Reviews

This "movie" (actually a pilot for a never-produced series, I believe) is one of the more original science fiction concepts to see production in years. The story is of a young medical student in the distant future, fulfilling his internship on a planet that is so far removed from everything that its inhabitants live a largely technology-free lifestyle. The planet is divided into two halves that are often at war, and as we join the story it is just entering into a tenuous peace.

White Dwarf is part futuristic science fiction, part Victorian/medieval fantasy, and part television drama (having many of the best qualities of each). With many such stories, we get no sense of history or depth to the characters, but with this one we are not let down. We are given fleeting glimpses of deeper things (only glimpses at times because, one might presume, it was written to continue as a series, to establish relationships to be developed further as time went on). There are hints of vast histories for the characters, the places, and the ideas the underlie so much of the story. A fine example of this would be the apparently long-standing and deep relationship between Osh, alien warden of "the Keep" (the planet's prison), and the prisoner listed only as "Lady X" in the credits (played by Katy Boyer).

My only complaints about White Dwarf would be with the sometimes stiff acting and the occasional stilted dialogue (when combined, as they normally are, the two can be difficult to take). Still, special accolades should go to Paul Winfield for his portrayal of Akada, the doctor under whom Driscoll Rampart serves his internship, and CCH Pounder, who plays a nurse in Akada's clinic. Both portray their characters with generous portions of substance and apparent ease. The rest of the cast do reasonably well, only occasionally stumbling over the stilted dialogue. This is most noticeable with Ele Keats' performance as Princess Ariel, whose dialogue is always very formal, resulting in a performance that comes across very wooden. For the few of her lines that are more relaxed, her performance improves, serving mostly to emphasize the stiffness that we see the rest of the time. Perhaps this just isn't her genre.

Perhaps the greatest tragedy is that this unique piece of work is no longer available on video (unless you're willing to pay $50 or more for a used VHS copy). This is rare and inspired fiction, a must for anyone who's growing tired of the recycled ideas we see so often, and who wishes to see something distinctly different, if somewhat imperfect. As a life-long sci-fi and fantasy afficionado, I consider myself very lucky to have acquired a copy, and enjoy every viewing as much as the last. We can only hope that it will be released on DVD someday, and that it will not be doomed to disappear forever into obscurity. Something this unique deserves far better than that.

Being an egghead of sorts and a student of so many philosophies, I thoroughly enjoyed this movie the first time I watched it, and each time after that. Sam Waterston, Liv Ullman, and John Heard star as 3 people who meet by chance while touring an island. They then spend the rest of the movie talking about various scientific and philosophical concepts. There are brief (and very wooden) appearances by Ione Skye as the daughter of Liv's character.

The topics they discuss are fairly heady, but despite the edgy nature of their topics, the discussion never becomes heated or even mildly animated. Others have made the perfectly valid point that the dialog is one-sided, and I completely agree. Topics of this kind of importance and scope demand a discussion with all viewpoints represented. Otherwise, it can't approach the real heart of the issue, and it spirals rapidly into intellectual propaganda. These are good topics and valid points; they deserve better treatment. Nonetheless, the movie was enlightening on some levels.

I you're going to watch it, don't watch it to be entertained or awed by an auteur's cinematic masterpiece (which this isn't); watch it to expand your mind. Pay no attention to the plot (thin as it is) or the acting (stiff and clumsy at times). Just open your mind to the ideas expressed, then think about it after the movie has ended, because the topics discussed can go so much farther. The movie falls a bit short in expressing them; you'll have to finish the journey yourself.

Contrary to popular consensus, TotGM was not an Indiana Jones knockoff, although the popularity of those movies was probably responsible for Gold Monkey getting its shot on television. No, Gold Monkey was much more in line with many older adventure movies, and creator Donald Bellisario insisted it was inspired mostly by the 1939 movie Only Angels Have Wings.

Regardless of where it came from, though, this was a very enjoyable series. As a boy of 9 at the time it originally aired, I was absolutely enamored with it (so much so, in fact, that my father still calls me "Jake" to this day). Now, as a man of 30, I have managed to find copies of all the episodes, and I find that I still love it. I may love it even more now that I'm older and more able to appreciate the historical references in the show, which is set in the Pacific in 1938. Spies and political intrigues abound in every single episode, and provide the perfect backdrop for an adventure story.

This series is clearly a product of early 80s American television, showing quite a bit of similarity in structure and production values with nearly every other series produced at the time. Gold Monkey, though, was far from formulaic, and very original. How many shows can you name that had an intelligent one-eyed dog that was regarded in every respect as an equal member of the cast?

I will never understand why it didn't last more than a single season, but at least I can enjoy what little there is. "Tales of the Gold Monkey" will always have a special place in my heart and on my video shelf.

I'll start by apologizing to filmmakers everywhere for using the terms "filmmaker", "film", or "movie" in connection with this, but "criminal" and "crime against humanity" seem a bit harsh.

The writing: pathetic.

The directing: pathetic.

The acting: pathetic.

The cinematography: too inept for words.

The technical skills used to assemble this atrocity: NONE WHATSOEVER.

This lump of waste could hardly be called cinema. The majority of family home movies come closer to earning that distinction than Revenge Quest. No, this is just a 10 car pile-up caught on video.

We'll skip the plot in this review, because there are far too many holes to be covered at once. Let's just say that it stinks worse than the rest of this movie. To call the acting one-dimensional would be giving them credit. What little there is, is atrocious to begin with, and made much worse by the terrible video and editing.

The worst part of this atrocity, though, apart from the plot, would have to be the effects... or rather the disturbing lack thereof. There are no blanks in the guns, no flashpots, and what few sound effects existed were either stock "gun" sounds, or they were generated by mouth (yeah, you read that right). The filmmaker actually had the audacity to record a "shh" sound for the elevator doors; I guess he felt it made them sound more futuristic. This is supposed to be set in the year 2031, after all. That doesn't explain the sounds he created by mouth for the fist-fight scenes, however.

If it wasn't bad enough that the sound quality is terrible (he just used the microphone that was mounted on the video camera, and it shows), the use of stock gun sounds was almost worse than not using any sounds at all. The sound effects stand out from the rest of the soundtrack like a drunken yak in a herd of sheep, and they're just as clumsy. Picture this: The bad guy enters an office building searching for his prey. A lady starts to run in fear. He raises his gun (an uzi), and shakes it. We hear a sound that is clearly not an uzi. The woman runs away from camera, and suddenly a single blood pack (only 1) explodes on her back (looked like she was hit by a paintball), and she falls flat on her face.

Bear in mind that my description does far too much justice to the ineptitude of the actual sequence.

In another sequence, one which almost- but not quite- makes the movie funny enough to watch, takes place in a stairwell. The bad guy chases the good guy and the lady he's protecting down the stairs, shaking his plastic uzi all the way. You may wish to duck; there are badly timed sound effects flying all over the place.

I supposed Alan DeHerrera can't be locked away for conceiving of this train wreck, but he did follow through all the way to editing and releasing it. If there's any justice, there's bound to be some karma out there with his name on it.

Should you decide to watch this lump of industrial waste- and I would strongly advise against it- be sure to watch for the entire scenes lifted nearly verbatim from Bladerunner, and the AM radio that doubles as a walkie-talkie. Try not to focus too hard on the plot; it will only hurt you more if you do.

0 stars of 10. And that's being generous.

The story is classic: A person feels out of place in their own world, but manages to find a new one in which they are something special. There have been countless takes on the idea throughout the ages, and this one, while arguably not classical literature, is a very delightful story in its own right. The book is fun to read, for adults as well as kids, and the movie certainly follows suit. Young Harry, orphaned when he was only a toddler, is being cared for by his cruel Aunt and Uncle, and is forced to quietly tolerate the constant bullying of his cousin, Dudley. On his 11th birthday, however, he gets a present no one could possibly expect: He finds out that there is actually another world- a magical world- right under everyone's noses! And beyond that, it is there that he truly belongs! With that simple discovery, Harry goes from being an ordinary young man in an ordinary world to an extraordinary young wizard in a world with no limits.

Sorcerer's (Philosopher's) Stone is the first in a series that seems to grow and mature in parallel with its title character. In my opinion, this is not the best of the series, but it is absolutely enjoyable in its own right.

Magic and mysticism of all kinds permeate throughout the stories, but it is clear that the real magic at work here is at the tip of Rowling's pen. I, for one, hope that she continues to write even after she has finished the Harry Potter series. Bravo!

Nothing is sacred. Just ask Ernie Fosselius. These days, everybody has a video camera, and a movie is hardly out before the spoofs start flying, quickly written and shot, and often posted directly to the internet. Spoofs are hot these days, and we go out of our way to make sure filmmakers don't get off on their own self-importance. 25 years ago, when the first Star Wars was made, it was a different world. Filmmaking was the playground of a select few and spoofs were very rare. Then God gave us Hardware Wars. It was shot to look cheap (or was it just cheap?) and the audio was obviously recorded after the fact. Does that take away from the experience? HECK NO! That's what makes it so great! It was raw and unpolished, and hit relentlessly on some of the more pretentious moments of the original movie. From Fluke Starbucker waving around a flashlight instead of a lightsaber (I did that when I was young!) to Chewchilla the Wookie Monster, to Auggie Ben Doggie's "nah, just a little headache" remark, this film short is as much a part of the phenomenon as any of the actual Star Wars films. Rent it. Buy it. Borrow it from a friend. And may the Farce be with you. Always.