Rosemary’s Baby 1968
5/5
First of all, let me explain that my mother's name was Rosemary and I was born in the early sixties, so this movie did cause me some teasing in grade school--and many references since then. Despite all that, this film as always been a favorite of mine and I've watched it many times on TV over the years. (I also read the book when I was in my teens, and I plan to read it again now that I'll probably understand it a lot more!)
But until today, I had not seen the theatrical release without the broadcast-required cuts and trust me, it gives the movie a whole new depth and horror. Unlike the TV version, this one really IS terrifying.
The rape scene, which is almost completely missing from the chopped-up versions, is shown from Rosemary's POV and extremely disturbing, especially when she screams "This is no dream! This is really happening!" There's also a lot more nudity than the TV version, none of which I feel is gratuitous but all a part of the story--a lot of the disgust for me was watching her husband after that and how he handled having seen a demon rape his wife. It's obvious he really doesn't want anything to do with her or with the baby after she becomes pregnant and her bafflement on this development is clear, esp. when she tries to get him to touch her stomach the first time the baby moves and he jerks away.
Technically, the film is absolutely stunning and incredibly well filmed. Some of the camera angles are deceptively simple, at first normal-looking but off-standard enough to really make things look a little odd, especially the slow, steady zoom in-and-outs of Rosemary's face in key points. Polanski lets her face tell us her story, for example when she and Guy are eating dinner the night of the rape and Minnie comes over with the doctored mousse; he keeps the camera on her, and you only hear what happens at the door. Another example is how he lets her reaction tell us what the baby looks like when she finally sees it rather than showing the child, and that makes it all the more horrible. No matter what else he may be, Polanski certainly knows how to make a movie.
Also an important part of the film is the music. While now dated and, IMHO, rather silly in parts, the atonal soundtrack really does set the mood esp. at the end. When she's going through the closet with the music swelling and then she walks into the Castevets' living room and sees the black-draped cradle and WHAM the music just shuts off--that gave me a real jolt. And the lullaby, in fact sung by Farrow, during the final pull-away just gave me cold chills down my spine; it wouldn't be the same movie without it.
And Polanski certainly knew how to get amazing performances out of his actors! Between John Cassavetes' clearly torn Guy, Ruth Gordon and Sydney Blackmer's friendly and bumbling yet subtly sinister Castavets, and of course Mia Farrow's innocent-to-tormented Rosemary, not a one of them puts a foot wrong. I was surprised to find out that while Ruth Gordon won for Best Supporting, Farrow wasn't even nominated--a real shame because she certainly deserved it.
This is a true classic that should be watched by any fan of a good horror movie, because while there isn't any gore or jump scares there certainly is steadily building psychological horror that pays off in the end. A huge THANKS to my wonderful husband for gifting me with this; I can't wait to watch it again!
Epic Movie 2007
0/5 (only because I can't give negative numbers)
The main reason I watched this movie is because Joe had found it on cable while we were surfing for something to watch and I was too lazy to get up and walk away. Really. That and I thought that maybe it would get better; at least the previews had some funny parts... but that's all there was, and they really weren't that funny in the context of the movie.
The only good thing I can think of to say about this movie is the actors; they did get an interesting bunch to put through this muddled mess of a script. Crispin Glover was great as the Johnny Depp/Willy Wonka character, Jennifer Coolidge (yes, Stifler's Mom) clearly had fun as the White B*tch, and Fred Willard as Asio was amusing (esp. in the "show the stunt double" fight sequence) to name a few. But I certainly wouldn't recommend the movie to see them; find other movies they've done which are certainly a lot more enjoyable no matter how cheap or low-budget.
I did get a few laughs out of the Kumar and Stifler's Mom references, but I hadn't seen most of the movies/shows they parodied (Narnia, Willy Wonka remake, Talladega Nights, Cribs, Punk'd) and the repeated and unnecessary use of rap music really annoyed me. Being a Good Bad Movie aficionado I just had to sit through the whole thing, but trust me I'd watch any of my Good Bad favorites over this annoying waste of an hour and a half (which felt like three hours). Ed Wood or Roger Corman could teach these yaboos how to make a movie, for cryin out loud.
Stay far, far away; if you must watch a parody, I'd recommend any of the "Scary Movie" (esp. 1 and 3) or "Airplane!" movies over this un-funny joke.
Dude Where’s My Car 2000
5/5
Although I’ve seen this movie several times, I hadn’t seen it for over a year when I watched it this time and figured that after all the other references I make to it in other reviews, I really should review the thing.
First, let me say that while there’s plenty of outright crude, stupid fart, poop, T&A, and other adolescent boy-type humor, it’s mixed in with enough truly other funny stuff that I really don’t count the movie down for it. Considering that I was raised with two male cousins 2 & 4 years older than me plus raised two sons, most of that stuff rolls right off of me anyway.
The story, while actually quite simple, does grab you right at the beginning and make you want to continue watching to find out what happened the night before the movie starts and where in the bloody heck is Jesse’s blasted car! There’s plenty of the aforementioned stupid stuff as the movie goes along, but with the enjoyable and notable chemistry between Kutcher and Scott, some truly funny lines (“I watch Animal Planet!”) and a surprisingly good supporting cast, it’s very watchable.
The only part I don’t care for, which is mercifully short, is the stoner-dudes-as-rapper sequence. Stupid and unnecessary, it goes by quickly so the movie can continue in a funnier vein.
Overall, I’d say give it a shot if it looks of interest to you, but be warned--it is exactly what it looks like, no more no less. Although if this mid-forties grandmother of seven can enjoy it, I don’t think it’s restricted to any one type of audience!
National Treasure: Book of Secrets 2008 (mild spoilers)
4/5
I liked the first one enough that watching the sequel was a no-brainer, especially when I heard that they had not only re-cast the original principals, but had some other really good actors as well. Well, it wasn’t until we started watching that I realized that the ‘other good actors’ were Helen Mirrin, Ed Harris, Bruce Greenwood, and Alicia Coppola! I just about fell off the chair as each one was revealed.
It definitely has the same “feel” as the original, of Ben Gates figuring out and following clue after clue, no matter how improbable or crazy (I half-expected to see David Duchovny show up as Agent Mulder to do one of his infamous wild leaps of logic). And, of course, the sidekick comes through with the one answer that none of the brains can figure out and savors it, but I didn’t begrudge him that.
The only part I had a problem with was where Ben kidnaps the president (played by Bruce Greenwood, heh); it wasn't so much the kidnap as the how of it. I just couldn’t buy the President going off to some abandoned tunnel with this guy he barely knew, and making the Secret Service stay behind.
The payoff in this one was, to my relief, worth watching the movie for if a bit far-fetched (yes, even more so than the first). Even *I* know that the ancient Incas (or whatever non-American tribe that was) didn’t build their cities underground in North Dakota, but I was able to let it go by with nary a murmur.
Best of all was the acting, and I’d recommend watching it just for that. Cage and Diane Kruger are amusing and realistic in reprising their roles but as having broken up in the time since the first movie, and
Justin Bartha as the sidekick Riley is just as good as in the first. Helen Mirrin did a fantastic American accent and was just wonderful bickering with Jon Voight as Ben’s long-divorced parents. I was particularly tickled to see Alicia Coppola, late of “Jericho”, in a small but important part as an FBI agent on Ben’s trail.
While this one wasn’t quite as good as the first, it’s a worthy sequel and well worth watching if you’ve seen the other.
Flags of our Fathers 2006
4/5
Despite some confusion at the beginning due to the non-linear style of telling the story, this is an amazing movie that should be seen by anyone interested in WWII. The acting is spot-on and probably the best part of the movie.
The violence and gore of war is shown unadorned, not in-your-face but it doesn't pull any punches, either. With one of the survivors being a medic you know you're going to see some horrific wounds, but they're not dwelled on, only part of the story.
As mentioned before, the only problem with this movie is the way it's told. At first it seems like flashbacks, then I thought it was a younger man interviewing the survivors for a book, then I guess it was the son of a soldier who didn't survive telling the story--I think. Still, this gets four stars just for material and acting.
WALL-E 2008
5+/5
Adorable. Flat-out adorable, as well as technologically amazing and visually stunning. Pixar, as always, puts story before effects and "WALL-E" shows their care in telling about one lonely little robot who makes a difference.
WALL-E is, as the previews have shown, cleaning up the Earth after mankind has messed it up and abandoned it. But when a probe named EVE comes to see how the planet is doing, his (its?) world changes. After she finds what she's looking for and the explorer ship returns for her, he has no intention of letting her go without a fight. One of THE most adorable parts is where Wall-E breaks out of a repair bay (clearly meant to be a psych ward) and lets out the nutty/malfunctioning robots along with he and EVE. There is also great and exciting drama once you figure out what is really going on, and much cheering on everyone/thing that gets involved when the "bad guy" tries to stop them from returning to Earth.
The entire first half (or more!) of the movie contains no dialog at all, and after just a short time you don't notice it as you get caught up in WALL-E's lonely but productive and, oddly enough, happy life. The music is just stunning, though I did catch parts that sounded a lot like "Finding Nemo" (which I personally think is composer Thomas Newman's finest score) and "Monsters, Inc" in several parts. A major part of the movie was the sound effects, which were absolutely perfect in every way. The animation is just stunning, though despite my trying to pay attention to the technology I ended up forgetting about it and watching the movie. Maybe after 20+ viewings, like with all the other Pixars, I'll finally be able to pay attention to the animation as an artist/computer tech instead of getting caught up in the story. Maybe.
And don't forget the short beforehand! I'd heard it was like an old Bugs Bunny cartoon and so it is--I was laughing so hard that I missed a few moments near the end because I couldn't see for the tears in my eyes. Next to "Tin Toy", "Knick Knack", and "Gerald's Game" this is Pixar's finest short IMHO.
Last but never least I can't--and don't--want to imagine a Pixar without John Ratzenberger. His part isn't big, but hearing his voice is like walking into your grandmother's house at Thanksgiving and smelling turkey and pumpkin pie--it's like coming home. The rest of the voice work is stellar; much is the computer-generated voice of the robots, but a turn by Sigourney Weaver as the voice of the mothership is notable as well.
One final note for parents: Please teach your children to wait until AFTER the movie to ask questions. I could understand that the younger kids didn't understand some of the plot at the end of the movie and asking what was going on, but the parents trying to explain it loud enough to talk over the movie is rude and thoughtless. Having some experience in that area myself (4 children, 7 grandchildren to date) I'm not just complaining. You'll be able to explain much more thoroughly to the child, and not annoy everyone else in the theater--especially those who have children who have been taught to behave properly in public. But even the thoughtless jerks behind us couldn't ruin my appreciation and enjoyment of the movie, and I can guarantee you we'll be back to see it 2-3 more times before it leaves the theater--just like all the other Pixars :-)
10,000 BC 2008
4/5
Despite all the bad reviews I read both for acting and story, I found this to be nowhere near as bad as I’d expected. While it certainly was nowhere near as good as “Quest for Fire” it wasn’t as abysmal as “Clan of the Cave Bear” (I love the novels, abhor the movie).
The main problem I had was with the CGI; I watched it in HD on a 42” widescreen TV and the bloopers were noticeable. Like the CGI animals in “I Am Legend” and dinosaurs in “King Kong”, the mammoths and saber-toothed tiger were bags of bones with notably lacking internal structure--muscles and bones, mostly. The tiger was the worst, and the first mammoths you see, during the hunt, were probably the best.
The acting was more or less decent, with Cliff Curtis being outstanding as Tic-Tic beneath the tons of hair they slapped on him. I think the weak link was the actress who played Evolet; she had no passion or fire in her role as did her counterpart D’Leh (and her contacts were noticeable and awful). Everyone else did a good enough job, which during the middle of the movie seemed to only involve shaking spears and yelling angrily. The bad guys were great; it’s clear they combed the acting roster to find craggy, evil-looking beings to play the invading tribe. One last note of the two kids who played the boy from D’Leh’s tribe and the African chief’s son, they were enjoyable to watch and their goodbye scene was very touching.
The story could have been so much better it’s sad that they ended up with what they did, but I was able to suspend belief long enough to enjoy the movie and shrug off the historical inaccuracies. Besides, anyone who expects accuracy from a Roland Emmerich film is fooling themselves to begin with; enjoy his sweepingly impressive directorial style and forget the rest, and this is well worth watching.
The X-Files: I Want to Believe 2008 (SPOILERS!)
5+/5
I decided to wait until the second time I’d seen the movie before writing a review, because very often I’ll love a movie at the first showing--especially one I’ve really looked forward to--then dislike it the more I see it. I just got back from my second viewing of “XF: IWTB” three days after the first and love it even more. Chris Carter knows what his “shipper” fans want, and he gave it to us in droves as promised.
First, let me say that the base story is the weak link; unlike the monster-of-the-week episodes this was supposed to be akin to there was no disbelief in “it”, more disbelief in its messenger, a pedophile ex-priest played stunningly by the Scottish comedian Billy Connolly. Also a bit on the heavy-handed side is how Scully urges Mulder to help with this case then unexpectedly does a one-eighty and wants him to quit before the victims are found one way or another. Last but never least, the one bad actor was the rapper Xzibit, who was a wooden one-dimensional character; Amanda Peet wasn’t bad but wasn’t good either. But other than those mild gripes this movie was incredibly acted and filmed. And well worth waiting six years for, IMHO.
The movie is stunningly shot and photographed, and smoothly edited as well. Even if the mountains of Vancouver are a bit tall to double for the softer West Virginia hills the locations were excellent and, as always, the set dressing among the best I’ve ever seen in TV or movies. I think I caught most of the deliberate homages to people and names from the series, but I’ll keep watching to see if I can find more.
The base story, which Carter and crew worked so hard and successfully to hide during production, deals with a psychic priest who is trying to help the FBI find a kidnapped agent. The agent in charge (Amanda Peet) decides that she needs Mulder’s help and so Scully is contacted, since she’s not underground but working as a doctor in a Catholic hospital very interestingly named “Our Lady of Sorrows”.
When you first see Scully go to Mulder, it appears that he’s hidden away in a remote house with a rickety but dangerous-looking gate, clipping odd articles out of the paper and huddling in his messy study--my first assumption was that he’d gone “Conspiracy Theory” for a bit. He’s wearing a beard and longer hair which I found attractive but definitely made him look a little less Mulder-ish. But the very first thing I noticed is that the charisma between the two actors/characters was still there, they still had that same dynamic that made them so watchable in the 1990s. The next thing I noted was the absence of the old sexual tension between them, but they were clearly together at the end of the series so I found that normal--but I immediately assumed that they were no longer together and that Scully was visiting him at his house.
Just a few scenes later you see Scully laying awake in her bed (with a comforter that has UFOs on it!) and then you hear Mulder's voice and when finally he sits up behind her I wanted to cheer and clap. After nine years of caring about these characters, I was so happy that Carter had decided to have them be together.
But it wasn’t to last.
While Mulder wants Scully to help him solve the case, she is both revolted by the pedophile priest who is the key and involved in trying to save a young patient’s life that everyone else has given up on. This causes problems in their relationship that I had a little trouble buying, but I think it was more because the whole situation between them was rushed rather than fully explained--I suspect there was some editing for time done there that would explain it better.
Mulder runs off to try and help solve the case, Scully stays to help her patient and also goes to see Father Joe, who has said something to her that she doesn’t understand: “Don’t give up”. Does he mean her patient? On Mulder, who is admittedly being a bit of a selfish jerk at this point? Or on the case itself?
Gillian Anderson really shines in these scenes, although she is stunning and letter-perfect from start to finish. Her struggles are clearly shown on her face, and looks between she and Duchovny speak volumes in every scene they share. While he is a fine actor in his own right, Anderson steals the movie from him--and everyone else for that matter, although Connolly does give her a run for her money with his anguished Fr. Joe.
It’s around this time that the core plot is revealed--it’s those wacky Russians swapping out body parts to keep a rich guy alive. Boooo-ring. I wish it’d have been the werewolf, now that would have been cool.
The final scene between Mulder and Scully after the mystery is solved is the real payoff of the movie, far more than the actual base story--and for those who don’t know, don’t leave until after the credits because they give us one last smile.
The music by Mark Snow is just incredible, fitting every scene perfectly, and I bought the soundtrack the moment I got home. I particularly like the song that plays during the credits.
Last but never least, I bought the struggle between faith and science/reality without a qualm even though I’m an atheist and don’t share the core beliefs of this movie at all. It’s so good to be back with these characters and the storyline is so central to their lives that it worked, and worked well for me.
As I write this, the movie is not doing well at the box office and it’s looking dismal for another one, which all involved have said they want to make. But I remember how badly the first “Star Trek” movie did and look how that franchise evolved; maybe we’ll get lucky here. In the meantime, I plan to see this at least once or twice more before it ends its theater run and am already looking forward to the DVD, which promises all sorts of goodies. I want to believe, too.
ADDENDUM 1/11/09: This was posted to a YahooGroups mailing list during a discussion of the movie and thought it deserved to be added here as well.
I think the biggest problem with the film is that CC tried to give the shippers what we wanted at the risk of the main storyline, which was always the underlying strength of the show and previous movie. Like Pixar, he's always previously understood that story comes first but I think the writer's strike really threw he and FS for a loop in rushing to complete the script. If you recall, they had to beat the deadline for the strike to get this finished script in and I wonder how many changes for the better story-wise might have been made if not for that.
That said, I ADORE the movie while admitting its weaknesses. I do agree with many of the critics about the weak storyline problems but disagree with the ones that say it's just lousy. It's far from lousy and, in an artistic sense, it's a gently flawed masterpiece. The direction, cinematography, continuity, lighting, foley, music, CGI--all are absolutely stunning. I think that it should get Oscar nods for the above parts, as well as for DD, GA, and Billy Connelly's outstanding performances (and I think Xzibit deserves the Razzie). I know damn well it won't get a single damn nomination but that doesn't stop me from wishing.
I've now seen "IWTB" at least a dozen times, four in the theater and at least six on my HD TV (I've also watched it in the shower and during a long car ride on my iPhone) as well as all the extras/behind-the-scenes stuff available. I've studied this movie like I learned to in my (admittedly brief) film classes, dissecting it scene-by-scene and paying attention to the camera angles, focus, and lighting. Looked at this way, its true strengths are revealed; the clear loving care put into filming and assembling and finishing it are just beautiful.
Now as a simple viewer rather than as a critic, this movie warms the cockles of my shippy little heart and everytime leaves me with the biggest smile on my face imaginable. It's even better than I had hoped in that department and I do think that without what we were given it would have done even worse at the theater than it did; the shipper fans kept going back to see it despite the base storyline that most didn't care for. In the M&S relationship department I think it couldn't have been better, and if there isn't another movie I'll hold those scenes close to my heart and assume that they, for once, really did live happily ever after.
The Gay Divorcee 1934
5/5
I love Fred Astaire with or without Ginger Rogers, but this particular movie featuring them is a real treat. This is only Fred’s 3rd movie, his 2nd with Ginger, and 1st as the stars. It co-stars RKO/MGM staples Edward Everett Horton, Alice Brady and Eric Blore in hysterical supporting roles, with an interesting cameo by then-rising star Betty Grable.
Although the film bears the Production (Hays) Code approval stamp at the beginning, there are more than a few questionable scenes and a rather eyebrow-rising “knock knees” dance number that made me wonder if this wasn’t a pre-code no matter what the title card said. Let me assure you, *someone* wasn’t paying attention or was paid off to let this one by!
One was the story itself; Rogers wants to get a divorce from her absentee husband but to do that, she must be caught in flagrante delicato with another man. So her bumbling lawyer (Horton) hires a professional Italian man to be her “lover” but brings Astaire along on the trip where they’ll be caught--and he’s been chasing Rogers’ character since he first met her at the beginning of the film not knowing who she was. Many hijinks ensue, with the most laughter between Horton’s inept lawyer and Blore as a befuddled waiter, and much dancing ensures not only with Astaire and Rogers, but with Horton/Grable (I had NEVER seen Horton dance and sing before and now I know why) and a whole stableful of RKO starlets and boy dancers for the final big production number. If you enjoy 1930s musicals, don’t miss this one--it gets a wee bit slow in the middle but it’s well worth sitting through for the surprisingly clever ending.
