Change Your Image
speedy-droid
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Star Trek: The Next Generation: Who Watches the Watchers (1989)
One of the Best TNG Episodes... Should Have Been a Movie
The worst thing about this episode is that it's far too rushed. The concept is intriguing and could easily have been a feature-length film. For a 1980s TV series that was still finding its legs, the acting and story were very good. However, 45 minutes was not enough time and there are obviously gaps in the plot. The most glaring example is that it takes Picard only about 5 minutes of screen time to bring a bronze- age person aboard the Enterprise, educate her about 24th-century medical technology, dispel a return to an ancient superstitious religion, and solve the problems caused by an inadvertent first contact.
This episode gets a lot of heat for being anti-religious, but it's really not. The dilemma is that a progressive society is inadvertently contacted by the Federation, which triggers a return to beliefs in an ancient religion based on superstition (the kind where thunder means that God is angry and demands a human sacrifice). At no point in the episode is it asserted that there is no God... in fact, that issue is not even addressed. The issue is the superstitious basis for a religion long since discarded which returns with a vengeance due to the inadvertent contact and ultimately results in Picard being worshiped as a god.
Men in Black (1997)
The Cast Makes this Movie
This is, by far, one of the best cast-driven movies I've ever seen. The plot itself is ridiculous and the visuals are even more so. However the combination of Will Smith and the not-so-subtle straight men -- Tommy Lee Jones and Rip Torn -- makes the movie work. This is a movie that makes "Trite" work, exceptionally well. It's still my favorite MiB movie, closely followed by number 3. I do like sci-fi that doesn't take itself too seriously. If you're the same, this is a fun 2 hours.
The one-liners are non-stop...
"I AM half the man you are"
"We at the FBI do not have a sense of humor that we are aware of"
"I'm gonna come back and talk to you about them Rolexes"
Arrival (2016)
Nice Discussion of Time and Moral Dilemma
Right up front, this is not Star Wars or Star Trek. There is only one explosion in this film, and it only lasts for about one second. This is science fiction, not science fantasy, and it will be incredibly boring if you were waiting for Guardians of the Galaxy, Part II.
Consider yourself lucky if you didn't see this one in the cinema, because about 75 minutes into the film, you hit that point where you think, "Well, now I have to start watching again from the beginning."
If you liked Interstellar more than you liked Star Wars: Episode VII, then this is probably a good movie for you.
I already checked the "Spoilers" box, but this is an extra warning that will definitely spoil the movie...
The movie is based upon a short story that discusses the subject of predestination and free will. If you could see your whole life from start to finish, would you change anything?
Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (1986)
The Last "Old-School" Star Trek Story
The Voyage Home (TVH) is indeed the last Star Trek movie to follow the original, traditional goal verbally stated by Gene Roddenberry back in the 1960s... To address current social and political issues using a fictional universe as a metaphor. Roddenberry wasn't specifically trying to create what most folks consider to be science fiction, he wanted to address issues like race in a way that people would understand, but that would also make it past the censors. For example, there was no way, in the 1960s, that NBC would have aired a prime- time TV show about Black/White racial strife, but they did air a Star Trek episode about people with half-black, half-white faces who hated each other so much that they genocided each other (Let That Be Your Last Battlefield). Why did they hate each other so much? Some were white on the right side and black on the left side, and the others were the opposite. Nichelle Nichols confirmed this in a TV interview when she recounted a meeting with Roddenberry and told him, "You're making morality plays." Roddenberry responded, "Shhh... Don't tell anyone."
TVH hits this old-school theme right on the button by addressing a modern issue... animal species endangerment and extinction caused by man. The plot is a bit quirky and silly at times, but the core of the story is rock solid. Humans have gotten themselves into a real pickle and now face extinction themselves, all because of their ecological negligence and short-sightedness. There is also an ethical "awakening" when Spock theorizes that Humpback Whales might just be a much older and more advanced species than Humans. That question is never answered, but by the end of the movie it does seem somewhat possible that the whales are, at least in some fashion, ahead of humans on the evolutionary ladder. The whales' "God" certainly isn't afraid to show up and wipe out the whole planet Earth. It's never quite clear if the whale god is only trying to establish contact, or if it's exacting vengeance, or it's a combination of the two. It appears to me that it either doesn't recognize humanity or just completely ignores it, but it is intent upon doing some serious damage to Earth. It's certainly one of the most powerful entities ever seen in the Star Trek Universe... the only entity other than V'Ger to show utter contempt for the Human species, possibly indicating that Humans are nothing more to it than an amoeba is to Humans.
The underlying message is that yes, humans do have an impact on the Earth, and their negligence can unintentionally genocide a (possibly sentient) species. In the Star Trek universe, at least, the whales understand the concepts of species and self-awareness to some degree, as Spock mentions that Gracie understood his intentions and was saddened by the treatment of her species by humans.
The backstory of the crew's return and Spock's re-discovering of himself keeps the new-age Trekkies interested, which is difficult to do without some phasers and explosions. There's a nice little surprise at the end, resolving an issue that was raised over 15 years prior to the release of TVH, and it totally caught me and most other Trek fans off-guard when we first saw it. That is the resolution between Spock and Sarek, which I honestly believed would never be resolved.
For the non-Trekkies, the Spock/Sarek issue is a character study of the Human species. Contrary to popular belief, Vulcans have far more powerful and often violent emotions than humans, which almost led to their self-destruction a long time ago. Vulcans are not without emotion... rather, their emotions are so passionate that they are compelled to control them and become "logical beings" for the primary purpose of preventing them from exterminating themselves. Sarek, a full Vulcan, actually has more difficulty controlling his emotions than Spock, his half-Vulcan, half-Human son. Until this film, Spock was staunchly Vulcan (or wanted to be), while Sarek has been leaving clues all along that he wanted to be an emotional being... more Human. Sarek spent a lot of time on Earth as an ambassador and married a Human female. He opposed Spock's entry into Starfleet, probably because he didn't want Spock to lose control of his Human side, which Sarek feels constant association with Humans will cause. The irony is that Sarek desperately wants his half-Human son to be Vulcan, while he, a full Vulcan, desperately wants to be Human, at least subconsciously.
Neither Nimoy nor Lenard is a top-notch actor, but they've been playing (and living) these two characters for a long time, and it comes to a head in this scene near the end of TVH. If Star Trek ever had a scene approaching "fine cinema" quality, this is it. Both Nimoy and Lenard nail the scene, and their characters, perfectly.
Flight of the Navigator (1986)
A Great Sci-Fi Movie for Kids
This is one of the best sci-fi movies I have ever seen for kids, and not just because your kid (about 8 - 12 years old) will love it. The best thing about it is that it takes a more realistic approach to an alien encounter than most adult movies in the present day. The details are a little corny and cheesy... of course... it's a kid's movie. But the basic premise is sound:
1) An advanced alien species would most likely be non-belligerent explorers. The alien (actually an alien machine) in this movie views humanity with a kind of indifference, much the same way as humans look at cats... cute, but stupid and primitive.
2) Despite their indifference, the aliens don't wantonly destroy life. They are curious about all life, but they don't interfere with it or destroy it. Although aloof, the alien seems sympathetic to all life... he briefly laments that one of the creatures he is observing is now homeless, as his planet was destroyed by a comet.
3) The aliens possess advanced technology that the movie doesn't attempt to explain. No tired Star Trek dilithium crystal explanations. We don't even know the alien's true shape, although we assume it's the walnut shape. It can change shape at will. This would be an epic technological breakthrough for humanity, but the second Terminator movie is the only other mainstream movie to explore this idea.
If you're into the whole movies as education thing (as I am), you can really engage your kid after watching this movie by discussing what you think aliens would be like.
There is no sex, no violence (guns are drawn but not used), and only one or two relatively "tame" curse words.
Captain America: Civil War (2016)
A Nice Surprise -- A Very Intelligent Morality Film
Nice timing for a film to highlight the moral dilemma facing the USA today: Liberty or Safety.
On the one hand, we have Tony Stark/Iron Man, who values safety above liberty:
1. He signs an international agreements that gives governments control over what individuals do with their individual talents.
2. He indefinitely imprisons a minor girl who is accused of no crime, justifying it by stating that her prison is a luxury home.
3. He believes that an individual forced to commit a crime is still responsible for that crime.
4. He denies the right to legal representation (to Captain America) and imprisons him without due process.
... and many other violations of the U.S. Constitution
Captain America, on the other hand, is disgusted by Stark, and of course the film ends in a metal-clad grudge match between the two.
Additional characters (superheroes/antiheroes) are brought into the Avengers fold, and the action is pretty good, but I got the most enjoyment out of the morality side of the story.
In the Heart of the Sea (2015)
A Movie that Should Not Have Been
The film is well-made, the actors do a good job, and it's a powerful story. The problem is that the story just doesn't make a good movie. The filmmakers had to stretch hard to get the limited amount of action that the movie contains, and although the story is powerful, there is no high drama and there are no heroes.
The bit of drama that hits the hardest is entirely fiction...
Chase had no "Moment of Truth" with the whale. In fact, he continued with a long and prosperous career in the whaling industry, eventually even having his very own whaling ship built. This is documented history -- his ship's name was Charles Carroll.
Saving Private Ryan (1998)
A Powerful Film with a Difficult Question
"Saving Private Ryan" is, more or less, a character study, not of only one person, but of U.S. philosophy. Why send a squad to find one guy and send him home? The premise is that the mother had already lost 3 of her 4 sons to the War (World War II, or the Great Patriotic War), and that she should not be expected to lose her 4th and final son to the War. She had lost 75% of her children, and shouldn't have to lose 100% of her children.
However, what about the mother who watches her only child go off to war? If he dies, she already lost 100% of her children to war. It's an issue that comes up many times in the film, and we get to see every man in the squad fight with this issue in his own mind during the film.
The "Private Ryan" character (Matt Damon) fights with this issue too. He's already been designated as an object of hatred and contempt by the entire squad, before they even meet him. He understands that the mission is both justified and ludicrous, at the same time. He didn't ask to be "rescued", and he doesn't want to be rescued, but he seems to understand why he should be rescued. He represents the feeling that the USA shouldn't lose all of its children to the War.
The main characters are a brilliant mix...
The captain, who is fulfilling his duty to his country in its time of need.
The sergeant... a crusty old lifetime war veteran... the kind of guy who actually eats MREs because he likes the taste.
The sniper... a soldier who feels that his God gave him an amazing gift, specifically for the purpose of defeating the German army.
The Jew... who joined the army specifically to fight against the anti-Jewish Nazis.
The "Tough Guy"... an almost Mafia-like character from New York City, who has no problem with getting in the face of his Sergeant, and even his Captain.
The "Good Guy"... who initially seems like a Tough Guy, but ends up being a soft-hearted guy who royally screws up by trying to save the life of a little girl in a war zone, at an inopportune moment.
I didn't really care for Giovanni Ribisi's character in the film. The character just didn't seem realistic to me. However, the rest of the cast is a total Home Run.
The film does a great job of capturing the horrors and realism of first-person warfare, and the story is awesome, too. Surely, one of Spielberg's finest films.
Shutter Island (2010)
Brilliant Psychological Thriller
This little gem was worth an immediate Second Viewing, just to pick up on all of the "little things" that I missed the first time.
It's easy to just throw around the name "Martin Scorsese", and assume that the movie is going to be good. But the truth is that... sometimes... Scorsese is absolutely brilliant.
I haven't read the novel upon which this film is based, so all of my comments are based upon Scorsese's interpretation... not the novel, the Film.
The beauty of "Shutter Island" is that there really is no resolution at the end of the film. Was that really a guy deluding himself, trying to escape from the horrors of his own life, or was he still trapped inside of a drug-induced hallucination? Nobody knows.
He obviously knew, at the very end of the film, that by speaking to his "partner?", he was basically telling everyone that he had not been "cured." Was that a "request" to be lobotomized, so that he would never have to remember the horrors of his life again, or was it an acceptance of the fact that he would never escape from the island? Everyone assumes the former, but Scorsese leaves the question open.
Equilibrium (2002)
Not perfect, but a highly underrated film
I consider this to be Christian Bale's "Breakout" film, as an adult actor. He wasn't bad in "Reign of Fire", but he is much better in "Equilibrium." Credit the filmmakers with a good plot and script, too.
Bale is very good as the quiet, "grey hat", powerful (anti?)-hero. There is some type-casting at work here, but Bale carries it well.
The film can't resist some clichéd remarks... "No... Not without incident." <*yawn*>
Otherwise, the film does well with the subject... humans without emotion. Sean Bean did very well with his part, and deserved some more screen time with his performance.
The Terminal (2004)
A Wonderful Character Study
The Terminal is a wonderful character study, which is something with which Tom Hanks seems to be intrigued... Forrest Gump, Cast Away, The Terminal, Bridge of Spies, etc. He does a very good job with it, for the most part.
First of all... The premise of the film is unlikely. A person in the situation of Hanks' character -- Viktor -- would not be treated/ignored in the manner show in the film, especially post-9/11 (the film was released in 2004). I know -- I work in the travel and transportation industry. However, that is not really relevant to the point(s) that the film appears to be trying to make, so a little suspension of belief in this regard is acceptable.
Just for the Record: In the real world, Viktor would swiftly have been removed from the airport, and probably would have been granted temporary asylum or somehow returned to his home or an intermediary location. At any rate, he wouldn't have been allowed to wander around the airport for weeks or months, when the authorities knew his situation from Day One. In that respect, the film is just a caricature of U.S. bureaucracy. That situation was necessary for the plot, so the filmmakers had to use a little "artistic license" to create the situation which they wanted.
So, then we see the Character Study. A foreign national, who doesn't know English, is suddenly trapped in an unusual situation in the USA. He's not an accused criminal, but he's trapped. How would he respond? According to the film, he does so by reverting to his own culture and personal morals. That makes sense. When we feel afraid and isolated, we almost always revert to our basic instincts and base culture. It helps us to feel safe and comfortable.
Viktor does that. He looks for ways to sustain himself, he helps other people as he was (probably) taught to do as a child.
The only real issue that I had with the film was the somewhat manufactured relationship between Viktor and Amelia (Catherine Zeta- Jones). That seemed to be a bit non-sequitur.
Overall, a very good film that explores humanity and emotion very well.
Star Trek Beyond (2016)
Cookie-Cutter Shoot-'em-Up
I like Star Trek, but this isn't Star Trek.
Save your money and your time. Here's all you need to know...
Bad guy finds awesome weapon and threatens to destroy the Federation. He destroys the Enterprise, but Kirk and company eventually show up to save the day at the very last moment. The End.
The bad guy ends up being some ex-military guy from before the Federation. Apparently, he's been stranded on some planet for so long and/or longs for the "good old days" of wartime so much that he wants to bust up the Federation so that the military days will return. As plot-twists go, it's pretty weak.
The old, worn-out "hive mind" concept allows Kirk, etc. to bust up the bad guy's fleet, and Kirk manages to get rid of the super-weapon at the very last moment.
There's no meaningful story, other than an under-explored back-story that the entire incident manages to convince both Kirk and Spock to stay on the Enterprise (the Enterprise "A", now).
The Spock/McCoy relationship gets the most attention, while the Spock/Kirk and Spock/Uhura relationships get almost none at all.
I don't blame the actors. They all did just fine. They just didn't have a decent story to work with.
I continue to feel that Karl Urban as McCoy is doing the best job. He's really "owning" the character, but putting his own spin on it as well. I was happy to see Urban get some decent screen time in this film.
I wouldn't even buy the DVD for this one. Wait for it to appear on HBO.
Focus (2015)
An Entertaining "Con" Movie with a Lot of Flaws
The film has the feel of a "Con" movie that really plays more upon the emotions than upon reality. Will Smith's character relies upon rather dubious techniques to win big gains. In real life, those "Cons" place a lot more of the risk upon the played, rather than the player. Even at the very end, at the climax of the final scam, the entire Con depends upon a shot from a handgun being placed between the 3rd and the 4th rib, or something like that.
Margot Robbie turns in another stellar performance in this film, not long after "The Wolf of Wall Street". It was nice to see Gerald McRaney, in true "Major Dad" form, back in action as well.
All in all, the film was fun to watch, but had a manufactured and unbelievable plot.
Firefly (2002)
A Brilliant Little TV Serial that Died Way Before Its Time
Firefly was a rare bird... one of those unique little television series that really opened up a new idea. Unfortunately, the producers of the show and the Network airing the show never came eye-to-eye about the show, and it collapsed before it even got started. This, despite a stellar concept and an unbeatable cast, as evidenced by the continued success of several of the stars of the show... Nathan Fillion, Gina Torres, Morena Baccarin, Adam Baldwin, etc.
It's a shame that the show never got its full credit and its full run, although the story-line did come to an abrupt ending in the follow- on film, "Serenity", which exposed the intended story that was supposed to take 5 to 7 seasons to be revealed in the series.
The character development in the series is remarkable, considering that there were only 14 one-hour episodes, and a relatively large ensemble cast, including a few returning characters.
Firefly played the science-fiction theme quite nicely for a show done on a marginal television budget. The show very rarely relied upon special effects, instead using realistic situations to make its points and build its plots. It's easy to imagine a future where real food is more valuable than gold and where the simplest machines are highly-valued because they are reliable and don't break. There is a very good reason why people in the distant future might still be using revolvers and semi-automatic handguns... they work. They are very simple machines that rarely break.
If humanity does end up ruining the Earth and/or becoming too large of a population, it's very likely that we'll strike out and establish new worlds, many of which will require a lot of hard labor to support life. The premise of the show is quite sound.
Studio politics being what they are, this show just wasn't destined for a long run, and that's a shame. It would have been a lot of fun to watch for 6 or 7 years.
Childhood's End (2015)
A Slightly Better Than Average, "Dumbed-Down" Version of a Classic
I had very high expectations for this movie/film/mini-series. I am a huge fan of "Classic" Science Fiction, and "Childhood's End" is my favorite Sci-Fi novel, Ever. I've been waiting 40 years to see this movie. I'm very pleased to have finally seen this story made into a film, and I did enjoy most of it. I found the first part/episode (of three parts/episodes) to be the most true to the original story. After that, the movie slid backwards a little, but not terribly so.
If you've read the book, and especially if you do enjoy the classic, more cerebral style of science fiction, you'll probably have mixed emotions about the movie. The film remains very true (not completely true) to the concept and basic plot of the movie. That was very important to me. I haven't watched a film adaptation of a classic Sci-Fi novel in almost 20 years... ever since I saw that ridiculous abomination, "Starship Troopers." I remember thinking, "I don't think the screenwriters or the director read the book"... and I was right. The director openly admitted that he never read the book. Other than ripping off the title and the names of the characters, "Starship Troopers" is completely unrelated to anything in the book. I breathed a huge sigh of relief when I quickly realized that "Childhood's End" was not similarly written and produced by individuals with IQs smaller than their shoe sizes.
If you watch this film thinking it's going to be "Star Wars" or post-Original Series "Star Trek", you're going to be severely disappointed. There's not a single Death Star, Laser, or Photon Torpedo in this movie. Go watch "Transformers 9, the Quest for More Explosions", instead.
The major differences, in my opinion, between the movie and the book are:
1) Personal/Romantic/Family relationships are more detailed in the film, and get a lot of "screen time." Clarke was never particularly good at character development... or maybe he just didn't think that it was necessary to his stories. In the film, there's a lot of time spent on relationship stuff, which is supposed to enhance the dramatic impact of the climax of the story, when the secret of the alien "invasion" is revealed.
2) A lot more attention is given to the Religious aspect of the story. Although the Christian God and The Devil are important concepts in the book, the movie ramps it up a bit.
3) Although it's only for a few moments, the movie gives the impression that the Overlords are directly involved in the evolution of Humanity. The book depicts them as observers and caretakers only. In the book, Humanity is ready to evolve, and the Overlords are on Earth simply to prevent Humanity from interfering with its own evolution, and to observe the process of that evolution. The Overlords, in the book, are essentially Cosmic Guardians and Librarians. They take a more active role in the film.
4) A lot of things are "Dumbed Down" in the film, I suppose to attract at least a few more viewers -- those who like everything to be explained to them. For example, in the film, the only mention made of Why the Overlords appear to be Devils or Demons is one character's statement, "They've been here before." The book's explanation is a bit more intricate... Humans have a "Racial or Species Memory" of the Overlords, and associate that memory with the end of the Human Race. Therefore, Humanity associates the physical appearance of the Overlords as the image of Ultimate Evil. Since Humanity does evolve beyond its 4-dimensional existence, time is meaningless for those "Racial/Species Memories." Humanity, as a Species, subconsciously remembers the Overlords from its own "Future", and the arrival of the Overlords heralds the end of Humanity and the destruction of Earth. It's worth noting that no religious text describes the Devil's physical appearance... that's entirely a construct of writers of fiction.
There are several scenes in the movie which appear to me to be blatant attempts to increase the drama, which is unnecessary, in my opinion.
My personal vote for Best Actor in this film goes to Charles Dance (Karellen). His portrayal of a sad, yet comforting Overlord is very convincing and adds a lot to the story. If you don't really keep up with the story, you'll miss the significance of this. The Overlords are little more than Slaves, who are forever forbidden/prevented from evolving to a higher state of existence. They exist only to serve a higher power, and seem to experience great despair in witnessing the pain and eventual destruction of species like their own -- those who "cannot follow" their children in that higher state. Charles Dance does an exceptional job of expressing this... even his smiles (rare) are somehow sad. He's like a doctor witnessing the last days of a dying cancer patient.
Star Wars: Episode VII - The Force Awakens (2015)
Not Bad... Certainly Not Extraordinary... Better than the Prequels
The movie was fun to watch, especially after 10 years since the last film. The new leads, played by Boyega, Ridley, and Driver, are much better than Christensen and company. And... Thank Goodness... NO tag-along "comic relief" aliens.
The plot is so-so, but it does appear to be leading up to something which could make for an excellent sequel and finale in this trilogy. Kylo Ren is the most interesting character so far, so I hope that he sticks around for whole trilogy. Something happened between Ren, Leia, Han, and Luke... and I think it's going to be a lot of fun watching that story unfold. Plus, Adam Driver has the character "Nailed".
The first two trilogies started off with a big "We Won!" in the first film, but that was not the case in Episode VII. I like where that is going. This seems to be a big setup for a very "Dark" Episode VIII, which would be awesome. The release date for VIII has already been pushed back, perhaps because the writers and director see an opportunity to really make it the darkest "middle" episode of the whole saga.
The acting by Driver is exceptional, and both Ridley and Boyega are above average, although Boyega was stuck in some places where the dialog didn't quite seem to meet the situation. Gleeson (General Hux) does some decent work, although he doesn't have many lines in the film. Word is that Gleeson and Isaac (Poe Dameron) will have bigger parts in VIII. I think that would be a good thing.
I saw the film in IMAX, which was definitely worth it. If you haven't seen it yet, and don't have easy access to an IMAX cinema, I'd wait for the Blu-Ray.
Captain Phillips (2013)
Pretty Decent Thriller based upon Current Events
I genuinely liked "Captain Phillips." It came across as a reasonably believable account of the incident that occurred. Of course, I'm sure that it wasn't entirely accurate, as few films of this nature are.
There have been quite a few challenges by the crew members of the ship which is the subject of this film, contending that Phillips is not the hero which the film portrays him to be. Well... Those crew members were there, and I was not. It's just as likely that they are telling the truth as that they are lying, as far as most of us are concerned.
So... On the merits of the film itself... It's a pretty good flick, and it's believable. It's tense. It's certainly not an "Action Film"... definitely more of a drama. It's basically a broad character study of Captain Phillips and a couple of the Somali pirates. Why are they here? Why are they doing this? What are their true goals and motivations? That kind of stuff.
These character studies do get interesting. The Somali characters let a few clues slip about the situation at hand... "I have bosses, too" ... etc. One gets the feeling that the REAL antagonists in this film will never be seen... and, in fact, they are not. That fact, in and of itself, is disturbing.
In the end, "Captain Phillips" is the story of a brief confrontation between two cultures that are so vastly different that there is very little chance that they will understand each other in the near future.
The Martian (2015)
Not Perfect, but a Solid, Enjoyable Story
First of all... I really enjoyed The Martian, and I think that most people would. It's a long film, but it did manage to pick up the pace a bit, right when I was starting to get a little bored.
Whenever a film like this, which tries to be accurate, is released... Everyone, including me, starts to pick apart the technical inaccuracies, and there are a few. The most commonly mentioned so far is the "impossible" sandstorm at the beginning of the film. Such an event is, indeed, quite impossible on Mars, and even the author admits that it was merely a plot device. He should have thought of a better one.
However, there is nothing in The Martian that just screams "No Way!" to me. The author and the filmmakers did a very good job of trying to be as accurate as possible, while still allowing the story to proceed. There is some "artistic license" but there is no "deus ex machina" in The Martian. It's a good movie that doesn't betray anything that is science.
Really, the most unbelievable thing that I saw in the whole movie was the gym on the Hermes -- Huge Windows and 5 times the space and gym equipment needed to accommodate 6 astronauts. It looked like the hotel gym at the Marriott. No Way would NASA or anyone else waste that kind of space, and build such an unrealistic section of the ship.
As long as I'm doing my part in the nit-picking, we are once again faced, as in so many space-travel movies, with a centrifuge that is too small and/or doesn't rotate fast enough. And it doesn't feel like normal gravity either, as is readily apparent if you just gently toss a tennis ball into the air. OK, I'm done with my nit-picking.
As many people already have stated, I was instantly reminded of the movie "Cast Away", with Tom Hanks. I liked Cast Away, but it did get boring at times. The Martian solves this problem by injecting a bit more humor and action into the film. Rather than Hanks' downbeat character, Damon's character is far more upbeat and involved in his own rescue throughout the entire film. I definitely did not expect the humor that is present throughout the film. Whether it was script-writing, ad-libbing, or a combination of the two, it worked out quite well.
As with most movies of this type, the ending is poor compared to the rest of the film. The climax is so over-the-top dramatic that I didn't get the least bit excited about it. The thing is... the film didn't even Need a climax. The climax was already built in. A guy has survived on Mars for well over one year. Just being rescued at all is a climax. Instead, we got a bomb set off aboard a spaceship -- intentionally -- and some kind of glove-thruster maneuver.
I think that a much better ending would have been Watney passing out during the launch (which he did in the movie) and then waking up to slowly see the Hermes come into focus, nearby, slowly approaching, and a waiting Hermes crew-member with an outstretched hand. Add a few tears if you like that sort of thing.
Too bad this film didn't get to show on IMAX.
Overall, a great film. It's definitely worth it to see it in on the big screen.
Hachi: A Dog's Tale (2009)
A Decent Interpretation of a True Story
I am struck deeply by the tale of Hachiko. Yes... My ID here on IMDb is based upon the story of Hachiko -- But let me be clear -- it is NOT based upon this film. I have reviewed many films prior to reviewing this one, here on IMDb, using my "Hachi Ko" ID. I feel that I can review this film objectively.
First of all, after reading all of the accounts of the Real story of Hachiko, I can confidently say that this film is a decent story in its own right, but it is a Very Loose interpretation of the tale of the real Hachiko. It is, for all practical purposes, a Work of Fiction.
"Hachi", the film, barely works as a 1.5-hour film. I did enjoy watching it, but it's not worth a second look. The film is essentially a 1.5-hour melodrama that appears to have the sole purpose of making dog-lovers cry. There is very little in the way of a real plot in this film. The same instrumental music playing over and over and over again throughout the entire film doesn't help.
With that said, I'm not going to pretend that I know how the film could have been better. Most likely, it probably just wasn't a good film story to begin with, and should have just been left alone.
Basically, an empty-nest guy stumbles upon a dog, and falls in love with the dog, which also falls in love with him. The guy's wife gets jealous of the dog, but before that jealousy can become a serious plot issue, the guy suddenly dies of a freak aneurysm. Then, the dog waits for him at the train station for several years, until the dog finally dies. I'm not trying to make fun of the story. My point is that there is only so much that you can do with that information. Just getting this film to 90 minutes was a stretch. This story was better left on paper.
A few points that were brought up regarding flaws in the plot, by some of those who commented earlier:
1) 'The dog only went back to the station for the food that the station vendors were giving him.' Actually, in the true story, in Japan, the vendors initially hated the dog and shooed him away for awhile. Eventually, however, they began to respect the dog's loyalty, and began feeding him.
2) 'In the film, no one in the family seemed to realize that when the dog disappeared, he was waiting at the train station.' Well, the guy's wife was the only one in the family who would have known that, and she supposedly hated the dog. She certainly didn't want to go retrieve the dog, and she didn't talk about the dog with her daughter.
3) As for the dog... Is it loyalty or obedience? Akita Inu are known for their "loyalty" and strict "pack mentality." If the guy was the "Alpha", then the dog would have waited out of Fealty as much as out of Loyalty. Since none of us is a dog, we can't know for sure exactly which emotion drives a dog to be loyal. I have my opinions, but they are just that... Opinions.
Chappie (2015)
Original Idea, Great Story, Poor Ending, Mediocre Acting
There are so many good things -- things that I really like about Chappie. Unfortunately, some of the acting is just not up to par, and the film just seems "unfinished"... as if the screenwriters got tired and just quickly whipped the last few pages of the script together as the last moment. Another few days in Editing would have greatly improved the film.
The ending is just odd, and while it makes a few good points, it mostly abandons the main theme of the film, in my opinion. All of a sudden, it's all about the people, and Chappie's existence seems to be just an afterthought.
The last time I saw a film that depicted A.I. as a powerful entity that literally began in a child-like state and had to learn everything from the ground up, was 4 decades ago, in "2001: A Space Odyssey." Watching a bona-fide killing machine that was specifically designed for police duties, just cower in the corner while learning the meaning of the words "Daddy" and "Mommy," and playing with dolls... was just Unique. Not many films really present something truly refreshing and new these days.
The acting itself is an odd twist. Sharlto Copley isn't even REALLY on the screen, but he acts circles around every other actor in the film. However, Dev Patel and Ninja also put in some very nice work. The real Heavyweights in the film, Hugh Jackman and Sigourney Weaver, are mediocre at best. Of course they are not used to playing relatively minor roles, as they do in this film. Their energy is just not in their acting in Chappie, and their characters come across as "plastic" and unbelievable.
The special effects in the film are not remarkable at all, with the exception of Chappie himself, which is a magnificent piece of performance capture and animation. Chappie's movements are so realistic that when I first saw the film, I kept trying to figure out how they fit a person inside the robot suit. I assumed that there was a tall, ultra-skinny person in there. I didn't find out until later that it was actually performance capture.
The film definitely has its own strong answer to the "Trading Places" scenario. Chappie is 100% a product of his environment, not any kind of "destiny" or "genetic predispositions."
While Chappie is certainly not a comedy, you will definitely want to pay attention during the sequence where Ninja takes Chappie out into the real world to steal cars. That is the most brilliant thing that I have seen in a long time. I was laughing so hard that I could hardly breathe.
Seeing Chappie is definitely worth your time and money, although you'll be disappointed in some of the acting performances and the lack of some final polishing work by the film-makers.
Jurassic World (2015)
Nothing Spectacular
The movie was a disappointment but did have a few good action sequences. The CGI is stellar... Incredible, even.
However, that can't make up for Zero character chemistry. Not one single character in this movie is believable. It all seems like that awkward high-school prom, when everyone is trying so hard to act cool and/or natural.
The continuing "Dis" on Costa Rica continues, with a shot at another airport masquerading as the Juan Santamaria airport in San José, and the use of the "CR" prefix on aircraft (which is NOT Costa Rica's prefix). In addition, the pilot is shown flying the helicopter from the left side, which is the opposite of real-life.
A pretty mundane script, Although the show was still enjoyable to watch, for the action sequences.
The Campaign (2012)
Excellent Parody of U.S. Politics
The Campaign is one of the best comedies that I have ever seen. You definitely have to watch this movie in context, and see past the obvious, crass, junior-high-school humor. Most of the real humor is buried deep within this film. A few subtle points, just to get you started:
1) Labrador Retrievers (dogs) did NOT originate in the USA. Pugs are from China, but were bred long before China was under Communist rule.
2) The car that Cam Brady drives is made in Canada.
3) Cam Brady parts his hair to the Left... Marty Huggins parts his hair to the Right.
Rendition (2007)
Very Chilling
One of the better movies that I have seen concerning terrorism. This is a very well-done movie about fear and prejudice. I like that the movie never addresses exactly how the telephone calls occurred.
I also wonder how many people really understand the ending, where the CIA guy (Gyllenhaal) sneaks the guy out of prison onto a small cargo ship. I really wonder how many people understand the implications of that.
You CANNOT let someone who is innocent go free. If you torture the guy and he turns out to be innocent, you MUST KILL HIM! Because... What would happen if people found out that you tortured an innocent guy? If you torture a guy, and he turns out to be innocent... You MUST KILL HIM!
That is a bone-chilling reality that is brought to light in this film.
Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015)
Good Action, "Blah" storyline
Spoilers Follow!
This entire movie felt way over-the-top melodramatic, and like one big 2-hour set-up for the next "Guardians of the Galaxy."
I miss Tom Hiddleston as Loki. He would certainly have been a huge boost over the trite dialog that permeates this film.
There are some bright spots... We finally get to see Paul Bettany's face in an Avengers movie. In fact, Paul Bettany and James Spader pretty much steal the show, such as it is.
Scarlett Johansson and Mark Ruffalo have a couple of really cool moments in the film... good acting... but then fall flat, later in the film.
Jeremy Renner (Hawkeye) also has a couple of moments that fall flat... Just not in line with the Avengers theme.
Almost all of the attempts at humor are just too manufactured and inappropriate to the story. Would 2 characters really quip about remodeling a house while riding on an entire city being elevated into the stratosphere and fighting an army of Self-Aware robots?
Joss Whedon has done some awesome stuff in the past, but this script was just horrible. That being said, the actors did what they could to salvage the project, and the action is very good.
Star Trek: First Contact (1996)
A Great Character Study of Picard... With One Huge Flaw
I liked "First Contact" instantly.
I had always hoped that someone would do the Zefram Cochrane story, and this caught me by surprise. I thought the main plot was particularly well-done, and deserves a "9". Cromwell did an outstanding job of portraying Cochrane as just a regular guy who had a brilliant idea, and didn't want to be famous, or any kind of "hero." I liked that little "twist" on Star Trek history.
Unfortunately, the whole "Borg" subplot just detracted from the Cochrane story. I would have happily settled for a shorter movie or any other excuse for the Enterprise to travel into the past. "Borg" is just Old and Worn Out. It is now, and it was in 1996. It almost ruined the movie for me.
A couple of particularly "low points":
1) Picard calls Worf a "Coward" -- Totally out-of-character. I can't imagine the Picard character ever doing that, Borg or not.
2) The Holodeck and Dixon Hill -- Worn Out, totally self-serving, and completely unnecessary.
However, the movie did turn out O.K., with a few great lines and scenes.
1) Lily: "Borg? Sounds Swedish."
2) Lily: "It's my first Ray Gun."
3) Data: "Resistance... Is Futile!" (probably the best line Brent Spiner ever had in Star Trek... delivered perfectly -- I guess the re-hash of the Borg story line had a purpose, after all)
4) Troi: "He wouldn't even talk to me unless I had a drink with him. And then, it took three shots of something called 'tequila' just to find out that he was the one we're looking for. And I've spent the last twenty minutes trying to keep his hands off me. So don't go criticizing my counseling techniques." (probably the best line Marina Sirtis ever had in Star Trek)