Does anyone remember the title of the movie starring Billy Crystal and it is about the character's relationship with his father? I think Billy Crystal is a doctor or something in that movie. I remember liking the movie, don't know if I'll like it on a rewatch.

"Memories of Me"??

Alan King was just great in that film.

The Big Lebowski, a touching movie about Vietnam and bowling.

I watched World Trade Center for about the 3rd time. Nothing beats seeing it in the theatre though. I know some who say they can never watch the movie. But I feel the movie is more uplifting in showing how strangers came together to help each other. Even knowing what the outcome is I still cheer and get emotional at the rescues. The movie showed the confusion in the beginning, when no one knew the second tower was hit. I felt like yelling at the screen that they were wrong.

The final moments of the movie are riveting. Staff Sargeant Karnes telling Will, "We're the marines, you are our mission" still gets me every time I hear it.

I saw World Trade Center on the big screen. It was the worst film I saw that year.

What I think disapointed me was how in that same year, we also got Paul Greengrass' intelligent and daunty UNITED 93.

When Oliver Stone is no longer the one pushing our cerebral buttons...that's a sign that he's over the hill.

When was Oliver Stone ever pushing our cerebral buttons?

Let me rephrase that....remember when Oliver Stone was worth a shit as a Director?

It's a simple true-life story that could have been set in any building anywhere; its title, specific to 9/11, is only because of the historical proximity to the actual events (it may as well have been called "Towering Inferno", or "Rubble Film"). I agree with you, RRA; United 93 presented a much wider, more intelligent handling of the events in both humane and political terms, and on aesthetic grounds it aped Stone's TV drama (though to compare the films too much would be unfair, with their very different intentions).

To be honest, it isn't horrendous. My problems are thus (written at the time):

Stone's film has no real energy, no real explosive or electric rhythm, no narrative drive. It's not a bad film by any means - in fact it's rather watchable - but it's decidedly ordinary. It looks like a TV movie, viewable to all, with intentions of inspiration and shortcomings in production value. Two moments of mild effect - when the first tower falls, with the men inside, and when the two survivors first hear help above on the ground. It's a conventional film, though, about an extraordinary event; and what is it that makes Nicolas Cage far more enjoyable to watch when he's deliberately and physically disabled under a pile of rubble, as opposed to a pro-active, no-shit member of the emergency services...? Flat.

I ABSOLUTELY agree with you on this point, and if I remember right, I got in serious heat with a BB.Net senior because I had written that I "never made to give a shit about the family's drama," which he interpreted as me disrespecting the real-life 9/11 families....which I absolutely don't at all.

What I thought was weird back in 2005 was how an Oliver Stone cinematic treatment on a subject was the less controversial picture compared to Greengrass' UNITED 93, which had that infamous "Too Soon!" incident in that NYC theatre. Nevermind UNITED 93's trouble with the Screen Actor's Guild because Greengrass had a non-union cast, and if rumors are to be believed, SAG did its very best to blackball U93 at Awards Season, though enough voters came through to land Greengrass a Best Director nod.

The only good thing from WORLD TRADE CENTER to me is that it gave Oliver Stone a rebound of sorts after the great failure of ALEXANDER, and who knows, maybe his controversial W this winter will be his comeback.

hey Irish I just bought my DVD's number 1 and 2 for my collection! (GoodFellas and The Big Lebowski) - by the way, who is that funny guy Mortimery Young?? I've also seen him in the Blood Simple DVD.

I am looking forward to seeing the new X-Files movie, which starts this weekend. They have been very sketchy with the previews and details of the film. Anyway, I've always been a fan of the show and even these years later, I look forward to seeing this movie.

TIS

Good choices my friend. Only a few more to go to catch me (I'm up to 799 BTW) Sorry, I don't know the answer to your question

He's a fictional film historian who gives insightful introductions to the Coen Brothers' films; I believe it's a spoof.

yeah that's what I thought. thanks.

PASSENGER 57 (1992) - **1/2

Action movies like these always have an opening that either displays the badass credentials of the hero, or the diabolical capability of the villain. With PASSENGER 57, it’s the latter where you have Bruce Payne at a cosmetics practice to get some plastic surgery when the FBI busts in. Payne takes a scalpel, slits the surgeon's throat, then jumps out the window of a two-story building, crashing hard into the cafe below without anything to soften his fall...but he gets up and runs away without a scratch. It's such a ludicrous opening, but I kept watching.

Later, this whack job is advised by his attorney to seek an insanity defense, which prompts a beat down until the lawyer is made to utter over and over that his client isn't crazy. Can you really blame Payne though? I mean, I'm sure the admission of mental disease hurts your stock as a free agent terrorist, perhaps because clients may think you're unstable or unreliable, and the guy has gotta pay his bills somehow.

If you went to see action at the cinema in the late 1980s and early 1990s, you already know the plot: Terrorists hijack, civilians held hostage, hero at the wrong place at the wrong time happens to be in proximity, and he kicks alot of ass. What is unique about PASSENGER 57 is that among all the DIE HARD knock-offs, this is arguably the sole blaxploitation entry. I guess I could also count HALF PAST DEAD, but that sucked so fuck it.

Consider how the hero Wesley Snipes is seated on the plane next to a Jewish Grandmother, who mistakes him for Arsenio Hall. It's a quite funny scene of Snipes' eyes during that whole ordeal, and because of the stereotype that white eyes can't tell the difference between those black people. This just me, but both Snipes and Payne should fire their travel agent for booking them on the same flight. "Oh and Mr. Payne/Snipes, I should tell you out of courtesy that the best counter-terrorism expert/airline hijacker in America is also on your plane. Smoking or Non-Smoking?"

Then later when Snipes is thrown off the captive plane during landing, the redneck police rough him up and don't believe him at all because why would a black guy in the middle of an airport be doing but causing trouble, right? In fact, the hick sheriff actually seems to take the white baddie's word for granted that Snipes is one of the terrorists. Sorry dude, but you're a racist dumbass for trusting some evil British asshole over Blade. Then there is the epilogue where Snipes' Caucasian schmuck buddy Tom Sizemore (before he was the druggie who beat up Heidi Fleiss) takes credit for saving the day, while Snipes goes off to score some hot hero sex. But most of all, we get the picture's sole cool one-liner: "Always bet on black!"

Shaft would be so proud.

Yeah I'm rambling here about PASSENGER 57 because it's not just formulaic, its practically a rerun of the Steven Seagal vehicle UNDER SIEGE. Both have heroes that are former governmental warriors who are locked up (Seagal in meat locker, Snipes in bathroom) when the shit goes down, both have female sidekicks, both fighting a lunatic super-hijacker, both take place primarily on a moving vehicle, both kill their adversary in a fist fight, both were produced by Warner Bros., and both in fact came out in 1992. Weird.

But the difference is that while UNDER SIEGE was a pretty good flick, and the king of the DIE HARD clones, PASSENGER 57 is more SUDDEN DEATH in being uninspired as running the genre playbook with the clichés. You have the retired hero who got his wife killed, so he's trying to gain redemption. Payne is a calm quiet generic as hell psychopathic because he enjoys killing passengers, every cop but Snipes is incompetent, he also happens to be an expert motorcyclist, he kills the henchmen one at a time, etc.

It doesn't help how despite being trapped on a plane during flight, and escaping by an elevator, the hijackers easily could have found and killed them in such a cramp limited space. I mean I can buy such sneaking and hiding in a skyscraper or battleship, but this is ridiculous. The whole carnival setpiece sorta comes off as more campy than exciting, and also how did Snipes even know the crooks would be heading there? Hell, why didn't they simply steal a car from the airport parking lot?

That said, PASSENGER 57 is still entertaining in a mindless disposable sort of way, but I won't recommend this to casual viewers. But if you're an action junkie and a fan of Snipes before he went to jail, it's perfect when you're home alone on a Friday night with pizza and booze. Plus, one of Payne's hijackers is a younger Elizabeth Hurley. You know, that pretty British model that couldn't act her way out of a paper bag to save her life, but was admittedly surely hot before she got preggers and disappeared on us. So if you are really really home alone, at least you'll save some money.

But only idiots actually pay for porn, or mess with Snipes.

Those darn federal idiots!

From The Times
April 25, 2008

Wesley Snipes given three years for tax evasion

Wesley Snipes was sentenced to three years imprisonment last night for his “brazen defiance” of the US taxman.

The 45-year-old Hollywood actor, who has starred in films including Blade, White Men Can’t Jump and Demolition Man, was given the maximum sentence possible after prosecutors described him to a court in Ocala, Florida, as a “truly notorious offender.” He did not have to go to prison immediately but must surrender to custody at a later date

Seems excessive.

RRA, how do you decide what movie you will watch next and review? Some of your reviews seem to be of movies that come out of nowhere.

And I'm not complaining. Just curious.

RRA, how do you decide what movie you will watch next and review? Some of your reviews seem to be of movies that come out of nowhere.

And I'm not complaining. Just curious.[/quote]

Oh they really do come out of nowhere.

Sometimes its whatever I've been getting through Netflix (like PASSENGER 57), or sometimes something that happens to be on TV which sparks me to review (like TIMECOP).

Maybe I'm just a sucker for action movies. I mean who else is gonna try to be an aficiondo of such a thing here or at FCM?

Tell you what Blibble....guess what my next review is gonna be, and you get to pick my next review.

Yeah, Blib. Just don't ask him to review PRINCE OF THE CITY.

That's coming!

Come on, you need a 1,000 word rambling from me on how awesome PRINCE is? Its like you writing a 1,000 review of the Bush Administration. Do we really need it?

I kid, I'm just swamped and my next review is a deadline up my ass that's just a pain right now.

Anyone see that "gross-out" stinker Waiting... (2005)? Okay, it wasn't entirely bad -- quite humorous in spots -- but overall meh, compared to American Pie, etc. Tho it will probably often prevent me from sending food back at a restaurant! I can't help but wonder how many of us have consumed things we didn't quite intend to....

Where's DMS in your rental queue, JG? Get to it pronto.

Also, watch The Wire. Or at least rent the first season.

DMS is #5 (less, really, since 21 and The Bank Job are on the waiting list). Been watching subsequent Torchwood DVDs in between other titles...

I added The Wire recently (in the 300's of the queue, but will probably raise it up). Also the new Dr Who (which I didn't know existed) to see what Torchwood background there is...

300 titles in your queue? That's ridiculous.

In fact, that deserves a beating.

A lot of them are multi-disc series titles, so, more like 250

TREMORS (1990) - ***1/2

I love movies when they don't immediately reveal themselves for what they are. If every other horror movie opens with a kill or a scare tease, TREMORS spends its first 15 minutes or so with Kevin Bacon and Fred Ward as roughnecks making a living from clearing out garbage and emptying septic tanks, bitching about wanting to escape from Perfection, Nevada when they meet up with a cute seismologist chick. See if you didn't know any better, you would think that you had mistakenly rented a buddy roadtrip/romantic comedy.

I think a successful genre movie is one that is working with a horror template that we've seen administered a thousand times before, afterwards, and mostly terrible, but still produce something so matinee fresh and infectiously goofy fun. I think a key reason for TREMORS working is that for a 90 minute creature feature, director Ron Underwood lets his film take its time in introducing the characters and visually laying out the geography of this glorified rest stop in the middle of the desert, so that when the shit hits the fan (or more like the dirt), we know where we are always during the narrative, and actually care about the outcome. In other words, this is the Anti-30 DAYS OF NIGHT.

Much like the 1950s Monster movies that TREMORS is lovingly aping, Underwood has us learn the "rules" about these star beasts scene by scene, showing us instead of some goddamn awkward talky exposition. Take when Bacon and Ward try to escape the town the first time around when they come upon a friend of theirs, stuck on top of an electrical tower, dead for three days from dehydration, with a firm finite grip on his Winchester Rifle. What would cause someone to stay up that high for days until they died of thirst? Because they can sense the "tremors" from your footsteps. Later when the duo try to get out again, they happen upon dead sheep and a hat inside a weird crater, which reveals the head of a victim.They can grab and eat you from underground. Get on top of a building or a giant rock, you're okay. They can travel through loose soil, but not solid objects.

You get the point, and grin wide, when Bacon and Ward declare together: Oh Shit!

There are two cool if simple shots that Underwood should be proud of. First, when a car is being dragged to an Earthly grave by the critters, the radio is accidentally turned on. The next day when Bacon and Ward visit the site, they hear the muffled music, dig until they discover the buried grill of the station wagon, with the headlights still on. Second, when someone in the village says that surely the phone company would notice that their lines have been severed, we cut immediately to a company truck with only two hard-hats and some blood stains at the scene. Really, it's hard to believe that the same director would later shoot the atrocious Eddie Murphy flop THE ADVENTURES OF PLUTO NASH.

Anyway, let's admit that the whole concept of the "Graboids" is pretty damn creative for the genre. They're like the midget-size sand worms from DUNE, with snake tentacles reaching out of their mouths, the srength of a bulldozer, but the intelligence of a dog. But the secret reason for them being underground dwellers is that you don't necessarily need to show them constantly to create thrills or tension, and save money on the FX budget. Like the shark in JAWS, just have a fence rattle, a sign fall down, or a building crumble just to know where these unseen pests are at all times.

But the ice-breaker may in fact be the humor. People want to compare this to GREMLINS, but I say it's more in the tradition of THE BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN. With the kills and scares, there is a cheese camp element to them, as if the filmmakers are saying to us, "we're making a thriller here, but if this and that makes you laugh, you have our permission." Or at least that is my impression when Bacon punches one of the snake-tentacles. Plus, he also gives us a memorable if idiotic one-liner: "Who died and made you Einstein?!?"

But the biggest barrell of laughs comes from Michael Gross. His part clearly was meant to mock those survivalist gun-nut types, you know the sort with the wet dream that RED DAWN really would happen? I mean look at the casting of Gross, who was the hippie Dad on FAMILY TIES. Yet with his tongue and cheek demeanor, Gross somehow takes a parody and reverses it into sheer awesomeness.

The best scene in TREMORS is when a Graboid invades his basement, and he and his wife empty every machine gun and firearms they own in their insane arsenal, without inflicting any damage. It finally takes a goddman Elephant Gun(!) through the mouth to kill it. Gross nearly steals the show in TREMORS, and in fact would later become the star of the direct-to-video sequels for TREMORS and even the short-lived television series.

TREMORS is quite a pretty darn good movie, even if I think Bacon's redneck accent is too cartoonishly all over the place for my taste, but Ward is blue-collar money here. The casting of Victor Wong is cool, considering he ruled in John Carpenter's BIG TROUBLE IN LITTLE CHINA and PRINCE OF DARKNESS, but damn did his character have to be the cliche greedy Asian businessman?

Also, if the Graboids are blind, then what is up with the Point-of-View shots of them in the soil?

Rambo (2008)... perhaps the most anticipated action-dramady of the year. Haha, just kidding! But Oy vey. Sure, it gets some points for heightening the Burmese situation, but the rest of it? Ugh... worst effects I've seen in 20 years probably. Lame. ...and this is coming from a fan of many lame films.

ONLY see this if you're (somehow) a HUGE fan of the franchise... or, if the Saw clown says you have to to live. Otherwise, just lob your foot off.