Reviews

"Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb" might prove that Stanley Kubrick is in fact the greatest director of all time. That's not to say "Dr. Strangelove" alone is his best work -- only that it proves a range of direction that has never been matched.

So many other directors are acclaimed for their ability to define a genre -- John Frankenheimer paved the road of action films; Billy Wilder was the king of comedy; and Alfred Hitchcock is of course the master of suspense.

But Kubrick arguably made significant contributions into each of these genres -- all while tackling forbidden subjects. You want action? Try "Full Metal Jacket." You want horror? Try "The Shining." You want science fiction? Try "2001: A Space Odyssey." You want crime? Try "The Killing."

You want comedy?

"Dr. Strangelove" is Kubrick's genius at work in a dark comedy. The movie laughingly shows the dangers of a nuclear holocaust when an insane general begins an unwarranted attack on communist Russia. Meanwhile, the U.S. president and other politicians try to figure out a way to avoid the earth's destruction.

Without taking anything away from Kubrick, it should be noted he has some help with "Dr. Strangelove." -- namely, Peter Sellers ("The Pink Panther"), who takes on three roles in the film, including the wacky title character, the U.S. president and a captain trying to bring the insane general to reason. Sellers is remarkably funny in each role, without overlapping any techniques. His characters truly have their own identity, and it's easy to overlook that the same man is playing all three roles.

Perhaps the most surprising performance, however, comes from George C. Scott ("Patton") as an egotistical general who is advising the president on the situation. Scott is hilarious -- there's no other word for it. His character is perfectly played: Although not entirely bright, the general is quite sure he is the smartest person in whatever room he's in. His lines are filled with stutters and uh's, as if he simply enjoys hearing his own voice even if he isn't sure what he is going to say.

But all acclaim for this film should rest with Kubrick, who also co-wrote the screenplay. His timing -- including the carefully timed camera shots of his actors -- is unmatched. The way each character enters the film is also superb.

Of course there is also a message being sent in his film. "Dr. Strangelove" was released at the height of the Cuban Missile Crisis. The anti-war sentiment Kubrick captured so well in "Full Metal Jacket" is attacked by yet another angle -- absurdity.

And, as always, he had to slight his message to get it through. This time he used satire.

Trying to keep in mind that this movie was made in the late 1960s, there are so many questionable calls in "To Sir, with Love" from a director's standpoint.

Starring Sidney Poitier, "To Sir, with Love" is the story of an English school teacher who tries to tackle a classroom of deviant students. And while the theme and even the script are well thought out, Director James Clavell (who co-wrote "To Sir, with Love" and 1963's "The Great Escape") makes a lot of choices that guarantee this movie will always be dated.

For example, when Poitier's character takes his class to a museum, Clavell chooses to show the experience by still photographs of the students looking at sculptures, while 1960 rock music plays in the background.

And speaking of music, Lulu's unspectacular title track from the movie is played three separate times during the movie, much to the distaste of anyone under 25.

Plus, there are small technical problems that should have been averted. A party near the end of the movie showcases a band singing without any microphones. A conversation in the hallway is difficult to hear because of the echo. Small details that current Hollywood filmmakers would never dare try to get away with.

All of that said, Poitier is brilliant, and makes this a film worth seeing. Poitier proved his ability to have fun with a character in 1963's "Lilies of the Field." He showed his tremendous ability to remain stoic in 1967's "In the Heat of the Night" (which actually came out after "To Sir, with Love"). What he brings to this role, however, is a spectacular example of how a character can gradually grow throughout a one-and-a-half hour movie.

A terrific example comes at the very beginning of the movie, when Poitier's character is in a bus surrounded by a group of lewd women. He remains emotionless for as long as he can, then shows just a hint of disgust, followed by just a hint of amusement.

That scene provides great foreshadowing for the rest of the movie, as Poitier's character remains completely emotionless to his students, then loses his temper with them, and finally begins to care for them. Near the end of the movie, he actually tears up.

Another good performance comes from Judy Geeson (Maggie Conway from TV's "Mad About You"). In this movie, Geeson plays one of the students who has a crush on Poitier's character. What makes her so fun to watch is not necessarily the chemistry she and Poitier have, but, instead the awkwardness that accompanies every scene they are in together.

All in all, performances and a suitable script make this movie worth seeing. The directoral choices are cumbersome at times, but do not weaken the movie as a whole.

I would not recommend the soundtrack, however.

It's interesting for a younger generation to watch movies such as "North by Northwest" to see just how much recent movies rip off original ideas.

"North by Northwest" is a spectacular suspense movie (I would not classify it as a thriller or action), with a keen script and even keener delivery of the lines. Cary Grant is commanding in his role as a fugitive from the law, while Eva Marie Grant is captivating as the femme fatale.

I did have my problems with the film. As with most movies of the period, it dragged on at points. While Grant and Saint have a nice on-screen chemistry, Hitchcock at times dwells too much on the duo and not enough on the intriguing storyline.

Plus, the movie has unnecessary exposition. There is a lot of emphasis on making the viewer realize Grant's character is a fast-thinking businessman at the opening of the movie, but the story never gets back to that. Grant's character never really has the chance to evolve, he just simply changes.

But overall, this movie triumphs because of the pace at which the viewer learns interesting details. Unlike most current Hollywood flicks in which the viewer has to wait until the end to learn anything (and the rest of the movie is spent trying to guess its secrets), "North by Northwest" lays down all its cards well before the movie's climax. The result is a story that is interesting throughout the entire film, as well as proof of Hitchcock's genius in direction.

Sometimes it's hard for movie reviewers to adequately discuss heavily artistic movies. With so many metaphors and imagery, the films become almost impressionistic in that viewers interpret the meaning so differently.

"American Psycho" fits the description well. The movie is so heavily dosed with abnormal scenes, viewers have to decide for themselves the message being sent.

Christian Bale plays a successful businessman in the 1980s with an insatiable appetite for killing. The movie is more of a confession than it is a story, with Bale's character becoming more insane with each passing scene.

"American Psycho" is a bit like "American Beauty" in its overwhelming artistic endeavors. What "American Beauty" did for suburbia in the 1990s, "American Psycho" tries to do for yuppie life in the 1980s. Both try to act as examples of what actually happens behind the facades of those who are rich and successful.

The movie also has a pretty remarkable, although underused, cast. Reese Witherspoon, Chloë Sevigny (nominated for an Oscar in "Boys Don't Cry") and Willem Dafoe all make appearances in the film, but really not much more than that.

However, Bale is spectacular as both a stuck-up yuppie and a psychopathic killer. What makes his performance - and the movie, for that matter - so disturbing is how believable Bale is at playing both parts at the same time, as well as being able to make the transition from one character to another.

Another disturbing element of the film is the haunting mixture of comedy with horror. One of the most amusing scenes in the film shows Bale's character becoming angry because of the impressive embossing of his co-workers' business cards. It's humorous, yes, but sickening when combined with the fact that he plans on killing one of the men because of the business card.

In spite of some troubling scenes in the film, "American Psycho" still has the ability to be a rewarding film for viewers. If for nothing else, it should be praised for stunning originality and terrific acting.

The science fiction surrounding "Frequency" is so incredibly far-fetched, most people familiar with the theme going into the movie won't think its makers can pull it off.

For a great deal of the movie, they don't.

However, after awhile, the you start suspending disbelief. The plot grows on you, and, before long, you are completely wrapped up in the story.

James Caviezel plays a police officer in the 1990s who, because of aurora borealis, is able to communicate via radio with his father (Dennis Quaid) in the 1960s. The two use the communication to avert a family disaster, only to find their meddling caused even more problems.

The problem with the movie is not the dialogue - in fact the scene when the two realize they're talking to each other is relatively believable. It's just that, after awhile, the complex history changes become overwhelming for the viewer. Instead of remembering one story line, the viewer has to remember multiple. For those viewers who thrive on being able to understand exactly what is happening in a film, "Frequency" can be frustrating at times.

About half way into the film, however, the viewers change how they watch the film. They let loose of the need to comprehend the science aspect of the movie, and focus more on the compelling adventure story.

The plot isn't the only thing that grows on the viewer. Set in Queens, N.Y., the film demands heavy New York accents from actors that take an awful long time to get used to. Like every other bothersome element of the film, however, the viewer begins to not even notice the accent.

Aside from the accents, the actors do a commendable job in this film. While Quaid seems to have a hard time playing a macho fireman, Caviezel is actually quite believable as a man who is battling the insanity of the multiple histories he remembers.

Overall, "Frequency" does a lot with the plot devices it uses. If viewers are able to not worry about believability from the onset, they will probably enjoy it even more.

There's no mistake that "U-571" is intended to be a suspense thriller - there is little dialogue and an huge emphasis on special effects and dramatic music.

And as a thriller, "U-571" is among the best in the category.

However, what puts "U-571" over the top is how intelligent it is when it tries to be more than a thriller. The movie is also a first-class drama, with superb acting, dialogue, plot and character development.

Set during a fictional naval mission from World War II, "U-571" tells the story of an American submarine crew sent to steal secret code information from the title Nazi submarine. However, during the mission, another Nazi submarine destroys the Americans' ship, leaving the crew stranded on an enemy ship in enemy territory.

The movie is able to accomplish a lot of difficult blending. Not only is it able to be both dramatic and action-packed, but it is also able to remain extremely detailed to naval lingo without being confusing to average viewers.

From an acting standpoint, the movie is a huge success. This is Matthew McConaughey's finest performance to date, and the supporting cast is equally superb. Few movies allow a character to be defined without words, but the view knows within the first minute McConaughey is on the screen exactly what his character is all about.

Harvey Keitel leads the list of co-stars, brilliantly portraying the ship's wise chief petty officer. Also terrific in the film is Jake Weber, who plays a suave operations commander who has to learn the ropes of being aboard a submarine.

All in all, there is nothing wrong with this movie. It perfectly gauges when to build tension, and when to relieve it. Its special effects are hardly noticeable because they fit in so seamlessly with the rest of the film. The sound is well distributed around the theater to give the viewer the feeling of actually being in the submarine. And the music is a masterpiece at setting moods of vulnerability, fear and triumph.

"U-571" will undoubtedly be chastised for creating a piece of fiction about historical events. However, some of the most successful historical movies draw a tangent away from the history books into a completely fictional story ("Titanic," "Saving Private Ryan"). "U-571" is no different.

This film deserves plenty of attention from viewers for what can only be called an achievement of action filmmaking.

I beg some casting director to put Samuel L. Jackson into a role where he doesn't have to be a bad-ass. It seems like every movie he makes has some speech where he takes his "Pulp Fiction" character with him.

It's not because he's a bad actor. On the contrary, he plays bad-ass better than anyone else in Hollywood.

It's just getting old.

Jackson's performance in "Rules of Engagement" is not the only thing that's old, however. Government cover-ups and high drama court scenes also lace this film, and they do so in the most predictable manner.

Jackson plays a marine officer who is charged with murder after ordering his troops to fire into a crowd of civilians outside the U.S. embassy in Yemen. He asks his longtime marine buddy (Tommy Lee Jones) to represent him.

This movie could have made an extremely intelligent war film. The pictures of the crowd after being massacred are terribly frightening, and audience members actually start to question their loyalty to Jackson's character. Such mixed feelings are refreshingly similar to those envoked from "Three Kings."

In fact, the entire first half of the movie has extremely well shot war scenes, plus surround sound used as effectively as it has ever been used.

Then predictibility sets in.

The audience becomes convinced that Jackson's character should be a hero, not a criminal. Jones' character delivers an emotional closing argument. The final scene of the movie shows captions of what happened to all of the characters in the movie.

What was so appealing about "Erin Brockovich" was that, despite being a movie about a court case, there was not one scene from inside the court. There's no such luck in "Rules of Engagement."

Plus, why do fictional movies insist on making epilogues? If a movie is based on a true story, it makes sense because the viewer is curious about where the characters are now. However, in "Rules of Engagement," some of the most compelling plot developments occur in the epilogue. It becomes a cop-out piece of cinema and is unfair to the viewer.

Despite all of its negatives, "Rules of Engagement" certainly has its moments. Jackson and Jones have a surprising amount of chemistry - much more than one would think considering their careers. Plus, those who enjoy fake courtroom drama would probably enjoy the cliches carried through in this film.

For the most part, however, "Rules of Engagement" is what most people find annoying about big-production Hollywood dramas - big name actors, but overwhelming predictibility.

Edward Norton's directing debut, "Keeping the Faith" is full of charm, wit and brains, but might be the slowest moving film of the year.

There is a lot of fun to be had at this movie, which tells the story of a rabbi (Ben Stiller) and a priest (Norton) who are best friends and both in love with the same woman (Jenna Elfman).

Despite the obvious possibility of religion jokes, this movie admirably only occasionally makes light of the characters' faiths. It actually handles the topic perfectly - it has plenty of humor, but within the dignified confines of the religious overtones.

The movie also has sharp performances all around. Stiller and Norton are terrificly blended as friends, and actually quite believable as hip spiritualists. Elfman ("Dharma & Greg") does the impossible by shedding her sitcom persona without losing any of her charm. And the three actors together have terrific chemistry.

Plus, the film has an intelligent theme throughout. Norton's character must deal with the temptation of sex in light of his vow to the church. Stiller's character must handle the fact he has fallen in love with someone outside of his faith.

So how can a movie with everything going for it still not be worth seeing?

It is unbearably long, and for no reason. The dialogue in the film, although well scripted, is often repetitive or obvious. The characters are given too much time to speak to each other, which simply results in lines being said over and over.

Pacing in this movie is indeed a big problem. The first half of the movie goes nowhere, and there is so little tension, it makes the plot to that point unmemorable. Once the ball does get rolling, there seems to be little deliberation on the already mentioned sharp themes. Three weeks go by for the characters to think about it, but then the tension is relieved without any healing process.

The ending is also a bit disillusioning, although it's hard to avoid that when the topic is about a love triangle with all good characters.

There will be a great deal of people who will see this movie and enjoy it greatly - as I did - but chances are most will still take a few glances at their watch periodically throughout the movie. No matter how many great things a movie does, it still shouldn't be recommended if it doesn't begin or finish well.

"Black and White" breaks nearly all of the rules of a traditional movie.

There is essentially no plot, only a set of circumstances. There are no central characters - instead there are about a dozen characters of equal importance. Of those dozen characters, none are protagonists and all are highly flawed individuals. The movie has the most conversational dialogue of any movie this year.

It's also probably the most boring movie of the year.

"Black and White" takes a glance at race relations between young blacks, and young whites who try to imitate them. But that's really all it takes - a glance. The rest of the movie uses tired stereotypes to try to poke fun at cultural differences. The movie is highly unsuccessful either as a drama or a comedy, however, and would really only have worked as a true to life documentary. (As a subplot, one of the characters in the movie - a movie maker played by Brooke Shields - is making a documentary about white youth imitating black culture.)

However, knowing that every line in this movie was scripted and acted defeats any type of message the movie was trying to make. It's unfortunate to say the movie could have benefited from more of a Hollywood feel, but it at least should have had a similar formula.

Additionally, the movie makes extremely poor use of some high name talent. Elijah Wood, Brooke Shields, Robert Downey Jr., Ben Stiller and Claudia Schiffer all come away with weak performances - mostly because of weakly written characters. Maybe the most entertaining performance is by Mike Tyson, who plays himself and, for the most part, is pretty true to life. He doesn't make himself out to be a hero, which goes a little ways in helping the credibility in the film.

It's unfortunate that with such a volatile theme, the script of "Black and White" could become such a dud. Nevertheless, there is no entertainment value to this film, and even less of a lesson to be learned.

Following the musical triumph of "The Lion King," and the sheer magnificance of "The Prince of Egypt," there should have been a lot of enthusiasm about their creative meld - "The Road to El Dorado."

But the genius of Elton John, Tim Rice and Hans Zimmer (all who won Oscars for original music in "The Lion King"); and Dreamworks' animation division (who received critical acclaim for "The Prince of Egypt") don't bring enough to "The Road to El Dorado" to make it a movie worth watching.

"The Road to El Dorado" follows the story of two Spanish con artists who hitch a ride across the Atlantic and stumble upon a native civilization that mistakes them for gods.

It's tough to handle that everyone in this movie speaks English, although for practical purposes it's probably more handy than having small children try to read subtitles. But the movie still takes Euro-centricism to a disturbing level. For heaven's sake, the tribe actually calls its city "El Dorado."

That's not the half of it, though. The two Spanish protagonists are white enough to be from Norway (although the other, evil Spaniards are dark-skinned). They are voiced by Kevin Kline (who's from Missouri) and Kenneth Branagh (who's from Northern Ireland). Members of the tribe - the movie never says exactly who they are or where they're from - are generally slow-witted, with the exception of a manipulative thief (voiced by Rosie Perez) and an evil priest (voiced by NArmand Assante).

That's not to say the movie is racist; in fact the movie is for the most part kind-hearted. But the movie is highly insensitive about race, and promotes an awful lot of stereotypes to children at an impressionable age.

However, there are plenty of other reasons young children should be discouraged from seeing this movie. There are disturbingly explicit sexual scenes, and a lot of adult humor, such as Kline's character yelling "holy ship" during the voyage across the ocean.

Children's movies seems to often struggle with this point - a movie aimed at children still needs to appeal to the adults who are taking those children to see it. Advertisers are quick to point out whenever a critic says "fun for all ages" about any film.

"The Road to El Dorado" seems to overdo its attempt to involve adults in the movie by sacrificing its innocence. It's not simply a matter of grown-up themes like "The Lion King" tackled with a character's death. On the contrary, "The Road to El Dorado" only uses adult themes of the most immature nature.

Add to all of these problems a weak soundtrack - weak as far as animated musicals go. John's songs are actually OK, although the movie probably would have benefited had he not provided nearly all of the song's vocals in the movie itself.

At every level of execution, something went wrong with this movie. Instead of being a promising children's movie, it turned out to be a highly flawed movie inappropriate for younger viewers.

Few thrillers explore just how terrifying death can be. Most are concerned with mysteries, chases and nearly immortal bad guys.

"Final Destination," however, seems to want to put the entire focus of fright on death itself. Viewers find themselves thinking much more about how they think characters are going to die, and less about why.

Such a result can be chiefly attributed to the plot. Devon Sawa plays a high school student set to take a class trip to France. However, before the plane takes off, he envisions its explosion and demands to be removed from the plane. The commotion forces several other passengers off the plane, and, taking off without them, it explodes in mid-air.

For the rest of the movie, those who got off the plane are stalked by death itself, who apparently was not amused by being cheated out of several lives.

There's little in terms of a story here, and the acting is just sort of blah. But by having no real villain in the film, it frees the death scenes into becoming among the most elaborate productions of any movie. There are no guns, axes or knives (well, almost no knives) that are standard in every other horror flick. Instead, this movie creates death scenes that require complex chains of events.

The thought this movie must have taken is amazing — not only to imagine the half-dozen death scenes that are in the movie — but to create circumstances that mislead the viewer into thinking others will occur.

Execution helps pull everything together. As elaborate and fast-paced as the action sequences are, the viewer can still figure out how it works because of perfect camera work.

The problems with this movie all result from a fruitless effort to make the movie overly intelligent. For example, as Sawa's character tries to figure out how to cheat death again, he breaks in to the mortuary to visit death's first victim after the plane crash. If that weren't ridiculous enough, he is confronted by the mortician who tells him (in a spooky voice) the secret behind death. This scene could (and should) have simply been deleted from the movie.

When the movie is not trying to be too intellectual, however, it's terrificly frightening and makes viewers squirm in their seats. So far this year, it sets the standard for thriller movies.

Although the set up of "The Skulls" is relatively formulated, the movie takes some pretty good departures from the norm of thriller movies.

That's not to say the movie is completely unpredictable. On the contrary, there are a lot of punches (both literally and figuratively) the viewer sees coming. However, "The Skulls" follows a different method than most thrillers of building and easing tension — relying less on cloak-and-dagger scenes and more on situational problems that characters have to solve.

Joshua Jackson plays an ivy league college student who gains entry to a secret society that includes senators and judges. Although thrust into a world of wealth and power, he begins to question his loyalty to the Skulls following the mysterious death of his friend who was investigating the secret society.

Although the premise has been used before ("The Firm"), this movie has plenty of original content. In fact, this movie's best quality is that it doesn't have a lot of the plot twists that are standard in thriller movies. For example, the viewer truly does not know who to trust throughout the movie (although some of the untrustworthy characters are pretty apparent).

The most unfortunate aspect of the movie is the climax. Instead of being unpredictable, the ending is just ridiculous. Although it resolves the conflicts in the movie, it strongly tests the viewer's ability to put up with the believability of the secret society.

From an acting standpoint, "The Skulls" delivers neither remarkable nor damaging performances. Everyone plays their part well, but no one really stands out.

What does stand out, although many viewers will not notice it, is a unique camera use throughout the film. This movie is beautifully lit, with soft glows gracing the set and characters. However, in a thriller like this, such lighting effects might be out of place.

"The Skulls" is not a tremendous movie, but does what it sets out to do — make the viewer tense and eager to see what happens to the movie's characters.

It's tough to make a martial arts movie with any degree of original fight scenes. After all, how many different ways can somebody punch another person?

"Romeo Must Die" sure tries hard to break the mold. By combining traditional martial arts with effects reminiscent of "The Matrix," this film is able to add flavor without moving the movie into a new genre. In other words, with too many effects, this movie would move into the realm of fantasy or science fiction. Instead, effects are just used to enhance fight scenes to give them extra pop.

Fight scenes are indeed the thrust of this movie. Although this movie has an appreciable storyline, too many of the plot twists are predictable and the dialogue is a bit subpar.

Jet Li stars as Han, who comes to America after hearing his brother (Jon Kit Lee) has been the victim of a war between rival gangs - one of which is led by his father (Henry O). As he begins his investigation, he becomes romantically interested in the daughter (Aaliyah) of the other gang's leader (Delroy Lindo).

If Li reminds viewers of Jackie Chan, he should. The methods and props used by the two martial artists are strikingly similar. But while Chan seems to always add an element of comedy in his action sequences, Li brings an overwhelming sense of intensity to his role. It might be an overstatement to call his performance remarkable, but he at least fits the billing of the part.

At times, the special effects in the movie are less than fluid, and the viewer can tell the scene has been altered. More often than not, however, the effects are so seamless the viewer wonders whether the sequence was done with computers or the actors were that acrobatic.

And although "Romeo Must Die" seems to borrow a lot of techniques - from "The Matrix" or "Three Kings" or "Face Off" - the melange of these techniques creates a relatively original and entertaining film.

Minnie Driver's greatest ability as an actress is to find chemistry with her on-screen partners. She was brilliant, for example, with Matt Damon in "Good Will Hunting" and John Cusack in "Grosse Pointe Blank."

Even those performances, however, do not evoke the tremendous amount of charm Driver has in "Return to Me."

In this heart-warming movie, Driver plays Grace, a woman who has been given a heart transplant and is self-conscious about dating. However, sparks fly when she meets Bob (David Duchovny), whose wife died a year prior. Tension builds, however, because of Grace's reluctance to tell Bob about the heart transplant and because - unbeknownst to either of them - her new heart came from Bob's wife.

Driver and Duchovny have chemistry that melts the screen. Then again, whoever is on the screen with Driver seems perfectly matched, including Carroll O'Connor who plays her grandfather and Bonnie Hunt who plays her best friend.

Hunt also makes her directoral debut with the film, which actually does not seem put together very well. She makes some odd choices in developing the story, especially in the beginning when the wife of Duchovny's character dies. Instead of some build up to the fatal car accident, the scene shifts from the husband and wife dancing to the husband walking by her as she is wheeled to an emergency room.

Indeed, the scene splitting in the film seems awkward and haphazard. The storyline is obvious to the viewer within minutes of the movie, but is still treated as a surprise when actually spelled out. But what Hunt lacks in a directing effort, she more than makes up for in her performance and in co-writing a wonderfully personable script. So much of the character in this film is created by cute little one-line jokes that seem almost out-of-place in a movie. In fact, those jokes make the dialogue seem as if it could actually be delivered in real life.

Similarly, other small details give the film a credibility uncommon with most Hollywood productions. The timing with which actors deliver lines is realistic - people talk over each other and there are missing beats after humorous lines. The result is often some missed dialogue - either because too many characters are talking or because the audience is laughing - but there's also a feeling as if you're listening to someone's conversation instead of watching a movie.

This is obviously an actor's movie. While the film might have benefited from a more standard line of direction, Hunt should be applauded for putting the strong script in the hands of the actors for interpretation. Many directors would have streamlined the movie to the degree that it would lose its personal feel.

It's arguable that the movie is predictable and the story doesn't move much. However, anyone going to this movie simply with the intention of having a good time is sure to do so.