Change Your Image
troybierkortte
Reviews
Danger Beneath the Sea (2001)
Not your typical submarine movie
As a submariner, I have become accustomed to ignoring the technical inaccuracies in submarine movies. It would be impossible to watch them if I let those mistakes bother me.
This move was different. Rather than ignoring the inaccuracies, I tried with dogged determination to find one thing that was accurate.
From both the Captain and Executive Officer wearing Command at Sea pins above the right pocket, to the unrecognizable Submarine Qualification pins , to the fact hat every Petty Officer on the pier at the submarine base was an aviation rating, to the wrong people barfing out information they couldn't possibly have, to the "you can find me by the radio console" etc. Etc. Etc. The pep talk from the chief to the new sailors was ridiculous. His prediction that two thirds of them won't qualify for a rating and that half of them won't earn their Dolphins is some kind of "elite fighting force" bs that doesn't apply to subs where nearly everyone qualifies.
Not one thing was realistic except for the Los Angeles class boat that was featured in the ship's external scenes.
The problem is that it is the wrong class boat. Strategic nuclear weapons aren't carried aboard an attack sub.
Nope. Not one thing about this movie was even close to realistic.
I could overlook Gene Hackman calling the Chief of the Boat "Mister Cobb" in Crimson Tide.
I could forgive Scott Glenn for leaving his billion dollar nuclear submarine to join a boarding party (something no ship captain other than Kirk or Picard would ever do) in Red October.
But this one doesn't just do a lot of things wrong. It doesn't do a single thing right.
20/20: A Tangled Web (2020)
The cops use a perfect Columbo tactic.
A manipulator who commits a murder lays out an intricate and exhaustive plan to get what she wants.
When police can't solve the crime with conventional means, they enlist the aid of the murderer, who can't resist the opportunity to mislead them in a way that they knew would incriminate her.
It's a tactic straight out of a Columbo episode.
The twist in this story is worthy of he best crime novel, but it's true.
Prescription: Murder (1968)
A different kind of Columbo
I had been a fan of the Columbo series for decades before this resurfaced.
It is one of my favorite episodes because it shows us a younger, less rumpled Lt. Columbo against an arrogant and cocky murderer with no apparent conscience.
In other episodes, Columbo has perfected the use of Socratic Irony to trap murderers who are mostly sympathetic characters in trouble. Few of his adversaries have the lack of any redeeming qualities as does this cold and soulless psychiatrist. We are used to seeing Columbo disarm unwitting killers with his clumsy and affable manner. In this pilot movie, Columbo displays few of the idiosyncrasies by which we came to know and love him. He lacks a pencil, but shows no other signs of absent mindedness. His suit is in better shape and he carries the raincoat rather than wear it.
Unable to trap the sly doctor with questions, and one trick, he turns toward the vulnerable accomplice. This is where we see the hard boiled detective use pressure, rather than guile, to break the case.
It's a refreshing and unique twist on the character, which we viewers may attribute to his being younger and up against a more evil and calculating opponent. Seeing this side of Columbo makes me appreciate he genius of his style in later episodes. From this starting point, we see the development of the softer exterior of he older Columbo for what it is - a clever disguise for his true ability.
Outlaw (2010)
"It seems to me I've heard that song before..."
Conservative Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, Cyrus Garza, faces impeachment for his marginal conduct off the bench unless he votes the party line on the appeal of a convicted cop-killer. Garza writes the majority opinion ordering a reversal of the conviction, and announces his resignation from the court after reading the decision. The door is now open for Garza to arrange a partnership in a noted law firm and to argue the appeal of the case of the alleged cop-killer. Relying partly on legal precedent that he wrote himself, Garza convinces the appellate court judge to allow the introduction of new evidence during the appeal. This is where the plot gets all too familiar. A witness vital to the case disappears. Another, uncooperative, witness is hiding the whereabouts of a potentially crucial witness who wasn't known before and hasn't testified. How does Garza pull victory from the jaws of defeat? Rather than spoil it, I won't say here what happens. But anyone who has seen The Verdict, staring Paul Newman, can see this one coming for miles. The plot devices were lifted entirely from the 1982 film. It might be forgivable that a legal drama will involve deviation from actual legal procedure. Matlock and Perry Mason were very successful legal drama series - even though neither lawyer ever practiced law within the rules of legal procedure. Outlaw, may be an apt title for this show, as it seems it will follow the path of those legal thrillers where the thrill is more important than strict adherence to legal procedure. Fine. But what isn't forgivable is to serve warmed-over leftovers for plot lines. The vanishing witness, the sneaky way of finding the hidden witness, the smoking gun that the hidden witness kept for all those years, are each clever and valid devices for moving the story past a point of conflict and crisis. Any one, or even two, of those would have contributed to this script and served it well. Using all three was over the limit. Not since The Flintstones "reprised" The Honeymooners has one script ripped of another in such a wholesale fashion.