whiterat1 Reviews

Pathfinder (1987)

A Powerful Movie About Manhood

[4 August 2001]

This is a beautiful movie about men and spiritually and what it means to be a spiritual man. The idea of a higher good; universal truths and the role of man on Earth. Man has always been the protector and warrior and this movie portrays that duty in its purest form. This is masculinity distilled and captured sublimely on film. Every male should watch this movie, particularly young American men who are told how horrible they are and how wrong it is to act as their nature dictates by the media and academia. I plead every father in this country to watch this with their sons. This is one of those movies that is great because it transcends simple entertainment and increases the amount of good in the world every time it is watched.

The Contender (2000)

Women Good Men Bad

[27 April 2001]

Women are good. Men are bad. Women are good. Men are bad. Women are good. Men are bad. We men should be ashamed. We are bad. Hollywood is good. Men are bad. Movies should be for daughters. Women are good. Men are bad. Sons are bad. Men are bad. Women are good. Daughters are good. Men are bad. I believe what Hollywood tells me. Women are good. Men are bad. Women are good. Hollywood never lies. Men are bad. I am a man. I am bad. Men are bad. Women are good. Men are bad. Women are good. Men are bad. Women are good. Women are good. Women are good. No matter what. Women are always right. Women are always right. I am always wrong. That's because women are always good. And men are always bad. I am ashamed to be a man. Work will set you free. Work will set you free. Men are bad. Men are bad. Women are good. Work will set you free. Work will set you free.

The Patriot (2000)

Does This Movie Make You Mad?

[9 October 2000]

Just read the last few reviews of this movie and some people seem rather upset. That, to me, is very interesting. Is it because they despise portrayals of heroism? Is it because they cannot get over their phony hatred of romanticism? Is it that they hate to see men portrayed as noble? Is it that this movie is a mirror reflecting their own decaying souls? I am not being overly dramatic here. To dislike this movie is to dislike humanity. What this movie portrays is the ability of individuals to stand up for themselves and their families and their country and to do so without apprehension. This is something that does not happen very often anymore (in war or peace) and this movie is a simple reminder that it is okay to believe in something and stand up for yourself. And not to mention the fact that it was beautifully filmed, well-acted (yes, Mel Gibson did a very good job, even if it's not cool to say so), and absolutely entertaining on all levels. I recommend this movie to all people but especially to children (hey kids, watch this and learn some real values before your friends and parents drain the life out of you). This movie gets my highest rating and then some for the fact that they actually managed to get it made in America 2000. Watch it and feel good for a couple of hours.

The Cell (2000)

A Good Attempt

[9 September 2000]

I agree with a lot of the previous reviewers who remark on the weak acting, thin plot, and bad writing, but find it visually compelling. There is no question that there are many weaknesses, and I certainly do not believe in style over substance, but the only point of the movie was to explore a killer's brain, and the directing achieved that goal in a very beautiful way. The mind of a schizophrenic is an uncertain area and one in which someone attempting to portray it on film is given a great deal of leeway. This could easily have been done terribly by many directors utilizing stale imagery and obvious analogies and whatnot. In The Cell, though, the dreamscapes are very original and dynamic. The point of the movie is to transport the viewer into another world and it works. I don't think this movie pretends to be anything it's not. It is a visual exercise based on a plot that could be nothing but a visual exercise. The style is the substance (unlike a film like Run Lola Run which is mechanical and does not work toward any goal whatsoever but is highly praised as artistic). It is not a great movie by any means but very enjoyable and I will most definitely see this director's next film.

Cecil B. Demented (2000)

Yawn

[19 August 2000]

I love John Waters. I consider everything he's done to be great with two exceptions: Serial Mom and Cecil B. Demented. I was so excited to see this therefore ready and willing to laugh and have a good time, but I did NOT. I sat there the whole time feeling rather bad for Mr. Waters. How could the creator of Pink Flamingos, Desperate Living, even Pecker, actually think he was making a good movie? There is very little to laugh at in this movie, no characters that you care about for even a second or two, and an extremely thin plot. For a man whose film is a call to awaken the taste of the public, and bring more art, and sex, and violence into mainstream movies and smack us all around a little bit, he has made his least "offensive" or shocking movie to date. Nothing happens in this movie except a bunch of self-righteous anarchist brats with guns running around acting like idiots while totally lacking the style and perverted dignity of Waters' other characters. If you are a Waters fan, save your money. Everyone else should go see it for charitable purposes.

Small Change (1976)

Almost Perfect

[19 August 2000]

This is a beautiful movie. It portrays the drama of childhood very realistically and accurately captures the workings of children's minds as they try to make sense of a world that seems tremendously confusing at times. The film deals with all aspects of childhood, from school cafeterias to child abuse, without much adult interpretation of the events. For the most part Truffault is an observer who simply takes the world of these children for what it is: an incomplete, thus innocent, mysterious reality to be figured out by the children in due time. The only time in the movie where he does not do this is the speech by the teacher towards the end of the movie about childrens' rights and the formation of a childrens' political party or some such nonsense (very French--I suppose all French movies must have a "French" moment or two, so all is forgiven).

That having been said, this movie is brilliant and Truffault remains a master, in my eyes.

Yankee Doodle Dandy (1942)

One of the Greatest Movies Ever Made

[17 August 2000]

This is, without a doubt, one of the greatest movies ever made. This movie is unabashedly patriotic, humorous, sentimental, nostalgic, and pure without getting tasteless or corny for one second. James Cagney is the greatest actor/showman America has ever produced and he gets to utilize all of his many talents in this film. It is beautifully done in every respect. It could be used as a litmus test for relationships (if you don't love this film, well, I'm afraid that I just don't want to invest any more time in our friendship. Sorry). You think I'm kidding? If you knew me you'd know that I'm not. Now go watch this movie.

Lord Love a Duck (1966)

This Movie Haunts Me

[13 August 2000]

I first watched this movie about one year ago without knowing anything about it other than what is written on the back of the video box. Since that first viewing this movie has...well...haunted me. I can't get the theme song out of my head for one thing. The movie itself is a bizarre story about Southern California teens in the Sixties, but read the other reviews to learn about that. I agree with all of them. It is a great movie for all those reasons but there also seems to be something else. Almost a Felliniesque other-worldliness about it. I haven't been quite able to put my finger on it. Maybe that is why this movie has burned itself into my brain. There is some kind of, for lack of a better word, magical element to it. It is interesting to me how the other reviewers see this as a very important movie in their lives as well. It is a great film discovery on all levels. One of those overlooked gems that it is so important to hang onto.

Safe (1995)

One of the Creepiest Movies EVER

[12 August 2000]

Okay, look, I absolutely love suburbia. I think it's great. I like lawns, I like parking lots, I like big homes, I like everything about it. I am aware that this movie was some kind of critique of, among other things, suburbia. But I don't care. To me the suburbs in film offer the same kind of dynamic as the towns in Westerns. A clean canvas on which to develop an idea without much environmental interference. Not to mention the fact that whining about the suburbs is in itself extremely suburban, as all the complaints come from suburbanites with little understanding of why suburbs exist in the first place. So my interest in this movie was purely the mental decline of the main character. This was done beautifully. The tension built slowly and strongly as she was overcome with anxiety and struggled to make sense of it. This is a pretty basic theme in film (and everything else) but it was handled in a very unique and compelling way. This is a great work of art. Very American, very Nineties, and it will stand the test of time.

Aguirre, the Wrath of God (1972)

First Herzog Movie Actually Liked

[12 August 2000]

Great film! The first one by Werner Herzog that I not only stayed awake through, but actually enjoyed. A large part of my enjoyment was due to the fantastic performance by Klaus Kinski. I cannot think of a better film portrayal of a power-mad lunatic, including Marlon Brando in Apocalypse Now. In fact the more I think about it, the more I wonder how much of it was an act. Seriously. Did ya see those eyes? An extremely well done film, beautifully directed (especially the opening shots of the conquistadors marching down the mountain). I might give Mr. Herzog another chance after finally seeing this.

The Wild Child (1970)

A Great Film

[10 August 2000]

Everything about this movie is great. The acting is done perfectly, particularly Victor. This child has the ability to evoke every primal human emotion without doing anything but making sounds and using facial expressions. Perhaps only a child could be capable of doing this but I doubt any child could do it as well. We feel sympathy for him and want to care for him ourselves at the same time that we are anxious about the deep mystery he forces us to recognize. The scene when he is rocking under the full moon, and the look on his face as the movie ends, are brilliant and frightening. The fact that this actor, to my knowledge, has done nothing since, adds to the effect. Where did he go? Might he have been more in touch with this side of humanity than just as an actor? Just incredible. And Truffault's direction was perfect as well. Filmed in a minimalist style and cleverly utilizing early film techniques, he evokes a time period yet allows no distraction from the actual issues involved in the story. The viewer is forced to pay attention and forced to deal with the issues confronting the doctor and his relationship with the boy. I cannot recommend this highly enough.

Jules and Jim (1962)

Lighthearted? Idyllic?

[10 August 2000]

I watched this movie last night, and just scanned the comments on this database about it and am left feeling perplexed. The word lighthearted pops up quite a bit (including on the back of the actual video) and this strikes me as bizarre. This movie was about three pathetic, spineless, irresponsible adults. Is that lighthearted or idyllic? Two men so infatuated with this heartless fickle woman that they bow to her every whim? So lost without her "love" that they live in this state of emasculation sharing her with eachother and every other man who crosses her path? And betraying promises left and right? No human being could be truly satisfied with this kind of relationship. It is at its core biologically incorrect and thus psychologically incorrect. To tolerate this kind of relationship each character would have to be drenched in a lack of self worth. It is fine to film a movie about such characters as long as the correct value judgements are placed on them and judging by the actual film and the response to the film I would say that Truffault failed to do that. Or he feels that this is fun and healthy as well, which makes it even worse. Terrible.

My Dinner with Andre (1981)

Thoughts within 10 minutes of rewinding the tape

[8 August 2000]

1. Nice direction from Louis Malle on what must be the most visually challenging film to make. Never got tiresome.

2. Andre's emotional state in the movie is the proof that he is

wrong and Wally is right. Humans become weeping wrecks when

they allow themselves to drift from their senses into the

supernatural. You cannot cope with reality if you do not

perceive reality.

3. And to those of you who just read that and said "Andre's

reality is not Wally's reality", well it's time to put down the Derrida and get a job. I mean really.

4. I thoroughly enjoyed this movie from start to finish and

would recommend it to anyone with half a brain.

5. Louis Malle rocks.

6. I might watch it again tomorrow.

The War Zone (1999)

Amateur

[5 August 2000]

I just finished watching the War Zone and must say that I was not very impressed. Before I go into what I don't like about the movie let me say that the acting by all involved was excellent. Okay. The plot: how many times are we going to have to sit through movies about the outwardly happy family that is really about to burst apart at the seams due to some terrible secret? Yawn. We all know by now that there is a dark side to life. Some of us may have even experienced it. And if we haven't, we certainly encountered it in film long before Tim Roth decided to tell us about it. And how abut a nice respectable father figure for once? Or is that too "square"? The directing: How many times are we going to see the evocative lonely house on the prairie shot? Ever so symbolic and mysterious. It really grabs one's attention, doesn't it? "Just what is going on in that mysterious house", we think to ourselves. Puh-leeeez. The worst part about this film experience for me is knowing what critical acclaim this film has received. It is on the low side of average AT BEST.

Run Lola Run (1998)

False Style versus Substance Dichotomy

[5 August 2000]

I have heard much talk of this movie in terms of style versus substance. It seems that most people who think this is a great film argue that the stylistic innovation makes up for any lack of "substance". I do not believe that the two can be separated. In art, the presentation of organized themes is deliberate and controlled, as it has to be in order for it to be called art. If style is different from substance then art is meaningless. Is a well-done paint job on an apartment art? No. Is a philosophical discussion between friends art? No. Art must be a combination of the two on equal grounds and toward the same end. Which brings us to our movie. Run Lola Run was about nothing. And not only that, it was about nothing SEVERAL TIMES. "Style" alone cannot make up for nothing to say. This film was not the least bit innovative. Many directors have filmed their stupid ideas before this and created boring film. Its really nothing new. Some things have not been done before because wiser directors rejected them outright. This movie is B-O-R-I-N-G.

Magnum Force (1973)

Best of All Dirty Harry Movies

[5 August 2000]

Contrary to popular belief this is the best of the entire Dirty Harry series. Detective Callahan is more human, thus easier to identify with, thus more able to give the viewer a tangible sense of efficacy which is the reason these movies are so popular. One watches Dirty Harry in order to feel like goals can be accomplished despite the, at times, overwhelming roadblocks that occur in life. These movies provide the profound satisfaction of the bad guy getting what he deserves and the good guy getting the glory. The more human the hero the more deeply these emotions are felt by the audience. This movie does this very effectively. (Hmmmm...re-reading this I realized that if my comments are correct than this should be the most popular Dirty Harry movie, but it's not---as I freely admit in my first sentence. This is a problem. Well then, take my comments as what I alone expect from these movies. From now on I'll be a little more prepared when writing a review.)

American History X (1998)

Obvious

[3 August 2000]

This is nothing but the same mainstream ideology disguised as "edgy", "daring" entertainment. Regardless of one's politics, to see this as anything but agit-prop for hip teenagers is remarkably ignorant. The story is boring and unbelievable, the acting is stiff and unbelievable, and the directing is obvious and amateur.