Tim-177 Reviews

Two Evil Eyes (1990)

I have mixed feelings about it.

[4/10 · 1 October 1999]

This film is (or should I say "Both of these films are"?) really very suspenseful and action-packed. The acting is very good, although I would have liked to see the old pro's like E. G. Marshall, Martin Balsam, and Kim Hunter all have more time onscreen. Tom Savini reaffirms his position as one of our great makeup artists. The problem is that TWO EVIL EYES is much too gory, especially Dario Argento's take on THE BLACK CAT. I watched this movie on video last night and my stomach is still queasy 12 hours later. It is not necessary to show graphic and gory effects to tell a good story. DO NOT WATCH THIS RIGHT AFTER EATING, although dieters might do well to watch it before eating. Also, do not show this to children.

The Thomas Crown Affair (1999)

Not bad

[7/10 · 21 September 1999]

This movie was sleek, stylish, and sexy. In the negative column, the pace dragged at times. Don't expect too many laughs, because it's not really a comedy. There is nudity: two scenes where you see Pierce Brosnan's (or his body double's?) rear end and Rene Russo's breasts. Denis Leary says f*** a few times. There was no graphic violence that I could see.

All in all, not a bad film and worth the price of admission.

Lost Horizon (1973)

What's everyone complaining about?

[10/10 · 21 July 1999]

I don't see that much wrong with this movie. Granted, the principal singers might not be Luciano Pavarotti and Maria Callas, but they can certainly carry a tune. Burt Bacharach and Hal David are talented songwriters and I happen to love their songs, especially "The World Is A Circle", "The Things That I Will Not Miss", and "Question Me An Answer". Some people claim that Hermes Pan's choreography is ghastly and that the snowy mountain sets look as if they were made of plastic; I disagree on both counts. I've seen powdered snow before and the snow in those mountain scenes looked realistic to me. And most of all, in this film's defense, it is appropriate for a family audience (at least I remember it being that way when I saw it on Christmas Day a few years ago.) With all the outcry over sex and violence in the cinema these days, I find it refreshing to note that this film deserves its G-rating. And they don't say that naughty "F" word every ten minutes like some films I've seen. Thank God. So although this film may not be everyone's cup of tea, it does have some redeeming value and I give it ten points out of a possible ten. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

A Star Is Born (1976)

For whatever it's worth...

[4/10 · 20 July 1999]

This movie is NOT the same as the 1954 version with Judy Garland and James Mason, and that is a shame because the 1954 version is, in my opinion, much better. I am not denying Barbra Streisand's talent at all. She is a good actress and brilliant singer. I am not acquainted with Kris Kristofferson's other work and therefore I can't pass judgment on it. However, this movie leaves much to be desired. It is paced slowly, it has gratuitous nudity and foul language, and can be very difficult to sit through.

However, I am not a big fan of rock music, so it's only natural that I would like the Judy Garland version better. See the 1976 film with Barbra and Kris, and judge for yourself.

Harper (1966)

Now THIS is a suspenseful movie!

[8/10 · 16 July 1999]

HARPER has got intriguing characters, crackling dialogue, and an intelligent plot, without resorting to lots of gratuitous nudity and four-letter words. Attention must be paid!

You've Got Mail (1998)

Well done.

[7/10 · 15 July 1999]

No four-letter words. No nudity. Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan are at their engaging best and the result is a thoroughly enjoyable romantic comedy. And it's good to see older actors like Jean Stapleton and Dabney Coleman still getting work in the motion picture industry.

Krippendorf's Tribe (1998)

Not as bad as others say.

[10/10 · 15 July 1999]

Frankly, this is the funniest movie I've seen this year. I laughed my head off at the incredible extremes that Richard Dreyfuss' character goes to in order to placate his fellow academics in this. Granted, I don't know if I would show this to young children, but still I liked it very much. Great slapstick!

Antz (1998)

Very clever and inventive.

[7/10 · 15 July 1999]

I am continually amazed at the technical advancements that are being made. I cannot imagine how much effort went into the production of this movie. It's neat! Bring the kids!

Primary Colors (1998)

One or two redeeming features...

[3/10 · 15 July 1999]

...but on the whole, this is too long and the language is too salty. The screenwriters should all have their mouths washed out with strong soap. Why do screenwriters operate on the belief that smutty language equals a good script? They're all wrong.

Deconstructing Harry (1997)

Woody, how could you?

[1/10 · 15 July 1999]

Woody Allen has created some excellent movies in his time, but I honestly believe that he misfired badly with this one. As someone said, this movie is vulgar. It leaves a very bad taste and gives me the impression that he was thinking of his relationship with Mia Farrow when he wrote it. Woody Allen can do much better than this and has done so on many occasions. The first time I saw ANOTHER WOMAN, I was disappointed. But in the few times that I've seen it since, I've come to enjoy it much more. I hope that that is the case with DECONSTRUCTING HARRY. I just hated this.

The Rosary Murders (1987)

This film rises above its major flaw.

[7/10 · 28 June 1999]

The author has relied heavily upon the literary device of COINCIDENCE in constructing his plot; i.e., he expects you to believe that several people living in the same part of the country would have certain proper names. I'd love to explain that in detail, but doing so would ruin part of the ending. Rent this movie and see if you agree. But this flaw will not diminish your enjoyment of the film, as there is enough action to keep the murder mystery fan happy. I was never bored during any of the times I watched this film. I recommend this any day of the week.

Weird Science (1985)

What was John Hughes thinking?

[1/10 · 24 June 1999]

When this movie first came out, the reviewer in my local newspaper began his review with "This offensive mess..." and finished by giving it an F minus. He was being way too generous. So was Leonard Maltin when he gave it 1 and 1/2 stars, although his use of the word "appalling" is pretty much on target. The boys wear jock straps on their heads; the sadistic older brother/military school cadet refers to the 2 main characters as donkey genitalia (not a direct quote; I'm too much of a gentleman to use the correct word here and if I did use it, it would probably be expurgated); and one character gets turned into a three-foot-tall clod of steaming manure (how symbolic). The TV series on which this movie was based was marginally better; possibly because the censors were on duty. John Hughes wrote this thing in two days? I'm not surprised. This is the worst piece of garbage I've ever seen. Take my advice and pass this by; THERE IS NOTHING WORTH SEEING IN THIS WRETCHED EXCUSE FOR A MOVIE!

The Lucifer Complex (1978)

A war movie? A suspenseful espionage drama?

[6/10 · 24 June 1999]

Yes on both counts. It seems that the Nazis are on the rise, this time coming to power by abducting and cloning world leaders. Robert Vaughn turns in a credible performance in this movie, but the pace is uneven. This movie begins with several (too many) minutes of stock scenes from wars, and this sequence could do with some trimming. This is where the pace lags. I would have liked to see more character development. Also, the photography/lighting leave much to be desired; it's too dark and there are shadows all over the place.

However, war movies are not interesting to me. That may explain why I was disappointed with this film. If you like the genre, you'll probably enjoy this film.

Bug (1975)

Very effective thriller...

[21 June 1999]

...but if it were made today, I think it would require a PG-13 rating. I'm squeamish about bugs, which may explain why this movie was so effective for me. In other words, I thought I could feel the damn bugs crawling all over me. I experienced the same sensation in the movie theater a few years back when I saw ARACHNOPHOBIA for the first time. Fans of the genre will not be bored, but DO NOT WATCH THIS FILM WHILE YOU'RE EATING or you may well lose your appetite.

A Star Is Born (1954)

One of the greatest movies ever...

[10/10 · 28 May 1999]

My user rating for this film is a 10, only because they don't have a rating of 15. Judy Garland is a show-business legend, and James Mason is (was?) a director's dream. Thank God the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences restored much of the lost footage. This movie is brilliant on all counts; what more can I say?

Rabbit Test (1978)

A few funny moments, but that's about it.

[5/10 · 18 May 1999]

This movie does boast quite a good cast; unfortunately it's not a good movie. If you watch this, you will see such exotica as: Joan Rivers as a clumsy and foul-mouthed nurse ("Screw Florence Nightingale! What did she know?"); Murray Matheson as a lecherous quack; Roddy McDowall as a gynecologist (complete with a bandaged index finger); George Gobel as U. S. President Lee Ron Bob suffering from serious prostate trouble; Jimmie (dynoMITE!) Walker as a ventriloquist and nudie native; Billy Barty as his dummy; Peter Marshall as a game show host (wow, what a stretch!!!); Rosey Grier as a greedy taxi driver; Tom Poston as a smart-aleck minister; Alex Rocco as a gung-ho army sergeant (don't you love the smell of turkey in the morning?); and Sheree North as a lusty mystery woman. Add in mailed poultry, a band of gypsies, nutty foreigners who make a beeline for the door at the sound of "IMMIGRATION!!!", disparaging remarks about Helen Keller, inflatable rubber women (shades of Bud Bundy on MARRIED WITH CHILDREN!) and bad taste jokes about fat people, and you've got all the key ingredients for a Razzie-Award nominee. If you watch this film, don't expect too much and you might have a good time.

Q: The Winged Serpent (1982)

Not for all tastes.

[6/10 · 14 May 1999]

Fans of the genre will enjoy this, but be warned that it's definitely not for the squeamish and it has some very gruesome scenes it. The R rating is justified.

Queen of the Stardust Ballroom (1975 TV Movie)

Brilliant!!!

[10/10 · 14 May 1999]

This is a true tear-jerker. The songs are beautifully written and the performances are finely honed by all concerned. The only problem is that you may have trouble finding it, because it's not shown on television very often. But what a find it is! Have a box of Kleenex handy; you'll need it.

Just One of the Guys (1985)

Yuck!

[25 March 1999]

This is FUNNY? Well, it could have been. This is nothing more than an offensive messy dud; a total waste of time and celluloid. Don't waste your time or your money; rent TOOTSIE instead.

Batman Returns (1992)

Everyone is well-cast, but...

[6/10 · 11 March 1999]

I liked this movie, but not as much as I liked the 1989 original. Danny DeVito and Michelle Pfeiffer, both of whom I like, both overplayed their parts. Michael Keaton practically just slid back into his character from last time. I think my favorite actor in "Returns" is Christopher Walken, mainly because he didn't ham it up too much. BE PREPARED FOR THE VIOLENCE IN THIS MOVIE. There's more violence in this than in the 1989 original; a friend of mine who saw this movie with me calls it "The Oswald Cobblepot Bloodbath."

Cousins (1989)

It's uneven, but enjoyable.

[7/10 · 11 March 1999]

There are some very wistful moments in this movie, and some that are, how shall I say?, raucous, for want of a better word. Still, COUSINS is an enjoyable romance. Fans of AVANTI! and CACTUS FLOWER should definitely check this out.

Batman (1989)

Tim Burton takes a new approach.

[8/10 · 11 March 1999]

A dark, serious version of BATMAN? It's quite an innovation to me, because the only BATMAN I knew before this was the campy 1960's TV series that I saw in reruns when I was growing up. When I heard that Michael Keaton and Jack Nicholson were going to star, I said, "Michael Keaton as Batman? I don't know about that, but Jack Nicholson as the Joker is perfect casting." I was right about Nicholson's Joker, and Keaton's Bruce/Batman is quite credible.

Avanti! (1972)

An amusing love story, beautifully done.

[10/10 · 11 March 1999]

Jack Lemmon is wonderful as the self-centered American businessman who gradually becomes more sensitive to the plight of fellow traveler Juliet Mills, who gives a very sensitive performance. Clive Revill's wry performance as the hotelier Carlucci is a delight. The location scenery is lush and gorgeous. The more conservative viewers may have a problem with the nudity in this movie, but it's still a good find. And I agree with Leonard Maltin that it's sadly underrated. It's well worth a look.

The Abominable Dr. Phibes (1971)

It's stylish, in a Grand Guignol sort of way.

[8/10 · 11 March 1999]

I remember seeing a clip from this movie on the A&E Network Biography segment on Vincent Price and thinking, "That looks rather interesting. It's too bad the video stores in my town don't carry this." I jumped at the chance to buy it for a low price, and I was not disappointed. Do not show this movie to children, and do not watch this movie if you have a weak stomach. Also, check out the sequel "Dr. Phibes Rises Again." Both movies show the late Vincent Price at his best.

Cactus Flower (1969)

A beautiful movie.

[8/10 · 11 March 1999]

Walter Matthau is wonderful as the "philandering" dentist Dr. Julian Winston whose frequent fibs to girlfriend Goldie provide textbook proof of the dangers of lying. Goldie Hawn's touching kook Toni Simmons certainly deserved to win her Oscar. Ingrid Bergman's work as the stiff-as-starch nurse Stephanie is also touching to watch as she comes out of her shell, slowly and nervously. This is a great movie to watch in the springtime, or any time for that matter. It's very underrated; I never heard about it until I found it in the video store, and what a find!