I've never been a big WIND AND THE LION fan, Connery is great but the movie is kinda blah -- and I'll be honest -- I've never been crazy about Goldsmith's score either. I realize half his fans at least consider it a classic, but I'm not in that half

ANDROMEDA STRAIN is better IMO but it's still very dated...haven't seen it in a while and haven't had much of an inclination to do so.

AndyDursin wrote:I've never been a big WIND AND THE LION fan, Connery is great but the movie is kinda blah -- and I'll be honest -- I've never been crazy about Goldsmith's score either. I realize half his fans at least consider it a classic, but I'm not in that half

ANDROMEDA STRAIN is better IMO but it's still very dated...haven't seen it in a while and haven't had much of an inclination to do so.

The love theme is okay, but the rest of the score is so-so.

COMA - 7.5/10. Some of the dialogue was dumb, and at times the script undermined Bujold's character (I honestly found it hard to believe that such a smart character could be duped by Dr. Harris), but I was very entertained and thought the movie was creepy and effectively suspenseful (though a bit cliched). Glad I finally watched it. Jerry's score is excellent.

I Love You, Man: 8/10

It looks like Apatow, it feels like Apatow, but it actually has no Apatow involvement whatsoever (aside from Apatow regulars like Paul Rudd and Jason Segel in the cast). That said, this is the best "imitation Apatow" comedy to date, expertly mixing sentiment and silliness. "SLAP-A-DA-BASS!"

John Johnson wrote:

AndyDursin wrote:I've never been a big WIND AND THE LION fan, Connery is great but the movie is kinda blah -- and I'll be honest -- I've never been crazy about Goldsmith's score either. I realize half his fans at least consider it a classic, but I'm not in that half

ANDROMEDA STRAIN is better IMO but it's still very dated...haven't seen it in a while and haven't had much of an inclination to do so.

The love theme is okay, but the rest of the score is so-so.

Y'know...I've never been huge on it either. In terms of technique its spot-on, but it doesn't move or thrill me nearly as much as some of his other scores. Of course the performance isn't great either.

And I'll always wonder what the score would have been like had MGM permitted John Milius to hire Basil Poledouris to score it.

BIG CITY BLUES (1932) Other than "Three on a Match" (also 1932), I have yet to see a B-movie pack more into a 60+-minute running time than this one. Eric Linden (probably best known today for playing the soldier who gets his leg amputated in "Gone With The Wind") stars as the naive youngster who goes to New York and within hours has fallen in love with a chorus girl, throws a room-wrecking party at his hotel ($8.00 a night!), is systematically fleeced of his dough, and winds up on the lam as a murder suspect. There's also a great sidestep as he encounters a rich older woman with a pencant for younger men (it's not subtle, but the bit works, mainly because Linden is so convincing as the inexperienced lad-- his character has absolutely no idea what she's after -- and the older woman character is nicely fleshed out, considering she only has about five or so minutes of screen time). There's even time for a nightclub number. The rush of city life is nicely portrayed though the use of montage, and also through the introduction of characters like the above-mentioned lady; they show up, influence the turn of events, and then disappear into the crowd -- you never seen them again. I had taped this off TCM a while ago, but if it shows up again, check it out. Linden is quite good in the role -- he was about 22 when this was filmed and looks immaculately innocent next to the other people he encounters -- and Joan Blondell is wonderful as the chorus girl he falls for. Prime example of a pre-code programmer. Wait till you see the book one of the chorus girl is reading!

QUO VADIS - 10/10 as technical achievment, but 5/10 on actual overall movie. Beautiful film with amazing sets, wonderful performances from Ustinov and Genn, great score by Rozsa. However, the love story really irritated me. The history of the persecution of Christians during the time of Nero is dramatic enough without a bland, stupid love story. The last 30 minutes or so of the film were a train wreck in my opinion. Loved it for the spectacle, but thought they went too far in the wrong direction with the story to make it more dramatic.

THE GEISHA - 7/10. Decent film that made me think of Mizoguchi's STREET OF SHAME, though I prefer Mizoguchi's film. Hard core tear jerker drama that plays like a TV movie, but I thought it was effective. God acting from everyone. Hard to watch at times.

A Very Brady Sequel - if you get the chance, rent this. The main flaw is there isn't much of a story, but the character interpretations are quite funny.

The Pessimist wrote:A Very Brady Sequel - if you get the chance, rent this. The main flaw is there isn't much of a story, but the character interpretations are quite funny.

I thought this sequel was terrific. Whereas the first film had a little too much of an edge and is actually as dated now for its '90s grunge "modern setting" as it is parodying the '70s, VERY BRADY SEQUEL just riffed the original series, and was a much more confident -- and funny -- film as a result.

Loved Gary Cole, and most of the performances were spot-on too.

SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE - 10/10. Honestly, great movie. Very entertaining with solid performances. I felt the movie was sincere and just an outstanding feel good story that handled flashback sequences well. Never got too outrageous in any way. Well done, and well deserving of the praise it has received from the majority of people out there. Well worth your time.

Hard Boiled (1992): 10/10

This is the first of John Woo's Hong Kong productions I've seen, and it won't be the last. A serious "Wow" from beginning to end, an action-lover's wet dream. Shame that, Face/Off aside, he's never had an American production to match it.

mkaroly wrote:SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE - 10/10. Honestly, great movie. Very entertaining with solid performances. I felt the movie was sincere and just an outstanding feel good story that handled flashback sequences well. Never got too outrageous in any way. Well done, and well deserving of the praise it has received from the majority of people out there. Well worth your time.

See I told you!

(Not you Michael but the others who were skeptical. I think this movie is tremendous).

I've been going through the Blu-Rays of DR.NO, FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE and GOLDFINGER over the last week -- really sitting down and savoring them.

Not only is the sheer fact of watching them in glorious (fully restored) HD a sight for sore eyes, but damn, I keep forgetting HOW GOOD all of the early Bond films are...before an excess of gadgets and effects (like the later Connery and Moore films)...while also still not taking themselves too seriously (like the Craig films). Taut, well written, splendidly performed -- these early films are dated in some regards but I think they remain the pinnacle of the entire series. GOLDFINGER is still the greatest of them all for me, finding the balance between what the early movies are, and what the series would eventually become. (It's a balance the Craig films still need to find, IMO).

Granted, I'm a lifelong Bond fan who grew up on the Moore movies and still appreciate them for the escapist, at-times campy extravagant fantasies that most of them are -- but the early Connerys remain the best of them all.

I also can't recommend the Lowry restorations enough. They look great on regular DVD but seeing them in full HD on Blu-Ray is where you really can appreciate and see the work they did on those films. Just amazing.

I watched REAR WINDOW again the other night. I was amazed at how much better it is than most thrillers/mysteries made since. One could argue that it is "dated" (because it arguably would not work in our age of air conditioners and cellphones), but none of that interferes with the film's effect, which keeps the viewer riveted.

The sure don't make 'em like they used to.