R List of Movie Reviews
(For optimum viewing, adjust the zoom level of your browser to 125%.)
The Race for the Double Helix (1987)
Rate:
9
Viewed:
2/14
2/14:
If you want to see an inspiring story, look no further than The Race for the Double Helix.
It was truly a race during the 50's that earned three men (James Watson, Francis Crick, and Maurice Wilkins)
Nobel Prize although Rosalind Franklin should've been also awarded it posthumously. The movie can't be any more
interesting, and the cast is incredible with exceptional performances. Of course, Jeff Goldblum gets a bit of
credit for making it exciting to watch.
Speaking of exciting, how about the editing work by Robin Brightwell and Jim Latham? It's fun to watch how the
scenes flow. At the end, I recalled the famous photo of James Watson and Francis Crick in front of the DNA model,
but in the film, it was the re-creation of the actual model. Either way, the attempt is as good as it gets. The
last ten minutes is dramatic.
All in all, The Race for the Double Helix will inspire anyone to enter the field of hard science.
Racing with the Moon (1984)
Rate:
7
Viewed:
1/21
1/21:
Racing with the Moon is a lightweight pre-WWII period picture with tremendous star power in a couple of up-and-coming
actors.
During the first half, I was feeling a bit bored with the slightly sappy story, and then things started to pick up for the rest
of the way. Racing with the Moon is a better film when its whole is evaluated instead of parts. It's interesting to see
how people ran bowling alleys back then.
Shot on location in Fort Bragg and Mendocino, California, John Bailey's cinematography is outstanding throughout. To make for a
strong starting point is the screenplay by Steve Kloves who'll go on to direct an expertly made picture called
Flesh and Bone with Dennis Quaid, Meg Ryan, James Caan, and Gwyneth Paltrow and write
the adapted screenplays for all Harry Potter pictures.
Propelling Racing with the Moon even further is the unique pairing of Sean Penn and Nicolas Cage. They're
very good with Cage stealing a bit of his co-star's thunder at times. Whenever both are in the same scene,
there's a ton of star power. Of course, one is grounded, and the other is wild. It's not hard to figure out who is which.
Sadly, it'll be the only film Sean Penn and Nicolas Cage had done together; that's because they aren't friends anymore
after the former said, "Nic Cage is not an actor. He could be again, but now he's more like a...performer." That was when he
started doing bombastic popcorn films like Con Air and Face/Off. Cage fired back: "He
pretended to be our best friend. We all went out for drinks and supper and he kept calling us his family, and then, the next day,
he stabs me in the back."
Anyway, there's a plot twist when Hopper finally finds out his love interest isn't a Gatsby girl
after all. I have to say that, at this point, I wasn't even thinking about it. When the moment happened, I was like, "Okay,
well...so?" Instead, I view the film as a series of little incidents, and it so happens that the twist is one of them.
If The Best Years of Our Lives is the right bookend of WWII pictures, it's safe
to say Racing with the Moon is the left. They're both highly similar but different in a couple of important points.
Without a care, Hopper and Nicky aren't aware of what's coming to them. The characters in the 1946 picture returned to their
former lives shell-shocked, having experienced the full horrors of war. The first two had it so easy by not needing to deal
with life; the other group was hit hard in the head by reality.
There are some gems among the young cast: Carol Kane, Crispin Glover, Michael Madsen, and Michael Talbott. Dana
Carvey is supposed to be in it, but I didn't see him. Sean Penn sure got schooled badly when he had a moment with Michael Madsen.
Fresh from her appearance in Once Upon a Time in America, Elizabeth McGovern is
perfect for the role. She and Sean Penn were actually engaged during the time, and their chemistry obviously shows.
I wonder what would happen to Hopper and Nicky afterwards. My guess is the former will survive the
war while the latter dies during an act of bravery by doing something absolutely stupid (then again, it's Nicolas Cage
we're talking about). Perhaps they'll surprise me by returning in one piece, but alcoholism is a fate awaiting Nicky.
All in all, Racing with the Moon is a decent coming-of-age film that's genuine in human spirit.
The Racket (1951)
Rate:
4
Viewed:
1/09, 2/24
1/09:
Although The Racket is well-directed, it has many things up its sleeve that I don't particularly like.
The acting is fair. Robert Ryan makes his presence felt but goes overboard with the hardheaded persona. Robert Mitchum,
like he always does, sleepwalks through his performance.
The story is murky and sometimes hard to follow, yet I get what it's all about. At the same time, the characters are too
damn talky. I can't believe the guys, who are apparently crooks, were allowed to have respectable jobs. Back then, that's
the way it was through graft.
After the virtuous cop was shot, the general feeling I got is that nobody cared and that it was more important to
apprehend the killer, put him away, and call it a day. It's plain silly. Of course, the filmmakers want me to
forget about it quickly while subpoenas are being served for the others.
There's an Untouchables moment when Robert
Mitchum's character came to the precinct for the first time and gave an I-Want-You-to-Be-Pure speech.
The Killers'
William Conrad, who plays the mustachioed Turk, did the same thing in Tension.
All in all, The Racket isn't a good film noir picture although it's dark and full of unethical elements.
2/24:
Upping my rating from '3' to '4' for The Racket, there are obvious problems.
It's advertised as a Robert Mitchum picture, but really, how much in total out of 89 minutes is his screen time? The other
is how unfocused it is. Different players get plenty of attention such as Robert Ryan, William Talman, Lizabeth
Scott, and Robert Hutton. It's crazy. By the way, why will a newspaper publish the address of where beat cop lives?
I'll be surprised if that happened for real.
The plot is too ambitious in sort of The Untouchables way such as the "I Want You to Be
Pure" speech by Robert Mitchum.
At least, Brian De Palma was able to have it under control. The Racket overreaches but settles for one criminal:
Nick Scanlon. Unsurprisingly, there were four directors taking turns with the material. The best thing to do is let
Robert Ryan take over and only stick to his character's perspective since his performace stood out a bit more than the others.
It's possible the film would work out if Robert Mitchum was instead Nick Scanlon along with more screen time.
All in all, The Racket is accurate when it comes to the subject of corruption but falls short elsewhere.
Rad (1986)
Rate:
8
Viewed:
4/14, 3/22
4/14:
I am a big fan of Rad, having seen it multiple times during the 80's.
Arguably, it's the best BMX picture ever made because of the lack of competition. In fact, nobody has made one
since then. However, it's certainly a cheesy film because the older I get, the less naïve I am, so I
realize that.
It's comical when Cru's mother was angry at him for skipping the SAT exam for some BMX race that could potentially
net him one hundred grand. He would've used the money to pay for college, gee! I mean, the test can be made up
anytime, and it's no great loss if Cru decides not to go to college. He can learn a vocational trade such as
fixing bikes and running a bike shop.
How funny is whenever I see the brand Mongoose, and because of the film, it carries a negative connotation which
still persists to this day. Well, well, well...look at Bart Conner the blonde BMX champion. He's the famous
gymnast who won Olympics and world gold medals and is currently married to Nadia Comăneci, a much
more über-famous gymnast.
All in all, Rad is simply rad.
3/22:
Upgrading my rating of '7' to '8', Rad is the best BMX film made.
Anyone who lived through the 80's will surely recognize the film, especially when it aired a lot on HBO these days.
Good-looking back then, Bill Allen and Lori Loughlin are famously associated with Rad. So is the Mongoose
brand that's negatively perceived. There are great BMX stunts, being ahead of its time, especially during the
opening and closing scenes. The music perfectly complements what's going on which is the pinnacle of such 80's
films.
Unfortunately, a lot of viewers don't realize Bill Allen never did most of the stunts. Yeah, what he did
looks extremely realistic, but a stunt double (it was Eddie Fiola) was used, hence the hockey mask. Of course,
it's obvious somebody else (again Eddie Fiola) was wearing a dark wig in the place of Lori Loughlin. If that's
really Lori, her body is often shown from the waist above while the bike is cut out. Regardless, the editing
has to be considered skillful, so kudos to Carl Kress.
All in all, ignore the critics of Rad; they've missed out on a great movie.
Raging Bull (1980)
Rate:
10
Viewed:
2/03, 6/03, 12/03, 8/05, 7/07, 2/10
8/05:
Robert De Niro's performance in Raging Bull is validation of what a gifted actor he is.
It's Martin Scorsese's best directorial work. Michael Chapman's cinematography, along
with Thelma Schoonmaker's editing, is what sets the film apart from the rest of the pack in 1980. Newcomers
Joe Pesci and Cathy Moriarty are fantastic with the former making a name for himself for years to come.
All in all, Raging Bull is a brutal biopic featuring an Oscar-winning performance by Robert De Niro.
7/07:
*table crashing* "Bodder me abott a steak? Huh? You bodda me abott a steak?!?"
This scene pretty much sums up what Raging Bull is all about. Looking almost unrecognizable, Robert De Niro gives a
performance that's among the top ten ever. He alone takes his character to another level by showcasing naked human emotion. A good
example of it is when he's finally crowned as the boxing world champion. The cinematography and editing are still excellent.
All in all, the genesis of Raging Bull is Robert De Niro getting Martin Scorsese to direct it after he first read the
eponymous book by Jake LaMotta, and the rest is history.
2/10:
Raging Bull is still a brilliant film.
Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)
Rate:
10
Viewed:
3/03, 5/06, 3/16, 3/22
5/06:
Raiders of the Lost Ark is an action-adventure picture for people of all ages.
There's nothing like it with the exception of the next two sequels.
All in all, Indiana Jones is one of the greatest and most iconic characters ever created in cinema history.
3/16:
If there's a film that defines the action-adventure genre, it's Raiders of the Lost Ark.
No movie gets a viewer going at the beginning than this one when Indiana Jones has his bullwhip ready to get
rid of the gun before he's faced with the most devilish booby traps deep inside the cave of the South America jungle.
All in all, Raiders of the Lost Ark is a must-see for people of all ages and is what movies should be all about.
3/22:
Raiders of the Lost Ark continues to be a great adventure.
The funniest part is when the scimater-wielding Arab tried to have a duel,
Indiana Jones didn't feel like it and just pulled out his revolver to shoot him dead.
All in all, Raiders of the Lost Ark will always stand the test of time.
Rain Man (1988)
Rate:
10
Viewed:
3/04, 12/24
12/24:
The Academy Awards has a notorious history of screwups.
Came along Rain Man, and they decided to give Dustin Hoffman the Oscar for "Best Actor in a Leading
Role." He was not in the leading role and never was! That would be Mr. Tom Cruise who was doing 90% of the
work while Dustin Hoffman stood there like an idiot, taking the abuse.
It's exactly what I thought in 1989. Tom Cruise got robbed of an Oscar while Dustin Hoffman was at best a supporting
actor. Regardless, it's an outstanding film with a very strong script that's most likely a variation of John
Steinbeck's Of Mice and Men. I have no complaints about either's performance. At age 27, Tom Cruise was a
highly mature actor, showing why nobody in modern cinema will ever measure up to him. It's keen to see him and
Dustin Hoffman in the same screen, considering that they did similar coming-of-age films:
Risky Business and The Graduate,
respectively.
As for the term "autistic savant," it became part of the national lexicon when Dustin Hoffman introduced it
in a big way. How his character, Raymond, acted and behaved is accurate. The fact that he was able to do
complicated arithmetic calculations and memorized everything isn't the definition of "genius." His brain
is simply broken, and he's able to see things more clearly than most people possibly can.
On the other side of the coin is the lack of social connection. No matter how often Raymond is asked a question, he
doesn't know what he's saying for an answer whether it's "yeah" or "no." The whole trip has no special meaning
for him; he'll fail to understand the significance of it. When he goes back to Wallbrook, it'll be as if nothing
happened. No matter what, it means a lot to his brother Charlie.
By the way, the title Rain Man is actually meant to be "Raymond" through Charlie's ears when he was a
little boy; he just misheard it and kept that as a memory over the years. When Tom Cruise has a meeting with
two doctors at the end, the long-white-haired guy is Barry Levinson, the director of the film. I'll say Barry was
funny, but he should have slowed down his speaking style and not be so forceful about it. As a matter of fact, he
did it on purpose to make Tom Cruise mad. And yes...Kmart sucks, and that's why it went bankrupt.
All in all, if not for Tom Cruise's exceptional performance, Rain Man could've never worked; a lesser
actor would have made his character unbearably obnoxious.
The Rain People (1969)
Rate:
7
Viewed:
4/25
4/25:
People making comparisons between The Rain People and
Easy Rider are far off.
They happen to be road pictures but are totally unlike. It's interesting to see an early work by Francis
Ford Coppola that also features James Caan and Robert Duvall before going on to do
The Godfather. The talent is there, and everything looks competent,
having been shot on location at every point for real during the road trip which turns out to be seven states
in total.
Only James Caan plays an interesting character and steals the show whenever he appears. What Killer simply has is
traumatic brain injury. By the way, is this the film that changed Adam Sandler's life so he could be like him?
If so, that would explain a lot. The college Killer attended for football commits a serious error by
kicking him out when it should've contacted his parents or relatives to ensure he's safely shipped back home. If
none can be reached, the next step is getting in touch with the state to put him in a residential facility.
Otherwise, it's a potential lawsuit.
Shirley Knight as Natalie is a stupid, selfish, and ungrateful bitch. I don't care about her or her problems.
All the bad stuff she's dealing with, I'm sure it's mostly her fault. On the other hand, Robert Duvall,
making a very late appearance, plays a creepy cop who's also a terrible father. As far as their acting
performances go, both are average. They're responsible for Killer's death but won't be blamed for it.
All in all, if not for James Caan, The Rain People would've been a nothing movie about ugly people.
The Rainmaker (1997)
Rate:
6
Viewed:
10/03, 3/06, 4/17, 6/22, 3/23
3/06:
I love the plot for John Grisham's novel The Rainmaker, but the film is quite a letdown.
Of all Grisham's book-to-movie adaptations, I have to say this is the best of them all. The running length doesn't bother me, but
the changes do...big time. Yet I'm surprised at how well-cast everybody is; they're exactly whom I imagined from the book.
All in all, if you've read The Rainmaker, then prepare to be disappointed by the film.
4/17:
I decided to watch The Rainmaker after reading the book again.
Among the best of John Grisham's writing career, the story is engrossing, but the movie doesn't hold a candle to it. What I
hate is the weak acting performances and the omission of certain details such as Booker, how the info containing
Section U was discovered, the situation with Miss Birdie, and the rushed relationship between Rudy and Kelly. There are several
parts that aren't clear on screen, so to understand the subtleties, The Rainmaker has to be read.
However long as the book is, I don't think Francis Ford Coppola needed to make any changes because it was basically
filmable to begin with. Matt Damon as Rudy Baylor is perfect. The same goes for Claire Danes as Kelly Riker,
Danny DeVito as Deck Shifflet, Danny Glover as Judge Tyrone Kipler, Johnny Whitworth as Donny Ray, and Mary
Kay Place as Dot Black, among others. Yet for the rest like Jon Voight, the acting isn't up to par.
All in all, The Rainmaker is disappointing compared to the book.
6/22:
I'm trying hard to avoid the comparisons to the book which is why the film has a generous rating of '7' from me.
It's extremely well-cast, especially Matt Damon, Danny DeVito, Teresa Wright, and Claire Danes, but I don't see Jon Voight as
Leo F. Drummond at all. The book was basically filmable, and there's no need to change a thing. But Francis Ford Coppola
went ahead and did it anyway. The result is a massive letdown; the feel is just not there. Regardless, it's a decent courtroom
picture.
All in all, the book is perfect while the movie is passable enough.
3/23:
Before seeing the film, I read the book one more time, and my opinion of both is now lower.
If Oscars were given out for casting, then Linda Phillips-Palo would've gotten my vote; it's perfect: Matt Damon for
Rudy Baylor, Danny DeVito for Deck Shifflet, Mary Kay Place for Dot Black, Danny Glover for Tyrone Kipler, and
so on. I thought for a long time that Jon Voight was miscast, but he's perfect.
So, where did the film fall apart? It's the case per se. Francis Ford Coppola has unnecessarily changed it too much. The book
was just fine; yes, it was a one-sided case from the start as Tyrone Kipler had been in Rudy Baylor's corner the entire time.
Oddly, at one point, Delbert showed up with his wife, yet nothing came out of it afterwards. At least, there are many scenes
that are shot perfectly well to mimic parts of the book.
By the way, whatever happened in the trial won't matter because Leo F. Drummond will have the verdict
overturned on appeal. How? Deck Shifflet, who failed the bar exam six times, committed fraud by pretending to be
a lawyer, even if it's only for a minute. That part never occurred in the book.
All in all, The Rainmaker is fine in some ways, but too much of the trial has been altered, souring my mood.
Raintree County (1957)
Rate:
5
Viewed:
3/17
3/17:
Raintree County is mostly a clone of Gone with the Wind with
traces of The Snake Pit.
The movie is tedious to watch, lacking any emotional intensity despite the lavish costumes and cinematography.
An hour should've been cut out because hardly much happens. I was already desperate for the ridiculous epic to
end when there were ninety minutes left. When the Civil War finally came and John Shawnessy decided to enlist,
it was a relief to break up the monotony.
One thing is clear: Raintree County isn't about the Civil War but mental illness, a topic that wasn't
handled well by the filmmakers. They also bungled badly by not making Montgomery Clift's character be the
center of the show by focusing more on the Raintree Myth.
Elizabeth Taylor doesn't look credible for somebody with mental problems. Plus, she's too beautiful and ageless
to be believable. From start to end, her character doesn't change an iota. Therefore, why was Elizabeth Taylor
rewarded with an Oscar nomination? It should've gone to Lee Marvin for giving the best performance of the show.
He's more special than he was in Cat Ballou. Nigel Patrick is also great as
the professor, having the best lines. Eva Marie Saint is hopeless while Rod Taylor is okay but disappears for
several long stretches that I had forgotten about him when he came back at the end.
During the filming, Montgomery Clift was involved in a serious automobile accident by driving straight
toward a telephone pole which happened on May 12, 1956, setting off the longest suicide in Hollywood history.
Elizabeth Taylor had to remove two front teeth from inside his throat that were choking him to death. Thus,
Raintree County was suspended for a few months until Montgomery Clift returned, and he was never the
same again. However, the decline of his facial features or thespic abilities is hardly noticeable in the film.
All in all, Gone with the Wind had already been made, and that's enough.
A Raisin in the Sun (1961)
Rate:
5
Viewed:
12/15, 5/19
12/15:
I read the play A Raisin in the Sun by Lorraine Hansberry many years ago and came away impressed,
but I'm not sure why I never saw the film until now.
Whenever Sidney Poitier is cast, my expectations are always set very high. And in A Raisin in the Sun,
they're easily met. He's simply a tour de force. The most impressive sight is Sidney Poitier in the same scene
with the young Louis Gossett, Jr. (in his film debut), who will be Oscar winners, becoming the first two black
males to receive them.
Claudia McNeil doesn't get enough credit for her powerful performance as she goes against Sidney Poitier. It
turns out they didn't like each other while making the picture due to their creative differences. Many themes
are touched upon: poverty, hope, racism, family dynamics, trust, religion, gambling, pride, and the lack of
education and opportunities for blacks. It's amazing how all of them are packed into a two-hour film which can
be tragic at times.
All in all, A Raisin in the Sun is a black cinema classic.
5/19:
Sadly, my rating of A Raisin in the Sun is dropped from '10' to '5'.
I realize now it's an overwrought, talky film, resembling too much of a play which takes a while to get to
the point. At least, the second half is better than the first half that's merely an excuse to explain what
happened in the past. I hate when they do that.
Sidney Poitier is okay but is guilty of overacting with his arms flapping all over the place. Instead, Claudia
McNeil wins me over with her subdued performance. Ruby Dee isn't much of an actress. Louis Gossett, Jr., makes
his film debut and will go on to be the third black thespian ever to win an Oscar which is nineteen years after
Sidney Poitier's dramatic victory for Lilies of the Field.
All in all, reducing the high amount of lines will be beneficial for A Raisin in the Sun.
Raising Arizona (1987)
Rate:
7
Viewed:
8/19
8/19:
I had predicted the rise of the Coen brothers after seeing Raising Arizona at a theatre in 1987, and I wasn't surprised
afterwards.
Yes, it's a good, wacky movie that scores well in originality. Nicolas Cage is one of the most underrated actors, and he's
perfect as H.I. McDunnough. So is Randall "Tex" Cobb, a former boxer, as the unforgettable biker/bounty hunter. The best moment
is when Nicolas Cage and Holly Hunter lie down on their chaise lounge chairs as the sun is setting down.
However, I don't like the writing. It's too pretentious which is the biggest reason why I don't like most of Coen brothers'
films. Who honestly speaks this way, especially when it comes to these low-IQ people? The other is the constant screams from John
Goodman and William Forsythe. These idiots should cool it and start acting normal.
All in all, Raising Arizona is a creative but cartoonish, goofy, and forced comedy picture that doesn't hold up over time.
Raising Cain (1992)
Rate:
3
Viewed:
7/16
7/16:
Raising Cain is uhh...?
The top part of the movie poster is pefect: "DeMented. DeRanged. DeCeptive. DePalma." It pretty much sums up Brian
De Palma's thinking when he decided to do the film. He uses as many manipulative techniques as he can to make an implausible
psychological thriller. In almost every scene, I've been able to guess which film, even his own, was ripped-off from.
However, there are many good shots that are aesthetically pleasing. Playing between four and six different characters
with none of them distinguishable from one another, John Lithgow is quite silly by playing a caricature.
All in all, Brian De Palma is a hit-or-miss director, but he'll have two consecutive hits up next:
Carlito's Way and Mission: Impossible.
Rambo (2008)
Rate:
2
Viewed:
6/08
6/08:
I've got to keep my expectations at rock bottom after experiencing three Rambo
films because the fourth part is truly bad.
The first half is okay, but afterwards is when everything began to go terribly wrong because of the
relentless violence. I anticipated the soulless-looking John Rambo to stop himself and say: "You know what?
This is fucking pointless. I'm going home." To punctuate the silliness, there's not a single mention about
the aftermath of the Burmese Civil War.
All in all, Rambo is a senseless pornography mess of violence.
Rambo III (1988)
Rate:
7
Viewed:
11/03, 10/07, 7/11, 1/17, 8/20
10/07:
Having seen Rambo III at a theatre in 1988, I expected a lot of cheesy scenes and tedious action, but
boy...was I wrong.
I have to say it's about as good as the last sequel. At top peak, Sylvester Stallone looks absolutely ripped.
He took his role very seriously by aiming to make the best action-adventure movie possible which is a credit
to his legacy. That's why I can never understand critics who hate him.
All in all, Rambo III is entertaining.
7/11:
Is Rambo III the best picture of the trilogy?
It's very action-packed with a great deal of intensity. Also, it's not too often that a big-budget Hollywood
film is set in Afghanistan. Of course, they never shot it on location there.
All in all, it's hard to go wrong with Rambo III.
1/17:
Having an enormously tall order to try to top the sequel, Rambo III is quite good.
If you thought the body count was high the last time, it's now even higher, which is twice as much, setting a
Guinness world record as the most violent film. Thanks to the helicopters, the editing is still outstanding.
There's nothing fake about anything except for the location; they used real bombs, gunfire, explosions, tanks,
and helicopters, and Sylvester Stallone did his own stunts in the middle of them all.
The funniest part, which makes it all memorable, is when Arnold Schwarzenegger in
Twins saw the movie poster for Rambo III and compared the size of his
biceps to Stallone's and laughingly dismissed him with his hand. Yeah, well.
All in all, unfairly criticized to this day, Rambo III never fails to deliver.
8/20:
As much as I love the trilogy, I now feel Rambo III is ridiculous.
I was willing to overlook the problems because the action was too good, but this time, it has become difficult
to ignore. The part when Rambo and Trautman stood in front of the entire Soviet army was enough for me. By the
way, Trautman doesn't look like he has done any fighting. Speaking of that, my favorite is when Mousa judged
Rambo: "But by the way you look, I can see you have no experience in war, do you?" Yet there are many good
moments. One of them is the Kickboxer-like intro. Another is Rambo taking
up Afghanistan's national sport which is called Buzkashi.
All in all, although unbelievable at times, Rambo III is a nice try.
Rambo: First Blood Part II (1985)
Rate:
9
Viewed:
10/03, 5/04, 4/05, 10/07, 7/11, 1/17, 8/20, 6/25
4/05:
"To survive a war, you gotta become war."
So it goes in Rambo: First Blood Part II. Sylvester Stallone has never been more thrilling before or
since then. It's the role that made him a worldwide icon. My favorite line, which is on the definition of
expendable, is: "It's like someone invites you to a party and you don't show up. It doesn't really matter."
All in all, Rambo: First Blood Part II is a unique action-adventure war picture that stands the test of
time.
10/07:
John Rambo does everything and never runs out of ammunition in Rambo: First Blood Part II, one of the
most thrilling action-packed pictures of all time.
All in all, a lot of people make fun of Rambo: First Blood Part II but can be surprised to realize how
good the movie is if they'll give it a chance.
7/11:
Rambo: First Blood Part II keeps getting better all the time.
1/17:
Of the trilogy, Rambo: First Blood Part II is the most memorable.
So much deal has been made out of it, spawning many spoofs. Well, guess what? Sylvester Stallone still kicks ass.
Rocky was great, and it put Sylvester Stallone on the map. But
Rambo: First Blood Part II made him an instant worldwide icon. It's by far the most famous role of his
career. When people think of him, they think of the absolutely ripped, shirtless Rambo with an M60E3 through
the jungles of Vietnam, ready to mow down everybody who stands in his way.
Sylvester Stallone did his own stunts, and he's unbelievable. A lot of hard work went into it. According to IMDb:
"To prepare for this role, Sylvester Stallone did eight months of training for four hours a day. He also took
SWAT combat, archery, and survival courses."
A lot of people make fun of the film, but honestly, it's that good and has many memorable scenes, right down to
Stallone's famous scream during the helicopter ride. Whenever I think of the greatest action-adventure pictures,
Rambo: First Blood Part II ranks right up there. It's hard to come up with one that's as
explosively action-packed.
The editing, especially with the helicopters, is marvelously done. Rambo: First Blood Part II, given its
staggeringly high body count, is so fast-paced that a lot of things are happening at the same time, but there's
a beautiful rhythm to it. It's easy to absorb every shot and know what exactly is going on, something that's
been missing in cinema nowadays. The story is creative and a complete detraction from the original. That's why
a lot of people have either forgotten about the first film or thought of the sequel as the
original. Some of the lines remain memorable to this day:
"Sir, do we get to win this time?"
"Sir, I'm alive. It's still alive, ain't it?"
"It's like someone invites you to a party and you don't show up. It doesn't really matter."
"To survive a war, you gotta become war."
"You may scream. There is no shame."
"Dragonfly...Wolf's Den...colorful names!"
"Murdock...I'm comin' to get you."
"Mission...accomplished!"
"You know there's more men out there, and you know where they are. Find 'em. Or I'll find you."
"I want what they want and every other guy, who came over here and spilled his guts and gave everything he had,
wants. For our country to love us as much as we love it. That's what I want."
All in all, Rambo: First Blood Part II is an all-time great action-adventure film.
8/20:
The Killer and Rambo: First Blood Part II are two films that
come to my mind when I think of par excellence in editing.
Truly in the greatest shape of his life, Sylvester Stallone is mesmerizing. It must have taken an unbelievable
amount of energy to pull off the stunts. He became the character, and for that, Stallone should've gotten at
least an Oscar nomination.
The screenplay is another aspect I like which has many well-written lines. My favorite is
when Rambo explained the concept of expendable: "It's like someone invites you to a party and you don't show up.
It doesn't really matter." Another classic is when Rambo was asked how he felt after being electrocuted by a
metal bed frame: "Tough night." Yeah, no kidding.
All in all, there's nothing like Rambo: First Blood Part II.
6/25:
Still fun to watch.
Ran (1985)
Rate:
2
Viewed:
5/14
5/14:
Ran would've gotten a deserving '1' from me, but the breathtaking cinematography precluded it from happening.
The battle scenes, I admit, are impressive. I like the costumes which netted an Oscar win. And that's it. If
there's anything I hate the most, it's the trainload of theatrical performances. I thought this was supposed
to be a movie, not kabuki theater.
Everybody, from the female jester to the hoary bearded dude, wildly overacts. The jester should've been killed
off early on; she's so annoying to the point of unbearable. The old man has only two expressions: angry and
shocked. It's been the latter 90% of the time. He's too much of a nitwit to comprehend the fact that he conceded
power to his sons.
I have to laugh at the scenes when the samurais used guns that were semiautomatic! Another hoot is after the
lady's head with eyebrows five inches too high was chopped off, somebody threw a gallon of red paint
against the wall. Hence, Akira Kurosawa is an overrated director because his pictures such as
Shichinin no samurai are too long and boring with melodramatic
characters.
All in all, I felt relieved when Ran ended.
Random Hearts (1999)
Rate:
6
Viewed:
8/23
8/23:
Sydney Pollack asks too much out of me for Random Hearts.
Because of Pollack's name, his association with political thrillers, and Harrison Ford who had done similar
pictures such as Witness, Frantic, and
Presumed Innocent, I was misled into thinking there's something bigger
than the affair. Instead, it turns out to be nothing. Wow, this is what I wasted two hours and thirteen minutes
for? Jeez. Psst, Harrison...lose the earring; you just look ridiculous.
Oddly, Kristin Scott Thomas somewhat resembles Harrison Ford's current wife, so I had to check out the chronology.
The movie was filmed in 1998-99, but he didn't meet Calista Flockhart until 2002. At any rate, both give decent
performances, but Kristin Scott Thomas plays an unlikeable character. Maybe that's why her husband cheated on her.
How about Van den Broeck? He probably had no time for his wife.
To everybody's credit, the production value is high. That's why I was able to get through the film rather nicely.
However, it's strange seeing Sydney Pollack because he's acting like a director given he's the director of
Random Hearts. One mistake is there's another subplot going on at the same time which involves Dennis
Haysbert. It's needless.
All in all, when a movie attempts to create a love story, the filmmakers should first make sure the
woman is likeable; otherwise, there's no rooting interest.
Ransom (1996)
Rate:
5
Viewed:
7/21
7/21:
Wait a minute...why am I rooting for the CEO who refuses to pay the ransom to get his son back but is
perfectly okay with bribery to save his own airline?
There's something seriously fucked up with the narrative, but Ron Howard wants to force me to swallow it for
Ransom. Well, I'm not going to be fooled. Even the guy who took the bribe went to prison while the CEO got
away with it. In reality, the movie is about Mel Gibson not caring a farthing about what happens to Nick Nolte's
son because of his "principles." Of course, nothing bad will happen. Therefore, where's the suspense?
Frankly long, Ransom is as Hollywood as it gets with some substandard acting and many implausible moments.
The story should've been presented through the family's perspective the whole time. That way, tension can be
held at high level. But knowing the activities of the criminals every step of the way, what happens next
becomes fairly predictable.
Rene Russo pairs up with Mel Gibson after their terrific chemistry in
Lethal Weapon 3. Unfortunately, whatever she has in mind holds zero
sway over her husband's decisions. Delroy Lindo seems to make out slightly better only because he's a man.
Gary Sinise tries hard, too, but his character is ultimately the biggest loser.
All in all, Ransom has a good premise but would've done a lot better if it was an independent, not
big-budget Hollywood, picture.
Rapid Fire (1992)
Rate:
7
Viewed:
11/06, 4/19, 1/22
11/06:
Brandon Lee starred in five films, and the best of them is Rapid Fire.
I saw the movie in 1992, knowing full well who Brandon Lee was, and predicted he would be a huge star, but what happened on the
set of The Crow was devastating news.
It has plenty of action, plenty of charm, and plenty of fun. One moment I love the most is when Brandon Lee
did the hurdles and had a vulnerable facial expression at the end.
All in all, Rapid Fire is a rare treat for Brandon Lee fans.
4/19:
To me, Rapid Fire, not The Crow, is Brandon Lee's best film.
A bona fide martial artist in his own right, Brandon Lee is electrifying and has a charismatic presence, having orchestrated
many fight scenes. The story is good and suits him well. My favorite part is when he ran away from the cops and did
the hurdles through the steel A-frames. Reminding me of John Saxon, Powers Boothe is a nice treat, making the film better.
Nick Mancuso is kind of silly as Serrano, but I'll take it. The Die Hard actor is Al Leong.
All in all, if you have to see one Brandon Lee movie, make it Rapid Fire.
1/22:
Brandon Lee had a rare combination of looks and charisma, and it shows in Rapid Fire.
Instead of a straightforward plot, it's multilayered with several threads going on at once. This works to the favor of
Rapid Fire for being different from most action-adventure pictures. Getting more out of Powers Boothe's and
Kate Hodge's characters goes a long way. Of course, the real star is Brandon Lee who provides the most excitement.
All in all, Rapid Fire is a terrific Brandon Lee vehicle.
Raw Deal (1986)
Rate:
3
Viewed:
7/05, 2/24
7/05:
Brainless, Raw Deal is a watchably enjoyable picture to some extent.
A better director might have done justice for Arnold Schwarzenegger. I like the story, but some clarity is
needed given the high number of misguided subplots. At least, it has a nice sense of humor at times.
All in all, the title Raw Deal seems appropriate since it was such a hastily made picture.
2/24:
Congratulations to everybody; they got Arnold Schwarzenegger to star in what's the most tedious action movie of his career:
Raw Deal.
I've fallen asleep halfway through because everything is so bland. There's no difference between this and dozens of other
pictures just like it. What's the point of planting Arnold in the Mafia if he'll find out nothing useful in the long run
and plan to blast everybody away when he should've done it sooner?
All in all, don't be misled by the poster of Arnold Schwarzenegger for Raw Deal; it's really boring junk.
Raw Meat (1972)
Rate:
3
Viewed:
5/24
5/24:
Slow and boring, Raw Meat is a British snore horror picture that's also known as Death Line.
The movie poster is completely misleading. Donald Pleasence plays the most irreverent copper ever who's fucking
useless like the tea bags that he keeps complaining about. If I were Alex, I would be pissed off at being called
down to the station several times to be treated like a criminal when trying to be helpful.
What's with the dull pan shots? Yeah, I get it. There are dead people down in the tunnel. Okay, so what? Move
on...stop wasting time. Get on with the story. Instead, nothing happens for the longest time. The final ten
minutes finally gets to the bottom of the mystery when it should've been checked out many years ago. It only
got attention because some worthless O.B.E. guy went missing.
All in all, skip Raw Meat.
Rawhide (1951)
Rate:
2
Viewed:
4/09
4/09:
Sheesh, did I just see one of the worst Western pictures made?
I can't believe the stupidity of Rawhide. The jailed man and woman decide to make a hole through the wall that's so small
that it can fit a child. I mean, what were these two thinking? They're held for only one night. During the duel,
Tyrone Power fires at least ten times from a six-shooter gun without reloading.
Once the climax comes, the archvillain dies early. Instead, the grand prize is a boring shootout between a dorky guy with
the weird-looking buttoned black shirt and an unappealing dude with bulging eyes. Of course, the latter is familiar
as the quack doctor from The Cannonball Run.
Let's go back to the hole digging scene one more time. The pair working on it are never shown dirty as
Susan Hayward's white shirt is pristine. When the baby came out of the hole, I was ready to declare
Rawhide one of the worst films of all time if she was going to pick up the revolver and bring it back to the room.
Meanwhile, the performances are terrible, and none of the thespians belongs in the West. Susan Hayward is the biggest
stinker of them all, and she shouldn't have gotten the role in the first place. The casting of Hugh "Who the Hell Is He?"
Marlowe as Zimmerman is a huge mistake as well.
All in all, armed with a predictable ending, Rawhide is laughably bad.
The Razor's Edge (1946)
Rate:
4
Viewed:
4/21
4/21:
I first watched the Bill Murray version of The Razor's Edge before finding out
later that it was a remake of the 1946 picture.
One thing is for sure: they're both bad films. While the similarities are obvious, there are significant differences
such as the weird inclusion of the book's author W. Somerset Maugham among the fictional characters.
Yes, the story is mildly interesting, but it's hollow in execution. The chief problem starts with the central star, and
then there's the lack of character development for everybody else. I've rolled my eyes at the sight of the "Indian"
guru who's played by a white guy named Cecil Humphreys. Good job, Mr. Darryl F. Zanuck, for failing big time.
Tyrone Power plays Larry Darrell, a man who's supposedly achieved enlightenment after a long search for meaning
of life by finding it deep in the mountains of India during a mere visit. Well, for the life of me, he looks practically
the same before and after the "transformation." That being said, Tyrone Power is clearly miscast as he's only 40% effective.
Either William Holden or Montgomery Clift would've done a better job of handling such a difficult role. In reality, Larry
just wants to be a lazy fuck; therefore, we should pass along the weed to him.
Next is Clifton Webb. He's good, if boring and silly to listen to, for a curmudgeon, but when his character passed
away at the end, I didn't care. Just die, so this overlong movie can end already. On the other hand, I'm not sure why
Larry bothered showing up given the guy never cared for him.
Battling against Herbert Marshall and Anne Baxter, the ever-gorgeous Gene Tierney can be great at times but loses her way
by falling prey to typical soap opera tendencies. At least, she looks fantastic in a dress. Baxter may have won the Oscar for
Best Supporting Actress, but she fails to give me any reason to merit it after playing a boring, melodramatic Lost Weekend
character. However, I like Herbert Marshall's presence for the sake of balance.
The Razor's Edge is more of a showy picture because of the grand in/exterior sets. What good are they if I can feel nothing
for anyone? No, that wasn't India but (a fake backdrop of?) Denver, Colorado. What annoys me to no end is how the camera moves
in a rigid path as the characters have memorized their blocks by going from point A to point B and then from
point B to point C or sometimes back to A and then to C and back to A or B or wherever else. It occurs frequently
throughout despite never happening in real life. A great number of years pass, but nobody looks aged for the least bit.
All in all, The Razor's Edge is very unconvincing because nobody has an idea of what "enlightenment" looks like.
The Razor's Edge (1984)
Rate:
2
Viewed:
4/21
4/21:
Hey, Bill Murray...come closer to me for some wisdom talk, so I can punch your face.
After seeing the ineffectual remake of The Razor's Edge, I'm starting to realize that Bill Murray is a really bad actor. He
doesn't have the knack for dramas or know how to behave appropriately in period pictures. When somebody tells him something that's
profoundly important, he can only come up with a blank stare (see the movie poster to know exactly what I mean).
Well, the original version wasn't good, and this remake is even worse despite the Farewell to Arms intro. Only the
terrific cinematography, which actually looks better than the original film, saves me dying from boredom. Because of it, I
thought of giving the remake a '3' but changed my mind.
The performances are equally flat and monotonous throughout. Worse is the zero character development from the get-go. I have
no idea who everybody, especially Gray Maturin, is; hence, the 1946 picture can only serve as a helpful reference. Nothing
happens while time simply passes. There's supposed to be enlightenment going on, but I never witness it.
Bill Murray and Tyrone Power are both miscast in the leading role. As Sophie, Theresa Russell is passable given the low difficulty
of such a role. Catherine Hicks makes for an unmemorable Isabel compared to Gene Tierney. Denholm Elliott can't hold a
candle to Clifton Webb. The fictional character by the name of W. Somerset Maugham is noticeably absent. At least, the
filmmakers have managed to correct the guru's ethnicity while shooting the particular scene in India instead of Denver, Colorado.
All in all, Ghostbusters, not The Razor's Edge, made Bill Murray famous because
it was the right vehicle to showcase his comedy talent, deadpan face and all.
Real Genius (1985)
Rate:
3
Viewed:
4/12
4/12:
A painfully mediocre film, Real Idiot is more like it.
The kids, most especially Chris Knight (very hard to discern any genius in him), look like they're in a serious
need of Ritalin. Just take as many as they want. I don't really care, but calm the fuck down once and for all.
Sheesh, check out the nonexistent sideburns on Val. Meanwhile, I can't believe that nobody working on the project foresaw
the true purpose. I mean, it's so obvious. Speaking of stupid, notice how the 15-year-old Mitch had a hard time figuring out
the weirdo's disappearance. I thought the solution was quite simple: just close the damn door!
All in all, math and science should've been shown more in Real Idiot while the crappy plot needs to be cut out for
the most part.
The Real McCoy (1993)
Rate:
5
Viewed:
10/21
10/21:
A female version of Mission: Impossible, The Real McCoy is as mundane
as it gets by using recycled concepts from every complex bank heist picture that has been made.
Kim Basigner is beautiful but isn't exciting enough for an action star; she seems rather bored. Surprisingly ineffectual,
Val Kilmer follows her lead while contributing nothing of significance. Ditto for Terence Stamp. The rest of the cast
is filled with no-names. There's zero thought put into character development, setting up The Real McCoy
as a run-of-the-mill flick. The mother-son subplot does nothing, either.
I wish, at the beginning, there was an explanation of what Karen McCoy did do to get caught before getting sent to prison for
six years. For a smart woman like her, she, once out, should be able to get jobs easily despite her criminal record.
Then again, her taste in men leaves a lot to be desired (see her ex-husband for reference). By the way, how did he
enter the airport with a gun, and how was she able to go through the X-ray machine with three million dollars in the bag?
Why rob banks physically when hacking into a bank system poses less risk?
As for the title, nobody knows where the phrase "the real McCoy" originated from although it may be a varation of "the real
MacKay" which first appeared in 1856. It means "the real thing" or "the genuine article." I guess Karen McCoy fits the bill
because she knows how to rob a bank while others like J.T. Barker will mess it up in the first minute by stepping into the building.
All in all, would Kim Basinger's life be dramatically different if she skipped The Real McCoy to star in
Boxing Helena instead of the other way around which caused her to go bankrupt in 1993?
Reality Bites (1994)
Rate:
6
Viewed:
6/04, 2/18
2/18:
The title Reality Bites is perfect.
It's true for most young adults who graduate recently from either high school or college. Then, reality starts to sink in.
Hence, the know-nothing kids with no useful skills to offer start to realize how big the world is when they stop
depending on their parents' money and start fending for themselves.
I have met and known people like Troy Dyer, who's played perfectly by Ethan Hawke, and they, in order to maintain their coolness
factor, do often sell themselves short despite their high IQ. Only if they could put in 25% effort, things would've been
different for them.
All characters including Troy are self-centered, immature, typical, and boring. Interestingly, they're also white.
Oh, yeah...I'll repeat Troy's definition of irony: "It's when the actual meaning is the complete opposite from the
literal meaning." These yuppie characters are just exactly that: frauds.
All in all, Reality Bites hits a lot of points very well, but I don't like the movie.
Re-Animator (1985)
Rate:
1
Viewed:
10/07
10/07:
It's not that Re-Animator is offensive and tasteless but is rather unintelligent.
To add more to my misery, it's a boring movie to sit through. There are so many unethical moments that I'm supposed to
believe they commonly occur to anyone who work in the medical field.
For starters, Herbert West probably killed a doctor somewhere in Europe, but why wasn't he prosecuted for it?
How can he be admitted to a medical school after what happened? Then, at a pseudo-university somewhere in the United States,
he's able to continue his sadist ways. He first works over a cat and therefore kills him. Not getting
the intended reaction, he declares his experiment successful and decides to move on to dead bodies. Um...how?
Fast forward to the morgue, a corpse is awaken to life after he's injected with a glowing yellow reagent. He proceeds to break
down a heavy steel door and wreaks havoc on everybody in the room. Later, the same door is shown functional as if it's new.
Hmm. After blood has been splattered everywhere and the old man's fingers sliced off, there isn't an acknowledgment of what
just occurred which explains why there's no investigation. So, who cleaned up the mess? It must have taken forever in spite of the
incident happening in one night.
All in all, Re-Animator is garbage.
Rear Window (1954)
Rate:
8
Viewed:
3/06
3/06:
It'll never happen in real life that one can see everything that goes on in an apartment building because there are no
curtains on most windows.
But Alfred Hitchcock wants me to suspend my disbelief and watch Rear Window for the sake of simplicity. Well...okay.
It starts off slowly but easily races for a thrilling end. The mystery is compelling to follow. Naturally, Alfred Hitchcock's
filmmaking technique is of the utmost importance.
The cast is great, and it's impossible to go wrong with James Stewart. Thelma Ritter is the true winner as Stella who takes
care of Mr. Jefferies. Grace Kelly isn't bad.
All in all, Rear Window is fine, but it's difficult to ignore the impossible premise.
Rebecca (1940)
Rate:
9
Viewed:
5/12
5/12:
Rebecca is a bit of unusual departure for Alfred Hitchcock, yet it's very good.
However, the logic is somewhat flawed. Of course, a newlywed bride will want to know what the previous wife looked like,
but it never happens in this film. For somebody who owns a grand estate, Maxim de Winter should've taken his time
before proposing to marry by becoming fully acquainted with her. Otherwise, he'll have tons of problems in the long run.
By the way, when a new wife takes over the estate, she automatically assumes the power over her servants which means the
second Mrs. de Winter can dismiss Ms. Danvers at will. Nonetheless, the performances by Laurence Olivier and Joan Fontaine
are excellent. It's the latter who makes the most out of the plot, envoking suggestions of
Ingrid Bergman-Casablanca moments.
All in all, Daphne du Maurier wrote Rebecca, and Alfred Hitchcock used his technical brilliance
to transform it into an outstanding picture.
Rebel Without a Cause (1955)
Rate:
9
Viewed:
5/05, 1/14, 2/17
1/14:
Although the problems of the three teenagers are nebulously trivial and melodramatic, Rebel Without a Cause is
a highly regarded picture, thanks to James Dean.
How James Dean acted, moved, and did things differently, he was breaking through barriers like no one had done before or
ever since. Marlon Brando demonstrated The Method, and James Dean took it to the next level.
Without question, James Dean abused a lot of rules when it came to conventional human behavior because everything he did
in the three films he starred in was unthinkable. Yet he influenced a generation of actors who wanted to be the next Marlon Brando.
On the other hand, Natalie Wood and Sal Mineo are all right; it's evident their performances were simply elevated by the
presence of James Dean. Hence, what a surprise the first two were Oscar-nominated while he wasn't.
By the way, notice the empty pool at the abandoned mansion. It's the same one used in
Sunset Boulevard. It was filled with water, so the Billy Wilder classic could start
the film with William Holden floating above.
All in all, because of his untimely death, James Dean is forever an icon, and Rebel Without a Cause exemplifies why.
2/17:
Rebel Without a Cause is a strange high school classic picture because of how confusing and vague the teenagers'
problems are, yet James Dean's performance is undeniably brilliant.
Only if the issues could be made more clear, giving it a '10' would probably happen for me. The weakest link is Sal Mineo.
Homosexuality is plainly written all over his character's face, and he's just a needy puppy with mental problems. I bet Jim Stark
found him creepy but didn't have the heart to tell him.
Undoubtedly, James Dean is the show, having become an icon overnight and thus a staple of the Beat Generation. On the other hand,
Natalie Wood and Sal Mineo are okay but have been largely overshadowed by James Dean.
All in all, James Dean is the sole reason why Rebel Without a Cause is an enduring classic.
Rebound: The Legend of
Earl "The Goat" Manigault (1996)
Rate:
4
Viewed:
3/09
3/09:
There was a Harlem basketball legend named Earl "The Goat" Manigault who ruled the courts of New York City,
became a drug addict, was found to be completely uncoachable, and died at age 53.
Naturally enough, a biopic had to be produced, and it's the unathletic Don Cheadle who nabbed the leading role for
Rebound: The Legend of Earl "The Goat" Manigault. After seeing the film, I wondered, "What else is new? Why do I care?
It's not like America lost a future Nobel Prize winner."
The basketball scenes are average, and the acting is even more so. I keep waiting for something interesting to happen but only
to be presented with incidents that are either unconfirmed or outright lies. Eriq La Salle tries his best to show the setting
taking place during the 50's to 70's, but it still looks like the 90's. There's no substance most of the time except for the
last few minutes which revealed the real guy himself.
All in all, I would rather watch Hoop Dreams over
Rebound: The Legend of Earl "The Goat" Manigault.
Recreation (1914)
Rate:
1
Viewed:
10/06
10/06:
Recreation is a total waste of my time.
It would've been nice if Charlie Chaplin was met with some unfortunate incident around 1914 and just vanished off the face
of the earth.
All in all, thoughts of suicide can be rampant after seeing Charlie Chaplin's pictures such as Recreation.
The Recruit (2003)
Rate:
6
Viewed:
8/05, 8/23
8/23:
I was thinking of giving The Recruit an '8' or a '9' for a while.
Then, the last thirty minutes happened, causing it to go completely south. What went wrong? At first, the twists and
turns were nice. Then, the more they came, the harder it was for my brain to resist the strain. Finally, I had enough of the
convolution.
Funnily enough, Al Pacino kept saying, "Nothing is what it seems." I wanted to correct him on the spot: "Nothing makes sense."
Anyway, he and Colin Farrell are fine, but I don't care for Bridget Moynahan. The best part is the CIA training stuff while the
back-and-forth between what's real and not is fun.
I thought the plot was heading in a certain direction, and James Clayton was going to expose Layla by finding out that she's working
for Iran because she spoke Farsi earlier. But noooo...they had to make up a stupid twist to throw me off which forced Al
Pacino to make a fool out of himself.
All in all, Roger Donaldson did it so much better in No Way Out with Kevin Costner.
The Red Badge of Courage (1951)
Rate:
5
Viewed:
11/06
11/06:
The Red Badge of Courage is a nice, short, and sweet picture about war but feels too ordinary to wow me.
All Quiet on the Western Front had already accomplished many goals that
The Red Badge of Courage was trying to reach. The battle scenes come off as weak which is a disappointment
given John Huston is the director.
All in all, it's better to see Lewis Milestone's Best Picture winner
All Quiet on the Western Front over The Red Badge of Courage.
Red Corner (1997)
Rate:
5
Viewed:
10/23
10/23:
It'll be easy to say Red Corner is the one that got Richard Gere banned from entering China.
But that's not true. His intense support for Tibet and the Dalai Lama is the primary reason, having become
interested in Buddhism during his twenties. Therefore, I was surprised to see him in a Chinese setting. What
happened is the filmmakers shot a lot of footage in China and had the images used for reconstruction of Beijing
right in Los Angeles along with the CGI work. In other words, Richard Gere was never in China to send his personal
"fuck you" message.
Back to Red Corner, it's not good, bringing back memories of
Midnight Express and
Brokedown Palace.
Bai Ling plays a stupid, useless, and brainwashed state-sponsored lawyer who's not worth caring about, hence the
loss of emotional value throughout. Smug, impossibly handsome, and smiling during the worst of conditions, Jack
Moore makes the biggest mistake by leaving the embassy when we know in China that a happy ending shan't be expected.
It's amazing to see how much Jack Moore can remember and recall the tiniest but significant information that'll
ultimately exonerate him. The idea of him asking for an English-translated book on Chinese laws is laughable.
They'll make up anything as long as there's no public embarrassment of being wrong. Sometimes, the scenes jump
ahead rapidly in order to wrap up the story with a predictable ending. If Jack Moore's eyeglasses had been
stepped on, then how is it possible that he could "see"?
All in all, Bai Ling's unlikeable character is the number one undoing of Red Corner.
Red Dawn (1984)
Rate:
8
Viewed:
9/10, 7/24
9/10:
The most salient aspect of Red Dawn is the lack of restraint given the somewhat all-star cast.
As a matter of fact, no character is made to be the central focus. Rather, the movie is about guerrilla tactics
and people's willingness to survive in a potential war with the Communists. At the beginning, I expected
Toy Soldiers, but I didn't see the high level of violence coming.
A few things I love are the quick, dramatic opening scene of the Communist paratroopers, the grave situation
sinking in everybody's head, and the moment when a Wolverine was labeled a traitor and got summarily dealt with.
If there's a gripe I have, it's just that everybody looks too good after a month...two months...three months...
Hair doesn't tend to look neat and all nicely trimmed after living in the woods for so long. Are the filmmakers
telling me they took regular showers to prepare for a model show?
Nonetheless, Red Dawn is a great survival picture that's made for fanatics who build bomb shelters and
stockpile food and guns in order to get ready for an imminent nuclear holocaust that'll never happen. They need
to get a grip on reality. Of course, the poster's tagline is pure bullshit: the United States had been invaded
before plenty of times.
For anyone interested in some cinema history, it's Charlie Sheen's first feature film, and he'll have a movie
moment with Jennifer Grey in Ferris Bueller's Day Off while she's
eternally famous for Dirty Dancing with Patrick Swayze.
All in all, Red Dawn paints an interesting picture of what might happen if the Cold War had suddenly become
reality.
7/24:
I've raised my rating for Red Dawn from '7' to '8'.
It's not a bad "what if" movie that's set in the Cold War. You never know if it'll happen, but I find it hard to
believe that the bad guys will land smack in the middle of the United States without being shot down by the
initial defense. In the meantime, there's a lot of action that pulls no punches, but interestingly, as
star-studded as the cast is, barely anybody has a memorable performance. If I were the guerrillas, I wouldn't
spray paint "Wolverines" every time an attack occurred.
All in all, Red Dawn isn't about the cast but rather the concept that may or may not happen.
Red Eye (2005)
Rate:
3
Viewed:
3/08
3/08:
The Master of Suck is back.
Wes Craven's latest crappy film is Red Eye which is basically Scream meets
Executive Decision. Passenger 57 may not be
out of the question although I can see Charles Rane blowing raspberries at the sight of Cillian Murphy.
Instead of Neve Campbell, it's Rachel McAdams. There are not two but one villain teenager. The story takes place on an airplane
instead of house. At the same time, everything has to look fresh and hip. Did I tell you already that Wes was the Master of
Suck? Maybe he should be called the Master of Recycled Shit. I was actually okay with the movie for forty-five minutes,
and then, it went for a nosedive when Cillian Murphy started to suck hard.
If it's about a bunch of terrorists trying to assassinate a politician nobody, they'll use somebody else who's hell a
lot more professional than the wimpy killer. By the way, why does the assassination plot have to take place at the airport and
then on the airplane? Won't it be easier to kill him at his home? Again, what do I care if the politician lives or dies? He's
just another useless scumbag. Although the bad guy followed Lisa for eight weeks, he could've kidnapped her after the funeral
but right before she headed out to the airport. The headache would be avoided by making a simple call to the hotel and
then killing her afterwards.
All in all, I want to give Wes Craven a black eye for making Red Eye.
Red Planet (2000)
Rate:
3
Viewed:
10/21
10/21:
"I, uh...I really hate this planet. Fuck this planet."
My sentiment, exactly. So, why are these guys there? A major box-office disaster, Red Planet is a boring sci-fi picture
that's low in intelligence. Only Val Kilmer saves it from earning a potential '1' from me. Then again, what is he doing
in this turkey? I thought Val was a serious actor.
The dialogue during the first forty minutes is hard to get into; nothing makes sense. By the time the five guys are
on Mars, the movie starts to improve, bringing me back into the fold. From there on, I'm on a roller coaster ride of ups and
downs. By the time Val is all alone, it's been bearable until the end.
Of course, nothing shown in Red Planet is remotely possible. For starters, Mars is approximately fifty million miles
farther from the sun than Earth which translates to less sunlight, hence colder environment. In other words, the average
temperature on Mars is -81°F. So, a permanent settlement for humans there? Impossible. Okay, maybe it's the summer
which means up to 70°F during the day, yet it'll sink to -100°F at night. At one point in the film, the temperature
read -51°F, but nobody seemed to struggle.
I'm aware that the distance for one kilometer is 0.62 of a mile. Therefore, 100 km is 62 miles. Are the filmmakers telling
me that people are capable of walking this far in nineteen hours with no food or water? Uh...okay. I actually thought they
planned to skip because gravity on Mars is a little more than one-third of Earth's gravity. Later, Bowman asked for a line to
reach Gallagher in outer space which is 43 km (27 miles) apart. I wondered why in the world a spaceship would bring
something this long. From an actual visual standpoint, it can't be more than one mile.
I'll say Red Planet is a good-looking movie, but when there's action, the quality of special effects drops a lot. Having
AMEE on board is an overkill because what the characters are going through is more than enough. To make matters worse, it's been
done already with HAL 9000 in 2001: A Space Odyssey. Back to AMEE, I'm quite sure
Gallagher was trained to deal with all conceivable situations, so why not have an option on his armpad to neutralize the stupid
robot immediately? By the way, if Burchenal has a Ph.D. in genetics, then he should please enlighten me in what P stands for
in the world of DNA nucleotides.
All in all, Red Planet would've been perfect for 1950, but filmmaking had already advanced fifty years since then.
Red River (1948)
Rate:
6
Viewed:
6/22
6/22: Red River was going well until Joanne Dru showed up, and then everything changed for the worse.
Howard Hawks should've gone back to the editing room one more time and made the necessary changes which includes cutting out
Joanne Dru completely. I thought about giving the film a '9'; when she went away, things were better, and I was hoping not to see her
again. Yet the final fifteen minutes was enough to convince me that my time had been ultimately wasted. What a terrible
ending with Joanne Dru having her way. So is the editing that rushed through almost all of the intertitles.
Why? Why? Why Joanne Dru? She single-handedly ruins the movie. Red River should be about men...no women allowed. For a
bit while, I was confused whether or not Coleen Gray and Joanne Dru were playing the same character, but whatever.
Interestingly, John Ireland (Cherry Valance) ended up marrying Joanne Dru; I didn't know this until afterwards. In the meantime,
I don't understand why Thomas Dunson didn't take his love interest with him at the beginning. What a joke he is, honor bullshit
and all.
Meanwhile, Red River is Montgomery Clift's first movie, but it was theatrically released after
The Search which got shelved for two years due to a combination of editing and legal issues.
He's better this time around but is strangely one-note. On the other hand, John Wayne was delivering a masterful performance until
Joanne Dru showed up; afterwards, he stopped being effective on top of his absence for twenty long minutes! The same can be said
for Walter Brennan who was on a serious roll.
On the positive side, the cinematography is outstanding despite the terrible traveling matte here and there. The setting may be
Texas, but it was actually shot on location in Arizona. There are many beautiful scenes in regard to the cattle drive. Then again,
I'm reminded of a superior film called The Culpepper Cattle Co. which isn't a remake,
but there are plenty of similarities. Personally, I prefer it over Red River for showcasing a high level of realism.
All in all, by getting rid of the women, Red River would've been on its way to being labelled a Western masterpiece.
Red Rock West (1993)
Rate:
5
Viewed:
10/14
10/14:
Coming fresh off from Kill Me Again, I proceeded to see Red Rock West that's
directed by John Dahl.
The story is captivating until Dennis Hopper shows up. Then, it's been downhill from there. The truth is: Nicolas Cage,
J.T. Walsh, and Lara Flynn Boyle are enough. Adding Dennis Hopper (or rather Frank Booth) to the mix makes it a crowd. I like
him, but he's too much here.
Only Nicolas Cage is the standout, and he proves what a talented actor he was back then. Lara Flynn Boyle is distracting at
times; it's not that she's bad but has too much screen time. J.T. Walsh is solid but should be shown longer.
The more twists and turns there are, the more ludicrous and unbelievable the movie is. I'm okay with the
hit-and-run incident and think it's cleverly done, but the victim was also shot earlier? It's a coincidence that I cannot accept.
The last thirty minutes is tedious which aims for the most convoluted go-for-broke ending possible.
All in all, John Dahl can direct neo-noir pictures, but he needs to show restraint, stick with what's working for
a longer time, and draw the line when enough's enough.
Red Shoe Diaries (1992)
Rate:
5
Viewed:
4/24
4/24:
At least, Red Shoe Diaries is better than Delta of Venus.
The first half works, and there's a lot of erotica that's done in an artistic way. Then, the second half falls apart when it's
apparent that Alex is nothing but a spoiled child in spite of everything going right in her life. Yet she kills herself. Why?
When Billy Wirth was playing basketball with David Duchovny, I suddenly remembered the former from
The American Gladiators.
I hadn't see him in anything else besides The Lost Boys and thought he did fine playing Tom,
but his character is too aggressive and thus becomes unlikeable in the long run.
As for Jake Winters, he shouldn't feel bad, and I can see why he's confused by the whole thing which wasn't his fault. The
girl cheated on him for poor reasons. He was too good to come along in her life, yet it's not enough for her. Ridiculous. By
the way, this movie came first for David Duchovny before he broke big in The X-Files. He did both TV shows simultaneously
the next few years.
All in all, Red Shoe Diaries is okay, but the subsequent TV show is better because it's shorter and changes it up in every
episode.
Reds (1981)
Rate:
5
Viewed:
6/07
6/07:
When I think of absolutely overrated films, I think of Reds.
What a tremendously long piece of work. Are you kidding me that I sat through this boring bullshit for three hours and twenty
minutes?
The problem with Warren Beatty is his constant look of disbelief as in "what the heck am I doing here?" Only if he would take
some acting lessons and try to change it up in terms of facial emotion, it's possible that depths of humanity could be reached
for this serial womanizer. But when I look in his eyes, I've concluded that there's no hope.
All in all, Reds is a long, overblown Russian soap opera about nothing important.
Reefer Madness (1936)
Rate:
4
Viewed:
5/05, 9/07
5/05:
Well done.
Reefer Madness has me sold. Marijuana is the greatest menace ever...worse than the Black Death, syphilis, polio,
alcohol, and the dust bowl. Although intelligence is sorely lacking and there are slow parts, it's a somewhat enjoyable,
amusing movie. Dave "Faster! Play It Faster!" O'Brien is effective in a campy way.
All in all, Reefer Madness is too silly to be believed.
9/07:
Reefer Madness is now a boring movie to sit through.
There's no story, and the ending leaves me in disbelief. The bad guys would've skipped town to avoid getting entangled
with the murder case. On the other hand, the best part is when Ralph yelled, "Play it faster! Faster! Faster!" He may have been
speedballing before that.
Of course, everything that's gone on is pure propaganda which ultimately backfired because everybody who's high seems to have
loads of fun. Even the ending ruins the intended purpose because anyone of good character have been uncaught with serious crimes
like that guy who went crazy behind the steering wheel, hitting somebody and driving away afterwards.
All in all, for a moral picture, Reefer Madness fails miserably.
Reflections in a Golden Eye (1967)
Rate:
5
Viewed:
2/07, 3/19
2/07:
Unfairly bashed by countless critics and viewers alike, Reflections in a Golden Eye is a surreal film that's a mix of
high quality and incomprehension.
The performances are excellent, most especially from Marlon Brando in a role that was meant for soon-to-be-deceased Montgomery
Clift. Elizabeth Taylor, Brian Keith, Zorro David, and Robert Forster make for wonderful treats. The photography is unique,
and Tony Thomas wrote the following in The Films of John Huston:
"It evolved a costly and complicated process of desaturating the film's color until only a gold and slightly pinkish image
emerged. [Cinematographer Oswald] Morris called the effect on the film's mood 'quite extraordinary.' Warner Brothers didn't
agree, however, and released the film in full Technicolor, which made the film pictorially striking and quite beautiful to
look at, but decidedly worked against the emotional impact Huston wanted Reflections to have."
All in all, I'll have to see Reflections in a Golden Eye later for a re-evaluation.
3/19:
It's twelve years later, and I realize now Reflections in a Golden Eye is a bad movie.
It's just too soap operatic for my taste. Elizabeth Taylor overacts every chance she gets. Marlon Brando is angry at himself
for no reason. Zorro David needs to stop being so blatantly effeminate. Robert Forster goes around and around the woods in the nude
for who knows what reason. Julie Harris...Julie Harris...please shut up, for goodness' sake.
Tennessee Williams had never written such trash. In fact, he didn't, but it's Carson McCullers of
The Heart Is a Lonely Hunter fame who did. It's interesting that a couple
of things came out of this film for Brando: his monologue with the mirror which became the genesis of "You Talking To Me?" scene
in Taxi Driver and the pictures
of him in uniform which would be used in Apocalypse Now.
All in all, when I think of Reflections in a Golden Eye, I think of the urine-stained cinematography.
Regarding Henry (1991)
Rate:
9
Viewed:
5/16
5/16:
Regarding Henry is another great, enjoyable Mike Nichols picture.
Harrison Ford is outstanding as Henry who's shot in the head by none other than John Leguizamo (who actually received
hate mail for it). Afterwards, he experiences deep amnesia and is forced to relearn everything from square one. In other words,
Harrison knows how to shut off his Indiana Jones persona and adapt himself into ordinary, everyday characters.
Henry's physical therapist, who's played well by Bill Nunn, is another asset. As Henry's wife, Annette Bening isn't bad
as her character turns out to be a good person after all. There are nice moments which include a funny reference to the
turtle table, and a surprise twist comes at the end.
I like how Mike Nichols throws me off by revealing Henry's secret affair with his assistant at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel given that
she's shown a bit from time to time. As a matter of fact, she's Rebecca Miller who's Arthur Miller's daughter
and also Daniel Day-Lewis' wife.
All in all, I don't agree with the poor reviews of Regarding Henry; it's a fine film with a great performance by
Harrison Ford.
The Reivers (1969)
Rate:
5
Viewed:
12/15
12/15:
Let me ask you this question...who is supposed to be the star: Steve McQueen or some nobody kid?
The Reivers is a weird selection for the Cooler King because it's not his M.O. At any rate, he's just okay,
but it has no classic moments that will define him like The Great Escape,
Bullitt, and Papillon.
Amazingly, along with The French Connection,
Dirty Harry, First Blood,
One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, and Apocalypse Now, Steve McQueen
declined Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid to do this
movie. Is it because of the Yellow Winton Flyer? He would end up keeping the car, but the drugs had definitely
turned his brain into mush.
Rupert Crosse was Oscar-nominated, being the first black ever for the Best Supporting Actor category which is worthy
for a trivia question that almost nobody will be able to answer correctly. He's fair and has his moments but does
nothing extraordinary. Rupert Crosse worked for another two years before dying of lung cancer in 1973 at age 45.
The star of the show is Mitch Vogel as the young boy Lucius. However, it's a shame he didn't get enough screen time,
probably because of Steve McQueen's giant ego which explains why he turned down
Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid for not wanting to be
billed second behind Paul Newman or see his name slightly below his. If Mitch had more time, he would've been
nominated for an Oscar. By the way, he broke his shoulder during horse riding when a water sprinkler went off,
spooking the horse.
The story is simple: borrow the grandfather's car to visit a whorehouse in the city and get into all kinds of
trouble along the way. Not wanting to lose the audience, the filmmakers decided to put on a big horse race in the
style of National Velvet. Unfortunately, it proves to be costly by failing
to tie up loose ends and thus renders the movie a sheer waste of time.
All in all, The Reivers is indeed a strange choice for Steve McQueen who spent most of his time raising
hell on director Mark Rydell.
The Relic (1997)
Rate:
5
Viewed:
5/24
5/24:
What an idiot Peter Hyam is.
He's the one who handled the photography of The Relic. I could never see anything much, not even anyone's
face clear enough. The percentage of blackness must have vacillated between seventy and one hundred. Afterwards,
I checked out the trailer, and the lighting looked perfect. So, what gives?
The creature turns out to be dinosaur-like. Here's the problem: if something like that can be cultivated in South
America, how come there isn't at least one roaming around the jungle? Halfway through the film, I'm shown the room
that houses the museum's extensive surveillance system. Hence, there should be a video recording of the creature,
especially when it killed the black security guard during his bathroom break. So, why didn't Lieutenant D'Agosta
check that out?
The collective star power may be weak on paper, but the cast isn't the issue. Tom Sizemore and Penelope Ann Miller
do what they can do. Having the latter threatened by the creature is a big mistake as it suddenly reminded me of
the famous movie moment with Sigourney Weaver in Aliens. The script isn't bad,
but the tunnels make no sense. It's not often that I'm shown people getting decapitated, but kudos to
The Relic for it.
All in all, my rating for The Relic would've been one or two points higher if it had proper lighting.
Remando al viento (1988)
Rate:
3
Viewed:
9/21
9/21:
Gothic or Remando al viento aka Rowing with the Wind?
That's the question to find out which movie is worse. Because of Ken Russell, I have to go with the former. Both
deal with the same set of characters but under different circumstances: Lord Byron, Percy Bysshe Shelley, Mary
Shelley, Claire Clairmont, and Dr. John Polidori.
Once again, nothing makes sense. Remando al viento either omits a lot of important details or takes too
many liberties with the truth; the pace is unbelievably slow, but things are better during the second half. The
dialogue is gibberish when there should be excerpts from each individual's work to educate me. Really, I blame
it all on the writer-director.
At least, the photography is nice, and the acting is generally fine. This is the one that Hugh Grant and Elizabeth
Hurley got together for the first time before getting married. Meanwhile, she might want to do something
with these eyebrows of hers. The movie was oddly produced by a Spanish company, yet everything is in English.
It even won a bunch of awards from Spain, but I shudder to think of how bad the contenders were.
I wasn't aware that Lord Byron had a limp. The date is supposed to be 1816, but Polidori didn't kill himself
until five years later. William Shelley, the son of esteemed authors, died not from drowning but malaria at age
3. The ending is a reproduction of Louis Édouard Fournier's painting The Funeral of Shelley, but in
reality, Mary Shelley didn't attend and Lord Byron had left early.
All in all, Remando al viento is strictly for viewers who are highly familiar with Lord Byron, Percy
Bysshe Shelley, Mary Shelley, Claire Clairmont, and Dr. John Polidori while everybody else can safely skip it.
Remember the Titans (2000)
Rate:
8
Viewed:
5/04, 5/24
5/24:
I hate those "based on a true story" movies because it'll give me a lot of ammunition to rip them apart, no
matter how good they may be.
This time, it's Remember the Titans. Granted, it scores well in a lot of areas that can sometimes be
twenty times Brian's Song on the high school level. Then, there are stuff
that either never happened or differed too much from the actual events. Finally, it loses me for good in the
home stretch by being another football picture.
Yeah, Gerry Bertier looks like a fine upstanding guy with great character traits, but the reality is he
drove drunk and got himself in a single-car accident which occurred a few days after the state title game. At
least, he'll be forever remembered by being kissed on the lips by Sunshine who only received the nickname not
because he's from California but of his sensitive eyes when he's out in the sun. And no...the kissing part never
happened in real life. Ether way, it's a strange moment, indeed.
Racism? Nah, there was no such thing. Only a stone's throw from Washington, D.C., Alexandria, Virginia, had been
an affluent, integrated city for a long time. It's where many of the people connected to politics reside in. The
whole film was shot on location in Georgia to make Alexandria seem like the Jim Crow South that it never was.
How about racism on the football team? Nobody fought each other because of this issue but over starting positions
because there were so many good, albeit long-haired, players due to the merger of three high schools into one,
making itself a state football superpower. Hence, the 13-0 team rolled over its opponents by a scoring
differential of 357-45 with nine shutouts. All the schools they played against were also integrated. The state
title game? Nah, it wasn't close but a 27-0 blowout. National runner-ups? Gee...only if there existed an actual
game. The team was simply voted second in some poll. Of course, there was no unique dance warm-up, either.
While watching the film, I became interested in this name: T.C. Williams. I had never heard of it before, and
after looking him up on the internet, it turns out he was a staunch segregationist. Now, this is extremely funny:
Remember the Titans is a Disney movie that's about overcoming fake racism at an integrated high school
named after a segregationist. Sometimes, the truth can be stranger than fiction. T.C. Williams High School was
eventually renamed in...2021. The people in Alexandria sure take the longest time to wake up, huh?
Oh, yeah...Coach Herman Boone...the big bad Boone. He's a mother, huh? It turns out Boone's players hated him so
much that he was fired from his job, and he was never hired anywhere else. Again, racism had nothing to
do with it; Boone was rather hateful and abusive in the mold of Woody Hayes and Frank Kush, causing a mutiny among
his players. Even three of his assistant coaches quit out of their own volition. After the movie came out,
Boone capitalized on his new fame by giving $10,000 or $15,000 speeches while making up stuff about himself and
the team. Talk about winning the lottery. By the way, 50,000 people didn't die at Gettysburg, but yeah, it
remains the bloodiest battle ever fought on American soil.
As for the performances, Denzel Washington is a '10' by playing himself to perfection, but he's rendered less
effective toward the end. I have to say his character's single-minded focus is disturbing...it's only
high school football. Jeez, nobody cares. Will Patton is fine but has a weird, unexplainable moment when he
decided to bench Petey (editing issue?). Everybody else on the team is excellent even though roughly eight are
featured a lot with Ryan Hurst standing out the most as Gerry Bertier. The worst and most annoying character
of the film is Yoast's little stupid daughter who comically said at the beginning, "In Virginia, high school
football is a way of life." Boone's girl should've yelled at her, "Just shut the hell up! And go away forever!"
If it's any consolation, the real-life daughter died of heart failure in 1996 at age 34.
All in all, "history is written by the winners" is the perfect tagline for Remember the Titans because
they sure made up a lot of shit.
The Replacements (2000)
Rate:
6
Viewed:
5/08, 1/20
5/08:
Miles ahead of Any Given Sunday, The Replacements is a hysterically funny movie
that teaches teamwork and character despite the cliché story.
I like most of the characters as they're fun to watch although a couple of them, most especially Jon Favreau's,
are annoying. Overall, the cast has good chemistry. It's refreshing to see Keanu Reeves giving his all which shows how much
he cares. Moreover, he's primarily responsible for the infusion of comedy and romance.
For the final film of his storied career, Jack Warden has been a great actor, having once played George Halas in
Brian's Song.
It's a nice touch of Gene Hackman's character to seek out a deaf player from Gallaudet "University" and put him on the
team, but I'm disappointed to see he didn't go further by getting an ASL interpreter for him. Otherwise, how will he
understand what people are saying?
All in all, The Replacements is a definite crowd-pleaser.
1/20:
Although a fun movie to watch with pretty good football scenes, The Replacements is a rip-off of
Necessary Roughness.
Instead of college, we have a mix of semi-pro and washed-up football players. Jettisoning the whole season, they must win
three out of the last four games to qualify for the playoffs. Instead of a female, the kicker is a coarse, chain-smoking
guy from Wales. The rest of everything else is pretty much the same: a band of misfits, a quarterback and his head coach as
the two principal leads, a speedy wide receiver with stone hands, and an announcer (in this case, it's two: John Madden
and Pat Summerall) to explain in colorful words what he's seeing for the audience.
Aw, it's nice to have on board a deaf player from Gallaudet "University." Their football program has been shitty for
pretty much of its existence. That's not the worst part, but rather, it's this: how is he on the team
but nobody provides him an ASL interpreter? I'll be surprised if he knew what the hell was going on all the time.
Only Keanu Reeves and Gene Hackman do decent jobs. For Jack Warden, it's his final film appearance after 56 years of acting,
having been in two other football pictures: Brian's Song and
Heaven Can Wait. But the rest of the cast is garbage, and pretty please...no more of the
"let's get mad" idiocy that's heartily supplied by Jon Favreau. You don't think that life imitates
art? Well, four years ago, Michael Jace, who plays a convicted felon named Earl Wilkinson (aka Ray Smith for the games), was
sentenced 40 years to life in prison for fatally shooting his wife.
All in all, The Replacements is essentially the same as Necessary Roughness
but worse.
Repo Man (1984)
Rate:
3
Viewed:
1/11
1/11:
Repo Man is a wannabe of cult films.
This fact will be painfully clear thirty minutes into it. I knew director Alex Cox was being stupid on purpose in the hope of
attracting fanboy idiots. Ultimately, his career ended after taking the helm for Sid and Nancy
and Walker which are both massive box-office failures.
The way the rules were laid out in Repo Man, I was like, "Eh...?" On what planet is the setting supposed to take place? By
then, my patience had quickly run out, and I couldn't wait for it to end. There's no story or no logic...absolutely nothing.
All in all, Repo Man is junk that's primarily directed at man-children.
Repossessed (1990)
Rate:
3
Viewed:
9/10
9/10:
Repossessed is a terrible spoof of The Exorcist.
Many "jokes" fall flat before they can make to the finish line. From time to time, I felt compelled to take a break to
rest my brain from decaying. The worst part is the incessant display of the green pea soup vomit.
Linda Blair decides to sell out by cashing in fifteen minutes of her fame when she should be thanking Mercedes McCambridge
for doing most of the work. Let's be real: it's exactly what she was doing in her entire career including porn as a
desperate attempt to stay relevant.
Now, what's Ned Beatty doing in this über trash? Too good for Repossessed, he used to appear in better films. It's time
for him to relive the bad memories of Deliverance. On the other hand, Leslie Nielsen is
boring as heck.
All in all, I consider myself as accursed after watching Repossessed.
Repulsion (1965)
Rate:
3
Viewed:
1/16
1/16:
Roman Polanski's films are often misses, and Repulsion is one of them.
While watching it, all I could think of was Eraserhead. At least, Repulsion has more
dialogue, better pace, and more coherent plot. Of course, strange things will happen. It's less believable when Helen
is taken aback after seeing what her sister, who was probably raped by a relative, had done because she would've predicted it.
The cinematography is great as usual, and the same theme will be revived in Rosemary's Baby and The Tenant.
However, I'll say that the protagonist was suffering from mental illness, probably schizophrenia. Hence, it doesn't make for an
interesting viewing.
All in all, the film title Repulsion is apt.
Requiem for a Dream (2000)
Rate:
10
Viewed:
7/07, 6/11
7/07:
Requiem for a Dream starts off slowly as it shapes into a run-of-the-mill drug picture, but the individual characters'
free fall is what makes it extraordinarily haunting.
There's no question that the most outstanding performance goes to Ellen Burstyn as she combines the delicacy of Blanche
DuBois with the madness of Baby Jane Hudson. For a long time, I've thought little of Jared Leto, but here, he digs deep by
pushing himself like never before. In other words, it's a breakthrough role for him. Jennifer Connelly has always been a bland,
albeit beautiful, actress, but she finally hit it out of the park. Ditto for Marlon Wayans who's a veteran of many bad movies.
Editor Jay Rabinowitz has done a wonderful job of putting the film together as a horrific spectacle that it is. It's hard to
forget one particular scene involving Jennifer Connelly which is as fast as a machine gunfire of five-hundred rounds.
All in all, calling Requiem for a Dream as the ultimate anti-drug picture isn't out of the question.
6/11:
Requiem for a Dream is the ultimate anti-drug picture.
Show this one to kids, and you might get some of them to stay away from drug abuse for good. It's also an ADD flick because of
the extensive editing. Typically, a motion picture averages between 600 and 700 cuts, but Requiem for a Dream has 2,000.
I love the camera style throughout which is bold and innovative. The pacing is fast and to the point, magnifying
the extremeness of each scene by tenfold. As a result, the ending is depressingly maniac. While the cast is
excellent, it's been Ellen Burstyn's show all the way through by playing a sad, pathetic character.
All in all, if you need a strong reason to stay away from drugs, legal or illegal, then you should check out
Requiem for a Dream.
Reservoir Dogs (1992)
Rate:
8
Viewed:
6/03, 12/04, 3/08, 6/11
3/08:
When Reservoir Dogs was theatrically released, I just knew Quentin Tarantino was going to be the hottest director.
The hype surrounding him was sky-high. Then, Pulp Fiction came out, and the rest was history.
It's like what happened to Jean-Luc Godard when he made À bout de souffle.
So, why did it happen? What made Quentin Tarantino special, unique, and, most importantly, fresh? It's simple: the dialogue.
The ten-minute opening scene of Reservoir Dogs is a perfect example. He would take the art of conversation
to the stratosphere in Pulp Fiction. Afterwards, there had been so many imitations but
absolutely no equal.
All in all, Reservoir Dogs is what I call a very hip movie.
6/11:
I'm dropping my rating of Reservoir Dogs from '10' to '8' although it's still a cool movie yet has a couple of flaws.
One, the acting can be either overdone or theatrical. Two, blood has come out of Mr. Orange for so long that it has gotten
ridiculous. Nonetheless, the dialogue remains excellent as ever. It's the primary reason why I love revisiting the film. Of the cast, I have
to say Chris Penn stands out the most, especially with his eyes popping out while he's mad. It's ironical that his character's
name is Nice Guy Eddie when he, in fact, isn't.
All in all, Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction are the alpha and the omega of Quentin
Tarantino's cinema greatness.
Restoration (1995)
Rate:
6
Viewed:
5/22
5/22:
Despite winning two Oscars in 1996, I had never heard of Restoration until now.
The wait has been well worth it. I like the pace, and therefore, I wasn't bored at all. Initially, I thought
"miscast," but the thespians, save for Meg Ryan (what a bad choice), proved themselves in the long run.
Sam Neill is probably the best of anybody. His character, King Charles II, was famous for the dogs he owned,
hence the King Charles Spaniel although the current breed isn't descended from them. On the other hand, it's a
good performance by Robert Downey, Jr., who continues to be an underrated actor. Ian McKellen first became
friends with him on the set and was so sufficiently impressed that he wanted him to star in
Richard III.
There isn't much of a plot, so the film is more of going through life for one person: Robert Merivel. As much as
things happen and how the characters feel, they're never convincing or deep enough. I don't know how many
years have passed, but nobody ages for the least bit. Hence, most of the effort is spent on costumes and art
direction, and they all look great, hence the well-deserved Oscar wins. However, the film loses its way during
the final third.
The most interesting aspect is the Great Plague of London which occurred in 1665-66, having become the last
outbreak ever in England. An Old World disease, the bubonic plague killed many millions of people for
centuries. It came from infected fleas that were carried by rodents, most especially black rats, on ships which
went back and forth via trade routes across the world. Nobody made the connection at the time as it was
originally thought that touching dead people's clothes was enough to contract the plague. The other possible
culprits were miasma, foreigners, Jews, gypsies, and punishment from God, among others.
All in all, Restoration is a nice period film that will sure to delight Robert Downey, Jr.'s fans.
The Return of Superfly (1990)
Rate:
3
Viewed:
6/15
6/15:
In hindsight, the Super Fly franchise might have gone longer because of Curtis Mayfield's music which has the
distinction of a soundtrack outgrossing the film.
Out is Ron O'Neal, and in is Nathan Purdee. What I love about the first half is the style. There's a lot of
Miami Vice feel about it. Nathan Purdee plays the role of Priest with confidence. He has a plan and is only
waiting for the pieces to fall into place.
Then comes the second half which pretty much ruins the movie. Many scenes serve as a filler while Priest is slowly erased
away when he's supposed to be the focal character. Therefore, I've stopped caring anymore. Also, the story is confusing
as I keep asking this important question: "Why did Priest come back to the United States?"
Samuel L. Jackson makes an appearance to show why he's destined for stardom because he can clearly act. It's a pity
his character was killed off early, hence the loss of quality. If the Panamanian-born actor Carlos Carrasco looks familiar,
it's because he was one of the passengers in Speed with Keanu Reeves. His villain here
has a lot of potential, but he's not utilized enough.
All in all, the initial success of The Return of Superfly is ultimately ruined by the second half.
Return of the Jedi (1983)
Rate:
4
Viewed:
6/03, 5/17
5/17:
I might as well call this one Return of the Muppets because that's what the film has been all about.
George Lucas definitely went soft. It's very much a kiddie movie with low level of suspense. Not only are the muppets heavily
involved, but there's also a lot of rehashed material from the first two films, hence the lack of originality. Littered
throughout are uninspired performances.
Harrison Ford said he was bored of playing Han Solo that he wanted him killed off early so he could move on with his career.
That's why Harrison Ford was the last of the cast to be resigned after being offered a lot of money. When he did, his heart was
never in it, failing to resemble Han Solo.
The same thing happened to Carrie Fisher who once said, "I did so much cocaine on Star Wars set
that even John Belushi told me I had a problem." You can see her sporting a cocaine nail in several scenes. When Luke told Leia that
she was his sister, her reaction was like: "Oh...um, that's cool." By the way, what the hell happened to her hair? Mark Hamill
looks too old, and his face is greatly changed. Although he tries his best, his acting ability has been nonexistent for the most part.
As for the rehashed stuff, it's been a series of them. The beginning feels like I'm back at the cantina again in Mos Eisley
which is affixed with perhaps the worst scene of the trilogy: Jedi Rocks. Like the Hoth intro from the previous sequel, the
whole thing is too long and feels like a snag to get things going.
Then, the next thing I see is the Death Star. You know, I was actually confused about that for the longest time since the 80's
because I thought it had been completely blown up in Star Wars. It's like watching a
Friday the 13th picture or
something. Yet what's shown isn't the same model. Therefore, why couldn't George come up with something original?
Later, when everybody is in Endor, it's Robin Hood shit all over again; in fact, I was thinking of the one with
Kevin Costner and how his men set up the natural-made gimmicks to defeat the Celts in Sherwood Forest.
I admit that when I was a kid, I thought the Ewoks were cool and didn't see a problem. Defend them, I would. My goodness, I'm
now speaking like Yoda. But now, they're distracting and too small to be able to defeat the heavily armored Imperial
Stormtroopers and machines; it's not even possible with their primitive sticks and stones. Meanwhile, why not go above the
trees instead of riding through them at 120 MPH? Have some common sense, please. Afterwards is the most anticipated
final showdown between Darth Vader and Luke Skywalker. Once they started fighting, I felt like I had seen it all in
The Empire Strikes Back. Even Luke chops off his father's hand. How unoriginal.
What surprised me the most is how ineffective Darth Vader is. He's like nothing. Worst of all, the emperor keeps stealing the
show from him despite boring the heck out of me. When Darth Vader dies, he simply dies. It's a "who cares?" moment,
hence the absolute lack of tension throughout after it had been built up for so long in the first two films.
To wrap things up, Lando Calrissian and his buddies do the exact same thing as Luke did in
Star Wars by going to the
center of Death Star and blowing it up. My goodness, where the fuck is the originality here? Then, the movie just ends.
What a goddamn joke the franchise has been which is why I was never a Star Wars fan.
Despite the clean-up job through the release of DVDs, these three films weren't good back then due to clunky visual graphics,
simple plot, and terrible acting.
Jabba the Hutt is probably the most memorable character of the third part not because of what he looks like but how it's
a negative connotation for somebody who's called that. Oddly enough, George Lucas decided to insert him in one scene
for Star Wars, and they don't look the same. By the way, the sight of Leia in her bikini
while being chained to Jabba the Hutt is pretty gross.
Overall, I'm not surprised how Return of the Muppets has turned out to be, and it's because of Richard Marquand who's a
historically inferior director. He went on record as saying, "It is rather like trying to direct King Lear...with
Shakespeare in the next room." No, Richard...you just suck. It doesn't matter anyway because he died in 1987 at the age of 49.
I won't bother commenting on the actor change for the ending, but Hayden Christensen sure looks like a sex predator
and I don't know who the fuck that is because I've never seen the prequels before. Let's put this out of the way once and for all:
there's no "good" in Darth Vader...in fact, he never had it to begin with, period.
All in all, unlike the brain-dead suckers, I'm glad not to have paid a cent for anything that's
Star Wars-related and only borrowed the movies from the library.
The Return of the Living Dead (1985)
Rate:
7
Viewed:
11/03, 10/07
10/07:
While watching The Return of the Living Dead, I wondered why I rated it a '7' the last time since I thought it was
great until the ill-advised ending told me why.
For the first half, the movie is filled with comedy and then transitions to gore and horror. While the plot is clever and
ingenious, the cast is great as I love the inclusion of Thom Matthews, Clu Gulager, Don Calfa, and James Karen. They all work
together seamlessly. One of the best parts is when Frank told Freddy about the true case of the living dead, validating what
happened in the original.
However, when the end comes, it's a letdown, if not a major disappointment. Although there was a social commentary during the
conclusion of Night of the Living Dead, it doesn't necessarily mean it should
be repeated. Perhaps the producers ran out of either money or time and had to make do. My other complaint is how sophisticated
the zombies are. In regard to the term "living dead," shouldn't they be unable to think for themselves or even speak?
All in all, The Return of the Living Dead is a decent sequel to prolong the franchise, but the ending needs work.
Return of the Secaucus 7 (1979)
Rate:
10
Viewed:
4/14
4/14:
I avoided seeing Return of the Secaucus 7 for many years because I thought it was a sequel.
Also, I didn't know this one came first, not The Big Chill. Now, I must say the latter is
a straight-up rip-off of the former. There are so many similarities between them that there's no way Lawrence
Kasdan couldn't have seen it.
However, three prime differences exist between these two. The Big Chill had an all-star
cast, a great soundtrack, and a mainstream release. Don't get me wrong: I like the film and think of it as a classic of the
genre. But let's give credit where it's due: Return of the Secaucus 7 is the original.
I get bored easily when there's so much talking. But not this one. The dialogue is funny, and the conversations are
interesting. What a surprise that John Sayles wasn't Oscar-nominated for Best Original Screenplay. Rivaling the script is
the wonderful camerawork and editing by Austin De Besche and John Sayles. The characters, the lines, and the background
become as one in a smooth flow. Hence, the feel of the film is perfect. At the same time, the cast is terrific.
It's a bunch of nobodies, yet their chemistry is absolutely top-notch.
Most of the public think The Silence of the Lambs is the greatest movie in the
world when it's, in fact, inferior to Manhunter. Similarly, people say
Fatal Attraction is all the rage when
Play Misty for Me was really
the originator. Following the same logic, Return of the Secaucus 7 is the rightful gold standard when it comes to the
reunion of a clique compared to The Big Chill.
All in all, don't be fooled: The Big Chill is a true rip-off of Return of the Secaucus 7.
Return of the Seven (1966)
Rate:
1
Viewed:
4/14
4/14:
SEVEN again...MAGNIFICENT again!
What in the Sam Hill are they talking about? I only see Yul Brynner. Not only is Return of the Seven one of the worst
sequels, but it is also one of the worst films made. The movie may run for 95 minutes, but it's very long to sit through. I
can't believe there are scenes of cockfighting and bullfighting with the bull killed by a sword through his head. Let's
not forget how many horses were knocked down to the ground.
The title is misleading because only one is actually back; hence, it should be called
Return of a Seventh of the Seven. When Chris Adams asked for Vin, I, putting a cupped hand to my forehead,
was like: "Where? I don't see Steve." So, three of the seven original characters return, but two of them are played by
different actors, and the other four are brand new. So, how exactly does this make it the return of the Seven?
Save Yul Brynner, everybody is bland, boring, and lifeless and has the personality of wood. In fact, some of them look
like pieces of wood. Any time one speaks, it feels like an obligatory for him to perform a service to the profession of
oration. The chief reason why the film falls apart is that it has too many lines. Therefore, Chris Adams is less mythical.
Obviously, Yul Brynner looks bored, and I don't understand why he agreed to do the sequel. On the other
hand, the storyline is basically the same as the original which makes it all pointless.
All in all, Return of a Seventh of the Seven is a very, very bad movie with lots of animal abuse.
Return to Horror High (1987)
Rate:
1
Viewed:
4/13
4/13:
Well, talk about having great instincts.
George Clooney appeared in the first ten minutes of Return to Horror High only to walk out of the set forever,
leaving behind his character to be killed off. The rest of the film fell into an indescribable mess.
In short, Return to Horror High is one of the worst horror movies made. Nothing makes sense; it's been a series
of random scenes which is something like Plan 9 from Outer Space. In all
probability, Return to Horror High may be the Plan 10 from outer space.
After half an hour, I thought I could probably stomach it, but as the clock started to tick and tock by the minute,
the movie was getting worse and worse until the unfathomable ending. Almost a movie within a movie within a movie,
the plot jumps around a lot among these three, confusing me further.
All in all, George Clooney was smart to recognize a stinker from a mile away.
Return to Paradise (1998)
Rate:
9
Viewed:
11/23
11/23:
If Vince Vaughn and Anne Heche completely shamed themselves by redoing
Psycho, they more than make up for it by delivering powerful performances
in Return to Paradise, a remake of the French film Force majeure.
Deserving of Oscar nominations, they remind me of Marlon Brando and Eva Marie Saint from
On the Waterfront, and their chemistry was for real. The "prisoner's
dilemma" story is at once compelling and intelligent which sets up for a two-hour conscience picture. I don't
blame Sheriff and Tony for feeling this way and can identify with them. Who knew that throwing the wrecked
bike over the ravine would produce fatal consequences? What made Sheriff's decision easier is that he
gained a girlfriend after all. Either way, he's a hero.
Thinking about the all-time bad situation, I wonder if it happens for real. In my prescient review of
Midnight Express, I mentioned, "'Does the punishment fit the crime?'
is irrelevant here because he's not in the United States anymore. Billy traveled to a foreign country where
laws are different, no matter how illogical they are. Just respect them, don't cause problems, and leave quietly.
Life is easier this way." Then, I said, "Of course, Midnight Express
is a gritty picture about serving time in a foreign prison where anything goes just like its cuckoo criminal
justice system." Indeed so.
All in all, you can now wash your mind away of the Psycho remake by
checking out Return to Paradise.
Return to Peyton Place (1961)
Rate:
8
Viewed:
9/14
9/14:
I thought the original was a marvelous movie: just exactly what an insular small town is like that's protected by its bigotry and
holier-than-thou standards, and I should know because I used to live in one for three decades.
Return to Peyton Place promises more of the same, and it sure delivers. The first half is slow and boring at times,
rehashing what had happened in the previous film although there are shades of
Valley of the Dolls minus the drugs. In
fact, according to nhmagazine.com: "[Peyton Place's author] Grace [Metalious] melted down
just before her appearance on Mike Wallace's show. She accidently ripped her girdle, and a young assistant calmed her down.
Her name was Jacqueline Susann. Ten years later, she would write Valley of the Dolls."
Things are more ramped up during the second half with fireworks, thanks to Mary Astor as Roberta Carter which is one of the
finest portrayals of evil. She's absolute camp and does it with such nobleness. If there's going to be a third part, I imagine
the next controversy will be a black family settling in Peyton Place with her exclaiming: "How could you allow this family
of...dark...colored...people live in Peyton Place? It's a permanent stain upon this fine, clean, and white New England town."
Although it's annoying to see the original cast be completely redone, their replacements are identical in terms of appearance,
yet they've turned in strong performances, matching the standards and delicateness that are required of them. My weak rating of
'8' is due to loose ends.
All in all, Return to Peyton Place is an excellent follow-up to the original.
Revenge (1990)
Rate:
2
Viewed:
7/08
7/08:
I only picked up Revenge because I saw Kevin Costner's face on the DVD cover, but I didn't realize until afterwards it
was directed by Tony Scott which should've told me what I was in for.
The first hour wasn't so bad, but Anthony Quinn kept hogging the screen time with his loquaciousness. Then finally, Kevin
Costner and Madeleine Stowe started to get into it. Although she served up a couple of sexy moments, I became bored after seeing
many more of them. By the time these two got caught by the husband and were forced to pay the consequences, I almost didn't
care anymore. At the end, I was left with the crappy feeling of having seen a terrible movie.
Acting isn't the issue. It's rather the story which has been done many times before. Why
must the opening scene be so like Top Gun? I don't like how the camera panned from left to right
and vice versa in a herky-jerky manner. At least, Tony Scott didn't go Man on Fire on me.
The plot structure is loose, hence the need for tight editing. It also never feels plausible for a minute when the powerful
drug lord-husband (if that's what he is) let the guy off the hook after finding out about the affair. In fact, didn't Abel Ferrara do
this already for Cat Chaser with Peter Weller, Kelly McGillis, and Tomás Milián?
All in all, Revenge is a dud.
Revenge of the Nerds (1984)
Rate:
5
Viewed:
9/08
9/08:
Revenge of the Nerds is one of those films that fit the 80's very well but is no longer watchable today.
It's also thought of as a comedy classic which ran on television countless times back then, but now...wow, the movie is
quite dated. There are many misconceptions created about college. One thing is for sure: higher education
isn't about fraternities or sororities. One day, they'll be a thing of the past when deaths via alcohol poisoning
and hazing incidents have piled up so fast.
A rinky-dink college that populates seven thousand students doesn't become a national player in college football unless
we are talking about Division III which is full of jerkwater schools with obscure names. Oddly, there's hardly a scene of students
in class. Are the filmmakers telling me that Ogre is college material? Zoo is
where he belongs in. Not a single faculty member can be spotted except for a dean of something or the other.
During the competitions for the Greek council presidency, there's a lot of cheating going on, especially from the nerds who
have transitioned to sex offenders by installing video cameras in one sorority house. When the nerds arrive on campus at
the beginning, they're wearing coats and jackets as if it's late fall in the middle of August. That being said, global
warming is sure a reality.
All in all, Revenge of the Nerds is totally forgotten for lots of reasons.
Revenge of the Nerds II:
Nerds in Paradise (1987)
Rate:
3
Viewed:
9/08
9/08:
No, I was absolutely not looking forward to seeing Revenge of the Nerds II: Nerds in Paradise.
Starting it off with the Star Wars-like introduction is a big no-no. The idea of nerds being
treated like how the blacks were for decades through racism is enough to make me cringe because the ratio of average-looking
to good-looking people must be like 20 to 1, if not more. A lawsuit can be simply filed against the hotel for discrimination backed
with Sunny's damaging testimony.
Equally hard to watch is the war between the nerds and the models in Miami-esque setting. I honestly can say none of
them looks the part. Instead of entertainment, the movie runs on clichés, has no momentum, and ends predictably. If Lewis and
Betty are a couple, that means he cheated on her with Sunny which is an indication that the nerds can be as pathetic and
hypocritical as jocks.
All in all, Revenge of the Nerds II: Nerds in Paradise should've stopped the franchise dead on its tracks, but
unfortunately, there are two more sequels to go.
Revenge of the Nerds III:
The Next Generation (1992)
Rate:
2
Viewed:
9/08
9/08:
Revenge of the Nerds III: The Next Generation has finally hit rock bottom by becoming a telefilm.
The material is stale as ever, and there isn't an iota of comedy. It's almost akin to a twenty-five-year-old man-child
trying to come up with a good penis joke in a room full of urologists. The idea of advancing Nerdism like the Germans did
with Nazism is anathema enough for me to want to finish the movie as quickly and painlessly as possible.
A toss-up for the most hated character comes down to Harold (who's a sex offender for sure) and the Malcolm X wannabe. By the
way, why is it every time a comedy is produced, a black guy has to be just exactly that? At least, Clancy Brown makes an
appearance. I spent most of my time trying to guess who that was while being stuck between Woody Harrelson and Thom Matthews.
Speaking of cameos, Morton Downey, Jr., shows up; not many viewers will realize this, but he was the original Jerry Springer.
All in all, they should've ended the franchise already before green-lighting
Revenge of the Nerds III: The Next Generation.
Revenge of the Nerds IV:
Nerds in Love (1994)
Rate:
7
Viewed:
9/08
9/08:
I know the rating for Revenge of the Nerds IV: Nerds in Love looks high, but it has charm.
There have been moments that are a mix of good, bad, and ugly. Some scenes are mildly funny while the others are cringeworthy.
In spite of the negatives, I ended up having a good time. It's easily the best film of the entire franchise.
The acting is refreshingly good, and there are plenty of romance to go around. A huge reunion of nerds from the past is held
for this sequel which is nice. I like the stories which are lighthearted and well-meaning which isn't so much about the nerds
but rather the idea of embracing diversity.
All in all, they finally got it right in Revenge of the Nerds IV: Nerds in Love.
Revenge of the Ninja (1983)
Rate:
7
Viewed:
12/14
12/14:
Considered the best film of the ninja genre, Revenge of the Ninja is typical of a Golan-Globus production: low-budget,
tons of action-adventure, and high level of creativity.
Shô Kosugi is definitely the star of the show, and his martial art skills are amazing and realistic. He proves that CGI is
completely unnecessary. Of course, there are certain times it's easy to tell some modifications had to be made. For
instance, when Shô is scaling the wall with his claw hands, notice how it moves too much.
The final fight is an outstanding display of arts in deception and invisibility which is unlike most in other
films. Although some scenes are cartoonish, the violence is surprisingly graphic as people including children are bloodily
killed, even with shurikens on their heads.
Kane Kosugi is pretty good for a child actor with talent in martial arts, and I don't mind him as a replacement for any one of
the terrible kids in 3 Ninjas. I wonder why Sam Firstenberg, given the great start, didn't carry the same level
of quality over to the American Ninja franchise.
All in all, if you have to pick only one ninja picture, make it Revenge of the Ninja.
Reversal of Fortune (1990)
Rate:
8
Viewed:
5/08, 3/21
5/08:
Here's a famous, but completely forgotten, case which occurred during the early 80's:
One day, Sunny von Bülow, a wealthy Manhattan-Rhode Island socialite, slipped into a coma for the second time one year after
her first and never woke up again. By the way, she's still alive, and it's been 28 years now. Her husband, Claus, was convicted
of attempted murder by insulin overdose only to be fully acquitted in a successful appeal due to Sunny's self-administered
overdose of barbiturates which was combined with other drugs and food she ingested.
Jim Cramer, the very same one of Mad Money who worked for Alan Dershowitz during that time, thought Claus von Bülow was
"supremely guilty." Yet the lead counsel cleared up the air by stating: "I am not sure whether he [Jim Cramer] ever met von
Bülow, and his research on the case was minimal and did not involve issues of guilt or innocence. But Cramer, as a minor
research assistant, had absolutely no knowledge upon which to base his opinions. His opinion was based on abysmal ignorance
and a desire to make a point about why he hated law school and rarely attended his 'boring classes.'"
Enter Reversal of Fortune which netted Jeremy Irons an Academy Award for Best Actor. It's a good movie, but
the story is too linear. Although I like Jeremy Irons, his performance is overrated. There were worthier
candidates that year for the coveted award. Glenn Close gives a nice, if brief, supporting performance as Sunny von Bülow.
Playing Alan Dershowitz, Ron Silver shows he's a capable thespian, and his hair is different compared to what I'm accustomed
to. Sadly, his acting performances have dramatically crumbled since then.
All in all, Reversal of Fortune is compelling, but it lacks depth to make a long-lasting impact.
3/21:
There's the rich, and there's the ultra rich.
The brilliant panoramic opening shot of Reversal of Fortune shows how small people are compared to the vast
estates of Newport, Rhode Island, with their perfectly manicured lawns. But they don't have to feel bad after observing how
the von Bülows conduct their quotidian lives by staying in bed as often while chain-smoking and are out of it from drugs.
Yep, Jeremy Irons won the Oscar for his portrayal of Claus von Bülow but didn't meet the guy himself until three years
afterwards. Ending the film on a high but cryptic note, he's at his delicious best, and it's a superb performance. Ron Silver
has done an amazing job of playing Alan Dershowitz. I'm surprised he didn't get any acting accolades. Glenn Close is fine,
but it's no picnic for her, being in a coma most of the time.
Despite the great cinematography by Luciano Tovoli, the real problem is the script. It doesn't make sense most of the time.
Some clarity will be appreciated. Nevertheless, the high production values are enough to overcome it. Back then,
the von Bülow Case was a national cause célèbre, but now, it's practically forgotten. To this day, nobody knows if the husband
had done it or not. My opinion is: it's 51-49 in favor of his guilt. He lived until 2019, but Sunny remained a vegetable
for twenty-eight years until her death in 2008.
All in all, Reversal of Fortune is a supreme example of sublime filmmaking.
Revolution (1985)
Rate:
8
Viewed:
7/08, 7/13
7/08:
Revolution is a bit like Barry Lyndon yet is so far from it.
It's also a bit like The Last of the Mohicans yet is so far from it. But the
film was most defnitely there first before The Patriot, an ultra cheesy movie with Mel
Gibson and Heath Ledger, showed up. The cinematography is particularly
wonderful, and the costumes are well-done. There are many lovely shots, and I like how the characters are placed.
Plus, the mix of motley elements helps the film achieve the necessary atmosphere.
So, what went wrong in Revolution? How can a film that stars Al Pacino at the hands of Hugh Hudson, the director of
Chariots of Fire, fail? Simply put, there's no "middle." There is the introduction and
there is the end, but there's
no middle. The movie is full of style but no substance. Every time a battle happens, little is shown which is
disappointing. As for the setting, there seems to be exactly two locations: the docks and the grass field. How about coming up
with more?
Al Pacino, I admit, is completely miscast; he may have had the potential to give a polished performance. However, the way he acts
is like he showed up on the set just for one day, said his lines, and left. In other words, he's flat, boring, and emotionless.
It doesn't surprise me one bit this film nearly ruined his career.
Meanwhile, the love story between Tom Dobb and Daisy McConnahay isn't convincing because she looks old enough to be his
son's lover. She just comes and goes with the promise of coming back in the future on some battleground through some
odd chance. Also, her presence confuses the aim of Revolution, leaving me unsure if Hugh Hudson wanted a love story or a
retelling of the events during the American Revolution. As a result, his mind was never made up, thus wasting a valuable
opportunity to turn it into a three-hour epic that should've rivaled the best of the bunch:
The Birth of a Nation, Gone with the Wind,
Ben-Hur, and Schindler's List.
Donald Sutherland is among the greatest actors in history, and he gets to have the ugliest mole on his face? How ridiculous.
Every time the focus is on his character, I'm not sure how he connects to the overall story. The relationship between him and
his son is also pointless. By the way, when the closing credits came, I spotted a name that's the most interesting of them all:
General George Washington. I must beseech thee to spot him for me in the film because I'm quite sure that I never missed him.
Once again, Revolution should've been a three-hour epic, going from the Crispus Attucks incident to the Boston
Tea Party, from Lexington to Washington's crossing of Delaware River, from Yorktown to the Treaty of Paris, and from the
British's rule to the Declaration of Independence. There should be a display of sweeping changes and emotions amid the
divided groups of King's George loyalists and patriots as well as neutrals. It'll be a fascinating movie this way.
All in all, Revolution had the premise, but what a bad mess it has been with no clear message.
7/13:
I've changed my tune for Revolution and think of it as a fine picture.
It does well by creating ambivalence within the central character, Tom Dobbs (Al Pacino), in terms of fighting for
the cause. In the long run, changes come for him and his son as they go through harsh experiences. From time to time,
Daisy (Nastassja Kinski) pops in to check on how these two are doing. It can be emotional sometimes. Overall, I
won't say Revolution is a grand spectacle because it's a muddy and wet one, but that's what I like about the movie.
As time passes, there's a shift in the climate of how well the troops are faring although it's not always clear.
The plot is mostly told in a gist to speed up the timeline without referencing to any important event during the American Revolution.
In the end, it turns out that Tom had been cheated out of 150 acres and some money. What does this mean after all? And to
answer the question, I'm not sure.
All in all, Revolution isn't bad, and I've actually gotten into it very well.
The Revolutionary (1970)
Rate:
4
Viewed:
4/22
4/22:
Showing shades of 1984, The Revolutionary has a terrible script to begin with, but Jon Voight nearly saves it.
What's remarkable about Jon Voight is he can make something out of nothing as if it's second nature to him. I was pretty
much with the film. Then, it fell apart by the time his character was drafted. The rest of the way is bad, especially when
Seymour Cassel got into the act by being a jackass. I hate the ending which tried to force me to answer: Will he, or not?
Forget it...I'm not playing that game.
Thinking back, I think A is a wannabe revolutionary. He is like a small bough floating on a river that's almost moving
south. Nothing can make him be stuck for a while, so he's always on the move. Every time A faces a momentous decision, he's
vague about committing himself and then drifts along until something else is happening. Eventually, he'll reach the point of no
return and must ask himself: was this all worth it? There's a good scene with his father, offering plenty of layers to unearth.
That's when I thought Jon Voight was the perfect casting choice; amost nobody would've done the part justice.
Unfortunately, he had a bad director to begin with, hence the film's burial in complete obscurity.
At one point, I was scanning faces in the crowd, and there he was: just stood out as plain and clear, Jeffrey Jones in his
first movie. He wouldn't appear in another for a decade. Jennifer Salt isn't much of an actress who probably got the role by
virtue of her dating relationship with Jon Voight which started shortly before the filming of
Midnight Cowboy. Seymour Cassel is too silly to be taken seriously while Robert Duvall
is wasted in a thankless role as if he only showed up to pay his dues.
All in all, Jon Voight's performance is the only worthwhile aspect of The Revolutionary.
Revolver (1973)
Rate:
4
Viewed:
3/25
3/25:
A sensible script is essential in the creation of a successful film, but that's not the case for Revolver.
I don't know if there's mistranslation going on here, causing a disconnect with me. Either the writers were bad,
they didn't understand English well enough, or their words got away during the strange dubbing. Another
mistake is taking a trip to the Alps that serves no purpose. The plot makes zero sense, involving a rock star in
the kidnapping plot.
Having Oliver Reed on board goes a long way. He's right for the role. Unfortunately, his performance is
ultimately reduced to one-note due to the same type of line he keeps saying over and over. I attribute
this to bad direction or lack of imagination. It's particularly the reason that can make a huge difference in
some films Oliver Reed starred in such as Paranoiac,
The Hunting Party, and The Brood.
As for the supporting cast, it's full of amateurs. I'm not familiar with Fabio Testi;
obviously, he can't act. Ditto for Agostina Belli and Daniel Beretta. Because of his looks, the latter could've
played Jesus Christ at some point in his career. Interestingly, Daniel Beretta used to dub Arnold Schwarzenegger
in French in every film for nearly three decades. Frédéric de Pasquale is a familiar face from
The French Connection by playing an actor with the
clout to have the dirty car transported on boat from France to New York City.
The cinematography is Revolver's strongest asset as it's stunning in parts. At first, I thought Henri Decaë
might have done the work, but it turned out to be Aldo Scavarda. To my surprise, he's a nobody with a scant
résumé with the exception of L'Avventura. Strangely, it's the final picture of his career when he
could've done more and more.
All in all, too long by at least thirty minutes, Revolver is lost in translation.
Revolver (2005)
Rate:
2
Viewed:
5/24
5/24:
Stick a fork in Guy Ritchie; he's done.
Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels showed promise, and
Snatch was unique. But this one, Revolver, is the biggest piece of shit
I've come across in a while. It only takes five minutes into the film for me to scream, "Pretentious!"
Ray Liotta needed to take a long look in the mirror and ask himself, "Are you fucking kidding me?" While at that,
he should've sued whoever did his makeup job. Ditto for the other guy who was sitting next to him at the casino.
I don't have a single clue as to what the story is all about...none whatsoever. I kept falling asleep because it
was so boring. Because of Mr. Gold as a stand-in for Keyser Söze, did Guy Ritchie watch
The Usual Suspects to death and then pour in the ridiculous maxims
for the hell of it?
All in all, marrying Madonna was the biggest mistake of Guy Ritchie's life.
Rich and Strange (1931)
Rate:
3
Viewed:
5/24
5/24:
If not for Alfred Hitchcock's name, Rich and Strange, aka East of Shanghai, will be so obscure that it's a
wonder if anyone thought of seeing it nowadays.
For the most part, it feels like a twenty-minute picture that's stretched to four times as long. There's a strange mix of silent
and talkie cinematic elements despite the excellent editing for a while early on. That being said, Henry Kendall,
who plays an extremely unlikeable cad, is stuck with the past as shown on his face while Joan Barry has wisely moved forward
with the changing times. Hence, their differing acting styles have hurt Alfred Hitchcock's chances of making a successful film.
Meanwhile, the story is threadbare: a married couple from England is lucky to receive lots of money from a relative, goes on a
cruise, cheats on each other, comes to their senses, gets involved in a sinking on their way back, and is happy together again
when they're back home. If that seems like a lot packed into the film, believe me...it's not. Everything has been simply drawn out.
By the way, we don't say "Rangoon" anymore today; that will be Yangon which used to be the capital of Myanmar, a country that's
formerly known as Burma.
All in all, Rich and Strange may seem timeless in the filmmaking sense, but it offers nothing interesting besides the
fact that it was directed by Alfred Hitchcock.
The Rich Man's Wife (1996)
Rate:
4
Viewed:
6/20
6/20:
If you feel sorry for gold diggers who suddenly lost their sugar daddy, then The Rich Man's Wife is the film for you.
Let me digress for a minute here: Priscilla Presley, with the help of a ghostwriter, wrote an autobiography called
Elvis and Me. It became a national bestseller which was made into a telefilm. Twelve years later, Suzanne Finstad
came out with Child Bride: The Untold Story of Priscilla Beaulieu Presley that was both independently researched and
vetted by a law firm, refuting just about everything stated by Priscilla.
The moral is this: never believe somebody's version of how it went down as 100% truth. That's the trouble with
The Rich Man's Wife which begins with a woman telling the cops what happened.
Uh...The Usual Suspects,
anyone? Naturally enough, just as I predicted, she lied at the end, and therefore, the whole film became a sheer waste of time.
The cops letting her go, it's pure manipulation because she confessed to killing Cole, and nobody knows for sure if it was done in
self-defense.
I'm kind of curious here: while the wife was telling her story and it's supposed to be based on what she saw, heard, and
experienced, how would she know what the cops were talking about in the car during surveillance at the funeral? Ditto for
the encounter between Jake and Cole when they were alone.
At one point, the wife ran away from Cole by crossing over the high-traffic highway. So, how did she get back to her SUV which
was parked where she was running away from? I can see Cole sitting there and waiting for her to appear. Earlier, she was
driving her Wrangler until it died in the middle of the woods. All of a sudden, Cole showed up to help her out. Think about
that: coincidence or...planned? While in the garage, at the end of the film, he jumped through the window opening, but why?
In the meantime, the cast is all right, never hitting any point of suspense. Redundantly using her eyes to revive
clichéd moments of terror, Halle Berry wears too much makeup (check out her overlarge sunglasses) and never appears in any
scene without it. Her character should've lawyered up at the beginning after hearing what Cole did to her husband,
but then again, she told her version of the story. At the end, chances are: she'll never get the money, right?
Having a couple of bit parts in films such as The Usual Suspects and
Pulp Fiction, Peter Greene finally gets the
chance to shine in a bigger role. But this time, he looks like a caricature and is better off not having done it.
All in all, Halle Berry later confessed The Rich Man's Wife was the worst film she did.
Richard III (1955)
Rate:
4
Viewed:
10/08
10/08:
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Shakespeare's plays have no place in cinema.
Richard III is no exception to this rule because it's a deeply boring picture. Don't get me wrong. The performances are
excellent, the acting is impeccable, and the writing is as good as any. There's no question Laurence Olivier was the
master of the Bard.
But the language is four hundred goddamn years old. We no longer speak this way anymore. Today's English is much clear-sounding
to the ear. Because of the old language, the entertainment value of Richard III is practically nil. I'm sure there
are people who will disagree strongly with what I've just said, holding Shakespeare's work sacred, but it's 2008, not 1623!
There are complaints about the low quality of costumes and interior sets. To be honest with you, plain and simple are exactly
how I envision Old England, and they appear correct as opposed to the unrealistic-looking, lavishly wasteful apparel
that are common in films of today.
All in all, I would rather see Die Hard again than sit through another minute of
Richard III.
Richard III (1995)
Rate:
2
Viewed:
2/14
2/14:
Upon seeing the trailer of Richard III, I was fooled into thinking that it might be a modern picture about the dictator.
However, the title's inference had given me a disquietude: *shudder* Shakespearean language. Lo and behold! My fears sadly
came true. Unsurprisingly, Richard III was a complete box-office failure because nobody, and I mean nobody,
wanted to see it. I honestly didn't want to, either. Hadn't I endured enough from Laurence Olivier?
This version is so full of anachronisms (my horse for a kingdom!), Nazification, and poorly written, outdated lines that it has
become a confusing, deplorable mess. Shakespeare and cinema are like oil and water; they don't mix...never have and never will.
All in all, Richard III serves as a bad excuse to make smoking cigarettes in a different way look cool.
Ricochet (1991)
Rate:
7
Viewed:
10/04, 5/06
5/06:
Showcasing Denzel Washington at top of his physical peak, Ricochet is a fine film that moves well for a thriller
but is ultimately marred by Ice-T's presence and bad ending.
My absolute favorite scene is when Denzel Washington took off his clothes during the hostage crisis. The whole thing makes
no goddamn sense, but it's a great movie moment nonetheless. Denzel Washington gives an outstanding performance and shines
like a 24-karat gem. John Lithgow plays a mean guy well once again.
The film loses its focus toward the finish line because Nick Styles isn't yet out of the woods as he's still implicated in
the murder of his partner. There's the videotape of him having sex with a prostitute along with the pool shaming incident and
what happened with the clown in public.
All in all, Ricochet is an enjoyable Denzel Washington picture that leaves behind many loose ends.
The Right Stuff (1983)
Rate:
7
Viewed:
10/06, 8/21
10/06:
Move over, Top Gun morons; it's time for The Right Stuff.
A highly technical but fascinating film, its importance in American history cannot be overstated, showcasing the birth of NASA
and the space race. Unfortunately, there are glaring aspects that I don't like.
First, I hate when The Right Stuff decides to focus so much on Chuck Yeager and four characters from the Mercury
Seven, but there's little attention on the other three (Wally Schirra, anyone?). I don't understand this move
and think they're all equally important.
Second, it wasn't the astronauts who made the space program possible but rather the countless mathematicians, physicians,
engineers, technicians, and chemists, among others. Let's just say they were the means and the astronauts the ends.
Third, it isn't a visually good picture, failing to clear the high bar that was set by
2001: A Space Odyssey.
Fourth, although The Right Stuff is an educational picture for the sake of history, it drags a lot, is overlong,
and has many useless scenes.
Fifth, I'm not sure why, after showcasing Chuck Yeager's achievements so much, the filmmakers didn't include achievements
by the Wright brothers. How about Robert Goddard who was the first in the world to launch a liquid-fueled rocket successfully?
In fact, the Goddard Space Flight Center was named after him, being NASA's first, and is now the oldest space center.
Sixth, did LBJ really act like that? I don't think so.
All in all, the astronauts were chosen to go up in space because they simply had the right stuff, hence the movie title.
8/21:
Based on Tom Wolfe's book, The Right Stuff is about the nascient history of NASA and the search for men who had *drum
roll* the right stuff.
It begins with a pilot that most people today have never heard of: Chuck Yeager. Famous for breaking the sound barrier and
setting many speed and altitude records in air, he just died last December and was 97, having outlived every character in the
film. His work was instrumental in making the space flight possible. A lot of what happened as shown did occur including
two broken ribs during the horse ride. The two reasons why Chuck Yeager didn't become an astronaut despite having the right
stuff are that he only had a high school diploma and that he was a very racist person.
Everybody in the United States was caught off guard on October 4, 1957, when the Russians successfully launched Sputnik I.
It was the greatest accomplishment in the country's history which happened during the Cold War. Hence, the space race was on,
hyper-fueling money and attention in math and science curriculums. Many Americans suddenly thought they were
so far behind the Russians, but in truth, their technology was already advanced while the Russians' wasn't that great; they
were only successful in keeping up the bluff until the end of the Cold War.
Then, the Mercury program was underway with a lot of firsts. The incident with Gus Grissom happened for real. How it was
portrayed in the film is quite controversial. The capsule was fished out in 1999 and then examined, finally exonerating Grissom
after Wally Schirra proved on purpose in 1962 one would have to have a deep bone-bruise on his hand which is something
Grissom never had to begin with. Therefore, he didn't blow the hatch on purpose.
It may be a surprise that The Right Stuff was a box-office bomb, but I can understand why; it's a long, technical
movie. A lot of what's shown is true for the most part but is overly dramatic, but LBJ's cartoonish behavior? I don't think
so. The actual Mercury Seven astronauts didn't like the film, calling the whole thing made-up. By the way, the
Gonzalez character who has a problem with Alan Shepard (Scott Glenn), who later landed on the moon and played golf there,
is Anthony Muñoz, the Hall of Fame linebacker for the Cincinnati Bengals.
The direction is a major problem; Philip Kaufman spends too much time on certain people like Chuck Yeager and Gordon Cooper,
throwing the film off its balance. Although I understand the next two phases, the Gemini and the Apollo programs, weren't
covered in the book, it's disappointing that they were still omitted in the film. Also, I would've liked to watch the first lunar
landing for the sake of completeness.
All in all, although slow, long, and highly technical, The Right Stuff is a great film that should be seen to
appreciate how the space race came to be.
Righteous Kill (2008)
Rate:
6
Viewed:
9/23
9/23:
What came to my mind the most while watching Righteous Kill was why Robert De Niro and Al Pacino didn't do films
together during their prime like the late 70's.
Hell, get Martin Scorsese while they're at it. De Niro and Pacino appeared in
The Godfather Part II but for separate
threads. Then, they did Heat, but it's more of a cheat as they were never in the same frame.
Now, we have them truly together in Righteous Kill, but the result is mixed.
For starters, they're good, but I'm surprised to see Robert De Niro in top form this late given his output of terrible
performances since 2000. Al Pacino turns into a caricature at the end once again and did the exact same thing in
The Recruit. In retrospect, Scarface really ruined
his acting style.
For a long time, it was obvious Turk was the serial killer. Even his suspicious behavior gave him away. When the twist came,
it seemed to be initially clever, but the more I thought about it, the less it made sense. Then, Turk stopped acting like he's
the guy. Whatever. Hence, the filmmakers should've done everybody a favor by going with the obvious which would be acceptable enough.
All in all, Righteous Kill may be enjoyable for seeing Robert De Niro and Al Pacino finally together in the same film,
but the stupid twist ruins it.
The Ring (2002)
Rate:
9
Viewed:
1/06
1/06:
I've been asked many times if I had seen The Ring but always replied in the negative.
Finally, I got around to seeing the film given its enormous reputation, and I've come to agree with them. Gore Verbinski
has done a good job, establishing himself as an innovator of some style in the terror genre.
However, I have to reserve my judgment by checking out the originator which came four years earlier: a Japanese film
called Ringu by Hideo Nakata. Meanwhile, Naomi Watts is outstanding, and she has created a niche for herself:
an investigative scream queen. Also, there's great acting by Martin Henderson as Noah.
All in all, Ringu needs to be seen first before releasing my full judgment of The Ring.
The Ring Two (2005)
Rate:
2
Viewed:
1/06
1/06:
Hollywood has taught me a cardinal rule that's nearly inviolable: horror sequels suck.
I'm afraid this is painfully true for The Ring Two. Consequently, I've wasted two hours by watching nothing but crap.
Because the director is replaced, the original touch has been irrevocably lost. To make matters worse, the suspense is
also gone. All there's left is fluff. The kid, who plays Aidan, is so anoying that I wish he would die violently.
All in all, it has been a long wait for me to reach the end of The Ring Two.
Ringmaster (1998)
Rate:
6
Viewed:
11/20
11/20:
A notorious bad movie back in the 90's, I didn't see Ringmaster until now.
Yes, it's trashy, but it's good, entertaining trash. The thespians really believed in the material so much that they put
forth wonderful performances. It's the biggest reason why the film gets a '6' from me in spite of not caring for Jerry Springer.
The best of the bunch is Molly Hagan as Connie's mother. She plays an almost endearing but totally flawed
character. On the other hand, Jaime Pressly is the hottest thing going. I'm surprised to see Michael Dudikoff,
but he finally shows some personality compared to the American Ninja films.
I was never a regular viewer of The Jerry Springer Show during the 90's, but it achieved the feat of being the first
to beat The Oprah Winfrey Show in ratings. Yet everything was scripted: the people, the stories, and, most of all,
the fights. Therefore, why bother with such garbage?
All in all, Ringmaster brings respectability to trash, but it's not quite on John Waters' level.
The Rink (1916)
Rate:
1
Viewed:
10/07
10/07:
I'm beginning to notice more that Charlie Chaplin had physical talent.
Yet I've been thinking of how to describe Charlie Chaplin as a performer. Hence, this is the best I can
come up with: imagine a one-man show featuring him. A young boy walks by and yells, "Look, ma! A freak!"
All in all, The Rink is what it is: a freak show.
Riot in Cell Block 11 (1954)
Rate:
8
Viewed:
3/16
3/16:
The moment I saw the name of the director for Riot in Cell Block 11, I instantly knew I was going to be in for a
treat because Don Siegel had proven again and again that he could deliver first-rate entertainment.
It's this film's success that led him to make
Invasion of the Body Snatchers, an all-time B movie classic. Also,
it provided the very first work for Sam Peckinpah who would go on to direct
The Wild Bunch, Straw Dogs,
and Junior Bonner.
There's an eerie déjà vu which would be the basis of the Attica Prison Riot that took place in 1971. Let's face it: the public
doesn't care about prisoners, prefering them to be locked up and the key thrown away forever. I'm also of the same mind and
don't have any sympathy for them. Their beef about prison conditions are trivial. Yet the film is as well-done as it can
be.
However, the guards have got a long way to go if they want to be safe. They should've been better equipped for the crisis.
Also, no self-respecting prison official will divulge confidential information in front of the prisoners during critical
moments. The ten-minute ending is too 50's for me to swallow.
All in all, prison riots never work in reality, and Riot in Cell Block 11 shows why.
Ripley's Game (2002)
Rate:
9
Viewed:
12/17, 1/22
12/17:
Ripley's Game is a strange, unusual movie, but it works pretty well.
I have seen Plein soleil and The Talented Mr. Ripley, and each lead actor plays
the same character differently for various reasons. But there's no question that John Malkovich was born to be Tom Ripley.
I liked Dougray Scott in Mission: Impossible II and was curious to see him in
another film. It turns out he didn't do that bad in Ripley's Game. Yet his performance isn't consistently convincing.
Ray Winstone is well known for Sexy Beast with Ben Kingsley. As gregarious as
Reeves, I wish there was less profanity in his lines. The more he curses, the more cartoonish his character becomes.
Remember the moment when Jonathan was insulting his brother and Tom asked him repeatedly for his "meaning"? Then, think to
later about why the whole thing happened the way it did. This was about revenge for Tom Ripley, a man of no conscience, who
didn't care about the consequences either way.
At one point during the train scene, I had thought of a Hitchcock movie called
Strangers on a Train. It turns out
that it was Patricia Highsmith's first novel and she also wrote the book series (1955-1991) about Tom Ripley
(The Talented Mr. Ripley, Ripley Under Ground, Ripley's Game, The Boy Who Followed Ripley,
and Ripley Under Water).
All in all, John Malkovich is perfect as Tom Ripley.
1/22:
John Malkovich was born to play Tom Ripley.
Like Dougray Scott and Ray Winstone, it's a perfect casting choice. Ripley's Game has a strange plot. It's unclear
if Ripley wanted to take a revenge on his brother for verbally insulting him in front of friends or give him the most
criminal adventure of his life because he was going to die sooner than later. At any rate, the cinematography, especially
the interior, is magnificent.
All in all, John Malkovich should've gotten at least an Oscar nomination for Ripley's Game.
Rising Sun (1993)
Rate:
6
Viewed:
8/04, 2/19
2/19:
The moment that really bothered me whenever I thought of Rising Sun is when Sean Connery and Wesley Snipes
were fighting with Japanese henchmen and stopped themselves early in the middle of the fight to walk away.
This just does not happen in any film. Watching it again, I realize now a diversion had been created, but whatever.
That's exactly what Rising Sun is to me: a big whatever. I prefer Black Rain
more because of the gritty edge.
Walking on water, Sean Connery isn't bad and makes things interesting. Wesley Snipes is bland and may
have been miscast but has a nice one with Alexandra Powers during the most powerful moment of attempted seduction.
All in all, Rising Sun offers something for everyone whether they are into business, Sean Connery, Japanese culture,
or kinky sex.
Risky Business (1983)
Rate:
10
Viewed:
9/13
9/13:
Risky Business is a classic 80's Tom Cruise picture and is the one that made him a household name.
His character is so much better and more real than Dustin Hoffman's from The Graduate. It's
easier to identify with him than Benjamin Braddock. Funnily enough, they'll star together in
Rain Man five years later.
On the other hand, it's a surprise that Rebecca De Mornay, given how much Hollywood loves hookers, didn't get an
Oscar nomination for her performance. She's just great.
All in all, Risky Business supersedes The Graduate.
The Rival Mashers (1914)
Rate:
1
Viewed:
6/07
6/07:
Me crawling on my fours...
Looking for a gun...ready to do it...an act of desperation in
Harvey Keitel-Bad Lieutenant way. Hence,
The Rival Mashers is somewhere in the IQ of 5 territory. There's no coherent story in sight.
All in all, I'm happy and pleased to know that Charlie Chaplin is largely forgotten today because his
films are too scatterbrained to be taken seriously.
The River (1984)
Rate:
5
Viewed:
5/21
5/21:
Despite a couple of dramatic scenes, The River is very, very, very average.
If it wasn't for Mel Gibson's huge star power, the movie would've been difficult to sit through. Nothing much happens.
It's kind of like watching The Grapes of Wrath all over again except the family
stays, thanks to one man's immense stubbornness only because his ancestors were buried there.
To be honest, my advice to the wife is: just move away with the kids. The agriculture occupation is too difficult which
is often marred with high rates of suicide in the face of low income. There's no question the land will be flooded
heavily from time to time. In fact, it's not really about the river, so why not call the movie The Flood?
There are two scenes I spoke of for showing drama power, and they're the wife's arm being caught in the drive
train underneath the tractor and the husband making a stand for his principles by blocking the flow once more. Other than
them, there's a lot of ordinariness going on. At least, Vilmos Zsigmond's cinematography is outstanding, earning himself
one out of four career Academy Award nominations.
Tanned and handsome-looking, Mel Gibson is strangely aloof; in fact, he appears to be out of his element compared to Henry
Fonda as Tom Joad. The word is Mel Gibson begged hard for the role and then later admitted he was simply miscast. An Oscar
nomination went to Sissy Spacek, but she's merely okay. Scott Glenn repeats his Wes Hightower schtick but
without taking any action.
All in all, The River will resonate the most with farmers and those who had faced similar situations.
River of No Return (1954)
Rate:
5
Viewed:
5/25
5/25:
Picture this in River of No Return.
It's the West of 1875. Marilyn Monroe is inside the tent, belting out a dance hall song, while being surrounded by
fifty men. And nobody has rape on his mind? Only in Hollywood. At least, Robert Mitchum's character has the
sense to entertain thoughts of it before a mountain lion showed up to stop him from going further.
Anyway, I hate the ugly color treatment, ultimately ruining the film. It's hard to believe this one was done in
Technicolor. Many shots don't match up well. The fake whitewater rafting scenes are also a downer. Obviously, the
big ones are done with rear projection effect, and anything else is either a long shot that renders the
stunt doubles of Robert Mitchum and Marilyn Monroe impossible to discern or a simple shot that's safe for the
stars to handle on calm water.
Robert Mitchum and Marilyn Monroe are okay for the most part but have been saddled with a crummy script. When
they're wet, the two big blankets they've taken on the trip are improbably dry. Marilyn Monroe's make-up and
hair are always impeccable, no matter how bad the situation is. The little boy means nothing in the grand scheme
of things and therefore should've been cut out. To make the ending work, he can play a customer in the store and
shoot Rory Calhoun in the back.
All in all, River of No Return is strictly for Marilyn Monroe addicts who like to waste their time in
quibbling over whether or not it's her singing and/or playing the guitar.
A River Runs Through It (1992)
Rate:
8
Viewed:
3/04, 7/13, 8/20
7/13:
The first of two Montana Brad Pitt pictures, A River Runs Through It is mythically sublime.
I've come to the realization it's a moral story about how somebody who seems to need the most help can't be
helped because, like the title says, a river runs through it.
Of course, it's nice to see the three topics of religion, Montana, and fly fishing interweave together as a tale to be told.
The Oscar-winning cinematography is a lovely touch, and of course, who can't up there? Superb performances come from Craig
Sheffer, Brad Pitt, Tom Skerritt, Emily Lloyd, and Brenda Blethyn. They're all perfectly cast.
All in all, A River Runs Through It is a well-crafted masterpiece with a lot of hidden meanings.
8/20:
A River Runs Through It is a pretty, well-directed picture by Robert Redford.
The story is simplistic; it's the summer, making for the last time two brothers are together, and one of them dies.
As they say, a river runs through it because people are difficult to understand or control. Of course, Brad Pitt is the
glue; he's a darling, and this is the film that saw his career take off. But Craig Sheffer and Tom Skerritt
can't be counted out as they're also a big part of it.
I love the cinematography by Philippe Rousselot, especially the fly fishing scenes; in fact, it won the Oscar.
A nomination went for Best Adapted Screenplay, coming from Norman Maclean's novella, which is well-deserved with
the last lines being exactly as written. The author died two years prior to the film's release, and thus, he never got to see it.
All in all, A River Runs Through It may be the best representation of Montana.
The River Wild (1994)
Rate:
8
Viewed:
6/25
6/25:
Where River of No Return fails, which is many areas,
The River Wild delivers.
I'm impressed with the whitewater rafting scenes. The filmmakers didn't cheat in editing. The next best part is
the performances by Meryl Streep and Kevin Bacon who's very believable as the bad guy. They did their own
stunts in most scenes; the extremely dangerous ones were done by professionals. Not to miss is the wonderful
cinematography which was shot on location in Oregon and Montana apart from Boston, Massachusetts, for the opening.
But yeah, there are questions. The biggest of them all is: why not get off before the Gauntlet
is about to commence and just walk for two miles before getting back on the water? If so, that would mean Wade
and Terry didn't need the family after all. How about Gail hitting them with oars at the right time when
they're in the rapids and/or the river is moving quickly and it's in the deep portion? That being so, it'll
be impossible to hold on to anything, let alone trying to shoot the gun.
Kevin Bacon sure likes to slap people, huh? The only one who didn't get the treatment from him is Meryl Streep.
The sign language used by everybody is 100% accurate. However, when it comes to reading the pictographs on the
rock to warn Gail, they aren't clear. Gail classifying the rapids is how it's done with the numbers going
from I to VI with VI being the most difficult. David Strathairn must be a superhero after taking so much
abuse from Kevin Bacon, falling down so much, traversing the country, and setting up the most intricate gotcha.
All in all, if anyone wants a fun action-adventure picture, this is it: The River Wild.
River's Edge (1986)
Rate:
10
Viewed:
3/06, 5/15
3/06:
River's Edge is an exceptional, absorbing motion picture that's a study of social disaffection among teenagers.
The film is apathetic as they come, and the story is compelling with insight into loss of meaning of life. There are two
outstanding performances by Crispin Glover and Daniel Roebuck. I like Dennis Hopper as Feck. Everybody else is good, too.
All in all, River's Edge is a well-directed masterpiece by Tim Hunter.
5/15:
There are a lot of things I remember about River's Edge: the naked deceased girl, Crispin Glover's
spaced-out performance, Daniel Roebuck's chilling soulless eyes, and Keanu Reeves' appearance.
Most importantly, it's a cult masterpiece that offers a realistic insight into teenager's social disaffection in the face of death. The characters live in the moment and try to get stoned or drunk as much as
they can. When they see their deceased friend lying on the ground, it's like she went away on vacation despite having grown up
with her since kindergarten. There's an interesting psychological aspect about the whole scene in terms of shock
and apathy. Nobody wants to be the fink, so they just say nothing and therefore get on with their lives.
There are many excellent performances which are hauntingly real. My favorite has to be Crispin Glover whose character is
so spaced-out that he's pretty weird himself. What's interesting is his perverse set of values. Layne is so stoked by the
murder that he wants to protect his classmate, regardless of their superficial friendship, by proving his loyalty and
doing what he can to help him get away with the murder.
Daniel Roebuck as Samson gets my vote as the creepiest character although Dennis Hopper's Feck is almost as crazy as him.
The interactions between them are among the best scenes, and their psychoses are equally convincing. Because of Dennis Hopper,
River's Edge is almost Rebel Without a Cause all over again.
Another weirdo is Joshua Miller who plays the brother to Keanu Reeves' character. I suppose it's because of their looks. I like
the series of his actions, leading up to the moment that he's ready to kill his brother for trivial reasons. Keanu Reeves is
perfect, but his performance is nothing interesting. He'll do a similar film a couple years later:
Permanent Record. Everybody else blends in the ambience to give it a realistic feel.
All in all, River's Edge is Rebel Without a Cause of the 80's.
RKO 281 (1999)
Rate:
8
Viewed:
12/15
12/15:
Citizen Kane is a legendary film.
Adding more to the legend makes it even more fascinating. That's what RKO 281 did. At the beginning, I had my doubts
about Liev Schreiber, who looked nothing like Orson Welles (Vincent D'Onofrio would've been a more suitable choice), but
he did pull through.
Having John Malkovich on board is a bonus. His character Herman Mankiewicz wrote the screenplay for
Citizen Kane along
with Orson Welles, netting them an Oscar. James Cromwell is perfect as the myopic newspaper magnate William Randolph Hearst.
The story of how the famous movie was conceived is extremely interesting. Most of the information as presented is true,
but it's hard to say for the authenticity of the rest (the Manolete story, anyone?). At the same time, plenty of Wellesian
ironies are peppered throughout. On the downside, there aren't enough technical scenes in terms of how
Citizen Kane was
made. A good example is using a low-angle shot to film the characters in front of the overhead ceiling. Come on...more, please!
All in all, RKO 281 is fascinating that's full of Citizen Kane tidbits.
Road House (1948)
Rate:
4
Viewed:
12/15
12/15:
Road House is a tale of two halves that are plagued with problems.
The plot takes too long to get to the point, and when it finally comes, the picture starts to show why it's a
film noir. Then, the rest of the way is more of "blah." *eyes roll* Please give me a break with the bowling
scene. Also, the court case is a farce to sit through.
Richard Widmark is the only reason why I selected the film, the third of his career, and he's excellent playing Tommy Udo
the nightclub owner. However, his co-star Cornel Wilde is flat and expressionless. It's not the finest hour for Ida Lupino.
She has no chemistry with either male and pretends to sing by talking. Celeste Holm is forgettable.
All in all, Road House is strictly for Richard Widmark fans who can't get enough of his Tommy Udo persona.
Road House (1989)
Rate:
7
Viewed:
6/10, 8/18
6/10:
Road House is an easy target as one of the cheesiest films from the 80's, but if given the chance,
it's actually a decent show with high replayability value.
Patrick Swayze is entertaining, and his looks have always been handsome in an unusual way. Hence, he's easy to watch, and pretty
much all of his films are the same way as well. His character is a walking contradiction because he practices tai chi
yet chain-smokes incessantly.
The trouble with Road House is the running length. It starts off well and has an okay finish but loses momentum in
the middle. The reason is that there are too many fights. Plus, it's hard for me to believe nobody has a gun for the longest time.
Dalton would've been finished much earlier unless he had a gun, too.
Doc is a strange gal. At first, she was repulsed by Dalton killing a man, which was actually justified in the name of
self-defense, and wanted him to stay away from her. After he put the archvillain away for good with the help of several
locals, she happily came running to him. Uh, okay...mucho hypocrite? Of course, it's also weird that Dalton rents a room
right across the lake from where Brad Wesley's house is located.
All in all, Road House is an enjoyable movie if you try not to read too much into it.
8/18:
Road House is a fun "don't think too much about it" flick starring Patrick Swayze as the cooler-manager of
bouncers at a rowdy bar in the middle of nowhere.
Fights happen on a nightly basis, and bouncers get beaten up while escorting instigators out of the bar. It's truly hard
to believe guns don't exist for a long time until the end. Although I like Patrick Swayze's character who has a good
approach in terms of defusing situations, I hate the fact that he has to smoke so much. It's just contradictory given that
he graduated from NYU with a major in philosophy and practices tai chi. Other than that, he's fun to watch. So is the movie
although it runs a bit long.
Ben Gazzara plays an evil guy, but after a while, questions start to come up. Eventually, because he's been exposed for too long,
his character becomes one-dimensional. I was more curious about his relationship to Jimmy (Marshall Teague) and whether they
were father-son or gay lovers. This part has never been made clear to me. Sam Elliott's appearance as Wade Garrett is a strange
one. He's kind of corny, but whatever. Sam Elliott has claimed in interviews that his role in Road House is what he's
recognized for the most. I have to agree with his assessment because he's barely in anything else as far as I'm concerned.
As often as I've seen the film, I didn't realize Jeff Healey was both legitimately blind and an accomplished
musician. He, having passed away in 2008 from sarcoma cancer at age 41, lost his sight to retinoblastoma which is a rare
cancer of the eyes, and his eyes were surgically removed and replaced with ocular prostheses. Interestingly, because of his
knee injury during filming, Patrick Swayze had to turn down Tango & Cash and
Predator 2, opting for easier work which turned out to be
Ghost that obviously made his career again post-Dirty Dancing.
All in all, Road House has been routinely voted as one of the worst and cheesiest films made, but that's ridiculous because
it's a good movie.
Road to Singapore (1940)
Rate:
3
Viewed:
7/04, 3/08
3/08:
If Bing Crosby donned a hockey mask during the 80's, he would look exactly like Jason Voorhees, and an interesting
coincidence is that one of his sons appeared as Bill in Friday the 13th.
Of course, I'm digressing. When I saw Road to Singapore for the first time, I thought it was a funny film. Now, seeing it again,
and er...it's not so funny anymore and is perhaps now outdated. Most of the reason is due to nonexistent story, loose subplots, and
numerous stop-and-sing moments.
Mainly a radio star who got cast in a breakthrough role, Bob Hope would've turned Road to Singapore into a riotous
picture had he been used more often. However, let's be fair: it's the beginning of Bob Hope-Bing Crosby collaboration.
They work really well together, and it's easy to see them ad-libbing many times. Bob and Bing would go on to make six more
films for the Road to... franchise. Dorothy Lamour appeared in all of them and was quite beautiful in her time. The very
young-looking Anthony Quinn makes his appearance.
By far the best moment is when Bob Hope and Bing Crosby do the patty-cake thing before getting the hell out of dodge.
Interestingly, the title indicates the setting takes place in Singapore, but the whole time, it's been Kaigoon which doesn't
exist in real life. So, why not call it Road to Kaigoon?
All in all, if Road to Singapore was more of a laugh-a-minute than stop-and-sing picture, I would've enjoyed it more.
Road Trip (2000)
Rate:
7
Viewed:
6/04, 6/05, 7/18
6/05:
Compellingly funny, Road Trip is easy to watch and always fresh every time I see it.
The aftermath of the car jump scene is the clincher of the film's comedy. I love the idea of E.L. stealing a yellow bus from
the school for the blind. Seann William Scott is pretty much the man of the show, and he's funny. Tom Green certainly makes
things interesting, especially when he's narrating the story. His character who can't wait to feed the snake a mouse
is absolutely hilarious.
All in all, Road Trip is worth watching.
7/18:
Road Trip is still a funny movie after all the years that have passed.
What makes it work is the little incidents that happen along the way on the trip to either Austin or Boston. Some of the
best moments are the aftermath of the car jump, Barry's fascination with the mouse and the snake, and E.L. stealing a yellow
bus from the school for the blind. Of course, any successful comedy film must have a story for the humor to work, and this
one definitely has it. Not everybody needs to be one-dimensional or perfect. Hence, it's smart of the writers to come up with
Kyle who's an abnormal but unforgettable character.
The cast is fabulous and has great chemistry. Of the thespians, the catalyst is Seann William Scott who knows how to amp it
up in order to take the comedy to another level. Tom Green isn't so bad himself. The toe-licking pervert on the bus is
Todd Phillips, the director of Road Trip. On a sad note, Mia Amber Davis, the plus-sized black actress who plays
Kyle's love interest, died on May 10, 2011, one day after her knee surgery, due to pulmonary embolism which may have
been triggered by birth control pills.
By the way, as shown in the beginning, the flyover scene isn't of Ithaca University (nor is there one as the real school is
called Ithaca College which is located in upstate New York) but Harvard University. And there exists no veterinary school at
the University of Texas at Austin even though the film refers to it as the University of Austin. It's only offered at, out of
the entire state, Texas A&M University.
All in all, there have been many high school/college comedy films the last twenty years that are either crass or offensive,
but Road Trip separates itself from the pack for being well-done.
The Road Warrior (1981)
Rate:
9
Viewed:
7/04, 12/04, 7/07, 7/21
7/07:
It's hard to explain to somebody, who didn't first taste the pre-CGI cinema world, why The Road Warrior was a
thrilling film during the early 80's.
Fast forward to today, yeah...the movie looks average although the stunts are world-class. The story is bare bones and
silly most of the time. Occasionally, I'm put to sleep although the original did do that to me more often.
Yet I remember how The Road Warrior was the rage for a long time. It made Mel Gibson a household name, and he only had
sixteen lines of dialogue. I sometimes wonder if Lord Humungus' hockey goalie mask served as an inspiration for Jason Voorhees
of Friday the 13th.
All in all, the unbelievable stunts did make The Road Warrior an outstanding picture in the heyday,
but it's now outdated.
7/21:
Changing my mind, The Road Warrior seems to have aged well, and it's still the best post-apocalyptic picture made.
Compared to Mad Max, the movie moves quicker, is equipped with better story, and has more
interesting yet less annoying characters. Coupled with the terrific editing, the stunts are still out of the world. The opening
and closing scenes are unbeatable as well.
Having only sixteen lines of dialogue during the entire film, Mel Gibson is better this time around. Instead of being too
clean-cut, he's dirty and more in tune with the barren environment. There are many weird characters clad in leather. I
suppose it's the only time when the bondage apparel starts to make sense. By the way, Emil Minty, who plays the feral
kid, is actually a he.
All in all, a highly creative action-adventure movie, The Road Warrior is far better than
Mad Max.
Roadhouse 66 (1984)
Rate:
5
Viewed:
6/21
6/21:
Take away Willem Dafoe, and Roadhouse 66 has nothing going for it.
The movie was doing fairly well until the car race and then sputtered badly all the way to the end. At the same time, I noticed
the loss of momentum when Willem Dafoe was gone for a bit while. Hence, he's too good for this piece of shit, having moved on
to do serious pictures with an A-list cast.
Oh, that god-awful car race. There's no question everybody was driving less than fifteen miles per hour. The first two
Mad Max films had characters going at least four times faster while doing incredible stunts.
In Roadhouse 66, it begins with six cars. The drivers of the four are known, but for the final two, I'm never shown their
faces.
The cast is all right which includes Judge Reinhold and Alan Autry. There's a good reason why each is memorable for one and only
one thing: the former, Beverly Hills Cop, and the latter,
In the Heat of the Night. Forget the young ladies;
one of them saw her career go way south and disappeared from Hollywood four years afterwards.
All in all, the rookie director should've skipped the car race by relying on the chemistry among Willem Dafoe, Judge Reinhold,
Kaaren Lee, and Kate Vernon to make Roadhouse 66 work.
Roadie (1980)
Rate:
6
Viewed:
4/21, 1/22
4/21:
Like many of its time, Roadie is a loud, go-bonkers picture with weird characters engaging in senseless hijinks.
This sort of formula started to subside during the 90's and was seen no more thereafter. I guess people wised up by realizing
they were making stupid movies although most of the content was actually creative. I don't have anything against them,
but sometimes, I wish they had more substance.
So anyway, Roadie isn't bad for the most part. Plenty of young-looking luminaries from the late 70's and early 80's rock
'n' roll make their appearance: Hank Williams, Jr., Roy Orbison (whose moribund career was actually revived by this movie),
Debbie Harry, and Alice Cooper. Sadly, they're underwhelming, only showing up for the music part.
Of the cast, I'm surprised Meat Loaf didn't sing, but he more than makes up for it by playing an endearing character
who's instantly likeable. His on-screen relationship with Kaki Hunter reminds me of Paul Le Mat and Mackenzie Phillips
in American Graffiti. It's largely the reason why Roadie worked out.
All in all, Roadie is a nice small gem in Alan Rudolph's résumé before scoring big time with
Keith Carradine in two films: Choose Me and The Moderns.
1/22:
Meat Loaf and Kaki Hunter are the heart and soul of Roadie.
It's a wacky movie with lots of music. The concept of a jack-of-all-trades handyman to make the whole concept fly is passable
enough. However, Roadie only works because of the two lead stars. Everything else is stupid. Rhonda Bates, anyone?
The biggest mistake is dropping the anvil on the momentum as soon as Blondie's Debbie Harry takes the stage. After she
exits for good, things are back to normal, allowing Meat Loaf and Kaki Hunter to pick up where they left off.
All in all, it's true about the two lines for Roadie: "Everything will work if you let it!" and "Bands make it rock,
but roadies make it roll!"
The Roaring Twenties (1939)
Rate:
9
Viewed:
10/08
10/08:
The Roaring Twenties is Unforgiven of the 30's gangster pictures and rightfully so.
It basically carries the message that crime does not pay. The performances are excellent, and James Cagney once
again delivers a winner. The more gangster pictures he does, the better he becomes at it. Having Humphrey Bogart on board is a treat.
I like the plot, although it can be formulaic, and the educational narrative reminds me a bit of Goodfellas.
I actually learned more about the Great Depression and the stock market crash of 1929. When the ending comes, it's sad, hence the
Unforgiven feeling.
All in all, thanks to The Roaring Twenties, Raoul Walsh solidifies himself as one of the better directors from
the first half of the 20th century.
Rob Roy (1995)
Rate:
10
Viewed:
9/04, 7/12, 6/16, 8/21, 2/25
7/12:
I only wanted to see Rob Roy again for Tim Roth's awe-inspiring performance which scored him an Academy
Award nomination that should've been converted into a win.
What I didn't notice the last time is how well Liam Neeson held his ground against Tim Roth, a very tall task indeed.
Brian Cox's Killearn is as almost sinister as Archibald Cunningham. I shouldn't be surprised considering that he's
the original Hannibal Lecktor. Jessica Lange isn't bad by giving an even-kneeled performance.
The sword battle at the end is the best ever and is thus worth the effort of sitting
through the buildup of the tension between Rob Roy and Archibald Cunningham who's one of the most formidable
adversaries in the history of the silver screen.
All in all, Tim Roth turns in one of the greatest performances of his career in Rob Roy.
6/16:
Tim Roth should've won the Oscar for Best Actor in a Supporting Role as nobody was better than him that year.
Rob Roy is one of the best swashbuckling films I've seen. I love the writing, the acting, and the stabs at
primitiveness. The story is fun to follow. So is the idea of showing the real Scottish Highlands which is pretty
by the way. The ensemble is through and through outstanding: Liam Neeson, Jessica Lange, Brian Cox, John Hurt, and
Andrew Keir. The best of them all is Tim Roth who easily steals the show. His character, Archibald Cunningham, is
pure evil.
All in all, Rob Roy is my favorite movie for both Liam Neeson and Tim Roth.
8/21:
When I think of a truly great Scottish picture, Rob Roy, not Braveheart,
comes to my mind right away.
Striving for a high level of authenticity, everybody in the cast, save for Jessica Lange and Liam Neeson who's
actually Irish, is either Scottish or English. The Highlanders have ugly teeth, don't wear underwear, and filthly
roam the countryside. People say great films must begin with a strong script, and that's true of Rob Roy.
It should've won Alan Sharp an Oscar.
It has a phenomenal cast that includes the very tall Liam Neeson, Jessica Lange, John Hurt, Brian Cox, and Andrew
Keir. Of course, Tim Roth steals the show as the baddest and most evil villain in a long while. The sword duel at
the end is breathtakingly absorbing. A tough swordsman to be reckoned with, Archibald Cunningham was clearly the
victor, and Rob Roy just happened to be lucky at the final minute. By the way, Tim Roth and John Hurt did some
work together in The Hit with the former starting out in the film
business. It's clear they have a good working relationship.
All in all, being on the same level as The Last of the Mohicans,
Rob Roy is a rousing action-adventure that's more about honor than anything.
2/25:
Rob Roy still holds up well, and Tim Roth and Alan Sharp were robbed of their Oscars.
The Robe (1953)
Rate:
6
Viewed:
1/16
1/16:
The trouble with The Robe, which is the first film released in the widescreen process called CinemaScope, is how flat it is.
The story is a bit ridiculous, and the scenes can be camp. Yet The Robe is responsible for beginning the new trend
of Biblical/Roman epics that'll see Quo Vadis, Spartacus,
The Ten Commandments, and Ben-Hur come to life.
What's impressive about Richard Burton is that most actors in his place would've crumbled under the weight given
the beautiful cinematography and the daunting task of standing alone amidst the vast space. So, that's why he was awarded an
Oscar nomination for Best Actor.
On the other hand, it's strange to see Victor Mature here, making a transition from black-and-white noir pictures of the
40's. Awkward and lumbering, he looks out of place and thus doesn't belong. As a matter of fact, his role was intended for Burt
Lancaster.
All in all, fair or not, The Robe is wholly underwhelming, lacks a great deal of action, and is devoid of power compared
to Spartacus,
The Ten Commandments, and Ben-Hur.
Robin Hood: Men in Tights (1993)
Rate:
1
Viewed:
7/07
7/07:
Hey, Mel!
Guess what? You aren't that funny. I got to call the keepers of Guinness World Records and let them know I set a world
record by sitting through Robin Hood: Men in Tights without a single nanosecond of laughter!
The acting is horrible. Maid Marian's assistant is the worst. Cary Elwis looks like the second coming of Errol Flynn but can't
do enough to save the film. The lack of cleverness throughout has me snoring. It's like watching
Spaceballs for one hundredth time and then getting sick by going for another.
What's disgusting is the ribald language that's littered with many bad sex jokes. The key to the greatest treasure
known to mankind...it's immature. How dare Mel Brooks to make fun of Winston Churchill. Does the idiot director know
Winston Churchill was one of the primary reasons why the world got rid of Nazism?
All in all, Mel Brooks wouldn't know how to crack a joke if he was handed a walnut opener.
Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves (1991)
Rate:
9
Viewed:
6/03, 6/08, 2/15
6/08:
Having seen Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves at a theatre in 1991, my motivation going through it again is Alan Rickman's
performance as Sheriff of Nottingham.
As usual, Alan Rickman is a crowd-pleaser and thus steals the show. He's very funny and has the best lines. I love one
particular scene when Guy of Gisborne, who's well-played by Michael Wincott, was curious about the use of a
spoon and Sheriff went berserk upon hearing the question.
Kevin Costner and Morgan Freeman are superb together, making for a satisfying duo. I love Christian Slater's facial
expressions as they create an important subplot what will be revealed later. Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio is perfect as Lady Marian
by being neither showy nor pretentious.
Clocking at 144 minutes, there wasn't a moment that prompted me to ask, "How much longer?" The in/exterior sets are beautifully
done to give it an Old English feel. Ditto for the costumes. Buoyed by the wonderful cinematography and the well-written
language, it's cool to see the archers readying to shoot the flaming arrows during the siege of the families' homeground
in Sherwood Forest.
All in all, Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves is an enjoyable action-adventure picture.
2/15:
Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves is an unstoppably entertaining action-adventure picture.
The cast is star-studded as it contains Kevin Costner, Morgan Freeman, Alan Rickman, Christian Slater, Mary Elizabeth
Mastrantonio, Michael Wincott, and Sean Connery in a cameo. The best performance goes to Alan Rickman. He's
funny and memorable and has winning lines. Of course, it's Kevin Costner and Morgan Freeman who make the movie fun to
watch by doing the action scenes.
All in all, Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves is the best Robin Hood movie made.
RoboCop (1987)
Rate:
5
Viewed:
7/09
7/09:
RoboCop, as I remember having seen it many times during the 80's and early 90's, hasn't fared well against the test of time.
The storyline is interesting and makes for a good sci-fi picture, but the concept isn't well-executed. More intelligence to push
the film beyond its limits just like how Paul Verhoeven did for Total Recall is needed.
The high amount of violence is staggering that's on the same level as
Scarface. I'll say the
special effects were ahead of its time. I bet you'll be surprised to learn the sinister villain machine (ED-209) with two
large guns was an inanimate miniature that got filmed one shot at a time. Those were the days before CGI took over.
All in all, somewhat similar to The Terminator, RoboCop is dated.
RoboCop 2 (1990)
Rate:
2
Viewed:
7/09
7/09:
RoboCop 2 is a dumb, dumb cartoonish picture that's full of gratuitous violence, crappy subplots, and bland moments.
As boring as the film is, the final twenty minutes puts me to sleep. Everybody, especially the black mayor, looks like
a caricature. Whenever the leader of OCP shows up, I kept thinking of that Irish white-haired guy who sold Shamrock masks in
Halloween III: Season of the Witch. When the closing screen credits came, my guess
turned out to be correct, and it's Dan O'Herlihy.
All in all, RoboCop 2 is boring tripe.
RoboCop 3 (1993)
Rate:
1
Viewed:
7/09
7/09:
This is the last of the crap.
RoboCop 3 has left me brain-dead at the end. It's hard to believe this is the same director who did
The Monster Squad: Fred Dekker. Consequently, he never did another picture. Frank
Miller needs to stay away from Hollywood altogether because all he does is produce works of shit.
All in all, to paraphrase the titular character in Oliver!: "Please sir, I want no more."
The Rock (1996)
Rate:
5
Viewed:
3/06, 3/20
3/06:
Thanks to The Rock, I may have witnessed the genesis of a certain style as shown in many action films that I've been
seeing lately and hate it.
The Rock nails down a good story, and the cinematography is undoubtedly excellent. I like how the secondary characters
are astute and matter-of-factly about what's happening. The acting is fine; having Sean Connery and Nicolas Cage together goes
a long way.
But Michael Bay needs to learn a tried and true adage: less is more. Everything looks overdone, over the top, and dumb. Ed
Harris' character was looking awesome until he turned out to be a wimp. That being said, the final half-hour is a disaster. The
message it sent out is unpatriotic in spirit by saying it's okay for some people to die so the government can save measly $100
million. Really, the most logical solution is to pay the ransom and everybody lives. Afterwards, they can hunt down the bad guys.
All in all, there's no doubt The Rock unleashed the beast in Michael Bay, setting off a dark period that reigns action
cinema to this day.
3/20:
"Welcome to the Rock."
Too long and stupid to be taken seriously, The Rock is an overblown extravaganza that defies how action pictures used to be
put together in the conventional sense. Of course, the 81 hostages mean nothing at all, just the stupid girl who cries profusely
about getting Stanley Goodspeed back. It's the same predictable ending of good guys saving the day, no matter how
sinister, clever, and well-prepared the villains are.
Playing the long-haired James Bond, Sean Connery isn't bad, but Nicolas Cage is somewhat annoying: always shouting and complaining
to get attention. It's hard to believe that Ed Harris involved himself with this tomfoolery because I thought he was a serious actor.
Equipped with fired-up boilers for who-knows-for-what-reason, the extensive maze system of tunnels under Alcatraz is absurd
and looks like a city unto itself when the island is only 0.034 of a square mile. Even more ridiculous is the storyline that's
bypassed a lot, especially when there are eight hours left and then one hour left.
After Hummel is killed, the film overstays its welcome with more mano a mano battles. Then again, how can a chemical weapons
expert who's untrained in combat and a federal prisoner who's been out of action for thirty years be able to take on Hummel's
highly trained, modern killers? It's unbelievable. David Morse's character was a lot more successful than Hummel in wiping
people out when he released a deadly virus from the containers in 12 Monkeys.
All in all, The Rock is bombastic popcorn junk for man-child retards.
Rocky (1976)
Rate:
10
Viewed:
6/03, 12/03, 12/05, 5/11, 9/20
6/03:
I have been to the Philadelphia Museum of Art many times, and it's impossible not to think of Rocky while going up the
steps.
When people talk about power of cinema, the best examples are the training montages in any of the first four Rocky
movies. They're uplifting, powerful, and unforgettable. That's why the Philadelphia Eagles football team always uses them
during the player introduction for home games.
Rocky isn't just an outstanding boxing film; it has the romance of a lifetime. The ending is an all-time great.
Terrific acting and direction transcend Rocky into a moving motion picture for all people.
All in all, Rocky is magnificent.
12/05:
Anybody who thinks Sylvester Stallone is rubbish really needs to watch Rocky.
A Philadelphia movie, it's very inspiring and the one that made Sylvester Stallone a star overnight. The "Gonna Fly Now" scene
when Rocky Balboa does his training regimen which includes running up the steps of the Philadelphia Museum of Art always gets
me every time I see it.
All in all, Rocky is for people of all ages.
5/11:
Rocky is such a phenomenal motion picture, and I never get tired of it.
The superfight between Rocky Balboa and Apollo Creed is what makes the movie so good, and the ending is even better.
All in all, of all films he had been involved with, Sylvester Stallone should be most proud of Rocky.
9/20:
Because of Sylvester Stallone's Brando-esque performance, Rocky is the most statisfying winner for Best Picture.
There's a lot to like: the story, the characters, the drama, the sport, and the romance. At the end of the day, Rocky gets
the girl, and that's all it matters. If anything, Rocky is the film that made Sylvester Stallone an overnight star
which would reach its zenith when Rambo: First Blood Part II was released.
Because of the Ali-Wepner fight, Stallone suddenly had an inspiration to write the screenplay during the next 86 hours with nine
eventual rewrites and refused to sell it unless he was made the star of the film, a condition that no studio was willing
to concede to because he was an unknown. Eventually, United Artists relented but kept the budget at a bare maximum of one million
dollars, and the rest was history.
Rocky has great characters and spends a lot of time on them during the first hour. Then, the saga is born during the
second hour, leading to five epic fights with Apollo Creed, Clubber Lang, and Ivan Drago. Burgess Meredith may have been
nominated for an Oscar, but Carl Weathers deserves it more. Burgess will give a stronger performance the following sequel. Tony
Burton is also excellent as Creed's trainer. Stu Nahan and Bill Baldwin provide some of the best blow-by-blow commentary I've
heard in a boxing match.
All in all, Rocky is a special motion picture.
Rocky Balboa (2006)
Rate:
4
Viewed:
5/08, 8/11, 10/20
5/08:
Much better than I anticipated, I thought Rocky Balboa was going to be the worst movie of the series, but lo
and behold, Rocky is back by charming his way.
I have not had so much fun in a while and love the whole package. What Sylvester Stallone brought to the table is old memories and characters.
At the same time, he merges the past with the present, showing no hard feelings or bitterness about how things have turned out.
Mature by now, Sylvester Stallone has a different perspective. The best part...well, there are many of them, but it's the ending which
shows how much Rocky doesn't care about the fight result but winning the true battle.
The editing is good, unlike the crap I've been seeing nowadays, and has an interesting back-and-forth of what's currently
happening and the fight. Sylvester Stallone (whose best acting scene is when he gave the speech to his son before going back
to the restaurant) is phenomenal, and it's a role that he was born to play. Everybody else is more or less okay. It's too bad about
not seeing Talia Shire again. Actually, her death contributes a great deal to the story, making it work.
Another aspect I like is how Sylvester Stallone combined the juvenile mentality of the god-awful sports channel ESPN and the need for
Rocky to come back for another fight when he demonstrated severe brain damage in the previous sequel. Mike Tyson trash-talking
with the current champion reminds me of the post-conference melee when he yelled at Lennox Lewis, "You're scared coward, you're
not man enough to fuck with me."
All in all, despite the awful rap song during Mason Dixon's entrance, Rocky Balboa is a feel-good movie that brings back
memories.
8/11:
My, how times have changed, and I now conclude that Rocky Balboa isn't a good film.
Of course, it's filled with memories, but I can always watch the first five pictures to relive them. So, what's the point? The
most atrocious aspect is the camera work. Did the guy holding it suffer from a bad case of rheumatoid arthritis?
It's hard for me to stomach Robert Balboa, a whelping who needs to be beaten by his father to get his priorities straight.
Also, Paulie is tiresome, making the same complaints over and over. That shit was already old, going back to
Rocky III. He should've died, not Adrian. Rocky goes into several different directions at
once, leaving the film with ambiguities. In other words, not much happens. It's just a brain-damaged dude who likes
to bullshit a lot.
All in all, it's time for the Rocky franchise to die once and for all.
10/20:
What an embarrassment.
I went through the first five parts and thought they were all good. Then, I came to Rocky Balboa. Boy, what a stinker.
They're both night and day in just about everything. Had Sylvester Stallone opted to do another sequel not
long after Rocky V, it might have been worthwhile to watch, but sixteen years is far too much.
I hate the digitalization as well.
Boxing was popular in 2006? No way. It pretty much died during the late 90's; since then, almost virtually nobody knows who the
boxers are save for a couple, and they aren't even that good. So, why is Stallone desperate to tell people otherwise?
The announcers during the boxing match between Rocky and Dixon are absolutely the worst. It's the low-IQ, ESPN crap. I got
tempted to hit the mute button many times while trying to watch the fight. Want to hear from the best of the best? Go
to Stu Nahan and Bill Baldwin from the first two films: they were always spot-on and had perfect delivery of great lines.
Robert Balboa is played by three different actors when I thought Sage Stallone was perfectly fine. Why
couldn't his father bring him back? Their peculiar relationship brought depth to Rocky V, so
what's wrong with continuing it more? Sage's replacement sucks and looks like he never had an acting lesson in his life; the
same can be said for Antonio Tarver.
Back to the main event, the fight is okay; it starts out well, and then, the horrible editing gets in the way after two
rounds, ruining the show for me. The whole time, I had been thinking, "Why the heck am I supposed to be interested in an old
man who's over twenty years past his prime for his last hurrah?" Honestly, what's left there is for Rocky to prove?
Despite the silliness, I have to say Sylvester Stallone didn't do a bad job, but his character looks
quite out of it; hence, he should've made brain damage the central focus of the film, marking Rocky's true downfall as
a result of being hit in the head too many times, especially in the fight with Ivan Drago. His attempt to build a
relationship with Marie is kind of icky.
All in all, Sylvester Stallone shouldn't have kept going after Rocky V.
Rocky II (1979)
Rate:
9
Viewed:
12/03, 12/05, 5/11, 9/20
12/05:
Bolstered by the outstanding ending, Rocky II is a phenomenal boxing movie.
Let's clarify one thing about Sylvester Stallone: he is a misunderstood creative artist. When I watch many films, they come
off as bland. Then, when I watch Rocky II, I feel overwhelmed by the highs and lows. It's a lot of adversity for Rocky
to overcome. What I love is how dopey he is, making it easy for anyone to like him. It's very good character work by Sylvester
Stallone.
Also, I like how the atmosphere is set up for the superfight rematch between Rocky Balboa and Apollo Creed. I wish it was
more real due to the numerous shadow punches. Once again, Carl Weathers and Burgess Meredith give remarkable performances.
All in all, Rocky II is tremendously underrated.
5/11:
Although Rocky is a Best Picture winner, Rocky II is nearly as good.
The fight between Rocky Balboa and Apollo Creed still looks spectacular with an unforgettable ending: "Except for my kid bein'
born, this is the greatest night in the history of my life. I just wanna say one thing to my wife who's home, 'Yo, Adrian!
I did it!'" Although Burgess Meredith was Oscar-nominated for the last picture, he's a lot better in this. I'm always a sucker for
Rocky training montages, and Rocky II meets the standard easily.
All in all, if you want to know what "heart" means, look no further than Rocky Balboa.
9/20:
Rocky II is almost as good as the original picture.
I actually view both films as one just like The Godfather trilogy. All characters pick up
where they left off to sustain the continuity. The superfight rematch between Rocky Balboa and Apollo Creed is the reason
for the high replayability value of Rocky II.
The original may have received some Oscar nominations, but none went for the sequel when I thought there were a couple
of worthy contenders. First is Burgess Meredith for Best Actor in a Supporting Role; he's a lot better and more memorable this
time around. The other is the editing, which is among all-time greats, that's underscored by the dramatic finish in the final
round which took eight months of work.
Apollo Creed is a great champion; it's enjoyable to watch him fight. Rocky Balboa was in the match of his career with Apollo,
and he showed heart by winning it. Of course, there's a lot of drama beforehand that makes the film compelling to watch. The
training montage is a can't-beat with Rocky and the children running up the steps at the Philadelphia Museum of Art.
Rocky's switching to right hand for the boxing match wasn't originally planned. What happened was that Sylvester Stallone was
in a bench press contest against Franco Columbu and thus tore his right pectoral muscle. Afterwards, he needed surgery and
had to box right. If you watch Rocky in the sparring session with a lightning-fast Mexican boxer, it's Roberto Durán.
All in all, Rocky II is an underrated sequel to one of the best pictures of all time.
Rocky III (1982)
Rate:
6
Viewed:
12/03, 12/05, 6/11, 9/20
12/05:
Rocky III isn't good anymore because there's no magic save for the montage training scene.
The wrestling match is an absolute farce that's so pointless. I'm befuddled by the sudden change in Rocky's personality
when he went from a lovable dope to a uh...capitalist? That's just sad, man. Even Rocky looks bored in the movie poster.
All in all, Rocky III is a disappointing film.
6/11:
Anticipating a letdown in Rocky III, the only thing I remember is that it was responsible for the introduction of the
popular statue which still stands today at the Philadelphia Museum of Art.
The museum didn't want it there in the first place, calling the statue a "movie prop," hence shuttling it back and forth
between the museum and various Philly sport stadiums. The superfight at the end is totally predictable. Of course, Rocky was
going to win in a dramatic fashion. The montage training scene is nice and all, but the homoerotic moment when Rocky and Apollo
hugged each other in the middle of the beach is corny.
Once upon a time, sporting many massive gold neck chains with an ample supply of "I pity the fool" one-liners, the
mohawk-haired Mr. T became famous worldwide for his role in a TV sitcom called The A-Team. It would be natural for
him to get the role of lifetime as Clubber Lang in Rocky III, making for an okay character.
All in all, I still hate the wrestling match in Rocky III.
9/20:
Rocky III is a weird movie compared to the last two parts.
What the heck happened to Rocky? Sylvester Stallone plays a boxer who's corporate-ish with endorsements in mind. Adrian
looks totally different and is also corporate-ish. Paulie is always complaining about his shitty problems. Why am I supposed to
care? The focus is supposed to be on Rocky...hellooooo!
I hate the first half. The charity wrestling match between Rocky and Thunderlips looks ridiculous and is a total waste of time
although it did propel Hulk Hogan to superstardom. By the way, Hulk is plain massive compared to Stallone. Then, things are
better in the next half that's somewhat vintage Rocky. The training montage is okay, and I
like the use of the phrase "Eye of the Tiger."
Clubber Lang is a worthy opponent, but I think Apollo Creed could beat him only if he would cease his execessive
showmanship; otherwise, he'll be drained during the fight. At any rate, Mr. T and Carl Weathers give credible acting
performances, but both never got along on the set, hence their real anger toward each other during the rematch.
All in all, if there's one positive thing to say about Rocky III, it produced a statue which now stands besides
the steps at the Philadelphia Museum of Art.
Rocky IV (1985)
Rate:
7
Viewed:
12/03, 12/05, 6/11, 9/20
12/05:
Standing at a good half foot taller, Ivan Drago famously says to Rocky, "I must break you," and the rest is history for Dolph
Lundgren.
Anyway, here we go again: more Rocky crap. I have the formula memorized, and it simply repeats
here except for one twist: Apollo Creed is killed. Cuing Ivan to describe his death perfectly, "If he dies, he dies."
All in all, Sylvester Stallone went for broke in Rocky IV and therefore made good bank.
6/11:
Okay, okay...Rocky IV isn't bad this time.
It's a good movie with a very memorable character in Ivan Drago. The funniest irony is he's painted as the bad guy
for being on steroids yet Sylvester Stallone had taken copious amounts of them for so many years. Who's really the
hypocrite here? The other is that no scenes of Rocky IV were filmed in Russia.
Although Apollo Creed is a great boxer, I hate his prematch introductions. It's no wonder why Apollo got killed because
he wasted all his energy before the fight was about to commence. Had Apollo been more focused, he would've survived
and probably win the match. Dolph Lundgren makes his character work, and he'll go on to be a famous star despite
being an insanely terrible actor. The montage training scene is, once again, inspiring.
All in all, Rocky IV is much better than the previous sequel.
9/20:
I prefer Rocky IV over the last sequel because it's a major improvement in many aspects.
The best part is Ivan Drago who's perfectly played by Dolph Lundgren in the role of his career.
He'll never reach the same heights again. I love his character's scant supply of lines: "If he dies, he dies" and
"I must break you." Of course, the victim to his soul-crushing punches is Apollo Creed who proved to be a great champion
with the fatal tendency of displaying too much showmanship.
Character-wise, Sylvester Stallone is in better form than Rocky III. His training
montage that's intercut with Dolph's is more exciting this time although the overall editing can be sometimes terrible.
Of course, the filmmakers want to make me think that USA is good and USSR is bad and that Rocky is clean and Ivan is dirty,
but who are we kidding here? USA has always been bad and corrupt, and their athletes have been cheating for decades. There's
absolutely no way Rocky has a shredded body as shown in the film without the help of anabolic steroids and diuretics. So...please,
stop with the hypocrisy.
Ivan Drago's punch power is approximately 2,000 pounds per square inch (psi) when the average for boxers of his division
is around 1,200 to 1,700 psi. I estimate Ivan must have hit Rocky in the head at least 100 times during the match. Hence, why
didn't the latter show any symptoms of dementia pugilistica in parts six and seven?
All in all, thanks to Dolph Lundgren's effective performance as Ivan Drago, Rocky IV is a highly memorable boxing picture.
Rocky V (1990)
Rate:
8
Viewed:
12/03, 12/05, 7/11, 9/20
12/05:
The Rocky franchise did enjoy a nice resurgence when Sylvester Stallone came back to reprise
his role for Rocky V with John G. Avildsen reclaiming the director chair.
There's a touching scene that was never shown before, and it's Rocky and Mickey at the old gym. The acting is much
improved this time with excellent supporting work from Tommy Morrison as Tommy Gunn and Richard Gant as George Washington Duke
who's an imitation of Don King in the flesh. What I like is Rocky going back to his roots which is a complete opposite of
how he was acting in the previous sequel. The street fight between him and Tommy Gunn at the end is entertaining.
All in all, although dark and depressing, Rocky V is a welcome deviation from the usual formula.
7/11:
Rocky V has been long considered the black sheep of the franchise for failing to follow the formula.
Yeah, when Rocky left his son at the airport, he was like 7 years old. After his father returns a month later, he's 14. The
best performance comes from Richard Gant as a clone of Don King. Another aspect to like is the skillful editing. Sylvester Stallone
recapturing the old Rocky persona goes a long way, too.
All in all, Rocky V is a sequel that people will either hate or accept.
9/20:
Dark and depressing, Rocky V is a lot better than the last two sequels because it's honest and goes back to the roots
that made the boxing icon who he was.
There are many strong performances. I'm surprised to see Adrian coming out assertively which never happened before. Even
Paulie is likeable this time around. Mickey is back to be special once more. Largely because of the cast, Rocky V is
finally a movie about human beings and their flaws.
There's a sad truth about life imitating art when it comes to the relationship between Sylvester Stallone and his son
as Sage died of a heart attack eight years ago (most likely suicide by drug overdose or simply from many years of drug abuse).
The rumor is he had a nonexistent relationship with his father, having been raised by maids, nannies, and gardeners, and
was a loner most of his life with a few friends. At any rate, both are very good in Rocky V.
Interestingly, Tommy Morrison passed away one year after Sage's death from complications of AIDS and had a pretty weird life
himself. The parts his character was saying during dinner did happen for real. Despite being tested HIV positive, Tommy claimed
he didn't have it, but knew otherwise in 1989, and was asked to be tested over and over. He also committed bigamy by
marrying two different women, calling his first wife "D1" and the other "D2." When his body broke down years later,
he opted for chest implants only to have them removed due to infection.
Two best parts of the film are Rocky hitting the bag while watching Tommy Gunn's match with Union Cane and his street
fight with Tommy afterwards. It's thanks to the excellent editing job by John G. Avildsen, Robert A. Ferretti, and
Michael N. Knue. Rocky can be corny and naïve at times, but he's endearing.
All in all, a detour can be wise when the sequels have become too formulaic, and that's why Rocky V worked.
Rollerball (1975)
Rate:
3
Viewed:
11/08
11/08:
The only reason why I wanted to see Rollerball is the roller derby scenes.
I got them but also a whole lot of rubbish in between which took up a lot of energy: boring conversations, arcane
subplots, and uninteresting conflicts. There's no doubt the skillfully edited roller derby scenes look realistic.
Unfortunately, James Caan acts as if he's saying to himself, "What the hell am I doing here?" Then, he proceeds to face the
music. Jimmy must have been out of his mind while addicted to cocaine. The fault also lies with Norman Jewison who's
historically a hit-or-miss director.
The tagline of the movie poster is stupid: "In the not too distant future, wars will no longer exist. But there will be
rollerball." Wars will always be around, but rollerball? Please.
All in all, it's too bad that Rollerball has to be a mishmash of science fiction and roller skating.
Rollercoaster (1977)
Rate:
7
Viewed:
9/21
9/21:
It's hard to believe, but riding on a roller coaster is more fun than watching Rollercoaster.
There are two chief problems. The first is direction. It's quite mundane; probably thirty minutes is spent on going
through the process before there's some action. The second is George Segal who's miscast. His mere presence dates the movie
a lot. Switch him with Richard Widmark, and there's a very good chance that Rollercoaster would've been
more exciting. Adding Charlton Heston to the mix will be a good idea, too.
A career first to play a villain, Timothy Bottoms is an interesting choice, but his character isn't given much to work with and
has a weak death scene which indicates a lazy wrap-up for the film. He should've planted more bombs around the track just in
case or gone for a bigger bang.
Henry Fonda may be billed, but he's only in the film for a minute total. I didn't recognize the daughter until the closing screen
credits, but it's the thirteen-year-old Helen Hunt in her feature film debut. Who knew she would win an Oscar one
day? And yep, that's Steve Guttenberg, also in his first movie, as the messenger near the end.
A lot of people place Rollercoaster in the disaster genre. It's completely incorrect. The premise
is based on terrorism; therefore, it's a suspense thriller. To qualify for a disaster picture, something bad
has to happen naturally such as an earthquake, a volcano eruption, a sinking ship, etc. Sometimes, it can be dealing
with the aftermath that's caused by others for nefarious purposes such as
Airport and Daylight.
By the way, the Revolution at Six Flags Magic Mountain in Valencia, California, is the first ever to showcase a
complete 360-degree vertical loop which occurred in 1976. That's the main ride toward the end in Rollercoaster
which understandably had a lot of people going crazy, hence the golden tickets. It's now a common feature in many roller
coaster rides. They're never circular in loop but rather clothoid in order to lessen the intensity of the G-forces. The first attempt
was actually made in 1901 at Coney Island, but nobody wanted to go on the ride and I don't blame them.
All in all, Rollercoaster is a good remake candidate given the enormous potential.
Rolling Thunder (1977)
Rate:
7
Viewed:
4/22
4/22:
Because of the ending, I wondered which came first: Rolling Thunder or Taxi Driver.
The answer is the latter given Paul Schrader did the story for both films: people with mental problems resolve their conflicts by
using an explosively violent means. To be fair, Joe did it way earlier than either by six and
seven years, respectively.
It may be William Devane's show with Tommy Lee Jones playing a small part, but Linda Haynes ends up stealing their thunder by
virtue of her strong performance. She would do three more films before retiring in 1980. It's too bad because she showed plenty
of promise. Showcasing an emotional breakdown, William Devane isn't bad, but he should've done more with his character
to reach the goal of driving the point further.
A strong neo-noir film, Rolling Thunder is perhaps exploitative in nature although the story is
nothing new. The main protagonist's profile is unique: a former P.O.W. is equipped with a metal hook after his hand was put
into the garbage disposal and seeks revenge for what happened to his family during home invasion. It's interesting
when he pointed out the men who killed his son but said nothing about his wife. This shows you how much he's been traumatized
by the Vietnam War experience.
All in all, Rolling Thunder scores well in many categories but can be somewhat empty.
Roma città aperta (1945)
Rate:
3
Viewed:
6/25
6/25:
After watching many samples of early Italian cinema in Martin Scorsese's documentary
My Voyage to Italy, I decided to check out Roma città aperta
aka Rome, Open City.
The movie failed to capture my interest in the first half hour, and I could be barely gripped by what's going
on. Therefore, it's been too much praise for nothing. My recommendation to these people who love it
is to watch at least one hundred WWII films and then go back to the other one to realize that
Roma città aperta is more or less the same like the rest. The better film with a similar storyline is
Soldaat van Oranje becuase it's exciting and happened for real.
I won't put down Roma città aperta because I'm sure it's realistic and may have been ahead of time
in 1945 with several dramatic scenes. But today, too many war pictures have been made with the same story,
creating a race to discover the very few that stand apart. Also, it doesn't help when the cast is made
up of nobodies save for Anna Magnani who made a career out of acting in the virtually same manner, especially
with her hands and face.
Worse is the whitewashing of history. Let's not forget the Italians, having taken the Nazis' side, played a huge
part in killing citizens, political prisoners, and Jewish people. According to IMDb, "all the atrocities in the
film are attributed to the Germans. This was due to the policy of national reconciliation which was relevant
in Italy during the filming of the film." In fact, there wasn't much of resistance going on prior to 1943.
Thus, it's easier for Italy to look good in 1944 only because it had already surrendered to the Allies the year
before, causing Winston Churchill to joke, "In Italy until July 25th there were 45 million of fascists;
from the next day, 45 million anti-fascists. But I don't know that Italy has 90 million inhabitants."
All in all, Roma città aperta is disappointingly bland.
Roman Holiday (1953)
Rate:
9
Viewed:
5/17
5/17:
Before there was La dolce vita, there was Roman Holiday.
Both are very similar films, but I prefer the latter over the former, William Wyler over Federico Fellini, and Gregory Peck
over Marcello Mastroianni. The jury is still out for Audrey Hepburn versus Anita Ekberg. Each is different in her own
special way. Audrey is perfect for Roman Holiday while Anita was for La dolce vita.
What makes Roman Holiday a unique American film is it was completely shot on location in Rome, an achievement that
was hitherto never done in Hollywood history, thanks to William Wyler. Gregory Peck gave a lot of wooden performances
throughout his career, but he's quite good as Joe Bradley. Let us not forget the great supporting job by Eddie Albert who's
perfect as his slapstick partner. He was rewarded with an Oscar nomination which should've gone to Gregory Peck as well.
It's the first big role for Audrey Hepburn. Gregory Peck, a consummate professional, guides her. Hence, an Oscar was given to
Audrey Hepburn, the only one of her career aside from the Humanitarian Award, although I'm sure it was mostly due to being cute.
Ian McLellan Hunter may be the screenwriter for Roman Holiday, but it's actually Dalton Trumbo. Anytime a movie
is based on his screenplay, my expectations are always set high. Hence, I'm happy with how the film ended which is justifiable.
Typically, Hollywood would have Audrey's character breaking ranks by having one last kiss with Joe Bradley.
All in all, Roman Holiday is a special romantic comedy picture, one of the fewest when Audrey Hepburn is tolerable
enough to put up with.
Romero (1989)
Rate:
6
Viewed:
12/20
12/20:
People are being killed in El Salvador, and the Church tries to end the civil war, which ultimately lasted for
twelve years, by asking everybody to love God and pray for peace?
Uh, right. My answer to that is: get the fuck out of the country and never look back. The situation never got better as
El Salvador, along with Guatemala and Honduras which form the Northern Triangle, is currently one of the most dangerous
countries in the world. The United States averaged 5.0 murders per 100,000 people the past year. El Salvador? It's 61.8.
Yeah...no kidding.
So, what has the church done about the problem since the 80's? Apparently nothing because it's too busy dealing with child
abuse lawsuits and trying to mitigate the subsequent massive financial loss. It's what stayed on my mind while watching
Romero, a supremely boring, static picture about a topic that was already covered in Oliver Stone's
Salvador.
Raul Julia is fine; it's the kind of role I don't often see him take on. The acting from the rest is generally good,
and there's a high level of docu-realism surrounding the civil war, making for the film's strongest point. Yet the level of
violence as depicted isn't on the same level as Salvador and
The Killing Fields. Had it been so, Romero would've been more powerful.
The trouble, as it takes place in El Salvador, is I didn't understand the context or, rather, there wasn't any provided. It's
just people being killed and their freedom that's severely curtailed. The truth as to why the civil war lasted so long is the
United States funded it.
All in all, to follow the tactic that's advocated by Archbishop Óscar Romero in Romero is what gets people killed.
Romper Stomper (1992)
Rate:
4
Viewed:
9/05
9/05:
So, let me guess: Romper Stomper is Russell Crowe's autobiographical film?
In any case, it looks realistic. Anyway, it's your standard nihilistic picture, but this time, it's less
depressing than Sid and Nancy. The plot is a mix of
The Believer, A Clockwork Orange, and
Niagara, Niagara.
I was initially confounded by the message Romper Stomper was trying to convey. At the end, I seem to have completely
missed the point. Meanwhile, it's a nice foray for Russell Crowe, but Daniel Pollock tops him by giving a better performance.
All in all, not a total dreck, Romper Stomper plays somewhat well given the running length.
Ronin (1998)
Rate:
8
Viewed:
6/17
6/17:
Mostly shot on location all over France, Ronin was a film that I saw back then when it was first released but
didn't leave me impressed.
Today, it looks better. Robert De Niro's acting is terrific, and he's the chief reason why the movie has aged well. I like his
relationship with Jean Reno.
Remarkably done is the cinematography which was handled by Robert Fraisse. He was chosen by John Frankenheimer because
of his work on Citizen X, a docu-realistic film about a notorious Russian serial killer.
Moreover, I like how intricate the plot is; maybe that's the reason why I didn't like Ronin in the first place for
going over my head. Now, it's more easily followed.
Yet I have a difficult time swallowing the concept that these guys, good and bad alike, can constantly get away with
shooting at each other and waving their guns around in public. The only plausible reason is that Interpol let them go for the
sake of international security.
The best part, apart from Robert De Niro's and John Frankenheimer's attachment to the project, is
the Grand Prix-stylized car chase that seemingly takes forever. It must have been a highly complicated
task for everybody involved which included over 300 stunt drivers, John Frankenheimer being among them. A total of eighty automobiles
were destroyed. At one point, the speedometer could be seen reading 0 MPH. So did the fuel gauge. Another is the sight of a
cameraman inside the tunnel. Naturally, the filmmakers couldn't keep up with all the details that went on during the
complicated pièce de résistance.
Naturally, save for Skipp Sudduth, many thespians didn't do the driving themselves. According to IMDb:
"To make it look like Robert De Niro and Natascha McElhone were actually driving during the car chase, right-hand drive cars
were used, with the passenger side made up to mirror the real controls. The actors then mimicked the stunt drivers movements."
Because of the title, I hate it when the film has to associate itself with the samurai crap. Why did John Frankenheimer
have to stoop so low with this fanboy bullshit? It's something that Quentin Tarantino would've done.
If there's anything else I like, it's Sam sniffing out Sean Bean's character to reveal that he's an amateur. It's funny because while
Spence was doing all of this, I was forced to accept what's happening. But he seemed to be abnormal for somebody who's
supposed to be acting like he had been there before. Yet the façade came tearing down which made Spence look all silly.
Unfortunately, the rest of Ronin is standard with too many chases which should've been cut down, but the acting is
what kept it together, holding my interest from start to finish. That's why John Frankenheimer has always been a master
director. By the way, the figure skater is an actual Olympic and world champion from Germany, and her name
is Katarina Witt. Also, David Mamet, under the nom de plume of Richard Weisz, wrote most of the screenplay.
All in all, Ronin smacks of old-school filmmaking, which is of the enjoyable kind, but sadly, it has become a lost art.
The Rookie (1990)
Rate:
7
Viewed:
5/04, 11/05, 3/20
11/05:
There's no stronger indication than The Rookie that it's time for Clint Eastwood to stop appearing in policiers.
An action film involving Lara Flynn Boyle? I can't believe it. Almost everybody is terrible, and Pepe Serna gets my vote
for the worst actor of the cast. Only Charlie Sheen and Marco Rodríguez keep me interested.
There are many acts of police brutality. I have no idea how all can hold up in the court of law. The hostage torture
conducted by Sônia Braga's character is too weird. Even worse is the somewhat overlong ending, reminding me
of Bullitt.
All in all, I liked the moment when Charlie Sheen hopped into the car before blurting out, "Are you fucking crazy?" Now,
that's the question of the year for Clint Eastwood when he decided to do this film.
3/20:
The Rookie looks a lot better this time around.
Thanks to Charlie Sheen and Marco Rodríguez, the policier has a nice edge to it because of the exciting action
stunts. The more attention they garner, the better the film is. Although Clint Eastwood is the star of the show, somewhat
playing Dirty Harry again, Charlie Sheen steals his thunder. Amusing is the Puerto Rican Raul Julia being
portrayed as a German, but it's too bad he never got the chance to develop his character more.
The best part is when Charlie Sheen told his partner, "Are you fucking crazy?" before driving the
car out of the window. Unquestionably, the weirdest scene is the sex torture (or rape?) that Sônia Braga's character
inflicted on Pulovski. Both are unforgettable.
All in all, if not for Charlie Sheen, The Rookie would've been another tired Dirty Harry picture.
Rookie of the Year (1993)
Rate:
6
Viewed:
5/25
5/25:
If you liked Major League and want to find something similar,
Rookie of the Year will do.
It's a solid '6' picture with occasional editing overload. I didn't realize Daniel Stern directed it, being the
only one of his career. He plays a funny character who finds himself stuck between two barriers for the longest
time. Thomas Ian Nicholas isn't the greatest actor in the world, but he's passable enough to keep the show
moving. Gary Busey helps him out whenever he can.
Because of Uncle Buck, it's natural to think of the Chicago Cubs and John Candy
although everybody knows that broadcaster position was completely owned by Harry Caray at the time. However, I
have to say John Candy wasn't funny as he should've been. The writers have to either give him very good lines
or let Bob Uecker take over the role.
A lot of people may be amused by Henry Rowengartner as the youngest player in MLB history, but there's
some truth in that. Joe Nuxhall made his debut at age 15 in 1944, pitching for the Cincinnati Reds, because of
manpower shortage due to WWII. On the other hand, thanks to Bill Veeck's ever-showmanship, Eddie Gaedel of the
St. Louis Browns was the shortest player ever at 3'7"; it was impossible to strike him out because
of the strikeout zone being too close to the ground, so he batted once, was walked, and never played again. By
the way, the "hidden ball trick" is illegal.
All in all, Rookie of the Year can proudly brag that it's the only film that shows Barry Bonds getting
struck out by a 12-year-old kid.
The Room (2003)
Rate:
7
Viewed:
9/23
9/23:
Called one of the worst movies made, The Room isn't that bad, but it's the idiots lambasting it who have a serious
problem.
To start off, the script is well-written on the simple level, and the conversations are interesting to listen to. It held my
attention from start to finish. One odd thing I noticed the most is how the characters were on different planes when
speaking to each other. It's more prominently displayed by Johnny who emotes completely different than expected.
During the whole time, I had to ask, "Is Tommy Wiseau autistic or, at least, brain-damaged?" I actually can't find a
straight answer from anywhere on the internet, but I'll have to say, "Yeah, he is." If true, it should explain everything.
And if so, this means I'm surprised he made a workable film given his limited capabilities.
Yes, I understand there are subplots such as the breast cancer and the drug debt that have gone unresolved, but they aren't the
point; it's the cheating, and the main question is: what's Johnny going to do when he finds out? Then, the answer came; that's the
whole movie right there. The only part that threw me off completely is the guys wearing tuxedos. I thought it meant
Johnny was getting married, but it turns out later he wasn't. So what's the occasion?
Meanwhile, the acting is fine for what it is: a low-budget picture. Most of the money was wasted for the wrong reasons due
to Tommy Wiseau being new to the film business and the high turnover among the cast and crew. Juliette Danielle is
the catalyst and therefore succeeds in selling the main premise.
All in all, there are thousands of movies way worse or more boring than The Room, and they were shockingly made by
competent people.
Room at the Top (1958)
Rate:
8
Viewed:
1/25
1/25:
I didn't know Laurence Harvey had it in him.
Having seen The Manchurian Candidate many times, I always
thought he was a one-hit wonder. Now, it's clear why he was perfect for the role of Raymond Shaw given the
tailor-made traits he displayed in Room at the Top.
The film is responsible for initiating the British New Wave by blowing up adultery big time, hence the
'X' certificate. So far, I consider
Saturday Night and Sunday Morning the best
of the pack with This Sporting Life in a close second. No matter what,
it's a strong picture because of the Oscar-winning adapted screenplay by Neil Paterson and Freddie Francis'
stunning black-and-white photography. Along the way is a social commentary about class division that's better
handled than Stella Dallas, a film I saw recently which did a very,
very poor job of it.
The performances are impeccable. I know a lot of people were enamored with Simone Signoret who won
the Oscar for Best Actress, but Laurence Harvey impressed me the most by dominating the show. As a
result, he was rewarded with an Oscar nomination. Surprisingly, Hermione Baddeley, as Alice's friend, was
also tabbed for it, making history for the shortest performance ever.
What do I think about the story? For starters, Joe Lampton wasn't familiar with the adage:
"Be careful what you wish for." Eventually, he got what he wanted, but it ended up costing a woman's life. Imagine
the happy outcome if he would focus on just one person. An aspect I've found extremely strange, which occurs several
times, is when Laurence Harvey smoked first before kissing Simone Signoret right away. Unsurprisingly, both passed
away at a young age (45 and 64, respectively) from smoking-related cancer.
All in all, Room at the Top works because of Laurence Harvey.
A Room with a View (1985)
Rate:
10
Viewed:
2/07, 10/10, 2/25
2/07:
A Room with a View is a rare achievement in filmmaking which is turning the screenplay into a
motion picture with the feel of a 19th century novel with brilliant performances, and it only cost $3 million.
The direction is adroitly done by James Ivory, and the cinematography is magnificent. Maggie Smith and Daniel
Day-Lewis are perfect and also funny because of their prim and proper behavior. The latter is brilliant because of
his total transformation from a flaming gay lover in
My Beautiful Laundrette to an excessively upright bore. Denholm
Elliot, Helena Bonham Carter (who was 19 years old at the time), Simon Callow, Rupert Graves, and Julian Sands
give strong performances. The most hilarious scene is when the last three guys went for a skinnydipping in the pond.
What a perfect title as it's illustrated by Helena Bonham Carter and Maggie Smith when they're placed exactly where
they wanted to be all along and then again by the former and Julian Sands at the end as shown in the movie poster.
Mostly, the story is about a girl meeting the right boy but refusing to believe it, deciding to marry the wrong guy
before realizing her mistake in time, and going back to the other one.
All in all, A Room with a View is a pure Merchant Ivory picture.
10/10:
After retrying A Room with a View, I unfortunately find it long and boring with a lot of pretend acting.
Although I've read these novels written during the 18th and 19th century and understand how the characters'
deportment and etiquette should be, the duplication feels fake and awkward. It's also difficult to adjust my
21st century mind to what's going on because the themes are now antiquated and frivolous.
All in all, A Room with a View will have to be watched again later.
2/25:
A Room with a View is back on my list of Best Films.
I think the last time I saw it I was put off by the airs put on by the characters, and it's about rich white people
with too much time on their hands. No matter what, I appreciate anything by Merchant Ivory, and this is first class
all the way through. What a fine cast on top of splendid writing, cinematography, and costumes. It's too bad about
Julian Sands who went missing recently during a hiking trip and wasn't found until six months later.
All in all, if you have to pick one Merchant Ivory picture to watch, you must make it A Room with a View.
Roots (1977)
Rate:
10
Viewed:
8/15, 12/20
8/15:
If there is a definitive black American motion picture, it's Roots.
Starting out as a novel in 1976 by Alex Haley about nine generations of African descendants, Roots was
developed into a TV miniseries a year later, and just about everybody in the country watched it, setting viewership records.
For ten hours, Roots is a powerfully moving story about the lives of black slaves owned by
white slaveholders in plantations run by white overseers over 120 years. Although a potential viewer may be fooled
by the TV look, there's really nothing like it before or ever since.
There are many ups and (mostly) downs throughout the ordeal; obviously, no dramatic acts of heroism are undertaken,
but rather, there are countless scenes of black slaves putting their heads down and taking the abuse. The transcendental power is
within the formation of the lineage which is often tainted with miscegnation; eventually, the family of Kunta Kinte survives,
overcomes the system, and is finally free from the fetters of slavery.
What I love about the portrayal of their lives is the historical accuracy of the slavery era. It's hard to find anything that
isn't consistent with what I have read about the topic, and I'm sure it was more brutal than shown in Roots. It's only
that I wish the language spoken in the Africa segment was Mandinka until the just-turned-slaves crossed over the Atlantic Ocean
and were forced to assimilate.
Nevertheless, I'm impressed with the prevalence of the N-word, female nudity in Africa, and treatment of blacks
by whites. In so many ways, Roots beats the pants off of Gone with the Wind by destroying
the myth of the Old South. However, it's hard to say if the saga makes for appropriate viewing in schools because of its
immense power which can be misconstrued. There's one thing that needs to be kept in reminder: slavery isn't unique to the
United States of America or blacks; it happened to all races in every continent. In fact, there were more white slaves than
black slaves in colonial America during the late 17th century.
Of course, Roots has a lot of conflicting messages. Should whites be punished for what they did to
blacks? Should blacks take arms and kill whites for payback? How should blacks feel after slavery has ended?
What's the correct resolution for what blacks had suffered? Should they go back to Africa and reclaim their roots?
How should the ex-slaves view their white ex-slaveholders? Truth be told, a very high percentage of blacks currently living
don't have a lineage to former American slaves, and there were plenty of black slaveholders back then.
Meanwhile, the performances are uniformly excellent on both sides. However as hard as it is to single out anyone, it's
undeniable that Louis Gossett, Jr., Madge Sinclair, and Ben Vereen give the most moving performances as Fiddler, Bell,
and Chicken George, respectively.
All in all, Roots is among a handful of must-see films for all Americans.
12/20:
Not just a motion picture, Roots is an experience.
Powerful, absorbing, racially stirring, and controversial, it ranks right up there with
Schindler's List and The Killing Fields. Backed
by an uniformly outstanding cast, Roots was honored with 37 Primetime Emmy Award
nominations, winning nine of them. Aired on eight consecutive nights from January 23 to 30, 1977, it was seen by over 130
million people with the finale being the, hitherto but now third, most-watched episode ever in TV history.
There's nothing like it: from village life to slavecatchers in Africa, from slave ship to slave auction, from forced
submission to plantation work, and from whipping to rape. Zero freedom is given to the blacks who are routinely called
"niggers" and treated no more than a piece of property. Generations of them are forced to wait to be finally free, and
many of their souls had already died before their bodies plain wore out. No brutality is ever spared by the whites.
As outstanding as everybody is, there are a few who stand out, and they're Louis Gossett, Jr., Ben
Vereen, and Lloyd Bridges. Edward Asner, Lorne Greene, Vic Morrow, Chuck Connors, and Georg Stanford Brown are really good,
and Leslie Uggams, Sandy Duncan, and Madge Sinclair are unforgettable as well. It's hard to leave out others
because they're so many of them, spanning seven generations.
Unfortunately, the story of Roots is fiction although there's absolutely no doubt of what happened. It was probably a
lot more brutal than what's shown. Today, there are people who say slavery was a uniquely black experience which is 100% untrue.
It did exist for all races as far back as human history was first recorded.
A major contributor to the interest of genealogy, Roots author Alex Haley was sued by Harold Courlander for plagiarism
from The African which was written nine years prior, forcing him to settle out of court for $650,000. The trouble with
his novel is that it's not confirmed by historical records and that it's often contradictory in dates. In fact, during episode V of the
miniseries, you'll notice the Nat Turner event is dated wrong, being ten years too late. No matter what, Haley deserves
accolades for capturing the nation's attention about the black experience during the 18th and 19th centuries in both continents.
All in all, there's Roots, and there's the rest of black cinema.
Roots: The Next Generations (1979)
Rate:
10
Viewed:
8/21
8/21:
Roots: The Next Generations picks up where Roots left off and finishes at a very high note.
Although there are scores of thespians spread over seven episodes, there are six standouts: Henry Fonda, Georg
Stanford Brown, Stan Shaw, James Earl Jones, Al Freeman, Jr., and the Godfather himself: Marlon Brando.
It took over ten hours of waiting to see Brando, and when it's time for him to speak, he's brilliant, hence the Emmy win for Best
Supporting Actor. How Brando got cast is that, because of Roots'
success, he simply made a phone call out of the blue and asked for a small yet memorable part. It's certainly right on
the money for both counts.
Although the first three episodes are very good, the fourth slows everything down, and it has gotten to the
point of being a soap opera. But the seventh and final episode is the most powerful of them all: going back to what
Roots is truly about. I wouldn't have minded if the first three episodes were turned into a sequel and the last four
to be the next one in order to give the subplots proper development.
One part I'm surprised from episode six when Alex Haley was driving around the town for motel
accommodations is not showing The Negro Motorist Green Book. Not a lot of people today know about
this, but it was the go-to book for black travelers from 1936 to 1966. Many had to pack a week's worth of food and
cans of gasoline because thousands of towns refused to accommodate them, even for bathroom trips.
I've read the book The Autobiography of Malcolm X a couple of times which is how I knew of Alex Haley before
I got into this Roots stuff. Therefore, the coverage of what happened during episode seven is
extremely fascinating. On the other hand, I didn't know anything about Marlon Brando's real-life character; it's all news to me.
Easily the most disappointing aspect is the countless characters who have become quickly forgotten. Some get so much
attention that there's no follow-up to them in the long run. A good example is Jim Warner and his black wife (I'm
surprised by this because interracial marriage was illegal in Tennessee back then; it later turned out to be false).
Also, it's weird to see Chicken George be played by somebody else other than Ben Vereen.
Despite the ups and down, Roots: The Next Generations deserves a '10' from me. The writing is absolutely
terrific throughout, and Alex Haley's postscript is a bonus, reminding everybody the purpose of watching the entire saga.
Unfortunately, he made up a lot of stuff, having been charged with plagiarism which led to an out-of-court settlement.
All in all, Roots: The Next Generations is a fitting sequel to the best miniseries in television history.
Rope (1948)
Rate:
4
Viewed:
10/06, 12/12
10/06:
It's amazing to notice that Rope was made in 1948 and that it's still groundbreakingly innovative today.
The acting by James Stewart, Farley Granger, and John Dall is perfect. The dialogue is perfect. The setting is perfect.
The direction is perfect. The suspense is perfect. The characters are perfect. Everything about Rope is perfect: a
definitive Hitchcock masterpiece.
Ahead of its time, there's a lot of information presented which will be proven true through the study of serial killer
duos, especialy when it comes to the dominant/submissive relationship.
All in all, Rope is a bona fide Hitchcock classic.
12/12:
The first time I saw Rope, I was enthralled, but now, I realize it's an annoying movie.
Right off the bat, it's a very talky picture in a theatrical way. The characters are lame, and their conversations are hammy
to listen to. About ten minutes or so into the party, it has gotten too obvious that the killers, mostly Brandon, want to
be caught. Rupert, who's played somewhat well by James Stewart, has it figured out by the 50th minute mark. From that point
thereon, it becomes chore to wait until he reveals what he knows about the killers who freely dish out many clues to make
their murderous accomplishment all too obvious. It's been suggested they're homosexuals, prompting me to say, "Huh? Grow up, please."
However, Rope is a technically well-shot picture. Imagine trying to make a movie in a single room for the
entire duration. In other words, it feels like the whole thing was shot in one day. Another is the gradual shift
of light from daytime to nighttime as seen through the orangery. Sometimes, I think of how fake the city background is,
but there are certain aspects that make it appear real and illuminating along with cloud changes.
One thing I don't like is the placement of neon lights in front of the bricked building. Let's be real: why would a businessman
set it up this way by letting some of the letters be blocked? I know, Hitchcock wanted to add the noir feel, but still...
All in all, in spite of some mertis, Rope is a flawed picture.
The Rosary Murders (1987)
Rate:
7
Viewed:
10/03, 7/12
7/12:
All the more reason to hate the church and to support the atheism/agnosticism movement.
There's so much hypocrisy about the silly institution and its "oh sacred" rules. The church basically says religion is more
important than people's lives. That's great. It's no wonder why the child sex abuse lasted for so long. Take a look at the
Joe Paterno mess: Penn State University is more important than the raped children.
For what it's worth, Donald Sutherland turns in another masterful performance, and he's the only reason why I don't mind
seeing the film again.
All in all, The Rosary Murders is a nice little thriller, but I'm peeved by the inviolable seal of clergy privilege.
The Rose Tattoo (1955)
Rate:
7
Viewed:
7/24
7/24:
The Rose Tattoo is pure Tennessee Williams.
Anna Magnani was actually foundering on her own during the first half. As soon as Burt Lancaster showed up, the show finally
took off, making her look better. Hence, it's a strange movie with two eccentric characters. If the script called for them to give
overdone performances, then so be it. That being said, the negative reviews pointing out this aspect are completely
unwarranted.
Tennessee Williams wrote the play with Anna Magnani in mind. She didn't want to do it on Broadway because she didn't know English
well enough. So, Maureen Stapleton ended up getting the role. When Tennessee Williams sold the film rights to producer Hal B. Wallis,
his condition was that Anna Magnani must star in it. The rest was history with eight Oscar nominations, winning three with one going
to Anna Magnani. I'm only surprised Burt Lancaster wasn't nominated because he never acted like that before or ever since then.
They say The Rose Tattoo takes place in Louisiana, and there are references to New Orleans. I find that preposterous.
There's nothing South about it. All I see is Key West which is exactly where they shot the movie in. It would be better if
they went that way plus "Miami" instead of "New Orleans."
All in all, The Rose Tattoo is an uneven, quizzical movie, but it has charm.
Rosemary's Baby (1968)
Rate:
10
Viewed:
11/04, 2/07
2/07:
Before Roman Polanski directed Chinatown, he struck gold in Rosemary's Baby, one
of the finest horror films made.
The acting is uniformly impeccable. I'm surprised that Mia Farrow wasn't given enough credit for her breakthrough performance.
John Cassavetes, Ruth Gordon, and Sidney Blackmer are outstanding as well. Although the movie plays out like a soap opera, it's
the beginning of what's to come. Rosemary's transformation is eerie to watch. The ending is a shocker.
All in all, Rosemary's Baby is a timeless horror classic.
Rosewood (1997)
Rate:
9
Viewed:
2/04, 5/17, 11/20
5/17:
The story of what happened in Rosewood, Florida, was untold for sixty years, and it occurred during the nadir of America's
race relations in the 20th century.
During the first week of January 1923, a white married woman in Sumner, a white town, was beaten up by a white lover; she ran
out of the house some while later to yell that a "nigger" did this to her. A mob of white men gathered, and Rosewood, a
nearby black town, was wiped out in a matter of days. Black residents were lynched. The state government of Florida knew of
the incident but did nothing. The town was never rebuilt, and no black residents talked about what happened until the
1980's.
Filled with great acting, Rosewood is a rare film about the dark history of racism which existed in the U.S. for
hundreds of years. It began with the genocide of American Indians in the 16th century and was well underway with the
enslavement of Africans. The real history of the United States isn't widely told in high schools because people in authority
don't want the kids to know just to keep their patriotism intact.
If there's anything to dislike, it's the introduction of fictional characters and the deviations from historical accounts. It
would've been nice if John Singleton told the story of how the events went down, but I understand that he wanted to give
some power back to black people in order to inflate their actions and not make them look weak in the face of white injustice.
All in all, Rosewood is worth watching and has done a lot of good by bringing the untold history to light but falls
to the classic Hollywood trap of rewriting history.
11/20:
Florida tried to hide its racist side by not acknowledging what happened in Rosewood for over 70 years, but it
was a black town that got completely massacred by white people and the state did nothing about it.
Hence, the film had to be made to remind everybody of what happened, and it's still powerful. Yeah, the truth is sort
of loose, but the main facts are still intact: a white married woman lied about being beaten and raped by a black man when
it was really her white lover who did it, and the rest was history.
Rosewood may be long, but what's incredible is the snowball effect: the situation just
keeps getting bigger and worse than ever. The only way it ends is when there's nothing left to destroy. Although not
an easy movie to watch, the cast is top-notch, and the performances are uniformly excellent.
All in all, in the tradition of The Ox-Bow Incident, Rosewood ranks among
the best in mob justice genre.
'Round Midnight (1986)
Rate:
3
Viewed:
8/21
8/21:
Although splendidly photographed, 'Round Midnight is an agonizingly long, slow movie about a working jazzman.
Not much happens for more than two hours. What's shown during the first twenty minutes is endlessly looped the rest
of the way: get up, act stoned, mumble a few platitudes, play some jazz, find a drink, and be rescued at the hospital.
Bizarrely, a white Frenchman wants to save the black dude while neglecting his own daughter. Because of the way he looks,
I can't help but feel like I'm sitting through a bad Dustin Hoffman movie. Francis' obsession for Dale Turner is weird as well.
Never was an integral part of the Golden Age of Jazz which occurred during the 1920's and 30's, the 6'6" tall Dexter Gordon tries
to revive what the jazz scene was like in Paris during the 50's. However, it's tough to put up with his character who talks
slowly and is drunk out of his mind. Having served time in prison, Dexter was a heroin addict which probably explains
his behavior a lot.
That being said, I have to bring up Saturday Night Fever. The reason why the movie
worked so well is that it was filmed during the zenith of disco. Therefore, it became a time capsule that'll never be replicated.
Had it been done for 'Round Midnight, it's highly probable the film would've succeeded on the poetic level, but
everybody is simply too late to the party.
All in all, 'Round Midnight is geared toward serious jazz lovers, but the rest need not apply.
The Rounders (1914)
Rate:
1
Viewed:
4/07
4/07:
Just about every stereotype that exists can be found in The Rounders.
There's one for every group: blacks, disabled, drunks, females, crippled, police, and so on.
Oh, Charlie Chaplin thinks it's funny to beat up women or crippled people?
Oh, Charlie Chaplin thinks it's funny to push a wheelchair-bound guy to the edge of a pier just right before the ocean?
It's no wonder why Charlie Chaplin is the biggest sadistic ever to embrace the silver screen. Marlon Brando was definitely on
to him during the filming of A Countess from Hong Kong.
All in all, Charlie Chaplin was a sick fuck.
Rounders (1998)
Rate:
6
Viewed:
6/05
6/05:
Rounders is an insightful movie when it comes to the game of poker.
The rest of everything goes in circles without coming to a point, hence the apt film title. Matt Damon and Edward Norton are fair.
As for the plot, it's been "who cares?" Why make a movie that bows down to poker legends? These people are ridiculous.
All in all, it's impossible to make a great film out of poker.
Roxanne (1987)
Rate:
6
Viewed:
9/10
9/10:
Roxanne is a witty modern adaptation of the famous French play Cyrano de Bergerac that was written by Edmond
Rostand.
It's a clever movie that generates lots of laughs. However, the premise is illogical and unrealistic. The trick of one doing
the voice while the other shows off his good looks won't hold water after a while. Hence, it'll fold quickly.
There's no question of Steve Martin's comedic genius, and he wholesomely displays it here. The two best parts are
he meeting the two snobbish males at the beginning and being forced to sound out twenty things better than the affront he
received from the male barfly. The bird sitting on Steve Martin's nose for a perch while he's writing a letter is cute.
The rest holds up well, save for the awkward classic hiding-in-the-bush scene which is actually the most memorable part of the
play. Notwithstanding, I like how the issue of having an unsightly appearance is played out, and it does give an extra touch
to the plot.
All in all, Roxanne isn't bad and needs another viewing.
Ruby Gentry (1952)
Rate:
9
Viewed:
11/15, 12/21
11/15:
"Hill country liquor, tidewater cooking, and North Carolina women."
So it goes in Ruby Gentry, invoking the feel of melodrama that's associated with Douglas Sirk's pictures.
This is my second Jennifer Jones movie, and after developing a low opinion of her in
Love Is a Many-Splendored Thing,
she's much better this time and looks a lot like Elizabeth Taylor.
Jennifer Jones and Charlton Heston are excellent together even if it's unbelievable at first, but the approach they take
starts to make sense as more time is spent in unraveling their characters' conflict. It reminds me of the relationship between
Heathcliff and Catherine in Wuthering Heights.
On the other hand, Karl Malden is superb. It seems like he worked with just about everybody in Hollywood. King Vidor is to
be commended for his outstanding direction by telling a complicated story in a short amount of time. Chemistry between two
lovers on screen is the hardest thing to achieve, but King sells it well through Jennifer Jones and Charlton Heston.
The last ten minutes, which is essentially the same scene from Gun Crazy, has me realizing
it's film noir after all and also a Southern Gothic movie.
All in all, Ruby Gentry, a sexual picture, slowly wins me over with great performances by Jennifer
Jones and Charlton Heston who were probably at the prime of their physical beauty and energy.
12/21:
Ruby Gentry is among the most overlooked films of the 50's.
It has all: story, writing, acting, lust, passion, intrigue, and revenge. This is Jennifer Jones at her sexiest,
and countering the firecracker is the eternally handsome Charlton Heston. When they are together, their chemistry is
electrifying. Any time Ruby is with the doctor or Jim Gentry, it's obvious that neither is in her league.
But Boake Tackman...oh, boy.
The story is also interesting because a lot of times love is very straightforward and they simply get married. Yet Boake has
other things on his mind, mainly to elevate his social standing. Ruby just can't believe it, and I agree with her. Still, I
don't understand why she consented to marriage with Jim who's a father figure to her and nothing more. Perhaps it's her fault
by playing too hard to get.
All in all, Jennifer Jones and Charlton Heston...what a brilliant pair they've made for Ruby Gentry.
Rudy (1993)
Rate:
9
Viewed:
10/03, 9/06, 12/22
9/06:
Rudy is a feel-good picture that's abysmally corny.
So, what is Rudy Ruettiger doing at Notre Dame University besides football? Does he have any other hobbies? Friends? What's
his major? Please don't tell me he's studying Notre Dame University football history.
Yeah, the ending is an all-time great only that it never happened. Rudy's "famous play" is just a half-sack through pressure
or perhaps a finishing tackle after his teammate made the primary sack. You can check out the play on YouTube to see if I'm
wrong. His number is 45.
The jersey-throwing scene is fake as well. There was no older brother named Frank (Rudy was the oldest of fourteen children
in the family), and there was most certainly no black greenskeeper. What's not known is Rudy served in the Navy which
meant his tuition was covered by the G.I. Bill.
The famous speech by Knute Rockne? That was just for show in the newsreels. The 1975 Notre Dame-Georgia Tech game? It
wasn't the last one as there were still two games left in the season. Fans chanting Rudy's name to entice the coach to let
him play? Nah, it happened after he made the game-ending "sack," and the chant was mostly confined to a small
section of the crowd.
All in all, Rudy Ruettiger might be the worst person to get drunk with because all he'll do is speak about the boring,
glory days of Notre Dame football.
12/22:
As extremely corny as Rudy is, it's a fine movie with all the elements of classic filmmaking.
Let's not kid ourselves: the story is mostly fake. A lot of the events as shown in the film never happened.
A quiet, modest man by nature, Joe Montana went so far to debunk many myths which surprised me. He played for
Notre Dame from 1975 to 1978 although he missed the '76 season due to shoulder separation and he couldn't dress for the
'75 season, when Rudy was a senior, because freshmen weren't allowed to play.
There was no such person named Fortune. Nobody gave up his jersey to let Rudy in the final game. When I say it, I mean
the final home game of the season as there were still two more away games left. It wouldn't have mattered anyway because Coach
Dan Devine had allowed him to play. He also said, "Anybody who knows me knows that if any kid came in and put his jersey on
my desk, he'd never see it again." There were no fans chanting for him for the final play or two, either. Rudy did get a sack,
although it looked questionable, and got carried by some players off the field, but it was more of a joke.
The movie also left out a pertinent fact: Rudy served time in the Navy which meant the G.I. Bill
covered his tuition afterwards at both schools: Holy Cross and Notre Dame. Subsequently, it meant he had plenty of
free time to focus on his studies as well as football and—surprise—boxing. Rudy was the oldest in the family of
fourteen children; hence, there's no brother named Frank. His real father did support Rudy's ambitions right
from the start.
Back to Joe Montana, he went further by saying, "That guy was a joke. The movie was NOTHING like what really went on at that
time. I was the quarterback then, and I wouldn't let them use my name for that movie." It's indeed strong words because you'll
never hear him talk that way. Even Sean Astin had to concede. By using his story and reputation to sell a fraudulent sports
drink bearing his name, Daniel "Rudy" Ruettiger eventually became a pump-and-dump scammer. He got charged by the SEC and
was forced to pay a huge fine. Some sport "hero" he is.
All in all, despite the heavy liberties taken with the truth, Rudy is a fine, inspiring movie.
The Rules of Attraction (2002)
Rate:
1
Viewed:
5/25
5/25:
I can see why Bret Easton Ellis called The Rules of Attraction the best film adaptation of his books.
It's as nihilistic as it gets: suicide, rape, and depravity, among others. Well, I hate the movie that tries to
be the corrupt version of La règle du jeu. I hate all of the characters.
They are dark, pretentious, and reprehensible. What's the point of them going backwards occasionally? Ditto for
the frenzied summary of Victor's trip to Europe. The abrupt ending is stupid. Sean Bateman? Is he supposed to be
related to Patrick in American Psycho? If so, I
guess he'll be a future serial killer.
James Van Der Beek is so gross. Who wants to see him up close fucking a girl or pleasuring himself? Shannyn
Sossamon needs to get a proper haircut. Somebody should tell Ian Somerhalder that he has no future in Hollywood.
Why the hell is Jessica Biel in the film if she isn't going to take off her top at a party with nude women and
while having sex? Now, this is one fucking joke of an actress.
There are few more notable thespians reaching the nadir of their careers: Faye Dunaway, Eric Stoltz, and
Swoosie Kurtz. Thinking of himself in Boogie Nights, Clifton Collins, Jr.,
is far better than this trash. Remember the boy on his bed with a clarinet while shooting himself up with heroin
in his toe? That's Fred Savage. Yep...and I hope he's proud of his work. Jason Hervey needs to beat him up
some more.
All in all, don't be fooled by the chic poster of The Rules of Attraction; it's not that kind of film.
Rules of Engagement (2000)
Rate:
9
Viewed:
2/25
2/25:
William Friedkin delivers a quality film once again, and this time, it's called Rules of Engagement.
What a strong cast: Tommy Lee Jones, Samuel L. Jackson, Ben Kingsley, Anne Archer, Guy Pearce, and Philip Baker
Hall, among others. Even more important is the story. Sure, I'm reminded of
Man in the Middle, Breaker Morant,
and A Few Good Men, but the genre is always compelling: military
courtroom drama.
It's possible the director had to make a tough choice to whether or not include what happened. I say this because
if that isn't offered all we have to go on with are witness testimonies and pictures, making it hard for
us to arrive at the correct verdict. Since we already know the truth, it's easy to conclude
that Colonel Childers didn't do anything wrong and that he and his men acted in self-defense. The following
terrific logical deduction by his defense lawyer is what won the case:
"But the camera on the embassy roof had the same point of view. The government would have you believe there's
no tape from that camera. I have shown you that that tape was delivered to the State Department. Do you believe
that tape got up and walked out of the State Department on its own? By not producing that tape, the national
security advisor, Mr. Sokal, has brought dishonor into this court. Without that tape, I cannot show you that
the crowd fired first and that Colonel Childers is innocent. But without that tape, they cannot prove beyond
a reasonable doubt that he's guilty!"
Yet think about it...what reason does the United States have by masking the truth? Why do that when Colonel
Childers had done nothing wrong? All the evidence is there for the taking. The Yemenis were throwing rocks and
shooting at people in the embassy. In fact, the military didn't engage for a long while which means women and
children had plenty of time to change their minds and walk away from the situation. By not doing so, they
declared themselves "hostile."
All in all, Rules of Engagement is a fast two-hour picture that's excellent in every aspect.
Rumble Fish (1983)
Rate:
5
Viewed:
10/03, 8/07, 5/21
8/07:
I've got to hand it to Francis Ford Coppola for assembling the largest group of the hottest young stars of the 80's
in two films: The Outsiders and Rumble Fish.
Look at the names: Matt Dillon, Mickey Rourke, Patrick Swayze, Tom Cruise, Emilio Estevez, Rob Lowe, Diane
Lane, Nicolas Cage, Laurence Fishburne, Chris Penn, Ralph Macchio, Tom Waits, C. Thomas Howell, Diana Scarwid,
Vincent Spano, and Leif Garrett. We're talking about big-time moneymakers.
Back to Rumble Fish, the first time I saw the film, I thought it was good but murky. After the second
viewing, my sentiment became "murky but good." Now, I must say the movie sucks. It's incoherent for the most
part. To make matters worse, the topic of gangs keeps being harped on throughout, weakening any visible development
among the characters. I still don't get Rusty James' problem while wanting to know more about the Motorcycle
Boy's history. My favorite part, which was completely avant-garde at the time, is the sight of colored fish.
It goes without saying everybody looks great in black and white. The only actor to appear in the first three S.E.
Hinton films, Matt Dillon is okay if somewhat annoying, but I liked him more in
The Outsiders and Tex.
Everybody else is somewhat the same which is equivalent to saying they're forgettable.
All in all, Rumble Fish, a film about juvenile delinquents, offers no interesting points.
5/21:
No matter how many times I've seen Rumble Fish, nothing makes sense.
Two things the film has going for it are the pretty black-and-white photography and the all-star cast. Beyond
them, there's no plot; it's mainly two hours of Rusty James talking the big talk and the Motorcycle Boy being
stuck in a dazed haze. The biggest mistake is not incorporating anything from the past to back the
latter's larger-than-life reputation.
The cast is unbelievable in retrospective because many went on to bigger things: Matt Dillon, Mickey
Rourke, Nicolas Cage, Laurence Fishburne, Diane Lane, Chris Penn, and Sofia Coppola. Dennis Hopper was on the
cusp of a comeback after many alcohol-drug fueled years of erratic behavior. Diana Scarwid was already an
established actress, but she didn't see her career improve much afterwards.
All in all, Francis Ford Coppola was the wrong choice to direct
The Outsiders and Rumble Fish.
Run Silent, Run Deep (1958)
Rate:
8
Viewed:
6/24
6/24:
I thought there would be endless comparisons between The Enemy Below and
Run Silent, Run Deep, but both are good movies in their own way.
It helps to have the immense star power of Clark Gable and Burt Lancaster on board. Otherwise, the bland cast, save for Jack
Warden, was going to doom the film. Many said Clark Gable was too old to play the role of Commander P.J. Richardson, but I thought
he was great, being the biggest reason why the film worked. Burt Lancaster just helped out.
Yeah, it's somewhat obvious that everything appears to be in the form of a toy model and that there's a rear projection effect.
Yet they aren't too distracting to make a dent on the show. The story is well-crafted, and it's easy to follow what's going on.
Some of it reminds me of Moby Dick with several mutiny talks but doesn't go that far.
All in all, I got nothing bad to say about Run Silent, Run Deep, and I was entertained from start to finish,
thanks to Clark Gable.
Runaway Train (1985)
Rate:
7
Viewed:
7/07, 6/11, 4/20
7/07:
Jon Voight's Manny Manheim is a mean, hard, and tough son of a bitch to ever grace the silver screen.
Runaway Train is a spectacular, thrilling machine that never lets down. There's no question Jon Voight completely owns
everybody. He deserved the Oscar nomination. Also receiving the same is Eric Roberts who's good but annoying. John P. Ryan
is even more memorable, but Rebecca De Mornay is random.
Thanks to the incredible stunt work, especially when Ranken held to the rope ladder that's hanging off from the helicopter,
the battle between him and Manny speaks volumes to their machismo. There's a fine line separating those who can from those
who can't. It's plain through Manny and Buck.
Against the backdrop of Alaska's snow-covered terrain, the runaway train heightens the suspense of the plot which is
ingenious with twists and turns. The movie never tries to be unrealistic in terms of impossible physics.
As poetic as it can be, the ending is one of the greatest ever shot.
All in all, Jon Voight is brilliant, breathtaking, and ferocious in Runaway Train.
6/11:
Runaway Train is one of the most unusual pictures that leaves me out of breath from start to finish.
It's easily Jon Voight's show, and his thrilling performance as Oscar "Manny" Manheim comes close to topping what
he did in Midnight Cowboy. Eric Roberts is certainly a better actor than his sister Julia.
All in all, armed with one of the top ten greatest endings ever, Runaway Train is special.
4/20:
Runaway Train is still a good movie despite losing its luster this time around.
The action is kind of stale at times during the final hour. Parts of it remind me of William Friedkin's
Sorcerer.
I hate the fact that there's a woman on the train, having initially fallen asleep, because it seems random. The train
is unrealistic; you can point it out for me anywhere in the United States because that thing looks like it was built to run
in Siberian Russia.
Scenes involving the command center to control the situation take away the focus a bit because it eventually stops playing a part in
the last thirty minutes. Hence, I don't know the remedy should be because who cares what the operators are thinking
or dealing with? On second thought, the film's point of view is better off limited to the two escaped convicts.
Naturally, Runaway Train is about two hard-ass characters: Oscar "Manny" Manheim and Warden Ranken. Thus,
John P. Ryan is more memorable than Eric Roberts who's annoying by being an ass-kisser. Jon Voight is
special; it's his film, and he deserved the Oscar nomination.
All in all, Runaway Train is a must-see because of Jon Voight.
Running Brave (1983)
Rate:
6
Viewed:
12/23
12/23:
You have to be a serious runner to know who Billy Mills is and the existence of a movie called Running Brave.
Long forgotten and probably never recognized to begin with, Billy Mills shocked everybody by winning the gold medal in
the 10,000 meters at the 1964 Olympiad Games in Tokyo, Japan. An American Indian, he was considered a long shot by not
establishing himself as a contender on the world stage.
At that time, Australian Ron Clarke was the most feared runner, having been destined to win, but what people didn't know is
he was showing off his world-class speed on track within a couple of days before the race which left him tired. Currently,
Billy Mills is the only American Olympic champion in the event. He ran the marathon a week later which was won by the great
barefooted Abebe Bikila.
Displaying too much of made-for-TV feel with weak subplots, Running Brave paints a story of how Billy Mills was able
to overcome the odds, but it's hard to say what's factual because no book exists on his life which will have made for an
interesting read. The scene that shows him being intentionally pushed off by one of the runners isn't true; Mohammed Gammoudi
of Tunisia was only making a breakthrough.
Robby Benson may look like Billy Mills, but it's disappointing that they couldn't get an actual American Indian to play him
given how much the movie centers around racism. Surprisingly, he did become a serious runner, completing a marathon,
despite his cardiac issues which ultimately resulted in four open-heart surgeries since age 28.
All in all, Running Brave is an okay movie, but I prefer to watch the 10,000 meter race in its entirety which isn't
available on the internet.
The Running Man (1987)
Rate:
4
Viewed:
9/06, 2/24
9/06:
Everybody is silly in The Running Man.
I thought Arnold Schwarzenegger would save the movie, but he fails miserably, having been a lot better in
The Terminator, Predator, and
Total Recall. Interesting is the inclusion of the legendary Family Feud host
Richard Dawson. It's almost like seeing who he really was, especially behind the scenes.
All in all, The Running Man has a lot of potential, but it goes wasted.
2/24:
The Running Man is still a bad movie, but I'm upgrading my rating from '3' to '4'.
It's not Arnold Schwarzenegger who's the problem but rather how underwhelming the game show is. The concept needs to be
developed more. While at it, the filmmakers should've pushed the year forward by 100 years. It's now 2024, and they saying
the whole thing takes place in 2017 or thereabouts is laughable. Sometimes, I thought of
Rollerball with James Caan.
Seeing Richard Dawson is surreal given how much I enjoyed him hosting Family Feud. I'll say he stole the
show from Arnold. Many who worked with Richard Dawson said that's how he was behind the scenes. What people don't realize is
Jesse "The Body" Ventura never fought Arnold in the final battle; it was all faked. Paula Abdul did the choreography for the dance
sequences, but they're both horrible and pointless. By the way, Erland van Lidth, who played Dynamo, may look stupid, but he
graduated from Massachusetts Institute of Technology with a B.S. in Computer Science & Electrical Engineering.
All in all, the filmmakers should've taken more time in developing the material to make The Running Man better.
Running Mates (2000)
Rate:
6
Viewed:
6/25
6/25:
Since Tanner '88 has been made, Running Mates is mostly superfluous.
There's only one guy from the former appearing in the latter: Matt Malloy. Because of the theme when it comes
to picking the vice president, I kept thinking of The Contender. It'll
never happen for real. Vice presidents have been chosen because of their voting power and/or the monies involved
despite being hated intensely by the president. Some examples are Dwight Eisenhower/Richard Nixon, JFK/LBJ,
and Ronald Reagan/George H.W. Bush.
Of course, the whole thing is bullshit. That's how I view politics in general: talk the big talk and then do
nothing much after being voted in. The next election comes up, and it's all about clearing out the lobbyists
and special interest groups in Washington, D.C., for the umpteenth time. If that has been going on for so
long, then how come nobody has done anything about it?
The performances are generally fine with Tom Selleck and Faye Dunaway standing out a bit. I got confused by
how many female characters had slept with the governor, and it turned out to be four: his wife, Lauren
Hartman, Meg Gable, and Shawna. During the first half, there were little stuff that went over my head, and
the writer didn't bother elaborating on them. The second half is better by zooming in the objective.
All in all, Running Mates is fine.
Running on Empty (1988)
Rate:
9
Viewed:
6/05, 7/20, 2/25
6/05:
River Phoenix had never been as outstanding as he was in Running on Empty.
What a great story with lots of endearing performances. Sidney Lumet is a master director.
All in all, Running on Empty is a must-see for everybody, not just River Phoenix's fans.
7/20:
Strong story, great performances, and masterful direction all make Running on Empty a moving picture
to watch.
River Phoenix was a precocious actor for a seventeen-year-old boy, and he gave the performance of his career as
Danny Pope, resulting in a much-deserved Oscar nomination for Best Supporting Actor. I have to say it's a leading
role because the picture follows where his character goes. River Phoenix has several touching scenes, especially
in the last thirty minutes.
Being shut out of the opportunity to attend a prestigious university like Juilliard because of the felony crime
his parents committed over fifteen years ago isn't fair to Danny. It's the ultimate price they must pay:
giving up normal contact with him just like they did with their relatives; otherwise, they'll have to turn
themselves in and serve time. Danny's father may be selfish, but he means well; ultimately, he came to his senses
and let Danny go, thus the powerful ending.
Aside from River Phoenix, there are many strong performances coming from Judd Hirsch, Christine Lahti, Martha
Plimpton, Jonas Abry (which is the first of only two films he ever appeared in; he currently teaches high school
English), and Steven Hill. At one point, River expressed desire for a sequel to Running on Empty which
seemed like a smart idea because I would be interested in seeing what happened to everybody afterwards. By the
way, the writer of the Oscar-nominated screenplay is Naomi Foner who's Jake Gyllenhaal's mother. And no,
River Phoenix didn't play the piano; it was done by somebody else.
All in all, if people say River Phoenix was so good in
My Own Private Idaho, I'll shoot back at them with "But have you ever
seen Running on Empty?"
2/25:
Sidney Lumet gets the best out of everybody in Running on Empty while River Phoenix reminds me of James Dean.
Rush (1991)
Rate:
7
Viewed:
7/14, 3/21
7/14:
What's one possible way for narcs to catch drug dealers?
Simple! Do what the addicts do: inject drugs into their bodies. What an amazing concept. Of course, the theory will never
work, but that's what happened here.
Obviously, the logic of the plot is against every ounce of common sense there is. The simple fact is: nobody can handle
heroin, period. It's a hell of a lot easier to surveil the buys and make the busts afterwards.
The promise I saw during the first thirty minutes with The Lost Boys' Jason Patric, who's
the show, quickly dissipates, and the rest turns out to be your average drug junkie picture. Jennifer Jason Leigh shows she
can act and will be better in later films.
All in all, Rush is a good try, but I can't suspend my disbelief for this one.
3/21:
My opinion of Rush is better now, but it's still a dumb, underwhelming picture.
The acting is uniformly good, especially from Jason Patric, Jennifer Jason Leigh, Sam Elliott, and Max Perlich. Despite that,
what's tough to overcome is the implausibility of the story. The simple answer should be: make the deal and catch them
in the act. Some soldiers will break rank and confess against the higher-ups in exchange for a lenient plea deal.
Instead, the lead characters have turned into junkies. Almost the whole film is about them battling against addiction. Here's
the interesting thing: everybody else on drugs seems to handle it pretty well as compared to the undercover cops who
folded like a lawn chair within weeks. Another is Gregg Allman may look good on screen but drug and alcohol abuse would ruin his
appearance the next three decades until his death in 2017.
The filmmakers claim the time period is during the 70's. Ha! No way. It's very modern...like 1991. It's based on Kim
Wozencraft's book which happened to her while working undercover in Tyler, Texas. She manufactured evidence in almost 200
drug cases, was found guilty of perjury and civil rights violations, and got sentenced 1.5 years in federal prison.
All in all, Rush doesn't have much of a plot, but it's worth watching primarily for the thespians.
The Russia House (1990)
Rate:
3
Viewed:
7/17
7/17:
The Russia House is one of those "I Don't Know What the Fuck Is Going On" movies.
I think it's about retired but unkempt-looking James Bond who returns to the fold as a favor for England as he goes
deep into the heart of Russia to procure whatever the secret information is before going back to what he was doing.
Perhaps a better explanation would be Sean Connery signed on for the project because he wanted to get his hands all over
Michelle Pfeiffer's body. As a matter of fact, he had the final say on casting choices.
Speaking of Michelle Pfeiffer, why couldn't the filmmakers cast a true Russian who's a complete unknown to the American
audience? That's how it worked out with Tatiana Samoilova for Letyat zhuravli which
is otherwise known as The Cranes Are Flying.
The film takes place in Russia, and hardly anyone speaks Russian? Horseshit. Similarly, I've been confused many times as to
whether or not Sean Connery's character is a Russian. It must have been the influence of
The Hunt for Red October. In
fact, Sean Connery looks more Russian than British. What a perfect line to describe him: "I look like a large, unmade bed with
a shopping bag attached."
If the guy with white hair and huge eyeglasses looks interesting, then it should be because that's Ken Russell who made
his career out of directing absolutely bizarre films such as Altered States,
Gothic, and
The Lair of the White Worm.
All in all, you should skip The Russia House in favor of
The Spy Who Came in from the Cold.
The Russians Are Coming,
the Russians Are Coming (1966)
Rate:
4
Viewed:
5/17
5/17:
It was awkward to get through the beginning of The Russians Are Coming, the Russians Are Coming because I was thinking,
"Uh, subtitles?"
Afterwards, the film somewhat improved, and it was starting to become funny. Then, I stopped laughing, and the rest of the
way turned out to be a massive dud. Even the ending felt like a shameless pitch for the Nobel Peace Prize by allowing the
white Americans and Russians to get along together.
The Russians Are Coming, the Russians Are Coming is so dated that it's literally a product of 60's screwball comedies.
Even worse is the boy and the girl falling in love with each other because they happen to be the most beautiful people in the
world. By the way, the filmmakers didn't shoot the picture on location in the Eastern Seaboard as the whole thing was done in
Mendocino, California. So much for authenticity.
Already proficient in speaking the language due to being raised in a Russian Jewish household, Alan Arkin may have scored an
Oscar nomination, but he's just okay. He would deserve it more for
The Heart Is a Lonely Hunter and should've gotten
another for Wait Until Dark. Not much of credit is given to Brian Keith who's the
other shining star. It's easy to see how good of an actor he was.
Jonathan Winters is the most annoying of the cast. He was overdoing his part, especially the way he squinted his eyes. That's
why he didn't last long in movies, having made the transition to television. Eva Marie Saint, as always, is hopelessly wasted
which is becoming a common theme of her career. Her co-star, Carl Reiner, is boring given the fact that he's a comedy writer.
All in all, The Russians Are Coming, the Russians Are Coming isn't a funny movie and fails to stand the test of time.
Rustler's Rhapsody (1985)
Rate:
4
Viewed:
3/24
3/24:
As a fan of Tom Berenger, I sought out any early films in his oeuvre that I might have misssed, and the result is
Rustler's Rhapsody.
Now, I know why it's an obscure title. What a bad Western spoof it is. Clearly, the director had no idea what that word meant.
I'm supposed to be laughing, but everything has been lame.
The cast is all right. It's the script that's lifeless that keeps reminding me of Mel Brooks' bad comedies. Tom Berenger is
fair while G.W. Bailey is annoying. For somebody who's dragged through the ground by a horse for over ten hours, Sela Ward
manages to be free of scratches and bruises.
One part that's not made clear to me is when Rex O'Herlihan transitioned from black-and-white to color. What
just happened there? As a result, the film never recovered from it. There should be an explanation for a minute to clear up
the confusion. By the way, Bob Barker wasn't a "good guy" to begin with because he worked for bad people.
All in all, Rustler's Rhapsody fails because nobody involved with the film knew what "comedy" meant.
Ruthless People (1986)
Rate:
5
Viewed:
6/25
6/25:
People forget that once upon a time Ruthless People finished in the top ten at the box office during 1986.
It's been decades since I last saw the film, and I wondered how it would hold up today. One thing is for sure:
the story is clever. However, it's never laugh-out funny as hoped for. There's no way a modern writer (Dale
Launer) would've come up with it. In fact, O. Henry wrote the short story called "The Ransom of Red Chief" in
1907. That's the biggest asset of the film.
It's also possible Dale Launer was familiar with an adaptation from many mediums, most likely the British picture
Too Many Crooks, and decided to do something with it. And I just thought so, he also did the same for
Dirty Rotten Scoundrels which is a straight up rip-off of
Bedtime Story.
The other valuable asset is Danny DeVito. He brings Louie's persona of Taxi to the table and is effective
playing an incorrigible character named Sam. As a result, most of the film's humor comes from him. I was on Sam's
side when his wife turned out to be Bette Midler whom I absolutely hate. The evidence is all there on screen by the
way she acts. To counteract her are the decent performances by the supporting cast, most especially Anita Morris
and Bill Pullman who makes his screen debut.
Another downer of Ruthless People is how badly it has aged for an 80's picture with ugly furniture and
clothes. This is where strong cinematography could've done the film huge favors. That and had it been much
funnier, I would've raised my rating. By the way, whatever happened to the police chief and Carol Dodsworth?
Now, that's good opportunity to have lines at the end to reveal the fate of everybody involved.
All in all, Ruthless People feels like a one-time viewing, and it can go either way.
Ryan's Daughter (1970)
Rate:
3
Viewed:
2/10
2/10:
Much like Doctor Zhivago, Ryan's Daughter has me drowned in sea of wastefulness.
Both of these films are so similar that I have to refer to the former as the Russian flick and the latter Irish. They contain
a cheating slut, an incomprehensible revolution, lushful yet overrated cinematography, a nonexistent story, and many pauses
in dialogue that fail to advance the plot.
In other words, Ryan's Daughter is a ninety-minute film that's stretched to three and half hours. I fell asleep
many times during it. Thus, I'm not surprised that Pauline Kael wrote a scathing review of it which effectively ended
David Lean's career although he came back to do one more film fourteen years later.
John Mills got lauded for his work as the village idiot who said nothing meaningful? For crying out loud, you must be joking me.
An actor was signed to play Doryan, yet he's dubbed by somebody else. Wouldn't it be easier to hire the latter?
If there's any consolation, I like Trevor Howard's performance and the scenes of the waves crashing against the rocks.
Well...that's about it.
All in all, David Lean used to make masterpieces such as
The Bridge on the River Kwai and
Lawrence of Arabia and then lost his way for good.