rate the last movie you saw

[Jedbu]

TED: 7.5/10 (see my opinion on the page about its opening weekend)

THE PATRIOT: 5/10-saw this film when it originally was released and really loved it but watching the Blu-Ray of the Extended Version was taken with how LONG it seemed. Williams score is still very pleasing to the ear, and Ledger's performance is even better than I remembered (I have been taking a second look at his work after watching THE DARK KNIGHT recently-still one of my all-time favorite performances) but DAMN that film drags and whenever Gibson makes a snide comment about anyone I have to wonder what group he was channeling. It is probably Emmerich's best looking bit of direction, but that isn't saying much.

THE ARTIST: 9.5/10-aside from my quibble about a nitrate fire being much more of an inferno and anyone within 50 feet being dead within minutes from the fumes, this film is incredibly accurate in depicting the era, that it is in the correct aspect ratio and even the right font for the intertitles and just a wonderful film all around. The Blu-Ray is so much better than the DVD...

[Paul MacLean]

It is probably Emmerich's best looking bit of direction, but that isn't saying much.

At the time this film seemed a new step for Emmerich, and indicative of a desire to direct more serious, less escapist fare. But I guess not, as things turned-out.

I only ever saw it once (in theaters), and was very impressed at the time. I've been meaning to revisit it. While I admired and enjoyed it, one thing that struck me about The Patriot was its conspicuous similarities to the screenplay for Revolution -- precocious son joins the colonial army against the wishes of his father (a widower), father rescues son from British captors and gets drawn into the cause himself. Both films also climx at the Battle of Yorktown.

[AndyDursin]

While I admired and enjoyed it, one thing that struck me about The Patriot was its conspicuous similarities to the screenplay for Revolution -- precocious son joins the colonial army against the wishes of his father (a widower), father rescues son from British captors and gets drawn into the cause himself. Both films also climx at the Battle of Yorktown.

Paul it's a great point and it's interesting because even though they share plot similarities, they couldn't be any more different -- THE PATRIOT being a rousing, "patriotic" film whereas REVOLUTION is a more liberal "deglamorization" of the American Revolution (which all of its benefactors in this new Blu Ray say failed because it came out during the Reagan era) with a character totally indifferent to what's going on around him. Granted there was a small percentage of colonists didn't care one way or the other about what was happening, but quite obviously others did, and the two films are starkly different in terms of their perspective because of their lead characters and outlook. Very interesting study of contrasts there that makes for a fascinating 'double bill'. (Personally I think we need more films about that time period!).

I was always a big fan of THE PATRIOT. Caleb Deschanel's gorgeous cinematography is outstanding and often looks like one of those old Revolutionary paintings come to life. Williams' score is also, for me, one of the last times we got a true "John Williams" type of score -- that love theme is beautiful, and the main "Patriot" theme is glorious. I also agree with Jeff the extended version slows the film down a bit more, but in general, it's an excellent film IMO -- probably more the work of Robert Rodat (who also wrote Saving Private Ryan and Falling Skies among other projects) than Emmerich, who decided mostly to make lame disaster movies afterwards.

Anyway, thanks for bringing it up, I might even break out the Blu-Ray this week! (It's also on sale for $10 at Amazon)

[mkaroly]

STAR TREK III: THE SEARCH FOR SPOCK - 5/10. I have always been somewhat disappointed with this film, so I tried my best to approach it with new eyes when I put the Blu-Ray in the player to revisit it. After the excitement, suspense, and performances (with a powerful ending) in STAR TREK II, III still comes up short in my opinion. I liked that the film was more "intimate" in its atmosphere - it seemed to me more of a "family" centered picture (ie the Star Trek family) that focused on the loyalty and commitment the Enterprise crew had with each other. It didn't need to be an action packed film (and it wasn't). I also felt the Katra ritual was effective (including the music). And there were moments of subtle humor that I enjoyed.

However, I felt that Nimoy's vision for the film to be operatic in scope (emotionally and visually) didn't quite happen, which is why the film still doesn't work for me. First, there were the performances; I felt most of them were very reserved and low-key for something attempting to be more operatic in scope. At times Shatner was so reserved that I felt as though he was not really "in" the performance (though I will admit that I felt his performance at hearing of David's death was effective). The music, overall, was also very sluggish for me. Again, I thought the music for the Katra ritual hit the nail right on the mark, but the rest of the music was just "there" for me. The film has a dated, 80s soundstage look to it as well, and I was not really feeling the savagery and antagonism of the Klingons (for the most part). I can't say it is the worst film in the canon; I just don't think overall that the film delivers on the emotional aspects of its story. I actually found the documentary footage of interviews and Nimoy's commentary to be more exciting than the actual film itself.

[AndyDursin]

It has its moments but I agree with you Michael. Watching it again a few months ago, you can totally understand why they wanted to go OUTSIDE, off sets, and lighten the tone for IV. Completely understand it. Even Horner's score is on auto pilot (which is also why I had no issue with Rosenman being brought in for the cheerful and lighter Voyage Home)

[Monterey Jack]

The Towering Inferno (1974): 8/10

[AndyDursin]

Quick thoughts on this week's Warner Blu-Ray releases (full reviews will be up later this week):

OUTLAND 8/10
One of Peter Hyams' better films houses one of Sean Connery's finest non-Bond performances. Well made with a good amount of suspense. Hyams' script requires a suspension of disbelief in some places, but between Connery's magnetism, ALIEN-like set design and a tense Jerry Goldsmith score (not one of his great works but certainly serviceable), OUTLAND is a solid sci-fi/western hybrid. Warner also finally does the movie right on Blu-Ray -- the prior DVD was 4:3 and mastered off the laserdisc transfer -- and this effort is fully remastered in 1080p with an excellent DTS MA soundtrack. Hyams' commentary, newly recorded for this release, is also insightful and well worth listening to.

ALTERED STATES 6/10
Bonkers Ken Russell adaptation of the Paddy Chayefsky novel (Chayefsky had his name removed from the screenplay credit) is an unpleasant affair for the most part and is essentially two movies: one, a tedious, dry, talky scientific drama, the other a crazy "mad scientist" visual trip that plays more to Russell's strengths. Not an easy watch for me, but its impressive visuals, John Corigliano's avant garde score (again, not easy listening, but certainly effective in the film), and the conviction of the performances by William Hurt and Blair Brown (at the height of her on-screen appeal) make it recommended viewing for sci-fi fans -- though its hard-core appeal is probably an acquired taste. Warner's BD has a fine transfer and soundtrack, and just the trailer for an extra.

BRAINSTORM 7/10
Another troubled film, this will probably get more play now that the police have just ruled Natalie Wood's death as 'inconclusive'. Douglas Trumbull's interesting sci-fi thriller doesn't entirely work but remains watchable for two reasons: one, Christopher Walken's intermittently wacky performance, and two, James Horner's excellent score. The movie is disjointed and uneven, and you can sense the reports of Trumbull having lost control of the actors -- and created a tense set -- from some of the dry "dramatic scenes" in the picture, where Walken looks like he's improvising while Natalie Wood and Cliff Robertson (among others) appear as if they're in a different movie altogether. The way Trumbull captures the "brainstorm" scenes -- going from 1.78 to 2.35 -- is lost somewhat on the small screen, but Warner's BD does replicate the shifting aspect ratio and preserves its intention by pillarboxing the non-anamorphic content with black borders on all four sides of the image. Good transfer and soundtrack, with the trailer offering some unused special effects footage.

COMA 7.5/10
Sturdy Michael Chrichton thriller with Geneviève Bujold and Michael Douglas likewise gets the HD treatment from Warner this month -- only the trailer is included as an extra, but the transfer is DNR free and looks quite good.

[AndyDursin]

MAGIC MIKE
8/10

I have to confess I didn't want to see this but I owed Joanne from CABIN IN THE WOODS. Turns out this is one of Steven Soderbergh's better, and more likeable, films -- an interesting character study of Channing Tatum's veteran stripper soul searching for something more, and young protege Alex Pettyfer's immediate attraction to the fast living lifestyle. Though set in a male strip club, the film isn't particularly raunchy and doesn't have much sexual content either -- the characters are appealing, the performances laid back (McConaughey is terrific), and there's good chemistry in the relationship between Cody Horn (quite cute) as Pettyfer's older, more responsible sister and both her on-screen brother and Tatum. Soderbergh even throws a bone to the guys by having geek media icon Olivia Munn chip in an early topless scene. (And two bonus points for Soderbergh opening up the movie with Saul Bass' '70s Warner Bros. logo too!).

[mkaroly]

STAR TREK IV:THE VOYAGE HOME - 10/10. This movie holds up really well and was a breath of fresh air in the series after III. I love the humor in it...and I loved how the different members of the Enterprise got to interact in groups and act outside of normal boundaries. I didn't think the story was that far-fetched either; it was nice to see Shatner play up the suave, ladies man Kirk in this movie as well. Rosenman's score was pretty good too.

Overall, the movie was loose, fun, and it appeared that everyone was having a good time making it. It's hard for me not to like this film...I know a Trek fan who doesn't like this movie at all; he feels that the humor was too obvious, and that the "fish out of water" concept was too cliche and brought cheap laughs (I hope I'm representing him correctly...lol...). I disagree with him on that and believe that the humor served the film and the characters well. I don't think the film ever crosses a boundary into "cheese"; rather, as I said earlier, I think it holds up well and is a fine addition to TOS film franchise. I have to give it a perfect score since I honestly can't think of anything about it I dislike enough to complain about.

[AndyDursin]

STAR TREK IV:THE VOYAGE HOME - 10/10. This movie holds up really well and was a breath of fresh air in the series after III. I love the humor in it...and I loved how the different members of the Enterprise got to interact in groups and act outside of normal boundaries. I didn't think the story was that far-fetched either; it was nice to see Shatner play up the suave, ladies man Kirk in this movie as well. Rosenman's score was pretty good too.

Overall, the movie was loose, fun, and it appeared that everyone was having a good time making it. It's hard for me not to like this film...I know a Trek fan who doesn't like this movie at all; he feels that the humor was too obvious, and that the "fish out of water" concept was too cliche and brought cheap laughs (I hope I'm representing him correctly...lol...). I disagree with him on that and believe that the humor served the film and the characters well. I don't think the film ever crosses a boundary into "cheese"; rather, as I said earlier, I think it holds up well and is a fine addition to TOS film franchise. I have to give it a perfect score since I honestly can't think of anything about it I dislike enough to complain about.

I love the film also Michael.

It worked brilliantly with an audience. It's lighthearted, fun, upbeat, joyful -- and FELT alive especially after its immediate predecessor. Really when you think about it, TMP, II and III were almost entirely shot on sets -- seeing the crew go outside really for the first time in the entire series was a breath of fresh air all by itself. So many of the classic Trek stories had to do with time travel, and IMO they managed to come up with a wonderful script that was playful and fun, with a strong (yet never overbearing) ecological message, and that had no villain...and didn't need one. It also effortlessly tied up the loose ends of III in a way that was really quite remarkable, considering how much of III WAS those loose ends of II.

To this day it still is -- with the exception of the Abrams film -- the only Trek film to really score with crossover audiences and appeal to a mainstream viewers beyond the hardcore Trekkies. It was one of the highest grossing films of 1986.

And for me, Rosenman's score is an asset. It works splendidly in the film -- it's upbeat in a way that Horner's "sea-faring" approach isn't. I've never bought the argument either that Horner should've returned for IV for "continuity reasons." It's a different film, and a different tone, in IV -- one which Horner's wonderful, yet dramatically heavy (and occasionally melodramatic) music would've clashed with. I just have never imagined Horner's theme or that type of scoring working with what Nimoy wanted to achieve (and did, brilliantly) with The Voyage Home. He and Rosenman were on the same page. I also confess I loved the ending with the crew returning to the Enterprise -- Rosenman's music is just so ideal there, and the end credits montage served the picture well also. That last scene always manages to get me a bit choked up!

[Eric W.]

I also confess I loved the ending with the crew returning to the Enterprise -- Rosenman's music is just so ideal there, and the end credits montage served the picture well also. That last scene always manages to get me a bit choked up!

Agreed. That ending sequence really is what the best of Trek is all about if you had to encapsulate it into a few moments. I miss that Trek very badly.

[Paul MacLean]

BRAVE
(spoilers below)

I was really looking forward to this film and wanted to like it. And indeed it has many positive elements -- particularly a fabulous lead character, Merida, a tomboy and skilled archer who is appealingly feisty (and, yes "brave"), and beautifully rendered with her mane of blazing red corkscrews.

Unfortunately, the actual screenplay is a huge letdown, and never does anything really interesting or unique with the character. The set-up is wonderful -- sure, the idea of a blue-blooded young woman who rejects the idea of a pre-arranged marriage is an old chestnut, but I was confident the film would take this in a new direction. It didn't though.

The ensuing story is basically a re-hash of old cliches (and not-so-old animated films). The "hero's journey" which Merida must undertake is lame -- furious at her mother for imposing an unwanted marriage upon her, Merida purchases a witches' spell, which she hopes will change her mother's mind, but instead turns her mother into...a black bear. So Merida's big task in the story is to sneak "mum" back into the castle and repair a tapestry depicting a family portrait (which Merida tore-up in anger earlier in the film), which will reverse the spell. That's pretty much it.

So we have a bit of Mulan (I jokingly refer to the film as "MacMulan"), a bit of The Lion King and a bit of The Emperor's New Groove. Moreover, the character of Merida's father is basically a clone of Stoick the Vast from How to Train Your Dragon.

One of my main interests in Brave was the Scottish setting, but even that feels tacked-on. The highlands are beautifully rendered in the film, but really, there's nothing about the story which is intrinsically Scottish. Brave could just as easily have taken-place in England, Ireland, Wales, etc. (in fact I kind of wish it had taken place in Wales -- we've never had a movie like this set in Wales, which is a land rife with legends and folklore).

The film is also too frenetic for me, and often feels rushed. I realize it was made for a a generation of ADD kids (but aren't these the same kids who gleefully sat through all those 180-minute Harry Potter movies?). And despite this frenetic pace the actually becomes tedious, because there are few "reflective" moments to offset the more propulsive ones, and one becomes numbed to the action and suspense after a while.

Patrick Doyle's Gaelic-flavored score is one of his better ones, and the scenes of reconciliation between Merida and her mother are genuinely touching -- a fleeting indication of what the film could have been. Some fabulous vocal talent is on display as well -- Emma Thompson, Billy Connolly, Robbie Coltrane, Craig Ferguson (and even Patrick Doyle himself voices one of the supporting characters). But overall Brave is a disappointment considering the overwhelming appeal of the leading lady, and the film never lives-up to its possibilities.

[AndyDursin]

Paul, great write-up! I've seen that type of response echoed in several reviews of BRAVE...not to mention the whole "turning into a bear" thing was handled in Disney's own (and ill-fated) BROTHER BEAR not all that long ago!

I think it speaks to a larger point that the whole "CGI animated kid" genre is starting to fall into a rut; collectively, they're taking fewer and fewer chances with plenty of sequels and frankly lame films coming at audiences. MADAGASCAR 3, ICE AGE 4, a slew of Pixar sequels and 3-D Disney re-issues, a bunch of tepid Dr. Seuss adaptations -- parents are probably not just being exhausted by them all, but given the box-office response, it looks like kids aren't as jazzed either. BRAVE did its usual Pixar $225-$250 million gross but it's been a while since any Pixar film has done something for me (yes, I admit that I did find Wall-E to be overpraised; ditto for Ratatouille, which was just okay) and broken through to NEMO-like popularity. All of these movies seem to hit the ceiling at $200 million -- parents bring their kids because they "have to," not because they want to (though ICE AGE is going to be lucky to do much north of $130 million -- looks like the franchise has run out).

PARANORMAN looks refreshingly off-kilter (and apparently it's pretty good), but you just know it'll be lucky to do CORALINE-like levels of box-office revenue.

[mkaroly]

...but it's been a while since any Pixar film has done something for me (yes, I admit that I did find Wall-E to be overpraised...

I'm glad someone else in the world didn't find that film to be everything the critics were saying it was. I thought it was an awful film with a horrible score from Thomas Newman (pains me to say that since I really like his stuff for the most part). I still don't get what people saw in WALL-E.

[AndyDursin]

...but it's been a while since any Pixar film has done something for me (yes, I admit that I did find Wall-E to be overpraised...

I'm glad someone else in the world didn't find that film to be everything the critics were saying it was. I thought it was an awful film with a horrible score from Thomas Newman (pains me to say that since I really like his stuff for the most part). I still don't get what people saw in WALL-E.

I liked the character and thought he was appealing -- but the film itself I found pretentious, and I hated both the eco posturing and "consumerism" critique that was so hypocritical coming from corporations like Disney that it left a bad, bad taste in the mouth. Agreed that Thomas Newman's score did nothing for the film either.