Change Your Image
harry-m
Reviews
Joshua (2002)
Sweet G-Rated Gem
This story is about a "woodcarver" (carpenter)named Joshua who shows up in an Anytown, USA and by his example helps turn the town into a real community concerned with the welfare of everyone else. It may be helpful to know that "Jesus" is the Greek form of "Joshua." This is not a story of the "Second Coming," but a story of what a decent person can do for a town when he leads by example and hard work. Joshua leads in the rebuilding of a Baptist Church, he befriends a confused Roman Catholic priest, he helps in the new musically oriented church, "Lost and Found," he helps restore the bad marriage of his landlords and he helps put back whole the broken life of a woman named "Maggie" (Mary Magdelene). Along the way he performs a miracle or two when he has to. All this pleases everyone in the town except the head priest of the Roman Catholic church, who feels Joshua is a false prophet and fraud and is really a threat to the town. He uses his influence to have Joshua "invited" to the Vatican to be questioned. Joshua goes and when he is questioned about his identity he replies with the best line in the movie: "I am what I am." (Compare this to what God says to Moses at the burning bush when Moses asks His name.) I will not go into his talk with the pope, other than to say you'll enjoy it. The movie is enhanced by its original music, as well as some classics. Tony Goldwyn as Joshua plays the role with tremendous understatement and is near-perfect; Kurt Fuller is wonderful as the confused fisherman-priest (Peter); F. Murray Abraham gives another of his usual great performances as the misguided priest; and Stacy Edwards is excellent as Maggie. This movie is a G-Rated feel-good gem which the whole family can watch and enjoy regardless of their religion. The weighted average of 6.1 hardly reflects how good the movie is or the the most common vote of 10, the mean of 7.4, or the median of 8. Nor is it an accurate reflection of the User Comments. The movie is a 9 out of 10.
Mr. & Mrs. Smith (2005)
Absurd Movie With Nothing But Bullets & Bombs
The first half-hour of this movie introduces the super beautiful Angelina Jolie and the equally beautiful Brad Pitt. This part of the movie is fun. Then the next one and a half hours is non-stop shooting of about one hundred thousand bullets and fifty thousand explosions of various kinds of bombs and other explosive devices. When Brad and Angelina are not trying to kill each other, many others are trying to kill them. Superman could never survive this continuous onslaught; I leave it to your imagination if Brad and Angelina do or don't. This movie is the movie equivalent of Jay Leno's "Jay Walking." Just brainless. If you like pictures without any semblance of a plot, with absurd dialogue, but with multitudinous special FX, mostly explosions and car collisions, then this is the movie for you. But then it will also be time for you to rethink your life and why you enjoy mindless pictures like this junk, instead of well-written, well-acted movies, that tell a story.
Double Jeopardy (1999)
Based on a false legal premise!
The movie is based on a false premise that is well known: A convicted criminal cannot benefit from the crime. Yet in this terrible movie, the convicted murderer gets $2,000,000 from her victim's life insurance policy. The movie gets even worse from there, except that Ashley Judd is beautiful eye-candy.
That is the only comment I wish to make since none of the other comments even alludes to this important point. You can also add that the Supreme Court has ruled that even an innocent person does not have the right to escape from prison or run from parole, let alone commit crimes as Ahley Judd does, including stealing a gun from her parole officer and carrying it on a plane (which is not explained).
In summary, this movie goes beyond stupid. Every legal point is wrong. So how can any intelligent movie goer enjoy it?
You Only Live Once (1937)
A Bad Movie Despite Its Director And Stars
A Fritz Lang film starring Sylvia Sidney and Henry Fonda sounds like it can't miss. But it does. People react so absurdly that the story is just not believable. A trucker fires Fonda without any rational reason. Fonda is convicted of heinous murders only because a hat with his initials is at the scene of the crime. (No wonder Lang doesn't show the trial on screen.) A miraculous gun followed by any even more miraculous pardon. And then the epitome of inexplicable actions: Fonda callously murders the only person besides Sylvia Sidney that he loves and trusts! Please! This is just a bad movie. Maybe in 1937, in the midst of the Great Depression, it was accepted. But today, it's a joke despite its director and stars.
Elizabeth (1998)
A purported "historical" movie that would earn a grade of "F" in school.
The movie "ELIZABETH" is a decent movie based on acting, direction, and cinematography (although too gory for my tastes). But it is a nearly complete failure as history--especially for a movie which claims to be "historical." The writer takes a few undisputed facts a builds a wholly concocted story around them. He invents entirely false stories, distorts others, and even takes events that occurred 20 years later and attributes them to Elizabeth's first year. Along the way, he deflowers "the virgin queen," and makes a traitor out of her one true love, Robert Dudley, who never would betray her. In short, for lovers of history like me, the movie is sanctimonious drivel.
Sahara (1995)
Better Than Expected
Although I am generally against remaking classic movies, I must admit that this TV-movie starring Jim Belushi was very well done and was far better than I expected. And Belushi's fine acting was a delightful surprise, too. I recommend that you see the original with Humphrey Bogart and compare. You'll enjoy both.
The Quiet Man (1952)
The AFI Should Be Ashamed
The AFI should be ashamed of itself for not including this delightful movie in its top-100. PULP FICTION but not THE QUIET MAN? Yeah, right!
Les misérables (1995)
The most magnificent movie I have ever seen--in every respect.
This French movie is a 20th century version of Hugo's classic. The story itself is entirely different, with a new Jean Valjean who identifies with the original hero shown in flashback throughout the film.
The story is mostly about this new Jean Valjean and his life during the Nazi occupation of France and his relationship with a Jewish family that he attempts to save from the Holocaust. The story is beautifully told with a superb cast led by Jean-Paul Belmondo in three roles. The movie flawlessly weaves the characters' lives together to an enormously esquisite and life affirming conclusion. Superb in all aspects of film-making.
Hats off to Claude Lelouche (writer-director) and everyone else associated with the making of this fabulous epic.