DouglasGlendower Reviews

Charlotte's Web (2006)

Why?

[1/10 · 30 November 2006]

Having seen this at a prescreening, I just have to ask the above question. It improves no way on the original, lacks a connection to the children's book, and covers it all in a glossy production package that just screams dollars-to-the-studio. The animated movie captured the simplicity of a time where family farms were around, state fairs were huge draws before mega-amusement parks, and reminded us that sometimes we want to believe that magic can happen. The new one uses slick CGI, modern cues, and points a computer at you and says "YOU WILL BELIEVE IN MAGIC OR ELSE". I'm going back to 1972, thank you. I might have enjoyed the movie more if the original hadn't been so dear to me, I know, I'm not saying I'm not biased. That being the case, why not take a chance and film one of the other great children's books out there that's not been made into a movie? The one I push for is "A Conneticut Cricket In Times Square." Sadly, it doesn't have another movie to leech free publicity off of...

Battlestar Galactica (2004–2009)

You've got to be kidding me...

[2/10 · 5 September 2006]

I've always hated remakes, but I hate remakes that don't hold true to a story the most. This has a hint of the basic outline of the original series, then threw in some modern cheap plot lines and trashed one of the more original stories to be brought to television. Sometimes I feel I am tuned to ABC and am watching, forgive the pun, "Lost" in Space. I don't like the changes, the cheap thrills, and it seems like the only people who know how to act in the series are those over the age of 40. It saddens me to know that this is what was made instead of Richard Hatch's other vision, which would have advanced the old storyline, dumped '80, and kept the quirky colonials that I came to care a great deal for as a young sci-fi watcher. This show will appeal to the teens who aren't afraid to watch spaceships, but it has all the polish of Wing Commander the movie without the plot depth.

Neuromancer (1988 Video Game)

Another Interplay Classic RPG

[9/10 · 17 July 2006]

How come one of the finest groups dedicated to putting out high-quality role playing games went under? We will probably never know. But the legacy they've left behind will linger in all the minds of the people who've played their games. One of them was Neuromancer, a wonderful adaptation of the William Gibson novel. Ranging from the gritty Chiba city to the wonders of the orbital city, it manages to bring you into Wiilam Gibson's most celebrated world. It's true to the book, yet offers just enough outside spin to grab your attention. The graphics, whlist outdated now, were magical in 1988, especially on the Commodore C=64. If you're looking for what an interactive adaptation of a novel should be, look for the 1988 classic "Neuromancer".

A History of Violence (2005)

Slow but steady...

[8/10 · 27 October 2005]

A good piece of character driven drama, History Of Violence is shot in a dark and simple style that draws the viewer in and allows the best impact from the excellent and small cast. Viggo Mortensen gives an understated performance in the lead role, moving quite well through the slowish pace of the movie. Ed Harris is... Ed Harris, coming off quite enigmatic and believable in his role as the heavy. The movie reminds me quite a bit of the slower film noir that I've seen, and works quite well for a mature audience. Teens looking for "violence" in Violence should stay away, 'cause the background scenes will put them off. Adults who don't like graphic violence should also pass. But if you want to see a gritty drama, Viggo and Ed have one for you.

Rating on the "Money I'd Pay To See It" scale: $8.50 (Primetime, baby!)

War of the Worlds (2005)

Plodding like a tripod...

[1/10 · 27 October 2005]

Now, I've read the book, and now I've seen the 'faithful' if updated movie and I can see where Mr. Spielberg was going with this. That said and done, it's like A.I. without the redeeming quality of Spielberg trying to make an homage to Mr. Kubrick. I think this film needed to have a different cast, especially the lead character. If you are going to center a film on one actor for all 2 hours of it's existence, get one who is interesting to watch. Tom Cruise stumbles through this movie more as a prop than as a story telling device, showing only numbness at the invasion of the aliens, causing the audience to show nothing but numbness in the theater. Dakota Fanning can be replaced by a scream machine and a rag doll. The son was the only one who interested me at all, but even then the broken home angst was a touch overdone (rooting for the Red Rox 'cause dad likes the Yankess is a little obvious, but it is American Big Budget Film) My take on the film, using the "Money I'd Pay To See It Scale" is: -$5.00

Domino (2005)

Like getting stuck with the six-five at the end of a game of muggins...

[1/10 · 17 October 2005]

I like the Scott Brothers work, usually, so I was willing to shell out the $6.50 to see the latest movie from Tony Scott. I mean, what the heck, how bad could it be? Bad.

With an attempt to honor Mr. Tarantino with a time-disjointed tale, with Tony's background in music video, we are given the first two hour long incoherent nonlinear bad music video. The story, as we have all been told, is 90% fictional, and written by some monkey with a Smith Corona from the mid fifties. Sitting here, I am trying to recall a scene in the film (excluding the ones with Lucy Liu), that had a duration of more than 1 minute long. I know, attention spans are getting shorter, but this movie is not for those with epilepsy... or anyone else for that matter.

My official take on this film, on the "How much would I pay to see this film" scale is -$5.00

Crusade (1999)

Some small changes could have turned turkey into an eagle

[2/10 · 4 October 2005]

For some reason, the spit and polish of the established Babylon 5 theme wasn't translated into Crusade. Star Trek accomplished this with DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise... on any of those series the "look" was not a major hindrance. But Crusade launched feeling as if it was a completely new creation, almost totally devoid of the feel of it's Babylonian mother. The first ax against the show truly was the music. The battle sequences were devoid of the martial themes, background chatter, and (implausable) sound effects. Instead we get some neo-classical claptrap whose rhythms and peaks in no way mate with what's on screen. The second ax is in the writing. Episodes 8-13 show that they were trying to fix that, but by god, I'll never watch episode 3 and 5 again. I nearly stopped right there. It should have been an adventure show with a little mystery, but the only mystery it presented us was where was the adventure?

Around the World in 80 Days (2004)

Aw, isn't it cute?

[8/10 · 21 June 2004]

A: Take everything that follows with the understanding that I love the works of Jackie Chan:

If you love Jackie Chan, and you have kids, and you want your kids to see Jackie Chan, then this movie is a good choice. Also a good choice to introduce them to Arnold too, but how you go from here to "Terminator" I leave to the discretion of those wiser than I. Jackie, Coogan, and the rest give a valiant effort to bring to life for a new generation the wonder of Verne's story. I don't think they succeed as well as the earlier film, yet this one is in it's way just as charming and interesting for the viewing public. The "fantasy" map transitions were novel, if a bit distracting in their way, perhaps a bit to "Disneyesque" to fit with the turn of the century styling that the sets bring to the film. I didn't see a lot of modern pop culture references, and for a film like this, the less there are the better it is. (0=perfect I don't need to hear any Snoop Dogg in 1890's San Francisico...)

All in all, it's a pleasant way to spend an afternoon (especially in 100+ degree Bakersfield)

8-10

Fahrenheit 9/11 (2004)

Historic development of the movie industry.

[1/10 · 18 June 2004]

I really only had one thought about the movie after seeing it, that after all was said and done, and no matter the information presented to me and the movie making that went into Fahrenheit 911, I had just been subjected to the worlds first feature length negative political advertisement. It seems to me as if Mike Moore took all the credibility he had with "Roger and Me" (without really pointing out Detroit's true faults) and parleyed it into a giant soapbox for his views. I'm not a fan of G.W. Bush, but if anyone changes their mind solely because of this film, I've a bridge in Brooklyn I'll part with cheap. See this movie to find out how Mike Moore will run the Kerry/Clinton 2008 campaign ads. Don't see this movie if you like your $8.

Please read at least four newspapers before voting in November. Eight if you've already seen this film. Rush Limbaugh broadcasts cannot be used to "make up" for film viewing.

The Matrix Reloaded (2003)

What happened to the Matrix?

[4/10 · 17 February 2004]

It seems as if in Science Fiction you have this periodic throwback to perform an odd phenomenon that appears in long serial novels. It's where the first novel (Dune, Ender's Game) blows you away with an actionpacked revolutionary story. The sequels however take that universe and lead you down the garden path to whatever new little social or political commentary the author wants to make. The Matrix is finally the film equivalent. The Matrix stands tall, alone, as an interesting film with an odd twist in the middle. Seeing this cash cow just sitting there, and wanting to explore other aspects of society, the writers and directors then lead you through what has to be some of the most painful monologues and non-action sequences in SciFi. While the visuals remain as stunning from the first movies, the new explorations of the characters falls terrible flat in the sequel. Watch for eye candy, not for deep thought.

4 out of 10, as registered by this fine website.

Enemy Mine (1985)

Differences are solved by people, not by organizations

[10/10 · 5 February 2004]

This movie captures the essence of the ideal relationship between one person and the next. We always fear the stranger, but when we are released from sociatal pressures to hate and are forced to deal with the other alone, we prefer their company to being alone.

In America, it seems as if there is always one group who takes issue with another, but it takes a rare incident like the movie "Enemy Mine" to show us that underneath it all, we are not all that different. After the Star Trek and Star Wars phenominons, it was nice to see a sci-fi movie that was a little more philsophical rather than action-packed. Our first contact with an alien race may be troublesome, but we've gotten great practice (for good and ill) on each other.

Dennis Quaid puts on quite a show here, transforming from willing agent of the government to a man with his own mind about his situation (you know, that war thingy) in dealing with probably one of the most believable alien performances by Lou Gossett Jr. who've I have always respected for his acting.

Sci-Fi shoot-em-ups have thier place, but Asimov, Bradbury, and Clarke didn't write alot about us blowing things up. If you've a taste for what real first-contact would be like, for right now, 2001 and "Enemy Mine" are it. And good for the watching as well.