Reviews

The filmmakers clearly wanted to make a PBS documentary disguised as a romantic thriller. Its not the fault of the actors, I've loved Ralph Fiennes since The English Patient and Rachel Weisz is terrific. However dropping the 2 leads into a Lecture on Poor Abused Africans and Evil Big Pharma soured a story with a lot of promise. I'm reading the book right now and it puts a lot of meat to the bones of a superficial presentation here.

Justin Quayle is a mild mannered diplomat and avid gardener. One day while giving a lecture to a disinterested audience, Tessa jumps up and shouts her disapproval at Justin over the U. K. involvement in the Iraq War. Smitten with her passion and commitment, he falls in love with her. It's a scenario you can buy into: he is passive and steady, tending to his garden diligently with patience and care. She is a passionate radical, a vocal advocate for left wing causes. He likes her passion...he makes her feel safe. It makes sense.

Tessa and her African guide are murdered early on and grief stricken Justin begins to uncover a sinister and far reaching Big Pharma plot involving using Africans as guinea pigs for research of a new TB drug that can cause severe side effects. It would cost millions of dollars and years of research to start over with a new drug. The conspiracy goes all the way to the top of the U. K government and the diplomatic office where Justin works. There is paranoia as we don't know who is involved...could it be Justin's colleagues? Another interesting plot device is the suggestion in the beginning of the film that Tessa is cheating on Justin. Later as Justin picks up where Tessa left off, uncovering the sinister plot we learn just how deep her love for Justin was. It's all a great framework.

Unfortunately, the story is told in flashback which for some reason desensitizes the viewer to any sense of real attachment to the world of the characters. By the end of the film I just don't care if Justin allows himself to be found by the bounty hunters and killed so he can be with Tessa in the afterlife and at this point I should care deeply. I was devestated at the end of The English Patient. Technique and and overly political message...the filmmakers couldnt wait to take a shot at Big Pharma, the Iraq War, the Bush administration, White Colonialism and Her Majesty's Government and it cheats of us out a real experience with the characters. Even the gardening metaphor which I can relate to as a gardener myself gets lost in The Social Justice Message.

Final judgement: It's OK, it held my attention, and I love the lead actors. Some interesting plot twists but read the book it's much more rewarding.

Although never mentioned in the film, the story takes place during and in the immediate aftermath of the military coup of Salvador Allende in Chile in 1973. American journalist and filmmaker Charles Horman disappears while discovering possible U. S. involvement in the military takeover of the country.

Charles' father, Ed Horman (Jack Lemmon) a conservative businessman from New York arrives in the country to begin a frantic search for his missing son only to be given lip service by the U. S. ambassador and consulate. To complicate matters, Ed and Charles' wife Beth (Sissy Spacek) are on opposite ends of the political spectrum with Beth being the unicorn hippie and Ed harboring resentment towards her lifestyle and worldview. There is a lot of prickly back and forth between Ed and Beth that drives a lot of the emotional connection to the story. I found that I was on Ed's side a lot of the way, identifying with his sense of frustration and anger but at the same time sympathizing with Beth's anguished plight. Ultimately, the 2 draw closer and reach a mutual understanding by the film's tragic conclusion.

There are chilling visual metaphors in the film...the beautiful white horse being chased and shot at by the military symbolizing the boot of the government crushing the natural order...the makeshift morgue with countless bodies...the constant ring of gunfire interrupting attempts at resuming normalcy...the (most likely) fictionalized scene of the U. S. official walking in on Spacek taking a bath...a brazen and arrogant violation of autonomy echoing the brutal nature of the coup...the eerie paranoia of government officials that on the surface are there to protect American citizens but may not only be complicit in the cover up, may have participated in the disappearance. Ed is ultimately told from a source at the Ford Foundation that his son was executed and buried in a wall in the stadium where mass arrests have taken place. One of the many agonizing moments of the film is not only when Ed learns his son is dead but his government, who has trust and faith in, has lied to and betrayed him.

There are many parallels that resonate 40 years later. I felt extreme anger and kinship with Charles' father and wife. Missing was a rare movie for it's time as it triggered the deep state. A 150M lawsuit was filed by the former U. S. Ambassador to Chile (who is not portrayed favorably in the film) but later dismissed also caused the film to be removed from distribution for many years. The director, Costa-Gavras, was accused of being anti-American which is laughable put into context of today.

The movie is unforgettable, if you can find it, and I had to watch it on my phone, it's definitely worth while.

The story of Ruth and Michael Paine, a couple who befriended and took in Lee and Marina Oswald in the months leading up to the assassination of John F. Kennedy in 1963. On the surface, they are a charitable, religious couple; Ruth a Quaker, Michael a Unitarian. But there is way more to this couple than meets the eye.

The Paines move from the East coast to the working class neighborhood of Irving, TX a suburb of Dallas because of Michael's job with Bell Helicopter. At some point they separate and Michael moves out. Ruth is lonely and out of her element and eventually meets Marina Oswald at the home of George de Mohrenschildt, a white russian anti communist and CIA informant. After this brief introduction, Ruth decides to open her home to Marina. The summer before the assassination, Ruth drives Marina, her children and all her worldly belongings from New Orleans to Dallas out of the goodness of her heart. After the assassination, Ruth discovers Lee Harvey Oswald had been hiding a gun in her tiny garage as well as various other letters and damning evidence given to the Warren Commission. Ruth's testimony is instrumental in painting Oswald as a lone nut who wanted attention, glory and credit for killing the most powerful man in the world. She is asked more questions (5,000 to be exact) than any other witness before the commission. (It's curious, however, that Oswald didn't seem to want any credit and publicly insisted he was a patsy before being gunned down by Jack Ruby 2 days later.)

The problem with the Paines is that there are too many head spinning coincidences to be believable. Such as:

The Paines come from wealthy, elite, east coast families. Ruth Paine's lineage dates back to the Mayflower. Michael Paine is a member of the Forbes family. His mother was very close friends with a woman named Mary Bancroft. Bancroft is the mistress of, wait for it, ALLEN DULLES. Yes, THAT ALLEN DULLES. The Director of the CIA who Jack Kennedy fired after the Bay of Pigs fiasco. The ALLEN DULLES who was the central figure in the Warren Commission (Deep State, anyone?) The Paines, even though they were separated, vacationed together in the summer of 1963 on Naushon Island, a private retreat off Martha's Vineyard owned by the Forbes family for 150 years. The same summer that Ruth drove all the way back to New Orleans to pick up Marina, then back to Irving. All happening 2 months before the killing of the President.

Michael Paine's step father was the designer of the Huey, a helicopter that became an icon of the Vietnam War which made a fortune during that war.

Ruth's sister worked for the CIA along with her father who worked for USAID, a known CIA front. (Members of congress are today trying to reign in USAID) Her father was also under consideration for covert operations in Vietnam in 1957.

Ruth got Lee Harvey Oswald the job at the School Book Depository and was hired without a background check even though he had been a Soviet defector at the height of the Cold War (the Cuban Missile Crisis had taken place the year before) Ruth also failed to inform Oswald of another job offer that paid significantly higher than the one at the book depository.

Michael Paine got a security clearance for classified work at Bell Helicopter despite his father being a Trotskyite. (This was at a time of McCarthy blacklisting for suspected leftist affiliations)

Despite being a known defector, Ruth meets the wife of Lee Harvey Oswald, Marina, at the home of a white russian anti-communist (and known CIA informant)

Ruth claims her family is staunchly anti communist yet attends meetings of famed socialist Norman Thomas with her father?

Despite coming from families of vast wealth and power, the Paines live in a tiny ranch house in a working class suburb of Dallas. (And although not included in the documentary some internet sleuths claim the Paines owned other much larger houses but never took in charity cases like Marina, the wife of a Russian defector. The sleuths claim the Paines did not open their doors to the neighbors and were actually quite snobby to others not of their social station.)

It's simply implausible that so many coincidences exist around the Paines to be explained away by naivete and misplaced trust. It would make sense the CIA recruited families and friends from the same circle of elites rather than unknowns in the outside world. People with the same worldview and sense of entitlement. The blue bloods were probably greatly threatened by not only Kennedy's radical foreign policy departure but by his power itself. An Irish Catholic only a few generations removed from the potato famine was a far cry from the Brahmins. We'll probably never know exactly what role the Paines played in the assassination but they certainly weren't the heartwarming do gooders they've been portrayed as for almost 60 years. In all likelihood they were CIA babysitters and disinformation agents.

An excellent documentary and a must see for all patriots! What's past is prologue.

Set in a small depression era town in rural Mississippi, This Property Is Condemned tells the story of a single mother with 2 daughters operating a run down boarding house at the side of the railroad tracks. The railroad is the major employer of the town...most of the men work for the railroad in one capacity or another. The mother, Hazel Starr (Kate Reid) is cold, calculating and self centered, caring little for her daughters' emotional well being. The daughters Alva (Natalie Wood) and Willie (Mary Badham) are more or less pawns in Hazel's quest for economic survival. A particular burden is placed on the beautiful, sexy Alva who is expected to be the 'star attraction' in the boarding house. She is flirtatious with the male boarders and (while under the Hays code of the 60s) is strongly suggested that Alva trades sexual favors with the men for gifts and occupancy at the boarding house.

Enter Owen Legate (Robert Redford), the handsome young stranger, new to the boardinghouse. Unbeknownst to the Starr women, he is there from the railroad to give out pink slips to a large number of railroad workers, includiing fellow boarders. Alva is immediately drawn to him as she dreams of getting out of her dying Mississippi town and life of misery selling her body to keep her mother's head above water. Redford is both repulsed and bewitched by the seductive beauty Alva. Eventually Alva learns of Legate's reason for being in town but still sees him as possibly her only way out. He hands out the pink slips and the town is devestated (the railroad workers beat Redford to an inch of his life in one harrowing scene) Owen leaves for New Orleans but not before confronting Alva on the disgusting folly of her life.

Once most of her railroad borders are fired and can no longer stay at the boardinghouse, Hazel sets up a "business opportunity" for Alva to move to Memphis, selling off the dying boardinghouse to a wealthy older man who's wife is an invalid and is looking for "companionship" from Alva. After pressuring Alva into the faustian bargain with the older man and laying a heavy guilt trip on her, Alva, the elderly suitor, Hazel and the town bully (Charles Bronson) go out for a night of heavy drinking. After drunkenly eloping with the bully to spite her mother, she runs away to New Orleans and meets up Owen. The two have an illicit but ill fated rendezvous.

This is one of my favorite Natalie Wood movies although it deserved a much better conclusion. I'm a sucker for Tennessee Williams and this one delivers although it leaves you slightly unsatisfied. The cast is solid, especially Kate Reid (who was only 8 years older than Natalie Wood at the time). She gives a memorable performance as the loathsome, selfish mother Hazel, forcing her older daughter into an unspeakable choice and ultimately abandoning her younger daughter to save herself. But the star of the show is Natalie Wood. Putting into context what we know now of Natalie's life story, her portrayal of Alva Starr is mesmerizing. A ghostly pall hangs over the entire film, with a sense of impending doom thats heartbreaking. There will be no happy endings here, for This Property is Condemned. The town is wiped out, lives are scattered to the four winds and all that's left are dilapidated buildings and a young girl wearing raggedy clothes and eating out of garbage cans. I go back and watch this one once a year. Despite it's flaws its a moving tragedy that does what movies are supposed to do...make you feel.

When I first saw The Verdict back in 1983 I thought it was a gripping, thought provoking legal drama with outstanding performances by Paul Newman, James Mason, Jack Warden and Milo O'Shea. Had I written a review back then, I would have given a 9. However, I was a teenager back then with a naive and inexperienced worldview. Now 36 years later, when I went back and watched it again I really see all the flaws with the film. While the performances still are the best part of the movie, Im bothered by all the plot holes.

1 - The film drags on about Newman's drinking and ambulance chasing in funeral homes. Not enough explanation is given on how he got to this place in his life, except for a couple of brief scenes. Flashbacks to his experience standing up to corruption at his previous law firm would have pulled the story together more cohesively and garnered more sympathy and emotional connection to Newman's character, Frank Galvin. We are left to pretty much draw our own conclusions about Newman's path to this state of despair.

2. Why in the world would Frank turn down an offer of 200k and not at least consult with his clients? I'm no lawyer but how is that even possible in the real world, couldn't he lose his law license over That? That would be like me selling a house and getting an offer from a buyer but turning it down without even telling them.

3 How in the hell is that judge (O'Shea) and defense lawyer so obviously chummy that Mason got to hang up his coat in the judge's closet but Newman had to hold his coat. Are judge's supposed to be that blatantly biased, the whole thing smacked of a conflict of interest but Newman never reported him, he seemed like he was on the take from the start. Perhaps this was to make the audience feel for the corruption, the David and Goliath thing our leading man was up against.

4 If the Charlotte Rampling character was a lawyer at a firm in New York, why did she have to sleep with Paul Newman and spy on him for a $1,500 check from Mason, why not just get a job somewhere. And why did Mason pay her by check anyway so it could be traced? Why did Jack Warden put the check back in her pocketbook, why the hell wouldn't you keep it as evidence of bribery?

5 The scene where Newman punches Rampling in the face to the point she fell down and was bleeding was gratuitous and excessive even back then. That's not the first time Newman used unnecessary violence against women in his movies.

6 Newman just never convinced me he was a great lawyer throughout the entire movie, if anything, Mason was a legal scholar. Either you use the law to help your client or you do something else for a living, go work in a homeless shelter. The ending was just 12 jurors decided to do the right thing even tho legally they weren't supposed to consider the surprise witness. That's great Hollywood but it doesn't make Newman the terrific lawyer who lost his way which is the premise of the whole movie.

Movies are about suspension of disbelief and a lot of viewers may feel differently when watching but this movie didnt age well, for me anyway.

I lived in the section of Staten Island where this documentary took place for 19 years. By the time Id moved there in the late 90s much had changed and I didn't know about the history of missing/murdered children. I didnt know the College of Staten Island was once the infamous Willowbrook. I didnt know that the cops tracked down Andre Rand buying baby food in the same Shop Rite I bought my son's baby food years later. And I didn't know that Jennifer's Park, the playground next to my son's school where he spent a great deal of his childhood was named after Jennifer Schweiger, the only murder victim who's body was recovered. I do know having lived there for many years and raised a child there that no murders or abductions have occurred in the area since Andre Rand went away. So for those on this board who have been speculating on a possible innocent man being convicted, I am happy to report that much to you.

My personal experience aside, the documentary does a very effective job building a darkly fascinating narrative, weaving an urban legend with the real life case of Andre Rand. Everyone likes a spooky story and the filmmakers do a terrific job keeping us spellbound by the story of the missing children in the 70s and 80s. While some of the witnesses may not have been presented as credible in the documentary I doubt we saw all the evidence the jury saw. One of the more compelling eyewitnesses was the guy who said he and a group of his friends were kidnapped by Rand when they were very young and they were let go because Rand realized he couldn't complete his mission under those circumstances he had to come up with a different method of operation. If Rand were truly railroaded by a kangaroo court he surely could have told the filmmakers or anyone else in all these years. An innocent person takes any opportunity they can get to proclaim their innocence. Rand wasn't just a poor, random homeless guy who looked different that a hysterical gang of white trash and dirty cops pinned the rap on (which is what was presented as an option by Zeman and Brancaccio) he was an orderly at Willowbrook for years during the height of the abuse and horror that was happening there in the 1960s. Some may have been left with lingering doubts, however, I was satisfied in the end, the cops, prosecutors, and jury ultimately got it right.

Ive already watched the film several times over the years and its still spine tingling. I only wish more fact based information was included instead of the merry go round of alternative theories. It leaves you wanting for more.

It's a shame that you need to go back 44 years to find a thoughtful Science Fiction film where the special effects are secondary to story and themes, but here we are. Originally when I first saw Logan's Run, it was on television after a successful theatrical release and even if edited for TV, movies on TV were a big deal for Gen X kids in the 70s. At the time, I liked the futuristic setting, being a Planet of the Apes and Twilight Zone fan growing up. However, you really need to see this as an adult to get a full appreciation for it. It's a Message Movie for sure and if that's not your cup of tea, don't bother.

In the year 2274, the world has been destroyed by wars and environmental disasters. Humanity now lives in a domed city, controlled by Computer, where all of your fantasies and desires are available to you. The only catch is, when you are 30, you have to submit to Carrousel, an event where you have a chance at Renewal, where you are reborn and live again (or so says Computer), but you will actually be killed while a crowd of onlookers cheers. It's really a totalitarian society, controlled by Computer, but everyone is conditioned into thinking that it's Utopia. There are some who refuse to submit to Carrousel and become Runners in search of Sanctuary, a mythical society on the Outside where Runners can live on past 30 and grow old. Logan is a Sandman, a type of law enforcement officer for the New Order, dictated by Computer, where he hunts down Runners and kills them if they refuse to submit to Carrousel on their 30th birthday.

After awhile, Logan is ordered by Computer to investigate Sanctuary on the Outside and has his crystal Life Clock fast forwarded 4 years. When realizing his time is up, he too becomes a Runner. His best friend, Francis, who is also a Sandman, must hunt him down along with Jessica, a fellow Runner, who wants to reach Sanctuary too. After a series of narrow escapes with various bad guys, they reach a frozen cave and meet Box, a killer robot who freezes Runners before they can get to Freedom. Again, narrowly escaping death from Box, they get Outside and see the Sun for the first time. The domed city is near the old Washington D.C., now run down and virtually destroyed by wars fought centuries ago. They meet Old Man and are stunned to see a person who is older than 30. They are enraptured by stories of his parents, long dead, that were married and the concept of a couple staying together for love and children and being remembered after death. From here, the movie has a very satisfying ending.

I'm not giving the movie 10 stars only because it could have been better with tighter editing and it drags in spots. I think Old Man should have had more depth and character development. Old Man is the moment of Logan's Truth but he's merely a one dimensional back drop. Yet aside from some problems, this movie leaves you with deep themes, Empty Consumerism, Loss of Individualism, Societal Stagnation, Truth, Love and Spiritual Revelation. Yes, the set reminds me of Epcot Center at Disney World Meets a Shopping Mall in New Jersey but that's hardly the point. What a tragedy an entire generation has been taught that if a movie doesn't have mind blowing special effects, it doesn't have anything to say.

I've been watching Twilight Zone marathons twice a year for 30 years and somehow I missed this phenomenal episode...possibly because it's from season 4 where the shows were an hour long. In any event, this is a timeless masterpiece by Rod Serling...a message show for the ages! Nevermind that the special effects are cheesy and dated! Today's youth are being taught that if there isn't wall to wall CGI is isn't worth sitting through. Have I got a lesson for them!

A group of colonists leave Earth in search of a more utopian society without war, famine, disease, etc. They land on a desolate, barren planet that has a hostile, unforgiving climate and is nearly impossible to survive on, let alone thrive. James Whitmore plays their defacto leader who shows them how to survive and keeps their morale up by telling the group of 187 men, women and children of life on Earth and impending rescue. They live under these conditions for 30 years until one day when a spaceship arrives from Earth to, at long last, take them back home. Tim O'Connor is the strong, young, good looking astronaut that comes to their rescue. At first Benteen (and I've learned that Benteen was the name of one of Custer's men) is as happy and excited about their rescue as the rest, but it quickly begins to dawn on him that his days of being the leader are over and he's no longer needed. From this point on, Captain Benteen (Whitmore has made himself a captain in his time there) becomes obnoxious and controlling, desperate to cling to his position of power.

Whitmore and O'Connor play perfectly against each other with the latter the flawless personification of freedom and individuality...strong, welcoming, desirable, with an element of risk. (there are problems with their spaceship and may have difficulties getting back with such a large group) He allows Whitmore to continue his leadership role for the final few days for the sake of social harmony. Towards the end, Benteen declares that the group cannot go back and the O'Connor character tells them to take a vote. Naturally, the outcome is unanimous.

The show is either the perfect political metaphor for totalitarian government and the corrupting influence of power on the human psyche or could simply be a tale of a meddling in law or parent who refuses to let go. It doesn't matter what your interpretation is because its ambiguity is precisely the point. Power corrupts and the need for dominance and control ultimately destroys. A must see.

Frank Gorshin saves this otherwise silly episode that's full of holes. He rattles off most of the superstars of 20th century Hollywood in less than 5 minutes. (We don't have Hollywood superstars anymore, so there's no one memorable enough to mimic, I guess) Gorshin climatic scene is pure gold. The ending with the Angels disarming bombs with the help of a sweaty, humorless "bomb expert" was the precursor to the later Airplane movies. Where has our pop culture gone?