Movie Review

(On VHS, November 1997) Utterly, utterly forgettable movie about yet another cover-up at the highest level of the government… yawn. In fact, only a few days after seeing this movie, I was unsuccessfully trying to remember the ending, at no avail. Suffice to say that this movie reminds one of the term “preposterous”, and that the usually dependable Linda Hamilton is unexpectedly weaker here than usual. Try this for a quote: Shadow Conspiracy redefines an entirely new level of blandness.

(In theaters, November 1997) Calling this a bad movie would be too generous, even though it’s not that bad. One of the few things this film manages to make look good is the original, which was at least a decent example of tremendously entertaining mind-candy (Paul Anderson’s exciting direction, missing here, might be a factor.) If you can make it through the horrible fifteen first minutes, the remainder isn’t so horrendous. But unless you’re really in the mood for this kind of stuff, avoid.

(On VHS, November 1997) Everyone has a few guilty pleasures, and sappy Anime Romances are one of the best around. Pretty potent teenage fantasy material (A video girl materializes, and tries to help her “owner” get the girl he’s lusting after before herself falling in love with the guy) simultaneously undermined and enhanced by the usual Anime tics. Unexpectedly moving at times, but then again I cry at Saturn commercials… The first two episodes are a laugh riot, the second third is effective melo-romantic material but the final hour manages to make a muddle of everything. (Pretty cool symbolism, though.) Once again (see Ghost In The Shell), this manga adaptation feels like half of the relevant material has been left in the original source.

(On TV, October 1997) I wasn’t really familiar with the whole Nightmare On Elm Street series, so my enjoyment of this movie was affected in consequence. What’s so special about Freddy? Who’s that girl anyway? Why should I care for her annoying kid? There’s one scary sequence (the death of the babysitter, predictable but still spooky) and one chilling scene (the script-on-the-computer-screen), but the finale is average (My, it seems we’re knee-deep in phallic symbols, here!), the remainder only shows blips of interest. The shock tactics are predictable (oh no! It was a dream!) and the meta-story element isn’t even near of the much more enjoyable In The Mouth Of Madness. Not good, not bad, not even bad enough to be good.

(On TV, October 1997) Exceptional movie, superb acting, groovy visual style. The initial situation is preposterous, but once past the premise, 12 Monkeys becomes one meanly effective motion picture. Of course, the script is great; how could it have been otherwise from the pen of the Peoples (re: Blade Runner, Unforgiven…)? I see it as an answer to the in-comparison almost-jovial tone of both Terminator movies. It would have been an interesting thing to read, (my criteria for good media SF) and it is certainly an interesting movie to watch. Doesn’t insult the audience, take its time with the characters, packs some impressive emotional power. One of the best SF movies, ever.

(In theaters, October 1997) Average techno-thriller, but any average techno-thriller is better than no techno-thriller at all. Clooney and Kidman are delightful in their respective roles, and a few scenes are just too good to be missed: This is the first movie I’ve seen that more or less has a good grasp of what it takes to correctly disarm a nuclear bomb. Greatly benefits from being one of the most “realistic” (read: mean-spirited) movie in recent memory. Good direction by Mimi Leder, nice “invisible” special effects. Worth a matinee, and certainly the video rental.

(Second viewing, On TV, March 2001) While this film received mixed critical attention upon release, a second look reveals an efficient action film backed up with a solid post-cold-war plot that’s nothing to be ashamed of. George Clooney’s first film breakthrough (well before Out Of Sight) shows him in full command of his trademark mix of easy cockiness and hard confidence. Nicole Kidman is irreproachable as the analyst suddenly plunged out of her depths, without the usual clichés associated with these characters. It’s a shame that director Mimi Leder hasn’t followed up on the dynamic direction exhibited here; the action scenes are models of clarity and sustained tension. The Vienna car chase/demolition derby alone is worth a rental by its nastiness alone. A few budget-induced problems (the unseen opening explosion, mostly) still annoy me, but while The Peacemaker doesn’t really aspire to be more than a good technothriller, it does so exceedingly well.

(In theaters, October 1997) Very cold, but at the same time very interesting SF movie for the high-IQ segment of the movie-going audience. No aliens, no laser pistols, no gee-whiz machinery, no impressive special effects. In other words, the words are important. That’s why it failed at the box-office and that’s why it’s the best SF movie of 1997 along with Contact. Like the latter, it’s an ultimately uplifting tale of human determination and of unusual style. Never mind that the setup is ridiculous, that the story is of early-sixties written-SF vintage and that the instant-blood-test is already obsolete: “There is no gene for the human spirit” says the tagline, and that’s exactly the gist of the movie. This being said, I can understand why less sophisticated viewers would consider this dreadfully boring. That’s good news: for once, a movie doesn’t have to pamper to the illiterate, MTV-afflicted hordes in order to fashion a satisfying movie. I hope director Nichols makes more movies like this.

(Second viewing, on DVD, June 2009): I remembered how great this film was, but I didn’t remember how much of its greatness it owes to its mesmerizing design sense. Because, let’s face it, from a story telling standpoint this is a hollow shell: It stops dead with exposition during its first thirty minutes, takes place in a South California simulacrum with no relation to reality, features amazingly stupid detective “work”, and hobbles from one repetitive situation to another, always playing on the same suspense of discovery. Almost all of its emotional power works by allusions and not demonstration: All the characters seem frozen, and it’s easy to claim that the film’s deeper emotional interest only appeal to space nerds. And let’s not speak of the science. Still: I watched the film in a trance-like state, amazed at the visual design, the mixture of styles, the fairyland stiffness of the world. It’s a fable much more than a science-fiction film, and it truly delivers on its premises when seen as such. For a film that doesn’t survive any degree of scrutiny, it’s still unbelievably convincing. In fact, it uses its own limits as a shield of sorts, and effortlessly evokes the mythical whereas a more realistic approach would have moored it in the past: You can still see it twelve years later and it hasn’t aged a bit. What an achievement. The “Superbit” DVD looks nice, but what this film needs is a special edition with supplements that do justice to the film.

(On TV, October 1997) Lifeless, not really enjoyable “blob from space eats people” flick. Follows standard horror conventions, is too stupid to be believed in, but too competent to be laughable. Better seen really, really late. Effects are beginning to show their seams.

(Second viewing, On TV, April 2020) Watching the remake of The Blob after the original is… interesting. It’s certainly more polished, gory and conspiratorial than the previous one. Not necessarily better, though — Kevin Dillan is no Steve MacQueen, and you almost need an actor of that caliber to ensure that this repetitive monster movie stands out. The theater scene is still a standout, though, and horror fans will be satisfied by how no one dies cleanly in this film. (As for the rest of us: Eeew.) Given the presence of ever-more realistic gore and sadism in killing off the cast, what’s definitely missing from The Blob to ensure any B-movie charm is more humor to counter the grimness of the premise and its execution. I mean — it’s all right if you’re looking from some 1980s horror, but it could have been much more.

(In theaters, September 1997) Audience reaction to this movie will probably hinge on their level of tolerance for… um… gay issues. A very smart, very funny script is backed-up by fantastic acting and unobtrusive direction. Loses steam and gains “meaningful intent” in the second half, but a good time is had by mostly everyone except the most closed-minded. (Be forewarned, however, that the writer Has An Agenda) Not really a good date movie! Random thought: It’s probably a good sign of our evolving society that this movie is rated PG only a few years after the separate matrimonial beds of the puritan TV shows of the fifties…

(On TV, September 1997) Any self-respecting Babylon-5 fan had to watch this movie, only for the nearly-naked scenes of “Captain Ivanova” (Claudia Christian). Alas, Shelley Michelle body-doubles for Christian, but Hexed is still a pretty enjoyable comedy, at times oddly reminiscent of the hilarious, senseless violence of Pulp Fiction. Characters are okay, the comedy oscillates between the slapstick (the Rodney King send-up) and the lame-but-lively repartee (“I forgot to tell you; I’m pregnant” “What?” “Just kidding.”) but while this is far from being a work of art, it’s not a big waste of time either.

(On TV, September 1997) Very stupid, utterly hilarious “horror” movie. The premise (serial killer gets transformed in computer form, kills people using microwaves, heat dryers and dishwashers.) is about as ridiculous as it can get, and the details are about as ludicrous as anything else. Anyone can have several sadistic laughs at the ineptness of this grade-A Z-level shlocko flick: One of the funniest worst movies I’ve seen. Not to be confused with SF-anime masterpiece Ghost In The Shell (1995).

(In theaters, August 1997) Dark, creepy but also surprisingly forgettable suspense movie about giant insects taking over the lower levels of the New York subway. (And, presumably, the world afterward since those pesky insects are pretty much unstoppable, y’know?) Mira Sorvino is quite pleasing to look at as a top-notch entomologist, and director Del Torro sure knows how to effectively create a suspenseful atmosphere. Low points include a letdown finale (earlier scripts reportedly had a more appropriate, if darker, conclusion) and a really annoying subplot about an autistic child. (High points, however, include the killing of sympathetic children and a dead dog in the same scene, so there’s still hope for Hollywood scriptwriters…) A decent video rental for those in the mood for a “bug” movie.