Byers Reviews

Cast Away (2000)

The Decline and Fall of "Cast Away"

[5/10 · 7 January 2001]

"Cast Away" has a brilliant performance from Tom Hanks, solid direction from Robert Zemeckis, and an intriguing plot from writer William Broyles. The film quickly grows out of slow beginning to build to the fantastic island sequence, which leaves the audience hungry for the final climax. Yet "Cast Away" squanders all these advantages and crashes in the last act. Why did a movie with such potential self-destruct? Some points:

1) Turning the film into a two hour FedEx commercial was disgraceful and unnecessary. The family is eating Christmas dinner, and what do they talk about: FedEx! Hanks and a friend are flying in a plane, and what do they talk about: FedEx! Who greets Hanks upon his return to civilization: the president of FedEx! The story would have been much better served with a fictional shipping company, which would have preserved key aspects of Hanks character but not insulted the intelligence of the audience. People paid to see a movie, not a FedEx commercial.

2) The studio ad campaign, which made a super human effort to give away the ending of the film. I don't know who was responsible for the second trailer, but I would advise studios not to hire them.

3) A poor screenplay from Broyles, who came up with a good idea but lacked the talent too properly execute it. Top on the list is the failure of Tom Hanks' character to undergo any kind of change or growth: after suffering through a life altering adventure, he emerges as the exact same man as when he started. He remains optimistic and cheerful, never displaying any anger or bitterness. You would think that a man who was stranded on an island for four years and lost the love of his life would be at least a little upset or depressed. And after spending these four years alone, living in the most primitive conditions, he needs no time to adjust to modern civilization, except that he doesn't like sleeping in his bed. He also feels a need to apologize to everyone he meets for being marooned the island, something akin to apologizing for being hit by a drunk driver. And the final scene with Helen Hunt looks more like it was written for a romantic comedy; in fact, that argument could be made for the entire final act, which is filled with site gags.

4) Casting Helen Hunt. What a waste of talent. She receives no billing (justifiably, see this is Tom Hanks' movie from beginning to end) and has a relatively small role. Better for Hunt to devote her considerable abilities to a worthier project, and for Zemeckis to cast a less well known, up and coming actress that might surprise the audience.

"Cast Away" is a movie in three parts: a decent (but slow moving) opener, a fantastic middle, and a disastrous end. It's a movie that could have (and should have) been better. On a scale of 1-10, with 5 being average and 10 being a masterpiece, I am forced to give "Cast Away" a 5, making "Cast Away" a discount theater or rental movie.

Caligula (1979)

So bad, even the porn wasn't good

[1/10 · 21 April 2000]

"Caligula" is simply not a good movie. In fact, it's a really bad movie, and that's the God's honest truth. If it weren't for the pornography, this piece of garbage would have been long forgotten. As with most bad movies, the problems start with the writing. The dialogue is corny, the history is poorly told and the transitions from scene to scene feel disjointed and out of place (for the record, I saw the complete and unedited version). The direction, set design and cinematography are also horrendous. The cameraman seemed capable of only two views: close, and far. There was no movement to the camera, as if it were firmly planted on the set. Speaking of the sets, they were also pretty nasty and poorly done. Instead of conveying a period feel, they screamed "we just threw this together in a few minutes". The lighting didn't help much, either; it was either way to bright, way to dark or way to red. Then there were the costumes (or lack thereof). The Romans did not wear black togas with gold trim; they wore white togas with purple trim. And there were a few moments where we really didn't need to see nude bodies. The best example is in the beginning of the movie, where naked slaves are engaged in some kind of road project. Slaves may not have lived well, but they at least had a tunic or a loincloth. Finally, the porn scenes. I'll admit, I was shocked the first time I saw masturbating men and women, group orgies and couples engaged in various acts of intercourse, but I suppose that the intent was to get some shock value, and compared to what's out there this was relatively tame. Nevertheless, the sex added nothing to the movie, and wasn't exciting or stimulating. It felt as though it were thrown in simply as a gimmick, a way of attracting movie goers with the allure of a large scale porn movie. In conclusion, if you're looking for exciting Roman history, or pornography, or a combination of the two, don't look to "Caligula". For Roman history, see "Spartacus" or the upcoming "Gladiator". If you want porn, type "Pamela Lee and Tommy" into your search engine, or visit an adult video store. But whatever you do, stay away from "Caligula"; the movie, in more ways than one, sucks.

Wild Wild West (1999)

Hideously Awful

[1/10 · 20 April 2000]

As a fan of the original TV show, I was really rooting for "Wild Wild West" to succeed. Imagine my disappointment then, when it turned out to be a complete failure, a dud of a movie, a huge disaster; in a word, it just plane sucked. There were so many mistakes and errors made by the so-called "filmmakers" that I'm not even sure where to start. First, casting Will Smith. Unless your willing to completely disregard the history of the late nineteenth century and make race a complete non-factor (which is not what the writers chose to do) there is no way to sell a black James West. Hell, the giant mechanical spider was more realistic than a black army officer in the post Civil War army. Don't get me wrong, I love Will Smith, but because he is black this role was just not right for him. Second, the writing. Four people are credited with the screenplay, and God only knows how many others "polished" the script along the way. Yet, with all this talent involved, the end result is hideous. It reminds me of the old maxim that a thousand monkeys randomly typing on typewriters would produce Shakespeare sooner or later; well in this case, they had a lot of writers carefully and selectively typing on typewriters, and they didn't get within a parsec of Shakespeare. The story and characters were all wrong (they needed to look at the original show, which got it right), the dialogue is truly pathetic (I got real sick of West and Gordon saying "We have to save OUR president" "That monster is after OUR president") and NONE of the jokes work. The absolute lowest point was when the writers tried to milk humor from a lynching; perhaps in their next effort, the writers will find the humor in the gas chambers of Auschwitz, or the killing fields of Bosnia. The musical score was also a complete failure; it was flat, unimaginative, boring and unengaging. The music should have been building suspense, providing a rousing theme, etc. Except, about all it provided was a headache and all it roused was my ire. "Wild Wild West" is the posterchild for the hallow, overhyped Hollywood movie that is supposed to be a guaranteed blockbuster (see also "Judge Dredd" and "The Avengers"), and it truly deserves the heaps of scorn and criticism which have been dumped on it. I can only pray that Smith's next project can restore his now tarnished reputation, and that Barry Sonnenfeld never makes another movie again as long as he lives.

Titanic (1997)

Surprise Twist Ending That You'll Never See Coming

[6/10 · 28 January 2000]

"Titanic", a movie based on an obscure footnote of maritime history, is a mixed bag of a movie. On the one hand there's the amazing visuals, the intense attention to historical detail, commendable performances and to top it all off, a nude scene with Kate Winslet. On the other hand this movie has a sub-par script and a cliche of a plot, coupled with stereotypical, one-dimensional characters and a three-hour running time. Even when you factor in the surprise ending (hint: it involves an iceberg) this film is far from "the greatest ever"; in fact, I wouldn't put it in my top thirty. However, despite the fact that it is overrated, "Titanic" is still an entertaining piece of cinema and an enjoyable, if predictable, journey through history.

Quentin Tarantino's Star Wars (2002 Video)

A Sweeping Film of Epic Proportions

[26 January 2000]

"Quentin Tarantino's Star Wars" is a creative and imaginative piece of filmmaking. Using the Star Wars action figures we've all come to know and love (especially the rare Slave Leia figure) and the techniques of Quentin, the plot of Episode IV is told in all its glory. Filmed on an epic scale and filled with humor and sadness, tragedy and triumph, the movie takes us through a breathtaking journey of both the Star Wars universe and the work of Tarantino. I recommend that every fan of movies and Star Wars, as well as everyone else, check it out whenever they have a few.

Red Dawn (1984)

Interesting "What if?"

[6/10 · 7 September 1999]

It's true that "Red Dawn" is full of cheesy dialogue and plots and an unbelievable story; I love the part when the Air Force pilot explains how the whole Cuban and Nicaraguan army attacked from the south. When I heard that, I was literally trembling in my seat at the thought of the dreaded and renowned Nicaraguan war machine invading America :). Still, there is something to be said for this movie. It offers an interesting "What if?" scenario and does raise one or two moral questions. The story keeps up a good pace and the action sequences are well done. In the end, "Red Dawn" should not be taken seriously at all, but should be viewed as one part Cold War time capsule and one part alternative history. 6/10

Batman & Robin (1997)

One of the worst monstrosities EVER committed to celluloid

[1/10 · 24 May 1999]

Right from the beginning, I knew this movie was in serious trouble when Batman, driving a one seated, open cockpit Batmobile that looks like something out of a Flash Gordon serial(ugh!!!!!) is contacted by Gordon. The following dialogue is so corny, so rotten, so poorly acted and written, it made me physically shudder. And the scary thing is, it was all downhill from there. I can't think of a single positive thing in this entire disaster of an excuse for a movie, not one reason (no matter how small or insignifigant) for the viewer to waste precious hours of their life watching this horror. Where as the original "Batman" was a little to dark for my taste, and "Batman Forever" blended just the right amount of comic book camp, action and drama, "Batman and Robin" looked like it was made by those responsible for "Operation Condor", with the only difference being that "Batman and Robin" was given a huge budget. The acting, the story, the characters, the way they raped the comic book and bastardized the character relationships and histories, the not-so-special effects, the writing, the directing (oh God, the directing! The humanity!), the costumes (it would have been better if the actor's mom's had sewn them, like for a grade school play; it would have been a VAST improvement over what they were "clad" in), EVERYTHING SUCKED!!!! I could write a brief novella on exactly what went horribly wrong on each of these topics, but there is not a enough room in the IMDB to store my comments. After "Batman and Robin", the franchise needs serious new leadership and a lot of hard work to get it back on track. Otherwise, if the next Batman movie continues on the course layed out in "Batman and Robin", it could literally spell the end of our civilization and trigger the Apocolypse.

Amistad (1997)

Spielberg was on cruise control

[6/10 · 4 May 1999]

Spielberg has been accused of being inconsistent with his movie making; "Amistad" is all the proof I need. The film is disappointing to say the least, and I came out of the theater thinking that Spielberg made it while on cruise control. It lacks the necessary passion and emotion, both in the performances and in direction; it feels like Spielberg decided the story would carry the movie all by itself, and all he needed to do was sit back in his director's chair and say "action" and "cut". When he occassionaly tries to inject some power and feeling into the film, the attempts feel completely contrived and slightly insidious. The best example is the scene midway through the movie depicting the middle passage; this should have been the high (in a matter of speaking) point for the movie, but instead it felt like Spielberg simply went through the motions in depicting the attrocities. Above all, the way the scene is introduced (as a flashback stemming from a court scene) is entirely wrong and feels orchestrated and planned, as if somebody decided that "hey, we need to depict some of the horrors of slavery, so why not do it right here". In other words, the movie doesn't flow properly from scene to scene. Finally, the approach to the story was totally wrong. Most of it is told through the eyes of American lawyers and activists. Instead, the film should have been from the point of view of the Africans. Spielberg missed a golden opportunity with "Amistad"; handled properly, it would not only have been a great movie but a testament and monument to the victims of slavery. Instead, the film simply disappoints.

Lawrence of Arabia (1962)

This is a classic?!?!

[2/10 · 4 May 1999]

Somewhere along the way, some over respected, snobbish egghead know it all film critic must've branded this movie as "truly great", and all the other movie critics (like cows following the herd mentality in a stampede) agreed. That's the only way that this abomination could be called a classic. Boasting an utterly predictable, completely lame plot (yes, I'm aware it's based on fact; it's still really lame), the movie takes way way way too much time to tell said "story", and relies on performances that are so overacted I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the actors are still in character. In short, this movie is a giant (and I mean giant) waste of time, and it's a tragedy many people wasted precious hours of their life sitting through it.

Deep Impact (1998)

This movie took itself seriously. Big mistake!

[1/10 · 22 April 1999]

In the battle of the Hollywood asteroid clones, "Deep Impact" is definitely on the losing end. Sure, both DI and "Armagedeon" have cardboard characters, a predictable plot, and no relation to science or reality whatsoever. The main difference is that "Armagedeon" recognized this, while DI did not. DI actually took itself, and its story, seriously. Big mistake! In order for a movie to take itself seriously, it needs everything that DI does not have: believable characters, believable story, believable science, etc. The movie makers should have realized that this is a summer blockbuster popcorn movie, not a film with Oscar potential, and was thus immune from the regular movie making standards. With summer blockbusters, the only real rule is to sit back, have some fun, and make money, not to worry about getting caught up in the drama, or the story, or the plight of characters we don't care about. By violating this rule, DI's makers ruined the "film". The next time they make a summer popcorn movie, they need to have fewer scenes of daughter and daddy making up, and more special effects shots of destruction.

The Star Wars Holiday Special (1978 TV Movie)

Those that have looked into the abyss that is the "Star Wars Holiday Special" are brave indeed.

[1/10 · 18 April 1999]

So indescribably bad that it was only inflicted on the the viewing public once, the Star Wars Holiday Special raises questions as to the sanity of the writers and actors who participated in this monstrosity. This is the bastard of the Star Wars family, cast out and exiled for all time; George Lucas has been quoted as saying that if he had the time and energy, he would track down and destroy every bootlegged copy. The "plot" concerns Chewie's attempt to return to his home planet for the important festival of "Life Day", which is your generic, "life is great, freedom is wonderful" celebration. The total budget for the entire thing must have amounted to just under $3.75; not just costumes and props, but actual footage from Episode IV is used. There are plenty of moments where you'll be forced to ask "What on God's good earth were these morons thinking?!?!": the constant wookie growls (with no translations), the completely pointless cantina scene, and unquestionably the worst part of the entire debacle, the songs (including a Carrier Fischer/Princess Leia number towards the end, which scientific testing has proved will cause permanent psychosis if listened to multiple times). While many laud the Boba Fett cartoon, it looks quite cheap and is far too short. Those that have voluntarily looked into this abyss are brave indeed.

Godzilla (I) (1998)

Plot does matter.

[1/10 · 18 April 1999]

This movie proves several things: there is no sure thing in life, many very stupid people work in Hollywood, and plot does matter. "Godzilla" was supposed to be the monster hit of 1998, overwhelming audiences with its hype and special effects. But when word got around, it's no surprise that it was quickly forgotten (or at the very least, people TRIED to forget it). The story is a carbon copy of thousands of past movies, the characters are one dimensional cardboard cut outs, the dialogue is completly ludicrous, and the special effects aren't very special. There are only two, slightly original elements of this story: Godzilla shows up in NYC, and it's pregnant. Neither of these is enough to carrying this overblown movie though, especially the NYC angle, which is spoiled because it appears they shot this movie during the monsoon season. Avoid this one if at all possible and rent the original instead; at least its camp is somewhat entertaining, while the remake just disappoints.

Surf Ninjas (1993)

This movie was made for MST3K.

[1/10 · 18 April 1999]

"Surf Ninjas" was made near the peak of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles craze and is obviously a blatant attempt to capatalize on the ninja mania. They didn't do a very good job. This movie is such a great candidate for Mystery Science Theater 3000 (MST3K) that the producers should have skipped its distribution to theaters and sent it straight to the bots. There "story" is that a couple of kids (brothers), heirs to the throne of an island country that has been overthrown by a tyrant, are living in exile in the U.S. (they don't know they're princes, btw; what an original concept). Suddenly they are informed of their true identity, receive "super powers" (instant kung fu knowledge for one, psychic ability for the other) and must free their homeland. Throw in some stunt doubles doing cheap looking martial arts moves, a few poor attempts at humor, a few feel-good moral messages (freedom over tyranny, everyone has a special gift, blah blah blah), and a commercial tie in (Sega's Game Gear) and you've got yourself one giant waste of money.