Movie Night: The Replacements.

Review #370: The Replacements.

Cast
Keanu Reeves (Shane Falco), Gene Hackman (Jimmy McGinty), Brooke Langton (Annabelle Farrell), Jon Favreau (Daniel Bateman), Rhys Ifans (Nigel Gruff), Orlando Jones (Clifford Franklin), Brett Cullen (Eddie Martel), Faizon Love (Jamal Jackson), Michael Taliferro (Andre Jackson), Jack Warden (Edward O'Neil), and Ace Yonamine (Jumbo) Directed by Howard Deutch.

Review
This is at heart...an epitome of generic sports movie. This is a movie filled with sports cliche on top of more sports cliches. In fact, you could count the amount of cliches and play Cliche Bingo. What is Cliche Bingo? Think of the cliches that make up sports movies, such as:

The washed up player who is trying to redeem himself.
The grumpy coach.
The romance subplot between a player and cheerleader/person.
The crazy owner.

The big man.
The crazy guy who has a lot of power.
A speech about needing heart/determination/the guts to win.
Playing a strong team and being the underdogs yet somehow winning.

The antagonist who could also be one of their own.
The comic relief character.
Being down at halftime/near the end of the game.
Dramatically diving/slding/slapshooting/moving by a player.

I realize that's only 12 and you would need 12 more to make an actual bingo card, but let me tell you a secret: You can find the rest if you look hard enough. The acting is decent enough, though I do wonder what exactly motivated Hackman to do this movie. I know what you're thinking is the reason, which might be the reason for Welcome to Mooseport, but that's neither here or there. The football action is at least watchable, the movie's not horrible, it's just a typical sports movie that is sickeningly sweet to the point where by the end of it you just want to watch actual football, at least that isn't acted out. Most of the time.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: House on Haunted Hill (1959).

Review #369: House on Haunted Hill.

Cast
Vincent Price (Frederick Loren), Carol Ohmart (Annabelle Loren), Richard Long (Lance Schroeder), Alan Marshal (Dr. David Trent), Carolyn Craig (Nora Manning), Elisha Cook Jr. (Watson Pritchard), Julie Mitchum (Ruth Bridgers), Leona Anderson (Mrs. Slydes), and Howard Hoffman (Jonas) Directed by William Castle.

Review
In a way this was the longest time ever spent on a film. Why so? See, I began watching the film last Tuesday before being cut off due a neighbor's fire, which postponed the review until I got enough time to watch this ironically short length film which lasts about 70 minutes. So how was it? It was allright. It wasn't as silly I thought it could've been, and it does have its moments with even a twist at the end, which I didn't really expect honestly. And there's our main lead, Vincent Price, who has been reviewed here before in House of Wax and The Great Mouse Detective, and in this film he does pretty good, evoking the classical master of cool, overshadowing the rest of the cast and yet still making this a fine film to at least watch.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: The Little Shop of Horrors.

Review #368: The Little Shop of Horrors.

Cast
Jonathan Haze (Seymour Krelboyne), Jackie Joseph (Audrey Fulquard), Mel Welles (Gravis Mushnick), Dick Miller (Burson Fouch), Myrtle Vail (Winifred Krelboyne), Karyn Kupcinet (Shirley), Leola Wendorff (Siddie Shiva), Lynn Storey (Hortense Fishtwanger), Wally Campo (Joe Fink/Narrator), John Shaner (Dr. Phoebus Farb), Jack Nicholson (Wilbur Force), and Charles B. Griffith (Audrey Junior) Directed by Roger Corman.

Review
Not only is today Jack Nicholson's birthday, it is also the first review of a film directed by Roger Corman, who reportedly has directed over 50 films and produced 300...one of them being Sharktopus. But nevertheless, this is an early 60's film made in two days from sets used in another Roger Corman production that has inspired a musical and a remake. And...the film is good. Despite the title, it actually has a good amount of laughs, which make the horror scenes more contrasting, creating a good balance. And of course, Audrey Junior makes me giggle, and that may sound strange, given the amount of reviews here. Nicholson may have a small part, but it certainly is memorable. The acting is fine, and it has its good moments all throughout. The effects work well and the film flows well given the small, but fine length. Happy 76th birthday, Jack. Great way to celebrate Earth Day, huh?

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Julius Caesar (1970).

Review #367: Julius Caesar.

Cast
Charlton Heston (Mark Antony), Jason Robards (Brutus), John Gielgud (Julius Caesar), Richard Johnson (Cassius), Robert Vaughn (Casca), Richard Chamberlain (Octavius), Diana Rigg (Portia), Jill Bennett (Calpurnia), and Christopher Lee (Artemidorus) Directed by Stuart Burge.

Review
Well, well, I'm reviewing a movie based on a play by William Shakespeare, and it's been a while since I've done that (#103 - Romeo + Juliet, unless you count #229 - She's the Man, but even that was just a revised version), but there is the benefit of the star power, who've managed to be reviewed in films here, examples being: Planet of the Apes, Arthur, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, any of Christopher Lee's films, etc. (Seriously, this is the tenth time he has been listed, and he is listed here due to his small but significant part in the film.) But nevertheless, does that mean that there is a good film in all of that? In some ways yes, but in others, no. Heston does a good job, commandeering a relatively good performance, probably the best here. Gielgud does alright, even if his part is ironically small (It's not like his character is the title of the film or anything), but oh well, and Richard Johnson does a decent job, even if he is another example of having a beard equaling being evil. The supporting cast (Such as Rigg, Vaughn and even Lee) do okay, not having much time to act but adding on nicely. Then there's the acting performance that apparently some are split on, Jason Robards as our de facto lead. His performance has been called "flat" and "wooden", I prefer to use "miscast". He just looks a bit old for the part, given the grey hair, which even Johnson doesn't have. Besides that, the battle sequences are alright and the sets do look like there was effort put into it, but in the end not everything connects perfectly, despite the movie being a decent adaptation of the play. Take it for what its worth, which may or may not end with "Et tu, Brute?". Ironically, the only reason I watched this was due to my teacher selecting this to be shown to our English class.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Dude, Where's My Car?

Review #366: Dude, Where's My Car?

Cast
Ashton Kutcher (Jesse), Seann William Scott (Chester), Jennifer Garner (Wanda), Marla Sokoloff (Wilma), Kristy Swanson (Christie), David Herman (Nelson), and Hal Sparks (Zoltan) Directed by Danny Leiner.

Review
This movie feels like it was made on a whim, made with sub plots held together by a very loose string made (obviously) in the turn of the millennium, and because of that, this film is deeply rooted in the 2000's, nothing more, but is there any hope for this film? Maybe if you were really, really, really bored or needed 100 minutes to waste, sure. Kutcher and Scott are strangely a decent duo, only because they match in annoyance, oddly enough they remind me of a 2000's like version of Bill and Ted, which is either sickening or just sad. The jokes are hit and miss and sometimes annoying to the point where I just yell "Get to the point", which changed from a playful annoyance to an irritated yell which thankfully did not make me want to throw my hockey puck. The story is strung up easily but it feels like the jokes are the only thing making the movie last longer, which is what most would call "padding", which gets old. There's no point in judging the acting because there's not much point, but at least some comedies try to be a bit subtle, but oh well. The movie isn't "North" bad, it's around the level of "Happy Gilmore" level.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: The Jackie Robinson Story.

Review #365: The Jackie Robinson Story.

Cast
Jackie Robinson (Jackie Robinson), Ruby Dee (Rae Robinson), Minor Watson (Branch Rickey), Louise Beavers (Mallie Robinson), Richard Lane (Clay Hopper), and Harry Shannon (Frank Shaughnessy) Directed by Alfred E. Green.

Review
This is an unusual movie, not because it's a film about a baseball player, but the fact that the man that plays the main character based off real life events...is the same guy, starring himself. Basically in a nutshell, Jackie Robinson playing Jackie Robinson. But nevertheless, the film doesn't have any other odd quarks, it is sort of a footnote, released at the mid point of Jackie Robinson's career, and this was the first of a few films about him. The acting is decent, nothing too special. Robinson does okay for what is essentially just Robinson being Robinson. But at least the film has its moments and it at least for what it's worth tells a story. Robinson was the first African American to play in Major League Baseball since the 1880's, and he would be the first of many to come. The film is okay and short to the point at about 70 minutes. Take it for what it is worth.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: High Anxiety.

Review #364: High Anxiety.

Cast
Mel Brooks (Richard Thorndyke), Madeline Kahn (Victoria Brisbane), Ron Carey (Brophy), Cloris Leachman (Nurse Diesel), Harvey Korman (Dr. Montague), Howard Morris (Professor Lilloman), Albert Whitlock (Arthur Brisbane), and Rudy De Luca (Braces) Directed by Mel Brooks (#061 - Blazing Saddles, #198 - Spaceballs, #248 - Robin Hood: Men In Tights, #361 - The Producers)

Review
Mel Brooks keeps popping up here, and this is the fifth review reviewing a film directed by him (sixth with him, #087 - Robots), and the track record of his films are fine, ranging from a 7 to a 10, so could this keep the track record going? Yeah, pretty much. The film is a parody of suspense films by Alfred Hitchcock (most notably Vertigo), and the parody for the most part works out well. It doesn't shred Hitchcock (in fact, Hitchcock gave Brooks some wine after the film was released), it instead embraces it, and yet still has some good gags. Brooks is alright, not a bad lead. Kahn and Carey are okay, but what I find the best are Cloris Leachman and Harvey Korman, who do a fine job (being the villains, spoilers, but yeah.), and make this worthwhile. Admittedly some of the jokes don't hold up as well, but at least I had some fun while watching. Trust me when I say this, this won't be the last time a Mel Brooks film will be reviewed here. While this film isn't as good as say, Blazing Saddles or The Producers, it is at least a decent Mel Brooks film, and that's usually enough.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: North.

Review #363: North.

Cast
Elijah Wood (North), Jon Lovitz (Arthur Belt), Matthew McCurley (Winchell), Alan Arkin (Judge Buckle), Jason Alexander, Julie-Louis Dreyfus, Dan Aykroyd, Reba McEntire, John Ritter, Abe Vigoda, and Bruce Willis. Directed by Rob Reiner (#108 - This Is Spinal Tap, #180 - Stand by Me, #232 - The Princess Bride)

Review
It's sad, a cast that looks recognizable, and a director with a good record on the reviews all got together to make this. The only reason I know about this film is due to Roger Ebert and his review of the film, absolutely destroying this film. But does the film have ANY respectable thing going for it? Does it have anything that makes it any better than something like, say The Room? Well........No. Kind of expected, actually. But hey, it-No wait, it really can't be that worse. The film starts and ends...with Bruce Willis. Seriously, he pops up seven times, and not one of them makes any sense. Is he his guardian or does he really just pop up for no reason? It's sad that that this is my first review of Elijah Wood (Okay second counting 9, but first live action film.), and he actually does a decent job, not annoying. That goes to Matthew McCurley, who oddly enough reminds me of Macaulay Culkin, but he's actually worse, not having one degree of subtleness or even a smudge of actual character.  What's sadder for me is that Rob Reiner directed this, a director who's last three films reviewed here got scores of 8, 9, and 10 respectively, and he churns out a painfully unfunny film. I wondered who they made this for, who would possibly like this. Kids? Maybe, but then they would grow older and hate this film and tell others to stay away. I figured this would be easy to watch, given it's scant 88 minute run time. I was wrong. While the film does boast showing locations from Alaska to...South Dakota, it practically has a checklist of what things to make "fun" of, none of them working. What's even stranger is that this was based off a novel named "North: The Tale of a 9-Year-Old Boy Who Becomes a Free Agent and Travels the World in Search of the Perfect Parents" by Alan Zweibel, and this film was even co-produced and screenwriten by the author. Clearly, this isn't a case of "Bad novel adaptation", this is a rare case of "Bad movie coming from possible bad novel", which is extremely rare. Clearly this film was made for the sole purpose of having exotic film locations to film in more for vacationing than actual good movie making. But to close this review, I will let a definite judgement of the film come from someone else more experienced for over 45 years sum it up: "I hated this movie. Hated, hated, hated, hated, hated this movie. I hated it. Hated every simpering stupid vacant audience-insulting moment of it. Hated the sensibility that thought anyone would like it. Hated the implied insult to the audience by its belief that anyone would be entertained by it." Roger Ebert, everyone.

Overall, I give it 2 out of 10 stars.

Rest in Peace - Roger Ebert.

    There was a time when people watched two crtics talk about movies, not on paper, but on television, and it originally had Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert as the two critics. After Siskel's death, Richard Roeper would replace him, but the main defining force was Roger Ebert. He reviewed films for over 45 years, and he was the first critic I ever watched on TV, and probably the first for other people as well.

Roger Ebert once said that "Being a film critic mean finding someone who's willing to pay you to do what you love."

In his last words on his blog, he said: "So on this day of reflection I say again, thank you for going on this journey with me. I'll see you at the movies."

Truly he was a great man, and from a reviewer to another reviewer, my thoughts are with him and his loved ones.

Roger Ebert: 1942-2013.

Movie Night: Mac and Me.

Review #362: Mac and Me.

Cast
Jade Calegory (Eric), Christine Ebersole (Janet), Jonathan Ward (Michael), Katrina Caspary (Courtney), MAC (MAC), Squire Fridell, and Ronald McDonald. Directed by Stewart Raffill.

Review
It just so happens this is nearly 25 years old, but hey, who's counting? Anyway, this was made for the sole purpose of...entertainment. Yeah, nothing else, nothing at all, and with a "purpose" like that, even Ronald McDonald decided to star, for the "honor", I suppose. I think this is actually my first review with a lead actor who uses a wheelchair, and he does a fine job, not really a bad actor, not memorable, but not annoying. Then there's our alien, named MAC, which stands for "Mysterious Alien Creature". What, it sound repetive and oddly familiar to some other alien with letters that form an acronym? Never noticed. The plot is essentially an alien who crashes down to the planet, getting into hilarious hijinks, and of course he is discovered by the kids, and even though we (the audience) know he exists, we must go through sequences where the parents don't believe the kids, until finally, they do. Oh and, let's not forget the scientists who try to capture the alien, even though they cause more damage, almost eliminating the purpose of the scientists. Almost, because clearly they aren't a cliche, nope, not at all. Oh, and there's a dance sequence at McDonalds, and it totally works into a plot like this. And naturally, everything works out well, because this was the 80's, so, yeah. What a happy film.

Overall I give it "10" out of 10 stars...


...APRIL FOOLS! (actual rating: 5)