Reviews

In the future, all "haunted house" movies ought to take place on intergalactic spaceships. Well, not really, but you have to admit the concept works - at least when the movie you're talking about is Alien. (Or maybe the most recent Friday the 13th flick, but I digress.)

Long story short, the crew towing a mining freighter (the Nostromo) back home is awakened from hibernation to investigate a distress signal sent from a nearby planet. Upon landing, the ship that presumably sent the signal is found to be lifeless and covered with an odd substance. Kane, the crew member volunteering to check out the lower hull of the dead ship, finds what appear to be eggs and is attacked by an odd alien being. Upon returning him to the ship for medical treatment - that is, getting the alien off his face - the crew wonders what fate might be in store for Kane and themselves. Luckily, the facehugger eventually detaches itself and dies, leaving Kane to wake up and rejoin his mates. And it's at just about that point that all hell breaks loose on the Nostromo...

Without giving too much more away, I should make one thing clear. Alien is not a kind, gentle movie about friendly creatures. The alien in Alien pretty much wants to kill you and everything you love. It appears to have minimal compassion for any living thing, least of all humans - which are, probably correctly, viewed as a threat.

And the alien isn't even the most important part of the movie. What is more intriguing is director Ridley Scott's conception of future gender relations. Aboard the Nostromo, "male" is the dominant theme for both sexes - after all, the uniform (shirt, pants, optional jacket or hat) is pretty much the same either way. Females, for the most part, are forced to think and act in the same way as males - Ripley's tough demeanor, especially in the first half of the film, is the best example of this ideal. Lambert represents a more traditional female ethos, but her fate shows that such a forgiving attitude will not be advantageous in the future.

And in that vein, there's one more interesting way to look at the film. The ship - nicknamed "Mother" by her crew - effectively serves as a technological counter to the entirely natural alien incubator on the "dead" ship. Both are adept at keeping their living cargo safe, and both are surprisingly mechanical in the way they do so. Obviously, this is to be expected from Mother (who is a digital entity, after all) but is interesting coming from a natural life form. But when one thinks about it, an evolution into which a creature exists only to feed and reproduce is maybe inevitable in the end.

Now, to rate the film. Alien is technically beautiful, both from a directorial-cinematic point of view and in a design sense. To be specific, great acting and camerawork allied to truly lifelike sets make you feel as if you're a crew member. Not to mention scaring the living daylights out of you at times. It's a true classic, both for the way in which it tackles the subject of interstellar life forms and for the fact that it's simply a brilliant piece of filmmaking.

Rating: 3.5 out of 4 stars (thus, a 7-star IMDb rating)

"What? It's black-and-white? From 1927? And German? Well, I'll never watch that."

Such would be the average response from the average person regarding Metropolis, Fritz Lang's masterwork. Be assured, it is not the average film.

As with most older films, we must first remember that what you see on screen had never been visualized in such a way before. Thus, the sheer thought of such stunning ideas as airborne walkways between buildings, entire cities underground, or even the ability to use TV cameras and "see" into other rooms (TV didn't hit the big time until the 1940s), was absolutely incredible.

And it's shocking that Lang's vision of our modern world would prove so accurate, 70-odd years hence. You will recall that skywalks are fairly common in large cities, airplanes have become far too prevalent, places like Walt Disney World actually do have "workers' cities" underground and TV - well, I won't go into TV. And the fact that all of the incredible effects still have the power to awe viewers today, without the use of complex animation or computer graphics, makes the film a treat to watch.

The plot is fairly formulaic by modern standards, though it was stirring stuff for the poor and disadvantaged majority of Germany's inhabitants in 1927. Young Freder Fredersen, privileged son of city leader John Fredersen, has an epiphany of sorts when he finds out about the subhuman treatment of the underground workers who keep the city of Metropolis alive. Disillusioned by his father's uncaring attitude toward them, Freder leaves his comfortable surroundings and decides to live underground. To his surprise, the young man discovers a small but influential resistance movement led by the beautiful and mysterious Maria.

Maria turns out to be the central point of the story once properly introduced, embodying obvious references to religion (as a way to appease the monotony of daily life). But, later on, she also embodies the problem of centralized power when under her (?) control, the workers finally revolt with perhaps an unintended result.

Freder, of course, represents the transformation of man into man-as-machine by uprooting himself from a palatial garden of Eden (literally) and descending into the workings of the massive power plant that keeps Metropolis running. Lang's concept of such a transformation is brilliantly realized in the towering control room where exhausted workmen robotically transfer back and forth along a series of dials and switches, acting only as a "human valvetrain" of sorts in an effort to appease the machine. Another device, the "clock-wheel", forces Freder to continually keep up with time as each second must be marked by the pull of a lever. Though implausible in design, the wheel is a visible indication of man's futile struggle to beat the clock and work harder.

If nothing else, Lang managed to promote the cause of the laborer, though the ending (as well as certain plot points leading to it) is fairly hard to believe given the apparently hopeless situation of the workers and the chilling indifference of the elite.

Metropolis is definitely worthwhile, not just for its groundbreaking technical achievements but also for its (sadly) historical impact. It must be mentioned that this was reported to have been Adolf Hitler's favorite film. And while his own plot to free Germany's workers from oppression perhaps began with a noble goal, Hitler's own maniacal and misguided views on race relations and political conduct proved to be horribly destructive for the world as a whole.

It would be unfair to say that Lang's impressive achievement managed to cause World War II all on its own, because such a murderous outcome was probably not what the director hoped would result. Like all films, Metropolis must be seen with an eye toward the times in which it was created. It was a fabulous commentary on an overly-technological society back then, and it remains so - perhaps being even more relevant today.

Four stars - a classic, and for good reason.

I finally saw this whole film on Tuesday as the primer for a course

on science fiction. Some might question this 14-minute short's

value as a sci-fi piece, but it does have all the important elements.

Allow me to explain.

For instance, there's the very concept itself - "a trip to the moon".

This was heady stuff at the time, considering the first manned

flight experiments (via the Wright brothers) had only just begun in

1902. And Melies' conception of how this might be achieved, by

being shot from a giant gun barrel in a hollow bullet, was probably

the most plausible way to achieve space travel back then. The

director even briefly goes into detail on how the gun barrel might

be constructed, with a very impressive stage set depicting a

massive foundry that belches steam and smoke as the huge die

is cast - and, perhaps unwittingly, setting the stage in a larger

sense for the century of innovation that was to come. (Somehow, I

doubt that magician-turned-cinematographer Melies had such lofty

goals in mind at the time, but one never knows.)

Then there's the early conception of what space must be like.

Since there would be no significant research into the ways of

space travel until the 1950s, the whole thing was pretty much up in

the air. Thus, Melies could only base his ideas on what he'd

already seen - Earth. So we have a Moon that is mainly a dark and

featureless desert (although with some intriguing geological

formations) and where breathable oxygen is in abundance. You'll

note also that the "astronomers" dress as any good scientist

would have back then - in formal eveningwear.

The Moon, of course, is the focal point here. People wanted to

know what it would be like, and Melies let them know the truth as

he saw it - again, based on Earthbound conceptions. Thus we

have the first appearance in film of "moon men", "aliens from outer

space" or whatever you'd call them. In any case, the astronomers

are unsurprisingly bewildered by them and fail to deal with them in

a productive way at first - but I shan't ruin the outcome for you.

Now, down to the bottom line. What we have here is not so much a

great film or even a classic, but an experiment (and not just at the

on-screen level). This film was more of a chance to see how far

the medium could move away from reality, and the idea of going

anywhere beyond Earth was as whacked-out as you could get at

the time. People loved it, and as mentioned before, the die was

now cast. After this point, filmmakers went ever farther and sought

to amaze and delight the viewer at every possible opportunity. By

simply going through some of the later cinematic creations

cataloged in this website, it's easy to tell whether or not they

succeeded.

One thing is very clear, however. Without this tiny bit of filmed

madness, I might not have had a website upon which to comment

on the movies at all. Remember that when you watch Episode II.

Highly recommended - 8 of 10 stars

Saw this on TBS the other night, expecting the usual poor substitute for a good action movie. True, I did get a mediocre film overall, but as a form of reimbursement, I received a bunch of quality martial-arts sequences.

Yes, the plot is amazingly uncomplicated - the most unexpected thing (and also the dumbest) is when not just one, but TWO car bombs explode within two days of each other. But besides the improbability of a Utah native growing up with an Australian accent (can we assume he picked that up in the "Special Forces"?), at least it's not too unrealistic.

But this movie was basically created to showcase Rothrock's abilities, and they are readily apparent. Someone mentioned that this film was meant as a vehicle for Jackie Chan; this is also easy to see based on the beautifully choreographed fight scenes that make good use of the available props (the scene in the high school's weight room is particularly fun).

Overall score: With regards to the filmmaking process, this one gets a low rating thanks to bad sound effects, cheap production and minimal writing talent. However, the great fights more than make up for it. Five (5) stars out of a possible 10.

Let me explain that "one-liner" first. Some quick video game history:

As a video game company, Sega had always been something of an also-ran when compared to mighty Nintendo during the 1980s. Nintendo's venerable 8-bit NES absolutely ruled the gaming world at that time, with the company using its incredibly powerful marketing department to tackle and eliminate all potential challengers. When Sega introduced its competing Master System in 1986 (after a trial run of sorts with a variety of arcade games), it was hard to look past Nintendo's immense library of game cartridges and see that Sega had actually crafted a more capable system.

But Nintendo had relied on the NES architecture for too long. This meant that the time was right by 1989 for a competitor to rise, like a cobra, from the mists. Sega took the chance and introduced its groundbreaking 16-bit Genesis system. Critics were impressed - the semi-3D graphics were a huge improvement over the NES' largely one-dimensional images, and the Genesis platform seemed to have been designed with the serious game-player in mind.

Sega's problem, however, was in Genesis games. Mainly, there were not enough of them - and of those, only a few were really very good (Sega relying mainly on lots of blood and gore to pull in older customers). Genesis was popular among gamers who simply wanted a change of pace, but the system needed what is now called the "killer app" - a game that was good enough to sell the systems on its own.

Which brings us, in a roundabout way, to Sonic the Hedgehog.

Introduced for 1991, Sonic was in most ways a typical action platform game - cruise through a variety of interesting places, collect power-ups and score points, and attempt to beat the evil bad guy and save the world at the end of the game. Most people at the time said, "So it's like Mario Bros., then?" Those people hadn't played Sonic yet. Sonic the Hedgehog was a feast for the eyes with beautiful graphics, well-designed levels and a main character (the titular blue Hedgehog) who had more attitude than any chubby Italian plumber could ever achieve.

But of course, Sonic was so named because it (and he) was fast. Faster than any video game most people had ever played on a home system, so fast that one could easily become overwhelmed by the rapidly shifting scenery. And herein lay the challenge: control Sonic's speed while completing the mission (the levels were timed, of course) and you would be rewarded with one of the finest gaming experiences ever digitized.

And graphics and gameplay are only part of the story. Great music, by MIDI master Yuzo Koshiro, both highlights the speed of the game and defines the unique character of each Zone. Replay value is enhanced by the challenge of finding eight Chaos Emeralds, hidden within special stages that get progressively harder to navigate through. Find all eight and there's a very special surprise...which I won't reveal. You figure it out!

The only drawbacks are that once you figure out the secrets of harnessing Sonic's speed, the game is not that tough to complete (aside from the aforementioned Chaos Emerald challenge, which is a bear). And modern gamers who've been spoiled by the ability to constantly save their progress will probably be disappointed at the prospect of (gasp!) starting over anew every time, though there is a continue feature allowing two more tries from the same Zone.

Overall, an excellent game and - as mentioned earlier - the true "killer app" for the Genesis. (Sega eventually figured this out and began to sell the game as the "pack-in" title with the Genesis hardware package.) Eleven years on, I still find it immensely entertaining to pop that cartridge into my dusty old Genesis system and wheel Sonic to glory once again.

Highly recommended.

hondaboy :-D

This is simply one of those great old "wronged man" westerns. Douglas is perfect as the tormented marshal. Quinn also puts on a good show as a cattleman (although I sense a little too much "gangster" in his acting). But, all in all, a great western. Watch it.

I don't want to say too much about this movie. Let's just say that I've been a car fanatic all my life, and this film only helped to further my obsession.

The only reason I bought Le Mans is because I liked Steve McQueen -- and his driving -- in Bullitt. Le Mans is a very different movie, basically a 1.5-hour car chase with a little drama thrown in for good measure. And to those of you who say "but I don't like car chases that much," I say watch this movie anyway. You'll get a real feel for what it's like to be in a champ-caliber race car in one of the world's greatest races. (Not that I know what it's like, but I have a much better understanding after this film.)

And for those who do like this movie and are racing fans too, check out the list of stunt drivers in the credits. You'll find our man McQueen in there, as well a host of other 1970s road-course greats. As a matter of fact, if you've ever watched Speedvision's Legends of Motorsport series (a collection of old racing films), you'll realize just how good this movie is at portraying racing as it was then.

Heck, this movie is even better to watch than the omnipresent "in-car cams" at NASCAR events. That's how good this movie is. Am I exaggerating? I don't think so. Just go rent -- better yet, buy -- this film. Race fan or otherwise, you'll enjoy the ride.

Let's not start off on the wrong foot here. I appreciate the Star Wars series as a landmark in movie history, as a paragon of special effects, and as a cultural phenomenon. However, I don't understand why the "movie event of 1999" had to be so...mediocre.

Regardless of what George Lucas or anyone else says, Jar Jar appears to be the prime focus of this movie. No, not because he's incredibly important to the Star Wars saga (geez, I sure hope he's not, anyway) but because his inane portion of the dialogue and "acting" really seem to hit home with the kids. Consider the number of children you see wearing Jar Jar Binks T-shirts. Also consider that the single-most common Star Wars action figure bought at my particular discount retail store seems to be the "lovable" Jar Jar Binks. If lines like "How wude!" are the future of talking action figures, I may start melting some plastic. But never mind the merchandising, let's get back to the target audience. Kids love this movie and the three earlier editions, which is probably the main reason (besides massive amounts of money) for Lucas to make this one.

As a motion picture, I was unimpressed with Episode 1. All the special effects in the world can't make up for a generally boring story. But the thing is, no one can really regard this movie as just another story committed to film. You have to take it as a part of the Star Wars series.

In that context, it's still a boring story. But I got a kick out of seeing where the storylines began. Who knew that the decrepit Emperor Palpatine of Episode 4 started out as a bland Senator on Coruscant? Or that C-3PO was built by that annoying little monkey, Anakin? (Which I find hard to believe, by the way.)

It's not a special movie, but it's worth renting - after the next two come out. Then we'll see if Episode 1 really makes a difference in the Star Wars world.

Because it sure as heck didn't do anything on this planet.

I recently bought this movie and watched it again. Yeah, I still love it. The best part is, it's an action flick that's just about as well-made as any high-quality thriller. McQueen, as usual, plays the calm-cool-collected role down to a tee. For another example of this, see The Great Escape (also a well-made action movie).

But of course, you don't watch this movie merely for the plot and the atmosphere. Any true Bullitt fan watches for the car chase. It is, to put it simply, a cinema landmark. Never mind the fact that McQueen shifts about 47,000 times, or that all seven (!) of the Charger's hubcaps fall off. Oh, I'm exaggerating - It's more like 27,000 times. It's OK: such mistakes are forgivable, given that this is 1968 we're talking about. And you wouldn't think of watching a movie car chase now without expecting to see some airborne wheel trim.

The movie is worth buying for that chase alone. The surprise is that the rest of the picture isn't bad either.

Other recommendations for good car chases: Ronin (with Robert DeNiro) and The French Connection (with Gene Hackman). And I've also heard they're going to remake the classic Gone In 60 Seconds using Nicolas Cage as the con man. We'll see how that goes.