Reviews

T I wanted to see how they adapted the book into a movie. I wondered if they would keep the three perspectives and jumping around in time. They did; they shouldn't have.

I found it hard to follow and i had just read the book. I can see why it wasn't a box office success. It didn't help that they treated it like a horror film when it was a mystery story. It was well acted but the story was a challenge to keep track of, and the jerky camera movements were distracting. The absence of a music sound track in most scenes didn't help.

The use of the three perspectives was intergral to the book (not sure i can say the same thing for the jumping around in time sequences, except perhaps the flashbacks to the drunken night that was hard to recall) but the movie should have just followed a chronological order. It would have given time to flesh out the characters and allow the audience to follow the plot. It may have not been true to the book's format but it would have been a better movie and still retained the essence.

This show "Accused" is reminiscent of the television series "Motive" where each episode reveals the killer and the victim at the beginning; and the rest of the episode details the ongoing investigation. In this show we start with an "accused" and then go back in time through the events that lead up to why the person is "accused." The pacing is similar along with limited use of music and the type of camera angles and relatively lengthy film shots.

What it doesn't have is the same detectives investigating and solving the cases so there is no one to relate to as new characters and situations are introduced in each episode.

An unusual look at the daily life of the Dalai Lama where he discusses essence of the universe; gaps between rich and poor; and the role an individual has to play in religion and contemporary society.

Narration in Russian with English subtitles. Tte comments of the Dalai Lama are made in English. There is also some Tibeta spoken. It is a comprehensive and compassionate perspective of his daily routine, from morning exercise to bedtime.

The footage is quite intimate of the Dalai Lama's living quarters with close up footage of the people he meets with and are part of the audiences that greet him.

The photography was exceptional; the settings were realistic for a dystopian situation. Hilda, Alberta served well (as in the community coming together) in making it seem like a run down existence.

The monologues were well written and the main roles were well acted but some minor actor deliveries were stilted. The editing was intriguing (moving back and forth in time). However the story was thin; the movie was too long.

Cyril Anderst had less of a role than he did in "Where Were We in '63" and the same amount of dialogue. The same old house was in the movie but in one scene it burned down; it won't be in any future films.

It was a good story. Austin Butler gave a oredible performance as Elvis and Alton Mason was commendable as Little Richard. Tom Hank's role as Colonel Parker was an gnoying carciture. It was interesting to have the Colonel tell the story except it wasn't consistent (wasn't always his version) and was jumpy as all get out. The erractic jerky edits and camera movements were nauseating and did nothing for enhancing the movie. They might have been more suitable for a combined psychedilic Marvel Comics tale, which at times the filmmakers might have been trying to attempt. It might have been better if they used actual brack and white footage of Elvis, in the flahbacks, as they did for clippings of the Beatles, Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy.

After being away a number of years, presumably improving her detective skills, why hasn't DS Florence Cassals returned at the DI? Wouldn't that be a logical outcome for her to have the promtion?

A pignant look at life on a Native Reservation, the poorest jurisdiction in the United States. Interviews and on reserve footage shows the sad state of affairs in one of the richest countries in the world. The film is educational in showing a lot of the abuse stems from childern being raised in Christian Schools and not knowing how to be a parent when they grew up because they didn't experience their parents raising them. With the US spending billions of dollars g overseas aid it is a shame that such destitution exists within its own burders.

It was impressive how the storytelling switched seamlessly between four time frames: the present (1980); the meeting of the "Steve McQueen clone and "Blondie;" the rubbery planning; and the FBI pursuing the crime. It was humourous that the Steve McQueen Doppleganger was not cool, but thought he was. Some good robbery tips offered up (but didn't prevent them getting cnught).

This was so ridicrous it was hilarious. I was laughing a lot. Kate McKinnon was fabulous. Gillian Anderson was perfect in a supporting role. The pacing was splendid, keeping my interest throughout. Great location scenes in Vienna, Prague, Berlin and Amsterdam. It was also amusing watching it with French subtitles seeing the translations (e.g. English "Huh?" French = "Nous trois?").

Not terribly interesting. Some decent photography and editing but only a few discoveries such as fish that eats wood. For something more interesting about the Amazon try "Burden of Dreams", the film about the making Werner Herzog's movie "Fitzcarraldo".

I first saw Hatari sixty years ago, when i was ten years old. It was quite the cinematic event. Back then admission was 15¢ and 10¢ for a popcorn. The ten weeks leading up to the showing of Hatari, when you bought a popcorn you got a promotional card for Hatari. If you collected all ten cards you would win a prize. Just the fact the movie was going to be in colour was a win (most were black and white offerings back then).

I had forgotten there were two female leads and five main male characters; i only recalled it featuring John Wayne and Red Buttons.

A scant 20 years later i was in Arusha, climbing Kilimanjaro, Safariing on the Serengeti and exploring Ngorangora. I didn't recall the settings from the movie but perhaps viewing it two decades earlier got the adventure bug in me. The film taking place in what was then Tanganyika, around Arusha, the Serengeti and Ngorangora Crater.

Before watching the DVD, other than it being about chasing African wildlife, there were only two things that i remembered about the film: [1:49 mark] when Pockets (played by Red Buttons) fell off the fence and the Brandy character got all concerned (when she was not bothered by two other suitors hurt in a vehicle accident); and [2:00 mark] the rocket goes off pulling a net to capture monkeys in a tree, quite the feat!

I wondered why i recollected those two particular things? Could it have been one offered insight into a woman's mind and the other extolled the virtue of inventiveness? The thing I realized in rewatching was that both incidents had quite the buildup and that perhaps was made them more indelible to me.

Two other things that stood out in rewatching were: the profusion of smoking in most every scene by the characters, including the female actresses; and the "mistreatment" of animals in the capturing (before the days of tranquilizers). One of the comments in the Trivia was how many of the cast, in later years, had health issues attributed to smoking. Tourism was just catching on when i lived in Africa in the 80s and with it came a better respect for wildlife.

I enjoyed the scenery, the wildlife shots, the telling of the story and the character portrayals. It was a seven star movie but i'm giving it eight stars for the original impact it had on me six decades earlier.

Dark and depraved > damn my soul for watching it all. Perhaps this film featuring Bill Murray* and Jack Black* had an intriguing story line and just the execution was wanting but i received no enjoyment from viewing it and wondered why i stayed to the end.

* i know it wasn't him, but looked like, acted like.

This was a sorry excuse for a film with its implausible storyline and gratutius violence. Its maid redeeming value was that there was little dialogue and one could fast forward through most of it. Nice scenery though.

This was a challenge to watch as unless one was familiar with the Citizen Kane film the references were obscure although sometimes brilliant. Having studied the CK movie in Film studies I was able to follow somewhat but wondered at general audiences being able to appreciate the subtilties. Famous film stars (Clarke Gable, Carol Lombard etc) were portrayed without identification. Although i recognized the Gable character the others I missed. The use of projectionist cue blips in the upper right corner was an interesting touch but who but a projectionist would appreciate this inclusion?

Slow paced with good photography. Not sure why Lorne Greene did some of the narration - Eastman was adequate for the job (and did most of it). Interesting about the large caribou herds in Jackson Hole in the early 1970s.

Well paced beautifully filmed series with great scenery from the Nehimiah Valley to Williams Lake, BC featuring Tsilqot'in riders from Xeni Gwiten in their natural environment as they chase, break and ride wild horses to the dangerous mountain ride at the Williams Lake Rodeo. The documentary gives individual close up footage of the participants as they embark on perilous adventure.

There hasn't been a Scorcese film I have cared for - this one was dreadful. There was the crash scene in the "Aviators" that I liked but apparently that was directed by someone else. Other than the Lisette character the acting was stifling and stilted - painful to watch in the static scenes.

The opening scenes and set design were stunning but the story soon bogged down. The old movie scene creations had merit as well but not enough to make up for the forced acting.

Wholeheartedly I agree with the one star and three star reviewers' comments, who gave more thorough condemnations.

It was different. I liked it, stupid as it was. I agreed with reviewers that rated it poorly. They had good points why it was not good but I couldn't stop watching. It was hard to take seriously and I didn't laugh that much but I laughed a few times. The idotic plot and moronic characters (even the minor ones) had a certain charm.

I'm in agreement with the other reviewers of the implausibility of the wrap-ups. It was over the top; the writers disappointed. It would have been enough for Standing Bear to have made the change and go from there (leave it at that or make way for continuing the series some later date). Vic doing the final shooting would have been a better result (which was poorly edited); it might have explained that terrible (change the channel) kissing scene. The "endings" were out of character and I had to wince at witnessing them. I wish I had not seen past the escape but even if warned (like some reviewers did) I would have kept watching wondering how bad it could be. Read the Spoilers if that will help you decide.