nsharky-732-789549 Reviews

Sliding Doors (1998)

I Expected a Much Better Quality

[3/10 · 17 November 2023]

Frankly, it was a real disappointment. If you like this type of movie (What If), I recommend watching The Family Man with Nicolas Cage. In the latter movie, I really cared for the main character. I don't blame Gwyneth Paltrow in this movie but the writer instead. No offence to the British, but their romantic comedies have never been my cup of tea. I you liked Three Weddings and a Funeral or Muriel's Weddings, you will probably enjoy this movie. In my opinion, the British excel in other genres, like the suspense type (e.g., The Day of the Jackal and Eye of the Needle are top notch). In the romantic comedy genre, the Americans are better (e.g., Fun with Dick and Jane and French Kiss).

To Sir, with Love II (1996 TV Movie)

Almost as Good as the First Movie

[8/10 · 31 December 2016]

I loved the original "To Sir With Love" movie when it came out in the sixties. As Sidney Poitier is one of my favorite actors, I definitely wanted to watch this sequel when I found out yesterday that it existed. I did not expect this one to be as good as the first. However, I was pleasantly surprised for several reasons. First, Poitier kept his charm, charisma and his signature stare despite the passage of nearly 30 years. In my opinion, he is still one of the greatest actors of all time. Second, the director and producer kept the movie completely free from any subliminal political messages. It is an unfortunate fact of life that many Hollywood directors and producers cannot resist the temptation of injecting their biases into every movie they make (I don't need to specify which party is always blamed, but it starts with an R). Third, the main message of the movie was hopeful and uplifting. Overall, the movie was definitely better than I expected.

Hitman (I) (2007)

Better than the Bourne Trilogy

[9/10 · 4 June 2015]

This movie was way better than I expected. Timothy Olyphant is very believable as Agent 47: An orphaned child, kidnapped and trained to become an elite assassin. Dougray Scott also does an excellent job as the Interpol agent in pursuit. The action scenes and the suspense in this movie were impeccable. I was indeed very impressed. But to top it all, I was pleasantly surprised to see that the US was not portrayed as the evil empire. In most other spy/action movies (including the Bourne trilogy), the bad guys are always CIA executives or US military zealots. If you are sick of this stereotype and you like a good spy/action movie, you will definitely enjoy this one. I recommend it very highly.

Men in Black³ (2012)

Very Disappointing

[1/10 · 4 November 2014]

I enjoyed highly the first two installments of Men in Black, and I would have given a higher score to this third installment if Steven Spielberg (the executive producer) did not succumb to a temptation that only few viewers have probably noticed. I am referring to the intentional injection of certain messages in the present movie. Here are three examples: 1) As Will Smith is about to travel back in time, he is reminded that he is returning to a period which "was tough for your people". 2) The scene where Will and another person are alone in an elevator. 3) The scene where two police officers question Will when is driving a fancy car. Normally, if I watched this movie when it first came out, I would not have been bothered at all by such scenes and I would have enjoyed this movie fully. However, in October 2014, I can detect the presence of subliminal messages much more easily. Here are a few facts that may clarify my point: 1) This movie was released in May 2012 (a US presidential election year). 2) Use of a similar technique has been made in the midterm elections of 2014 (in a much more open and shameful fashion). 3) I recognize the genius and impressive contributions of Steven Spielberg. At the same time, I am aware of his heavy involvement in politics in the last few years (for instance, his $250K contribution to the Senate Majority PAC in 2014). Anyway, in conclusion, this movie would have been much more enjoyable if it was kept as "innocent" as other Steven Spielberg movies (such as the excellent trilogy Back to the Future).

Non-Stop (2014)

Entertaining but Somewhat Disappointing

[3/10 · 15 April 2014]

I usually like movies starring Liam Neeson. So I expected some good entertainment with a healthy dose of realism. I was actually kept guessing throughout the movie and in this respect, I am quite satisfied. However, I am very disappointed in the lack of realism exhibited by the writers. In fact, this has erased practically all the positive feelings I originally had about the movie. What I am particularly disturbed about are the identity and motive of the perpetrator. They illustrate not only a lack of realism, but more importantly a lack of sensitivity. If this was a science fiction movie or if it was completely unrelated to a real-life event, I would not have expected any degree of realism.

Regarding the subject of realism, there is no question in my mind that the vast majority of the 1.5 billion Muslims are peaceful and are against terrorism. However, there is an important distinction between the following two conditional probabilities. The first one is the very low probability of being a terrorist (or backing terrorism) given that the person is Muslim. The second one is the very high probability of being a Muslim given that the person is a terrorist (or backs terrorism). In conclusion, I would have completely enjoyed this movie if the writers chose a more inspiring and realistic scenario. For instance, the perpetrator could have been a Muslim extremist while the person who helped Liam Neeson would still have been a moderate Muslim.

Arranged (2007)

Mostly a Good Movie but Could Have Been Better

[7/10 · 29 March 2014]

My wife loves this movie and she would not hesitate to give it a rating of 10. However, since I am the one writing this review, I am entering a rating of 7. Overall, I recommend this movie because it tackles an interesting and original topic, it is pleasant to watch, and the acting is quite good. Having said that, I should also add that the movie would have been much better if the writer/director depicted the two sides in a more even-handed manner. Firstly, it is difficult to miss the attempt of portraying Rachel's family as extremely intolerant while Nazira's family appears to be much more open-minded. Secondly, I agree with the fact (advanced by Nazira) that the vast majority of the 1.5 billion Muslims are peaceful and they do not harbor any ill will toward Jews. However, in the language of statistics, one should not confuse the following two conditional probabilities: Probability of being hostile to Jews given that the person is Muslim, and Probability of being Muslim given that the person is hostile to Jews. Anyway, I am not suggesting that the movie should have addressed this complicated issue. But since the writer decided to mention this topic, it would have been nice if he let Nazira state something along the line of "Our leaders do not tolerate the violent actions of the very few individuals among us".

As a final comment, it is interesting to note that each reviewer has his or her antenna tuned to a particular frequency, so to speak. For instance, Paul stated in December 2010 "What bothered me about the movie is the political correctness evident throughout". On the other hand, Mike stated in April 2010 "This film has a distinctly anti-liberal point of view". Obviously, I agree with Paul. A quick check of Schaefer's views on various issues (such as the environment) shows that he is indeed a liberal.

One Angry Man (2010)

A Great Movie (almost)

[8/10 · 4 November 2013]

Although I am one of Jackie Mason's greatest fans, I must admit that I was slightly disappointed in this movie. In my opinion, it's not quite up to par with the kind of comedy that I expected from this great comedian. In fact, through the years, I have watched hundreds of comedians and none of them comes even close to the originality and genius of Jackie Mason.

It is extremely difficult to make a truly funny movie. Perhaps one in a hundred or a thousand comedies would deserve such a qualification. That's why it's not my intention to criticize Jackie Mason here. Far from it.

For his other works as a comedian, I would give Jackie Mason a 10. However, in my opinion, this movie deserves an 8. Finally, Jamie Colby was great in the movie.

Method to the Madness of Jerry Lewis (2011 TV Movie)

A True Disappointment

[2/10 · 28 October 2013]

I used to be a Jerry Lewis fan when I was in my teens and twenties (now I'm in my sixties). Before I watched this movie yesterday, I expected to enjoy a nice autobiography of this talented and original actor. However, I was hugely disappointed. I was treated to an unending display of self-praise. As if it was not enough to hear dozens of actors and directors commenting positively about him. Jerry had to hammer it down himself incessantly. Furthermore, if he acknowledged the positive contributions of a few people in his life (such as his father and Dean Martin), this was quickly followed by sarcastic remarks about them.

After watching this movie, I discovered a very unflattering aspect of Jerry's personality. His narcissism, which permeates the entire movie, is very hard to miss. It's very unfortunate that he chose to end his career in this manner.

Unknown (I) (2011)

Nice movie but is there a hidden message?

[1/10 · 8 July 2013]

**Spoiler Alert** This review is definitely not intended for people who have not seen this movie. Furthermore, other reviewers (300 of them) have already discussed the merits and flaws associated with this movie. The purpose of this review is to point out the presence of a hidden (or not so hidden) message behind most thrillers or action movies. Having watched hundreds of such movies, I would say that at least 90% of them have a left-leaning slant. Since "Unknown" has been compared by several reviewers to "The Bourne Identity", I will briefly discuss these two movies (which I both enjoyed by the way).

The obvious message behind the latter is that the CIA is a ruthless organization which, knowingly or unknowingly, allows the assassination of foreign nationals and, if necessary, its own operatives. The message behind "Unknown" is less obvious. After all, the movie was made during a different U.S. administration. The intended victim of the assassination was described in the movie as a German "liberal" whose purpose was to provide easy access to food throughout the world. In contrast, the hired assassins were all American. It was left unclear who had hired them, but it was definitely not a liberal organization (neither governmental nor nongovernmental).

In my opinion, it's very unfortunate that movie viewers are subjected to this type of nonsense when they are trying to relax and forget about politics.