Shark Tale 2004

2/5

Well, I don't regret seeing it, but "Finding Nemo" rip-off is indeed what it was despite a totally different story and animation style. The best part of it was the voices; I'd recommend seeing it just to hear De Nero and Scorsese together. Will Smith is always good and no less than outstanding here, and the Jamaican jellyfish are a hoot. I didn't know until after the movie was over that they were voiced by real Jamaicans; no wonder they sounded so good! Everyone else was adequate, though I found some of them (Renee and Jack in particular) to be rather bland.

Although I am a huge animation fan, it won't be one that goes in our collection. It really was too reminiscent of "Finding Nemo" which kept distracting me all through the movie as well as some plot holes you could drive a whale through, such as why they take elevators up and down the skyscrapers when they could just swim...!

The animation stood up to Dreamworks' standard, that much is for sure. I'd say see it just for the voices and animation if you don't have to pay more than a couple bucks for the rental, but don't expect much from the story. If you do see it, though, be sure to sit through the credits; the nutty hermit crab has some memorable moments.

Undercurrent 1946

3/5

This is a little-known film with Katharine Hepburn, Robert Taylor, and Robert Mitchum. It reminded me very much of "Notorious" in tone and style, though NOT plot. It was mildly predictable, though sometimes when you thought you knew what was going on, they did something to make you doubt what you were thinking. Very nicely done overall, with outstanding acting from the three leads and well-wrapped-up at the end but with a neat hint of uncertainly as well. I highly recommend it if you like Kate Hepburn in particular, or just this type of post-WWII mystery-type movie in general.

Return to Snowy River 1988 SPOILERS

3/5

Well, unlike the other Netflix reviews said, I did not find this one better than the first. It was a worthy sequel and definitely no worse, but the one thing that kept hanging me up was Brian Dennehy. He's not a bad actor, but he certainly couldn't fill Kirk Douglas' shoes even if the man can ride a horse. I didn't buy him in that role, but as Joe said, at least they didn't try to also have him do the nutty brother.

And the movie was in fullscreen, ARGH! All those gorgeous shots of horses racing across mountain meadows with the most incredible scenery all around them... and 1/3 of it missing. Bleah.

As with the first it was a beautifully shot movie with a true feel for horses and good interaction between the people (except for poor out-of-his-league Brian D), and the land is as much a character as the people or animals. The story continued along well except for the (spoilers) below...

The big plot hole that we both noticed was the young couple "living in sin". When her father forces her to make a choice between him and Jim, she chooses Jim and goes to live in his mountain cabin with him. They're not shown being married or anything despite the noticeable mention of a priest in town earlier in the film. So, this is the mid-to-late 1800s and this fine young couple are just living together up there? I think not! This was bad editing as its finest as they removed the "wedding" scene for time as I found out in the extras. It was a huge goof, though, because they do such good work on the period feel. There's also a "suspend reality" bit where Jim saddles up and rides the wild stallion that had me shaking my head, but he had been domesticated once so maybe, just maybe, that could have happened... but I doubt it.

There were also a couple of recycled bits from the first, including Jim's awesome downhill ride with a horrible interruption that had me wincing; not quite sure how they did that one without hurting either the horse or stunt rider, but apparently they did.

I'd say that if you enjoyed the first one do see this one, but don't expect as much.

De-Lovely 2004

4/5

What a lovely movie, no pun intended but true. It's the story of Cole Porter and his wife, Linda; what makes it noteworthy besides the wonderful songs he wrote is that he was very openly gay. At first I wasn't too sure about the format, which has Jonathan Pryce as an angel (?) guiding him back through his life. But as the movie moved on, it really began to work for me. Ashley Judd was phenomenal, though both Joe and I agreed that they didn't age her as well as they did Kevin Kline, who turns in one of the best roles of his career. His makeup was so well-done that I thought they'd pulled a "League of Their Own" trick where they dub the younger actor's voice over an older one, though later I could tell it was Kline. The real-life singers doing his songs as part of the movie was very nicely done, though I could have listened to Alanis Morissette and Natalie Cole for more than one song. I didn't know much about Cole Porter other than some of his songs from musicals before seeing this, and I highly recommend it. I'm still not quite sure why it was rated PG-13, though, other than one scene of an obviously-naked man under a sheet that Kline kisses before leaving the room. Pretty tame stuff, IMHO.

Shakespeare in Love 1998

4/5

I'd wanted to see this one for a while and it didn't disappoint when we finally rented it. The chemistry between Paltrow and Fiennes is fantastic, which is mostly the icing on the cake for this wonderfully done movie. The period look and feel is perfect, and both Joe and I agree that with how good Ben Affleck is in this one it's a shame he's been in so many clinkers lately. He needs to fire his agent and go back to working with Damon and/or Smith, IMHO. It does lose one star for trying to make us believe that Paltrow could hide all that billowing hair under a small brown wig.

A Nightmare on Elm Street 1984

4/5

I haven't seen this movie since it first played on cable back around '85-'86, and I was stoned the first and only time I watched it. Since I no longer do drugs, or even drink, I was quite curious as to how it would be 20+ years later while I'm straight and sober.

It was cool!

I had forgotten both how lame most of the acting is (the mother could be out-acted by J-Lo, for cryin out loud!) and how actually un-frightening the overall movie is, though it has its jump and neato gore moments. Still, I very much enjoyed it and will probably buy it depending on whether or not there's a better DVD as this one didn't have any extras on it. I'd like to see how they did some of the effects, I mean the fountain of blood and Bathtub of Terror were kinda obvious but I'd still like to see exactly what they did. I also counted while the burning Freddy was on the screen and was rather surprised to see several 6-to-10 second unbroken shots, which is a bit longer than usual for a movie with this budget. Impressive even if you can see the stuntman's flame-retardant suit, mask, and gloves under the flames.

I didn't remember much of it at all, and didn't even recognize Johnny Depp until my son walked by and said, "Is that Johnny Depp?!" and so it was. I caught a couple of huge goofs, all of which are already in IMDb and then some I didn't catch. The only thought I had that no one else mentioned is that it probably took Nancy longer than 20 minutes to booby-trap the house, but as they say, it was just a movie... or was that, "it's just a dream"?

The Truman Show 1998

5/5

I hadn't seen this movie since its original release in the theater and had forgotten how beautifully made it is, esp. the music. I've since become a big fan of Laura Linney after seeing "Mothman", and was tickled to spot Peter Krause (Six Feet Under) in a very tiny role as I've never seen him in anything else. I wish Ed Harris had had more screen time but what he does get, he uses to full advantage. And what more can be said about Jim Carrey... good or bad, silly or serious, the man keeps your eyes on him. I haven't seen some of his goofier roles (Ace Ventura, Dumb & Dumber) but have enjoyed his performances in "Liar Liar", "Bruce Almighty", and even the sometimes outright annoying syrupy-sweet "The Majestic" and the darkly weird "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind". I know there are plot holes in this movie, but I really don't care as it unfolds because I'm too busy caring about the characters. What more can one ask for?

Finding Neverland 2004

4/5

Joe and I watched "Finding Neverland" last night and all I can say is--WOW! Want to see a tearjerker? Watch this movie and if you can not cry at the end, you're a better being than me. Whew! I was still choked up when I went to bed about a half-hour after the movie ended.

I swear, Johnny Depp gets better with every movie and he really meshed with Kate Winslet, who I thought was outstanding in "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind" (despite it being a freaking weird-ass movie) and the best thing next to Kathy Bates' cameo in the much-hated "Titanic". The kids were also very good, and Dustin Hoffman's part is small but noticeable. After having seen the worst romance of the decade in the last 3 Star Wars films I've learned to enjoy a good chemistry in a love story, and these two had it.

The Day After 1983

5/5

Those who know me, know I'm an apocalypse movie nut. I don't care what destroys the earth-- zombies, plague, nukes, aliens, comets, weather, whatever--it's the end of civilization as we know it that fascinates me. Among my favorite movies are Romero's "Dead" series, "Independence Day", "The Stand", "On the Beach", etc. I finally got around to watching "The Day After", a TV-movie from 1983 about what would happen in a nuclear exchange between the U.S. and Russia. I had caught this movie on TV a couple years back, but it was chopped up and with commercials and didn't remember a lot of it. I'd bought it a few weeks back in a Best Buy DVD-buying spree and since forgotten about it.

Well, am not feeling real good today (of course, I have a show tomorrow) and decided to rest this morning. When browsing through our 200+ DVD collection I spotted it and thought, "Hey, that's just the thing for a grey rainy fall day when I feel lousy!"

You know, I almost wish I had watched "Phantasm" instead, which is the other movie that I was considering. That may be a cheap bad horror flick, but at least there's some levity in it! I had totally forgotten what a completely dark, hopeless, bleak movie "Day After" is. I remembered bits and pieces, but don't think I've seen the entire thing since it originally aired in 1983. Trust me, 20 years hasn't weakened the power of this movie, which beats both "Independence Day" and "The Stand" for sheer emotional impact in less shots and with barely any EFX. The only other movie I think that comes close is "Terminator II" when Sarah dreams about nuclear war and you see the playground get destroyed. While "ID4" and "Stand" have longer shots and better effects, I think it's the quick, almost jittery shots of the destruction during "Day's" strikes that hit me so hard. When the nukes actually hit, it's a still shot of cars on the freeway with Kansas City in the background and what looks like computer-generated mushroom clouds drawn in. Sound silly? It isn't, trust me.

A lot of it, too, is Jason Robards' amazing performance and the good makeup job by the effects team. He doesn't yell and scream or hog the screen, and it's his understated agony that sells it all. His final scene, the last of the movie, is probably one of the best I have ever seen from any actor. The gradual degeneration of the people who were exposed to radiation is incredibly well done, with excellent continuity that puts recent blockbusters to shame.

I had tears running down my face within half an hour of the end of the movie, and was outright sobbing by the end. I do tend to get emotional over movies, but this one really hit me hard for some reason. I think that part of it is that I grew up in Detroit in the '60s and '70s and was taught that if there was a nuclear war, we'd be among the first to get hit. To this day if I see a radiation symbol I shudder, and get cold chills at the sound of an air-raid siren.

You want to hear the weirdest part? On the day of the attack, one of the radio announcers in the movie mentions that the date is September 16th. Guess what today is.

The Pirate 1948

4/5

On Sunday afternoon we watched this movie, which features Gene Kelly and Judy Garland, directed by Vincente Minnelli, songs by Cole Porter. I rec'd the 3-disk set of "That's Entertainment" for Christmas and it was while watching them that Joe and I realized that we'd never actually sat down and watched a MGM musical. Well, my mother was a huge fan of the Nelson Eddy/Jeanette MacDonald operettas but when I watched them with her as a child it usually wasn't voluntary if you know what I mean.

So we sat down to really watch this movie, which we taped off TCM on TiVo, to see what we thought of the lavish old MGM musicals. To our surprise, we enjoyed it! We did do quite a bit of heckling, but it wasn't mean or disgusted if you know what I mean. More noting some things like the wire holding up Gene as he does his tightrope act, gauze over the lens during every blasted single one of Judy's close-ups, or the actors' shadows falling on the "Caribbean sea" which was a matte painting. It wasn't as boring or outright stupid as I thought it might be, though it really doesn't stand up to the dramas of the time as far as story and acting goes. Still, it was a cute movie and the occasional song didn't distract from the plot or toss you out of the movie's world. And who can resist Gene Kelly?! Not only his dancing, but his acting was outstanding. He and Judy had really good chemistry, which helped a lot. They literally struck sparks off each other and I sure wish they'd had more dance numbers together.

I'd say that if you're curious about the old musicals and have never seen one, this is a good one to start with. I never much liked musicals before this, including new ones like "Moulin Rouge", but this one had a spirit and innocence that was very appealing. Now I really understand the appeal of the old MGM musicals, and we have several more ("An American in Paris", "Brigadoon", and "Singing in the Rain") lined up to be watched sometime soon. I'm very much looking forward to it.

AVP: Alien VS Predator 2004 SPOILERS

4/5

No, I had not seen this movie yet and yes, I'm not too good to watch it.

I love both the original Alien and Predator movies, as well as "Aliens", although I don't admit the existence of any other sequels. I also enjoy a good action-adventure movie esp. if it doesn't have too much realistic violence, so I thought this might be a good match. Regardless, I went into this movie with very low expectations.

And they were met, kazowie were they ever met!

I've never read the comic books or played the video game, so I knew nothing about this movie other than what the title implies. So I have to admit that I was not only satisfied by the title-promised fight sequences, I was quite pleased overall by the movie. The best way to describe it, IMHO, is, "it is what it is". "Lawrence of Arabia" on ice it's not, but a good fun rousing monster movie it is. There's monsters of all sorts all over the place with nods to reasoning and plot, but wisely there's not much time spent on trying to explain the long-awaited meeting of the critters. It also has a short run-time and pretty much jumps to the action, so you really don't have much time to get bored. Although, I do have to admit, some of the rather silly plot holes had us all remarking on them and, at times, laughing out loud. All in good fun!

My favorite scene is a toss-up between the Predator swinging the Alien around by the tail, or the scene where Alexa gets the mark for her Alien kill. I found myself cheering them on when Alexa and the Predator team up, and really liked how it played out despite the multitude of rather distracting problems (not wearing a coat in Antarctica and not shivering? Predators using Earth time measurements on their spaceship? I could go on but won't). It was a fun movie to watch and I'm glad I saw it, even more glad I saw it with my son and husband so we had even more fun heckling it when it got a bit slow during the "plot" parts. My son had already seen it and, in fact, borrowed the DVD from a friend for us to watch, but managed to restrain himself from saying too much or laughing in advance, which probably wasn't easy.

Last but never least I give credit to Sanaa Lathan, who played Alexa, for a very good performance when the role really didn't require it.