Reviews

The real clincher of this picture is that it offers no resolutions and doesn't even attempt to wrap it all up in a tidy little package. Here are two lost souls. She's just starting to look for answers. He's still searching after 25 years of marriage. And it's in this common bond they can find comfort in one another. Murray's at his best in the scenes where he's on the phone to his wife. And there's a natural beauty and delivery in her performance that makes Scarlett Johansson one of the brightest up-and-comers! I didn't care for Sofia Coppola's "Virgin Suicides," even after multiple viewings. It was ambitious, and the talent was there, but overall something didn't seal the deal for me. However, "Lost in Translation" is Coppola's movie and will be the picture she will be remembered for in the years ahead. Nice, touching, and simply brilliant!

What an incredible story this man's life is it should be a movie. And here we are with "The Kid Stays in the Picture". A documentary, but not of the Discovery Channel type (not that there's anything wrong with those). This documentary with its moving photographs, hip soundtrack, and kinetic pacing, will absolutely suck you in. The rise and fall and ultimate redemption of Hollywood Producer Robert Evans is simply fascinating. And the fact that he narrates his own story makes his tales even that much more rich. The highlight for me: hearing how Robert Towne's script for "Chinatown" was absolute Chinese. It made no sense to anyone who read it.

I'm shocked at the number of negative comments posted for this movie. 'Straw Dogs' is hardly overrated and boring. Groundbreaking and shocking for its day, 'Dogs' may appear to be tame by today's standards, but that doesn't lessen its impact. At the heart of the story is man's animal nature and how fine a line it can be. Peckinpah also seems to explore how female sexuality can provoke this animal behavior. Setting the story in England is essential to building Hoffman's character. He's a man disconnected with his foreign surroundings and completely out of his element. This adds an even greater tension. There's alot of great filmmaking at work here. Highly recommended. (Do you think he goes back to his wife at the end?).

'Strangers On a Train' is the one great Hitchcock movie that seems to get lost among the other pillars of his filmmaking career. There really is some outstanding filmmaking taking place here with high marks for editing and cinematography. The title "Master of Suspense" is earned with a sequence where a key tennis match is intercut with the murderer, Bruno, heading back to the scene of the crime. Incredible! If the movie has a fault it's that the acting comes off a bit...amateur. And the climax on the carousel (a great idea) plays out a bit silly. Overall, 'Strangers...' deserves to be listed among his best work.

I can understand why others adore this movie. I can understand its charm and appeal. But for me this picture was nothing more than a vanity project. The movie comes to a screeching halt 3 times to allow star Deanna Durbin a chance to show off her vocals. Not that the plot itself is anything serious. In fact the movie makes many attempts to define itself as a 'fun' thriller, but turns out to be super-silly and ultimately annoying.

"Hideous Kinky" is not a plot-driven movie but more of a meditation on time and place. And I can live with that. The photography is so rich with colors and beautiful locales, I want to visit Morrocco. The acting in splendid across the board with particular note to the two young girls who were handed quite a bit of duty with the roles. Where this movie failed me is in the character played by Kate Winslet. She behaves with such selfishness and stupidity--not once--but over and over again, that I really grew to dislike her. Sure...she may be a young, naive, adventurous, hippie in the early '70's, but a I refuse to believe she didn't realize what kind of danger she was putting her children in. "Hideous Kinky" is a good movie--not great. And it's good for one viewing, maybe two for the cinematography.

I have not seen the 6 other versions of this movie, so I do not have anything to compare it to. I did like the story. The cinematography is stunning with nice throwbacks to "Lawrence of Arabia." Heath Ledger finally earned my respect as a serious and gifted actor after so many roles marketing him as a teen idol. Wes Bentley's character isn't utilized enough. He's believable, although the accent drops out every now and then. And Kate Hudson's character is so far in the background you forget she's there. I found the storytelling chunky, as if large amounts of footage were left on the cutting room floor. And I didn't buy the Abou character. There's no concrete explanation as to why he's helping Harry. Overall, it's not as bad as others would have you believe. There's no doubt director Kapur has enormous talent and vision. I wanted more for a follow-up picture to the outstanding "Elizabeth." Where this movie succeeds, it fails on just as many levels. It's almost, but not quite there. It's a high C to Low B grade.

This movie had everything going for it: Stunning photography, an incredible soundtrack, 3 great lead performances, all touched off by that undeniable Coen Brothers touch. But what went wrong with this picture?

"O Brother,..." is supposedly based on Homer's the 'Odyssey,' (and 'Fargo' was 'supposedly' a true story!). Like that legendary tale, 3 escaped convicts embark on their own crazy adventures in search of buried treasure. Along the way they run into a series of characters played by Coen-movie veterens like Holly Hunter, John Goodman, Charles Durning and more!

Despite all the goods, the movie lacked a strong backbone to support what it had. The central plot is paper-thin before trailing off into non-existence!

Don't get me wrong. I liked what I saw. I got some great laughs especially from George Clooney who is such a standout in this movie! But I was very dissatisfied with how the movie unraveled. I am and will always be a fan of the Coen's work, but this particualar movie is not my favorite!

"All the Pretty Horses" is a most beautiful movie. A simple story told in the most simple story-telling technique. Directed masterfully by Billy Bob Thornton. The photography is stunning and the score is one of the best I've heard in a motion picture this year. Where the movie fails is in its underdevelopment in character and plot. But please understand where this fault lies. Not on its director or actors or screenwriter...but on a studio that wouldn't allow for the story to unfold in its original 4 hour running time. At 2 hours, this movie was good. What is keeping "All the Pretty Horses" from being a masterpiece is the 2 hours of footage lying on the cutting room floor! See this movie--it's good. Let's just hope the Director's Cut will be released on DVD.