Change Your Image
cn9174
Reviews
Rocket Man (2005)
A Mess Technically, but Very Entertaining
I will say upfront that I fly large amateur rockets as a hobby and obviously know something about the subject matter. Actually the stuff I fly is quite a bit bigger than what the "Rocketman" is trying to create.
Rocketman works best when focused on one man's obsession to build his rocket to launch his late wife's ashes into space. I especially enjoy the interaction with his fellow rocket builders as I have seen much of the same myself. None of these things (rockets)ever work the way they're supposed to and I have experienced some of the situations depicted in the program. What's especially effective, is how his coworkers make fun of him and hearing the wives and girlfriend's of everyone proclaim, "all you care about is that damn rocket!" Spoiler Ahead....
The second episode hit a little too close to home for me (at least according to my wife), with the rocket's restraints being weakened by the dog and the bloody thing taking off and creating a huge fireball. I can't say that this has actually happened to me, but his metal test stand with the rocket strapped to the top, dog barking, all the neighbors gawking, seemed so oddly familiar to me; mostly because I think I'm known as the "mad scientist" in the neighborhood with the kids enjoying seeing the high-speed contraptions I'm always building.
As said above, the appearance of the rocket and related stuff is just not realistic at all, but everything else about the writing is good fun.
C. Newport
Lost in Translation (2003)
You had to have been there to understand this film
I think that only people who have been in Japan or traveled extensively overseas will understand this film.
It's really about two things: First, the little love affairs that can crop up when you're away from home in a strange country and how out of place a person can feel in a different culture.
I have worked overseas in many countries, including Japan, for many years and I can tell you that it can be difficult to do even the most simple thing if you do not speak the language, or sometimes even if you do. This was one of the topics that the film touched on, hence the title, "Lost in Translation." In addition, believe it or not, the United States is not the center of the universe and there are a wealth of cultures out there who function quite well doing things differently than us. For example, the fast food restaurants (e.g., McDonalds, Burger King, etc) I've visited are usually better than the ones in the states; surprising, considering that we invented the things! This is small thing but an important point.
In addition, when you spend considerable time away from home in a foreign country, having even a friendship with someone from your land can be like being handed a lift preserver in the ocean. It's better to have someone to "hang onto" during such times and I think this was one of the themes of the film.
With respect to Japanese stereotypes, well, they do the same thing to us, don't they? I mean, I get the feeling that the Japanese do have preconceived notions about us, as we do about them.
Overall, while the film may not have the "action" that some people need in a motion picture, Lost in Translation worked for me and I give it a 7 out of 10.
I will end this review with one humorous story. I was working in Hachinoe, Japan back in 1987 and after walking around a bit, decided to see a Japanese war movie (I thought it would be interesting to see how Americans were depicted); this was an effort as I was not sure of the show times, etc (duh... everything is in Japanese). When I got into the theater, there was a scene depicting American aircraft attacking a Japanese aircraft carrier during World War II. I almost laughed out loud when a scene showed OUR planes diving Kamikaze style into their ships! How's that for a role reversal? It's all about perception.
CN
In the Bedroom (2001)
**Possible Spoilers Ahead** Excellent - Works at Every Level
"In the Bedroom" was one of those films that I heard about but never saw, because of the misleading title. I watched it for the first time last night and am glad I did. A fantastic cast, wonderful performances, and solid direction.
Wilkinson and Spacek play a normal New England couple whose world is almost destroyed when their college-age son is murdered by the ex-husband of his older girlfriend (Tomei). When it appears that our legal system is unable to do the right thing, Wilkinson and his best friend take things into their own hand and eventually do what justice cannot.
I was totally sucked into this film and cannot even remember if it had a musical score. While it dragged a little in the middle, maybe this was necessary to set up the audience for the inevitable, and violent ending. Director Todd Field accomplished more in one steady shot than most directors do in whole scenes, like when he centered the camera on the license plate of Wilkinson's Saab as he observed his son's killer at his place of work. The bottom of the plate had one word; "Veteran;" This told the audience several things - that Wilkinson probably knew how to handle weapons, that he may have been in combat, or at a minimum, that he was trained how to kill by the military. This same fact was also established for Wilkinson's partner in crime as the camera panned across numerous photos of him obviously taken during the Vietnam War.
I also liked the part when Wilkinson abducted the killer and forced him to turn on a baseball game on the radio, as opposed to having to converse with the man he knows murdered his only son. Not only did it eliminate the need for conversation in the car (as he guided the killer to his own death), but it showed that Wilkinson did not want to relate to the murderer; that he wanted the man to remain an object,as opposed to a human being - this, probably making it easier to kill him in the end.
While it's a matter of opinion as to whether or not Wilkinson was justified in murdering his son's killer, the film expertly shows the trauma experienced by the family of murder victims and how normal law abiding citizens can be forced to take matters into their own hands and do what needs to be done, even if it involves breaking the law.
A.I. Artificial Intelligence (2001)
** Possible Spoilers ** Too long, but thought-Provoking
This is my first review on IMDB after reading many written by others. AI does display classic Spielberg touches by having a "childlike" quality of wonder to it, as did ET. The director forces you to become fascinated with David, the main character, who is a robot build in the form of a small boy. I also liked the three act structure, the first, centered on David and his home life, the second showing his relationship with the older "father-figure" robot, and the last, his voyage of discovery.
The film is well shot and acted and thought-provoking because it forces you to ask the questions, "What is life, really? Can a machine ever be termed 'alive?' Where is the human race going? When will it cease to exist?"
Personally, I found the last third of the film to be the most interesting and less predictable. However, I did have some technical issues with this section of the film. First of all, it was unclear to me whether or not the "aliens" were living beings or machines. Secondly, as a 30 year professional in deep ocean operations, there is no way that structures such as the ones depicted (i.e., Cony Island ferris wheel, buildings, etc) are going to survive 2,000 years underwater. That stuff would be gone in less than 200 years, especially in shallow water. But I understand the need for film makers to "bend the truth" for story development.
Also, if David was such an intelligent machine, how could he fantasize about being a human boy? Would he not know that he is a robot and therefore incapable of organic life? Why would he undertake a journey he knows will fail in the end? I also agree with one of the other posters in that the film would have been better if it had ended with the submarine and "Blue Fairy" shot showing David staring at the stature for eternity. Films don't HAVE to have happy endings to be good.
Finally, I see a disturbing trend in films these days in that they have become far too long. Does it really take three hours to tell a story? Why have directors not figured out that longer is not necessarily better? If the film as shown was 180 minutes, I cannot imagine how much footage was left on the editing room floor.
Overall, good, but not a masterpiece. I give it 7 out of 10.
Curt N.