Reviews

Steven Prince, who played the gun-dealing babble-mouth "Easy Andy" in the Martin Scorsese classic TAXI DRIVER, has his hour to shine.

This, a documentary involving Prince, Scorsese, and actor George Memmoli (the really fat dude in MEAN STREETS and the guy who reluctantly allowed Stallone to ice-skate in ROCKY) sitting around a living room, is really a gloriously-glorified home movie, adding images of the subject as a child while he's bantering - with a more grating voice than Horseshack from WELCOME BACK KOTTER - about gorillas, drugs, bagels, working for Neil Diamond, and his suburban-dwelling parents.

Few of the diatribes are interesting and some seem a bit forced. But it's during the last fifteen minutes, as he shares about killing a man in Arizona by shooting his six times, where things pick up.

The standout tale of madness involves Prince saving an overdosing girl's life by injecting her in the chest with an adrenaline shot while reading instructions on how to do so. Sound familiar?

Neil Young's obscure track "Time Fades Away" envelopes the piece nicely.

A tough middle-aged woman, Carroll Baker, does electrolysis out of her home and runs a female-assassin service on the side. Enter a studly male lodger, Perry King, who joins the band of cold-blooded vixens and... this intoxicating indie follows the nightlife of the sick and twisted throughout New York city as they: drop a car on a mechanic, beat up an old man (Lawrence Tierney) and his dog, toss a crying infant out a window, plan the murder of an autistic child, and hang around talking about nothing.

This isn't a great so-bad-it's-good flick, but then again it's not a terrible b-movie (or rather, d-movie) either. Real actors deliver lines professionally, making you forget the anemic budget. And you'll be tempted several times to stop watching... the adventure gets trudgingly-painful, especially when the storyline centers on Susan Tyrrel giving another purposefully-annoying (though hypnotic) performance; and many of the perfectly-pointless diatribal-conversations drag on way too long.

But by the very end... As blues guitar icon Mike Bloomfield's pornesque instrumental rendition of "You've Got The Cutest Little Baby Face" plays (like in the opening credits)... You'll realize that what you experienced, for better or worse, was some really weird, and very original, stuff.

The Steely Dan title-song playing as a big orange sun rises above a dusty city skyline anticipates heaven for rock fans and "no static at all". For the next twenty minutes, through a handing-off of various turns at the mic - as we meet each disc jockey working at the little-guy radio station playing wall-to-wall music - the good times continue to roll. The cool, down-to-earth boss (Michael Brandon), also a DJ, fights to keep the airwaves commercial free, providing the dream radio station "for the people".

The neverending (airwave) tunes are great, the live performances pretty good, and the eclectic cast of disc jockeys are decent enough - including Martin Mull, Cleavon Little, Cassie Yates, Alex Karras and Eileen Brennan - but the initial spontaneous fun (reminiscent of CAR WASH) is soon marred by a story involving villainous corporate goons forcing Army commercials on the station, turning a laidback character-study into typical underdog vs big business fare... and guess who wins?

The famously bad low-budget Brazillian import isn't so bad after all. Centers on a group of diamond thieves in South America who, after blowing up a big outpost during the opening credits and nabbing a cache of jewels, hides the goods in a lake that becomes inhabited by killer fish i.e. piranha, all pets of shady millionaire James Franciscus to weed-out any takers. A couple of the thieves are killed attempting a premature recovery and because of this, Lee Majors and Karen Black, both leaders of the heist, are pitted against each other: Black joins with Fransiscus and beautiful Margeaux Hemingway, as a fashion model on a location-shoot, beds the Bionic Man. Eventually a boat is stuck in the inhabited lake and the surviving cast attempts to get ashore without becoming piranha burgers.

The special effects are pretty bad - the piranha looking like soup crackers on underwater strings... people fall into the water, scream, sink, and red-die rises... the music is pornoesque, the dialog's corny and badly looped, but on the plus-side, an immanent sense of danger is palpable: whoever goes in the water is gonna die; and for a movie called KILLER FISH, what else matters?

Guns blasting, buildings exploding, cars crashing, and that's just the first ten minutes.

This action-packed film involving a rogue ex-CIA mercenary who can't seem to die no matter how many times he's shot (hence the title) is pretty decent.

Tough and toothy Gary Busey, usually cast as a villain in these kinda flicks, has his usual crazy charm but is a bit more subdued: after all he's carrying the entire show. Which doesn't mean there isn't a lot of terrific supporting roles including William Smith, Luke Askew, Mills Watson, R.G. Armstrong, Henry Silva, Lincoln Kirkpatrick, Thalmus Rasulala, and several other "forgotten" character-actors.

There's enough smaller action sequences to hold up the entire story: Busey has to free a group of "kidnapped" American military elites and return a high-tech "supertank" (a normal tank with a cheesy add-on pasted to the top) back to the States.

But does America deserve this killing machine any more than the bad guys? This question is asked, of course, like in any film centering on the CIA... but without getting preachy.

This is like one of those nightmares you have as a grownup that is strangely enjoyable and completely involving. Beginning with a guy played by actor/writer/director Vincent Gallo fresh out of a five-year prison stint who really needs to take a leak but can't find a bathroom anywhere.

Then he kidnaps a beautiful (and somewhat willing) young tap dancer Christina Ricci (in a building where he almost finds a toilet), brings her to his family and poses her as his wife. We then get a wonderful half-hour of the biggest generation gap in history in which Gallo, Ricci and his parents, Angelica Huston and Ben Gazzara, have the most complicated anti-bonding dinner in history.

After which Gallo and Ricci... who's now totally into being abducted by this insult-spouting, tantrum-throwing goblin-chinned freak... go bowling, then go to Denny's, then get a Motel (but not doing anything)... After which Gallo ventures off alone to a strip bar owned by a retired kicker of the Buffalo Bills - to kill the kicker for losing the Superbowl in which Gallo lost money on a bet in which, to make up for the debt he had to serve five years in prison for a crime he didn't commit (remember now, the film begins with him getting out).

This indie gem is downright brilliant with wonderful imagery, antique film stock, strategically placed camera-angles and split screens that all work to embody the dreamlike... or rather... nightmarish quality. Vincent Gallo is at his beautifully-ugly best as the troubled, woman-hating ex-con and Christina Ricci is basically a pretty piece of meat, but that's exactly what she's supposed to be.

The climax involving Gallo facing off with the Bills kicker at the Strip Joint is one of the best filmed purposely-overly-violent scenes ever, reminiscent of early Scorsese and, a year later, "borrowed" by the directors of "The Matrix".

A hotdog consists of rejected parts of a pig all thrown together and picked up off the butcher's floor. This is Woody Allen's hotdog. Many of the elements are borrowed from past films, like his fourth-wall-breaking first-person-narrating philosophy of life being meaningless and love being luck and everyone is dying and... all that stuff that was once entertaining when Woody Allen was younger, and funny.

His patented neurotic-Intellectual character is given to Larry David as a chess-instructing codger who marries a gorgeous twenty-one year old, Evan Rachel Wood. This entire concept is funnier than any line in the movie; not ha-ha but "Am I actually supposed to buy this" funny.

There are plenty of one-liners but nothing seems to matter: the characters all frolic stupidly before David so he can put them down. His monotone delivery of Allen's penned tirades are limp and lifeless (David even admits he's not an actor, so I guess he's not to blame).

Christians are seen as robots and everyone not from Manhattan are merely seeking their true selves as anti-Christian "heathens". Woody seems to be finished bagging on what and who he knows (New York and New York intellectuals); his sights are now set on those he never knew but thoroughly despises (anyone who hunts, fishes, or prays).

There are a few good moments of acting, like when Evan Rachel Wood's mother, played by Patricia Clarkson, is discussing photography - for an instant the dialog seems not written but actually spoken by a real human being; you know, like Woody's older films - the ones about people, not stereotypes.

Allen is becoming just like those he's against: close-minded and completely bias. And he's pushing the same envelope that's already been mailed.

We got it already, Woody. You can move on now.

In most cases when Hollywood revamps an old TV show and turns it into a film, it seems the stars of the film are intruding upon the show's template - keeping the basic plot intact and altering things for their particular style. But in this case the (side) character's of the classic Sid and Mart Krofft's LAND OF THE LOST are intruding upon a really bad Will Farrell science-fiction action comedy mess... and don't seem too happy about it.

Enik The Altrusion, Grumpy the Dinosaur, the Sleestaks, and Chaka seem like prisoners forced to conform to Farrell and his two co-stars hijinks, which are as funny as lung cancer. The action is non-stop like a person with nothing to say never shuts up. And the CGI looks like a cartoon.

Well the good thing is, the film bombed, big time. Let's hope Hollywood learns that we Generation Xers love our old shows (no matter how corny they were) and would rather celebrate than parody (i.e. ruin) them. Get your hands off our childhood you unoriginal jerks, and start thinking up new ideas that can be demolished in thirty years by someone else. Then again, nothing in the last ten years would probably merit a remake.

So I guess that explains all the remakes.

The Steer of Mediocrity returns with HIS OWN show. I guess he felt THE TONIGHT SHOW wasn't good enough. After all, it was one of the most popular franchises in television history, and Jay, when he took over, continually beat Letterman in the ratings (after Hugh Grant's appearance post-blow). Leno announced his "retirement" a few years back... but it was for a 2008 exit. Conan O'Brien was the next in line as Tonight Show host and now has taken over the 11:30 slot: his college slackers grew up, got jobs and can't do those late-nighters so these are "assured" ratings. Then NBC does what I still can't believe... gives Jay Leno a show EVERY NIGHT at 10 pm, a slot usually reserved for a different hour-long-drama. Jay's new vehicle is much like the old one except the set looks more like an airport lobby than... whatever it was before (big blue city motif, or something). Kevin Eubanks, the bandleader with an awesome looking guitar, still laughs at Jay's monologues (shortened stand-up routines) more than Ed ever laughed at Johnny's (if you can believe it) and instead of live skits happening before the interviews, the interviews sort of happen between pre-taped bits, all which suddenly appear without much of a segway as this is supposedly a "comedy show" as opposed to a "talk show". The desk is gone and Jay now sits with his celebs on easy chairs. His interview style remains as dull as ever (Jay always seems like he's merely waiting to meet each celeb at a local bar afterwards for a REAL CONVERSATION). I always felt he was more at home/comfortable when subbing for Johnny. Anyways, we'll see how long this turkey gobbles. And my theory as to why NBC would want to knock-off its own Tonight Show by having ANOTHER ONE happening an hour and a half earlier is... they want Leno to "die off" on his own accord. "He built this ship himself so if it sinks, we'll have no guilt about it" they MIGHT be heard to say. Iceberg anyone?

"Reservoir Dogs" introduced me to Lawrence Tierney. Like Tim Roth's character says about him (pp): "He looks like The Thing". So true. The old Tierney does in fact look as if he were made of giant stones. But when you go back fifty years, you find another kind of superhero altogether: a thin, good looking one that's still tough as nails. In the forties, Tierney starred in many low-budget noirs: including "Dillinger", "Devil Thumbs a Ride", "Kill or Be Killed", "Bodyguard", and "Born to Kill", and this one is, by far, the very worst. The title is misleading. This has almost nothing to do with "San Quentin". It's not a prison flick. Wouldn't it be great if it centered on Tierney playing a tough convict (which he was in real life)? That's what most would assume with the title and the star. But Larry plays an ex-con who's a really nice guy who's tracking down a couple escaped cons - not nice guys - who are giving other ex-cons a bad name. This noir entry (or should I change that to snoir) is a complete dud. Noir films rarely completely stink... there's usually something that makes them at least worth viewing... But not this turkey. Lock it up and throw away the key.

This is a meandering film that doesn't know what it is. For one instance it's very much like a documentary with the dizzy camera moving with each footstep, causing a viewer to be sea-sick. Certain side characters are documentary-like; as in, they aren't interesting, like people in movies, and seem somewhat realistic, i.e. mundane: this includes his boss, his opponents, his manager, and a little kid he befriends. But then there's his daughter, whose subplot provides melodrama the likes of a bad soap or, let's just say, a normal date movie. And his "girlfriend" stripper, who provides the film with a formulaic love story, seems out of place, and their relationship never seems right. This movie should have been more like the original "Rocky", and kept a fictional yet interesting feel throughout, with colorful characters we can be a part of, instead of walking the fence of realty show/fictional film. And the director should have kept the camera from moving so much. He had two shots: a far away shot where the camera isn't moving that seems like a security camera footage; and then everything else is shaky-cam: to the max. This film is overrated, big time. And the bar scene where the Wrestler and his stripper gal sing "Round in Round" is truly horrific.

Oliver Stone is guilty of Director Intrusion. The film could have been an interesting twist on the old noir premise of a stranger in a small weird town hired to do murder for a jealous husband which then becomes a triangle when he falls in love with the young wife. But the way this is edited with a million different shots and angles and diversions (kind of a fall-out from "Natural Born Killers"), it leaves little to the imagination. We get too much of what we don't need. I would rather be sucked in by the characters then by the director wanting to make something "creative". Oliver Stone must have been suffering from director's mid-life crisis. He tries too hard, which is a sin of directing; he - the artist behind the canvas - shouldn't be in anyone's mind: the actors and the story - the painted portrait - are all we need to center on. But it was difficult in this film. Sean Penn seemed kind of listless (maybe because Stone's camera tricks got him lost in the mix); Nick Nolte was good but looked like an anorexic Ron Pearlman and seemed like he was imitating a villain; Jennifer Lopez was tough as nails and sexy and to my surprise acted better than either of the male leads. The stand-out is Joaquin Pheonix as a white trash teenager defending his honor, that is, his flirtatious girlfriend played by Claire Daines. If you blink you'll miss a wasted cameo with character actor veteran Bo Hopkins. Julie Haggerty appears as a waitress; Jon Voight as a white/blind Indian with a dead dog that somehow comes back to life; Powers Booth as the town's sheriff; Billy Bob Thorton as a scruffy mechanic who is a fan of the game Twister and the alternative band Ween (one of their country songs is playing on his radio); and Liv Tyler appears for about ten seconds in a bus station. All these appearances leave us with nothing to feel, except that the director himself wanted to be remembered more than the story. Oh well, at least it wasn't a Quentin Tarantino story he messed up this time.

I have "Commie" in quotes because the word "Commie" is used about 100 times in the first episode of the series dealing with the title character seeking out murderers of a jazz musician who is considered a "Commie" by the small town townies who killed the musician, and thus they think that "Stacatto" is also a "Commie" as he bugs them into giving up some information. This show is fun to watch, has some great noir elements, but is as dated as can be. Hearing people say "Daddy" and "Mommy" without referring to their parents is funny enough. The whole jazz language inspired by Jack Kerouac and the beatniks is here in all its glory, spoken by men in their thirties and that too is hilarious, as you can imagine the writers really wanting to relate to the younger generation (at that time). It'd be like hearing Magnum PI saying "Totally, for sure... to the max!" The main reason I bought this online is because of one of my favorite actors (and writer/directors) John Cassavetes who is the star. He is good, as usual, but on occasion can become quite hammy, and preachy. But that's all par for the course when it comes to any kind of show with an agenda, and this one has a few... hundred, daddio.

This movie could have been a lot better with a lot less Charles Durning. He's a great actor but his character should have been edited down some. It was as if the indie filmmaker was so happy to have a very talented "heavy" (literal and otherwise referring to a bad guy) appear in his film that he had to devote a lot of screen time to him. (He had extra weight added to his already large girth and seemed like he was trying to emulate the Orson Welles character in "Touch of Evil".) (Durning's put-on accent was almost exactly the same as "Doc Hopper" in "The Muppet Movie".) More should have been focused on Brooke Shield's character, "Tilt", a rebellious young girl who is very good at pinball. Although I don't think she has a very fitting nickname; calling a pinball champion "Tilt" is like calling a football player "Clip", isn't it? But nonetheless, this movie was wasted on long bouts of dialog between Durning and Shields, and Durning and Ken Marshall who plays a young musician who uses Tilt to save up money for a demo. Also there was too much time wasted on Marshall's character as he and a very bad acting buddy try swindling people until they meet their prodigy pinball queen who can help them rake up dough by means of hustling; the hustling scenes were good but there should have been more of them. All in all this is a so-so little movie, relaxing to watch on an afternoon when you don't have to work. I bought the VHS and I don't know if I'll ever watch it again but it was okay while it lasted. I guess what I'm trying to say is the film lived up to the name. It was alright for a while, and then just kind of... titled.

This is a great film after the first time seeing it and then watching it twice. When you realize that the entire plot is about a man dying and coming to terms with the fact that his days, hours and minutes are numbered. When I first saw this, Ed Harris, although an excellent actor, annoyed me, but it really was his character, "Billy", who annoyed me since he was so melancholy and took himself so seriously and was such a primadonna to the other riders whom he was the chosen "King". But then I realized something; "Billy" is a man who knows he is basically dead (in a matter of speaking) (which fits being that it's a Romero film) and he must come to terms with letting go of his title, and his troupe. He is not trying to regain anything, which is what it seems like at first; he's trying to give it up gracefully. Tom Savini's "Black Knight" character is the opposite; he is very much alive and knows he won't die but he has to learn to not only humble himself, but to prove worthy of inheriting the king's title, not only through the motor-joust but through his attitude. It was nice to see a few "Dawn of the Dead" alumni, especially Scott H. Reiniger whose character "Roger" is one of the best horror films characters of all time, but we needed more of him. Some other actors came and went without much story but the main characters held everything together. This is an excellent movie, possibly one of the most underrated, and definitely the most ambitious movies ever, ever made. A true labor of love, it is one to watch again and again... because the more you see it, the more you'll get out of it. Watch for Stephen King in a very brief cameo as a hillbilly local who is watching the first jousting match in Bakersfield.

There are tons of sci-fi movies where the main character runs around trying to convince everyone that "The Monsters are Coming" then only to realize that the people he is trying to warn are in fact the "Monsters". I felt this way before, during and after watching this horrific, overrated film. I couldn't believe why everyone loved it. I am not going to put it down for having no point. I like no point. I like books and movies with no point, because the entertainment happens around the characters, which is what a character-driven movie is as opposed to a plot or theme-driven. If you want to see a movie about kids in a small town with nothing to do and getting picked on, rent "Welcome to the Dollhouse" which is one of the greatest underdog teen films ever made. The best thing about that movie is it's real; the underdog ugly duckling doesn't rise up and "win" at the end, like in this movie where the main character becomes popular, and how he becomes popular is by far the worst experience I've ever witnessed on film. This movie is just boring. It's not funny, and it's conceited in the sense that it doesn't have to even merit anything worthwhile, yet it still glides along as if it were majestic somehow. It isn't. It's awful. It's so horrible, and not even "quirky". It just flat-out stinks. It's one of those movies that is so purposely over-the-top oddball that fans will say "If you don't like it you don't get it", which thus makes it, in their eyes, infallible simply because it's different. But that's my point, it's no different than any underdog-wins-big/teenage coming-of-age tale that we've seen, or read, a hundred times before - and without anything redeeming about it and, most importantly, it's not funny. It's horrible. Horrible, horrible. And I'll put this out: "If you do like it, then you just don't get what true originality is". And what is a truly original underdog teenage cult film? "Welcome to the Dollhouse". Rent it; watch and learn. It's what this movie tries, and pretends, and fails, to be.

First off, I am not reviewing the classic original which I would give 10 stars to, I am reviewing the horrible 2001 redux, and this is why there is 1 star.

I don't care what Coppola says. He calls the REDUX/redo/re-edit that he put in theaters in 2001 the "definitive version" of Apocolypes Now. He's crazy. He hasn't made a decent film in a long, long time. He took a great and classic film and ruined it, and it's his own. Will he do this to the first two Godfather films? Robert Duvall's gung-ho character has turned into a buffoon, searching for a surfboard that Martin Sheen has stolen. Martin Sheen's character has turned into a warm-hearted guy who loves his crew, plays games with them like stealing surfboards, as opposed to a serious guy who has a very serious mission like in the original. Marlon Brando reads TIME magazine. And there is a scene with a French Plantation that destroys the entire flow to the movie, and plays like a corny dream sequence and is just horrible, with acting so bad it's more of a nightmare. The worst scene in the redux is when Chef and Lance (Fred Forrest and Sam Bottoms) party in a "parked" helicopter with some of the Playboy Playmates from the previous R&R scene. One of the playmates has a birdcage on her head, no joke. This is another scene that kills the entire flow of the movie, and makes Martin Sheen a nice guy, since he is the one who sets up his men with the girls in the first place. And also, Coppola takes the scene where Lance is water skiing (with the Stones "Satisfaction" playing) and moves it from the beginning of the film to the middle. This was, in the original, one of the best setup scenes of all time, letting you unwind and to get to know the laid-back situation of these men, and Coppola ruins it. Oh the horror, the horror, the horror of this redux. The Redux is a total travesty. Coppola has ruined his own masterpiece. Imagine Van Gogh, if he'd lived, taking "Starry Night" and adding to it, or DiVinci or Monet or anyone else. Coppola has lost it, completely. And so, the true "horror" isn't the Vietnam war, but the hands of a burnt-out has-been filmmaker mangling one of his best works. And by the way, here I am reviewing the redux only, which is why there is only one star.

This film is horrible. There is no chemistry between any of the characters. It is dull and there doesn't seem to be any meaning at all, or reason. It's hard to care about any of the characters. The dialog is so written, as in, it seems as if the actors are reading written lines. The entire film seems as if it's a rehearsal rather than a film. The story centers on a young man who is a tennis instructor for the rich and then he marries into a very nice (much too nice) rich family. He then, for no apparent reason other than lust, has an affair with an American actress, girlfriend of his brother-in-law. Then she starts to get clingy and so he kills her. That's that. First though he kills an old lady and then he kills her to make it seem like a robbery. But we get no idea, or real reason, why he has to do all this just to keep his marriage, since he seems, throughout this entire overlong movie, to hate his wife. This film is compared to 'Crimes and Misdemeanors' because of the basic theme, and that is a travesty. 'Crimes and Misdemeaners' is one of the best films of all time, while this film is one of the worst, by Woody or anyone. It's just a horrible, boring nightmare. And we have to sit through the exact same dialog and themes that Woody has put into way too many films, things like: luck is the meaning of life, faith is meaningless, and science dictates everything we know. It just gets tiring, especially hearing these deep themes being spoken by people in their twenties, who would never, ever, ever speak this way. Woody's dialog seems more fit to sixty year old Aristocrats, not twenty-something rich airheads. This movie is horrific. Avoid it at any cost.

Lawyer meets girl, girl enriches him, lawyer gets nice. Sound familiar? This film came out a few years earlier than the popular romantic comedy I'm referring to, and the woman who steals this ruthless lawyer's heart isn't a prostitute, in fact she's a classy artist in disguise who works for this lawyer as an investigator. The love story here is nice and relaxing, takes it's time and pays off somewhat. We get to see John Ritter playing a selfish guy who loves picking up on girls, much like his character in "Three's Company", only this guy wants to change... But only after meeting this older woman (who in real life is only three years older than Ritter but in this is thirteen years his elder), this woman who gives him a hard time at first, a chase... As in, she won't just give in to a good line like the other easy girls in single's bars that he'd excelled at "conquering" before. And so, after said lawyer and nice woman "connect", he gets smitten... And along the way she tells him that inside of that clam is a pearl... so to speak... And thus he becomes a nice lawyer and backs off a case which could have been a cinch. So what is it Hollywood's telling us? That without love we're all ruthless lawyers, and then, after-wards, furry bunny rabbits? Or rather, furry lawyers? I'm still not sure. Either way, this TV movie isn't bad for an afternoon waster if you have nothing else to do but watch TV.

This is my third favorite of the Inger-Pippi films (films starring Inger Nilsson as Pippi). It's also the most memorable. Anyone who was a kid during the seventies will recall the flying balloon/bed, the lion on the desert island, and the pirate island where Pippi battles buccaneers... beating them all up. Her father, who resembles a better looking and less fat Dom Deluise, is held prisoner by some nasty pirates. They want to know where he has his treasure, and he won't tell them, but Pippi ends up saving him and, well... this is definitely a good movie for kids. And Pippi fans will think of this one as the most "violent" of the Longstocking saga. She really beats the heck out of the pirates, and the fight scenes never end. It's an enjoyable romp, but I prefer it when Pippi is back home... the adventures are tighter and more fun in my opinion.

This is my least favorite of the Inger Nilsson Pippi films, but it's still enjoyable. It's basically more of the same of the first film. Pippi doesn't join her father on the ship, and spends more time having fun in town, and at her awesome home, with her friends Tommy and Annika. They walk around buying more candy, throw a party, and Pippi makes a giant snowball. They have to battle the same bumbling crooks who are after Pippi's gold coins. And in this film, Pippi attempts to go to school. But she won't adhere to the rules. You can't tell Pippi what to do, and this lasts about five minutes. I'm not sure why it's titled "Goes on Board", when in fact she doesn't go on board, that is, she doesn't go on the ship with her father (this film begins with the end of the first film). They do build a little canoe, perhaps that's the reason. Either way, this movie is enjoyable. I think of it as part two of the first film, simple and cute.

This is, by far, the best of the four films starring the original (and in my opinion the only) Pippi, Inger Nilsson. She's fantastic and so are the actors playing her cohorts, Tommy and Annika. You cannot have a Pippi film without all three kids. In this outing, the trio run away and go on many adventures. One includes riding on a train. Another includes taking a trip on a flying car that runs on super-glue. I like the scenes when they are watching the wild strawberries and kicking back, enjoying their freedom near a river in the journey's start. There is such a relaxing aura watching these gems. Space and time are quite important, especially since it's shot in the beautiful Swedish countryside that seems to go on forever. Another great scene is when Pippi rides a barrel down a waterfall. And they also visit a farm and Pippi battles a bull to save a child. All is great fun. This one is the best. Pippi is the epitome of a superhero, and she's one of the best superheroes of all time.

This is my second best Inger-Pippi film, that is, of the original films (with the original stars). It's a great movie and has the flow of a dream and the freedom of a cartoon, that is, almost anything can happen... at least it feels that way. The two side characters, Tommy and Annika, are very important, as in, we go through the adventures in their eyes. It's not just about Pippi, it's about Pippi, Tommy and Annika. Not that the entire film is in Tommy and Annika's perspective, but the film begins with their narration, and we learn about the "spooky" house and then we are introduced to Pippi, who lives in this house alone. It's great seeing different ways that Pippi cleans her house; these scenes steal the movie. Also is fun to see Pippi interact with her two pets, Little Old man, the horse, and her cool little monkey. This is the introduction movie to the four original films (all taken from the television series with the same actors). This is my second favorite of the four, my first being "Pippi On the Run". The dubbed voices get annoying, but that's okay... it's still a classic.

We saw this in a film class and the reason was to show us how not to make a short film. The story was good but the pace and cadence was awful. It seemed cut like the editor was blind and there was no flow what-so-ever. It seemed like a movie that was abandoned halfway through and then pieced together by a sixth grader with A.D.D. And it's a shame because there are some good actors, Joe Lambie being one, and a few veteran actors, one who has played Ronald Reagan many times. The story involves a young boy who hangs out with his grandpa while a bunch of old men are trading things. That's all I'll mention of the plot. As I said, the story is good; it'd be a good campfire tale; or else a short story (if done correctly). But as a film you can see so many flaws, it just doesn't wash. I felt as drowned as that pistol that ends up going back into the big mossy lake at the end (talk about corny). And hey... this film won an award? That'll just go to show ya how much they (whoever they are) know about film-making.

Remember when Kevin Costner made you feel good? Remember when his excitement and energy woke you up? SILVERADO and BULL DURHAM, and this film, comes to mind, when the man had charisma. Something happened after his entertaining yet totally overrated DANCES WITH WOLVES (GOODFELLAS was robbed). Kevin gained weight and he became mellow thereafter. In every movie he seemed bored and tired and sluggish to me. Wisened or something. In TIN CUP he regains some of his earlier charm, but this is a review of American FLYERS. A feel-good movie, this film centers on a kid named David, who is a college aged slacker. But is he a slacker? He exercises a lot, that's for sure. But no matter, he has no purpose in life other than lying around dating models (who are trying to impress his casting agent mom) and watching KUNG FU (if you ask me his life was JUST FINE). Then Costner, his older brother with a fine mustache and a fine girlfriend (played by Rae Dawn Chong), comes in and takes him to a big bike race. I'm skipping a lot of stuff here, the main plot being about a certain illness that runs in the family. This is done nicely, and doesn't get in the way of the humor and action of the film, in fact it compliments it. Even a side story with John Amos and his overweight son helps things along. But all in all this movie runs smoothly. The only cast member who bugged me was Alexandra Paul, as David's hippie girlfriend. She was annoying and tried way too hard to steal scenes, in my opinion. But the rest of the film is quite entertaining, and in the vein of ROCKY and THE KARATE KID, this movie will make you guilty that you don't exercise, and if you do, that you don't do it enough.