moviegal-6 Reviews

The Patriot (2000)

Needs to be given due credit

[8 January 2001]

Why are people so quick to judge historical inaccuracies in films? So the two lead males aren't American. So it's got a tone of nineteen hundreds mentality. So Mel Gibson can take on twenty men singlehandedly and live to talk about it. Why don't people focus on what makes this movie so good?! *BEFORE PROCEEDING, MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS THAT GIVE AWAY PLOT* There are many accurate aspects, the British aristocracy at its finest- (the portrayal of Cornwallace was dead on accurate), the cold calculation in the murder of innocent women and children(the church fire left me speechless and in tears), the fact that this man lost more than one child, and not necessarily in battle (also not uncommon in the Revolutionary War), the idea that many slaves were there by choice (also something that has been historically proven accurate in both the Revolutionary and Civil Wars-while slavery itself is an awful and prejudicial idea, the mentality of the time was that many could not have lived better independently; many were also granted freedom for fighting in the Revolutionary War), and finally, that in the south (the area the movie talks about) some of the bloodiest battles were fought; not by "regulars" but by militiamen fighting more guerilla than elbow to elbow. As for violence, if you want a clean war movie go rent "the Longest Day." Movies like "Saving Private Ryan" prove that today's moviegoing audience is more moved and reached by grandscale acts of violence. Finally, to say a German shouldn't direct, or Australians can't represent Americans, is prejudiced and as un-American as can be. I thought it was a sweeping epic showing how horrible war can be and how strong the human heart and soul can be.

Asteroid (1997 TV Movie)

Unfair-inacurate assumptions

[8 January 2001]

Okay, so this is not the greatest "disaster movie" ever made. It's made for tv so it doesn't have the budget as Armageddon or Deep Impact did. Also, one must realize as someone pointed out before...it was made a good year before the others. It was really one of the first to broach this type of topic and I feel it did quite well. All movies have inaccuracies and many other movies have numerous more problems then this one. Implausable, perhaps; corny dialog, not the fault of the actors. The point that must be remembered is that it is a movie!!! Sure, the FEMA director probably wouldn't ever leave the office- perhaps he or she should! Sure, modern observatories are more computer run than anything (hello, then it wouldn't be a human interest movie), and the actors in it really do well with the story that they have. Michael Biehn and Annabelle Sciorra, screen actors, usually in supporting or secondary rolls are contending with lead rolls. Don Franklin, Jensen Daggett, and the others are all television actors in a story that had the scope to be a big screen film. Anthony Zerbe is the seasoned actor here, having done both film and tv, but he was cast in a minor roll and did pretty good with it. Comparing this to big budget large screen films is unfair. It is also unfair to judge actors based on weak script writing. They do what they can with what they're given. What this is is a movie that makes you feel good about being human and gives you hope that we can come together if there ever would be a major disaster.

The Cutting Edge (1992)

A great story for all ages

[8 January 2001]

I was twelve years old when I saw this film. Then, I thought it was great. Now, at twenty-one, I think it's awesome. Some may criticize the "inaccuracies" of the skating, but if one looks closely at the credits, world renowned skater Robin Cousins is the technical advisor and skating scene coordinator. Also, the pairs skaters they compete against are also, as far as I can tell, are real skaters. While they probably wouldn't jump into major competitions right away, they did it this way most likely for timesake. It's a sweet love story that is refreshingly free of violence (save the occasional slapshot), gratutious sex, and vulgar language. It is a delight for young and old combining chemestry, believability, and awesome skating sequences. I give it a nine and a half out of ten; if for nothing else, then for the warm fuzzies you get from watching it.

Anastasia (1997)

Critics aside, this is a good movie.

[22 January 2000]

I feel that Anastasia is one of the best animated films I've seen; and believe me, at twenty years old I grew up watching animated films from Disney and the like. The premise is that in 1923 the Romanov family was overthrown in the Bolshevik Revolt which plunged Russia into Communism. In this animated version, the villain is the former advisor; Rasputin. Most critics of this movie feel that this character is unnecessary and fictional. There is some historical basis for the character, and if one pays close attention it is stated that he planted the seed of hate which caused the uprising. Villains are necessary for a children's movie; and before you criticize too much, this is a children's movie. The story picks up ten years later with orphaned Anya setting off to find her past; and consequently, her future. Along the way she is guided by con men Dimitri and Vladamir, both of whom were formerly connected to the royal court. Even though the historical context is lacking, and as a child care provider I can say this, you cannot have such a tragic story presented to children. To hold their interest, it has to include a fun plot, cute characters, and a story that is fresh and exciting. All things in life don't have happy endings, true, but in a child's idealic world, we should not kill their innocence. Anastasia is a fun family movie that makes you feel good and also gives you a good taste of Russia and Paris in the thirties. I loved it.