I watched "Generations" when I was supposed to, but am finding the review difficult to right, which is just insane. It's a Star Trek movie. It shouldn't be this hard. Unfortunately, it turns out that I care so much about the shows that my reflections on the movie have become quite in-depth. I am trying to cut the size down a bit.
I am thinking of writing up a generic one, and then posting a longer one with all my geeky thoughts about the movie to satisfy my own need to rant.
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Monday, August 10, 2009
My experience so far
Well, I'm only three movies in and I've already seen one that I hated. What a miserable experience it was watching The Getaway. It's a relief to know that I like the next few movies I'm going to watch. At least, I think I do. I haven't seen Deep Impact since it came out. Maybe it sucks. And I hope knowing how awful the last Indiana Jones movie was won't destroy my enjoyment of Temple of Doom. We'll see.
So far, this has been fun. The hardest part is stopping myself from watching more than one movie a day. I know if I start that I'll get sick of watching movies and will stop doing it. It seems that I was right in that writing a review for each movie is a great motivator. I haven't felt like watching movies this much in a long time.
I'm now trying to psych myself up to watch Sleepers in a few days. I didn't care for a lot of the traumatic events that occur in the film. I haven't wanted to watch it since I saw it in the theater with my husband. It's one of the rare films in the collection that was not bought for me. The only thing that's keeping me going is the hope that it might make for a very interesting review.
I actually picked every single one of the films on the list this month by random. I separated out my master list of unopened DVDs by category in stacks, calculated how many I need to watch a month to get through each of the categories by the deadline, and then picked the needed amount from the middle of each of the stacks. Well, technically some of the categories like drama had several stacks. I do have more than 350 DVDs to watch after all. I think I might go through the movies and pick the ones I know I don't like, and make sure to watch a couple of those a month. I would rather spread them out than be miserable watching a lot of movies I don't like in the course of a single month.
So far, this has been fun. The hardest part is stopping myself from watching more than one movie a day. I know if I start that I'll get sick of watching movies and will stop doing it. It seems that I was right in that writing a review for each movie is a great motivator. I haven't felt like watching movies this much in a long time.
I'm now trying to psych myself up to watch Sleepers in a few days. I didn't care for a lot of the traumatic events that occur in the film. I haven't wanted to watch it since I saw it in the theater with my husband. It's one of the rare films in the collection that was not bought for me. The only thing that's keeping me going is the hope that it might make for a very interesting review.
I actually picked every single one of the films on the list this month by random. I separated out my master list of unopened DVDs by category in stacks, calculated how many I need to watch a month to get through each of the categories by the deadline, and then picked the needed amount from the middle of each of the stacks. Well, technically some of the categories like drama had several stacks. I do have more than 350 DVDs to watch after all. I think I might go through the movies and pick the ones I know I don't like, and make sure to watch a couple of those a month. I would rather spread them out than be miserable watching a lot of movies I don't like in the course of a single month.
The Getaway (1972)
The Getaway (1972)
Steve McQueen – Doc McCoy
Ali McGraw – Mrs. McCoy
Director: Sam Peckinpah
I have to get two things out of the way out of the way right off the bat. First, I think Steve McQueen is the coolest cat to ever come out of Hollywood. Second, I don’t like Sam Peckinpah’s treatment of women in his films. These two things provided a major conflict for me in The Getaway. In the end, my hatred for the director won out. Peckinpah was always better than most at portraying vivid characters. Unfortunately, he was at his absolute best when he got the chance to show women who allowed themselves to be physically and emotionally dominated; reveled in it even. In Peckinpah’s world, women respond only to men that dominate them, emotionally and physically. His films highlight women that are willing to put up with being slapped around and beaten, and will even gleefully leave men that treat them with adoration and respect for violent men. The audience is treated to scene after scene featuring a criminal and a couple he kidnaps. The wife falls for the kidnapper. That is not necessarily bad, but in nearly every scene the husband is tied up and forced to watch his wife have sex with the criminal. After a while, it goes from merely showing a counterpoint to the McCoy’s marriage, to just being gleeful in showing such cruel behavior.
In this film, the woman who has a husband who is respectful and nonviolent leaves her husband for a criminal. That husband is so traumatized by what his wife does, and what he is forced to witness, that he hanged himself. The implication is that the husband is weak and impotent. Mrs. McCoy, who is slapped around by her significant other and can’t even trust him because he is a criminal who spent years in prison, fights tooth and nail for her marriage. In the beginning, she sleeps with a politician to get her husband out of prison. Through the movie, Doc McCoy struggles with this infidelity, an infidelity that he essentially asked her to commit. Yet the wife calls him weak for not getting over it. Once he gets over her infidelity, despite being killers and robbers, and having a relationship based in domestic violence, they manage to save their marriage.
This aspect of all Peckinpah films leads to a problem: The Getaway is obviously supposed to be about a husband and wife who don’t trust each other because of all the problems that go wrong on the heist, not to mention the fact that the wife sleeps with a politician to get her husband out of prison. This is what the book on which this film was based was about. It would have been an interesting relationship to see explored. Instead, because of Peckinpah’s portrayal of how he views a natural relationship between a man and woman to be, the suspicion comes through as something every husband and wife experience, rather than events criminals go through. Hence, it doesn't add any tension to the film, and isn't even explored that much.
Despite all of this, if the movie had any redeeming qualities, it may have been easier to handle than it was. I have always enjoyed films with bank heists and wild chases across the country. Combining this with Steve McQueen seems like a fail-safe recipe for an exciting film. Unfortunately, the film is saddled with a lazy script, rife with plot holes and inconsistencies. After an hour, I didn’t care who lived and who died, just as long as it ended as soon as possible. The key problem is that it wants to portray Doc McCoy as an elite bank robber, but time after time his actions show him to be a foolish amateur. At one point he shows that he is aware that the people chasing him know which hotel he is heading for, yet he goes there anyway. Even worse, when he and his wife get there, he acts as if he isn’t aware of the danger he is in at all. Time after time, problems occur, all of them his own making. He shows absolutely no remorse over killing people, yet after having one guy he failed to kill come back to haunt him, he chooses not to kill him again. As you have probably guessed, this guy comes back once more. His stupid mistakes indicate lack of experience; not the type of a guy people hire to steal money for them. In the end, I think this film would have worked better as a comedy filled with a series of hilarious high jinks revolving around a fumbling, incompetent bank robber. I doubt I could laugh any more at his incompetence than I did tonight.
On a side note, this review took me two hours to write. At one point, I told my husband how difficult it was, and he said it should be easy, and that I just needed to write “It sucked.” Part of me thinks that it may have been better to go with that.
Steve McQueen – Doc McCoy
Ali McGraw – Mrs. McCoy
Director: Sam Peckinpah
I have to get two things out of the way out of the way right off the bat. First, I think Steve McQueen is the coolest cat to ever come out of Hollywood. Second, I don’t like Sam Peckinpah’s treatment of women in his films. These two things provided a major conflict for me in The Getaway. In the end, my hatred for the director won out. Peckinpah was always better than most at portraying vivid characters. Unfortunately, he was at his absolute best when he got the chance to show women who allowed themselves to be physically and emotionally dominated; reveled in it even. In Peckinpah’s world, women respond only to men that dominate them, emotionally and physically. His films highlight women that are willing to put up with being slapped around and beaten, and will even gleefully leave men that treat them with adoration and respect for violent men. The audience is treated to scene after scene featuring a criminal and a couple he kidnaps. The wife falls for the kidnapper. That is not necessarily bad, but in nearly every scene the husband is tied up and forced to watch his wife have sex with the criminal. After a while, it goes from merely showing a counterpoint to the McCoy’s marriage, to just being gleeful in showing such cruel behavior.
In this film, the woman who has a husband who is respectful and nonviolent leaves her husband for a criminal. That husband is so traumatized by what his wife does, and what he is forced to witness, that he hanged himself. The implication is that the husband is weak and impotent. Mrs. McCoy, who is slapped around by her significant other and can’t even trust him because he is a criminal who spent years in prison, fights tooth and nail for her marriage. In the beginning, she sleeps with a politician to get her husband out of prison. Through the movie, Doc McCoy struggles with this infidelity, an infidelity that he essentially asked her to commit. Yet the wife calls him weak for not getting over it. Once he gets over her infidelity, despite being killers and robbers, and having a relationship based in domestic violence, they manage to save their marriage.
This aspect of all Peckinpah films leads to a problem: The Getaway is obviously supposed to be about a husband and wife who don’t trust each other because of all the problems that go wrong on the heist, not to mention the fact that the wife sleeps with a politician to get her husband out of prison. This is what the book on which this film was based was about. It would have been an interesting relationship to see explored. Instead, because of Peckinpah’s portrayal of how he views a natural relationship between a man and woman to be, the suspicion comes through as something every husband and wife experience, rather than events criminals go through. Hence, it doesn't add any tension to the film, and isn't even explored that much.
Despite all of this, if the movie had any redeeming qualities, it may have been easier to handle than it was. I have always enjoyed films with bank heists and wild chases across the country. Combining this with Steve McQueen seems like a fail-safe recipe for an exciting film. Unfortunately, the film is saddled with a lazy script, rife with plot holes and inconsistencies. After an hour, I didn’t care who lived and who died, just as long as it ended as soon as possible. The key problem is that it wants to portray Doc McCoy as an elite bank robber, but time after time his actions show him to be a foolish amateur. At one point he shows that he is aware that the people chasing him know which hotel he is heading for, yet he goes there anyway. Even worse, when he and his wife get there, he acts as if he isn’t aware of the danger he is in at all. Time after time, problems occur, all of them his own making. He shows absolutely no remorse over killing people, yet after having one guy he failed to kill come back to haunt him, he chooses not to kill him again. As you have probably guessed, this guy comes back once more. His stupid mistakes indicate lack of experience; not the type of a guy people hire to steal money for them. In the end, I think this film would have worked better as a comedy filled with a series of hilarious high jinks revolving around a fumbling, incompetent bank robber. I doubt I could laugh any more at his incompetence than I did tonight.
On a side note, this review took me two hours to write. At one point, I told my husband how difficult it was, and he said it should be easy, and that I just needed to write “It sucked.” Part of me thinks that it may have been better to go with that.
Sunday, August 9, 2009
As Good As It Gets
As Good As It Gets
Jack Nicholson - Melvin
Helen Hunt - Carol
Melvin: “What if this is as good as it gets?”
I watched this movie nine hours ago and tried to write a review immediately after, but I couldn’t do it. I really enjoyed watching it, but when I started typing out the review I ran into a problem: how I felt about the movie after thinking about it was a lot different than how I felt while watching it. I decided to let things stew in my brain for a little while and figure out why.
The last time I saw this film, nearly a decade ago, I thought it was a cute romantic comedy. I remember liking Helen Hunt’s performance. This time around, I found Helen Hunt’s performance to be even better than I remembered, but it did not come across as a cute romantic comedy. There are several funny moments, and there are romantic moments, but it feels far too serious and sad to be labeled as cute.
The best part of this film is Helen Hunt; she is stunning. Her experience in a sitcom served her well with all the funny scenes, but her ability to switch from comedy to serious drama in just a few heartbeats is breathtaking. This turns out to be a good thing because even though the movie is about her, Jack Nicholson does everything he can to make it about him, and not in a bad way. Hunt somehow keeps that from happening.
Though the acting shines in this film, it suffers from a mediocre script clumsy direction. There is a point about a third of the way through the movie where the characters' motivations stopped making sense. Rather than the story flowing organically, the characters seemed to be nothing but props used to play specific scenes. That James L. Brooks' career has mostly been in television is evident on the screen. The entire thing felt more like an extended sitcom or television drama than a film. The situations sometimes threatened to become very sappy and over the top, but the actors managed to keep the scenes light enough that it never quite reached that point. Brooks doesn’t show any skill in knowing how to zoom in and out on a character without taking you right out of the scene. There was one point where it felt like I was watching a soap opera because of the way the camera zoomed in so obtrusively on Helen Hunt.
Despite the script's overall problems, the concept of the story is interesting and something that is not usually touched on in Hollywood. Since the “normal,” perfect relationships exist only in Hollywood movies, how much should a woman put up with in order to have a relationship with a man? Should a woman be willing to put up with someone who has an abrasive behavior if he loves her and is trying to change?
In the film, Carol is in a tough situation. She is a single mother, working as a waitress and has a son with severe health issues. She is so caught up with trying to make enough money to scrape by while taking care of her son that she has next to no opportunities to find a man to date. And that is the crux of the film. She is desperate for affection. She spends her entire life making everyone around her feel better. She puts up with a cruel, bitter man with next to no complaints. She helps a man who is borderline suicidal come back from an emotional edge and gives him comfort he needs precisely when he needs it. Yet she doesn't have what she really wants: a (heterosexual) man who will give her love and affection. In a situation like that, it comes as no surprise that when Melvin starts offering incredibly romantic, complimentary words to her, she starts giving him chance after chance to win her over. Unfortunately, this concept barely comes across because of a serious defect with the film.
It is an interesting fact that even the best acting can’t overcome a lack of romantic chemistry. Nicholson and Hunt have none. They do have a type of chemistry, but it is purely platonic. When Carol comes close to telling Melvin that he looked sexy, it was in no way believable. It felt like she was talking to her brother. When he stares at her from across the room in what is supposed to be adoration, he looks more like a proud father. Because of this lack of any real romantic passion, it makes no sense that she would put up with his cruel behavior towards others, and especially towards her.
Despite these problems, unbelievably, the movie is a pleasure to watch. All credit goes to the actors. They somehow keep the film alive with their combined talent. Though the movie’s flaws are apparent on reflection, while I was watching, it was easy to sit back and just enjoy the ride. In the end, the movie is fun and has interesting things to say about how much we are sometimes willing to put up with just for the sake of companionship. But I don't recommend thinking too much about how well the movie is executed after you're done watching.
Jack Nicholson - Melvin
Helen Hunt - Carol
Melvin: “What if this is as good as it gets?”
I watched this movie nine hours ago and tried to write a review immediately after, but I couldn’t do it. I really enjoyed watching it, but when I started typing out the review I ran into a problem: how I felt about the movie after thinking about it was a lot different than how I felt while watching it. I decided to let things stew in my brain for a little while and figure out why.
The last time I saw this film, nearly a decade ago, I thought it was a cute romantic comedy. I remember liking Helen Hunt’s performance. This time around, I found Helen Hunt’s performance to be even better than I remembered, but it did not come across as a cute romantic comedy. There are several funny moments, and there are romantic moments, but it feels far too serious and sad to be labeled as cute.
The best part of this film is Helen Hunt; she is stunning. Her experience in a sitcom served her well with all the funny scenes, but her ability to switch from comedy to serious drama in just a few heartbeats is breathtaking. This turns out to be a good thing because even though the movie is about her, Jack Nicholson does everything he can to make it about him, and not in a bad way. Hunt somehow keeps that from happening.
Though the acting shines in this film, it suffers from a mediocre script clumsy direction. There is a point about a third of the way through the movie where the characters' motivations stopped making sense. Rather than the story flowing organically, the characters seemed to be nothing but props used to play specific scenes. That James L. Brooks' career has mostly been in television is evident on the screen. The entire thing felt more like an extended sitcom or television drama than a film. The situations sometimes threatened to become very sappy and over the top, but the actors managed to keep the scenes light enough that it never quite reached that point. Brooks doesn’t show any skill in knowing how to zoom in and out on a character without taking you right out of the scene. There was one point where it felt like I was watching a soap opera because of the way the camera zoomed in so obtrusively on Helen Hunt.
Despite the script's overall problems, the concept of the story is interesting and something that is not usually touched on in Hollywood. Since the “normal,” perfect relationships exist only in Hollywood movies, how much should a woman put up with in order to have a relationship with a man? Should a woman be willing to put up with someone who has an abrasive behavior if he loves her and is trying to change?
In the film, Carol is in a tough situation. She is a single mother, working as a waitress and has a son with severe health issues. She is so caught up with trying to make enough money to scrape by while taking care of her son that she has next to no opportunities to find a man to date. And that is the crux of the film. She is desperate for affection. She spends her entire life making everyone around her feel better. She puts up with a cruel, bitter man with next to no complaints. She helps a man who is borderline suicidal come back from an emotional edge and gives him comfort he needs precisely when he needs it. Yet she doesn't have what she really wants: a (heterosexual) man who will give her love and affection. In a situation like that, it comes as no surprise that when Melvin starts offering incredibly romantic, complimentary words to her, she starts giving him chance after chance to win her over. Unfortunately, this concept barely comes across because of a serious defect with the film.
It is an interesting fact that even the best acting can’t overcome a lack of romantic chemistry. Nicholson and Hunt have none. They do have a type of chemistry, but it is purely platonic. When Carol comes close to telling Melvin that he looked sexy, it was in no way believable. It felt like she was talking to her brother. When he stares at her from across the room in what is supposed to be adoration, he looks more like a proud father. Because of this lack of any real romantic passion, it makes no sense that she would put up with his cruel behavior towards others, and especially towards her.
Despite these problems, unbelievably, the movie is a pleasure to watch. All credit goes to the actors. They somehow keep the film alive with their combined talent. Though the movie’s flaws are apparent on reflection, while I was watching, it was easy to sit back and just enjoy the ride. In the end, the movie is fun and has interesting things to say about how much we are sometimes willing to put up with just for the sake of companionship. But I don't recommend thinking too much about how well the movie is executed after you're done watching.
Saturday, August 8, 2009
Harvey Birdman
So, yeah. I watched the 2 episodes I was scheduled to watch. Thank God each one is only 12 minutes. That show is so not made for me. Out of the two episodes combined, I think there were maybe four or five things I laughed at. Mike only laughed at one thing. He told me I should sell it immediately. There are only 11 episodes left, and since each is only 12 minutes, I am going to try and rough it out. I don't want to sell something after barely watching it.
Besides, it may get better. The first episodes of most shows are rarely ever good.
The problem for me is that the subject could be so very funny, but most of the jokes are on the level of fart jokes. Very disappointing.
Besides, it may get better. The first episodes of most shows are rarely ever good.
The problem for me is that the subject could be so very funny, but most of the jokes are on the level of fart jokes. Very disappointing.
Friday, August 7, 2009
Sea Hawk
The Sea Hawk (1940)
Errol Flynn
With
Brenda Marshall
Claude Rains
Donald Crisp
Summary: Set in the late 16th century, Spain is trying to take over the world. It is preparing its Spanish Armada to first attack and conquer England, and then the world. Queen Elizabeth is in denial, and short on funds. One of her advisers is acting sneaky. The only man left to defend England is Errol Flynn!
All right, so the character's name isn't Errol Flynn, it's Captain Thorpe. But who cares? Errol Flynn movies are just like John Wayne movies, the character's name doesn't matter.
As with all pirate movies, this is entertaining fluff, so I don't feel the need to do a real in-depth review. On the other hand, since it didn't exactly require my full attention to enjoy the movie, I made notes while watching. I thought I'd share those first, with an overall review at the end. I hope you enjoy.
Notes:
The one thing I have always liked about the old black and white swashbuckling movies is the opening music. The sound of brash trumpets heralding the exciting adventures sure to come always gets me excited.
Hearing a supposedly Spanish character speaking in an English accent is fantastic. Listening to a Spanish king tell one of his minions in an English accent to “Proceed to England as my ambassador” is hilarious. Apparently the only difference between the English and Spanish in the 16th century was that the Spanish had goatees.
And of course the one English guy who is clearly a traitor to his country has a goatee.
It is so obvious that this is an American movie. The Spanish king has a gigantic 16th century world map on the wall behind him, yet America takes up more than half the map.
It is an indisputable fact that a pirate ship is incomplete without a monkey.
The good guys in this movie, the English pirates, are mostly played by Americans, complete with American accents. The old adage that the English always play the bad guy holds even in a movie where the good guys are English.
All of the slave labor manning the oars are old white man. And apparently only the Spanish used slaves. In the 16th century.
Errol Flynn is so refined, and looks great in tights. No one has ever looked as dashing as he does swinging through the air on a rope.
Apparently, 16th century English pirate ships have lower level balconies. Perfect place for a beautiful woman to stand so that a dashing pirate can gaze down upon her from above.
Oh, Errol Flynn. A pirate with a heart of gold. Has no problem fighting off half a dozen men at the same time, but fumbles shyly when facing one beautiful woman. Honorable and noble to the very core. Not too afraid to tell a woman he loves her. Looks gorgeous. And has hair to die for. I would betray my country for you any day.
Queen Elizabeth: “Captain of the Guard. You will accompany Captain Thorpe to my private chamber where he will wait my further pleasure.” Tee hee
I love Claud Rains. He’s so deliciously slimy. He emotes more with a look than many can do with a monologue.
LOL The movie uses sepia color for Central America. Not racist at all.
That final sword fighting scene is fantastic! Starts off slow, but the last minute or so is just breathtaking. Errol Flynn was quite an athletic guy.
Overall, this was a lot of fun to watch, which is precisely what Errol Flynn movies were all about. Flynn is in fine form here: charming, charismatic, and heroic. My only problem was that it really slows down half way through when his character disappears for nearly 20 minutes once he's been captured by the Spanish in Panama. Even with Claud Rains, the loss of Flynn’s energy is very noticeable. Up to that point, when Flynn wasn’t around, the heavy drama never lasted for more than a couple of minutes. And half the scenes he wasn’t in were lighthearted. More than 20 minutes of heavy, almost depressing, drama was a bit hard to swallow. And this is made worse by the fact that when Flynn does come back on the screen, the drama and seriousness continues without stop. I don’t dislike serious action movies, but after more than an hour of a lighthearted swashbuckling romp, with Errol Flynn at his charismatic best, it was very hard to watch more than ten minutes of him not only speaking no more than two words at a time, but also not cracking smile a single time. He doesn’t have enough of a presence to handle those types of scenes for such an extended length. The ten-minute scene where Flynn and his crew escape enslavement on a Spanish ship had barely any dialogue, and it was excruciating to watch. The moment Errol Flynn gave his charming little smile after taking over the Spanish ship, the movie immediately felt better. The movie flowed swimmingly after that, he got the girl, words of love were expressed on both sides, he killed the English traitor in a thrilling sword fight, and saved England single-handed. Happy ending for everyone except the evil Spanish empire.
I had forgotten how wonderful it is to watch Errol Flynn. He wasn't a great actor, but he was handsome and charming with an athletic body to boot, all of which have inspired thousands of pirate romance novels for decades.
Errol Flynn
With
Brenda Marshall
Claude Rains
Donald Crisp
Summary: Set in the late 16th century, Spain is trying to take over the world. It is preparing its Spanish Armada to first attack and conquer England, and then the world. Queen Elizabeth is in denial, and short on funds. One of her advisers is acting sneaky. The only man left to defend England is Errol Flynn!
All right, so the character's name isn't Errol Flynn, it's Captain Thorpe. But who cares? Errol Flynn movies are just like John Wayne movies, the character's name doesn't matter.
As with all pirate movies, this is entertaining fluff, so I don't feel the need to do a real in-depth review. On the other hand, since it didn't exactly require my full attention to enjoy the movie, I made notes while watching. I thought I'd share those first, with an overall review at the end. I hope you enjoy.
Notes:
The one thing I have always liked about the old black and white swashbuckling movies is the opening music. The sound of brash trumpets heralding the exciting adventures sure to come always gets me excited.
Hearing a supposedly Spanish character speaking in an English accent is fantastic. Listening to a Spanish king tell one of his minions in an English accent to “Proceed to England as my ambassador” is hilarious. Apparently the only difference between the English and Spanish in the 16th century was that the Spanish had goatees.
And of course the one English guy who is clearly a traitor to his country has a goatee.
It is so obvious that this is an American movie. The Spanish king has a gigantic 16th century world map on the wall behind him, yet America takes up more than half the map.
It is an indisputable fact that a pirate ship is incomplete without a monkey.
The good guys in this movie, the English pirates, are mostly played by Americans, complete with American accents. The old adage that the English always play the bad guy holds even in a movie where the good guys are English.
All of the slave labor manning the oars are old white man. And apparently only the Spanish used slaves. In the 16th century.
Errol Flynn is so refined, and looks great in tights. No one has ever looked as dashing as he does swinging through the air on a rope.
Apparently, 16th century English pirate ships have lower level balconies. Perfect place for a beautiful woman to stand so that a dashing pirate can gaze down upon her from above.
Oh, Errol Flynn. A pirate with a heart of gold. Has no problem fighting off half a dozen men at the same time, but fumbles shyly when facing one beautiful woman. Honorable and noble to the very core. Not too afraid to tell a woman he loves her. Looks gorgeous. And has hair to die for. I would betray my country for you any day.
Queen Elizabeth: “Captain of the Guard. You will accompany Captain Thorpe to my private chamber where he will wait my further pleasure.” Tee hee
I love Claud Rains. He’s so deliciously slimy. He emotes more with a look than many can do with a monologue.
LOL The movie uses sepia color for Central America. Not racist at all.
That final sword fighting scene is fantastic! Starts off slow, but the last minute or so is just breathtaking. Errol Flynn was quite an athletic guy.
Overall, this was a lot of fun to watch, which is precisely what Errol Flynn movies were all about. Flynn is in fine form here: charming, charismatic, and heroic. My only problem was that it really slows down half way through when his character disappears for nearly 20 minutes once he's been captured by the Spanish in Panama. Even with Claud Rains, the loss of Flynn’s energy is very noticeable. Up to that point, when Flynn wasn’t around, the heavy drama never lasted for more than a couple of minutes. And half the scenes he wasn’t in were lighthearted. More than 20 minutes of heavy, almost depressing, drama was a bit hard to swallow. And this is made worse by the fact that when Flynn does come back on the screen, the drama and seriousness continues without stop. I don’t dislike serious action movies, but after more than an hour of a lighthearted swashbuckling romp, with Errol Flynn at his charismatic best, it was very hard to watch more than ten minutes of him not only speaking no more than two words at a time, but also not cracking smile a single time. He doesn’t have enough of a presence to handle those types of scenes for such an extended length. The ten-minute scene where Flynn and his crew escape enslavement on a Spanish ship had barely any dialogue, and it was excruciating to watch. The moment Errol Flynn gave his charming little smile after taking over the Spanish ship, the movie immediately felt better. The movie flowed swimmingly after that, he got the girl, words of love were expressed on both sides, he killed the English traitor in a thrilling sword fight, and saved England single-handed. Happy ending for everyone except the evil Spanish empire.
I had forgotten how wonderful it is to watch Errol Flynn. He wasn't a great actor, but he was handsome and charming with an athletic body to boot, all of which have inspired thousands of pirate romance novels for decades.
Quick list
Here's the schedule of stuff I plan on watching through the rest of this month. Number in parentheses corresponds to number of episodes to watch.
August 7
Movie: The Sea Hawk
TV: Harvey Birdman (2)
August 8
Movie: As Good As It Gets
TV: Harvey Birdman (2)
August 9
Movie: The Getaway (original)
TV: Harvey Birdman (2)
August 10
Movie: Star Trek Generations
TV: Harvey Birdman (3)
August 11
Movie: Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom
TV: Harvey Birdman (2)
August 12
Movie: Deep Impact
TV: Harvey Birdman (2)
August 13
Movie: Sleepers
TV: Frasier (4)
August 14
Movie: None
TV: CSI Season 6 (5)
August 15
Movie: Class Action
TV: Frasier (5)
August 16
Movie: Island in the Sky
TV: Frasier (5)
August 17
Movie: Dave
TV: Frasier (5)
August 18
Movie: M
TV: Frasier (5)
August 19
Movie: none
TV: CSI Season 6 (5)
August 20
Movie: The Towering Inferno
CSI Season 6 (2)
August 21
Movie: Orgazmo
TV: Kung Fu (2)
August 22
Movie: The Letter
TV: Kung Fu (2)
August 23
Movie: Black Christmas
TV: Kung Fu (2)
August 24
Movie: All That Heaven Allows
TV: Kung Fu (2)
August 25
Movie: none
TV: CSI Season 6 (5)
August 26
Movie: Pinocchio
TV: Kung Fu (3)
August 27
Movie: Jeepers Creepers
TV: Kung Fu (2)
August 28
Movie: Once Upon a Time In America
TV: CSI Season 6 (1)
August 29
Movie: The Dark Knight
TV: CSI Season 6 (1)
August 30
Movie: Teeth
TV: Kung Fu (2)
August 31
Movie: None
TV: CSI Season 6 (5)
August 7
Movie: The Sea Hawk
TV: Harvey Birdman (2)
August 8
Movie: As Good As It Gets
TV: Harvey Birdman (2)
August 9
Movie: The Getaway (original)
TV: Harvey Birdman (2)
August 10
Movie: Star Trek Generations
TV: Harvey Birdman (3)
August 11
Movie: Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom
TV: Harvey Birdman (2)
August 12
Movie: Deep Impact
TV: Harvey Birdman (2)
August 13
Movie: Sleepers
TV: Frasier (4)
August 14
Movie: None
TV: CSI Season 6 (5)
August 15
Movie: Class Action
TV: Frasier (5)
August 16
Movie: Island in the Sky
TV: Frasier (5)
August 17
Movie: Dave
TV: Frasier (5)
August 18
Movie: M
TV: Frasier (5)
August 19
Movie: none
TV: CSI Season 6 (5)
August 20
Movie: The Towering Inferno
CSI Season 6 (2)
August 21
Movie: Orgazmo
TV: Kung Fu (2)
August 22
Movie: The Letter
TV: Kung Fu (2)
August 23
Movie: Black Christmas
TV: Kung Fu (2)
August 24
Movie: All That Heaven Allows
TV: Kung Fu (2)
August 25
Movie: none
TV: CSI Season 6 (5)
August 26
Movie: Pinocchio
TV: Kung Fu (3)
August 27
Movie: Jeepers Creepers
TV: Kung Fu (2)
August 28
Movie: Once Upon a Time In America
TV: CSI Season 6 (1)
August 29
Movie: The Dark Knight
TV: CSI Season 6 (1)
August 30
Movie: Teeth
TV: Kung Fu (2)
August 31
Movie: None
TV: CSI Season 6 (5)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)