Reviews

Which is not necessarily a bad thing, at least in this case. I welcome modern movies and series being a little simpler to follow, like Gilligan's Island. And that actually talk about the real God in a respectful way. But I digress. This is really more of a Hollywood-ized (although I doubt it was anything Hollywood) tribute to a good American president. If it weren't for being drowned in the Hollywood and mass-media left for the last many years I would be tougher on the only-the-good-part angle. Dennis Quaid, who's often a stiff, does a career performance as Dutch, along with Penelope Ann Miller as Nancy (maybe the best performance of the movie). Nice to see Jon Voight in an over-used and likely madeup role as a Soviet spy explaining how Reagen brought down the USSR. But then again, hundreds of millions of Eastern Europeans have Dutch to thank for being free rather than under the Russian thumb. Maybe some special people earn a tribute rather than an expose. Enjoy.

P. S., for all the complainers about the "accuracy" of this movie, just remember we've had to put up with all your political media fantasies for the past 8 years that far outdo anything here.

As the mass media has spun off into outer space with Trump Derangement Syndrome, no show is more important in my lifetime as The Five. History may look back at Biden's train wreck adminstration, made possible solely by the left wing media, as the nadir of American history. And here's a tell - while the NBC, CBS, MSNBC and the View like to stay in lockstep, all opinions are permitted on the Five, plus these folks make fun of themselves as much as any one else. Enjoy a breath of sanity, freedom and free speech.

My son reminded me that my Bush II era rant against Fox News is still on Imdb. I'll leave it there, because that was then and this is now. The main stream media is a disgrace, a real embarassment to America and an abandonment of their obligation to provide full and fair disclosure.

So the straight scoop is that those not watching Fox for the last 8 years have little clue about what is really happening in their own country. Gutfeld contributes to the education of Americans who actually think they are getting the real thing rather than carefully selected semi-facts and skewed analysis from the mainstream.

No problems there. Some of the panelists, particularly Kat Timpf and Molly Hemindway, are funny and insightful, while others are a little out there. The problem is with the presentation. Gutfeld is a strange dude who claims to be a libertarian rather than a conservative, and has some unusual and unexpected takes on certain issues. At other times he can be the absolute sharpest analyst on the Fox network, but you never quite know what you'll get.

But the sick, low-grade sexually obssessed fraternity humor of the show is so unprofessional, and so pervasive, that it detracts from the commentary. Is it an attempt to be cool? To get a younger audience? To gross out most of the viewers? I don't know, but it doesn't work for me in the least.

Or maybe "Jakob Sees the 60's and Makes it His Own". I didn't know who Jakob Dylan was until I saw this movie, and I even saw the Wallflowers as an opening act years ago. The best part of this movie is the maybe 40% of the time when Jakob (of course) interviews many of the key people in the late 60's LA rock scene. It works even when the camera needlessly yet constantly pans to Jakob to catch his reaction (usually stoic) to the star's story. The interviews are generally short and don't really follow a theme except for how cool the Laurel Canyon was for rock groups in the 60s, and how the bands profited from their collective community. They also tell various and sundry anecdotes of their life at the time. Generously interspersed with the interviews is the practice for and eventual performance of an Orpheum Theater 60's tribute featuring you know who and his assorted rock buddies. Without being rude, the tribute falls well short of the original, with the exception of Jade Castrinos' contributions. So if you're not annoyed by Jakob's intrusion into the Laurel Canyon scene you're good to go. Otherwise it might be a little tough to take.

Nice settings, festive scenes, well cast with professional acting. In reality, the King of Britain's 's two daughters were let out of the house (castle) for a few hours of fun following the surrender of Germany in WWII. But they didn't get far off the London grounds and had a considerable party watching them. This is more of a Roman Holiday, I'm free and I'm going to see how the other 99.9% lives story. What they ended up seeing and doing was alternately confusing, regrettably seedy, or uninteresting.

So great premise, an attractive cast (Gadon as Elizabeth was magnetic), all they needed was a better story about what they did in those off hours. The options are endless and could have been great fun. But not this.

And then I watched it and I thought it was pure junk. So I must have known something. Reminiscent of Being There, another pseudo-intellectual psycho-babble satire with no substance. Shallow people, shallow acting, shallow relationships, lots and lots of unnecessary yelling, and not a soul in sight you can make a connection with. I could do a Peter Finch about how bad this movie was but I don't have the energy for it.

Basically a Godless, heavy-handed commentary on the meaningless of modern culture. This one-trick pony is set up right off the bat and plays out painfully and predictably from there. Sort of like a really boring two hour sociology lecture. The talent, which is considerable, could have been better served with (any) other material.

So this movie has some really strong assets going for it - a solid Andrew McCarthy and Jami Gertz as romantic leads, opulent LA scenery, a very good 80's musical background. Unfortunately, the focus is on McCartthy and Gertz's obsession with rescuing high school class mate Downey from his drug dependence. That includes all of the unpleasant things his debts to the dealer makes him do. I like Andrew and Jami as a couple and I enjoy the LA scene. But their efforts to rescue poor Robert get old and end up leaving us with little to work with. It cudda been a contender, but ended up a waste of a good cast, atmosphere and musical score.

This is the real deal. Kamikaze pilot who chickened out at the end of WWII has repeated confrontations with: 1) his feelings of failure for not sacrificing himself in the Big One; and 2) one hell of a monster in Godzilla, who only enhances himself after a close call with the Bikini A Bomb test. Along the way our hero returns to a war torn Tokyo, and adopts a woman who has herself adopted a child among the ruins.

The immediate post-war Tokyo is excellently portrayed, as is the platonic relationship between our hero and his charges. Our hero gets a job exploding live mines in the waters off Tokyo when the Big Guy returns much more buff then his first appearance and trashes the whole city. After another trashing of Tokyo things finally come to a head.

As with any really good foreign movie, you forgot you were reading dialogue rather than hearing it about two minutes in. The cast is uniformly excellent. The story of our hero, the woman and the child is an interesting side story, along with the crew of the ship our hero works on.

Watching a foreign movie was a breath of fresh air compared to the PC/woke-infested drivel spewed out by current US filmakers.

I love Lacey Chabert Christmas movies as much as life itself. I could watch Lacey Chabert doing laundry. Who wrote this movie? And who approved who wrote this movie? The lame plot, such as it is, has Lacey breaking up with her goofy boyfriend and coming home for Christmas just in time to see her mis-cast parents shoot off to Florida. In the meantime there is a neighborhood conspiracy to have Lacey do all the HOA Christmas chores that her parents did before they booked. I shiver in revuslion just having to relate the plot details. In the midst of this is Stephen Tobowolsky, the poster man for annoying, along with a herd of others driving Lacey crazy, most particularly Wes Brown as the HOA zoning officer holding incessant citations for Lacey. Brown out-Tobowolskies Tobowolosky. None of this is done in any sort of charming fashion, just one ridiculous, unpleasant and/or annoying moment after another after another after another.

Hallmark movies are supposed to be semi-believable, semi-rational, and at least semi-enjoyable. This is none of the above, and is so absurdly off the mark to be a disgrace to not only Lacey but the Hallmark Channel. I apologize to Lacey for being so ill-served. I couldn't make it to the end, but there was nothing on earth that could have saved this movie by the time I left. Shame on Hallmark for throwing such junk out during the holiday season.

So I am a fundamentalist about the Bible, as in 35 years teaching Sunday School. I appreciate very much the efforts to make The Word more accessible and engaging among non-church-goers. So if it takes a little off-record soap to enlarge the audience, okay. The mood of the series is fine. They appropriately portray Jesus as a laid back, caring miracle-worker who holds power from The Lord. His humanity and good but humble spirit is the biggest asset of the series. The other characters, Biblical or not, are adequately played (Nicodemus being the best). My two biggest complaints: 1) this appears to be so popular that the pressure is and has doubtless been on to stretch, so there is alot of filler and some episodes with very little substance, and 2) I appreciate broadening the Bible to include things that could have happened to the characters but aren't told, but I object to important things that couldn't have happened under any circumstances, or would be recorded if they did happen (like Jesus and John the Baptist's meeting as one of several examples). Give me $10M and a good crew and I'll go out and film the Book of Mark from beginning to end, including acting out the parables, word for word. And there's no reason why that wouldn't be entertaining enough.

An unadorned Kristen leaves the city and her AP writing job to return to mom and dad. She gets her old lifeguard position and settles into whatever it is she seems to want to settle into. Which, unfortunately, includes having sex with one high schooler and hanging out and smoking dope with a bunch more, along with some of her piggy-backing adult friends.

I have always considered Kristen very attractive and enjoy her screen personality. There were some good slice-of-life elements to this, the best thing about the movie, that stay with you after viewing. But there were also some characters acting out of character or without any depth or substance. And some of the musical background was just plain cheesy. In the end I gave it as good a rating as I did because of Kristen, but this movie is not a finished or entirely cohesive product.

A script and story just plain cut out for Madonna, who might wallow in pretty much anything else off her character. Amazing that they cast for her role, when it seems pretty clear she was The One. Madonna plays the laid back, somewhat trampy lead while Rosanna Arquette - ordinary suburban wife - gets interwoven into Madonna's unquestionably wild life. And what a ride it is, repleat with an evil villain, played by a hard-to-recognize Bill Paxton, and a bunch of odd characters including dead-panner Steven Wright and John Turturro as a stand-up comic. And then there's Mark Blum, playing the dufus straight out of Crocodile Dundee. A fun ride all around, great music for great moments, like when The Material Girl struts her stuff down the street. As 80s as it gets and that's a good thing. I'll keep typing until I hit the 600 letters limit, I should have said Aidan Quinn does a great job as someone helping the desperate Rosanna, but still a little menacing after Stakeout. Enjoy!

I loved the original Flip or Flop and frequently watch the reruns. Great LA scenery, beautifully filmed and produced, interesting properties and contractors with intriguing hosts. This is about as far as you can get from Flip or Flop with the same cast of characters (excepting one big one). It's not the loss of Christina per se, it's the focus of the show. The original focus was on the challenge of making money under unexpected conditions and trying circumstances. The focus of this show is the trip to the gynecologist for Heather Rae. And at the end of the hour, we don't even know if they turned a profit. I'd love to rant more but I've hit my minimum word limit. I will not watch this show again.

My first review was different and reflected the confusion of many others. I watched again last night and came away feeling quite different. Young married professionals party and work in the 50's in a desert white-collar company town. Classic male co-worker & housewife bonding of that generation. Then one of the wives starts raising questions about the place and we're off the tracks. I really enjoyed the depiction of a perfect 50's husband-wife relationship, and the parody of the corporate macho wannabe males. Florence Pugh, who I had never seen before, was absolutely breathtaking and made this movie. It's really about her. Similar in several ways to The Menu, which we watched the night before we watched this. If you get into the plot then it works. I understand the detractors, and you shouldn't have to watch a movie twice, but I thought this brilliant in its own inimitable way and really enjoyed it second time around.

Now, to the extent that this is a feminist manifesto for the 2020's, as claimed by some over-ripes on-line, it fails miserably. But it is very entertaining, take it at face value and ignore any real or accidental message.

I think Anya Taylor-Joy is the next thing in movies, since I'm behind on things maybe the current thing in movies, with her exotic looks and great under-played talent. Assorted group pays $1250 per to take a boat trip to secluded island and experience an unexcelled series of courses by renowned chef. As the story goes along things get strange, and that's all I can say without doing a spoiler alert. The cast is very good, particularly, of course, Anya and Fiennes. I wouldn't say it's brilliant but rather very clever. It may be slightly distasteful to some (including me on the first go-round) but I wouldn't say it's trash. For what it is it's presented very professionally. I have nothing more to say but in the interest of the website add this final sentence.

Stuck with nothing better I took in a large part of this 50s amoral mindless junk. Very similar to Bogie's Beat the Devil, the famous stars, here featuring The Chairman and Deano, meander around the locations and the plot without any clear meaning. Were all the social dramas of the 50's like this? Arthur Kennedy doesn't help at all as just another philandering star. I just don't see anything meaningful in this movie and have little idea what any current viewer would find entertaining. I've run out of words to finish this review but would love to get it published so I will just string the rest of this along.

Almost perfect rendition of the Johnson presidency from his swearing in to '64 election. My only moderate criticism is that for those of us who lived through LBJ Bryan Cranston, makeup notwithstanding, cannot approach the papa bear physical presence of the former president. The script seems very balanced, we get to see the positives and negatives of each of the major players. Being only ten at the time, some of this went over my head when it happened, I'm assuming it gets accurately retold here but I don't think anyone was seriously concerned about Goldwater beating the Big Guy. The Pres is presented sort of as a tragic figure, doing his duty maybe better than JFK could have done, and not getting much credit when it was all over. Highly recommended.

Not the voters, mind you, but the actual reviewers. I would say not a bad movie for background where you're just looking for some noise while you're doing something else. Nice elements, but as a whole just too much of everything.

I'm a tad young for the surrealistic dance numbers of the 50's, and was never a Gene Kelly fan, so even with the fantastic (if bizarre) closing dance number this was nothing particularly special for me.

I promise I'll stop after this one. This film has a side agenda that may not be welcomed by all of its viewers. It certainly drove me out within about 20 minutes. Is that blurb unAmerican or seditious in this country of the free? Apparently so, what a shame.

I just tried this show recently. Tim Allen is the sitcom man, and the other actors seem good also. But if they plan to syndicate this forever, like Gilligan's Island, they just might want to consider the monstrous, too frequent and overloud laugh track that just plain spoils it for me.

Starts slow, but picks up speed as it goes along, due to a great plot and script and fine actors throughout. Daughter and grandkids of Igon Spengler visit rural farm of the recently deceased Igon, and not suprisingly run into ghostly shenanigans as well as an explanation for Igon's reclusive life. Prior viewing of the real Ghostbuster movies (1984 and 1989) recommended but certainly not required. Cranks up to a smashing finale. A fitting tribute to Harold Ramis, this film makes up (mostly) for the incredible monstrosity of a few years back.

Douglas and Fonda spar as prisoner and warden respectfully in the Old West. I found this totally un-engaging despite the star-studded cast. The sort of overdone movie of the 60s/70s that turned me off to stars with a much better film portfolio.

This is the sort of 40s-50s stuff that turned me off as a child of the sixties. It's like Grease, except Grease was a spoof of this. Overacted to the hilt. I respect anyone who watched this as a child and still remembers it fondly., but for a new viewer it's way over the top.