Reviews

11 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
7/10
A mixed bag of soap opera and legitimate education
2 January 2015
Warning: Spoilers
I saw this for the first time yesterday. I started watching it only because Joan Crawford is in it, but I became involved with it when I saw the authentic methods being used to educate Esther at the special school she attended. (I am a retired speech-language pathologist, so I'm familiar with many of the methods shown.)

Where the film started to disgust me was when it became obvious that Rossano Brazzi's character was sexually interested in Esther, yet Joan Crawford's character remained oblivious to it. Wait - let me put this another way -- Joan is aware that Rossano had cheated on her in the past. She is aware that there is an attractive (non-related) teenager in the house. She has begun to have suspicions about Rossano's manipulations of the whole charity/money- skimming situation (which should have been a red flag, all by itself, about the man's moral deficiencies.) Most especially, Joan has apparently never explained to her the need to make sure that when she undresses, she needs to be behind closed doors/curtains. (Just because Esther can't see, doesn't mean that she can't BE seen.)

To me, the worst betrayal of all is that when Joan realizes that Esther has been raped, and she doesn't IMMEDIATELY call the police!

Okay - I realize that I might be laying 21st-century sensibilities onto mid-20th century ones, when the film was made, an age when NO ONE publicly discussed issues of sexual abuse, incest, or abuse. But it still bothers me that Joan not only failed to protect Esther (since she was, in effect, her adoptive mother), but failed to get justice for what happened to her. (Unless you think it's justice for both her and her husband to have been killed.)

As to the very end of the story, I think it's fine that the details are slightly ambiguous. The important thing for us to know is that Esther is going to try to make things right, as best she can, by telling the truth as she knows it. We can only hope that the audience doesn't throw rotten food at her, or rip her apart...
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Too violent
14 June 2014
The animation is SPECTACULAR, and so is the soundtrack, and there are some very amusing moments. However, there is a great deal of violence - well, more the THREAT of violence - which I find inappropriate in a children's movie. Look - "101 Dalmatians" had plenty of that threatened violence, too, but in "Dragon," we actually SEE the boy brandishing a knife, hear him trying to talk himself into killing the dragon and removing the heart to give to his father. (You KNOW that won't happen, but the concept is way too scary for a young child, IMHO.) Yes, I know I tend to be a wuss about these things, and standards are rapidly changing, but I would have rated it PG-13.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Sleepers (1996)
7/10
SPOILER ALERT! Very good film, BUT....
18 February 2013
Warning: Spoilers
This film is very well done, of course, being in the capable hands of Barry Levinson and a fantastic cast. I was pulled into it 100% until the trial. I find it not only hard to believe, but IMPOSSIBLE to believe, that any lawyer, under ANY circumstances, could ever have gotten the prison guard/witness/friend/co-worker of the murder victim to admit to the abuses that he committed (along with the murder victim) while a guard at the reform school. In my opinion, anyone as callous and cold-hearted as he was, as a multi-repeater rapist and torturer of children, wouldn't have even a shred of humanity left wherein he could be made to feel guilty in a court room. So that's where this movie fell apart for me.
44 out of 49 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Propaganda for Jesus
29 September 2012
I gave this film 2 stars just because it's always interesting to me to see real-life footage from the past, as well as to hear the various crime statistics of the age, in this case, 1962.

The film starts out by explaining how modern society (1962) has a lot in common with Ancient Rome and its eventual decay and downfall. We have readily-available divorce; "out-of-wedlock" births by young teenagers; gang violence; drug abuse; Americans cheating on tax returns; etc., all of which the film calls "sins of the heart."

The remedy? The ONLY remedy for society's problems, according to this film, is to accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior. That will cure everything. They want Jesus in everyday life, including in our schools.

I wonder what the film's producers would have said could they have looked into the future and seen the huge ramping-up nowadays of all the sins highlighted in the film! Also, what would they have said had they known about the widespread betrayal of trust and innocence by priests and other male role models that we are now so aware of!

All in all, the film is an interesting religious propaganda oddity and nothing more.
8 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
A life, illustrated
29 September 2012
TCM showed "The Sid Saga," Parts 1,2 and 3 tonight. I missed Part 1 but caught the last half of Part 2 and all of Part 3. So, even though this review is showing up for Part 3 only, I'm really giving my opinion of all that I saw.

If you don't like home movies, then this isn't for you. It's really an autobiography, told through still pictures, artifacts, and home movies over all of the eight decades of Sid's life, with Sid providing the narration. Sid had quite an interesting life with many interesting jobs, including one-man band, inventor, designer, nature filmmaker and more. He was married three times, and each of those marriages added color to his story. Sid was a really bright and creative guy who also had great handyman and make-do skills. It seems that everything he did, he did well, and with joy.

Perhaps it's Sid's straight delivery that makes his story so charming. His vocal demeanor doesn't change, whether it's bad or good things that happen. The events themselves, the pictures and videos, allow us to impose our own emotions on them.

It's just the story of A Life. It could be anyone's life, I suppose, except for the details. Sid's journey is like many people's journeys, with joys and disappointments and achievements. His story is just more interesting than most (in my opinion.)

In some ways, I am reminded of "Crazy Quilt," a WONDERFUL-but- impossible-to-find-anywhere little film from the early 1960s that also showed us a man's life without embellishment. It, also, was charming, just like Sid's story is. I still think of "Crazy Quilt" sometimes and wish I could see it again; I'm sure I'll be remembering Sid's story now, too.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Maytime (1937)
8/10
GWTW shared rooms?
27 August 2012
I'm watching this for the first time, on TCM. I've always been a huge fan of Lehar's "The Merry Widow," and it's a treat seeing Maurice Chevalier in his prime! That being said, however, the reason I came to IMDb just now was that the ballroom that the first big dance scene took place in looked awfully familiar! (The ballroom with lots of columns.) I think it's the same room that was used in GWTW when Scarlett was widowed and she wound up dancing with Rhett in public at the CSA fundraiser. So I came here to see whether or not they were both produced at the same studio - MGM. They were, so I think I'm probably right. (Also, the upstairs bedroom in "Maytime" looks very much like one of the bedrooms in GWTW, and the table area of that first ballroom in "Maytime" reminds me of the restaurant where Rhett and Scarlett ate dinner while on their honeymoon in New Orleans. I'll be curious whether anyone else has noticed these similarities of locations. Thanks!

P.S. To the people who complained that this movie isn't available on DVD, I saw some paid ads at the bottom of IMDb's page for this film on DVD. But I didn't check them out.
0 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Do Sarah Palin types channel Lonesome Rhodes...?
7 December 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Andy Griffith's performance in this film is an absolute revelation to anyone who thinks he was born to always play the good-natured small town sheriff in his TV show. His performance in "A Face In The Crowd" is a true tour de force, a spot-on characterization of a man who starts out with 'aw gosh' charm and originality, but becomes a power-mad, jaded, user/abuser of everyone around him. Griffith's charisma and acting power in this film are truly remarkable!

Budd Schulberg's script is absolute genius! This is more than just the journey of one man and the woman who has the misfortune to love him; he insinuates that Lonesome Rhodes (or any charming/disarming character) has the potential to become dangerous if he starts believing in the hero worship that an adoring public provides.(Or is it that the public itself is dangerous, since they can be so easily fooled and misled?)

Watching the "makeover" of the Presidential candidate in the movie - giving him the superficial appearance of someone who is folksy, simple, and a man of the people (in stark contrast to his actual stuffed-shirt personality) was truly chilling, since the candidate actually had only contempt for the public, saying that they needed to be told what to think, and couldn't possibly know on their own what is good for them. The candidate's handlers also used religion as a political tool (still a very familiar ploy in 2010, unfortunately!)

This area of the movie seemed truly prescient to me. It reminded me a lot of the down-home folksiness of someone like Sarah Palin, as just one example of a politician whose "simple talk" belies raging ambition and power lust; someone who makes a living by mocking educated and sophisticated people in power, and pledging that they, themselves, could never be so uncaring about "The People." Lonesome Rhodes' idea for 'jes' plain folk' sittin' 'round the cracker barrel talking' 'bout whatever they feel like, even politics - couldn't help but remind me not only of Palin, but also of some of the shows on Fox News, which claim to represent the voice of 'The People,' but which are known to do their darnedest to manipulate what 'The People' think.

I'm not saying much about Elia Kazan's direction simply because he has always been my favorite director. I can't possibly write anything that does justice to his directing genius. (And I wonder if any other director could have helped Andy Griffith reach into his guts and soul to come up with that mind-blowing performance!) It's also noteworthy to see Lee Remick's screen debut as a nubile teenager whose eyes seduce Lonesome Rhodes even before her baton-twirling performance does (complete with total head-to-ground back-bend.)

I think the ultimate message in this movie is that not only does power corrupt, but it is for sale to the person who can best manipulate the public. THAT is as dangerous today, in 2010, as it was when Schulberg wrote the script for this great film.

As someone else pointed out on these boards, it is really shocking that Andy Griffith didn't receive a Best Actor nomination, or Kazan a nomination for Best Director, the film for Best Movie, etc. I think it's because of strictly political reasons, this movie having been made towards the end of the Blacklist era, and both Schulberg and Kazan had testified before the HUAC. I don't know. It's simply a great film - one which I enjoy re-watching every few years, and which always gives me fresh insights and enjoyment.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Team Picture (2007)
1/10
Complete waste of time!
23 November 2008
If I hadn't been able to start folding socks midway through this bore-fest, I would've fallen asleep. I love indies, but this one was pointless, meaningless, and with characters I couldn't care about. A complete waste of time and resources. I can't imagine why anyone gave this flick high marks unless they were the family and friends of the filmmakers. I would rather watch dustballs grow under a bed rather than have to sit through this mind-numbingly bad flick again. Oh - apparently, this review won't be accepted until I add a few more lines of text, so I'll just add meaningless, boring words until it hits the minimum (kinda like the flick.) Boring, sad, pathetic, waste, mundane, mumbling, soporific, blah, feh, and phooey. Now let me try again.
6 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Great Performances: The Most Happy Fella (1980)
Season Unknown, Episode Unknown
10/10
Update: Broadway at its BEST!
26 December 2006
I'm updating my original 2006 review to say that I just finished watching the 2-DVD set that I recently purchased from Jim Berg, who has kindly made it available to us TMHF lovers. The DVDs are professionally printed and look quite good. Best of all, the quality of the recording itself is excellent! No, of course the video isn't up to today's HD/Hi-Def quality we've become used to, but when you consider that this was transferred from a Betamax tape; recorded at home by an amateur; from a live TV broadcast; made over 30 years ago; it's really excellent!

Almost the entire show looks and sounds smooth and great, but there's a kind of "pop" (I don't know what else to call it) around 20 minutes before the end of the show. Fortunately, the show still goes on to completion, albeit with a slightly different look and subtle sound quality difference -- still quite watchable, however. (I don't mean to complain; I just want to be as accurate and honest as I can. Anyone who was around in the Betamax days probably knows what I'm talking about here, since the taping process was dependent on mechanical means, rather than digital, so it was subject to problems unknown today.)

So -- that minor complaint aside, this recording is an absolute TREAT for the soul, with a production worthy of watching again and again. In fact, I'm going to order another set from Jim to send to my daughter, who's a big fan of Broadway musicals and will surely appreciate the rare genius and musical complexity of this unforgettable gem of a show.

I had recently been fortunate enough to see an excellent off- Broadway production in NYC of this great show just a few years ago. Short of being able to see such a live production whenever I feel like it, having this 2-disc set is the next best thing!

------------------

This was first shown on PBS in 1980 (before the widespread availability of home video recording machines) so I wasn't able to make a copy for myself. I'd always been a fan of the Original Broadway Cast double- LP album, but this production just about blew me away! I think it was done live on-stage by a community troupe somewhere in Texas. I know that PBS recorded it because it was shown twice that week in 1980...

Musically, this cast was as good as, or even superior to, the audio talent on the LP. Seeing it on the home screen also showed its wonderful choreography, dancers, lighting, costumes, scenery, direction, and musical direction.

Frank Loesser's music was and remains inventive, satisfying, original, and altogether wonderful. So many hummable tunes, such as "Standing On The Corner," "Big 'D'" and so many more! There is lots and lots of music, it having filled up 4 LP sides on the original cast album, which didn't even include a lovely balletic piece shown in this version.

Written in the 1950s I think, the story still holds up, as it deals with issues similar to online dating nowadays, wherein someone isn't completely honest in their pre-meeting communications. It deals with issues of loneliness, age, physical appearance, family, and even pregnancy. It has elements of comedy and tragedy, sin and forgiveness, love and acceptance.

It's a fabulous show I've never forgotten, and I'd give anything to be able to have a video copy of it to watch over and over again! 10**********!
11 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Revolutionary (1995 Video)
4/10
Not quite the worst
19 December 2006
I wouldn't call it the WORST film ever - I mean, have you ever seen "They Saved Hitler's Brain"? At least this one makes an effort at scene continuity.

Compared to "Hitler's Brain", this one is a masterpiece of costuming, direction, editing, plot, and photography. It is an adequate film to teach the uninitiated and unsophisticated viewer about the basics in the life (and crucifixion) of Jesus.

Not much else to say!

For some weird reason, IMDb is making me add lines of text (HAVE TO BE 10, THEY ARE TELLING ME!) in order to submit my comments. I think that's silly. Anyone else ever notice this and found it to be a problem?
2 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Monkeybone (2001)
9/10
Imaginative, original, fun; an Alice in Wonderland for grownups!
6 January 2005
Warning: Spoilers
What's wrong with the other folks who wrote to pan this film??? Where's their sense of humor, their appreciation both of the absurd and the original? This has got to be one of the most imaginative, fun, and well-done fantasy flicks I've ever seen!

First off, Brendan Fraser and Bridget Fonda are two of the most talented, sexy and gorgeous actors in the world. They are just about perfect in this film. I can't recall ever seeing Bridget Fonda in a comedy before, but she is as good in this film as she is in her most dramatic roles. Brendan Frasier never disappoints either, no matter what kind of film he's in. In this go-round, he is absolutely flawless as both Stu and Monkeybone. (Why is great comedic acting usually so under-rated?)

Speaking of comedy, I've never been much of a fan of Chris Kattan, but seeing him as a corpse walking with a broken neck has got to be one of the funniest physical comedy bits I've ever seen in my life. He injects new life (!?) into the film near its end, just when you think that there can't possibly be any more wild surprises left!

And how can ANYONE not laugh at first seeing what the "Little Jack Horner" monkey toy can do??? I almost fell off my chair laughing!

Unlikely creatures abound in Stu's unconscious! They are as fun to watch as any I've ever seen in A Nightmare Before Christmas, Beetlejuice, or any other fantasy flicks I've ever seen. They are brought to life seamlessly by teams of brilliant animators. I think the very best one is the rolling, scrawny-legged egg-shaped body they gave to Giancarlo Esposito, another terrific actor I had no idea would be so funny in a comedic role.

I had this flick on in the background while waiting for Larry King's show (!) to start in an hour, but, after the first very silly ten minutes or so, I found myself paying full attention to this movie in spite of myself. I got drawn in by the terrific actors, the outrageous situations, and the amazing animation.

There are some great rock songs in the soundtrack, too.

I really can't understand why anyone wouldn't be amused by this most unusual, fun flick! Yes, it has some sophomoric humor, but so what? I think that everyone just needs to sit back and enjoy, and not read too deeply into what they're watching. Let the child in you be amazed by the nightmarish visions and the endless visual surprises.

I think I just might go and buy my own copy of Monkeybone!

***
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed