Reviews

11 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Zodiac (2007)
10/10
Engrossing Crime Drama, A Great Film Overall
3 March 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I can't remember the last time I saw a movie in which I didn't want to miss a single frame. "Zodiac", an excellent film by director David Fincher fills that bill however. The movie is gripping and full of tension from start to finish even though the story of the infamous "Zodiac" killer of northern California is well known to many of us who lived through it. It is a completely fascinating crime drama, one which I think actually surpasses Fincher's noted "Se7en" in quality.

For those who are unfamiliar with the story, this strange killer terrorized northern California during the 70's and late 60's and relied on cryptology as well as astrological symbols to further his reign of terror. Completely unrelated to another "Zodiac" killer who used similar astrological codes and stalked the New York City area in the early 90's, the story of the California "Zodiac" has found it's way into the annals of crime lore, possibly ranking up with such stories as the "Black Dahlia", or "Jack the Ripper" as one of the most noted unsolved crime mysteries to date.

"Zodiac" captures the look and feel of late 60's and early 70's San Francisco and Northern California, an era of the Patty Hearst kidnapping, "free love" and Ronald Reagen as California governor. As a "period piece", the film is remarkably authentic, capturing all aspects of that era down to the famous giant "smiles" on the now defunct PSA (Pacific Southwest Airlines) airplanes. It looked as if it actually had been made during the time period in which it was set, rather than almost 30 years later. The cinematography is excellent throughout and there are two particularly breathtaking shots in the movie, one of the valley around Modesto, California at night and another taken from the top of the Golden Gate bridge.

"Zodiac" in fact reminded me in both look, feel and attention to detail of another great thriller about the same era in US history, (albeit a political thriller in that case) the great "All The President's Men", by Alan Pakula. I found the "Golden Gate Bridge" shot in this movie to be very reminiscent of the famous shot taken from the top of the Library of Congress in Pakula's thriller and the entire movie details a similarly intense, relentless quest for the truth as in "All The President's Men".

Fincher keeps the action taut, with a sense of underlying danger permeating the entire movie. While one might quibble with a few scenes here and there (for example, one scene where a woman and her baby are kidnapped by the Zodiac is never fully developed or it's outcome fully explained) the movie is particularly thorough in detailing the story. The acting is universally excellent throughout the film and Robert Downey Jr. is particularly good, playing a quirky, alcoholic reporter who faces the same type of demons that Downey himself apparently faced earlier in his life.

One of the better crime dramas in recent years, I would highly recommend this film.
4 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Scary Movie (2000)
1/10
"Scary Movie" alright...because it's so Bad!!
21 April 2001
The scariest aspect of this movie is that it made it to the screen in the first place, that some people apparently think it is funny and/or worth watching and that some well-known film critics who should have known better actually gave it fairly positive reviews. It is absolutely the worst movie I have seen in a long, long time....the bottom of the barrel.

Replete with bathroom humor and tasteless, vulgar jokes throughout the movie, there is something in it to offend everyone. Supposedly a comedy or spoof, it is very rarely actually funny and succeeds primarily in being only boring and repugnant.

It is easy to understand why the film industry has been so lowly regarded the past year or two (and feeling considerable financial pain as well) when it puts out dreck like this.

Don't bother seeing it...save your money and your time for a movie that doesn't spend all of it's time in the sewer, as this one does.
11 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Grease 2 (1982)
1/10
What a Terrible Sequel to a Great Movie!!!!!!
30 July 2000
I think most people are accustomed to sequels that are not as good as the originals. There are exceptions of course, such as the Godfather, Lethal Weapon, etc. which had some great follow-ups. Rarely are there sequels as bad as this one is however. It is a perfectly awful movie.

I hate it when film makers try to capitalize on a movie as successful as "Grease" by trying to foist junk like this off on the public as a follow-up. The sequel doesn't have the same director, writers or major cast members of the original movie and it shows!

There *are* some decent cast carry-overs from the original movie but they are wasted (as is just about everything else about this movie). I'm sure they must have later regretted lending their considerable names to this disaster.

I have rarely heard so many forgettable (read: terrible) songs in one movie. Don't waste your time on this one. Stick with the original. It's incomparably better.
21 out of 38 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Not Your Typical Story Line! What a Terrific Off-Beat Thriller.
18 July 2000
Great Suspense and Atmosphere. This movie instantly became one of my all-time favorites and is difficult to describe without giving too much away. More than most movies I can remember, reading too many comments about it's content beforehand can detract from the viewing experience (and a great one at that!) and ruin the suspense. I will try not to give too much about the film away beforehand.

First of all, I loved the production quality, atmosphere and locale. It would be a great movie to see on Halloween night for example, at least in my opinion. It really can be watched anytime however and will be just as great. The acting was high quality, all the way around but especially with Jodie Foster and Martin Sheen and the direction and score are excellent as well.

I had a problem with the plausibility of Jodie Foster's character behaving essentially as an adult. It was a little tough for me to buy into a 13 (or newly turned 14 year old) cooking gourmet meals, serving fine wines, listening to Chopin and generally acting much older than her chronological age.

Even taking into consideration the events in her life which apparently had shaped her personality, she seemed too mature for her age. If you put that concern aside however and accept it as a given premise of the movie you can sit back and enjoy the fun of trying to figure out what's going on.

And trying to figure out what's going on really *is* fun in this movie. Figuring out what's going on with her mysterious father is enough to keep you occupied in itself (if you think you've figured out what's going on with him you will find later that you probably haven't) and that's only one aspect of this complex scenario.

I hate when movies this good are not in general circulation any longer. Brian de Palma's "Sisters" and many other excellent movies also fall into this category. I can't figure out why studios can't figure out ways to continue to make them available to the public, after all...they went to the trouble to make them in the first place.

If you do get a chance to see "Little Girl Who Lives Down the Lane" however, jump at it. You aren't likely to be disappointed.
91 out of 104 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Crew (1994)
2/10
Great Scenery and Photography...Ridiculous Plot...Downhill From There!!
17 June 2000
Well...OK..there is a decent stereo score too but the plot, if you can call it that is beyond ridiculous. Characters are totally unsympathetic to the extent that they are defined at all and no one in the movie is at all likeable. Everyone deserved the situation they found themselves in as far as I was concerned.

There is some great nautical photography and scenery in the tropics however. All of the action takes place on boats, in the ocean or on beaches.
14 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Not Your Ordinary Action Film, Very Underrated
20 February 2000
More than any film I can remember in a long time, I have never understood why this film hasn't gotten higher ratings than it has. The plot, while not ingenious (and even somewhat predictable) is still exciting and will keep you engrossed.

The film's creators get a lot of points in my book for locale creativity. Instead of setting the film in some predictable location such as New York, Los Angeles, Miami or San Francisco they set it in Pittsburgh, PA, definitely not your ordinary movie location. It's one that adds a wonderful freshness to the movie however.

The location shooting is outstanding. The scenery is different and excellent, the photography is great, even spectacular in places and the action is on a par with some of the best action films ever, including Bullitt. Who would normally think to expect extensive boating and water action in a state as synonymous with mountains as Pennsylvania is? That alone is worth taking a look at this movie.

I do not usually care much for Bruce Willis. I thought he was very well cast in this movie however and Sara Jessica Parker added extra special chemistry. The cast is much better than average overall and includes such outstanding actors as Andre Braugher, of the outstanding tv series "Homicide". I thought that the casting in general, as well as the photography, location and action very adequately made up for any possible deficiencies in the plot itself.

I would warn that there is extensive foul language in this film, more than is necessary even for a film of this genre in my opinion and probably it's biggest drawback. I would still say that the film is well worth watching when your in the mood for some escapist fun and action fare. As I said earlier, I think the film deserves higher ratings than it's gotten so far. I've watched it twice now (it was just as good the second time, in fact even better) and that definitely won't be the last time I watch it.
66 out of 82 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Game (1997)
3/10
This is supposed to be believable?
1 January 2000
The best description I heard of this movie once was that it is a complete "crock". I can't think of a description I could agree with more. While the movie has good production values and a good cast, the plot is totally unbelievable. I can't imagine anyone wanting to do what happens in this movie or having the technical means to do it even if they *did* want to. If this movie were listed in the category of "fantasy" it might have had a chance. As a drama however, it is a complete farce. Save your time and money.
4 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Sisters (1972)
A Terrific Thriller !!
5 September 1999
This is a terrific thriller, one of De Palma's best! It's one to watch on a dark stormy night, with a fire in the fireplace. Don't watch it alone though.....well, maybe you better watch it alone because you may never again be certain about the person your with after seeing this one.

There is violence and gore in this movie but it is not excessive, in fact it is fairly mild by today's standards. The movie opens in a very low key manner but before you realize it, the suspense is gripping you completely. The scenes in the hospital are a visual treat and build powerfully to a dramatic finale. The only thing comparable that I've seen in other movies is in Hitchcock's work, in my opinion.

This movie is out of print and hard to find. There are still good used copies around though and it's occasionally on TV. It's well worth the effort to try and see it.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Milo (1998)
2/10
Easily one of the worst films I've seen in many years!!
29 August 1999
This is easily one of the worst films I've seen in many years. I started viewing the film not expecting much and that is exactly what it delivered....not much! In fact, it ended up delivering even less than I expected. My first reaction when I saw the opening portions of the film was that I would probably end up rating it a "4". I thought that it seemed to have reasonably good photography and a haunting atmosphere.

As the film progressed however, the rating kept going down and down in my mind mainly due to pedestrian acting and a plot that went from being just plain silly and tasteless at the beginning to being both silly and repugnant near the end. By the time the movie was over, I was willing to rate it no more than a "1".

Don't waste your time or money on this one.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Entertaining and Unique
14 June 1999
I found this to be an underrated movie, particularly by some movie critics. The premise (medical thriller) is different than those normally found routinely in the movies. Beyond that, it has an above average cast, with Gene Hackman leading the way. His acting alone raises the quality of the movie although I found Hugh Grant's character to be fairly pedestrian and uninspiring.

While I think he (Hugh Grant) is a good actor, I think he is miscast and that a different actor might have been more convincing in this particular role. I always enjoy Sarah Jessica Parker's movies and found her to be quite good in a role much different than those in which she normally performs. The direction is well done with some unusual locales and very tense, exciting scenes along the way.

Despite the fact that you can tell early on where the movie is headed, it still works as both a thriller and a medical drama and is worth watching just to see how it unfolds. You'll find some very thought provoking ethical questions along the way as well. This is a unique thriller, a movie well worth seeing in my opinion.
7 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
A classic - one of the very best ever!!
4 January 1999
If I had to pick a single movie as my personal favorite, this would be it. It is hard to find any faults in this movie and it deserves all of the praise it has received. Hitchcock movies are among my very favorites and this is the best of them all in my book.

I think the crop-dusting and Mt. Rushmore scenes are two of the very best scenes ever shot in movies. The acting, plot and scenery are superb and there is hardly a dull moment. I wish they still made movies like this today and I think the only ones that come close to this quality now may be some of Stephen Spielberg's.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed