Reviews

It was intriguing. It would have been better with a Pink Floyd score. It wasn't so much a movie as a Twilight Zone without Rod Serling to make it seeem important. I think I would have understood it better if I'd watched it again, but I somehow feel that understanding it is missing the point. This movie is dada revivalism. Also, why would I want to sit through it a second time? It was hard enough to sit through it once.

I'm giving this movie three stars, because I've seen movies that are much, muich worse, and more than two because the bartender was quirky, but really, some movies invite speculation and others invite somnabulism.

Scorcese tries desperately hard to mimic the Italian masters he worshiped as a youth. Alas, he settles on Antonionio's L'Aventurra and succeeds in making the most boring movie of the last 30 years.

Perhaps if any of the characters in this movie weren't so incredibly despicable and obnoxious it might be possible to work up some feelings towards them, but since they are all people I would never want to meet in real life I had a hard time working up any sympathy for them. I just wish that they had all suffered a lot more than they did.

I hope that Scorcese and DeNiro suffer for making this wretched piece of crud.

Truly a waste of an evening. A terrible movie on every level.

First of all, the theatrical packaging for this movie totally misrepresents it as a romantic gay comedy. A third of the way into the film it turns into an AIDS tragedy. Nothing wrong with that, but it's not what I was expecting when I rented it.

The previous posters seem to think this movie is a comedy. I must have seen a different movie from them. I agree it's a good film, but I didn't find anything comic about it. I was crying throughout the last half hour or so.

Well, it's an interesting film and I think it's worth seeing. I just wonder why all gay movies have to be about AIDS.

That said, I think it's a good portrayal of a presumably straight man falling for a gay man and embracing gay sex. The actor playing Lucas does an excellent job as the confused straight boy who finds himself falling in love with Martin no matter how hard he tries to fight it.

I just wish someone would write a gay movie where nobody has AIDS.

Ken

I've seen every James Bond film, including the original TV version of Casino Royale and Die Another Day manages to make it into the bottom of the mediocre pile. It's nowhere near as bad as the embarrassing Diamonds are forever, the painful Moonraker, or the nearly unwatchable Man With A Golden Gun, but it's still pretty bad and is probably the worst entry since Octopussy.

For one thing, Bond is thoroughly incompetent throughout the movie. He fails in his mission objectives, he gets captured, he doesn't escape, and he remains clueless as to the identity of his adversaries. Sure, he can surf and handle a sword, but he's a lousy spy.

Most Bond movies have relatively weak plots but this one seems totally rambling and inconsequential. What exactly were the scorpions meant to symbolize? Do we care? And why Iceland? Apparently just because it was cool, since it had no intrinsic meaning to the villain. Then again, this villain is one of the least fleshed out I've ever seen in a Bond movie.

In some ways this was almost a retrospective of Bond movies, as the director tried to lift a scene from all the previous ones. I was slightly reminded of the homage scenes in On Her Majesty's Secret Service, but at least there the retrospectives had a narrative point. Here it just feels heavy-handed.

Nobody is going to get any awards for acting in this movie. Halle Barry is miscast as Jinx and serves more as a distraction than a partner. The villain seemed like a pale imitation of John Malkovich's character in Johnny English. Judi Dench can play M in her sleep and it looks as if she's doing so this time. The obligatory Q scene felt forced. And I'm still trying to figure out why they felt the need to humiliate poor Moneypenny at the end.

If Brosnan is going to make another Bond film before he retires the role I hope they get a director who understands the Bond mystique, because this one seems to think it's all about blowing things up while making jokes about your genitals.

Anyone sick to death of the horrible Capra schlockfest, "It's a Wonderful Life", would do themselves a favor by viewing this non-sentimental love story featuring Stewart and his Vertigo co-star, Kim Novak.

I'm quite surprised to read some other reviews and see how many people are panning this movie. Oh well, it's not the first time I've seen people with no taste.

Everyone else has already given plot descriptions so I won't bother. Stewart and Novak are great. Lanchester, Gingold, Lemmon, and Kovaks put in fine performances. The story is a subtle blend of romance and allegory. And you have a feel good ending that doesn't leave you in need of a insulin injection like Capra's movie does.

It's a shame BB&C isn't shown every holiday season instead. I'd much rather see Hermione Gingold on Christmas Eve than that Clarence bozo.

I'd heard a recording of Broderick singing Trouble the day before this aired so I was pretty sure it was going to be awful, but I figured I had to watch it anyway or I wouldn't be justified in bashing it.

Man oh man, what a stinkeroo this one was! Broderick is a talented actor but you'd never know it from watching his emotionless performance in this incredibly flat movie. I knew he wouldn't be Robert Preston but he wasn't even Matthew Broderick. Maybe Nathan Lane would have been a better choice. Great Honk, Brian Stokes Mitchell would have been a better choice! Mayor Shinn to the contrary, this Professor Hill was no spellbinder.

It's not fair to single out Matthew since the entire cast was incredibly dull and plain. The Shinns apparently didn't realize that their characters were meant to be comical so they played it straight. Nobody told Mrs. Paroo she was supposed to have an Irish accent which kind of killed the coronet player joke. No one told the children that this was supposed to be 1912 so they would have blended just as easily into an episode of Dawson's Creek. The movie didn't give us anybody who cared about anything and so it was impossible to care about any of the characters. I tend to expect this from network television but this is The Music Man, a show full of colorful characters. Whose decision was it to make everyone as bland and as lifeless as a Star Trek bridge crew?

Some of the filming decisions were a little strange too. Marian seducing Charlie the Anvil Salesman in broad daylight??? An entire night passing between Harold's arrest and his trial??? And why does Harold leave Marian and go back to his hotel room alone when his goal up until that moment had been "collecting his commission?" What should have been an exciting climax was ruined by monumental pacing problems.

On the plus side, you still have Meredith Wilson's score and despite the director's best efforts, a few of the songs are still listenable. The School Board does the best job with their numbers as they seem to be the only ones in the movie that were allowed to have personalities.

Comparisons to the 1962 movie are inevitable and I never expected this Disneyfied version to match that gem, but this movie doesn't even come close to an episode of Matlock. I give it 3 out of 10 stars and it only scores that high because of the barbershop quartet.

I'll come right out and say it: Peter Sellers made a better James Bond than Roger Moore. However, this one and A View to a Kill are at least watchable.

For one thing, the plot is closely modeled on the best Bond movie, From Russia With Love. All Bond has to do is retrieve a coding device. His main opponent is a blond hunk who's even stronger than he is. The supporting players act like real people most of the time. And, best of all, they cut way back on all the gimmicks and gadgets and let Bond use his fists and wits to get out of his predicaments.

Unfortunately, this is still Roger Moore we're talking about and every time he does a stunt all believability goes out the window. There's also the dreadful scene with Blofeld at the beginning and an obnoxious teeny-bopper. I would have preferred seeing more of Ilse and a lot less of Bibi.

In fact, I don't really like seeing Americans in Bond films. They never seem to fit in.

Anyways, this one isn't as mindnumbingly stupid as most of the other Roger Moore films so it's a diverting way to spend an evening. I'm not sure I'd rank it in the top ten Bond movies, but it's probably close, and it was certainly the best one since On Her Majesty's Secret Service.

I'd still rather rent From Russia With Love or Where Eagle Dare, but that's just me.

This movie compares favorably with any horror movie that's been made in the last 25 years, partly because it doesn't take itself real seriously and partly because the teen cast in this one is engaging and talented. The real stars though are MacDowall, Sarandon, and Stark. Roddy brings just the right amount of hamminess and nobility to Peter Vincent while Sarandon and Stark make for one of the creepiest couples in movies.

The movie is filled with subtle touches recognizing all the vampire movies that came before and does a great job of integrating vampire "lore" into a world where everyone thinks vampires only exist in the movies.

The movie is nicely filmed and the special effects don't seem at all dated.

All in all, a great pic. Excellent acting, a witty, intelligent script, good music and visual effects, and a finale that knocks your socks off. I'd give this flick 8 out of 10 stars and I rarely give any movie made in the last 30 years more than 5 or 6.

I hadn't see this movie in years but since AMC was running it last night I took another look.

First, I was very happy to see one of my favorite actors, Thayer David, playing the villain. Dark Shadows fans may remember Thayer as Ben Stokes. I consider him one of the best character actors of all time. It's always nice to find him in a new role.

As for the movie, well, I try to be generous with older movies. What looks silly today probably looked very impressive 50 years ago. The important thing is that the acting never gets as dumb as the special effects. Everyone is the main cast, including Pat Boone, plays it straight and that makes everything work.

Okay, so we all know the story is ridiculous and the special effects are laughable. So why am I recommending it? Because despite the silliness, it all works together and makes you WANT to belive in it.

If you're looking for great cinema, look elsewhere. But if you want to have a good time for a couple of hours watching a talented cast in an entertaining story, you could do a lot worse.

And maybe it's just me, but I kept kept wanting to see Alec and Hans make out. I thought their love story had a lot more potential than Mason and Dahl's.

I guess I'd give this movie 2 1/2 stars out of 5. It's not great, and you have to forgive a lot, but overall I think it holds up a lot better than most movies of its time.

P.S. I liked the duck. I think she added a visual interest without being Disney cute.

When people ask me what my favorite movie is, I never have to think very long. 8 1/2 always tops the list no matter what other movie tries to supplant it. Even after seeing it a dozen times I still get a thrill when Guido finally figures it all out and the music begins for the final sequence.

This movie deserves more than ten stars. I give it ten and a half.

I think the last time I saw this movie was probably over thirty years ago on the late-nite movie during Errol Flynn week. The local PBS station just showed it tonight and I was very impressed. I hardly knew who Bette Davis was back then, but now that I do know her, I was pleasantly surprised not to see her in this movie. Her Elizabeth was so unlike what I've come to expect from Davis that it was like seeing her for the first time.

Flynn, of course, is Flynn, and I refuse to say anything bad about a guy as handsome as him that wears thigh-high boots throughout the movie.

I thought the script was intelligent, the dialogue realistic, and the pacing pretty good. Yes, it flagged a couple of times, but never for more than a moment and the next scene picked it right up again. Except for de Haviland, the supporting cast doesn't have much to do and Vincent Price is more or less wasted. Those are minor quibbles, however, as overall the movie seems to have held up amazingly well.

I gave it a rating of 9 stars. It's not perfect, but it's very good, and Bette Davis is outstanding. And did I mention Flynn's boots?

While not the best Bond movie by any means, OHMSS would be the last decent one for many years. The Bond franchise had already started to slip with the silly You Only Live Twice, and Diamonds are Forever would be worse. Then there was the seemingly endless supply of bad Roger Moore movies. While Moore would eventually make a couple of good Bond movies (though the only one that comes to mind right now is View To a Kill) none of them come close to OHMSS and Lazenby makes a much better Bond.

The movie does have flaws. It's badly paced and Telly Savalas is a comic book version of Blofeld. For all that, it's watchable and even quite entertaining in places which is more than can be said for Live and Let Die or Man With A Golden Gun.

So yeah, after the first four classic Bond movies, OHMSS was probably the best one until Dalton took over the role. And the music is great.

Apparently not for everyone, this is a quintessential example of a 60's farce. As such it hasn't aged very well and some sequences, especially the slapstick finale, fall flat.

Other scenes are as hilarious now as they were then: The Berlin Wall shots, the school for spies, anything with Orson Welles, Deborah Kerr, or Woody Allen, and the segment with Q and Peter Sellers. All the actors are at their best: Ursula Andress (the original Bond girl) as Vesper, David Niven as Sir James, and the countless character actors who show up in small roles.

Of course you can't talk about this movie without mentioning the sensational soundtrack and Dusty Springfield's "The Look of Love." This movie is a feast for the ears as well as the eyes.

It probably is a bit too long. By the time you get to the finale you're likely to be so burned out that you can't even begin to appreciate the slapstick. And Hera help you if you're watching this on commercial television! Still, this movie has so many classic bits in it that I think it should be required viewing for anyone who's sense of humor has advanced beyond Saturday Night Live sketch movies.

I first saw this movie on TV one Christmas Eve about 35 years ago and I've tried to see it just about every Christmas since then. I bought the video a few years ago just so I wouldn't have to depend on the local stations to show it. (They always cut the Lincoln sequence anyway, the rats!) I've never seen a colorized version and I don't think I want to. I like the way the gowns look in black and white! Virginia Dale is a vision in the "Easy to Dance With" sequence and colorizing that dress would ruin the whole effect.

All the songs are great, the dancing's great, and the interplay between Crosby and Astaire is downright witty. I much prefer this movie over the sappier White Christmas with Bing and Danny Kaye. People have talked about this movie being made in simpler times, but I think it has a level of cynical sophistication missing from the later movie. Check out the ending where the camera pulls back to reveal that the Inn is really a set on a soundstage. It's touches like this that make this movie a classic.

There's just one thing I want to know? How do I get to Connect-ticut?

I was surprised to see so many negative comments here. The movie wasn't perfect, but it was well-played and the NYC settings and media involvement gave it some visual interest that is lacking in more traditional versions. The liberties that were taken with the script didn't really bother me very much.

Things I especially liked were the excellent soundtrack and Bill Murray's Polonius. Murray can be very hit or miss for me but here he was spot-on perfect. Kyle MacLachlan was also quite good. He was suitably threatening as Claudius, yet still handsome enough to make Gertrude's interest in him plausible.

All in all, an interesting variation on a classic and an entertaining way to spend a couple of hours.

I mean, let's face it. These days any movie that doesn't have a car chase automatically gets at least a 5 or a 6 from me.

An extremely disturbing movie almost totally devoid of any humor. The moral of the story is that it doesn't matter how big a liar or a screw-up you are so long as you aren't a pothead.

My recommendation: Don't bother. Rent Mystery Men instead.

Rape. That's what the makers of this movie did to this charming off-Broadway classic. I'd heard terrible things about it when the movie came out so I didn't bother seeing it in the theater. When I saw it on the shelf in Blockbuster, I figured why not?

Why, oh why, would have been the better question. Why was this movie ever made? I can't imagine anyone being pleased with the result. Fans of the play will be left shaking their heads, and anyone coming on this for the first time will be left wondering what all the fuss was about.

Lifeless staging, stiff performances, actors who possess no charisma or charm...what were they thinking? The Forbidden Broadway troupe does a number about how Hollywood will always turn a Broadway hit into a bomb and this movie is a classic example. In some insane attempt to be politically correct they even replace the play's only showstopper with one of the most trite and inane bits of music ever filmed.

Well, I turned it off after that. This movie simply wasn't worth wasting my time. The only reason I'm taking my time to write this review is on the off chance I can save some other fan of the play from the unpleasant experience that is this movie.

0 stars. Go buy the OCR instead to get an idea of what this was supposed to be.