Reviews written by registered user
|29 reviews in total|
As a student of Political Sciences, I believe this to be one of the most fascinating and introspective documentaries regarding the subject of campaigning. The first modern campaign, the 92 Clinton war is an amazing melodrama of quick rises to power, downfalls, villains, heroes, and the precursor to one of the most vicious political battles of our nation's history. In the film, if you look hard enough, you see the seeds of weakness being sown which would lead to an awesome political showdown which is more grand, more high-stakes, and more dark than the plotline of any film in this database. Note: If you like "The War Room," read Woodward's "The Agenda."
This film is among those few which exhibit qualities of clear-cut and exciting movie-making. Although it does not stand out in any brilliant way and I do not consider it to be a "must-see," it is a film I recommend to anyone who has the opportunity to see it. Well-developed characters couple with an intelligent and fascinating plotline and make for a truly gripping film that is, in fact, very educational. I had the honor of watching this film with a good friend of both Watson and Crick and for me, the experience in hearing of the reality of the characters heightened the experience.
Although A Chorus Line is a film which carries with it a strong message and a look at fascinating characters, the point of the film (losing one's inhibitions through dance) is disrupted by musical interludes and flashbacks which - although develop two characters further - distract the viewer from the present frame of reference. The message and introspect of the film - which is brilliant - is belittled by being made to double as a setup for a song. The dance is necessary in the film; characters dancing about are an important element of the plot. But the movie might have been good if the songs were absent. A good message is worth nothing if that message cannot be relayed clearly to the viewer.
Being a Bond fan, procuring the video of this original broadcast was neither
an easy feat nor overlooked in its importance. The October 21, 1954 episode
of "Climax!" was the first time James Bond appeared on-screen, and nearly
half a century later Bond is still making movies.
The "live" quality of the show makes it all that much more enjoyable; the spontaneity of the lines spoken and the fact that the actors are working with an actual time limit makes for a show in which the flow is constant and consistent, the interest is kept to an expected level, and the characters are more realistic. These are qualities which cannot be replicated in some 20 overly planned and rehearsed later Bond films - but this only makes Casino Royale different - not better.
It is certainly entertaining, to say the least, to watch the original characterization of "Jimmy" Bond - a fast-talking American agent - and compare it to the amazingly developed cool-headedness of today's 007. What a difference 45 years can make!
Very rarely does a motion picture version of a great novel match up to the quality instilled directly from the author. Murder on the Orient Express, however, is one of those beautiful exceptions that proves the rule. A thrilling film that will keep you guessing until the end (unless one had already read the book), Murder comes complete with an all-star cast which includes such favorites as Lauren Bacall, Sir John Gielgud, and Sean Connery. (And as we've seen many times before, whenever Sean Connery gets on a train, something exciting happens.) The storyine begins understandable complex - while the viewer only sees and hears as much as Hercule Poirot - the film's hero. But through some master directing and writing, all of the once-confusing elements take shape and reveal a stunningly simple plot that seems all-too impossible anyway.
I was so shocked about how much this movie captivated me! I
usually go for the action/adventure type movies, so I wasn't too eager to see it. Yet, I realized that this movie had a little bit of everything, which would be able to please everyone. It had comedy, drama, action, etcetera. Two thumbs up to Culkin, who really surprised me with his superb acting ability. As for Gillian Anderson (of course, I'm going to mention her,): I expected her to be more of a Scullyish character. But she turned out to be an excellent choice for Loretta Lee. I loved the expression on her face when she opened the door for the first time! A+
Ronin is one of the best action films to hit the silver screen in a long while. It has all of the action and intrigue of a 007 film, the twists and turns of a Humphrey Bogart mystery, and the intelligence of The Manchurian Candidate. Sporting an excellent cast composed of Jean Reno of The Professional, Robert DeNiro, and three former Bond villains, this movie tells much about friendship, trust, and personal integrity in a profession where honor is a valued commodity.
Beau Geste presents a magnificent based-on-novel re-telling of one of the greatest stories ever told. Three brothers embody the ideal reservoir of human resource and comraderie as they travel together from England to the battlefields of the French Foreign Legion and manage to stay wholly devoted to each other. Beaten down, broken, and sometimes bloody, they serve as models of absolute integrity which transcend traditional paths of moral thinking. Never faltering from their direction, never stopping from pain, and never complaining, the Geste brothers show the viewer what it means to be human in times of desperation and need.
Have any of these commenters actually SEEN the movie? Great acting? I agree that John Malcovitch, Gerrard, and Jeremy Irons' performances were good - a few scenes were great - but Leo! What a load of nothing! The only role he was any good at was the retarded individual in Gilbert Grape. You know why? Because his acting is naturally retarded! You actually felt sorry for Gabriel Byrne when he had to act near Leo! You could tell that Gabriel wanted to do this great scene and was pulling it off until Leo said something with the emphasis of a high school production of "Our Town" and Gabriel just rolls his eyes up and wants to throw some punches! Part of it, too, was screenwriting. I usually respect a LOT of stuff that writers put on the screen, but I could literally pull a better script off by shouting gibberish into a voice-recognition microphone. With any luck, Leo will continue to boycott the Oscars and stay home and mope so that he doesn't get any pity nominations.
Octopussy has the distinction of being the Bond film that symbolized a bit of a resurgence in effort on the part of Roger Moore and the producers. Having to compete with another 007 for the first time ever (Never Say Never Again), Moore gave it his all - and so did Sean Connery. Octopussy is actually a fairly-made movie with great action and interesting gadgets. The only question is why was it titled Octopussy? Maude Adams' character has little to nothing to do with the plot. At any rate, if Octopussy looks somewhat familiar, it's because Maude Adams also played the lead Bond girl in The Man With the Golden Gun - she died.
|Page 1 of 3:||  |