Change Your Image
fmcchris
Reviews
Another Life (2019)
Poor writing mars a potentially good show
The men take a back seat to the women in this estrogen-driven, trope-filled, and often incoherent, emotional roller-coaster ride through interstellar space where the plot holes are as big as black holes and logic is jettisoned out the airlock. It is the women who seem to run the show here, making all the important decisions, providing much needed morale boosts to the crew, and sallying forth with great courage into the great alien unknown that their male crew members (with the exception of a few) fear to tread. There is something especially disturbing about watching a 100-lb. Unarmed woman (in this case, the character, "Cas") take out five heavily armed male soldiers while her male counterpart lies on the floor nearby, shaking and cringing like a damsel in distress. I have nothing against women leading the way, à la "Ripley" in the "Alien" movies, but this movie is full of wimpy guys who have serious problems taking any kind of decisive action. The one guy who does possess leadership capabilities turns out to be a psycho, and he's killed off early on.
The movie itself plays out like a soap opera on steroids, with all the attendant melodramatic jumps and emotional hysteria that ensues when characters are portrayed as two-dimensional beings. And with almost every character employing the "F" word to the point where it becomes extremely annoying, you begin to dislike these people and end up not really caring what happens to them. Someone should have pointed out to the writers that the overuse of vulgarity is no compensation for a poorly written script, and this is where the major fault lies with this production. Logical inconsistencies abound and often seem to have no antecedent causes. To illustrate, there is one scene where the crew land on an alien planet and encounter a creature who remains hidden but is very powerful, doing some damage to their shuttle. Later, they discuss the issue and come to the assumption that the alien was no more a threat than a bear (yes, a bear) and proceed to colonize the planet. What happens when they do actually come face to face with the alien? They kill it. Would you call that colonization effort a study in due diligence? I wouldn't. They didn't do their homework and, as such, the colonization process is called off because there is a law that forbids colonization of an already colonized planet. Pretty dumb.
I don't fault the actors at all in regards to their skills. They play their parts to the best of their ability--especially Katee Sackhoff, who is an excellent actress. It's a pity she and the other cast members weren't given a script worthy of their talents. She does an admirable job as "Niko," the Commander of the space ship, but her intractable nature and desire to prove herself often lead her into making reckless decisions when logic would dictate a saner and safer course of action. For example, when the aliens ask her to choose between saving her young daughter's life or humanity, she chooses humanity. Say what? I don't know of any loving parent, including myself, who would stand by and watch her/his daughter or son be put to death for the sake of some nameless, faceless, abstraction called "humanity". In the hierarchy of values, the life of your child would always come first--even before your own. But we should not be surprised at her answer. After all, she left her husband and child to go on this interstellar mission, which would take her away from her family for at least six months and possibly expose her to any and all hidden terrors that lurked in the vast unknown reaches of space simply to find out why an alien artifact had landed on Earth.
In summary, I found this show entertaining enough to watch both seasons, hoping it would get better as it went along. It had some good moments that were unfortunately ruined by the often-absurd choices the characters make, forcing me to scratch my head in disbelief. If "Another Life" had concentrated on its central premise of humans vs. Aliens, and had developed its major characters where we actually care about them and had not wandered so far off the mark by introducing a succession of plot twists that have no real relevance to its central theme, the show would have been far better than what it is. Once again, it's not the fault of the actors or anything else except poor writing. It always is.
Enchanted (2007)
An Enchantingly Beautiful Movie!
"Enchanted" is a delightful animation/live-action tale of the young and beautiful princess Giselle (played superbly by Amy Adams) who wants only to marry her perfect fairytale Prince Edward (James Mardsen) and live happily ever after. But when she is banished from Andalasia by the evil Queen Narissa (Susan Sarandon) to the streets of modern-day Manhattan, and subsequently falls in love with the handsome lawyer Robert Philip (Patrick Dempsey), she begins to wonder if her innocent, fairytale view of love can survive. Against the most improbable odds, Giselle's infectious warmth and optimism win the hearts of everyone--even the cynical Robert.
The songs are marvelous and the production top notch. The supporting cast (including the animated characters) does a wonderful job of keeping the story moving along at a fast pace. There is never a dull moment in this movie! One of Disney's best!
Serendipity (2001)
A flawed premise equals a flawed movie.
Telling a lie requires you to invent more lies to sustain the original untruth. Likewise, an implausible premise requires abundant fictions to keep the story going--often into even more absurd realms. The premise of "Serendipity" is that it is not you who determines your own destiny; rather it is fate that makes the determination as to how your life will play out. Consider Sara's retort to Jonathan just after they meet and he wants to get her name and phone number:
Jonathan: I just had a really great time and for all we know I wouldn't be able to find you again.
Sara: Well, if we're meant to meet again, we'll meet again. It's just not the right time now.
Now how does Sara know what the RIGHT time is? She doesn't, so she's going to let fate decide. How droll!
The doctrine of fatalism is a flawed doctrine which states that all events are fixed in advance so that we are powerless to change them. People are merely pieces on a chessboard, manipulated by some supernatural power--all choice has been removed from the equation and we have no recourse but to submit ourselves to the will of some external agency. At one point in the movie, Sara's friend Courtney told her as much, and that was the closest we come to ANY truth in this movie. But the premise must be maintained at all costs, and so once the two main characters part, all kinds of fatalistic events occur as if on cue to help them find one another again--the five dollar bill with Jonathan's name on it, the book with Sara's phone number in it, etc. The list of improbabilities increases as the movie descends into utter ludicrousness.
One particularly distasteful aspect of this movie was the shallowness of the lead characters. When Jonathan and Sara first met, they were both involved with other people. And those other people, we come to find out, are very nice people who are in love with our main characters. Well it seems to me that Jonathan and Sara can't be too happy with their respective relationships if they are flirting with one another! And if they had any misgivings, then it would have been honest of them both to let their significant others in on the secret instead of leading them on in such a disingenuous fashion--especially since those significant others were good and decent people who truly loved them. To string someone along to the point where you've convinced that person that you want to marry him or her, but to pine away for someone else and then end the relationship at the last moment is not only cowardly and dishonest—it is cruel. But why settle for second best when fate has decreed otherwise?
Given the above, it was impossible for me to like Jonathan and Sara. All I felt was contempt for their willingness to submit to fate and to not take the responsibility for their actions into their own hands. If I had met a girl whom I thought could be the love of my life (and I sincerely doubt such a thing would happen during a brief interlude in a department store as it did in the movie!), you can bet your bottom dollar that I would NEVER, EVER leave anything up to chance! I would have asked that girl for her phone number and would not have left her without it. Unless of course she was a girl like Sara, in which case I probably would have had no choice but to let fate decide. After all, she did say "it's just not the right time now." Sure babe. Sure.
To cap off the succession of absurdities, there was no emotional payoff at the end of the movie. Jonathan and Sara shake hands when they finally meet followed by a weak and unconvincing kiss. You would think after two years of constantly thinking about one another and trying desperately to reconnect, that our lovers would have rushed into each other's arms and shouted for joy. But no! They simply stand next to each other on the ice rink looking cold and bemused. But then, considering the flawed script and all the fatalistic occurrences that permeate every inch of this ridiculous movie, I can only believe that it was fated to be this way.
Predators (2010)
"Predators" suffers from lack of well-defined characters
I've always had a problem with the premise upon which the Predator films are based. The idea that an advanced civilization of aliens would spend a great deal of their time hunting less advanced beings for sport makes them seem more like humans than the superior beings they supposedly are. But if we are to believe that even advanced beings have a penchant for blood and gore, then so be it. But I think they are far more like us than they would care to admit.
The problem with this film and others of its type lies in the failure of the writer(s)to fully realize the characters. Character drives plot, not the other way around. People are defined by their actions and a person's psychological makeup determines how that person will act in any given situation.
In "Predators," I did not feel any empathy with any of the characters. The only one who came close to showing any real, honest human emotion was the character Isabelle, played by Alice Braga. But this show of concern for her fellow human beings came very late in the movie. It would have served the interests of the film far better if we had learned more about her and the other major characters in the beginning of the movie during the exposition. In this way we, the audience, would come to care for these people. But this did not happen. Laurence Fishburne, who is a fine actor, was completely wasted in a gratuitous role and we never get to know him. Adrien Brody, as Royce, the ostensible "leader" of the group, is cold and one-dimensional, and his victory over the alien is made that much more unimpressive because of it. And, like Isabelle, he shows a glimmer of human feeling only at the end of the movie, when we already have stopped caring about him. When you feel nothing toward a character, you don't care much how he or she ends up.
Filmmakers should try to understand that it is not special effects, great cinematography, sublime music, or even great acting that makes a film a success--it is adherence to the rules of good writing, which means creating three-dimensional characters who are thoroughly fleshed out, and by their actions, make us care about what happens to them. In the case of "Predators," the only real emotion I felt was dismay that such creative potential was never realized.
Marley & Me (2008)
A good solid movie with lots of heart
You know when a movie is going to be good. In most cases, you can instinctively tell that you're in for a good time within the first five minutes. Such is the case with "Marley and Me". Marley is an undisciplined dog for sure, and there are times when you just want to kick him out the door and leave him out. But his energy and love soon win you over, and pretty soon you learn to accept this four-legged whirlwind with the heart of gold for what he is: a truly lovable and affectionate little critter.
Owen and Aniston really shine in their respective roles as the couple who try, mostly unsuccessfully, to keep Marley in check, and bring depth and meaning to what is, in essence, a very simple story. But the true star is Marley, who in his own simple canine way, works his way into your heart, as he does with the Grogan family, making all of their lives a much richer experience for having known him.
The Omega Man (1971)
Misses the mark
I have always thought Charlton Heston was a great actor and he does an admirable job in this movie despite its many flaws in logic. Anthony Zerbe as Matthias does a great job too. However, If I were being hunted down by a bunch of mutants I think I'd be heading for the hills ASAP instead of hanging around in the hopes of finding where the mutants hide at night with the intention of destroying them. It never fails to amaze me how the characters in some movies seem to always invite danger when they should be running the other way. It's called bad screen writing. And the downbeat ending, which has Heston dying in a pool of blood while the remaining humans--including children--look on rather unconcernedly, was a big turnoff for me.
My biggest problem with this movie, other than its obvious lapses in logic, is the score. I think Granier is a great composer, but he falls far short of the mark with his cheesy, over-the-top style. At the end of the movie we are left with Heston lying dead in a pool of blood while a silly cha-cha underscores the pathetic scene. Another major turnoff.
If you are a fan of Heston, you may want to see this movie. If not, I wouldn't bother.
AVPR: Aliens vs Predator - Requiem (2007)
Story in search of a plot
At one point in this movie our hero asks, "Can someone tell me what the hell is going on?" Maybe the producers and director of this horrendous movie should have asked themselves that question before releasing it to an unsuspecting public. Ten minutes into the movie and I was asking myself the same question.
There is really no plot to this film. We are introduced to several characters at the beginning and none of them is ever fully developed. The story line keeps jumping from one character's point of view to the next, with no real coherence to knit the overall fabric together. We really don't care one bit about any of these people as a result.
This version brings nothing new to the table. We've seen it all before and it has been done infinitely better in previous incarnations. Exploding heads and mutilated bodies do not make up for the lack of intelligence and coherence, which this film sorely lacks. My advice to the Strause brothers: Find another line of work that does not require intellectual integrity as a prerequisite. And to Shane Salerno (writer): Do the same. As for you, Mr. Dan O'Bannon, your mind must have been elsewhere when you co-wrote this ridiculous script. Shame on you! AVPR is a complete waste of time and an insult to the franchise.
The Mist (2007)
An illogical outing into the mist
Mix in one part provincial town, one part alien monsters, a demented religious woman, some tentacles, a government scientific lab conducting possible life-threatening experiments unknown to the townspeople, and a bunch of people eager to cast away a lifetime of moral convictions to blindly follow the above mentioned religious nut, and you've got "The Mist".
Fantasy or not, if a story's premise and characters are based upon anything other than logical motivation, then you end up with melodrama, not drama. And this absurd potboiler evinces all the hallmarks of an incoherently written script. Yes, I know that we all act illogically sometimes; we let our emotions carry us away. However, even the most emotionally charged acts must have their basis in truth--the truth of the premise, and the truth of the characters. When we are constantly second-guessing a character's motivations, then truth has been sublimated to whim or license. This does not produce superb storytelling. I will use only one example to emphasize my point.
One of the more distasteful of these lapses in logic occurs when the majority of the people in the supermarket abandon their reason to slavishly follow and obey the dictates of Mrs. Carmody, a raging, religious lunatic. Yes, alien monsters that appear intent on destroying them besiege the people and they are fighting for their lives. But why are they so quick to forsake their personal ethics to mindlessly obey the commands of an Old Testament-quoting, "fire and brimstone," self-appointed, religious nut who is unquestionably a psychopath? The people in the store are not a group of fundamentalists who may possibly be swayed by such ranting, and even if they were, why eagerly surrender your reason and morals to carry out this woman's demented plans? Who the hell is she that she can claim such slavish devotion? Does she, and only she, have a direct link to the Almighty? The majority of the people in the store seem to think so. I say "Bah humbug!" The mob killing of Private Jessup, committed under the instigation of Mrs. Carmody, was nothing more than cold-blooded murder. Are we to believe that in this small town, where many people presumably know one another, all logic and moral decency are thrown out the window so that an innocent man must be killed in order to satisfy the blood lust of a demented woman? And if that is not enough, what about David Drayton's young son, Billy? Well, seeing that the aliens are still present, Mrs. Carmody decides that maybe it's time for the kid to go too--an Abraham-esquire sacrifice to a god whom seems decidedly disinterested in the fates of these terrified humans.
The ending of the movie was depressingly anticlimactic. Escaping the clutches of the lunatic crowd, David Drayton, his son, and three others get into a car and drive off into the mist--until they run out of fuel. Seeing a humongous alien monstrosity wade across their path, and believing that they will soon end up as alien fodder, they mutually agree to terminate their lives. The only survivor of this massacre, David Drayton, lives to see the mist dissipate, revealing soldiers in the act of cleaning up after the alien invasion. All he can do is look upon the dead bodies in the car and weep. Had he waited only a few minutes more, his son, and the others, would have lived to see the end of the alien invasion. If I were David Drayton, I might have not been so keen to end these people's lives, especially that of my own son, in the hopes that maybe, just maybe, there was a chance for life. It is manipulation of the highest order and most disagreeable. This ending encapsulates for me all the intrinsic logical faults that appear to plague this movie. For although some of the acting and special effects are good, they cannot compensate for what is, essentially, an illogical outing into the mist.
Grumpy Old Men (1993)
A gift
I look upon this movie as a gift from two incredibly gifted actors--Lemmon and Matthau--to the rest of us. Get a big bag of popcorn and your favorite beverage and sit back and let the magic unfold. It's one of the funniest movies I have ever seen. Lemmon and Matthau are at their comedic best in this hilarious tug of war concerning two lifelong friends who treat each other as anything but. Yet underneath all the bickering and pranks, the two men have a genuine love for each other. One of the most important things I learned from this movie is that "the only regrets you have are the risks you never take". I highly recommend this movie to all those who appreciate a little wisdom to go along with their humor. Watch it with someone you love.
El laberinto del fauno (2006)
Devoid of grace, wit, and soul
I was warned that "Pan's Labyrinth" had some violent content, but I was not prepared for the senseless brutality, cruelty, and depravity that this pointless horror film contained. It left me feeling disgusted and angry at the people who wrote this piece of trash. Beyond the sophisticated production and excellent special effects, I have nothing whatsoever to say in favor of this ultimately nihilistic, pseudo-mythic-poetic fairy tale. It has no grace, no wit, no soul. I would never even mention this film in the same breath as "Lord of the Rings" or "Chronicles of Narnia," which are both on an entirely different level altogether. And yet this film is rated at #41 on the IMDb Top 250 film list--higher than "To Kill a Mockingbird," "Alien," and even "The Wizard of Oz"! This has a lot to say about the graceless and degenerate age in which we live, and about del Toro himself, who, by virtue of this film, has shown himself to be quite in step with the prevailing moral climate of today.
The reviews, marketing, and previews would lead you to believe that this film was a fantasy tale for both children and adults to enjoy, which it most assuredly is not. What you really have is an utterly grim war drama with a touch of fantasy thrown in for good measure. But both of these elements are not confluent and the juxtaposition only serves to muddle the film and create an incoherent whole. Graphic depictions of amputations, wanton killing, and what I consider to be the most reprehensible act of all--the senseless murder of an innocent childmake "Pan's Labyrinth" irredeemable in my eyes.
I think that any society that can embrace this psychotic and sadistic film as art is in danger of imminent decline. Anyone with a sensitive soul and kind heart will quickly see through the subterfuge parading itself as fantasy and recognize the beast for what it truly is.
Cube 2: Hypercube (2002)
Convoluted script, poorly acted, and no character development
This film made no sense to me and I have to question the sanity of the people who made it. The cube is a death trap but we don't care if the characters die off because we never really get to know these people. The acting in this film was poor, but I think the fault lies mainly with the nonsensical script. The original "Cube" was better, but even so we never learn why the characters are in the cube and how they got there in the first place. The characters are just so much fodder for the cube's booby traps. Some people may find this mystery compelling storytelling, but I find it a serious flaw. And to have the sole survivor get her head blown off at the end of the film was cruel and pointless, and perfectly suited to the overall mood of this convoluted mess of a movie.
Deep Impact (1998)
Poor script and lack of focus hurt this movie
As Rick K. from Virginia so wonderfully pointed out: "I considered erasing the movie before returning it to the video store, as a humanitarian move." Believe me, he would be doing a lot of folks a very big favor.
This movie fails on many levels, not the least of which is James Horner's overblown score, which turns any attempt at pathos into bathos. But my main gripe is with the poorly written script, the lack of general focus, and the overall insipid acting. Tea Leoni, especially, seems to sleepwalk through her part, never once bringing any conviction her role. Morgan Freeman is wooden throughout and his platitude-ridden speech at the end of the movie is painful to listen to. Just about every major character comes across as boring and I blame the script and director for this.
The main problem lies in trying to depict so many different characters' lives in the space of two hours. If the focus had been on one or two people, the script would have been far more cohesive. Lacking this cohesion, we are left with undeveloped characters that we care nothing about. So when Tea Leoni and Maximillian Schell get killed by the tidal wave, we are happy to see them go. The director allows us little vignettes that are supposed to offer us insight into the lives of the characters, but all it does is destroy any focus the movie might have had.
A good movie should draw you into its own unique universe, such that your emotional involvement is held captive. When you start looking for the fast forward button, you know you're in trouble.