danielwill Reviews

13: The Musical (2022)

Excellent musical numbers!

[10/10 · 12 August 2022]

If you love musicals you'll find yourself smiling while watching this. The songs are snappy and smart, the choreography is exciting and the performers top notch.

The story may be conventional, but it's all done unconventionally well.

Musical theater lovers of all ages will love this.

The Architect (I) (2016)

A movie without a good script is like a house without a good floorplan

[1/10 · 2 July 2019]

If you want to see a movie about building a house, watch "Mr. Blandings Builds his Dream House" which is still more relevant (and funnier) after 70 year than this movie is after three. Blandings shows the strain building can cause on a couple--while being realistic, smart, and very funny.

I teach writing workshops, and this is a script I will show students as an example of what not to do. Don't make characters afterthoughts that go through motions so your plot can happen. Don't have plot holes so big that virtually any person in the audience may think, "Wait, that doesn't make sense, if they'd simply xxx there'd never have been this problem..."

And even a movie that starts with an "idea" should be able to make that idea clear. Here, it's so strained in every possible way that you have to wonder what the original idea was.

Was it that architects are egomaniacal liars? Was it that mismatched couples shouldn't design a house? Was it, perhaps that a client should not sleep with her architect (a time-tested tradition) and possibly have his baby (the last minor issue never being addressed).

If the vision was to stack of lack of logic on top of a dearth of emotion, then they succeeded with flying colors (speaking of colors, I did like the way the CGI house was painted and the mural at the end, but you can simply jump to the end and save yourself from the rest.)

I'm sure everyone involved worked really hard, but without a good script to start with, it's like building a house without a floorplan.

We'll start with the couple who are so completely mismatched from the start there's no reason for them to have gotten together, much less to be together. She's an artist, he's a number's man with no artistic outlook much less imagination. The numbers man would clearly have done more research on the architect than was done in this case, so the entire ending is unbelievable--not that anything else is that believable to begin with.

Then there's the architect so transparent in his motives that a single Google search would have revealed his "secret," not to mention the fact that he'd designed this house 15 years earlier. And a house itself where the entire first floor is devoted to the staircase and disregards not only any practical use, but also windows on the beautiful lake view.

The house they build makes as little sense as the story they built around it. Take the end (please). Why have the characters have changed so drastically as to be unrecognizable? The numbers man is suddenly sensitive to his wife's artistic nature. The wife seems to now have a busy art career while her formerly workaholic husband tends the baby. WHY? We don't see them change, we just see them magically different as if it's suddenly a different movie. That's not a character arc, that's Deus Ex Bulldozer.

So, go watch "Mr. Blandings Builds his Dreamhouse," a movie that lives up to the potential of its subject with characters, relationships, charm, and humor that actually makes you laugh.

My Architect (2003)

A beautiful documentary about the man behind the buildings

[10/10 · 11 December 2017]

Anyone interested in modern architecture should see this film.

It's rare to get behind the facade of an architect's work and learn more about the person.

This documentary does it in a beautiful way, mixing a reverence for his work with a sincere exploration of the man himself--by his own son.

The film combines the usual biographical information, with an unusually personal insight and helps give you a new view, and appreciation for architect Louis Kahn's work.

Kahn clearly had a profound effect on modern architecture. It's fascinating to hear his peers, giants of architecture, talk about him in spiritual, as well as physical terms.

The entire film is deeply emotional, culminating in the last scene, set at Kahn's last and largest work, the massive Parliament complex in Bangladesh. People don't talk about this architect as a "form-maker," but as someone who understood the spirit of a place and made it concrete.

It's really beautiful.

The Orville (2017–2022)

Disappointing - Un-funny as a comedy, uninteresting as sci-fi

[1/10 · 11 September 2017]

Well, that was a big disappointment. I just watched the first episode and it wasn't funny, dramatic, or promising.

As a big fan of Star Trek & Galaxy Quest (I like both sci-fi and funny sci-fi), I'd hoped this would be a little of both.

But the only "Star Trek" you get is the music, which is extremely derivative of TNG music.

The only Galaxy Quest you get is a green villain who, at one point, says a Sarris line, verbatim. Maybe it was an "homage" or maybe it was just laziness, it's not clear.

The only laugh... wait, there wasn't one. Really, I wish there had been, but there wasn't. There was annoying bickering between MacFarlane and his first-office/ex-wife and some snide remarks from a crew that doesn't feel remotely real.

And yes--"realness" is important. Even in Galaxy quest, we believed the characters, we believed they were invested in their situations.

Here, we believe that the network bought this on the strength of MacFarlane's reputation. That's about it.

The production has good special effects (a baseline these days), but the lighting looks like a 3-camera in-studio show--which means, not at all dramatic or interesting.

Let's hope the new Star Trek keeps this genre alive, because The Orville is DOA.

The Lost City of Z (2016)

Painfully boring, repetitive, pointless

[1/10 · 18 July 2017]

This movie was tedious and boring.

The man does the same thing over and over and over to pretty much the same result. It's long. It's pointless. I kept hoping the explorer was going to be killed and put us all out of his misery.

I don't hate many movies, but I really hated this one and found it painful to sit through. If I hadn't be there with a friend (who liked it-- so clearly some people do) I would have left long before it was over.

Restoration (1995)

Spectacular--and moving

[10/10 · 24 December 2012]

This movie is visually stunning--the spectacular sets (the floating wedding scene), the sumptuous costumes.

But it's much deeper than the glorious surface would suggest--it's not just a costume drama--the story is about someone and something--one man's life from selfishness to selflessness.

Downey's acting is superb, he's always been a wonderful actor, and here he's both subtle and broad and always believable. Meg Ryan is so different here from her normal cute roles that you might not even recognize her.

The script, direction, acting, editing, and beautiful score combine to make this a rich, emotionally moving experience.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012)

POINTLESS, no character development or emotion, BORING

[1/10 · 23 December 2012]

The Hobbit SUCKED. It's like Star Wars Episode 1, all effects, no character development or emotional content. No charm, no magic.

Horribly cliché script and dialog, terrible pacing (did we really need to see dwarfs eating for a half hour?). You know there's a problem with the entire audience is happy to see Gollum--and he elicits the most empathy!

Really, this was inexcusably bad, from the dwarf makeup that looked like early Star Trek prosthetics, to the boring effects, to them slowly traipsing through New Zealand which we saw three times before.

This was about nothing. Bilbo should be the center of the movie, right, but he wasn't. You didn't get to know him or care. He goes from freaking out because the dwarfs are using his dishes, to the next morning waking up and wanting to go with them-- with NO hint of why his character would make such a huge shift.

It doesn't matter how much CGI you have, if you don't have people to root for, you simply don't care and all those battles are boring! Compare this with "Life of Pi" where the CGI was totally in service of the characters, where you cares about the boy--and even the tiger!

There was NO POINT TO THIS MOVIE. It's insulting and stupid that they're turning this one book into three bad movies, just try to make one GOOD one. DON'T WASTE YOUR MONEY ON THIS 3 HOUR WASTE OF TIME!

The Bourne Ultimatum (2007)

Exciting, but lacked characters and a real conclusion

[6/10 · 5 August 2007]

I really enjoyed the first two films, but this one was pointless.

First, the good news: Joan Allen proved once again she can say more in a single subtle look than many actors can say in an entire performance. You literally could see what she was thinking.

The chases and stunts were sensational. This series always comes up with things you haven't seen before. If all you want are stunning chase scenes, then this movie will be enough for you.

If you want characters, motivation or explanation, then this will feel futile.

Were are the characters? Bourne was--Bourne. We've seen him before, twice, and in those films we learned a little more about him each time.

This movie, should have explained not just what happened (since we basically knew) but WHY. Why did Jason agree to do this (or not). What motivated him? What was his relationship with these people before? Clearly he had his reasons, but we don't learn what they were! You know as much going into this film as you know after. So it turns into a loud, busy, pointless exercise.

And frankly, Bourne is now becoming almost a super-hero in his ability to survive virtually everything.

The endless use of jumpy hand-held, the closeups, the flash cuts all got tedious. Without the constant "Stomp" drumming that passed for a score it might have just seemed like a busy music video.

Casino Royale was brilliant because it made Bond, formerly a machine, into a real person. The Bourne Ultimatum does the exact opposite, changing Bourne from a person into to a machine.

Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow (2004)

Culmination of 100 years of film-making

[10/10 · 19 February 2005]

Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow is, quite simply, the culmination of 100 years of film-making, summed up in a single film.

I literally couldn't believe I was seeing this. It all looked real, not cartoonish like Spider-Man did, not even like CGI.

Unlike some recent special-effects serials that look great but are basically dumb, this had a sharp, funny script, excellent action from a great cast, and truly good, fast-paced direction.

The movie clearly went over the head of a lot of theatergoers, especially younger ones who didn't understand the look or style of the film. But sophisticated film-goers with an appreciation for cinematic history will LOVE this movie.

An amazing, entertaining achievement.

Heartbreakers (2001)

Don't miss the DVD voice over commentary!

[9/10 · 9 October 2001]

The movie itself is well done and VERY funny--for women as well as men. It's a little too long, but otherwise well written, directed and acted (the acting is both believable and hilarious). Some really big laughs, and despite what the Amazon review says, it's not cliche at all. The scams are quite clever.

So watch the movie--but then make sure to watch the DVD voice over commentary by the director, Weaver and Hewitt. They are hilarious. They are totally open, just sitting there and talking, relaying stories about the filming, but also injecting a lot of personal comments.

It's extremely rare to hear such candor and unscripted humor from actresses--especially stars, but these two (and the director) make the voice over a true highlight. It's funny, charming, and add a whole new layer of entertainment.

The Mexican (2001)

Excellent--pleasantly surprised

[9/10 · 3 September 2001]

I didn't expect much of this film and was pleasantly surprised at how good it was. Well written (despite what others here have said), well directed (except for the pace which got slow), well acted (both Roberts and Pitt were believable and very funny, and Gandolfini was funny and touching). The criticism of Pitt, Roberts and Gandolfini is especially perplexing, as they were all in top form.

So why all the complaints? I don't get it. Yes, it was 10-15 minutes too long. Yes, it changed tone somewhat drastically near the end. But overall it was surprising, very funny, interesting to look at and fun.

It's Like, You Know... (1999–2001)

Very LA, very funny

[16 June 2001]

If you have ever lived in LA, then you will understand the bizarre truth underlying this show. You'd find the show hilarious and true, and very smart--a kind of Seinfeld for LA.

Jennifer Gray plays herself, after her plastic surgery when no one recognizes her anymore. There's an independently wealthy bald guy named Shrug who is exactly like someone I knew in LA, a shallow but good looking prouder, and a ditzy, sweet masseuse.

The shows are about getting work, getting dates, plastic surgery and traffic--meaning, it's about LA.

The unhappy New Yorker's view of LA is dead-on, as is the fact that he loves to complain about it, and then gets to like it.

The best episode is when they all had to stop everything they were doing and watch the skycopter follow a high-speed chase. This is also true to life.

Very funny, but probably too hip for the room. Too bad it didn't last. If it's on reruns anywhere, watch it!

Almost Perfect (1995–1996)

Really Perfect

[16 June 2001]

First you've got the Always Perfect Nancy Travis, a modern day Lucille Ball, with all her comedic genius, perfect timing, and cute looks. Why she isn't getting Meg Ryan parts is a mystery.

Then you have a setting which people haven't seen since the original Dick Van Dyke show--and which hasn't been handled as realistically and hilariously since.

Then you have a cast that's Also Perfect--from the nebbish played to perfection by Chip Zein, with his hilariously whining wife (whining has never been funnier than it was from Lisa Edelstein), to the kid from the mid-west (Matthew Letscher) who's trying to be hip with disastrous results, to the spaced-out writer played by David Clennon who's as far from Miles Drentel as he could be. And the love interest, the perfect straight men--Kevin Kilner.

Then you have the writing--which perfectly combines the awful truth about TV with hilarious dialog and a charming romance.

And the result is one of the best sit coms in years--which the network (in a display of bad-sense similar to what happens on the show itself) never gave enough exposure or time to gain an audience.

This is a show that could have fun for 7 years if the network had let it run for two. It could have run for years if Lifetime cable had picked it up. But for some unknown reason, they all let it drop, and the viewers are the losers.

Lifetime did show the entire series (including episodes that the network never aired) but they only did it one--so watch their schedule to see if they did it again.

Pennies from Heaven (1978–1979)

Truly original

[10/10 · 4 March 2000]

I remember seeing this on TV when it first came out. I was changing channels, and here were these woman, tap dancing on a coffin, lip syncing, "I'll be glad when you're dead, you rascal you." I was hooked.

It was the first time I ever saw Bob Hoskins, who managed to make a character who was truly awful somehow loveable.

It's a depression-era story, and while the story itself is grim, somehow the telling is joyful, with the cast breaking into "song." The songs are wonderful old songs, and they just mouth to them, and it creates a surreal feeling, but one that works, because it's as if this is what they are feeling (and could have felt at the time in the vernacular of the old songs).

The whole telling of this story is so original and vivid that you must watch it when you can.

==> Don't confuse this with the movie version, directed by Herbert Ross, with Steve Martin and Bernadette Peters has spectacular production values (unfortunately, the biggest production number was actually cut), but Steve Martin, great as he is, just doesn't make you like and feel for him the way Hoskins does. Bernadette is sufficiently waif-like, but she lacks Gemma Craven's grittiness.

Christopher Walken is the highlight of the film, doing an incredible song/dance/striptease on a bar that shows what a great dancer he is.

An Ideal Husband (I) (1999)

Surprisingly good - surprisingly timely, terribly marketed

[9/10 · 26 February 2000]

I saw "An Ideal Husband" at the Old Vic theater in London, and was surprised at the time how timely a 100 year old play could be.

When I saw the trailers, TV ads and posters for this version, it seemed like an entirely different story--will Rupert Everett get married off. That's certainly a thread in the movie, but in the marketing of this version, they made it appear as if it was the entire wardrobe.

I didn't see the film when it was in theaters because these ads, with their very modern music and fast cutting, made the film look like a joke.

But when it came out on video, I decided to try it, and am glad I did.

The film itself is excellent. Beautifully shot and paced, with an expert cast. Wilde's humor shines through, and the writer-director has done a wonderful job "opening" up the play into a film, without changing anything important. It's a masterful job of translating from stage to screen. It's really so crisply done, and very funny.

In years to come people will realise that this is a fine movie version of this play. And by then, hopefully, they will have either forgotten about the marketing campaign, or hopefully learned from it.

I recommend the film.

Forces of Nature (1999)

Very funny, beautifully acted and directed

[8/10 · 14 November 1999]

It's interesting for me to see so many negative comments about this movie, because I thought it was totally charming, hilariously funny, and, in the end, quite honest.

Those who don't think Sandra Bullock can act don't know what acting is. She is totally believable, able to say lines as if she's just making them up, and just comes across as a person you'd like to spend time with, which is one of the keys to being a star. Ben Affleck, who I wasn't a great fan of in the past, was equally real, also charming and funny--hard to do in a pretty wacky story like this.

The two of them did not have great romantic chemistry, which was perfect, but they do have great personal chemistry--which was just right for the story.

All the acting was right--especially Steve Zahn who has been great in everything I've seen him in.

The direction was fast paced, with amazing cinematography, quite rare for a comedy, and wonderful, beautiful, magical effects that seemed both real and surreal.

Maybe this movie was too subtle for some people (even though it's also broad at the same time). But I thoroughly enjoyed it, and my wife and I both thought that it had a feeling to a screwball 30's comedy like It Happened One Night.

If you want some laughs, and also some thoughtful ideas, watch this movie.