Reviews

The Legend of Boggy Creek has to be one of the greatest works of accidental genius in film history. It's obvious that no one set out to make a classic here, but this film is more than the sum of its cheap and tawdry parts. It is hysterically (if unintentionally) funny, and the songs are just a hoot. I wish I could get a hold of the soundtrack. I wouldn't recommend this to someone who really wants to be scared, unless that person was under the age of 10. But "The Legend of Boggy Creek" is wondefully inspired silliness, and in some ways, is a pre-cursor to "The Blair Witch Project", with it's semi-documentary feel. The next time it's on TNT at 5 AM, I suggest staying up and watching it!

WOW!!!! As a movie goer who watches at least four films per week, and who is very interested in the harrowing politics of the human soul, I can safely say that there has never been a better movie about alcoholism (no, not even "Days of Wine and Roses") than "Drunks". When I read the plot synopsis on the back cover of the tape case, I was expecting some preachy AA recruitment nonsense. This movie was nothing of the sort. "Drunks" is, for better or worse, a very realistic treatment of addiction, and of 12 step programs in general. The format of the film juxtaposes monologues from AA members during a meeting, with one off- the- wagon evening in the life of Richard Louis' character (I can't remember his name).

Richard Louis is not one of my favorite comedians (understatement of the year), but he pulls off a tour de force performance here. Due to Louis's textured performance, towards the end of "Drunks" I reached a full

understanding of his character, and the knowledge that recovery isn't just "quitting the sauce", but an individual's willingness to look his demons in the eye, and face up to his own particular hell. The ensemble cast of talented actors (including Calista Flockhart, Faye Dunawaye, Dianne Weist, Parker Posey, and a highly amusing Spaulding Grey) do wonders with their monolouges, which are so well written, you feel like you are there, eavesdropping on a meeting in a Times Square church meeting. I absolutely recommend this movie. I wish that it had gotten more publicity during its original theatrical release.

The first time I saw this movie, I absolutelly loved it. And then I saw it again. Isn't it a horrible feeling when you realize a movie you had originally thought to be brilliant just doesn't cut the mustard in subsequent viewings? Granted, the performances by Elizabeth Shue and Nicolas Cage are outstanding, but there's something cold and exploitative about "Leaving Las Vegas" that I can't quite put my finger on. Two hours of watching someone sink into his own personal hell just doesn't cut it for me anymore. The characters were just so self indulgent, especially Ben. I'm not saying that "Leaving Las Vegas" isn't worth seeing, or that there isn't a good deal to recommend about it, but it's just such a downer. "Days of Wine and Roses" and "Drunks" deal with alcoholism in a much more three dimensional manner than this melodrama.

I am probably the only person in the world who thinks this , but I honestly believe that Superman II is (and I'm not joking), one of the absolute greatest, most fun movies of all time. I think I've seen it 300 times (no exaggeration), and at least thirty of those were during the original theatrical release. Once, my father and I sat through it twice. This movie has it all-- humor, melodrama, three supervillains. What is there not to like about it? And unlike most sequels, it actually improves on the original. I feel about this movie (and the original Superman) the way many movie goers feel about Star Wars. There's something so mythical, so archetypal about it. The scene where Superman faces off against General Zod and his flunkies is sheer magic. Maybe I just love this movie because of my childhood memories, but I loved a lot of stuff during my childhood (fruit roll ups, Shira Princess of Power, football players, etc.) that I can't stand now, and therefore the conclusion I'm coming to is that regardless of nostalgia, this film rules. Go out and rent this movie, and the original, but don't bother getting Superman III or IV, because they are an embarrassment compared to the first two.

Although uneven and flawed, this movie is a must see on the strength of two scenes, the first being the opening sequence (some of the most superb editing of all time), and the love making scene between Julie Christie and Donald Sutherland. Both of them give excellent performances as always, and you'll never think of Venice the same way again. The ending is a bit of a let down-- it felt forced after the foreboding build up. I understand the mythology and the religious symbolism behind it, but... a midget? Come on!!! After all is said and done, "Don't Look Now" is something that can't be missed, regardless of its faults.

I have to admit that I was a little embarrassed walking into this movie-- after all, it really is for pre- teens-- and I didn't have very high expectations for it, but I was pleasantly surprised by how well written it was, which isn't to say that the script was some kind of masterpiece, but in its own way, it was quite insightful and very very funny. What makes this film a sheer joy is Drew Barrymore. Why can't she be in every movie? She's tough, yet vulnerable, and in my opinion, nothing less than a comedic genius. She's one of the only Hollywood actresses who, despite her effervescence and good looks, women can really relate to. There's just something so honest about her. Sorry to gush, but she just lights up the screen. The film also does a very nice job of exploring (albeit in a fairytale sort of way) just how rotten high school and adolescence in general can be, and how as silly as it may seem, the trauma we attain during that period of our lives can affect us in very damaging ways as we get older. I'm sure someone is reading this review and rolling their eyes. Yes, this movie is a light comedy which follows Hollywood conventions closely, but it has a point to make and it makes it very well.

The perfect movie for those of you who like the travel channel but wish there were a little more plot (though not much more). Bertolucci has a lot of self indulgent fun translating both the landscape of Tuscany and the akward beauty of Liv Tyler into pleasant eye candy. If you're into the whole cinematography bit, then this is for you, but other than that skip it. The film revolves around who Liv Tyler will lose her virginity to. Will it be Jeremy Irons (spare us the whole Lolita thing please!), a dumb adolesecent clod or another even dumber adolescent clod? Who cares? Everyone involved with this project should have devoted their talent to something more interesting, instead of this European set "Where the Boys Are" for the 90s.

I care! I care! I care... wait a minute, I don't care, and neither should you. What's the point of brainwashing a bunch of kids to care? To sell toys? It would have been a lot better if at the sugar-coated climax of this animated kid's classic, instead of projecting all that caring, the care bears projectile vomited in the same manner as the viewers--in horror at what the kids of '85 were being spoon fed. The only redeeming value of the film is the high level of realism and social commentary that portrays an America torn apart by violence, class warfare, predjudice, and Hi-C. Share Bear, Birthday Bear... how 'bout Disgusted Bear. Please don't subject your children to this piece of un-Carefully illustrated nonsense. Take them to the park instead.

What a dilemma! As a feminist, I feel that I should be deploring this movie right now. However, I enjoyed it immensely. I felt that the subject of child prostitution was very well handled, and that (surprisingly enough), Brooke Shield's performance was very textured and real. As outlandish as the whole thing was, Louis Malle really sucked me into that turn of the century red light district world, and thankfully did not bludgeon me over the head with exploitation or heavy handed tragedy. I'm still not very sure where the moral center of the movie was located, but I think that was Malle's point-- that it's a good idea to question and re-evaluate all taboo subjects to understand why they are taboo in the first place.

Oh Lord, Oh Jesus Christ (as Seargant Howie would say), how did anyone ever come up with such an amazing, bizarre, and altogether wonderful piece of cinema?This film, which utilizes the conventions of horror and mystery, coupled with a satirical approach to organized religion and the law, is one of the greatest "unknown" films ever made. You gotta love Chrisopher Lee's tongue in cheek performance as Lord Summerisle, the pagan ruler of this isolated Scottish community. Perhaps the finest point in the film is Brett Eckland shaking her booty to one of the many ecclectic folk songs that grace this cult classic. Rent it. No, buy it. Make sure to get the extended version, or you'll miss out on some of the best moments.

I'm willing to bet that the concept of this film (baked guy growing mass quantities of pot in some random rainforest in California) has generated a good deal of impulse renting from college students and people who wear a lot of political buttons. At the same time, I'm willing to bet double that each and every one of these unfortunates has been disappointed and possibly scarred for life by this cult film, unless they were too stoned to notice. There is no coherent plot, the characters are flat, I can't imagine anyone caring whether this guy gets busted or not, and the meta-ending is a joke. There is one redeeming scene, however bizarre, involving a two-hundred foot waterfall and a saxophone player in a tree, but aside from that, I wouldn't waste my two-fifty for the rental. Perhaps the most heart-wrenching portion of the film is when the viewer realizes that stoners really can't do anything with their lives. I cried for weeks. DON'T RENT THIS MOVIE IF YOU KNOW WHAT'S GOOD FOR YA!!!!