The Adventures of Pluto Nash.

Review #1930: The Adventures of Pluto Nash.

Cast: 

Eddie Murphy (Pluto Nash / Rex Carter), Randy Quaid (Bruno), Rosario Dawson (Dina Lake), Jay Mohr (Anthony Frankowski / Tony Francis), Peter Boyle (Rowland), Luis Guzmán (Felix Laranga), Joe Pantoliano (Mogan), James Rebhorn (Belcher), Pam Grier (Flura Nash), John Cleese (James), Burt Young (Gino), Lillo Brancato (Larry), and Victor Varnado (Kelp) Directed by Ron Underwood (#808 - City Slickers)

Review: 

"I knew we didn’t have the kind of wit and the fun that I would want...I felt that it was not really working fully...But it wasn't very obvious how to correct it." 

Poor Ron Underwood. He was an exchange student in what is now known as Sri Lanka for AFS Intercultural Programs, and it inspired him to become a filmmaker by what he saw there. He studied at the USC School of Cinematic Arts (after changing his mind from studying at Occidental College as a pre-med student). After doing short film and television projects, Tremors (1990) became his very first film as a director, and he also served as a co-writer. Underwood did four further films in the 1990s such as City Slickers (1991) and Mighty Joe Young (1998). When he was finishing work on the latter film, he received an offer to work on a script by Neil Cuthbert that had Eddie Murphy attached that dealt with a colony on the Moon. The Cuthbert script had been bouncing around Hollywood for years, first being brought as a project at Universal...in 1983. 1989 even saw an attempt to see at Universal with Peter Faiman (the director behind Crocodile Dundee) as director. Keep in mind, when Underwood was brought in, he joined in with the understanding that they had 7-9 months to work on the script before Murphy could join in to help with shooting. Underwood felt that there was an issue with the main core in the script, and yet it never came together. Murphy did not care for the script that was presented to him, nor the handful of scripts presented afterwards, and he seemingly wanted a film that was written for someone like Sylvester Stallone or Harrison Ford that would have him bring the comedy...which meant a straight draft. Underwood stuck with Castle Rock Entertainment because of the obligation he had to friends that worked with there despite the fact he had other offers while the film process "seemed to just be going and on"...the result was that he was on the production for four years.

The film was such a tremendous failure with audiences and critics, being one of the few $100 million movies to not even make ten percent of its budget back. Underwood would direct for television on a fairly regular basis in 2003 (one year after this film) while having just one film credit since that film: In the Mix (2005), although he at least seems happy by what he gets to direct. Even Eddie Murphy made light of the failure of the film, although if anyone is to be blamed for this film, it is him (Underwood, while being charitable about him being nice, thought Murphy wasn't feeling funny in production). The problem with the movie is that it isn't particularly funny, and it desires an actor with some sort of energy to it due to how the bland story is not particularly interesting as an adventure nor as a "mystery". It doesn't feel particularly like a science fiction worth gawking at, looking like the world's cheapest expensive film, never insipiring curiosity over the time or tech beyond demo levels. The only highlight might be Quaid, having a bald head while trying to play an old robot. Somehow, he proves the quirks that are just begging to be let out here, having the rare distinction of being funnier than the actual lead. Murphy has the "in it for the money" face, not inspiring anything for comedy or for adventure, and the fact that he has a double role as the villain doesn't do him any favors either. The only one to possibly pity would be Dawson, adrift in a film with no energy for her to tap into/absorb for fun. John Cleese being in this film in the shape of a hologram is the very definition of "phoned in", as if he was tricked into believing that he had to top Eric Idle in phoned in supporting performances (hey, speaking of Idle movies...next year?). Faking one out with a few seconds of Alec Baldwin is more amusing than the gags presented (such as Hilary Clinton being on a $100 bill or a Trump Realty sign), sadly. The less said about Pantoliano, Boyle, Guzman, and Mohr, the better. As a whole, what we have here is a movie that is not particularly funny, not particularly adventurous, and not particularly fun. It is a snooze fest for 95 minutes that only avoids being called one of the absolute worst after 20 years because there isn't even enough to remember in how bad it is. 

Overall, I give it 1 out of 10 stars.

Last one: Valley of the Dolls.

The Goonies.

Review #1700: The Goonies.

Cast: 

Sean Astin (Michael "Mikey" Walsh), Josh Brolin (Brandon "Brand" Walsh), Jeff Cohen (Lawrence "Chunk" Cohen), Corey Feldman (Clark "Mouth" Devereaux), Jonathan Ke Huy Quan (Richard "Data" Wang), Kerri Green (Andrea Theresa "Andy" Carmichael), Martha Plimpton (Stephanie "Stef" Steinbrenner), John Matuszak (Lotney "Sloth" Fratelli), Anne Ramsey (Mama Fratelli), Robert Davi (Jake Fratelli), Joe Pantoliano (Francis Fratelli), Mary Ellen Trainor (Irene Walsh), Keith Walker (Irving Walsh), Steve Antin (Troy Perkins), and Lupe Ontiveros (Rosalita) Directed by Richard Donner (#075 - Scrooged, #355 - Lethal Weapon, #356 - Lethal Weapon 2, #547 - Superman, #619 - Maverick, #731 - Lethal Weapon 3, #734 - Lethal Weapon 4, #1452 - The Omen, #1542 - 16 Blocks)

Review: 

Richard Donner was a director that managed to channel a long career in film through his versatility and consistency. He honed his craft through television in the late 1950s and the 1960s while making his start in film with X-15 (1961) before having his breakthrough with The Omen (1976) that continued with the film that defined superhero adaptation for a generation with Superman (1978). He directed twenty films from 1961 to 2006 alongside taking time to produce films with his wife Lauren with the Donners' Company before his recent passing early this month. The Goonies was the eighth feature directed by Donner, and it certainly serves as one of the most interesting collaborations between filmmakers, if you think about it. Steven Spielberg contributed the story (which was his last story credit until A.I. Artificial Intelligence in 2001) while also serving as executive producer with Amblin Entertainment as the main production company, while Chris Columbus (best known for his work on Gremlins the year before) wrote the screenplay (the second of three collaborations as writer to an Amblin production, which closed with Young Sherlock Holmes the same year). I will admit that the curiosity for watching this film has varied wildly over the past few years, although some movies slip by the cracks when you grow up past being a kid (which happened about over a thousand reviews ago). But hey, I guess one needs imagination now and then, whether that involves riding bikes with friends, them telling you about big events in their life so you don't hear it second-hand, saving the community, or pirate treasure involving dead pirates. It depends on how much one can dwell on the adventure and the craftsmanship taken to get to that point in the guise of a movie for kids with plenty of syrupy tone to go around. If you thought E.T. the Extra Terrestrial (1982) was too odd to try and experience for oneself in terms of "connected" aliens for the kid at heart, why not go a different direction with a tilt awhirl of feel-good adolescence? At least one can't say that the vision of the director isn't consumed by the habits of their producer (this is more true for other features with Spielberg as a producer with Tobe Hooper's Poltergeist (1982) or Joe Dante's Gremlins (1984), for example). While there were rumblings of a potential follow-up for a number of years, no sequel has come from it (or even a remake), which seems to be appropriate no matter how much one likes the film (because, really, who needs to break the illusion?).

This is one of those movies that could be thought of as "classic-proof" to those who like it. For me, I just call it "okay-proof" and shrug my shoulders. The level of enjoyment depends on the level of patience one has for the contrivances displayed on screen (maps in the attic that happen to lead to treasure, the amount of booby traps in the road to the ship, finding jewels right before a big signing moment, et cetera). It likely hasn't aged as well as other highlight films that grabbed the attention of its audiences in the 1980s, but it does manage to have an appeal within a game cast and some interest in maintaining adventure after a sluggish start that will surely leave one satisfied enough with the concoction brewed by Donner. The kids are kids, really. I think at least one of the kids will remind you of yourself, so I suppose that is more of a compliment than if I was instead bored by syrupy sentiment or self indulgency, and this is for a film where four of its main seven kid actors are making their film debut (Astin, Brolin, Green, Cohen) and the most experienced actor is Feldman. In that sense, Brolin stands out the best among the fresh folks, mostly because his beleaguered elder presence is the most refreshing to see through the film, which is then followed by Plimpton, who provides fair timing to accommodate a mild Green (with milder chemistry shared against Brolin). Astin is fine, in the sense that he holds well to the quivering balance of adventure and goofball folks without seeming like a slam brand of bland man (of course, the scene at the well is hit-and-miss for me, but hey, if it is indeed your time, go ahead). Cohen did exactly one feature film before eventually deciding to study law, so I think it all makes out well for some decent comic relief that is more than just "haha Truffle shuffle". Feldman maneuvers fine in mouthy charm, while Quan gets to have a few chuckles with the gadget sight gag cycle. Sure, the kids are fine and all, but I find the adult trio of Ramsey-Davi-Pantoliano to be far more curious to view from time to time, particularly if one views them as a prototype for the foils in Home Alone (1990; Columbus did co-write the script for the film, after all). Ramsey generates a few chuckles for what is needed in that friendly balance of cartoon and cruelty that results in plenty of curiosity and moments to view with brazen warmth. The same goes for Davi and Pantoliano, each of which clearly had bigger and better roles to come when it comes to cultivate distinct presences beyond just "the heavy" (which works when using a trained singer doing opera for a joke). Football player-turned-actor Matuszak plays the heavy with the right balance of strength and timing to not become just an effects-show. Honestly, the best parts of the movie come out best when the film doesn't turn on the hokum full blast; it is nice film to look at when it comes to its trek across the water for a ship, and seeing a bunch of skeletons around does at least make the danger seem apparent to make sure one isn't too lost in syrupy antics for gold. It can be fun for those who want to have fun with it, and that will surely work enough for those who buy into the execution of a few gags of humor to go with its eventual end shot, which I admit is a nice touch. I can't quite go so far as to label it as a refined classic, but the lasting appeal has been there in the 36 years that have followed its release for those in need of movies with "heart", if you will.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

U.S. Marshals.

Review #1692: U.S. Marshals.

Cast: 

Tommy Lee Jones (Sam Gerard), Wesley Snipes (Mark J. Sheridan / Mark Roberts / Mark Warren), Robert Downey Jr (John Royce), Joe Pantoliano (Cosmo Renfro), Daniel Roebuck (Bobby Biggs), Tom Wood (Noah Newman), LaTanya Richardson (Savannah Cooper), Irène Jacob (Marie Bineaux), Kate Nelligan (Catherine Walsh), Patrick Malahide (Bertram Lamb), Rick Snyder (Frank Barrows), and Michael Paul Chan (Xiang Chen) Directed by Stuart Baird.

Review:

Do you remember The Fugitive? A long time ago, I was first introduced to it by the 1993 film, one of a string of adaptations of familiar television shows that have been quite prevalent over the past few decades. The original series had ran for four seasons from 1963 to 1967 involving the chase of an escaped convict (an innocent victim of blind justice) that goes from place to place trying to clear his name while an lieutenant bound to enforce the law is keen on catching him. The show was created by Roy Huggins (whose previous successes included Maverick, which also saw a film adaptation in the mid 1990s) with Quinn Martin producing the show; supposedly the idea for the show was based on the real-life trial of Sam Sheppard, who was convicted but subsequently acquitted of the murder of his wife, although Huggins denied this (at any rate, Victor Hugo's 1862 novel Les Misérables is likely the most evident inspiration). Oh, and it happened to be one of the first notable series finales ever broadcast on television, but that's besides the point. The reason I mention all of this is to provide context for when a film adaptation of the show eventually came to pass, one that modified details within an attempt at making a thriller capped by one big stunt (with a train, what else?). It did its own interpretation of the main two characters that retained a good deal of the claustrophobic feel of the series that works in character-driven drama with plenty of shots of Chicago that seemed distinct and useful when compared to the anthology premises used by the show. It wasn't a perfect movie by any means (since it inadvertently captured the fuzzy resolution of trying to cap a thriller with shaky explanations that the show also had), but it certainly received enough notice from folks to stand well among its time, even after nearly three decades. One of the benefactors from that success was Tommy Lee Jones, who won an Academy Award for his performance in that film; if you remember correctly, Jones spent screen time either paired with an elusive Ford or paired with the folks on the hunt for him that ranged from Joe Pantoliano to Johnny Lee Davenport (i.e. a supporting cast of five), and most of that supporting cast returns here. As with this film, Huggins served as one of the executive producers, while John Pogue served as screenwriter.

Are you surprised that this movie came out five years after the success of The Fugitive? Or is the real surprise the fact that this "spinoff" was even created at all? Nay, the true surprise is how average the movie is, a movie that is blandly unnecessary yet never infuriating enough to stop watching (if only because of the folks involved). In other words, if you've seen one movie about a fugitive on the run, watch The Fugitive. You could replace Jones and his character with any kind of generic hero and probably not lose much when it comes to entertainment value (incidentally, Stuart Baird had served as the editor on a variety of action films that ranged from Lethal Weapon (1987) to Demolition Man (1993) before debuting as director with Executive Decision in 1996). The movie builds on the idea of "innocent man on the run" in trying to add a conspiracy aspect to it that results in a very muddled movie that takes quite a while to really do anything of circumstance, and we are talking about a 131 minute movie. When one starts talking about innocent fugitives who are also former CIA operatives after we see him nearly get taken down by zip guns hidden in a prison plane, the brain starts to check out. The performances are relatively fine, in that the main group of Marshals roll with the clichés without turning into complete cardboard (i.e. you don't groan at the banter). However, Snipes certainly suffers the most when it comes to having to deal with the muddled focus, contrasting oddly with Jones in the levels of interest despite having (on paper) more to work with in terms of people to bounce off than Ford had to do in the first film (i.e. Jacob, although she is merely just okay here), and yet it still feels a bit hollow. I like Jones just fine for this film, but he clearly had better material to work with before, in that there isn't anything that really stands to interest a newcomer or one familiar with the first one. Of course, if one likes seeing Jones or Snipes as actors, one could be fine with what they see anyway, since bad movies with a favorite actor can theoretically still be interesting to view (for example, there are folks who probably can stomach Blade: Trinity for Snipes just as I remind myself of the amusement I share in thinking about Volcano (1997) with Jones in its monumental amusement factor). Downey has described this as one of his worst filming experiences, going so far as to call it "the worst action movie of all time", one that depressed him and made him rather be in prison than wake up on the set of it again. It likely doesn't help that he seems a bit miscast here, and we are talking about a movie that barely has that much energy to go with in the first place. Really though, a great deal of the movie could be summed up as "on paper", in that the idea of a film about folks pursuing people on the run could on paper be interesting, or maybe the idea of seeing where a guy like Gerald goes after having spent considerable time catching one innocent fugitive goes (on paper). Instead, one gets a mild movie that seems to have the odors of studio notes, where the demand to try and top the stunts that captured attention before go hand in hand with trying to wring originality out of familiar pulp. The swinging stunt onto a passing train is likely the most notable scene from the movie (the plane crash is a close second, but yeah), and if it is taken as just a movie for distraction without taking too much into its middling middle-ness, it might prove inoffensive enough to see once. As a whole, it is an unnecessary spinoff that doesn't equally doesn't do much to spin on what had been done years before while serving average in every other aspect that will either mean a movie one will pass on seeing or find to be a mild curiosity on a long boring night.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

The Matrix.

Review #1272: The Matrix.

Cast: 
Keanu Reeves (Thomas A. Anderson / Neo), Laurence Fishburne (Morpheus), Carrie-Anne Moss (Trinity), Hugo Weaving (Agent Smith), Joe Pantoliano (Cypher), Marcus Chong (Tank), Anthony Ray Parker (Dozer), Julian Arahanga (Apoc), Matt Doran (Mouse), Gloria Foster (The Oracle), and Belinda McClory (Switch) Directed by The Wachowskis.

Review: 
One wonders how a film likes this has endured for two decades. The answers may differ slightly from person to person, but it is likely the entertainment value alongside a fairly developed philosophical core that stays on a steady path for most of its 136 minute run-time. How many directors have their main cast read works such as "Simulacra and Simulation" by Jean Baudrillard? One can't fault the Wachowskis for being ambitious with their story ideas, but credit also must go to others such as Yuen Woo-ping for coordinating the fight scenes or the visual effects headlined by John Gaeta (most notably with the bullet time parts). It has plenty of style and just enough substance to not collapse under its own weight, which would've happened under lesser hands or interference over the intended vision of a sci-fi action film that has its own voice involving a dystopia. Looking at the rooftop sequence for the beginning is certainly interesting, one for the way it grabs the viewer but also because the scene is one that uses sets from Dark City (1998) - bad movies sometimes makes you want to pick other movies instead, but sometimes good ones help inspire interest for additional ones too, I suppose. Maybe it isn't as great as something like Blade Runner (1982) or The Terminator (1984), but it belongs up there as something worthy to be watched alongside those kind of films without needing to defend it so heavily, where expectations for a first time viewer can be moderately high without being obnoxious.

The characters don't seem as developed as they likely should be (name one defining characteristic of the supporting cast-mates), but at least the actors don't squander their time by looking completely vacant. One can barely even see the seeds of a romance between Reeves and Moss (maybe they just bond over blank stares over "lunch" or something). For all that can be made fun of the film with its philosophy at times, at least one can give credit to Fishburne for keeping to his convictions and selling this whole-handily. Reeves generally goes through the motions with an oddball plot, but at least he seems ready to engage with the film without being too dull or too quippy with what is meant to be an interesting journey. The what-ifs for this film certainly are interesting - Will Smith was a potential choice for Neo before he turned it down (for Wild Wild West, but also because he didn't feel he was mature enough for it), but one noted choice for Morpheus was Val Kilmer. Moss does fine with handling herself when it comes to the action (such as the noted beginning, although the second half doesn't leave her too much to go with, for better or worse. Weaving is pretty involving as the non-generic AI program adversary, seeming like a mirror to Reeves that works out pretty well. Pantoliano does pretty good with a slick role that always proves watchable when needed. The film sure knows when to have an action sequence, or show off an interesting effect or two, and while it may take over the film for its climax to where the philosophy it taking a break, at least things do not end up crashing down by the time it reaches its endgame. One retains interest in seeing more from this interesting world and what can happen next, which did happen with two sequels released four years later. It may prove to be an experience for the viewer in more ways than one if it reaches its high points, but even when it seems like it wants to collapse, there is enough conviction and craftsmanship to make the whole thing worth it.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Risky Business.

Review #1082: Risky Business.

Cast: 
Tom Cruise (Joel Goodson), Rebecca De Mornay (Lana), Joe Pantoliano (Guido), Nicholas Pryor (Mr. Goodson), Janet Carroll (Mrs. Goodson), Richard Masur (Rutherford), Curtis Armstrong (Miles Dalby), Bronson Pinchot (Barry), Shera Danese (Vicki), and Raphael Sbarge (Glenn) Directed by Paul Brickman.

Review: 
Risky Business is the kind of film that isn't merely just stuck to one type of genre or idea of what it is, whether that is a coming-of-age film, a romantic comedy, or look at society in the world of a teen. Whatever lens that you view the film through, it is a fairly effective experience that has enough clever moments and energy to make a solid winner. This was the film that helped launch the career of Cruise, who had starred in four other films prior to this one, and it is certainly easy to see his charisma on-screen and why he makes the film tick, including memorable moments such as the sequence with "Old Time Rock and Roll" (a fun song from Bob Seger to listen to in any context) - which is likely the most iconic thing from this film, with its own share of inspirations and parodies in the decades that have followed this film. In any case, it's an interesting part to the film. De Mornay manages to also pull off a fine performance, being quite the charming rogue that elevates a role that could've just been thankless with a sort of energy that works handily with Cruise in their scenes. The other members of the cast do fine jobs, with Pantoliano having some crudely effective zip in the scenes that he is in. The film is fairly engaging with its plot and its depiction of angst and greed that certainly make what could've probably just been a cliché teen comedy with less clever hands and instead make something a bit more sharper, with its own bits of social satire included. The cinematography by Bruce Surtees is glossy and effective, having some fine shots such as the sequence on the train or nighttime shots at times. Brickman (who also served as writer) wanted the film to end on a different note than what occurs in the film (as dictated by the studio), involving the nature of the two main characters and their future. It feels a bit more raw and it likely will touch a nerve for some, but I can't really object to the ending that ended up on-screen. Ultimately, this is a film that has enough amusing moments but also enough clever moments to make for a relatively engaging experience that is worth the 99 minute run-time - and then some.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Daredevil.

Review #443: Daredevil.

Cast
Ben Affleck (Matt Murdock/Daredevil), Jennifer Garner (Elektra Natchios), Colin Farrell (Bullseye), Michael Clarke Duncan (Wilson Fisk/The Kingpin), Jon Favreau (Franklin Nelson), Joe Pantoliano (Ben Urich), and David Keith (Jack Murdock) Directed by Mark Steven Johnson.

Review
On November 2, 2006, Ben Affleck stated his disintrest in being Daredevil again, saying "by playing a superhero in Daredevil, I have inoculated myself from ever playing another superhero... Wearing a costume was a source of humiliation for me and something I wouldn't want to do again soon". Irony is a terrible thing isn't it? Yes, Ben Affleck will be Batman. Yes, I would've liked to hear about much better things, like a Wonder Woman movie, or when the Hulk will get a film that will actually get a sequel. But hey, at least Affleck has some experiance as a costumed hero, and it was a success, right?...Sort of. It was a financial hit when it first came out, and yet all that this inspired was an Elektra spinoff...and no sequels. It's a stand alone film, and an unfocused one at that. My first question for this film came when you first see Daredevil's costume. Maybe it's just me, or my complete non knowledge of the comics, but Daredevil's costume is hilarious. Maybe it's the shade of red, or how it looks at night, but it looks very funny. The film starts off...normally, and the action is okay, and than we get introduced to Elektra 30 or so minutes in. You'd think that the subplot between Elektra and Daredevil would be entertaining, but it's mild in its approach, and it makes you yearn to see the over the top Colin Farrell (Who I last saw being harassed by Kiefer Sutherland in Phone Booth), or wonder why Michael Clarke Duncan isn't seen in this film too much even though he is an entertaining villain. Affleck isn't too bad, and I admire his attempt to be like the character because he apparently read the comics as a kid. The film...just can't support itself. It's not a great or good comic book film, but it could be passable for some, and I give this more credit then other early 2000's comic book movies (Catwoman, Fantastic Four, or even Green Lantern) that weren't as good. I've heard that people like the Director's Cut more than the original version, but at this point I just want to keep this review under a millenium words long. Countdown to 450 Reviews: 10, 9, 8, 7...

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: The Fugitive (1993).

Review #176: The Fugitive.

Cast
Harrison Ford (Dr. Richard Kimble), Tommy Lee Jones (Deputy U.S. Marshal Samuel Gerard), Sela Ward (Helen Kimble), Joe Pantoliano (Deputy U.S. Marshal Cosmo Renfro), Andreas Katsulas (Fredrick Sykes), Jeroen Krabbé (Dr. Charles Nichols), Daniel Roebuck (Deputy U.S. Marshal Robert Biggs), Tom Wood (Deputy U.S. Marshal Noah Newman), L. Scott Caldwell (Deputy U.S. Marshal Erin Poole), and Julianne Moore (Dr. Anne Eastman) Directed by Andrew Davis

Cast
This movie was based off the classic 1960s TV show of the same name. Ford and Jones are excellent, playing off each other great. Jones does the best job, conveying a sense of ell, doing his job as a US Marshall. As the movie continues on, the doubt against Kimble unravels which you see from Gerard's point of view. One thing I notice is that it turns from escape film to conspiracy as the film gets to the end which feels a bit odd. But nevertheless, this film is heart pounding with good amounts of action in an excellent film.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.