Change Your Image
dkanter
Reviews
For Love of the Game (1999)
where's Detroit?
How does a movie about a pitcher with 18 years playing for the Tigers manage to show NO scenes of Detroit? Florida, New York, the Rockies, yes. Detroit, no. If the movie held up otherwise, this would just be a flaw. But the movie was dull, corny, and full of plot glitchs. Whether Costner is a great actor is up to debate, but he is usually very likeable on screen. He plays a similar role in TIN CUP--the down-and-out, sliding-into-middle-age athlete--there Kevin was charismatic and fun to watch. Not so in FOR THE LOVE OF THE GAME. Probably playing across from the lifeless Kelly Preston did not make his job much easier here. Well, maybe there's a Tigers' game on t.v. . . .
Illuminata (1998)
disappointing
While I'm normally a big fan of John Turturro's work as an actor and director, ILLUMINATA is a great disappointment. Although the film has some charming moments, overall it falls flat. Worst of all, the film is confusing. Where is the movie set? Italy or an Italian troupe in New York? Why bother making a historical film if it fails to convey a setting? If you want to see a well-made, inspiring historical film also about theater, go see Tim Robbins' THE CRADLE WILL ROCK. This movie has many pluses, including a fine performance by John Turturro.
Metroland (1997)
roads not taken
METROLAND's retrospection comes from a young mid-life vantage point. As Chris wanders away, recalling a past life, love, lost avenues . . . what is he, all of 31? Then again, parenthood ages most people. I liked this movie much more than the 6.5/10 suggested. Saville and his fine cast do a good job of conveying both the male and the female perspectives on sex, romance, marriage, and maturation. It all seemed very real. Emily Watson did an (expectedly) fine job. But Elsa Zylberstein was really charming! So 60s, so Truffaut! For another bittersweet look at youthful adventures, sex and roads-not-taken: BEFORE SUNRISE with Ethan Hawke.
Stuart Little (1999)
a perfect first movie for little ones, but . . .
I took my 3-year-old to see STUART LITTLE as his first movie. I did so, however, with some trepidation. I have such wonderful childhood memories of White's book and Williams' perfect illustrations. My son was enchanted once little Stuart appeared on screen (as was I) and he really liked the cats. He made it through the whole movie which is in itself a tribute to a nicely-made children's movie. As for me, the yuppie/preppie accoutrements of the the movie's Little family did make me a little queasy. Worst of all and not surprisingly, the filmmakers avoided the novel's bittersweet ending. Instead they opted for a simple, warm-and-fuzzy Hollywood ending. Clearly, school-age children need to read the book for a more edifying and emotional experience. For younger kids, STUART LITTLE makes for a fun trip to the movies.