Change Your Image
beuchertk
Reviews
Columbo: Murder by the Book (1971)
An Average Columbo, except for Cassidy
The Columbo series doesn't wear too well, as I find it almost impossible to re-watch most episodes. Part of it is for the obvious reason that I already know the ending twist. But part of it is because of Falk's irritating mannerisms and the patently obvious and corny attempts by the writers to create an anti-detective - sloppy in dress, carries no gun (yeah, right), in fact is even afraid of guns (!!!), drives a broken-down car on a police lieutenant's salary (where does all that money go?), and on and on. Altogether a phony and pathetic attempt to make Columbo interesting. The plots of the stories are usually shot thru with inconsistencies and ridiculously nonsensical endings - in most cases Columbo would find it difficult or impossible to get a conviction in any trial. This particular episode has the implausible plot but at least it has Jack Cassidy as the main character, something he did three times in the series, always as the murderer. As for Steven Spielberg, his direction is average, despite his rather obvious and transparent attempts to elevate the story thru rather inappropriately "serious" camera-work. This is Columboo, Steve, not Citizen Kane. I half expected "Rosebud" to filter thru the audio track. He made the same type of error in Saving Private Ryan when he portrayed the Omaha Beach landings as a Holocaust, a rather hard thing to do when the casualty statistics were so low - less than 350 dead of the 40,000 troops landed. It also had a ridiculous (not to mention totally impossible) fictitious plot.
A Shot in the Dark (1964)
Best of the Pink Panthers and one of the best comedies ever
The first Pink Panther film was, in my view , the second best Panther film, despite having the best cast. A Shot in the Dark I laugh just thinking about it. It has Herbert Lom, a perfect foil for Clouseau, which the original Panther film lacked, and I ascribe that as the principle reason A Shot.. is better than the first film. There are films that cannot be watched a second or third time, but this isn't one of them. I must have seen this film 5 times and at this point pretty much know the dialog by heart. But it still works, partly because of the sight gags, and partly because of the Clouseau- Chief Inspector Dreyfus back and forth. "What kind of a plan?" "A plan that cannot fail." "And he killed a Cossack, a doorman and a gardener just because he was jealous!!!!!????" "Insanely jealous." The dialog is so perfectly in tune with the characters. A true comedic masterpiece, of which there are precious few, even after 100 years of film.
Titanic (1997)
Cornpone and really bad history
The sinking of the Titantic is actually quite interesting, as anyone who has read a well-written book about the event can tell you. This film tosses away that story and replaces it with a cornball teeny bop-per love story that makes one want to puke, all the while slandering historical figures (like J Bruce Ismay, whom James Cameron has falsely portrayed as a prototypical heartless and cowardly businessman) and some others unfortunate enough to be a target of Cameron's biases. In the end, Cameron's film so far removed from reality that it's unlikely anything it contains would ever be taken seriously by anyone looking for the historical facts. I mean, when was the last time Hollywood presented real history? Probably 1964 when they filmed The Longest Day, whose script was religiously close to Cornelius Ryan's book. Since then, not much. The fact that Cameron had to make up a subplot wouldn't have been so bad, had it remained a subplot to the story of the sinking, and had it been realistic rather than such a trite piece of romantic nonsense. Cameron had the opportunity to make a definitive account of this well-known event and totally blew it. To tell history you need someone who is dedicated to historical truth, not someone determined to make the audience reach for their collective handkerchiefs. Shame on you, Mr. Cameron. What a colossal waste.
Mr. Previn Comes to Town (1985)
Excellent documentary because of its subject
This is one of the best documentaries I have ever seen, mostly because of its subject - Andre Previn. There is no script and Andre Previn provides virtually all of the text. He is a very interesting and amusing guy and makes this documentary memorable. I have been trying for years to find a replacement for my VHS copy, which has deteriorated into nothingness but have not yet found a source for the film, which is extremely odd, since it won an award as I recall. I even called the local PBS station that was responsible for the filming and they indicated that no copies were available. Considering the fact that this was without doubt th best PBS show I had ever seen, I found this behavior by the station to be inexplicable.
Citizen Kane (1941)
Borrrringg
That about sums up my reaction to this manipulative film that so obviously wants to be intriguing. I suppose that in the era when this film was made, there was some good reason for supposing audiences would be enthralled to learn the inner goings-on for a famous and powerful man such as Kane. Those days are gone and I must report that everyone I know considers this film a dinosaur and utterly lacking in both plausibility and attractiveness. The very last thing I will do is to sit around attempting to learn the wheres and why-fores about a completely fictional person who I couldn't care less about. Kane was an unimportant nothing, in my book, be he fictional or the representation of someone real. The supposedly enthralling "Rosebud" clue was almost an insult to my intelligence - an obvious gimmick to hook the viewer. And in the end, it was nothing more than a cheap sham. For this film era, might I recommend a good Charlie Chan film?
JFK (1991)
A travesty Pure fiction from one certifiably ignorant filmmaker
It should be a tipoff when one learns that Stone refused to buy the screen rights to his favorite hokum conspiracy book because he thought the price too high. So he blithely bought the rights to another hokum conspiracy tome, and then disregarded everything it said. This film is based on commonly held mistaken beliefs and ridiculously inane conspiratorial delusions. My favorite instance of this nonsense is Walter Matthau's knowingly smug remark that Oswald couldn't hit the side of barn while firing a rifle in the Marine Corps. The records clearly show he was a very good shot (not that he had to be in order to hit a target at less than 100 yards with a scope!!!!) and I can personally verify that no Marine recruit ever gets out of basic training without showing a fair degree of marksmanship. The other outstanding fraud is when Costner claims that the Zapruder film shows Kennedy's head moving back at impact of the third bullet, when in fact it clearly displays a sudden, short, forward movement at impact, followed by a large backward jerk because of the sudden straightening of the JFK's body due to massive muscle contraction (which of necessity jerked his head up and back). The movie totally ignores the physical evidence and dispenses pure fraud. Everyone who deals in such matters knows that a bullet has no ability to force the human body to make drastic reactionary movements. A bullet drills a nice neat hole thru the human body but it only weighs around an ounce and cannot displace a 20 pound human head. Newton knew that 350 years ago - Stone is clueless about laws of motion and inertia. The JFK assassination is about as completely understood as any important crime can be. There simply are no mysteries about the case.
Reality is not Hollywood's strong point. Nor is accurate history, even in the best of cases. Oliver Stone has produced a piece of unmitigated historical and logical nonsense that serious students of the JFK assassination can only laugh at, make fun of, and wonder why our country has so many gullible and illogical moviegoers. Fortunately for Oliver Stone, all those slandered folks who would normally sue him for every cent he's got, are dead and buried. He knew he couldn't prove anything his movie said. Costner should be ashamed for being part of this travesty. And Matthau as well. My opinion of their ethics put them on my "Never watch" list of actors.