Reviews

19 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Parkland (2013)
8/10
An underrated masterpiece...
7 October 2013
Warning: Spoilers
I'm not too sure why this film has had such critical reviews but what I will say is that given the depth of this story, the condensation of this into a mere 90 minutes manages to pull off the gist of the tale quite well. Anyone who has read "Four Days in November", "The Death of a President", and " The Day Kennedy Was Shot" can appreciate how much more could've been told in this film but in the same vein doing so would've made watching this film interminable. Oliver Stones "JFK" could pull off three hours because much of what he directed was contrived and speculation which makes for more interesting cinema but "Parkland" tells the story as it was and leaves the speculation of conspiracy to others. In the end this was a good effort because fundamentally some stories are best left to proper documentary film makers and historical writers who possess the talent to tell it in a way only they can. (and there is plenty of excellent material out there to read and watch)" Parkland" may help encourage the curious to seek this material out given the half century anniversary of this tragic event. In the final analysis, this movie achieves its goal of depicting how the assassination of the 35th president affected its witnesses, peripheral players and ultimately a nation even till this day.

This was not a film meant for controversy, Academy Award nominations or box office ticket sales records.
12 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Butler (I) (2013)
7/10
Unfairly criticized in my opinion...
25 August 2013
I would agree with some critics who say that certain characters were miscast in this film, from John Cusack as Richard Nixon, to Liev Schreiber as Lyndon Johnson to Robin Williams as Dwight Eisenhower, however given their very limited roles in this movie I'm not sure it's entirely justified. I would say the same about Alan Rickman as Ronald Reagan and Jane Fonda as Nancy Reagan. (a part that barely gets more than two minutes in the entire movie)

The storyline is elegant and I believe quite well-told and let's be fair in saying that only so much history over 25 years can be told in a two hour movie with any serious depth given the nature of the topic behind it.

So to be clear here it is. This movie is political but in a way that transcends whether you are Democrat or Republican. It addresses the fundamental issue of civil rights in the United States since the late 1950's when Eisenhower was reluctant to use federal troops to intervene in Arkansas to integrate racially segregated schooling to Ronald Reagan's opposition to a U.S. position opposing apartheid in South Africa in the early 1980's. Therefore the movie has racial undertones and in this 50th anniversary of the March on Washington and JFK's assassination we shouldn't be surprised by films that attempt to highlight injustices that took place during this period of U.S. history. Yes, there may be more a glorification of Democratic president's Kennedy and Johnson, but let's also be clear they were the only president's since Lincoln and Grant that dared to challenge the status quo in a serious way since Reconstruction, even if it was for expedient purposes.

As such it's no coincidence that Whitaker's character wears JFK's tie and LBJ's tie clasp upon his meeting Barack Obama at the film's end. It's fitting and appropriate, and above all else this movie forces you to think about certain issues that are all too easily forgotten, even in this day and age.

Yes, 'The Butler' might resemble 'Forrest Gump' in many ways but where it excels over the former is making a statement about American history and society that far too many choose to ignore or minimize in importance.
7 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Quite a ridiculous proposition...
15 August 2013
I think Hollywood is getting seriously desperate for story ideas because I remember back in 1997 when 'AIR FORCE ONE' was released and how essentially "Olympus Has Fallen" replicates such. Only difference is the plot is in the White House proper versus the Flying White House.

Without getting too much into detail, the entire premise of this movie is ludicrous as is the notion the White House could ever be taken in the fashion portrayed here. I actually sat there laughing at the entire scene because it's so implausible. I know action flicks are going to be unreal to some extent but not to the point of living in some alternate reality world that completely distorts any semblance of the real world. Meaning there has to be at least some possibility of the events happening to make the movie enjoyable and here, despite the decent cast of actors, the film fails miserably.

I'd even go a step further and suggest that much of the script here was ripped off from 'Air Force One' which in my view was an infinitely better film and much more plausible despite it's being highly unlikely.

So I give this movie 6 stars because I like Morgan Freeman, Gerard Butler and Aaron Eckhart. They try their best to make it work but in the end you have to wonder after watching the movie themselves they don't regret the choice. Especially for Freeman whose presence in a movie like this obviously has it's roots entirely in the money he's being paid and where his stature lends the credence to get people willing to pay enough to watch it. (Clearly he's a much better actor deserving of more decent roles)
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Conjuring (2013)
8/10
Genuinely scary film unlike the competition...
19 July 2013
I have to admit that the selling point of 'The Conjuring' to me is the fact that it's based on a true story and I think that's what makes the story so disturbing and chilling for the audience.

Unlike films such as 'Paranormal Activity' or 'Insidious' this is not just simply meant to frighten you but to actually make you think about how there are evil spirits out there among us and that stories like this, many of which we probably will never know about, do exist.

The acting was superb and not over done by any means. It's not a fast paced thriller and it's more deliberate pace is the stuff stories are made of in place of a cheap thrill.

There are many pretenders to this genre of film. 'The Conjuring' is most certainly an original and a must-see.
0 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Colony (I) (2013)
4/10
One of the worst films I've paid to see in years...
29 April 2013
While I do believe the story line here had tremendous potential, hence the reason I went to see 'The Colony' in the first place, the whole experience truly was a let down. The plot line was far too predictable and reminiscent of '30 Days of Night' which was a far superior cinematic experience for the genre.

'The Colony' left many unanswered questions from beginning to end, like how the climate truly turned so cold based on man-made weather stations to the point in the movie where it seemed this effect was being reversed. By the end of the film I hoped we'd get some answers on that score but that was left hanging.

And of course what led to the entire break down of civilization as a whole which is the underlying story of this movie beyond the clichéd explanation that people will do almost anything under great stress doesn't go far enough.

I think in the end I was looking for a more intelligent film which is what actors like Laurence Fishburne and Bill Paxton have brought to projects in the past, I'm a little surprised they agreed to do this film on the script alone.

4 Stars
37 out of 76 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
An interesting take on a real life story...
9 October 2010
To me this film is essentially your average made-for-TV production that isn't really memorable in one way or another. I'm not going to go into the acting, direction or overall plausibility of the storyline as other reviewers have except to say that this movie is basically a telling of the real life relationship between President John F. Kennedy and a Washington socialite named Mary Pinchot Meyer.

Meyer had been introduced to Kennedy some years back through various acquaintances, namely Ben Bradlee of the Washington Post fame who at that time was a reporter for Newsweek magazine and Bradlee was in fact married to Mary's sister, Tony. Mary Meyer had in fact been married to a CIA operative named Cord Meyer who as portrayed in this movie was once the idealistic and now cynical and alcoholic ex-husband still looking for a chance to reunite with his wife. Mary was also indeed an exceptionally attractive woman in her day and was artistic as depicted in this film by Gretchen Mol's character. The existence of a diary detailing the nature of the relationship with Kennedy was very much real in 1963-1964 for Mary Meyer and upon her death nearly a year after Kennedy was assassinated, CIA operatives were intent on retrieving the diary for the potentially explosive information it contained not only about the affair but also on Agency operations with a view to the idea that JFK shared secrets with Meyer that may have ultimately resulted in his assassination.

The plot of 'An American Affair' does indeed follow this real-life story nearly to the letter and the mystery surrounding Mary Meyer's death lingers today for those that believed she knew much more and indeed let on she knew who might have been responsible for the President's death. That is very much implied in this movie, but I can't help but think this could've been such a great film with a better script. It truly has all the ingredients of being a love story, political thriller and mystery wrapped up in one.

6 out of 10.
13 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Karla (2006)
6/10
A difficult film to watch...
23 October 2007
Being Canadian and the fact this film isn't widely available up here I feel compelled to offer some comment on what many consider a tragic story exploited for financial gain to no end.

Those of us that lived this story back in the early 1990's and the subsequent trial of Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka can attest to the degree of disgust many felt at the crimes these two committed. The film is accurate in many respects as to details of the story, but make no mistake that the details were far more sadistic and brutal than what has been portrayed in this movie. At least to those of us that have read the transcripts of the videotapes that Bernardo took of his victims, and one can hardly blame the director from omitting those details or forcing an actor to play such a role out.

My only beef with this movie however is that it does attempt to paint a picture of Karla Homolka being just as much a victim here as Bernardo, and although no one can deny she was under his influence and subject to this violent outbursts, to suggest she had no control over this situation and simply tagged along for the ride is to suggest that she was just as much a victim of Bernardo as the two murder victims. Those versed in this case know much better and the role she may have played in the death of Kristen French (aka Kaitlyn Ross) is something we'll likely never know as there are those that suggest she was directly responsible for killing the second victim.

The acting in this film is nothing notable, but given the nature of the roles played here it's wonder they found anyone to play these two to begin with. Because of the difficult subject matter I'll let the mediocre acting pass because for it to be much better would almost be like saying the actors immersed themselves perhaps a little too much in characters that most would find revolting and if not downright sickening.

In the final analysis, 'Karla' is a film you'll only watch once and personally I don't think this was necessarily ever meant to be a movie for mass consumption either at the theatre or your local videostore. That being said, Canadians should have the right to see this movie for those so inclined vs. having the state tell us what is suitable or unsuitable for our viewing pleasure as there are movies out on the market FAR more disturbing about real life events than this flick could ever hope to be.
45 out of 55 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Absolutely fantastic and beyond expectation
25 May 2007
This 3rd installment of the POTC trilogy is by far the BEST in my view. Each character in this movie really gets some serious screen time but more importantly the plot comes together in ways you'd never expect. Critics that pointed out that key characters each had their own plots and treachery weren't kidding. The movie seriously ends on a note you'd never quite expect and that is the genius of this particular installment. I think honestly my favorite character in this now is Lord Beckett, ruthless as he is, Tom Hollander did an excellent job filling out the role of a villain beyond his part in POTC 2. Almost comfortable that he is playing the part.

This I will purchase when it comes out on DVD.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Crash (1996)
2/10
Worst movie I've seen ever...
7 July 2006
And frankly I've never been a fan of James Spader either. I've always thought he was partial to B-movies both for their poor acting and generally shoddy story lines.

In 'Crash' all I see here is an excuse for Spader to get it on with the likes of Rosanna Arquette, Holly Hunter and Deborah Unger. Beyond that, I fail to see any story line beyond the obvious notion that near death experiences can result in closer physical relationships. Maybe this is true and I've heard as much before in the real world, but frankly I view 'Crash' as nothing short of pornographic in content and more deserving of the 'X' rating. Don't get me wrong, I don't mind a decent sex scene, but this film has one too many that qualify it for the porn shop and not Blockbuster.
1 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Fog (2005)
7/10
The film wasn't that bad...
12 February 2006
Rarely it seems does a horror film get good reviews or scores on a scale of one to ten, but honestly this was a significant improvement over the original in 1980, and unlike the original, this film strived to at least trace the origins of the vengeance enacted on Antonio Bay which gives the viewer a better understanding of the story.

I give this a higher mark of eight simply because as far as contemporary horror films go, this one at least kept me interested and incredibly I didn't find myself laughing like I would during most gore flicks mainly because at least this one tries to take itself seriously, along the lines of 'The Grudge' and 'The Ring' both of which got higher scores than this did by IMDb users.

Give it a try if you're looking for some easy, digestible entertainment and aren't adverse to the horror genre.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
John Q (2002)
8/10
Controversial...
20 October 2003
Although 'John Q' is quite frequently shown as a thriller or suspense movie on digital cable genre channels, it is really a political flick for all intents and purposes. The criticism expressed towards this movie on the part of some is missing the entire point however, and that is the fundamental weakness of the so-called U.S. health care system. A system that sees more than 40 million people without health insurance, and a great deal many more with insufficient coverage for such procedures as heart transplants. We don't hear of people going out and hijacking emergency rooms every day of course, but we do hear stories of families forced to sell practically everything they own in order to cover hospital costs for unforseen catastrophic events. A system driven purely by profit without regard for human compassion is a system badly in need of reform and this movie does a good job of bringing the spotlight on one of the most controversial issues facing the American public and politicians today.

**** out of *****
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Reasonably good movie...
5 October 2003
In essence, 'Maid in Manhattan' is really nothing more than a remake of 'Pretty Woman', however the plot does seem fresh and just a little more realistic in that it could happen.

Not a huge J.Lo fan, but she gives a convincing performance and it's great to see one of my favorite actors, Ralph Fiennes playing a part that suits him equally to the bad guy parts he has played in the past.

Good popcorn and/or date movie.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Path to War (2002 TV Movie)
9/10
Excellent and truly compelling...
4 October 2003
effort at depicting the essence of Lyndon Johnson and his tragic presidency. Michael Gambon is a superb actor and his portrayal of the 36th president is by far the best I've seen yet. Most films depict LBJ as essentially some Texan buffoon without a clue. In reality, Johnson was a superb politician whose hopes and dreams for his country were ultimately thwarted by a war he never wanted in the first place. 'Path to War' shows how a man with all the strength, talent and skill to do potentially great things finds himself losing the battle on both fronts. The war on poverty that he so dearly cared for being defeated by the war in Vietnam, and as his own administration and the country turn against him, the downfall of a political giant.

I would suggest that this film be shown in high school classrooms as a way to educate our young people about LBJ, the man, his times and his legacy. Vilifed though he may be by many, 'Path to War' is truly a fantastic portrayal of the human side of the man and how he struggled to do what he thought was right for his country and for the world.
22 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
RFK (2002 TV Movie)
7/10
Could've been better...
1 October 2003
This depiction of the life and times of Sen. Robert F. Kennedy is a good effort at capturing the essence of the man who might have been the 37th president, however I do believe that the overuse of John Kennedy's shadow throughout this film detracted somewhat from the story. Robert Kennedy did indeed feel the weight of his late brother's legacy after 1963, and the film is correct in showing this, however I would suggest that by 1966-1967, RFK had truly become his own person and the extensive use of JFK's shadow really serves no purpose other than to distract and even annoy. Performances are good overall, but I would agree with others that this film would've been better had it come out shortly after the 1968 assassination.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Not bad. Could've been better.
17 September 2003
This film can't help but make one think that perhaps there is such a person as the 'second gunman' still out there today, and that such a person could indeed come forward before their time was up to tell the truth. The film is exceptionally intelligent in this regard, however I wish it had been filmed in the more traditional sense. The use of camcorders pretty much throughout this film is certainly unique and not as bad as my heading might suggest, but to have made this a film in the traditional manner truly would've made it a 'chilling and terrifying' piece of work. Nonetheless, this is a movie that makes you think and proves yet again, that even 40 years later, the circumstances surrounding JFK's assassination still continues to capture the people's imagination.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Absolutely stupid....
10 September 2003
I saw this movie for the first time the other night, and although I've always liked Lee Marvin as an actor, I've never thought that Chuck Norris could act if is life depended on it. In fact, his performance here is so bad I was agonizing throughout much of the film. Add to that the cheesy theme music they play over and over again during every fight scene, and I'll leave the rest to your imagination.

Fact is that movies like this are about as hollow as they get. Another glorification of the American military and how great the U.S. is, and a total vilification of the concerns of Arabs/Palestinians and their motives. Blow away the bad guys, but don't give any reasons or rationale for terrorist actions in the first place. I take no sides, but movies like this are an insult and lack depth for such a serious issue as terrorism. I think Charles should stick to promoting workout equipment on infomercials and do us all a favor by staying away from the silver screen.
9 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Cute...
18 August 2003
This is essentially a remake of the 1959 Doris Day and Rock Hudson flick "Pillow Talk" with a few twists here and there. I can't help but think in addition to Tony Curtis, an appearance by Doris Day herself would've been a great bonus to this film. Nonetheless, a good movie to watch and certainly one to wax nostalgia over the 1960's. What a decade!
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Probably the worst of the Sinatra films!
16 August 2003
No doubt Frank Sinatra was a talented actor as well as a talented singer. After all, very few actors nowadays can get a scene just right in one take, and that was pretty much Sinatra's modus operandi on set.

I feel that as the 1960's wore on, the quality of the man's films really started to tank. The Tony Rome detective series was nothing short of trying to compete with Dean Martin's Matt Helm series which came out at the same time. Perhaps even a James Bond competition, but nothing really worked for Frank during these years. His personal life in shambles, his music fading out...Sinatra appeared more like a throwback to the 1950's. The last great Sinatra film of this period was probably Von Ryan's Express in 1965.
10 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Counterpoint (1967)
7/10
The movie ain't THAT bad...
20 January 2003
Seriously though, this film is not merely about whether the plot seems ridiculous or whether Maximilliam Schell and Anton Diffring made careers out of playing Nazi 'creeps' The story here is simple and that is that even in time of war and all its attendant horrors, people can still preserve a little of humanity through the appreciation of what lives on eternally. Music. Music such as the pieces highlighted in this movie, the talent of the musicians and the conductor can win over even the most heartless and potentially cruelest of individuals which many Nazi's arguably were at the time. Perhaps above all else 'Counterpoint' is really about how individuals are indeed malleable and can be made to see reason through all the madness. Maybe in this regard it proves that ideology and a belief system can be overidden by emotions and a love for something as beautiful as great music. As an interesting aside it should interest viewers of this film to think of the niece of the great composer Gustav Mahler, Alma Rose who as a Jew was sent to Auschwitz where she eventually died. Gifted violinist that she was even Joseph Mengele was rumoured to have paid her solemn respect after she had died. He was even rumoured to have tried to save her life before it was too late, so perhaps the morale of the story in this 1968 film is indeed relevant to real events of the past.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed