A Bad Movie - and an All Time Great One!

We haven't gone to a lot of movies lately.  A large part of the reason why is that we've just not been terribly excited about our choices.  This week, we decided to get back in the habit, and went to see The Other Woman - a comedy starring Cameron Diaz, Leslie Mann, and Kate Upton.  After seeing the trailer, I wasn't expecting much.  Unfortunately, I wasn't disappointed.

Diaz plays Carly Whitten, a lawyer who unwittingly has an affair with Kate's (Leslie Mann) husband.  The two become friends, and, while performing a bit of amateur spying, discover another mistress, Amber (Kate Upton).  There are some funny bits in the movie - most of them due to Mann's skills as a comedic actress, but the movie falls short of being laugh-out-loud funny.  The women bond over their shared heartbreak, but this is no "relationship" movie.  What you're left with is a movie that feels like it should be a screwball comedy, but just isn't very funny.  Then you start to think it might be a touching story, but you really can't relate to the characters, so it just doesn't reach you.

Some of the problem is that, at 109 minutes, it's at least 15 minutes longer than it should be.  I suspect they had to add meaningless minutes in order to have time to show Upton jogging in her bikini (admittedly an incredible visual), as well as show Diaz in all manner of attire.  The bigger problem, however, lies in the fact that the audience just can't connect with the characters.  Diaz is a beautiful woman, but there's no depth to her character - in fact, she comes off as cold, even after befriending Kate.  Upton is just there for show - she couldn't be more wooden if she were carved from oak.  Mann is actually quite good - her character is likable, vulnerable, and a bit manic.  Probably because there's more depth there, she's easily the most attractive of the three women - I found myself thinking, "What in the world is wrong with this guy - why would he leave home at night to see these other two bimbos?"

Fortunately, after we came home that night, I switched on the TV and happened to catch the last half hour of Guess Who's Coming to Dinner (I watched the first half the next night).  This 1967 classic, starring Spencer Tracy (in his last movie role), Katherine Hepburn, and Sidney Poitier, has everything the other movie lacks - real, three dimensional characters, clever writing, humor, and drama.  Tracy, as Matt Drayton, is perfect.  A life-long liberal, he's forced to live up to his rhetoric when his daughter brings home her African-American fiance.  There's plenty of drama in his journey to a decision, but it's pretty funny, too.  Hepburn is, well, Katherine Hepburn - fiery, outspoken, funny - but also vulnerable and afraid.  It's not a perfect movie - Poitier's character is a little too perfect to be true - but most of those faults can be traced to it's era.  In 1967, a black man would have to be nearly perfect to meet most parent's approval, and that's kind of the whole point of the story - the ONLY possible reason to reject him would be based on the color of his skin.  Of course, in the end, Matt makes the right decision, and everything works out as it should.  All in all, if you're tempted to go see the new Cameron Diaz movie, save the time and money and rent this film - even after seeing it at least a dozen times, I can't stop watching.

Oh, one more thing.  At one point, Tracy asks Poitier if he plans to have kids, and what Tracy's daughter thinks about it.  Poitier says, "Oh, she's wildly unrealistic, as you might imagine.  She thinks they'll all be perfect, and that all of them will grow up to be president of the United States."  I guess they were a little too late - by 1967 our first African-American president was six years old, and about to move to Indonesia. 

The Heat - Movie Review

The weekend, we went to see the new Sandra Bullock - Melissa McCarthy movie, The Heat.  There's nothing new or ground breaking in this flick - it's a pretty standard "mis-matched buddy cop show".  Except it features two female cops, and McCarthy is totally over-the-top hilarious.

Bullock is the big star, of course, but in this film, she's the straight man to McCarthy's antics.  Her character, socially stunted FBI agent Ashburn, is uptight, unpopular, and very by the book.  McCarthy's Detective Mullins is the  polar opposite in every way - sloppy, crude, nasty - but a very effective cop.

It will come as no surprise that these two are forced to work together.  Naturally, there's a lot of conflict between the two, and eventually they bond and catch the bad guys.  If this description makes the movie sound very predictable, it should - you can know what's going to happen just by watching the trailer.  That doesn't make the movie bad - suspense isn't the point here.   It's plenty entertaining watching Bullock try to manage the foul-mouthed McCarthy, and the pratfalls and jokes are virtually non-stop.  I found myself laughing through the whole thing - from the opening to the final credits.

I'd talk about other performances, but there's not much to say.  The rest of the cast is fine, but no one really stands out.  McCarthy's on-screen family is funny, the bad guys are really slimy, and the cops are just kind of there.  The plot, such as it is, is fine, but this is not a plot-driven movie.  It's all about McCarthy, and she's just really funny in this one.

If you're looking for a fun, easy watching movie - and if you're not easily offended by bad language - check out The Heat.  It's certainly worth the price of a big bucket of popcorn!

A Good Day to Die Hard - Movie Review

I hadn't heard from my estranged son for a couple of years, so I had a cop buddy run a search for him.  Turns out he was in a Russian prison, charged with killing a government official.  Since this could be it for him, I decided to go see him at his trial.

As I'm waiting at the court house, there's a huge explosion, and who do I see escaping in the confusion?  You got it - my son, along with a Russian dissident!  I steal a truck, and follow the gang of thugs who are trying to kill him.  After crashing into about a thousand other cars and stealing another vehicle, I save him from the bad guys.  As I'm giving him hell, I discover he's not really a criminal - he's CIA!

Of course, the bad guys crash our safe house, somehow miraculously missing us with all the machine guns, and we make our escape.  After some close calls, we steal another car and catch the bad guys, foiling their nefarious plot.  My son and I trade wisecracks throughout, and bond between dodging bullets.  The world is once again safe for democracy!

What's that you say?  You aren't buying this story?  That's OK - I know you're shocked, but this didn't really happen.  I've just given you the plot to the latest of the "Die Hard" movies - A Good Day to Die Hard.

I'm not a big fan of violent movies, but this Bruce Willis series is fun - filled with plenty of cartoon-style smashups.  You always know John McClane (Willis) will be OK in the end.  There are plenty of dead bodies, but they're mostly bad guys, so who cares, right?  This one is typical of the series - McClane lives through beatings, car crashes, and gunfire that would kill any normal human.  Of course, the trademark wisecracks flow as swiftly as the bullets.

Does this movie sound silly and illogical?  Do you have trouble believing the McClanes can arrive at Chernobyl in their stolen car just moments after the Russian crooks in their helicopter?  Do you find it unlikely they'd be able to survive massive gunfire, and avoid local police?  Of course you do - this movie is not realistic in the slightest!  You know what else?  It doesn't have to be.  This is a fantasy - like any super hero story, you need to disconnect your disbelief and just enjoy the show.  John McClane, like Superman, Spiderman, or The Green Lantern, exists in another universe - where men can fly, walk on walls, or get the living hell beat out of them while cracking wise. 

As long as you're willing to accept the realities of his world, you'll find this to be an entertaining movie.  The plot, if you can call it that, is OK.  Willis is fun as the aging McClane.  Everybody else is forgettable.  There's no deeper meaning, no hidden message to it.  Good guys win, bad guys die, I eat popcorn and enjoy the action.  Yeah!

Warm Bodies - Movie Review

I like zombies.

Check that - I should say I like zombies in the movies and TV shows.  I don't personally know any zombies, so I 'm not sure what I would think of them if I met one in person.  I suspect I wouldn't like them much, but a new movie, Warm Bodies, is out that may change my mind.  I've watched a couple of entertaining and funny zombie flicks (Zombieland and Shaun of the Dead come to mind), but I had yet to see a zombie love story.  This move changes that!

"R" (Nicholas Hoult) is a zombie, and the story is told from his point of view.  We hear his inner monologue, which is much more eloquent than the grunts and growls he is able to express out loud.  R can't remember his name, and knows something is missing, but he just can't seem to get it out.  He and his "best friend" - played by veteran character actor Rob Corddry - can't communicate, but hang out together, making this one of the strangest buddy films of all time.

R knows something is missing, but just can't put his finger on it.  That all changes when he and a group of fellow zombies attack a scavenging party of survivors.  R kills and eats the brain of Perry (Dave Franco), gaining some of his memories in the process.  Perry's girlfriend, Julie (Teresa Palmer) is also there, and some of the residual feelings from Perry's brain cause R to save her from the other zombies.

Nothing that follows will surprise you, as R becomes more and more lifelike as he takes care of Julie.  There are some funny bits as R struggles to communicate, a confrontation with Julie's father (John Malkovich), and a climatic struggle between good and evil - just an ordinary day in the life of a zombie.

Warm Bodies isn't a great movie.  It's dumb, and the logic of it breaks down if you're paying attention, but this movie isn't about paying attention.  It's a unique concept, and has some really funny moments.  It's a great send up of movies like the Twilight series, which have humans romantically involved with vampires and werewolves.  If that can happen, why can't your daughter hook up with a zombie?

You could make a case that the zombies lovers represent same sex or mixed race couples, but really, if you're looking for deeper meaning here, you're missing the point.  This is a funny movie, more in the tradition of The Naked Gun than Guess Who's Coming To Dinner.  Don't expect to learn anything - just relax and enjoy the fun.

Russian Amerika - Book Review

Russian Amerika is an alternate history novel written by Stoney Compton.  This is the first book I've read by Compton, who apparently uses Alaska as the setting for most of his tales.  Sometimes, authors feel the need to set the stage for their alternate history stories by showing the exact divergence from our timeline.  Compton takes a different - and, I think, correct - tack by just presenting it as it is and not trying to fill in all details.  We know this world is different from our own, we just don't know exactly what happened.  That's OK with me - the world is described well enough to follow the action, so that's all I need.

In Russian Amerika, the Czar still rules in Russia, the United States lost the Civil War, and North America is split into 9 or 10 smaller entities.  The political situation isn't well defined by the book, but the United States and the Republic of California appear to be allies, and support the revolution that is trying to form the new republic in Alaska.

The action centers around Gregori (Grisha) Grogorievich, a former officer in the Russian equivalent to the French Foreign Legion, who is thrust into the middle of the conflict by circumstances.  What follows is a good adventure yarn, taking us through the revolution.

Technology in this universe is somewhat behind that of our world - late 1980's in the book feels more like 1940 - no jets, limited communications, less sophisticated military equipment.  Because of this, the rebels, led by Native Americans (the Dena) have some success against the Russian forces.

 Grisha is a good protagonist - tough and smart. Circumstances throw him together with the Dena, eventually leading to his important role in the revolution.  The Dena are superb woodsmen, fierce warriors,  and loyal friends, so it's easy to root for the revolutionaries.

I like Russian Amerika, but it's not perfect.  The characters are interesting, but quite black and white.  Every rebel is altruistic and heroic, while the Cossacks are universally evil, with no redeeming qualities whatsoever.  Other Russians are mostly incompetent, except those who convert to the rebel's cause.  Speaking of turncoats, everyone - with one exception I can think of - who goes over to the rebel side is completely converted, and instantly becomes a trusted, valuable member of the revolt.  The Dena Indians are almost superhuman, possessing incredible fighting and tracking skills, and able to withstand torture without cracking.

The battle sequences are entertaining, but a bit hard to believe.  Small, ragtag bands of heroic guerrillas succeed by sabotage and subterfuge, not by fighting pitched battles with enemy infantry when they're badly outnumbered and outgunned.  To be fair, the rebels get some valuable help, which makes this a little easier to believe, but it still seems as though their success comes a little too easily.  To me, it would be a bit more believable if the technology level was lower - say about equal to that availble during our Civil War.  That would even up the playing field a little, and make the rebel's victory more plausible.

I'd also like to see more character development.  Grisha is a three-dimensional character, but many others are less fleshed out.  I'd like to see a sympathetic Cossack - not agreeing with his superior's methods, but powerless to do anything about it.  In any revolution, there are good and bad guys on both sides - I'd like to see a little more of that.

All that being said, this is still an entertaining yarn.  There are a lot of interesting characters, and the action certainly keeps your attention.  In many ways, it reminds me of Eric Flint's 1632 series (although that is a better book, IMHO), in that it presents an extremely optimistic view of the events.  That's OK - we know this isn't a history book, and who's to say it COULDN'T go like that?  If there's no great message behind this story, it's still fun to read.  There's at least one sequel, which has the potential to further develop characters and plot lines.  This is a simple book that tells an entertaining story - worth the time if you like an adventure story.

Blogsy test

This is a test post using Blogsy, a new blogging tool I'm trying for the iPad. If it works well enough for me to use it, I'll review it in a future post. For now, I'll just try some basic formatting, as well as some other features

You should be able to add links http://garthright.blogspot.com/2013/01/a-powerful-anecdote.html?showComment=1358655038091&m=1, but I don't know how to do it yet.

 

Posted with Blogsy

Jack Reacher - Movie Review

Fans of the Jack Reacher novels were up in arms over the casting of Tom Cruise as the title character in the new movie - an understandable position, since the fictional Reacher is eight to ten inches taller and 80 pounds heavier than the vertically challenged actor.  I've read one of the books, but wasn't familiar enough with the character to have an opinion about it one way or the other.

Cruise's size didn't have an impact on my enjoyment of the movie - he's not a big guy, but he's in shape and pulls off the action sequences very well.  Good camera work - shooting from different angles and avoiding direct height comparisons - helps to keep the audience focused on the action, instead of the physical size of the actors.  In truth, the action is so fast and furious that you don't have time to worry about anything but keeping the story straight.

Jack Reacher is an ex-military cop, a drifter who has gone "off the grid".  He's a tough guy - basically indestructible - and isn't shy about dealing with evil doers.  This is an action flick, and there's not much for humor, but I did laugh when he warned the group of young toughs who intend to rough him up:  Reacher:"OK, but pay your bill first"  Tough Kid:"I'll pay later"  Reacher: "You won't be able to pay later". 

Reacher is involved when a sniper kills 5 people in an apparently senseless spree.  When caught, he tells the arresting detective to get Jack Reacher.  It turns out Reacher has a past with the guy, but they're "not friends".  Reacher reluctantly agrees to investigate the shooting for the accused's lawyer Helen, played by Rosamund Pike.  It wouldn't be much of a story if everything was just as it appears, and Reacher soon learns there's more to the story than meets the eye.

Jack Reacher is a violent character, but the bad guys in this movie would give criminals nightmares.  The baddest of the bad is "The Zec" (Werner Herzog).  The Zec never touches anyone, but he's about the creepiest character you've ever seen. 

Other characters are pretty standard fare - most of them don't last long enough to to be fully developed, but they fit the style of the film.  The plot is interesting, and there's enough of a twist to keep you interested right up until the end - but face it, this isn't a movie to provoke thought.  It's chock full of action, not particularly believable, and a whole lot of fun.  If you're in the mood to see a lot of action, a few interesting characters, and an entertaining story, check out Jack Reacher.  It's certainly worth the cost of the popcorn.

Here Comes the Boom - Movie Review

I know I've said here a few times that I don't like a lot of new movies, but here's one I actually kind of liked!  Here Comes the Boom is a lightweight comedy, starring one of the funny, "heavyweight" comedians, Kevin James.  James plays Scott Voss, a disillusioned teacher just going through the motions - barely staying awake long enough to watch his students disinterest. 

James is a funny guy, best known for the sitcom The King of Queens.  In that series, he played Doug Heffernan, a roly poly regular guy.  Throughout the series, you keep wondering, "How in the world did this guy land that girl (Leah Remini, playing his wife).  Somehow, this works, and the interaction between the two makes for some funny moments.

James must live right, because his love interest in the movie is even further out of his league - Salma Hayek, dressed down and low key as the school nurse (Bella) who somehow falls for this lunk.  His cheesy attempts to pick her up fall flat - sometimes literally - and serve as good preparation for his later battles.

The plot revolves around a spur-of-the-moment vow from Voss to raise money and save his friend's job - as well as the music department.  Henry Winkler, far removed from his Fonzie days, is fine as a bumbling, slightly lost, relic.  Since Voss spoke without thinking, he's obligated to do something - he just has no idea what.  A chance viewing of a Mixed Martial Arts (MMA) bout leads him to pursue that avenue as the easiest way to raise some big bucks.  As a former college wrestler, Voss is sure he can handle it - a laughable belief, as it turns out. 

To enjoy this movie, you have to suspend your disbelief.  In the real world, chunky 40-somethings get killed if they tangle with younger, tougher opponents.  MMA is a brutal sport, much more violent and dangerous than boxing, and there's a very real possibility of permanent injury or death if you're over matched.  That being said, there's a bunch of funny moments in the fight scenes.  James got in shape for this role - although still chubby, he looks like he can handle himself OK.  Like most fight movies, you just accept what's happening, while remembering this is a movie, not a real fight.

Voss, with some help from his friend Niko (played with surprising ability by Bas Rutten), fights and loses, donating his purse to the cause.  When a lucky punch lets him win a fight, he realizes he could raise the money faster by actually winning now and then.  The fight scenes are not too violent, and the injuries inflicted are more funny than traumatic - this is a comedy, after all.  Chance and dogged determination lead Voss to the opportunity for a big-money fight.  I won't give the ending away, but if you don't know how this ends, you probably can't read this anyway.

It's dumb.  It's unbelievable.  It's unrealistic.  It's also funny and touching.  This movie appeals to the part of you that wants to believe we can be more than we are - the part of you that says, "I could step up, if I really needed to".  Like The Mighty Ducks, we love to watch the underdog beat the nasty guys.  If you want to laugh and have a good time at the movies, get a jumbo bucket of popcorn and enjoy.

Trouble with the Curve, and Won't Back Down - Movie Reviews

Often, I review old movies here.  There are a couple of reasons for that:

1. I'm old.
2. Many new movies are a disappointment.

I still like to go to the theater to see a movie, and we go frequently.  Unfortunately, it's all too common for us to be in the mood to see a film, but be unable to find one worth the $20 or so to get inside.  These two movies both looked like we'd enjoy them, so we went with high expectations.

Trouble with the Curve has everything necessary to be a popular success: Clint Eastwood, playing his now-familiar gruff old man with a (well hidden) heart of gold; Amy Adams, as his cute-as-a-bug daughter; and Justin Timberlake as the guy who gets Amy Adams (lucky bastard!). 

The problem here is this movie is extremely shallow.  Clint's character is just like everything he's done since he got old - he's a tough guy who's falling apart physically (I guess this is growth for him - he used to just play a tough guy).  He's distant from his daughter, keeping his emotions hidden, with a big heart somewhere deep inside.  We've seen it all before - much like his old Spaghetti Western characters, you could take any character he's played, move it to a different film, and just go right on with the story.  Clearly, Clint has a limited range as an actor - he's OK in this, I've just seen it all before.

I never get tired of watching Amy Adams.  She's very likable, and you want everything to work out well for her.  Unfortunately, you don't understand why she wastes time following her father around.  She gives up plenty for him, but you don't get a glimpse of what it is that makes her willing to do that.  She can't be stupid, but you're left with that impression.  Likewise, it's hard to see her ending up with Timberlake - I mean, he's a handsome guy, I guess, but there's no spark between them.  There's also no reason they get together in the first place, and no reason for conflict later on (and, no real reason they get back together at the end). 

I'm not giving anything away to say this all gets wrapped up nicely at the end - everybody is happy, except the bad guys, who are unhappy.  The characters are one-dimensional, the story is predictable, and, as far as I can see, there's no enlightenment delivered as the plot unfolds.  The happy ending seems contrived - complicated situations don't lend themselves to simple solutions in real life.  The ending really feels like someone said, "OK, it's been long enough, we need to get this wrapped up now".  It's not bad, it's just not good.  If you really want to see this, wait 6 months and catch it for free on cable.  If it starts early enough, you just might be able to stay awake until the end.  If you really want to see Clint, pop some popcorn and put High Plains Drifter into the DVD player.

 A few days later, we went to Won't Back Down, the story of two women's struggle to save their children's failing school.  Maggie Gyllenhall plays a struggling single mother, with Viola Davis as the crusading teacher.  This movie has its moments, but many characters are cartoon-like - pure good or bad, with little or no nuance.  The movie has a point to make, and they make it with a sledge hammer.  According to this, the problems in our urban schools are the sole result of the teacher unions - the teachers don't care about their students, and the only solution is to disband the union.

This is a simplistic view of the problem - poor performance in any field is most likely the result of incompetent management. In the real world, problems have complex causes and solutions.  Most conflicts are best resolved by compromise between the two sides.  The movie ignores this reality, and can't really be taken seriously because of it.  It's the cinema equivalent of Fox News - a slanted, distorted, simplistic view of a complex issue.

Gyllenhall is appealing, and Davis is quite good, as usual, but that's not enough to save this show.  There's a good movie in this topic, but this isn't it.    Save your money on this one.

Movie Review - "Witness for the Prosecution"

Last weekend we decided to watch a movie on Netflix, and Theresa picked out Witness for the Prosecution, an entertaining courtroom drama that's full of surprises.  Based on a play by Agatha Christie, the film features Tyrone Power and Marlene Dietrich, along with a thoroughly entertaining Charles Laughton.

Laughton plays Sir Wilfred Robarts, a barrister who is recovering from a heart attack, under strict orders from his doctor (and nurse!) to avoid strenuous activity.  Robarts is an appealing character, driving his nurse to distraction, sneaking cigars, and, most importantly, taking a seemingly hopeless case - a man accused of a murder that everyone thinks he did. 

Tyrone Power is quite good as the accused, Leonard Vole.  You like him, and really want to give him the benefit of the doubt, but there's just something that makes you wonder if he's on the up-and-up.

Marlene Dietrich is superb as Vole's wife, Christine.  I haven't seen her in a lot of movies, so I didn't know what to expect, but she was excellent.  Is she the doting wife?  Scheming temptress?  Innocent dupe?   We see all of this, and more, as the plot is revealed.

Being an Agatha Christie story, there's plenty of twists and turns as the story is told.  You're certain you know what's going on, then realize you have it all wrong, then certain again.  I must confess, I had it figured out about half way through, but I wasn't sure until the end - and I was still blown away as the final twist was revealed.  I won't give away the ending - you'll have to rent it to see for yourself.

If you're not used to watching old movies, it takes a bit of adjustment on  your part.  This was released in 1957, so the film quality is not what you'd expect today.  It's shot in glorious black and white, and don't expect high definition.  The sound is tinny, and there are no special effects (not that any are called for).  The sets are simple - mainly just the law office and courtroom, but the characters are complex.  After watching for a few minutes, none of these minor annoyances even registered.  It's a great movie, with three-dimensional characters involved in a convoluted plot that reaches a stunning and unexpected climax.  Along the way there's suspense, of course, but also plenty of humor.  Pop some popcorn and fire up Netflix for an entertaining evening.

Movie Review - Charade

OK, I admit it, when it comes to movies, I can get stuck in the past.  I like a lot of the old movies, even some that aren't really that great, when you look at it objectively.  I like most of the Cary Grant movies, but a couple are really quite good.  Charade is one of the best - right up there with North by Northwest.

Theresa and I watched Charade on Netflix recently.  I remember seeing it years ago, when I was a kid, but I really didn't remember it at all.  I was not disappointed!  It has some interesting characters - a lot of humor, and just a little bit of suspense.  As a romantic mystery, it holds its own with many more modern movies.

I've never been much of an Audrey Hepburn fan, but she's perfect in this role - she has that fragile, aristocratic look that makes it work.  Her Regina Lambert is vulnerable and terrified, but just a little tougher than you might believe at first.

I really liked the heavies in this film, in particular George Kennedy.  He plays Scobie, missing a hand, brooding and menacing - at one point, Hepburn makes a point of mentioning his "ugly, scary face".  He's not the nastiest of the bad guys, or the toughest (that distinction almost certainly goes to James Coburn), but you've got to love a character that's so ugly he has to be evil.  His mother must be so proud!  The third bad guy - Ned Glass as Gideon - isn't big or tough, but somehow you just know he's nasty. 

Another bonus in this movie is the chance to see Walter Matthau, playing it straight as a CIA bureaucrat. 

With the three bad guys after poor Regina, she really needs a true-blue hero to watch out for her.  What she gets is Cary Grant as Peter Joshua (or whatever other name he cooks up - he has several aliases).  Joshua, or whoever he is, is charming, and he always seems to show up at just the right time and place.  The only question is, is he really there to help Regina, or is he just another crook ready to torture/kill/rob her?  You don't really THINK he's a bad guy, but you're never quite sure. 

If you're like me, you'll probably figure this out before the end of the movie, but you won't be sure about it until the very end - in this film, very little is what it seems to be. 

This is a film that could easily be made today.  Oh, there'd be some changes made - we'd have more of a physical romance between Regina and Peter, and there'd be some special effects and probably a bit more violence.  The dialog would be different.  None of that really changes anything, though.  The basic plot and characters would work as well today as they did in 1963.  It's a great movie, highly recommended.

Movie Review - "People Will Talk"

I'm a big Cary Grant fan - I love all his old movies, many of which are classics - check out Father Goose or Bringing Up Baby if you want a lighthearted romantic comedy.  A couple of my other favorites are Operation Petticoat (a WWII comedy) and Arsenic and Old Lace.  Of course, my tastes run to screwball comedies.  If you like something with a little suspense, you might like North by Northwest or Notorious - they're both good, and stand up when compared to more modern movies.

I was browsing the movies on Netflix, looking for something to kill a couple of hours, when I noticed a Cary Grant movie that was unknown to me:  People Will Talk.  The movie was made in 1951, but it has the look and feel of a 40's film.  It's billed as a comedy, but it has some touching moments.

Grant plays Dr. Noah Praetorius, an doctor/teacher who is unconventional and at odds with Professor Elwell, a nasty little man who is determined to cause trouble.  Elwell is played by Hume Cronyn, a character actor that's been in a bunch of shows - you might recognize him from Cocoon.

While this is not Grant's best work, it's an interesting movie for a couple of reasons.  Most unusual for a romantic comedy of its era, the love interest (Deborah Higgins, played with some depth by Jeanne Crain) is an unmarried, pregnant woman.  The father of her child, who she "didn't know well enough", didn't know about the pregnancy, and was killed in the service.  I was shocked that this subject was handled reasonably, and without moralizing or contorting the plot to remove any responsibility for her actions.  I've never seen Crain in anything else (or if I did, I didn't recognize her), but she did a nice job here.  I loved the scene where she realizes Dr. Praetorious is in love with her - you can see her transformed in that instant from a scared girl to a woman who knows she's got him right where she wants him.  It was a small, but nice, moment in the film.

Although the romance is a big part of the story, there's no real conflict there.  From the moment you see them, you know how that part is going to turn out - and there's no "boy loses girl" part of the story.  The conflict in the plot is due to the actions of Professor Elwell, and involves Dr. Praetorius' companion, Mr. Shunderson (Finlay Currie).   There's something a little odd about Shunderson, and we can't quite figure it out until the climax.  I won't spoil it here, other than to say it's an odd and touching story.  Shunderson puts Elwell in his place convincingly at the end - I would have given him a standing ovation, except for the fact I was alone in my basement at the time (and, of course, being dead, Currie wouldn't have appreciated it, anyway).

If you've got a little time, and you want to watch an unusual, classic movie, give this one a try.  It's not rolling-on-the-floor funny, but you'll get a couple of chuckles.  You may also think a bit about human relationships, and just what it is that makes a person worthwhile.

Book Review - Brain Twister

I have never been a big fan of audio books, but lately we've been listening to some books while we travel (mainly Janet Evanovich's Stephanie Plum series), and it really does help to make the trip go faster.  These are light hearted adventure/romance novels - more funny than suspenseful.

Recently, I made a trip by myself.  Rather than continue the book Theresa and I had started, I decided to download something different that she might not appreciate.  I had access to download some free audio books from LibriVox, so I figured I could find something I'd like.  Since I like old science fiction, I looked through the selections of that genre, and picked Brain Twister, by Mark Phillips.  Mark Phillips is actually a pseudonym for two writers - Randall Garrett and Laurence M. Janifer, who collaborated on this book.

Many old science fiction books are not great, so I wasn't expecting much when I started to listen to it.  Before I could get into the story, I had to become accustomed to the reader.  Some of the mannerisms I found annoying - especially a couple of the voices used for different characters - but soon got used to it and it didn't bother me at all before long.

The story revolves around an FBI agent, Kenneth Malone, who is assigned the task of finding a telepathic spy.  Since there are no known telepaths in the world, he has to find one - searching from one insane asylum to the next - ending up with a gang ranging from the delusional to the catatonic.  The highest-functioning of the group is a little old lady who just happens to think she's immortal.  Oh, yeah - she also believes she's Queen Elizabeth the First!  Of course, the only way to get her cooperation is to humor her, and she leads the FBI around by the nose.

Malone is a stereotypical tough-guy G-Man - hard drinking, lady killer, and all that - but he's never quite in control of this caper.  I love it when the too-good-to-be-true hero struggles to keep it together.   Brain Twister is a pleasant story, with a nice mystery and a clever twist at the end.  There's not a ton of action, but it's funny, and the characters are interesting and likable, so it holds your attention.  If you're looking for something light and entertaining, it's worth checking out.

Brain Twister received a Hugo nomination in 1960, so there are a few things that don't fit in this world - I don't recall an "atomic rocket to the moon" - but those are incidental to the story.  For the most part, the plot works, and could be set in any decade easily enough.  The most obvious signs that this was written in the middle of the last century lie mainly in the lack of strong women or minority characters - except of course for "Queen Elizabeth". 

The audio book format won't ever replace the printed version, at least for me.  It does, however, provide a pleasant way to pass the time while you're mowing the lawn, driving, or engaged in some similar activity that won't allow you to read.  LibriVox is a great way to try it out without spending any cash, and most new releases are available for a fee at iTunes, or similar sources.

 

Movie Review - Mirror Mirror

We had a chance to go to the new Snow White movie last weekend - Mirror Mirror.  It's an entertaining re-telling of the fairy tale, with a few twists.  This is not your grandmother's Snow White!

I have a thing for evil beauties, and Julia Roberts is perfect as the wicked stepmother queen.  She's obviously having a great time in this film - hamming it up, letting the evil seep from her at every opportunity.  She's funny, nasty, and gorgeous - the perfect combination in this role.  Since it's a fairy tale, it's impossible for her to be too far over the top.

The other characters are pretty good.  Nathan Lane is always great, and this is no exception - he's perfect as Brighton, the Queen's main toady.  I also liked Armie Hammer as Prince Alcott - he always tries to save the day, but usually ends up just getting his pants stolen.  Far from being the helpless maiden in distress, Snow White (Lily Collins) is saucy and capable - and tougher than the prince. 

In this version of the fairy tale, the real heroes are the dwarves (with an able assist from Snow White, of course).  These guys are funny, while also proving that the worth of a man is not measured by inches.  I particularly liked Mark Povinelli, as the love-stuck Half-Pint, and Danny Woodburn (of Seinfeld fame) as Grimm, but the whole gang is really good.  Finding Snow White in the forest, the group reluctantly take her in and teach her how to take care of herself.  I love tough guys with hearts of gold, and that describes the dwarves perfectly. 

Don't expect to know what's coming in this fairy tale - while we all know how it's going to end, how it gets there is quite different than you may expect.  This is an updated tale, after all, and there were a few (actually a lot) of liberties taken with the original story.  I happen to like saucy, kick-ass girls.  I also like heroes that don't look the part, especially ones that don't take any BS from idiots. 

This movie has no objectionable language, nudity, or graphic violence that would make it unsuitable for young children - the kids behind us seemed to enjoy it.  Children will see different humor than adults, but both can enjoy it.  If you're looking for light entertainment - or a good date movie - this is worth the price of admission. 

Act of Valor - Movie Review

A couple of weeks ago, we had the opportunity to see Act of Valor - the action movie starring active-duty Navy Seals.  I enjoy a good shoot-em-up action flick, and that's just what this is.  If your theatrical tastes tend towards 2 hours of non-stop action, check it out.  If you're looking for Citizen Kane, don't bother.

I've never been a gung-ho uber-patriot who thinks "our guys" are always right - honest, loyal, and true.  I admire our service men and women, but recognize we have our share of less than perfect soldiers.  That being said, the Navy Seals are like real-life super heroes.  If anything, this fictional story pales in comparison to the real-life assault on Osama Bin Laden's compound last year.  While I was watching the movie, I kept thinking, "This would be totally unbelievable, if I didn't know about Bin Laden". 

The movie plot revolves around the rescue of a captured spy (Roselyn Sanchez) in South America.  During the rescue, the team uncovers evidence of a terrorist plot aimed at the United States.  The rest of the movie follows the team's pursuit of the terrorists and their leaders.  Is the plot realistic?  I don't know, but the action feels real, and it certainly keeps your attention while it's happening.  Face it, you don't go to this movie for the plot, character development, or scenery.  This movie is about action, special effects, and patriotism.  On those fronts, it's a success.

As I mentioned, the action is virtually non-stop.  I didn't make any attempt to count the bodies, but they had to add up to quite a number.  The special effects - nothing ground-breaking here - don't distract from the action.  You'll have to decide if it's realistic, but it's certainly easier to think these guys can take out the terrorists than John McClane in Die Hard.  There's a lot of violence, but nothing too graphic - the torture scene early in the movie is largely off-screen.  You'll get to know the characters only superficially, but you'll identify with them and care about what happens to them.  There's a little humor, but not much - mostly you'll just have periods of intense action, followed by short stretches that move the plot along and allow you to catch your breath before the next firefight.

What stops this from being a great action movie is the thing that makes it unique - the stars are active duty Seals (they don't even list their full names in the credits).  Their performances are better than I would suspect, given their backgrounds, but they're not asked to do much.  The dialog is limited, and the plot, as I said above, is limited.  It's just not that kind of movie.  I made a reference to Die Hard above, but in reality, there's no comparison.  The action in the two movies is roughly comparable, but Die Hard has a more complex plot, better character development, and better acting (even with Bruce Willis).  Die Hard isn't a great movie, but it's a really good action movie.  Act of Valor is a decent action movie, but doesn't measure up to to the better examples of this genre.  Go see it, have a great time, be proud of our service men and women.  You won't buy it, and you won't watch it every time it's on TV, but you'll have a great time and walk out of the theater feeling proud and positive about our country.  If you're like me, you'll be glad these guys are on our team!