Based on Michael Korda's bestselling interpretation of the life of legendary movie star (and his aunt) Merle Oberon, this 1987 mini-series chronicles the life of a young Eurasian woman (Mia Sara) who flees India to England, where she hides the truth of her past (including her role in the accidental death of an important British official back in India) to become a famous movie star. The script for "Queenie" is extremely melodramatic, and the time frame doesn't seem quite accurate (in part II, Queenie returns to India to make a movie that one character describes as "more expensive than Gone with the Wind"--meaning she and a large British-American entourage are trapsing across the globe to make a movie at the height of World War II!!!), but the show is quite lavish and, thanks to an energetic cast--especially the lovely Miss Sara--quite entertaining. There's also a fine score by Georges Delarue. Worth seeing if you come across it on television--I'd love to have it on DVD.
Reviews
24 Reviews
Subway
(1985)
Really a lot of fun.
2 November 2002
It would be difficult to describe "Subway." Fortunately, I threw it into the DVD player knowing only who directed it, who starred in it, and that it was set in the Paris Metro. Maybe that was a plus for me, since I had no idea where the serpentine, if occasionally silly, plot was going. Suffice it to say that Christophe Lambert is chased into the Paris Metro, clutching some files that Isabelle Adjani is desperate to get her hands on. Of course, there's a romance with them, and a number of supporting characters--a roller skating purse snatcher, a smart cop, a dumb cop, a philosophical flower vendor, etc. Like many Luc Besson films, this one is over the top from the get-go, a crazy ride to nowhere, surreal, perhaps, but a bit obtuse at times with its eye-rolling symbolism. But it's fun, especially the excessive 80s look of the costumes and hairstyles, and Eric Serra's synth-and-bass-heavy soundtrack. Between Lambert and Adjani, I have to reserve all the praise for the lady, who deliciously scores with superb comic timing.
National Velvet
(1944)
A marvelous family film
2 November 2002
A sentimental, heart-tugging family film set in England of the 1920s. A young Elizabeth Taylor wins a horse in a raffle and decides to enter him in the Grand National; fortunately, ex-jockey Mickey Rooney is around to give Liz some help. Director Clarence Brown displays some remarkable control with material that could've been excessively maudlin in someone else's hands. He and screenwriters Helen Deutsch and Theodore Reeves take great care in establishing genuine characterizations and developing the story naturally. True, there are one or two scenes that seem a bit forced, but overall it's quite affecting, and gorgeously filmed in Technicolor. The race itself is quite thrilling, and like so many great classics, there's a marvelous, three-hankie fade-out at the end. Liz proves that she was a real trooper right from the start, and Rooney--who I usually find rather annoying--is surprisingly subdued and really very good. Donald Crisp is terrif as Liz's gruff father and Angela Lansbury is a delight as her older, boy-crazy sister. Most of the acting kudos, however, belong to Anne Revere, who won a richly deserved Supporting Actress Oscar playing Liz's wise and caring mother.
Below
(2002)
A smart, chilling "B" picture.
20 October 2002
Below (*****) I know what you're thinking. A "B" picture about a haunted submarine? And I think it's the best flick I've seen so far this year? Well, when a "B" picture is this smart, this intricate, this well-made, this damned entertaining, then, yeah, it's the best movie I've seen so far this year.
Here's the set-up: it's 1943 in the North Atlantic, and the U.S.S. Tiger Shark picks up three survivors from a British hospital ship that was torpedoed two days earlier; the discovery that one of the survivors is a German leads to violence; and, then, really weird things start happening, all the while a German cruiser is chasing the sub down. Is a ghost trying to destroy the sub and its crew, or are they just imagining things through convenient coincidences?
Below was written by Lucas Sussman, Darren Aronofsky and the film's director, David N. Twohy; Aronofsky is the smart filmmaker behind the art-house hit Requiem for a Dream, and Twohy has consistently specialized in sophisticated "B" pictures like The Arrival and Pitch Black. Below offers up an intricate storyline that keeps both the characters and the audience guessing--when they and we aren't jumping out of our skins in terror. Twohy's direction is an example of economic brilliance--the flick charges forward, piling on the twists and scares methodically, but never gratuitously--thankfully, this is a horror flick that's more about mood than about gore--indeed, it's less in tune with modern splatterfests than it is an homage to the cerebral Val Lewton thrillers of the 1940s (like The Seventh Victim or Isle of the Dead).
And what mood this movie creates! Ian Wilson's cinematography is vibrant and chilling, and the magnificent special effects never overwhelm the story--except for a final, hauntingly beautiful shot that will linger in your memory for quite awhile.
An added bonus is the cast of smart players: Bruce Greenwood as the sub commander trying to hold his crew and himself together; Matt Davis as the wet-behind-the-ears officer not really accepted by the crew; Olivia Williams as an English nurse who is both suspect and suspicious; and Holt McCallaney as a gruff officer.
It appears that Below is being dumped by its studio, Dimension, with little advertising or fanfare; a shame, really, since it's one of the most sophisticated and highest quality pictures I've seen in quite awhile. [Rated R: Violence, language, brief nudity.]
Here's the set-up: it's 1943 in the North Atlantic, and the U.S.S. Tiger Shark picks up three survivors from a British hospital ship that was torpedoed two days earlier; the discovery that one of the survivors is a German leads to violence; and, then, really weird things start happening, all the while a German cruiser is chasing the sub down. Is a ghost trying to destroy the sub and its crew, or are they just imagining things through convenient coincidences?
Below was written by Lucas Sussman, Darren Aronofsky and the film's director, David N. Twohy; Aronofsky is the smart filmmaker behind the art-house hit Requiem for a Dream, and Twohy has consistently specialized in sophisticated "B" pictures like The Arrival and Pitch Black. Below offers up an intricate storyline that keeps both the characters and the audience guessing--when they and we aren't jumping out of our skins in terror. Twohy's direction is an example of economic brilliance--the flick charges forward, piling on the twists and scares methodically, but never gratuitously--thankfully, this is a horror flick that's more about mood than about gore--indeed, it's less in tune with modern splatterfests than it is an homage to the cerebral Val Lewton thrillers of the 1940s (like The Seventh Victim or Isle of the Dead).
And what mood this movie creates! Ian Wilson's cinematography is vibrant and chilling, and the magnificent special effects never overwhelm the story--except for a final, hauntingly beautiful shot that will linger in your memory for quite awhile.
An added bonus is the cast of smart players: Bruce Greenwood as the sub commander trying to hold his crew and himself together; Matt Davis as the wet-behind-the-ears officer not really accepted by the crew; Olivia Williams as an English nurse who is both suspect and suspicious; and Holt McCallaney as a gruff officer.
It appears that Below is being dumped by its studio, Dimension, with little advertising or fanfare; a shame, really, since it's one of the most sophisticated and highest quality pictures I've seen in quite awhile. [Rated R: Violence, language, brief nudity.]
Sweet Home Alabama
(2002)
An underrated, though flawed, delight.
29 September 2002
Sweet Home Alabama may well turn out to be the most underrated movie of the year. Is it a classic? Hardly. But is it deserving of some of the most viscous, nasty reviews I've seen this year? Hardly.
It's true that Sweet Home Alabama has many flaws. It's not a smooth comedy, it bumps from scene to scene, with not a few moments that seem tacked-on rather than flowing from genuine characterizations. Director Andy Tennant telegraphs almost all the important plot developments rather transparently.
Nevertheless, I enjoyed the movie, and am chagrined that it has been treated with so much superior disgust by many critics. Many reviewers accuse the flick of being "sitcom", an appellation that is a mark of laziness and needs to be retired immediately. The truth is that the plot of Sweet Home Alabama--an ambitious woman (Reese Witherspoon) must choose between an urban sophisticate (Patrick Dempsey) or a redneck stud (Josh Lucas)--is more or less a Southern-fried variation of the plots in The Awful Truth and His Girl Friday, films that have provided much inspiration for many sitcom writers over the years. Now, Sweet Home Alabama lacks the style, wit and pinache of those Leo McCarey and Howard Hawks efforts, but it still has charms worthy of respect. It's genuinely funny most of the time, is a fine showcase for a talented cast, and is filled with a marvelous sense of place, even if that place is something of a fantasy (incidentally, the movie was filmed in Georgia and Florida, not Alabama!).
That sense of place is another aspect that critics are grinding against. There are accusations of stereotyping of Southern people and heritage in the film. These are many of the same arguments thrown against My Big Fat Greek Wedding, with its "stereotyping" of immigrant Greek culture. I can only surmise about that, and I've heard from real Greek immigrants disparaging Greek Wedding's portrayals. But I know Southern culture: I grew up in a small Southern town and still live in the South. While Sweet Home Alabama doesn't acknowledge the modern, suburban South, with its populations of many minorities (not just Black, but Hispanic, Asian, Middle Eastern, etc.), I nevertheless nodded my head in recognition throughout the film. I know the honky-tonks like the one Jean Smart's character owns. I know the double-wides like the one in which Fred Ward and Mary Kay Place live. Heck, my dad once had a truck just like the one Lucas drives around. Sweet Home Alabama, to me, was a warm-hearted spin on Southern culture (and much more digestable than another 2002 release, the hurl-inducing Divine Secrets of the Ya-Ya Sisterhood). Perhaps it could have managed a bit more edge or bite to its comedy--not wanting to deal with the darker aspects of Southern history (slavery, racism, religious fundamentalism), it's more Ma and Pa Kettle than A Face in the Crowd--but I felt I was laughing WITH these Southerners rather than laughing AT them.
Too, here's a great cast obviously enjoying themselves. Reese Witherspoon doesn't get to showcase her comedic abilities as much as she did in, say, Election or Legally Blonde, especially considering how strident her character is (not nearly as strident as Candice Bergen's NYC mayor, a harpy Hilary Clintonesqe Democrat, probably a sop to Southern Republicans); still, Reese's charm is primarily evident and she's mostly a pleasure to watch. For me, it was the supporting cast that shined in Sweet Home Alabama. Josh Lucas was charisma defined, matching Witherspoon quip for quip--it's a great verbal dance between them. Patrick Dempsey is a prince--we know all along who Reese is gonna choose, but Dempsey's charming turn makes her final decision more moving then it could've been. Mary Kay Place and Fred Ward offer stoic shadings to their character that are well-appreciated. Best of all is Ethan Embry, playing a neurotic redneck outed by Witherspoon during a drunken pool game; Embry's comic timing is a joy to watch, his pop-eyed reactions worth the price of admission alone.
C. Jay Cox's script never delves deeply into this or other issues, which is frustrating. So, I could understand a casual dismissal of Sweet Home Alabama, but to denigrate it as some kind of inept disaster is inappropriate. I know I've seen far worse films this year, many of which others have wildly overpraised. And, I wouldn't be surprised if Sweet Home Alabama ends up being more fondly recalled by moviegoers than some of those other films ever will be.
It's true that Sweet Home Alabama has many flaws. It's not a smooth comedy, it bumps from scene to scene, with not a few moments that seem tacked-on rather than flowing from genuine characterizations. Director Andy Tennant telegraphs almost all the important plot developments rather transparently.
Nevertheless, I enjoyed the movie, and am chagrined that it has been treated with so much superior disgust by many critics. Many reviewers accuse the flick of being "sitcom", an appellation that is a mark of laziness and needs to be retired immediately. The truth is that the plot of Sweet Home Alabama--an ambitious woman (Reese Witherspoon) must choose between an urban sophisticate (Patrick Dempsey) or a redneck stud (Josh Lucas)--is more or less a Southern-fried variation of the plots in The Awful Truth and His Girl Friday, films that have provided much inspiration for many sitcom writers over the years. Now, Sweet Home Alabama lacks the style, wit and pinache of those Leo McCarey and Howard Hawks efforts, but it still has charms worthy of respect. It's genuinely funny most of the time, is a fine showcase for a talented cast, and is filled with a marvelous sense of place, even if that place is something of a fantasy (incidentally, the movie was filmed in Georgia and Florida, not Alabama!).
That sense of place is another aspect that critics are grinding against. There are accusations of stereotyping of Southern people and heritage in the film. These are many of the same arguments thrown against My Big Fat Greek Wedding, with its "stereotyping" of immigrant Greek culture. I can only surmise about that, and I've heard from real Greek immigrants disparaging Greek Wedding's portrayals. But I know Southern culture: I grew up in a small Southern town and still live in the South. While Sweet Home Alabama doesn't acknowledge the modern, suburban South, with its populations of many minorities (not just Black, but Hispanic, Asian, Middle Eastern, etc.), I nevertheless nodded my head in recognition throughout the film. I know the honky-tonks like the one Jean Smart's character owns. I know the double-wides like the one in which Fred Ward and Mary Kay Place live. Heck, my dad once had a truck just like the one Lucas drives around. Sweet Home Alabama, to me, was a warm-hearted spin on Southern culture (and much more digestable than another 2002 release, the hurl-inducing Divine Secrets of the Ya-Ya Sisterhood). Perhaps it could have managed a bit more edge or bite to its comedy--not wanting to deal with the darker aspects of Southern history (slavery, racism, religious fundamentalism), it's more Ma and Pa Kettle than A Face in the Crowd--but I felt I was laughing WITH these Southerners rather than laughing AT them.
Too, here's a great cast obviously enjoying themselves. Reese Witherspoon doesn't get to showcase her comedic abilities as much as she did in, say, Election or Legally Blonde, especially considering how strident her character is (not nearly as strident as Candice Bergen's NYC mayor, a harpy Hilary Clintonesqe Democrat, probably a sop to Southern Republicans); still, Reese's charm is primarily evident and she's mostly a pleasure to watch. For me, it was the supporting cast that shined in Sweet Home Alabama. Josh Lucas was charisma defined, matching Witherspoon quip for quip--it's a great verbal dance between them. Patrick Dempsey is a prince--we know all along who Reese is gonna choose, but Dempsey's charming turn makes her final decision more moving then it could've been. Mary Kay Place and Fred Ward offer stoic shadings to their character that are well-appreciated. Best of all is Ethan Embry, playing a neurotic redneck outed by Witherspoon during a drunken pool game; Embry's comic timing is a joy to watch, his pop-eyed reactions worth the price of admission alone.
C. Jay Cox's script never delves deeply into this or other issues, which is frustrating. So, I could understand a casual dismissal of Sweet Home Alabama, but to denigrate it as some kind of inept disaster is inappropriate. I know I've seen far worse films this year, many of which others have wildly overpraised. And, I wouldn't be surprised if Sweet Home Alabama ends up being more fondly recalled by moviegoers than some of those other films ever will be.
Astonishing imagery
8 August 2002
The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse is an astonishing and spectacular film. I agree with most of the other comments, that this film is definitely a must-see, though I have reservations about some unevenness in the plotting. But the spectacle, the fire-and-brimstone imagery, and the excellent star-making performance by Valentino more than compensate. In many ways, it DOES tower above 99 percent of what Hollywood throws up today.
The Godfather
(1972)
Massively overrated.
5 August 2002
I continually fail to understand why The Godfather is hailed as "The Greatest Movie of All Time". I've seen it twice--a second time just to make sure--and I have to tell you that I sat there in a stupor, bored out of my mind. And I'm not a teenager raised on MTV; I'm in my 30s and am absolutely devoted to movies--I've seen as many classics (American & foreign) that I can get my hands on. But, for me, The Godfather ranks alongside Singin' in the Rain as the most overrated films of all time.
Singin' in the Rain, at least, I get (it's just my intense dislike for Donald O'Connor that makes me dislike this film). But The Godfather? It's just a bland epic about a bunch of moronic gangsters, with Marlon Brando giving a campy performance, and riddled with repulsive violence. Give me a break. The fact that this movie is so "beloved" has had the direct result that nowadays we got absurdly worse and worse films every year, created by clueless filmmakers.
Singin' in the Rain, at least, I get (it's just my intense dislike for Donald O'Connor that makes me dislike this film). But The Godfather? It's just a bland epic about a bunch of moronic gangsters, with Marlon Brando giving a campy performance, and riddled with repulsive violence. Give me a break. The fact that this movie is so "beloved" has had the direct result that nowadays we got absurdly worse and worse films every year, created by clueless filmmakers.
Voyage of the Damned
(1976)
An Outstanding Cast in an Unforgettable True Story
16 June 2002
"Voyage of the Damned" is the true story of a shipload of German Jews fleeing Nazi persecution in 1939 by seeking refuge in Cuba; the Cuban government waffles and won't let them in; sadly, neither will the United States; and the ship is forced to return to Europe.
Knowing that the voyage of the St. Louis actually happened deepens the impact of the film; while the movie itself is rather perfunctorily directed, the incredible all-star cast keeps the film very human and touching.
Lee Grant received the only Oscar nomination of the cast--her hair-cutting scene was obvious Oscar-bait if there ever was one--but she still conveys considerable pathos. Nevertheless, I was considerably more moved by the performances of Max von Sydow and Oskar Werner. Von Sydow portrays the captain of the St. Louis, attempting to keep the calm in an undeniably tense situation, growing ever more subtly aghast as the events unfold around him. Werner is his counterpoint among the passengers, an esteemed Jewish doctor and educator, seemingly serene in the face of such horror, but methodically determining what to do. Faye Dunaway plays Werner's embittered wife and her commanding charisma and beauty are at full wattage. Malcolm McDowell is rather endearingly miscast as a ship's steward who has a romance with Grant's daughter. Katharine Ross turns up briefly and gives one of the best performances of her career.
"Voyage of the Damned" may not be brilliant cinema, but it is an unforgettable story filled with an amazing cast and I highly recommend it.
Knowing that the voyage of the St. Louis actually happened deepens the impact of the film; while the movie itself is rather perfunctorily directed, the incredible all-star cast keeps the film very human and touching.
Lee Grant received the only Oscar nomination of the cast--her hair-cutting scene was obvious Oscar-bait if there ever was one--but she still conveys considerable pathos. Nevertheless, I was considerably more moved by the performances of Max von Sydow and Oskar Werner. Von Sydow portrays the captain of the St. Louis, attempting to keep the calm in an undeniably tense situation, growing ever more subtly aghast as the events unfold around him. Werner is his counterpoint among the passengers, an esteemed Jewish doctor and educator, seemingly serene in the face of such horror, but methodically determining what to do. Faye Dunaway plays Werner's embittered wife and her commanding charisma and beauty are at full wattage. Malcolm McDowell is rather endearingly miscast as a ship's steward who has a romance with Grant's daughter. Katharine Ross turns up briefly and gives one of the best performances of her career.
"Voyage of the Damned" may not be brilliant cinema, but it is an unforgettable story filled with an amazing cast and I highly recommend it.
Topkapi
(1964)
A joyously fun caper comedy
11 May 2002
I don't know how anybody couldn't like this movie! Rarely have I had such a fun time watching a flick. This joyously fun caper comedy is the one that started them all and while it lacks the techno whiz of all the modern imitators (like Soderbergh's leaden Ocean's 11), it makes up for that with wit, style, and panache. Topkapi is alternately gripping and hilarious, cast to perfection with Melina, Peter, Maximilian, et al, just having a ball! And that last scene--wow, what a great way to end the movie! Sit back, relax and have fun!!!
Camelot
(1967)
Begging for a remake, but...
7 April 2002
Now that movie musicals are in vogue again, maybe somebody at Warner Brothers will give the green light to remake this Lerner & Loewe spectacle that was poorly filmed in 1967.
This version is really a shame, considering how beloved the original 1960 Broadway musical is. Lerner & Loewe wrote some of their best songs for this show: "If Ever I Would Leave You", "Camelot", "What do the Simple Folk Do?" and "Fie on Goodness". But when making the film, producer Jack Warner chose tone-deaf actors, one of the worst directors in the medium, and had Alan J. Lerner rewrite his script, stressing the drama over the comedy (to the narrative's detriment) as well as throwing out half the score (including, sob, the show-stopping "Fie on Goodness"). Richard Harris and Vanessa Redgrave ARE great actors, and in their dramatic scenes, they are quite effective, but they most certainly are NOT singers, especially poor Ms. Redgrave (although, her orgasmic rendition of "The Lusty Month of May" has to be seen to be believed). Franco Nero, a beautiful, beautiful man, has a great opening with "C'est Moi", but then goes downhill from there. David Hemmings manages to bring some mirth to the film, but he's only in the last third, and by that time it's nearly too late (plus, they cut his only song!).
On the plus side, the film DID deserve the 3 Oscars it won: Best Scoring (if you take the voices out, the music sounds magnificent), Best Art Direction/Set Decoration, and Best Costume Design (the flick IS sumptuous). And the cinematography is rather breathtaking at times. (If you do watch it, try to see it on DVD, where it's letterboxed.)
So, if anybody from Warner Brothers, or any other studio for that matter, is reading this, give it another go: go back to T.H. White's original source novel and Lerner's original B'way script, keep ALL the songs intact, and hire actors who are proven singers, say, Ewan McGregor (he demonstrated his pipes in Moulin Rouge!) as Arthur, Kate Winslet (who scored a British top 10 hit last year) as Guinevere, and Hugh Jackman (who got his start in a West End production of Oklahoma!) as Lancelot. Please....
This version is really a shame, considering how beloved the original 1960 Broadway musical is. Lerner & Loewe wrote some of their best songs for this show: "If Ever I Would Leave You", "Camelot", "What do the Simple Folk Do?" and "Fie on Goodness". But when making the film, producer Jack Warner chose tone-deaf actors, one of the worst directors in the medium, and had Alan J. Lerner rewrite his script, stressing the drama over the comedy (to the narrative's detriment) as well as throwing out half the score (including, sob, the show-stopping "Fie on Goodness"). Richard Harris and Vanessa Redgrave ARE great actors, and in their dramatic scenes, they are quite effective, but they most certainly are NOT singers, especially poor Ms. Redgrave (although, her orgasmic rendition of "The Lusty Month of May" has to be seen to be believed). Franco Nero, a beautiful, beautiful man, has a great opening with "C'est Moi", but then goes downhill from there. David Hemmings manages to bring some mirth to the film, but he's only in the last third, and by that time it's nearly too late (plus, they cut his only song!).
On the plus side, the film DID deserve the 3 Oscars it won: Best Scoring (if you take the voices out, the music sounds magnificent), Best Art Direction/Set Decoration, and Best Costume Design (the flick IS sumptuous). And the cinematography is rather breathtaking at times. (If you do watch it, try to see it on DVD, where it's letterboxed.)
So, if anybody from Warner Brothers, or any other studio for that matter, is reading this, give it another go: go back to T.H. White's original source novel and Lerner's original B'way script, keep ALL the songs intact, and hire actors who are proven singers, say, Ewan McGregor (he demonstrated his pipes in Moulin Rouge!) as Arthur, Kate Winslet (who scored a British top 10 hit last year) as Guinevere, and Hugh Jackman (who got his start in a West End production of Oklahoma!) as Lancelot. Please....
Annie Get Your Gun
(1950)
Fun, bouyant, but uneven
2 March 2002
MGM's long unavailable adaptation of the Irving Berlin Broadway musical is very much a curio well worth seeing, although, to my opinion, Berlin's old-fashioned approach doesn't fit snugly with cinema. Still, hard to go wrong with those songs, and the DVD version is truly breathtaking in its vibrant color.
Much is made over the difference between Betty Hutton and Judy Garland. I think Hutton totally triumphs. She's bombastic, sure, but she measures the bombast with genuine feeling--she's quite moving in her ballads and magnificently exhuberant in the up-tempo numbers. By contrast, Judy Garland, in the two numbers that were filmed, looks terrible, wan, tired. Even if she was in poor health, it was a wrong marriage of star and material if there ever was one. Hutton should've been the first choice to begin with.
Much is made over the difference between Betty Hutton and Judy Garland. I think Hutton totally triumphs. She's bombastic, sure, but she measures the bombast with genuine feeling--she's quite moving in her ballads and magnificently exhuberant in the up-tempo numbers. By contrast, Judy Garland, in the two numbers that were filmed, looks terrible, wan, tired. Even if she was in poor health, it was a wrong marriage of star and material if there ever was one. Hutton should've been the first choice to begin with.
Big and boring
25 December 2001
This first installment in Peter Jackson's trilogy based on J.R.R. Tolkien's classic fantasy novels follows the adventures of the hobbit Frodo Baggins (Elijah Wood), who inherits a ring coveted by an evil being who hunts Frodo and his friends down as they team with a variety of protectors to journey to the only location that can destroy the ring. Whatever, something like that. I can't deny that this expensive film (all three together cost nearly $300 million) is dazzling on the eyes--sweeping photography, incredible sets, eye-popping visual effects--but it's all been directed with so much awe and self-reverence that it never engaged me on an emotional level (well, not until the last scene, which is a bit late). It comes across as nothing but a repetitious display of our heroes walking and running, mumbling gobbledygook I couldn't understand, and fighting ceaseless armies of rejects from Friday the 13th casting calls. And it goes on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on
. With all the swirling helicopter shots of moutaintops, I was hoping Julie Andrews would turn up for a much needed production number. No such luck; instead, we get Cate Blanchett inducing giggles as some kind of omniscient fairy (the only laughs in this dour, humorless film). The cast tries hard--it's commendable that they kept a straight face with some of the unintelligible dialogue. Also with Ian McKellen, Viggo Mortensen, Liv Tyler, Sean Astin, Ian Holm, and (the film's best performances) Sean Bean and Christopher Lee.
History of the World: Part I
(1981)
Still pretty funny
8 December 2001
I remember watching this on cable as a kid, probably not getting all the jokes, but still enjoying it cuz I love history. Now, I've got a DVD player and I wanted to see it in it's original widescreen presentation.
The movie is a mixed bag, really. Not anywhere near the classic that "Blazing Saddles" and "Young Frankenstein" are, "History of the World Part I" still offer plenty of good, strong laughs. The script, which never really hits a stride or rhythm, bounces from the Stone Age to The Old Testament to The Roman Empire to The Spanish Inquisition to The French Revolution, skewering all the legends and myths and mostly throwing the facts completely aside. The comedic highlight is without question The Spanish Inquisition--appallingly offensive and gut-bustingly funny. The Roman Empire sketch has the most consistent laughs, with especial thanks to the legendary Madeline Kahn. Harvey Korman and Cloris Leachman are the sole redeeming aspects of The French Revolution segment, which is a rather tired parody of "A Tale of Two Cities"--though I'll never be able to look at Blanche Yurka without laughing ever again.
The movie is a mixed bag, really. Not anywhere near the classic that "Blazing Saddles" and "Young Frankenstein" are, "History of the World Part I" still offer plenty of good, strong laughs. The script, which never really hits a stride or rhythm, bounces from the Stone Age to The Old Testament to The Roman Empire to The Spanish Inquisition to The French Revolution, skewering all the legends and myths and mostly throwing the facts completely aside. The comedic highlight is without question The Spanish Inquisition--appallingly offensive and gut-bustingly funny. The Roman Empire sketch has the most consistent laughs, with especial thanks to the legendary Madeline Kahn. Harvey Korman and Cloris Leachman are the sole redeeming aspects of The French Revolution segment, which is a rather tired parody of "A Tale of Two Cities"--though I'll never be able to look at Blanche Yurka without laughing ever again.
Nicholas and Alexandra
(1971)
A powerful, underrated epic
17 November 2001
I first saw this film when I was a kid, after having read Robert K. Massie's excellent biography. This 1971 film beautifully, magnificently retells the story of Russia's last czar, his family, and the turbulent events that led to his downfall and the murder of his family in a celler in Ykaterinburg. The movie's extreme length may be daunting to some viewers, but the story builds to a powerful denuement, aided by the strong performances of Michael Jayston as Nicholas, Janet Suzman as Alexandra, and Tom Baker as Rasputin. James Goldman's script sticks to the facts marvelously, while brilliantly balancing the humanity of the people. The biggest detriment of the film would be Franklin Schaffner's dodgy direction--he gets some scenes perfect (Nicky's return to Alexandra after he abdicates) and other scenes, well, could be better (Count Witte's rant in the war room is iffy).
I see that the movie has received mixed reviews, just as it did when it was originally released (though the Academy showered it with 7 nominations, including Best Picture and Best Actress--it won two, for Best Costume Design and Best Art Direction/Set Decoration). If you enjoy historical epics, or even just want to learn about such a momentous event, this is one to see. Check out the DVD (Note to Sony--magnificent package!), which reinserts scenes that had previously been deleted as well as including an 18 minute featurette about the making of the film narrated by actress Lynne Frederick (Tatiana).
I see that the movie has received mixed reviews, just as it did when it was originally released (though the Academy showered it with 7 nominations, including Best Picture and Best Actress--it won two, for Best Costume Design and Best Art Direction/Set Decoration). If you enjoy historical epics, or even just want to learn about such a momentous event, this is one to see. Check out the DVD (Note to Sony--magnificent package!), which reinserts scenes that had previously been deleted as well as including an 18 minute featurette about the making of the film narrated by actress Lynne Frederick (Tatiana).
Falcon Crest
(1981–1990)
A solid, classic soap opera
5 January 2001
Set in the fictional Tuscany Valley of California, Falcon Crest focused on a large family of wealthy vinyardists, who were either bickering with each other, plotting against each other, and occasionally swapping mates. Legendary film star Jane Wyman played the ambitious matriarch Angela Channing, constantly at loggerheads with her nephew Chase Gioberti (Robert Foxworth), an airline pilot (and ex-Vietnam vet) who returned to Falcon Crest to claim his inheritance following his father's mysterious death. Others in the FC's large cast included Chase's long-suffering wife Maggie (Susan Sullivan), their children Cole (Billy Moses) and Vickie (Jamie Rose, Dana Sparks); Angela's children Emma (Margaret Ladd) and Julia (Abby Dalton), Abby's irresponsible son Lance (Lorenzo Lamas), who married the conniving Melissa (Ana-Alicia), when she was pregnant with Cole's child. A solid soap during its first season, FC got a major boast with the arrival of nefarious Richard Channing (David Selby), who turned out to be related to the Giobertis and would stop at nothing to get his share of Falcon Crest. The first 5-6 seasons of Falcon Crest remain among the best television has ever offered, with terrific acting, strong storylines, suspenseful and unforgettable cliffhangers, and a wonderfully dry wit. Currently, SoapNet runs episodes 3 times daily, Mon-Fri; try to see it if you can, Falcon Crest is an absolute must.
Mayerling
(1968)
Flawed, yet still impressive romance
13 July 2000
Although not up to the excellence of the classic 1936 film starring Charles Boyer and Danielle Darrieux, this remake of the tragic romance between Crown Prince Rudolph of Austria and commoner Maria Vetsera is still quite compelling. Omar Sharif is burdened with the worst haircut imaginable, yet when he looks longingly at lovely Catherine Deneuve, it should send your heart fluttering. And while Maria isn't as strongly written as the character should be, Deneuve projects innocent maturity beautifully. Ava Gardner and James Mason don't have much to do, but James Robertson Justice is a joy as Prince Edward of England. Extraordinary production values make it a visual delight. Finally, while the script fails to properly explain the political situation that would drive Rudolph to his drastic decision, director Terence Young builds the tension to heartbreaking pathos, with the final moments fully worthy of a great tearjerker.
Held Up
(1999)
Underrated, low-key, endearing
27 May 2000
I genuinely enjoyed this movie. It's not perfect--a number of the jokes fall flat--but when the jokes do work, the movie can be side-splittingly funny. It helps that the script manages to create real characters that one cares about and pushes an agenda of understanding. Plus, it has the funniest final scene I've seen in a movie in a long time.
Airport
(1970)
Classic combo of soap opera and suspense
14 April 2000
I have a great deal of affection for "Airport": the Arthur Hailey novel was the first 'big' book I ever read as a child; my father was, in fact, a commercial airline pilot; and I, myself, actually work for a major airline (love the first line of dialogue in this flick!) So, perhaps my appreciation of "Airport" is just a little skewed. But, then, I'm also a huge movie buff and will honestly tell you that "Airport" is one grand piece of cinematic entertainment. It combines all the melodramatic trappings of a "Grand Hotel"--an all-star cast centered in a specific location--with the added, er, incentive of impending disaster. Tho "Airport" jump-started the disaster craze of the 1970s, it isn't really the granddaddy, nor is it the grandson--it's more like the great-grandson (check out "San Francisco" or "In Old Chicago" from the '30s). "Airport" is crisply, intelligently filmed by George Seaton (I especially love his effective use of split-screen), with a rousing score by Alfred Newman. And the cast is just great: Burt Lancaster, Dean Martin, Jacqueline Bissett, Jean Seberg all give fine performances. But the best performances are provided by George Kennedy (actually, tho playing a mechanic, a more accurate portrayal of a sky jockey I've ever seen), Helen Hayes (hilarious in an Oscar-winning performance), Van Heflin (sobering in his final screen appearance), and Maureen Stapleton (who provides the film with some necessary gravity). This is classy, funny, pull-out-all-the-stops entertainment!
Dallas
(1978–1991)
Classic, influential show
2 February 2000
"Dallas" is without question one of the most compulsively enjoyable television programs of all time. I watched it when it was first telecast and still watch the reruns.
Along with "Dynasty", "Dallas" defined '80s excess, Republican values, big hair and everything else. But "Dallas" was also a smartly written program, unlike "Dynasty", which was basically a cartoon (albeit a fun one). The miracle of "Dallas" was how it managed to retain it's major characters for nearly a decade, keep strong storyline pumping for them, unlike most soap operas, which drop characters left and right. But "Dallas" had some of the strongest-written characters in television history: ambitious J.R., dependant Sue Ellen, good-guy Bobby, prim-and-proper Pam, envious Cliff, unassuming Ray, and so many others, whose memory I cherish--Miss Ellie, Donna, Katherine, Mickey Trotter, etc....
Additionally, with the "Who Shot J.R.?" cliffhanger in 1980, "Dallas" created a new marketing tool the television continues to use to this day to retain audiences. Not just soap operas use the season ending cliffhanger; it's been effectively used by such shows as "Friends" and "Will & Grace" recently.
"Dallas" was for many years the most watched program on TV, and continues to be watched by devoted fans, many of them discovering its greatness thru reruns. One episode, and you'll be hooked, too.
Along with "Dynasty", "Dallas" defined '80s excess, Republican values, big hair and everything else. But "Dallas" was also a smartly written program, unlike "Dynasty", which was basically a cartoon (albeit a fun one). The miracle of "Dallas" was how it managed to retain it's major characters for nearly a decade, keep strong storyline pumping for them, unlike most soap operas, which drop characters left and right. But "Dallas" had some of the strongest-written characters in television history: ambitious J.R., dependant Sue Ellen, good-guy Bobby, prim-and-proper Pam, envious Cliff, unassuming Ray, and so many others, whose memory I cherish--Miss Ellie, Donna, Katherine, Mickey Trotter, etc....
Additionally, with the "Who Shot J.R.?" cliffhanger in 1980, "Dallas" created a new marketing tool the television continues to use to this day to retain audiences. Not just soap operas use the season ending cliffhanger; it's been effectively used by such shows as "Friends" and "Will & Grace" recently.
"Dallas" was for many years the most watched program on TV, and continues to be watched by devoted fans, many of them discovering its greatness thru reruns. One episode, and you'll be hooked, too.
Will & Grace
(1998–2020)
Flawed but funny
22 September 1999
"Will & Grace" is my favorite show on TV, but even I'll admit that it has flaws. On the plus side, it's quite often side-splittingly funny; last night, I was laughing so hard I almost fell on the floor. However, I believe that the show relies a bit too heavily on sarcasm to get its jokes across. True, Jack and Karen are hilarious, with nasty one-liners that I wish I could've thought up myself. And it's also true that Will is a rather bland leading man. (Grace, played by the radiant Debra Messing, has many terrific moments). Perhaps if the snappy entendres were refocused so that Will could really get some digs in at Jack and Karen, that would balance out the show. But do we want our Will to be as bitchy and bitter as Jack and Karen? Will is a sweet character and it's not in his nature; perhaps its just the actor who plays him. I hate to say this, but Eric McCormack has zero charisma as Will. He has absolutely no comic timing, which has a tendancy to throw off his scenes with Messing, who has the ability to zing with the best of them.
What I like best about "Will & Grace" is that it treats gay life as it really is, unpredictable, funny, yearning for romance, but isn't in your face with the politics. If McCormack could get better, the show could be a classic.
What I like best about "Will & Grace" is that it treats gay life as it really is, unpredictable, funny, yearning for romance, but isn't in your face with the politics. If McCormack could get better, the show could be a classic.
Titanic
(1997)
A romantic, spectacular epic
4 December 1998
As a Titanic buff since the age of 5, I was very excited and impatient to see this film--the whole of 1997 I was on pins and needles awaiting its release (you can't imagine how crushing it was when it delayed from June to December). Of course, with that much anticipation, I was worried that I might also be massively disappointed--but not only was I happy with the results, I was ecstatic! This movie is simply extraordinary. It magnificently, beautifully brings the Titanic back to life, fulfilling one's dream of actually being able to sail on the mammoth liner.
But what really drew me back again and again to see it was the radiant, exquisite performance of Kate Winslet. She propels this movie with such grace and beauty that it's difficult to take your eyes off her, despite all the chaos going on around her. If the Oscars were given out based on genuine excellence of a performance, the statuette would've been hers. Unfortunately, politics has to play a part, so she was denied what was justly hers. But she'll get it someday, I know it!
But what really drew me back again and again to see it was the radiant, exquisite performance of Kate Winslet. She propels this movie with such grace and beauty that it's difficult to take your eyes off her, despite all the chaos going on around her. If the Oscars were given out based on genuine excellence of a performance, the statuette would've been hers. Unfortunately, politics has to play a part, so she was denied what was justly hers. But she'll get it someday, I know it!
The Concorde... Airport '79
(1979)
Total camp classic
4 December 1998
The fourth and last of the calamitous Airport series, The Concorde is undeniably the most wretched of the bunch, but presented with such disregard for intelligence that it's also the funniest. Bubble--headed reporter Susan Blakely finds out that boyfriend Robert Wagner, a duplicitous arms dealer, has been secretly selling weapons to the Russians; when she boards the Concorde bound for Paris, he sends his latest heat-seeking missle after the plane. Pilots Alain Delon and George Kennedy (who started out as just a simple mechanic in the first Airport) turn the plane upside down to avoid it. After the missle is destroyed by some USAF sky jockeys, the plane continues on to Paris (!). Approaching France, a jet fighter starts shooting off missiles again at the Concorde, so Kennedy opens up the window (!!) to shoot off a flare. In Paris, Wagner tells Blakely it's all a mistake, so she gets on the Concorde again (!!!) to jet off to Moscow. A timer opens up the cargo hatch and the plane starts to break apart, but not before Delon lands the plane in the Alps (!!!!). A laugh riot, from start to finish!
Peyton Place
(1957)
The mother of all soap-operas
4 December 1998
Based on the bestselling novel by Grace Metalious, Peyton Place is a solid melodrama all about the secrets and scandals of a small New England town. John Michael Hayes did a fine job of adapting the book, tightening the plot and losing most of the cynicism, though it can be argued that the book's feminist slant was lost in the process as well. Mark Robson's direction is the model of craftsmanship; the film is slick entertainment that moves along smoothly and assuredly. And what a cast! Lana Turner justly earned an Academy Award nomination for her work her (sadly, her only nomination); obviously identifying with elements of the role, she delivers her most even keeled performance. She also has terrific chemistry with Diane Varsi, playing her daughter. Other great performances are provided by Hope Lange, Russ Tamblyn, Terry Moore, and Lloyd Nolan. Peyton Place is more than just an artifact of the 1950s; it's been highly influential, and if you don't believe me, just take a look at Dawson's Creek.
Random Harvest
(1942)
A must for all romantics
4 December 1998
One of the most irretrievably romantic films ever made, Random Harvest is an absolute must for romantics of all ages. I'd agree that Ronald Colman is a bit too old for the early parts of the story, but that didn't stop him from giving a magnificent performance. And Greer Garson is every bit his match in a perfect role. However, if you possibly can, read James Hilton's amazing book first; the movie totally negates the important plot twist that makes the last page of the book such an incredibly emotional experience.
Tell Your Friends