Reviews written by registered user

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

Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]
20 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

A stunning counterpart to the Cameron film, 15 April 2015

Let me just say that I loved James Cameron's "Titanic," which took a huge historic disaster and turned it into a compelling film that went beyond the sensational. Yes, it was a populist film (who can argue with its record-setting box office?), but a damn good one. That being said, I enjoyed "A Night to Remember" immensely. It doesn't have the lover's story contrived for the Cameron film as its anchor, but I was still captivated by the ticking bomb of the "unsinkable" ship approaching its demise, with some rising to a heroic level and others resigning themselves to fate, or simply refusing to admit reality. And I was blown away by the special effects, expecting them to be primitive in an old-school kind of way. Yes, there were models, but their impact was every bit (if not more) of that of the Cameron film. This was truly a remarkable accomplishment.

64 out of 78 people found the following review useful:
Much better than the standard gangster flick implied by the title, 24 January 2015

I've been amazed at some of the slams this movie has taken. No story? Boring? Slow? You've got to be kidding. This was a fascinating character study of an "honorable man" trying to retain his honor in a corrupt business and political environment. From the title, I was expecting more of a traditional Martin Scorcese gangster flick, so I was surprised (pleasantly) that "violence" of the film was primarily about two codes of life clashing against one another. I can certainly understand a viewer attracted to the film because of the word "violence" ibeing disappointed at seeing so little on the screen. But I found the film riveting: excellent plotting, great writing and superb performances.

6 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
Beautiful and sinuous, 5 December 2014

I was expecting a standard gay film and was quite surprised. This film is primarily about dance. The four performers are all superb dancers, and their dances are the main focus of the film, reflecting (to a degree) their relationships with one another and others in their lives (who are never seen). The main character is Chip, a somewhat naive 18-year-old Kansan, trying to cope in New York City without appearing too vulnerable. I did find it strange that these four dancers (and their choreographer) had very little personal or verbal interaction for most of the film; indeed, it wasn't until toward the end that they seemed to actually know one another. Chip's intimate relationship with the other male dancer is handled tenderly and realistically, but their story is secondary to the love and dedication all the characters have for their art.

89 out of 94 people found the following review useful:
A completely revolting couple, 8 August 2012

I knew the back story to "Queen of Versailles" before I saw it, but I wasn't prepared for the extreme revulsion I felt for these characters, particularly David Segal. These folks are poster children for the worst extremes of our materialistic, narcissistic culture. Their values are money, ostentation, self-aggrandizement, acquisition and mindless hedonism. They are venomous leeches on society.

Yet I felt pity for them as well, particularly Jackie. She's something of an enigma. She boasts about getting an engineering degree so she wouldn't have to work as someone's assistant, yet she mostly devotes herself to keeping young-looking and voluptuous (those breasts of hers deserve some sort of special effects award) so she can snag and keep a rich hubby. As her world starts to fall apart around her, she begins to have some insights about what life is really about (not building the world's biggest house), yet still can't abandon her out-of-control shopping sprees or torturous visits to the beauty clinic.

The children, also, seem to be far more aware than their parents of the emptiness and ridiculousness of their lifestyle.

Fortunately, I saw very little of myself in this abhorrent couple, but I did see some similarities to friends and family. Everyone is susceptible to greed and an inflated sense of self. This film shows what happens when that proceeds unchecked and fueled by obscene wealth.

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
A semi-nude Brad is worth the wait, 18 July 2008

Okay -- terrible movie, horrible concept, inept concept, blah blah blah -- but this piece of garbage does have at least one raison d'etre for those of us who are into the masculine form. Leading man Brad Harris indulges in a blatantly homoerotic river bath about halfway through the flick, with the camera lovingly gliding over his sculptured body. His post-gladiator movies (mostly pathetic German 007 rip-offs) always featured an excuse for him to strip down, and this turkey is no exception. For lovers of softcore beefcake porn, this is almost (but not quite) worth the price of admission! But you can stop watching after that point.

6 out of 21 people found the following review useful:
Two movies in one...and neither are very good, 29 July 2006

I went into "Catch Us If You Can" expecting a pallid DC5 rip-off of "A Hard Days Night." Well, it is that all right, but director John Boorman also reaches for something more by abruptly separating the two main stars (Dave Clark – inexplicably named 'Steve' -- and sunny Barbara Ferris) from the madcap Swinging London antics and plunging them into a existential search for meaning in a superficial world obsessed with celebrity. So there are lots of brooding looks on the part of 'Steve' and shallow ruminations on the pressures of fame from Ferris. On their journey they meet a pack of drugged-out hippies squatting in a military bombing site, a disaffected upper-class couple who adopt the pair as a sort of kinky project, and a man who operates a Western dude ranch in southern Devon.

To satisfy what few remaining DC5 fans were coerced into seeing this film, the rest of the rock group is brought in at intervals to dance and leap about. But their presence is never really explained. They're not portrayed as a rock group (their songs are heard on the soundtrack but no musical instruments are in evidence) but as 'stunt boys' who all live together in what appears to be a refurbished church/gym. There's a definite homoerotic tone as they shower and work out and eat breakfast together.

Oh, and there's also a subplot on the cynical nature of advertising involving Ferris' managers and his ad agency cohorts. The whole thing comes off as something of a mess, albeit a watchable one, with bleak shots of the wintry English countryside and 1960s London. A definite curiosity.

1 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
Doris tries but can't begin to redeem this ridiculous mess, 2 April 2006

Whoever enticed Doris Day to squander her talents in this unbelievable bilge should be burned at the stake -- or, perhaps, forced to watch this film endlessly. Not only is our Doris asked to play a goofy airhead 20 years younger than her actual age, but she has to utter the worst dialog ever written in between achingly unfunny slapstick scenes. I knew going into this that it would be a bad 60s comedy, but I had no idea what I was in for. Even seeing Paul Lynde in drag was a sad case of too little too late. The only worthwhile moment comes in the film's first three minutes, when Rod Taylor -- in his hunky prime -- fishes shirtless on his boat. Yum! They should have ended the film right there.

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
The sound of one jaw dropping, 3 September 2005

I finally caught up with this. . .ummm, "film". . .not realizing it occupied the Number One spot on the IMDb Bottom 100. Subsequently discovering that fact did not surprise me in the least. This movie is not just bad, it's astoundingly bad. Everything about it, and I mean everything, from the wholly inappropriate soundtrack and pathetic sets to the leaden-paced direction and bizarre "plot", is about as inept as could be. Yet somehow it actually seems to be a sincere attempt at making a serious thriller! Equally surprising is that this appears to have been created by (apparently) functioning adults and not a group of 10-year-olds who have been given a camera and some cheesy costumes. The tired phrase, "What could they have been thinking?" only begins to express one's incredulity. Most people view this in its MST3K version, which is probably the only way to view it without sustaining serious injury from having your jaw drop onto the floor.

To have to award this "film" even 1 star is giving it WAY too much credit. Even the most boring family's camcorder footage of their last vacation to the Poconos would put this to shame.

Naked Fame (2004)
20 out of 22 people found the following review useful:
A star isn't born, 30 August 2005

This documentary about a gay porn star's quest to embark on a singing career has surprisingly more depth than I was expecting. Actually, I'm not sure what I was expecting other than a few gratuitous shots of star Colton Ford's body (check) and some insights into the "private" life of a male porn star (check). I was not expecting to have much sympathy for a forty-ish gay man, who has enjoyed fame on what has to be one of the lowest rungs of the celebrity ladder, believing he has any chance of success in the youth-obsessed, very heterosexual world of pop music. Yet Ford's naiveté, at first sad, ultimately comes across as somewhat charming as he chooses dance music as his genre. Never mind that the only "stars" in that field are black female divas, and even they only enjoy a level of fame just a notch above that of a gay male porn star. Ford would have been much better off choosing to be a rock or cabaret singer. But he soldiers on, supported by an apparently devoted partner (fellow porn star Blake Harper) and amazingly understanding parents, and despite the pale efforts of his pathetic "manager". As a documentary, "Naked Fame" won't make Errol Morris shake in his boots, but it's certainly an interesting glimpse of ordinary people trying to cope in a surreal profession.

3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
What a wonderful film!, 25 August 2005

Films such as "Dear Frankie" -- a touching and achingly real portrait of the overwhelming need for family connections and love -- are much too rare in these days of homogenized, formulaic pap. Nearly every element is perfect. The direction is sure-footed and nearly poetic in its choices, and the performances are unilaterally brilliant. It left me with a strange combination of sadness and happiness, much like life itself usually does. The ending might be a bit too tidy for some, given the unusual course of most of the film up to that point, but it all works. See this film if you need an reminder of the miracles and tragedies people can bestow on one another.

Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]