Change Your Image
pfalvey500
Reviews
Noises Off... (1992)
An Underappreciated Comedy Gem
***MINOR PLOT SPOILERS***
The plot is simple - a group of inept stage actors fumble their way
through three performances of a British sex farce with increasing
hilarity as backstage antics have more and more affect on their onstage
personas. Think of it as SOAPDISH onstage. Or just think of it as
NOISES OFF, the film version of the popular play. Whatever you do, just
see it.
The film is structured, as the play, in three acts of decreasing length,
but increasing tension. Act one sees the final dress rehersal of the
play in the wee hours before opening night, and Act Two puts the viewer
backstage during a tumultuos performance, as we watch what happens
behind the stage drastically affect performances, cues, and lines
onstage. Finally, Act three returns the viewer to the normal audience
point of view during an even WORSE performance, as all hell breaks
loose.
This may not sound particularly funny, but it is. The cast is uniformly
fantastic, the timing is spot-on perfect, and the big laughs just keep
coming. It's actually one of those movies that gets funnier as it goes
along, instead of growing stale as the end credits near. Act One is by
far the slowest, but it is essential in setting up the characters and
the onstage lines. Act Two is by far the funniest, and Act Three is the
most insane.
I don't know why this movie didn't make more money - with its mostly
B-list stars and low key marketing campaign, Touchstone certainly didn't
have much faith in it, but it is a favorite of mine and most of my
friends, and I am glad it had found its audience somewhat on video.
Rent it. Trust me. You
Showtime (2002)
How Did This Happen?
MINOR PLOT SPOILERS AHEAD!!!
How did such talented actors get involved in such mindless retreaded
drivel? Robert DeNiro plays a Dumb Hollywood version of the standard
violence prone tough cop (i.e., he beats up the bad guys and rolls his
eyes at cops who prefer to stick by the book), and Eddie Murphy plays a
not so tough cop who would rather be an actor (i.e., he screams out,
"Freeze, police!" and has his "tough look" down pat). Naturally, they
are partnered when Bobby's loose cannon tactics get him in hot water
with the media and he is essentially blackmailed into starring in a
"Cops"-like reality show. Take a breath, cuz that's as funny as it
gets.
No energy was put into the script - it feels like a pale retread of
every copy buddy movie tossed into a blender with "15 Minutes" starring,
yes, DeNiro himself as, pretty much the character he is playing here.
The jokes fall flat, the action feels listless, and no one seems to be
having a good time. It's dead on the screen.
Please don't waste your time. Even if you have an overwheming affinity
for one of the actors - avoid it and do them a favor. Becauze if this
makes money, these kinda of scripts will be deeemed perfectly acceptable
for actors of their quality.
And to Mr. DeNiro. You used to make serious films. I remember them -
they were good. You were nominated for awards for them - remember how
much fun that was? Now after "Analyze This" (which was good), "Meet the
Parents" (which was also good), and "The Adventures of Rocky and
Bullwinkle" (which was NOT good), I think we need to see you parodying
yourself less, and BEING yourself more. "Casino" feels like a long time
ago. And no, I don't count "15 Minutes" as serious Bobby. Anyone who
took that media satire seriously must get their weekly world news
Pete's Dragon (1977)
One of my childhood favorites.
Though it has the words "Walt Disney's Classic" above the title on most of its video incarnations, this charming story of a boy and his pet dragon gets overlooked more often than not when lists are made about people's favorite Disney films. And though it's always on mine - I can understand why.
A. It's too long and slow. At over two hours, the movie is paced like an elephant moving through a vat of mud. Long sections drag - 30 minutes could have been cut and no one would really notice.
B. Technical merits are dire. Though everyone in it speaks English and the film is in English, it appears some post production work has been done as the voices and mouths don't always match up completely, and foley noise is overemphasized. Also, the mixture of live action and animation is pretty rough - though technically good for the time, one can see the strings and seams showing almost always, and there is no doubt the actors are reacting to air.
C. Speaking of actors - the acting is terrible. The cast overacts with glee, and Sean Marshall, as young Pete, has the dubious distinction of being a poor actor AND singer. Not a good thing when he is given most of the major songs.
But all this aside, I LOVE this movie. I remember when VHS was new and we used to rent this movie every weekend and I would watch it four or five times. The songs never fail to touch me or move me to sing along even today. "Candle on the Water," "Brazzle Dazzle Day" and the rest get me every time, and I will often slip this movie in as a pick me up.
It's one of my most treasured DVDs. And in this high tech era of family filmmaking, if you haven't seen this film - rent it, and return to a time when "kids films" were about the story, the songs, and imagination.
Crossroads (2002)
Brit flick needs more fun, less angst.
***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** Everyone I talk to calls it THE BRITNEY SPEARS MOVIE. They may have seen it, they may have just heard of it - it will forever be THE BRITNEY SPEARS MOVIE. Just as anything she toplines in the future (and feel free to hold your breath - this one turned some opening weekend coin) will be referred to as THE NEW BRITNEY SPEARS MOVIE. So how does the movie hold its own in our crowded multiplexes?
The plot, overcomplicated as it is, concerns three childhood friends who have grown apart through high school, but inexplicably rejoin to travel from Texas to California on a road trip. One's the most popular (and meanest) girl in school, one's the egghead valedictorian, and one's the trailer trash waif with dreams of a singing career. Guess which one is Britney? Nope. Nope again. She's the egghead. Yes, ladies and gentlemen - this film wants you to truly believe that Brit's the school's virginal valedictorian whose aim is to become a doctor. Britney. The same one with a different hairstyle every shot, the super toned body, and the bare midsection. Okay, but enough about that... Yes, they have a driver, yes he's extremely hot, and yes, the car is a convertable. It's a road movie. Brit wants to find the mother who abandoned her when she was three, popular girl wants to visit her "fiancee" at UCLA, and trailer trash, as mentioned, just wants to SING.
****SPOILER ALERT****
UNlike how the film has been being marketed, but without giving too much away, lets just say that the gals are in for some heartbreak. BIG, LIFE CHANGING heartbreak. But don't worry - it's all dealt with as casually as if almost nothing had happened. And everyone gets on stage to sing the big Brit ballad "I'm not a girl....not yet a woman." Roll credits.
****END SPOLIERS****
Now, I didn't loathe this film like many did. I can't say I liked it, but I tolerated it. My biggest complaint is that this BRITNEY SPEARS MOVIE is not more FUN!!! Call me an idiot, but this film needed more SPICE WORLD and less STAND BY ME. The movie pops and bounces when the girls jump, dance, and sing to songs on the radio, and it comes to a complete standstill when angst takes over and they get all teary-eyed about "friendship" and "how hard it is to grow up." I don't need moral lessons in pain from the princess of pop. I wanna see her smiling. And Brit's not bad all you naysayers. She has a natural film presence, and though we won't have to worry about her name on the ballot next year OSCAR time, she does not embarrass herself like other singer/model/whatevers before her. And her supporting cast (stuck in the shadow of THE BRITNEY) supports without ever shining.
The film seems like a missed opportunity. It goes for pathos when a free spiritedness would have done just fine. They made BOYS ON THE SIDE when they should have made CLUELESS. And worst of all - they ruined the best decision they made. Kim Cattrall was INSPIRED casting as Brit's mom. But she's in it for three minutes, and she too is stifled under a frown of world-weary depression. It just reinforces what an interesting and far more entertaining movie could have been made with Kim and Brit as a mother/daughter singing duo hitting the road to find their fortune. But as it stands, sigh..... ...I can hardly wait until next year - maybe NSYNC will tackle a movie about teen suicide.
Lara Croft: Tomb Raider (2001)
Exactly the fun movie I expected.
I am completed confused. People are really HATING this movie. Did anyone bother to look at the poster and read the title before entering the theater? The movie is called TOMB RAIDER and it's based on a video game! Wanna know what other gems were based on video games? SUPER MARIO BROS, DOUBLE DRAGON, and MORTAL KOMBAT. Okay, so MORTAL KOMBAT was fun, but come on! I don't know about you, but I had a ton more fun in this movie than in THE MUMMY RETURNS. Angelina Jolie is perfect as Lara Croft - yes, she's all attitude and one note, but she kicks BUTT, and isn't that what she's supposed to do? The plot is slight, yes, but you have your goal, your bad guys, your good guys, and heavy machinery. The dialogue is decent, keeps things moving along, and the CGI is actually quite good (as a comparison, see the embarassing rush job in MUMMY RETURNS). I know I'm all over the map with this review, but I'm so confused as to how people can hate something with a passion as much as so many seem to with this movie. It's NOT INDIANA JONES - It never claimed to be. It's NOT THE MATRIX - It's not supposed to be. but it seems in this era of advances in the action film genre LIKE MATRIX, people will settle for nothing less (how they settled just fine with MUMMY RETURNS, I'll never know)... Just see the movie. If you know what you're buying a ticket to, and lower the expectations slightly, and just go have a good time, I don't think you'll be disappointed. But what do I know? I liked it.
Girlfight (2000)
Lacks Punch.
******SPOILER WARNING******
A tough little Filly from the inner city of......somewhere that's not LA or New York - starts taking boxing lessons to.....um.....let off steam. That's really why. She's angry - so she decides to put that anger into fistfights with gloves.
She hates her brother, hates school, glares at everyone, and wouldn't be fun to know personally.
Predictably, her trainer resists at first ("I'm not going to train a GIRL!!!"), and her father forbids her ("Would it kill you to put on a dress from time to time?"), so, OF COURSE, she excels. She meets a cute boy, also full of anger, and they start a relationship that represents the best part of the movie. They are cute together. You almost like her. But she never registers quite enough as a person to REALLY like her.
****HERE'S THAT SPOILER*****
There is scene after scene of the angry girl glaring a lot, and practicing boxing. Fine. Lil' Miss Rocky. Her boyfriend's name is even Adrian. I'm cool with that, but get me EXCITED. You WANTED to see Rocky make it in the end - you are lukewarm about this girl. And, predictably, it ends with a "big fight." Twenty lashes with a spiked cat o'nine tails to whoever INcorrectly picks the winner.
But when the inevitable end happened, I didn't feel ANYTHING. All I kept thinking is how beautiful the actress must be when she rids her head of those infectious BRAIDS she always has. And how sexy her man looks in a T-shirt and jeans. The story didn't hold me. Yes, she comes from poverty and starts to make something of herself and all that ANGER. But I've seen a lot of better movies deal with the same subject that actually rope you in to care and root for the character.
It's too bad - this could have been a rousing little indie crowd pleaser. Instead, it just sits there, all good intentions, decent performances, a sweet love story, and nothing to get you excited.
The movie isn't lighting any art house boxoffice fires. When I first heard that, I was surprised. Now that I've seen it, I'm not. There's nothing PATENTLY WRONG about the movie (like terrible performances, misguided humor, or abominable plot twists), there's just nothing to get behind. I had already started to forget the movie when the credits started to roll. I miss the days when "indie" USUALLY meant quality, because there were so few RELEASED, that they usually were the cream of the crop. Now there's just as much average and bad indies as studio films. This one falls right in the middle.
And that's my two cents.
Dr. T & the Women (2000)
MISTER T and the Women would have been a far better film.
**SPOILERS** **SPOILERS** Now, let's think - Robert Altman - shaky, but generally "good" track record, he arguably made THE movie about Hollywood when he unleashed "The Player" on the unsuspecting masses in 1992. Then he made the world safe for long movies that were not period pieces when he tickled out feet with "Short Cuts." But did anyone know what "Pret-a-Porter" meant when he boasted supermodels galore in 94? Did anyone want to know? Did anyone care? Did "Ready to Wear" end up on ANYONE's home shelf as a keeper?
Richard Gere is a gynecolegist. His office is ALWAYS filled with women, who ALL have appointments, ALL need to see him RIGHT NOW, and ALL have a crush on him. Now while, in theory this might be funny - let me paint with my beautiful brush of words what it feels like to watch upwards of 15-20 women, all in Dallas, Texas accents, ALL talking at the same time, all bickering, running in and out of slamming doors, giving orders to the staff, fighting with each other, and NOT ONE VOICE every becoming coherant enough for you to understand and focus on, but instead the entire scene plays like you are sitting in the middle of a baseball game right after a particularly exciting play that you had to be blindfolded during. You HEAR armageddon all around you, but you have no idea what they're talking about. And this goes on for 15 minutes at a time.
PLOT SPOILERS AHEAD!!!!!
The plot? Gere's got a wife who's lost it (Farrah Fawcett, who proves that she has "lost it" when she is seen in her first big scene of the film dancing COMPLETELY NUDE in a mall fountain - why? Well, gosh kids - SHE'S NUTS!!), one daughter getting married, but holding back a BIG SECRET (wanna know what it is? Here's a hint - Liv Tyler appears out of nowhere - if you know what I mean), the other daughter just stands there annoyed, and Helen Hunt is the new woman in his life (it takes him the whole movie to realize, apathetically, that she is using him for sex - GEE, Gere - was that hard to figure? She strips on your first date and has sex with you before you've had time to learn her last name - women looking for long term don't usually DO THAT - we're you the AMERICAN GIGOLO?).
And did I mention dull? Scenes flicker on the screen for five, sometimes twenty minutes at a time, and I found myself saying - "Whoa - how long was i just asleep for? Ten minutes? Well, no matter - NOTHING HAS HAPPENED!!!." Characters do things for no reason - REPEATEDLY, and every half hour we are treated to a meandering scene with Gere going hunting with his four buddies (or was it three? Who cares, they shared ONE personality), if only to prove that there are OTHER MEN in Dallas than Gere!!!! Performances? Well, everyone gives one, and as the movie is now mercifully over (while watching it, I doubted that it would be by today - my companion turned to me and asked, "Is this movie TEN WEEKS LONG?"), I can honestly say that the only person I remember in the film aside from the "I'm BEFUDDLED, get it?" Gere is Shelly Long, and only because it's been so long since I've seen her in anything, and I really like her. But even she is reduced to trying to seduce Gere in a ridiculous scene that, like every scene in this movie - leads nowhere and accomplishes nothing.
Put yourself blindfolded in a room full of screaming banshees and elevator music and have them spin you around in a chair until you vomit. It's just like seeing, "Dr. T and the Women." One friend said, "And I thought DUETS was bad." Another friend agreed she would have rather seen "Ladies Man" AGAIN. Another friend and I needed Tylenol when we got back to my place. It's just that kind of movie. And, true to form - the critics are liking it.
And that's my two cents.
Tigerland (2000)
Atmosphere and stars make TIGERLAND worth visiting.
For every serious misstep like the rubber-nippled batsuit and the drag queen farce "Flawless," Joel Schumacher offers up a "Lost Boys," or "St. Elmo's Fire" and (for all intents and purposes) temporarily redeems himself, at least in our memories. Yes this is the man who bathed Matthew McConaughey in "all hail the golden hues and locks of this boy from God" light in "A Time to Kill," but he also stood behind and pushed "Queer as Folk" to come to America. So as reviled as the man is, he sometimes has both his heart, mind, and libido in the right place and makes a good film.
Such is the case with TIGERLAND. It's a Vietnam movie that's NOT obsessed with war (take THAT Oliver Stone!). It's more interested in people, a squadron going through boot camp and realistic training (in this "Vietnam simulator" called Tigerland, to be exact), confiding in each other, and earning respect and trust, if not exactly "friendship." It's about authority, and how those in authority are not necessarily BETTER than those they lead, and are often just doing their job the best they can. And it's about the realism of what it takes for a man to be a soldier. And through it all, thank GOD - it's about Matt Davis and Colin Farrel.
First, for those to whom this is good news - both men spend a good deal of the movie in either tank tops, white T-shirts, or completely nude. Both have spend quality time getting to know gym equipment, and the result is very worthwhile. Matt Davis proves again that he's got acting chops behind his rugged good looks, and turns in a very good performance. But the winner at the end is a man named Colin Farrel, who might as well start practicing his upper end leading man salary negotiations now, because he's an amazing find. He plays a Texan named Bozz, but his character isn't a one line write off - he's a rebel, yes, but he's also a patriot, a leader, a pacifist of sorts, a clown, a best friend, a confidant, an insubordinant, a jerk, a weasel, a lothario, and he's magnetic on screen. Natural as all get out, charming to the point that he has charmed YOU by the time you're done with the movie, and extremely good looking, Farrel takes the movie, sticks it in his pocket, and walks away. Without ruining anymore about what his character does for the others in his squad, I will tell you that I have never seen a war film that takes this particular view, and it's refreshing.
It's 90% handheld camera, and there are entire scenes that feel so natural they seem ad libbed. Farrel owns the screen with his McConaughey drawl and rugged looks - and did I mention that fact that he is a stage actor from Ireland, so EVERYTHING that he comes across in this movie (from accent on) is a put on? - when I told my companion that, you could have knocked her over with a feather (so I did - it was funny - you never know when a feather will come in handy).
It's an excellent departure from what else is out there, and since it has not yet attracted much attention, I'd like to add my voice to the presently quiet grumblings of support for this fine attempt.
And that's my two cents.