arlened324 Reviews

Find Me Guilty (2006)

Perhaps this was the first Galveston jury

[10/10 · 27 March 2006]

I find it very disturbing that as interesting and entertaining a film as "Find Me Guilty", directed by the always compelling director, Sidney Lumet, had next to no pre-release marketing and was so harshly criticized by those "evah-so-smaht" critics.

This is no spoiler - we are told at the very beginning that this is inspired by a true story and the real trial testimony has been used as dialogue. That's always a plus to me. However, some of the critics seemed blinded to the fact that this thing really went down and was based on true events. Shame.

By Galveston jury, i'm alluding to the millionaire who killed his friend and cut up his body but was found innocent by the jury because they felt the prosecutor had not nailed down who shot the gun (first?) - Dead guy or live guy???? Forget about hacking up a body. Any sane guy would do that!!

In any case, Find Me Guilty, is an interesting, well directed, courtroom drama. Vin Diesel did a good job and I can't help but wonder if the critics are out to shorten his career.

It's about time to give Vin a break. He worked hard here and I think it paid off.

Match Point (2005)

Spoiler (I think) - "Crimes & Misdemeanors II" - otherwise entitled "Match Point"

[5/10 · 25 January 2006]

I am so frustrated and terribly disappointed in what I hope is a final re hash of redemption as an old-fashioned notion and the relish with which Woodman gleefully seems to enjoy "getting away with murder," shades of "Crimes & Misdemeanors." I have been a Woody Allen fan since I was a teenager (moons ago) and he's finally lost me. Not to say I won't see his next film but it looks as though Woody has finally decided, once and for all, there there is no God and God is LUCK. In "Match Point" he alludes to how punishing the killer would renew his faith in the human condition (paraphrase) but he places the final nail in the coffin with this second tale of none redemption - luck (?) or simply poor choices all around. I found no surprises in this film except for the sorry surprise of no new "Allen". Even the phrase, "I'm walking on air" was one that contributed to Michael Caine's Academy Award for "Hannah & Her Sisters."

Just need to get over my disappointment. Or, maybe I'm expecting too much. We can all get stuck somewhere in our lives. I'm going to pray for Woody whether he likes it or not.

Oh yes, the acting, directing and cinematography were just ducky!

The Ice Harvest (2005)

Christmas in Slimetown (SPOILER - There is no redemption)

[5/10 · 5 December 2005]

We open with some close ups of a creche. This gives you some idea of what's to come if you've read that this movie is about small time crooks trying to make the big score. You'll see booty moves in a strip joint you'd never believe possible (I forget if this was done to a Christmas carol or not). You'll see a lot of vomiting and hear a lot of vulgarity. You'll get a few laughs from a couple of lines of funny dialogue, and you'll come out of the movie feeling scummy, slimy, and rank. Deck the Halls! I gave this piece of "film" a 5 due to the terrific acting of Billy Bob Thornton, John Cusak, and a sadly funny Oliver Platt. The rest of the film rated a very generous "0".

But, and, as I always say, because we all come from different backgrounds and have different attitudes toward life and its trappings -- please see the movie to make up your own mind. It you're going to hate this movie, hate it because you've seen it and hate it for yourself. If you're going to enjoy this movie and find some intrinsic value in it - go see it for yourself and find that value.

Happy Holiday Season to All!!!

Closer (I) (2004)

When a film should be rated "X" and Isn't

[4/10 · 4 December 2004]

Like most films I've seen that upset or disgust me greatly, I am going to buy the Patrick Marber play, "Closer," to see just how close Mike Nichols & Marber got. What I'm really hoping to see in the play is more about the humanity underlying these sexual neanderthals. The word "love" is used in the film. LOVE is non-existent in it. These 4 people play sexual ring-a-round-a rosy with each other and think the word "commitment" is spelled the old anglo-saxon "f" way.

And maybe "f" is what they are basically committed to.

There's some line about "truth" in the movie (in my head I kept hearing Jack Nicholson say, "You can't handle the truth") and this is a movie in which there is little if any truth among the sexual predators. The only "truth" comes as a semi-surprise at the end of the movie. I don't want to be a spoiler so you'll have to sit through the whole, nauseating mess to find what seemed to me to be the only "truth" in this ugly, sometimes funny - although not meaning to be, exercise in pathetically unfulfilling lust. The acting sufficed.

Oh Mike Nichols what in hell are you crying out for?

Sideways (2004)

We don't always go up, we don't always go down -- sometimes we just go "Sideways"

[10/10 · 26 November 2004]

This is an "R" rated movie, deservedly so. It is also a beautifully written, acted, and incisively "Human Comedy."

In a much less favorably reviewed film, "Shall We Dance" (American, not Japanese version) Susan Sarandon has some dialogue about the meaning of, or one of the meanings of marriage. "We validate each other, we validate each others lives." Not everyone builds the Taj Mahal.

And indeed, at last, the Miles character in "Sideways," so truly and deeply played by Paul Giamatti, finds validation. For me this was a lovely way in which two movies validated each other. In "Shall We Dance" everyone had energy and life they needed to express and there were commitments they chose not to break. Most people I saw leaving the theater were simply dancing down the aisles. And the soundtrack is a killer. Gee, sorry Richard Gere didn't break his marriage vows. He simply helped his life partner dance their marriage back to life. Good going for the movie, bad going for the uncommitted critics.

"Sideways" revolves around the adventures of two almost past prime time players who are having one last try at living it up, before they hit life's downslope. And, in the process, they evolve as naturally as a teenager goes from puberty to young adulthood, and as a young adult fights the journey from youth to middle age. So, if you enjoy wine, if you'd like a tour of the wine country around Solvang, if you need comedy in your life - some goofy, some complex, if a little male full frontal nudity doesn't bother you, if you want to hear powerful and, in some cases, almost poetic dialogue, if you enjoy rich and rounded characterizations from fine actors and if you'd like to see a movie you'll want to watch again and again, the only direction to go is "Sideways."

Shall We Dance? (2004)

How Can We Not Dance???

[10/10 · 17 October 2004]

I vaguely remember enjoying the Japanese version of this film. However I also remember its limited impact.

Deep breath! My partner had tears in his eyes. People were dancing down the stairs of the stadium style theater at the River in Rancho Mirage. People waited until the very last credit & sound before leaving the theater.

(A problem reviewers who think they're too important to be bothered by audiences face, when they sit in the cold comfort of a studio & couldn't' care less what the average moviegoer thinks.) This film celebrates the joy of music and dancing while it also explores the difficulties of marriage, growing older, and keeping long-term relationships alive.

Some things we expect to happen don't. Something we expect to happen do.

A lonely dancer stares out a dancing school window. An older man, Richard Gere, who's afraid his bones are turning cold looks up & sees her. He comes home to his wife and family. Susan Sarandon who loves him but feels she's being shut out of his life. As Richard Gere comes alive when he finally takes the dancing school plunge, so do we the audience and everyone in the film come alive. Richard is having such a great time learning his ballroom dancing that we can't help but take the ride with him. Problem with this film is the age barrier. I don't think anyone under 40, who is insensitive and filled with the arrogance of youth can really understand how wonderful this film is with its depth of understanding about the human condition and the joy of being filled with music that moves you to movement yourself, and, more importantly, revives your joy of life and living.

De-Lovely (2004)

I THOUGHT I WAS GOING TO SEE A MUSICAL

[10/10 · 17 July 2004]

This biography soars toward the Academy Awards on the backs of its producer, director and actors. Kevin Kline proves you don't have to look like the "Real Person" to bring his spirit to life and Ashley Judd (contrary to some unfair and plain wrong reviews) gives us a strong Linda Porter, a complex and vulnerable Linda Porter who, as is usually the case, finally succumbs to her life choices with an uncommon grace and courage.

Those people in the audience who had no idea about Mr. Porter's sexual preference, oh'd and ah'd in the beginning. Then they learned that all the talent in the world, all the money in the world, all the joyous hedonism of youth in the world - all of it falls in upon itself as age overcomes and destroys the arrogance of youth.

Irwin Winkler has given us an unflinching portrait of an unusually talented man, an unusual life, and a painful end to that life.

My palms were ice cold and I felt drained as this film concluded - not because it failed as a project, but because it succeeded so well.

DE-LOVELY is not an easy movie but it is a brilliant one.

The Terminal (2004)

See Hungry Man staring at people scarfing down Big Macs - Hilarious!

[3/10 · 4 July 2004]

Directed by Stephen Spielberg. Enough to steer one to their nearest Cineplex. Advertised as an endearing comedy...

No mention that this film is based on the plight of a real human being who was held at the Charles De Gaulle (sp?) Airport for some 15 years, and was paid some $100,000 by the Spielberg people to use his plight as the basis for a fictional piece of garbage. The documentary I saw on CNN mentioned that the gentleman was now free to leave the airport, the glitch having been solved, but that his mental state was so fragile he still remained at the airport. Supposedly he bought some new clothes and books with part of the $100,000 he was paid.

No, it's not funny to see a hungry man watching airport travelers scarfing down burgers while he picks up the scraps. (Who the hell wrote this screenplay?) Nor is it endearing to find that the airline hostess who has a thing for married men is an OK broad because she doesn't ask her lover(s) to leave their wives! What a gal...

Yes, this could have been a good movie but it needed good and honorable (and honest) people to write it.

Waste of talent and money. Insulting to the real man caught in this dilemma.

Oh, yes - the set is Academy Award worthy. Yes, Tom Hanks is delicious and Stanley Tucci a vicious authority figure - what else? Catherine Zeta Jones is beautiful, if confused (as the written character).

What a dishonorable, disagreeable, and dishonest story. Where are the writers?

The Alamo (2004)

Where oh where has inspiration gone?

[2/10 · 12 April 2004]

Had the good fortune of seeing the 1960's version of "The Alamo" this evening, after suffering through the 2004 version of "The Alamo" yesterday.

How to describe the dull dialogue, one-dimensional characterizations (with the exception of Billy Bob Thornton's exceptional "Davey Crockett"), and the claustrophobic view of the Alamo fighters who apparently were not respected by either the film's writer or director.

And, there's one line that seems to sum up the politically correct view of those involved with the film - the line - something like - the Mexicans are fighting for Mexico, the Texicans want to conquer the world.

On the other hand, in John Wayne's "The Alamo" the fighters are treated with respect, both American and Mexican. There was a story and dramatic line that carried you from the beginning to the end. Situations that were unclear in 2004's murky pc film were presented clearly, thoughtfully, and with solid dramatic impact. And the acting -- Lordy, Lordy -- Richard Widmark's feisty Jim Bowie, Laurence Harvey's powerful, yet prissy Col. Travis, and Richard Boone's powerful Sam Houston....

What's the phrase - there were giants then...With a strong thumbs up for that exceptional actor - Billy Bob Thornton, who unfortunately could not singlehandedly save the current film.

John Wayne respected his material, respected the people. The writer of the 2004 version toyed with the material and provided dialogue of little consequence. Subtlety does not appear to be his strong suit as he hands Billy Bob Thornton one-liners, shows Jim Bowie as a one-dimensional consumptive, portrays Col. Travis as an uptight incompetent and General Santa Anna as part peacock, part buffoon.

Let's face it, since everyone's long dead and gone, a writer has lots of freedom in which to create his fantasy of what really happened at the Alamo and both movies have silly scenes that don't track. But, with all of that, I'm left with that old cliche - they just don't make them like they used to.

City of God (2002)

Talk about overkill!

[7/10 · 14 February 2004]

Great reviews. Disappointed by the relentless violence. Had no idea this was based on a true story because of the excess. As seems to be the case in 2004, graphic violence is supposed to make and help us feel the impossible situation of the poor slum kids. It doesn't. Damn it. Is there anyone who remembers that the story of one, only one, victimized character is more powerful than watching millions of people slaughtered.

It was like watching 2,000 St. Valentines Day massacres in 2 hours. Horrific but not touching. We need to care. This film had too many stories. Tried to link Vietnam with corporate greed and the eternal reach for money and power.

This could have been a brilliant film. Instead it was a two martini film (you had to wind down) but one which left even the photographer survivor, suspect.

Miracle (2004)

It's a Miracle I wasn't enthralled

[6/10 · 7 February 2004]

I won't always use full sentences. A phrase, or word is as good as a mile.

Expected to embrace this film with my entire being. Forget entire.

Kurt Russell gave a fine performance as Herb Brooks, coach of the U.S. Olympic soccer team that won the gold medal at the 1980 Olympics. The 20+ soccer players were interchangeable with semi-memorable personal stories. And this is where MIRACLE failed me. Unlike SEA BISCUIT, where 3 human lives and 1 animal life, combined to form the "perfect storm" that was the story of Sea Biscuit, in MIRACLE the chemistry that makes good stories extraordinary was missing. Hooray USA. Hooray soccer team. Hooray Herb Brooks. But I was only touched intellectually, not viscerally. And, since I'm no script doctor, I offer no further opinion in that area.

Give me stories about people, real or fictional, that I can care about, cry with, be frightened of, or admire beyond description.

MIRACLE failed, for me, by not even arousing deep feelings for Herb Brooks who had such a desperate need to win that Olympic game because he had been sent home, 20 years before, being unable to play on the U.S. team that won the gold medal in 1960. Here was a human story barely touched upon and which, with a little milking, might have possibly saved MIRACLE, a wasted opportunity - quite sadly so.

The Butterfly Effect (2004)

sad to see a dead butterfly!

[2/10 · 31 January 2004]

Please. See "Memento" or "21 Grams." Different films. Same puzzle technique. "Memento" is the major diagram. Start at the end and arrive at the beginning of the story. "Memento" - brilliant. "Butterfly Effect," a poor plagiarism at best, confused, & worse, the author(s), director(s) need immediate psychiatric intervention. In "Butterfly Effect" it's almost impossible to arrive at a distinction between illusion and reality, a difference I suppose between the young performers who think they're brilliant (and are just confused) and the pros who can truly grab tough abstractions and give them a film "reality."

Two martinis still haven't made "The Butterfly Effect" disappear from my memory. Yup, it was powerful. Worse, it couldn't and wouldn't help either you (or them) distinguish reality from illusion.

This fllm saddened me because it tried so hard to "best" the brilliant "Memento" and failed so miserably.

Big Fish (2003)

Wouldn't have believed it, but this one reeled me in!

[10/10 · 10 January 2004]

Like DUETS, which many reviewers called a "road comedy," not a tragic homage to music's transforming power, BIG FISH is being called a fable and a lot of other nonsensical things.

"Big Fish" in a little pond called Ashton. This was a father-son reconciliation story told in parables (golly, am I sounding biblical?). With wit, humor, charm and suspense, Tim Burton made me a believer as question after question was posed - what is the truth about who we are? If we dramatize and enlarge stories, is our essence forever lost in them or can we, with desire and patience, at last discern who we are and who the people we love are, understand and be understood.

My bet was that I wasn't going to like this movie. Tim Burton's work has usually had too dark an edge for me. Even here we're dealing with death and understanding our lives and their meanings. But Tim Burton hit every mark for me - acting,story, direction, et al. Tears began rolling down my cheeks as the son takes over the telling of his father's last story, finally understanding that he really does know and love his father. The son completes his father's death story/image for him in a beautiful reconciliation sequence, and life continues.

Aint' that the truth!

21 Grams (2003)

A Brilliant Movie is as light as a feather, heavy as a tank, and simply unforgettable

[10/10 · 8 December 2003]

First I must review the reviewers. Sunday night in our house it is "tradition" to watch Ebert & Roeper. Will we agree? Will We disagree?

We just happened to see 2 movies this weekend, "Bad Santa" (an Ebert & Roeper 3-1/2*) and "21 Grams" (an Ebert & Roeper 3*). My husband and I just shook our heads in disbelief (not to mention disgust).

"Bad Santa" is simply a BAD MOVIE - gross, unsavory, and, in some instances, disgustingly vulgar...a scraggly bearded Santa, always boozing it up, unable to control his bladder, sodomy obsessed = with some dialogue that is not only R but most probably X rated. After the 2 or 3 times we laughed in the beginning, and we did laugh, the gross vulgarity and sophomoric "humor" began to weigh heavily on our psyches.

NOW - "21 Grams" = a film I thought I would want to walk out of -- surprise, brilliant ensemble acting, incomparable direction, and unbelievable editing that brought each and every particle of this movie together to its unexpected finale...A dark, compelling story of disparate lives brought together -- to kill, to heal. This is an exceptional film with acting so true and focussed, you stayed with it, following each story and, little by little getting to know each character, inside and out. Believe me, it all comes together beautifully.

I'm still unsettled by the Ebert & Roeper reviews. I truly believe that comedy is highly subjective - funny to you is disgusting to me and vice versa. But as far as BAD SANTA goes there just doesn't seem to be an upside - unless it's NOT GOING TO POLLUTE YOUR MIND with that junk!

Naomi Watts' performance in "21 Grams" is Oscar material. Benicio del Toro and Sean Penn are magnificent. Don't let "21 Grams" leave your neighborhood before you let it take you on its journey to hell and back again.

Brother Bear (2003)

Am I still having trouble finding my "totem"?

[9/10 · 22 November 2003]

I'm a lousy story teller, which is part of being a reviewer, I guess. However, in this animated film about knowing who and what we are and having the courage to follow our highly specific paths - I was caught short and made to think.

Too much for children? How could that be since children will see this movie through different eyes and fewer experiences than we have had as adults. The darling little orphan bear Koda would be, I think, enough for children to identify with.

As an adult I was struck by the idea of each of us having a specific purpose in the scheme of things. Something I believe, but have difficulty living.

This is both a simply delightful animated film which children will enjoy because of the silly moose - their dialogue is a hoot, and the poor rams who almost kill themselves by responding to an echo because they don't understand what an echo really is. In the watching, it's funny stuff.

If you know the joke about "there must be a pony," all I can hope is, "there must be an Oscar," soon for this intelligent and delightful animated film.

Shattered Glass (2003)

Was Glass shattered before or after he came on board at the New Republic?

[9/10 · 22 November 2003]

Was truly surprised. Thought this would be a good film, but not as good as it really was. On the other hand, I think it took a bit longer than I would have liked to get to the heart of the story - Steven (Stephen) Glass' falsification of stories to secure the adulation & professional advancement he so desperately needed.

The ensemble acting was superb and the pain caused by Mr. Glass' deception was communicated almost directly - to my heart at least.

Whatever script imperfections kept me from rating this film a 10 - it's still a must see. A view of society as many people seem to be living it today - "give me that 15 minutes of fame and I'll do anything and everything to get it!"

How pathetic and tragic.

Now I'm going to re-watch "My Cousin Vinnie" to regain a sense of balance!

Runaway Jury (2003)

Run to see RUNAWAY JURY - There are too many movies out now that you'd best RUNAWAY from!

[9/10 · 5 November 2003]

For the acting performances alone, particularly Gene Hackman's and John Cusack's (oh that gleam in his eye), this film is worth the time - not to mention the surprise twist at the end.

I'm personally disappointed that the critics fell over themselves for MYSTIC RIVER and LOST IN TRANSLATION - throwing away an enjoyable, extremely well-done and compelling film (except for some southern accents gone astray).

To mix apples and oranges (good acting is a passion of mine) - Tim Robbins in MYSTIC RIVER deserves an academy nod for his compelling & complex performance although I'm afraid that Sean Penn will get the attention for his more showy, over-the-top role (did anyone notice that the only truly fully developed character was Tim Robbins' while we (I) needed more insight into Sean Penn's character & much more insight into Kevin Bacon's (Clint Eastwood clone?)detective who seems to communicate best by ESP (with his ex-wife that is).

Compliments to Bill Murray for his sympathetic role in LOST IN TRANSLATION (although I personally found the "bored" characters boring). And, although I think IN THE CUT was a waste of an afternoon (did the book's writer read anything after "Looking For Mr. Goodbar?"), Meg Ryan was superb as the sexually perverse teacher.

Here's to the movies. I love them, notwithstanding my reaction to any individual effort. Can't wait til next week!

In the Cut (2003)

Let's use a "mystery story" as a red herring for a how-to-do-it porno flick?

[2/10 · 3 November 2003]

"In the Cut" -- do we mean the cut-up women? Do we mean the "cut" that figure skating blades make in the ice? Or do we actually mean a four letter word for the last three letter word of the title? The Mss. Campion & Moore may have thought they could have a laugh at the little people with a double-entendre title - but they can guess again. I came to this film expecting to be horrified, scared, perhaps mentally challenged and never expected to be schooled in erotica - mainly about pleasuring a female with a little info thrown in about pleasuring a man. This film is vulgar and disturbing, partly because it pretends to be something it's not. And what it is would best be forgotten. Want a good mystery, thriller - how about "Primal Fear" - saw it again last night - good acting, good dialogue, interesting story, some sex, and a satisfying plot twist at the end. "In The Cut" is rated R (restricted) - as it should be. But the newspaper ad gives another clue to this film's true emphasis, and I quote - "Everything you know about desire is dead wrong." Guess to Mss. Campion & Moore it sure is.

And Now Ladies & Gentlemen (2002)

Surprise, Surprise -- A Brilliant Movie and I walked in without a clue!

[10/10 · 31 August 2003]

I was sure Claude Lelouch was 80 or 81. After all, hadn't it been about 40 years since I saw, "A Man and a Woman"? But I didn't know that Mr. Lelouch began as a child director!

"And Now - Ladies and Gentlemen" is an exciting, engrossing, intelligent, funny, cynical and symbolically thought-provoking film by a writer/director who I'm still sure is over 80 but is allowed to deduct several years due to the nature of the business.

Mr. Lelouch uses music to move the action forward. to establish time and place and (no surprise at all) to elicit emotion and, not coincidentally, to entertain. And the acting - brilliant Jeremy Irons captures each and every nuance of his demanding role. The film is worth it if you only attend to see his performance.

I can't guarantee you'll walk out singing. As a matter of fact, I doubt it. I can't even guarantee you'll enjoy the film. But I can guarantee you will be talking about what it all meant long after the New Year has dawned.

This takes me back to my childhood, when the likes of "A Man and A Woman," "Hiroshima Mon Amour," "Last Year at Marienbad," "Jules et Jim," and a host of other fine european films were part and parcel of the "film-going" experience -- where you were not only entertained but fiercely challenged to think about what you thought you had just seen!

My plea, my suggestion to you is see this film and make up your own mind. Never, ever, let anyone make up your mind for you. Experience the power of movies for yourself, whenever you can.

Sordid Lives (2000)

Brilliant adaptation of play. Beautifully acted & directed.

[10/10 · 3 March 2002]

The title turned me off. I had no idea what to expect, only that I was seeing a film that was not in wide release, for some reason I still don't understand.

With an amazing combination of humor and humanity, Del Shores, created a masterful portrait of a "wacky", dysfunctional (by whose definition?) family that eventually grew to know itself at its highest level.

The characters were broadly drawn, but due to the rich acting level caricature was avoided, and each character retained his or her humanity. Moreover, this film, originally a play, retained the intimate quality of a stage play that is often lost when a play is transferred to the screen.

"Sordid Lives" is for everyone & is not just a "feel good" homosexually oriented move. Don't understand why it wasn't more widely distributed because it's surely on my list of the 20 best films ever.