Reviews

Being home sick on a holiday week means you may watch some really bad movies. Just finished watching the whole "Deathwish" collection and then "Futureworld". It will never cease to amaze me how a "franchise" and one or two "former marquee" names can get a production financed, no matter how bad the script, direction, production value and quality. Cable TV and streaming gives life to these clunkers.

So, "Futureworld" will probably get some air time in the coming months due to the HBO "WESTWORLD" reboot. And, there is even some linkage (the value of the park is the data and info, not the admission fees). But this is a made-for-TV style, 1970's production. Can you do something as iconic as "Easy Rider" and then this and still live with your self. I guess Peter Fonda said "Hell, yeah!".

Any movie with Blythe Danner gets a least a vote about 2 points beyond what it deserves. Since I gave this a 2, draw your conclusion........

The important things to know about this movie are as follows: Claude Rains, even at the end of his career and life, was an exceptional actor. The work he phoned in was superior to 99% of the rest of the world. Second, Nick Adams was a tragic figure. A fine actor who made some really bad career choices and then died of a drug overdose. Third, Richard Chamberlain in his day was not only a heart throb, but a very fine actor. Nice to see him still around and living a life openly that was denied to him when he was young. Fourth, Joey Heatherton (here in her first movie) was hotter then hot. Lastly, this is actually a pretty good movie. In many respects, it is a poor man's "Anatomy of A Murder", but it does hold up pretty well 50 years later. The courtroom stuff blends back and forth with the scenes leading up to the crime told in recall. Adams got a Best Supporting Actor nomination out of it and the rest of the cast does a professional and workman-like job, director and writer included. All in all, a nice diversion on TCM with no commercials.

And this comes from someone who likes Don Ameche and Angie Dickinson....... Bad writing, bad direction, bad acting, bad use of Angie. The ending is a cherry on top of the turd. Just about everyone in the movie has passed, so I will observe the "no speaking ill of the dead" rule. If you happen to catch this on TCM (as I did), assume you will consider it as two hours of unrecoverable life moments. So, if you are home sick, depressed beyond comprehension, drunk, or in need of background noise while you do something more useful, then by all means, watch this. If you have a choice of this flick or hernia surgery, I suggest you fully research the surgery before jumping to any conclusions. The anesthesia and pain killers may make the surgery a better bet.........

Spock getting it on with Uhura? Vulcan blown to eternity? McCoy a young drunk? The long time Star Trek fan is going to have to weigh the future satisfaction of endless sequels from the re-launch with the stomping on of some ST history and tradition. The bottom line is that the movie is a blast.

But.......

I thought young Spock looked like Ben Stiller in a made-for-Fox spoof. No one is Leonard Nimoy, but I wanted to laugh each time this guy was on screen.

The explanation of how "old" Spock enters the movie was a bit contrived (yeah, I know, calling anything "contrived" in a Star Trek movie is dumb) and you probably need to watch the flick twice to "get it".

The Eric Bana character was Khan revisited, and Ricardo Montalban's camp was sorely missed.

The script, at times, was a re-hash of multiple ST TV and past big screen plot lines.

But....

I still enjoyed the film immensely. I am old enough to vividly remember the pilot and the TV seasons. I faithfully watched each movie and The Next Generation was never as good as the original.

So.....

Even a flawed, sometimes dumb and contrived (that word again) reboot is just plain fun. Leonard Nimoy could bring dignity to anything, and his presence in the film, regardless of the weakness of the script line, is terrific.

Let's face it; being in love with a series that was canceled 40 years ago is not rational to begin with!! Don't analyze the film too much. You'll spoil it.

If you want to enjoy this movie, keep the sound off, fast forward through most of it and just enjoy a few scenes with some very good special effects.

The script is awful, Cage has a bad wig and sleep walks through the movie, and the End of the World thing just never works in Hollywoodland.

The theme of the film is that "nothing is random, we exist because some aliens may have put us here and look after us, and when the Sun blows a gasket and ends our existence, some cool taxis from the stars will take some deserving white kids to another galaxy and let us start again, so don't worry!!!!! It's all good!!!!!"

Someone should have found "The Origin of Superman" and realized that the gig is 70 years old and the Nick Cage character was known then as Jor-El, and rather than aliens take his kid, put him in a rocket to Earth. Wait, wasn't Cage long rumored to play Superman in a reboot??? Guess this was his revenge.

Can you picture some real-life "Ari Gold" pitching this thing?? "Hey, think of it! End of the world, special effects of a plane crash and a New York subway gone to Hell, Telepathy, Angels from another world, New Eden, God and the Hereafter! And..... we got Nick Cage!!!!!!"

Skip it.

If John Casavettes invented the independent film, John Sayles perfected it. Time and time again he crafts works that are both commercial and intellectually interesting. Lone Star would stand on its own as film about a 40 year-old murder mystery, but we see so much more in typical Sayle's style; well written dialog, impeccable casting and even-paced story telling.

Rio County, where Lone Star is set, is a microcosm of the U.S.; minorities becoming the majority and a town and its inhabitants coming to terms with past prejudices and deeply held secrets. The lead character, Sheriff Sam Deeds, seeks to reconcile the reverence with which the town holds his late father and predecessor, Buddy Deeds, with the man he knew as a distant and sometimes cruel father. When the 40 year-old remains of his father's immediate predecessor are discovered, Deeds retraces the lives and secrets and papered-over injustices of Rio. The murder is only one more sin that has come unexpectedly back to the surface.

Rio's Mexican and black residents have suffered under the weight of Rio's history, and some prefer to leave the past buried. Truth is less important than distance from the pain. Sam Deeds looks at his father's legacy and sees compromise, corruption and selective justice. The younger Deeds came back to Rio not to continue his father's legacy but to come to terms with an identity he walked away from years before.

Deeds ultimately solves the murder mystery, an outcome that is unsatisfactory (he wants to expose his father as a severely corrupt and phony hero) in some ways, but delivers to him a perspective on his town, his life and his father that brings a different type of closure. Justice is not always perfect or transparent.

The "shock" of Don Murray's gay former lover, the Vice President of the United States flying commercial airlines, etc., all make this seem dated, but the themes remain timely. Power, morality, politics, idealism, obligation, and fear.

One can take each character and recognize a member of a Senate that does not exist until years after the film's release. With only a bit of imagination, you see Jesse Helms, George Mitchell, Paul Wellstone, Joe Biden, Strom Thurmond and on and on.

The cast alone makes this worth the watch, but the whole of the movie, its direction, production values, staging and script hold the viewer's attention for every second. It is one of those films that always remains fresh.