Viewed in
2009
Premise
Marty McFly (Michael J Fox) and Doc Brown (Christopher Lloyd) go into the future to keep McFly's kids out of jail, but sets off a chain event that allows Biff to rule the town in 1985.
Who should watch
Fans of the first film.
Thoughts
It was a pretty good film, but I should have mentally prepared myself of the inevitable sequel letdown.
At first, I thought this took place entirely in 2015. Little did I expect a mind-boggling third act. It's kind of a spoiler, but Marty and Doc eventually return to 1955, and are forced to save the future without ruining what they accomplished from the first film. The hilarious and well-choreographed dance between the characters from both time lines was a stroke of mad genius.
Another thing I liked was that the film truly showed the consequences of time-travel, which was illustrated by 2015 Biff destroying 1985. Also, some of the actors playing older/younger versions of themselves/relatives was amusing.
However, as a standalone movie, it was sub-par, mainly because of the first act. When characters repeat the same actions in the past, it's funny, but when they repeat it in the future, it feels like a re-run.
Unlike the first film, this one was heavily dependent on special effects, and the lack of quality stood out like a sore thumb. Add the fact that the writing felt dated due to inaccurate predictions of the future, the first act was just plain distracting and boring. Even the excuse to bring Marty into the future was lame.
While I understood that it was meant to set up for the last film, the whole 'Are you chicken' theme was annoying. Mainly because it came out of nowhere, and felt uncharacteristic of Marty.
Basically, I hated the beginning, loved the ending, but overall felt disappointed that it took two hours to set things up for the third film.
What I would change
Rewritten the first act by figuring a better reason for Marty and Doc to go into the future and taken out the useless chase scene.
Showing posts with label 1989. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1989. Show all posts
Batman
Viewed in
1993, 2006
Premise
One of Tim Burton's greatest movies that started the Batman franchise and the modern comic book storytelling.
Who should watch
Fans of Tim Burton and Danny Elfman. Comic book fans.
Thoughts
Naturally, the movie felt outdated, but it still had it moments. Michael Keaton was a great choice. His natural weirdness perfectly fit the anti-social, disturbed Bruce Wayne. Obviously, the main reasons to watch this was Jack Nicholson's scene-stealing performance as the Joker and one of Danny Elfman's coolest scores. Personally, I liked the sleek Batmobile in this one than the lumbering tank in 'Batman Begins'.
What I would change
Nothing.
1993, 2006
Premise
One of Tim Burton's greatest movies that started the Batman franchise and the modern comic book storytelling.
Who should watch
Fans of Tim Burton and Danny Elfman. Comic book fans.
Thoughts
Naturally, the movie felt outdated, but it still had it moments. Michael Keaton was a great choice. His natural weirdness perfectly fit the anti-social, disturbed Bruce Wayne. Obviously, the main reasons to watch this was Jack Nicholson's scene-stealing performance as the Joker and one of Danny Elfman's coolest scores. Personally, I liked the sleek Batmobile in this one than the lumbering tank in 'Batman Begins'.
What I would change
Nothing.
Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure
Viewed in
2003, 2005
Formats
DVD
Premise
Keanu Reeves and Alex Winter are high schoolers sent on a time-travel mission.
Thoughts
It's been a while, but if I recall, it was consistent with its goofy charm from beginning to end. The cast was very likable, including the late great George Carlin. Silly at times, but always fun.
What I would change
Nothing.
2003, 2005
Formats
DVD
Premise
Keanu Reeves and Alex Winter are high schoolers sent on a time-travel mission.
Thoughts
It's been a while, but if I recall, it was consistent with its goofy charm from beginning to end. The cast was very likable, including the late great George Carlin. Silly at times, but always fun.
What I would change
Nothing.
Crimes and Misdemeanors
Viewed in
2012
Formats
HDTV
Premise
Martin Landau stars as successful opthamologist who kills his mistress, but falls into a spiral of guilt. Written and directed by Woody Allen.
Loved
Introspective moments.
Disliked
Woody Allen subplot.
Thoughts
Like most Woody Allen stuff, this was thoughtful and entertaining.
What I liked best was that it was probably Allen's darkest and one of his most introspective pieces. I was really engrossed by Landau's character's path. The film somehow naturally dived into themes of religion, guilt and consequences, with fascinating debates from different points of views from his rabbi friend and his low-life brother. These moments were personal, never preachy, and seamlessly integrated into the story.
For my generation, it was very amusing to see young-ish Landau, Jerry Orbach, Alan Alda and Sam Waterston in action.
While I greatly enjoyed the dynamics between these four characters, I was unfortunately not a fan of Woody Allen's subplot. I guess it's meant to be contrast with Landau's self-examination and arc, but I really didn't get the purpose of his character, other than he just happened to run in the same circles. This would've been just as intriguing had it just solely focused on Landau's character.
Despite its massive flaw, Crimes and Misdemeanors was arguably Allen's second greatest film, thanks to the main plot and exploration into the dark psyche of men. I always thought Martin Landau's performance in Ed Wood was his greatest. I might have to take that back.
2012
Formats
HDTV
Premise
Martin Landau stars as successful opthamologist who kills his mistress, but falls into a spiral of guilt. Written and directed by Woody Allen.
Loved
Introspective moments.
Disliked
Woody Allen subplot.
Thoughts
Like most Woody Allen stuff, this was thoughtful and entertaining.
What I liked best was that it was probably Allen's darkest and one of his most introspective pieces. I was really engrossed by Landau's character's path. The film somehow naturally dived into themes of religion, guilt and consequences, with fascinating debates from different points of views from his rabbi friend and his low-life brother. These moments were personal, never preachy, and seamlessly integrated into the story.
For my generation, it was very amusing to see young-ish Landau, Jerry Orbach, Alan Alda and Sam Waterston in action.
While I greatly enjoyed the dynamics between these four characters, I was unfortunately not a fan of Woody Allen's subplot. I guess it's meant to be contrast with Landau's self-examination and arc, but I really didn't get the purpose of his character, other than he just happened to run in the same circles. This would've been just as intriguing had it just solely focused on Landau's character.
Despite its massive flaw, Crimes and Misdemeanors was arguably Allen's second greatest film, thanks to the main plot and exploration into the dark psyche of men. I always thought Martin Landau's performance in Ed Wood was his greatest. I might have to take that back.
Dead Poets Society
Viewed in
1997, 2012
Formats
VHS, HDTV
Premise
Robin Williams stars as an unorthodox English teacher who takes over poetry class of an uptight boys school and shakes things up.
Liked
Performances.
Disliked
Story.
Thoughts
There are quite a few "Robin Williams is an unorthodox ______ who shakes things up" movies, but this was probably of his best.
Director Peter Weir extracted some excellent acting from Williams and the rest of the cast. As we know from his career, Williams is usually at his best when he's restrained and reserved, and this was a classic example. The cast included some recognizable faces, such as Ethan Hawke, Robert Sean Leonard, and Kurtwood Smith. Apparently Lara Flynn Boyle was in it, but I couldn't spot her.
While the acting was strong, the writing was rather weak. I dislike movies that are light-hearted in the first hour, but super-serious in the second half, and this was no different. In addition, the dialog was sometimes too on-the-nose and the lessons seemed to have the same repetitive morals.
Despite its flaws, the performances were strong enough to overcome those to make Dead Poets Society an worthwhile drama.
1997, 2012
Formats
VHS, HDTV
Premise
Robin Williams stars as an unorthodox English teacher who takes over poetry class of an uptight boys school and shakes things up.
Liked
Performances.
Disliked
Story.
Thoughts
There are quite a few "Robin Williams is an unorthodox ______ who shakes things up" movies, but this was probably of his best.
Director Peter Weir extracted some excellent acting from Williams and the rest of the cast. As we know from his career, Williams is usually at his best when he's restrained and reserved, and this was a classic example. The cast included some recognizable faces, such as Ethan Hawke, Robert Sean Leonard, and Kurtwood Smith. Apparently Lara Flynn Boyle was in it, but I couldn't spot her.
While the acting was strong, the writing was rather weak. I dislike movies that are light-hearted in the first hour, but super-serious in the second half, and this was no different. In addition, the dialog was sometimes too on-the-nose and the lessons seemed to have the same repetitive morals.
Despite its flaws, the performances were strong enough to overcome those to make Dead Poets Society an worthwhile drama.
Do the Right Thing
Viewed in
2007
Premise
One hot day in New York, temperature and racial tension are on the rise.
Who should watch
Spike Lee fans.
Thoughts
The first three quarters of the film, were amazing. It was full of color, character, humor, bite, music and style. I felt like I was watching a Shakespearean play. I loved every speech, every monologue, every dialogue.
Like a lot of Spike Lee films, race was the main theme of exploration. Most of it was black and white, but Asians and Latinos got their say as well. My favorite scene was a playful scene in which different actors break the fourth wall and shout racial slurs at the camera until one of them shouts 'Enough!'.
Another wonderful thing was the casting. The acting was great, from the legends to the newcomers. Historically speaking, this film put Spike Lee, Samuel L. Jackson and John Turturro on the map.
What prevented this film from greatness was the last act. Maybe my life background did not understand. But the actions by the main character were curious choices considering the film's title and dialogue by the great Ossie Davis. Nevertheless, kudos to Spike Lee for not going formulaic.
What I would change
Nothing.
2007
Premise
One hot day in New York, temperature and racial tension are on the rise.
Who should watch
Spike Lee fans.
Thoughts
The first three quarters of the film, were amazing. It was full of color, character, humor, bite, music and style. I felt like I was watching a Shakespearean play. I loved every speech, every monologue, every dialogue.
Like a lot of Spike Lee films, race was the main theme of exploration. Most of it was black and white, but Asians and Latinos got their say as well. My favorite scene was a playful scene in which different actors break the fourth wall and shout racial slurs at the camera until one of them shouts 'Enough!'.
Another wonderful thing was the casting. The acting was great, from the legends to the newcomers. Historically speaking, this film put Spike Lee, Samuel L. Jackson and John Turturro on the map.
What prevented this film from greatness was the last act. Maybe my life background did not understand. But the actions by the main character were curious choices considering the film's title and dialogue by the great Ossie Davis. Nevertheless, kudos to Spike Lee for not going formulaic.
What I would change
Nothing.
Field of Dreams
Viewed in
2006
Premise
A farmer builds a baseball field, and baseball greats from the past come to play ball.
Who should watch
Sports fans. Fans of good film.
Thoughts
Great movie. Even though I am not a baseball fan, I still found every moment magical. The film was full of memorable quotes and speeches.
If you have ever been forced to part with your passion, you will instantly sympathize with Shoeless Joe. I liked how the wife was supportive, not cliched and skeptical. The cast was cool, and I got a hoot seeing Brett from 'Pulp Fiction' in here.
While you're enjoying the baseball-ness of the film, it sneaks in the themes of estranged family and forgiveness near the end. This unexpected turn packs an emotional punch.
There is a night scene where you see a line of cars for miles. Since this was made in 1989, they had no computer graphics to create the scene cheapily. It meant there were that many cars on that road.
Lastly, it is funny/scary that I can recognize a composer within two measures. Ethereal wind instruments are always a dead giveaway for James Horner.
What I would change
Nothing.
2006
Premise
A farmer builds a baseball field, and baseball greats from the past come to play ball.
Who should watch
Sports fans. Fans of good film.
Thoughts
Great movie. Even though I am not a baseball fan, I still found every moment magical. The film was full of memorable quotes and speeches.
If you have ever been forced to part with your passion, you will instantly sympathize with Shoeless Joe. I liked how the wife was supportive, not cliched and skeptical. The cast was cool, and I got a hoot seeing Brett from 'Pulp Fiction' in here.
While you're enjoying the baseball-ness of the film, it sneaks in the themes of estranged family and forgiveness near the end. This unexpected turn packs an emotional punch.
There is a night scene where you see a line of cars for miles. Since this was made in 1989, they had no computer graphics to create the scene cheapily. It meant there were that many cars on that road.
Lastly, it is funny/scary that I can recognize a composer within two measures. Ethereal wind instruments are always a dead giveaway for James Horner.
What I would change
Nothing.
Heathers
Viewed in
2007
Premise
Two high school misfits take the school back by taking out the clique leaders, literally.
Who should watch
Those with a dark sense of humor and are not afraid of a little Columbine-like situations.
Thoughts
Of all the high school outcasts versus popular cliques movies, this was probably the most intriguing. I would rank it higher than the more polished 'Mean Girls' because of fearlessness in the dark themes and because it came out ahead of its time.
Wynona Rider was sexy and cute as an intelligent student working as a popular-girl-in-school trainee. Christian Slater nearly stole the show with his charming and psychotic performance as an outcast who shows Rider's character that she is above the clique she is trying to fit in. And Shannon Doherty was unintentionally funny.
Like any excellent film, the writing ruled the day. There were very funny and insightful observations about the pressures of fitting in in high school. It was not afraid to play with themes such as teen suicides. Because of its uncompromising and sharp witty, I found the film sadistic and hilarious.
This was very close to a great film. I was distracted by the 1980-ness and some bad acting. Unfortunately, the climax could have been better. It was not a Hollywood ending, but it went a direction that was different from the rest of the film.
What I would change
Created a more logical, consistent ending.
2007
Premise
Two high school misfits take the school back by taking out the clique leaders, literally.
Who should watch
Those with a dark sense of humor and are not afraid of a little Columbine-like situations.
Thoughts
Of all the high school outcasts versus popular cliques movies, this was probably the most intriguing. I would rank it higher than the more polished 'Mean Girls' because of fearlessness in the dark themes and because it came out ahead of its time.
Wynona Rider was sexy and cute as an intelligent student working as a popular-girl-in-school trainee. Christian Slater nearly stole the show with his charming and psychotic performance as an outcast who shows Rider's character that she is above the clique she is trying to fit in. And Shannon Doherty was unintentionally funny.
Like any excellent film, the writing ruled the day. There were very funny and insightful observations about the pressures of fitting in in high school. It was not afraid to play with themes such as teen suicides. Because of its uncompromising and sharp witty, I found the film sadistic and hilarious.
This was very close to a great film. I was distracted by the 1980-ness and some bad acting. Unfortunately, the climax could have been better. It was not a Hollywood ending, but it went a direction that was different from the rest of the film.
What I would change
Created a more logical, consistent ending.
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade
Viewed in
1996, 2000, 2006, 2008
Premise
Indiana Jones teams up with his estranged father to find the Holy Grail.
Who should watch
Fans of the first film. Those who want to see an action flick that is also funny and contains family values.
Thoughts
Just like the first one, this film was full of wild chases, evil Nazis, exotic locations, mysterious artifacts, Harrison Ford getting beat up, and a great sense of adventure.
I thoroughly enjoyed 'Raider of the Lost Ark' and 'Last Crusade' for different reasons. It is tough to decide which I like better. The first film was pioneering, had a better sense of danger, and had a slight horror zest.
At gunpoint, I would probably choose this film. I laughed out loud more often as it made fun of the action genre as well as Henry Jones Junior. The origin of Indiana (with the late River Phoenix) was pretty cool, too.
The main reason I love this film was the father and son dynamic. Throughout the entire film, there was a well-weaved story between these two characters. Credit should go to the writer, Jeffrey Boam, for injecting some really funny dialogue and action scenes between the two. On top of that, Ford and the great Sean Connery deliver some excellent interactions.
Now, because the father-son stuff was so well done, suddenly the climax was punctuated with some emotional punch, making it quite a memorable scene and film. Instead of just giant fireworks of special effects, it was a genuinely exciting last act. My friend once wrote an article about this, placing it in the pantheon of 'Movie Power Scenes' (spoilers in the article).
As for flaws, I missed the sense of danger and horror that the first film had. Also, some of the scenes bordered on implausible goofiness. But these are small quibbles.
To summarize, this was an exciting adventure with a great sense of humor, and a pleasant surprise of emotional elements.
What I would change
Like the first, I thought it was a bit long. This could have been remedied by deleting the Brody scenes. He was supposed to be the comic relief, but I found him annoying, and there was plenty of humor throughout the film, thanks to Dr. Jones and Dr. Jones.
1996, 2000, 2006, 2008
Premise
Indiana Jones teams up with his estranged father to find the Holy Grail.
Who should watch
Fans of the first film. Those who want to see an action flick that is also funny and contains family values.
Thoughts
Just like the first one, this film was full of wild chases, evil Nazis, exotic locations, mysterious artifacts, Harrison Ford getting beat up, and a great sense of adventure.
I thoroughly enjoyed 'Raider of the Lost Ark' and 'Last Crusade' for different reasons. It is tough to decide which I like better. The first film was pioneering, had a better sense of danger, and had a slight horror zest.
At gunpoint, I would probably choose this film. I laughed out loud more often as it made fun of the action genre as well as Henry Jones Junior. The origin of Indiana (with the late River Phoenix) was pretty cool, too.
The main reason I love this film was the father and son dynamic. Throughout the entire film, there was a well-weaved story between these two characters. Credit should go to the writer, Jeffrey Boam, for injecting some really funny dialogue and action scenes between the two. On top of that, Ford and the great Sean Connery deliver some excellent interactions.
Now, because the father-son stuff was so well done, suddenly the climax was punctuated with some emotional punch, making it quite a memorable scene and film. Instead of just giant fireworks of special effects, it was a genuinely exciting last act. My friend once wrote an article about this, placing it in the pantheon of 'Movie Power Scenes' (spoilers in the article).
As for flaws, I missed the sense of danger and horror that the first film had. Also, some of the scenes bordered on implausible goofiness. But these are small quibbles.
To summarize, this was an exciting adventure with a great sense of humor, and a pleasant surprise of emotional elements.
What I would change
Like the first, I thought it was a bit long. This could have been remedied by deleting the Brody scenes. He was supposed to be the comic relief, but I found him annoying, and there was plenty of humor throughout the film, thanks to Dr. Jones and Dr. Jones.
Kiki's Delivery Service
Viewed in
2001, 2002, 2004
Formats
DVD
Premise
Hayao Miyazaki's tale of a young witch striking out on her own in the big city.
Thoughts
My memory might be fuzzy, but it was very cute and non-threatening. Instead of stupid plots with bad guys, it was just full of squeezable characters full of earnest intentions doing good deeds for each other. My favorite character was Jeff the dog, so cute and cool! The English dub was pretty good, but the original audio was still better, especially the magical cat.
What I would change
Nothing.
2001, 2002, 2004
Formats
DVD
Premise
Hayao Miyazaki's tale of a young witch striking out on her own in the big city.
Thoughts
My memory might be fuzzy, but it was very cute and non-threatening. Instead of stupid plots with bad guys, it was just full of squeezable characters full of earnest intentions doing good deeds for each other. My favorite character was Jeff the dog, so cute and cool! The English dub was pretty good, but the original audio was still better, especially the magical cat.
What I would change
Nothing.
The Killer
Viewed in
1999
Formats
DVD
Premise
Chow Yun-Fat stars in John Woo's masterpiece about a guilt-ridden assassin who takes one last job to pay eye surgery for a singer he accidentally blinded.
Thoughts
It's been a while, but I recall this being Woo's best action flick. Naturally, it had entertaining over-the-top action glazed with lyrical, slow-motion style. Chow Yun-Fat was badass. While it did not have action as great as Hard Boiled, it had a much better story, with a plot that I cared about, especially the heart-breaking end.
What I would change
No idea.
1999
Formats
DVD
Premise
Chow Yun-Fat stars in John Woo's masterpiece about a guilt-ridden assassin who takes one last job to pay eye surgery for a singer he accidentally blinded.
Thoughts
It's been a while, but I recall this being Woo's best action flick. Naturally, it had entertaining over-the-top action glazed with lyrical, slow-motion style. Chow Yun-Fat was badass. While it did not have action as great as Hard Boiled, it had a much better story, with a plot that I cared about, especially the heart-breaking end.
What I would change
No idea.
Little Mermaid, The
Viewed in
1992, 1996
Premise
A Disney film about a mermaid who falls in love with a sailor and yearns to be human.
Who should watch
Everyone.
Thoughts
It had a good blend of animation, fantasy, adventure, danger and music. Ariel's sidekicks were cute and funny. The best part of the film was the music, especially the two classics, 'Part of Your World' and 'Kiss the Girl'. There was also a funny short song involving Sebastian and the cook ('Star Trek' fans should check out the casting of the cook).
What I would change
Nothing.
1992, 1996
Premise
A Disney film about a mermaid who falls in love with a sailor and yearns to be human.
Who should watch
Everyone.
Thoughts
It had a good blend of animation, fantasy, adventure, danger and music. Ariel's sidekicks were cute and funny. The best part of the film was the music, especially the two classics, 'Part of Your World' and 'Kiss the Girl'. There was also a funny short song involving Sebastian and the cook ('Star Trek' fans should check out the casting of the cook).
What I would change
Nothing.
Major League
Viewed in
2009
Premise
In an effort to tank the season, the malevolent owner of a professional baseball team hires a motley crew of misfits. But things are derailed when they start winning.
Who should watch
Fans of goofy sports comedies.
Thoughts
Considering its popularity, I was underwhelmed by its mediocrity and dated-ness.
The cast of 'Major League' was the best thing about it. There was a skinny Wesley Snipes doing his best Eddie Murphy impression, Charlie Sheen as Wild Thing being badass with bad haircut, and a young Renee Russo. There was Tom Berenger and Corbin Bernsen, who I've been told were big stars in the 1980's (though I could not tell them apart). I was shocked to find President Palmer of '24', Dennis Haysbert, in a rather embarrassing role. My favorites were the walrus-mustached manager (James Gammon) and the scene-stealing alcoholic game announcer (Bob Uecker).
Unfortunately, parts of the movie were so bad and incredulous that I think it would score well in the Unintentionally Comedy Scale (and rising). The worst was the predictable and creepy subplot of Berenger's character attempting to win back his ex-wife. Also, Dorn's wife subplot made no sense whatsoever.
Watching it 20 years later, I do not know what made this movie so popular to spawn two sequels.
What I would change
You expect me to believe a movie when Wild Thing starts wearing glasses, and nobody - and I mean NOBODY - gives him crap (not even a 'four-eyes' dig)?
Random
If you look in the lower left hand corner of a certain celebration scene, there is a fat kid trying to get high fives from others, but they avoid him like the plague, forcing him to do the awkward solo celebration. That slayed me.
2009
Premise
In an effort to tank the season, the malevolent owner of a professional baseball team hires a motley crew of misfits. But things are derailed when they start winning.
Who should watch
Fans of goofy sports comedies.
Thoughts
Considering its popularity, I was underwhelmed by its mediocrity and dated-ness.
The cast of 'Major League' was the best thing about it. There was a skinny Wesley Snipes doing his best Eddie Murphy impression, Charlie Sheen as Wild Thing being badass with bad haircut, and a young Renee Russo. There was Tom Berenger and Corbin Bernsen, who I've been told were big stars in the 1980's (though I could not tell them apart). I was shocked to find President Palmer of '24', Dennis Haysbert, in a rather embarrassing role. My favorites were the walrus-mustached manager (James Gammon) and the scene-stealing alcoholic game announcer (Bob Uecker).
Unfortunately, parts of the movie were so bad and incredulous that I think it would score well in the Unintentionally Comedy Scale (and rising). The worst was the predictable and creepy subplot of Berenger's character attempting to win back his ex-wife. Also, Dorn's wife subplot made no sense whatsoever.
Watching it 20 years later, I do not know what made this movie so popular to spawn two sequels.
What I would change
You expect me to believe a movie when Wild Thing starts wearing glasses, and nobody - and I mean NOBODY - gives him crap (not even a 'four-eyes' dig)?
Random
If you look in the lower left hand corner of a certain celebration scene, there is a fat kid trying to get high fives from others, but they avoid him like the plague, forcing him to do the awkward solo celebration. That slayed me.
Say Anything...
Viewed in
2005
Formats
DVD
Premise
John Cusack stars as a high school loser who courts a beautiful valedictorian.
Thoughts
I don't remember much, but I recall the two leads being very likable, and the famous scene of Cusack with the boombox over his head.
What I would change
NA
2005
Formats
DVD
Premise
John Cusack stars as a high school loser who courts a beautiful valedictorian.
Thoughts
I don't remember much, but I recall the two leads being very likable, and the famous scene of Cusack with the boombox over his head.
What I would change
NA
Sex, Lies, and Videotape
Viewed in
2006
Premise
I think the title says it all. Just kidding. A sexually repressed woman's husband is having an affair with her sister. The arrival of a visitor with a rather unusual fetish changes everything.
Who should watch
Fans of Steven Soderbergh or the cast. Indie movie fans.
Thoughts
Very interesting movie. While the story was pretty simple, I liked the performances, premise and sexual tension without the unsexy hollywood softcore.
As an added bonus, it was cool watching the yet-to-be-discovered cast.
What I would change
Nothing.
2006
Premise
I think the title says it all. Just kidding. A sexually repressed woman's husband is having an affair with her sister. The arrival of a visitor with a rather unusual fetish changes everything.
Who should watch
Fans of Steven Soderbergh or the cast. Indie movie fans.
Thoughts
Very interesting movie. While the story was pretty simple, I liked the performances, premise and sexual tension without the unsexy hollywood softcore.
As an added bonus, it was cool watching the yet-to-be-discovered cast.
What I would change
Nothing.
Steel Magnolias
Viewed in
2010
Formats
HD TV
Premise
Based on the play of the same name, a drama about six Southern belles in 1980's Louisiana.
Liked
The cool female cast, their acting, and the vibrant dialogue.
Disliked
The 180-degree turn in tone halfway through.
Thoughts
I expected this to be a total chick flick, instead it was a well-acted, likable drama.
Derived from a play, it was very dialogue-heavy. Not only was it fun to listen to, the dialogue was smart, funny, insightful, human, and even sometimes pushed the plot a bit. Each character had her own unique voice, and their personalities and zingers created some genuinely laugh out loud moments. Coupled with the Southern drawl, it was delicious ear candy (I just made that up).
The cast was practically a who's who of the 1980's: Julia Roberts and Sally Field were very strong as the mother-daughter centerpiece, Dolly Parton turned out to be a pretty likable actress, there was Tom Skerritt, Olympia Dukakis, Daryl Hannah, with Shirley MacLaine getting the juicy role as the local grouch, and apparently Dylan McDermott had not aged in the past twenty years.
Everyone acted very well, and they showed their versatility as it transitioned from comedy to drama during the film. Field's painful cry for reason near the end was especially excellent. Regardless of the situation, I empathized with the characters due to quality dialogue and acting.
I still despised the fact that the film changed genres midstream, going from frolicking light-hearted to Oscar-pining tear-jerker mode, but at least this time, it tried to forebode the oncoming crisis. So it did not come out of nowhere. Nevertheless, it gnawed at me, wondering when was the the movie going to actually start during the slice-of-life parts, and annoyed that I am watching something completely different in the heavy parts.
Despite this pet peeve of mine, I enjoyed the film, thanks to the Southern charm of the characters and vibrant verbosity that leaps to life off the screen.
What I would change
Nothing.
2010
Formats
HD TV
Premise
Based on the play of the same name, a drama about six Southern belles in 1980's Louisiana.
Liked
The cool female cast, their acting, and the vibrant dialogue.
Disliked
The 180-degree turn in tone halfway through.
Thoughts
I expected this to be a total chick flick, instead it was a well-acted, likable drama.
Derived from a play, it was very dialogue-heavy. Not only was it fun to listen to, the dialogue was smart, funny, insightful, human, and even sometimes pushed the plot a bit. Each character had her own unique voice, and their personalities and zingers created some genuinely laugh out loud moments. Coupled with the Southern drawl, it was delicious ear candy (I just made that up).
The cast was practically a who's who of the 1980's: Julia Roberts and Sally Field were very strong as the mother-daughter centerpiece, Dolly Parton turned out to be a pretty likable actress, there was Tom Skerritt, Olympia Dukakis, Daryl Hannah, with Shirley MacLaine getting the juicy role as the local grouch, and apparently Dylan McDermott had not aged in the past twenty years.
Everyone acted very well, and they showed their versatility as it transitioned from comedy to drama during the film. Field's painful cry for reason near the end was especially excellent. Regardless of the situation, I empathized with the characters due to quality dialogue and acting.
I still despised the fact that the film changed genres midstream, going from frolicking light-hearted to Oscar-pining tear-jerker mode, but at least this time, it tried to forebode the oncoming crisis. So it did not come out of nowhere. Nevertheless, it gnawed at me, wondering when was the the movie going to actually start during the slice-of-life parts, and annoyed that I am watching something completely different in the heavy parts.
Despite this pet peeve of mine, I enjoyed the film, thanks to the Southern charm of the characters and vibrant verbosity that leaps to life off the screen.
What I would change
Nothing.
Turner and Hooch
Viewed in
1993, 1994
Premise
A cop teams up with a slobbering dog.
Who should watch
Tom Hanks fans.
Thoughts
One of those 1980's Tom Hanks movies that had become intentionally and unintentionally funny. At first, you will think the dog was big and ugly, but it grows on you.
What I would change
Nothing.
1993, 1994
Premise
A cop teams up with a slobbering dog.
Who should watch
Tom Hanks fans.
Thoughts
One of those 1980's Tom Hanks movies that had become intentionally and unintentionally funny. At first, you will think the dog was big and ugly, but it grows on you.
What I would change
Nothing.
UHF
Viewed in
1993, 1995
Formats
VHS
Premise
Weird Al Yankovic stars as a daydreaming schlub who inherits a rating-devoid television station.
Thoughts
Don't remember much, but as a Weird Al fan, I probably enjoyed it more than I should. There was silly gags, plenty of awesome parodies, and wacky characters. Most of these worked on me when I was young, so I am a bit scared to re-watch it, in fear that an older, wiser me would find it not entertainingly stupid. His role as Spadowski might have been Michael Richard's most embarrassing moment had it not been for that racist rant caught on video.
What I would change
Nothing.
1993, 1995
Formats
VHS
Premise
Weird Al Yankovic stars as a daydreaming schlub who inherits a rating-devoid television station.
Thoughts
Don't remember much, but as a Weird Al fan, I probably enjoyed it more than I should. There was silly gags, plenty of awesome parodies, and wacky characters. Most of these worked on me when I was young, so I am a bit scared to re-watch it, in fear that an older, wiser me would find it not entertainingly stupid. His role as Spadowski might have been Michael Richard's most embarrassing moment had it not been for that racist rant caught on video.
What I would change
Nothing.
Weekend at Bernie's
Viewed in
2010
Formats
HD TV
Premise
Two dudes try to make the most of a summer party weekend with their rich, recently-deceased boss.
Liked
The funny physical comedy.
Thoughts
Better than I thought.
I was surprised by how funny the physical gags were. The stuff they did with a dead body was rather creative and humorous at times. Sad to discover one of the most memorable moments in Clerks was already used here. Kudos to the actors for really selling the dead body jokes here, especially to Terry Kiser. Turns out playing a dead guy was more than just lying around doing nothing.
The flaws were those that you'd expect; the plot was very implausible, and the love story I could care less. Also, it had an annoying sitcom feel to it. But thanks to the comedy, they were forgivable.
While it basically was a one-joke comedy, I was impressed by how much mileage they got out of the premise.
What I would change
Nothing.
2010
Formats
HD TV
Premise
Two dudes try to make the most of a summer party weekend with their rich, recently-deceased boss.
Liked
The funny physical comedy.
Thoughts
Better than I thought.
I was surprised by how funny the physical gags were. The stuff they did with a dead body was rather creative and humorous at times. Sad to discover one of the most memorable moments in Clerks was already used here. Kudos to the actors for really selling the dead body jokes here, especially to Terry Kiser. Turns out playing a dead guy was more than just lying around doing nothing.
The flaws were those that you'd expect; the plot was very implausible, and the love story I could care less. Also, it had an annoying sitcom feel to it. But thanks to the comedy, they were forgivable.
While it basically was a one-joke comedy, I was impressed by how much mileage they got out of the premise.
What I would change
Nothing.
When Harry Met Sally...
Viewed in
1999, 2001, 2004
Formats
DVD
Premise
Billy Crystal and Meg Ryan star as two lifelong friends who fear sex would ruin their friendship.
Thoughts
My memory may be fuzzy on details, but I loved it. The two leads were very likable, as well as their best friends, played by Carrie Fisher and the late Bruno Kirby. All the characters were crafted with care, the story was believable, and the dialogue was smart and insightful. There were cute moments, funny moments, and one outrageously funny fake orgasm scene. Arguably the greatest romantic comedy ever.
What I would change
Nothing.
1999, 2001, 2004
Formats
DVD
Premise
Billy Crystal and Meg Ryan star as two lifelong friends who fear sex would ruin their friendship.
Thoughts
My memory may be fuzzy on details, but I loved it. The two leads were very likable, as well as their best friends, played by Carrie Fisher and the late Bruno Kirby. All the characters were crafted with care, the story was believable, and the dialogue was smart and insightful. There were cute moments, funny moments, and one outrageously funny fake orgasm scene. Arguably the greatest romantic comedy ever.
What I would change
Nothing.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)