Change Your Image
thermoj1
Reviews
The Butterfly Effect (2004)
Five words: $16 million Twilight Zone episode.
Need I say more? If this had been written for Zone, I would have almost thought it was the writing of Rod Serling or Richard Matheson or even M. Night Shyamalan. An original idea with some real twists and turns that anyone who loves psych thrillers with just a dash of sci-fi and romance for spice could appreciate. It just seemed like it was running out of steam during some of the scenes and experienced some continuity problems in others. Also appreciated Mr. Kutcher's attempt to be taken seriously in The Wood as an EP and an actor. It still did decent B.O. and provided a little depth for a Friday-night flick with a significant other, and no celluloid was harmed in the making of this movie, but I still think I would have preferred to go back in time, confronted Messrs. Bress, Gruber and Kutcher and convinced them their energies would be more appreciated as a SyFy Original Motion Pic. Sums up as: Small Screen Good, Big Screen...Not so good. If you feel you MUST watch the DVD, one small hint... Watch the Director's Cut. The ending at least bears some resemblance to reality.
The Choirboys (1977)
Another sanitized and homogenized product from The Factory!
My brother was a police officer for over 10 years, and he recommended that I read Joseph Wambaugh's book. I liked it so much that I re-read it several times! It really takes a cop to appreciate cop humor, and once my brother kind of explained it to me I almost split a gut. However, when workers of The Factory AKA Universal got hold of it and sanitized it, it really became bland farce (like so many other things Universal touched, truly anti-Midas at times). The Factory neatly excised such nasty things as child abuse and homicide, along with homosexuality and other freak-show attractions such as strippers, exhibitionists and the like. Even THAT could be forgiven, considering the fact that Americans at the time were kind of Pollyanna-naive on the human condition. What could NOT be forgiven was how the movie was given a relatively happy ending (just what The Factory Doctors ordered). Totally contrary to the book. I don't blame Robert Aldrich for this somewhat stale movie, I blame The Factory and its methods of stifling any creativity and integrity.
The Don Is Dead (1973)
Universal's answer to the Godfather? Not likely.
I read the novel by Marvin Albert and though it was not Puzo material, it showed some grit and strength--A more realistic depiction of a real mob family. To be fair, Richard Fleischer did a very good job of directing, considering what he had to work with. Then, Trumbo and Butler--encouraged by Universal brass, no doubt-- just had to take it and monkey with it. The casting was inconsistent, with kudos to getting Anthony Quinn, Abe Vigoda and Al Lettieri as classic Mob paisani. Still good was the casting of Robert Forster but could have been better with James Farentino or Tony Lo Bianco as Frank Regalbuto. Then it gets worse, with Frederic Forrest as the quiet leader, the "answer to Al Pacino's Michael Corleone". Forster, in my honest opinion, should have been Tony Fargo instead. The book-to-film transition was highly sanitized, understandable given Universal's desire to stay mainstream and not rock the boat. It did lead to a bump in the road when Tony Fargo was unaccountably absent when Vince and Frank were going to a sit-down with the numbers boss Zutti. In the book, Tony was dallying with one of Marie Orlando's callgirls. All in all, an attempt by "The Factory" to throw the dice and see if they come up with an answer to The Godfather. Didn't happen.
Locusts (2005)
A tribute to the 50's drive-in shockers, but not much to digest!
SPOILER ALERT--Getting that out of the way! Now--To begin with, I thought that the movie started out reasonably well in the first scene after opening credits where the girlfriend goes into the locust box. It made me think that this might be the possible cause for the impending disaster. Gave me a good cheap scare, and that is the only reason that it didn't get a 1. From there...Well, the plot just kind of went downhill. First plot hole: If the Dept. of Defense was acting in conjunction with Peter (John Heard), what would have stopped them from just going in and taking a couple of the little hungry buggers even before Maddy (Lucy Lawless) knew about the project to begin with? Washington DC is like a sieve, the walls have ears AND eyes. Second--And this is where the SPOILER warning is REPEATED...What makes anyone above the age of 9 or 10 think that the national interconnect grid being juiced up to be a gigantic "bug zapper" would work anyway? EMF (Electro-Magnetic Fields) ARE generated by power lines, but the electricity required to make them flare like that would probably melt the lines and/or cause an electrical crossover (Boys and girls, I think I know what I'm talking about, my uncle worked for a major public utility for over 35 years). THIRD--MOST IMPORTANT--Why did it have to be genetic engineering on LOCUSTS? Why not conduct genetics experiments on a subject like MOTHS or BUTTERFLIES? All I can say that was good about this movie was that if it was back in the 50's it would have made for a decent movie at the drive-in (and then get moved to "Shock Theater" or whatever on TV. In that sense, it paid a somewhat more sophisticated tribute to the 1950's sci-fi thrillers. For today's audiences? Ain't gonna fly. Just trying to keep it real, folks.
The Day After Tomorrow (2004)
Independence Day Goes Climactic!
The road to celluloid Hell is always paved with good intentions, and The Day After Tomorrow is living proof that this road exists. Mr.Emmerich took a well-intentioned futuristic look from Messrs. Bell and Strieber, tried to squeeze the events which could potentially happen in anywhere from 100 years or more (probably more) and turn them into a thrilling story but instead turned it into something rather aimless and inconsistent. Watching big cities get tormented and trashed seems to have turned into a national pastime (I cite ID4, Deep Impact, ad infinito and nauseum), and I think that Mr. Emmerich believes that he is giving us a well-intentioned look at the "Big Picture", but it gets rather sketchy and loses focus. When I went to see the movie this afternoon, I saw something that I have seen only MAYBE once before. There were people getting up and leaving some time before the end of the movie. There were MANY goofs, such as Mr. Gyllenhaal's use of the payphone: 1. NO central switching office would be operable with the water that was flooding into Manhattan at that time, and 2. With the way the water was flooding in, NO electronic device such as a payphone would be operable fully submerged in water the way that one was depicted. Another equally improbable premise is the way the cast was going around with no gloves on. If the surrounding metal objects were as frozen as the movie made them to be, there would have been LOTS of injuries due to flesh cold-welded to metal. Another inconsistency was the gas burners in the fast food joint that Mr. Quaid and his assistant fell into. If the temperature fell so quickly that gasoline would freeze, then how was his character able to use natural gas?
I do realize that Mr. Emmerich meant this as only a fantasy and has allegedly represented it as such, but shouldn't there be a line drawn between good fantasy and total BS?
There were two things I did enjoy about the movie, however. I did enjoy the SFX VERY much, very realistic in quite a few ways. And I did enjoy the uplifting tone of the movie that we can ALL pull together and face adversity and near-certain death with dignity and nobility if we choose. Otherwise, lots of high-tech sizzle but no steak.