The_Core Reviews

The Goodbye Girl (1977)

How the heck did I ever miss this one?

[10/10 · 7 March 2007]

One of the best films I've seen in a long, long time. I recently came across "The Goodbye Girl" on cable (On-Demand) and noticed all the awards it won. I was around in 1977 but was a younger teenager... still, you'd think I would have seen this film by now. The acting was incredible, enormous energy invested by all concerned... script was awesome.

I'm not usually that big on love stories, but this one was so entertaining and simultaneously touching that I found myself looking up after two hours, feeling like five minutes had just gone by. An easy classic, 10/10.

The Notebook (2004)

Good chemistry all around...

[8/10 · 2 November 2006]

Every different genre of film requires something different to make it special. Science fiction needs intelligent storytelling, war films require moving/agonizing drama. And of course, love stories need good chemistry between whoever's supposed to be in love. I thought this one had it in spades, with all concerned. It did get slightly melodramatic at the end, but nothing that anyone who enjoyed "Somewhere in Time" (another movie that many love story fans are fond of) couldn't handle... in fact, the former was quite a bit more sappy or melodramatic, and in my opinion this one leans toward realism more than the average. I just saw it "cold" on a cable channel without knowing anything about it, and was basically riveted to the screen the entire time. Recommended for fans of the genre, and others should at least dip their toe in and see how it strikes 'em. 8/10.

The Jacket (2005)

Far from a classic, but a good rental...

[7/10 · 25 August 2006]

That is, if you like somewhat artsy sci-fi films. I felt the acting was pretty much excellent from all involved, and the direction was slightly uneven but pretty much great. Cinematography was terrific, some real eye candy there. The main problem, IMO, involved the script. I've said quite a few times in my IMDb reviews that Hollywood has run out of ideas, and I believe this completely. Seeing the deleted scene in the extras with the protagonist in an ice bath really sealed this in my mind... straight out of Jacob's Ladder. Basically, this film is an amalgam of several others... One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, Jacob's Ladder, 12 Monkeys, etc. Many other reviewers have noticed this as well.

Overall, a very watchable film that will never become a classic like Jacob's Ladder or 12 Monkeys, but is certainly worth a Saturday rental or something. You'll likely forget it soon afterward. The ending rather let me down (too pat, little emotion, lacking in cleverness and originality) but after seeing some of the deleted endings I'm very glad they went with the one they did. Most were a direct imitation of Jacob's Ladder, I mean literal ripoff. I feel the director did made some good choices in not directly ripping off the films I've mentioned, while more subtly and appropriately borrowingfrom them, just as a screenplay with very few original ideas could be expected to do. 7/10 (maybe 6/10, can't decide).

Control (2004)

Comes close to greatness, IMO

[8/10 · 7 June 2006]

"Control" is one of the most satisfying movies about the human spirit that I've seen in years. I usually don't like Ray Liotta much, but even he was excellent in this film. The movie gets off to a bit of a slow start, but after "phase 2" trials start, things pick up. There's a bit of predictability at work, but for the most part I was in the dark about what would happen, and the twist at the end caught me *totally* off guard.

As someone else mentioned, the film is almost ruined by a 20-second sequence following the point where it *should have* ended. However, I have to overlook this sequence in favor of the rest of the movie. It moved me. Almost to tears. 8/10.

The Killing Kind (1973)

What?

[3/10 · 24 May 2006]

The people giving this film high ratings have got to be nuts. Very poorly paced, amateurishly directed (almost to the point of "home video camera" amateur) and mediocre acting makes this a film to strenuously avoid at all costs.

Indeed, there are some "twisted" scenes in this film but nothing that could't be done by walking out in nature with a video camera and randomly killing wildlife. The mother figure had absolutely nothing in her on-screen persona to suggest something that would drive someone crazy, and the actual "madness" displayed by the crazy guy was utterly ridiculous. Also, cyanide does *not* gently put a person to sleep.

The pacing was so slow and boring that I caught myself checking the time on the DVD player repeatedly, wishing it would end for god's sake. Almost praying that it would end. I came very close to just turning it off, but it was barely interesting enough in a "just to see what happens" sort of way.

Avoid this film, do yourself a favor -- get outside and get some fresh air, do *anything* but watch this movie.

Red Eye (2005)

Careless...

[5/10 · 18 April 2006]

What ever happened to suspense where you actually care what happens to the characters? This film certainly didn't have it. A bunch of cardboard cutout characters in a film that's been done ten million times before, and a miniscule story arc (if you want to call it that) that didn't mean anything.

This movie is a curious example of utterly pointless suspense, edge-of-your-seat nothingness. I really despair of Hollywood releasing any good films anymore after seeing a piece of nonsense fluff like this movie. It did keep my attention, but is that really all that we as audiences demand from films anymore?

A History of Violence (2005)

Great film...

[8/10 · 17 April 2006]

It's evident to me from reading some of the other reviews that a lot of folks just don't 'get' David Cronenberg. I can see why in some ways, but I'm puzzled at the one-star reviews. If nothing else, I found this film highly entertaining and so fast paced it seemed to end as soon as it started (in fact, I wish more time was spent in character development... a three hour movie would have been better.

I don't really agree with Cronenberg's "Darwinistic" view of violence (which is for the most part no longer necessary in today's society, not to mention doubtful as a trait passed down in families) but I sure do appreciate a director putting his ideas down in film so effectively. Apparently the psychological meaning of the second sex scene escaped a lot of people as well, which I find to be strange.

Anyway, this is certainly a movie worth owning on DVD... particularly if you're familiar with some of Cronenberg's earlier films. Don't overanalyze it, and don't go in expecting anything (this attitude works with all films) and you just might like it. 8/10

War of the Worlds (2005)

Pretty good roller coaster ride...

[6/10 · 27 November 2005]

I think people are mistaking this film for sci-fi, when in actuality it's a pure summer action blockbuster with little science fiction content.

If taken as such, it's very entertaining indeed and "edge-of-your-seat." I was especially taken by the plight of the little girl in the film, and her near descent into catatonia produced by all the stress. An interesting examination of how almost unbearable stress can affect people.

The special effects were first rate, although not 100% convincing... however, they were convincing enough to enjoy the film and be able to sustain disbelief.

Overall, a fun roller-coaster romp that requires no brain power whatsoever. Hey guys, we browse the Net so much... what's wrong with relaxing the gray matter at a film once in awhile? 6/10.

Against All Odds (1984)

Kill 'em some way (corruption... corruption...)

[7/10 · 1 November 2005]

*** Spoilers in this review ***

Probably my favorite scene in "Against All Odds is at the meeting between Brogan, "Jake" and corrupt rich dude Ben Caxton. Brogan has something of Caxton's and says all he wants in exchange is to get Jake out of his life. Caxton responds, "Why don't I believe you," to which Brogan replies "Because you're a corrupt old man!" The look on Caxton's face is so hilarious, like he's thinking "Yeah, he's got a point there!" LOL.

This film in many ways is a typical Hollywood expose' of the corrupt right-wing "movers and shakers." Hollywood has certainly never been afraid to expose the hypocrisy and corruption that runs rampant among the rich and powerful so-called "movers and shakers" (who nearly always 'move' through lies, underhanded deals, and various other forms of immorality), and Against All Odds is no different.

A good movie, not great, but good. In many ways it's unpleasant to watch because there are so many "bad guys" and only one "good guy" who really is against nearly insurmountable odds. It's not a film I can watch often, but one I catch every few years or so and always re-appreciate. Helps keep me aware of what goes on behind the masks, you might say. The last scene of the film is poignant, no question about that at all. 7/10

Mind Meld: Secrets Behind the Voyage of a Lifetime (2001 Video)

Truly excellent

[10/10 · 26 October 2005]

"Mind Meld" exceeded all my expectations for a film of this nature. It's hard to imagine how two guys sitting together and talking could be so fascinating, but I found myself riveted by the insights and interaction between these two fellows discussing such a famous and well-known series. Not a moment of boredom to be found here.

The re-watchability factor is surprisingly high as well. I've seen "Mind Meld" now about 4 times, and found it equally interesting each viewing. Not sure why that is, but it makes purchasing the DVD a really good idea. I ended up doing just that, and am not sorry. One of the most interesting one-to-one's I've seen. Recommended for anyone who's even a slight fan of the original "Star Trek" series.

Safe (1995)

Genuinely eerie near-masterpiece...

[9/10 · 12 October 2005]

I went into this film knowing little about it, except the basic subject matter (which I'd read up on in the past). In the first five minutes, I knew I was going to like it... the atmosphere, camera angles, saturated colors, acting, everything. The director seems to have really learned something from Stanley Kubrick here, and I can't help but wondering what the film would have been like if Kubrick had directed it. Many "Kubrickian" long shots and tilted overhead camera angles are used (perhaps a bit too often).

This is one of Roger Ebert's "how it's about it" films (if you get the reference). There's a lot more depth to the film than what seems to exist on the surface. It's definitely not for those under-30 folks who seem to be lacking in attention span. No explosions or fires, and Schwarzenegger doesn't waltz onto the screen. Instead, it's a fascinating study of "environmental illness," and it provides no real answers to the questions it raises. Some have noted the film as "subversive," but it's also very entertaining (at least for those who appreciate cinema as an art form rather than simply a mindless escape). Demands a fair amount from the viewer, and is very rewarding for those willing to put something into the viewing experience. "Safe" has become one of my new favorites, and I wish I had seen it in the theater... some of the cinematography clearly demands large-screen viewing for the best possible experience.

Sometimes I think the word "safe" should be written as "reaf" -- a rearrangement of the letters in the word "fear." If you understand why I think this, you're likely to enjoy this film. 9/10.

Twin Peaks: Fire Walk with Me (1992)

Where's my garmanbozia?

[5/10 · 9 October 2005]

If it's possible for a film to suffer from too much "Lynch factor," this one's a textbook example. An overwrought mess, saved only by its beautiful cinematography and accurate portrayal of the way drug addiction makes some people behave.

Worst of all, this film is downright boring in parts. I never expected to be bored watching a Lynch film, but this one did it to me. I did finally "get it" after seeing it for what I think was the second or third time since its release -- it's weird enough that it may take time to filter through the usual mental screens that serve to filter out this sort of nonsense.

If you're new to Lynch, I suggest you 'de-virginize' with one of his other films, perhaps Blue Velvet.

Not up to Lynch's usual standards, this one's an exercise in self-indulgence that could make even the most ostentatious filmmaker start blushing. For hard-core Lynch fans only.

Lost in Translation (2003)

Excelente

[9/10 · 17 September 2005]

I've seen this movie twice now, and for some reason enjoyed it much more the second time. I was lucky enough to see it without ever having heard any of the hype (I don't follow Hollywood anymore, since most of what's released is junk) or even knowing who directed it. I must say it was interesting the first time, but seemed somewhat long and a little bit confusing.

The second time I saw the film, I really enjoyed everything about it more... the ambiance, the amazing chemistry between Johansson and Murray, and the basic story. This is both a hyper-modern and meandering tale, and not everyone's going to "get" it, or be able to get past the hype. It truly is not for everyone. I believe those who do enjoy it will really like it a lot... in a way, it's a "love it or hate it" sort of picture. Put my squarely in the 'love it' camp. This is somewhat to my own surprise, because this is not really "my type" of film. Yet I love it anyway. 9/10.

Open Water (2003)

Pretty darned good...

[7/10 · 25 August 2005]

I was reading through comments from reviewers here, and came across this one (who incidentally gave it a low review): "I have just finished watching 'Open Water' and must admit that I have been left feeling rather confounded as to how I am meant to feel about the content of this film." That, my friends, is unfortunately the mentality of the average Hollywood film-goer. So used to being spoon-fed, that a movie like this will probably seem like total crap. After all, it doesn't tell you how you're supposed to feel and what you're supposed to think!

I found the film to be very suspenseful and a great existential meditation. I may have been lucky in totally avoiding the hype... I was never even aware of this film until my brother rented it on DVD, and was able to view it with no preconceptions at all. I found it very spooky and well made (far better than "Blair Witch Project"). Some of the lines were a bit cheesy, but not too terrible (like the characters repeating "Nobody we know has ever {insert phrase here}"). These few cheesy lines can be forgiven in the scheme of things, particularly with such a low budget involved.

Overall I give this a 7/10... a good watch for the thoughtful, patient moviegoer (yes, an attention span is actually required in this one -- will wonders never cease?).

Se7en (1995)

Slightly overrated...

[8/10 · 17 April 2005]

I think "Seven" is an excellent crime drama with great acting, script, cinematography and score. Somehow though, it hasn't held up (for me) over time and repeated viewings as well as it should. I just viewed it again today, and although enjoying it I no longer get the 'kick' I once did. Once the ending is known, it definitely loses some of its power. See the ending more than a few times, and that loss starts to extend over the last 20 minutes of the film as well (starting from the time the killer turns himself in).

Something about the style of the film hasn't held up that wonderfully either, or maybe it's just been over-used at this point and feels tired. It could even be that I've gotten so jaded about "stylish" films that they're all starting to look a little bit pretentious.

I noticed there's a bit of recent backlash to all the "10 star" ratings and cult status of this film. Not unexpected, and maybe the reasons I've given above have something to do with it as well. As moviegoers, we've seen this kind of film a bit too often now, and it's lost some of its power to frighten or shock.

Anyway, I'd still rate this movie highly, but I'm not so sure it's a masterpiece. A very good movie, yes. Worth watching, without a doubt (particularly if you enjoy this genre). Somehow I can envision John Malkovich playing the "John Doe" role... he might have done very well, and certainly would have been interesting in the role.

Jurassic Park (1993)

Quite Good...

[7/10 · 17 April 2005]

"Jurassic Park" is an entertaining and occasionally inspired movie directed by Steven Spielberg, based on the novel by Michael Crichton.

To my mind this is a very good popcorn flick, with occasional flashes of inspiration. The CGI work, which still holds up decently today, is stunning and groundbreaking stuff for the early 90's. Spielberg directs with a deft hand, and the action never lets up.

If I had any complaint, it would be that the acting (except for Goldblum and Attenborough) is merely average -- in particular, the usual weaknesses involved with child actors applies here. Also, the movie is long on popcorn action and relatively short on brains... the subjects of cloning, ecology and paleontology are lightly and briefly touched upon but that's it (if you want more in this area I'd suggest reading Crichton's book, which is quite good).

Overall this movie is worthwhile, and easily one of Spielberg's stronger films. Recommended for rental or purchase, kids will love it.

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004)

Cometh the emperor...

[4/10 · 16 April 2005]

This film must be the ultimate example of the "Emperor has no clothes" syndrome, not to mention the combined degeneration of both Hollywood and the general movie-going public.

To start this naked but well-dressed festival, we have two lovers (Carrey and Winslet) with absolutely no on screen chemistry. The plot thickens -- lots of artsy photography with little substance (ala "The Cell" or "Vanilla Sky"), and it continues its well-plotted plotlessness with, well, no real plot to speak of.

The silliness continues with soap-opera intensity, as we get a bizarre love triangle between the memory doctor and Kirsten Dunst, as well as Winslet and several servings of Sum Yung Guy.

The film ends with a deep examination of the shallow question: "Is it better to have loved and lost, than never to have loved at all?" A pointless question if there ever was one, as one has either loved or not loved, and therefore need not inquire.

Abstract art is often accused of being pointless and artless, a false accusation if there ever was one -- there's talented abstract art, and untalented abstract art, and it's not hard to pick which is which if you have any sort of eye for talent. In the same vein, there are "arty" films that are truly artistic, as well as pretentious vehicles designed to make money and help shallow people weep crocodile tears of joy at the sheer depth of it all. Unfortunately, ESOTSM is of the latter category.

Can we dress the big fat guy wearing the crown now?

Star Trek: First Contact (1996)

Many weak points...

[5/10 · 13 April 2005]

I've seen this movie several times at this point, and each time I see it I notice more of its weaknesses. Pacing is terrible in this film -- plot points that should take a minute or two go on for much longer (e.g. disengaging the magnetic shield to prevent the Borg from communicating, this scene goes on and on and on), and stuff that should be emphasized flashes by in a blip (e.g. the scene with Picard deciding the fate of the Enterprise).

Someone else noted that the Borg are part biological, part machine. That point was respected with the Borg queen dying, but not with the Borg setting up the transmitter in space -- their flesh would have been frozen and destroyed by the vacuum.

And maybe it's just me, but I found the whole Zephram Cochrane subplot so cheesy it was embarrassing -- the way he behaved (a rocket scientist? Suuuurreee...), Deanna Troi getting drunk, the music... it all feels adolescent and ridiculous. The Vulcan coming out of the ship at the end and his first words being "Live Long and Prosper" (that's supposed to be a goodbye, not a hello!).

To summarize -- in my opinion, this film is the most overrated Star Trek movie ever made. I believe the most underrated to be the new director's cut of "Star Trek: The Motion Picture." If you haven't seen the latest version of that one on DVD, I'd recommend a rental and skip this entirely... unless you're a *huge* TNG fan you're not missing much.

Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979)

Unfairly maligned...

[9/10 · 6 April 2005]

Note -- this review is for the recent director's cut.

What we have here is a true science fiction movie -- intelligent scriptwriting, combined with great (re)introductions to the "Star Trek" cast and crew.

The movie tries a bit too hard for profundity at some points, which is why I've knocked a point or two off. However, most of the time it actually succeeds in being profound, a rare achievement for Hollywood. Combine this with an entertaining script and you have a blockbuster formula.

The changes made for the Director's Cut are all worthwhile, most of them enormously improving what was already a very good film. A great job was done with this, and if you haven't seen the new cut it's well worth a rental.

Apparently this movie did very well at the theater. Why it's so maligned now, I have no clue. They really don't make movies like this anymore, particularly Star Trek movies. In other reviews I've heard this compared to Star Trek 5 (the worst of the series) and my jaw dropped nearly to the floor. Did certain other reviewers see the same film than I did? Maybe it's because the film plays best on the big screen, and not as well on small television sets. I was lucky enough to see it at the theater, and thoroughly enjoyed it. 4/5 stars, or 9/10.

Star Trek: Nemesis (2002)

An excellent movie...

[8/10 · 5 April 2005]

... unfortunately marred by too-high fan expectations. At this point, the "Star Trek" franchise has practically become holy, and fans expect -- well, they expect what they expect.

Judging from some of the other reviews, many fans didn't get what they expected out of this one. As other reviewers have stated, this is more of an action movie than most other "Trek" films. Personally I appreciated this for what it was (the action was really well done and a lot of fun), but many fans seem to want a one-pointed focus on character development. In my view a certain amount of that is great, but this is an entirely imaginary universe, after all. A well made franchise film does not need to be slavishly "backward-compatible" with all the rest (particularly at the expense of artistic or entertainment value), and any fan who feels it does has slipped into the "fanboy" mentality and richly deserves to be ignored.

8/10, an excellent and entertaining addition to the "Star Trek" universe.

The Final Countdown (1980)

Totally engrossing...

[8/10 · 2 April 2005]

How did I manage not to run into this movie all these years? I saw "The Final Countdown" for the first time today, and I must say I was glued to the screen the entire time. I'm a big sci-fi fan, and really enjoyed this film on that level. It also helps that I was in the Navy Reserves from 1983-1989 and so it's nostalgic seeing ops aboard a Navy vessel somewhat within that time frame.

Very well done overall, although certain elements of the film were a bit on the cheesy side (the whole side plot with Senator Chapman was just silly, and I thought the part was overacted by Charles Durning). The movie is only 102 minutes long, and I would like to have seen many plot elements further developed... around 140 minutes probably would have done it. I'm wondering if there are some deleted scenes from this film floating around somewhere -- unfortunately there will probably never be a "special edition" of this one, so we may never know.

Really quite good for many reasons, which I'll leave you to find out for yourself -- as long as you're not too spoiled by today's computer graphics, this one is well worth a rental. If you enjoy both sci-fi and watching scenes aboard an aircraft carrier ca. 1980, you may even find yourself owning it.

An Officer and a Gentleman (1982)

Excellent

[8/10 · 30 March 2005]

This movie (in part) inspired me to enlist in the Navy Reserves back in 1983. It was certainly brought up in boot camp, and everyone who'd seen it agreed it was excellent.

I recently saw the film again after a long time (five years at least) and it's amazing how fresh it still is. It really doesn't have the "80's feel" that a lot of other movies made around that time. It does sadden me to note that there were many more Naval bases then, before the Clinton-era closures.

All in all, a rather timeless classic with themes that aren't limited to the military and that all of us can relate to in one way or another. Highly recommended rental, at least... if you like it, buy the DVD, because this is one film with a high re-watchability factor.

Nice Dreams (1981)

Very funny...

[7/10 · 30 March 2005]

It's not easy to figure out how to rate a movie like this, so I decided to rate it based purely on my opinion of its "laugh factor." I've seen this and "Next Movie," but not "Up in Smoke." In my opinion, this one is the funnier of the two. It is definitely zanier and more over-the-top (not to mention just plain weird), but the jokes are funnier and (unlike "Next Movie") it has something of a plot. Some of the scenes are real classics, like the "chicken guy" in the nuthouse, Cheech's inability to scratch, Jimmy's reaction to the light bulb in the police station, and others.

I enjoyed both this one and "Next Movie" but have to say this is the better of the two in my opinion. One of these days I'll rent "Up in Smoke" as well. These films were made when I was in High School and I've enjoyed the occasional viewing through the years... although I'm not a stoner, it's still easy to enjoy this kind of silly humor.

2010 (1984)

Holds its own...

[7/10 · 29 March 2005]

"2010" is a pretty good science fiction film that falls down only in the shadow of 2001. I actually don't view "2001: A Space Odyssey" as a science fiction film at all... rather, it's.... well, I don't know exactly what it is! It's an enigma -- a space ballet with elements of thriller, mystery, mysticism, music and a whole lot of other things.

On the other hand, "2010" is a pretty straightforward science fiction film, except for a few mysterious (but not exactly mystical) elements taken from 2001. The acting, visuals and story are all above average and don't deserve to be so overshadowed by 2001 (yet there's just no avoiding it, as it's billed as a sequel).

Bottom line... if you can get over "2001" long enough to watch this, you'll likely notice a pretty good sci-fi film trying to get out. If you can't, don't even waste your time. 7/10.

Christine (1983)

Decent adaptation

[7/10 · 28 March 2005]

Lots of reviewers saying they haven't read the book. I've read it numerous times, and seen this movie several. All in all, I think it's one of the better King adaptations. Doesn't compare to either Green Mile or Shawshank Redemption as far as "true to original story," but in my opinion it's easily third behind these.

I almost wish this film was more recent, because I think more could have been done with today's special effects. But if you've read the book, the movie won't disappoint you -- it conveys the overall spirit of the book, if not all the specifics. Check it out... very much worth a rent.