Change Your Image
newsjunkie356-1
Would-be writer (who isn't? :o). Married. Father of one.
Lists
An error has ocurred. Please try again
The Best Heist Movies
Reviews
The Star Wars Holiday Special (1978)
Seven Years Old And Needing My Fix!!
I clearly remember this and how bad it was. Loyal fan that I was, I watched the whole thing. And given the long droughts, see below, between movies for a grade schooler was frustrated it was never aired again. I needed a Star Wars fix even if it was a lousy one.
One thing, however, that needs to be kept in mind, is that in 1978, VCRs had only recently hit the market and Hollywood had yet to release movies on video (and, was, in fact, vigorously attempting to have the recorders banned just as they've done with every advance in recording technology over the last 40 yrs). Shocking as that may seem to those under 30, in those antediluvian days, there was no way to see a movie except in a theater or when it hit Network Movie of the Week night.
Thus, you couldn't simply run out to a store and buy a copy of Star Wars to enjoy at home. And for 7 yr olds having to wait 3 years to see "The Empire Strikes Back" might as well have been 3 decades. (The closest you could get to having a copy of the film was an audio only LP version/8-track tape that was had been heavily edited to fit the time constraints of vinyl. And we played that 8-track until it demagnetized.) So ANY Star Wars related TV show was a God-send. Of course, no one counted on it totally sucking. Which was obvious even to those of us in 3rd grade. (My 4 years old brother was too young to care.) Today, at age 39, I can only laugh when I think about this. I can well-imagine Lucas' embarrassment that this craptastic disaster can't be round-holed.
The thing I've never understood is how he ever allowed it to be broadcast in the first place. Given his famous fastidiousness about tweaking the movies until he gets them "perfect" -- apparently an ever diminishing mirage on the horizon since neither he, nor Spielberg, seem content to leave well-enough alone (see "E.T.").
Did Lucas not bother to screen this thing? It's hard to believe that he did. On the other hand, given some of the absolute garbage he's allowed the Star Wars logo and characters to appear on over the years (merchandise which is estimated to have brought in $13 BILLION and counting and that's NOT adjusted for inflation), maybe this piece of Bantha poodoo is not so surprising after-all.
Still, it would be nice to have a DVD of this, if only for the unintentional hilarity. But Lucas doesn't have much of a sense of humor ("Howard the Duck" anyone?) and the Star Wars franchise has made him a billionaire many times over. Given the fact he's rarely missed an opportunity to capitalize on it, it's more than a little surprising that there hasn't been an official release.
I guess it goes to show that South Park's Matt Stone and Trey Parker have overestimated Lucas' greed. There are places even the great one won't go to pad his bank account.
Star Trek: Voyager: Faces (1995)
The first truly excellent Voyager Episode
After the pilot, this the first Voyager episode that doesn't come off as the weak sister of a TNG ep. Some of the previous episodes were clearly recycled TNG (and even TOS) episodes. Some were just ho-hum.
This is the first one with a tightly written plot and sharply drawn characters.
THIS is the kind of episode that I've been waiting for. A desperate situation. Wonderful acting by Roxann Caballero Biggs Dawson (can we just call her the most beautiful Klingon-Human hybrid since Susie Plakson?). If ever there's been a Star Trek race more deserving of extermination, it's the Vidiians--truly morally (and visually) repellent aliens.
It's rather amazing that an alliances of Delta Quadrant species hasn't banded together to wipe them out--given what a threat they are to every humanoid their sociopathic evolution of their culture presents. Every further encounter with them, with the exception of the Doctor's romance with the Vidiian hematologists Dr. Danara Pell, always results in an attempt to murder everyone aboard Voyager and steal the usable organs.
Whether this has been in the minds of the writers I don't know, but I'm led to think of the Chinese Communist government's execution of 10-15,000 "criminals" (the only "crime" many have committed is demanding freedom and an end to repression) and the subsequent sale of the victims' organs to foreigners who can bring the Chinese foreign currency--a must for their frenzied defense build up targeted against the United States and Japan. However sinister the end, it's the means that most disturb me--both with the fictional Vidiians the real life corollary in Red China. It's a scheme so repulsive its hard to imagine even the Ferengi participating in it.
This is Star Trek at its best: riveting story telling coupled with a look inward at the early 21st Century from the perspective of a fictional, Utopian future. As Nicholas Meyer, direction and writer of Star Trek II & VI and writer of Stark Trek IV, puts in the commentary to "Wrath of Khan" (on the now out of print "Director's Cut"): "The job of the artist is to ask questions. It's the job of the audience to supply the answers." If you're reading this what answers do YOU bring to Vidiians and their relevance to the societal crimes of our species?
Law & Order: Dissonance (2000)
A somewhat average L&O from the Lennie Briscoe Days
This is not one of the top of the line eps. Since nearly all murders involve money, love or pride, Law & Order's biggest challenge has always been to leaven the bread, as it were, with either creative plotting or well-drawn characters. Since the show is episodic in nature (as compared to, say, "Battlestar Galactica" which is one story told across 4 seasons), creating compelling supporting characters is very difficult. One of the things that makes this one of the best TV dramas is how often such characters ARE created.
So it's hard to blame the writers for not always putting the ball in the left field corner. This show, to continue this strange baseball metaphor streak, is more like a looping single over the second baseman.
It goes through the motions until the detectives find a motive and build the case from there. And this one certainly appears to be a standard lover-scorned-lover-kills scenario.
The twist here, if one can call it that, is not that the prime suspect's wife may well be the murderer but that she's covering for him to protect her cushy lifestyle. After all, it would be hard for her to enjoy his $2M a year salary if he's in Attica.
So basically this episode fires on all cylinders but not particularly compellingly. It certainly doesn't belong the top 100 best L&O Prime eps.
Star Trek: The Next Generation: Conspiracy (1988)
The genesis of the Borg?
This has long been one of my favorite episodes.
And I've long wondered if this episode didn't have some influence on the Borg plot-lines. After all, both alien species' M.O. is basically the same: instead of political conquest, "conquer" the enemy at the individual level. To reverse a cliché, "If you can't beat 'em, make 'em join you." Of course, the very last episode of S1, foreshadows "Q Who?" et al, tho' we're given no information as to who destroys the Federation and Romulan bases and the thrust of that episode, of course, is the "return" of the Romulans after decades of isolation.
Back on point: Making "Conspiracy" a two-parter might have worked, but I'm not sure exactly how. More cloak-and-dagger? Battles between starships controlled by the alien creatures and the Enterprise-D? Discovering compromised members of the "Enterprise"'s crew (Wesley, perhaps? Been funny to have seen HIM throw Worf around like "ragdoll.") As it is, I'm sure that the "Mother Alien" creature and its death are probably the most expensive single effect shot in the whole seven year series.
I do agree that the preceding shot, where the, ah, "soldier" aliens are crawling up Remmick's legs is clumsy, certainly by later series standards. But we should always keep in mind that, as with The Original Series, NexGen was done on a relatively low budget--though larger than TOS which was had the lowest budget of any drama during its 1966-69 run.
Also, computer animation was in its infancy, Pixar's legendary short, "Luxo" had only been created around this time--and the cost was astronomical. it would be the late 90s before computer animation would be advanced enough to realistically replace entire ships, people, aliens, etc.
To comment on ewf58's commentary: I've never seen the "edited" version of this episode. I believe it was originally broadcast in "unedited" form, at least that's my memory. But it's been 22 years...
The "full" version is on the DVD (S1 D7). And every time I've seen it on syndication, it's been the unedited one.
And it is pretty gory. I'm surprised that Roddenberry would have gone that far over 20 yrs ago. Today, such things are seen all the time on TV. "Battlestar Galactica"'s had some pretty hard core moments. Think of Starbuck stabbing Leoben through the neck on New Caprica; or Caprica Six's murder of the baby in the mini...
(Lastly, guess the aliens were sexist, notice that they all refer to each other as "brother" and never "sister"...)
The Trials of Ted Haggard (2009)
A fair and impartial look at the fallen preacher
Unlike Alexandra Pelsoi's first documentary on Evangelicals, this documentary on Ted Haggard's post-scandal life, is free of the critical stance of its predecessor. She takes a neutral and, for the most part, impartial stance towards the fallen preacher.
Haggard seems genuinely repentant for his double-life; his commitment to his Christian faith appears to be genuine. Unlike, however, the four preachers who were "appointed" to "supervise" his "spiritual recovery". Rather than following the core Christian precepts of "judge not, lest ye be judged" and "hate the sin, not the sinner," his "redemption supervisors" and successors at the mega-church that Haggard founded, have instead shunned him and not only have failed to forgive him but have, at least as its presented in Ms. Pelosi's docu, continued to actively persecute him. They made him leave his home, "banishing" from Colorado, thus forcing him & his family, into a nomadic existence of hotel rooms and tiny apartments. They also insisted that he refrain from preaching and get a "secular" job despite the fact that he's never held a job outside the ministry.
One of the most poignant parts of this film was Haggard's unsuccessful attempts to find that secular job, whether distributing door hangers for a mortgage "help" service or selling insurance door-to-door.
What shocked me the most, was the treatment meted out to his wife and two teen-aged sons who did nothing wrong except to stand by and love their husband and father in an unconditional and Christian manner (as far I understand the Christian concept of forgiveness as I admit I am not a Christian).
In summary, despite Haggard's failings and formerly hypocritical double life, he and his family have received no succor from their former "friends" and fellow-parishioners. In fact, when he sent an email to a small group of friends asking for donations to help support his family, one of them leaked it to the media who, along with his "redemption supervisors", proceeded to rake him over the coals.
He was never one of those preachers that condemned gays as some evangelical ministers do. Had he, I imagine that Ms. Pelosi would have found video and included it in the docu. Thus I found it doubly ironic that he should be treated so harshly by the men allegedly concerned with his "redemption." One last word on Mike Jones, the man whom Haggard paid for sex and, allegedly, drugs. This drug dealer and prostitute is doing everything he can to capitalize on his illegal behavior and Ted Haggard's misery. I found him absolutely disgusting.
Though I do not share Haggard's beliefs, I can only hope he and his family will be able to find some happiness; and perhaps he'll one day return to the vocation he so clearly loves: preaching to Gospel.
The film is well-worth watching whatever one's opinion of evangelical Christianity is. It shows a man who made huge mistakes and is paying for them in a heart-rending and brutal manner.
Emperor William of Germany, and Emperor Franz Josef of Austria (1898)
The title needs to be fixed
The image quality is so bad (due to the primitive equipment, this was "filmed" only a few years after Edison had invented it, after all) that you'll get much more detail and much cleaner images from the surviving stills. And almost every decent biography of these figures (and especially Germany's last Emperor who loved the camera, were he on the throne of Germany today I'm sure he'd be known as "Der Tabloid Kaiser") includes such pictures. Giles McDonough's "The Last Kaiser" has a very, very rare picture of Wilhelm II's "withered" left arm (the arm was damaged due to a botched forceps delivery occasioned by the baby presenting in the breech position).
Having seen some of this footage from documentaries (as well as the BBC mini-series "Fall of Eagles" about the collapse of Imperial Germany, Austria & Russia), I can say that it has some interest. But probably more for the scholar.
The major goof here is the incongruity of the names. Franz Josef is called by his actual name where as Wilhelm II's name is Anglicized (Wilhelm probably wouldn't have minded since he was Queen-Empress Victoria's grandson and could speak fluent, if idiosyncratic, English).
Also the title doesn't give Wilhelm II's regal number. He was, after all, NOT the first German Emperor named Wilhelm. His grandfather, the "founder" of the Empire, was Wilhelm I; the actual work of unification, however, was orchestrated by Bismarck, who, in three wars united Germany under Prussian domination and created the most powerful land power for the next 41 years. (What had taken the "Iron Chancellor" more than a decade to create, Wilhelm II took less four years to destroy.) Also, though it's rarely used today, Franz Josef's official name was Franz Josef I (tho', of course, there never was a II; the last Austrian Emperor was Karl I, who reigned less than 2 yrs before being chased out of Austria by a democratic revolution; the family, after years of enforced exile, now lives in Austria, tho' as private citizens, the Austrian state having confiscated their vast wealth (much of their land had been in countries other than Austria anyway).
Interestingly, Wilhelm II was able to salvage a good deal of his wealth in a deal with the Weimar Republic. Eventually he was paid some 70,000,000 marks (probably about $15M 1921 US dollars; or $300M+ in our vastly devalued 2008 dollars).
THUS THE TITLE NEEDS TO BE FIXED. It should read: "Emperor Wilhelm II of Germany and Emperor Franz Josef I of the Austria."
Star Trek: The Next Generation: The Child (1988)
Season 2's Debut
A very moving episode, one that manages to combine "hard" sf with a deeply human element. In this it is rather different than the typical "softer" more fantasy-like of most episodes of TNG (and eps of Old Trek and Voyager and...).
Story lines: The "A" plot: Troi is impregnated with a male clone of herself by an unknown life form. The child goes from conception to about age 8 in less than a week. He also displays a perspicacity than unnerves everyone except Deanna.
The "B" plot: the "Enterprise" is ordered to transport hundreds (512 to be exact) of deadly viruses and other pathogens to a planet suffering from a devastating plague, the cause of which is unknown. The newly promoted Geordi creates a containment field to keep the bugs in stasis.
However, one of the bugs begins to multiply, stimulated, apparently, by a form of radiation given off my Troi's child. If the containment vessel is breached, the "Enterprise" will become a ship of the dead within hours.
The episodes ending, neatly intertwining both the A and B plot-lines, is a rare Star Trek tear-jerker.* No sense in repeating russem31's rather extensive list of the changes appearing in this the very first episode, so I'll merely comment on some of them and add a few he/she didn't.
--Gates McFadden took off a season in order to raise her child (in a first season "feaurette" celebrating the unveiling of a new Paramount office building named in Gene Roddenberry's honor, a very pregnant McFadden can be seen). Fortunately, she decided to return to TNG.
--Diana Muldaur steps in as CMO (very much in Rosalind Shays mode, her very next gig), and begins by offending the Captain and then displays her disdain for Data be deliberately mispronouncing his name.
Muldaur had, by this time, lost the fragile beauty that was so enchanting in her two Old Trek episodes (as well as her co-starring turn with John Wayne in "McQ"). The vulnerability she displayed in her early work is now gone; perhaps this is one reason she was such a delicious villain on L.A. Law.
--Wesley decides he can't leave the "Enterprise" and asks, and receives, permission from Picard to remain aboard while "pursuing" his Academy studies. (Frankly, always found this rationale more than a little flimsy, how likely is it that Annapolis would allow a midshipman to do his--or her!--course work by correspondence while working aboard a ship?) --Marina Sirtis's hair does assume the style that she's sport until season six; while the pseudo-Princess Leia "bun" is gone, Sirtis is saddled with a pretty heavy weave. So, I imagine is was a relief, when she's allowed to her hair returned to its natural, brunette color.
--Data's personality begins to become more human-like, a response, surely, to his being surround be humans only a daily basis. Since he had been in the company of human/oids for nearly two decades before the point at which TNG begins, it's always struck me as odd that he seemed almost completely oblivious to the nature and habits of creatures he's been interacting with for such a long period...
--Some fantastic computer graphics (for the day) are to be seen when the cargo of bugs is beamed aboard. Such intricate graphics will not become the regular part of a show until J. Michael Straczynski's Babylon 5.
*This is not, of course, to say, that Star Trek is devoid of moving, tragic scenes, the most obvious being Spock's death scene in Star Trek II & Data's death in Star Trek 10. And, most famously, the death of Edith Keeler (Joan Collins) in the celebrated "City on the Edge of Forever" episode during the first season of Old Trek (the script, written by Harlan Ellison, whose ego is in inverse proportion to his size, is inarguably the best thing he's ever written.)
Dispatches: China's Stolen Children (2007)
Heart-breaking and shocking: a social Chernobyl is growing
This docu is both heart-rending and disgusting. The logic behind the "One Child Policy" (OCP) is, from a strictly utilitarian viewpoint, a necessary one. China cannot feed its present population; millions literally live in holes in the ground. Rural poverty is grinding in the extreme. As usual, those with money and connections to the Communist Party or government officials (often one and the same) or police are immune from the OCP; since violations of the policy are punished by fines, couples with money can easily pay the fines or go to the gray market (there's no mention of whether voluntary baby-selling is a crime; to be fair, most US states have no law against selling children).
The OCP which has done much to stabilize China's population growth (to the point that India will, in the very near future, pass China as the world's most populous nation). But it has produced "social imbalances", as the Communist Party puts it. With the traditional preference for boy babies--there are no old-age pensions or other "safety net" in China and the poor can scarcely afford to feed themselves, let alone save money for their old age (many would probably find it astounding that Americans prefer to spend so much money on luxuries rather than save enough for comfortable retirements).
Therefore, the only safety net is a son. Tradition makes the parents' welfare the son's duty. Daughters become members of their husband's family and thus can do nothing, or very little, to help their parents in old age. Therefore, there is a premium on very young boys kids. "Child Registration Officials" are bribed to manufacture the necessary paperwork--as this docu shows. As always, money talks and walks.
But as with everything else, the OCP has boomeranged in a way the Communist Party--obviously--never imagined or, hopefully, intended. With so many baby girls being aborted or abandoned, there is now a high demand for young women and teenagers; and many are kidnapped for profit. At present, according to the docu, 40M Chinese males have little or no hope of ever getting married (and, doubtless, this "official" figure is way too low). So some families buy their "little prince" a future wife and raise her to be submissive and uneducated, apparently the preferred type of wife for many, if not most, Chinese men.
The documentary focuses on a Private Detective who quit the police force in order to search for China's stolen children. After many years on his chosen crusade, he has rescued only 100 kids. And in one of the film's only dramatic moments, we are witness to the rescue of a 16 year old girl who was kidnapped by traffickers--whether to be sold as a wife or to be forced into prostitution isn't clear. What is clear is that the young teen was relieved to be freed from what is slavery in all but name.
The docu also relates the stories of several other couples who've either had children stolen or are actually looking to sell their children, either because they can't afford them or for profit. A child trafficker (the kind of man who used to be called a "white slave" trader in the US 50-60 years ago) also shares his story and we are shown how one such "negotiation" is conducted, between a couple, their faces carefully blurred, seeking to buy a baby boy and a woman seeking to sell her year old son (she tells the trafficker she has already sold two previous children; though she claims she does this because of poverty, the three children have brought her enough money to equal 10-15 years wages; so, clearly, she's using her womb as a baby factory).
This emotionally grinding work is obviously breaking down the resolve of the PI. A scene shows a conversation with his mother where he tells her he's going to quit looking for children. Obviously the tiny number of recovered children, combined with the danger of dealing with traffickers, has weakened his resolve and now outweighs the "hatred" of the traffickers that motivates him. And it's hard to blame him. With probably 99% of his cases ending up dead-ends (we are also shown one family whose young son he did manage to recover via a cell phone trace to the "adoptive" parents), with little or no help from corrupt police, Communist Party and governmental officials, he's searching for "needles in a haystack." And in a country of 1.3B people, the analogy is barely adequate.
However laudable the goal of reducing China's population growth to negative (a "Two Child Policy" would people zero population growth), the OCP is like a nuclear reactor slowly going critical. A social "Chernobyl" if you will. The increase in the price of girl children is a clear sign that the imbalance between the sexes is already a problem and one that can only grow worse.
Population limitation is a must for China, but, clearly, the corrupt and heartless system bolted onto Chinese society is causing more problems than it's solving. It's corrupting not just officialdom, but the very concept of family, so central to China's most ancient traditions. The documentary clearly shows the consequences of the usual Communist preference for orders from on high and the use of force to ensure compliance. The Party never thinks of the carrot only the stick. And the sticks are huge fines, forfeiture of one's house, and forced abortions.
Definitely something to think about as we are watching the Beijing Olympic games coming to and end. The gov't spent $23B--or so it's claimed--to make its capital suitable for the games. One has to wonder if that amount of money--a gigantic one given the pathetically low standard of living for 90% of the population--would not have been far better spent to solve the population control methods and the social time bomb they have created.
Star Trek: The Next Generation: Who Watches the Watchers (1989)
Good story spoiled by obtrusive, patronizing atheism
In most ways this is a top tier NexGen ep. The usual excellent acting, directing and with an acute moral dilemma at the plot's center. This is why it gets a 4/10. Had it been executed with anything less than its usual brilliance, I would have given it a much lower "score." This is one of the very, very few Star Trek episodes or movies that I actually find personally offensive. The transparent "global warming" nonsense introduced--see below--late in the series run was merely annoying gibberish without scientific basis. THIS episode is an attack on one of my deeply-help personal beliefs.
And it didn't have to be that way. The central dilemma, the accidental violation of the Prime Directive, could have been handled without the frontal assault on religious beliefs and the very concept of spirituality. But the writers don't take that tack. Instead of just telling story, the bare-bones of the plot are used to erect a soap-box for the writers' personal beliefs.
(For some reason, the Vote drop down box won't let me change the rating to "4" from the "6" I mistakenly entered.) What spoils it, however, is the almost militant espousal of atheism put into the mouths of the crew of the good ship Enterprise by writers Manning and Beimler (each with eight writing credits for TNG).
The central dilemma is the discovery of a "duck-blind", used by Federation archaeologists, by the bronze-age inhabitants of Mintaka III--whom the aforementioned archaeologists were studying.
This episode is the most virulently anti-religious of any Star Trek TV show or movie I've ever seen. Religion is at worst treated as pathological mania utterly destructive to societies, at best it's treated with a condescension so common to American Academia and Left-wing journalists.
Religion, in deed belief in a Supreme Being or God at all is derided, specifically by Picard, as totally devoid of any benefits. This is an extremely shallow view of religion and/or spiritually, one which clangs even more incongruously from an amateur archaeologist like Picard.
The scene (at the end of Chapter 5 on the DVD) which best illustrates the attitude toward spirituality occurs towards the end when Picard is having another of the obligatory confabs in the conference room ("Ready Room", "Conference Room", all that on the Bridge and no bathroom! Must've been a long walk in urgent situations).
Picard delivers a rant that defines religious belief, and belief in god(s), as the "dark ages of ignorance and superstition and fear." A breath-takingly ignorant and narrow-minded view of the history of religion on this planet (let alone other planets in a humanoid filled universe such as Gene Roddenberry's!) would be harder to imagine! One needs only to be acquainted with the FIFTEEN centuries of French nuns who cared for the sick, fed the hungry, clothed the naked and sheltered the gentle from an often brutal, barbaric world. Are those nuns--and a good Frenchman like Picard WOULD well-know this--an example of a "dark age"? Of ignorant, superstitious fear? Star Trek has always tried to push the envelope by showing the uglier side of our contemporary life by comparing it to an ideal--and idealized--future. Roddenberry created a locus that has allowed for much great story-telling, many great episodes. This isn't one of them. This substitutes the careful construction of a story, for shrill propaganda and a personal agenda.
This is one of the rare occasions in which Roddenberry's open-mindedness is not to be found (there is NOTHING like this eps attack on religion and spiritual-people in Old Trek or the 10 movies). Instead the writers's & producers prejudices are paraded as though they are gospel (pun intended). A sad irony for a "franchise" which trumpets its open-mindedness and "tolerance." Happily, this is a rare exception to the usual run of Trek story-telling. Though it coincided with the elevation of Rick Berman and Michael Piller to "show-runners" of NexGen, it didn't mark a trend. Only toward the end of the series run (seasons 6 & 7) did present-day politics again obtrude.
The nonsensical late series plot point of warp-drive "destroying" space and therefore "limits" had to be placed on FTL travel was nothing more than the global warming hoax, without even going to the trouble of trying to veil the Leftist politics with even a smattering of Treknobabble as a cover.
(Of course, to casual viewers or non-fans, talk of "warp drive" may seem like Treknobabble itself. We Trekkers know how much thicker than that it often got! In fact, Star Trek had an entire department dedicated to nothing BUT creating pseudo-scientific tongue-twisters to make the show sound more future-y.) Bottom line: This is more like an episode of Aaron Sorkin's "The Left-Wing" fantasy about a non-existent "virtuous" Chief Executive, rather than the Star Trek both conservatives and liberals know and love.
Star Trek: Patterns of Force (1968)
With a historical error at its core, not one of the better episodes
This is, arguably, the most disappointing of Second Season episodes. Not only for its poor execution and bad special effects (see the ridiculous flogging "wounds" on Spock's and Kirk's backs), but for the flaw at the heart of the story.
Also naming the victims of the Ekosian Nazi's "Zeons" (as in Zion, a Jewish term for Israel) could hardly be more transparent. Star Trek fans don't need road signs telling them who the players are supposed to be.
But it's just a mediocre episode, not even relieved by the usual verbal sparing between Spock and McCoy. With an episode this silly, there better be some really good comic relief to make it tolerable. But there's no spoonful of sugar for this medicine--and it goes down hard.
It's even more annoying that this was the second use of "Hodgkins' Law of Parallel Development" in the same four episode run (see "The Omega Glory", Episode 2.23, where the "Enterprise" encounters a post-apocalyptic planet whose inhabitants not only speak English, but carry the American flag, have a copy of the Constitution, recite the Pledge of Allegiance and call themselves "Yangs" ("Yanks"); while their enemies are called "Kohms", as in "Communists."
Roddenberry uses the same device for a THIRD time in the season finale, "Bread and Circuses" (Episode 2.25) where an exact duplicate of Imperial Rome has survived 2000 years to develop Twentieth Century technology (i.e. machine guns and swords).
"The Omega Glory" is about on the same quality level as this episode. "Bread and Circuses" is much better. This plot device wears thin quickly--much as Time Travel was beaten to death in TNG, DS9 and even Voyager and three of thee ten movies. "Bread and Circuses" would have been believable by itself, but the other two just aren't up to par; as a result all three look like the product of desperation to meet "air dates." Indeed, a constant theme in the extras about the show's production was how often they came to missing those dates! These shows have the feeling of "quickie" scripts, slapped together in order to deliver the required 25 episodes to NBC.
"Bread and Circuses", at least, features character development and an interesting religious development that perplexes Kirk & Co.
The first two episodes are just excuses to show off Spock's usual cleverness MacGyver-style: he uses the "transponders" implanted in his and Kirk's arm to create a primitive "laser" powered by a light-bulb (!) to cut through the lock on their cell door.
Shatner (and his stunt double(s) are given an excuse to show that he's Macho Man and kicks bad guy behind with his usual relish. BORING.
I almost have the feeling I can hear a big sigh of relief at the time bought by these truncated, half-written scripts for the perennially over-worked, over-budget, behind-schedule crew and cast.
When Kirk is finally able to confront Prof. John Gill about why he chose to infuse Ekosian culture with National Socialism, Gill calls the Nazi regime, "The most efficient in history..."
This is flat-out wrong.
Nazi Germany was terribly, purposefully inefficient. In order to ensure that absolute control remained in his hands, Hitler encouraged inefficiency, overlapping authority between agencies, built his own personal army that rivaled the regular Wehrmacht, and fostered rivalries among his inner circle (Goering, Himmler, Bormann, et al).
He also used every excuse he could to centralize military command ever more tightly into his hands. He blackmailed, framed, and bullied the generals he inherited from the Weimar Reichswehr until he was "commanding" armies hundreds of miles away as though he were on the spot. German troops suffered as much from his arrogance and stupidity as they did from Soviet and Allied military action.
A further demonstration of wild inefficiency was the existence of TWELVE separate foreign intelligence gathering agencies. Naturally, the intelligence gathered was often contradictory.
Despite the use of the most brutal methods imaginable, the Nazis were never able to stamp out resistance movements inside Germany (as the three known attempts on Hitler's life demonstrate), let alone in conquered nations such as France, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia.
Hitler twisted the Germany economy toward one purpose: a quick conquest of Europe and the Soviet Union, a goal quite beyond Germany's capacity--especially once the US was involved. Like Napoleon, Hitler depended upon plundering his conquered victims to fund, fuel and feed his war machine.
Hardly what one would call a paragon of efficiency.
Charmed: Witchness Protection (2004)
An ironic episode considering...
Since this show is basically a cheap rip-off of "Buffy" and "Angel", having Charisma Carpenter (in the interests of full disclosure I was an acquaintance of hers in high school) appear in episode is hilarious.
But even her beauty and decent acting chops can't save this show from its mediocrity.
It's amazing a show this badly written, acted, and directed--with some of the cheapest special effects I've ever seen--lasted as long as it did.
Don't get me wrong, Alyssa Milano, Holly Marie Combes and Rose McGowan are gorgeous (Shannon Dougherty's alcoholism makes her look 10-15 yrs older than she is; I assume aesthetics, if not the bottle, was the reason she left the show early). And all three CAN act, but with the brain-dead material they just didn't have much to work with.
Law & Order: Smoke (2003)
the punishment doesn't seem to justify the effort
I'm not a lawyer however I have been reading the New York Penal Law, NYPL; don't ask, I'm just weird like that. (You can find NY laws, as well as those of several other states, here: http://law.onecle.com/new-york/penal/index.html)
Monty the comic (i.e. the thinly Michael Jackson character) molests Sammy Mireles 5 years before when the boy was 11.
McCoy prosecutes his parents with Conspiracy to commit Sexual Abuse in the first degree because they've been taking payments from an out-of-court settlement. Without getting into the plot any further, my question is rather, the law.
According to NYPL section 160.35, Sexual Abuse in the 1st is a "D" felony. Under NY Law the maximum sentence is 7 years in prison.
As I read the conspiracy statutes, Sammy's parents would be facing Conspiracy in the 5th Degree (NYPL 105.05). This is an "A" misdemeanor, that is the maximum sentence is 1 year in county jail.
IF the crime had been a B or C felony (with maximum sentences of 15 and 25 yrs respectively), then the Conspiracy would be that of the 4th Degree, an "E" felony. "E" felonies in NY state carrying a max sentence of 4 yrs in the Gray Bar Hotel, with mandatory parole after 32 months (with good behavior, automatic time off, etc).
It's a little hard to believe that McCoy would pursue (and Arthur sign off on) a trial that, as I read it, would get the parents a maximum of 12 months in county jail! (As probably loss of custody of their minor son.) But the stakes just aren't that high. The way I read the text of the laws in question, a trial would have never happened. It would have certainly been pled down to one misdemeanor or another.
It just wouldn't be worth the effort of a full-blown trial, especially when no-one (even the molester, Monty, since the statute of limitations had "tolled", as lawyers put it) would ever see the inside of a prison cell.
IF YOU ARE A LAWYER, pls drop me an email @NJ_Pman(at)yahoo(dot)com and let me know if/how I'm wrong; or if I'm right.
It's a good episode, compellingly written. I felt my stomach back-flip when McCoy proves that Sammy's parents had literally pimped him out. It's good drama but it doesn't seem any more faithful to the actual laws of New York that, say, "Gladiator" is to actual Roman history.
Lisa Lisa (for those of you too young to remember her in her salad days when the phrase "and Cult Jam" always followed her name) in particular puts in a fine performance.
Serena does some of her bleeding heart tap-dancing (of the kind that Arthur fires her for). McCoy won, which, often seems to be more important to him than anything else. Arthur had politics uppermost in his mind. But the law is always political!
Law & Order: Trophy (1996)
Claire and Jack, sittin' in a tree...
This episode exposed, or, rather, confirmed, a romantic relationship between Kincaid and McCoy--only a song-and-dance number could have made it more plain.
Claire confronts Jack's former assistant (Diana Hawthorne) and the latter says, "You are sleeping with him, aren't you?" And Claire not only doesn't deny it, but doesn't even BLINK.
With none of his subsequent assistants has their been a hint of romance. It's hard to imagine the Jamie Ross (Carrie Lowell) or Abby Carmichael (my personal fav amongst Jack's assistants, Angie Harmon) characters in an office liaison; especially Jamie who's terrible marriage (and terribly underused actor who played her ex) began as just such a romance. Serena (Elizabeth Rohm) was a lesbian (either I missed an episode or her revelation to her Arthur came completely out of nowhere!). Can't see it with Rubirosa. It's one thing for two ADAs to have a relationship, but the sitting DA and an ADA. Lawsuit on a platter. Besides, the age gap between Jack and the ADAs (all of whom seem to what the French call "un femme de trente ans") is getting a little wide (tho' fortunately for Sam Waterston, he isn't).
There have been hints before, but never this openly. And none since. Not that I disapprove. After all, to go much beyond the surface of the characters' personal lives would push "Law & Order" more in the direction of "Hills Street Blues" + "LA Law" (=soap opera). Wolf has wisely kept the nature of the Law & Order "franchise" right on formula: police procedural+courtroom drama. While the different shows have measured out the formula with different emphases, they all maintain the core mantra. Not all have been blockbusters (as "SVU" is and "Prime" was for so many yrs); but all have been solid in the ratings. And each has its own core of devotees.
Law & Order: Scoundrels (1994)
A ridiculous reach....
I realize this is a fictional TV show, but this episode really stretches the credibility to the breaking point. The suspension of disbelief (to borrow a line from McCoy in another episode) is not made of taffy.
The episode starts off with the formula beginning of Act I. The victim, Arthur Kopinsky, a lawyer, is discovered shot in the head by his secretary and office partner.
Briscoe and Logan quickly discover that the victim was running a scam on the victims of an S&L swindler named Willard Tappan (very transparently modeled on Charles Keating right down to the MO Keating allegedly used: selling customers uninsured bonds instead of opening Federally ensured savings/checking).
They quickly home in on one of the victims (named John Curran) whom Tappan had swindled out of nearly a million dollars.
McCoy and Kincaid, during the trial of Curran for the murder, discover that Tappan has hidden illegally $5M in an offshore account and that the murder victim had discovered the money. They also discover that Kopinsky was blackmailing Tappan.
Kincaid then discovers a connection between (a 12 minute phone call) Tappan and the killer Curran.
This (Act III) is where the story loses all credibility.
McCoy concocts a theory that Tappan is responsible for the murder because he pointed Curran at Kopinsky! "Curran was dynamite..." It just doesn't make any sense. The only thing McCoy has proved is that the two men talked! On the witness stand, Curran, the actual killer, claims, without any proof offered, that Tappan told him he would pay Curran to kill Kopinsky out of the hidden $5,000,000.
I can't believe this would pass the smell test. McCoy could almost certainly have gotten Tappan indicted by a grand jury. But I can't believe that the indictment that would have survived a preliminary hearing.
When Tappan takes the stand in his own defense, McCoy introduces the fact that Tappan had been convicted of defrauding 14,000 of his customers. It's clear that jury convict Tappan because of his prior bad acts and not the murder.
Under the law, accomplice testimony is worthless without corroboration. McCoy presents none. As far as I know the judge would have had to dismiss the case.
McCoy even admits to Adam and Claire that he was counting on the hatred of Tappan by the jury to convict him. And that's exactly what happened.
I admit I'm not a lawyer but I just don't see that McCoy made a prima facia case.
In fact, in the epilogue McCoy admits to Kincaid that he suborned Curran's perjury in order to convict Tappan. "Heaven's to Betsy, Claire, what a dreadful idea!" The case would never survive on appeal even though the meat head judge allowed the trial to go forward.
I love this show but sometimes the writers really go overboard.
The North Star (1943)
A perfect example of Communist influence in Hollywood
This film is an out and out falsification of conditions on Soviet collective farms. It is pro-Communist propaganda designed to present the collective farms as filled with "happy, well-fed peasants", when it fact, the conditions were horrendous. And the peasants were forced by violence, mass murder and mass starvation into the collective farms.
The film is so filled with falsifications that the expert of the crimes of the Stalin Period (1927-53), British historian Robert Conquest calls it, "a travesty greater than could have been shown on Soviet screens (in the 1940s)." (Robert Conquest, "The Harvest of Sorrow," page 321, Oxford, 1984)
When pro-Communist influence is talked about in Hollywood, this movie is exactly what is meant. Despite the fact the truth about the horrors committed by the Soviet regime was known long before this movie, pro-Communists in Hollywood made this movie as an attempt to influence American audiences to have a favorable view of the Evil Empire.
Lenin and Stalin murdered more people than Hitler did before the last had even come to power; Stalin himself was to order more mass-killings-- and genocide against the Ukrainian people, and others--by himself than Hitler did. In fact, it is not going to far, by ANY stretch of the imagination to say that Hitler was an amateur in mass murder who learned many lessons from the master: Stalin.
Yet all the while pro-Communists like the writer of this movie, the despicable Lillian Hellman were denouncing Hitler, they were actively aiding Stalin's campaign to deceive the West about his own crimes.
It's one thing to ignore or fail to speak up about crimes against humanity. It is entirely something else to actively help cover them up. The makers of this film were AT BEST tools; at worst accomplices of the worst mass-murderer in history.
If you've ever wonder what HUAC (House Un-American Activities Committee) was looking for when it investigated Communist influence in Hollywood THIS is exactly it! Those who believe that HUAC (and Sen. Joe McCarthy's hearings) were "witchhunts" are deluding themselves. The proof of Communist influence--in Hollywood--is right here; as well as in the films "Misson to Moscow" and "Song of Russia."
The Exhibitionist Files (2002)
Bad even for a Pay Channel "Adult" movie
When "erotica", even soft-core, puts "plot" ahead of titillation (pun intended) the results are seldom good.
The actress playing the main character, Catalina Larranaga, is beautiful and shows some potential as a character actor; unfortunately her attempts at cinematic seduction fall flat.
An attempt at video camera "exhibitionism" almost brings on the giggles. It's a shame that a woman feels she has to do this kind of trash simply to get a SAG card. And whatever potential she has is wasted in a paper-thin, cliché ridden plot. A few more acting classes and she may be ready for prime time.
The director and writer, however, are sub-par film school hacks, the lighting barely professional, and the rest of the cast is utterly forgettable. It almost has the feel of a corporate training video.
The so-called "stalker" sub-plot is the worst of TV stereotypes and, in this I agree with the other reviewer, serves only to add another fifteen or twenty minutes to reach the 90 minutes that's the bare minimum for a "movie".
Bottom line: D+
Apocalypse Now (1979)
DEMAND Redux Version
Like its basis, Jospeh Conrad's "Heart of Darkness", "Apocalypse Now" isn't so much a story as an experience. In a way similar to Kubrick's masterpiece, "2001", this movie is a sensory experience that is, at once, a metaphor for the American (and French) experiences in Vietnam, and an examination of men in the most extreme human experience: war. As Nietzsche wrote: when you look into the abyss, the abyss looks into you. And America, like Coppola's hero, is never the same again.
The "Redux" version's added footage fleshes out both the metaphor and the film in a way that makes for a much more satisfying cinematic experience. The protagonists' stay with the French family heightens both the insanity and intensity of the movie's denouement and very much belongs in the film.
Ultimately, however, like the Vietnam-era itself, the movie lacks coherence. As in the "Godfather, Part II," Coppola disregards traditional cinematic structure. Thirty-three years after American military involvement in Vietnam came to end, the country is still as divided as ever. Thus it is little wonder that reactions to this movie will vary as much as the individual's opinions, and experiences, of that tragic, and seemingly interminable, era in American history.
The film is also unique for the roster of actors who would later become superstars. It also noteworthy for being Marlon Brando's swan song; after "Apocalypse" his sad decline into overpaid cameos, depression, obesity and family tragedy would begin.
Coppola's three masterpieces, "The Godfather," "The Godfather, Part II," and "Apocalypse Now" all examine the nature of evil, especially that of an essentially good man losing himself in evil. Without the razorsharp plotting, brilliant character development of the Godfather films, "Apocalypse Now" is a chaotic miasma lacking nearly all of the qualities that made the Coreleone epic the greatest family story in film history. Despite its defects, which are manifold, "Apocalypse" is utterly unforgettable.
The Hunt for Red October (1990)
Excellent movie, good adaptation
Tom Clancy's novel, the basis for this movie, was first brought to national attention by the endorsement of the late President Ronald Reagan. Seen carrying a book, Reagan was asked what he was reading by a reporter. He told the reporter and added that it was a "rattling good yarn." It would be six years after the book was published (1984) before it would be on the silver screen. Clancy's books are a tribute to the men and women of the US military and the film maintains that spirit throughout. Neither side is presented as one-dimensional.
John McTiernan, the director, best known as the director of "Diehard"--a movie that was the breakthrough film for another actor, Bruce Willis-- weaves a taut, intelligent thriller that keeps the tension right until the end. He avoids the tendency of Hollywood to paint the Soviets as "misunderstood" and shows us the basic themes of Clancy's novel.
The Soviets have built a "First Strike" weapon, the submarine the "Red October" which has a radically advanced, silent drive system rendering it undetectable by sonar. The "Red October", in the words of Jeffrey Jones' character Skip Tyler, "...could lay off Washington or New York, fire its missiles and nobody would know anything about it until it was all over."
It is true that the movie is not a strict adaptation of Clancy's novel. It would require a mini-series to do that. The flawed adaptations of Clancy's subsequent books show how difficult his work is to translate to the big screen. His deft and unrivaled ability to make the most complicated military technology accessible to general readers is impossible to convey in a movie. His often encyclopedic detail is also not film-able. Clancy also builds tension and dramatic intensity in layers, often taking hundreds of pages. Alec Baldwin exaggeratedly described it thusly: "Clancy can spend three pages describing a government-issued pencil."
The book sets a gripping pace almost from the beginning. Sean Connery's Ramius is a compelling, charismatic figure, the very image of a modern-day Nelson. The character's motivation, however, is a little thin. In the book, and this is left out of the movie, one of the main reasons that Ramius decides to defect was the death of his wife. She needed an organ transplant to save her life. The organ, instead, went to a high party official and the wife died. This brought home the inhumanity that was central to the Soviet system.
This was Alec Baldwin's breakthrough role and he does an excellent job. His acting is crisp, trim and controlled. His political obsessions had not yet robbed his craft of its vigor. He's a joy to watch and he stands toe-to-toe not only with a superstar like Sean Connery, he never disappears in Connery's shadow as so many of his co-stars have, but he also shows his acting chops are on a par with excellent character actors such as the legendary James Earl Jones, Scott Glenn, Sam Neil and Jeffery Jones. The beautiful Gates McFadden, aka Dr. Beverly Crusher of "Star Trek: The Next Generation," has a cameo as Ryan's surgeon wife.
Neil also gives a sympathetic performance as Remius' executive officer, Borodin. He also adds the movie's touch of tragedy--as if to illustrate a line said by Connery's Ramius, "I've been at sea for 40 years...fighting a war with no battles, no monuments, only casualties."
One thing often forgotten is that this movie was one of the first in which an African-American plays a high ranking military officer. James Earl Jones plays an Admiral who is also Director of Central Intelligence. There is absolutely no mention of his race in the movie.
Finally, a word about how the real-life military operates, something faithfully reproduced in this picture. Enlisted personnel do the work, officers supervise (with certain exceptions). There's nothing unusual about enlisted sonar operators on a US Naval ship. There are no other kind. Ned Vaughn's "Jonesy" is a brilliant sonar operator who happens across the way to track the "Red October" after it disappears from the sonar screens of the USS "Dallas", the American submarine which had been shadowing it after it had left its Soviet base.
Bride & Prejudice (2004)
A pleasant and fun surprise...
Not being a big fan of musicals in general, especially those of a la arch-schmaltzmeister Andrew Lloyd Webber, and having never seen a "Bollywood" film I didn't expect much. However, I was impressed with "Bend it Like Beckham" so I decided to give this movie a chance.
This movie is a very good time. The song/dance numbers are infectious and downright fun, the bright colors and unabashed embrace of Indian color make it little short of dazzling. And seeing Naveen Andrews (Balraj) doing "his Indian MC Hammer" number is a treat--showing this Anglo-Indian actor's versatility and range.
The real treat is Ashwarya Rai, a stunning beauty with a sweet voice and good acting chops as well. I saw her in a Cover Girl commercial last night. It would seem that Rai is poised to conquer the US as she has South Asia.
I'm glad I overcame my usual distaste for musicals. I like this movie so much I've actually bought the DVD. If you are a fan of musicals I would definitely recommend this. If you aren't, give it a try anyway. Director and co-writer Charinder Chadra breathes new life into the Jane Austen's tired cliché of a novel, adding culture clash to the original's mix of class conflict and les affaires de coeur.
If Bollywood soon finds an audience in the US, this movie, and especially Ashwarya Rai, may well be looked upon as the catalysts which opened the door.
The Adventures of Bob & Doug McKenzie: Strange Brew (1983)
Actors' Rebellion Pays Off In Laughs
The genesis of these two most Canadian of characters came from SCTV producers pressing Moranis and Thomas for "more" Canadian characters. Stumped as to what "more" Canadian could mean and annoyed for being asked to do it, the two actors created Bob & Doug Mackenzie as the ultimate Canadian stereotypes. What was obviously an act of rebellion created, arguably, Canada's best-known "cultural" ambassadors.
The plot--as if it mattered--is an odd mix: a semi-satire of Hamlet and the old sci-fi serials of the 30s (Max von Sydow did, after all, play Ming the Merciless in the "Flash Gordon" film).
The boys have drunk all their father's beer and don't have the money to buy more. They concoct a lame-brained idea to extort beer from their favorite brewery. Instead of getting shown the door, the boys are given jobs and an entire van-load of beer.
Unbeknownst to them they've been recruited to aid in mad scientist von Sydow's plot to take over the world with beer tainted with a mind-control drug.
The movie careens from one hilarious situation to another, satirizing Canadians, science fiction and movies ever so gently. In the end, after the mad scientist is thwarted and Canada's beer supply secured, the boys ask, "What's wrong with the beer? Will the it kill ya?" Told no, they drive away the semi full of the "strange brew" and into cult history.
Enjoy one of the most underrated comedies of the 80s--the laughs done without the toilet humor, flatulence jokes and sexual innuendo that no comedy can seem to do without these days. If nothing else, this movie shows that truly talented comedians can be hilarious without falling back on the lewdness that set in with "Animal House" and has only gotten worse with the Farrelly brothers, et al. This is one of the reasons the funniest movies these days are rarely comedies. Moranis and Thomas show how to do it right. They achieve the movie's laughs in way that doesn't require shooing the rugrats from the room or making you gag on your popcorn.
Truly funny movies don't need rely on hair "gel" stunts or potty-mouthed vulgarity. Perhaps, one day, Hollywood will remember this and give us comedies like this and the recent "Dodgeball." One can only hope.
The movie is also noteworthy for being Mel Blanc's swan-song as the brothers' beer-loving father.
Sapphire Girls (2003)
Mary's the reason
Mary Carey's the only reason to watch this. Apparently intended for the "couples" market, it's definitely pitched towards women. Being a straight softcore flick instead of the usual, edited X-rated fare that once dominated late-night premium services.
The real star, is of course, the luscious Mary Carey. Her only sex scene highlights her assets to perfection. It's great for those of sick of of the tons of silicon coming from the San Fernando Valley, Mary's natural body is a wonder.
It was NOT men who created the anorexic archetype that tortures so many girls. Kate Moss has never filled anyone's fantasy. Mary's voluptuous body is the perfect remedy to the plague of silicon and the starving actress fetish of Hollywood films.
The plot is silly, the acting terrible. But porn producers have figured out that women tend to like a plot, however silly or badly done it is.
More Mary and less inane dialog would have helped this movie immensely. In fact, a total absence of dialog would have helped it even more.
Grade is a six, but only because of Mary's girl-next-door charm and hard-body.
My wife pointed out something else: nearly all the male actors appeared to be fifteen or twenty years older than the women. "The Hollywood stereo-type even in porn. Be nice if the guys were as good to look as the girls." I hadn't even noticed any men in the movie until she pointed it out.
The Thing (1982)
Carpenter's dramatic masterpiece...
Usually mislabeled as a "horror" film, this is really a drama in science fictional clothing. The plot is really driven by the impact on the characters of an alien that can perfectly disguise itself as any organism it's come into contact with. Carpenter ratchets the paranoia and tension almost to the breaking point as the creature slowly destroys the entire crew of an Antarctic research station.
As faithful to the original short story, "Who Goes There?" by legendary sf editor (and usually mediocre writer) John Campbell as the original movie was not, Carpenter's adaptation is a masterful study of humans under the most unbearable tension imaginable.
The special effects retain their punch, 23 years later whilst the intense criticism they brought at the time (the movie opened two weeks after "E.T.; as Carpenter says, "ET was the good movie and we were the bad.") is no longer relevant in the post-9/11 world. We've all seen things far more horrible than anything ever conceived by Hollywood.
The movie that got Carpenter labeled by one critic as a "pornographer" of violence" has stood the test of time; the now criticism but a footnote.
None-the-less, they remain spectacular. The kennel scene is particularly astonishing. A later scene in which Dr. Copper (Richard Dysart) is killed is also a special effects marvel.
Carpenter also treats us to breathtaking scenery (Alaska and British Columbia served as "Antarctica") of vast ice fields and glaciers.
Kurt Russell also turns in one of his best performances. Forced to become the leader of the dwindling band of humans, his character MacCready displays the tough-mindedness of "Snake Pliskin" combined with a humanity the latter lacked. To be fair, the movie also lacks the humor that helped alleviate "Escape from New York's" violence and degradation.
The entire cast does stellar work. Even the dog "actor" playing the alien turns in a great performance, never once looking at camera or crew in the scene's he's in.
Russell and Carpenter also offer a funny, incisive and illuminating commentary on the 1998 "special edition."
If you haven't seen this movie in years (it had been at least fifteen years for me) you'll be presently surprised how well everything holds up, from the special effects to the actor's performances, to Carpenter's directorial trademarks.
Ennio Moricone's score fits Carpenter's style almost as well as one of Carpenter's scores. Low key and unobtrusive, it provides the perfect counterpoint and undertone to the intensity of the images and performance.
Still not for the squeamish or the kiddies, if you like your sf, or horror, served up without the usual clichés or half-naked females helplessly waiting for the killer, then I definitely suggest this movie.
As Carpenter proved he could master comedy with "Big Trouble in Little China", so with "The Thing" he proves he can handle deadly serious drama. The denunciations have faded with the paper they were printed on. 23 years later what's left is an excellent movie and special effects landmark.
DVD Ratings: Transfer: 8 5.1 remix: 8 "Extras": 9 (for Carpenter/Russell commentary track; the "Special Edition" also contains a nearly 90 min documentary about the movie; also highly recommended.)
Trivia tidbit: associate producer Larry Franco--who also plays one of the Norwegians at the beginning of the movie--was also, at the time, Kurt Russell's brother-in-law.
That's My Bush! (2001)
Disappointing, forgettable effort by South Park Geniuses
The reigning kings of satire for my generation (i.e. those of between 30 and 40), Parker and Stone badly misfired with this flat-lined attempt at political humor.
Though Parker and Stone usually roast Left more than the Right, this feeble satire about...well, no one's really sure what it's about. Even Co-Creator Stone was led to comment: "A lot of people didn't get it. I didn't get it myself." And that's really because there was nothing to get. Essentially a one-joke pony (how much mileage did they really expect to get from retreading NY Times stories anyway?) it appears to have run out of steam before it left the storyboarding sessions. The usual, lamentable sitcom personalities and situations litter the 22 minute shows because there's nothing else to go in their places.
The envelope-pushing and complete disregard for any sacred cows that make South Park the most cutting satire since "Married With Children" signed off, simply isn't here.
Matt and Trey definitely phoned this one in. What could have been a great opportunity to satirize the entire political culture, falls as flat as the dim-bulb jokes and the ad infinitum reminders of George W. Bush's alleged stupidity.
Bottom line: should have never gotten past the pitch session, let alone out of the development process. (It's impossible to believe this one tested well. Even if you don't like the President, you surely won't find this funny.) But Comedy Central has made its mark by taking chances on shows no one else would touch with a ten-foot poll. They can't all be "South Park".
Battlestar Galactica: The Second Coming (1999)
Have exchanged emails with Hatch...
...about the possibility of making his trailer available on his website.
Though he said nothing explicit, Mr. Hatch hinted that he's working toward getting permission to post it for download.
He also responded to my email in only a few minutes--a record for a response from any "celebrity" type I've ever contacted. He comes across as a genuinely nice guy.
I still feel that Universal should have given him a credit as a "consulting producer"; at least some acknowledgement of his 20 year effort to revive BSG. At the very least, they could have paid his credit card debt he piled up making his trailer. Because without his two-decade quest, we fans wouldn't be enjoying the amazing "reimagined" version. At least he got two guest starring roles out of it. Perhaps it can kick start his career again.
But as is obviously even to those of us outside "the Biz", the only thing rarer in Hollywood than gratitude is loyalty.
While BSG II is becoming a masterpiece, I still hope one day a "continuation" can become reality. Perhaps as a fully cg-animated feature. That way there could be no confusion with Ronald Moore's series.
Heat (1995)
One of the Top 5 crime thrillers of all time
SPOILER ALERT--from the get-go.
"Heat" contains the best, most exciting bank robbery scene ever filmed. (And in an eerie example of life imitating art, an infamous bank robbery not dissimilar from the one in the film occurred in LA only months after the movie had been released; fortunately, unlike the movie, no one but the bad guys were killed). Mann gives us a tableau showcasing a scene of such intensity, it makes the viewer feel as if he were almost there. Mann plunges you into his familiar world of cops versus bad guys. It's the dazzling execution which enlarges the formula and raises it to an accomplishment of both directorial technique and white-knuckled suspense.
"Heat" begins with a slam-bang armored car heist (in another example of life imitating art, a similar robbery was committed only miles from my home a few years back; as in the movie all three guards are murdered in cold blood), a signature Michael Mann violent set-piece that proves the better moments of "Miami Vice" were just warm-ups for his outstanding feature work such as in this and "Collateral." "Heat" presents us with a hardcore crew of criminals who specialize in highly lucrative but dangerous robberies and burglaries. Robert DeNiro plays the leader of this band of elite bad guys. Val Kilmer and Tom Sizemore also turn in excellent performances. Henry Rollins, however, should look into more acting lessons. The genuinely frightening Danny Trejo is badly underused, a rare example of Mann under-utilizing a talented actor.
The pace is frenetic, the characters sharply drawn and Al Pacino's explosiveness has seldom been put to better use. The film also has a cameo from the serial killer in "Red Dragon" (Tom Noonan). John Voit also gives a low-key, effective performance as McCauley's fence-cum-manager-type.
DeNiro gives us a man who's always been outside the "system" and now views, Don Corleone-like, those of us who do choose to live by society's rules as nothing but pawns pushed around by forces beyond our control. As Neil McCauley, DeNiro delivers to us that staple character of Westerns, the man who means to live by his own rules at whatever cost to himself or innocent bystanders. Smart enough to use violence only when necessary, but cold-blooded enough to murder anyone in his way "at the drop of a hat." McCauley gives us his philosophy about "the Life" learned from years inside California's toughest prisons, "Have nothing in your life that you cannot walk-away from in thirty seconds flat if you see the 'heat' coming around the corner. That's the discipline."
The film is beautifully shot and expertly cut. Like "Collateral", this picture is another kind of visual "tone poem" of LA, the beautiful camera work revealing both the ethereal nature of the city and the brutality beneath the glitz and glamor. Mann's trademark cinematography sparkles.
The movie is encumbered, however, by a distracting and irrelevant subplot involving Natalie Portman as Al Pacino's Lt. Vincent Hanna's stepdaughter and his collapsing third marriage to (the wasted) Diane Venora. It takes time and intensity away from the whipsaw action and crackerjack plot, weakening the movie's focus especially during the race to the "inevitable" denouement.
Often touted for being the only movie in which DeNiro and Pacino have ever appeared in a scene together, the famous scene fails to meet expectations. The two greats don't seem to have much chemistry. The conversation between their two characters starts with inanity and ends in sputtering, platitudinous machismo unworthy of neither the actors nor director. Pacino's delivery of "Brother, you are going down" will hardly go down as one of Mann's best lines--or Pacino's best deliveries.
I would give the movie a 10 except for the above-mentioned unnecessary family suds and half-develop subplot about a serial murderer who also happens to be a key character in McCauley's fall; this irrelevant filler distracts the viewer and weakens the dramatic structure and forces me to give it a 9.
And, a minor nitpick with the climactic bank robbery scene. The only hole in the writing is how Pacino's cops learn of the robbery. After one of McCauley's crew is locked in by police surveillance and has to bail out of the "scores", Mann expects us to believe that this crew of hardcore hijackers wouldn't alter their plans, the timing, the date of the bank job or simply abandon it. It's the one really false note in the main plot. But the spectacular results of Mann's plot device almost makes you forget about the contrived way it was brought about that false note.
Finally, one more subplot is left dangling and unresolved. McCauley's girlfriend, played by a subdued, sexy Amy Brennerman, is left, at the end, in a car with $5 million in stolen cash. And...nothing. Mann just leaves it and the character hanging. I mean, if you're looking at a dozen accessory after-the-fact murder charges, that's no minor thing. The time wasted with the schmaltz could have been used better here. Personally, I have to say, I would have booked. You'd have never talked yourself out of a prison sentence and no one even knows you're involved. Honestly what would YOU do? Mann doesn't give us his answer.
The ending leaves you nearly breathless and the beauty of the whole outweighs the flaws.
DVD transfer: 9.
Sound: 9
5.1 Remix Quality: 9
Packging: 6
Disk Image: 7