appealing_talent's reviews

Ryan Gosling is the drug dealing 2nd son of a maniacally perverse drug lord mother, who loved her 1st son more and evidently never let Gosling forget it. When his psychotic brother kills at least two prostitutes the head of the police department in Bangkok, Thailand hunts him down and sees that he is eliminated. The mother tries to get Gosling to avenge his death, when others she hired to do so fail. Gosling is a deeply troubled son, who has been unable to cut the symbolic apron strings that strangle his ability to enjoy the 'company' of women in a healthy way.

This film has a great deal of bloody violence and an underlying Oedipal styled subplot, both of which can cause discomfort and uneasiness among its viewers. It's very atmospheric, much of it is slow paced, darkly photographed and contains little dialogue. It's definitely not for the faint of heart, or for those who are expecting a rousing, escapist action flick. Fans of Gosling may not appreciate the flawed character he plays. Where, in "Drive" a movie by the same director, his role is of a strong, resourceful man - this story is of a deeply conflicted and ultimately tragic individual.

To say that this film was a long awaited sequel to the original "Blade Runner" really goes w/o saying. Unfortunately - for me - despite having the lead role played by a favorite actor, this overly ambitious - affectedly grand - movie left me as cold as the frigid replicant who ultimately caused Ryan Gosling's demise. To be fair the special effects were pretty and fans of such will be awed. However, they don't make up for the very thin plot and depressing darkly photographed, somewhat steampunk industrial styled, landscapes. The ultra modernistic interiors were a slightly toned down version of the same style, except for Harrison Ford's hideout. Everyone was busy being either very earnest or very obtuse and it was all done at a slowly plodding pace. Simply put, at the end of this deliberately 'atmospheric' piece, I was completely underwhelmed.

Zachary Scott, who was arguably the king of Film-Noir villainous cads, is up to his old tricks in this dark tale of humiliation and revenge. He seduces and abruptly fires his new secretary, a high strung, vulnerable Phyllis Thaxter. But then she valiantly plans and executes her special brand of retaliation. Her payback is possibly more degrading than the various and sundry ways old Zachary 'bit the dust' in those '40s movies, such as "Mildred Pierce" and "Flamingo Road." Both actors were nothing short of brilliant in their characterizations and the train ride was especially intense. This episode remains my favorite not only because of the story, but also because of the perfectly cast players for those two roles.

Please don't get the idea that this review will be an awful one, due to using that word in the subject line. On the contrary, this episode has turned out to be my very favorite of the whole series. From the very beginning it captured my interest and as the plot unfolded all the elements involved flowed in a natural cohesive pattern. Unlike some of the others, this story was devoid of clever subterfuges that lead into convoluted labyrinths and then out again. There were no 'red herrings' or false leads and since the two guest stars were notable actors it was apparent, right from the start, who at least one of the perpetrators was. The acting was superb and their characters were as perfectly matched, as they were when together years earlier, in the terrific movie "Breaking Away," as father and son. This time, though, they brought a twisted malevolence, which fairly seethed of intense selfishness, greed and an almost palpable lack of humanity. Kudos to whoever thought of casting Dennis Christopher and Paul Dooley in the parts.

There aren't enough superlatives to describe what a brilliant film rendering this version, of the H. G. Wells classic novel, "The Time Machine" is. Rod Taylor and Yvette Mimieux were perfectly matched both acting their parts beautifully and believably well. The supporting cast complimented the stars admirably. The production values were excellent and George Pal's special effects were amazing, especially considering this motion picture was made in 1960. There was plenty of action, some sweet romance and even philosophical food for thought, in this realistic fantasy. I'm not much of a sci-fi aficionado, but this story is an exception. My 1st viewing of the movie was the year it was released. I was 10 and went to a childrens' matinee showing. Through the years I've had occasion to watch it several more times and it has always held up as a true work of cinematic art.

I was particularly moved by this episode primarily because of Gary's amazing story, although Maggie's and Barbara's ordeals were indeed horrific and they displayed incredible courage. That Gary used such ingenuity to not only save himself, but his bravery extended to helping his friend, was what impressed and effected me deeply. In my opinion he deserves a medal for his actions, as he's a bonafide hero.

What can I say to add anything that's not redundant to describe this remarkable cinematic achievement? I asked myself this question before endeavoring to review one of the most satisfying films I've ever experienced.

All I could come up with is that this is what excellent movie making is all about. It's an amalgamation of truly Great talent, magnificent production values and last but not least HEART. The emotion is real, so the story lives and freshly lives on never becoming dated or appearing merely topical.

Garland is at her pinnacle, her strong personality perfectly counterbalanced by Mason's amazingly distinguished and effective performance. They're believable and beautifully compatible as lovers as well as ultimately tragic star-crossed mates.

To go into the impersonal technical aspects of this conglomeration would only break the magic spell it casts. Suffice to say, including a flawless script, sensitive direction and everyone from the capable co-stars, Jack Carson et al, to the last 'extra' everything contributes equally to the wonderful final product.

The musical numbers are uniformly glorious possessing rarely seen honest emotion to rival the often understated, always sincere and genuine dialogue. All in all every element and component combined makes this version of A Star is Born the quintessential classic Hollywood story.

Being a big fan of the late great Judy Garland and James Mason it might not be fair for me to judge this version of the classic Hollywood story.

However, I also admire Streisand's early work before her monumental ego began to overshadow the unique conviction of her immense talent. Kris Kristofferson's rendition of his "Me and Bobby McGee" made a big hit by Janis Joplin still resonates when I hear it and I regard him as a very appealing performer, too.

With all that said my opinion of this movie may actually be unbiased and worth considering. So, here goes... As far as I'm concerned changing the story's basic concept, from actors to musicians, wasn't a bad idea. But, apart from a few good songs the film has very little to offer in the way of honest emotion and the two leads weren't compatible let alone believable as lovers.

I lost interest about a third of the way through and had to force myself, while repeatedly stifling the urge to yawn, to watch the rest. The production was unbalanced and severely flawed due primarily to Streisand's major domination of most scenes and Kristofferson seemed ill at ease pretty much throughout the proceedings. I rated it a (5) because of some of the music.

This rather amateurishly acted variety of less than usual murder stories could have made a really good series, if it had been written a bit better and shot with a more competent cast. Its episodes are presumedly based on actual crimes, but the factual details were purposely and I believe unnecessarily obscured for unknown reasons. The somewhat snarky comments - by the 'host' - add nothing positive to the proceedings and would be best dispensed with. However, after all is said and done, I enjoy learning about many of the cases themselves...

Why this absolutely - 1st Class - biopic was relegated to TV, instead of given a theatrical release, is unfathomable to me. It was a brilliantly acted, particularly by Judy Davis as the adult Garland, and well written, beautifully told story with excellent production values. Such a praise worthy rendering of the legendary singer/actress is certainly better than many, if not most, top notch major motion pictures I've ever seen. Maybe the producers didn't feel Garland's current fan base was substantial enough to warrant a klieg lighted premiere... Your guess is as good as mine. But, whatever the case may be, this is a film made with a great deal of care and genuine Love for its subject. I highly recommend it to any and everyone who enjoyed Garland's work, some of which is highlighted, and for those who are curious about her personal triumphs and tribulations.

I watched enthralled by the lush countrysides, wonderful production values, convincing and heartfelt acting, within the sphere of romanticized ironic events. However, the music, which was an ever-present distraction succeeded in drowning out the dialogue, at times, and when it wasn't doing so it seemed out-of-place in its purposeful attempt to add grandeur to scenes that needed no such addition. In fact, the music's loud volume was so off-putting, in its attempt to unnecessarily telegraph emotional content, that it only added an overblown pretentiousness to the proceedings. With that said, I gave this film a rating of 8, which - without the overwhelming musical score - probably would have netted a 10, for all the other elements it had going for it. Sometimes less is more and if the music had been a subtle background inclusion, rather than an overpowering entity unto itself, I believe this movie would have benefited rather than suffered as a result.

After watching the well-crafted and riveting "Judgment at Nuremberg," I was prepared for a worthy follow-up - companion piece - in "Schindler's List." This over-rated film was a dismal disappointment to me. Anyone with a heart and soul could have felt the suffering and tribulations - of the Jewish population - without the director resorting to heavy-handed dramatic subterfuge, telegraphed to elicit sympathy for their plight. Furthermore, the movie could have been cut by at least an hour and benefited from that alone. Conversely, Liam Neeson's final scene was so over-the-top and downright hammy that it was totally unbelievable to me. All in all I deeply resent this important subject matter treated in such a forced-fed or programmed manner that precluded the audience from forming their own conclusions and allowing us to arouse genuinely deep-felt compassion for the victims of these atrocities... If simplicity is elegance this lengthy, haphazard hodgepodge lacked the class it should have displayed and as a result left me cold. I unreservedly recommend those who actually liked this picture to view "Judgment at Nuremberg" to distinguish the difference between mawkish, self-indulgent directing and true art.

This piece of awful tripe is not only the most cheap, tawdry, seedy and sordid mess I've ever had the misfortune to waste my time viewing, but it serves the added disgrace of discrediting, for me, every critique ever written by Roger Ebert. After seeing this mind numbing pile of trash, penned by him, how can anyone with any common sense, or even a modicum of good taste, consider his reviews remotely credible? I mean anyone responsible for writing such an unappealing and worthless script cannot possibly be qualified to pass judgment on other screenplays or on the filmed presentations of such. Furthermore, The actors, uniformly, suffer from the worst make-up and hairstyles of any movie I've seen and the costumes, as well as the production values weren't much better. The trite and overblown "message" at the end of the show literally made me shake my head in wonder. The bottom line is that this is the raspberry of all time, or the turkey of all turkeys...

Rather than reiterate what others have been lauding as the main strong points of this movie, such as frantic speed, pulsating soundtrack, etc., I want to muse on one particular facet. There is a message beyond the obvious one being made that each and every act we commit can have a direct impact and, essentially, has a domino effect on many lives.

It is introduced with the lyrics: "Do the right thing." to one of the songs within the movie, the exact piece and when it's played escapes me, now. This is a most uplifting and profound lesson I gleaned from the movie. While the first and second episodes were focused entirely on the breakneck quest for money, at almost any cost, the last segment concentrated on a higher force, which added humanity to the plot. Lola put her trust in something, or someone, beyond her realm - in a fervent prayer for help - and the scenario changed from base reality into reaffirmation of faith and thereby became inspirational.

Apart from the "A Little Priest" scene, which was wasted, as the perverse humor that should have prevailed was completely missing, along with one of the stanzas, this was a gem of a movie. Depp's Sweeney Todd/Benjamin Barker although a bit one note and lacking in dimension was still compelling and who knew he could carry a tune? The duet he sang with Bonham Carter, in particular, was quite nicely done, in fact. I think a more boisterous and lusty rendering of Mrs. Lovett and an uplifting ending, with Anthony and Johanna escaping together, would have fared better and wouldn't have detracted from the overall Grand-Guignol theme. But, still, I enjoyed the film and most of the music, which is more than I can say about the majority of Broadway musical film adaptations.

Regardless of what some of the more jaded and pseudo sophisticated critics may say this little film is not only charming, but it has a significant message to impart. A woman, who believes that she should care enough about herself not to give her virtue away to any or every Tom, Dick and Harry, is faced with the dilemma that life is passing her by while she awaits the man of her dreams.

She's 25 and has not yet surrendered her virginity despite the fact that she feels passionate about wanting to find someone who cares about her and who she cares about, too. Furthermore, the element of physical attraction must also be present, in the equation, otherwise she knows it just won't be right. One can blame Disney's romantic renderings, of the happily-ever-after prince and princess fairy tales, for the high standards this woman has. However, by the same token, morals enter into her viewpoint, as well, when dealing with married men who hit on her.

She's simply an idealist who writes and performs music, with longing and intensity, about what she wants and doesn't want to have to settle for less than the beauty of true love. Experiencing one fiasco after another she begins to see how impossible the perfection she's seeking is to achieve. She learns the lesson: "Be careful what you wish for," first hand. And it finally dawns on her that the man she was searching for is not the dramatically handsome, charismatic type, oozing with finesse and savoir-faire, but -instead- the somewhat nondescript and stalwart, supportive friend she's loved all along...

The ensemble of actors are uniformly real and believable in their parts. Michael Harris, in particular, playing a famous composer who equates women with food, is very attractive and sensitively seductive as the engaging cad who deflowers the leading lady. The tunes and lyrics, to the songs Marla Schaffel sings, are soulfully written and performed movingly, with great pathos. I highly recommend this film to everyone who has ever yearned for love and for those who continue to do so.

Despite the radiant beauty of its hopelessly misguided leading lady and solid performances by the entire cast I'm truly stumped as to why this film gained such popularity and a cult following. The story was, in my opinion, boring and overly long. The characters, other than the tortured husband, were a bunch of worthless nitwits, who lacked any dimension or depth of feeling. Why is it that instead of finding the ending tragic I simply felt that a couple of people, who caused a great deal of pain to others, wasted their lives and my time were put out of everyone's misery? What a dismal disappointment this film, which I had looked forward to seeing, turned out to be...

I had heard so much hype about this movie and the leading character's performance. When I saw it I wondered what all the fuss was about. The dialogue was unrealistic, as young people in small rural towns do Not talk like that and the 'quirky' characters were boringly pretentious, rather than endearing. The sarcasm was Not clever or funny and the characters were strictly two dimensional. Ms. Page is very cute and spunky, so that must be why her less than stellar performance was lauded. Too bad the controversial out-take, with the neighbor, whose furniture was moved to Bleeker's lawn didn't make it into the film. It would have woken a few people up, but I guess most film makers take the safe route rather than boldly put themselves out on a limb. Refraining from rocking the boat seems to be the latest trend in churning out family fare, nowadays... Ugh!