Home Movie Reviews

Speaking of Smith, I liked him the best in the first six or seven episodes. He was a competent scientist, able to save Maureen's life when she responded badly to the suspended animation. It's hard to reconcile that Dr. Smith with the spineless ninny he later became in the second and third seasons.

I wonder if My Friend, Mr. Nobody, will still be my favorite? How will the characterizations stack up in these more enlightened? times. Maureen was a doctor of some kind but I don't remember seeing her do much of anything but housework. Penny was cool, Judy was just there like a Barbie doll. John was what every leader should be, Will the young warrior eager to prove himself, and Don argued a lot.

I can't wait to see these episodes again and all of the aliens!

Another great company is Paramount, and I hope they will soon release the original Mission Impossible TV series on DVD.

A VERY HAPPY CUSTOMER FROM THE UK!

Newman, in an Oscar nominated role, is Frank Galvin, a cynical and alcoholic ambulance chaser who is tossed a bone by old friend Mickey Morrissey (Jack Warden) in the form of a personal injury suit. A young woman went into a hospital, owned by the Roman Catholic Church, was given the wrong anesthetic, became comatose, and is never coming back. The idea is that Frank will do the paperwork, accept the settlement offer, and go back to sinking into oblivion. But circumstances convince him to get his day in court and go for broke.

One of the key dyanmics of this film is that even as Galvin has sunk so low as a lawyer, his opponent, Ed Concannon (James Mason, also deservedly nominated for an Oscar) represents one of the most corrupt large corporate law films in film history. Concanno will literally do everything possible to defend his client, as we see over the course of the film. Clearly the goal for Concanno is not justice but victory, while for Galvin the two become one in the same. Mason's performance is as strong as Newman's, mainly because Mamet has written some great scenes for each actor's character. But then, think of what is involved to make Newman the underdog in a major Hollywood movie.

The flaw in the movie comes when we learn that while Concanno has an army of associates as well as a large law firm and the weight of the local archdioesce behind him, Galvin might actually have the truth on his side. The case comes down to the claim of a proverbial last minute surprise witness as to what "really" happened and exactly what was the mistake that made the young woman brain dead. This becomes more than a case of contradictory testimony but one of contradictory records as well. At this point the every ready Concanno pulls out the appropriate legal precedent to have the piece of evidence thrown out. The judge agrees, Galvin throws a fit, and the verdict comes down to what sort of an empassioned speech our heroes gives in his closing.

The only problem is that the rule is wrong, and even viewers whose legal background consists of several seasons of "L.A. Law," "Law & Order," "The Practice" or even "Ally McBeal" can probably spot the flaw in the judge's reasoning. Even if they cannot come up with a sound legal basis for overturning the ruling, they will recognize on a fundamental level that this is just not right. I have every reason to believe that the twelves jurors true sitting in judgment of the case recognize the sense of injustice as well and just might have their minds made up before Galvin's closing argument.

Granted, most viewers are probably not as offended by this plot device as I am, especially given the mesmirizing performances of Newman and Mason. But I cannot get away from the idea that the flaw robs Newman of his climactic moment. Given the facts of the case there might not be any way around that particular legal predicament, but that would be a crime of a different nature.

In 1803 Thomas Jefferson Purchased the Louisiana Territory from Napoleon. Jefferson Comissioned his friend Merriwether Lewis to explore this new territory. Being a naturalist, Jefferson wanted Lewis to record all of the nature of this new area. His main purpose was to discover the northwest passage.

In 1804 Lewis and his partner William Clark set out along the missouri river. Ken Burns does a great job of capturing the beauty of this area. The Buffalo herds today were not any where near the size of the herds when lewis and clark first saw them. They also saw prarie chickens as well as prarie dogs. Lewis sent a couple of prarie dogs back to Jefferson.

Lewis and Clark never found the northwest passage, but they returned as heroes. Ken Burns includes what happened to Lewis and Clark after their journey, including the tragic suicide of Merriwether Lewis. The journey of Lewis and Clark was a major accomplisment for the young United States.

The best part about this documentary, however, is the characterization--not only of Lewis and Clark, but also of their men. This film portrays them as a closely-knit family, a band of brothers. And, most importantly, it shows that they were ALL heroes, down to the last and weakest of the men. Lewis and Clark are portrayed as the extraordinary individuals and talented leaders that they were, but the ugly side of both men is also apparent. Lewis and Clark were human, and this is one of the things that makes them such spectacular models of American spirit and courage. This film helps us to see Lewis and Clark, as well as Thomas Jefferson, as the great heroes they were.

Like Burns's documentaries on Mark Twain and the Civil War, this film successfully conveys the emotion, the feeling of the Lewis and Clark expedition. This is much more than just a rambling of dry historians or a rattling of dates and facts, this is a story. Most importantly, it is a true story, told in a true manner, one which will give inspiration and courage for many generations to come.

It was with rather guarded expectations that I picked up this first season as I really don't expect much from them. Usually the characters are yet undefined and I thought the storylines were written with "we may not be returning next season" in the background. The first seasons of Simpsons, Friends, even Star Trek TNG, for me, emphasized this point.
Fortunately, I was very very wrong.

The first season of Cheers was quite the surprise by offering a totally different type of experience that from the sitcoms that I had been used. While I view modern sitcoms as pure comedies (enjoyable, but far from moving), the first seasons of Cheers had a great balance of comedy and romance. While the latter seasons with Cheers was a great laugh, I don't think I ever pulled for any one character and simply enjoyed the stories for what they were worth. However, with the first season, I thought the Diane and Sam story line was done brilliantly and I actually found myself genuinely hoping that the two characters would get together.

The Diane and Sam story line seemed much more enjoyable... pleasant than latter stories between Sam and Rebecca. In my view, Sam and Rebecca was pure laughs and while I certainly did laugh at their various exploits, now that I have watched the first season, I definitely don't think it has the same sentimental value as the Sam and Diane storyline.

While I don't think there are too many people such as myself who jumped on the bandwagon late. But for those people, and I guess anyone, I would definitely recommend this DVD. It has certainly showed me that Cheers did not develop into one of the greatest sitcoms of our time, but it started out that way.

Although it drags a bit (maybe should have cut 20 minutes or so) I found numerous humorous moments in the movie (especially the Hitler parody with the beach-ball globe and duck hunting). There's a serious from-the-heart speach at the end, one that's very much out of character (or in character, depending on how you look at it), and, although it lends gravitas to the parodies beforehand, I think it would have been much more appropriate (and scathing to all political nonsense) if it had been done in character.

Anyways, The Great Dictator is a fun movie, that serves as a good introduction to Chaplin (at least, I'm eagre to see more, especially Monsieur Verdoux and Modern Times). The DVD has some nice goodies too, so it's worth a purchase if you want to build up a library, but I can't see myself wanting to watch this again for a long while.

Valentine (Irene Jacob) is a fashion and photography model living in Geneva. One night while driving, her car hits a dog, which she subsequently takes to the vet to be patched up. From the address on the animal's collar, she tracks down the pet's owner, a retired judge (Jean-Louis Trintignant), who has no interest in keeping the dog. As a matter of fact, the man has little interest in life whatsoever except to eavesdrop on the wireless phone conversations of his neighbors. Slowly, however, the chance encounter between Valentine and The Judge grows into a platonic friendship. The potential for other random encounters swirls around Valentine. Some may happen; most will likely not. But this one occurred, and both participants are the better for it.

RED must be the last film of the trilogy seen. At it's conclusion, a most improbable coincidence brings together the major characters of all three. The lesson of BLUE, WHITE and RED in the aggregate appears to be that life is a series of coincidences, and the potential for personal growth from any connection between one or more individuals is a mine of great richness if one cares to work it. Humans are reputed to be a social species. However, the trilogy is perhaps best appreciated by a "people person", who relishes the interaction of daily encounters whether random or not. I'm not that sort (much to my wife's perpetual disgust), so my regard for the series is muted.

I was prepared to give RED three stars until the conclusion, after which I boosted it to four. I recognize the ability of the film, and the trilogy, to stimulate opinionated discussion, which, as long as it doesn't degenerate into name-calling and fisticuffs, is a swell thing, especially over pizza and beer.

RED, WHITE and BLUE also makes the point that there's commonality in the experiences of varied individuals. In each film, the major character observes an old person struggling to insert an empty bottle into the elevated aperture of a large, curbside container for recyclables. Only in RED does the protagonist (Valentine) give aid. Whether there's more to this symbolism or not could be the starting point of another discussion. It only indicated to me that Valentine was the more generous and less self-absorbed of the three.

I liked RED and its predecessors, but am not such a profound thinker as to regard them as Great Cinematic Contributions.

John Wayne always played himself in his films. I don't know whether he could 'act', because the characters he played were always the same. I loved him and the stories he played in.

This was probably his best. I loved the Rooster Cogburn parts as well, but this one was, I think, his best.

A tired old gunman discovers he is dying of cancer. In fact, Wayne WAS dying of cancer when he made the film, which makes it the more poignant.

The supporting cast was excellent as well, each in their own role, and the casting was superb. Ron Howard fit the role of a snot-nosed kid who eventually developed some character, and Lauren Bacall was perfect as the widow--at first outraged, and finally sympathetic to Wayne. Hugh O'Brien was great as the conniving gunslick gambler, and Richard Boone was perfectly cast as a rotten bastard. I never cared for him in the part of Paladin, in the series, but this part was made for him. Harry Morgan acted the part of the marshal as if it were written for him.

All in all, this was a great film, and a fitting end to the great John Wayne's career.

Joseph (Joe) Pierre

author of Handguns and Freedom...their care and maintenance
and other books

This final film of the Duke could not have been more fitting. Wayne plays an old gunfighter who's dying of cancer. He knows he's dying, and tries to live out his final days in peace. The real tragedy of the story is that no one will let him--he is constantly harassed by would-be heroes, newspapermen, and people seeking to play a part in the death of a legend. The role is a different one for the Duke--he doesn't play the tough-as-nails cowboy this time--and yet he seems to fit it perfectly.

This is perhaps the most fitting farewell of a Hollywood legend conceivable. No matter what people think of him, few can deny the everlasting impact that John Wayne has had on American society. This film is the last hurrah, the blaze of glory. Wayne's character, and Wayne himself, senses the end of his era, and goes out with style.

Episode 79:Power Of The Spirit: As Goku gathers energy for the powerful Spirit Bomb, the Ginyu Force battles Yamcha, Tein and Chozou on King Kai`s planet!Can Piccolo stall Freiza long enough for Goku to launch the ferice blast?

Episode 80:Transformed At Last: Goku has finnaly defeated Freiza by launching the Spirit Bomb. But as Freiza quickly stops their celebration by returning, it seems his reign of terror has narrowly surived! By defeating Piccolo and Krillin, Goku has powered up to the limits of his power:Super Sayin!!!!!!!!!

Episode 81:Explosin Of Anger:As Gohan carries the nearly eliminated Piccolo away from the battlefeild, Super Sayin Goku confronts Freiza! Does the horrific alein stand a chance of even clashing his energies with the now unstoppable Goku? Or is his superior oppenet going to crush him to dust?