Change Your Image
macsroyal
Reviews
Gojira tai Hedora (1971)
#1 for the memories....
Ah yes! Godzilla vs. The Smog Monster. Thank God for AMC, The SciFi Channel, and cable in general.
I was 9 years old when this movie came out in the theaters back in my home town, a suburb of Cleveland, OH. 9 year olds didn't go to the movies often because there were none of the multiplexes we have today. To my surprise, my mom offered to take us kids in the neighborhood to see Godzilla vs. The Smog Monster at the Lake Theater matinée. I was so excited. I was going to see Godzilla (loved all his movies as a kid), have popcorn, and be inside a huge movie theater!
This experience was 32 years ago! Until last Saturday, I could only remember 4 things: 1) Waiting in my seat seaming like forever for the movie to start, 2) The Smog Monster sucking on a smoke stack, 3) The Smog Monster sliming down a flight of steps, withdrawing, and a cat being stuck in the slime residue, and 4) A psychedelic discothèque.
Fast forward 32 years to 2004. Last Saturday night I was surfing cable and stumbled upon Godzilla vs. Hedora. I said to myself "Hmmmmm
I don't remember this movie and thought I saw them all. What the heck
it's Godzilla and I am up for some cheese."
To my utter surprise, fascination, and joy I quickly saw the monster suck on a smoke stack and I said "Oh my gosh!!!! It's the Smog Monster!!!!"
I had sudden flashbacks of my childhood. All of my memories returned!
OK, it's a bad movie. But so what? It served its purpose. It was designed for a 9 year old child and gave him memories of a lifetime. As bad as it is, it must have entertained more children than just me because it has stood the test of time returning to AMC and The SciFi channel.
I say, "Thanks for the memories."
Phone Booth (2002)
Frustrating...
I rented this movie over the holiday (Labor Day) weekend and found it very frustrating.
The movie is clearly a high budget Hollywood movie with good acting and quality visuals.
But the people are sooooooooooooooooooooo stupid. You mean to tell me that the police could not figure out that a 'sniper' or a generally 'bad guy' is on the other end of the phone line of which the victim is speaking? But, noooooooooo. The cops drone on about how the lead character in the phone booth is actually the bad guy.
How long would it take a competent cop to see that the pimp in the movie was shot IN THE BACK so it couldn't have been from the dude in the phone booth? How long would it take for the police to show up with huge microphones (the kind you see on NFL sidelines) to find out what the victim is saying ("sniff sniff - Why are you doing this to me? Why are you killing people?") to a unknown person on the phone?
This ruined the whole movie for me. It took 60 minutes for the cops to figure out the guy in the phone booth was a VICTIM and not the shooter.
AND...when the cops DID figure out that the dude in the booth was a target of a sniper, they let the victim's wife continue to get out of the police car (where she was safe) and back in to the path of the sniper's bullet.
I just couldn't take the defiance of human nature of this entire movie.
Turns out that this is a "Yeah, right!!!" movie for me. (Yeah, right - as in Rambo running across an open field with 20 M16s shooting at him and never getting hit - yeah, right!)
The cops (and prostitutes for that matter) couldn't figure out the guy in the booth was in trouble and not the bad guy?
Yeah, right!
Led Zeppelin DVD (2003)
Satisfies a Taste
Let's not psycho analyze the quality and artistry of this Led Zeppelin DVD set. Led Zeppelin was such an innovative group that many of their efforts and attitudes resulted in a large void today.
When Zeppelin ruled the world (yes, they were bigger than the Beatles), their confidence allowed them NOT to bow to pressure to put out singles, name albums (their forth has no title), and most importantly, not allow recording or photographing of concert footage. Peter Grant (manager) was notorious in his violence towards bootleggers.
Here we are over 30 years later begging for something, ANYTHING that will allow us to remember the power and drive of Led Zeppelin in its prime.
This Led Zeppelin DVD does just that.
Yes, the quality is waning in some shots. But who cares? We take what we can get from the vaults of Jimmy Page.
Here are some of my thoughts:
I can not believe all the 'heavy lifting' Bonzo did in the performances. While Plant merely sang and JPJ kept it simple, often times Jimmy Page and Bonzo would face each other and hammer the rhythm and guitar together. Bonzo had to be thoroughly exhausted after each and every show.
The acoustic sets were unbelievable! Led Zeppelin was 'unplugged' 15 years before MTV knew the meaning of the word!
Watch Jimmy Page up close. You'll quickly see that Slash, Joe Perry, and even Eddie Van Halen (and his 'hammer-on') were wannabes at one time. The way they copied Jimmy Page is uncanny!
Songs of note: Trampled Under Foot is especially cool. A good 10 minute jam! All of the Royal Albert Hall performance is worth the price of the DVD alone. The acoustic ballads including Going To California and That's The Way were wonderful. They were of excellent quality as well! To here Achilles' Last Stand live in 1979 was absolutely riff bashing!
Any die hard Zep fan will be very pleased.
What is sad and profound about the DVD is Robert Plant's last words in Knebenworth 1979: 'Thank you for a wonderful 11 years'
It was as if he knew it was their swan song.
Showgirls (1995)
What a hoot!
LOL, I am 'Laughing Out Loud' as I type this!
This movie is so bad, it's funny. As I've mentioned in past reviews, I like to rent 'the worst movies of all time' to see what all the fuss is about. I had the pleasure of renting Showgirls over the weekend.
I don't know where to start. First, the movie is offensive to a lot of people. Consider this 'UNNECESSARY' dialogue that goes something like this: He says "I want to make love to you." She says "Not now, I have my period." He says "No way!" she says "Check if you don't believe me." So the guy sticks his hand down her pants, grins, then smells his fingers.
What a mess! I wasn't really offended by this flick because I have seen enough porno. But what a hoot. What what kind of writer and director are these guys? Why not just hire Nina Hartley and Tom Byron and go for broke?
The acting is so bad. The dialogue is much worse. So much so, I fell out of my seat laughing. Consider when one of the dancing females falls on stage and cries out in horrific pain "My knee, my knee, oh my God, my knee!" A stage hand comes out quickly to help her and touches her knee, she screams, and he says "It's her knee!" LOL, I can't stop laughing.
Anyway, if you are like me and enjoy laughing at bad movies, this is a MUST. Considered one of the worst of all time, I recommend having some laughs.
Enjoy!
The Ring (2002)
Just another tired ending....
/* This review MAY include spoilers - depending on what information you deem important. */
I gave "The Ring" an objective try Thanksgiving evening.
My knowledge of the movie was limited to understanding A) If you watch a specific video tape, you will die in 7 days, B) The movie is a recent addition to the 'scary movie' genre, and C) the movie has been doing quite well at the box office.
I do not profess to be some intellectually pompous boob who will critically analyze every detail, both explained and unexplained, to death. However, I have to say on a high level objective viewing of this film, "The Ring" was disappointingly tired.
I really liked the film's premise (see A above). Wouldn't it be frightening to know that in 7 days a creepy death will fall upon you? The way in which the main character re analyzed the video a second time (Why not? She's going to die anyway, right?) and discovered clues as to it's origin was fascinating. The video itself was creepy and well done. The young heroine's perseverance to get to the bottom of the video's meaning was riveting. ...and then I got tired, really tired.
First off, I am tired of every creepy movie (see: The Shining, Six Sense, et. al.) having some young kid who 'sees inside of the mind of the evil doer.' This movie has the same old clichés: The boy says to mom "She's yelling out to be released," and the boy draws deep disturbing pictures of a far off evil place using his crayons. Of course, when the time comes that mom must figure out a clue or two - she turns to the son and says "What is she trying to say?"
This has been done a million times.
In lies my potential *spoiler*. This movie has the proverbial person (in this case, a little girl) who 'disappeared' 25 years ago without a trace - she was abused by her parents who wanted a perfect child but became troubled when they discovered their only child had a mental illness. So the child mysteriously 'disappeared.' ...and today, we have a young boy telling his mom "She's yelling out to be released."
This has been done a million times. ...and then I got tired, really tired.
The visuals and special effects were good. It was a good premise, yet it went so wrong - ESPECIALLY the ending. Wait! Did the movie really end?
This movie had all of the traditional clichés of 'catching up with the girl' by the end. The movie should have ended. But no. When mom tells her son "the girl has been released," her son replies "what did you do that for? You shouldn't have done that!"
We get 20 more minutes.
This movie had all the makings of a good creepy movie with a riveting premise. But, inevitably it got tired with endless flashbacks, child clichés and a plot - not only done a million times - that would not end!
Metropolis (1927)
A Fascinating Experience
I had the extraordinary opportunity to view the 75th anniversary of Fritz Lang's stunning Metropolis at the fully restored historic Normal Theater in Normal, Illinois.
Metropolis is one of the sci-fi movies that is always referenced in a Discovery Channel or TLC documentary on the history of films and/or science fiction. The only 'clip' of Metropolis shown is the huge sky scrapers nearly blocking out the sun and high level roads and airplanes streaming the sky. My impression was that this was the only film footage that remained of the 1927 classic. However, to my surprise, I saw 'Metropolis' on the marquee of the Normal Theater. Before viewing the film, I had to get more information. What I found regarding Metropolis was both stunning and depressing.
The total accuracy of the information is questionable. However, my understanding is that the original film ran over 3 hours long. Through the ravages of time and disrespect, the film had been cut down to versions less than 90 minutes long. I also learned that the most recent release of Metropolis was more that of a 'rock opera' worthy of MTV than that of a classic movie house.
To my stunning pleasure, Normal Theater would have nothing of this disrespect. The 123 minute version I viewed was the most accurate, fully restored, full length version of the legendary classic. This includes the original 1927 orchestral score! Yes, the ravages of time have caused the loss of nearly 1/4 of the original film. However, in this stunning re-release, effort is taken to 'fill in the blanks' with story cards at the precise moments where the missing film occur. The plot flows with all of the gaps filled.
The story of Metropolis is a freighting one. It reflects the political arguments we have today - the alleged growing gap between rich and poor and the elimination of the 'middle class.' Workers who keep the city running live below and work in sweat shops while those with power live high atop penthouses above the city. When the son of the city 'leader' discovers how the working class is treated, he heads to the 'machine' factory to be with the workers. In the process he finds a beautiful woman deep below the city who takes care of the worker's children while the workers are slaving over their labor. The 'leader' soon learns of his son's exploits and hires a mad scientist to create a robot in the woman's likeness to head to the factories below to destroy any hint of rebellion.
This movie is considered one of the greatest sci-fi movies of all time. It is so hard and unfair to attempt to compare Metropolis to the bloated budget special effect blockbusters of today. After all, how many full length SILENT movies have people seen? This was my first, and most likely my last (not by choice but by availability). With this in mind, I cleared my mind and attempted to vision the reaction of the crowds of 1927.
In this light I can say that Metropolis was an awesome movie! It's fun to see the actors 'over react' to things so the audience can follow the plot. The obsession of make-up on the faces of the cast is a hoot. But I was surprised how few story cards were really necessary to follow the plot. For 123 minutes I sat their riveted to the characters as if I had full sound. I was fully concerned about the plight of the characters involved.
The most stunning thing about Fritz Lang's Metropolis is the painstaking detail and special effects. There are thousands of extras, huge sets, flooding water, and crumbling buildings. The mad scientist scene where the robot comes to life is fantastic. I can honestly now say I know exactly where all of the future sci-fi movies obtained their influence. Hollywood's Frankenstein was born of this movie. More recently, Blade Runner, the Metropolis of Batman, Dark City, and The Fifth Element.
To see this 'historic' movie in it's closest to the original form was a wonderful experience. I now have a sense of history and the evolution of classic film making. I encourage everyone to see this film (the original version - and music) if given the opportunity.
Metropolis is truly fascinating.
Snatch (2000)
Know what you are in for...
Snatch is a good movie! The dialogue between the character is some of the most dynamic I have heard in a long time.
However, I do feel sorry for the poor sap who rents this movie with no preconceived notion of what the movie is about or whether it is comedy or drama. Snatch is the type of movie that shocks you from the opening scene. Not by the violence, but by the interlocking twists and turns of the characters involved.
NO doubt, this is a hilarious comedy.
Many have described the plot as complicated, thin, or even irrelevant.
After my second viewing (I required two viewings just to make sure I could remember who was who and who said what), I realized that the plot is solid and an integral part of the movie.
A group of crooks dressed up as stereotyped Jews steal a huge diamond. The diamond is brought to London. Then (at least) 5 sub plots occur during the movie: There is Russian mobster Boris 'The Blade' Yurinov who attempts to secure the diamond. There is an American mobster Cousin Abraham 'Avi' Denovitz who comes to London in an effort to secure the diamond. There are 3 black petty thieves who are hired to secure the diamond. There is 'Brick Top' Polford - a gangster boxing promoter who later finds out about the diamond, and finally there is Turkish, the narrator of the movie, and his buddy Tommy who are in deep s**t with the boxing promoter and they know nothing about the diamond...BUT....
I will stop right there.
It is obvious that Pulp Fiction played a MAJOR influence on this movie. The plot(s) go in various directions, are often out of sequence, and then come full circle at the end. This is not an insult to Guy Ritchie for using Pulp Fiction as an influence. After all, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery
What makes this movie so good is the dialogue. My personal favorite characters were the 3 black thieves AND their dog. No point quoting them here because their thick English accents and the nature of their dialogue are necessary to put the humor over the top. I never laughed so hard at dog and his squeaky toy. Priceless!
I will admit, from a realistic standpoint, there were several things that bothered me about this move. The biggest problem was the non stop shooting of guns in public places, city streets, and no one notices or even cares? In one scene, Bullet Tooth Tony enters a pub, orders a dark beer, sits at a table and proceeds to pull out his gun and describe it to the thieves. Five minutes later he empties no less than two clips inside the bar, and no one notices????
I know, I know, I am nitpicking. Perhaps Guy Ritchie addresses this issue by having the police show up in full force at the end of the movie. Don't worry, that wasn't really a spoiler as they aren't really relevant.
As I said, this is a good movie. I highly recommend it.
Now you know what you are in for!
The Time Machine (2002)
Yep, it's kinda bad...
I am going to conclude with some spoilers, so don't read any further if you plan on renting this flick...
I love these types of sci-fi movies. I also like renting movies that the critics pan. This is one of those flicks...
I started out liking the movie. I liked the old late 1800's set. I liked the special effects of time travel. I like how the main character hopped of the machine a few times on his way to 800,000 years in the future...
But what made the movie so bad was the feverish 'rush' to get to the end. Emma dies....that was depressing. Emma dies again...that was depressing again. The main character hops on his machine, ends up in the future. He is taken in by the Elois (sic), there is no character development, the very next day they are attacked by Morlocks, the lead dude goes down, fights the main evil dude, the time machine blows up, somehow the main dude gets to the top of the mountain before everything blows up, he grabs the girls hand and end of movie.
Are they going to fall in love? Who knows? Why wouldn't the main dude want to go back to his own time? He had two opportunities. Yet, the makers of this film gave me NO REASON to believe he would actually want to stay there.
It would have been cool if he brought the young girl back with him to his time and get her reaction.
I dunno...it just wasn't put together very well....it is a bad movie...
The Deer Hunter (1978)
No No No!
Spoilers to make my point...
Dang this movie frustrates me. Was it good? Yes, it was high quality. Worthy of an Oscar? Probably. This movie had all the superb acting, camera shots, emotional topics of an epic film.
But dang!
Why in God's name was it so unrealistic and unexplained?
Did the three friends get drafted or did they enlist? If they were drafted, as some suggest, would they all be due to report on the same day? Had they been through boot camp already? If not, what are the odds that all three would be in the same platoon? Can this be requested of the Army when enlisting with a bunch of buddies?
I missed how the Vietcong captured all three of them. I saw Robert Di Nero in a battlefield without the other two and next thing I know they are captive in a swamp cage.
The Russian Roulette game was absolutely awesome. But was all of Vietnam like this?
Ok, I am only 39 and perhaps naive, but that is nearly all of Vietnam I saw in the film - a Russian Roulette game, escape, hospital stay, another Russian Roulette game - Di Niro and Walken were separated in Saigon and manage to end up together at another Russian Roulette game? What are the odds of that? They didn't see each other?
How did Savage lose his legs? Last I saw he had a compound fracture of the left leg (unbelievably realistic!), but amputation from the waist down?
Finally, Di Nero figures out Walken is still alive based on some money in Savage's drawer? He flies 15,000 miles back to Vietnam - and at the very moment that Walken is to play Russian Roulette - Di Nero finds him? What if he came a day too late? (Actually - in this case it wouldn't have mattered.)
How did Di Nero get Walken's body back home? The air lift was taking place at that very moment and he was far away from the US Embassy playing Russian Roulette with extremely hostile people and he manages to get Walken's body home?
I know, I know...OK, I am nit picking! But this is NOT a realistic Vietnam movie. It just can't be. The Vietnam scene in Forrest Gump appeared more realistic in terms of the soldiers, terrain, weather, and fight scene.
I indicated I understand why this won the Academy Award - due to it's epic nature.
But, it was still a hodge podge of disconnected scenes.
Battlefield Earth (2000)
I agree - HORRIDLY bad movie - But...
I think I am on the same page as most of the reviews. This movie is SO BAD that I had to watch it.
Do you remember as a kid as one of your teeth began to loosen that you poked it and prodded it with your tongue or finger? You knew it hurt and it would bleed, but you just couldn't resist moving it and touching it. You liked the pain in a weird kind of way.
That describes Battlefield Earth. The only reason I rented this movie is BECAUSE the reviews were so bad I had to see for myself. I wasn't disappointed.
Look, I am not a movie critic per se. So, I am not going to attempt to explain where everything went wrong. But it is amazing; This movie had a huge budget, elaborate set, and many special effects.
Yet, it is SO BAD!
If the Bots where still on MST3000, this movie would be PERFECT!
I encourage you to rent it and ENJOY THE PAIN!
Scooby-Doo (2002)
Some Critics Just Don't Get
My rating of Scooby-Doo? 3 Stars/7 out of 10.
Let me just say now, I loved the movie and will likely buy it. Being a 38 year old male, I was in the prime age group of Scooby-Doo (the cartoon) when it began in the 60s.
Scooby was my favorite cartoon. Why? Because Scooby was so cool. He was funny; I laughed my head off.
So when I saw Scooby-Doo (the movie) last night, I laughed hard and loud! There were kids all around me looking at me as if I was nuts! But Scooby was Scooby. That's who I grew up with and that's who I loved in the movie!
Why only 3 stars instead of 4? Why only 7 out of 10?
Three things about the movie bothered me: 1)The fact that the 'meddling kids' were doing so much fighting amongst themselves, 2)Shaggy and Velma had love interest (why does Hollywood insist everyone have a boyfriend or girlfriend?), and 3)the villain was such a disappointment. Many familiar with the original cartoon hated the character, and as a villain in this movie - it made matters worse.
If not for those three things, the movie would have played just like a standard 30 minutes episode with every silly hilarious cliche.
So the big rotund movie critic who sits in a balcony blasted this movie saying that "myself..., even at a very young age, [discovered]that the world was filled with entertainment choices more stimulating than "Scooby-Doo."
What arrogance!
He was right in saying that if you aren't familiar with Scooby-Doo you wont get the joke. Very true. But to insult people who did grow up with Scooby-Doo?
He also wrote (after blasting the movie) "I did like the dog. Scooby-Doo so thoroughly upstages the live actors that I cannot understand why Warner Bros. didn't just go ahead and make the whole movie animated."
Duh!!!! The dog IS the movie and everyone else is support!!! Also, why make it animated when that's what's on the Cartoon Network every day?!?!?!
Critics are pompous.
If you love Scooby-Doo - this is a fun movie!
The Sixth Sense (1999)
This is the ONLY review you will need! - READ TO THE END
I went to see The Sixth Sense at the theater opening week. I didn't hear anything about the movie so I had ZERO expectations.
I didn't like the movie because it was dark, depressing and extremely slow moving.
When the movie ended, I was troubled and did a double take. "Hummmmmm, I will need to see that again." Not as if it was good, but it was surprising.
When I rented it and saw it for the second time: IT WAS AWESOME! I UNDERSTOOD IT! It is one of the most perfectly mastered pieces of work I have ever seen.
When you see it again, you will slap yourself in the head time after time and say "Duh!"
Rent it - Watch it. But don't be so quick to judge it until you know all the facts!
The Big Chill (1983)
I gave it an objective try
What a snoozer!
To put things in perspective, I am 39 years old, so I was 20 when this movie came out. I can't exactly relate to the "pass the joint while we have deep thoughts" era of the 1960s. That is the 'era' in which these characters came.
I have older friends that swear by this movie. They say it's one of the best of all times.
I found it all a little too creepy.
For starters, I hate early deaths in real life. Anyone who loses a friend who is 30 something is a bummer. It is depressing.
So, why make a movie that takes place immediately after the funeral? I just found it creepy.
Second, the dialogue of each character was a little to serious for a comedy. These people were taking themselves way to seriously. I know, I know. It takes place after a funeral so they should be serious. BUT WHY MAKE THE MOVIE???
And finally, when a married woman openly and willingly offers her husband up to get a girlfriend pregnant is way over the top. CREEPY!!!
No, this was a depressing movie that I thought was quite the snoozer.
Titanic (1997)
Something told me not to see this movie!
Did I listen?
This movie made 800 gazillion dollars in the box office and every woman in the office had seen it 5 times!!!!!
Me being a big history buff and totally familiar with the detailed plight of the Titanic, I though perhaps I should see the movie for the highly touted effects.
But something in my head said "But Brian, you'll be sorry!"
Finally, I succumbed to the pressure and hype and saw it second run (I held out till the very end.)
Just as I thought. What a sappy three our cheesy love story bore!
I knew it, I just knew it.
The women just love this movie. Ugh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I am glad it isn't rated in the imdb top 250 at least. I still don't know why it made so much money.
Wait a minute. Yes I do.
Soccer Moms!
Last Action Hero (1993)
Bum Rap is Right
I'll make my comments brief on this one....
This was a box office flop and panned as a movie.
But why?
Do people really think "Commando" was realistic where Arnie takes on an ENTIRE small nation army single handed? Total Recall was a mind numbing mess of a plot. Jamie Lee Cutis goes her entire married life not realizing that her hubby is a secret government spy in True Lies?
These movies were HUGE blockbusters. Why? Because they had action! They had creative ideas. They were fun!
So, out comes Last Action Hero where a kid becomes PART OF A MOVIE and tries to explain to Arnie if he notices no one ever swears, all phone numbers are 555, and there is never any blood. What fun!
Look, I am not putting this movie up against The Godfather but I think it is on action par with all of Arnie's other action flicks.
I still don't get why it bombed...
Freddy Got Fingered (2001)
Tom Green is a non creative sick pup!
Are you kidding me? Really?
I am supposed to buy in to some of the opinions that this movie is art? That Tom Green is some kind of creative genius? I am suppose to believe that critics who panned this movie were actually hurt by this movie because Tom Green got their goat? The critics didn't get the joke? Tom Green is ahead of his time?
I have a hobby of late. I read critics picks then rent the WORST reviewed movies to see how often the critics are uptight because they refused to laugh. Examples include Dumb and Dumber and Tommy Boy. These movies were panned by the critics because the critics tried to understand them. What was there to understand? They were just funny, silly, dopey movies.
Then I came across the blistering reviews of Freddy Got Fingered. I had to rent it for myself. I soon found that yes, the 'Fingered' in the title refers to what one does to another's lower body orifice. How funny.
I am hardly a prude. My wife and I occasionally rent from the adult racks to maintain a creative and stimulated relationship. I loved Pulp Fiction because of the creative writing and how the story turned full circle. That was a violent film, yet riveting.
Freddy Got Fingered is a truly disturbing movie. Let me be overly kind and give the writers a pass on plot and even the bizarre nature of the main character. We often give a pass to Chris Farley and Adam Sandler for their obnoxious and often times mentally disturbed movie personalities. We often give their plots a pass as they are merely vehicles for humor.
However, with Freddy Got Fingered, the humor (I use the term 'humor' loosely - and I should preface it with 'attempted') is just plain jaw dropping. There is nothing and I mean NOTHING creative or funny about Tom Green.
He must be an arrogant guy who truly believes in his own greatness. Why else would his character stop a car in the middle of a highway for no apparent reason, hop a fence and grab hold of a horse's penis? And I mean a full fledged, fully erect horse penis. I am 38 years old and have never seen a horse's penis, nor did I know what one looked like. But thanks to Tom Green's creative genius I now know. That scene could only be toped by an elephant ejaculating. Tom Green delivers! HUH????
Tom goes on to gut a road kill and carry the blood soaked skin on his back for no apparent reason. Nice image. Oh, and you got to love the child birth scene where he spins a fetus around his head by it's umbilical cord as blood splatters all four walls of the room. Lovely.
I have never heard of Tom Green. When I first read the review I was wondering "Who is Tom Green, how can he be a director already, and who would finance his movies?" Well, I am sure he has some cult following somewhere and some long haired pointy head round rimmed dope smoking college kid who thinks his work is pure genius!
Hardly. Give me $1,000,000, a few cameras, and a technically sound crew, and I can 'create' the same rot gut as Tom Green. He is a legend in his own mind.
Tommy Boy (1995)
Funny Movie, but I wonder why.....
Can someone please explain why Rob Lowe has a relatively significant part, yet is uncredited? When I first saw this movie I said "Hey! That's Rob Lowe!" But because he isn't in the credits, I never knew for sure.
Anyway...regarding the flick...
This movie epitomizes exactly why people distrust movie critics as much as lawyers and used car salesmen.
I distinctly recall either Siskel or Ebert saying "This is one of the worst movies ever made. Why does Hollywood feel a need to spend money on this stuff. Chris Farley couldn't hold John Belushi's jock." I even think Siskel said he walked out of this movie early.
OK!!!!!!! It's a dopey movie and it's Chris Farley and not John Belushi. But I laughed! Is that OK? I mean, I work a stressful job and deal with trauma every day in real life. So why can't I enjoy Chris Farley lighting a toy car on fire and driving it around a desk making 'rum rum' noises?
The movie makes me laugh. So, for $9.99 I bought a copy at Blockbuster and I watch it from time to time.
Geesh!
Hold That Lion! (1947)
A Piece of history...
Thanks for AMC and their NYUK Three Stooges show on the weekends starring Leslie Neilson. While the introductions to the shorts are 'hokey', good factual historical information regarding the Stooges is often given.
This is the case with 'Hold That Lion.' I found this short to be 'average,' but knowing that Curly makes a cameo, I watch it every time I know it will be shown.
About 1/2 way through the short, Moe, Larry, and Shemp are walking down the center isle of a moving train searching for a man in disguise. They happen on a sleeping man with his Derby over his face. To check to see if he is the villain, the boys stop, lift the hat and we find Curly, thin faced, full head of hair, NO BEARD, and a clothes pin on his nose! One of the boys remove the clothes pin only to cause Curly to begin snoring loudly. In classic Curly fashion - He does the typical loud, deep 'SNOGGGGGG' on the inhale, but on the exhale he lets out a 'W00 WOO WOO R'ARF R'ARF R'ARF' and takes another deep breath with a 'SNOGGGGGGGG'
After two or three cycles, Moe says 'This guy must be some kind of Spaniel,' and Shemp says 'More like a Cocker Spaniel!' They replace the clothes pin, Curly's Derby and continue down the isle....
I watch this short EVERY TIME I see it now, and I find it somber. Curly has just suffered a massive stroke. He can barely walk, thus the appearance sitting and sleeping, and his snoring as described above is only with 1/2 the energy. Curly looks human.....and his two brothers (Moe and Shemp) are on screen with him to make light of the situation. This is classic Stooges. Curly would die one short year later...
As I said: A piece of history...
Hoosiers (1986)
Please. Try it; rent it.
Look; I don't want to get all dramatic. This movie was never commercially big. But TRUST ME; It is underrated. See it, and you will say wow!!! Why are classic works like these often overlooked? I just rented this movie for the first time. I know nothing about basketball, nor do I care. This is just a GOOD movie...
Citizen Kane (1941)
I am torn with Citizen Kane...
I am torn with this movie. I am 38, college educated, but had NEVER seen Citizen Kane until last week. I recognize that this movie is often rated number one of ALL TIME. I decided to rent the movie last week and form my own unbiased opinion.
I can feel it. I can sense it. I know why some find this movie great. The cinematography and screenplay is awesome. The movie moves rapidly from scene to scene. The 2 hours went by in no time. The plot comes full circle as the movie concludes. It is truly a dynamic movie.
At the same time, I can't run out and say "You have to see this movie!" I found it dark, sinister, and downright depressing. While black and white is classic film making, it can often create light and shades that are emotionally difficult to watch. Perhaps that's what makes Citizen Kane so great to so many. But at the same time I am spoiled by today's movie technology. I find it difficult to relate to movies that are so old (60 years) that the primitive technology effects my ability to appreciate how good a movie may have been IN IT'S TIME.
The greatest movies of all time will stand the test of time. The Godfather was made nearly 30 years ago and it has a whole new generation of fans. The college campus reaction to Citizen Kane would suggest that it does not have the same staying power.
As I said...I am torn with Citizen Kane