7 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Temple Grandin (2010 TV Movie)
10/10
Claire Danes better get a freakin' Emmy for this
20 February 2010
I'm a parent of a child with high-functioning autism, and while my child's condition isn't nearly as severe as Ms. Grandin's, I was touched and awed by the portrayal in the film on a deeply personal level and as a fan of film.

Not once during the entire film was I able to sit back and say, unequivocally, that's Claire Danes on the screen. Not once, because that was not Claire Danes - it was Temple Grandin, or at the very least what we saw on the screen was %99.999 the character brought to life with an unbelievably immersive portrayal of Ms. Grandin by Ms. Danes.

I've seen those looks, those pensive stares filled with wonder and awe and fear but on a level so completely foreign to those of us who do not have autism. There were moments in this film I was looking right into my child's eyes through that screen.

Ms. Danes is an extraordinary talent, and while I've watched many of her films with interest, I will make it a point to see those I have not yet seen, and will watch with renewed interest and intensity those I have already seen.

Wow...seriously, that's about all I can say about her performance - Wow.
138 out of 147 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
So why do I like Temple the least?
9 June 2008
1) A shrill, ridiculous female counterpart.

2) A main plot device that connects not at all with the primary viewing audience (the mystical stones).

3) A main story setting that...(see 2).

4) An 'over-the-top' mark that exceeds even the most ridiculous mid-century b-movies.

5) Her again...(so bad she deserves a second mention)

The other three movies had a main plot device that registers with most Americans and a good part of the Western world.

There was nothing in this movie, other than Indy, with which I connected - and short of the opening sequence which had Capshaw doing (in the proper setting) what she manages to do the rest of the movie, I really did not connect with the story or with Indy in this setting and on this adventure at all.

I'd venture a guess that the reason the 4th film is panned so much in Europe and other non-US countries has to do with its quintessential American tie-in from that era...Roswell Aliens - something which other nations have certainly heard of but which Americans, most of all, seem to have been obsessed with (either believing it or ardently arguing against it) over the last 60 years.

Bring on an Indy 5 - but dear Lord, please pick a story that Americans and hopefully a good portion of the West (the primary moviegoers for Spielberg/Lucas films) can actually get invested in - mystical stones just doesn't cut it.

And no more shrill damsels who can't shut up long enough not to risk the lives of everyone they are traveling with every 5 minutes.
10 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Eragon (2006)
2/10
A 15 year old wrote the book, too bad he didn't write the screenplay and direct...
29 December 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I didn't go into this movie thinking too much would come of it, but I did expect to see a reasonable attempt to translate what was a fairly entertaining story with a reasonably fleshed-out (if simplistic) world into the media of film.

I read the book, but even had I not, I'd still have the two dozen or so questions I left this movie with still in my brain.

So many pieces of the story are missing...the motivation for Eragon to leave his Uncle's farm, the true nature of Arya, Tronjheim and its vastness, the integral part that dwarfs play in the story, the Isidar Mithrim and the real tale of the demise of Durza, Murtaugh as more than a set piece, and the true and tragic end of the battle of Farthen Dur.

These are not merely niceties that provide a backdrop to the story - they are key to the story and its proper telling.

Ten minutes of well-written and adequately directed scenes and this film becomes a reasonable adaptation instead of the cut-and-paste get-it-out-by-the-holidays rush job that it appears to be.

As to effects, yes the dragon is spectacular, but did they blow the whole budget on scenes with Saphira and the (not-exactly-by-the-book) battle with Durza? And what is with the Urgals? Overweight, bald guys in caveman suits? The director's vision (or lack thereof) are clearly to blame for these gaps in the way the story is told through effects.

The 'world' is missing here, which though it is a simplistic one at best, it is still part of the tale and its telling...oh well, at least we've still got Peter Jackson.

Before they go and muck up the second part of this tale on film, I hope the director and writers have the decency to make it clear that this is NOT the tale of Eragon and Alagaesia, but an oversimplification of a story that could have benefited from the media of film instead of being butchered by it.

Pathetic, simplistic, one-dimensional storytelling at very nearly its worst.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Batman Begins (2005)
10/10
Tim...who?
23 July 2005
I walked out of the theater thinking just two words...Tim...who? Stellar job...consistent with the spirit and letter of key features of the Batman legends critical to the character, and too easily brushed aside by the over-the-top renditions of the Burton/Schumacher franchise.

Character, dialogue, story...outstanding in all respects (enough to draw some of the most talented and seasoned actors in the industry).

Parting thoughts: keep Clooney, Schumacher and Burton as far away from this version as is conceivable...and no cameos by Adam West, please for the love of God! :)
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
On the whole, about what I'd expect from a movie version of the Dark Horse comic
29 January 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I didn't have the luxury of seeing this film in the theater, and I kinda wish I had after viewing the DVD.

I was and still am a fan of Dark Horse Comics' multiple AVP series, and I was keen to hear way back in the late 80s that there was some commotion about making the series into a movie, simply because it brought together two franchises which both worked well on their own, and which definitely lent themselves to a celluloid treatment.

It finally happened, and admittedly it's not exactly the same story, but the essentials are there.

There are the odd-ball additions of the whole "Predators created civilization" foo, and the seemingly ended-before-it-was-begun hints at the beginnings of the "Company" that so dominates the landscape of the first four films (Weyland Corporation and the presumably collected information, either voluntarily or otherwise, from Lex about the technologies and creatures encountered during this little adventure). Other than those annoyances, the gist of the story is intact. Predators "breeding" Aliens for the hunt, humans getting in the way, one of them surviving, joining in the kill and being "marked" for it like a Predator.

What I did not get, I mean simply did not get, was the whole facehugger-to-alien in 30 minutes or less thing...if you want to voice an apologetic, I guess you could excuse it by saying the Queen is in duress, so the facehuggers are driven to rapid reproduction. It doesn't necessarily jibe with the timelines in the other movies for the belly-bursters, but hey...who's counting right? To be truthful, I can't say I was expecting anything, but I do know if all I had been treated to was an Alien/Predator bloodbath (or acid-bath, as the case may be) I'd have bolted inside of 10 minutes...I can see that kind of pointless noise three times a week or more on SciFi.

On the whole I liked it well enough. It wasn't Academy material, but come on...it's Aliens, it's Predators...

"You die, she dies...EVERYbody dies..."

That's like birthday cake on Christmas Day! :)
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Kill me...please...
25 November 2004
I am so NOT kidding...the images burned into my mind after seeing this film simply will not come out!

I walked up to the ticket counter when I took my two boys to see this film, 6 and 4 respectively, and casually asked for tickets for two easily entertained children and one reluctant adult. I pulled out the money I was soon to regret parting with (more than I regret not having followed Marilyn Sturgess under the bleachers at that Varsity Basketball game in 9th grade) and promptly entered a domain so much akin to the Purgatory mentioned in Catholic literature from the times of the Spanish Inquisition tnat I was wont to leave by any means necessary.

The only thing keeping in my seat through this film was the thought of either the fight I would have with my oldest son (who was on the verge of losing bladder control from excitement) or the prospect of a Child Protective Services indictment if I were to be seen running from the theater at top speed (for a middle-aged man of my not insubstantial girth) screaming in Aramaic (or some other Pauline-era dialect) without my children in tow.

It is remarkable how small those inducements seemed in retrospect once I had seen the entire film, an experience that at once made me both question my belief in a higher power who is merciful and benevolent, and called to mind thoughts of incurring a head-wound in the hopes that I could truly forget the experience.

The only comment I can make on this film for those who have not seen it is the one I offered to my wife, when I informed her that we should tell all of our friends who have children with ADHD that they can actually take them to see it without medicating them (having one of those myself I do not find that a particularly distasteful assessment).

My four-year old, whose wisdom is often startling, said simply, "that was the dumbest movie I have ever saw!" What more could one say to that?

If you are a parent who is forced to take your child to see this film, do so on minimal sleep and take a pillow with you...that or take 3-4 doses of a common, over-the-counter sleep aid prior to entering the theater. Alcohol also works, but only if you live within walking distance and are not prone to become violent when you imbibe. :)

Good luck to all who are forced to see this film. For the rest of you, pray to whatever God you hold dear that you will never be so compelled.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Frankenstein (2004 TV Movie)
5/10
Spoiler - What in the @$#* was that?
10 October 2004
Warning: Spoilers
The first time I heard the words "Parker Posey", I had an inkling of precisely what I was in for...a lead character (in this case a police detective working a string of grisly homicides in the face of some startling discoveries about the victims and uncommonly disco-era machismo) who was utterly unbelievable. Nothing demonstrated this more clearly than seeing Ms. Posey running through the all-too-cliché abandoned factory setting wielding a SPAS-12 in classic, two-handed Rambo-style...riiiiight.

As to the story, here was a concept that was an exceptionally unique and original take on a classic (for my own part) which flew off the tracks in a matter of minutes (one word, sanctuary) and never was quite able to right itself once it got off into the weeds.

Beyond that fundamental issue, there were so many scenes in this film that could've been salvaged in the hands of another director, without much of any change to the dialogue (lighting, cinematography, music, etc.), though a better explanation of a few characters' primary motivations would've been appreciated since one of the most critical relationships to the story went from being about two lives lived in despair to (following a death or two) one life that came from...uh...well...guess we'll get that answer in Act 2.

I say that because it's been awhile since a film ended so completely like the first act of a classic three-act drama. If someone had handed me popcorn and the intermission frame popped onto the tube I would NOT have been surprised.

As it happens we're stuck with a lot of questions, some of which we THINK were answered in the film but not in a fashion befitting one with such potential...give a couple of freshman film students access to the same gear and cast and I'm fairly sure we'd have had a 50/50 shot of getting a more compelling result.

Oh well, it was free (thank goodness).
0 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed