Reviews

I saw the DVD today and was so enthralled, I watched it twice. I sort of knew the story but since this event occurred during the beginning of the media venerated clinton administration; the whole story was never explained. The movie only makes a passing reference to the major reason why 19 soldiers died needlessly. Clinton and his minion, les aspin refused to allow light armor and c-130 gunship support for the troops; so delta force and the rangers were left to fend for themselves against a rampaging horde of somalis.

Hollywood would never say anything to disparage clinton so we are left with a cryptic statement regarding "Washington" refusing the aforementioned mechanized support. The fact of the matter is that if the soldiers had went in with support, the sad event would never have occurred.

This is clearly not what any good clinton-left winger want's to hear. That doesn't mean it isn't true.

I usually don't go into the politics of something but this needs to be said.

Now back to the movie: visually the movie is stunning, the cinematography and battle scenes are amazing. War should never be depicted as something glamorous; it is bloody and brutal. The violence in the movie is absolutely positively necessary.

I have heard 2 major complaints about the movie, one that the characters are not well developed and that the movie is one sided and racist.

Making some type of central character with a love story and other Hollywood clichés would truly detract from what this movie is about. It is about a group of soldiers fighting for their lives, not some inance piece of fluff in which the battle takes second place to some ridiculous love story.

The movie is one sided to an extent. It is not about the Somalis; it is about US soldiers. I agree that it would have been nice to have them explain themselves. Is it racist to point out that the US went in to help these people and had it's proverbial hand bitten. These people do not value life as most people. The Somali's statement to the effect that killing is negotiation is emblamatic of their belief system. If they valued life, they would not practice middle age tribalism. 1000 Somalis died in the raid; I have heard ad nauseum about those people. What about the 300,000 Somalis that starved to death, are those people not worth as much as the 1000 terrorists who died? Think about that.

Oh, by the way, have you noticed that the comments from the UK and Europe are overwhelmingly negative? Interesting isn't it? I saw a few comments from Denmark. What the hell does Denmark have to contribute--besides something rotten?

Finally, this is a story that needed to be told in a gritty, brutal way.

A 9/10

Uncle Buck is a great movie. John Candy (God bless you--we miss you) gives his character the warmth and humor that only he can. I don't think anyone else could pull this role off. The plot is straightforward; a dysfunctional family gets into a bind and Uncle Buck, the shiftless uncle comes in to babysit the children. Buck is initially introduced as an irresponsible slob without a plan but he becomes the loving uncle. When Buck goes the house to watch the children he becomes very responsible right away. It is too much a curve ball too soon. I think a little buffer between the initial introduction of Buck to when he starts to become responsible would have been helpful. This is a relatively minor quibble. The other quibble is the language, it should have been toned down a little. The famous Q and A scene with McAuley Caulkin and Candy is hilarious.

My favorite scene has to be when Buck is talking to Bug when Bug rags on Buck's car. "Have you ever heard of a tuneup?-hee, hee, hee ,hee? Hee, hee, hee have you ever heard of a ritual killing? hee, hee, hee Again, this would have been hard to pull off for anyone except Candy.

Jean Luisa Kelly is excellent as the angry, acerbic tongued teen. Amy Madigan has a small role; but she still manages to add something to the story. A great turning point is when Buck is going to take to take the children to a horse race but stops when he realizes what he is doing. The transformation of Buck is then complete. There are some great ending scenes. Overall, I give this movie a 9.9+++++/10. Please see it.

I won't go over the plot. I would have liked a little more explanation of the aliens and their effect on humans. The white devil is plain weird. I don't think the movie works on that level. The first 45-50 minutes of the movie is great with the evaluation of the ship and the implications of the alien presence. The actual results of the presence are a little disappointing. This is a major problem with the movie. That being said, I have the DVD and periodically watch this movie. I liked Andrew Keir's Quatermass and James Donald's Romey. Julian Glove is good as the pompous Breen. The sacrifice that Romey makes is neat, nobility still exists. Barbara Shelley doesn't have much to do in this movie. Is it just me, or is she really HOT? Overall, I really liked this film. A 7/10

Son of Godzilla is one of those weird movies which inspire strange feelings. The story is unique, no Godzilla doing his typical destruction. The story centers on the very human relationship between Godzilla and his son, Minya. This movie really touched me on this level. Some scenes really stick in my mind. The great scene with Godzilla teaching Minya how to shoot radioactive fire comes to mind. There is a real bond that comes out. When Minya is confronted with a monster, i.e. a bully, Godzilla makes Minya fight his own battle but is always there to back up his son.

Godzilla protects Minya and teaches him lessons; and in one of the climactic scenes, the son fights for his father's life; this is poignant. The scene at the end of the film in which father and son embrace to huddle from the cold is touching. If you divorce this from the typical Godzilla movie, what you are left with is a movie about a very close bond between father and son. I think I'm probably the only one who appreciates this movie on this deep a level.

One question: What Hollywood movie has a positive view of a father and son relationship?--- This movie made me very emotional, go figure. In short, if you want to see a typical camp Godzilla, look elsewhere. If you want to see something with emotional content; see this movie

8++++++/10

This movie was skewered by the critics as unfunny and unoriginal. I love this movie. It is not laugh out loud but it has it's moments. We see flashes of Mike Myer's brilliance in it. To see Myers play his father with that pompous ethnocentric Scottish lilt is worth the dvd alone. The funniest scene is when the father relates his conspiracy theory.

The best lines in this movie are when Myer's and his cop buddy discuss Mrs. X (which should have been the title of the movie; it would have played out better). Tony says "Charlie, does Harriet even know the lines of "Only You"? Charlie replies, I don't know we haven't reached the all too critical only you phase of our relationship, so I'm afraid I can't be much help." You have to appreciate context to appreciate the deadpan delivery of these lines. Nancy Travis is sooo cute. She has the Sandra Bullock effect. Travis makes you think, h'm she could actually be my girlfriend. It is that fresh genuineness that very, very few actresses have. Anthony Lapaglia's interactions with Alan Arkin are hilarious.

I have to give a thumb way up for this movie. Give it a chance, it will grow on you.

A 7/10 movie.

The modern day Robin Hood. This show is a classic. James Bond without the gadgets, or over the top criminals are here. The Saint was the work of Leslie Charteris; an Asian-American writer who penned many books and his character came to life in many 40's B-movies. There was even a show; with Vincent Price as the Saint. The defining Saint was of course Roger Moore's Simon Templar. A suave, sophisticated jet setter who always was available to do a good deed. His character had an edge; a perception at least, of an international rogue. He was first and foremost a man with a strong sense of right and wrong and would do anything to make things right. The Saint ran from 1962-1969 and is still beloved and with good reason. Roger Moore does the Saint with a flair and the supporting characters are always well defined and twists and turns of the plot are always there. There was an informal ensemble cast and many of the same actors play different characters. I had mixed feelings about Inspector Teal (Ivor Dean), he is always duped and his character, although well played, was a bit of an idiot. Still Inspector Teal had some charm. The series had recurring writers including my favorite: Terry Nation. (For those Doctor Who fans, Terry Nation is of course, the creator of the Daleks). Harry Junkin was the writer of the more fluid episodes.

Anyone who appreciates mystery, intrigue and well played characters, has to appreciate the Saint. The Saint gets 9.9/10 stars.

I saw this movie late night on HBO or something like that several years ago. The sheer stupidity of the concept just hit me several days ago.

A group of misfits from school get taken to vietnam for a covert operation? Huh?

I can just see the ads for the operation, study cooking hard or otherwise we will plant you on the Ho Chi Minh trail. The story is typical old Hollywood formula, a group of ragtag misfits who hate each other, come together, bond and save each other's lives. Ho hum.

What amazes me is that someone wrote this script, someone looked at this script, and said you know this could be a good movie to make. So, they went to the production company and studio and they said, you know this is such a great idea, let's give you several million dollars to make it. And wa la, we have a movie.

Michael Dudikoff is as wooden as ever and the rest of the cast is just creepy. To give this 3 stars is a crime.

To be generous, I would give it 0.5 stars out of 10.