Michael Bennett Cohn Reviews

Vanilla Sky (2001)

um, no

[4/10 · 16 December 2001]

Props for trying to turn Total Recall into a melodrama. But the results are as you might predict. I'm all for intelligent, complicated, genre-bending movies, but this was just not interesting and the payoff was just not worth it.

The Sticky Fingers of Time (1997)

amazing

[10/10 · 9 August 2001]

I can't say enough good things about this movie. Clever, well-acted, well-written, and constructed with an intricacy and a clarity that just blows me away. This movie is just plain solidly good.

Having said that, I'm amused by the critics I've read who make comments re this film to the effect of "Finally, a sci-fi movie directed exclusively at women!" I'm all for sci-fi directed at women. But let me tell you, as a hetero male sci-fi geek, I have no problem at all settling down to watch a story about time-traveling lesbians. Are you kidding? What is perhaps a bit more unusual in sci-fi is the portrayal of realistic, three-dimensional female characters, and the very natural, and, I'll say it, feminine way that they deal with the bizarre events that befall them. Particularly in genre movies, faux-feminist "strong women" are often depicted as essentially men in female bodies. The central characters in this film are strong people (well, one of them becomes strong) and it has nothing to do with gender inversion, or reversal, or some sort of overthrow of the male paradigm. Or, if that stuff is in there, it's buried deep enough that I didn't feel beat over the head with it.

The world would be a better place if the marketing machine was put to use convincing people to see movies like this instead of, to take some recent examples, Pearl Harbor and Planet of the Apes. The Sticky Fingers of Time made me feel better about being alive. I want the poster. Bravo.

Ace in the Hole (1951)

see it if you can find it

[9/10 · 17 May 2001]

Apparently not available on video or DVD as of this writing, Ace In The Hole is one of those movies where everything just seems to click. The understated storytelling meshes perfectly with Kirk Douglas's exhuberant performance. No wonder nobody went to see it, even when it was first released...the symbolism is effective but left half-buried, the "arc" is powerful yet understated. Strong images and thrown in the viewer's face one after the other...but they are secondary images, suggesting other events and relationships that we never see. There is an overwhelming feeling in this film that the viewer is intelligent enough that he doesn't need all the i's dotted and the t's crossed. Thanks to Wilder for that.

Memento (2000)

i've already forgotten it

[4/10 · 20 March 2001]

This film must be getting so much hype and praise because it's a somewhat interesting experiment in form, starting at the chronological end and then jumping backwards in time about six minutes after every three minutes that passes. This device is intriguing, and was enough to keep my interest for the first fifteen minutes or so. But once I realized that it wasn't going to stop until the movie was over, I began to go slowly insane.

Also, the structure implicitly asks you to take it for granted that when you reach to the end, everything is going to make sense in terms of character and motivation. Without going into any details, let me just tell you that it doesn't.

The acting was good, and the writing, in terms of dialogue, was competent. And there were a few good moments that made use of the memory-loss theme effectively. But in general, I think that history will find this movie little more than a mostly-failed exploration in form.

The Emerald Forest (1985)

beautiful

[8/10 · 15 January 2001]

Touching, well-paced, sad, uplifting, absorbing. Good acting, good writing. Lots of meaning, lots of symbolism, but never in your face, never tiring. Mystical stuff that's presented well and believably. A movie at once so ambitious and so real and so well-done...there just aren't very many in its league. Action, love, adventure, drama, striking images, succinct dialog. Amazing.

Dungeons & Dragons (2000)

unwatchable (minor spoiler)

[1/10 · 14 December 2000]

Set aside the modern colloquial talk amongst the two main characters, the obvious Star Wars and Raiders rip-offs, the bad dialog, the confusing story, the whimsically and hastily constructed fantasy universe, the polished but uninteresting special effects. This movie has a sheen of non-quality about it, that's noticeable from the prologue title cards at the very beginning. This is an example of a script that would have benefitted from its writers following the most cliche, Syd Field-ish rules of story and character construction.

When Marlon Wayan's character, Snails, meets an untimely demise, a young woman comforts his best friend by saying "I'm sorry about Snails," which comes off like she's apologizing for escargot. That's a moment not meant to be funny. And it's the highlight of the movie.

Honestly, I'm still not sure whether of not this movie even exists.

Unbreakable (2000)

smart, moody, doomed to under-appreciation

[8/10 · 24 November 2000]

I hope I'm wrong about the under-appreciation. But it seems that a cross-genre movie like this one is likely to leave a lot of people feeling unsatisfied. The two genres are drama (melodrama?) and superhero. It isn't clear for most of the movie just how much of a role each genre plays in this film. It's much more of an adult drama than a superhero movie, so comic book fans may feel bored and under-stimulated. And yet, the superhero aspect is ultimately so important that less fantasy-minded viewers may have trouble suspending their disbelief. This film is made for people who, on the one hand, believe in the importance of pop culture and the reflective importance of the sort of media that the literati may conventionally think of as "low art": comics, music videos, science-fiction stories...and, on the other hand, the same people must be in touch with the difficulties of a real life, a life where any fantastic or possibly fantastic elements are typically eclipsed by harsh realities: disease, serious injury, divorce, and the regret of having made a very wrong and very important decision many years ago.

Despite a few painfully obvious flaws (the titles at the beginning and the end being the worst), this film is a beautiful work, an engaging story that floats on a fine mixture of sadness and bittersweet hope.

Come Back to the 5 & Dime Jimmy Dean, Jimmy Dean (1982)

a high school play with some special effects

[20 November 2000]

There's nothing really wrong with this mediocre movie. But I'll examine some of the things that keep it from being actually good...

First of all, it's a play. There's nothing wrong with making a play into a movie, but when doing so, it's a good idea to take advantage of the newer medium and the possibilities it has to offer...in terms of a mobile audience point of view, if nothing else.

Secondly, it takes place all in one room. There's nothing wrong with this, either, except that there doesn't seem to be an aesthetic reason for it. Minimalist stories about geographically local but spiritually universal phenomena can fit quite nicely into a small, relatively unchanging setting: witness movie versions of Twelve Angry Men, American Buffalo, and some versions of Waiting For Godot. But this film is about a situation --a James Dean fan club based in the town where Giant was filmed-- which, while not entirely unique, is still a story that by definition takes place on a canvas much bigger than the one on which Altman paints it.

Being trapped in a drugstore with these obnoxious people did not leave me in awe of various broad profundities about American life. It just made me want to leave the drugstore and get away from the wackos.

The flashback scenes are shown as if they are taking place in the reflection of the drugstore in a mirror behind the counter. This lame and boring effect only reminds the viewer that there is no way out of this damn drugstore, not even in flashbacks.

They Were Expendable (1945)

not good

[3/10 · 14 November 2000]

If you lived through World War II, you may be so in tune with the overt sentimentality of this film that you won't notice, or care, how bad it is.

Scene after scene of talk about battles almost always fail to lead to the battles themselves. Even the "climax" is a flat sequence with little visual interest and almost no suspense.

Perhaps, in 1945 when this movie was made, audiences didn't want to see fight scenes that were remotely realistic. And I suspect that, because patriotism was running so high, it would have seemed in bad taste to depict any of the American soldiers in a negative light, even though this story is more or less about a conflict within the army over whether "speedboats" should be used to fire torpedos in battle.

Still, those two factors in the movie's creation should have served as reasons not to make it, not excuses to make it badly.

This movie is to World War II what Cider House Rules is to abortion. As a piece of art, it's terrible, but it was obviously made for people who are ready to praise any film that thematically reflects their own feelings.

L'hypothèse du tableau volé (1978)

pretty trippy

[8/10 · 13 August 2000]

This is a strange, cerebral, surreal, esoteric film. If there is such a thing as "intellectual horror" cinema, this film is it. I started to get scared and wish there was someone else watching it with me, and it barely has a plot! I'm going to have to see this film again multiple times before I feel I really understand it. If you're the kind of person who likes "My Dinner With Andre" and films by Godard, or if you do a lot of mind-altering drugs, you will probably enjoy this film. Wow.

The Replacements (2000)

de ja vu

[4/10 · 12 August 2000]

I think I've seen this movie before. I can't remember the title, but it might have been Wildcats, Necessary Roughness, Major League, Teen Wolf, Teen Wolf Too, or The Mighty Ducks. You'd never expect professional football players to miss plays because they're watching the unexpectedly sexy cheerleaders. And yet, apparently it happens.

Empire Records (1995)

so bad it's not even enjoyable in a bad way

[3/10 · 26 July 2000]

There's not much to say about this movie. A boring, cliche story, poorly developed characters, and terrible writing. Renee Zellweger looks good in a short skirt, but Liv Tyler actually looks clownish and unattractive in many scenes. It's obviously meant to be a Breakfast Club/Big Chill for the 90s, but it isn't. One scene is even an over rip-off from the mock funeral in MASH. At one point, an aging baby-boomer rock star, teased by the hip, young record-store employees, says: "Why don't you all just fade away?" There. Now I've told you the best part of the movie. Don't see it.

The Human Comedy (1943)

the sappiest movie ever?

[3/10 · 20 June 2000]

The Human Comedy belongs in that sub-genre of sappy WWII propaganda films like The Best Years of Our Lives, Hail the Conquering Hero, and Mrs. Miniver. Unfortunately, it's much worse than any of those just mentioned.

No doubt, if it was 1943 and I had just lost a loved one to WWII, I would be more in tune with the bittersweet mood of this movie. That being said, it's still terrible. The world in this film is so ridiculously wholesome that it could be (and maybe is) one of the inspirations for Pleasantville. I forced myself to sit through every painstaking minute, because it won an Oscar for best screenplay. I suspect that it really won the Oscar for being a WWII movie in 1943.

Mission: Impossible II (2000)

bad, bad, bad

[5/10 · 25 May 2000]

I can't express emphatically enough that you should not see this movie. Even for a dumb action movie, the story is ridiculous, the characters are uninteresting, and the villain is generic. Plus, the action is sparse, not very innovative, and edited in an annoying way. What a waste of money.

Where the Heart Is (2000)

boring, slow, scattered

[3/10 · 29 April 2000]

Natalie Portman is beautiful. But that's the only good thing about this movie. The main problem is that it's so episodic. Unpredictability can be great, but the chain of events quickly becomes so apparently random that it's hard to stay interested. Almost everything that happens to the main character, good or bad, is random and difficult to believe.

Cimarron (1931)

an imperfect but compelling American myth (contains minor spoilers)

[6/10 · 16 April 2000]

Yes, there is a ridiculously obsequious black character. And a tacked-on ending. But I think the characters in this film, including the white ones, are intentional stereotypes intended to suggest the character of the westward-expanding American people. In that light, the tragic (and almost unnoticed) demise of the black character is a criticism both of his obsequiousness and the white characters who take his loyalty for granted. And in the same light, the hero's sudden appearance at the end (which also takes place in 1930, the year the movie was made) suggests a hope that the unruly American energy that claimed the West is now being channeled, noticed or not, into the betterment of modern civilization.

That being said, this movie is slow by modern standards, and much of the dialog either wasn't recorded well, or didn't completely survive the transfer to video. Still, there are some memorable scenes: the Oklahoma land rush (literally a race with a starting line) and Yancey the frontiersman/preacher/reporter giving a sermon in a saloon, two guns drawn, leveled at the crowd (at hip level) as he intones "God bless this community."

Waking the Dead (2000)

wow, but...

[8/10 · 27 March 2000]

An unusual but completely workable structure, great sex scenes that actually make a difference in the story, wonderful acting and casting, lots of effective imagery. And then, the last five minutes are a tacked-on, over-obvious subtlety-slaying nose-dive, comparable to the ending of Copland in its amazing ability to annihilate everything good that came before it. Still, this is a film worth seeing.

I Want to Live! (1958)

bah

[4/10 · 11 March 2000]

Lots of slow, silent scenes, clearly meant to build suspense. Instead, they make this already uninteresting film move slower. I ended up wanting the heroine to die as soon as possible, just so the movie would be over. I know it was based on a true story, and it's too bad an innocent woman was executed, etc. etc., but that doesn't make a good movie. The bookend titles confirming the story's realism seem to be insisting that if you have a problem with the film, it's your own fault. But they're wrong.

Titus (1999)

damn good

[9/10 · 1 February 2000]

A visually dazzling adaptation of a very violent Shakespeare play. The main character is somewhere between hero and anti-hero, the villain is beautifully unrepentant. Taymor's surreal timeless style makes the story seem fresh while constantly reminding us that it's very old.

For a woman who will turn 50 later this year (heck, even for a woman who was going to turn 40), Jessica Lange looks gorgeous, and plays her insidious and charismatic character flawlessly.

The mixing of eras does at times distract from the story, and there is a narrative device involving a little boy that draws too much attention to itself. But overall I was impressed enough that by the end I had forgiven those minor slights.

Smilla's Sense of Snow (1997)

Great acting, good start, lame ending (minor spoilers)

[7/10 · 19 January 2000]

Julia Ormond is dazzling in her portrayal of an intelligent, extremely forthright woman with a chilling exterior and a big heart...big, at least, for one little boy. Watching her up against other personalities as she tries to solve a murder is fascinating for the first half of the film. But once the murky plot starts to clear, the film degenerates into a mediocre thriller, complete with fairly cliche car chases, gun fights, and even a virus from outer space. I ended up wishing that the Ormond character had been part of a different movie.

Magnolia (1999)

wow

[10/10 · 7 January 2000]

This film replaces Being John Malcovich as the best movie I've seen in the past year. An amazing blend of character study, suspense, and cinematic artistry. Impossible to predict yet finely woven, hugely moral without feeling moralizing, a long chain of characters, but each one well-developed and compelling. This is one of those rare and amazing movies that stretches and redefines the meaning and function of feature film making.

Boys Don't Cry (1999)

forgettable movie-of-the-week stuff

[5/10 · 26 December 1999]

For those viewers who have had, or plan to have, their sex changed, this movie may provide some catharsis. But just because a story is true and sad, does not mean that it will make a good film if that film isn't arranged in a way that works dramatically. And this film isn't. It's boring and slow.

I grew up in Kansas City, which is surrounded by the same type of impoverished rural towns that this story takes place in.

Different strokes for different folks, but I remember driving through those places and thanking my lucky stars that I had grown up in an environment that was (relatively) more suited to helping me explore life's possibilities and become my own person (I am not a transsexual. I'm talking in generalities here.) And yet, the main character in this film, Teena Brandon, a person who needs such a fostering environment if anyone does, actively seeks to immerse herself in midwestern small-town life, probably one of the worst situations in the world in which to be thought of as a sexual deviant. While I certainly wish she hadn't been murdered, I didn't like, or have much sympathy for, her character, and try as I might, I couldn't' get very caught up in her plight, which she created for herself (I'm talking about her efforts to take on the specific male identity of Brandon Teena in that specific situation, not her desire to be a man in general) and then hung on to with all her strength until it killed her. Other than her kleptomania, we know almost nothing about Teena's personality besides her gender issues. And if that's the only aspect of her personality worth mentioning, well...then I'm even less interested in her.

Cradle Will Rock (1999)

bah

[5/10 · 26 December 1999]

Communism, the red scare, federal theater, the conflict between commerce and art, America's changing relationship with Italy in the late 30s, and union strikes are each potentially fascinating subjects for a film on their own. But thrown together in such a complex way as they are in Cradle Will Rock makes it hard to get caught up in any particular issue, let alone any one of the many interesting but underdeveloped characters. I realize that these were all real issues of the day, and that director/writer Tim Robbins was trying to portray the sociological complexity and the whirlwind feel of the time. But it doesn't work. Instead of a complex, tightly integrated work, it comes across as confusing and episodic. If you personally lived through the movie's events, you may follow the story better than I could...but that's hardly a realistic expectation for audiences in 1999.

This film is full of interesting situations and people (John Cusack as Nelson Rockefeller-- fascinating casting, but we get only the barest glimpse into what he could do with the character), but they do not add up to a good movie.

Sleepy Hollow (1999)

a barely coherent mess, with some nice visuals

[3/10 · 19 November 1999]

Those who only see movies for the pretty pictures may not be vastly disappointed. Otherwise, watching great actors like Depp and Ricci wasted on a convoluted plot, flat-out stupid dialog, and even a few special effects right out of Pee Wee's Big Adventure, is quite disappointing. The tone is uneven, the music is in-your-face manipulative, and there are no characters to identify with.

I wanted to like this movie. I saw it in an ideal situation, too: very first screening, midnight the night before it opened, at the Mann Chinese theater, nearly packed, ushered by actors dressed up like characters in the film, and free t-shirts given to all in attendance.

Happy, Texas (1999)

stupid, boring, and rarely funny

[2/10 · 5 October 1999]

It's hard to come up with enough bad things to say about this movie. Steve Zahn has an obvious comedic talent that saves some of his scenes, and shows that he's worthy of better material. The tremendous flaws are mostly in the writing, from the static dialog-heavy exposition scenes to the predictable plot complications to the overly cutesy, anti-climactic ending. This movie sucks, pure and simple, and if you liked more than a cumulative five minutes of it, you must have a terribly depressing life.