Reviews written by registered user
|21 reviews in total|
If Jason Bourne ever put on a hat of any kind, he'd disappear. In both
this and the Bourne Identity, he has the same haircut and only once,
early in "Identity" does he change his wardrobe. In "Supremacy," he
wears the same black coat for most of the picture.
A one point, Nicky says, "They don't make mistakes." Yeah, right.... When he goes to the hotel where Neski was shot, he doesn't know his picture has been circulated to the press, and consequently, when the politzi arrive, and he starts running, they pick him up outside the hotel walking on the crowded street, initiating an elaborate chase sequence.
Of course, if he had a hat, there wouldn't be an elaborate chase sequence.
And, I assume that if they film the other books in this series, he won't wear a hat then, even if it's raining.
I have trouble "suspending my disbelief" for "Period Pieces," amime,
cartoons, and Sci Fi where the aliens look like humans with bad skin
So, I was not expecting much from this pic, and such low expectations probably helped it. I watched it to the end, and understood it, though it did it's best to "telegraph" what would come next.
Especially predictable were the scenes where the troop turns back to the town/city, first one, then another, and then all.
With starvation and disease rampant, life was much cheaper than that in the 14th century. They wouldn't have risked seven lives to save one that was old by the standards of the time, and would be dead in a few years anyway. Of course, if they'd've kept going, it wouldn't have been much of a story.
Any "round-eye" who's spent more than a vacation in Japan knows that every
scene at the beginning of that movie, except where Bill Murray sees his face
on a billboard, is a cliche... Boring.
I lasted 32 minutes watching the DVD, and that was all I could stand.
Then I heard that people who saw it in a theater liked it, but those who saw it on the tube didn't. So I thought maybe I should watch it until the end, which I did. No difference. If I hadn't forced myself to stay awake, I'd have fallen asleep at least twice.
Maybe someone can tell me, if the majority of the voting members of the academy didn't see it in a theater but watched the DVD version, how come the movie got the award for best screen play, which to me is a consolation prize for not getting best picture.
Something is rotten in Denmark!
What most of the write-ups for this show don't say is that it was a
late night show though only one night per week. For those who can
remember it, the transition of Art Carney from Newton the Waiter on
this show to Norton on the Honeymooners didn't seem a big change, in
name or in the actions of the characters.
When this ended, Broadway Open House took it's place. "Tonight" was not a name associated with Steve Allen, as his shows were always the "Steve Allen Show," but he was the first to do a Monday through Friday, late night show.
So there is, in my mind, a direct line from Morey Amsterdam to Jay Leno in the late night arena.
In none of the Gospels does the high priest Caiaphas stand there with his
cruel, impassive fellow priests witnessing the scourging. In Gibson's movie
they do. When it comes to the Jews, Gibson deviates from the Gospels --
glorying in his artistic vision -- time and again. He bends, he stretches,
he makes stuff up. And these deviations point overwhelmingly in a single
direction -- to the villainy and culpability of the Jews.
The most subtle, and most revolting, of these has to my knowledge not been commented upon. In Gibson's movie, Satan appears four times. Not one of these appearances occurs in the four Gospels. They are pure invention. Twice, this sinister, hooded, androgynous embodiment of evil is found . . . where? Moving among the crowd of Jews. Gibson's camera follows close up, documentary style, as Satan glides among them, his face popping up among theirs -- merging with, indeed, defining the murderous Jewish crowd. After all, a perfect match: Satan's own people.
C. Krauthammer, Wash Post, March 5, 2004, Pg A23
For what it purported to be, a musical comedy, it did ok. I'm no great fan
of rap, so this had to be light. Of course, the courtroom scene was way
over the top, but if you go back and look at some of those old Jane Powell
musicals, they burst into song in the strangest places and any "spontaneous"
dance is choreographed and well rehearsed, as are all the "numbers" in this
Of course, it's much easier and the motivation is stronger [I spent money for that!]to write a bad review than a good one, so trashing it is expected. Too bad the-powers-that-be at IMDB can't sort these into two headings instead of one generic because usually the bad reviews get in first. This'll be #29 and probably will never be read. "Que sera sera, y'all, I reckon," as they say in southern Italy.
Why is it that critics, and the academy seem to love movies or TV shows
about actors or the "show within a show" as is the case with they piece of...?
38 minutes was all that I could take. Why, because I've been on business trips to Tokyo and know how boring it is, and that's ALL the first 38 minutes is trying to communicate. Who cares if the screen play does a wonderful job of showing that other than those in "Show Biz?"
I'm sure the acting profession was delighted by Bill Murray mugging for the photographer the way they were for Travolta giving Devito acting lessons in "Get Shorty," but I don't see any entertainment value in that, nor people lying in bed or looking out windows, nor the blork on the "Actors Studio" TV show, nor the outakes and other junk that comes with DVD's unless I like the movie.
To use a Dorothy Parker line, "Bill Murray runs the emotional gamut from 'A' to 'B.'"
Maybe something else mildly interesting happens after that, and I may get back to it some day. Probably after I finish watching "Birth Of A Nation" and "The General," both of which have the nasty habit of putting me to sleep.
I guess if your hobby is turtle watching, this movie would excite you.
The stock company for this show was memorable, and it was a
when it was on. But, the episode set in the MP station in town, was
exceptional in that a parade of guest "stars" each more bizarre that the
previous were dragged in by the MP's.
Details escape me, now, but I think Larry Storch was one of the bizarros in that episode.
I echo the sentiment express above, put that out one DVD, and I'd buy it.
This is listed as one of the 50 funniest sitcom episodes, and it should
Unfortunately, there seems to be one scene missing from the current
The premise of the show is that there will be an attempt to set a record for inducting civilians into the army. A monkey gets mixed up in the proceedings and is sworn in a Private Harry Speakup, so named when one of the cadre says, "Name," without looking up and another say, "Hurry, speakup!"
The missing scene is a podiatrist, looking at feet of the inductees behind a screen on a raised platform. Seeing the monkey's feet, he rubs his eyes and says something about eyestrain and, "Next!" This scene was deleted, probably because it's over-the-top, but the podiatrist reappears in the final scenes and says, "I knew something was wrong" and that makes no sense without the cut scene.
What makes it such a good comedy is that it is non-stop surprises and twists including the court-martial where Bilko as Harry's defender shoots down all of the army's reasons for discharging Harry.
It's up there with "Who's on first?" and Curly Howard's "Take your hat off." Neither of which runs anywhere near as long as the Court-Martial Of Harry Speakup.
George Kennedy, in addition to doing a bit part(s) as an MP was in the
and was assigned as the Technical Advisor to the show. Phil Silvers told
the story that one day George told him he was getting out of the army and
was thinking of trying acting. Phil encouraged him, and, of course,
went on to win an Acadamy Award for Cool Hand Luke.
|Page 1 of 3:||  |