War Hunt.

Review #2421: War Hunt.

 

Cast: 

John Saxon (Private Raymond Endore), Robert Redford (Private Roy Loomis), Charles Aidman (Captain Wallace Pratt), Sydney Pollack (Master Sergeant Owen Van Horn), Tommy Matsuda (Charlie), Gavin MacLeod (Private Crotty), Anthony Ray (Private Joshua Fresno), Tom Skerritt (Sergeant Stan Showalter), and William Challee (Lieutenant Colonel) Directed by Denis Sanders.

Review: 

Yes, there are plenty of starts to highlight when talking about a film. This was a breakthrough of sorts for three people: this was the first credited role for Robert Redford, and it was also the film debuts for Sydney Pollack and Tom Skerritt. Now, who directed it? Well, this was the second feature film directed by Denis Sanders, who had done a handful of short films, which included A Time Out of War (1955), which not only served as his master's degree thesis at UCLA but also won an Academy Award for Best Short Subject. That movie got the attention of Charles Laughton, who hired them to work on The Night of the Hunter [1955] (Terry as a second unit director, Denis as a dialogue director). The brothers worked on further films such as Crime and Punishment U.S.A. With War Hunt, it was made as part of a deal between United Artists and the Sanders brothers. The two did a handful of documentaries over the next few decades, with Denis winning an Academy Award for Best Documentary Short Subject with Czechoslovakia 1968 (1969) while Terry co-produced the Academy Award winning Maya Lin: A Strong Clear Vision (1994). The writer of the film was Stanford Whitmire, a regular writer on television shows and TV movies for many years. I suppose it might be interesting to note that Francis Ford Coppola drove a truck in the film.

Sure, a war movie can be pretty dour, and it probably isn't up to the level of say, The Steel Helmet (1951), but War Hunt is a curious movie to engage with, one that wonders aloud just what the hell is one going to do after it isn't so easy to go around killing the enemy in war. Well, as one does when set near the armistice of the Korea War. Sure, it is evident to see where it is more "low budget" than just being a "carefully composed drama" that happens to be a bit light on the action side. But it is a solid film of the soul, crafting itself well with an offbeat sense of patience and a worthy ensemble that you could at least call a solid find to maybe check out in long odds, complete with having a resourceful look from (prior Academy Award nominee) Ted McCord. At this point, Saxon had been a "teen idol" with films such as Rock, Pretty Baby (1956) and The Happy Feeling (1958) before doing other sorts of roles with The Unforgiven (1960). Here he gets to play an offbeat soldier that manages to give off an unnerving vibe without having to say many words that is weirdly fascinating, even when considering the stilted nature of what really drives his dynamic with Matsuda (an orphan reminds him of old times?). Redford had attended (and was expelled from) the University of Colorado in Boulder and soon traveled a bit before taking up work in the stage in the late 1950s. He did a handful of television appearances, but this is the first film he did in what was a long career before his death just this month. The toils of idealism in the face of actual combat are probably a bit obvious for anyone to portray, but Redford at least shows some promise that obviously would get meatier material to really sink in. In general, it is a movie that comes and goes for 83 minutes with familiar routines that look upon the people fated to kill or be killed and finds that some really will just wander into their own world even when the target is soon to be washed away. In a sea of movies dwelling in the action of war, sometimes you might find something in the low-key type of movie pile here.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

*I couldnt make the whole review about the actor debuts, so here is a note. Sydney Pollack actually started as an actor in the 1950s with theater work while dabbling in truck driving before he became influenced to direct when working as a dialogue coach on The Young Savages (1961) but dabbled in acting for films here. Then you've got Skerritt being noticed for a production of The Rainmaker (when at UCLA) by Sanders. But I suppose the reason this movie was picked was for Redford. RIP.

Sneakers (1992).

Review #1886: Sneakers.

Cast: 

Robert Redford (Martin Bishop / Martin Brice), Ben Kingsley (Cosmo), Sidney Poitier (Donald Crease), David Strathairn (Irwin 'Whistler' Emery), Dan Aykroyd (Darren 'Mother' Roskow), River Phoenix (Carl Arbogast), Mary McDonnell (Liz Ogilvy), Stephen Tobolowsky (Werner Brandes), Timothy Busfield (Dick Gordon), Eddie Jones (Buddy Wallace), George Hearn (Gregor "Greg" Ivanovich), Donal Logue (Dr. Gunter Janek), Lee Garlington (Dr. Elena Rhyzkov), and James Earl Jones (NSA Agent Bernard Abbott) Directed by Phil Alden Robinson (#488 - Field of Dreams)

Review: 

Ensemble movies need their appreciation too, if you think about it. Do you remember WarGames (1983)? In the process of writing the script for that film, Lawrence Lasker and Walter F. Parkes discovered the existence of "sneakers", which refers to hackers that well, sneak into a computer system somewhere (in this case, the hackers here are hired by banks to break in and test the security system). A number of drafts eventually attracted the attention of Phil Alden Robinson, and he ended up spending nine years trying to get the film going. Getting the attention of Robert Redford (cast in a role originally intended with a star in their mid-40s as written by people in their 40s) helped the process and eventually led to a film with a cadre of actors that went from veteran stars to younger names such as River Phoenix (this was the penultimate movie released before his death the following year) while squeezing James Earl Jones in for one scene. Lasker and Parkes also produced the film, which was their fourth venture together (one of them was Awakenings (1990)). Clearly, the movie is really more of a take on the caper movies of yesteryear with its distinct characters in its ensemble, although the message about a world run by "little ones and zeroes" probably still seems quite true after three decades. You probably remember Robinson as the director of Field of Dreams (1989), his second effort; Sneakers is his third feature effort, and his next feature film ended up being Freedom Song eight years later.

Admittedly, it is a nice little movie when it comes to seeing familiar faces in an attempt at a techno-thriller/heist movie. Oh sure, it is a movie that does extoll a little bit about the quirks of a new age where having control of the information might be more important than having the fastest gun. Sneakers does so with a grasp of a number of cliches you have probably seen in countless heist movies with how you can describe the supporting characters in two-word phrases or how the climax is operated (besides the literal slow-motion sequence), right down to needing to acquire a box. In that sense, it can either prove as a comfort movie with plenty of enjoyment from an age like the 1990s or just an average ensemble, and I think it works out more often than not to make a quiet winner. Redford does well with what is needed in general charm, a uniter of misfits with what you've seen a few times from him (perhaps playing a bit of The Sting but without looking like a copy). Poitier, in his penultimate appearance in a feature film, still has the knack for steely timing to contrast the semi-whimsical others, mostly against Aykroyd (amusingly, when approached for the film, he actually was more interested in playing the Cosmo role before being told that Kingsley was signed for it). Kingsley doesn't have as much to really do as the adversary, but in a movie with just a fraction of action and more about the general chase, this works out okay in general familiarity (better him than a ham or a nonentity, perhaps). Strathairn lends a few chuckles to go along with a wiry Phoenix that make the most of those little moments to shuffle the plot. McDonnell makes a quality deadpan middleperson, one who does share a few interesting moments with Redford alongside some chuckles with Tobolowsky, who seems to be having a ball with his moments on screen. 126 minutes is admittedly a big ask for thrillers to enjoy, but I think it does pull enough out of the bag of enjoyment to work at the expectation required from its cast and crew. It's a movie about a couple of scraps who just want to untangle themselves from a weirdo conspiracy involving uncertainties that is dealt with in wry patience that makes a solid little three-decade gem. If fun-loving ensembles trying to play caper is up your alley, go right ahead with this one, where the game of concerns of privacy still holds true now.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

The Sting.

Review #1445: The Sting.

Cast: 
Paul Newman (Henry "Shaw" Gondorff), Robert Redford (Johnny "Kelly" Hooker), Robert Shaw (Doyle Lonnegan), Charles Durning (Lt. William Snyder, Joliet P.D.), Ray Walston (J.J. Singleton), Eileen Brennan (Billie), Harold Gould (Kid Twist), John Heffernan (Eddie Niles), Dana Elcar (FBI Agent Polk), Dimitra Arliss (Loretta), Robert Earl Jones (Luther Coleman), and Jack Kehoe (Erie Kid) Directed by George Roy Hill (#962 - A Little Romance, #1178 - Slap Shot, and #1289 - Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid)

Review: 
"I find publicity is distasteful and I don't think it does the picture any good to focus on the director. I think it's only a very small group of the public that really pays attention to the director. Lately it's come around to that the director is more of a star than he was, but I've never wanted that."

There are just some movies that are destined to become great works to endure, whether for their style, or for their execution in writing, directing, or the actors. This is a film that has all of those attributes to make for one of the most well-crafted experiences for the 1970s. It should only figure that a well-crafted film would come from a craftsman like George Roy Hill. He had served as a pilot in both World War II and the Korean War as a Marine while having studied at Yale and Trinity College (studying music and literature, respectively). He made his debut in the stage of Ireland before moving to Broadway, where he would later shift his attention to directing. After nearly a decade of writing/directing for anthology television and Broadway (on and off), he made his debut in motion pictures with Period of Adjustment (1962, an adaptation of the Tennessee Williams play that Hill directed). Although Hill did not garner as much respect as other directors of his time (perhaps in part because of his reluctance for self-promotion), he would direct fourteen films in 26 years (retiring to teach at Yale) through his firm style of directing that made him a favorite for actors in films with varying success such as Thoroughly Modern Millie (1967), Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (1969), and Slap Shot (1977, now considered a cult classic). The script came from David S. Ward, graduate of both UCLA and USC film schools, whose only writing credit at the time was Steelyard Blues (1973). He was inspired to make a film about confidence men because he had never saw one about them before, having researched pickpockets (despite this, David Maurer, writer of The Big Con - a 1940 book that detailed real life grifters such as Fred and Charley Gondoroff, sued for plagiarism, which was settled after the film's release to the disappointment of Ward).

One doesn't need to say how much power Newman and Redford have in chemistry together, both having come from Broadway to film to become icons by the time of this film, their second of two films together. They are quality stars that bask into a quality script that gives them room to engage in some amusement alongside setting up the audience in confidence for the big con that resonates as a wonderful emulation of 1930s films with great style. It is escapism of the highest order for all to see and hear. Redford proves as capable as ever in exuding confidence and care for a role worth having so much self assurance and timing to go with it, a set-up man with plenty of charm to go around. Newman proves just as alluring in traditional confidence that can be just as amusing as Redford with plenty of ways of building people up, such as when he engages in a poker game with Shaw while pretending to be drunk and getting the better of him through a few jokes and careful handling. Shaw (who also was a novelist and playwright when not in the theater or films) proves resilient as the heavy for the film, having a striking quality to him that makes him a perfect mark and contrast to the others in the film that lurks in our attention without turning into a caricature. Durning (a prolific character actor of stage, television, and film) proves the perfect foil authority, one with brute convictions that makes a perfect mark. Walston and Gould (both prolific character actors) make for quality acts to help set up the background of making the con go with class, while Brennan rounds out the focus points with care, whereas others get brief but meaningful moments (such as an allusive Arlisss or a warm Jones for the first con of the film). One never finds anything they see or hear to be a distraction, playing a long game in delivering entertainment for its audience with a mix of humor and caper style to tremendous effect, where the 129 minutes slip away with no trouble in following it all the way with details. It is interesting that the film works so well as a film attempting to look like the 1930s with its cinematography by Robert Surtees, editing from William Reynolds and costuming by Edith Head that goes with a music score (done by Marvin Hamlisch) that adapts early 20th century ragtime music from Scott Joplin (ragtime, although outdated by the 1930s actually experienced a revival in the 1970s, with "The Entertainer" being a great tune to listen to) to make for such an involving experience. Perhaps it isn't surprising that this film received numerous accolades as a tremendous hit for the time, with Hill, Ward, Reynolds, Head, Hamlisch each winning Academy Awards for their work (along with wins for Best Production Design and Best Picture). In the long run, this is one of the most entertaining films of its time, one that serves as a gem for Hill, Redford, and Newman in captivating a sharp winner that holds true in great craftsmanship and planning after over four decades to make for a grand legacy worth checking out.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

The Way We Were.

Review #1444: The Way We Were.

Cast: 
Barbra Streisand (Katie Morosky), Robert Redford (Hubbell Gardiner), Bradford Dillman (J.J.), Lois Chiles (Carol Ann), Patrick O'Neal (George Bissinger), Viveca Lindfors (Paula Reisner), Allyn Ann McLerie (Rhea Edwards), Murray Hamilton (Brooks Carpenter), Herb Edelman (Bill Verso), and Diana Ewing (Vicki Bissinger) Directed by Sydney Pollack (#084 - Tootsie and #1441 - Jeremiah Johnson)

Review: 
“As a young woman, I wanted nothing more than to see my name in lights.”
Barbra Streisand dreamed of being an actress from childhood, and it is easy to say that she has followed through with considerable talent for six decades. The daughter of a teacher and a singer-turned-bookkeeper, she practiced singing from a young age while eventually spending additional time studying acting (such as stage actress biographies and acting theories). She made her way from nightclubs in 1960 to Broadway in 1962, with her first album being released the following year. Her appearance in the 1964 Broadway production of Funny Girl furthered her success, and when the musical was adapted into a film in 1968, she would make her film debut and reprise her role and win an Academy Award for Best Actress. By the time she was in line to do this film (her seventh), she had starred in a variety of genres such as musicals, comedies, and dramas.

Some movies are just schmaltzy, and this one nearly drowns because of it. Actually, one little barometer you can use to try and set the mood for if you may enjoy this film is how one reacts to the title song of the picture, sung by Streisand and written by Alan Bergman, Marilyn Bergman, and Marvin Hamlisch. It supposedly is a tearjerker kind of song, so if one really is swayed by melodramatic phrases like "Memories light the corners of my mind / Misty watercolor memories of the way we were", then by all means go for it. If I ever had a blindspot when it comes to music, sad love songs rank up there. Inspiration for the film came from the experiences of writer Arthur Laurents during his time at Cornell University, where he knew a student just as reactionary about events of the time as the main character present here, with an eventual turn to creating a love story (of sorts) with a talented writer without the strength to really apply themselves with writing. Laurents was a noted playwright who had directed Streisand in I Can Get It for You Wholesale back in 1962. The film may seem a bit jumbled with its plot, and the fact that there were numerous re-writes done to the script (from writers such as Dalton Trumbo) doesn't help, and Laurents had left (and returned) the production due to taking issue with Pollack with his handling of the main characters, since he felt that he needed to make Redford's character more equal to Streisand's character (since Pollack had promised Redford to make the character less of a strawman in order to get Redford to sign on). Laurents was obviously not too pleased with the resulting film, once stating that "To make a mantra of 'It's only a movie was as useless and foolish as feeling pain. No matter what I felt or thought, no matter what I tried to accomplish or how, Sydney Pollack would ultimately have his way. That was what I had to face and accept. They didn't cry 'Author! Author! in the movies, they never had. Now they cried 'Auteur! Auteur! -- even if the auteur fucked up the picture."

As a film about the evolving times into the Hollywood blacklist interlaced with a tragic romance, it isn't exactly a strongly put-together film, particularly when it comes to settling in the tragic parts of its climax, which seem too abrupt for a film that somehow seems too long and not long enough at the same time of 118 minutes. Your mileage may vary on what seems most interesting to you when it comes to the story, but I just couldn't get myself into all that this film wants to juggle, a snoozer in the political aspects (when not trying to preach to the choir). Everything one could praise for a film like this can soon be followed by the word however, as if this was a film of contradicted principles. Streisand and Redford seem to do well with each other, beaming as stars with distinct craftsmanship that can make for interesting magic when not arguing with each other. You know the type: the idealist with resilience and fire like a phoenix and the golden boy with his own sense of preservation (you can tell pretty quickly which one you might like better when it gets to the college speech scene, where she talks about her beliefs with Marxism before getting mocked with a "Any Peace But Katie's Piece" sign - which leads to her getting mad and calling them fascists, which is just as amusing as trying to take Marxism super seriously). In a sense it is like watching passionate waves crash onto a calming beach, which can work pretty well. On the other hand, the supporting characters seem to be a victim of the editing (particularly with a wasted Hamilton), where one only sees fleeting moments with folks like O'Neal that only serve to try to not drag things out to the inevitable pasture.  If one goes along with these characters, then all power to you - to me I couldn't help but think of them more as belonging to camp than true tragedy. For its failures to really set up a cohesive finish before its final manipulations with the climax, I can't find myself to give a positive shake for this film - its machinations to get to its tragic point are frenzied and not consistent enough to stick its landing, regardless of how much star power is present here. I do not care for tearjerker films like this because I know that it really isn't going to shake me the way it thinks it will, since this one nearly inspires laughter at its subject rather than pity. Maybe it is a reflection on what fits my tastes more than anything, since one knows Streisand and Redford have done far better films than this. This is an irritating mediocre movie, because you know that this annoying tearslop could do so much better, and yet here we are with a shaky principled mess that only serves as a late night rental for those who just want to see Streisand and Redford together once without having the highest of expectations. 

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Jeremiah Johnson.

Review #1441: Jeremiah Johnson.

Cast: 
Robert Redford (Jeremiah Johnson), Will Geer (Bear Claw Chris Lapp), Stefan Gierasch (Del Gue), Delle Bolton (Swan), Josh Albee (Caleb), Joaquín Martínez (Paints His Shirt Red), Allyn Ann McLerie (The Crazy Woman), Paul Benedict (Reverend Lindquist), Jack Colvin (Lieutenant Mulvey), Matt Clark (Qualen), Richard Angarola (Chief Two-Tongues Lebreaux), and Charles Tyner (Robidoux) Directed by Sydney Pollack (#084 - Tootsie)

Review: 
"Timing is a big thing with actors. You don't ever want to over-rehearse, but you don't want them under-prepared either. Part of the trick is knowing when to roll the cameras. So many times I'll see a performance peak during the rehearsal process and they never quite get it back. That's why I'd rather be rolling early."

"Storytellers broaden our minds: engage, provoke, inspire, and ultimately, connect us."

It never fails to turn to a new face for a film experience, whether for the 1970s or for versatility when it comes to directors or actors. It should only prove fitting to showcase a film involving lifelong friends in director Sydney Pollack and Robert Redford, who each experienced success in their own fields both with and without each other. This was the second of seven collaborations between Pollack and Redford (the first one being in Pollack's second feature This Property Is Condemned six years prior). Redford had his debut in the stage in 1959 while starting work on television as a guest the following year, while Pollack started studying theatre acting in 1952 with appearances in television starting in 1956. The two would meet up together in 1960 on the production of War Hunt (1962), which was the major acting film debut for both actors, and they would become life-long friends. The key to wanting to become a director came in 1961 when Pollack worked on The Young Savages as a dialogue coach, as he was encouraged by its star Burt Lancaster to try his hand at directing. He soon found television work to direct while cutting back on his acting appearances, and he received his first film to direct with The Slender Thread (1965). Redford (who would become a noted director in his own right) described him as a director with an ability to "connect the more commercial strain with the more abstract", one who could work with stars and make a film with wit that could differ from the usual commercial fare. Pollack would direct over twenty projects over the next four decades while also having a hand in producing (and occasionally acting) in them before his death in 2008, with notable films including They Shoot Horses, Don't They? (1969), Tootsie (1982, director/co-producer/actor), Out of Africa (1985, director/co-producer that garnered him two Academy Awards), and The Firm (1993, director/co-producer). 

The film is based on two works: Crow Killer: The Saga of Liver-Eating Johnson (written by Raymond Thorp and Robert Bunker) that detailed the life of John Jeremiah Johnson and Vardis Fisher's novel Mountain Man, which was a fictional work inspired by the exploits of Johnson. He was a man who went through many professions, such as sailor, trapper, and even deputy (although obviously the film is based on just the trapper experiences). The film was adapted to the screen by Edward Anhalt (co-writer of Panic in the Streets along with other films with and without his wife Edna) and John Milius (whose most notable writing credit was The Life and Times of Judge Roy Bean earlier in the year). It should only figure that Redford would be involved in a film like this (which he considers his favorite), one with a mountain man that seeks out the nature of the land (shot mostly in Utah, which Redford had bought his own ski area), a western of the wilderness with a careful pace and tremendous visual style to tell a worthwhile experience that will hopefully leave the viewer with some sort of appreciation for the loner in all of us or at least for the environment for which one can (and should) take time to view and breathe in all of its strange qualities. Redford lives up to the challenge of a role that requires a patient actor to suffer through the coldness of the land and reality with conviction and understanding. It is a role for the actor that wants to make something of themselves to make a mythic role their own with no pretentions. Geer and Gierasch make for colorful standouts among a carefully collected supporting cast that build a myth of nature and revenge with pathos and good timing. At 116 minutes (including overture and intermission), it makes for a fair sit to go through at least once, filled with wide open moments to see Redford and a landscape worth viewing for some quality entertainment as a wilderness western fitting for its era and the people who featured prominently in it.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid.

Review #1289: Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid.

Cast: 
Paul Newman (Butch Cassidy), Robert Redford (the Sundance Kid), Katharine Ross (Etta Place), Strother Martin (Percy Garris), Henry Jones (Bike Salesman), Jeff Corey (Sheriff Bledsoe), George Furth (Woodcock), Cloris Leachman (Agnes), and Ted Cassidy (Harvey Logan) Directed by George Roy Hill (#962 - A Little Romance and #1178 - Slap Shot)

Review: 
It never proves to be a bad idea to do watch a Western, especially when you have a dynamite trio of actors and a capable director willing to have some fun with a genre as familiar as this one. The 1960s certainly could turn a film genre on its head a bit, as was the case with The Wild Bunch - which was a violent shocking take on the genre released the same year. Really the best representation of this film and its vision of a Western could be the scene involving the sheriff and his attempts at rounding people up to apprehend the two leads, which leads to a salesman trying to push bicycles as the new way to get around instead of horses. William Goldman was inspired by the exploits of the real-life duo of robbers in part because of the fact that they had a second act (running off to Bolivia after their pursuit by the "superposse"); he wrote it as a screenplay between 1965-66, but it initially did not receive interest in part because of the departure to South America by the characters, and numerous actors rejected being the stars such as Steve McQueen, Warren Beatty, and Jack Lemmon. In any case, adapting an Old West legend into its own little tale isn't exactly a new thing, but this is a film that is fairly clever in its approach, being good-natured with where it wants to go without pushing its audience too hard in any one direction, having a bit of fun alongside other moments that make this a worthy Western for anyone. Both Newman and Redford are fun to be around with, with the former having plenty of charm and a sense of humor, which sticks out in most scenes, such as him riding a bicycle with Ross while "Raindrops Keep Fallin' on My Head" (which ended up winning an Academy Award for Best Original Song for its writers, Burt Bacharach and Hal David) plays in the background. Redford is just as dynamic when it comes to garnering a sardonic moment in a role that helped boost him to full-fledged stardom - for good reason. Ross proves interesting as well, making for a fine spark within a trio that holds the ship well. There isn't a big bad like one sees with other Westerns, but the film doesn't really need one to really drive things, where little moments with others work just as fine in giving the film something to tell an interesting yarn that doesn't need all the facts to be a capable Western. The 110 minute run-time proves alright, with its surrounding first and latter halves holding a bit more steady than its middle involving the departure to Bolivia. The action does work out pretty nicely, including one amusing moment with a train and its clerk. It stands out well with its good sense of humor and timing, a pleaser for the crowds that stands just as tall today as it did a half century ago.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

original image:

Legal Eagles.

Review #1278: Legal Eagles.

Cast: 
Robert Redford (Tom Logan), Debra Winger (Laura Kelly), Daryl Hannah (Chelsea Deardon), Brian Dennehy (Cavanaugh/Joe Brock), Terence Stamp (Victor Taft), Steven Hill (Bower), Christine Baranski (Carol Freeman), Roscoe Lee Browne (Judge Dawkins), David Clennon (Blanchard), John McMartin (Forrester), Robert Curtis Brown (Roger), Grant Heslov (Usher), Sara Botsford (Barbara), and Jennifer Dundas (Jennifer Logan) Directed by Ivan Reitman (#026 - Ghostbusters, #031 - Ghostbusters II, #243 - Stripes, and #487 - Twins)

Review: 
It doesn't take too much time to think that this film could seem interesting. The original idea was to make a buddy film involving Bill Murray and Dustin Hoffman, but when those plans fell apart, Redford expressed interest in doing a romantic comedy, which inspired changes to a dynamic reminiscent of Katherine Hepburn-Spencer Tracy films. The screenplay and story were done by Jim Cash and Jack Epps, Jr, with Reitman contributing to the latter. In a sense, this film is a romance. Of course it also happens to have a sense of comedy, thriller, and courtroom drama packed into its two hour duration, which turns out to be a most unwieldy combination. It certainly seems too packed in to really make the impact it wants to make, which results in a thoroughly average film. It complicates itself too much without really getting a feel for the simple things that can make a film tick: just having fun. One instead sees something that is bound to certain excesses (namely its budget of $40 million) and not working as great whenever it tries shifting gears between rom-com and thriller. There either seems to be too many characters or not enough that actually seems worthy enough to invest in. At least the performances are fine to watch, with Redford and Winder coming out the best, since they at least seem like they are having some sort of chemistry together, whether when trapped in buddy scenarios like an exploding warehouse or some other odd scenario, like Redford and his character that likes to tap dance when unable to sleep (gee, where do you think they'll go with that quirk). Hannah and her performance artist-turned-accused robber/murderer does okay, giving off a laugh or two, but she seems stretched pretty thin in actually making her presence really count, odd but harmless. When she actually does try to romance Redford and his character, I'm just twiddling my thumbs more than anything. Dennehy does just fine, snide yet worth seeing. The other members of the cast don't have as much to really do, seemingly there just to fill time and plot, which is a shame. How does one make a buddy movie with lawyers seem so awkward? One cannot help but wonder if this film needed more or less re-working to really hit its mark (it most certainly needed a trimming down). Actually, there exists an alternate version in which Hannah's character is found to be guilty of one of the murders. I guess that could've proved interesting, though I wonder if that version had more focus. The film just comes and goes, whether in the courtroom or somewhere else. At least one might get some sort of enjoyment over spectacle for the film, what with a climax involving a burning building and all, but its setup doesn't really leave much to give investment over. Their fates never seem to be hanging too much in the balance, and guessing who the real culprit is gets to be pretty easy when the others start dying off. It just seems like a movie too safe to either be really funny or usefully dramatic, trying to get its hand in many genre jars and getting only crumbs in return. It's a bland movie, but at least one could probably come out of it without groaning too much for two hours. I can't call it a winner, but it could probably work as a lark if faced with nothing else to do.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: All Is Lost.

Review #588: All Is Lost.

Cast
Robert Redford (Our Man) Directed by J. C. Chandor.

Review
All is Lost is unique in its setup, having only one character, one setting, and barely any dialogue, leaving Redford to carry an entire movie by himself. And he succeeds. Redford doesn't make the character just by dialogue, he makes the character his own by his actions, by how we watch him struggle with what's going on around him. Redford is still impressive to watch even today, especially when watching him try to call for help, which is both riveting and emotional. The movie may seemingly have a simple premise, but in that premise is layers of emotions that venture in. This is a remarkable movie, a movie that tries hard and succeeds in its main goal of excellence and telling a story.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Captain America: The Winter Soldier.

Review #571: Captain America: The Winter Soldier.

Cast
Chris Evans (Steve Rogers/Captain America), Scarlett Johansson (Natasha Romanoff/Black Widow), Sebastian Stan (Winter Soldier), Anthony Mackie (Sam Wilson/Falcon), Frank Grillo (Brock Rumlow), Cobie Smulders (Maria Hill), Maximiliano Hernández (Jasper Sitwell), Emily VanCamp (Kate/Agent 13), Robert Redford (Alexander Pierce), and Samuel L. Jackson (Nick Fury) Directed by Anthony Russo and Joe Russo.

Review
You might be wondering why I waited two weeks after the movie premiered to finally watch and then review this movie. Well, I wanted to give this enough time to subside and not have as many people (That and I actually had plans to do stuff on the Friday it came out, the ACT was on the week after and a talent show on last Thursday, so I had to get a few things done first), and yet there was still a good crowd of people going to see this, which is a good sign. To make a good sequel, you have to make it good enough to make you forget about comparing it to the first movie, in which that it is good enough to stand on its own. So how is this movie? It's a real blast that also manages to be a game changer in terms of this movie universe. This movie feels like a thriller from way back when, so naturally Robert Redford is in this. And he is wonderful, managing to have great chemistry with everyone, and is fun to watch, and he's really just one piece that makes up a good supporting cast, along with Samuel L. Jackson, who is given more depth and given more to do.

But do the main cast members fare well? Yes, yes, yes, and yes. Evans and Johansson have great chemistry together, they do well together, and you feel the connection between the two. Mackie is a welcome addition to this franchise, a good newcomer that is also a cool superhero to watch because it is always fun to watch people fly. Sebastian Stan doesn't have much to do for dialogue, but his character is interesting to watch and cool to look at. His character arc does go somewhere, and he is intriguing to watch. The movie delivers a clever twist that actually does manage to make sense and even connects with other films of this universe. The action and the effects are really good and show the filmmakers know what they're doing. The movie has a level of suspense but also a level of fun, a hearken back to the old days of thrillers with an exceptional cast and exceptional values that make for a really good movie. Go see it before it's out of theaters. Hail Hydra.

Overall, I give it 9 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: Quiz Show.

Review #252: Quiz Show.

Cast
John Turturro (Herb Stempel), Rob Morrow (Richard Goodwin), Ralph Fiennes (Charles Van Doren), Paul Scofield (Mark Van Doren), David Paymer (Dan Elright), Hank Azaria (Albert Freedman), and Christopher McDonald (Jack Barry) Directed by Robert Redford.

Review
This film is based upon the Twenty One quiz show scandal of the 1950's, where the contestants were assisted with the questions by the producers. In short words, cheating. The subject of the film needs a good director and acting to work well. Does it? Yes. The acting works very well, with Turturro, Morrow, and Fiennes being the main standouts. All three portray characters that work in different ways. The film is nailgripping in its drama, being very well delivered, all thanks to the direction by Robert Redford. While it may not be all entirely accurate (This is a rule I should call "The Movieilization Rule"), the film still works out well, giving a good sense of drama and entertainment.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.