They Call Me Mister Tibbs!

Review #2531: They Call Me Mister Tibbs!

Cast: 

Sidney Poitier (Lieutenant Virgil Tibbs), Martin Landau (Logan Sharpe), Barbara McNair (Valerie Tibbs), Anthony Zerbe (Rice Weedon), Ed Asner (Woody Garfield), David Sheiner (Lieutenant Kenner), Jeff Corey (Captain Marden), Ted Gehring (Sergeant Deutsch), Juano Hernandez (Mealie Williamson), Norma Crane (Marge Garfield), and Beverly Todd ("Puff") Directed by Gordon Douglas (#663 - Them!, #686 - In Like Flint, #2320 - Viva Knievel!)

Review: 

Hey, remember In the Heat of the Night? To refresh my memory, because I only remember a few fragments...the movie was based on the 1965 novel by John Ball that involved a small Southern town in Mississippi rocked by a murder in the midst of the 1960s as an outsider detective comes in, deals with bigotry and solves the case. Sidney Poitier and Rod Steiger were big on doing the film together, which was filmed in Illinois (as directed by Norman Jewison) that probably had its most interesting scene when Poitier's character slaps someone back (as not originally envisioned). Or, well, the scene where Poitier's character, being asked what he gets called back in Philadelphia, responds, with, well, "They call me Mister Tibbs!". Ball actually did a handful more novels with the character of Tibbs with The Cool Cottontail (1966), Johnny Get Your Gun (1969), Five Pieces of Jade (1972), The Eyes of Buddha (1976), Then Came Violence (1980) and Singapore (1986). But this would be a movie that just went on its own way, with Alan Trustman (writer of The Thomas Crown Affair and co-writer of Bullitt [both 1968], interestingly enough). writing the story and co-writing the screenplay with James R. Webb (the Academy Award winning writer of How the West Was Won eight years prior). At the helm for director was Gordon Douglas, a regular presence in various genres, which included follow-ups to films such as Lady in Cement (1968). While not as big a success as the first film, it made roughly over $2 milllion in rentals in the first six months. Poitier returned as Tibbs for one more movie with The Organization (1971), with Don Medford serving as director.

We now have a film set in San Francisco as our title character is now wrapped up in the investigation of a dead prostitute as some sort of city referendum is coming up about urban renewal with a preacher on one side. This also goes with a few scenes spent in the household of his wife and children (what, a lonely detective in the big city?) that results in a few moments of strife because damned if there is even one bit of tension in the murder case. The 1970s would have a few movies with an interesting presence behind it in terms of crime action thrillers, but Shaft (1971) would be the one people think of as among the first to get the ball rolling rather than this film, that's for sure. Hell, Cotton Comes to Harlem, released a month before Tibbs, is more captivating because it just feels like a movie that yearns to actually do something beyond the mundane routines that come with an investigation that might as well be the equivalent of turning over a rock to see a bunch of ants on the bottom. You might say that there was something lost in the curiosity factor in the character played by Poitier, because now he just seems completely rigid as a board, as if someone wanted to make a Dragnet impersonation but gave up. His family life just sits there in a strange type of "I recognize the dynamic, but I don't care about these people". Landau was a nice actor who people loved in film and TV (such as, say, his Mission: Impossible run*) but he barely has anything to really give in this film, which seems shocking when you consider he is playing a street preacher. You would think that an investigation that you've got a pretty good guess on who the killer is would have some sort of way to drive interest but nope, it basically stays on autopilot for most of it. Zerbe is the more interesting presence, and he's playing for a pimp, for God's sake (to say nothing of putting a wig on Ed Asner and doing a routine car chase). You get little to nothing from folks such as Corey on the police side and you barely get a feel for the city as a whole, managing to resemble Generic Town USA even more than the average sequels that usually pass by on charm. But this one doesn't have enough charm to actually ride the wave for a complete winner for all of its 108 minutes, even with its ridiculous ending (calling it a shaggy dog procedural might be nicer). As a whole, They Call Me Mister Tibbs! is a downgrade from the previous film in most of the aspects that matter and just isn't enough of a film to call a winner, managing to be a disappointment that lies in the shadow of the decade that would give out better films to offer in procedures and thrillers.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Song of the day!

*What can I say, I watch old TV from time to time. The Wild Wild West is the other old show I'm on at the moment, I've done a whole bunch of TV watching on DVD such as The Fugitive, The Addams Family, The Munsters, Batman, Star Trek, The Twilight Zone, Lost in Space, and Get Smart.

The X-Files

Review #2506: The X-Files.

Cast:

David Duchovny (Special Agent Fox Mulder), Gillian Anderson (Special Agent Dana Scully), Martin Landau (Alvin Kurtzweil), Blythe Danner (Jana Cassidy), Armin Mueller-Stahl (Conrad Strughold), Mitch Pileggi (Assistant Director Walter Skinner), William B. Davis (Cigarette-Smoking Man), John Neville (Well-Manicured Man), Dean Haglund (Richard "Ringo" Langly), Bruce Harwood (John Fitzgerald Byers), Tom Braidwood (Melvin Frohike), Jeffrey DeMunn (Ben Bronschweig), Jason Beghe (FBI Man at Bomb Site), Michael Shamus Wiles (Black-Haired Man), with Terry O'Quinn (Special Agent in Charge Darius Michaud), and Lucas Black (Stevie) Directed by Rob Bowman.

Review: 

"We aimed quite high in some sequences. It’s been extremely challenging. The question we put to ourselves was, do you make it different or do you make it more? Audiences become comfortable with certain aspects and you don’t want to rip all that out from under them. Like the legends that tell the location, we could do them as big fancy LED readouts or somesuch, but in the end we decided to keep it the same plain way we do it on the series. Let’s not take away that which they’re familiar. They’ll cheer when they see it. Of course some things are on a much grander scale. We throw a heck of a lot more rocks at Mulder and Scully.” 

Hey, remember The X-Files? At one point in time, it was the big thing for the then-fledgling Fox network that began in 1993 with various inspirations that popped into the head of Chris Carter, whether that was Kolchak: The Night Stalker to The Twilight Zone to, well, various other things. Various writers and directors were just as important to the success of the show from David Sackheim to Darin Morgan to Glen Morgan & James Wong, to, well the natural chemistry of the stars in Gillian Anderson and David Duchovny. Apparently, the original intent of the film was to start its own movie franchise* while the show would end (so basically what happened with Star Trek: The Next Generation) after its fifth season, but the show was so lucrative for Fox that two more seasons were ordered. At least it was helpful for fans, as the season 5 finale "The End" aired on May 17, one month before the premiere of this film on June 19 (meanwhile the season 6 premiere aired on November 8). Carter wrote the screenplay and co-wrote the story with Frank Spotnitz. The movie was directed by Rob Bowman, who directed countless episodes of the show (by the time of 2000, he had directed 33 of them). The next film in the franchise was with The X-Files: I Want to Believe in 2008.*

Honestly, it is an okay movie, but it is a bit amusing to think this was once conceived as the thing that would follow the fun that came from the TV show, mainly because for the most part, the so-called "Monster of the Week" episodes were mostly superior to the ones involving the "Syndicate" or whatever². It basically is an okay rendition of a usual two-parter (albeit much longer at 122 minutes to say, two TV episodes), one that basically coasts on how much you really care about the lead duo wrapped in the shadowy doubt of whatever lurks beneath the cornfields (this was 1998, before select people believed chemtrails were a thing). It's funny that a movie with a variety of returning characters from the show tries mildly to just have a fraction do something (seriously, Pileggi spends most of his time glaring or, um, sitting down*). The unraveling of actual answers only leads to just asking more questions, which is as frustrating as is easy to see coming for a film that mostly sticks the landings of making you curious for more with these folks. Regardless of how much one has seen the show, it is clear that Duchovny and Anderson were pros at making it clear how much they understand and respect each other in the mish-mash of grounded purpose (ironically, despite the obvious relationship these characters had, there were people actually whining on the Internet about it at the time). So you get the bemused expressions of Duchovny in seeing someone just as odd with Landau while Anderson basically glides through the mumbo-jumbo presented (namely, bees) with graceful charm to basically glue the film from what could've just been mumbo jumbo (right down to the opening scene involving black oil and cavemen, but nothing tops the ending scene involving the X-Files being re-opened...again, because, yes, they did that before). Landau and Danner lurk every now and then to deliver the spiel that comes with having name actors doing things that basically already happened in the show (i.e. "crackpot" and "authority figure in a hearing"), but at least Davis has not lost any sense of malevolence on the transition to the big screen and it is nice to see the cold steely dignity of Neville one more time (hey, it can't all be shadowy rooms with figures standing around). In general, the movie is moderately entertaining when focused on Mulder and Scully rather than the idea of unravelling the proverbial mystery bar (spoiler: the core of that bar is basically a roll of paper saying "try again later") to go along with a few decent visuals for a mostly standard affair. Regardless if you saw the show or not, the movie is mostly one to be enjoyed in the margins of middle ground entertainment, which is fine by me, I suppose.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

*Evidently, there were rumblings where the Season 7 finale "Requiem" (aired in 2000) could have just easily have been the finale of the show or just the setup to doing another movie.

*Regardless of watching the show on Season 10 or Season 1, what the fuck was "My Struggle IV" even meant to be? Nearly six years later and that's what the show ended on?

² See that's how you know the character of Marita Covarrubias stinks (blame Chris Carter?), she wasn't even in the movie despite being, you know, the informant character (of course I might be biased, I adored Deep Throat and X in the "oh hey, they are in this episode"). Even The Lone Gunmen got to be in this movie, and those guys are lovable scamps. Of course, this note section can't be just geeking out about random X-Files musings, then it would be too obvious (such as saying I would fold to Scully immediately).

EDtv.

Review #1848: EDtv.

Cast: 

Matthew McConaughey (Edward "Ed" Pekurny), Jenna Elfman (Shari), Woody Harrelson (Raymond "Ray" Pekurny), Ellen DeGeneres (Cynthia Reed), Martin Landau (Al), Sally Kirkland (Jeanette Pekurny), Elizabeth Hurley (Jill), Rob Reiner (Mr. Whitaker), Dennis Hopper (Henry 'Hank' Pekurny), Viveka Davis (Marcia Pekurny), Christian Kane (P.A.), Adam Goldberg (John), Wendle Josepher (Rita), Merrin Dungey (Ms. Seaver), Ian Gomez (McIlvaine), and Clint Howard (Ken) Directed by Ron Howard (#301 - How the Grinch Stole Christmas, #546 - Cinderella Man, #1085 - Willow, #1095 - Solo: A Star Wars Story, #1509 - Apollo 13)

Review: 

If you remember, The Truman Show (1998) was a movie that happened to feature a man with his life unknowingly being displayed on television to a captivated audience of the world. EDtv, released on year later, is a movie that happens to feature a man with his life knowingly being displayed on television to a captivated audience of the world. One can be called a "satirical comedy" and the other can fall into the "psychological comedy-drama satire". Well, that isn't particularly fair to this feature, which is actually a remake of the 1994 Quebecois film Louis 19, King of the Airwaves [Louis 19, le roi des ondes]. Lowell Ganz and Babaloo Mandel (who had written the scripts for a handful of Ron Howard movies likes Splash (1984)) wrote the screenplay for this film. Of course, one really shouldn't reference better material in its own film, with this film referencing An American Family (the hit reality TV show of 1973) in its early minutes when talking about its "innovations"...that show happened to inspire its own spoof with Real Life (1979), a comedy movie involving a documentary filmmaker trying to live with an American family for a year. The funny thing is that EDtv came out nine months after The Truman Show as a big-budget production that runs at 123 minutes (longer than you-know-who), and yet it was a considerable failure with audiences at the time. Maybe it was just more interesting to see Jim Carrey try to tap into comedy-drama rather than Matthew McConaughey (fresh from overrated material like Dazed and Confused (1993) to A Time to Kill (1996)), or maybe it was something else. But I think you know the answer isn't just that EDtv is inferior to The Truman Show, because dueling movies with similar concepts can work out for both sides. Besides, this was made in the era of shows like The Real World, what could possibly go wrong? 

Unfortunately, the movie only barely scratches the surface when it comes to any sort of "bite", because it point-blank does not know what the hell it wants to be, fledging between romcom and satire in ways that only an indecisive polar bear could love. I'm not saying that the movie needed to have the bite of Network (1976) when it comes to human nature, but one is basically watching a slightly amped version of The Jerry Springer Show. Of course, even Springer got to "take advantage" with his own movie that happened to have been released around that time with Ringmaster (1998), so perhaps calling EDtv the sitcom-infused love child of Springer and other offshoots is a bit on the mark. Maybe it isn't as much of a fantasy as the earlier 1998 movie, but it sure isn't any more in touch with reality, because its main motivation is never entirely convincing: if you were asked to be on television and have your life broadcast 24/7, you probably would have to be a crazy person to really go with this, and the movie just doesn't hold its own in terms of believability beyond what you would see in a paper-thin sitcom, which seems catered to being a movie made by committee of producers rather than a movie made from any semblance of believability. In other words: when you become a person on camera, you will lose far more of yourself than you prove to gain, and only the best translates well to television (best of course is subjective, since there are countless examples of people being famous on television for the sake of famous). 

The cast is here and there, which is not something you really want to say about a movie that likely has its myriad of cameo appearances happen because of some sort of insecurity (most apparent with its moments with Jay Leno, a presence odious enough to insult rather than allow him to make jokes for you). It especially doesn't help when the movie likes to show brief moments with "the average American viewer" from time to time, since it only adds on to the dry factor in all of its unnecessary nature (while homing in on the made-by-committee point). My real problem is that there are just too many characters present here, spiraling out of control for two hours when one could trim a few minutes and lose nothing. McConaughey is technically decent in the film in that he never borders on insufferable when it comes to being "man on television 24/7", because the script does want a presence of warmth within the initial spark of naivety that overrides any sense of wanting a looser script (i.e. either a performance of a loser or someone less likable). In short: he is fine despite the limitations presented. Elfman is wrapped in the least funny part of the film: the rom-com parts, which doesn't help matters when one is trapped like a fishbowl in ways that probably make Dharma & Greg seem completely tolerable, since the chemistry with McConaughey is marginal at best. Hell, even Hurley and her "hired gun" performance is slightly more interesting, even if it ends abruptly. Harrelson is slightly entertaining, but again, the movie needs desperation from its people rather than goofy middlemen (Landau and Kirkland play to form handily, but that isn't saying much). DeGeneres spends half of her time watching the screen of the lead character and the other half coming up with "zingers" that make for a forgettable performance, as if being the originator of 24/7 reality TV isn't exciting enough to make into biting humor besides the use of Reiner, which is as predictable as a meathead insult. Perhaps it is amusing fate that Hopper is in this movie, as he was actually originally cast in The Truman Show before being replaced by the filmmakers for Ed Harris. He just doesn't get much to do for his two scenes, which is surely disappointing for an actor of his stature - granted, the scene where he tries to reminisce about an old memory with his son only to misremember it on live TV.

There is potential for a movie worth watching in the desperation of someone who thinks that the best hustle in life is to go out on television and show their whole lives to the world, but the movie only thinks of it in the most basic of ways that has the effect of a whimper. It might be a cheap thing to say that the movie was steamrolled by a movie with a better director, writer and overall cast, but nobody, and I repeat, nobody, will ever find reason to give abject praise to EDtv, a mediocre movie in every sense of the word, without having to strain hard to not compare it to The Truman Show. 

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Meteor.

Review #1204: Meteor.

Cast: 
Sean Connery (Dr. Paul Bradley), Natalie Wood (Tatiana Donskaya), Karl Malden (Harry Sherwood), Brian Keith (Dr. Alexei Dubov), Martin Landau (General Adlon), Trevor Howard (Sir Michael Hughes), Richard Dysart (Secretary of Defense), Henry Fonda (The President), and Joseph Campanella (General Easton) Directed by Ronald Neame (#673 - Scrooge)

Review: 
What is a meteor? One definition (at least according to a cursory Google search) is that it is a " small body of matter from outer space that enters the earth's atmosphere, becoming incandescent as a result of friction and appearing as a streak of light." Perhaps the definition doesn't give the movie's big threat proper credit, since this is a disaster film released to ride on the popularity of films of its ilk released in the 1970s such as the Airport films (1970, 1974, 1977, 1979), The Poseidon Adventure (1972) and countless others  - with this one being distributed by American International Pictures and funding from Hong Kong studio Shaw Brothers. This was one of numerous AIP films in the 1970s that differed from the usual fare they had delivered in previous decades, with less focus on horror and more focus on other genres (whether it involved kung fu, blaxploitation, or something else), with an increase in budgets. This film, unlike others released by the studio, proved to be a failure, making less than $10 million on release with a budget over $15 million. This led to the demise of AIP, which soon merged with Filmways, Inc and stopped distributing films by 1980. In any case, the hands that attempted to guide the film might have seemed promising. Stanley Mann and Edmund H. North were the writers for the film, with the latter being responsible for writing films such as The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951) and Patton (1970). Much like the disaster films mentioned already, this one also boasts a collection of big-name actors of its time to supplant the roles.

With all of that in mind, it sure is strange that this film turns out to be a dud. How does one make a film racked with only the bare minimum of suspense and mild special effects? How does one make a film where the energy of the cast and the people they are playing fight blandness? By the time the actual meteor shows up for its climax, the level of excitement jumps up a percentage point, since it means it's almost over, even if the tension levels by this time are nearly non-existent. This probably would've fared better as a comedy, actually. Imagine a bunch of people flailing around talking about a giant rock hitting the Earth in your driest voice, and you have this movie basically summed up. As nice as it is to see Connery be pulled into this ridiculous mess, he isn't too particularly interesting - whether that it is due to the script or due to being on autopilot waiting to get done with this mess (and the check to clear) is up to you. Him and Wood don't have much chemistry with each other, but it really is more because it just feels like filler before scenes of exposition/meteor stuff take the stage again. Keith is fine, and he does provide a bit of humor to a film that is practically begging for some action. Malden proves okay with his gruff if not stock kind of role. Landau goes over-the-top for a role without any real sort of depth to it besides being adversarial to the others. The other members of the cast make brief appearances that come and go as they please. The effects are okay, but they don't really elevate this material to any real sense of enjoyable spectacle, with one sequence utilizing footage from Avalanche (1978) alongside tons of artificial snow for background shooting. The sequence involving the subway and the mud surely must've proven interesting to think of as effective in concept - but it just seems more of a waste of money and time (along with a pain for any actor having to act in mud). This mish-mash in quality for the effects can be attributed in part because numerous visual effects teams came and went during production due to being fired for the quality of effects delivered on a small budget (no doubt due to the budget focus on the actors) - the shots involving building collapsing near the end was actually just re-used footage from building demolitions. Ultimately, it is the lack of any interesting characters or situations that prove fatal to the film. It becomes evident quickly that there isn't much in the way of tension, since the idea of the meteor actually hitting the Earth never really seems all that likely. The film actually ends with a notation about a report named "Project Icarus", a student project done in 1967 at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology that involved students in a systems engineering class to make a plan to use rockets to deflect or destroy an asteroid in the event of a possible collision with Earth, which led to a book release the following year. One would likely be better off reading the report than watching the film, actually. It disappoints on a basic level as entertainment with its actors and it disappoints on a level of spectacle that makes this a chore for all but people with nothing better to do.

Overall, I give it 4 out of 10 stars.

Hollywood Homicide.

Review #1075: Hollywood Homicide.

Cast: 
Harrison Ford (Detective-Sergeant Joseph "Joe" Gavilan), Josh Hartnett (Detective K. C. Calden), Lena Olin (Ruby), Bruce Greenwood (Lieutenant Bernard "Bennie" Macko), Isaiah Washington (Antoine Sartain), Lolita Davidovich (Cleo Ricard), Keith David (Leon), Master P (Julius Armas), Gladys Knight (Olivia Robidoux), and Martin Landau (Jerry Duran) Directed by Ron Shelton (#381 - Cobb)

Review: 
If you have a film with two actors who seem to want to make the best of their time on screen and elicit some sort of chemistry with each other, you'll likely have a good time. It's a shame that is not the case with this movie, however. Ford and Hartnett manage to star in a film where they don't seem to share any kind of chemistry with each other, not eliciting many particularly amusing moments nor anything that seems remotely connecting. Ford does a decent job performance wise, but he doesn't seem to be the best type for this role, seeming a bit out of place that might've been better suited for someone like John Travolta (who originally was meant to star in the role), particularly with the real estate "dealmaking" parts. Hartnett doesn't fair much better, somehow looking too young to play this detective role while also seeming to be the wrong fit to go along with Ford, seeming a bit too relaxed for this part - and the parts with him playing a would-be actor also not hitting the notes correctly either. In any case, they don't make for a particularly inspiring duo. Washington doesn't particularly inspire much as the villain, mostly because the plot-line doesn't give him much room to actually seem compelling (especially with the climax), whereas Greenwood sells his adversarial role and scenes with Ford. Olin does a kooky but serviceable job, with her parts with Ford being nothing too special. The other members of the cast are all okay at best. It might interest you to note this was written by Shelton and Robert Souza, a former homicide detective in the LAPD Hollywood Division who also happened to moonlight as a real estate broker in his latter years. I'll give the film credit for having some sort of semblance of reality, but I didn't find the end product to be too particularly effective. The numerous subplots and how things seem to just connect out of thin air makes for a convenient but somewhat tiresome pace, complete with a somewhat long but somewhat effective climatic chase sequence. There isn't too much to the action, but it will likely be pleasing enough. The film never seems to get itself into high gear, seemingly stuck in a loop of a mediocre story and a buddy duo that doesn't live up to carrying the movie. The end product is something that can be mildly enjoyable as a late night flick watch, but it won't be anything regarded as anything too good in its action or comedy. Take this misfire for what it's worth.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: 9.

Review #321: 9.

Cast
Elijah Wood (9), Jennifer Connelly (7), John C. Reilly (5), Crispin Glover (6), Christopher Plummer (1), Fred Tatasciore (8), Martin Landau (2), and Alan Oppenheimer (The Scientist) Directed by Shane Acker.

Review
This is an unusual film, with a different kind of animation than usual and a decent set of characters. While it does feel shorter than it could've been (Seems to be a cliche that some animated films don't last longer than 79-90 minutes), it is imaginative and very deep in its intended roots of being a dark tale not just for kids (at least I hope that is the intention), and it makes sure not to be a disappointment. The voice acting is fine, not being embarrassingly odd, just doing a fine job of establishing the characters (though odd they may be), which is a benefit. I like the fact that the film manages to have some sort of pace, always keeping you in check and making sure not to be slowed down. In the end, it's a decent film, with some sort of focus and imagination, and I'm mostly glad I watched (and reviewed) it.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: North by Northwest.

Review #223: North by Northwest.

Cast
Cary Grant (Roger Thornhill), Eva Marie Saint (Eve Kendall), James Mason (Phillip Vandamm), Martin Landau (Leonard), and Leo G. Carroll (The Professor) Directed by Alfred Hitchcock (#219 - Rope)

Review
This was the last film Hitchcock made in the 1950's, which had Dial M for Murder, Vertigo, The Man Who Knew Too Much, and other various films, and this does feel like the end of one decade and the thesis of the next decade. It feels like a spy film with its involvement of a plot with agents, numerous chase scenes, a leading man and lady, mistaken identity, a villain, and an important object. Grant and Saint do a wonderful job, which usually is essential to make a film, but there is more to it as well, with suspenseful action and soundtrack with a dynamic climatic fight on Mount Rushmore to make a classic romantic thriller. It truly is a great film.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.