Reviews

Roger's Rangers became the inspiration for the formation of the modern Army's Rangers units.

Revived in World War II to accomplish missions that no one in their right-mind would even consider, they lead the way in numerous extremely hazardous operations. Probably the most famous was the assault up the sheer cliff faces of Pont du Hoc during the invasion of Festung Europe on June 6th 1944. They took 50% casualties in that operation.

This movie, NORTHWEST PASSAGE, depicts the ill-fated operation by the first American Rangers. It demonstrates their ingenuity, determination and fortitude in the face of every possible adversity one can expect in time of war.

I went through the Army's Ranger Course in 1980. It was a demanding year of my life and I have to admit, after seeing this movie, quite by accident several years later, I was reminded of everything that the training regime put me through. I was especially impressed with how Roger's men had to suffer from the deprivations of no logistical support to provide subsistence. I swear....it was a sorry water moccasin (snake) that crossed my patrol's path in Florida. You'd hear the word, whispered, "Snake." Followed immediately by the sound of several machetes being pulled from sheaths and a short 'splash'.

When we finished the last operation, the night assault on Santa Rosa Island, we were as jubilant as Roger's men were when they were 'relieved' by the British column. And we celebrated, about the same way....FOOOOOoooOD!

Jackson does it again! Better than the '33 version with Fey Wray, which is hard to do, but he does it.

I liked the length of the film as it allows for better character development. Denham comes across well as a sleazy film producer with a dream, that he'll gladly sell out anyone in order to fulfill.

The scenes beyond the wall on Skull Island are stunning and much more disturbing. Not to mention the character development of King Kong. The 'monkey shines' are very well done.

Some people have expressed difficulty suspending disbelief on things like how the few survivors of the ships crew were able to get Kong into the ship for the voyage back to New York. But I fail to see why. After all, there are no such things as 30 foot tall gorillas in the first place. If they were willing to accept the big ape, they should be willing to accept just about anything less. After all, they did in the '33 version.

It's well worth the effort on Jackson's part.

Akin to the great battle of the sexes films of the 30s and 40s staring Spencer Tracy and Kathrine Hepburn but in the settings of the feminist 80s and 90s.

The premise is almost prescient of the James Carville and Mary Matalin lash-up, as this film was released in '91 before those two diametrically opposed political advisers/pundits of reality became widely known.

Like the Tracy & Hepburn films of old this one is into feminine activism. Elizabeth Perkins' character, Lorie Bryer, is successfully fighting her way to the top of her profession in a major city newspaper. There's strong competition from Kevin Bacon's character, Dan Hanson, for a much prized promotion.

Like Tracy & Hepburn, both are highly intelligent, albeit in their respective ways. She's a liberal. He's more 'conservative', think of Billy Joel's hit,"Modern Woman" for the two of them and you'll get the general idea.

Unlike the Tracy & Hepburn films, there's deeper observation into the human psyche. And VERY well done. Their widely disparate perceptions of mutual experiences are hilarious as well as insightful.

Also, unlike the Tracy & Hepburn films, the supporting cast here have more depth and better expression. But with people like Sharon Stone playing the sultry other love interest and Nathan 'Mousehunt' Lane as the antsy television station manager, this should be expected. And it adds depth to the overall cinematic experience.

All in all, it's a good movie. I'll probably watch it as often as I watch the classic Tracy & Hepburn films in my library.

This story is based on the historic revolt of the Gauls against Rome as lead by their charismatic leader Vercingetorix.

It's fairly accurate in the characterizations of Caesar and the Gauls. The Roman encampments, armaments and tactics are fairly accurate.

Where the movie fails is in its lousy dialog and even worse story development.

I'm sure that the French can follow it quite well. It's their history. However, most people who are neither French nor have studied Caesar's campaigns in Gaul would not know what's going on or why.

There is a truly great line in the movie, early on, while Caesar is planning his invasion of Britain:

Caesar: I need another four legions.

Roman Senator: To conquer Britain.

Caesar: I am sending the Gauls. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. I have to get rid of them.

Senator: What cynicism.

Caesar: Another word for politics.