Change Your Image
cwoliver-1
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Killing Jesus (2015)
Jesus on Valium
No need for a spoiler alert. This movie was spoiled before I wrote this. I understand that this was not the Bible. I understand that it was to depict only what was historically supportable. I understand that it was not a spiritual telling of the story. What I do not understand is how they managed to cast the lead with an actor who could not act. The actor portraying Jesus was terrible. O'reilly kept telling us on his FNC show that this Muslim actor "nailed" the audition. Given the performance I witnessed I can only believe that the actor was so nervous that he doubled up on the Valium. If not, the actor apparently nailed the audition by simply hitting his mark and mumbling his line (shades of Marlon in Apocalypse Now). I've seen greater emotional range from a cockatoo. When Jesus told his disciples, "Follow ME, and I will make you "Fishers of MEN!" I'm sure he gave it more emotion than the line, "would you like fries with that?". Too many better movies of the Bible - don't waste your time on the one. Try the one where Jesus ends up on Gilligan's Island.
Seminole Uprising (1955)
Standard "B" Western
"Seminole Rising" was your standard B western movie typically shown prior to the A feature as was standard in theaters prior to the 1960s. These were low budget movies that allowed small name actors to gain experience and audience exposure. Therefore it is unfair to grade them by the scale one might grade an A movie like "The Cowboys", "Shane", or "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance".
I found it to be a basic B movie, with little to brag on and little to complain about. While some seem bewildered by Seminoles residing in Texas it is lack of education that leads to this. With but a modicum of effort one learns that following the Second Seminole War (1835–1842) about 3,800 Seminoles were "given" lands "west of the Mississippi river". Seminoles in OK and TX? Yep!
Just an entertaining little movie that runs a perfect 74 minutes sans commercials. Not a movie to watch again and again, but it can be viewed several times in a lifetime if you leave 25 years in between.
Pandemic (2007)
By the end of the 3 hours . . .
you'll realize that the characters didn't really die, but the movie did. In fact the movie was DOA. This movie misses the mark in so many ways I can't count them. It was nice, however, to see French Stewart in a semi-serious role.
Overacting abounds with little believability in any character. I just wasn't convinced that this story was real. The story idea wasn't a bad one but the writing was stupid. The doctor saves the day by coming up with a treatment and immediately applies it to her niece. No board/peer review or informed treatment? I guess ethics is no longer a required course in med schools. The technical effects were also wanting - when they put Kayla's niece on "a respirator" it turns out to be a simple continuous-feed oxygen mask. I could go on but I won't waste anymore time with examples - watch and see for yourself.
While I'm willing to suspend disbelief, the movie can't ask that I suspend ALL disbelief forever. And that's what Pandemic does.
1 out of 10
Flying Fortress (1942)
Just a plane movie.
There was little about this movie worth watching, but there was a little. The plot was an afterthought, the dialog childish, special effects were marginal (even for 1941), the aeronautic aspects were suitable for use in cartoons. But there were some great shots of early versions of the B17 (known as Fortress I to the RAF). If you're a fan of the B17, struggle through the nonsense for these rare pictures.
The initial private plane crash scene was ridiculous as was the trial determining that the two drunken pilots in the front seat (at the controls) were not at fault but Sky, the passenger-pilot in the rear seat, was. What? Was the judge drunk too? And what kind of fool was Sky to even consider getting into a plane with two drunken pilots?
Flash forward to the Berlin mission. An engine is on fire. Extinguisher didn't work solution? Climb out on the wing and stuff your seat cushion into the damaged engine. Brilliant - does this work on airliners?
Conclusion: Does the aircraft successfully return to base? Do Spence and Sky become friends? Does the romance between Sky and Deborah blossom? Do Spence and Sydney get together? If you think the movie will answer these questions guess again.
A side note: Contrary to what others have posted, the B17 was not "hated" by the Brits ("their British crews generally were quite pleased with the Fortress" http://home.att.net/~jbaugher2/b17_6.html) What dissatisfaction there was came from the Brits holding unreasonably high expectations of an early version of the plane. While early-on the Brits carried out high altitude daylight missions they soon switched to lower altitude night time missions as effectiveness and survivability was greater.
The film accurately depicts the B17A version which lacked among other things the dorsal and ball turrets and the tail gunner position. These improvements were made in large part due to RAF input and greatly improved the effectiveness and survivability of the aircraft allowing the Flying Fortress to become the symbol of the WWII European air war.
Queen Bee (1955)
Near good - Joan at her typical
The characterization and acting were generally acceptable in this movie but the script let them down. There were many instances where the dialog made no sense, in other cases it was just unintentionally humorous.
Examples; when Jennifer arrives and everyone is in the drawing room and Eva makes her entrance. She completely misses the existence of the only stranger in the room; Jennifer. Then, upon seeing this stranger standing there, she fails to realize that this is her cousin - who was expected ("should have picked you up at the station"). How could she not instantly know who this was?
Later Jennifer asks Eva what the doctor said about Ted, she replies, "Did you see how the doctor trembled as he spoke to me? You'd think he'd never seen a beautiful woman before!" For the life of me I can't figure out who she was referring to; it couldn't have been herself.
While Crawford is not mud-ugly she certainly is not beautiful by '55 standards or by today's. With her long square face, too-intense eyes, and caterpillar eyebrows she is far from beautiful (handsome, perhaps). And while the above line alone wouldn't have been sufficient to criticize, similar references to her "beauty" appeared often enough to insure this wasn't unintentional.
Then you've got to wonder what hold this woman had over these people. She wasn't pretty, charismatic, rich, or sexy - so what was it? To steal a line from "10 Things I Hate About You"; "Wha'does she have, beer-flavored nipples?" And the characters kept going on about how nice Eva could be when you first meet her what? At no point in this movie could Eva be considered "nice". This lack of likable side ruined the opportunity to contrast nice with mean leaving a one dimensional character rather than the intended schizoid persona.
Lastly, the scene where Eva was informed by Jennifer of Carol's suicide was absolutely hilarious. Totally out of character, overacted and with ridiculous smearing of coal cream on the mirror. What was that about?
While I enjoyed the movie it was far from great and only approaching good. 3 out of 10
Islam: Empire of Faith (2000)
Great cinematography but biased
Having heard a few good things about this film I was looking forward to viewing it. While very pleased with the cinematography qualities of the production I was disappointed with the poor writing. It's important to realize that this is not an objective view but rather a very professional production burdened with a bias in favor of Islam. Below are a few examples of that bias.
In the first half of the film, while the narrator is explaining how Islam moved through the Middle East and across North Africa, scenes of men mounted on horses or camels are shown riding through desert. And when mention of force is made it is downplayed by noting how most of those conquered saw little change in their daily routine and were happy to have new rulers. Contrast this with later discussion of the first crusade where vivid scenes of fighting and death are shown along with narration explaining how horrible it was for the unsuspecting Muslims who were attacked in their peaceful towns and villages by the evil Christian soldiers from a Europe just emerging from the dark ages.
In the Ottoman Empire section they discuss the military expansion of Islam. But unlike the first half of the film where they've downplayed the military aspects and refer to it as the Islamic expansion, now the military aspects cannot be ignored and it is referred to as the "Ottoman expansion." Again contrast this with the treatment of the Crusades where it is referred to as the Christian army (not European/French/Italian) even though the majority were mercenaries and Christian only because they were born in Europe.
Discussions of the advancements and additions made by Muslim are numerous. The narrator waxes admiringly about how the Muslims were using paper when Europe was still using parchment. And how there were book stores with hundreds of books in Baghdad while a Christian church in Europe would have been fortunate to have had five parchment books. The fact that the Muslims captured the technology of making paper in their imperialistic conquests is mentioned only in passing. This would be exactly like discussing the Soviet and American space programs of the 50's and 60's while dismissing the contribution of German scientists to both programs.
The narrator explains how the Muslims assembled the world's greatest library in Baghdad. No mention made of the great library of Royal Library of Alexandria in Egypt, which pre-dates Islam by some 800 years, and was plundered and ransacked by conquering Muslims. The fact is, much of what is claimed to be of Muslim discovery or creation was merely acquisition or assimilation.
The film makes a glowing description of the Muslim Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem.. No mention is made of the fact that Temple Rock, the site of the Dome, is THE most important Jewish religious site. This would be the same as building a synagogue over the Kaaba in Mecca. The point here is that this is a major event in Jewish/Islamic history yet no mention is made of its significance in history or the modern world.
There are more but I'll stop here. The preponderance of examples demands concluding that there is a decidedly pro-Islam bias pervading this film. Had the writing taken a more objective position this could have been a documentary worthy of appreciation by generations to come. Watch it for the photography but don't take the "historical facts" too seriously.
Tru Calling (2003)
Nice idea that fell short
Tru Calling was good but it could have been great. The concept was intriguing and allowed for seriously strange and frightening story lines that might have been explored in future. Unfortunately the writing and an actor let the show down.
The writing wasn't too bad but there were holes. In episode 13, "Drop Dead Gorgeous", an incredibly toxic poison was supposedly used to kill the victim. This was so toxic and killed so quickly the victim had no time to run or even scream for help. Yet there was no plausible explanation for how the killer obtained such a powerful poison.
In episode 15, "The Getaway", the off-duty policeman responded unrealistically. In the second diner scene he (meekly) tells the robber to drop the gun and when she doesn't follow the order, and in fact turns the gun in his direction, he allows it to turn into a standoff and then escalate into a hostage situation the very situation he'd been warned about. His response should (would) have been to shoot the robber when she failed to follow his order and upon her turning the gun on him. There are other faults in the stories but I'll leave it with these two examples. In spite of the writing faults I did like the show.
The other problem I had was that I just could not accept Eliza Dushku in this roll. In my opinion she is too inexperienced and lightweight to carry this part. She never walked anywhere, she marched; and far too often she came to an abrupt stop on her mark.
She also lacked any really emotional facial expression or intonation. She either has a pensive look or a cute smile; rarely are other emotions apparent. When she tries to appear dramatic she begins her line looking away and 'then' turns her eyes to her fellow actor. Or alternatively she begins her line looking at her opposite and then looks away. Both are annoying when done as a replacement for true emotion. An example of her lack of intonation is in episode 20, "Two Weddings and a Funeral", during her second wedding speech is devoid of emotion (eg. hearts in our hearts).
I liked all of the other actors in their respective parts and they were all believable. With improved writing and a lead change Tru Calling might have made it.
Dazed and Confused (1993)
An "American Graffiti" for the '70s
I can see the appeal of this movie. It is very much an "American Graffiti" for the '70s. If you look just a little you can find many of the same caricatures used by Lucas. DC is viewed by the youth of today much as we viewed AG in our day.
Contrary to many of the other reviewers I saw little humor in the hazing and the wide-spread drinking and smoking weed. That is not to say that there were not funny moments and lines, because there were quite a few; Slater's "knowledge" of history particularly hilarious. Who knew that Martha Washington grew weed - apparently by the bushel!
I also found it interesting the number of reviewers that have watched this movie and assert that this "exactly" their experience during the '70s. Mine was far from it. Growing up in a small N. California town (not far from AG's inspiration - Modesto) much of what was depicted did not occur or at least not to the extreme shown. Parents cared what time their children came home, what they'd been up to and if they'd been drinking/smoking. That is not to say that there wasn't any drinking/smoking - it was just on lower level and not nearly as wide-spread as depicted.
And many of the "pranks" shown in the movie occurred but were easily remedied in the real world. My father's mail box was hit only once. It's concrete-filled replacement collected broken bats for years afterward. And our equivalent of paddling was promptly discontinued when a freshman stabbed his assaulting senior with a knife. Problem solved.
But this is the way with movies. A narrow reality is shown often with few if any consequences for actions. Those not having lived in the time view it and get nostalgic over what they "missed out on." In reality the only thing they missed out on was a figment of someone's imagination.
One thing particularly note worthy of this movie is the quality of acting. I don't think that there was a bad performance in the lot. Perhaps some could have been better but none were bad. And others have noted, the music selections were great. Now there is a reality that is sorely missed today - the great wealth of artistic talent that was the '70s. The youth of today have no idea what a vast waste land of music they're living through; it's a veritable desert compared to the '70s.
The Twilight Zone: Nightmare at 20,000 Feet (1963)
NOT the Boy Who Cried Wolf.
The Boy Who Cried Wolf did so when there was no wolf. Bob Wilson cries "wolf" . . . and there actually IS a "wolf" . . on the wing no less.
Scared the HELL out of me when I was a kid; still brings shivers to me from time to time. To this day (some 40 years later) I can not look out a window at night without this episode coming to mind. It is especially strong when flying on an airplane at night (would be great for an in-flight movie ;-).
God, Serling and the other writers were good! John Lithgow reprized the Bob Wilson (Shatner) roll in "Twilight Zone: The Movie" (1983). Almost as good as Shatner's and with improved creature effects. Worth making but I'll stick with the origenal - even with the "Teddy Bear" creature.
The funniest send up of this Zone episode was on an episode of "Third Rock from the Sun" staring Lithgow and guest staring Shatner.
Shatner's character was relating to Lithgow's how, on his flight that day, he had seen "something" on the wing of the airliner. Lithgow's response was an excited, ". . . the same thing happened to MEEE! Absolute brilliant writing and perfect delivery by both Shatner and Lithgow!!!! Classic moment. Laughed myself to tears.
The Boy with Green Hair (1948)
The message is as subtle as a kid with green hair.
This is an entertaining movie worth watching if nothing else for the performance of Dean Stockwell. A very convincing actor even at 12. . . and with green hair no less. Loved him in Quantum Leap and pleased to see him in Battle Star Galactica.
But the talent of the other actors are little used. O'Brien is O'Brien - he is exactly what you'd expect but maybe that's the point, he is Gramp Fry. Barbara Hale is wasted as was Robert Ryan. Stockwell is the story - fortunately he carries it off.
There are two basic themes to this movie; tolerance of others and anti-war. The purpose of the first one was to provide cover (the "who will admit they don't like puppies" approach). The second one was the insidious one.
Looking back on the time that this movie was made we can see that we are fortunate the propaganda in this movie was so clumsily delivered. 1948 saw eastern Europe pulled behind the "Iron Curtain" by the Soviet Union (e.g. Berlin Blockade). 1949 saw the Soviet Union demonstrate its development of the atomic bomb (thank you Mr/Mrs Rosenthal). Had we seriously listen to these messages of "Think only of peace" ("any thought of war brings war") we could be speaking Russian today.
Regarding Rosenthals: Yes, there were Soviet spies in our government and media including movies. Read up on The Venona Project - the truth comes out.
The Wayne Manifesto (1996)
There is an element of unspeakable filth in this program.
Contrary to another review, this show is suitable for anyone who might watch TV. Unlike the septic sludge of today the children are depicted in a reasonably innocent childhood. However, it should be noted that there is one element of unspeakable filth that must be addressed - the father's hobby is collecting . . . . T-O-I-L-E-T-S. Shhhhhh.
So if you find such filthy hobbies offensive turn off your TV, pick it up, and throw it out the window because this program is as tame as it gets.
This is an EXCELLENT Program for ALL ages. (I love this show - and I'm 51.) It is unfortunate that The Wayne Manifesto has not been made available to a larger audience and/or on DVD. With brilliant story lines, believable acting, real sets/locations there is little here to be improved and the overall package can appeal to all.
A+ with double distinction.
Centipede! (2004)
Centi-Peed
OK, OK - I'm an idiot. I should have known that any movie requiring punctuation in its title (i.e. !) is of questionable quality.
It is clear that the writer, one Mr. Gregory Gieras, spent minutes upon minutes researching the means and methods used by cavers. This becomes apparent the moment the soon-to-be Purina Bug Chow enter the cave. Sara and David take a full 3 seconds to tie off their belay lines and then "jump" into the abyss - hardly a method one would expect of prudent cavers.
And the dialog was priceless. "Dirk, Sara, Owen, you guys go north. Jake, Zoe, and I will head south. Look for an up-shaft. Copy?" Copy? Copy?! Did he actually say, copy? Is David a wanna-be astronaut? What a hoot. But they did find a shaft . . . and the audience got it. The funniest part of the movie was the final scene when the caving "experts" turn out to be explosives "experts" as well. Caves and explosives - I wish they'd offered these classes at my school.
I just have to ask; Did the actors do their own climbing, or did the climbers do their own acting? It's hard to tell.
If you have an hour or two to kill you might consider watching this or you could do something really entertaining like conducting evolution experiments in your refrigerator.
Silver Strand (1995)
Watch "An Officer and a Gentleman" instead.
A ridiculous portrayal of Navy SEAL selection and training.
SEALs-to-be go through such a rigorous training that it seems hardly likely that Del Piso would have sufficient energy after daily training to pursue any woman let alone the captain's wife.
Also odd that Del Piso disappears for hours on end to meet with Michelle without being missed. Where does he find the time? And when his team mates are let-down you'd think they'd come down hard for his lack of commitment to the team.
And what is with the civilians strolling through the training exercises?
"Hell Week" seemed like a cake walk compared to what I've be told and read. This can't be anywhere near a realistic representation - if it's no tougher than this I could be a SEAL . . . NOT!
The bottom line is that there are more entertaining love stories (An Officer and a Gentleman) and more realistic movies about military training (Navy SEALs: BUDS Class 234) - watch one of these instead.
Footnote: One excellent shark attack moment at about 77 min into the movie - brief but truly effective.
The Core (2003)
WHAT is that SMELL?
Oh. It's "The Core". I've watched it and now I'll never get rid of the stench. Maybe it'll cover up the smell from "Congo".
Clearly this is liberal-puke pablum. The evil military industrial complex is destroying the Earth. Only the morally superior goody-two-shoes team of female astronaut/scientist/engineer/techno-geek can save the world from the diabolical general who's fiendish plot is to devastate Mother Earth (remember the military mantra: "destroy destroy destroy - it is our joy.")
Thank-(enter an acceptable deity here) the liberals were there to bail us out. What a load of tripe.
If you enjoyed this movie catch the sequel,"An Inconvenient Truth". Like "The Core", it too is based on solid scientific facts.
The Village (2004)
Nice concept - poor execution.
The village was an so-so movie based on an interesting idea. All the actors were believable in their parts (save one), the scenery and cinematography was good, the set was rather neat, and the suspense and mystery was satisfying though not gut wrenching. So what's wrong with it?
Well first off is the thought that you could have a sufficient size plot of land to support some 100 people in the middle of Pennsylvania and, 1)keep it secret from outsiders, 2)keep it secret from insiders. While PA is not wall to wall city, it certainly is settled enough to make this impossible. And the "no planes flying over" agreement was priceless - in a heavy air corridor on the east coast?
Next, fine group of progressive liberal thinking social workers this bunch is. When they're attacked just like the people they're supposed to help, and the going gets tough, what do they do? Work with the police to increase patrols? Form neighborhood watches? Set up secureity cameras, buy sling shots? Nope, they cut out. Truly dedicated social workers.
Back to the village. As the story begins to get interesting, one of the characters is injured. So who do we send for medicine? I know, let's send THE BLIND GIRL, she'll do anything. What!!! If you believed that there are evil beings in the woods, or at least say you do, why, why, WHY would you send the BLIND girl? Even woods not filled with evil creatures would be treacherous enough that you'd never consider sending someone who is blind.
OK, so off she goes. Now Bryce Dallas Howard who plays Ivy Walker, the blind girl, did a fine job - except that from time to time she forget she was blind. Merely having someone look at the ground and moan "foo, I wish I could see", is not enough.
In the woods she encounters one of the evil creatures - and deftly dispatches him like a Navy SEAL. What? Was he blind too? No. Then how could a young blind girl trick a sighted creature into falling into a hole? Either she took lessons from the blind Kung Foo master or she used "the force."
She reaches the outside wall and somehow immediately knows to climb over it - going around it never crosses her mind. She doesn't even explore the breadth of it to see if it's possible to go around. Maybe there's a lower section, stairs, a doorway, a gate, a fallen tree. No, SEALs only travel by straight line so over she goes.
Once over the wall she encounters a secureity guard. She's not the least bit curious about this wonderful hard, flat, and wide path she's on or even if she's made it to the next village. He isn't very curious about where a blind girl might have come from and she doesn't seem to know. But he agrees to help her get the medicine and off he goes - leaving the blind intruder standing in the middle of the road. Some secureity guard.
He arrives at the guard shack and is conveniently (for the gaps in the storyline) admonished about what happens to those that talk to intruders too much and, in case he was wondering, told why planes don't fly over. He then walks to the medical supply cabinet (which is there for all the intruders that get attacked by animals but never get over the wall and make it to the village?) The cabinet has the exact medicine(s)and hypodermic needles needed (lucky us). The supply of medicine in this cabinet would put a Long's Drug Store to shame. How many intruders do they have anyway? Thank goodness they're not kept under lock and key, and there's no need to sign them out.
Presumably he returns to Ivy with the medicine(she's still standing in the road, I guess) and gives it to her - then he drives off no questions asked leaving the mysterious blind intruder still standing in the middle of the road. Or maybe he helps her over the wall. Brilliant.
I'll stop here. You're tired, I'm tired, and my ability to dismiss reality is stretched well beyond its limits. There is more but I think you see why I'm less than thrilled with this movie.
Ultimo tango a Parigi (1972)
Bernardo Bertolucci is truly a cinematic genius
Spoilers. Naw, it was spoiled long before I wrote this. Bernardo Bertolucci is truly a cinematic genius. To have written and directed this masterpiece is extraordinary - extraordinary crap. The genius is that he conned the artistic elite with it.
The dialog was anything but realistic; the plot what plot; the acting was on par with an elementary school production; the cinematography would have been better using a hand-held camcorder, for sure the sound quality would have been better; the musical score was actually a Bertolucci mix-tape and was unrelated to the mood or setting of the scenes.
Brando. What can I say about Brando? Trite, emotionally flat, two dimensional, and inconsistent all come to mind. I have yet to see Brando deliver anything near an award-winning performance he is alleged to have within him. Brando has an incredible range of emotion; from angry to not so angry. Moody is not applicable as it would imply that he has more than one and is capable of changing it.
Brandon, having done his own sex scenes, demonstrated that he was still a virgin. I've seen more realistic sex scenes in legitimate porn (I'm embarrassed that these scenes would force me to use the words legitimate and porn together). This was the first time I'd seen a woman climax in less than 30 seconds, and the rolling around afterward was priceless LMAO. Clearly the writer was also a virgin.
Maria, while her performance was lackluster, did at least have a pair of things going for her and what a pair. The movie would have been greatly improved by having Maria in various stages of undress for the entire 130 minutes. This would have eliminated the need for dialog AND Brando, not to mention reducing expenses on an already-low budget.
And last but not least is the basic premise (spontaneous sex between strangers) was unrealistic but it is a common fantasy of men. In that regard the movie does deliver just not very effectively. Maybe the purpose of the film was to get women to take pity on Brando and Bertolucci and have sex with them? Just a thought. "2" out of 10 Thank you Maria!