Reviews

Excellent, gripping Made-For-TV story of the abductions and murders of African-American children, adolescents, and adults in Atlanta in the early 80's, and the sensational trial of the one man brought to justice for these crimes. The murders and trial polarized the communities of Atlanta and its environs, and the TV Movie re-creates this stunningly well in its deliberately ambiguous portrayal of suspect Wayne Williams, the evidence against him, and the issues of presenting a capital case based almost solely on circumstantial evidence. Just as the case inspires controversy up to this day, so does this movie.

Calvin Levels has Wayne Williams down pat in this production - alternately charming, charismatic, strange, and menacing - and creates a web of confused desires and motives that deliberately leaves audiences guessing - what REALLY happened on that bridge? Co-stars Morgan Freeman, Jason Robards, Rip Torn and Gloria Foster provide equally interesting performances throughout. While some viewers, especially those living in the Atlanta communities affected by these events, may be dismayed or even angered by the portrayal of the law-enforcement authorities attempting to make sense of this case, their issue is more with the deliberate manner in which no real sides are taken by the producers of this film. If in more recent decades the historic portrayal of White apathy towards crimes committed on Blacks is universally deemed insulting or unacceptable, then perhaps some progress has been made after all.

John Philipp Law and Don Stroud respectively play the two men named in this film's original title, Von Richtofen And Brown, and presents a fairly balanced and interesting set of parallels and divergences between the two men. As World War One rages to its conclusion, Von Richtofen and Brown head on a collision course towards their fateful encounter in the air.

Corman's production is a bit dated, and purists will point out many technical and historical errors in the film. Flight and combat sequences, however, are exciting, extremely well-conceived and filmed, and surpass most efforts before or since to show film-goers aerial combat of the First World War.

I saw this film at a drive-in when it was first released, and it still fascinates me to this day. While other more-expensive productions, with their sumptuous sets and A-list actors, continue to command the attention of film viewers and film collectors alike, I find the simple, sparing lines of this production far more effective as the vehicle for one of history's most famous duels. True, by now most historians have abandoned the notion that the fatal bullets came from Brown; however, this is the tale of popular culture as it was told for generations, not as nuclear scientists have most lately emended it.

Universal Studios funded several low-budget productions in the early seventies. By far the best to come out of this program was 'Silent Running', an ecologically-minded 'message film' that stands out today as one of the truly great films of the science-fiction genre.

Bruce Dern stars as Freeman Lowell, a futuristic Park Ranger minding Earth's last forests, sealed in gigantic domes aboard an equally gigantic freighter in space. When ordered to destroy the domes and return home, Lowell is forced to choose between his crewmates and his beloved forests.

The motif of a polluted, or simply, homogenized Earth, the ultimate triumph of human progress over nature and wilderness, is a standard theme of science fiction in the 20th century, and the film is not too different from many other films and episodic television programs seen since the postwar period. Rarely, however, has the theme been explored from the point of view of ecological ethics. The storyline is kept deliberately simple, and asks not the question 'How Would You Act In Such A Position', it merely shows how one particular man might. The characters are given seminal, yet subtle opportunities to flesh themselves out (comments made during meals and card games are particularly noteworthy), and even if the character of Lowell is ultimately dislikeable, he remains oddly sympathetic. Dern produces a remarkable performance here, as a tortured, perhaps even mentally-ill, loner. His work here is still fresh and understated and certainly not of the over-the-top calibre, despite the insistances of some.

The film possesses truly amazing visual images, from the spacecraft itself (the decommissioned and soon-to-be-scrapped aircraft carrier Valley Forge) to the domes (an aircraft hanger at Van Nuys Airport) to the unforgettable Drones, uncanny little robots designed around the amputee-actors that give them life. Visual effects are excellent, the direct prototypes of even more fantastical films to come. The music, composed for the film by Peter Schickele (known internationally as P.D.Q. Bach), is by turns boldly triumphant, softly mournful, and is quite effective; some viewers may hate the vocal work of Joan Baez, but she is a logical choice for this production and time period.

While many films have suffered since the release of 'Star Wars'(which is NOT, strictly speaking, science-fiction) due to dated visuals and obsolete effects technology, 'Silent Running' is still startlingly clean and visionary. A worthy film for all science-fiction fans to see.

Peter Foldes' trailblazing computer-assisted animation shows the incredible potential of this genre. The imagery is strange, lurid, almost psychedelic as one scene morphs into another. A repetitive machinelike musical soundtrack backs the unfolding principal narrative.

Our own civilization's rampant consumerism is symbolized by a single man, whose appetite, desires, and lack of control precludes any happy or reasonable balance. In the end he is forced to confront hunger born out of of impoverishment, rather than the result of affluence and greed. The conclusion is ambiguous: is it our future or our present that we are seeing?

I saw this film late one night on CBC in 1974 and it truly freaked me out. Eight years later I was able to get a 35mm film print of it for a report I did in high school French class. Today I finally own it on DVD. Seminal viewing for fans of the animated short film.

Extremely crude, terribly animated, eminently watchable series from the late sixties. Ralph Bakshi again shows his imaginative hand, even if the other is tied firmly behind his back.

All the well-known characters of the medieval romance are back, this time 1000 years in the future. The Solar System is dominated by the evil, monolithic N.O.T.T., and Robin and his merry men resist and rebel against all it stands for. Using a bevy of futuristic weaponry, including the formidable Electro-Quarterstaff, Robin and his Band "rob the Astro-rich to give to the Astro-poor".

As a young child I was wildly in love with this shlocky series. If I had to choose between the fabulously underdressed Maid Marion and the supernaturally-capable Samantha Stevens I'd have been one unhappy camper. Still a good watch, I hope a live-action picture is made of this one day. Maybe with Nathan Filion in the lead...

Brilliant, bizarre, shocking, sensual, touching, ridiculous satire of food and food obsessions in modern-day Japan. Goro, a trucker, and his well-meaning sidekick Gan, come to the aid of poor widow Tampopo, an unsuccessful ramen restaurateur. The three set off on a gastronomic quest to teach Tampopo how to be successful, and to find the ultimate recipe for ramen soup.

Tsutomu Yamazaki and Nobuko Myiamoto are perfect as Goro and Tampopo respectively, accurately portraying two well-worn people who nevertheless have much to teach each other. The film, arguably Juzo Itami's finest, includes parodies and homages of many different film genres, including the western and the Japanese samurai. Not simply a foreign film, Tampopo offers readily-accessible entertainment for all.

A Prison Movie. An all-male cast (except for Rita Hayworth). Violence. A title guaranteed to sprain your jaw. When Shawshank hit theatres in 1994, odds were decidedly against it becoming a huge success. It would be nice to think that an ultimately upbeat, earnest, modernist take on the films of Frank Capra would immediately find a sympathetic and appreciative audience. But that would be a fairy tale, and life, like prison, is no fairy tale.

The film has the cheek to ask Which is worse, being a murderer, or being a lousy husband? Certainly the audience must ask itself this of the main character, Andy, played by Tim Robbins, who is sent to Shawshank Prison in 1947 for the murder of his wife and her lover. Introverted, bookish, proud, his fate is uncertain until he attracts the attention of the prison "finder" Red, played by Morgan Freeman. Together the two men must find emotional healing, spiritual redemption, and hope, if they are to survive.

Adroit and expertly manipulative, the film's pace is dictated by the deathless narration of Freeman, who could hold an audience spellbound while reciting phone book listings; or, suspend utter disbelief at a patently preposterous storyline. Nor are characterizations any less preposterous, from the sociopathic Warden, to the sadistic Head Guard, to the grandfatherly Librarian, to the manic-youthful Young Punk. But if the characters seem too archetypal to be true, it is a necessary, and tolerable evil in this fairy-tale set in a prison.

As I said, life is no fairy-tale, and prison movies rarely get to top-ten status. But sometimes some good does prevail, and redemption often stands in wait for those who dare reach out to it. As a first-run cinematic release Shawshank was not a great success. But as a commercial video, the film has achieved high status, and is voted year after year as a top consumer favorite. Cinematically near-perfect, visually breathtaking, Shawshank is a state-of-the-art example of the power of film to tell stories, and is rightly considered a must-see by most film reviewers.

One of Twentieth Century Fox's best efforts for 1966, based on the Jack D. Hunter potboiler novel of the same name. Filmed on location on mostly drab or overcast days, the cinematography is first-rate. One of the most surprising turns of this film is the compassionate, sympathetic manner in which the German armed forces are portrayed, and although not perfect, the production values and attention to historical detail are impressive.

George Peppard plays Bruno Stachel, a middle-class hotelier's son who seeks glory as a German flying ace during WWI. Self-conscious of his low birth, he sees the legendary POUR LE MERITE, the Blue Max, as the decoration that will win him approval and parity with his aristocratic colleagues. His quest for the medal becomes a ruthless obsession, for which he will sacrifice anything, even his own soul.

Plenty of action, violence, romance, sex, war toys, things blowing up, for everybody. Andress sizzles as an adulterous countess; her towel sequence is very racy for the period. A Brilliant Gerry Goldsmith score provides a pounding heartbeat for the film. Plenty of black humour about celebrity and war, appropriate for an art form that has made a celebrity of war.

First things first. If you are a small child who has no understanding of the huge changes animated film has undergone in the last quarter-century, don't see this film. If you have no appreciation for the historical evolution of film adaptations of Tolkien's works, don't see this film. If you can't handle a film not created in an era where push-button special effects and computer graphics can erase any blemish from any director's vision and work, then for God's sake don't see this film. If you're too busy memorizing the names of Peter Jackson's film crew for your next fan club meeting, you probably don't have the time or the energy to see this film.

This is neither a great film nor is it a terrible film. It represents what, in 1978, one film director imagined Tolkien's world should look like. It represents what film producers were, in 1978, prepared to pay to see an adaptation of this kind committed to film. And it represents a necessary steppingstone on the way to the Jackson films. In 1978 animation was the only way such a film could be made, and yet a fairly revolutionary process of converting live-action footage to animation was employed by film creator Ralph Bakshi to make it as realistic, and as far-divorced from Disney-style films, as possible. The result is by turns imaginative, inspiring, surprising, and highly artful.

The film roughly corresponds to the first half of Tolkien's trilogy. Visual content owes much to the Hildebrandt brothers and European fantasy art of the period. Subjects are lovingly and respectfully treated, and the sexual edginess of previous Bakshi offerings "Wizards" and "Fritz the Cat" are abandoned here. The director instead focuses on melding his live-action and drawn animation into a coherent whole, while attempting to present his characters as endearing and as individualistic and as believable as he can. Hobbits are presented as naive and largely helpless, Men as flawed and corruptible, Elves as annoyingly perfect and beatific, and Dwarfs as members of the supporting cast. Aragorn is perhaps more credible as a Ranger than as a King; however, his transformation is not part of this film, as it was not really part of Tolkien's 'Fellowship' and 'Two Towers'. The numerous peoples and creatures of Mordor are mostly grotesque humanoids with surrealist cranial and facial features, but again, the focus is on the main characters and the Fellowship. Gandalf perhaps owes the most to Bakshi's previous films, and is somewhat as much a sleight-of-hand artist as he is a magician. His climactic return to the Ring War as a robed berserker on horseback, however, is an undeniably powerful and indelible image of Good Kicking Evil's Ass. Just ask Mr. Jackson et al.

The true wonder of Bakshi's film is how many of his scenes are redone in the Jackson films; in fact Bakshi's work is adapted almost as often as Tolkien's.

I enjoyed this film in 1978 and I think it still looks good today. It is unfortunate that the box-office dictated whether or not there would be a sequel. I believe the Bakshi film would be much better treated today if it were allowed to be finished.

George C. Scott stars as a marine biologist who has taught two dolphins to communicate with humans in english. His project attracts the notice of a shadowy corporate sponsor, who then kidnaps the dolphins to perform an assassination-at-sea. The film is divided in two parts, both exploring the ethics of man's meddling with nature. Stunning photography, excellent supporting cast, superlative effort from Scott, whose deep personal investment in the film's subject is easily sensed.

I saw this film in the theater in 1973 and thought it was one of the best I'd ever seen. I wasn't expecting a period action film or a potboiler-thriller and was pleasantly surprised to get neither. This is a thinking person's film, a modern-day Frankenstein which is made even more tragic because of the creator's love for what he has created. The conclusion of this film is uncompromising, and calls into question all animal experimentation. One of the best, and most important films to come out in my lifetime. See it.

I enjoyed the movie Troy, but was disappointed at the way Homer's work was butchered. Iliad was about events that occurred in the tenth year of the siege of Troy. The Greeks had come to Troy thinking it would be easy pickings and instead found themselves fighting a nightmarish never ending battle. Troy was Vietnam for Mycenean Greece.

Wolfgang Petersen attempts to do what even Homer never attempted; instead of taking one single story of the war and using it as a metaphor for the greater whole, Petersen scrunches together the whole war with its various tales, digressions, and consequences, and tries to make a single story of it. His version of the Battle of Troy plays fast and loose with the traditional details, and in attempting a task of such great scope, misses out on some powerful lessons about humanity, human behavior, and human nature. Wolfgang Petersen is no Homer.

This said, the movie is still tremendously engaging and interesting to watch. Computer-generated battle sequences are mesmerizing and in some cases improvements over those seen in the Hobbit films. Single combat is portrayed with great style and ingenuity and is truly frightening at times. The cast is able (Pitt is quite good as Achilles, Bloom is likewise appropriately flowery and dislikeable as Paris Alexandros). The scale and scope of the film is epic, grandiose, and impressive.

The best Bond film of any era. Sean Connery is at the top of his game here and cannot be bested by any of his successors. The story offers an amusing twist on the "rob Ft. Knox" theme, and most of the story's characters, good, bad, or indifferent, are strong, interesting people, rather than cardboard cutouts. The constant re-invention of commonplace objects as deadly weapons is a well-developed minor theme of the film and became a standard part of all subsequent Bond films. Most of John Barry's best music was composed for this movie, and Shirley Bassey's version of the title theme is unforgettable. An excellent film for the uninitiated to watch first.

This is one of the finest war films ever produced, and a true cinematic masterpiece. Juxtaposing the surreal beauty of Guadalcanal with the brutish horror of World War Two was a brilliant move. I would have touched that venus flytrap too. Would have liked to see the fish that live in trees, though. Penn, Nolte, Caviezel, and Koteas are amazing.

Adapted from the bestselling James Jones novel of the same name, the story follows American infantrymen fighting their way across the island of Guadalcanal in early 1942. Both sides experience the utter chaos of war, and stumble across the thin red line that divides sanity from madness.