hhg2 Reviews

Kings Row (1942)

Baffled by user rating

[4/10 · 11 May 2023]

I certainly don't expect to always agree with the collective wisdom of the IMDB users, but I am often surprised when I disagree so completely with the majority. First off, I found Kings Row to be a melodrama and not a straight drama. The characters were almost uniformly one-dimensional and uninteresting.

As with most adaptations from a novel, which always have way too much detail and information to fit within a conventional movie timeframe, the movie suffers from necessary edits of the story. I did not read the novel, but I am guessing that the screenplay did not do justice to the book. I can offer one example, which doesn't give away the plot. The story follows a handful of characters from childhood through adulthood. After showing some childhood scenes, the movie jumps ahead about 10-15 years. When some of these characters meet in the street, they brought up events--minor events--as if they had just happened and would obviously be on their minds.

I only found two points of interest: Ronald Reagan's portrayal was exceptionally good and perhaps his finest acting. The cinematography of James Wong Howe. He earned an Oscar nomination and it was well deserved. I would only recommend the movie to the biggest of diehard fans.

Roseanne Barr: Cancel This! (2023 TV Special)

Average special with above-average hype

[6/10 · 17 February 2023]

I am a bit puzzled by this entry in the database. After several decades of use, I have never seen an entry that has been rated by several hundred people (more than 500 at the time of my viewing), yet less than a handful are available for review. Is it possible that so few people were willing to go on record or is some type of cultural proxy war taking place? I think you have to have an account to vote your rating, right? Did people have an account, vote, but were disinterested in commenting? That seems so non-IMDb.

In any event, I thought her special uneven but certainly better than her current average rating of about 2.6. I have never been much of a fan of hers, both in her early stand-up days and later in her sit-com megaglory days. I decided to view it just out of curiosity. She is obviously on a mission and thinks that taking on as many taboos will strike the audience's fancy. Perhaps so, but I think she'd be better served by refining her jokes and stories. Perhaps after 16 years being away from the stand-up stage (or so I've read), she's just rusty.

The Black Swan (1942)

Not even Ty Powers can save this mess

[5/10 · 5 February 2023]

So, apparently, Fox Studios needed a counterpart to Warner Brothers successful swashbuckler movies from the 1930s and 1940s and came up with, among others, this Tyrone Powers vehicle, also with Maureen O'Hara, Laird Cregar, Thomas Mitchell, and early George Sanders and Anthony Quinn. Sanders is unrecognizable in makeup and full beard but his voice remains distinctive. Still, the golden throated Sanders seems out of place as a ruthless pirate. Not even an "arrgh" or a "hearty matey" for him in the script.

Alas, despite the excellent cast and luscious Technicolor cinematography, the plot is so awful that the movie is mostly unwatchable although you don't often get to see O'Hara take a full punch to the head and get knocked out!

Hard to know who would find this one of interest as even the sword fighting choreography was poor and sped-up for effect. Not clear why even this minimum requirement failed here.

Carol for Another Christmas (1964 TV Movie)

Heavy-handed and preachy

[2/10 · 25 December 2021]

I came across this oddity while searching through TCM's Christmas line-up. I was intrigued to see this (apparently) made-for-TV movie scripted by Rod Serling and produced and directed by Joseph L. Mankiewicz. I had trouble getting through it and had to fast forward to get to the end. I only watched about 60% of it, so that may disqualify my comments.

That it is a modernized version of the Dicken's story is obvious from the beginning, with the naming of the characters. So, also from the beginning, one is expecting the parallels to that story and awaits the ghostly visitations. I was truly amazed at how unnuanced the movie was. I have witnessed religious sermons that were less heavy-handed and preachy.

I do take into account the time period of the movie: 1964. The Cold War was in full expression, and children practiced "duck and cover" drills in school, as if hiding under a desk would protect anyone from a nuclear blast. Still, filming a sermon would seem like a waste of resources when one can easily find the real thing.

The sets were done well for a TV movie, and the cast was quite good with many A-list actors. Even with those positives. I can't be more generous than a 2 out of 10. Even cinephiles have to occasionally say that this movie should never have been made.

Eyes Without a Face (1960)

Silly movie that has loads of fans

[6/10 · 30 November 2021]

I'm having a hard time squaring my views with the largely rave reviews of others on this website. I saw a French version of a Hollywood B film. While the premise of a driven surgeon attempting to help his daughter is intriguing, the full story really has little meat to add. As with many films of this vintage, using technical advisors was not commonly done, so much of the medical science is beyond fanciful, if not comical. Even setting that aside, much of the detective story is truly absurd.

The movie does have interesting cinemaphotography and captures the mood with darkness and shadows. So, stylistically the movie is impressive. The story does not give the actors a lot of opportunities for displaying a range, but the actress playing the surgeon's daughter does an excellent job emoting through a mask.

I would only recommend this movie to die-hard cinephiles and those exploring the history of horror.

Head (1968)

Hard to watch

[1/10 · 3 September 2021]

Certainly a time capsule of psychedelic, anti-war statements (I wouldn't go so far as saying commentary), and groovy clothes, but this self-indulgent enterprise is totally unimpressive. Stream of consciousness films are not unique, so this movie doesn't score in that regard, but even those types of films have a theme--these were mainly vignettes. Some film buffs might be interested since Jack Nicholson was a co-writer. Overall, I'd rate this an epic failure.

Wonder Woman 1984 (2020)

Hard to believe bad

[3/10 · 29 August 2021]

As many have written, I loved the original version, which had plot, passion (of the film makers), and pathos. The sequel had none of the above. I've seen sequels that were made by different directors and/or production teams, but this movie did not, so it boggles the mind how the same team could score a bullseye and then miss the entire target.

My greatest criticism goes to the two villains. The original had a complex backstory for the hero and a reasonable backstory for the villain. WW84 can only phone-it-in quick, cartoonish treatment.

Normally I'd try to write some detail as to why the movie was so awful, but I am only issuing a warning here and not a true review. Beware: you'll never get back the two hours spent here.

A Room in Town (1982)

An experiment in melodrama?

[6/10 · 15 August 2021]

I checked out this movie because of Demy's earlier works, Lola (1961), The Umbrellas of Cherbourg (1964), and The Young Girls of Rochefort (1967), all of which I found charming and interesting. Demy has an unmistakable visual sense and makes expressive use of vivid color imagery. All of those films also had playful plot lines that did not always follow logic, order, or even reason. Instead a whimsical, airy feeling often permeated the films.

So, I do not expect, nor demand, that movies have precise plots that always follow order, but Une Chambre really tests that to the limit. The actions of the characters are mystifyingly foolish, as if they were undertaken by five-year-olds, with zero understanding of human emotions or consequences of action. Timelines are compressed beyond belief. This movie makes TV soap operas seem logical, rational, and reasonable! I found myself asking: did that character really do that? Did she really believe that would happen? On what planet might that actually take place.

On the plus side, the singing of dialog was interesting (and was used in his earlier films). The visual style was still strong. However, unless you are a film buff who requires to see all of a director's work, I'd suggest passing on this one. A rating of 6 might be generous, and I wrestled with giving it a 5, but I did like his other films.

Our Vines Have Tender Grapes (1945)

A curious bit of Americana that falls short

[6/10 · 24 December 2020]

I normally don't write reviews that contain spoilers but found it difficult to do so with this film. I enjoy old movies and have no trouble with sentimental themes, but I found this film difficult to watch because of its unevenness. While Dalton Trumbo is nearly universally hailed as a screenwriter, and I haven't read the book it is based upon, I can't help think Trumbo did not do the book justice.

The main characters show no depth; what you see initially is what you see throughout. I would agree with many others that Margret O'Brien shines in her performance. Robinson and Moorehead finally play characters different from their standard fare but don't do much with the opportunity. Perhaps the problem is with the script and they are not asked for much.

The main problem I had was with the pacing and opportunities for some possible tension to interrupt the idyllic nature of the film. The film is slow but that isn't the issue. There are really only two segments that offer tension: the bathtub voyage in the river and the big barn fire. The river scene comes first and one might think the idea of two children afloat in a raging river would be tense. But, despite the half the town showing up for the rescue, nothing happens. The bathtub is easily captured and nothing dramatic was required of the rescue. One townsman, at zero risk to himself, climbed onto a sandbar and grabbed it. (You might envision a man hanging from a bridge by his feet and reaching down at the last moment or a chain of volunteers holding on to one another--or something.) The kids barely got wet and showed no fear, much less terror! I was stunned at the lost opportunity. Then, when one might think the movie simply would gloss over any hardship, the barn fire scene arrives and the viewer is pummeled. Not only did the farmer lose all, but all the animals had to be shot to prevent their suffering from dying by fire. Really?! From zero tension to hearing shot after shot after shot as cows and horses are put out of their misery?

The movie is hardly unwatchable and true buffs will want to see the out-of-character performances by Robinson and Moorehead, but I think of the movie as a lost opportunity.

Fear (1946)

There are B movies and there are B movies

[2/10 · 16 November 2020]

I can appreciate that the budget constraints were severe, but I cannot appreciate how anyone could rate this film any higher than I have. The story was not "an original screenplay" by any measure. The acting was stilted. And the ending was horrible. Even noir aficionados will have a hard time sitting through this 68-minute torture fest.

From Beyond (1986)

Slimefest more than gorefest

[2/10 · 28 May 2020]

I don't usually watch horror films, so my review may be off target or of little use for those drawn to the subject matter. I was surprised to see it rated so highly, so when it turned up on TCM, I took a chance. That it was based (probably loosely) on an H P Lovecraft story was another attraction. OK, so the plot is weak. And the acting stilted. Without gallons of blood, I'm puzzled at the interest the movie generates although there is lots of slime and protoplasm. You get to see Barbara Cramptom in an S&M outfit for about 60 seconds, so I gave it an extra star.

My Man Godfrey (1936)

Greatest screwball comedy ever?

[10/10 · 17 February 2020]

The movie is on my top 10 list and perhaps the greatest screwball comedy of all times. Pitch-perfect acting across the board as was noted elsewhere that all four top acting Oscar nominations were given although none of the actors won the Oscar. The writing was also perfect, blending pathos and comedic elements throughout the movie. I cannot think of another movie off hand that touched me more emotionally in-between laughs.

The movie is a "comedy of manners" type of story, where class designations are made fun and the only sensible people are the waitstaff-the wealthy family are all nuts. Recommended highly for the entire family: rated G for glorious.

They Call Me Mister Tibbs! (1970)

Poor at so many levels

[4/10 · 28 September 2019]

I rarely stop watching a movie in the middle and I rarely review movies that I don't finish, but I'm making an exception for Tibbs. What a major disappointment. The movie failed me at multiple levels, even to the Quincy Jones score. Did he realize that almost everyone on the project was just "calling it in" and decided he didn't need to produce anything above that mediocre level of effort?

The plot was somewhat standard fare for a crime thriller, but the dialog was atrocious and completely unbelievable. The cinematography looked like a TV show: it could have been an episode of Streets of San Francisco.

I'm honestly and completely baffled from such a poor effort from a production house of normally quality output (Mirisch Company).

Maybe I was simply in a bad mood?

The Rabbi's Cat (2011)

Hated movie--not sure why

[6/10 · 3 September 2019]

For animation buffs, the visuals are superb, so it isn't a surprise that it won some French award for that. The story, however, is another matter. Since I am unfamiliar with the original material, of which the movie is based, I can only speak to the adaptation.

You can read about the plot or the synopsis for the story line. I think the plot does capture "cattish" behavior quite well. The problem for me was the PC world view of the story. Forget 1920. Despite the period piece timing, the story is very much 2120. Everyone gets along or, more to the point, everyone should get along. Christian, Muslim, Jew, believer and atheist, black and white--you name it, it is here. That utopia awaits should not surprise anyone.

I would say the movie is for animation buffs for the most part. Animal lovers, and particular feline lovers as myself, will get drawn in but lost in the shuffle.

Forty Guns (1957)

Did I watch the same movie?

[4/10 · 3 June 2019]

Sometimes it is difficult to rate an old movie--are you looking at the movie on its own merit? Do you through in "bonus" points for some historical reasons as in an old silent film or films done before the era of special effects? For effort, even if it falls short?

I am truly baffled this movie rates so highly by the 40+ other reviewers. Horrific dialog and script; stilted acting constrained by the aforementioned lousy script. I gave it 4 stars because some of the cinematographic had some interesting shots. Barbara Stanwyck must have needed the money for an operation.

Truly baffled,

Blade Runner 2049 (2017)

Stunning achievement; better than original

[10/10 · 8 November 2017]

I would have preferred to simply have "stunning" as my review, but it falls well short of the minimum size for a review! The movie will probably only appeal to a small percentage of the population because it is so slow-moving, but I consider the pacing a positive as it allowed me to luxuriate a bit longer in the visual world the director/writer created. A moody, visual masterpiece that combines the film noir aspects of the 1940s and 1950s with the futuristic sci-fi world view.

The performances are purposely understated and all actors put in excellent efforts. The music offers homage to the original but offers new explorations.

The movie might be a little difficult for those not familiar with the original, so I would suggest watching/reviewing that film beforehand.

I rarely go out to the actual multiplex, but I wanted to see it on the largest possible screen. I actually went twice!

The Lobster (2015)

Not for the faint of heart

[3/10 · 17 September 2017]

I would completely concur this movie ranks near the top of absurdist or oddest films of the decade. The premises of this dystopian, yet contemporary, film are never explained nor defended--they simply are, which can be frustrating when the internal "logic" of the bizzaro world collapse. It reminds me of some type of comic television shows where anything is allowed for the sake of a joke, even if it means, for example, characters dying and being brought back to life to setup the next laugh line. Nothing is spared to keep the viewer in a state of bafflement. As with any avant-garde type of art, the defenders often "see" things that simply aren't there, in my view, and this film is also such a Rorschach test.

In addition to the lack of coherence, I found the wanton cruelty and violence to be quite unnerving, yet I have a weak stomach for such things. I know not to see slasher-type films for this reason, yet this film gave no warning that it might not be suitable for sensitive eyes.

I give it three stars for technical achievement and to prove I'm not a total Philistine and want directors/writers to try new things.

Star Trek Beyond (2016)

Another tired episode of Star Trek 90120

[2/10 · 24 June 2017]

I just don't get it, and it might be generational. I am too old and remember the original Star Trek, or classic Star Trek, as it is now called, in real time. What has happened to the franchise? There is no more room for clichés--the plot doesn't have room for anything more. Kick-ass woman warrior. Check. Diversity is strength message, er, platitude. Check. Cool 20th century heavy metal music in a 22nd century environment. Check.

Dreadfully weak plot living in a guaranteed franchise. I give it 2 stars strictly for visual effects. If you liked others in the reboot, you'll find this review harsh--I understand.

Tokyo Story (1953)

Best for hard core cinephile

[6/10 · 13 March 2017]

I have always considered myself a film buff but I just didn't get Tokyo Story. I've enjoyed silent films and "art" films, but this 2+ hour long examination of an elderly couple visiting the big city of Tokyo to visit many of their children and in-laws was painful to watch. I clicked on the "spoiler alert" box but there is really nothing that can be spoiled: the plot is so "everyday life of ordinary people" that there is no suspense at any point in the movie. The parents are very simple people and speak simply, often only affirming or negating a question by saying "yes," "no," or "is that right?" So there is nothing resembling sterling dialogue. No, it is a character study of relationships among the family that carries on interminably.

What was odd to me was how unconcerned their children were about the visit and how little they were willing to sacrifice in time for their parents even as the trip must have been long-prepared. Perhaps the cognitive dissonance of my associating Asian cultures with respecting the elderly (if not their parents!) was surprising to me. Most people would have treated elderly strangers with more consideration. Their indifference was almost painful to watch. It was almost as if the director wanted to make the children as selfish and negligent as possible and exaggerated their flaws.

The cinematography was excellent but it, too, seemed odd as if beautiful scenic shots were interspersed among the tight interior shots where the sparse dialogue was taking place. It did break up the monotony of the first-grade level vocabulary and dialogue.

Give me the weakest Kurosawa any day over this. And Roger Ebert gave it 4 stars (highest rating) and said it was one of the greatest movies EVER made. I'm giving it 6 stars because I must be missing something obvious.

River of No Return (1954)

Dreadful plot drowns out any positives

[4/10 · 24 May 2016]

I came across this oldie recently and was excited by the cast (early Monroe and Mitchum) and was even more pleasantly surprised to see that it was directed by Otto Preminger. However, that excitement did not last long. The plot was so amateurish and bad that it defies logic and description. That is a lot to overcome. I do add a star or two in my rating because of the cinematography and because watching Monroe sing her three or four songs was interesting. Given the plot/dialogue's limitations, Monroe's performance was quite good and presaged a future star. Mitchum played the moody, brooding loner quite well--as always.

Only for film historians and die-hard movie buffs.

Pixels (2015)

Lost 20 IQ points in 90 minutes

[2/10 · 2 October 2015]

I was unclear about the intended audience. Was it for kids, who have never seen arcade games and would find them dull and antiquated? Was it for nostalgic adults, who find modern games hyper-violent and gory? I can't imagine either of those groups finding much of value in this movie. Since there was no effort at plot development, endearing or believable characters, or passable dialogue, I would have to vote for this as a "kids" movie. But, would if have been difficult to have at least *one* plot element consistent or plausible.

Whether for kids or not, the acting was almost horrible beyond measure. The support acting crew does well, but Sandler can barely be bothered with the effort. He literally could have phoned in his lines via cell phone and saved himself or the studio the limousine fees.

Why not a single star rating? I give it one above minimum for the graphics. Whether intentional or not, I believe they captured the old graphics' style in the 3-D modernization.

Event Horizon (1997)

High gore in outer space hell

[2/10 · 13 May 2015]

There are two basic types of horror films--suspense-based and gore-based. Since I can't stand the former, it won't be a surprise that I greatly disliked this movie. Placing the scene in the future allows for some plot contrivances (whatever plot there is), but the "science" in the science fiction is so lame as to be laughable. I doubt there was a technical adviser within 10 light-years of either writing or production. With no plot and no character development (and some idiotic characters, to boot!), you are left roughly with an Olympic-pool sized bloodbath to make up for the rest.

There were some reviewers who mentioned Hellraiser as a possible reference type in their comments, and I would concur. Some of the special effects grotesqueries were good, and that is why I gave a rating of 2 rather than 1. If hack-fest movies are your thing, have at it. I'd guess it might rate much higher in your view! But, if you are/were looking for an interesting science fiction tale, seek elsewhere.

At the Circus (1939)

Stop the Music--and the Pain

[1/10 · 23 March 2015]

I love the Marx Brothers, but I suppose that means I need to qualify that I love the Marx Brothers circa 1929-1937. You can read about the demise of their funny movie-making as a result of Irving Thalberg's untimely demise or the antipathy of Louis Mayer elsewhere.

I can't recall if I saw this picture early on and then forgot about it or not, but I did have the misfortune to revisit it recently as TCM had a tribute to their films. All I can say is horrible. I might have had a chuckle or two, but I did not have a full laugh throughout the picture. I can only recommend this one for die-hard fans who want to see the Marx's entire oeuvre. Too many musical numbers and too few belly-shaking laughs, I'm afraid to report.

Enough Said (2013)

Agonizing for Non Lifetime Channel Fans

[4/10 · 16 June 2014]

So many terrible characters, so much time to wallow. There are films where the protagonist is a flawed, but basically good person, so that we can appreciate their journey, whatever it might be. Not so here. Eva (Julia Louis- Dreyfuss) is a confused and bitter divorcée with a daughter to raise. That she is a good and caring mother is her only virtue. Generally she is shallow, entitled, and almost everything a massage therapist is not supposed to be: positive, supporting, and joyous. Most of her clients, as seen through vignettes, are either self-absorbed, non courteous, or are halitosis-challenged.

The story follows the web of conceit and duplicity of Eva as she inadvertently finds two new people to add to her inner circle: a new client (and friend) and love a interest. The twist: both were once married to each other, yet she tries to keep the secret from both of them, out of fear, insecurity, and general horrible judgment. The tension builds as her web collapses on her. The problem for me was that most of her supporting friends are vapid caricatures and largely unpleasant. I hate to use the sledgehammer term "chick flick," but unless you are interested in this type of pseudo-sophisticated dysfunction, you will be clamoring for the theater exit or the "off" button on the remote.

So, why four stars? Both main characters were well-played but given rough story lines to deal with. I was interested in James Gandolfini's role. We all know him from his gangster or "heavy" type of roles, and I found it endearing to watch him play a much softer role with such aplomb.

There Was a Crooked Man... (1970)

Awful and awfully disappointing

[3/10 · 2 March 2014]

I've admired the producer/director for awhile and came to this movie late. The cast is nothing short of stellar and the acting is up to that standard. The cinematography was lush and attractive--even with many shots taking place in the desert.

However, the weak and inept plot (with glaring holes), the off-beat music (perhaps standard for the time period), and the lack of character development among the stars left me squirming in my seat. Could a ruthless sociopath like Douglas really be that charming? Could a superior lawman like Fonda make rookie mistakes of judgment?

I found I was asking myself if the movie will ever turn around or should I quit now? Unfortunately I kept watching, and it never improved and, as they say, I lost two good hours of my life.