Reviews

6 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
5/10
Please excuse me while I commit cinematic sacrilege
6 June 2001
As it is clearly demonstrated even in this forum, many, many people love this movie. I just finished viewing it myself for the first time, and frankly, I can't say that I agree. Am I nuts? Maybe. All I know is I'd like to put my two cents in, for what it's worth.

For an espionage tale like this, I would have preferred an approach more based on grim realism. Instead, the narrative seemed a bit too convenient and contrived, as if Old Hitch was trying to make the ends meet at the last minute. Somehow, I never felt the `taut' tension of his other films that I've immensely enjoyed (Dial M for Murder, Rear Window, Psycho, The Wrong Man, Vertigo, to name but a few). It certainly doesn't help that the film contains too many scenes that verge on the `fantastical' level. For example, there's a scene in which a gun goes off in the living room of a house. Eva Marie Saint comes out of her room and asks, `What was that noise,' to which James Mason replies, `We were just wondering about that.' Martin Landau just gives a little shrug and all is forgotten. I mean, come on! I'd say it's pretty hard to mistake a gunshot for, say, somebody dropping a glass on the floor. As I mentioned, there are many more scenes like this during the course of the movie, and every single one of them acts as a ‘decelerator' of the narrative. Also, the overall performance of the cast struck me as rather underwhelming, especially when we're talking about some of the finest actors ever to grace the silver screen. James Mason, in particular, sleepwalks his way through, though I can't blame him, given the fact that his character was so painfully underwritten. The bit when Cary Grant acts like he's drunk was pretty difficult to sit through. Humor is fine when it works on, again, a believable level.

I like the idea of having a normal Joe get tangled up in a case of mistaken identity/international espionage. Also, it does feature some memorable scenes, especially the famous crop field/airplane sequence (it really does deserve all the praise it has received) But again, it just proves to me that even a seemingly sure-fire combo like Ernest Lehman-Alfred Hitchcock can still come up short on the goods.

The second 007 adventure, `From Russia with Love', received some hounding because people thought it was basically a rip-off of this movie (there are some obvious similarities), but in this madman's humble opinion, `From Russia with Love' is the one that achieves a better telling of a spy story.
68 out of 116 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Nothing Original, But...
21 February 2001
The kind of movie that really relies on audience participation. I saw this at a theater with my girlfriend and I can tell you her "reaction" was what made it an enjoyable experience for me.

All the punches are telegraphed way ahead, and Zemeckis even throws in the standard "Oh, it's only the cat" trick, but if you're lucky enough to be sitting next to somebody who'll scream his/her head off, none of the faults will matter. Good, campy fun.
0 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Just Say No
21 February 2001
I'd heard it wasn't a good movie, but I rented it anyway because I ran out of options at the local video rental. Bad call. Rob Reiner, who usually is good at making catchy comedies, fails miserably this time around.

It's a shame because it tends to taint all the quirky, fun memories that the delightful "When Harry Met Sally..." offered a decade ago. Bad script, bad direction, bad acting equals bad movie. Every acting "effort" in this movie pretty much sucks, but special mention must go to Rita Wilson (AKA Mrs. Hanks). I had no idea she was this bad. I'd never seen her in a movie before and now I know why.
0 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Waiting for Kaye's counter-punch...
23 September 1999
For a film that was clearly intended to be a jolting social commentary about the serious state of racial tension in contemporary America, I found it to be oddly lacking in any real dramatic `kick'. To be sure, it does have all the elements that should have added up to a classic tale of an `American Tragedy'---skinheads, guns, betrayal, and the final price of redemption---but somehow the end result seems all too neat and clear-cut (`black-and-white,' if you will) to be totally convincing.

The acting, as advertised, was very, very good. Edward Norton did a fine job of rendering a believable (despite the shortcomings of the script) portrait of a troubled, yet bright and sensitive young man, and does deserve all the credit he has received. Having said that, I must say that it was the other Edward who really gave me a pleasant surprise. Furlong's role as Danny is by no means as showy as Norton's, but his performance was every bit as impressive. By bringing a rich mixture of quiet intensity and genuine sense of innocence to the role, Furlong has made Danny into someone very `real', someone you would actually care for---the sweet boy next door who's going through a rough, confusing period.

Stacy Keach is one veteran who is always dependable, and in this film, he is chilling, dangerous, and oddly hilarious all at once. Good show for him! In fact, I liked everyone's performance with the exception of one: Avery Brooks as Dr. Sweeney. I do acknowledge the fact that he's supposed to be the strict-but-fair `guardian angel', and must therefore carry a certain measure of `weight of authority' in playing this role, but boy, there is such a thing called `overdoing it'. Frankly, he looked so stiff and uncomfortable that I began to suspect that maybe his suit was too heavily starched. It's a shame because Brooks is actually a good actor who hasn't been too lucky in getting meaningful roles such as this one.

All in all, the film is a solid one, the superb acting compensating for the lack of depth in terms of story development. It is a well-known fact that director Tony Kaye tried to get his name off the whole project due to `creative differences'. I have no way of telling, but I vaguely suspect that he was aiming for a direction that would have been more in line with what I had expected to see in this film. It would be interesting if he decides to tell his version by releasing a `director's cut' at some point.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Mummy (1999)
Horror-Lite
11 September 1999
I must agree with the many users who wrote that it's more or less entertaining as long as you check your brains at the entrance. Sure, it's totally ludicrous, but hey, why do people watch cartoons on TV?

Throughout the whole movie, I was very much impressed with one thing: Arnold Vasloo's screen presence. To me, it was the only thing that gave the film a "sense of gravity". Given the fact that the man hasn't had much luck in getting good roles until this one, it'll be interesting to see what he'll do next.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Heat (1995)
Miami Vice - Revisited
11 September 1999
As director Michael Mann has showed us over the years, he certainly has a highly developed sense of style. While watching this movie, I was constantly reminded of his hit 80's TV series, "Miami Vice". As many will remember, the show became a massive success not because its story line was something totally different than other Cops-n-Robbers shows, but rather because of its creative, original visual style.

The same logic can be applied to this movie as well. By adding a great shoot-out scene (really, one of the very best action sequences ever shot---right there with the car-chase scene from "French Connection") to the enhanced glitter of LA, and tossing in two of best actors of our generation, Mann has come up with a pretty impressive package. (At least, it was impressive enough to keep me engaged throughout the entire movie, which, by the way, is not a short one.) As for the story, there were a couple of "holes" in it and the development for the supporting characters was a bit weak, but considering the amount of attention given to the "style" side of the film, I can't say it came as a surprise. Even so, I wouldn't go so far as to say it isn't "solid". It is indeed that. All I'm saying is that it's not something I haven't seen before.

At least my eyes and ears had a real treat, which is more than I can say for a lot of movies out there.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed