Barry Newman should have his name removed from the credits while still alive. Low budget full-frame TV-movie vibe with a script that made little go no sense. Even the ending leaves you asking "WTF!? " Utter complete waste of talent and your time viewing this mess. I wish I'd taken advice in previous reviews here, but I like Barry and he had such little movie work for some odd reason. This is no Vanishing Point or Petrocelli. It's a 2nd grader effort at a Botticelli. Terribly awful film. 3.5 stars for Barry, Klaus, a few stunts and 'some' scenery. A total stinker.
Reviews
10 Reviews
Twentieth Century
(1934)
Not Hawks' best. Way over the top trainwreck.
3 January 2021
You'd think a comedy with Howard Hawks' hand guiding it and the great John Barrymore with Carole Lombard, you'd have a great success, but what you get instead is a shrill screaming mess. Over the top performances by the leads and even supporting character actors. Screwball comedy is one thing, but this is a non-stop shrill screamfest with melodramatic overtones so thick it's stomach-churning. I kept waiting for some subtlety and laughter. I was bored. I don't get bored during most classic films. I said to myself, it's only 90 minutes, so I'll stick with it. One of the longest 90 minute comedies I've viewed or rather, endured. There was simply no payoff at the predictable deja vu bookended ending. Amateur screenplay with chaotic pacing just doesn't engage the viewer and over-the-top acting with shrill screaming is just annoying. Very little entertainment value. Disappointed. It's certainly no Bringing Up Baby, but nothing is. 5 stars is generous, but for Hawks and the leads, that's why I'm being so kind. Too bad Hawks wasn't as kind to the viewers.
Love Monkey
(2006)
A well-thought out show with excellent acting, writing and production values.
17 January 2006
Having seen the pilot tonight, me and my wife have added another show to our TiVo list. Love Monkey is about a mid-30s major label A&R rep who is at a crossroads in his life. Without spoiling the plot of the pilot... basically, it involves the lives of main character/narrator, Tom Farrell (Tom Cavanaugh), his sister and his best friends, male and female. Clever uses of flashbacks are used sporadically throughout the show, but not overused. The music is great and REAL, not pseudo-represented by cover bands imitating well-known artists/songs as is usually the case with most TV shows for some reason.
The outdoor city filming locations used are actually in New York, not a set or stock footage - kudos for that. Also, some interiors are real locations (not sets) as well. The show's title, which primarily refers to the main character, is somewhat revealed or explained in the pilot. Some of the plot is predictable, albeit there are a few subplot twists, but yet it is still an enjoyable show, nonetheless. It (pilot episode) revealed many different stories that will develop along the way and hinted at a few others - due to its setting and cast of supporting characters, there is much promise for good future writing.
"Love Monkey" is just a nice, feel-good TV show with a just a bit of sex, some love, friendship and a whole lotta great music. Highly recommend for adults, young and old.
Ted in Gilbert, AZ
The outdoor city filming locations used are actually in New York, not a set or stock footage - kudos for that. Also, some interiors are real locations (not sets) as well. The show's title, which primarily refers to the main character, is somewhat revealed or explained in the pilot. Some of the plot is predictable, albeit there are a few subplot twists, but yet it is still an enjoyable show, nonetheless. It (pilot episode) revealed many different stories that will develop along the way and hinted at a few others - due to its setting and cast of supporting characters, there is much promise for good future writing.
"Love Monkey" is just a nice, feel-good TV show with a just a bit of sex, some love, friendship and a whole lotta great music. Highly recommend for adults, young and old.
Ted in Gilbert, AZ
Desperate Housewives
(2004–2012)
A guilty pleasure-loaded w/ humor, wit, wisdom, sex, emotion, sensitivity and insight into human behavior. Do NOT miss this one.
24 October 2005
I am a married man and first recorded Desperate Housewives (DH) on VHS to watch later on after our kids were asleep due to its airing in the middle of the prime time format (before their bedtimes) and this was definitely NOT appropriate material for their ages (all below teen) plus it aired here during ESPN NFL Sunday night football. Being married with kids, I thought I might enjoy this and somewhat identify, but unfortunately fell behind after only a few episodes and mixed up all the tapes since I stupidly didn't chronologically label/date each 2-episode tape which I tried in vain to do later. Well, to make a long story short, I decided to wait for the DVD set and rented it at Blockbuster, saving all the tapes for this season. Watching it on DVD, I found it to be far better than on broadcast TV, eliminating all the annoying bottom third news/promo scrolls, commercials and weekly cliffhangers. I rented out all the discs sequentially and watched all the bonus features on them, especially the extended episodes. DH has become one of my all-time TV faves... so much so that I have bought the Season One DVD box set which I highly recommend. In fact, you will more than likely watch some episodes several times for plot clues, humorous scenes and just great eye candy... the women (and men) are drop-dead gorgeous. I am now caught up to this season and am religiously watching the show each week, never to fall behind or miss another episode again. DH is comfort food... the characters are rich with hidden secrets, pasts, flaws, weaknesses and admirable qualities. Like the writing and production of the ABC show "Lost" (another of my faves), creator,/writer/director/producer Marc Cherry has totally fleshed out his characters and involved them in amazingly well-written plots full of twists, turns and jaw dropping surprises.
The four main housewives of Wisteria Lane in the fictitious city of Fairview are Lynette, Bree, Susan and Gabrielle. Gabrielle Solis (Eva Longoria), aka Gabbie, is the self-centered, primadonna, former-supermodel Latina diva who is cheating on her rich, chauvinistic, alpha-male husband, Carlos Solis (Ricardo Chavira) with their gardener, John Rowland (Jesse Metcalfe), a high school boy. Susan Mayer (Teri Hatcher, an Emmy nominee) is the recently-divorced, cute, klutzy, emotional single mom of a teen-aged daughter, Julie (Amanda Bowen), who falls almost immediately for the new neighbor, a mysterious handsome plumber named Mike Delfino (James Denton) who is also a "scoring" target of her neighbor rival voluptuous, vixen, platinum blonde, realtor, Edie Britt (Nicollette Sheridan), whom with Susan is seemingly always in constant competition. The prim, proper, well-mannered, immaculately dressed and groomed Bree Van De Kamp (Marcia Cross, an Emmy nominee) is an ultra-conservative, Baptist, NRA member, Republican socialite wife of a doctor, Rex Van De Kamp (Steven Culp) who on the outside is the homemaker/housewife extraordinaire with two teenagers, Andrew (Shawn Pyfrom) and Danielle (Joy Lauren) who seemingly are perfect kids, but this IS Wisteria Lane after all. Lynette Scavo (Felicity Huffman, who won the Emmy) is a former ad-executive who gave up her career after marriage to her fellow ad-exec. husband Tom Scavo (Doug Savant), so that she could properly raise her four children... twin 8 year old boy hellions plus their one year younger brother and infant daughter. This over-burdened wife and mom is the epitome of a desperate housewife - Lynette is probably the most identifiable character on the show and therefore clearly earns the most audience empathy.
Each episode opens with a nicely narrated recap/intro, wonderful Emmy-nominated title sequence and Emmy-winning theme by Danny Elfman and is wrapped up in poignant, narrative moralistic fashion. The brilliantly-conceived (by Marc Cherry) series' plot opens immediately with the apparent suicide of the four main housewives' neighboring wife group-hub and friend, Mary Alice Young (Brenda Strong) and is narrated (as well as acted) wonderfully throughout the entire series by her. There are several clouds of mystery surrounding her suicide, including a mysterious blackmail-type of note. This is pretty much the glue that holds all the subplots together, spawning several other subplots and introducing new characters as the series develops. Whatever you do, do not watch this season or any of its coming attractions (change channels on commercial promos) until you have seen last season - you will miss way too much character and plot development. DH clearly should have won the Emmy, but due to a major male voting portion of the academy's unfamiliarity with it and the "Raymond" hype of closing the book on 9 successful seasons, it lost out to "Everybody Loves Raymond," the sentimental choice. It was far better production-wise (with some amazing camera-work), scripting, editing, directing, costuming, casting as well as acting. I expect DH to win the Emmy for Best Comedy Series this season if it is nearly as good as it was in its debut year- so far, so good. Last season, it won for six of the astonishing fifteen Emmy nominations it received. In summary, DH is a guilty pleasure that really leaves you feeling not too guilty about enjoying it on a regular basis.
10/10 stars - practically perfect, flawless television entertainment
The four main housewives of Wisteria Lane in the fictitious city of Fairview are Lynette, Bree, Susan and Gabrielle. Gabrielle Solis (Eva Longoria), aka Gabbie, is the self-centered, primadonna, former-supermodel Latina diva who is cheating on her rich, chauvinistic, alpha-male husband, Carlos Solis (Ricardo Chavira) with their gardener, John Rowland (Jesse Metcalfe), a high school boy. Susan Mayer (Teri Hatcher, an Emmy nominee) is the recently-divorced, cute, klutzy, emotional single mom of a teen-aged daughter, Julie (Amanda Bowen), who falls almost immediately for the new neighbor, a mysterious handsome plumber named Mike Delfino (James Denton) who is also a "scoring" target of her neighbor rival voluptuous, vixen, platinum blonde, realtor, Edie Britt (Nicollette Sheridan), whom with Susan is seemingly always in constant competition. The prim, proper, well-mannered, immaculately dressed and groomed Bree Van De Kamp (Marcia Cross, an Emmy nominee) is an ultra-conservative, Baptist, NRA member, Republican socialite wife of a doctor, Rex Van De Kamp (Steven Culp) who on the outside is the homemaker/housewife extraordinaire with two teenagers, Andrew (Shawn Pyfrom) and Danielle (Joy Lauren) who seemingly are perfect kids, but this IS Wisteria Lane after all. Lynette Scavo (Felicity Huffman, who won the Emmy) is a former ad-executive who gave up her career after marriage to her fellow ad-exec. husband Tom Scavo (Doug Savant), so that she could properly raise her four children... twin 8 year old boy hellions plus their one year younger brother and infant daughter. This over-burdened wife and mom is the epitome of a desperate housewife - Lynette is probably the most identifiable character on the show and therefore clearly earns the most audience empathy.
Each episode opens with a nicely narrated recap/intro, wonderful Emmy-nominated title sequence and Emmy-winning theme by Danny Elfman and is wrapped up in poignant, narrative moralistic fashion. The brilliantly-conceived (by Marc Cherry) series' plot opens immediately with the apparent suicide of the four main housewives' neighboring wife group-hub and friend, Mary Alice Young (Brenda Strong) and is narrated (as well as acted) wonderfully throughout the entire series by her. There are several clouds of mystery surrounding her suicide, including a mysterious blackmail-type of note. This is pretty much the glue that holds all the subplots together, spawning several other subplots and introducing new characters as the series develops. Whatever you do, do not watch this season or any of its coming attractions (change channels on commercial promos) until you have seen last season - you will miss way too much character and plot development. DH clearly should have won the Emmy, but due to a major male voting portion of the academy's unfamiliarity with it and the "Raymond" hype of closing the book on 9 successful seasons, it lost out to "Everybody Loves Raymond," the sentimental choice. It was far better production-wise (with some amazing camera-work), scripting, editing, directing, costuming, casting as well as acting. I expect DH to win the Emmy for Best Comedy Series this season if it is nearly as good as it was in its debut year- so far, so good. Last season, it won for six of the astonishing fifteen Emmy nominations it received. In summary, DH is a guilty pleasure that really leaves you feeling not too guilty about enjoying it on a regular basis.
10/10 stars - practically perfect, flawless television entertainment
Psycho
(1998)
SEE THE ORIGINAL FIRST... before you see this - you will then know WHO is the MASTER & who is the wannabe.
16 August 2005
Warning: Spoilers
First, may I preface my review with the information that I studied the original film in college and have seen it several dozen times - each time I learned/still learn something new. The original "Psycho" is one of the greatest films ever made, because of its subtle direction and usage of light/shadow that can only be produced in black & white. Since this remake is a theoretical shot-by-shot remake, I will anatomize it in my review and their may be some spoilers for those who have yet to see this must-see film. If you are an aspiring filmmaker, this is a must-own and see several times type of film - the original film presents a great tutorial for direction, production, acting, lighting design and most of all, cinematography. There can only be one master... and his name is Hitch.
Well, now I have seen this... in full frame on STARZ on my 61" TV. I fell into it late tonight strictly by accident, just missing the opening credits and hotel scene. I joined in during the bank scene where Marion talks with the eccentric millionaire client, excellently portrayed by Chad Everett. In fact, all of the movie up until she meets Norman Bates was dead on... Anne Heche was almost perfect with the body language, movement, posture, gestures, facial expressions imitating Janet Leigh. I say "almost" because without b/w photography, it's just not fair as the light/shadow contrast on her face in the second car (especially) driving at night in the rain towards her final destination was missing, leaving her facial expressions nearly there. The Highway Patrolman was perfectly cast and shot and Anne Heche with her movements being startled awake was a dead ringer for Janet Leigh's performance. However, in those in-car driver scenes, her facial/eye expressions paled to the late Miss Leigh's dramatically, but it was a good attempt. The used car salesman was not as good, but still fairly, simply acted. For the first part of the movie, everything clicked... all the casting, original scored music, cinematography was good, but once Marion made it to the Bates Motel it all went downhill. Vaughn proved he is quite talented and gave an admirable job of acting, but at first came off too stable/normal, in control of himself, too macho/strong. Later, in the movie, he seemed to slip more into a mousy character and even stutter more (where was all the stutter in the parlor scene?), but it was too little, too late... the believability was gone. The parlor scenes didn't come off right... Norman just did not look like he was messed up in the head as he did in the original - the significant stuttering over the word "falsity" was gone as was the EXTREMELY poignant gesture of the hand being affectionately placed on the stuffed bird while stating "actually, it's more than a hobby." The peeping/masturbation scene was icky and an unnecessary modification to the original just plain peeping scene. The shower scene was very good, though and the petrified body of Marion was convincingly made to appear dead - kudos to Miss Heche. King of recent remakes, Viggo Moretnsen just did not have Sam's overpowering, calming, rock-steady macho presence as was portrayed in the original. Julianne Moore just did not have it at all... she is NO Vera Miles - there was little, if any emotional depth. William H. Macy was very good as Arbogast and brought back slightly more believability to the film's scene he was in. His superb acting juxtaposed Vince Vaughn's into being much better than earlier appearances, so does that mean Heche lacked as an actress? No - it means he was either less prepared, not yet fully established into the role or the direction. The biggest thing missing was the very human performances.
The ending/final credits were really awful... did not even come close to the original.
I give this 5 out of 10 stars for the first half of the film which was 9/10 stars (a near remake masterpiece, except for Vaughn), but the second half got only one star and that went for Macy's portrayal and Vaughn's uneven performance... the rest was just pure junk.
Well, now I have seen this... in full frame on STARZ on my 61" TV. I fell into it late tonight strictly by accident, just missing the opening credits and hotel scene. I joined in during the bank scene where Marion talks with the eccentric millionaire client, excellently portrayed by Chad Everett. In fact, all of the movie up until she meets Norman Bates was dead on... Anne Heche was almost perfect with the body language, movement, posture, gestures, facial expressions imitating Janet Leigh. I say "almost" because without b/w photography, it's just not fair as the light/shadow contrast on her face in the second car (especially) driving at night in the rain towards her final destination was missing, leaving her facial expressions nearly there. The Highway Patrolman was perfectly cast and shot and Anne Heche with her movements being startled awake was a dead ringer for Janet Leigh's performance. However, in those in-car driver scenes, her facial/eye expressions paled to the late Miss Leigh's dramatically, but it was a good attempt. The used car salesman was not as good, but still fairly, simply acted. For the first part of the movie, everything clicked... all the casting, original scored music, cinematography was good, but once Marion made it to the Bates Motel it all went downhill. Vaughn proved he is quite talented and gave an admirable job of acting, but at first came off too stable/normal, in control of himself, too macho/strong. Later, in the movie, he seemed to slip more into a mousy character and even stutter more (where was all the stutter in the parlor scene?), but it was too little, too late... the believability was gone. The parlor scenes didn't come off right... Norman just did not look like he was messed up in the head as he did in the original - the significant stuttering over the word "falsity" was gone as was the EXTREMELY poignant gesture of the hand being affectionately placed on the stuffed bird while stating "actually, it's more than a hobby." The peeping/masturbation scene was icky and an unnecessary modification to the original just plain peeping scene. The shower scene was very good, though and the petrified body of Marion was convincingly made to appear dead - kudos to Miss Heche. King of recent remakes, Viggo Moretnsen just did not have Sam's overpowering, calming, rock-steady macho presence as was portrayed in the original. Julianne Moore just did not have it at all... she is NO Vera Miles - there was little, if any emotional depth. William H. Macy was very good as Arbogast and brought back slightly more believability to the film's scene he was in. His superb acting juxtaposed Vince Vaughn's into being much better than earlier appearances, so does that mean Heche lacked as an actress? No - it means he was either less prepared, not yet fully established into the role or the direction. The biggest thing missing was the very human performances.
The ending/final credits were really awful... did not even come close to the original.
I give this 5 out of 10 stars for the first half of the film which was 9/10 stars (a near remake masterpiece, except for Vaughn), but the second half got only one star and that went for Macy's portrayal and Vaughn's uneven performance... the rest was just pure junk.
War of the Worlds
(2005)
not as good as the original, but still a good summer popcorn movie...
1 July 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Just saw it tonight. My 8 1/2 year old movie buff son went with me... we gave up our seats for the D-Backs getting pounded by the Giants for this, so this was better of the two choices. He's been waiting quite a while for this one - a huge Star Wars, Jurassic Park and classic film fan who has wanted to make movies since 2 1/2 years old. He liked it, but still preferred the original, as did I. It was still very good entertainment, though... I gave it 7/10 on IMDb - the original got a 9 from me as I rated it for its time, previous to CGI effects. This wasn't one of Spielberg's best, but it wasn't one of his worst, either. The original got more scientifically involved as to the origin and biological makeup of the alien invaders and had more narration. The original was somewhat campy (mostly due to the 50s film era), but this one was a little, also - with far too many narrow escapes for Tom and family for my taste. This version was more of a casual observer's (Tom Cruise's character, Ray) POV vs. the 1953 version from a scientist's (Gene Barry's character, Dr. Forrester) POV. This also lacked romance which the original touched on somewhat... there was good sexual tension between the two charismatic leads, Barry and Robinson. Also, there was much more deference to the Almighty in the original - this one barely touched on His intervention in mankind, other than the narration at the end. I guess He isn't needed to be called upon in the 21st century in times of peril such as HUMAN EXTERMINATION.
This version had too many plot holes that were so blatantly obvious - such as why Tom's vehicle was the only civilian vehicle (a mid-90s Dodge minivan) running/moving due to a change of just one part (solenoid - what happened to the computer that it also runs on?); how they drove over so much debris/vehicle wreckage and never got one flat tire, how they managed to make it through clogged interstates with just enough clearance space to get through at high speeds; the radio coming on just for a "test of the emergency broadcast system" and then going back to static; but the biggest whopper was at the beginning of the film with the now-infamous "camcorder" shot. OMG, that was so stupid! How in God's name when all electronics were zapped by an EMP could one camcorder function perfectly and record the invasion for no one other then the movie theater audience to see. Awful - Spielberg's biggest guffaw ever. They could not discover that in the editing room or during screenings? Pointless, unnecessary effect - really hurt film's credibility. Even my 8 year old boy whispered that was dumb. The scenes with Tim Robbins were a cutting room floor decoration - a complete waste. I won't even begin to address the end scene as to how ridiculously Hollywood that was. The narration helped cover the sugar somewhat.
This film COULD have and SHOULD have been a great classic - it had all the ingredients - instead it was a modest attempt at an updated remake consisting of a roller-coaster ride of awesome CGI effects with little or no character development or impact on the classic story itself. The SL did leave an opening for a sequel, however - should these aliens ever get another whim, but be more ready when they do. Without the great effects, this film would have been just average sci-fi/action fare. It's worth the nine bucks to see the effects on the big screen, but do not expect another Jurassic Park, albeit there were many similarities with kids in danger, screaming in panic, narrow escapes, etc.
7/10 stars - mostly for the effects, photography, music and nail-biting suspense - just forget all the story holes and outright goofs Ted in Gilbert, AZ
This version had too many plot holes that were so blatantly obvious - such as why Tom's vehicle was the only civilian vehicle (a mid-90s Dodge minivan) running/moving due to a change of just one part (solenoid - what happened to the computer that it also runs on?); how they drove over so much debris/vehicle wreckage and never got one flat tire, how they managed to make it through clogged interstates with just enough clearance space to get through at high speeds; the radio coming on just for a "test of the emergency broadcast system" and then going back to static; but the biggest whopper was at the beginning of the film with the now-infamous "camcorder" shot. OMG, that was so stupid! How in God's name when all electronics were zapped by an EMP could one camcorder function perfectly and record the invasion for no one other then the movie theater audience to see. Awful - Spielberg's biggest guffaw ever. They could not discover that in the editing room or during screenings? Pointless, unnecessary effect - really hurt film's credibility. Even my 8 year old boy whispered that was dumb. The scenes with Tim Robbins were a cutting room floor decoration - a complete waste. I won't even begin to address the end scene as to how ridiculously Hollywood that was. The narration helped cover the sugar somewhat.
This film COULD have and SHOULD have been a great classic - it had all the ingredients - instead it was a modest attempt at an updated remake consisting of a roller-coaster ride of awesome CGI effects with little or no character development or impact on the classic story itself. The SL did leave an opening for a sequel, however - should these aliens ever get another whim, but be more ready when they do. Without the great effects, this film would have been just average sci-fi/action fare. It's worth the nine bucks to see the effects on the big screen, but do not expect another Jurassic Park, albeit there were many similarities with kids in danger, screaming in panic, narrow escapes, etc.
7/10 stars - mostly for the effects, photography, music and nail-biting suspense - just forget all the story holes and outright goofs Ted in Gilbert, AZ
Please do NOT waste your time... unless you need to be anesthetized!
10 February 2005
In one word... abysmal. I give it one star for the hippie sex scenes and eye candy women, otherwise forget it. Corman's worst effort, bar none. Ben Vereen should have had his name permanently stricken from the cast. I cannot believe that this is now going to be on DVD (as of 2/15/05) with "Wild In The Streets" - another retro stinker. I woke up sick in bed this morning with a cold, decided to watch a movie to cheer me up some, scanned the digital channels... the premise looked interesting enough because I like viewing B-movie sci-fi, hippie culture and rebellious teen flicks. It seemed familiar somehow and with Ben Vereen in the cast, I thought... why not? What a big mistake... it was a horrible start to my day.
Only after viewing it, I now know why the familiarity crept into the recesses of my newly-awakened brain. I remembered seeing coming attractions for this film as a 14-year old (I'm 45), back in the early/mid-seventies at the Sombrero, a local art theater that no longer exists... the whole theater laughed hysterically and even groaned out loud at how bad this movie looked. Acting: dreadful, story: awful, cinematography: nearly-awful, music: terrible, sound: horrendous, directing: a joke. If you choose to watch this after my warning, remember... "I told you so."
"Gass-s-s-s" is the perfect title for this film... you feel "gassed" after viewing this putrid movie - or maybe that you should be taken to a "gas" chamber for wasting your brain away. I have seen homemade Super 8 movies that put this film to shame. Definitely a new addition to my all-time Top Ten WORST films... it's up there (er, down there) with "Tentacles."
Ted in Gilbert, AZ
Only after viewing it, I now know why the familiarity crept into the recesses of my newly-awakened brain. I remembered seeing coming attractions for this film as a 14-year old (I'm 45), back in the early/mid-seventies at the Sombrero, a local art theater that no longer exists... the whole theater laughed hysterically and even groaned out loud at how bad this movie looked. Acting: dreadful, story: awful, cinematography: nearly-awful, music: terrible, sound: horrendous, directing: a joke. If you choose to watch this after my warning, remember... "I told you so."
"Gass-s-s-s" is the perfect title for this film... you feel "gassed" after viewing this putrid movie - or maybe that you should be taken to a "gas" chamber for wasting your brain away. I have seen homemade Super 8 movies that put this film to shame. Definitely a new addition to my all-time Top Ten WORST films... it's up there (er, down there) with "Tentacles."
Ted in Gilbert, AZ
The Guns of Navarone
(1961)
Affectionately crafted piece of art that is sadly under-appreciated by the typical modern "soundbite" moviegoer.
15 August 2004
Wow - I used to think "Guns Of Navarone" was a try-hard, almost-there type of near-classic war film that had muffled sound, used a bad coloring process, was poorly lit, was limited by budget and the technology of the time. Boy, was I WRONG - I had seen this film several times, all on conventional/cable TV, VHS and even Laserdisc prior to the recent UCLA restoration now out on DVD. I never completely engaged in the reality/experience of this movie. It was as if I was listening to Beethoven's Ninth on an AM clock radio in an adjacent room. The newly-restored DVD in its original widescreen format showcased on a big screen TV in surround sound is the ONLY way to fully take in this piece of art, unless you perchance get lucky enough to see it in a cine complex.
Unless you have viewed this film in its original condition in a theater or restored, letterboxed with proper-sized screen and sound, your previous/future comments have ZERO merit, as far as I'm concerned. So many people here have commented on this film "lacking action" and being a "bore" - I could not disagree more. Although I have not read the book (something I rarely do anymore due to an unfortunate accident years ago), this movie resembled a well-written novel. It was FULL of REAL character development, bringing you mixed emotions - at times you love, feel for, loathe or despise them - even the German army officer, during the interrogation/capture scene (which I will not spoil), had a warm, admirable quality about him. I will purchase/rent/borrow an audiobook of this, if at all possible, because Alistair MacLean has some of the best written adventure material ever brought to film. The action in this film was aplenty - maybe not a Schwarzeneger thrillride, but that would have made it completely unbelievable. The character development, internal conflict and subplots more than adequately fill the non-action lulls, if you want to call them that. One reviewer here commented on a shipwreck scene of 15 minutes that seemed like forever - the entire realistic shipwreck sequence was barely five minutes long, FYI. Without going into too much "spoiling" detail, there was constant suspense while the Germans were nipping at their heels all film long. It contained espionage, several hand-to-hand combat sequences, several shootings, knifings, cars/trucks being blown up, carjackings, explosions, dive bombings, mortar bombardments, strafings, assassinations, etc. With six men and two women against several dozen Germans, you can't justifiably get much more action packed into a script unless you would unnecessarily/unrealistically insert more just to intensify the film. The film did not really need intensifying as the plot was strong enough on its own merits - as were all the characters and the subplots surrounding them.
The editing is top-notch. This film is lovingly woven into a tapestry with nice artistic dissolves/fades/graphics transitioning scenes (chapters) and furthering character development and story lines - the accompanying music only enhances those transitions like adding melted butter and/or salt to cooked vegetables enhancing their flavor. To me, this film is very warm and comfortable when it needs to be, but also cold and abrasive at times to make its social commentary. Carl Foreman scripted another great masterpiece with his usual pro/anti-war statements wrapped neatly in an entertaining adventure that makes one think. The end retrospective sequence with the Dimitri Tiomkin score is indelibly touching and unforgettable - a rather unorthodox approach for a "war movie."
The sweeping landscape photography and several cultural touches truly captured the beauty and flavor of Greece and its proud people. Ironically, when at Blockbuster, I coincidentally chose this film to view with my son - on the Opening Day of the XXVIII Olympiad, being held of course in Athens, Greece. I read somewhere that the people of Greece still hold this film in high esteem and were/are very proud of the way their nation was portrayed - they should be. Unlike many other movies made abroad, Guns Of Navarone affectionately honored its host country and its people. My 7 year-old film-making-wannabe son absolutely LOVED this movie, even better than his most recent film classic viewings... The Magnificent Seven and Bullitt. When I told him many here at IMDb said this film was boring and over-rated, he commented "are they nuts?" This coming from a kid who loves James Bond, Superman, Jaws, Jurassic Park, Star Wars, Star Trek, Power Rangers, Lost In Space and Jonny Quest as well as Classic Rock, film scores, Legos, Hot Wheels, plastic model kits, gymnastics and PS2. Guess there is hope for the future generation after all.
Some of the very best action/adventure films ever made have very little "constant action," FYI. I recently overheard a teen boy in a video store who said "Raiders was a slow, boring film" - of all things. No wonder the cumulative votes of classic films on IMDb do not entirely mirror or reflect what critics have historically said when they initially rated and/or reviewed them. I try to overlook the current technological advancements of today when compared with films of yesteryear in order to objectively critique a film. GUNS OF NAVARONE is no exception - made before traveling matte (blue screen) technology and CGI effects. Sure, the rear-screen projection photography and miniature work was not perfect, but no other film of its era was, either. Those factors aside, this film is EXTREMELY under-rated - this film is a stand-alone classic of its genre and amongst other all-time great films... a genuine piece of art.
Ranking just under the ten-star rated Bridge On The River Kwai, Guns Of Navarone is an instant-classic and will always be so (on a LARGE SCREEN in its original widescreen format); due to its solid foundation of high production values, endearing score, good writing, strong plot/character development, the fine actors to play those characters and loving direction. Kudos to all who worked on this film. (9.5/10)
Unless you have viewed this film in its original condition in a theater or restored, letterboxed with proper-sized screen and sound, your previous/future comments have ZERO merit, as far as I'm concerned. So many people here have commented on this film "lacking action" and being a "bore" - I could not disagree more. Although I have not read the book (something I rarely do anymore due to an unfortunate accident years ago), this movie resembled a well-written novel. It was FULL of REAL character development, bringing you mixed emotions - at times you love, feel for, loathe or despise them - even the German army officer, during the interrogation/capture scene (which I will not spoil), had a warm, admirable quality about him. I will purchase/rent/borrow an audiobook of this, if at all possible, because Alistair MacLean has some of the best written adventure material ever brought to film. The action in this film was aplenty - maybe not a Schwarzeneger thrillride, but that would have made it completely unbelievable. The character development, internal conflict and subplots more than adequately fill the non-action lulls, if you want to call them that. One reviewer here commented on a shipwreck scene of 15 minutes that seemed like forever - the entire realistic shipwreck sequence was barely five minutes long, FYI. Without going into too much "spoiling" detail, there was constant suspense while the Germans were nipping at their heels all film long. It contained espionage, several hand-to-hand combat sequences, several shootings, knifings, cars/trucks being blown up, carjackings, explosions, dive bombings, mortar bombardments, strafings, assassinations, etc. With six men and two women against several dozen Germans, you can't justifiably get much more action packed into a script unless you would unnecessarily/unrealistically insert more just to intensify the film. The film did not really need intensifying as the plot was strong enough on its own merits - as were all the characters and the subplots surrounding them.
The editing is top-notch. This film is lovingly woven into a tapestry with nice artistic dissolves/fades/graphics transitioning scenes (chapters) and furthering character development and story lines - the accompanying music only enhances those transitions like adding melted butter and/or salt to cooked vegetables enhancing their flavor. To me, this film is very warm and comfortable when it needs to be, but also cold and abrasive at times to make its social commentary. Carl Foreman scripted another great masterpiece with his usual pro/anti-war statements wrapped neatly in an entertaining adventure that makes one think. The end retrospective sequence with the Dimitri Tiomkin score is indelibly touching and unforgettable - a rather unorthodox approach for a "war movie."
The sweeping landscape photography and several cultural touches truly captured the beauty and flavor of Greece and its proud people. Ironically, when at Blockbuster, I coincidentally chose this film to view with my son - on the Opening Day of the XXVIII Olympiad, being held of course in Athens, Greece. I read somewhere that the people of Greece still hold this film in high esteem and were/are very proud of the way their nation was portrayed - they should be. Unlike many other movies made abroad, Guns Of Navarone affectionately honored its host country and its people. My 7 year-old film-making-wannabe son absolutely LOVED this movie, even better than his most recent film classic viewings... The Magnificent Seven and Bullitt. When I told him many here at IMDb said this film was boring and over-rated, he commented "are they nuts?" This coming from a kid who loves James Bond, Superman, Jaws, Jurassic Park, Star Wars, Star Trek, Power Rangers, Lost In Space and Jonny Quest as well as Classic Rock, film scores, Legos, Hot Wheels, plastic model kits, gymnastics and PS2. Guess there is hope for the future generation after all.
Some of the very best action/adventure films ever made have very little "constant action," FYI. I recently overheard a teen boy in a video store who said "Raiders was a slow, boring film" - of all things. No wonder the cumulative votes of classic films on IMDb do not entirely mirror or reflect what critics have historically said when they initially rated and/or reviewed them. I try to overlook the current technological advancements of today when compared with films of yesteryear in order to objectively critique a film. GUNS OF NAVARONE is no exception - made before traveling matte (blue screen) technology and CGI effects. Sure, the rear-screen projection photography and miniature work was not perfect, but no other film of its era was, either. Those factors aside, this film is EXTREMELY under-rated - this film is a stand-alone classic of its genre and amongst other all-time great films... a genuine piece of art.
Ranking just under the ten-star rated Bridge On The River Kwai, Guns Of Navarone is an instant-classic and will always be so (on a LARGE SCREEN in its original widescreen format); due to its solid foundation of high production values, endearing score, good writing, strong plot/character development, the fine actors to play those characters and loving direction. Kudos to all who worked on this film. (9.5/10)
The Whole Ten Yards
(2004)
Give a 1,000 copies of this film to Al Qaeda and they'll beg for mercy.
3 August 2004
Sometimes sequels to good films should not be released... examples: "The Sting 2," "Sister Act 2," "Another 48 Hours," "Dirty Dancing - Havana Nights," "Grumpier Old Men," etc. The latter (Grumpier) was directed by THIS director - that should serve as an omen, for sure.
Thank God Almighty I did not spend a dime on this rental with my Blockbuster Freedom Pass - something I highly recommend if you are frequently unsure of what to rent. This was a movie both me and my wife wanted badly to see, but (luckily) missed in the theaters. We saw the ad for it out on DVD and were excited about renting it. The multiple copies were amazingly all rented out (lots of suckers in this world) and (unluckily), I got one coming back just as I was returning another stinker my tween daughter picked out, "Confessions Of A Teenage Drama Queen." I mouthed my complaints a few times last night as it (Confessions) being one of the worst movies I had seen in recent memory. My sincerest apologies to my daughter... that movie was Oscar-worthy when compared to this film. OMG, watching this film was gut-wrenchingly torturous. I laughed (admittedly) at this supposed-comedy TWO times (my wife three times)... for no more than a second or two, while the original film made us both laugh almost continuously throughout.
The screenwriter obviously stole the entire story of the original (Whole Nine Yards) film's French protégé' - this I know, because the story writing of this unnecessary sequel was nothing even close to this film's view-worthy predecessor. I feel so sorry for those actors who could not have been paid enough to return and act in this awfully-scripted sequel. If a joke was not funny at first, the screenwriter kept dredging it back up over and over ad nausea. To make matters worse, he even did a retelling of the events to Oz (played by Matthew Perry) the dentist's receptionist/assistant, as if we left the theater and returned, I guess - fat chance of returning. A good example of how poorly written this screenplay is... they (the main characters) argued over accidentally locking a bad guy in the trunk of their car for a scene that went on (seemingly) forever, in fact, in the scene following, they were STILL arguing that irrelevant point. The story was so loosely tied together and with Kevin Pollack's horrendously overacted "bad poppa" type of character, this movie almost instantly became ingraining on my nerves, causing me a headache. This review is my headache and bellyache therapy, I guess.
Had I actually paid for a ticket at the theater, I would have asked the manager for my money back or comp passes (along with some Excedrin and Alka Seltzer) after thirty minutes, if I lasted that long, complaining of becoming ill and unable to finish the movie. I kept watching the DVD counter, waiting for this movie to mercifully end. Although my wife would not admit it, I think she was thinking the same thing. My advice - see the first one and leave well enough alone - like the Dodgers SHOULD have done with their nearly-perfect 2004 team at the trade deadline. The "Whole Nine Yards" was not a classic by any means, but it was well worth its money in full - however "The Whole Ten Yards" was not even worth being paid to view. Not quite as bad as "Tentacles" which is still laughably the worst movie I have ever seen, but then again, this movie wasn't even laughable... just painful. (1/10)
Ted in Gilbert, AZ
Thank God Almighty I did not spend a dime on this rental with my Blockbuster Freedom Pass - something I highly recommend if you are frequently unsure of what to rent. This was a movie both me and my wife wanted badly to see, but (luckily) missed in the theaters. We saw the ad for it out on DVD and were excited about renting it. The multiple copies were amazingly all rented out (lots of suckers in this world) and (unluckily), I got one coming back just as I was returning another stinker my tween daughter picked out, "Confessions Of A Teenage Drama Queen." I mouthed my complaints a few times last night as it (Confessions) being one of the worst movies I had seen in recent memory. My sincerest apologies to my daughter... that movie was Oscar-worthy when compared to this film. OMG, watching this film was gut-wrenchingly torturous. I laughed (admittedly) at this supposed-comedy TWO times (my wife three times)... for no more than a second or two, while the original film made us both laugh almost continuously throughout.
The screenwriter obviously stole the entire story of the original (Whole Nine Yards) film's French protégé' - this I know, because the story writing of this unnecessary sequel was nothing even close to this film's view-worthy predecessor. I feel so sorry for those actors who could not have been paid enough to return and act in this awfully-scripted sequel. If a joke was not funny at first, the screenwriter kept dredging it back up over and over ad nausea. To make matters worse, he even did a retelling of the events to Oz (played by Matthew Perry) the dentist's receptionist/assistant, as if we left the theater and returned, I guess - fat chance of returning. A good example of how poorly written this screenplay is... they (the main characters) argued over accidentally locking a bad guy in the trunk of their car for a scene that went on (seemingly) forever, in fact, in the scene following, they were STILL arguing that irrelevant point. The story was so loosely tied together and with Kevin Pollack's horrendously overacted "bad poppa" type of character, this movie almost instantly became ingraining on my nerves, causing me a headache. This review is my headache and bellyache therapy, I guess.
Had I actually paid for a ticket at the theater, I would have asked the manager for my money back or comp passes (along with some Excedrin and Alka Seltzer) after thirty minutes, if I lasted that long, complaining of becoming ill and unable to finish the movie. I kept watching the DVD counter, waiting for this movie to mercifully end. Although my wife would not admit it, I think she was thinking the same thing. My advice - see the first one and leave well enough alone - like the Dodgers SHOULD have done with their nearly-perfect 2004 team at the trade deadline. The "Whole Nine Yards" was not a classic by any means, but it was well worth its money in full - however "The Whole Ten Yards" was not even worth being paid to view. Not quite as bad as "Tentacles" which is still laughably the worst movie I have ever seen, but then again, this movie wasn't even laughable... just painful. (1/10)
Ted in Gilbert, AZ
One of the best 2-D animated films I have seen in a long time
5 July 2003
I liked Spirit, but loved Sinbad. Having two kids 10 and under, I see a lot of these types of films. My 10 year-old daughter did not like either Spirit or Nemo, but my 6 year-old son did. They both, however said this film was much better than either and most other recent animated films they have seen, including Monsters Inc. From the moment this film opens, it has brilliant color and movement. The sea monster sequence was teriffic and I particularly liked the CGI ocean waves. The ships had tremendous detail, especially the rigging. Dreamworks spent 4 years making this project - and it showed.
All of the voice work was very good - and in spite of what others here have said about Pitt, I thought he was perfect for the part. He had plenty of emotion - not overdone, but restrained - caged in a subtle manner, just like you would expect from a sailor and pirate. Jones was fantastic as Marina, as one would expect, but the true stand-out was Pfifer. I had forgotten she was the voice of Eris, the Goddess of Chaos. I kept asking myself "WHO is that - she must be very sexy in real life..." - uh, duh. I think the older Michelle gets, the sexier she gets - and her voice work is no different. It (her voice) was so silky and seductively smooth - to match the on-screen presence of the brilliantly-animated Eris. A little of Eris went a long way - you always felt her omnipotent presence, due in most part to Pfifer. There were a few men in the audience laughing at some of her comments on screen. The laugh was the kind of defensive laugh that we men use when we are are turned on. No doubt - what a voice.
Many on here have criticized the dialog as being too modern, not traditional enough. The simpler dialog, to me, made it more believable. I have never understood the reasoning of using complex word usage by such simple people as pirates and sailors. I am sure that if way back when, their dialog were perfectly translated into modern English, one would not see much difference than today's banter. Thees's, Thou's and Whitherest's are stereotypical usage of Medieval times. Just because those words were used in print does not necessarily mean they spoke that way in everyday informal conversation.
Unlike other recent animated films, there was no lagging preachy portion, sermonette or message. Good. It is about time that someone makes a film just for its entertainment value - like this year's Oscar-winning Chicago, for instance. Entertaining it was, too. Sinbad had me hooked all the way, wanting a sequel at the end. To me, 2-D animation is still my favorite. Although I like some 3-D animation, I tend to look for its flaws all throughout the movies. With 2-D, I just want entertainment and vivid color, not pseudo-reality. Sinbad's color was some of the best in years - many subtle shades, blended in dramatic fashion.
I thought the action sequences were carefully handled and put you incredibly on the edge of your seat. Unlike Disney's recent Tarzan, whose real claim to fame was the tree sequences, this film has real nail-biting action and a good, non-sappy story. The mythological setting seemed as if it actually was part of written history. To me, most fantasy films are just too surreal for believability, but this one, albeit 2-D, was unlike many of its animated and non-animated predecessors. The sirens sequence was an outright masterpiece. The Gates of Tartarus sequence was top-notch and almost believable. I won't spoil it for you as to why I say... almost.
Maybe I'm naive, but I do not know how this film achieved a PG rating. Nothing from what I saw warranted that - it was good, clean family entertainment that was, for the most part, an adult-oriented film. The usual kiddie-aimed characters, like talking animals did not exist. Spike the (non-talking) dog was the only real child-oriented comic relief character - and it was not over the top, either. Rat (a nicknamed sailor) was also comical, but was again, not aimed at the kids, although my kids laughed at him. The arguments between Marina and Sinbad were also comical. Some said this film lacks humor - not true - it lacks silliness.
The music score was reminiscent of past adventure films - a real symphonic score! There were no modern power ballads, synthesizers or overdubbed vocals - just great symphonic music. It truly followed the story on screen and complimented the action quite well. For those of you who like animated features that have songs sung by Michael Bolton, Bryan Adams and Phil Collins, etc. - you will be disappointed in Sinbad's soundtrack. I am getting the CD, for sure.
Last, but not least, this film concludes in fine emotional form. Even though you know how it will end, you still feel an emotional pull in one of the final scenes. There were little kids (and some adults) in the audience crying at that point which, unlike previous reviewers, I will not spoil. When I review a film, I review its merits and/or flaws. I don't, however, retell the ENTIRE story and plot - that is NOT a review - that is a retelling, summation or synopsis.
"Sinbad: Legend of the Seven Seas" is a rare find - good adult and AND family fare entertainment. It is not a "feel-good" movie, although it achieves that result. It is not a modern, priceless 2-D animated masterpiece like "Beauty and the Beast" or "The Little Mermaid," but it it comes pretty darned close. I highly recommend seeing this film.
9/10 or ***1/2 out of ****
Ted in Gilbert, AZ
All of the voice work was very good - and in spite of what others here have said about Pitt, I thought he was perfect for the part. He had plenty of emotion - not overdone, but restrained - caged in a subtle manner, just like you would expect from a sailor and pirate. Jones was fantastic as Marina, as one would expect, but the true stand-out was Pfifer. I had forgotten she was the voice of Eris, the Goddess of Chaos. I kept asking myself "WHO is that - she must be very sexy in real life..." - uh, duh. I think the older Michelle gets, the sexier she gets - and her voice work is no different. It (her voice) was so silky and seductively smooth - to match the on-screen presence of the brilliantly-animated Eris. A little of Eris went a long way - you always felt her omnipotent presence, due in most part to Pfifer. There were a few men in the audience laughing at some of her comments on screen. The laugh was the kind of defensive laugh that we men use when we are are turned on. No doubt - what a voice.
Many on here have criticized the dialog as being too modern, not traditional enough. The simpler dialog, to me, made it more believable. I have never understood the reasoning of using complex word usage by such simple people as pirates and sailors. I am sure that if way back when, their dialog were perfectly translated into modern English, one would not see much difference than today's banter. Thees's, Thou's and Whitherest's are stereotypical usage of Medieval times. Just because those words were used in print does not necessarily mean they spoke that way in everyday informal conversation.
Unlike other recent animated films, there was no lagging preachy portion, sermonette or message. Good. It is about time that someone makes a film just for its entertainment value - like this year's Oscar-winning Chicago, for instance. Entertaining it was, too. Sinbad had me hooked all the way, wanting a sequel at the end. To me, 2-D animation is still my favorite. Although I like some 3-D animation, I tend to look for its flaws all throughout the movies. With 2-D, I just want entertainment and vivid color, not pseudo-reality. Sinbad's color was some of the best in years - many subtle shades, blended in dramatic fashion.
I thought the action sequences were carefully handled and put you incredibly on the edge of your seat. Unlike Disney's recent Tarzan, whose real claim to fame was the tree sequences, this film has real nail-biting action and a good, non-sappy story. The mythological setting seemed as if it actually was part of written history. To me, most fantasy films are just too surreal for believability, but this one, albeit 2-D, was unlike many of its animated and non-animated predecessors. The sirens sequence was an outright masterpiece. The Gates of Tartarus sequence was top-notch and almost believable. I won't spoil it for you as to why I say... almost.
Maybe I'm naive, but I do not know how this film achieved a PG rating. Nothing from what I saw warranted that - it was good, clean family entertainment that was, for the most part, an adult-oriented film. The usual kiddie-aimed characters, like talking animals did not exist. Spike the (non-talking) dog was the only real child-oriented comic relief character - and it was not over the top, either. Rat (a nicknamed sailor) was also comical, but was again, not aimed at the kids, although my kids laughed at him. The arguments between Marina and Sinbad were also comical. Some said this film lacks humor - not true - it lacks silliness.
The music score was reminiscent of past adventure films - a real symphonic score! There were no modern power ballads, synthesizers or overdubbed vocals - just great symphonic music. It truly followed the story on screen and complimented the action quite well. For those of you who like animated features that have songs sung by Michael Bolton, Bryan Adams and Phil Collins, etc. - you will be disappointed in Sinbad's soundtrack. I am getting the CD, for sure.
Last, but not least, this film concludes in fine emotional form. Even though you know how it will end, you still feel an emotional pull in one of the final scenes. There were little kids (and some adults) in the audience crying at that point which, unlike previous reviewers, I will not spoil. When I review a film, I review its merits and/or flaws. I don't, however, retell the ENTIRE story and plot - that is NOT a review - that is a retelling, summation or synopsis.
"Sinbad: Legend of the Seven Seas" is a rare find - good adult and AND family fare entertainment. It is not a "feel-good" movie, although it achieves that result. It is not a modern, priceless 2-D animated masterpiece like "Beauty and the Beast" or "The Little Mermaid," but it it comes pretty darned close. I highly recommend seeing this film.
9/10 or ***1/2 out of ****
Ted in Gilbert, AZ
Tell Your Friends