THX 1138.

Review #1725: THX 1138.

Cast: 

Robert Duvall (THX 1138), Donald Pleasence (SEN 5241), Maggie McOmie (LUH 3417), Don Pedro Colley (SRT 5752), Ian Wolfe (PTO), Marshall Efron (TWA), Sid Haig (NCH), John Pearce (DWY), and James Wheaton (Voice of OMM 0000) Directed by George Lucas (#113 - Star Wars, #141 - American Graffiti, #142 - Star Wars: Episode I – The Phantom Menace, #143 - Star Wars: Episode II – Attack of the Clones, and #144 - Star Wars: Episode III – Revenge of the Sith)

Review: 

A half century later, there are quite a few things to unpack with this particular movie. For one, it was the feature film debut for George Lucas. As one must remember, the California native grew up with an appreciation for comics and science fiction (take note of the clips shown in the opening of the film), and this would serve him quite well when he entered the University of Southern California and its school of Cinematic Arts; he cited educators Lester Novros and Slavko Vorkapich (chair of the school) as influences on Lucas, who made numerous short movies as a filmmaker that were fairly abstract (ranging from a minute to seven, with only one having a narrative). He graduated with a bachelor's degree in fine arts in 1967, but his time spent with USC did not end there, as he went back as a graduate student in film production, with one of his duties being to teach students of the United States Navy that were studying documentary cinematography and working under Verna Fields in editing movies for the United States Information Agency (Fields would later edit a number of features for fellow USC filmmakers as a pioneer in her own right). In total, Lucas made nine short features from 1965 to 1968; the one that matters most to this discussion is his sixth in Electronic Labyrinth: THX 1138 4EB, made in the course of 12 weeks in 1967. He had an idea for a future film with existing stuff utilized for said future, and he tasked his friend (and fellow USC student) Matthew Robbins to write a brief outline involving the THX character and a chase scene. He utilized the Navy connection to helpful effect, since Navy folks served as crew for the movie while helping him get access for various locations to shoot. The result was a movie that won 1st prize at the National Student Film Festival in the Dramatic category. Later on, Francis Ford Coppola (fresh off Finian's Rainbow) helped Lucas with a deal to make a feature film with Warner Bros.-Seven Arts (co-produced with American Zoetrope, which Coppola and Lucas founded in 1969), and Lucas made the feature over the course of five weeks in the fall of 1969. A year was then spent in the editing room by Lucas and Walter Murch (who each wrote the movie). If you can believe it, studio executives did not appreciate what they saw of the final workprint, and they requested an edit to be done within the studio, which took out four minutes from the final edit. Made on a budget of $777,777, the movie was a mild success on initial release (making its budget back plus $122K).

I'm sure you are aware of the story that comes from a movie dedicated to the illusions of safety and order within a closed-off society filled with restrictions and watchful eyes everywhere. In fact, I know you have, because there have been a handful of books and movies that have run on similar lines for decades, such as George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four or Aldous Huxley's Brave New World, for example. Of course, we are talking about a movie with Chapperell race cars modified to look like jet cars. We are also talking about a movie that seems quite curious to talk about when thinking about Lucas as a filmmaker given what would come later in the decade, and yet it is the key piece in trying to understand what he aspired to do as a maverick filmmaker in terms of visual storytelling (along with his intent to not have studios try to control the production of his movies). Perhaps it was fate that a bleak movie involving the pitfalls of consumerism and conformity took its own path to reaching audiences. It likely seems more fitting of its decade than with the next two films Lucas directed, that might be for sure, which might seem a bit off-putting for those who come in completely cold for this sci-fi movie. Of course this isn't quite a movie one watches for acting chops; in an interview, Colley noted that Lucas seemed to not be too comfortable around actors, treating the production as like one of his student films (perhaps ironically, an actor in one his future movies would say something fairly similar years later); certainly it is an interesting sight to see a group of shaved actors amidst a crowd of other voices, and Duvall certainly does fine a role that requires a bit of a blank slate sparked into breaking out of obedience into ordinariness. Pleasance, gripping in confined obedience that drips of pathetic ooze within certain pieces of dialogue, matches fine with what is required from someone dealing in the middle of a society without any choices, where fear of the unknown can be a powerful deterrent (and easily identifiable). McOmie (in her one and only film as star) is used for poignant moments with attempts at breaking free with a sense of emotion that can be construed as fear with a bit of warmth waiting to break free. Colley proves curious in those moments seen on screen within the prison sequence, one in the middle between comfort and curiosity in the angle of finding a way out. The movie relies on visual interest within a dystopia where prisons have no walls, kids have IV lines for economics in their veins, and people like to take substances to curb their emotions as they work under jobs that are terribly dangerous (factories even announce the death tolls of the period in an attempt to promote safety); when not working, people just buy things without much thought while watching odd holograms. The robot policeman are the only visual adversary one sees, since you never actually see just who is in control, knowing only that set budgets are set for the capture of anyone who tries to escape. It is mostly a visual movie, which is interesting to see when most of the stuff is white (clothing, bald hair, et cetera) but certainly not the easiest film to sit through in its versions; the movie was restored in 1977 with an 86 minute run-time that restored the four cut minutes on the original release that was later put out on VHS and LaserDisc, while a Director's Cut was supervised by Lucas in 2004 that restored the film on an audio/video level while adding a few bits of computer generated imagery (along with adding detail to certain sequences) that resulted in a run-time of 88 minutes (in fact, one can apparently watch it with just the sound effects and score present with no dialogue, if one is into that sort of thing). Perhaps the easiest parallel in terms of a student film being turned into a movie for effect is Dark Star (released three years later...by sheer coincidence, it was made by a USC alum and included a reference to this movie), where it might have reached better as just a student film; regardless, I thought this movie was interesting in the right parts to work in generating a curious bleak world in imagery that leaves more for thought rather than thrills. It isn't a great achievement in originality with its story, but it does prove diverting in visual nature with the right kind of curiosity to make it worthwhile to overcome its shortfalls and work out fine, one that certainly merits attention as a cult classic, one that is just odd enough and interesting enough to win out.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Apocalypse Now.

Review #1460: Apocalypse Now.

Cast: 
Marlon Brando (Colonel Walter E. Kurtz), Martin Sheen (Captain Benjamin L. Willard), Robert Duvall (Lieutenant Colonel Bill Kilgore), Frederic Forrest (Jay 'Chef' Hicks), Sam Bottoms (Lance B. Johnson), Laurence Fishburne (Tyrone 'Clean' Miller), Albert Hall (Chief Phillips), Harrison Ford (Colonel Lucas), Dennis Hopper (Photojournalist), G.D. Spradlin (General R. Corman), Jerry Ziesmer (Jerry, Civilian), and Scott Glenn (Lieutenant Richard M. Colby) Directed by Francis Ford Coppola (#592 - Dementia 13 and #1139 - Supernova)

Review: 
"We were in the jungle, there were too many of us, we had access to too much money, too much equipment, and little by little we went insane"

The 1970s were a tremendous decade for Francis Ford Coppola, so it only makes sense to cover the last film of that era, one characterized by the highs and lows of the "New Hollywood" movement.
He had a hand in six films for the decade: Patton (1970, co-wrote the screenplay), The Godfather (1972, director and co-writer), The Conversation (1974, as writer, producer, and director), The Great Gatsby (1974, screenplay), and The Godfather Part II (1974, co-writer, director, producer), and this film. Coppola was born in Detroit but raised in Queens, New York as the son of music composer Carmine Coppola (who would work with his son on a couple of his films). He graduated from both Hofstra University and the UCLA Film School (the former in theater arts and the latter in film), with one notable influence on Coppola being Dorothy Arzner, a former film director who was on the staff at the time. Coppola's career in film started in 1962 with three films: The Bellboy and the Playgirls, Tonight for Sure, and Battle Beyond the Sun (the first and latter were English edits), with his next feature being the cult classic Dementia 13 (1963). He spent the next few years doing a few scripts and further directorial efforts (such as the hit You're a Big Boy Now) before the aforementioned luck in the 1970s, where he won a total of five Academy Awards on fourteen nominations.

This was inspired by Joseph Conrad's novella Heart of Darkness, written in 1899 under the inspiration of his travels on a river steamer sailing up the Congo River (both focus on a character named Kurtz). The screenplay was written by John Milius and Coppola, with narration by Michael Herr (a war correspondent most known for his book Dispatches that detailed his experiences in Vietnam). The initial director in mind to do the film was George Lucas. He worked for years with Milius to develop the project while busy with other scripts, and he had wanted to do it after THX 1138 (1971) with the intent to shoot in both California and South Vietnam on a modest budget of $2 million with 16mm cameras and real soldiers, although this did not come to pass. Coppola was eventually drawn to the script and initially aimed to produce the film before eventually pressing on to do it himself, which he had described as a "comedy and a terrifying psychological horror story". It would take years to ultimately plan and shoot the film, since it was originally set to be a four month shoot in the Philippines for release in 1977. There were of course a few obstacles that made this impossible. The original choice for the Willard character was Harvey Keitel (since others like Steve McQueen did not want to leave America for a significant amount of time), but Coppola soon found that Keitel was not quite right for the role, which led to Sheen being brought in. Describing the amount of production quirks almost sounds like a routine of dark humor. A typhoon wrecked a majority of the sets not long after production started. Sheen had a heart attack that took him off filming for a month (with his brother Joe filling in as a double and voice over at times). Brando showed up to the set severely overweight and hadn't read the script or the book. The film premiered in May 1979 at the Cannes Film Festival while not fully finished at three hours (where Coppola famously stated that his film was not about Vietnam but rather was Vietnam). Nowadays there are multiple editions to possibly view, such as the original 153 minute version, Apocalypse Now Redux (2001, which re-inserted deleted footage that runs at 196 minutes), and Apocalypse Now Final Cut (2017, which was trimmed to 183 minutes).

For a film that runs at a significant length and with such production quirks, it is amazing how well the film works as a look upon the dark parts of a man's soul when it comes to the horrors of war with such tenacity and depth to make for one of the most seminal films of its era and for epic war films as a whole. It is an experience like no other in ways that other films could only dream to do in terms of haunting timelessness, because it is something that can linger in our mind now more than ever. For a man who had his quarrels with Coppola and takes his time to show up in full detail, Brando generates a tremendous performance of stature, a poet warrior's voice from the dark that is intently fascinating to view in those moments for the clear-minded-but-darkened-soul that doesn't have to say much (Coppola edited down a rambling monologue by Brando to only a few minutes) to generate awe. Sheen follows along with great ambiguity, a passive presence that we have absolutely no trouble in following along with in a path of weariness as a changed man of war, right from the very first scene where he punches a mirror with his bare hand. Duvall makes for quite a fanatical presence in such a quick amount of time, a man that we can smell the napalm with in clear detail. The others in the cast prove worthy to travel along with, including a young Fishburne and a dazed Bottoms to go with the eccentrically on-point Hopper and bit highlights for Spradlin and Ziesmer. This is not a film that tests one's patience as much as it is one that probes into your patience, filled with a tremendous look by Vittorio Storaro in cinematography that makes a devastating classic worth checking out as a portrait of what can drive a man to certain actions in war under the guise of morality that leaves its audience fully stunned and ultimately satisfied for having watched it.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

M*A*S*H.

Review #1433: M*A*S*H.

Cast: 
Donald Sutherland (Hawkeye Pierce), Elliott Gould (Trapper John McIntyre), Tom Skerritt (Duke Forrest), Sally Kellerman (Maj. Margaret 'Hot Lips' O'Houlihan), Robert Duvall (Maj. Frank Burns), Roger Bowen (Lt. Col. Henry Blake), Rene Auberjonois (Father John Mulcahy), David Arkin (Sgt. Major Vollmer), Jo Ann Pflug (Lt. 'Dish'), John Schuck (Walter "The Painless Pole" Waldowski) Gary Burghoff (Cpl. 'Radar' O'Reilly), and Fred Williamson (Dr. Oliver "Spearchucker" Jones) Directed by Robert Altman (#900 - Nashville)

Review: 
"I equate this work more with painting than with theater or literature. Stories don't interest me. Basically, I'm more interested in behavior. I don't direct, I watch. I have to be thrilled if I expect the audience to be thrilled. Because what I really want to see from an actor is something I've never seen before, so I can't tell them what it is. I try to encourage actors not to take turns. To deal with conversation as conversation. I mean, that's what the job is, I think. It's to make a comfort area so that an actor can go beyond what he thought he could do."

The 1970s were an interesting time try and push the envelope with films, so it only makes sense to cover one that its director described one that didn't get released but instead escaped. Robert Altman was the right man at the right time to have a breakthrough through directing a film as transgressive as this one. Altman had a long and strange path to this film, with his first writing credit being a co-story effort on Bodyguard (1948). In the next few years, he would direct industrial films for the Calvin Company in his native Kansas City before getting a chance to direct with The Delinquents (1957), an independent hit. It led to Altman having plenty of chances to direct for television, which he would do for over a decade that helped him hone his craft in making things on budget. Altman returned to feature directing with Countdown (1968) and That Cold Day in the Park (1969), although neither had been particularly successful. When it came time to do a film version of MASH: A Novel About Three Army Doctors, several directors rejected the chance, but Altman was the one who ultimately agreed to do it. The 1968 novel had been written by Richard Hooker [Hiester Richard Hornberger Jr], who had served in the Korean War for the 8055 Mobile Army Surgical Hospital that was based on his dramatic and comedic experiences there. The film's success would inspire a broadly popular television series two years later that would match the success of this film. Ironically enough, Altman was not fond of the book or the show, describing the book as "just terrible" and the series as an "antithesis of what we were trying to do", while Hooker also disliked the show. To add on to this, screenwriter Ring Lardner Jr, who had disowned the film for its deviation from his script, would win an Academy Award for Best Adapted Screenplay. Altman, knowing that 20th Century Fox was focusing their attention on their bigger budgeted war films (Patton and Tora! Tora! Tora!), aspired to make his film under budget and without too much trouble so he could sneak through without too much interference from the studio.

The film has quirks to it that would become trademarks of Altman's films over the following three decades, such as overlapping dialogue, an ensemble cast, and improvised performances, which ultimately prove forthright in making a chaotic and irreverent classic. There is a mix of familiar and new actors present, such as Sutherland (who would have a breakthrough in his career starting with films such as these), Gould (who rose to prominence in his previous role in Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice), and Duvall (man of stage, television and occasional film who would become a bigger presence in this decade), while others were fairly fresh in film, such as Skerritt and Kellerman (both having breakthroughs after plenty of prior television work), or Bowen, Auberjonois and others (such as Bud Cort) making their first appearances in film. Each of these actors have their part to play in making this satire come alive with plenty to say and do, most of which resulting in an effective dark comedy. Sutherland does well with such mischief that is balanced from the seriousness of the horrors of war on the operating table that makes for inspired anarchy with his counterpart in Gould, who never seem to be out of step with each other in driving humor through situations without needing to hit one over the head too many times. Skerritt accompanies the action at times with steady timing, while Kellerman and Duvall both make for formidable balances (and targets) of authority to poke around with (although admittedly the film is much rougher on the former in terms of crudeness of jokes). Bowen and Auberjonois step in at times to round out the cast with straight-laced dignity (or at the very least the appearance of it), while others do fine with brief moments (such as a quietly sardonic Burghoff). On the whole, this is a fine film wrapped in cynicism, right down to the title song "Suicide is Painless" from Johnny Mandel and Mike Altman (Robert's 14-year old son), which was mandated by the elder Altman to be "the stupidest song ever written." The film packs a caustic punch for 116 minutes involving the nature of war and the people who have to make the most of it in their own way. It manages to pull through without too many crude stumbles after a half century because of a game cast and capable direction from Altman in making an apt film to mark the beginning of a new decade and new perspective for film.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

True Grit (1969).

Review #1314: True Grit.

Cast: 
John Wayne (Reuben J. "Rooster" Cogburn), Kim Darby (Mattie Ross), Glen Campbell (La Boeuf), Jeremy Slate (Emmett Quincy), Robert Duvall (Lucky Ned Pepper), Dennis Hopper (Moon), Alfred Ryder (Goudy), Strother Martin (Col. G. Stonehill), Jeff Corey (Tom Chaney), Ron Soble (Captain Boots Finch), John Fiedler (Lawyer Daggett), and James Westerfield (Judge Parker) Directed by Henry Hathaway.

Review: 
It seems perfectly appropriate to close a year out with a Western (or start one, if you're into that sort of tradition) - particularly one released in a year as intreging as 1969. That year was a time where the genre experienced variations of telling a tale of the Old West through various lens such as The Wild Bunch with its touch of violence or Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid and its touch of humor. This is a film that very well could have been made in a previous decade - after all, its director was known primarily for quite a few Westerns in his time (mostly with Gary Cooper as star), with producer Hal B. Wallis having served as producer on films such as Casablanca (1942) or Westerns like The Sons of Katie Elder (released four years earlier, which had both Hathaway and Wayne). However, this was an adaptation of the 1968 novel of the same name from Charles Portis, adapted to the screen by Marguerite Roberts. Wayne had read the novel and soon expressed a desire to star in the main role, while later calling the screenplay the best one he ever read. The other parts of the main trio came a bit more shakily, with considerations for Mattie ranging from Mia Farrow to Sally Field before Darby wound up with the role, while Elvis Presley was the original one in mind for the role eventually taken up by Campbell (complete with singing the title song to open the film). Hathaway did not find himself having a great relationship with either of them along with Duvall, but he certainly leads them to worthy performances, not tripping up the momentum in part because the film knows when to be an adventure and when to have a bit of charm as well. It may be a tale of revenge, but it's still one with tradition involved. Wayne moves with careful confidence, a man wracked by who he is and what he means to someone who needs a person like him to hunt - plenty of grit and plenty of charm beneath that gauze eye-patch. Darby shines with persistence, a fine person to play off the main presence without being lost in the background. Campbell seems a bit stiff when on screen, but at least he doesn't slow the momentum too much. Duvall makes for a fair adversary alongside Hopper and Corey (who gets to make a crack while doing a stare-down) makes for a compelling showdown person for the climax. It uses its 128 minutes to great effect, driving a riveting climax with action and class, earning its wonderful last shot (Wayne jumping a fence with a horse) with conviction and triumph. It is a film with a spirit of adventure that brims itself high and mighty without needing to be wrapped in too much sentiment or bluntness. It falls into the conventions of the genre, without trouble, a well made venture for those who seek it out looking for something worthwhile.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Widows (2018).

Review #1166: Widows.

Cast: 
Viola Davis (Veronica Rawlings), Michelle Rodriguez (Linda Perelli), Elizabeth Debicki (Alice Gunner), Cynthia Erivo (Belle), Colin Farrell (Jack Mulligan), Brian Tyree Henry (Jamal Manning), Daniel Kaluuya (Jatemme Manning), Jacki Weaver (Agnieska), Carrie Coon (Amanda Nunn), Robert Duvall (Tom Mulligan), Liam Neeson (Harry Rawlings), and Garret Dillahunt (Bash) Directed by Steve McQueen.

Review: 
I admit that this film came as a surprise on my radar, being something that fell right into the middle of November (right before Thanksgiving) with a bit of buzz but certainly one that probably would've benefited from being released in a different (and less busy) month, although at least it isn't one of those films that fall under limited releases. In any case, I was surprised to hear that Widows is based off a British prime-time television crime drama of the same name (written and created by Lynda La Plante), which aired as a six-part series each in 1983 and 1985 (along with a sequel series named She's Out in 1995). The show was remade previously in 2002, although the main plot dealt with theft of a painting. In any case, the film (with a screenplay from McQueen and Gillian Flynn) takes bits and pieces from the show while mixing in a political aspect (in this case, a robbery during a debate) that certainly make this film seem busy for its 129 minute run-time. Whether or not the film is fine entertainment relies on how much you invest into these characters and its buildup into its heist. For me, I thought the film worked just enough to make for some fine entertainment, having the right amount of capable thrills and a few moments of grimness and character moments to make for a solid winner. Davis pulls in a capable performance, showing strength in regard to what her character must go through with sudden events with a capability that makes her interesting to follow along with, whether when dealing with loss or dealing with having to set up a heist. Rodriguez is fine, but Debicki stands out quite well as the third arm of the heist, being charming and entertaining to follow along with as well. Erivo, the last arm of the team, does pretty fine with her time on screen, not having as much to say but doing her role without too much of a hitch. Farrell is effective in his plot-line, showing charisma alongside ooze in the fiber of his virtues, particularly when played off with his power broker on-screen father in Duvall, who plays his brief time to play it with such rude effectiveness. Henry also showcases his own degree of ambition that plays off fine, particularly when he and Farrell share a scene together involving an election for alderman. Kaluuya plays his ruthless enforcer role fairly effectively. Neeson is decent for his brief time on-screen. It has a fine deal of twists and action sequences that make for some entertaining execution, building up its characters and respective plot with a fair bit of juggling that makes for consistent (if not gradual) enjoyment. The film works better more often than not when dealing with the widows than the parts involving the election, although at least the two parts do feel natural enough to not seem too much like two different movies. I wonder how the film would have gone with a different length - would it have served better with a trim or lengthening in run-time? In any case, the movie serves its purpose of entertainment well with a fairly dynamic cast and a good amount of execution in the right places to make it something worth checking out.

Welcome to December. I meant to have this written prior to my birthday on the 1st, but time had to be spent to make sure that at least one review was done before November ended. Hopefully there will be a good amount of reviews to go around for the final month of the year, which is shaping up to have just as many (if not a bit more than) reviews as the year before.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Four Christmases.

Review #772: Four Christmases.

Cast
Vince Vaughn (Brad McVie), Reese Witherspoon (Kate), Robert Duvall (Howard McVie), Sissy Spacek (Paula McVie), Jon Voight (Creighton), Mary Steenburgen (Marilyn), Kristin Chenoweth (Courtney), Jon Favreau (Denver McVie), Tim McGraw (Dallas McVie), and Katy Mixon (Susan McVie) Directed by Seth Gordon.

Review
This movie is awful. If I wanted to, I could leave it that. But if I did, then someone might wonder why I only said it was awful and watch it for themselves (just go with the idea that people actually use these reviews as an influence). If you watch about 10-20 minutes of the movie, you will start to have a few questions:

1. Why do Vaughn and Witherspoon look really miscast as a couple?
2. Why can't they arrange the four families to meet at one place instead of having to go to all four in one day?
3. Why did I decide to watch this?
4. Are all romantic comedies like this?
5. Have you ever put a spending limit of $10 for each Christmas gift you gave someone?
6. Are there any likable characters in it?

The answers to the questions are as follows: Pass, Pass, Pass, Maybe, No and...Yes (Jon Voight, who is only in the movie for the last 20 (or so) minutes, and manages to be not only the least annoying character, but also the one who has the least screen time. Go figure.). None of the situations that are set up here are really that funny, feeling either standard or just downright odd. Tell me if this sounds like a goldmine of hilarity: Our main character getting tackled and wrestled with by his two other brothers, and this isn't just one time, no it happens (I think, I lost count) twice more. Of course the movie tries (read: tries) to phone in a happy ending, because I guess having the movie end with them not getting back together seemed not "cheery" enough for Christmas. This a movie that manages to be unlikable at times, but more often than not it's just boring. Why should I care about anything that goes on with these people? It fails as a comedy, it fails as a romance (chemistry clocks in at zero), it fails as a drama (read: last half hour), and its greatest failing is that it fails as a Christmas movie. This isn't a movie you watch to be cheerful around the holidays, this is a movie for people who honestly want to find any reason not to visit their relatives, because they very well may just be as crazy this year as the people in this laugh-forsaken movie. That, and apparently being married and having kids is the only way to be happy. I'd advise you to eat fruitcake before watching this over literally any Christmas movie. Except Deck the Halls. (Yes, I would watch Santa Clause Conquers the Martians again. Even Jingle All the Way). Stay away from this garbage.

Overall, I give it 3 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Bullitt.

Review #506: Bullitt.

Cast
Steve McQueen (Frank Bullitt), Robert Vaughn (Walter Chalmers), Jacqueline Bisset (Cathy), Don Gordon (Delgetti), Simon Oakland (Captain Sam Bennett), Norman Fell (Captain Baker), Robert Duvall (Weissberg), Georg Stanford Brown (Dr. Willard), Justin Tarr (Eddy), and Carl Reindel (Carl Stanton) Directed by Peter Yates.

Review

Bullitt is notable for one thing, and it must be mentioned first, and it's the car chase. A car chase that goes around San Francisco, between McQueen and the two hit men (played by Paul Genge and Bill Hickman), and the chase is the defining moment of this film, the part everyone who watches the film remembers. The editing (by Frank P. Keller) contributes to the chase because it gives the chase an even greater feel of excitement, the chase sequence is a classic that has undoubtedly inspired many others. While the film has that sequence, it's the only sequence, which is welcome by me, as McQueen does a fine job as Bullitt, Robert Vaughn pairs well with McQueen, as does Jacqueline Bisset, as she has a good effective scene with McQueen over what he does an hour in the film. The film takes its time, but the payoff is good enough to make you forget the wait. I've wanted to review this film for months (sadly not doing it on this film's 45th Anniversary date), and it seems that now, on Christmas Eve was the best time to review it. Speaking of which, there will be a review on Christmas Day, so be ready, viewers.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Secondhand Lions.

Review #385: Secondhand Lions.

Cast
Haley Joel Osment (Walter Caldwell), Michael Caine (Garth McCann), Robert Duvall (Hub McCann), Kyra Sedgwick (Mae Caldwell), Nicky Katt (Stan), Josh Lucas (Adult Walter Caldwell), Michael O'Neill (Ralph), Deirdre O'Connell (Helen), Christian Kane (Young Hub), Daniel Brooks (Sheik's Great-Grandson), Kevin Haberer (Young Garth), Eric Balfour (Sheik's grandson), Emmanuelle Vaugier (Jasmine), and Adam Ozturk (The Sheik) Directed by Tim McCanlies.

Review
When I watched this earlier today, I had...never heard of this. Yeah, a film made 10 years ago (in a decade where I've reviewed 85 of them), and yet has Michael Caine (#054 - The Dark Knight, #055 - Inception, #062 - Batman Begins, #134 - Austin Powers in Goldmember) and Robert Duvall (#036 - Network, #116 - To Kill a Mockingbird, #191 - The 6th Day, #383 - The Natural) in it. Is it any good? Sure. Some might find it "schmaltzy", I find it to be good. Sometimes a film is just fun for what it has, and this has a wholesome heart and a lot of fun to it. Caine and Duvall play off each other well, with Duvall being the breakout star who steals the show, and this being a good thing. While Caine may seem off cast (Trying to portray a Texan), he still manages to do a fine enough job. Osment is allright, not too bad, for a...teen actor I suppose. The film starts off fine and gets better as it goes along. It has its moments and it does entertain for the most part. It has adventure, excitement, and a lot of fun to go with it.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: The Natural.

Review #383: The Natural.

Cast
Robert Redford (Roy Hobbs), Robert Duvall (Max Mercy), Glenn Close (Iris Gaines), Kim Basinger (Memo Paris), Wilford Brimley (Pop Fisher), Barbara Hershey (Harriet Bird), Robert Prosky (The Judge), Richard Farnsworth (Red Blow), and Joe Don Baker (The Whammer) Directed by Barry Levinson.

Review
While this is the first time I've reviewed a film with Robert Redford, this is not the first time I've mentioned him (#252 - Quiz Show), as he directed that, and I said this about it: "The film is nail-gripping in its drama, being very well delivered, all thanks to the direction by Robert Redford." This time, he's the main star and not behind the camera, but does this film work well either way is the question. And...I like it. While at times the film sounds a bit much in idolizing its main character sometimes, it does have heart and the baseball action goes well with it. Redford does a pretty good job, essentially a "natural" at this. Duvall is fine, and Close does a noticeable, but good job. The rest of the cast, especially Brimley, do good as well, and the film goes along without much flaws. It has its moments and it goes along well in a decent 137 minute pace. Films like these don't come along too much, but when they do they have good merit to it.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: The 6th Day.

Review #191: The 6th Day.

Cast
Arnold Schwarzenegger (Adam Gibson), Michael Rapaport (Hank Morgan), Tony Goldwyn (Michael Drucker), Michael Rooker (Robert Marshall), Sarah Wynter (Talia Elsworth), Wendy Crewson (Natalie Gibson), Rodney Rowland (P. Wiley), Terry Crews (Vincent Bansworth), Ken Pogue (Speaker Day), Colin Cunningham (Tripp),and Robert Duvall (Griffin Weir) Directed by Roger Spottiswoode (#171 - Tomorrow Never Dies)

Review
Schwarzenegger has been in films ever since the 70's (unless you count that Hercules in New York film in 1969...). In the 2000's, he was in a few of them, which...wasn't as stellar (Collateral Damage, Terminator 3 - #089). This...is...yea, let me explain. The acting is decent, Schwarzenegger does his decent performance given his ability. The film has a science-fiction theme to it that is present through some of his other films (#001, #063, #067), but it doesn't feel as well as the others. I feel the film skims over the supposed message to get to the action, which given out actor makes sense. It can have some good action, but it isn't as memorable as his other films. Countdown to 200: 10, 9...

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Network.

Review #036: Network.

Cast
Faye Dunaway (Diana Christensen), William Holden (Max Schumacher), Peter Finch (Howard Beale), Robert Duvall (Frank Hackett), Wesley Addy (Nelson Chaney), Ned Beatty (Arthur Jensen), Beatrice Straight (Louise Schumacher) Jordan Charney (Harry Hunter), William Prince (Edward Ruddy), Lane Smith (Robert McDonough), Marlene Warfield (Laureen Hobbs), and Conchata Ferrell (Barbara Schlesinger) Directed by Sidney Lumet (#035 - 12 Angry Men)

Review
Review to be updated at a later point in time - hopefully by the end of 2018 or 2019. 

This film is excellent. Its a fun film that parodies the news and what happens if we let sensationalism win...which in retrospect we may already have let happen to us. The acting especially by Finch is good. He is a riot, as he makes you giggle and more (a shame that this was his last role). This isn't just a movie about Finch, this is a satire that reflects the time it was made while having an angry but collected tone that works. The movie won four Academy Awards, winning for Best Actor (Finch), Actress (Dunaway), Supporting Actress (Straight, who is in the movie for five minutes), and Original Screenplay (Chayefsky) while being nominated for five more. The film flows alright, as the direction by Lumet is (as with the previous film reviewed here) good. This is a fine film that hasn't aged badly.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.