Category: Reviews

  • ‘Airplane!’ is still funny in ‘Don’t Call Me Shirley! Edition’ DVD

    Julie Hagerty (right) co-stars in 'Airplane!'
    Julie Hagerty (right) co-stars in ‘Airplane!’

    Regardless of the up and down successes of their following movies, Jim Abrahams, David Zucker and Jerry Zucker created a bonafide classic with Airplane!. This unique comedy was starkly different than any other that had come before it, loaded with gags in nearly ever frame. So loaded that if you don’t laugh at one gag, just wait, because another will arrive in about five seconds.

    Airplane! was also unique because it was a parody. It poked fun at the overload of airplane- and airport-centric films that were abundant in the 1970s. But what makes this film original, along with this trio’s other comedies, is how the actors never waver in being honest and sincere. Like when Leslie Nielson delivers the famous, “Don’t call me ‘Shirley’” line, he does it with a straight face. There’s no winking or goofy looks, the humor is in the dialogue and the delivery, right where it belongs.

    The film is about a doomed airplane and its passengers. The main character is Ted Striker (Robert Hays), a troubled Air Force pilot who suffers from post-traumatic stress due to a deadly mission during the war. His girlfriend is a stewardess on the flight (Julie Hagerty), who tells him prior to taking off that she’s leaving him. He quickly buys a ticket to be on the plane with her, hoping to change her mind. But in mid flight, the crew and passengers begin to get sick due to some bad fish, and Striker must get back behind the throttle to save himself and the rest of the fully-loaded plane.

    The story may sound kind of dramatic, and that’s because it’s largely based upon the 1957 film, Zero Hour (Yes, there really was a film where bad fish endangered the flight). However, elements of other films, such as Airport 1975, are also used and parodied. I actually didn’t know a lot of this about Airplane!. I always knew it was a parody, but not of a specific film (Zero Hour), or that many of the shots were framed to specifically match that 1957 movie.

    That was a large part of the fun I had in watching Airplane!. Through the commentary and snippets of behind-the-scenes interviews and deleted scenes, I learned a lot about the making of the film and what went into developing the jokes. I remember hearing once that Pete Rose was originally meant to play the role that ultimately went to Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, but I didn’t know that David Letterman had screen tested to play the role of Ted Striker. It’s always fun when you can go back to a movie you’ve seen so many times and gain an new insight into it. It’s like watching it for the first time.

    It’s also funny to think that a movie like this was shopped around to numerous studios, all of which turned it down. But that’s often the story with films like this, because they are so different and original at the time.

    At first, I wasn’t all that happy with the manner in which Airplane!: “Don’t Call Me Shirley!” Edition was set up. All the behind-the-scenes information is packed into the movie itself, so to access them you have to watch the movie. There’s the commentary, which features producer Jon Davison, along with Abrahams, Zucker and Zucker. This is pretty fun to listen to, largely because most of the stories they tell take place in the first half of the film. They are then largely quiet during the second half, something they joyously poke fun at themselves about. Then there’s the Long Haul Version of the film, which includes deleted scenes, interviews and more. If you watch the film in this format, a little icon appears on screen and then takes you into a brief featurette. Then there’s the Trivia Track, where little bits of information pop up on screen as you watch. Some of the information in these different options are similar, but all of them are fun.

    My problem with it is just that you’re forced to watch the movie in order to see them all. You can’t view the interviews and deleted scenes separately. This isn’t terrible, but can get a little frustrating, especially if you’re not in the mood to sit and watch the film two or three times in a row.

    Either way, between the information you’re given and the beautiful presentation of the film, I can’t say that the Airplane!: “Don’t Call Me Shirley!” Edition is a waste of time, because it’s far from it. It’s one of the best editions of a classic comedy I’ve seen, and I was more than happy to give it a double viewing just to watch the bonus material.

  • ‘Bill & Ted’s Excellent Collection’ is the perfect package for a pair of perfect classics

    Ted (Keanu Reeves) and Bill (Alex Winters) with George Carlin in 'Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure'
    Ted (Keanu Reeves) and Bill (Alex Winters) with George Carlin in ‘Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure’

    If ever there was a pair of movies that deserved better treatment than a simple throw away onto DVD, it’s Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure, and to a lesser degree, Bill & Ted’s Bogus Journey. And finally they are getting it today in a special 3-disc set.

    This new box-set includes both movies in their original DVD release packages, along with a third disc filled with… well, “excellent” bonus material. This third disc provides a behind the scenes look at the making of both films, as well as a few featurettes about the art of the air guitar and more.

    But for me the highlight was getting to watch these two movies again. Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure is goofy, but fun. Bill & Ted’s Bogus Journey isn’t nearly as good, but has a few good qualities and manages to make you laugh from time to time.

    The first film introduces us to Bill S. Preston, Esq. (Alex Winter), and Ted Theodore Logan (KeanuReeves). The two slackers are clearly not the sharpest knives in the set, and are in danger of flunking their history class if they don’t get an A on their final report. In that report, they must detail what famous historical figures would think of the present day (which in this case is San Dimas, California, 1988).

    However, these two goofballs will someday form a band that will change the world, leading to an ultra-peaceful society hundreds of years later. In order to preserve that society, Rufus (George Carlin), is sent back in a time machine that looks like a phone booth to help Bill and Ted pass their class. If they fail, Ted will be shipped off to military school, and the future will be completely destroyed.

    Armed with the time machine, Bill and Ted decide to gather up as many historical figures as possible, including Socrates, Billy the Kid, Abraham Lincoln and Napoleon, and expose them to modern day life. But things go wrong when these famous people get caught up in today’s society and basically go nuts. Bill and Ted must then round them up and race against time to get their report done on time.

    Is it silly? Yes. Does the time traveling concepts explored in the film make sense? No. But Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure is still funny. You can’t help but like Bill and Ted’s innocence and charm, and how they interact with all the historically famous people they encounter. Sadly, this film did give us Keanu Reeves, but I think it’s also the role that has forever defined, him because no matter what movie he’s in, he still sounds like Ted.

    My favorite moment in Excellent Adventure has always been the brief time when Bill and Ted go to the future. They emerge from the phone booth/time machine and are looked upon like gods. As people arrive to see them, the three leaders of this society begin playing air guitar. The music is terrific in that scene, and in a film that is largely silly, it’s this lovely moment that I always find touching.

    Bill & Ted’s Bogus Journey is another story. This sequel lacked much of the innocence and fun that made the original so enjoyable. In this one, its five years after the original and Bill and Ted are living on their own. They’re struggling to get their band off the ground, and look to marry the two princesses they met during the first film.

    The two have the opportunity to become famous at “The Battle of the Bands”, a televised event featuring all sorts of musical bands competing for a record contract. But Bill and Ted’s Wyld Stallyns aren’t exactly good. In fact, while the two princesses can actually play, Bill and Ted never really learned.

    But it is during this event that Bill and Ted change the world, and an evil time traveler from the future wants to stop them and remake the future in his own, dark image. As such, he sends two evil robots back in time to kill Bill and Ted. The robots succeed, and the two slackers take a wild trip through the afterlife, facing off against the Grim Reaper, the Devil, and even God in order to get back to the living and save their band, the princesses, and the humanity’s future.

    Obviously the story takes a much darker turn that the original’s light-hearted romp through time. And while I think the story is interesting in that it doesn’t simply rehash the original, the difference in tone really makes the movie less enjoyable. There’s no sense of fun in Bogus Journey. Sure there are funny moments, but the story is more twisted than goofy, and the laughs are few and far between.

    Visually, Bill & Ted’s Bogus Journey is unique. Some of the visuals are more stylized than the original, and the art direction is clearly more impressionistic. And while I liked some of the designs, I thought the futuristic outfits — such as the garbs they put Rufus in — were pretty stupid.

    It’s not so much that Bogus Journey is a bad movie, just not as enjoyable as the first. It gets kudos for being different, but I think it went a little farther than it should have with the tone.

    The bonus disc in this three-disc box set is filled with some cool stuff. “The Original Bill & Ted: In Conversation with Screenwriters Chris Matheson & Ed Solomon” is pretty cool in that it details the evolution of the script and the two characters. It’s amazingly revealing, but does go on a bit too long. “The Most Triumphant Making-of” Documentary is also great, and is a little more honest about the second film than you normally get in these kinds of featurettes.

    Those are the two main extras, and there are several other smaller ones that are also fun. “Hysterical Personages” discusses the different famous historical people featured in Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure; an interview with guitarist Steve Vai; and a lesson in air guitar by Bjorn Turoque & The Rockness Monster, along with a few other things. The first episode of the Bill & Ted cartoon series is also included, but is kind of goofy.

    This was a DVD collection that I was really excited about, because I hadn’t seen either film in years. I think it could be argued that without Bill & Ted, movies such as Dude, Where’s My Car? and Harold and Kumar go to White Castle would not have existed. I’ll leave it up to you to decide whether or not that’s a good thing, but it would be wrong to not acknowledge that legacy.

    There is talk of a sequel in the behind the scenes documentary, but I’m not sure how real that’ll be. Honestly, I find it hard to believe that Reeves would step back into a role that he’s been trying to escape for more than a decade. But I would still line up to see it, should they decide to make Bill & Ted 3.

  • 2005’s ‘Amityville Horror’ remake isn’t actually all that bad

    Ryan Reynolds is haunted in 'Amityville Horror' (2005)
    Ryan Reynolds is haunted in ‘Amityville Horror’ (2005)

    With this review I’m not going to get into the details of how this film differs with the original. It’s been years since I’ve seen it and that wouldn’t be fair. And while this is yet another remake in a year of remakes, I wanted to rail against The Amityville Horror. To tell you it was another stupid attempt to rehash something you’ve already seen and does very little with it.

    Well, I’ve got good news and bad news. First, the good news: The Amityville Horror is a creepy, enjoyable horror flick. Now the bad news: It didn’t suck, scoring one more point for the Hollywood moguls who think making remakes is a good idea.

    I can’t stand remakes, but for every War of the Worlds there’s a Dawn of the Dead and now, The Amityville Horror. The scares in this flashy and dark flick are effective, with some strong performances by Ryan Reynolds, Melissa George, and the oldest of the three kids, Jesse James.

    As the story goes, the Lutz family has found the perfect house — a massive waterfront home with lots of property that is surprisingly cheap. Kathy (George) falls in love with the home, and is undeterred when she and husband George (Reynolds) discover that a young man killed his parents and siblings in this very house only one year earlier. Soon after moving in, the Lutz family begins to experience strange occurrences. Things begin to get worse when George starts acting strangely. He’s hearing things, voices, and becomes angry and violent towards the children.

    Soon these violent tendencies grow worse, and the rest of the family fear for their lives as they discover the same spirit who corrupted the young man and forced him to kill his family is controlling George — with the hopes of repeating history.

    I was honestly a little creeped out by this film. At one point I got a phone call while watching it, and paused the movie. I was out of the room for a few minutes, but returned when I heard dialogue playing and thought the film had resumed. It was very clear and distinct, but when I got back to the television it was still paused exactly where I had left it. I think at this point the film had effectively had me a little spooked.

    The Amityville Horror is all about horror and scares. So much so, that very little else is given much attention. While this is the film’s strongest asset, it’s also its biggest weakness. There are only two or three scenes that don’t contribute to the building tension, and these scenes are treated as arbitrary, to such a degree that they feel like minor distractions. Like the director knew he needed to include them, and momentarily cuts to them with a “oh, right, and this happens, now back to the horror!”-like attitude. They’re chopped together and clearly show the filmmakers cared little about them, wanting to get back to the house and the action as quickly as possible.

    Reynolds does a terrific job, shedding his sarcastic image in favor of the dark, troubled George Lutz. He’s come a long way since his days as the picked-upon teen who later becomes a bully in the Canadian soap opera for kids, Fifteen. George is also strong as the stricken wife, but I have to mention Jesse James, who really delivers as the oldest of the three children. The scene between him and Reynolds where they are chopping wood is one of the film’s best moments, and both actors make it work perfectly.

    The DVD includes a few choice bonus features, one of them being “Supernatural Homicide”, which discusses the real incident that this film, and the original, was based upon. It’s interesting and presents the facts, as well as the supernatural spin, but strives to be an honest discussion on the matter. There’s also a behind the scenes featurette, audio commentary which is rather entertaining, and deleted scenes.

  • Adam Sandler’s ‘Happy Gilmore/Billy Madison Collection’ is a double-punch of funny

    Adam Sandler in 'Happy Gilmore'
    Adam Sandler in ‘Happy Gilmore’

    Normally I wouldn’t be packing two films together into one review, but in the case of Happy Gilmore and Billy Madison, I’m making an exception because they are being released together in a special “collection” DVD set.

    Now, let me say off the bat that I’m not a Adam Sandler fan. I have friends who are, but I just don’t think most of his movies are all that funny. And in this collection, I half liked it and half disliked it. That means I enjoyed Happy Gilmore, but found Billy Madison to pretty much represent everything I didn’t like about Sandler’s movies as well as some of his Saturday Night Live skits.

    First, lets start off with Happy Gilmore, since I found that movie to be a pleasant surprise. I had actually not seen this film before watching the DVD. I was familiar with some of it, such as the Bob Barker fight scene, but that was about it. But this film actually had some heart and was pretty funny.

    Perhaps the main reason I enjoyed this movie is because I can’t stand golf, and this comedy effectively poked fun at the sport. From the stuffy fan-base to the way the players all seem to take themselves waaaay too seriously.

    I also liked how Sandler’s Happy Gilmore wasn’t nearly as obnoxious as his other film characters. In this case, he was a guy who loved hockey but couldn’t play. But when his grandmother’s house is repossessed by the government, he must raise more than $200,000 to save it. When he discovers he has a natural talent for golf, he quickly wins his way into a pro tour in order to raise the money.

    For the most part, Adam Sandler plays the same person in most of his movies: an obnoxious smart-ass who makes good. But the obnoxiousness that generally makes me ill in his other films is dramatically toned down here, as is his usual penchant for ham and ridiculous voice changes. Sure, he’s a short-tempered smart ass, but at least he’s a likable short-tempered smart ass.

    The only misstep in the film for me was the death of his golf instructor, played well by Carl Weathers. Sure, the death of the teacher is generally a staple in these kinds of “Rocky”-like stories, but it seemed a little unnecessary here. Plus, I liked Weathers in the film, and thought the death wasn’t terribly funny. It felt thrown in and wasn’t integral to the film’s conclusion.

    Otherwise, this was a generally funny and well-performed comedy. While not as good as The Wedding Singer, it’s definitely among his best.

    As for Billy Madison, that’s another story all together. The first vehicle for Sandler, it basically takes his antics from Saturday Night Live and puts them on the big screen. As a result, this film perfectly represents everything that isn’t funny about Adam Sandler.

    Billy Madison is the story of a goof-off rich kid who must win a bet to gain control of his father’s millions. The bet? Go from 1st to 12th grade in six months. And since Madison managed to fail each of those grades the first time around, he’s going to have a lot of difficulty when he tries them again.

    There is very little to like about Billy Madison. He’s obnoxious, annoying, stupid and a jerk. You can’t exactly hate him, but what is there to like?

    Yeah, okay, so you laugh once or twice. I’d be lying otherwise if I tried to claim that I didn’t. That doesn’t mean I liked it. Sandler’s antics grow old pretty quick, and the laughs don’t move much further than one-time laughers that simply get used over and over again. Norm MacDonald is hilarious, however, and his stone-cold delivery works far better than Sandler’s goofiness.

    Mind you, I think Sandler did manage to get better after this film. At least for a while. And his recent “dramatic” work has proven interesting. Billy Madison was his first major onscreen role. It’s largely a feature film-version of virtually all of Sandler’s characters on SNL. But at the same time, that’s largely why I dislike the movie. I was never a fan of Sandler on Saturday Night Live. He always seemed to find himself more funny than the skit actually was, and regularly cracked up. In fact, he seemed to do it so often, that it became what he was famous for. Suddenly, it was okay for the performers to just start laughing during a skit. The show declined as a result, and I think that’s when I officially lost interest in the show.

    Now, how about those features! Well, there aren’t all that many on either of these discs, but the ones that are there are often the ones most people want: deleted scenes and outtakes. And while some of the deleted scenes on both discs are just stuff that isn’t terribly funny anyway, the outtakes are great. Plus, Billy Madison features an audio commentary which is actually pretty interesting to listen to. Although it doesn’t feature Sandler, it does give the film’s director, Tamra Davis, a chance to discuss her experience making it.

    I actually would have preferred that they had a commentary on Happy Gilmore, since that was the film I enjoyed, but oh well.

    If you’re an Adam Sandler fan, then this collection will undoubtedly make you very happy. If you’re not, than let me recommend at least giving Happy Gilmore a chance, it’s definitely worth the time.

  • ‘Domino’ is the story of a model turned bounty hunter

    ‘Domino’ is the story of a model turned bounty hunter

    Keira Knightley in ‘Domino’

    There is an ancient Chinese proverb that cautions: “Be careful what you wish for, for your wish may well be granted.” Apparently it is a proverb that the late Domino Harvey never learned. She wanted to become a legend and now she has… posthumously. She died on June 27, 2005 and now, less than four months after her death, the story of her life comes to the big screen in the form of a film titled Domino, directed by Tony Scott and written by Richard Kelly.

    Domino is brilliant, dreadful, insightful and awful; and it manages to be all of these things all at once thanks to a truly dreadful script from Kelly. Apparently he felt that the real life of Domino Harvey wasn’t nearly interesting enough to capture the interest of film fans and instead he made up wild flights of fancy that have nothing to do with the reality of her existence. At the same time, he ignores the tortured parts of her existence that made what she managed to accomplish so much more extraordinary.

    Take Kelly’s script.  Add in the requisite Tony Scott visuals where cuts are done at the speed of a frog in a blender set on high and you have Domino. There is lots of action and thrills but it is a rough ride.  You may want to bring some aspirin or other painkiller into the auditorium along with your movie snacks, to make the journey bearable.

    The film shows us that Domino was born to a famous actor father and model mother. Her father died when she was young and that her mother abandoned her to boarding school early in life in order to pursue another husband. She located that husband and not too long after marrying him, relocated to Beverly Hills from London. Once there, the young woman rebelled against her family’s desires, giving up a career as a model to pursue a new life as a bounty hunter. Actually the idea of being a bounty hunter comes to her after she reads about a seminar on how to become a bounty hunter that she can attend for $100. She shows up, pays her money and she wants her money’s worth.

    What happens after this develops into the aforementioned flights of fancy, ignoring the reality of Domino’s life. There is a great scene involving the pursuit of a gangbanger that director Scott set up using real members of Los Angeles’s 18th Street Gang, a very funny scene involving the Jerry Springer show guest “LaTeesha Rodriquez” (Mo’Nique).   LaTeesha goes on Springer to espouse her views on biracial issues, and she coins phrases such as Blacktina and Chinegro that had the audience laughing out loud. There was even a chart that Ross Perot would have been proud of.

    Mickey Rourke in ‘Domino’

    Keira Knightley portrays Domino and she at least bears a passing resemblance to the late bounty hunter. Note that I did not say model turned bounty hunter, because I am convinced that she was not a model (more on that later). Mickey Rourke plays “Ed Mosby”, the bounty hunter who teaches Domino the trade of tracking and apprehending fugitives. His character is based on Domino’s real-life bounty-hunting partner Ed Martinez. The talented and seemingly always underutilized Delroy Lindo is “Claremont Williams”, the bail bondsman who employs Mosby and his character is also based on a real-life person, Celes King III. He worked on the movie as a technical consultant. Edgar Martinez is “Choco”, who was Mosby’s partner before Domino came along, and who speaks only Spanish to her, even though he knows she doesn’t understand it.

    Tony Scott is the personification of the yin and yang of filmmaking. He can be brilliant as he was in Top Gun and True Romance and abysmal as he was in The Last Boy Scout and The Fan. He doesn’t know where the top is and manages to go over it in almost every movie he makes. And while he can shoot action sequences as good or better than any director in the biz, apparently he has gotten lazy. The final shootout scene is right out of the script of True Romance (Bad Guy vs. Bad Guy vs. Cops while girl drags shot guy away). Richard Kelly on the other hand hasn’t written anything of note except Donnie Darko and after seeing this, I wouldn’t mind if it remained that way. The real life story of Domino Harvey would have made a much better film.

    What was Domino’s real story? Her father was an actor, Laurence Harvey and her mother a model, Paulene Stone. He died when she was very young and her mother remarried in the 1980s, marrying Peter Morton of the Morton’s restaurant and Hard Rock café fame. Domino studied the martial arts while in high school, and apparently was NOT a fashion model. While almost every source, including the film’s script goes along with the legend that she was a model of some type, either on the catwalks of London or for the Ford Agency in New York, a story this past July in the Los Angeles Times cites family and friends as definitive sources that she did not do any modeling. She did other things like designing clothes though. But the main part of her life that is left out of this film is that she apparently did drugs. Indications are she died of an overdose of the painkiller Fenatyl and she was under indictment for federal drug trafficking charges at the time of her death that carried a possible ten year prison term.

    Now that you know a little of the true story, perhaps you’ll know why it would have made a better film than the fake story did. The film wasn’t bad, but it could have been better.

  • Don’t wait to see ‘Waiting’

    Don’t wait to see ‘Waiting’

    Justin Long and Ryan Reynolds in ‘Waiting’

    “Waiter, what’s this fly doing in my soup?” “Looks like the backstroke to me, sir.” That old saw is worthy of a chuckle at best, but it pales in comparison to some of the choice humor that writer/director Rob McKittrick delivers to patrons of Waiting, a raunchy restaurant comedy.

    Set in a place called Shenaniganz — which could be Bennigans or TGIFridays or any other in the endless series of chain restaurants found on the corner of major intersections or in malls across the fruited plain — the film stars Ryan Reynolds, Anna Faris, Justin Long, Luis Guzman, Chi McBride and Andy Milonakis, among others as the crew of this restaurant, just waiting to serve you.

    That is, as rookie server “Mitch” (John Francis Daley) learns on his first day from “Monty” (Reynolds), when the men of Shenaniganz aren’t too busy playing “the Game”, which you’ll just have to see the film to learn about. I won’t spoil that experience for you by attempting to describe this particular juvenile foible. Or if they aren’t too busy lusting after the still not quite legal hostess “Natasha” (Vanessa Lengies) or the equally gorgeous and apparently unavailable lesbian bartender “Tyla” (Emmanuelle Chriqui). The servers deal with a kitchen staff who have apparently been carefully trained to provide the worst attitudes and least sanitary food possible, at least from what we the audience are allowed to see. Everything looks fine to the patrons, although if they saw what we saw, they’d think twice before digging in. This is especially true for those patrons who were less than polite to the servers.

    In the midst of all of this debauchery (and we get to see lots of that, both in the restaurant and at the crew’s parties after work) “Dean” (Justin Long) is wrestling with his own demons. He is attending community college and has been doing that and working at the restaurant for four years now. Meanwhile one of his classmates from high school has just graduated from college with a degree in engineering and is on the fast track to success, while Dean is on the slow track to nowhere. How he chooses to deal with this realization, especially when he is offered a promotion to assistant manager of the restaurant, is a nice subplot in the midst of the comedy.

    Luis Guzman and John Francis Daley in ‘Waiting’

    McKittrick clearly knows his subject, having worked in the restaurant industry, but what fascinates me about his involvement with this film is his tireless marketing of it on the internet on his own. He has engaged in dialogues about the movie with users of the Internet Movie Database (www.imdb.com) on that site’s discussion forums about his film, and he certainly does not refrain from speaking his mind.

    In a response to a post where someone accused Waiting of being a ripoff of another movie, here is part of McKittrick’s response: “In any case, rather than being an accusatory bag-o-douche, why don’t you reserve the final judgement for when you see the movie, rather than simply a trailer”. Now the ripoff accusation was inaccurate and downright rude, but should a director really engage in that kind of dialogue with potential ticket-buyers? In another discussion topic, where a poster says that actor Luis Guzman has said some very unfavorable things about McKittrick, McKittrick has said he will have a lot to say about Guzman after the movie is released. No surprise there, this is a director who is clearly never at a loss for words.

    This is a very funny movie, with one exception. Andy Milonakis. Milonakis, who has his own show on MTV though I do not know why, is very similar to Gary Coleman in that he suffers from a thyroid condition. As a result, he looks much younger than his real age, and is short, with round, chubby cheeks just like Coleman. Milonakis also suffers from that disease known as “cannotactitis”. A rare condition, found only in movies or television where people somehow make it to the screen without the ability to act. By the way, if you have a better adjective to describe this condition, please feel free to email it to me, for use in future reviews.

    Meanwhile, see Waiting. I plan to see it again. That’s the best review I can give any movie.

  • ‘A Knights Tale: Extended Cut’ adds goodness to a good movie

    Heath Ledger stars in 'A Knight’s Tale'
    Heath Ledger stars in ‘A Knight’s Tale’

    The first time I saw the commercials for A Knight’s Tale back when it was first released in 2001, I thought it was pretty silly. The idea of rock and roll music mixed into a medieval period piece was ridiculous. It seemed like some stupid gimmick to appeal to the chronic MTV watchers who would normally avoid anything that didn’t take place in modern times and feature fart jokes or lots of guns.

    But I have seen it a few times since then on cable, and now with this “extended cut” DVD, I have to admit it really is a funny film, made all the more interesting by its use of rock and roll. This unique mixture of modern music and old world jousting is well done, with some terrifically light-hearted performances from both the stars and supporting players.

    A Knight’s Tale is about a young squire, William (Heath Ledger), who assumes a fake identity in order to enter into a series of knight competitions. Assisted by his two friends, Roland (Mark Addy) and Wat (Alan Tudyk), as well as a writer named Chaucer (Paul Bettany), he wins one joust after another. During these competitions he meets the beautiful Lady Jocelyn (Shannyn Sossamon), as well as the viciously evil Count Adhemar (Rufus Sewell).

    But how long can young William protect his secret before it is discovered that he is not of noble blood, a crime that could land him in prison for the rest of his life.

    Ultimately A Knight’s Tale is a medieval comedy, because there are far more laughs in this film than anything else. In that way, everyone does a terrific job. Bettany delivers his speeches with robust enthusiasm, and Ledger is charming as the dreamer chasing his dream. Addy is one of my favorite character actors, and he’s excellent here. Tudyk is also hilarious, providing some of the best laughs in the film. Bruce Helgeland wrote, directed and produced this feature, and does an outstanding job.

    The jousting sequences are pretty good, some of the best seen on screen, I think. Although there are some moments that come off as being a little staged — Ledger’s opponents often have their jousts pointed down and away and not at him. But that’s a minor issue, one that is easily overshadowed by several great moments. One of my favorite scenes is when Ledger and Sossamon are at a banquet and there is an elaborate dance number to David Bowie’s excellent “Golden Years”.

    This extended cut DVD has a few added moments, the most notable being a scene featuring Chaucer’s wife (Olivia Williams), who was edited out of the original release.

    Special features here are pretty limited, as they include the 11 featurettes, as well as a music video and an HBO making of special, all of which were on the previously issued DVD. Sadly, they did not include an audio commentary, which I think would have been a great addition (but, I always think that, because I’m a big fan of audio commentaries).

  • ‘Roll Bounce’ revisits the era of roller-disco rinks

    Bow Wow, Brandon T. Jackson, Khleo Thomas and Marcus T. Paulk in ‘Roll Bounce’

    Director Malcolm Lee (forever to be known as Spike’s cousin) and writer Norman Vance take us back to the late 1970s roller-disco craze for Roll Bounce the latest in the string of films from producers Robert Teitel and George Tillman Jr. Teitel and Tillman Jr., who have given us Men of Honor, Soul Food, Barbershop and its spinoffs are intent on delivering a new type of “black” film that is almost the antithesis of the blaxploitation because they lack the exaggerated violence and profanity and because they show African-Americans, and African-American men in particular, as positive role models. Superfly is a classic film, but do we really want or need to be encouraging anyone to grow up to be a cocaine dealer? Instead, Teitel and Tillman Jr. deliver movies where the heroes can be held up as role models.

    That is a good thing and one of the many positives about Roll Bounce, a fun film with great music. It stars Bow Wow as Xavier (Like Mike) and Chi McBride as Curtis, as son and father living on the South Side of Chicago. McBride’s “Curtis” is an engineer who has lost his job, along with his wife. Xavier is his son and he has two major issues.  One is his inability to communicate with his father about the loss of his mother and the other is the loss of his favorite place on Earth — the skating rink where he and his four friends ruled the floor.

    Nick Cannon and Rick Gonzalez in ‘Roll Bounce’

    The alternative is to skate at a Northside rink where the best skater around is “Sweetness” (Wesley Jonathan) and he and his crew win the annual Skate-Off and its $500 prize with regularity, or to not skate at all. Not skating is not an option and soon Xavier and his buddies “Junior”, “Naps”, “Boo” and “Mixed Mike” are on the other side of the tracks, skating and trying to have fun and finding obstacles in their path at every turn. Of course there is confrontation and that will lead to the expected face-off in the “Skate-Off”, and while it is paid off by director Lee with style and flair, the predictable outcome cannot help but be anticlimactic.

    Lee has managed to recreate the “air” of the era, although there are some notable gaffes, like nutritional wrappers on ice-cream and light-up wheels on skates, things that didn’t exist at the time. The music is also perfectly suited for the settings, matched to the moment as though a committee of 1970s-era roller disco DJs and radio Music Directors met and helped to choose the songs to go with the settings.

    RollBounce will not win any Academy awards, it won’t top any critic’s lists of the best films of the year and it will not top the box office list for even one weekend. Does any of that matter? I don’t think so. It’s a good movie. It has good role models and positive images, and it was fun to watch and experience. Do we have to have more than that?  The answer is a resounding no!

  • ‘GARBO’

    Greta Garbo
    Greta Garbo

    In the last few months I’ve had the opportunity to watch several of the original documentaries that Turner Classic Movies (TCM) has been presenting, and by far I have to say that GARBO, which will be airing this evening at 8 p.m. EST (encore at 11:30 p.m. EST), is the finest. Centered on screen legend Greta Garbo, it tracks her arrival in the United States, her Hollywood career, and her legendary escape from the spotlight.

    Narrated by Julie Christie, and featuring interviews with family, former friends and co-workers (in new and archived interviews), it offers as much information as it can about the actress, whose captivating beauty and talent made her one of the most famous movie stars of her time. What is interesting is how much of GARBO is based on hearsay and a study of her work. Part of this is, naturally, because most if not all of the people she once worked with are gone. But another is that Garbo was very private, infamously so, rarely if ever agreeing to interviews. As a result, all we’re left with is her body of her work to piece together the kind of person she was in real life. The most personal observations of Garbo come from her family, grand nephews and nieces who offer their limited memories of the star — most of which contradict the image she maintained on screen.

    Greta Garbo was born in Holland, and came to America having made only a few films in Europe. She was anything but the bubbly young starlet, maintaining a sense of control over her career that was rare at the time. She fought the studio over and over again, refusing to accept roles that she felt were not worthy of her time, and fighting to work with co-stars that meant something to her, personally and professionally.

    Rising to fame in the silent era, she was one of a small portion of Hollywood stars that successfully transitioned into the era of “talkies”. Her sultry voice, accompanied by a sexy accent, complimented the beauty she exuded.

    I can’t say that I knew much about Greta Garbo before I sat down to watch this film. I was impressed by her strength when it came to her career, and respected her demand for privacy. In an age where celebrities live and die by the magazine covers they get featured on, spilling the details of their lives for public consumption, Garbo wished only to do her job and go home. The public attention frightened her, and when Hollywood ultimately turned their back on her, she slipped away into obscurity in New York City (or tried to, regardless of the attempts by photographers to haunt her every move).

    Screen beauty Greta Garbo
    Screen beauty Greta Garbo

    The thing that got me most, as superficial as it is, was how beautiful Garbo was in her later years. She aged well, and seemed to gain more character and dignity with every passing year. And in the brief images we see of her in her personal time, she is even more radiant than she was in the movies. A natural beauty, with a style and grace that far surpassed anything we see in many of today’s screen stars.

    GARBO makes a point to discuss how the protectiveness of her privacy ultimately fed the public and media interest in her. One story discussed how a photographer jumped onto her moving car in order to get a picture of her, and the story that accompanied it later claimed it was a “one word interview with Garbo”. That one word was what Garbo said to the photographer in that moment. It was: “Damn.”

    GARBO is a wonderful documentary about the life of one of Hollywood’s most charismatic and beautiful legends. There may never be another Greta Garbo, but the cinema is better off that she was once here.

    In order to further celebrate Garbo’s 100th birthday, which would have been on September 18th, TCM will show other documentaries about the actress throughout September, including Greta Garbo: The Temptress, Greta Garbo: The Clown, and Hollywood Remembers: The Divine Garbo. They will also be showing several of her films.

  • ‘Lilo & Stitch 2: Stitch has a Glitch’ is a charming sequel

    ‘Lilo & Stitch 2: Stitch has a Glitch’ is a charming sequel

    Stitch loses control in 'Lilo and Stitch 2: Stitch has a Glitch'
    Stitch loses control in ‘Lilo and Stitch 2: Stitch has a Glitch’

    Before I sat down to watch Lilo & Stitch 2: Stitch has a Glitch, I had to take the time to watch the original film. I wanted to get a sense for the originals of all the characters and how they ended up together. I have to say, this series of film is probably one of the most original things to come out of Disney in years.

    Now, technically, Stitch has a Glitch is the third film in this series of movies. Stitch!: The Movie came out in 2003. The reason for the “2” is because this one takes place just a few weeks after the original, and before the events in Stitch! (which was really the “pilot” for the animated series, but got released on DVD). Not to add to the confusion, but there’s going to be yet another sequel in 2006 called, Leroy & Stitch.

    Stitch (left) gets reassured that he’s still good by Lilo in 'Lilo & Stitch 2: Stitch has a Glitch'
    Stitch (left) gets reassured that he’s still good by Lilo in ‘Lilo & Stitch 2: Stitch has a Glitch’

    Anyway, with that established, lets focus on the movie we’re here to talk about — Lilo & Stitch 2: Stitch has a Glitch, which I thought was pretty good. It keeps the tone of the original film, and further develops the relationship between Lilo (voiced in this film by Dakota Fanning) and her alien best friend, Stitch (Chris Sanders). Lilo isn’t your typical Disney character. She’s flawed, sometimes selfish, and very much a child. Stitch is a genetically engineered killing machine that grew to love Lilo and her older sister, Nani (Tia Carrere), and decided to give up his destructive ways.

    But as Lilo is obsessed with finding a routine to win a local hula dancing contest, Stitch is beginning to revert to his old ways of mass destruction. According to his creator, an “evil” scientist named Jumba (David Ogden Stiers), a malfunction has affected Stitch, and if its not repaired, could kill him.

    Everything about the Lilo and Stitch characters is unique, and I really enjoyed watching this sequel. The outstanding artwork is also some of Disney’s best, with lush tropical scenery in stunning watercolor and slick animation — a mix of traditional and computer work. It’s really the characters that make this sequel entertaining, however, and I can’t praise them enough.

    Lilo hangs with Stitch in 'Lilo & Stitch 2: Stitch has a Glitch'
    Lilo hangs with Stitch in ‘Lilo & Stitch 2: Stitch has a Glitch’

    I also loved how it incorporated the different Elvis tunes, another original touch that sets this series apart from Disney’s other creations.

    The bonus features on this DVD are pretty limited, but fun. There’s an animated short, “The Origin of Stitch”, which reveals why and how Stitch was created. There are also some games, as well as a music video (which the kids might like, but the sugery-sweetness of it gave me a few cavities, so I had to turn it off).

    Fans of these characters will most likely enjoy this sequel, and they should. It remains true to the original, without rehashing the same story (not completely, anyway), one of the best compliments I can think to give a sequel.