Between the Lines.

Review #1988: Between the Lines.

Cast: 

John Heard (Harry Lucas), Lindsay Crouse (Abbie), Jeff Goldblum (Max Arloft), Jill Eikenberry (Lynn), Bruno Kirby (David Entwhistle), Gwen Welles (Laura), Stephen Collins (Michael), Lewis J. Stadlen (Stanley), Jon Korkes (Frank), Michael J. Pollard (The Hawker), Lane Smith (Roy Walsh), Joe Morton (Ahmed), and Marilu Henner (Danielle) Directed by Joan Micklin Silver (#1818 - Hester Street)

Review: 

Admittedly, if you want to follow up a sleeper hit that was thought to be too "ethnic" from big studios, I suppose an ensemble piece with up-and-coming actors is not the oddest thing to come up with. As with her last effort in Hester Street (1975), Raphael D. Silver served as producer. The film was written by Fred Barron and David M. Helpern Jr. Barron had written for the Boston Phoenix, an alternative weekly periodical and he used his experiences there to help shape the script (incidentally, Silver had worked for the Village Voice before becoming a director. This was the second of a total of seven theatrical films that Silver directed. The cast might be the most standout quality in terms of the sheer rise that came from some of them: this was the debut for Heard, Eikenberry, and Morton, who each had started in stage and television before this film, while Goldblum had made his debut in film only three years prior while Crouse was fresh off supporting roles in All the President's Men (1976) and Slap Shot (1977). Perhaps fitting the tone of the film is the inclusion of Welles, who earlier had a supporting role in Nashville (1976). The film was shot and set in Boston.

The movie has a picturesque style of trying to show a look at a time that was within a bare plot composed of episodic pace and an attempt at forming an interesting ensemble. I just wish it was a better movie to sit through for 101 minutes, because it is an experience that seems hopelessly stuck between wistful reminiscences of a time long ago and mildly interesting humor without ever sticking to one main plot. It lingers in episodic format without making a stand for itself beyond trying to ride with mildly likeable people (except for one glaring case) that has a last act that feels like it should have been firmly in the middle. Look, you don't need much to go on about the dangers of big business in little papers, but the bare minimum is meant to be doubly excelled, not barely cleared. Heard makes for a mostly capable lead in frustration and drive. His on-again, off-again dynamic with Crouse is at least entertaining to try and hold a film longer than the other ideas presented, if only because one would like to see more when presented with someone loaded in talent that could use her as just an excuse to not write. You can already see how Goldblum became a curious presence in film here, since he practically gobbles the attention right out from under folks, one that sees him act like a flake in mostly satisfying ways that might as well be a predecessor to his role in The Big Chill (1983); I especially like a scene where he talks with a performance artist with accompanying acts of "art". Kirby makes a suitable middleman in terms of wistful charm in the foreground. Korkes makes an okay beleaguered head to the process. It should only figure the one actor who is the most loathsome in terms of who they became in later life has the least interesting performance. Collins is simply not fun to watch, seemingly trying to bring humor in self-involved author crap that is bland and easily skippable when contrasted with literally anyone on screen. Whether intended as a caricature of writers who want to write the "great American novel" or not, he doesn't do anything worth mentioning positively. Hell, Pollard is playing a cliche with the newspaper salesman on the street, and he runs circles around him when it comes to general charm because one finds Pollard endearing in the foreground and background in those moments, while Stadlen is at least meant to be a foil in his advertising shill persona. Smith only shows up in the last couple of scenes as the prospective buyer of the news station that clearly means big changes...and since the movie ends quickly after that, his impact is diminished despite the fact that he makes an imposing figure. I mean, sure, make an argument all you want about the creeping danger of big business onto papers that supposedly tap into the city, but don't just latch it in late (putting "rumors of a big buy" through the film doesn't cut it). The presentation of contrasts between Heard-Crouse and Collins-Welles would be interesting if the latter didn't end with a completely lame resolution to the latter that is less a case of "human decision-making" and more just a lazy way to throw things together. As a whole, what I like about the movie is the occasional amusing moments that come within trying to make a living in newspapers with a place now resigned to being a middle-ground on the way up or down for people, one that has some ideas wishing to flow for a stronger experience. The loss of innocence within a newspaper that sees its ambition squashed would make an intriguing tragedy, but here one finds a movie that can barely hold the jockstrap of Park Row (1952) It might be an interesting time capsule for a time long past in terms of newspaper media being more than just the option used for people who don't like reading a phone screen, and that is probably the best compliment one could make. 

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Next Time: Cléo from 5 to 7 (1962)

Redux: Terminator 2: Judgement Day.

Redux Review #001: Terminator 2: Judgement Day.

Cast:
Arnold Schwarzenegger (The Terminator), Linda Hamilton (Sarah Connor), Edward Furlong (John Connor), Robert Patrick (T-1000), Earl Boen (Dr. Silberman), Joe Morton (Miles Dyson), S. Epatha Merkerson (Tarissa Dyson), Castulo Guerra (Enrique Salceda), Danny Cooksey (Tim), Jenette Goldstein (Janelle Voight), and Xander Berkeley (Todd Voight) Produced and Directed by James Cameron.

Review: 

A long time ago, I got the idea to review movies and write about them. I was fourteen and a pretty average viewer of action movies. The reviews weren't particularly good, but they generally still reflect my opinions on movies even after twelve years. In fact, I had originally planned to go back to the beginning and re-review this film way back in 2017. December 20, 2010 actually had eleven published reviews when I originally did them on a website called Star Pirates, which went like this: Terminator 2: Judgement Day, RoboCop, Rocky, RoboCop 2, Get Shorty, RoboCop 3, Looney Tunes: Back in Action, X-Men, Star Trek (2009), X2, and Fantastic Four. Four of those eleven actually have Redux Reviews already published, but I figured the best way to commemorate the 12-year anniversary of Movie Night is to make a loop from one James Cameron film to another. Enjoy.

From December 20, 2010:

Well, this film is a nice piece of work at 2 and a half hours long, and the Science Fiction is really put in first, along with the drama. The cast does an excellent job, especially Schwarzenegger and Patrick. This film has good use of CGI and great scenes that make you laugh and cry, as it qualifies for one of the best sci-fi films of all time. This film is probably the best sequel of any film as it does a great job.

"Even if we win the fight for our existence against the rise of machines, how do we define ourselves? Now it’s a real thing and a real concern and a real philosophical, existential question for the human race." - James Cameron

The Terminator (1984) is one of the best science fiction action films of its time. You already know that. Sure, Hemdale and Orion Pictures probably screwed up in promoting the film beyond what it clearly was: a classic in various genres. Of course, James Cameron became a prime name in directing because of the film, which he came up with the initial idea that eventually became fleshed out into what you saw. However, he did not actually feel that a sequel was particularly warranted - he went on to do films such as Aliens (1986) and The Abyss (1989), while the main star of the Terminator film in Arnold Schwarzenegger was always interested in making a sequel while continuing to become a film star on films such as Total Recall (1990). That film was funded by Carolco Pictures, and Schwarzenegger got the owners of the studio to try and negotiate with Hemsdale to buy the rights (they had half of the rights, while Gale Anne Hurd had the other half, since Cameron sold it to her for $1 as part of the deal for Hurd to advocate for Cameron). In 1990, Cameron agreed to join in, complete with asking William Wisher to help write the screenplay with him, for which they tasked to write it in six to seven weeks (because the release date was already set - July 1991). In the long run, it was one of the most expensive films of its time, made for roughly $94 million to $102 million. Interestingly, the idea of a liquid metal Terminator had actually been considered for the first film, as the original film had planned to have two Terminators sent by Skynet. Of course, trying to do a clay-animation Terminator in 1984 did not strike Cameron as effectively possible. It should be mentioned that this idea of two Terminators would find one key change: it wouldn't be a fight between two Terminators that happened to look just like Schwarzenegger (because Wisher thought it sounded like a boring idea). The idea of a Terminator that could take any shape it wants and strike from nowhere was originally intended in the first film, as you already might know. The fact that computer generated imagery (CGI) had managed to come along enough to actually be part of a film for longer than a few seconds surely helped this scenario (as evidenced by Cameron's previous effort in The Abyss). As such, the effects were done in various segments: Industrial Light and Magic (with Dennis Muren as supervisor) for the CGI effects, Stan Winston Studio for prosthetics and animatronics, Fantasy II Film Effects for miniatures and optical effects, and 4-Ward Productions and Pacific Data Images and Video Image for additional elements (such as a nuclear explosion effect). Muren has been quoted as saying that getting a convincing shot of a walking character that looks like it was made of chrome that had weight to it took months. Keep in mind, Cameron had to make sure the live-action shots matched with the effects that were being done by ILM, which meant plenty of takes needed to get the actors to hit their mark, and the final shots involving molten steel came down to the wire in getting them to render properly to reach the intended release date. In the end, the movie was a massive hit, receiving accolades for several members of its crew (such as Winston and Muren winning an Academy Award alongside Gene Warren Jr and Robert Skotak to go with wins for the makeup, sound and sound effects editing crew).

Sure, it is a sci-fi action film just like its predecessor from seven years ago, but it is a successor that hits every mark that you would expect from a film of its kind, sequel or not. It isn't executed in the style of a slasher film as before, instead reaching for new heights of thrills in action and drama that shows both a profound sense of entertainment along with profound sense of humanity. Cameron has called the relationship between the characters of John Connor and the T-800 as the heart of the film, equating it to the Wizard of Oz with the Tin Man getting a heart. If the first film was considered to be bleak within its depiction of a cyborg that would stop at nothing to strike at one of the future keys of humanity, there is a strike of hope within this film, where the progressive humanity shown by the T-800 alongside the resurgence of humanity with Sarah Connor is what drives everything together. Cameron has called it as the "world's most violent anti-war movie", and he does have a pretty good point there, if only because he has made a diverting movie that shows just how far one could possibly go with the basic urge of violence without becoming a movie simply for the thrill hounds (not that there's anything wrong with that, unless you are a pedantic critic – hell, did they not see how violent the first film was?). 

Hamilton clearly was ready for the assignment of playing a character now ravaged by post traumatic stress, which means a role that requires great timing in aggressive behavior and wavering humanity. Her paranoia is our paranoia, and it makes for a lean and effective evolution from her vulnerability all those years ago. Schwarzenegger says quite a few more sentences as before, but it is the progressive humanity seen through his scenes with Furlong that make the movie work as well it does when it isn't just about the action, and he shows his habit for making the audience smile in his expressions without needing to strain credibility. Furlong had never acted in a film before this film. He is the surly key in finalizing this offbeat, fractured family that we see for the film. It is natural honesty that never seems to grate on one's nerves in false notes. His scenes with Schwarzenegger when it comes to bonding with each other, whether that involves promising not to kill (instead going around throwing folks or kneecapping them) or trying to teach him to smile or their last scene together in the mill, which is definitely the most striking. Did you know that Cameron had Billy Idol in mind for the villain role? Well, his "look and presence" made him a brief favorite, but a motorcycle accident ended up opening the door for a mostly unknown actor. Interestingly enough, the one chosen to do the film after successful auditions was Robert Patrick, who had acted in a couple of Roger Corman movies (and even did his own stunts). He basically honed his performance in the film on what he did in the audition from what the casting directors were telling him, which basically was "You’re sense-aware. You’re tracking.” In fact, it was his idea to have the character run around with his fingers outstretched, which goes well with his physicality that reminds one of a snake, one who slithers through the film with worthy distinction. You would think the fact that Schwarzenegger is present during the film would make it distracting for Patrick to be a worthy title threat for the sequel, but he manages to hold his own, and this is in a movie where a good chunk of screen time has him away from the action, but he always makes his impression count. Morton is the one key supporting presence needed, playing an accidental Dr. Frankenstein with shock that makes a useful impression to sell the tragic part of this modern sort of fable when it comes to seeing where one's curiosity with machines can lead, regardless of the intent.

Brad Fiedel returns to do the musical score, which is quite fantastic in its usage of several sounds (organic and acoustic) that he had done through recently available technology, whether that means real air moving in a room in order to generate a sound. Any appreciator of the synth sound of the original will be satisfied with how Fiedel has managed to elevate his sound here. It is a great looking movie, one that is expertly edited (by three people) along with being expertly handled in its effects that have managed to still look quite effective in the art of being cutting-edge without seeming in-organic. It set the stage for future visual blockbusters such as Jurassic Park, that is a testament to the staying power of this film, There are two alternate versions of the film. The original version of the movie runs at 137 minutes long. The "Special Edition" is fifteen minutes longer and includes several scenes not used in the original cut, such as a sequence with Kyle Reese (Cameron prefers the theatrical releases while calling the extended versions just opportunities to see depth restored that couldn't be done with the current runtime). There also exists an "Extended Cut" that includes a scene of the T-1000 inspecting a room along with an alternate ending where an elderly Sarah Connor is watching her grown-up son, now a United States Senator. I ended up watching the Special Edition, primarily because of my memory being with that particular Reese scene (since who doesn’t love to see a little more Michael Biehn), but I imagine that the original cut will be just fine regardless of that fact. There are plenty of scenes one could highlight, but it always ends up being the fact that the movie has multiple potential climaxes (building explosion, the nitrogen chase, and the steel mill), which it handles with precision to where nothing seems dragged beyond comprehension. 

As a whole, Terminator 2: Judgement Day is a prime example of how to hone one’s craft in elevated storytelling, weaving a sci-fi action parable of humanity with expert filmmaking that has endured as a key moment for both effects work and for its time after over three decades since its release. The debate over which Terminator film ends up with the same result: you can't go wrong with either classic to pick.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

Blues Brothers 2000.

Review #1699: Blues Brothers 2000.

Cast: 

Dan Aykroyd (Elwood J. Blues), John Goodman (Mack McTeer), Joe Morton (Commander Cabel Chamberlain), J. Evan Bonifant (Buster Blues), featuring Aretha Franklin (Mrs. Murphy), James Brown (Reverend Cleophus James), B.B. King (Malvern Gasperone), The Blues Brothers Band [Steve "The Colonel" Cropper (rhythm guitar / vocals), Donald "Duck" Dunn (bass guitar), Murphy Dunne (keyboards), Willie "Too Big" Hall (drums and percussion), Tom "Bones" Malone (trombone / tenor saxophone / vocals), "Blue Lou" Marini (alto saxophone / tenor saxophone / vocals), Matt "Guitar" Murphy (lead guitar), Alan "Mr. Fabulous" Rubin (trumpet / percussion / vocals)], The Louisiana Gator Boys [various musicians, featured below], Erykah Badu (Queen Moussette), Blues Traveler, Lonnie Brooks, Eddie Floyd, and Kathleen Freeman (Mother Mary Stigmata) Directed by John Landis (#328 - Trading Places, #410 - Coming to America, #513 - Spies Like Us, #1114 - Animal House, #1462 - The Blues Brothers, and #1465 - An American Werewolf in London)

Review: 

"I was very pissed off by what Universal did to me on ‘Blues Brothers 2000′ and that was my first experience with the new corporate Hollywood. It’s very different. Everything is by committee now, and they destroyed that movie, though the music is still good."

If you remember correctly, the Blues Brothers was the result of two guys who loved the blues. John Belushi and Dan Aykroyd (who credits Donnie Walsh and Richard “Hock” Walsh as the model for their characters) had performed together on Saturday Night Live with the act a few times before being asked by Steve Martin to be his opening act at one of his shows, which resulted in the live album Briefcase Full of Blues in 1978. This, alongside Belushi's success with Animal House (1978) only served to attract the interest of studios to engage in a bidding war to make a movie. Of course, that movie was racked by chaos involving substances and one half of its writing team being fairly green at the art of creating a screenplay. In other words, it wasn't easy to make a movie involving numerous music acts and the destruction of 103 cars while shooting exclusively in Chicago, or one that focused exclusively on the blues (in a time that was more about disco and less about the blues and soul) while dodging complaints of being too over-the-top (i.e. people who don't know shit) to become a classic. Perhaps it only makes sense that Aykroyd kept the name around with the chain restaurant (and live music concert hall) House of Blues, which has managed to have a few locations around the country, and Aykroyd has taken to tour on occasion with the band (alongside with John's younger brother, Jim). So yes, I suppose it makes sense that Aykroyd wanted to do another movie involving the blues and put more acts on film. Of course, it is also possible that Aykroyd and Landis wanted to re-capture lightning in a bottle when it comes to success - this was after all the sixth collaboration between the two of them, all of which that were done in the 1980s. Just remember, this was done in 1998.

Reportedly, Landis and Aykroyd did not have a great time with filming. While they were the writers behind the script, Universal Pictures made their stipulations clear that involved requiring a PG-13 rating and a child lead. Of course, the original pitch that the two was apparently just a re-hash of the original, since it would have featured a plot involving refurbishing the old orphanage (which would have featured Jim Belushi cast as "Brother Zee" alongside Goodman as a trio). Of course, Belushi could not do the film due to contractual obligations (at the time, he was cast in a lead part in the series Total Security, which didn't even make it to 1998), so the script instead was modified to include Morton. Have you ever seen a movie that looks and seems DOA as quickly as this one? Making a sequel eighteen years after the fact is already a tough task, but making a comedy sequel that has the task of replacing one part of its key nucleus is like trying to do The Three Stooges with only two actors. Of course, Belushi wasn't the only actor to have died in the gap between the two films (the film opens with a tribute to Belushi, Cab Calloway and John Candy). Oddly enough, everybody else in the Blues Brothers Band returns, and they all get to have a scene dedicated to re-uniting them all together, because how else would this film run for two hours? Well, there is one solution that would probably have worked to the benefit of everybody who don't care for stories about pint-sized kids getting mentors and voodoo witches: focus entirely on the music. Heck, cut around the "plot" with no explanation and call it artistic license, that would probably work just as well (that, or alienate a whole bunch of folks who wonder where Eric Clapton came from). Call it the "Mission from the Blues" Edition, if you will. Let me be clear: teenagers don't watch movies just because the rating is PG-13 instead of R, and they sure won't watch it just because there's a kid as one of the leads. That isn't say to that foul language and certain situations is important to making something people want to watch, but this is a movie that clearly is the result of studio notes from people who think they know better.

Perhaps it is my imagination or my memories have faded from the year that followed watching the original film, but Aykroyd seems to have thoroughly faded into nothingness when it comes to generating anything more than a quivering thought of a chuckle. The fact that he doesn't take off those Ray Ban sunglasses doesn't help either, a dubious marker of shame for someone who probably should have known better as both writer AND star. Honestly, I do wonder if Goodman would have prevailed with the original script when it comes to zippy energy. He seems kind of pale here, seemingly stuck in that suit and sunglasses like a statue without a home to draw a response. Morton gets to play both uptight authority and inevitable "Blues Brother" in the same film, and it is perhaps a fitting marker of dubiousness that his most notable scene is one where he sees the error of his ways by levitating in the air and changing his outfit. Embarrassment is a hard word to swallow when it involves your lead trio. Well, there is Bonifant, but you and I both know that child actors are either forgettable, passable, or terrible. Take a guess how he does. Perhaps if one had never heard of the original movie they would be okay with this one, or maybe if they watched it solely to see blues musicians play on a big screen. Name dropping is an annoying habit, but yes, there are quite a few performers to see (mostly near the end) for the "The Louisiana Gator Boys": B.B. King, Isaac Hayes, Lou Rawls, Billy Preston, Bo Diddley, Koko Taylor, you get the idea. It is far more interesting than the car wrecks or the attempts at plot that go nowhere (which involves the group being turned into plastic statues after being forced to play Caribbean music...???). In the end, this reeks of something you might see in the direct-to-video junkpile, yet here we are with a $31 million/123 minute movie of failure that benefits from moments of music more so than anything else - indeed, it is some sort of accomplishment to have brought back the same director and a portion of the same cast after many years apart and make a sequel inferior in every way. 

Overall, I give it 4 out of 10 stars.

Ali.

Review #1531: Ali.

Cast: 
Will Smith (Cassius Clay Jr / Muhammad Ali), Jamie Foxx (Drew Bundini Brown), Jon Voight (Howard Cosell), Mario Van Peebles (Malcolm X), Ron Silver (Angelo Dundee), Jeffrey Wright (Howard Bingham), Mykelti Williamson (Don King), James Toney (Joe Frazier), Jada Pinkett Smith (Sonji Roi), Nona Gaye (Belinda Boyd / Khalilah Ali), Michael Michele (Veronica Porché), Joe Morton (Chauncey Eskridge), Paul Rodriguez (Dr. Ferdie Pacheco), and Bruce McGill (Bradley) Directed by Michael Mann.

Review: 
"The accomplishment of Will Smith in that movie is extraordinary: It’s not just the movement and the boxing — that’s difficult enough; it’s having your head in 1964, which came from sitting where you’re sitting and talking to Geronimo Pratt. That’s the challenge, because that’s what’s really, sincerely exciting — to get things to the point where they become emotionalized and real, so hopefully they have an impact upon audiences.”

It takes a life as big as Muhammad Ali to have two big names behind a biopic about his crucial years, which is why Michael Mann and Will Smith seemed destined to make this film together. The Chicago-born Mann studied English at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, but it was the viewing of films by F. W. Murnau and G. W. Pabst along with the release of Dr. Strangelove (1963) that influenced him about becoming a director and making a film with an individual statement with successful appeal for serious cinema without needing to be niche. He attended London Film School and subsequently made commercials and shorts before eventually moving back to the United States to do television, which led to his TV breakthrough with The Jericho Mile (1979) before a feature film breakthrough with Thief (1981). Known for his focus on his work with detail and style, this is the seventh of his eleven directorial efforts, and he would also serve as a co-producer and co-writer on the screenplay (with Eric Roth, Stephen J. Rivele, and Christopher Wilkinson, while Gregory Allen Howard got credit for the story). As for Smith, he had risen to fame through various media, which included hip hop in the late 1980s and television with The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air (1990-96) before carving a breakthrough in film with Six Degrees of Separation (1993). Smith had his hesitations of taking on Ali in part because of uncertainty about the script but also in if he was ready to be involved in the feature. He went through months of training in learning about boxing and Islamic studies while gaining weight for the role for a project that ultimately ballooned to over $100 million in budget.

Ali had been prominent on and off the ring, with his pursuits involving writing, music, and acting, which included features such as a.k.a. Cassius Clay (1970, documentary), which had archival footage and interviews with Ali about his exile from the ring, The Greatest (1977), in which Ali starred as himself detailing his life from 1960-1974, and When We Were Kings (1996, documentary), which detailed the "Rumble In The Jungle" fight with archival footage. One could likely do multiple projects on the life of Ali or study him and his prominent life through simply seeing him near a boxing ring. However, this is a film that details the most important years of his life that go from 1964 to 1974, detailing his holding to his principles through a rise, fall, and rise again to the ring and what matters to him most when it comes to holding his principles in religion and against war. In this sense, Ali is a decent film, packed to the prim with observation and some of the confidence and curiosity that made Ali such an icon while perhaps dragging its feet in covering all the fine points of what it wants to show in its vision, a man filled with idiosyncrasies that made him a courageous rebel with struggles and human flaws. In this sense, Smith pulls off a wonderful performance, wrapped in confidence that does well in bravado and stature that works as a tribute to the man portrayed without seeping into hagiographic worship, elevating the material beyond putty if in lesser hands. Foxx proves just as well in delivering someone wrapped in hype and mystery with the right kind of conviction and timing when he is needed for the experience. Voight, wrapped in makeup, pulls off a pretty convincing performance, one with enterprising presence that likely captures the blustery confidence of the real Cosell (in my vague awareness of him the film did actually teach me something I didn't know, namely that he studied law before broadcasting) without just seeming like a pale imitation. Others do fine, but they generally seep in and out of the film as time goes on that make it a bit difficult to really grab a hold on (aside from one might know about them, as is the case with figures played by Van Peebles and Williamson), although at least the film never detracts from its time period with something distracting. The boxing sequences are generally well done, handling the plight of what it means to get beaten pound-for-pound with flourish and careful cutting. Even though the film was not a success with audiences at the time, it shouldn't erase what turns out to be a useful experience to see on screen. One's enjoyment of the film comes from how much of the material will resonate with a viewer when it comes to being a celebration of Ali and what he went through in a decade of fighting others from the ring onto the system that go from place to place with a fair bit of impact for its surroundings that make a decent achievement for both Mann and Smith to be proud of.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Speed (1994).

Review #1115: Speed.

Cast: 
Keanu Reeves (Officer Jack Traven), Dennis Hopper (Howard Payne), Sandra Bullock (Annie Porter), Joe Morton (Lt. "Mac" McMahon), Jeff Daniels (Officer Harry Temple), Alan Ruck (Doug Stephens), Carlos Carrasco (Ortiz), Glenn Plummer (Jaguar owner), and Richard Lineback (Sgt. Norwood) Directed by Jan de Bont (#812 - Twister)

Review: 
At long last, Speed. I never intended for the Upcoming Features to have the film listed for so long (roughly a year or so), but it took a while to find time to do this one. Hope you enjoy.

Speed is an accomplishment in its execution of action and energetic nature that has numerous assets to achieving its goal as a popcorn thriller. This was the directorial debut of de Bont, a Dutch cinematographer who was responsible for numerous films such as Die Hard (1988), The Hunt for Red October (1990) and Basic Instinct (1992). Graham Yost, who had written for television shows such as Hey Dude prior to this movie, was inspired by his father Elwy telling him about Runaway Train (1985), which was about a train speeding out a control that had been based on an idea by Akira Kurosawa. Yost's original script was set entirely on the bus, with the sequence involving the bus looping around being at the parking lot of Dodgers Stadium instead of an aiport. Josh Whedon was brought in to do (un-credited) work prior to main production beginning, with Yost stating that most of the dialogue was written by Whedon, adding "We were very much in sync, it's just that I didn't write the dialogue as well as he did." In any case, having the film not having all of its time on the bus, such as the elevator sequence or parts involving the police (such as Daniels) outside the bus do make the action come off well in not being overwhelming nor sluggish in its 116 minute run-time.

The main three of Reeves, Hopper, and Bullock all manage to stand out well, doing great in their own ways. Reeves proves to be a capable lead hero, having an edge of vulnerability alongside an air of resourceful nature that makes him interesting to watch, whether when jumping a bus or trying to adapt to the situation of the plot. Hopper makes for an entertaining villain, having the right sense of timing with his lines that carry weight with the motivations written without resorting to being generically evil or chewing too much of the scenery, having a sardonic charm to him. Bullock holds her own well, proving to be a capable one to pair off with the action and Reeves, for which they have a fair amount of chemistry with each other. The others also do fine in their time on screen, such as Daniels, Morton, or Ruck, who both pull off their respective mannerisms and motivations well. The bus members don't have too much particular time to really shine, but they are believable people who don't come off as too annoying or too painfully generic.

The movie is a thrill ride from start to finish, having a consistency to what it wants to execute on screen that rewards the eyes without assaulting it. It isn't the kind of movie that wants to challenge the viewer too heavily, but it sure will give them something to behold in terms of what could and what does happen without being insulting to their intelligence or pushing things too far, having its share of fun moments. Arguably the most notable moment of the film is the bus jump scene. California Interstates 105 and 110 were used for a majority of the freeway sequences in the film, and while de Bont was scouting the area he noticed that there were missing sections and was inspired to add the sequence. Not to spoil too much about the stunt itself (or the feasibility of doing said stunt), but the sequence as a whole is breathtaking to watch, having a certain excitement that never falls prey to feeling too unbelievable. On the whole, the film works on a level of consistency that can be appreciated and aspire to after over two decades. It is the kind of movie you can appreciate on a technical level, where it even received Academy Awards for Best Sound Editing and Best Sound Mixing. There is enough suspense to make for an incredible time for viewers, especially ones with action in mind.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Stealth.

Review #1089: Stealth.

Cast: 
Josh Lucas (Lt. Ben "Big" Gannon), Jessica Biel (Lt. Kara "Guns" Wade), Jamie Foxx (Lt. Henry "E-Z" Purcell), Sam Shepard (Capt. George Cummings), Joe Morton (Capt. Dick Marshfield), Richard Roxburgh (Dr. Keith Orbit), Ian Bliss (Lt. Aaron Shaftsbury), Ebon Moss-Bachrach (Tim), David Andrews (Ray), and Wentworth Miller (EDI) Directed by Rob Cohen (#043 - The Fast and the Furious and #924 - The Boy Next Door)

Review: 
For a movie that is called "Stealth", the film's only real secret is that it is terrible within the first twenty minutes. From its preposterous plot to the underplayed characters that are followed up by equally underplayed acting, this film was a notable failure upon original release, making just over half of its reported budget of $135 million dollars. It would seem they put more thought into spending money for the effects than anything else, for the movie's detriment as it turns out. The effects aren't terrible, but there isn't a moment where you really feel the need to appreciate what is being shown on screen, with the action sequences being the worst offenders at this, feeling like bad cut-scenes that never cease to try and stymie the eyeballs. I was reminded of Broken Arrow (1996), a film I covered five years ago, while watching this flick - and that is not a compliment, seeing how that one was actually more riveting in comparison, where even Top Gun (1986) would be embarrassed at this thing. The movie uses the "set in the near future" excuse as a way to try and throw lingo (such as quantum computing) and the concept of AI, which is even more amusing if one has seen 2001: A Space Odyssey and its version of AI with HAL 9000, which was thought of in the 1960s as opposed to the 21st century like with Stealth, with the AI here seemingly placed to make it seem a little less like a generic action film and more like a generic science fiction action movie, but there is no way that any sane person would consider this sci-fi. This is more the kind of movie you would reject for $1 at the pawn shop than a worthwhile thing to watch.

There is something about this movie can't generate excitement beyond a chuckle at how over-the-top it presents itself that makes it a chore from start to finish. The acting is the nail in the coffin for this film, with our main trio of Lucas-Biel-Foxx being ridiculous to follow through with, in part because their characters are relentlessly generic and none of them are really up to the task of elevating them to watchability. The closest to entertainment value is Foxx, who has a few moments of amusement. Lucas and Biel have zero chemistry with each other, and they equally add zero charisma to these roles, coming off as boring people to follow that aren't entertaining even in the action sequences. Shepard doesn't do too bad, but the film seems to be beneath him, reminding me of how much more fun I had with him in The Right Stuff (1983). The most amusing voice is Miller, playing the "rogue AI", a trope that you can see coming nearly five minutes after he is first introduced. The plot is all over the place with stuff that you can readily expect and stuff that you wouldn't dare expect, but the most amusing aspect is a line of dialogue referring to the AI, in that it apparently downloaded all of the songs from the web. Yes, an rogue AI that not only goes against commands but also is a pirate of music companies. Oh, the horror. Trying to analyze the film or tear down its flaws piece by piece would be just as exhausting as watching the movie, only less time-consuming. By the time the film has the gall to end with a post-credits scene, you will have already started the process of trying to forget what you have seen, in the hope that it won't bore you to death any further than it already has in its 121 minute run-time. Even as a bad flick, it isn't enjoyably bad, managing to be a relentlessly dull and plodding piece of dreck.

Overall, I give it 3 out of 10 stars.