Reviews

14 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
In Harm's Way (1965)
7/10
Good, but should have been better
23 June 2009
Firstly, I enjoyed this film which, despite all the star names, is somewhat forgotten.

However, IMO there are too many stars and as a result the film is somewhat disjointed. There are too many sub-stories and as a result it turns out more like a mini soap/melodrama.

Wayne carries this film. His presence is really the only "glue" that holds the film together. Considering all the other star names involved this is quite a feat and demonstrates what made Wayne the star that he was.

I also think In Harms Way suffered from being made at the wrong time. WW2 films made either during the war or in the years soon after generally had a gritty realism borne out of memories still being very fresh. This realism resurfaced years later in films such as Saving Private Ryan and Thin Red Line, but for much of the intervening period this realism was lost and the 60's was a prime period for that. There were very enjoyable WW2 films made in that period such as Great Escape and Von Ryans Express, but these were generally as much rollicking good adventure films as much as war films.

I don't think In Harms Way has either the gritty realism or adventurism and it therefore suffers as a result. Trying to incorporate so many stars also makes it longer than it needed to be. I enjoyed the film, but it could and should have been better.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Two stories ....... connected
20 October 2006
The first part is a hard hitting thriller with Clooney and Tarantino as a pretty obnoxious couple, but with a sense of humour. Hard to envisage them as brothers though unless one of the parents was totally different to the other.

The second part is a horror film with Clooney, Keitel etc taking on a bunch of vampires.

Overall fairly good as a bit of mindless entertainment. I enjoyed the second half more than the first.

Decent performances by all the leads but hardly stretching.

That dance by Salma though ... WOW
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Angel Eyes (2001)
6/10
Passed a couple of hours
19 October 2006
Saw this for the first time on a minor TV channel recently. Essentially a romantic film, and casting JL as a police officer may indicate that this is a police thriller, which it is not.

It is fairly apparent at an early stage what Jim Cavaziel's past hides, and JL coming to terms with her past is the more complex aspect of the film.

I can only recall seeing Jim Cavaziel in one other film (Thin Red Line) and his performance and character here is reminiscent of his character in TRL.

Jennifer Lopez gives a fine performance. I have not seen her in many films, but she generally puts in a good performance. I think it is her choice of films which is suspect rather than her acting.

I am not a fan of romantic films, but this one is different enough to make it worth watching.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
FBB = Fabulous
18 July 2006
Fabulous Baker Boys = fabulous.

Slow story but always enthralling building on relationships at just the right pace. Jeff Bridges and Michelle Pfeiffer have always been classy - I have always thought that Jeff was Oscar winning material without ever being convinced he really WANTED to be. Beau was also excellent.

Adding to the pure class of the film is that Michelle did her own singing, and both the Bridges brothers learnt music as well. The rest of the caste also perform well, but understandably it is the three leads that rightfully dominate the film.

Michelle singing Making Whoopee on top of the piano must be one of the, if not the, sexiest performances in film history.
8 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
OK for what it is
28 June 2006
Picked this up as a cheap DVD as I am a sucker for 40's/50's WW2 films.

Taken as a bit of propaganda and entertainment, and not reflecting in any way historical fact, it achieves it's aim. IMO, it is not up to the standard of some of Wayne's other WW2 films of this period such as Sands of Iwo Jima and They Were Expendable.

It is somewhat disjointed, but I can imagine it having a positive effect on recruitment for the US Forces. Some earlier threads have commented on the reasons why Wayne did not have active war service. Whatever the reason, I would think he had a more positive effect on by being on film rather than seeing active service.
10 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Pretty Good
29 March 2006
Picked this up as a cheap DVD recently.

Part (small) documentary, part film, part propaganda. Various readers have commented on the accuracy of the aircraft etc, but as WW2 was still going on when this was filmed I guess they made use of what was available.

Follows a familiar theme of other WW2 films made whilst the war was in progress - Wake Island, Air Force etc in that historical accuracy is sometimes lacking, but as a flag-waver at the time it probably had the desired effect.

Although born some time after WW2 ended, as a story of life aboard a carrier it looked quite realistic to me. It was only the battle scenes where it seemed to lose its way, but this was nothing to do with the quality of special effects. Probably a bit too jingoistic.

Some good performances, particularly Don Ameche. It stands the test of time well, and a film that should not be forgotten and that I will certainly watch several times more.
6 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
rip roaring adventure
18 August 2005
I must have seen this film a number of times although usually just parts of it rather than start to finish. It's enjoyment does not diminish with repeated viewings.

OK, the story line is not believable, the Germans cannot hit anything when they shoot whilst Clint could knock a fly out of the sky a mile off etc etc but for sheer wartime adventure this is hard to match. It's not the type of role you associate with Richard Burton but he is excellent in this, aided by a quality supporting caste. The scenery looks good whilst Ron Goodwin's score is outstanding. One of the best things I can say about the film is that it does not look dated after nearly 40 years.

Very little footage seems unnecessary, and the cable car fight is as exciting as anything done since. Don't expect anything particularly thought provoking, but if you are looking for a couple of hours of excitement this is hard to beat.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Red River (1948)
9/10
One of the very best
11 August 2005
I have to admit that I am a sucker for Westerns and a John Wayne fan too so this could not really fail for me! Having said that, I think it is Wayne's best Western and beaten only by Once Upon A Time In The West as the best western ever. Wayne was designed for Westerns, Clift is excellent and Brennan one of the best character actors there has been. The supporting caste is good but the film is dominated by the 3 leads.

Basing the plot on a cattle drive makes a change from the usual cowboy/Indian/goodies/baddies plots and gives a chance to see the landscape cinematography which was excellent bearing in mind the film was made over 50 years ago. The film also covers human activities as relevant then as they are today, man management skills, delegation and the stress caused when these skills are absent.

The Joanne Dru role is somewhat superfluous, particularly her rant at the end of the film, and like many other reviewers I think the one area that lets the film down is the ending.

Overall excellent though and one I shall watch many times on DVD.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Not far off being amongst the best
10 August 2005
From a slow start this build into an exciting if somewhat unrealistic war film. However, it was designed for entertainment and not to depict any remotely historical fact.

The cinematography and scenery look good and although no expert on trains, they look from the right period. The characters are not fleshed out but as this is an adventure film this lapse is not too important. Some of the main characters are also casualties by the end thus avoiding the usual Hollywood line from that period of everyone escaping without a scratch.

I'm not a big fan of Sinatra as an actor but he does well here depicting a flawed character who appears both likable and unlikeable. It is established early in the film that Col Ryan is not a career airman and has limited military experience and so it is not surprising that he makes some key mistakes although he does learn from them.

The supporting cast is good although with the exception of John Leyton far too old to have been on military service.

Not up with the very best WW2 films but well above the average.
38 out of 58 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
One of the best
14 July 2005
One of the best WW2 films. There are several reasons why I rate this as only just below the top notch WW2 films. The special effects for the period are excellent, particularly during the kamikaze attacks. You only need to look back to WW2 films from a few years before this (They Were Expendable, Guadalcanal Diary etc) to see the advances that were made in special effects over a short period. The fact that it is not based on one of the more high profile naval vessels such as aircraft carrier, submarine, battleship is also a bonus. The purpose of the transport ships was to land the troops safely at a given point at a given time. They were not glamorous but were critical to the success of island hopping in WW2. The film also shows human frailties as well as strengths such as incompetence, poor officers, even cowardice is hinted at.

The story develops well, and shows the moulding together of a crew to become an effective fighting force. How realistic it is I don't know, but it looks good on film. The fact that there are several character actors well known at the time such as Richard Boone is a bonus.

Some of the scenes are a bit over the top and detract slightly from the quality, but I think this is pretty typical of films from this era. Not sure the scenes between George Nader and Julie Adams add much to the film, but I suppose they do demonstrate that many of the crew were family men and that sacrifices were made by all, not just those directly involved in the war.

Altogether very good though, and a film I shall enjoy watching frequently.
33 out of 35 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Air Force (1943)
8/10
Rewarding
14 July 2005
Bearing in mind that this film was made over 60 years ago, it thoroughly deserves its high rating. It is well put together, the special effects are generally good and the caste excellent.

I have read the comments made re the racism and agree with those who say that it has to be put in context with the times. They were the enemy, and in any case the film does not labour this point. Some of the action scenes are pretty exciting, particularly where the crew trying to take off whilst the Japanese army close in, and I also enjoyed the scenes from inside the plane.

Although based on the exploits of a real aircraft, some events are fictitious such as the sea battle. This was a flag waver though at a time when the US was looking for a morale boost. A few corny, over long scenes such as the death bed but this is in keeping with most films of this era.

Altogether, a film rarely aired but well worthwhile watching if you get the chance.
6 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
A Gem
14 July 2005
Very few, if any, WW2 films are better than this. I first saw it several years ago on a wet miserable Saturday afternoon in winter and subsequently taped it at the next showing. I have seen it several times since then.

Despite not living through this difficult time I can imagine it capturing how the US forces felt in the early days of the Pacific war. As the film states, these are the men who laid down the initial sacrifice that others built on. They were no doubt aware of this, and that escape before the Japanese arrived was their only real chance of survival.

John Ford created a basically solemn film in keeping with the times. Action is pretty minimal but this does not detract from the film at all. Solid performances from all the caste and one of John Wayne's best performances. Some of the action sequences could have been better (but it was made over 50 years ago), a bit too much of men jumping on and off MTB's, and the dinner scene between Wayne and Donna Reed did nothing for me. A downbeat ending with some crew going off to help plan for later battles and others marching off to almost certain death, but it is in keeping with what the US forces faced at the time.

Recent good WW2 films such as Saving Private Ryan and Thin Red Line show what can be achieved now with a big budget and huge technical advances, but it doesn't make them any better than this film.

I only hope it comes out in DVD in the UK. 9 out of 10.
39 out of 48 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
A Fine Film
11 July 2005
It's understandable that there were sensitivities in the UK over this film when released. After all the British played a major role in removing the Japanese from Burma, it was still fresh in the memory and this film largely overlooks the British effort.

We have to remember though that this is a film, not a documentary, and it was made during the war for a US audience. It is not meant to be completely factually accurate and bearing this in mind it is a very good film.

I have never been an Errol Flynn fan and always think of him as just a swashbuckling pirate in tights, but he is very good here displaying a sensitive side, the difficulty of command and appropriate humour. There is also a good performance from the underrated James Brown (who was also good in films such as Air Force and the Sands of Iwo Jima).

The story displays the usual war messages, it's futility, devotion to colleagues and duty etc. It also shows the jungle as almost a big an enemy as the Japanese. I'm lucky not to have lived through those difficult times but come from a region of the UK where a large number of troops were based in Burma, and several veterans of the campaign have told me they feared the jungle as much as the Japanese.

I am a big fan of WW2 films and certainly place this amongst my top 10.
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Catwoman (2004)
7/10
Not Good, but not THAT bad
11 July 2005
Picked this up as a cheap DVD despite having read negative comments.

Certainly not good, but not as bad as the rating suggests. Come on folks, there's a lot worse than this around. It's good in parts but it doesn't hang together at all. Basically it's let down by a poor script.

A film such as this was always going to require a high profile star in the lead role and they don't come much more high profile than Halle. Sharon Stone does a decent job with her role, although she is capable of performing at a significantly higher level than was required here. Likewise Halle who with the right role is one of the finest actresses around.

Catwoman also needed to be an attractive, sexy person who "looked the part". For this reason alone there was no better actress to undertake the role than Halle. She is one of the most beautiful actresses ever and would look good in a bin-bag, never mind the Catwoman outfit.

Both Halle and Sharon seem to have fun in their respective roles and they dominate the screen whenever they appear. The rest of the cast seem overwhelmed by them.

A fun movie which could and should have been better. It's saving grace is Halle and without her it would have been a real turkey.

Certainly worth a look.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed