Movie Review

(In theaters, October 1998) This film will undoubtedly appeal to some. Sugar-sweet moralistic fantasies about the possibility of an afterlife always reach a certain crowd (already satisfied in 1998 with the angel romance City Of Angels) and I suspect that this is where this movie will make most of its money. Me? As a coldly atheistic cynic, I appreciated the clever sights, but thought that it was a pretty good Outer Limits episode bloated to two hours and weighted down by incoherent dialogue and bargain-bin philosophy. Robin Williams is okay, as are Cuba Gooding Jr and Rosalind Chao. Not repulsively bad, or even displeasing, but not really one of the shining movies of the year; even taking “afterlife” movies as a category, Defending Your Life was much better.

(On TV, October 1998) A Die Hard clone taking place during the last playoff game of the Stanley cup hockey tournament. Starring Jean-Claude Van Damme, though that doesn’t really help. As a lifelong hockey fan, it’s clear to me that the writer of Sudden Death has no idea of what’s hockey… (“Sudden Death”, “The save of his life!”) …but I digress. Howlers here and there can’t damage the effect of Peter Hyams’ dynamic direction. Good fun for a late-night movie.

(In theaters, October 1998) I usually have a very high tolerance for bad SF, especially if it can be enjoyed as cheap SF. Soldier started out as a promising prospect: Written by David Webb Peoples (Blade Runner), directed by Paul Anderson (Event Horizon) and starring Kurt Russell, it seemed to be headed for a mix of intelligence, dynamism and coolness. It ends up as a disaster with neither. The script is beyond ordinary, offering no surprises and ever fewer interesting moments. The direction is flat, a shocking thing from Anderson who, despite being a moron (read any interview with the guy) had proved himself to be a visually interesting action director in Mortal Kombat. The only star emerging with his dignity intact is Russell, who despite saying a handful of words (estimates vary between 69 (Russell) and 104 (Edward Johnson-Ott). I counted around 75.) does wonders with what he had. But even that can’t rise above the ludicrousness of the setup (as serious SF, it fails in the first minutes), the cheap-looking sets, the awful touchy-feely song used as montage backdrop near the middle, the boooooring “action” scenes and the simple lack of imagination. I might have accepted this from B-series newcomers with low budgets. But given the talent and money that went into Soldier, the result might be best confined to the garbage planet (*Garbage Planet?*) it’s taking place on.

(On TV, October 1998) Now, can anyone explain to me why it’s supposed to be such a great movie? Glacial cinematography, coma-inducing pacing, painfully obvious plotting, ugly heroine, laughable scenes (the would-be horror showcase scene of the movie sent me in uncontrollable giggles the moment the words “Satan is the father! Hail Satan!” were pronounced) and a conclusion without any real payoff makes this ridiculous movie a relic of the past. It would have been far better as a half-hour “Twilight Zone”, although I doubt Rod Serling would have allowed such silliness on his show. It’s a measure of the movie’s lack of effect that I found myself thinking that real-life witches are unfairly discriminated against by Rosemary’s Baby.

(On TV, October 1998) One co-worker is fond of saying that Risky Business is one of the most subversive comedies of the eighties. He’s right: Not only is the premise (guy starts a whorehouse at home while his parents are gone on vacation) pretty amoral, but the movie makes no attempt whatsoever at any kind of message or fairness. Bordering on soft-porn at time, it’s definitely a memorable film. Unfortunately, that doesn’t quite mean it’s good: Overlong at times, suffering heavily from an infernal Tangerine Dreams early-eighties electro-synth soundtrack (and a Genesis song that was so singularly awful that it managed to make me fast-forward through a nude scene), not really witty in term of dialogues and muddily shot, it’s not quite as good at could have been. On the other hand, Tom Cruise is suitably sympathetic, Rebecca de Mornay is breathtaking and the unabashedly perverted tone is decidedly worthwhile.

(On TV, October 1998) It’s always a good time for a movie in which a monster takes over New York, and this one is quirkier than most. Titled Q because nobody (including me) can spell Quetzalcoatl, this is a low-budget horror film that has a few surprises but few rewards. The basic story (loser criminal discovering monster nest; police tracking down monster’s nefarious deeds) is better that average for the “monster”-type of movie, but it’s also unfortunately quite silly and burdened with laughable effects. Not a lot of suspense either, and not enough of that monster.

(In theaters, October 1998) Hot on the heels of Gattaca, Dark City and The Truman Show, here’s yet another quirky, imaginative film that truly gives hope for Hollywood’s future. What if those 50s sitcom were real, and you could live in them? What if you could change this universe? Pleasantville takes this rather simple premise and runs with it, delivering a scattershot of social commentary that is, more often that not, on target. Superb acting barely takes precedence over a wonderful use of digital effects to show the changing nature of Pleasantville. Without seeming like it, this is actually one of the most pernicious movies in recent memory; one -er- “flaming” visual pun is so obscene that I’m too ashamed to describe it here. I had problems with several elements the conclusion (Writer/Director Gary Ross wrote himself in a corner) until I rationalized them as Pleasantville‘s way of highlight one of its central thesis; uncertainty must be accepted. (I also have issues with the way that few of the other idealized values of Pleasantville are thought desirable.) Thought-provoking, uplifting and simply very well-done, Pleasantville vaults to the top of this year’s crop. Do not miss it.

(On TV, October 1998) It’s a well-known fact that high-profile film project often inspire cheap b-series movies. Jurassic Park spawned Carnosaur and Twister spun off Tornado (with Bruce Campbell) but here, Gridlock is a low-budget TV-movie exploitation of Die Hard 3: With A Vengeance. To wit: Robbers cause mayhem in New York to cover the fact that they’re robbing the Federal Reserve Bank. But instead of Following Bruce Willis and Samuel L. Jackson through New York, we get to see David Hasselhoff as a police officer trying to rescue his fiancée -played by supermodel Kathy Ireland- from the evil robber terrorists. Hasselhoff is actually credible and Ireland is pretty to look at. The remainder of the movie is an exercise on how to film a standard action flick without the big budget, a competent action director or a big budget: While the preposterous story is adequate by the standards of the genre, the final result falls short of even the most average actionners. (Favorite stupid detail: They steal gold and paper money and erase the numbers of both in the main computer. Why not just grab the gold and melt it afterward? Duuuh…)

(On TV, October 1998) This isn’t very good considering the logical plotholes, run-of-the-mill plotting, average dialogue and sophomoric humor. On the other hand, it lets itself be watched quite easily. Few comedies deal with submarines and it’s probably a measure of my fascination with subs that I enjoyed this even despite counting off the stupid mistakes. (Though we get the feeling that the mistakes are intentional and from someone who has at least an adequate grasp of the field.) Lauren Holly, despite being completely useless, is a visual delight constantly renewed (it’s amazing to see the lengths at which movie producers will go to show cleavage in any movie). It’s also kind of cool to see a Village People song used as package for the end credit outtakes, along with bodacious babes in bikinis in the background. A guilty pleasure.

(On TV, October 1998) Michael Crichton’s reactionary novel about female sexual harassment in a high-tech firm was a pernicious page-turner. Written according to Crichton’s usual stellar standards of plotting, accessibility and superficial issue examination, it seemed like a natural candidate for translation on the big screen. Disclosure is exactly what it purports to be; an average thriller with enough anti-feminist elements to make it attractive to the general public. Some moments are ludicrous (the Virtual Reality sequence, the elevator dream), but the remainder is okay. Demi Moore is hot. Some changes from the book.

(On TV, October 1998) This scores high on the giggle-meter if only for the setup, where Jean-Claude Van Damme is revealed to be a policeman from Quebec (!) put in a California prison so that he won’t be recognized (!!) while investigating the deaths of several prisoners. (!!!) From stereotypical lecherous hackers to the final showdown between van Damme and The Guy Who Killed His Partner -including the non-resolution of the mystery,- this is bad enough to make you throw a party every time it plays on TV. Better yet; rent it with Sudden Death and bill your experience as Sudden Death Warrant: A Van Damme Retrospective.

(On TV, October 1998) While this film will never be considered a great movie by any rational criteria, it must be said that it’s considerably enjoyable. One of the purest comic-book movies ever, Darkman blends howlingly funny melodrama with the over-the-top direction of Sam Raimi (Army Of Darkness) and the result is silly but exciting. It’s a shock to see Serious Actor Liam Neeson in the title role. A good late-night movie.