Reviews

Speed from 1994 is by no means a perfect movie. There are some moments that are ridiculous and some of the situations and dialogue makes you cringe and roll your eyes.

Yet for some moments of stupidity and ridiculousness, it also had some very clever writing to it allowing the hero (Keanu Reeves) to be a step ahead of the bad guy (Dennis Hopper) at times, the cinematography is some of the most beautiful camera shots I have ever seen on film, and though character development was minimal you still cared about the characters and they all had believable chemistry.

Despite its flaws Speed was a movie that stayed busy for two whole hours to deliver its audience pure entertainment and that's what it gave us with some clever writing, great stunts and great attention to detail.

Naturally it was a huge hit with critics and audiences alike and solidified Reeves action movie career as well as that of the then unknown Sandra Bullock who became a household name following it's success.

Naturally a sequel could be made well if enough attention to detail was given as it was in part 1.

Well director Jan De Bont who directed the original Speed and Twister literally compromised the entire premise of the Speed franchise by having the setting be a slow moving cruise ship.

In the first Speed it was very cleverly set up to have the first action sequence be on an elevator, the second on the speeding bus and the final act on a subway train. All things that could have their speed go out of control as the title suggested.

A slow moving cruise ship as the setting for Speed 2?... Hmm... Not quite as Speedy.

Of course Keanu Reeves while he has been ridiculed over the years actually grew the brain Dennis Hopper's character told him not to grow in the first Speed movie and said he wouldn't return as Jack Traven from the first film because he disliked the script.

Boy was he smart right off the bat. Bullock also initially said no to returning as Annie but agreed eventually because 20th Century Fox agreed to finance her dream movie Hope Floats if she came back.

Keanu was replaced by Jason Patric whose notable credits prior were The Lost Boys and Sleepers.

And off we go on a cruise. As you would predict from a slow moving setting the main problem is this movie is very boring.

It's almost all just a slow sailing ship of characters we couldn't care less about except the villain played by Willem Dafoe and Bullock and Patric have zero chemistry whereas her and Reeves felt like a natural couple in part 1.

Reeves is definitely a wooden actor but in part 1 he still made you care about his character because he genuinely wanted to keep hostages alive and everyone safe. He also put down his tough guy cop image at times and wasn't afraid to show genuine human emotion.

Here Patric is an aloof drip whose character is a complete bore and has nothing interesting about him at all.

Bullock who was not only likable in part 1 but also responded like a pro in trying to prevent the bomb from blowing up the bus, is annoying and whiny here.

In part 1 she only occasionally got whiny or freaked out but only in situations where you would expect her to do so.

She was also smart and quick to do what was asked of her in the situation. Here she is a lot dumber and way too whiny to the point it's hard to watch. Is this the Annie we liked so much in Speed 1?

Willem Dafoe brings some of the goods as the bad guy but he certainly is no match for Dennis Hopper.

In the first movie Hopper was a credible villain whose motives made sense. He wanted money and used his expertise of explosives from his days as a bomb squad cop to get the police to give him his requested ransom.

Simple motive, easy tip understand.

Here Dafoe's motive doesn't make much sense and while he is clearly the best part of this otherwise mess of a movie, he isn't a credible villain because he is still pretty low key in comparison to Hopper and you just want to know the whole time what he is doing. In Speed 1 that was all laid out and answered for the audience.

While the speeding bus was able to do some crazy stunts effectively, the cruise ship only has one towards the very end and by that time it's been so lagging you don't even care.

Also as aforementioned Speed had some cheesy dialogue, some of which was funny and some just stupid.

But any of the original's stupid dialogue is like the works of Shakespeare compared to the stupidity of the dialogue here.

While some of part 1's dialogue just made my eyes roll, in this it's so bad I legitimately cringed.

I don't feel the movie is the massive bomb it's made out to be but I still don't recommend it.

The first movie just career about entertaining it's audience and had enough material to do it.

This is set on a slow ship where nothing interesting really happens.

The characters are either unnecessary or just bad. Even Dafoe's few fresh moments he brings as the villain are not enough to make up for other character shortcomings.

Sandra Bullock has said she regrets this movie and Keanu is nowhere to be found. I think that should tell you everything.

I won't put it in my top ten worst movies list but it's a forgettable movie that should be forgotten.

Speed 1 is a movie I can watch over and again and always be entertained. Aside from a little bit of Dafoe's act there is no other entertainment to be found here.

Stick with the original. It's imperfect but you will never be bored.

This will have you constantly looking at your watch to see when it ends.

It's a good thing Sandra Bullock's career survived from this because Patric and De Bonts didn't.

Keeping my views on abortion out of this review I am focusing on the movie itself.

What I like about this movie aside from the acting and dialogue is that it's not really trying to get you to pick a side on abortion so much as it's informing you of what both pro-choice and pro-life have to offer while offering some humor and insight along the way.

This was Alexander Payne's first film as director and while he would get better a few years later with Election, About Schmidt and Sideways which remains his best film in my opinion (I still haven't seen a few of his others so my opinion may change later) this was a very brave start and one that overall works.

However it is a far from perfect film. While Dern and the cast are all excellent and the pacing is fine for about 70 or so minutes the last 25 or so minutes were so slow and the movie had run out of gas for me completely which weakened it significantly.

Dern does some of her best acting to be sure, Burt Reynolds gives a cringey but very well acted cameo near the end and Kurtwood Smith and Mary Kay Place are good as the pro life people who enter Dern's life.

Another complaint I have in addition to the painfully slow ending is David Graf's disappointingly small performance as the judge. Of course most audiences will remember Graf as Tackleberry from Police Academy but I liked seeing him in this smaller and more serious role.

However I was expecting to see him in another scene or two but he is only in the movie about three or so minutes.

Other than Tackleberry I just really liked him as a character actor in general. Payne did well utilizing him in a more serious role albeit one that should have been expanded.

If you're thinking of passing on this movie out of concern that it will go against your views about abortion my advice is go into it with an open mind as to me it seems more just to make you think about both sides of the argument versus just trying to get you to take a side.

I like that neutral approach and overall recommend the film.

Payne made better movies but aside from it's ending this is a pretty impressive directorial debut.

Every Christmas Santa Clause 1&2 makes my annual holiday viewing list.

The first film while juvenile to be sure does really capture a lot of holiday magic that may desire in seasonal movie viewing.

A sequel which came along eight years later is honestly about the same as the first film. Juvenile but magical in a pleasant way.

Then four years later came the most recently released theatrical film which continued another 16 years later with a miniseries on Disney+.

With that being said I always delayed watching this film as I had heard nothing but bad things about it.

I am a big fan of Tim Allen and Martin Short but both starred in the mediocre Jungle 2 Jungle together which while somewhat amusing I don't feel had the best chemistry between the two actors and was only mildly funny at best.

So their pairing not working the best in that film as well as the bad reviews for this one left me worried. It to date is the only Santa Clause film to receive a negative review from Leonard Maltin, a critic whom I don't always agree with but did on the first two films and listened to him on this one because if this was the first one he panned I would safely assume it had some problems.

Well this year I had a little extra time to check this panned part 3 out. In addition to being critically panned it also was the lowest grossing SC film. It still did well at the box office but it's numbers were a dramatic drop from the first two films.

Tim Allen has done worse films and even worse Christmas films. This third part makes Christmas with the Kranks his forgettable 2004 pairing with Jamie Lee Curtis look like The Godfather parts 1&2.

Still as a Santa Clause film this is the weakest entry and it's easy to explain why.

Ultimately it's just not as fun as the first two. The magic gets lost simply because the story is significantly weaker.

Allen and Elizabeth Mitchell whom he married at the end of part 2 are now living pretty unhappy lives at the North Pole.

Mitchell is expecting a baby but is overwhelmed and having a hard time adjusting to her new home in the far north.

She has become a teacher which she was in her previous life at the North Pole but her students aren't really embracing their education and she feels her parents need to be with her to get through this difficult time.

So Scott (Allen) goes down to the U. S. and summons his mother and father in law (Alan Arkin and Ann-Margret) flies them to their home in the North Pole and pretends they are in Canada where Scott works as a toy maker.

Naturally, Mitchell's parents are suspicious of their son in law and daughters whereabouts while Short portraying Jack Frost threatens to harm Christmas and steal Scott's spotlight as Santa.

There lies a huge problem as the story is rather dreary and Short while amusing goes a bit too far in his role. This makes his performance in Jungle 2 Jungle look Oscar worthy in comparison.

Also Arkin and Ann-Margret are uninteresting in their roles. Arkin is essentially playing the likable jerk in a much more family-friendly manner as he did in Little Miss Sunshine which he won the Oscar for the same year as this film.

And Margret is essentially playing the same likable quirky person she did in the Grumpy Old Men films with Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau. However in those films her character was necessary and essential to the plot, here she is an unfortunate distraction.

Three great actors talent goes to waste here which also weakens the movie.

While not as pleasant or engaging as the first two films it's also not a boring sequel hence not as bad as you have heard.

But there are still lots of problems. Judge Reinhold and Wendy Crewson return as Scott's ex-wife and Crewson's second husband a psychiatrist.

In the second film their characters weren't super necessary to return but their appearances weren't wasted either as they brought some laughs and warmth to their characters that was missing a little bit from the first movie.

Here Reinhold tries much too hard to push his character on us and while he wasn't the most likable character in the first film, and slightly redeemed himself in part 2 he had good chemistry with Allen in the first two flicks and strengthened them as a result.

Here Reinhold and Crewson are unnecessary and should have been written out. Even Arkin and Margret make an inside joke about this fact later in the movie.

Reinhold tries much too hard to be funny with his role whereas in the first two films he got natural laughs responding to Allen's character.

Mitchell is still appealing. I always for whatever reason think of her as a poor woman's Michelle Pfieffer. A pretty face who has some talent in front of the camera and plays similar characters.

The movie gets much better towards the end but before that we keep waiting for the good stuff and it comes too little and too late.

Are there worse sequels? Definitely. Is this a totally horrible film? Not in the slightest.

However it's easy to see why audiences and critics got tired with this franchise with this watchable but mediocre sequel.

I've seen it now it wasn't too bad but I think next year I will stick to my original plan and just stream the first two films on Disney+ as well as season 3 of The Santa Clauses miniseries. At least that has some fresh ideas and more of the magic that made me enjoy the first two films.

Unfortunately while watchable and never boring this one lacks the magic that made its predecessors delightful.

To quote Leonard Maltin "three times was not a charm with this sequel."

I read the books as a kid before this third movie had come out. I remember when the movie had come out but just never got around to watching it even though I owned the first two on VHS as a kid.

I think Michael Moriarty's absence as Ray the father was a big reason why I didn't get around to this one for so long.

I just thought he was wonderful as the father in the first two films and played him as a strict authoritarian, but also a loving man full of integrity.

Knowing he was replaced left a bit of a sour taste in my mouth.

Fortunately Gerald McRaney who replaces him in this film does a good enough job. Moriarty's presence is missed but McRaney is serviceable enough.

Scott Wilson still shines as Judd Travers who was mean all throughout the first film until the end, became even more mean in the second film but in this one he seems to have a bit more of a balance.

He can be mean some times but usually regrets it but we find out that Judd is actually a good guy in this installment which makes it an even better movie than I expected it to be. Wilson was indeed a very underrated actor and as Judd he showed many sides of his talent.

Here we see that Judd shows his good side when people treat him with kindness. He is very believable as a man who has been hurt by years of abuse that wasn't his fault but can indeed change by the smallest acts of kindness.

It's nice this film respects Judd's character enough to turn him from a horribly mean person who still has flaws but has a heart of gold underneath them.

Bonnie Bartlett is back as Mrs. Wallace but Rod Steiger died a few years before this was made so obviously he isn't back as Doc Wallace and another actor didn't replace him.

Jason Dolley doesn't have the same charisma that Blake Heron or Zachary Browne did as Marty in the first two films but he does ok as Marty in his own right.

Taylor Momsen from 2000's The Grinch is good as Samantha Wallace granddaughter of Bartlett's character and friend of Marty's.

I would say this one is as good as the first Shiloh and actually better than the second one.

While part 2 has Moriarty and Steiger I just feel this one has a stronger story with more suspense and also turning the antagonist into a protagonist.

Almost sort of like how Arnold Schwarzenegger started off bad in Terminator 1 but became good in number 2 Wilson's Judd has a nice similar transition and is very believable.

This was a surprisingly good movie. I agree with Roger Ebert the Shiloh films are intelligent, thought provoking and can provide enough entertainment for adults and children alike.

Adults shouldn't dismiss any of these films as a stupid kids movie.

These movies can be enjoyed by young and old alike and even as a 32 year old man I found a lot to entertain and enjoy me here just as the other two films did as a 7-10 year old child.

These films are hidden treasures and deserved to be seen by all families.

I know there is a fourth Shiloh book Shiloh Christmas.

Not sure if they will adapt it to a film. If they don't this was a perfect place to leave off for the movie adaptations.