Reviews written by registered user
mr Marble

Send an IMDb private message to this author or view their message board profile.

8 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

4 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Colourful life on the road/in the ring, 28 July 2011

Nice film with Peter Falk (RIP) ...I had seen it before, years ago, didn't remember it though...except the mud wrestling scene and that hot "Iris" aka Vicki Frederick - wow!

I wonder why Frederick didn't make it to a bigger star, she certainly had the looks and talent to be a real 80's sweetheart/hottie...

The movie is a sort of a mixed bag, divided between t&a of female wrestling scenes and story about them trying to make it...perhaps with too much wrestling/backstory depending on one's point of view... The last wrestling scene was something like 20 minutes long, a bit too much perhaps. But I have to say wrestling was well made and ladies were fit, so no big problem, entertaining fair nevertheless.

I liked the 70's feel of it, reminded me a bit about Rocky...well it did have "Paulie" in it. And Columbo, in quite a different role, pulling a fine performance as a sleazy manager. And of course according to this film, wrestling is all real, not a show. Ha! Wonderful find.


21 out of 25 people found the following review useful:
This is what science fiction is all about, 28 July 2011

Watched this one after few years, didn't remember what it was all about. Oh yes, it was the one with "V'ger"...aka amazingly beautiful Persis Khambatta...with her head shaved. Most beautiful bald woman I can think of right now...

The film is about huge unbeatable "cloud" approaching and threatening Earth, only thing standing in between is Enterprise with it's legendary crew. It appears I enjoy the film more and more each decade I see it again.

I thought there was slightly too much time used on introduction and drafting of old crew, but once the "action" began it kept me on edge of my seat all the way through. Don't think that "action" I mention was fighting and shooting, it wasn't. Perhaps lack of silly fighting makes (all too) many people to say that this film was too long and slow paced. Well, I disagree - this is exactly the kind of science fiction I love, you are given chance to use your own imagination. Some say pacing and the film is similar to Kubrik's 2001...I won't argue against it.

The film had amazing special effects for it's time. No, not amazing, incredible. But don't watch it for special effects only, the real interest of this film lies in the nature of the alien "cloud" and Enterprise crew trying to figure it out and trying to cope with it. Special effects were used as a tool to launch YOUR imagination, as they should be.

This film is probably closest to spirit of original series, without much campiness though. A thinking man's Star Trek film. What a wonderful treat. They don't make films like this any more.


Stylistic portrayal of competition, 3 January 2010

Finally saw this forgotten gem.

A small character study/sports film about downhill skiing, with Robert Redford, Gene Hackman and a fine looking actress named Camilla Sparv. I was also pleased to spot Dabney Coleman in minor role.

I was surprised to read all negative comments at this movie was plain and boring and who wants to watch skiing anyway...

I disagree.

For me it was exactly the authentic feeling this movie had on downhill scenes and the rarely depicted environment of downhill competition that made this film stand out from the mass. Have to admit that I was blown away by some of the skiing scenes, they were brilliantly done, imo. I agree that pacing was a bit slow at times and the storyline somewhat minimalistic. But as I saw it, this was exactly what the director had attempted...creating a true to life realistic experience, which should have been obvious from the documentary style of the picture.

Even the character of Redford's, or his relationship with the female, wasn't stripped down, but the viewer was left to draw one's own conclusions about his motives and what made him tic.

Really liked this one because it was different. And the ending was perfect: Reflecting the eternal cycle of life/competition and how small the difference between winning and losing can be.


Definitely worth watching

7 out of 14 people found the following review useful:
Parallax View - A greatly overrated and disappointing picture?, 29 September 2009

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Parallax View, starring Warren Beatty playing a reporter in Alan J Pakula's film, a couple years before ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN. A film that did not enjoy success when it first was released but has apparently gained some momentum since.

I had been reading some reviews full of praise for this film. It was compared to movies about conspiracy such as Three Days of the Condor, All the President's Men, Manchurian Candidate, JFK and the Conversation. The movie has 7.4 average at IMDb and 91% at Rottentomatoes. My comparison would be POINT BLANK except this one being slightly inferior on all counts.

"A masterpiece of suspense, tension and cinematic storytelling the likes of which, sadly, Hollywood doesn't make anymore."

I'm happy that they don't. Maybe 70's seems better from distance, or from parallax viewpoint? The movie was about a reporter Joseph Frady(Beatty) tracking a conspiracy to kill high position politicians, I think...

However the plot is sort of messy and unsatisfying, questions are being unanswered and unexplained or never made. I'm not sure if this was by purpose or due to inadequate writing. In the beginning a politician is killed and shortly after possible witnesses from the crime scene are getting killed in various "accidents"...which sounds like a nice prospect for a thriller. However we are never explained why the urge to kill the witnesses in the first place? There was nothing to witness after the assassin getting killed at the event. Yes, us viewers do see that someone else was involved in assassination at the crime scene, but how would the "witnesses" know that remains a question not answered in the movie. I guess they just have to be killed, all 12? of that will make the conspiracy less noticeable for sure.

While following a "lead" for one of the witness killings, Frady eventually finds out that there may be a company called Parallax behind all this. So how to get more information on the company? - Simple, fill out a psychological test application form and send it to the company. If you're found out to be an anti-social murdering type you get an interview...because that's how hit men are really recruited. In this interview they apply some brainwash techniques, just to be on the safe side when dealing with a psychopath I guess. Although I don't see the need for a brainwash AND being a psychopath.

Anyways the problem with the movie, apart plot holes, was the long, dragging scenes. I found myself just staring at the screen thinking something unrelated. The movie never grabbed me along the attempted atmosphere...which was supposedly very "dark" and "paranoid". Actually what was "dark", was the dim lit was so dark that you could hardly see anything in many of the scenes. This is something that is typical to many films of the 70's, usually for the bottom of the barrel types. It can be used to film's advantage, but not all way through imo, especially when you're kept in the dark about what and why things are happening in the first place. Filming long and black shots does not a suspense make, it actually requires something to be suspenseful about...something along the lines of TIGHTROPE or DIRTY HARRY perhaps, where darkness was used wisely to not only in attempt to create but also to enhance existing atmosphere created by script, acting and characterization.

Talking about characters...There was no character development at all, not even for the protagonist. Other characters did get very little screen time and seemed to be irrelevant. I don't know...maybe Hackman could have pulled this off, but Beatty didn't seem to be able to.

After the movie I found myself thinking...Wow, I would have really hard time explaining the actual plot afterwards. Very unclear plot, an unnecessary bar fight scene and out of nowhere car chase. What was that boat explosion all about...How come Frady was the only one to survive and how did he get to dry land? Were there only Frady and his boss working in this newspaper? How did he know there was a bomb on the plane? Who were the people he asked about the application form? etc etc...And most importantly, why did this all happen in the first place!? It's really hard to tell since there was no character development nor explanations but rather jumping from one scene to another making it look sort of like a montage of cut scenes that were barely related. Rather hard to follow when you're in the trance state of staring and suddenly notice that it's a new scene you're watching...what happened in the last one, how did we get here...

Positives for the movie would be: -Somewhat creative brainwash scene along the lines of CLOCKWORK ORANGE -Unclear ending...was Frady actually brainwashed and an assassin himself in the end. -The way how he informs the plane crew about the bomb while not being accused himself of planting it. -And finally a scene with a chimpanzee playing Pong. Yes, you read it right, this was the highlight of the movie for me personally...

Watch The CONVERSATION or THREE DAYS OF THE CONDOR instead. Former being vastly more successful on creating paranoid atmosphere and latter on suspense and having a good tight script with great pacing on keeping the suspense...NOT letting it drain away with long, pointless, disjointed and dim scenes as in PARALLAX VIEW.


18 out of 60 people found the following review useful:
Can not be trusted, 13 July 2005

Not a real documentary, but a collection of conspiracy theories of one man. No real interviews, but shouting own opinions to the ordinary people on the streets. No reliable sources, but pictures of text on websites.

Not that many things wouldn't be true, you just can't trust what's true and what's not.

This must be the cheesiest document ever. Watch Outfoxed and Fahrenheit 911 instead, avoid this like plague ...Or take your tinfoil hats ready and enjoy the unprofessional-ism.

2 out of 10, because it has it's moments as a show of foolishness some people are ;)

1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Greatest western ever made!, 20 July 2000

I'd give this movie 20 points out of 10 if possible. Even better movie than good, bad... Ennio Morricone's music is absolutely stunning, fits the film and scenes perfectly! Thrilling scene after scene after...Directing is something you have not seen before, with fascinating close shots of men fighting for life and death. The first time Eastwood appears, music roars in the backround, he's coming into town, it starts suddenly to rain. He's only a few steps from the building, but has no hurry at all to get into shelter, he just lights a cigarette like it was the most beautiful day, ignoring the shower, and that's only the beginning. From the times when men were still men, or more. If you liked "unforgiven" and the good, bad..., you will Love this.

Greatest war movie, 20 July 2000

Best war film I've seen, and I've seen plenty. It feels so real that it's hard to tell if the film is anti or pro war. Fascinating thing about movie is that Germans are this time the heroes of the film. Characters are very well personified, making you to identify, and hope that good guys will survive at the end. Not a typical war movie with lots of shooting without a decent plot. Far better than FMJ's, Platoons, Ryans etc.

Foul Play (1978)
2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Seventies at it's funniest, 20 July 2000

I'd put this film into category "comedy" instead of thriller. This movie is so seventies that it thrills me. Chase and Hawn are great. Most enjoyable character is of course Dudley Moore as Stanley Tibbets, unforgettable dancing scene...If you're a fan of Dudley, this film is a must!