MTGrizzly Reviews

The Creature Wasn't Nice (1981)

One of my favorite movie of all times..

[10/10 · 9 March 2007]

Okay, so I like really bizarre movies and am a big fan of Cindy Williams, but come on - this movie is not without it's merits. You have a great cast, a so so story, great music, interesting creatures and really bad special effects. What else could you want? I mean the movie wasn't supposed to be serious or even at the level of the ridiculous movies Neilson later made, like Smoking Gun...

Obviously this movie is an acquired taste. As far as quality, what should one expect from a movie produced by the "North Orange County Community College"? Star Wars? (I think that Star Wars would have been a lot better, if they had cast Cindy Williams as Princess Leia...)

War of the Worlds (2005)

Interesting Special Effects, No Story

[1/10 · 17 January 2006]

War of the Worlds is not only Spielberg's worst movie, but the worst movie I have seen in some time. It is right up there in the running for the worst movie I have seen in the last ten years.

Wells' story has never translated well into a visual medium. The story, inherently, lacks any of the elements necessary for a movie. There is no real conflict resolution, the story just ends. While that might work with a book, where pages and pages can be spent developing the back story, it doesn't work in a movie. In this particular treatment of the story, about ten minutes is spent on character development, resulting in characters that I didn't understand and could have cared less about. After that, the movie set out to try to "wow" the audience with special effects. Unfortunately, not even those where very good.

The appearance of the "tentacles" of the alien tripods were a poor imitation of the effect first developed for the water tentacle of the alien in James Cameron's 1989 thriller, "The Abyss." The same effect was resurrected, with somewhat less success, for Luis Llosa's 1997 stinker "Anaconda." Aside from the tentacles, the alien craft - and the aliens themselves - looked more than a little like the aliens from Roland Emmerich's 1996 classic, "Independence Day."

The story is,basically, the same story as was told in "Independence Day" and Tim Burton's 1996 tongue-in-cheek "Mars Attacks." In those movies, though, the story consisted of more than just a series of almost totally unrelated and entirely contrived scenes of the heroes, (in this case, Tom Cruise and Dakota Fanning, who, hopefully, will recover from this film and go on to make more movies with actual plots, characters and stories), running from the monsters. There was, essentially, nothing that connected any of the scenes in "War" to each other. Most of the scenes didn't even make sense - If the monsters are attacking cities, why would you run towards New York City? The monsters are flattening everything in their wake, why hide in a basement? - and seemed to be contrived to show off some novel special effect.

There were more plot holes than I care to count - If the electromagnetic pulse destroyed the electrical circuits, it is unlikely any car could ever be made operative, yet they find one car that they can drive off in. If the aliens were smart enough to plant the tripods millions of years ago, how come they weren't smart enough to figure out how to protect themselves from earth bound viruses? How come, at the end, when the ex-wife and the parents walk out of their charred house in Boston, they look like they just stepped out of a GQ spread when the rest of the world around them is in ruins? For that matter, how did the Cruise and Fanning characters even make it to Boston, not to mention the Chatwin character? And, finally, why is the reason the aliens died only explained by the narrator after the end of the movie?

I was not particularly impressed with the special effects, as a whole. There were some good ones, like the bridge exploding at the beginning of the film. However, because their was no story, no plot and no characters that anyone could care about, the special effects were left to carry the film. Given the film, it is hard to imagine that any special effects could have carried it. If I had been Industrial Light and Magic or Stan Winston, I would have been embarrassed to have my name associated this movie. Both ILM and Stan Winston have done much better and, in nearly all cases, their effects could have been used in movies that were much better.

For Spielberg's sake, I hope "Munich" is much better. But, then, it would be hard for it to be worse.

Inferno (I) (2002)

Not Worth the Film Used to Make it....

[1/10 · 25 June 2005]

You know this is going to be a bad film right from the beginning : The fire can be seen from a road - yet they drop in smoke jumpers? You don't jump into a fire that you ca see from the road. After the jumpers get on the ground, the "veteran" says he wants to attack the fire from the uphill side? Fire always runs uphill! Ask the guys that died at Mann Gulch or Storm King Mountain in Colorado how attacking fires from uphill works out. When they are walking to the fire, the sound of the wind is blowing loudly in the background, but none of the vegetation is moving at all and the fire isn't wind blown. After they have tried for a few minutes to put out the fire, a Sikorsky S76 helicopter appears and makes a water drop right on the fire without any planning? If they could have put it out with a water drop, they would have done that first. When the fire is "contained" and the entirely bogus rescue has been carried off, the "chief" calls for a helicopter and flies back to town - if they could have flown into the fire, then they would have sent a helicopter attack in, not smoke jumpers.

Later, after commandeering the helicopter to look for her daughter, the "chief" rappels down from the helicopter, (without throwing any rope out first) in to trees and abandons the firefighting effort. Then she gets stuck in the tree, (while still attached to the helicopter), and then falls out of the tree while trying to get down.

Unfortunately, the movie goes down hill from there. The dialog is terrible. The plot is contrived, (and entirely predictable). The special effects are about what I would expect from this kind of movie, in other words, really bad. Acting swings from non-existent to way over acting. If a movie has a good plot, sometimes you can be persuaded to suspend belief enough to enjoy the movie. In other instances, if the special effects are outstanding sometimes you can live with no plot. This is not either of that those types of movie.

Even if you know nothing about wildland fires or wildland fire fighting, this movie is not worth the film used to make it. If you like movies with plot, dialog, acting and a decent premise, this is not one of them.

Apparently, this movie is also shown under the title, "California Firestorm." If anything, that is even a less apt title than "Inferno."

Mother, Jugs & Speed (1976)

Interesting Period Piece

[8/10 · 18 June 2005]

This is a highly underrated piece of Cosby's work. Although, now, the concept of a private ambulance service that is primarily interested in money seems rather, quaint, it was almost the norm in the mid-seventies when this movie was made. Although most people don't realize it, the largest ambulance provider in the US is still privately operated, for profit, so, maybe not all that has changed.

Cosby is brilliant as "Mother", a sort of archetype character that melds together all the clichés of what "ambulance drivers" were in an era when many ambulance services were still run by funeral homes - I recall pushing a 1970 "Miller Meteor" Cadillace ambulance, which was basically, a converted hearse, up and down hills at 35 MPH, it's 500 cubic inch engine floored, straining and just barely able to make it up the hill. This is not "EMS," it is "you call, we haul." Cosby brings out the nitty gritty of a profession that was mostly populated by caring people who ran up against the ethos of profit in medicine and owners who were just out to make a buck. You start out really caring, but run head on into the reality that aiding the sick and injured is not the end, just the means to the end. You learn this working very long hours, under horrible conditions, for very little money.

Rachel Welch portrayed the emerging role of women in emergency services very well. The hoops she had to jump through just to get on a rig were exaggerations of what really was happening in the industry at the time. Similarly, Welch's reaction when faced with the reality of emergency medicine is right on point. There is a great deal of difference between what you learn in textbooks and real life. And real life isn't always that pleasant. But, as Mother says, Jugs has the "dedication of a jungle missionary." She would have to, just to get where she was and stay there.

Harvey Kietel was just starting out when he played "Speed" and his performance in the role foreshadowed the brilliant career that followed. I thought the "Speed" reference was a little cryptic. I thought, for a long time, it referred his desire to drive fast. However, the "Speed" character gives a different point of view - that of an outsider - to the hijinks of the staff of F&B Ambulance Service. He shows us how absurd some of things that happen are.

The rest of the characters seemed to all be lifted directly from the real world. Harry and Naomi Fishbine seemed to be modeled after a husband and wife team that ran a not too different private ambulance company that I worked for on the west coast in the seventies - right down to the lecture about how much each patient was worth. Larry Hagman's character portrayed a type of worker in the industry that was always on the margins - you weren't sure why he is doing what he was doing, but you couldn't see him doing anything else.

The events portrayed in the movie where very similar to the "urban legends" about what supposedly happened at private ambulance companies in the sixties and seventies. As most legends are, some of them are based on loose interpretations of fact. I have, in fact, had difficulty taking very obese patients down flights of stairs. Some of the places we went to on calls had rodents large enough to cause grave concern. There were always rumors of people who smoked pot or drank on the job. During my entire career, whenever there were two private ambulance companies in competition "jumping calls" and competing for patients did happen - sometimes on a daily basis. The owners of one of the ambulances services I worked for in the eighties ordered their employees to attend city government meetings when the company was being discussed, (this was long after the everyone who worked in the industry had becomes "professionals). And, yes, I have been the victim of layoffs from private ambulance companies when they lost their government contracts. I have, also, been held up at gunpoint for drugs, stabbed and shot at. The reality of the movie made it all that much funny and more real.

Mother, Jugs and Speed is an interesting and amusing look back at a time when EMS was just starting to become a reality. The acting was top notch. The events portrayed were close enough to real, (or to urban legends), as to make them seem likely. The writing could have been better - some of the dialog was very marginal. Overall, as a lay person and a retired EMS professional who worked in the ambulance industry at the time this film was made, I found the movie to be very enjoyable and suggest others watch it - with tongue firmly in cheek, of course.

A Thief in the Night (1972)

An Interesting Treatment

[4/10 · 23 May 2005]

This is an interesting treatment of a subject that is quite controversial, (just read the other comments on this film). Apparently, you either love it or hate it and it seems most people make that distinction based on whether they believe the tribulation and end times will happen as portrayed in the movie.

Basically, the film - and its sequels - were made for about $1.30 each. The production values are right down there with "Plan 9 From Outer Space" and the acting is about on the same level as "Glen or Glenda", (my apologies to Ed Wood). Putting aside the religious message, the story is as scary as they come. Add in even the slightest thought that the story might actually be close to something that might happen in the future and it becomes even scarier.

This movie, and its sequels, didn't try to bring in the reasons why the tribulation happened when it did. "Left Behind" and "The Omega Code" tried to get in everything "Thief" did and to explain all the politics and maneuvering in the Middle East leading up to it. The net effect was "Thief" did a much better job on the scary part of movie, instead of spreading itself too thin trying to explain what was happening in the Middle East at the same time.

Forget the politics and watch this movie, and its sequels, for what they are - horror stories. That they may be horror stories told, indirectly, by God makes them just that much more frightening. If it makes you think about the subject, it has done its job - even if you never believe.

Six Days Seven Nights (1998)

Good all around movie...

[7/10 · 8 May 2005]

There was a lot to like about this movie. The scenery, (Hawaii, not Obradors), was fantastic. The acting was superb. While the plot held no surprises, (once you understand the premise of the film, you know right where it is going, but, in the case of this movie, it was fun to find out how they get there), it was interesting. The gags were very funny, (particularly when Heche's character displays the her inability to cope in situations where there aren't subways and cell phones.).

The movie showcased the range of both Heche and Ford. It might have done the same for Schwimmer and Obradors, if they had significant roles. Since I have never seen a single episode of "Friends", (I know, I must be the only person in the world who hasn't), I cannot compare Schwimmer's acting in this movie with his role in "Friends." His acting in this movie didn't compare to his role as Lt./Captain Sobel in "Band of Brothers." Based on this role and "Band of Brothers", it seems to show that Schwimmer has a lot of range and can play different roles very well. Schwimmer does seem to be typecast as the inept "loser" who tries hard and always comes out second in the end. Unfortunately, he and Obradors seem to be limited to supporting , rather than starring, roles.

So, if you are looking for a light, funny way to spend an evening, watch this movie.

Virus (1999)

Interesting - but stupid

[1/10 · 7 May 2005]

What can one say about this? The writing was just barely acceptable. The dialog a little choppy, deteriorating into silly. The special effects are, besides incredibly corny and amateur, a complete waste of money. The actors seemed to be on 'autopilot' and cruise through the movie without even thinking, much less acting. The budget of $75,000,000 could have been better spent filming another, say, 20-50 seasons of "SpongeBob, Square Pants."

It would take all day to even to begin to describe the unlikely things that happen in this movie, (Radios work through solid steel? Curtis' character not only can navigate across the Pacific, but can suture lacerations, too. Yout get the idea.). Although the most unlikely thing that happened about this movie is that it got made!

The only good things I can say about the DVD are: It's round, it's shiny and it makes a heck of a coaster.

Signs (2002)

Stop Signs?

[2/10 · 12 April 2005]

After Shyamalan's excellent work on "Sixth Sense," I was really looking forward to Signs. Unfortunately, Signs never lived up to its hype and, certainly, not to its heritage.

This movie was the worst of Independence Day, (the way the aliens communicated), Night of the Living Dead, (boarding themselves up in to the basement), and The Wizard of Oz, (kill the aliens by throwing water on them? "Help me, I'm melting...), all rolled into one. The plot was completely predictable. The characters were not to be believed. The movie was made up of pieces of other, better films, assembled in a haphazard manner. The subplot concerning Hess' dead wife was pointless, what did his wife's death have to do with aliens from outer space? It amounted to 106 minutes of spooky sounding music that was supposed to increase the tension for the climax. Unfortunately, what was going to happen in the end was so predictable right from the start, it just ended up being 90 minutes of boring and 16 minutes of bad special effects.

The tag line, "It's not like they didn't warn us," says it all. Anyone who didn't get that the aliens were coming would have to have been deaf and blind. The constant references to water gave away the climax long before the aliens got there. The movie was set in Pennsylvania, not Siberia, was it really necessary to hide in the basement? Why didn't they just call someone, it's not like they were all alone. The problem is, I wish someone had warned me about how bad this movie really was, so I could have saved my $7.00.

Without a Paddle (2004)

A Surprisingly Good Movie

[6/10 · 5 April 2005]

I must admit I rented this movie because it featured "Little" Bart - Doug Seus' grizzly bear. I support Doug's work with grizzly bears and his work to save grizzly habitat through his Vital Ground foundation. In that respect the movie was a little disappointing as Bart was on camera longer in the production featurette in the special features section of the DVD than he was in the movie. However, I was pleasantly surprised when the movie was pretty good.

It isn't "high art", but from a pure entertainment stand point, it was great. The comedy is mostly slapstick. The settings are gorgeous, (I wish Oregon looked that good when I lived there). The characters improbable caricatures of common stereotypes. The story highly unlikely. Made by MTV, as one would expect, it is, basically, an excuse to make jokes about sex, drugs, rock'n'roll, the seventies and feminine hygiene, (for some reason, they seem to have left out flatulence jokes). Surprisingly, though, it works, on a certain level.