It seems more than passing strange that such utter dreck as "Dukes of Hazzard" and "The Hills Have Eyes" (the new version) can find DVD distributors while older - and far superior works such as this film - are nowhere to be found. With all the on-going debate about the morality (or lack thereof) of warfare, and interest in espionage (consider the multiple Jack Ryan, Bourne, XXX, and "Mission: Impossible" productions, this would seem to be an obvious choice for release on DVD. True, it LOOKS like a 1968 motion picture because it IS a 1968 motion picture. But style consideration aside, this is still a production that actually has something valuable to say, and has plenty of plots twists to keep an audience entertained. If nothing else, will SOMEBODY please consider getting the soundtrack onto some kind of CD, whether it be a compilation with other Morricone music or as a stand-alone. I don't know if industry people bother to read what we fans have to say about their products, but if you are reading this and other comments, please take us seriously. We are paying for your lavish homes with our hard-earned dollars spent on tickets, DVDs and CDs - give us what we want! All that said, if you are reading this and have not seen this film, lobby for it's release so you may see what those of us who have seen it are talking about. You will not be disappointed.
Reviews
8 Reviews
Ratatouille
(2007)
Thank God for Pixar's team!
6 July 2007
John Lassiter has created what has become THE clearinghouse for original story ideas extremely well-executed on the screen with outstanding animation. This film is no exception and continues to exemplify the quality that this collection of artists brings the world of family entertainment. I am so very grateful that Bob Iger managed to patch things up between Disney and Pixar, for to lose such a remarkable source of creativity and artistic talent would have been a sin on a level to cause Uncle Walt to bellow from the heavens. There are others (Dreamworks) who are providing quality family animation entertainment, but none on a level equal to Pixar. With all that said, let me simply say this: if you enjoy good story-telling, well-crafted characters, eye-popping animation, and a movie that the entire family (minus those who may have a rodent phobia) can enjoy, then by all means go and see this work of art. Congrats Brad Bird and team, you have done it again!
Transylvania 6-5000
(1985)
Just roll with it.
29 June 2007
If you go into this movie with hopes of seeing another "Young Frankenstein", you will be disappointed. If you see it with the understanding that this was made with "have to use it in Yugoslavia" funding from Dow - and not a lot of funds, but the buck does stretch a bit further there - and if you like shtick, you'll probably not regret your time spent. Others have divulged the plot, so here's my take: despite the inexpensive production values and a great deal of on-location shooting, this film offers some funk "pokes" at the classic horror movie genre. Michael Richards' performance causes a few squirms here and there, but everyone else does a fine job: John Byner and Carol Kane are a hoot, as is Joseph Bologna's "split personality" role. Jeff Goldblum is so laid back, he seems to be on vacation and Ed Begley is......well, Ed Begley. The ending actually has some warmth and heart, and speaking of warm things, see this - if for no other reason - to ogle Geena Davis in her "Vampirella"-like outfit. WHOA!
The Hills Have Eyes
(2006)
Heaping pile of excrement
19 March 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I viewed this thing over the weekend on the recommendation of an acquaintance whose judgment is now seriously in question. I can only assume that the agents for the name stars were not shown the full script or REALLY needed a paycheck. * SPOILER ALERT * At the point where the mutants have entered the trailer, raped the youngest daughter, molested the older daughter before shooting her in the head I was ready to give up on it. If I had been in a theater, I would have walked out and demanded a refund. Since I was watching a borrowed DVD, I stuck it out to the end to see if there was any redemption. Not much. The concept of an isolated mini-civilization made up of radiation-damaged mutants is a potentially interesting story, but in this film this storyline is is relegated to a sub-story. The primary focus in this film is gratuitous violence for the mere sake of gratuitous violence for apparently little or no reason. If this is your "cup of tea", then enjoy. If you prefer good writing and some semblance of viable storyline, look elsewhere.
Hostel
(2005)
Missing important points
6 November 2006
It would seem from the majority of the comments on this film that very few of the people making these comments have any real insight into film production or what some film makers are attempting to communicate to an audience. With that in mind, here are some things I discovered upon viewing this film: (1) The story is new and unique. Thank goodness for any film that is not a sequel, a remake, or a film based on some decades-old television program. (2) The director uses the Xenophobia most Americans have about Europe and the citizens of those countries to very good effect. He plays on those fears, throws fuel onto that fire, much like Tobe Hooper did with rural areas in the U.S. in "Texas Chainsaw Massacre". (3) I was impressed by the build-up of uneasiness leading up to the torture scenes, the prevading sense of something "off bubble". If the characters had not been tenth-degree horndog party animals intent only on having a good time, they might have been more suspicious of the strange events taking place around them, which - in my mind - justifies the scenes of debauchery to show how oblivious these guys were. (4) A great number of things often have to be done in a film to appease The Studio. I saw several scenes that appeared to be included seemingly at the behest of The Studio for "saleability", and were not necessarily included for story-telling. There is also a desire to "one-up" each other in the Studio System, which publicly decries sex and violence while unofficially tells Producers to "give us more, and make it even more shocking than (fill in the blank)". All-in-all, while this film is not for the squeamish, it does have some things to say that create discussion and dialogue about a number of things, from how we view foreign cultures to how we treat each other. Any film that can generate that kind of thought while providing innovation deserves applause.
Joe Somebody
(2001)
Unrealized potential
11 September 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I have the distinct impression that this film was the victim of studio-dictated edits. A terrific premise - someone who suddenly seems to earn the respect of his peers by trying to become the type of person he believes others want him to be rather than simply being himself - that was not fully realized. There is good casting and there are characters I wanted to know more about, but there were too many loose ends and too many questions left un-answered. The Director - John Pasquin - has shown in previous efforts like "The Santa Clause" and "Jungle 2 Jungle" for Disney that he is capable of helming a good story. Therefore, I have to assume the Studio folks at Fox decided to make some cuts for running time.
More background for Tim Allen's character would have helped us to understand why Joe is the kind of person he is, and possibly why the marriage failed. There was exposition that both Joe and his ex (Kelly Lynch) still have deep feelings for each other, and that a reunion of sorts might be in the offing. Joe's ex-wife is shown expressing greater and greater interest in his new personae, and we are led to believe that there will be some kind of emotional showdown eventually between Joe, his ex, and his new love interest. That plot line is just suddenly dropped, and in the end the ex-wife is sitting in a theater with her former husband and his girlfriend (Julie Bowen), and everything is just peachy keen. Huh? Didn't Joe give his ex-wife grief over kissing her new boyfriend in front of him, but thirty minutes later it's just fine for him to be doing the exact same thing? There was no satisfying resolution to their relationship situation, aside from the daughter (Natalie Scheffer) warning her mother not to be too quick to break her father's heart again. There had to have been some scenes shot where these characters find some way to work out their relationships, but if this was done, they were left on the cutting room floor and we are left with unanswered questions.
There was also no satisfaction in seeing Joe's boss, or the company as a whole, receive some comeuppance as a result of an obviously flawed, and certainly illegal, human resources policies. Was Greg Germann's character at least fired by the company, and Joe's work ethic rewarded with a real position in the company? Did Joe continue to work for this company, or seek his fortunes elsewhere? Did the co-workers who embraced Joe before the fight day come to understand his choice, and decide that he is still an "Ok guy", or did the entire office drop him like a bad habit? Maybe a "Directors Cut" will answer these and many other questions.
Also, if Jim Belushi's character was intended as a partial-parody of Steven Seagal (as it would seem), then don't hold back - bring on the barbs! Belushi's character was great, but it needed fleshing out as well as more screen time. Where did this guy come from? Former military? Did he only work in action films, or did he have another career before retreating to his storefront Dojo? He suddenly shows up in the daughter's play at the end, but we are left to wonder how and why.
While overall this is a fun movie to watch, it could have been a better film in the end with even an additional fifteen minutes of story to clarify plot lines and character development.
More background for Tim Allen's character would have helped us to understand why Joe is the kind of person he is, and possibly why the marriage failed. There was exposition that both Joe and his ex (Kelly Lynch) still have deep feelings for each other, and that a reunion of sorts might be in the offing. Joe's ex-wife is shown expressing greater and greater interest in his new personae, and we are led to believe that there will be some kind of emotional showdown eventually between Joe, his ex, and his new love interest. That plot line is just suddenly dropped, and in the end the ex-wife is sitting in a theater with her former husband and his girlfriend (Julie Bowen), and everything is just peachy keen. Huh? Didn't Joe give his ex-wife grief over kissing her new boyfriend in front of him, but thirty minutes later it's just fine for him to be doing the exact same thing? There was no satisfying resolution to their relationship situation, aside from the daughter (Natalie Scheffer) warning her mother not to be too quick to break her father's heart again. There had to have been some scenes shot where these characters find some way to work out their relationships, but if this was done, they were left on the cutting room floor and we are left with unanswered questions.
There was also no satisfaction in seeing Joe's boss, or the company as a whole, receive some comeuppance as a result of an obviously flawed, and certainly illegal, human resources policies. Was Greg Germann's character at least fired by the company, and Joe's work ethic rewarded with a real position in the company? Did Joe continue to work for this company, or seek his fortunes elsewhere? Did the co-workers who embraced Joe before the fight day come to understand his choice, and decide that he is still an "Ok guy", or did the entire office drop him like a bad habit? Maybe a "Directors Cut" will answer these and many other questions.
Also, if Jim Belushi's character was intended as a partial-parody of Steven Seagal (as it would seem), then don't hold back - bring on the barbs! Belushi's character was great, but it needed fleshing out as well as more screen time. Where did this guy come from? Former military? Did he only work in action films, or did he have another career before retreating to his storefront Dojo? He suddenly shows up in the daughter's play at the end, but we are left to wonder how and why.
While overall this is a fun movie to watch, it could have been a better film in the end with even an additional fifteen minutes of story to clarify plot lines and character development.
Radioland Murders
(1994)
For radio fans and employees
3 April 2006
Having spent three decades working in radio, I was encouraged by friends to pick this up on DVD. My impression is that the Lucas folks attempted to cram 10 pounds of stuff into a 5 pound bag. The potential is obviously present with a cast of extremely talented actors and even some of the folks who were a big part of radio history (George Burns and Rosemary Clooney), but someone (the Director? Producers? The Studio?) decided to increase the pace to the point where it feels like watching Spielberg's "1941" in fast-forward.
There is a stable full of interesting characters whom we never really get to know. Harvey Korman and Bobcat Goldthwait's characters obviously had some serious issues - but what was their story? The same with Brion James, Ned Beatty, and Jeffrey Tambor. Michael McKean's homage to Spike Jones was a joy, but too short, and there were too many missed opportunities to show what actually went on in radio broadcasts performed in front of a live audience. Sound effects played a major role, which was hinted at but never fully glorified in Christopher Lloyd's role. I would bet there is probably another whole movie sitting on the cutting room floor.
On the plus side, however, at least SOMEONE made the effort to capture the feel of major broadcast radio from it's heyday, and the look as well as the overall mood is fairly authentic. I appreciate that this is not a documentary, and the story itself is pure fantasy, but this film left me wanting more - like someone had torn half the pages out of a book. Perhaps, someday, the Lucas folks will release some kind of "director's cut" edition with restored scenes and a feature on the Golden Era of radio. Most people under the age of 50 have no idea of the remarkable entertainment that was available over the airwaves during this era - but for fans of the medium, and for those who have worked in it, this is a gem that will bring a smile.
There is a stable full of interesting characters whom we never really get to know. Harvey Korman and Bobcat Goldthwait's characters obviously had some serious issues - but what was their story? The same with Brion James, Ned Beatty, and Jeffrey Tambor. Michael McKean's homage to Spike Jones was a joy, but too short, and there were too many missed opportunities to show what actually went on in radio broadcasts performed in front of a live audience. Sound effects played a major role, which was hinted at but never fully glorified in Christopher Lloyd's role. I would bet there is probably another whole movie sitting on the cutting room floor.
On the plus side, however, at least SOMEONE made the effort to capture the feel of major broadcast radio from it's heyday, and the look as well as the overall mood is fairly authentic. I appreciate that this is not a documentary, and the story itself is pure fantasy, but this film left me wanting more - like someone had torn half the pages out of a book. Perhaps, someday, the Lucas folks will release some kind of "director's cut" edition with restored scenes and a feature on the Golden Era of radio. Most people under the age of 50 have no idea of the remarkable entertainment that was available over the airwaves during this era - but for fans of the medium, and for those who have worked in it, this is a gem that will bring a smile.
The Death of Ocean View Park
(1979 TV Movie)
A calmer, more accurate View
22 February 2006
Warning: Spoilers
A response to previous comments made by residents of the region where this motion picture was lensed: One person suggested that the closing and destruction of the Ocean View Amusement Park led to a downturn in the surrounding neighborhoods. This is simply not true. Prior to the construction of Interstate 64, which bypasses the Ocean View area, the primary route for traffic went through the heart of Ocean View. Once the interstate was completed, Ocean View rapidly became a ghost town with businesses closing up and an increase in crime. This led to a huge reduction in revenues for the park, which also faced new competition from nearby Busch Gardens in Williamsburg. Meanwhile, in the past few years, the City of Norfolk has done a remarkable job of fostering redevelopment so that the area has become a sought-after location for construction of high-end housing.
It has also been said that the destruction footage of the roller coaster was used in the film "Rollercoaster". This is also untrue. Footage was shot of two coaster cars careening off the ride for that film, but the actual explosions and collapse are exclusive to "Death of Ocean View Park".
As to the film itself, the storyline of a "supernatural" force in the water adjacent to the park was certainly silly, but somewhat typical for B-grade movies of the time. With the cast involved, there should be no surprise that the scenery was gnawed in almost every scene by the primary actors. I don't believe this film was intended to be another "Citizen Kane"; I believe Playboy was experimenting with a new non-nude format to determine if this was an area for the company to expand into (apparently not!). A strange force in the water causing strange events in an old amusement park probably sounded good at the conference table, but proved unmanageable in execution. The roller coaster and the rest of the park was destined for the wrecking ball anyway; "let's come up with a weird way to justify an explosive demise!".
For the casual movie viewer, this would be a "see once and forget about it" film (except for Diana Canova fans); but for the thousands of people who live in the region and have fond memories of the park, this movie is like a "walk down memory lane" for footage of the park as well as old footage of downtown Norfolk, the first "Harborfest", and Old Dominion University. Even a limited release of this film on DVD would be welcome.
It has also been said that the destruction footage of the roller coaster was used in the film "Rollercoaster". This is also untrue. Footage was shot of two coaster cars careening off the ride for that film, but the actual explosions and collapse are exclusive to "Death of Ocean View Park".
As to the film itself, the storyline of a "supernatural" force in the water adjacent to the park was certainly silly, but somewhat typical for B-grade movies of the time. With the cast involved, there should be no surprise that the scenery was gnawed in almost every scene by the primary actors. I don't believe this film was intended to be another "Citizen Kane"; I believe Playboy was experimenting with a new non-nude format to determine if this was an area for the company to expand into (apparently not!). A strange force in the water causing strange events in an old amusement park probably sounded good at the conference table, but proved unmanageable in execution. The roller coaster and the rest of the park was destined for the wrecking ball anyway; "let's come up with a weird way to justify an explosive demise!".
For the casual movie viewer, this would be a "see once and forget about it" film (except for Diana Canova fans); but for the thousands of people who live in the region and have fond memories of the park, this movie is like a "walk down memory lane" for footage of the park as well as old footage of downtown Norfolk, the first "Harborfest", and Old Dominion University. Even a limited release of this film on DVD would be welcome.
Tell Your Friends