I went to this film wanting to like it. The story seemed interesting and the cast had many of my favorite actors. The film is advertised as a story about the beginnings of th CIA. Well its not really, it's a hodge podge story of one man's life within the CIA. I am not a fan of movies that jump back and forth in time to tell a story. In some cases it can work but it is only a device and should be used sparingly. The Good Shepherd does this many times. The movie has a few glaring errors in it which make little sense. Overall the cinematography was good and there were some good scenes along with a few good lines but this film telegraphs where its going a lot. The movie is a little long at almost 3 hours. About 45 more minutes on the editing room floor would have improved the pace and not really lost any of the story. It's just my opinion but I think your movie dollar would be better spent renting this for $3 than paying $20 for a theatrical showing. 5/10
Reviews
11 Reviews
The Boy in Blue
(1986)
Just OK
27 March 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Unless you like movies about rowing, this movie is a little slow. The only thing this film has in common with Chariots of Fire is the fact that its a period piece. The film is predictable even if you never heard of Ned Hanlan. It's a little "sappy" at times. The acting is a bit over the top and wooden with little chemistry felt between Cage and Dale.
SPOILER The training scene for the race on the Thames looked like it was stolen from one of the "Rocky" films but without the speed bag. If you like to be bored to tears or need a non-narcotic to fall asleep this would be a good film for you.
** out of *****
SPOILER The training scene for the race on the Thames looked like it was stolen from one of the "Rocky" films but without the speed bag. If you like to be bored to tears or need a non-narcotic to fall asleep this would be a good film for you.
** out of *****
Rustlers' Rhapsody
(1985)
Better than its rating indicates if you like the genre
9 August 2003
I didn't really understand on why this movie was rated so low, until I realized that to really enjoy this film you needed to grow up watching horse operas on Saturdays. This means to appreciate the humor, you're probably closer to 40 than 20 or spend a lot of time watching TVLand. From what I've seen most members here are closer 20. This movie satires the Saturday matinee western where you can tell the good guys in the white hats from the bad guys. So it would be better for those of us who saw and liked westerns before the "anti-hero" westerns of the late 60's to present. Where the cowboy star has a new set of duds on for each scene, foils the bad guys and gets the girl but would rather kiss the horse. The storyline is thin because they were all pretty much the same back in the 50's. That's part of the joke. I'd forgotten about this little gem until I was looking at Tom Berenger's credits. He and the rest of the cast were really good. It may not be a great movie but its definitely worth a watch. Favorite line G.W. Bailey saying "Gee Rex, you really ARE a good guy!" 7 out of 10
Final Justice
(1984)
Bad, bad, bad
28 December 2002
I guess this goes to prove that Joe Don Baker will do anything for a buck. The concept of the film wasn't very good to start with. This movie has so many bad things about it I don't know where to start. The acting is horrible. The cinematography is marginal at best. The soundtrack was pretty bad. The score is terrible. There's a reason why this movie ended up on Mystery Science Theater 3000. I voted before I wrote this and I cannot believe that 9 people actually thought this "film" is excellent. They must have liked the two go-go dancers. Final justice would be if they locked this stinker in the film vault outside Wichita and never let anyone see it again! A 1 out of 10 rating is far better than this deserves.
The Quiet Man
(1952)
My favorite John Wayne film
6 December 2002
When I first saw this movie in the late sixties, I was already a big fan of John Wayne's westerns. I stumbled upon this gem during a snowstorm, sitting by the fire, on a Saturday afternoon. Still the best way to watch a movie at home. The film is pretty light-hearted without being too foolish and silly. You get to see the beautiful Irish countryside and a slower pace of life. I want to fish that stream where Father Lonergan was! The film slowly works up to its climax, the confrontation between Squire Danaher and Sean Thorton. The fight scene is pretty tame by today's standards but it was filmed in 1952. May not be everyone's taste, but if you like John Ford films, the Duke, or old movies, it may be worth your time.
Battle of the Bulge
(1965)
Historical Documentary - not, but then, what is
9 November 2002
This movie is not the "Tora! Tora! Tora!" for the battle of the bulge. It has many inaccuracies but it was meant to be a fictional account. It has a good cast composed of some great actors at the time it was filmed. The acting is fair to good and the score was decent in the original version. The movie has been dismembered to fit time slots and place commercials. Even the current video is missing some footage. Since the film was made in 1965, I try not to be too critical of the special effects or the military hardware. Effects have come so far in the past 25 years that audiences are too sophisticated for the type used in this film. As for the tanks, even in 1965, there were few WWII german tanks around or shermans, for that matter, and it would be ridiculous to expect the makers of a film to have them available to put in a film. If you want to see a king tiger, try a museum or watch the History channel. As for the film, or any other film, take it for its entertainment value and not its historical accuracy. 6 out of 10
Behind Enemy Lines
(2001)
Definitely needed a better script
9 June 2002
Warning: Spoilers
The concept of this film seemed to provide good material for an entertaining movie. With Gene Hackman, David Keith, and Owen Wilson, the cast wasn't bad. The special effects were ok but somewhat superfulous. Whoever wrote this pile, doesn't seem to know squat about the military. ***Some spoilers*** Carriers have CAG officers to run the air operations and they are not rear admirals. The plane flys in and takes pictures and yet there is time for a couple of phone calls and a guy to run and tell his boss about it and the pilot flys over the one missle battery the serbian commander calls. The guy even says he hears the jet. Then fires 2 missles, minutes apart that track the aircraft, catch up to it but cannot quite get those last few yards. They're pretty amazing missles as far as tracking goes too. Lt. Burnett finds his pilot and leaves him in the middle of an open field where he parachuted and is suprised when he gets captured and killed. Burnett runs through a mine field and lives! Not to mention why is he going through a factory to begin with. He was told to get to the "safe zone" and then gets sent back to the town near where he crashed. He stops a truck and hitches a ride. This movie is ridiculous. By the way, shaking the camera is NOT an artform, it just annoying. 5/10 If you got to see it, don't expect much!
Die Hard
(1988)
If you like Action-Adventure, It's worth seeing at least once.
23 March 2002
To start with, I am a big fan of this genre and Die Hard is one of my all-time favorites. It starts out slow but quickly builds up to an exhilirating pace. This is probably Bruce Willis' best performance and film. This was my first experience with Alan Rickman and he plays the bad guy well! The one-liners and sarcasm are a little cheesy but most of the actors do a great job. In my opinion, John McTiernan does know how to make a movie you can enjoy. I must not be alone since over 190 of the 200 reviews so far, give this film high marks! The sequels tend to be a bit weak but were watchable.
Stargate
(1994)
Great cure for insomnia
19 January 2002
The movie, to put it simply, starts out well but gets very slow and boring before picking up the pace at the end. The musical score is decent but does not carry you through the film. Most of the characters are one dimensional and the plot is very predictable. The special effects were good but nothing that hasn't been done before. The film is technically well crafted and the quality shows on the screen. If you like sci-fi, Stargate is worth seeing once. If you have trouble sleeping, buy the video and you'll be out within 30 minutes. Just put the sleep timer on for an hour or else the last 20 minutes will wake you up again! ** out of ****
I've read many of the comments on the board that really have nothing to do with the film. From it being a "Western" plot to say that the people of Egypt needed aliens to build the pyramids to Americans have to solve everything with guns. It was a mediocre movie, not a documentary. The person who wrote and directed this film, Roland Emmerich, was born and raised in Germany where he started his film making career.
I've read many of the comments on the board that really have nothing to do with the film. From it being a "Western" plot to say that the people of Egypt needed aliens to build the pyramids to Americans have to solve everything with guns. It was a mediocre movie, not a documentary. The person who wrote and directed this film, Roland Emmerich, was born and raised in Germany where he started his film making career.
Outside Providence
(1999)
Better than some
17 January 2002
Outside Providence is not the best movie I've seen but it's nowhere near the worse. It has some funny moments scattered throughout the film and Alec Baldwin's performance was very good. The soundtrack is probably the best thing about the movie if you like 70's classic rock. The premise of the film has been done before with a few twists but most movies are remakes in some way or another. Browsing through IMDB should show you that. If you're not offended by the drug counter-culture, or looking for the silly humor the makers of this film are known for, Outside Providence may entertain you for an hour or so.
Well Done
20 December 2001
I have been looking forward to seeing this movie for sometime now. I was concerned whether the film-makers would stay close to the story or turn it into some commercial junk to sell stuff in the stores. The "making of" program did a little to alleviate that. I found the movie very good. Although a few things were changed in regards to the story. Fans of the book might be a little disappointed with some of the artistic liberties taken, but the movie does a pretty good job of catching the essence of the story. The images of such places as Hobbiton, Rivendell, and the mines of Moria, were spectacular. My image of Lothlorien is brighter than they portrayed but the film could not spare the time to linger there as the fellowship did in the book. Was it worth a couple bucks per hour to sit through this? Yep!I've paid more and got much less in return . That D&D film last year was as bad as this is good. At least it's only a year until the sequel!
Tell Your Friends