Reviews

6 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Wolf (1994)
10/10
The thinking person's horror movie
26 July 1999
The greatness of Wolf is that it dares to examine the bitter conflict between age and youth in modern society within the context of the classic werewolf story. The result is a creative, thought-provoking film with superb acting and fascinating characterization.

As a horror fan, I always appreciate seeing a genre film that boasts intelligence and does not scare its audience away with excessive violence. Some critics have complained that the same story could have been told with greater emotional impact had the werewolf action been excised, but I disagree. The physical transformations are symbolic of the psychological theme of the story - that our civilization has become so corrupt and inhuman that the only way to reclaim our souls is to return to nature.
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
A classic adventure film
24 July 1999
There's something wonderful about the fact that a movie made in 1934 can be head and shoulders above every Tarzan movie that followed it, including the bloated and boring 1980s piece Greystoke. Once the viewer gets past the first three scenes, which are admittedly dull, Tarzan and his Mate takes off like a shot, offering non-stop action, humor, and romance. Maureen O'Sullivan is charming and beautiful as Jane and walks off with the movie. Weismuller is solid as well. Highly recommended.
20 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
A movie that never should have been made
28 June 1999
Generations was a tired rehash of old Star Trek material used earlier and more effectively in the much-maligned but superior Star Trek V. Soran is a watered-down and less sympathetic version of Sybok and the Nexus ribbon is no different than Sha Ka Ree. It is also incredible that the long-awaited meeting of the captains was presented in a such a slow-moving, pedestrian vehicle.

The story was far from epic, the villain nowhere near as grand as Khan or General Chang, and both captains emerged looking old and feeble.

Finally, and most importantly, Captain Kirk should never have been killed off since he IS Star Trek. I never understood the need for him to pass the torch to Picard, a captain whose series had just went off the air and whose tenure as a Star Trek hero was coming to an end as well. But even if the producers did feel it was time for Kirk to go, he deserved a far more heroic death than he got. It would have been better if Kirk had died at the end of Star Trek VI helping to forge universal peace with Spock and McCoy at his side.
12 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
A perfect end to a wonderful series
28 June 1999
To me, this will always be Captain Kirk's final adventure and the real ending to the Star Trek saga. It was a perfect blend of action, mystery, political intrigue, and humor. Also, it was the film where each of the crew members had an opportunity to shine. Both Spock and Sulu were given command positions, Uhura and Scotty were instrumental in the conclusion, and Dr. McCoy had one of his largest, most entertaining roles to date.

It is also one of the few overtly political Star Trek stories that works well. Since the characters show signs of prejudice towards Klingons and reticence to make peace, it shows that they are realistic individuals with real-life feelings and flaws. They are not the emotionless saints that would be seen in future Star Trek stories. The film makes a good point about the importance of leaps of faith in modern international politics without being too preachy to stomach - a very hard thing to pull off indeed.

Truly superb and one of the last great science fiction movies to hit the theaters before we started being subjected to crap like Starship Troopers and Star Wars: The Phantom Menace.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
A classic
28 June 1999
The Wrath of Khan is not only the best Star Trek film, but one of the truly great science fiction films, earning a place of esteem with classics such as the Fly, War of the Worlds, the Terminator, Aliens, and Invasion of the Body Snatchers.

Unlike many of the other Star Trek films, most of which are superb in their own right, this film is not laden with continuity references to the series which spawned it, making it more accessible to a general viewing audience. Aside from its obvious dramatic merits, it will always hold a sentimental value for me since I saw it as a child in the movies with my father. It also served as my introduction to Star Trek, familiarizing me with a cast of characters that would inspire me with their heroism for the rest of my life.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
A truly wasted opportunity
28 June 1999
As the only Star Trek film with a decent budget, the Motion Picture represented the franchise's only real opportunity to compete with the grandness of Star Wars by creating lush alien worlds and a variety of fascinating creatures a la Jabba's palace or the canteena. Instead, all the money was sunk into an adventure confined completely on the board the Enterprise, making one wonder where all the money went.

Since the setting never changes and the acting of the original crew is uncharacteristically wooden, the film seems stagnant and goes nowhere. Decker and the bald chick, unlike the female Vulcans in future films, are terrible additions to the cast. They are little more than boring intruders stealing screen time from the people we really want to see in action.
21 out of 43 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed