Reviews

14 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Dream Horse (2020)
8/10
Coltish charm makes this a winner.
27 May 2021
The underdog - or, perhaps, underhorse - sports movie is a well-worn cliche'. So, this breed of film allows for few surprises; no one makes a movie about a loser. We rely on this kind of tale to feel good at the tail end, whether it's "National Velvet" or "Seabiscuit."

"Dream Horse", however, rides to victory on the strength of the actors and the charm of small details. The show pony is Toni Collette, who brings a freshness to her performance. She gallops through the exposition, but manages to rein herself in for the emotional moments that are not overplayed. Even when she is talking to her horse in his stall, she never stalls out. We ride with her through sorrow and victory.

"Dream Horse" is worth a trot down to the local theater.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Brockovich without the Bite
1 May 2021
Warning: Spoilers
Fitting snugly into the "Erin Brockovich" school of the little-guy-taking-on-the-giant -corporation, this film falls short in a number of ways. The stakes are lower; here, it's control of seeds, not a life and death struggle with cancer caused by PG&E. Here the evil corporation seems less aggressively evil; it's not clear that Monsanto is doing anything illegal. Here, it's fighting against GMO seeds, not deadly polluted drinking water. So, the urgency that made "Erin" so compelling is missing here.

In fact, it's not quite clear what the battle is. The film starts as a story of a Canadian farmer (Walken) defending the integrity of his seeds. He argues that he did not knowingly use the Monsanto patented seeds. But the Canadian Supreme Court ultimately reads the law differently. The issue then changes to the battle against genetically modified seeds. Percy seems less engaged in this problem. And, as viewers, we are not told much about this issue or why it's so bad.

Walken gives a finely etched portrait of Percy. He eschews his normal mannerisms and captures the hesitation of this reluctant farmer as he is drawn into battle. The direction and cinematography are nicely done and capture the toil that farmers go through.

Unfortunately, this story never becomes a compelling film.
5 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Audrey (I) (2020)
3/10
Very frustrating.
28 March 2021
Perhaps I know too much about Audrey Hepburn.

I know they leave out the best part of her screen test for "Roman Holiday." I know the marquee for "Gigi" is for the movie, not the play she was in. And I know how many of her great movies are omitted. But, basically, I know they never capture what made Hepburn the incandescent star she was.

In fact, there aren't that many clips of her actually speaking in her movies. At the end of "Roman Holiday," she drops her voice to say she will keep her visit, "..in memory as long as I live." It's a lovely reading of that line. There are great moments from, "Two for the Road," and "Charade," and those movies aren't even mentioned.

I think Audrey took pride in her acting, yet you see little of that talent. She is mostly shown as an icon of style at many gala events. Too bad they don't show what made her a great and charming actress.
15 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Call My Agent! (2015–2020)
10/10
Why no American remake?
28 January 2021
This is a no-brainer. Set in LA, the show can recreate the cast dynamics of the original, much as "The Office" did. Actual episodes could simply be re-cast. Camile de France becomes Julia Roberts. Jean Dujardin becomes Edward Norton. Since an agent created this, I assume the rights have already been sold. : )

I am watching the last season with dread; I don't want it to end.
2 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
In & Out (1997)
6/10
Cute, but dated.
29 September 2020
You know the feeling as you watch, "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner?" The people are going through an enormous drama with turbulent emotions. Well, that's the feeling one gets watching, "In and Out,." It's hard to understand the utter shock as a teacher "come out." It's very dated, but one can appreciate the goodwill that went into it. The movie was aimed at a mainstream audience and, fairly boldly at the time, dealt with homosexuality in a small Middle American town.

There are still pleasures to be found because such talented professionals were involved. Paul Rudnick's script still has some nice touches. Kevin Kline is charming. And Joan Cusak, as the jilted bride, is a delight. My favorite line is from the model, Shalom Harlow, playing a model like Shalom Harlow. As she readies for the fashion show catwalk, she says, "I need time to shower and vomit." Jokes about fashion and Hollywood never go out of style.

How much have time's changed? At the end, Kevin Kline and Tom Selleck are dressed in black tie and headed to a wedding. The thought occurs to me: Is it their wedding? What was unthinkable at the time is now a reality.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A surprising screwball comedy murder mystery
18 September 2018
Big city newspaper man and light-hearted heiress should mean a screwball comedy, but this one takes a surprising turn into a murder mystery..Some snappy dialogue by Herman Mankiewicz (Dinner at Eight) and elegant production with amazing gowns by Adrian and sets by Cedric Gibbons give this picture an air of class. Clark Gable is Clark Gable in his "It Happened One Night" mode. Constance Bennett has wonderful chemistry with Gable and shows the same light comedy flair from "Topper." I kept thinking this should be better known because it's a very stylish hybrid - society murder mystery and madcap comedy.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Poor Barbra never felt pretty....
7 April 2018
Warning: Spoilers
No one ever told her she was pretty growing up. So, Barbra had to make a self-loathing piece of reassurance that, yes, she is pretty and that, yes, the WASP handsome guy will fall in love with her. It didn't work out in "The Way We Were." But in her own production, she can give herself the happy ending she always wanted. And that, when James Brolin married her, she got in real life.

This movie goes around and around: "Are looks the only thing that matter?" Yes. No. Yes. No. Barbra rejects poor Austin Pendleton, the ugly, nerdy guy who pursues her. Why? Because he is ugly and nerdy. We see him later with a doppleganger girlfriend, as unattractive and nerdy as he is. That's it, implies Barbra. Ugly people only get ugly people. She decries superficial attraction, yet it's the only kind that she herself seeks. Why won't the handsome guy love her? Pierce Brosnan rejected her because she wasn't pretty. (Mimi Rogers is held up as the ideal. Really?) But when Barbra emerges reborn as "beautiful" she rejects him for his superficiality. Yet she had only been attracted to him for his looks. So, who is the superficial one?

This movie should be structured so that the "Ugly Duckling" is transforms into a swan. "The Girl Most Likely To," has this before/after structure. Stockard Channing goes from unibrow frump to svelte beauty. (It's the apex of physical self-loathing, written by Joan Rivers, no surprise.) But here, the vain Barbra can't let herself be seen as truly unattractive.Her "Before" is "Before and After." Barbra is beautifully photographed and every hair is in place. People say she never wears make-up, when clearly she is perfectly made up. She wants to be loved "warts and all," but let's get rid of the warts first.

And, because Barbra has been too vain to ever look truly unattractive, her reveal is unrevealing. She is still no great beauty - just someone trying very hard to look that way. Yes, hair and make-up are better. Yes, the (product placement) Donna Karan dresses are more flattering. But she is never going to look like the stunning Elle MacPherson, who shows up as Jeff Bridges' ex at the beginning of the movie.

Get over it, Barbra.

But she, like Joan Rivers, bore the indelible scars of rejection. And no amount of plastic surgery - for Joan - or plastic movie-making - for Barbra - will ever heal those wounds. I think it's kind of sad and pitiful.

Some people reading this review might think, "What about the rest of the movie?" It's nicely produced. The writing is quite heavy-handed. The best scenes are given to a wistful Lauren Bacall. She remembers being beautiful and mourns her own aging. But the movie is all about the relationship between attractiveness and sex and courtly love. Taken as a treatise on superficiality - it's not pretty.
21 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Brad's Status (2017)
4/10
Days of Whine and Neuroses.
23 September 2017
Are we supposed to feel sympathy for a guy who has chosen to start a non-profit, has a loving wife, a nice house, a great son, and then whines about his life for most of the movie? I didn't. He is determined to make himself miserable by seeing nothing, but the lives of his buddies, who have seemingly been more materially successful.

He is taking stock of his life as he takes his smart, talented, decent son on his college tour, which includes his dream school, Harvard. (I am sick of Harvard being deified. Yale, Amherst, Williams, etc. are all viewed as lesser schools. They're not.)

In some ways, this is the modern, neurotic version of, "It's a Wonderful Life." A guy who has become bitter about his missed opportunities has the revelation that he's pretty lucky. But, somehow, Jimmy Stewart was charming. Ben Stiller is just irritating.

On one hand, he doesn't look down the social ladder to see how much better off he is than most people. He has a socially fulfilling job of his own making, not forced to work as a night janitor in an abattoir. And when he looks up the social ladder, he can only see an illusory world of wealth and happiness. It is beyond his imagination that people with more money - which is all he really knows about his old friends - can also be unhappy and unfulfilled. He doesn't know that there is "no there, there."

This is an aggravating, annoying movie. At one point, a young woman points out that his disappointment is really based on his white, male sense of entitlement. She says he should get pleasure from what he has done. I could barely contain myself from saying out loud, "Damn right!"
68 out of 112 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
70% of a Hitchcock
24 January 2017
"They Met in the Dark" is like the first draft of a Hitchcock film, before the better plotting, interesting camera-work, and Hitchcock wit is added. In fact, it's a blend of "The 39 Steps" and "The Lady Vanishes." With many of the same elements:

Man and woman meet during a mysterious incident. Check. They are forced to stay on the run together. Check. The "McGuffin" is a secret message about the military. Check. The secret is conveyed by a music hall entertainer. Check. The unlikely couple end up in love. Check.

It's interesting to see the difference between a perfectly fine movie and a great one. Hitchcock created striking lighting effects, innovative camera moves, and darker, more menacing threat.

"They Met in the Dark" is a perfectly charming diversion and a nice, little movie. But pales in comparison to the Hitchcock films of the same era.
5 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
A fiasco that utterly lacks Grace.
26 May 2015
I can't believe so many people have given this movie any stars. It's both ridiculous and inept. So, where to begin?

The idea that France would annex Monaco is treated with the world-shaking importance of the Cuban Missile Crisis. It's a spat about taxes. Hardly earth-shaking. Another crisis is whether Grace will return to Hollywood, beckoned by Hitchcock, to star in "Marnie." That movie was also a mess with Tippi Hedren and is certainly on the bottom of the Hitchcock oeuvre, alongside "Topaz". It would have been no better with Grace Kelly. The script meanders about with one poorly conceived scene after the next. None, even vaguely plausible. Do you think that people went around calling Rainier "Ray" and Grace "Gracie"? I think not.

As for Nicole Kidman, not for one minute does she look like Grace Kelly - or even seem to try. Kidman has red hair when Grace Kelly was one of the world's great blonds. Didn't anybody care? In addition, Kidman's face is as waxy as a polished dance floor. In endless, painful close-ups, Kidman looks like an ad for what can go wrong with too much Botox. She makes no effort to convey the famous Kelly, breathy speech pattern. And, while there are some beautiful gowns, her hair is simply unlike the way Princess Grace wore her hair. Real jewels from Cartier - with a nice product placement leaving the Paris store - can't make up for this plastic performance.

Tim Roth doesn't look like Rainier. Neither do the Onassis or Callas stand-ins. But why bother?

This is simply an insult to Monaco, to the memory of Le Princesse Grace, the craft of screen writing and the art of film making. This was jeered at its opening of the Cannes Film Festival. Rightfully so.
29 out of 47 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Terrible title. Great movie.
3 December 2013
I had never even heard of "Bullets or Ballots" until I stumbled across it on TCM. It's very crisply done with enough twists and turns to keep you entertained. A first-rate performance by Edward G. Robinson with fine supporting work by Bogart and others. I kept imagining it being redone today. In some ways, it's "The Departed" of its time. And I kept dreading that there was going to be a happy ending tagged on, but there wasn't.

Definitely deserves to be seen. Despite the bad title:

Alternate titles:

The Rackets Revolver Two Way Street
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Black Widow (1954)
5/10
This widow is not a killer.
24 September 2013
Was this a play first? It feels like it. It's a virtually stage-bound film that is barely opened up. Almost all of it is set in 3 locations. Perhaps Hitchcock could have made this gripping - as he did in "Rear Window" and "Rope" - but that doesn't work here.

In fact, Hitchcock might also have been interested in the "wrong man" aspect of this plot. But that is not developed here either. It's simply a drawing room murder mystery that is not really all that much of a murder mystery.

The performances aren't horrible, but nothing is really memorable. Ginger Rogers has the meatiest part, but doesn't make it to the league of Bette Davis' Margot Channing....but then who could?

The denouement - which, from the French means, "the untying of a knot" - is literally about a knot. But, again, one could see that coming a mile away. So, the movie ends with a thud.

Speaking of that, I wish the movie had ended with a thud. If the actual murderer had gone leaping off the much-discussed balcony overlooking Central Park, it would have been much more memorable.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Wilde Salomé (2011)
9/10
Salome served up on a platter by Al Pacino.
22 March 2012
I just saw the opening of "Wilde Salome" in San Francisco, with Al Pacino there to give an introduction to the film. He described the passion he felt when he first saw a staged version of "Salome," in London years ago. He was riveted by the writing and wanted to meet the author - before he realized that it had been written by Oscar Wilde. That set him upon a journey to learn more about Wilde and the play itself. In form, it's like, "Looking for Richard," his 1996 exploration of Shakespeare's "Richard III."

What follows is a dissection of Wilde's "Salome" that cuts between a stage performance, the filming of that stage performance, filming in the desert to catch the feeling of Biblical life, and a documentary about Pacino's own exploration. While the film can seem a bit disjointed, it's actually a circular route that ends at the most dramatic parts of the play.

Pacino weaves in bits of Wilde's tempestuous private life and how it relates to the themes of the play. (I didn't know that his wife and children changed their last name to "Holland" after his jail sentence.) It includes visits to Wilde's London house and ultimately to the hotel room in Paris where he died - and where he famously said on his deathbed, "Either the wallpaper goes or I go."

The performance of the play itself is anchored by the Salome of Jessica Chastain, in her first film role. Pacino said that he would not have made the movie without her. And one can see why; it's an electric performance filled with passion, coquettishness, raw sexuality, and evil. After Herod promises Salome whatever she wants in return for dancing for him, he is shocked when she demands the head of John the Baptist. Pacino's King Herod then promises her peacocks, jewels, and titles. But Chastain's Salome never wavers in her vengeful demand. She had been spurned by John the Baptist and she is determined to win - at all costs.

But, ultimately, this is Pacino's story. I felt that it was a bit of a vanity project because Pacino overwhelms both the play and Wilde. He is an over-the-top performer and an over-the-top personality. He pulses with passion, fire, frustration, humor, and intellectual curiosity. One can either marvel at his intensity or be irritated by it. At times, he seems to be a caricature of himself - the bellowing Al Pacino of "The Devil's Advocate."

"Wilde Salome" is an enlightening journey into the world of Wilde, acting, preparation, directing - and the art of being Al Pacino.
38 out of 42 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Mad Men (2007–2015)
10/10
Corrections to "Mad Men"
20 July 2007
Being in advertising, I was, of course, fascinated by the premiere of "Mad Men." It's beautifully shot, written, and acted. It's sort of the dark side of those Rock Hudson/Doris Day movies that were set in an ad agency or "Bewitched" - one can almost imagine Darren Stevens walking into one of the meetings. But, there were a few mistakes:

1) When the new secretary first sees her desk, an IBM Selectric typewriter is shown. However, the Selectric was not introduced until 1961 and the show is set in 1960.

2) When Draper discusses the research document that was stolen, he says that there is no "magical machine that makes copies." That's a joke about Xerox machines. However, the Xerox machine was introduced in 1959 and he would have known about it by 1960.

3) When discussing doing political ads, the candidate is described as a "handsome, Navy hero," which leads one to think they are going to say Kennedy. The joke is, they say Nixon instead. In fact, no one would have referred to Nixon as handsome or as a Navy hero. While he had a decent Navy career (http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/ faq60-8.htm) Nixon was not a Navy hero. He was best known as Vice-President.

4) When Draper brainstorms and comes up with, "It's toasted," he's 40 years too late. That slogan was introduced in 1917 to indicate that the tobacco was sun-dried rather than air-dried. I was surprised that no one mentioned "L.S.M.F.T." That meant, "Lucky Strike Means Fine Tobacco" and had been a famous Lucky Strike slogan for years.

5) The department store that "shared a wall with Tiffany's" was Bonwit Teller - at least on the Fifth Avenue side. It was, in fact, run by a woman - Hortense McQuarrie Odlum. In 1938, she became the first woman to be president of a major department store. But she wasn't running the store in 1960.

Still, a great show!
24 out of 72 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed