Showing posts with label Sports Film. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sports Film. Show all posts

April 5, 2021

Glory Road.

Review #1664: Glory Road.

Cast: 
Josh Lucas (Don Haskins), Derek Luke (Bobby Joe Hill), Mehcad Brooks (Harry Flournoy), Austin Nichols (Jerry Armstrong), Jon Voight (Adolph Rupp), Evan Jones (Moe Iba), Red West (Ross Moore), Schin A.S. Kerr (David Lattin), Alphonso McAuley (Orsten Artis), Sam Jones III (Willie Worsley), Damaine Radcliff (Willie Cager), Emily Deschanel (Mary Haskins), and Al Shearer (Nevil Shed) Directed by James Gartner.

Review: 
"I certainly did not expect to be some racial pioneer or to change the world." - Don Haskins

Sometimes, it is necessary to do a bit of a history lesson with a film, particularly one near and dear to my interest: sports...Texas Western was the first team from my home state to have won a NCAA Tournament (and the only one until Baylor in 2021), and they did so with a historical distinction as the first all-African American lineup to play in the Championship, which they did 72–65 over Kentucky on March 19, 1966. As one should say for any movie based on a true story...send in the fact checks. After all, we are talking about a movie with the same producer behind Remember the Titans (2000) in Jerry Bruckheimer, which has its own shares of dubious playing with the facts (particularly if you had asked one particular player).  Yes, one can say "it's just a movie", but one will always want to find the truth anyway...saying that you are a movie, not a documentary is hogwash - at that point, you might as well just say you aren't a slide-show too (trust me, there are other sports movies that merit this kind of skepticism...like Rudy). Consider the first point, in that Haskins actually arrived at Texas Western (now the University of Texas at El Paso) in 1961, not 1965. Those four years are important to note, because in that time there was a trend-setter in field of college basketball in Loyola University Chicago (as coached by George Ireland) - the 1963 team was the pinnacle of a program that was the first to start an all-black lineup in the NCAA (doing so in 1962), and the title game for that year would feature lineups with a majority of African American players as starters (four for Loyola, three for Cincinnati, who went to three straight title games in five straight appearances in the Final Four); if one wants to relate this to the Southeastern Conference, one of their programs in Mississippi State didn't even play in the NCAA Tournament until playing Loyola in the Sweet Sixteen because of said prejudices against lineups like Loyola (interestingly, 25 programs played in the '63 tournament but only 22 played in the '66 tournament) - the conference did not integrate until the following year. Why stop there? The University of San Francisco won titles in 1955 and 1956 with famed players like Bill Russell, K.C. Jones and Hal Perry. Nolan Richardson, a pioneering coach in his own right for Arkansas, got his start in college basketball as a player for...Texas Western, in the same year that Haskins was hired. Consider the stage and time: the NCAA University Division Basketball Championship Game (as it was called) wasn't even broadcast on national television, instead being shown by a company called Sports Network Incorporated (thankfully, the tape of the game is intact). The slam dunk would be banned by the NCAA for a period of years starting in 1967, and there was no three-point shot (take a guess which was which with these stat-lines: 22-for-49, 28/34 free throws, 27-of-70, 11/13 free throws). Checking the score-card reveals an easy slip: Texas Western never trailed after they went up 16-11. Heck, the first game of the year for the Miners isn't even correct, as it depicts a tough four point win over Eastern New Mexico...they won that game by 49 points. Interestingly, it covers the East Texas State game as being a road game...it was actually the second game of the year (in El Paso, not two weeks before the Tournament; the university, now known as Texas A&M–Commerce took umbrage with the filmmakers for what they felt was liberties taken with them in that game/after the game)…the five point struggle was actually 22. At least it reflects the last game of the year okay, in that they lost the same day that Kentucky had lost...but it was a two point loss, instead of the runaway loss portrayed here. Honestly, if you are going to make a sports movie, perhaps don't show the scoreboard with blatantly wrong scores - I don't care if it was done to add drama or not, it just seems ridiculous to make such bizarre moves. The nail in the coffin is the game versus Kansas (the third of five games played by Texas Western), for which it depicts the blunder by Jo Jo White as ending the game...nope. Besides, Haskins and his team wasn't exactly a Cinderella story. By the time Haskins had started his fifth season as head coach, he had led them to appearances in the postseason three times while going 78-25 (Haskins, in over three decades of coaching, would go 719–353 as coach; incidentally, if you are curious about Rupp and his own legacy, he went 876–190 in four decades as coach for Kentucky, who after years of trying to recruit to integrate with a great talent and not simply one for the bench, managed to do so in 1970, the season before his retirement).

Amidst all of this is the fact that we have a rookie director in James Gartner at the helm. It is the only credit that he has in feature films, as he is generally more known for work within commercials. The film takes material from the 2005 novel of the same name that was written by Don Haskins and journalist Dan Wetzel, with the screenplay adaptation being done by Chris Cleveland, Bettina Gilois, and Gregory Allen Howard - you may recognize the latter name as one of the key writers behind Remember the Titans (2000) and Ali (2001), for which we have mentioned before has its own little quibbles in facts.  One thing that I can personally say is this: It is irresistible, at least for me anyways, to see a team take a blue-blood program to the cleaners and win as Texas Western did, because one has to have their little moments, albeit with a very formulaic movie. It tries to find a balance with its cast and the significance of the moment in the struggle against prejudice over something as simple as just playing the game of basketball on their terms. In that sense, some players will stand out better than others, such as Luke or Kerr, who each prove quite entertaining in charm and in awareness when it comes to showing the degrees of college life, which makes one take perspective. Probably the one interesting scene that involves the team comes before it gets rolling, which involves a game of playing trash cans for fun - curious, yet far more interesting than something like the scene of the night before the title game with Lucas telling his team who he will start and why (I included that quote in the beginning of this review for a reason, and that is because Haskins picked his five on who was best to play and that was it). Lucas seems to follow the lines of Disney sports movies with tough-minded coaches (such as Remember the Titans and Miracle (2004), for example), one that feeds upon discipline that proves quite laconic at times. It is a decent performance, one that reflects Haskins that just seems to also reflect other sports movies of its ilk for better or worse (Deschanel, his on-screen wife, might be confused for a shadow with how the film shows Haskins at home with his family in those small moments, but that is neither here or there). Voight (remember him from his turn in Ali? Here's another makeup show) certainly has an interesting task at hand. He isn't exactly an adversary to the main task at hand but rather is like the dragon waiting at the end with a fire to win that can be seen from the drawl and expressions. I think he does fine with the role, one that provides a contrast and similarity with Lucas in the pursuit of victory with bare tinges of anything other than desire for victory. Look, at the end of the day, we have a movie that is 106 minutes that is okay with what it does. One gets a feeling for the feeling of the time without being smothered in patronization for it, and the basketball action is engaging enough for those who care about that sort of thing. If it makes folks want to check further into basketball history within the context of its times and pioneers to go with it, I think that will prove more than enough in generating solid entertainment.

Congratulations go out to Baylor University for having won the NCAA championship tonight. It took a bit longer to get this review out in order to accommodate a bit of research, but I am sure you folks will understand.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Bull Durham.

Review #1663: Bull Durham.

Cast:
Kevin Costner (Lawrence "Crash" Davis), Susan Sarandon (Annie Savoy), Tim Robbins (Ebby Calvin "Nuke" Laloosh), Trey Wilson (Joe "Skip" Riggins), Robert Wuhl (Larry Hockett), William O'Leary (Jimmy), David Neidorf (Bobby), Jenny Robertson (Millie), Danny Gans (Deke), and Max Patkin (Himself) Written and Directed by Ron Shelton (#381 - Cobb and #1075 - Hollywood Homicide)

Review:
“I thought if I was gonna have a shot as a director, I’m gonna have to write something that everybody else can say, ‘Well, whatever we think of Shelton, certainly nobody in the world knows more about the subject.”

This was the debut film directed by Ron Shelton, who has directed nine feature films in a career of over three decades - five of these films revolve around sports in some way (all except Cobb have comedy in some way, for example). But it is this film that is most personal for Shelton, who had graduated from Westmont College in California (studying English Literature for his major while being a star in basketball in baseball) and immediately went to play minor league baseball. For five years, he would play in various leagues and even reach Triple-A (the highest level in the minors) with Rochester before he decided to quit at the age of 25 in 1971, shaped by a strike in Major League Baseball. The curiosity for filmmaking came in part because he would go to see movies while on the road, with one particular film that inspired him being The Wild Bunch. Afterwards, he would do study within graduate school, graduating from the University of Arizona with a fine arts degree before moving on to do work with painting and carpentry with time spent writing screenplays. In 1981, Shelton received his first film credit when he worked on The Pursuit of D.B. Cooper, a troubled film that had three directors while Shelton worked as an associate producer and creative consultant. Two years later, he wrote his first screenplay, doing so in collaboration with Clayton Frohman on Under Fire (1983).

The idea for the film was quoted by him as “Lysistrata in the minor leagues", which if you may not be aware reflects a play about a woman who wants to end a way by having the women withhold romancing their husbands and lovers in order to garner peace (several writers and filmmakers have made their own works based on being inspired by the play) - Shelton wrote the film in one draft, with the filmed version having few changes (interestingly, one person that Shelton did have help from with the script was Kurt Russell, a former minor leaguer himself). Shelton drew upon his experiences in the minors for the script, ranging from moments such as an intentionally flooded field or a manager throwing bats at his team after a loss. He wanted to make a film with character development that did not necessarily go the way a number of sports films usually go, since what we are seeing is a movie about folks in transition, complete with a lead in Costner that might as well be drawn out from a Western (as per Shelton's liking for that kind of genre) for folks that will prevail in whoever happens to have less self-awareness. It's a study on human behavior that works fine for what is needed, which means a pretty good experience. Respectfully though, if I am asked about its place as a great sports film, there is one easy statement: the best baseball movie ever made in that decade came the following year with either Costner as the star (you know the one), or it came with the big ending at the end (Major League)...it might have been a mistake to watch the latter again before I saw this feature (look at it this way, maybe it inspired all those other baseball movies to come in its wake). But hey, if you want your romance comedy to mix with the usual sports movie, go right ahead. Writing about movies is a perspective different from person to person, and I found it to be good - and that's a fine place to be for a movie with a director that wanted to make it with his own perspective without fancy mythologizing (if one has to be pedantic, however, the minor league record for home runs was certainly not 246 - Buzz Arlett had 432; of course, if one really wants to drag it out word by word, I could also take umbrage with anyone who dislikes the designated hitter rule). Baseball is a business that has adults and kids playing a game, after all, and Shelton wanted a movie from an athlete's perspective, complete with filming in Durham on cold nights in winter (if one is curious about the name, as I was, it actually refers to a tobacco company of the same name, for which the city became famous for).

Oh, but enough about all of that, how's the cast? They do pretty well for themselves, with a core trio that is hard to resist in seeing on and off the park. Costner does well here, in part because he excels where others would probably grimace with a role that grits and grins in a way that might as well sound like Shelton talking about himself, one where each loves the game more than it loves him in a gunslinger-type of way (Costner's character was modelled after William Holden's performance in...you guessed it, The Wild Bunch). You can see the passion in his eyes any time he is on the field, one with honesty and charm that never wavers whether paired with Robbins or Sarandon. There are quite a few highlights one can note with him around, but I think the last scene spent with Robbins is a charmer, one where he imparts a key lesson about fear and arrogance for the majors while getting a shiner in the eye and asking which hand it came from. Sarandon gives her heart and charm with the depth one should expect from a veteran presence like her (she had been an actress for nearly 20 years before this film). She breathes baseball and care into a role that could have been bungled into casual fluff with a lesser actress; here we have a crisp performance that makes those intimate moments spent with either Costner or Robbins come out clear in balance in connections. The interesting thing to note is that the studio did not want Robbins for the role, since they really desired Anthony Michael Hall (Hall was ten years younger than Robbins...who was only three years younger than Costner), and it took Shelton threatening to quit for Robbins to stick around. He proves quite genuine here, brimming in confidence that makes for a quality one-two punch for what is needed in a coming-of-age (for baseball) tale that keeps everyone fresh without being sold out for a cheap joke. Let's put it this way: being on the mound in a garter belt makes for quite a fascinating little scene. Wilson (who died the following year at 40) contributes as well in character presence expected for a manager with good timing; the same can be said of Wuhl and his shepherding presence. If you need an easy confirmation that we have a movie that breathes baseball, one could just watch the parts with Max Patkin performing before the game. Patkin was the famous "Clown Prince of Baseball", and he would perform to any size of crowd for over a half-century. As a whole, what matters most for 108 minutes is in how much one connects with the story told here through the lens of sports with people at the crossroads of life, whether that means someone who only just taken their first few steps in a career or for people nearing the end of one path, or for those somewhere in between. In that sense, it makes for a fairly engaging movie, never tiring itself out at any road it wants to take that never compromises its vision for anything, and in the end that means a worthwhile time for all who find themselves involved with it.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Editor's Note: Obviously this review was meant to be published at a different time...four days late, as it turns out, since writing this took a bit longer than expected. At any rate, I wanted it to accompany the start of the season in Major League Baseball, back in its regular format of playing in the spring - as always, I hope for a great season, but I also hope that you enjoyed this review as well.

Personally, there is one more thing: Go Astros!

December 19, 2019

Million Dollar Baby.


Review #1310: Million Dollar Baby.

Cast: 
Clint Eastwood (Frankie Dunn), Hilary Swank (Margaret "Maggie" Fitzgerald), Morgan Freeman (Eddie "Scrap-Iron" Dupris), Jay Baruchel (Danger), Mike Colter ("Big" Willie Little), Lucia Rijker (Billie "The Blue Bear" Osterman), Brían F. O'Byrne (Father Horvak), Anthony Mackie (Shawrelle Berry), Margo Martindale (Earline Fitzgerald), Riki Lindhome (Mardell Fitzgerald), and Michael Peña (Omar) Directed by Clint Eastwood (#1252 - Space Cowboys)

Review: 
We all love underdogs. Or at least we love the idea of someone trying to claw their way out of their past and find a new life for themselves (a second act, if you will). Of course one may have already seen a Cinderella story through the eyes of boxing before with Rocky (1976), but the film finds its own place to deliver a wrenching drama that works wonderfully for its 132 minute run-time with a solid trio to make its foundation stick. The film is based on a short story collection named Rope Burns: Stories from the Corner by F.X. Toole (pen name of boxing trainer Jerry Boyd), with Paul Haggis writing the screenplay. The film plays itself out in realism piece by piece that draws its ensemble with quiet precision. The film plays itself out in realism piece by piece that draws its ensemble with quiet precision. Eastwood does the task of acting/directing with ease, seeping into a grizzled yet well-meaning teacher with confidence. Freeman (who also serves as narrator) does a wonderful sobering job, carrying the soul of the film to where it needs to go whenever he is on screen or narrating about these characters and who they are when down and out in boxing. Swank clearly trained hard to sell such a tough role, where looking the part is only the half of it all - one is invested in Swank because of the drive and raw charisma she brings here. It's no surprise each won an Academy Award (Best Director, Supporting Actor, Actress) for their work - they all play well with each other, no matter whose partnered with who is a scene. The supporting cast (filled with actors who would become known in their own right) give credence to this grizzled atmosphere seen in the film, where one has to find something to stick with to belong and face hard truths - whether it means how one can be as a fighter or as a father or with one's own relatives or with the reality of sudden changes. The boxing looks the part when it comes to giving the right balance of brutality and entertainment, where one is involved with the punches without bellowing for more or being squeamish for less.  It grips the audience like a book you'd find in the store and find reading piece by piece without hesitation, never hedging itself too long on somehing without a clear reason.

The film hits most of the right punches when it comes to mining hard hitting drama in and out of the ring, being more than a typical boxing film through its distinct first and second halves. It forges with its choices without hamhanded compromise or cruelty for its characters, which may work differently for a viewer with their own mindsets about certain uncomfortable decisions. For me, the film hits the landing with a quiet but resounding focus, where a tear may very well come out of a stone composure. After 15 years, it's no wonder why this proves to be a modern classic worth checking out at least once.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

October 22, 2019

Eight Men Out.


Review #1287: Eight Men Out.

Cast: 
John Cusack (Buck Weaver), Clifton James (Charles Comiskey), Michael Lerner (Arnold Rothstein), Christopher Lloyd (Bill Burns), John Mahoney (Kid Gleason), Charlie Sheen (Happy Felsch), David Strathairn (Eddie Cicotte), D. B. Sweeney (Shoeless Joe Jackson), Michael Rooker (Chick Gandil), Don Harvey (Swede Risberg), and James Read (Lefty Williams) Written and Directed by John Sayles.

Review: 
Yes I know, not a horror film. However, today is the start of the World Series, which incidentally features my Houston Astros, so how could I resist covering a baseball movie? This one had been on my list for quite a while, so it only makes sense to do it now. Enjoy, and let's hope for a wonderful World Series result.

It is interesting to note the passing of 100 years since the Black Sox scandal, in which eight players of the Chicago White Sox were accused of throwing games in the 1919 World Series in conspiracy with gamblers. A public trial ensued in 1921, for which none of the accused players were convicted of any crime, although they were banned from playing professional baseball for the rest of their lives. A tale as old as time for baseball (a sport I adore) undeniably has inspired writers to adapt it into stories. Eliot Asinof wrote an account of the scandal in 1963, while W. P. Kinsella's wrote a magic realist novel with Shoeless Joe (1982, which was adapted into Field of Dreams the same year as this film). It isn't hard to say that baseball fans will certainly have interest in seeing this tale come to life in film while non-baseball fans will have a little harder time getting behind what this movie wants to show with this (questionably accurate) period drama. When it comes to baseball movies, this is probably safe middle ground stuff, doing just fine with its look and some of its ensemble moments while being a bit lacking when it comes to making everything really stick (particularly when it comes to some egregious liberties taken with real events, which is just as true with the novel and its combination of fictional characters into what is meant to be a non-fiction narrative). It clocks in at just a few seconds under two hours, for which the first half proves more favorable than the latter half (what better way to combine baseball cliches than courtroom cliches), seeming to have a few amusing moments with its cast. As such, the highlights include Cusack, Strathairn, Sweeney, and Rooker, with each actor of the conspiracy sticking out, such as Cusack and his bright disposition (even when faced with a bunch of crooked teammates), or the calmness of the others in their belief of that allure one calls more money. Minor highlights include James and Mahoney, making crucial points count just fine. How much guff can one give about accuracy about adapting the scandal to film with source material that took its own liberties with the facts (the Internet sure does help occasionally when it comes to finding tidbits of information, such as Society for American Baseball Research (SABR), who recently had made an article detailing numerous myths about the scandal, such as the White Sox actually having a high payroll (for 1919), or the gamblers being approached by the players (as opposed to the other way around), or the grand jury testimony being stolen (which they simply re-created later on anyway, which didn't have a big effect on the trial). If you really wanted to go further, the Internet is your friend for finding things to pick at (for better or worse). For me, it does tend to rankle me, in part because a film should know a little better about getting more than basic concepts right, especially stuff like Christy Mathewson (famed baseball legend) being the one that helped out the journalist investigation as opposed to Lardner (played by Sayles himself). In the end, I find that the film does best when letting the players speak for themselves along with its baseball action, with its foundation having quite a few cracks that can make this a hit-or-miss kind of movie. For me, it is a fair single, worth a look if one is curious enough for an old-timey but fair-minded day at an old ballpark.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

February 4, 2019

Leatherheads.


Review #1187: Leatherheads.

Cast: 
George Clooney (Jimmy "Dodge" Connelly), Renée Zellweger (Lexie Littleton), John Krasinski (Carter Rutherford), Jonathan Pryce (CC), Stephen Root (Suds), Wayne Duvall (Coach Frank Ferguson), Keith Loneker (Big Gus), Malcolm Goodwin (Bakes), Matt Bushell (Curly), Tim Griffin (Ralph), Robert Baker (Stump), and Nick Paones (Zoom) Directed by George Clooney (#851 - The Monuments Men)

Review: 
Perhaps the appeal of football is all spectacle. You really do have to be a bit crazy to play a game where the point is try to score points and avoid getting tackled and suffer injury - although you could probably apply that to other sports (namely, hockey). Still, the amount of hype for professional football gets from its stars to its halftime shows can be a bit absurd, depending on the amount of patience one has with football. While football has evolved over the past decades, this can apply to films as well, where now there exists a screwball comedy with 1920s football in the background. The original script was done by Duncan Brantley and Rick Reilly (of Sports Illustrated fame) in the early 1990s, languishing for over a decade before Clooney re-wrote the material to fit as a screwball comedy (going un-credited for the work). The story took inspiration from the exploits of John "Johnny Blood" McNally and the signing of Red Grange to the pros in 1925. One thing that the movie does do well is capture the look of the decade it wants to portray with plenty of production value, and the music from Randy Newman is a fair standout. However, the film feels a bit too muddled into trying to be funny that it never really takes off, falling along the lines harmlessly. You would be better off with The Freshman (1925) when it comes to football and comedy, honestly. The film relies on the trio of Clooney-Zellweger-Krasinski to try and deliver laughs, and they do provide a few chuckles, but after a while you are essentially waiting for the movie to move along, as if watching quirky 20s football (and the offbeat people playing it) would actually serve for more of a focus. While the film may feel a bit too bloated in length in 114 minutes when it gets to its climax with the football game, it is somewhat of a relief.

Admittedly, the best person in the film is Clooney, who seems to be having fun with a role reminding me of a buccaneer for football, not being above using tricks to try and win (or have fun), which I can certainly go along with to a point. Zellweger is fine, and Krasinski is okay as well, but they don't really have much to go on in terms of personality that makes them resonate beyond a cursory glance. The football supporting cast (along with Pryce) seem to generate more interest than the love story, having more energy to it while going through its own type of routines. One film I did think about when watching was Slap Shot (1977), which embraced its old-time approach to its sport while having a charismatic lead that led to better laughs and overall a more entertaining time without needing to try to have it both ways (screwball and sports). The football stuff might have made for a TV miniseries or maybe even just a sketch, but as is this is simply just an average movie that doesn't quite fufill all of its aspirations but will prove just okay if you're into what it tries to sell you.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

January 2, 2019

Slap Shot.


Review #1178: Slap Shot.

Cast: 
Paul Newman (Reggie 'Reg' Dunlop), Strother Martin (Joe McGrath), Michael Ontkean (Ned Braden), Jennifer Warren (Francine Dunlop), Lindsay Crouse (Lily Braden), Jerry Houser (Dave "Killer" Carlson), Andrew Duncan (Jim Carr), Jeff Carlson (Jeff Hanson), Steve Carlson (Steve Hanson), David Hanson (Jack Hanson), Yvon Barrette (Denis Lemieux), Allan F. Nicholls (Johnny Upton), Brad Sullivan (Morris Wanchuk), Stephen Mendillo (Jim Ahern), Yvan Ponton (Jean–Guy Drouin), Matthew Cowles (Charlie), and Kathryn Walker (Anita McCambridge) Directed by George Roy Hill (#962 - A Little Romance)

Review: 
Minor-league hockey must seem like an interesting experience to play in or watch (whether at home or not), whether one lives in the Midwest or in Texas. The screenplay by Nancy Dowd was inspired by her brother Ned (appearing as Ogie Ogilthorpe in the film's climax) and his experience in playing this type of hockey. One of the teams that Dowd had played on was the Johnstown Jets, who had played in four different leagues before folding in 1977 (coincidentally the same year this film was released), with some of the players from earlier teams such as the Carlson brothers serving as the basis for characters in this film, as Nancy Dowd traveled with the team for a month. One of the slogans for the team was "Aggressive Hockey is Back in Johnstown", which certainly applies to this film as well. The film was shot in numerous locations, one of them being Johnstown, Pennsylvania along with three New York areas with accompanying hockey arenas. It is certainly obvious that the film embraces its hockey roots, from the usage of hockey goons (and accompanying fights) to its citing of "old-time hockey" greats such as Toe Blake to its hockey action along with a small-town charm (along with owners who seem to think of teams as a "tax write-off"), along with a few dated things (namely players without helmets).

Slap Shot is a wonderfully entertaining movie, having plenty of raunchy and silly humor while also shining well in its hockey action to make a fairly solid experience headed by a wonderfully game Newman. There is something wonderful about him in this film, having a fun sense of humor and clearly enjoying himself. He has fun in trying to give himself (and his team) something to play for again while showing off some sly charm in balancing his hockey life and his personal life with Warren, who matches him just finely with some amusement. McGrath does well with his time on screen showing some cheesy charm in trying to manage (and recruit) a colorful group like this while having to do such wonderful promotional things for the team such as having them do fashion shows. Ontkean is okay, but the conflict between the old-time/goon hockey styles certainly could have done with a bit of re-tooling, since I find myself getting lost in the admittedly silly nature of the latter style of play more than I care about if he plays dirty or his conflict with his on-screen wife in Crouse, although at least he makes up for it for the most part in the climax with quite a show on the ice. The group of players are pretty amusing, with the Hanson trio (based on the real brother trio of Jeff-Steve-Jack Carlson) being a treat each time they are on screen, whether when seeing them play with toy cars or when watching them on the ice. The gags certainly work more often than not, and while the violence can certainly feel a bit much at times, there is at least some realism to go around to make things not feel too much like a cartoon. The film builds up to a ridiculous but fairly satisfying climax (complete with gestures and a show) that helps make it feel worthy. On the whole, the film is full of ridiculous hockey action along with some salty remarks that certainly still sticks out in the four decades since the film's release, standing as an entertaining hockey movie worth a watch.

Welcome to 2019 and Season Nine, folks. I hope this year results in some enjoyable and interesting films and reviews - can't promise anything too concrete in what to expect, but hopefully there are some interesting surprises in store.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

April 2, 2018

The Longest Yard (2005).


Review #1066: The Longest Yard.

Cast: 
Adam Sandler (Paul "Wrecking" Crewe), Chris Rock (James "Caretaker" Farrell), James Cromwell (Warden Rudolph Hazen), Nelly (Earl Megget), William Fichtner (Cpt. Brian Knauer), Burt Reynolds (Coach Nate Scarborough), Bob Sapp (Switowski), Michael Irvin (Deacon Moss), Terry Crews ("Cheeseburger Eddy"), Bill Goldberg (Battle), Bill Romanowski (Guard Lambert), Brian Bosworth (Guard Garner), Kevin Nash (Sgt. Engleheart), and Steve Austin (Guard Dunham) Directed by Peter Segal (#466 - Nutty Professor II: The Klumps and #826 - Naked Gun 33⅓: The Final Insult)

Review: 
Remember the original 1974 film (#778)? The film managed to generate a good deal of laughs that is finely aware of what it wants to be, complete with a fairly entertaining and brutal game of football, with Reynolds being a key highlight due to his charisma. It may interest you to note that this is the second remake of the original film, with Mean Machine being done in 2001, revolving around soccer. In any case, this is a movie that is mediocre in its approach, not doing anything too new with its material nor being anything too terrible to sit through, but it also isn't anything too noteworthy either. Sandler can't compare to Reynolds in terms of his portrayal of Crewe, not having too much energy nor being particularly funny, but it isn't anything that becomes loathsome to watch, at least. Rock has a bit of wisecracking energy that makes for a few amusing moments. Cromwell does okay with the material he's given. The other inmates are all okay for their moments on screen (such as Nelly and Sapp), even if they are used at times for some cheap gags - for better or worse. The guards don't have much time on screen, but at least they provide themselves to be the necessary foil. There weren't many moments that I got any big laughs from, just a few mild chuckles from time to time, but I can't say that it was consistently funny. It is strange to see Reynolds in the film, who looks a bit tired while serving as a reminder of the contrast between him and the other Crewe; it's just weird to see him star in a remake of a film he did, and I can't imagine that would be the case for something like Deliverance (#975) or even The Cannonball Run (#034). I didn't really get much enjoyment from the gags, but at least the football action is fine to watch. I can't hate the movie nor really give it a ringing endorsement, because it just feels like a middle-of-the-road type of film, where the gags can hit or miss depending on the kind of mood you are in. It won't top the original in any real discernible way, but it also won't be anything offensive to someone's sensibilities. If you're up to watching it, I suppose 113 minutes isn't too much of a chore. For others, I would just suggest the 1974 film.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

February 23, 2018

Miracle (2004).


Review #1052: Miracle.

Cast: 
Kurt Russell (Herb Brooks), Patricia Clarkson (Patti Brooks), Noah Emmerich (Craig Patrick), Sean McCann (Walter Bush), Kenneth Welsh (Doc Nagobads), Eddie Cahill (Jim Craig), Patrick O'Brien Demsey (Mike Eruzione), Michael Mantenuto (Jack O'Callahan), Nathan West (Rob McClanahan), Kenneth Mitchell (Ralph Cox), Eric Peter-Kaiser (Mark Johnson), and Bobby Hanson (Dave Silk) Directed by Gavin O'Connor.

Review: 
Congratulations to the United States women's national ice hockey team, who won the Olympic Gold medal over Canada earlier yesterday, which also served as the 38th anniversary of the Miracle of Ice. In any case, I hope you enjoy this review.

What is there to say about the Miracle on Ice that hasn't already been said over the past 38 years? Particularly for the people that weren't alive to watch on February 22, 1980? Admittedly, there was a television movie based on the events that was released the following year (with starring Karl Malden in the main role), utilizing footage and original commentary from the game itself. The story of how the United States managed to beat the mighty power of the Soviet Union for the first time since winning gold in 1960 is an interesting one for people who dig into sports (which I do from time to time, particularly Of Miracles and Men (2015), which told about the Miracle on Ice through the eyes of the Soviet team members), but can it make for an entertaining film? The answer is yes, in part because of Russell, but also because the movie is honest enough to tell its tale without embellishing itself in too many cliches or anything too fancy. The film focuses itself on Russell and his moments in trying to portray a coach as honest and yet complex man who we find to be an interesting person to watch throughout. He just fits in so naturally, without any doubt to the way he plays it. Oddly enough, the only thing that wasn't particularly accurate was Brooks being friendly with the players (shown by him being at the Christmas party), with one player saying: "We respected him, but I wouldn't say that we liked him". The film's 135 minute pace feels satisfactory enough without being suffocating, and the film certainly has a correct feel that never looks suspiciously off-putting nor distracting.

There is time given to show some of the twenty hockey players that made up the roster, with Cahill and Demsey being fine standouts among the bunch. The players certainly look the part, with the hockey action being quite energetic and intense, looking fairly convincing without any resorting to anything too flashy, with accompanying commentary from Al Michaels and Ken Dryden (who had done the commentary for the original game, with all but the final ten seconds being recreated by the two). Clarkson isn't given too much to do, but she does her part convincingly enough. Emmerich does a fine time with the part he has, feeling fairly useful along with right for the part. McCann and Welsh do alright with the small amount of time they have to speak, but they serve as fair pieces to the film. A slight bit of time is given to show the Soviets, but the movie doesn't resort to trying to make them out to be villainous, instead just showing them and their dominance simply and naturally (except for the final, of course). This is a fine piece of entertainment, striving for satisfaction and achieving its goal without straining itself too hard in part because of a satisfactory cast with Russell doing a highlight job and hockey action that serves as tools to showcase the Miracle on Ice, being as majestic as it must've felt back then that still works now. It isn't anything too great, but it satisfies everything required with flying colors and that is more than enough.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

July 7, 2017

The Ring (1927).


Review #964: The Ring.

Cast: 
Carl Brisson ('One-Round' Jack Sander), Lillian Hall-Davis (Mabel), Ian Hunter (Bob Corby), Forrester Harvey (James Ware), Harry Terry (Showman), and Gordon Harker (Jack's Trainer) Directed by Alfred Hitchcock (#219 - Rope, #223 - North by Northwest, #446 - Spellbound, #447 - Psycho, #450 - Vertigo, #455 - Rear Window, #553 - Strangers on a Train, #800 - Shadow of a Doubt, #910 - Notorious, and #963 - The Lodger: A Story of the London Fog)

Review: 
This was not only Alfred Hitchcock's fourth feature film (along with the second released in 1927), this was also his only film in which he wrote the script all on his own. Naturally, it happens to be about two boxers competing for the love of a woman. It may not exactly be nothing too new in terms of the romance, but the film makes up for it by being nicely executed with its shots and actors. Like with some of the better silent films, it doesn't rely on too many title cards, using imagery within the actors and their expressions to help convey itself at times. Brisson and Hall-Davis have some decent little chemistry together, nothing too cute nor too unbelievable. Hunter is also fairly decent in a somewhat adversarial (though not explicitly villainous) role that works well with either of the two main romantic leads. The rest of the cast are also fairly decent in their roles, not doing too much to standout from the main actors, but also having a fair amount of screen presence. The match at the end of the movie is a key highlight, looking fairly believable (aside from a bit of fast forwarding at times) and being a good place for the movie to end without dragging too long. On the whole, this is a fairly watchable and well conceived movie that certainly holds up, as per the standard for Hitchcock films (or other fine quality movies). Is it one of his best? Not really, but it definitely holds up pretty well on a standard of being fine entertainment.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

January 9, 2017

Rocky V.


Review #895: Rocky V.

Cast:
Sylvester Stallone (Rocky Balboa), Talia Shire (Adrian Balboa), Burt Young (Paulie Pennino), Sage Stallone (Robert "Rocky" Balboa, Jr), Richard Gant (George Washington Duke), Tommy Morrison (Tommy "The Machine" Gunn), Burgess Meredith (Mickey Goldmill), Tony Burton (Tony Evers), and Paul J. Micale (Father Carmine) Directed by John G. Avildsen (#003 - Rocky)

Review:
Ah yes, this one. It has been a while since I talked about the Rocky franchise (#003, #277 - Rocky II, #340 - Rocky III, #597 - Rocky IV, #760 - Creed), so it only makes sense that I review the one that attempted to return Rocky to his roots...and does so with minimal results. It's not the fact that it inverts the formula as it the fact that it's just not that entertaining. Neither Rocky IV or V are good, for varying reasons, with one being ludicrous and the other feeling hollow. The way that the film resets Rocky's status seems cheap, with the brain damage part somehow not clicking, in part because Rocky seems the same anyway, and the climax is a fight in the streets (which goes down the way you expect, sans any idea of Rocky getting more damage). Probably the easiest problem with the movie is the fact that it tries too hard to return to the grit of the first film (while doing an inverse of the rags-to-riches story), without much of the heart of what made that movie entertaining. Obviously this is a movie that tries to end the series with some sort of dignity that the fourth film didn't have, but it all comes off as a throwback with some mold on it. The two stories (Rocky training Tommy and his family drama) don't mesh well, in part because they just feel unfocused.

It only makes sense that Stallone cast his son to play (are you ready for this): his son, ignoring the age difference from previous films. Obviously the two have father-son chemistry, but I didn't really find the son's narrative to be particularly interesting enough to care about. Of course the solution to his problems is fighting (literally every problem in these movies can be solved by fighting), but it just feels superficial. Heck, he even befriends the dude he beats up, because I guess that's how things work in Philadelphia in the 90's. As for the main Stallone, he does a fine job as always, continuing to make Rocky a likable character, though he does have some moments where he experiences some sort of depth, like when he is talking to Adrian about having meaning in his life again by training Tommy. Relating to that, Morrison (an actual boxer) doesn't have much screen presence, never really seeming like someone to care about, with Gant taking most of the villainous role...while playing it as over-the-top as one could do it. I didn't find him to be that great a villain (in part because half the time his pleas for Rocky to fight are rejected by Adrian), and his scenes with Morrison aren't anything special. He definitely doesn't help when the movie is trying to return to its roots. Young is fine as usual, with a bit more importance this time around (for better or worse). It is somewhat nice to see Meredith (playing Mickey again in a flashback) again, even if his scene is there mainly to speed the plot up.

There is a climax, culminating in a street fight...and some messy editing, where it flashes back at times to Rocky's other fights (which occurred numerous times already), which just makes me want to watch any of the other films instead. There really isn't a way to end the movie without the status quo (Rocky still being broke) still being the same unless you kill off Rocky, which apparently was the original plan, before it was changed...and it's easy to see why. Seeing Rocky die would be the ultimate downer in a series all about perseverance and heart. Sure, he wins the fight. So what? The movie's ending can be questioned with that phrase, and there really is no answer. The previous films had some sort of meaning with the way the fights go (even the fourth one, with Rocky's speech at the end), but this one just doesn't feel right. The last scene with the two Stallones (and a credit sequence that takes images from the previous films) is somewhat good, but by then it's too late to make any real kind of impact. At the end of the day, Rocky V just doesn't click right. There's no real punch to it, and it certainly doesn't feel like a proper finale to the series.

Countdown to #900: 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5...

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

December 4, 2015

Creed.


Review #760: Creed.

Cast
Michael B. Jordan (Adonis Johnson Creed), Sylvester Stallone (Rocky Balboa), Tessa Thompson (Bianca), Phylicia Rashad (Mary Anne Creed), Tony Bellew (Ricky Conlan), Graham McTavish (Tommy Holiday), and Wood Harris (Tony "Little Duke" Evers) Directed by Ryan Coogler.

Review
Almost 40 years after the original Rocky, here we are with a spin off (or sorts), with Rocky still playing a role even outside the ring. To be honest, I had no clue on how it would be mainly because I had no clue the movie was going to be made in the first place. The four Rockys I had seen all had varying degrees of entertainment (the first being the best), and I was at least interested in seeing how Jordan and Stallone would do. As it turned out, they both did great. It rises from potentially being mired in cliches to deliver a movie that is flat out entertaining. Jordan and Stallone are excellent together, having a good rapport with Stallone (the only person from any of the past six films) passing the torch onto Jordan. Rashad, though she doesn't have a lot of screen time, is also good to watch on screen. Bellew doesn't get much personality to work with the role he plays, but he does manage to make for an interesting character for Creed to fight in the end, and he certainly looks the part. Jordan and Thompson also share some good scenes with each other that certainly make the movie a little more than just boxing, though admittedly the boxing is excellent nonetheless. It looks really well-done, even including some blood (you can't have a Rocky movie without a little blood). It's a movie all about identity, and by the end it certainly seems to have found a lasting identity and the seeds to build a legacy. I'd love to see more movies about Creed, or even just movies with Jordan in general. This is an engaging movie that manages to evoke fun and the Rocky spirit to make for a excellent movie.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

July 14, 2014

Movie Night: The Bad News Bears (1976).


Review #616: The Bad News Bears.

Cast
Walter Matthau (Coach Morris Buttermaker), Tatum O'Neal (Amanda Whurlitzer), Chris Barnes (Tanner Boyle), Vic Morrow (Roy Turner), Jackie Earle Haley (Kelly Leak), Joyce Van Patten (Ms. Cleveland), Ben Piazza (Bob Whitewood), Alfred Lutter III (Ogilvie), Erin Blunt (Ahmad Rahim), and Gary Lee Cavagnaro (Engelberg) Directed by Michael Ritchie.

Review
At the end of the day, the movie is a look back into how competitive can get about a simple game of baseball. So I figured, give that the All Star Game is tomorrow, why not review a baseball movie? So how is the movie you may ask. I guess it's alright, it all depends on what your memories of being a kid are, competing in sports, or just being a kid. The baseball action is good and all, but the movie's main focus is on Matthau with his troupe of misfits that are somewhat endearing, and somewhat colorful. But is the movie funny? Yeah, it has its moments, I admit that playing the Carmen theme when showing the kids and their "talent" on the baseball field for the first time is oddly hilarious. Matthau is a grouch, but he is a fun guy to watch, especially when trying to coach. O'Neal is interesting to watch, especially when paired with Matthau, such as when they first meet, her selling Maps to the Stars to random passersby. The movie is pretty brutal, especially with its characters, and in the end, nobody wins, everyone seems to have die a little inside, ad they celebrate with beer, so I guess somebody wins. Watch some baseball tomorrow, or revel in some past baseball. Or see the movie, I suppose. Whatever works best.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

June 30, 2014

Movie Night: The Sandlot.


Review #605: The Sandlot.

Cast
Tom Guiry (Scott Smalls), Mike Vitar (Benny Rodriguez), Patrick Renna (Hamilton Porter), Chauncey Leopardi (Michael "Squints" Palledorous), Marty York (Alan McClennan), Brandon Quintin Adams (Kenny DeNunez), Grant Gelt (Bertram Weeks), Shane Obedzinski (Tommy Timmons), Victor DiMattia (Timmy Timmons), Denis Leary (Bill), James Earl Jones (Mr. Mertle), and Art LaFleur (Babe Ruth) Directed by David M. Evans.

Review
Yes, I know. I am aware of this movie's cult status, and I remember watching this movie a long time ago, though I never got to the end, so I get to connect to the past. And baseball films are usually enjoyable, so the movie has a good deal of promise. So how is the film? It's okay. Is it a classic? I guess so, but it all depends on what you define as classic. The Sandlot is slightly awkward (we all were like that once) and slightly fun, though the baseball action is more fun to watch than the interactions of the kids. Some of the cast are interesting, (Vitar, Leopardi, Jones, for all of his brief screen time), but others are just okay. Guiry isn't bad, I get the characterization of the new kid and how he develops, but eh, I still like Vitar better either way. He doesn't get much characterization, but he's fun to watch being the leader of a bunch of kids just playin' ball. The movie is more than just baseball, it's about these kids (and one big dog) and their summer in a time where there were only 20 teams in the majors (which means I can't make an Expos reference until 1969), and when baseball was at its era of dominance. The movie may not be a particularly great movie, but like Babe Ruth (played by a decent Art LaFleur) said, the legends never die.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

March 31, 2014

Movie Night: Angels in the Outfield (1994).


Review #566: Angels in the Outfield (1994).

Cast
Danny Glover (George Knox), Joseph Gordon-Levitt (Roger Bomman), Christopher Lloyd (Al "The Boss" Angel), Tony Danza (Mel Clark), Ben Johnson (Hank Murphy), Brenda Fricker (Maggie Nelson), Jay O. Sanders (Ranch Wilder), Milton Davis Jr. (J.P.), Taylor Negron (David Montagne), Tony Longo (Triscuitt Messmer), Neal McDonough (Whitt Bass), Stoney Jackson (Ray Mitchell), Adrien Brody (Danny Hemmerling), Tim Conlon (Wally), and Matthew McConaughey (Ben Williams) Directed by William Dear.

Review
In honor of Opening Day, I decided to review this movie because...it was easy to find. Of all the teams that deserve to win a pennant, the Angels (Known as the California Angels in this movie, then the Anaheim Angels, now the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim. And they say sports is always logical) were probably not high up on the list (Do the word Chicago Cubs come to mind?) to win one. This is a remake of the 1951 classic, and the first big change is the focus on the kids rather then the manager of the hapless team, which I guess makes it not just a copy of the original. The movie focuses more on...depressing "child drama", which I guess makes it more 90's. But it makes it less about baseball, and more of a boring drama that probably felt sappy in the 90's, which makes you want to yell "Get on with it!", over and over. At least you get some nice shots of Angels Stadium, with the Big A sign and all.

I find it funny that this was released in 1994, the year with the infamous baseball strike (Vive Le' Expos!), and canceled the playoffs. Talking about this movie is sort of boring when baseball is in the air, real baseball (though having an Opening Series, then an Opening Night before Opening Day is sort of annoying), with real meaning. The cast are sometimes entertaining (I wish Glover would get more screen time), Levitt is effective in portraying...a kid, I suppose. It's not too hard to do that (Unless you're Jake Lloyd), and Davis Jr pairs off well with Levitt. Lloyd isn't bad, but if you blink long enough, you'll forget he's there. The baseball action isn't bad (the effects are fine for the time, as I barely noticed this was made only 20 years ago), but this is a mediocre movie that is only notable because of all the rising stars in this movie (McConaughey, Levitt, and Brody), and for being a remake. I hope you have a fun Opening Day, no matter how the team(s) you root for do tonight.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

March 16, 2014

Movie Night: It Happens Every Spring.


Review #562: It Happens Every Spring.

Cast
Ray Milland (Vernon K. Simpson/King Kelly), Jean Peters (Deborah Greenleaf), Paul Douglas (Monk Lanigan), Ed Begley (Edgar Stone), Ted de Corsia (Jimmy Dolan), Ray Collins (Prof. Greenleaf), Jessie Royce Landis (Mrs. Greenleaf), and Alan Hale Jr. (Schmidt) Directed by Lloyd Bacon

Review
It Happens Every Spring was made without the support of Major League Baseball, which is evident immediately, given that all the stadiums are referred to by city (such as Pittsburgh Stadium or Brooklyn Stadium), a practice not really done at the time (Instead, they were referred to by other names, such as Ebbets Field, Forbes Field, Shibe Park, and Sportsman Park (Used by both St. Louis teams for years), though Cleveland Stadium was an exception to the rule that I just mentioned), and all the teams in the movie are referred to by city name in both jerseys and in dialogue. I'd like to think that the team the main character plays for is the St. Louis Browns rather then the Cardinals because the though of having to see the Cardinals win the World Series again even in a movie makes me shudder. So yeah, how is the film itself? If you ignore the fact that the main character essentially cheats to help his team win the pennant and no one bothers to complain, the movie is easy to like. The actors are fine, and Paul Douglas is enjoyable to watch (Douglas also does a good performance in a baseball movie, (#433) Angels in the Outfield), and I guess the movie is alright, even though it's not exactly a great baseball movie. It's certainly a decent movie, and I can see the effort that was done for this movie. Would I recommend it? I'd recommend it along with other baseball movies, such as The Natural, Angels in the Outfield, and Field of Dreams. But oh well.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

November 27, 2013

Movie Night: Field of Dreams.


Review #488: Field of Dreams.

Cast
Kevin Costner (Ray Kinsella), Amy Madigan (Annie Kinsella), James Earl Jones (Terence Mann), Ray Liotta (Shoeless Joe Jackson), Burt Lancaster (Archibald "Moonlight" Graham), Timothy Busfield (Mark), Frank Whaley (Archie Graham), and Gaby Hoffmann (Karin Kinsella) Directed by Phil Alden Robinson.

Review
Being a baseball nut (as I am) will probably make this film even more of a treat for them, but even if you're not a baseball nut, this is still a pretty enjoyable film. This is my first time watching a film that stars Kevin Costner (Though my dad seemed to love watching his films on DVD when I was growing up), and he does an alright job, perfectly awkward in a film like this, and he pairs off really well with James Earl Jones, the two just mesh well with each other. But of course, the two actors who quite nearly steal the show are Ray Liotta and Burt Lancaster, and it's because their presences in the scenes each have just leave a lasting impression on me, and it really is a warming film that forgoes sentimentality it transcends into its own one of a kind of films. Costner joined this film because he felt this would be "this generation's It's a Wonderful Life", and I don't blame him because while it may not be one of the greats, it can certainly be watched any time, any day, and work just the same.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

August 26, 2013

Movie Night: Major League II


Review #444: Major League II.

Cast
Charlie Sheen (Rick "Wild Thing" Vaughn), Tom Berenger (Jake Taylor), Corbin Bernsen (Roger Dorn), Dennis Haysbert (Pedro Cerrano), James Gammon (Lou Brown), Omar Epps (Willie Mays Hayes), Bob Uecker (Harry Doyle), David Keith (Jack Parkman), Takaaki Ishibashi (Isuro Tanaka), Margaret Whitton (Rachel Phelps), Eric Bruskotter (Rube Baker), Alison Doody (Rebecca Flannery), Michelle Burke (Nikki Reese), and Randy Quaid (Unnamed Fan) Directed by David S. Ward (#426 - Major League)

Review
Major League had its shares of laughs, and while it could've been better, it was a good comedy, arguably a classic. Five years, they made a sequel. This isn't as good. It feels like a rehash at times, and while it does have its moments, it's an okay comedy, as it eventually seems to win down in the same way the first film went, but at least this film doesn't get too sappy, which I guess helps...sort of. The film even retains the same "villain" from the first film, though I do wonder if she would've been allowed to own the team again, what with her deliberately trying to sabotage the team last season and all but oh well. The actors do fine, and Omar Epps does an okay job replacing Wesley Snipes from the last film, not too bad. It's an okay film, having some laughs, but not rising above the first film, inspiring more comparisons to the first film than praise for it. But hey, at least Cleveland got to win something, and that's always nice to see I suppose. I love the fact I've reached 444 reviews, and on my first day back at school. Countdown to 450 Reviews: 10, 9, 8, 7, 6...

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

July 20, 2013

Movie Night: Angels in the Outfield (1951).

Review #433: Angels in the Outfield.

Cast
Paul Douglas (Guffy McGovern), Janet Leigh (Jennifer Paige), Keenan Wynn (Fred Bayles), Donna Corcoran (Bridget White), Lewis Stone (Arnold P. Hapgood), Bruce Bennett (Saul Hellman), and James Whitmore. Directed by Clarence Brown (#423 - A Woman of Affiars)

Review
Baseball films have been shown prominently (mostly), such as Cobb, The Jackie Robinson Story, 42, The Natural, The Babe, Major League, ...and The Babe Ruth Story. After I saw the heinously overly sweet "The Babe Ruth Story", I needed something, anything to watch to get it out of my head. And so I decided to watch Angels in the Outfield, and as the film kept going, I realized that while this film wasn't exactly jumping out of the cliche monsters that sometimes plague sports films, this has enjoyment written all over it. It's a kids film at heart yes, but the baseball action is fine, with the players not swinging awfully as Bendix, and this film does have its moments, such as when Douglas' character meets Leigh's, where Douglas gives a reply on a note card with "Boo!" after Leigh criticises his team. I don't know why, but that's what gets to me, and it's a unknown sort of spirit that makes this a passable film. 

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars. 

July 13, 2013

Movie Night: Major League.


Review #426: Major League.

Cast
Tom Berenger (Jake Taylor), Corbin Bernsen (Roger Dorn), Charlie Sheen (Ricky Vaughn), Margaret Whitton (Rachel Phelps), James Gammon (Lou Brown), Rene Russo (Lynn Wells), Bob Uecker (Harry Doyle), Wesley Snipes (Willie Mays Hayes), Charles Cyphers (Charlie Donovan), Chelcie Ross (Eddie Harris), Dennis Haysbert (Pedro Cerrano), and Andy Romano (Pepper Leach) Directed by David S. Ward.

Review
Major League may not bring too much of new things to the table that other sports films like The Natural or 42 have, but it has its own way of trying to reach the level of enjoyment that it mostly gets right. It has its moments of being funny, and while it is sometimes crude in approach, it is excusable because the characters are endearing after a while.  The actors are alright, Berenger and Bernsen do good, Sheen steals the show, but Bob Uecker of all people has memorable moments, even for an announcer, the one liners are memorable It feels dated at times, with the old, now demolished stadiums (Milwaukee County Stadium was used for filming, though it was used only because the stadium that is actually depicted (Cleveland Municipal Stadium) was too busy for filming), the uniforms and other such things, But this film has some charm, it feels close to home, there's always that team that just feels down on times, especially Cleveland teams, and while the idea of comeback is somewhat cliche, there's always something to try and make different about it, and while sports films do run into one another a lot, this breaks that mold, if only slightly.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

June 13, 2013

Movie Night: Youngblood.


Review #397: Youngblood.

Cast
Rob Lowe (Dean Youngblood), Patrick Swayze (Derek Sutton), Cynthia Gibb (Jessie Chadwick), Ed Lauter (Murray Chadwick), Keanu Reeves (Heaver), and George Finn (Carl Racki) Directed by Peter Markle.

Review
Sports films aren't exactly my fortay, but I figured I might as well do one, so why not a hockey film since hockey's still going on with the Finals. That, and I haven't reviewed much of Rob Lowe, or Patrick Swayze. Is this film any good, or is just an 80s relic? Mostly the latter. It has it's weird moments, trying to be comedic that ends up getting in the way of the drama the film also tries to set, being a bit unbalenced. That goes for the hockey as well, which can be good, and Lowe does skate well, but the film then switches to fighting mode, which reminds me an awful lot of Rocky, which doesn't work well. Even though fighting in hockey is commonplace, having good hockey plays is more common, and combined the two just don't mesh. The acting's okay, mostly reminiscent of usual sports film acting. Lowe is allright, not too bad. The film spirals, it has its allright moments but it clunks where it doesn't need it, being disjointed, but mildly entertaining. Countdown to 400 Reviews: 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3...

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.