Change Your Image
rs1-6
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
The 15:17 to Paris (2018)
Disappointing
I watched this movie as it was promoted as being about a terrorist shootout on a train... Starting with the the big picture: It was one hour of a meaningless backstory followed by a half hour of the event itself and its followup. But almost more horrendous for me was the production itself. It was shot with a video (Arri) camera and had the unmistakable look of a low budget TV show or soap opera. Except for some shots of tourist locations in Europe, the scenery was either boring or bad dress ups (downs?) if existing places... For example, bricks that appeared to have been drawn with a ruler and bright red magic marker... Part way through, I discovered that this was produced and directed by (my idol) Clint Eastwood... Did he even look and the rushes? While I have admiration for the chaps who carried out the terrorist take-down of the perp, I cannot muster any for the film- err... video-maker.
I consoled myself by watching another movie ("Leave No Trace") made with the same Arri camera and it actually looked like a movie... Clint: "What were you thinking?!
Questioning Darwin (2014)
Questioning those questioning this documentary
I rarely write reviews, but I am moved to chime in after reading the surprisingly low (albeit few) ratings of others. I happened upon this documentary (that's all it is) on HBO. At the outset,it presents an interesting statistic that impressed me: Forty-six percent of us believe the biblical version of creation. That's OK. However, this film presents a fascinating overview of the history of Darwin's work along with belief of creationists. It was informative, not didactic-- an excellent use of the documentary form. I suspect the lowish ratings and negative reviews are the opinion of those who misunderstood the film as an attack on religion, which it is not.
Judge the film on its intent to inform about the work of Darwin and the belief of creationists. Nobody is wrong except, perhaps, those who don't want to learn. (That's why I like documentaries.)
Number Seventeen (1932)
Geeze, can you give the guy a break?
The reason to enjoy watching this film is to understand what a great director was doing to hone his craft when so many tools of the trade had yet to be developed. In 1932, many, if not most movies were still silent. Cameras, lights and labs were a nightmare. Storytelling was still trying to embrace the new medium of sound.
Yes, Hitchcock was doing a poor (by today's standards) attempt at a craft he ultimately raised to genius level. Watch this film and marvel at what was accomplished eighty-five years ago and all the technology and techniques that needed to be invented over the decades ahead. Enjoy it for what it is and what it is not.
The film is amazing! "Number 17" gets a number 8 from me.
The Seventh Veil (1945)
Dynamic Scoring
I watched this 1945 film, because I was 9 years old in that year and wanted to see how the era was portrayed. (I liked the 78 RPM shellac records were the only kind commercially existing then. But I digress.)
I first gave the film a "5" (which is low for me) because the writers, though inspired by a real story, devised a "backstory" that was unnecessarily long, added little to the film, and had the protagonist embarrassingly portrayed as a child by the adult star, Ann Todd.
I increased my rating to a "6" after we progressed past childhood and onto an interesting, although antiquated, presentation of psychiatry as it was simplistically understood at the time. Ms. Todd and Mr. Mason carried the movie, despite a lackluster supporting cast.
How did I get to a "7," which is my average? Well, that was because of the last half hour that presented a somewhat interesting narrative, plus, a surprise ending.
Oh, and I enjoyed the piano music throughout.
Step Up (2006)
But they can't
What we have here, is a cliché-ridden school of the arts flick. I am moved to write this review while it is only halfway through. Perhaps I'll change my opinion by the time it ends. A story about a street smart, sort of, break dancer (Channing Tatum), a budding ballet student(Jenna Dewan Tatum), and assorted family and plot-filling friends. The boy happens to be sentenced to janitorial community service at the school after having broken in and vandalized the building with his buddies. The dancer suddenly is in need of a practice partner and (guess what?) our janitor just happens to take on the job. The plot is annoyingly formulaic. Dancer and dude fall in love. Mother disapproves. For tears, there is a random death that goes nowhere in the story line. Well, the two protagonists wind up together forever in the film and in real life, as they actually met and fell in love on the set which is, perhaps, the most interesting part of this tale. OK, it's over and I haven't changed my mind. Watching it was a waste of time. Now, what is the worst thing about this dance production? Unlike, "Fame," "Saturday Night Fever," "Flash Dance," etc., nobody in the film can actually dance!
Alfred Hitchcock Presents: The Foghorn (1958)
Good Script and Wonderful Actress
First, I must admit I am a great admirer of Barbara Bel Geddes. I think it's her peaceful voice. I have been watching every episode of this Hitchcock series and, so far, this is my favorite story. A tale of two lovers, perfectly matched, but forbidden to consummate their love because of a previous marriage and a spouse unwilling to release her husband. The relationship, however, prevails almost flowing with poignancy. There is the inevitable and tragic happening which we do not fully understand until the very end (typical for Hitchcock stories). I agree with a previous commentator who notes the inaccuracy of the synopsis. However, I disagree with his/her saying the "payoff" was inadequate. I found the ending a fascinating and unexpected twist.