Archive for the ‘Movie reviews’ Category

No Movie for Coen Bros. Fans

Friday, September 12th, 2008

I’m a big fan of the Coen Bros. My favorite is “The Big Lebowski,” even though I don’t like profanities and it uses them, according to one tally, 271,422 times. It’s just so funny and well done, the characters so well drawn, like people I’ve known. I’m about their age, so we have similar enthusiasms, like The Three Stooges. A true cult classic.

Last year’s Academy Award winner, “No Country for Old Men,” was excellent, and I saw it twice.

“Blood Simple,” their first movie, was the best post-Classic Age (1944-1960) film noir after “Chinatown.”

So naturally, tonight I saw the premier of their new movie, “Burn After Reading,” but it was disgusting and unfunny.  Avoid it at all costs.

It was worse than “Crimewave,” another failure.

Let’s hope they’re back to form in their next talkie.

“No Country for Old Men”: Movie review

Tuesday, November 20th, 2007

Yesterday evening I saw the talented Coen Bros.’ latest movie, “No Country for Old Men.” It’s extremely violent. And most people won’t like the ending. A couple of young guys behind me, who probably came because they liked “The Big Lebowski” or “Fargo,” groaned at the ending, “Whaaaaaaaa……….?”

But the ending makes sense and the Coens are to be commended for including it. Although I haven’t read the novel it’s based on, by Cormac McCarthy, other reviews indicate that the novel is mostly faithful to the book. So the ending must be McCarthy’s.

The Coens try to make something different each time: film noir (”Blood Simple”), screwball comedy (”Raising Arizona”), gangster movie (”Miller’s Crossing), ripoff movie (”Fargo”) and whatever they intended “The Big Lebowski” to be (a comedy, it ended up being a cult movie).

“No Country” is their take on putting a literary novel up on the big screen. It’s about a guy, Josh Brolin, who while hunting comes upon the aftermath of a drug runners’ shootout. He takes of with $2 million in a large case and he and others face the consequences. Tommy Lee Jones plays a sheriff who’s seen too much. The theme is fate vs. free will.

Again, it’s extremely violent. But it’s the best movie I’ve seen this year and will keep you thinking.

(Keep up with my blog. Sign up for my RSS feed. And click here to hire me for your writing projects.)

Movie review: “The Bourne Ultimatum”

Wednesday, August 15th, 2007

Bourne UltimatumI liked the first two Bourne movies, “The Bourne Identity” and “The Bourne Supremacy.” The were thrillers that thrilled, instead of bored. And they had the sense to kill a major character in the sequel. Most sequels just rehash the plot of the previous movie or movies But if you kill of a major character, you’re free to go into new territory.

The latest movie, “The Bourne Ultimatum,” is out in theaters, and is the best yet. As in the other movies, Bourne isn’t a ridiculous superhero with gadgets, but a well-trained killer who uses what he finds — an aerosol can, a pen — as weapons. That’s more ingenious.

The new flick has a cautionary plot about giving government — specifically the CIA — way too much discretionary authority to kill whom it pleases, all in the name of “protecting us,” of course.

(Don’t forget to sign up for my RSS feed.)

DVD review: IMAX Space Station

Thursday, July 19th, 2007

Space StationI wanted to see this movie, “IMAX Space Station,” when it was out at the Edwards/Regal IMAX at the Spectrum in Irvine a couple of years ago, but one thing came to another and I didn’t go. IMAX charges about $14 bucks now, but it’s worth it to see something spectacular on their big screen.

So I had to settle for the DVD on my 20-year-old, 19-inch TV screen. Not the same effect, but the movie still was worthwhile. The best shot showed a spectacular Space Shuttle launching from Florida, filmed at long distance. I’ve seen Shuttle launches before, but this one was worth the price of admission.

The film also showed how, at Russia’s space facilities in Kazakhstan, family and friends can come right up to the rocket just before it is launched to see off the cosmonauts. You can’t get anywhere near that close at Cape Kennedy. Heck, you can’t even get anywhere near that close at a U.S. airport, thanks to the police state Bush imposed following 9/11.

I was a big space exploration fan growing up back in the brief “Space Age” of the 1960s and 1970s. Funny how the “Space Age” ended about the time that alien creature burst from the guy’s chest in “Alien” in 1979.

But of course the Space Station and Space Shuttle are tremendous boondoggles that should be sold. Government should stop wasting our tax money on space and let the burgeoning private space industry take over.

But what if someone doesn’t want medical insurance?

Wednesday, July 11th, 2007

sickoOne of the more interesting liberal blogs is Orange County’s own theliberaloc.com, which has a review of Michael Moore’s new movie “Psycho” — I mean “Sicko.” Not surprisingly, the theliberaloc.com finds the documentary makes a strong case for the government taking over health insurance. Moore himself, on the movie’s Web site, insists that everyone must have “free, universal health care for life,” with the insurance run by the government.

I haven’t seen “Sicko” yet and will write a full review when I do. But I want to bring up one thing: What if people don’t want medical insurance? Any national or even state “universal” scheme would be, by definition, for everyone. No exceptions. Or else.

Currently, they don’t have to get it in 49 states. The exception is Massachusetts, which under then-Gov. Mitt Romney imposed mandatory insurance last year. The bill went into effect 11 days ago. In Massachusetts the only way to breathe without having government-imposed insurance is to leave the state. Romney’s plan is probably the most likely to be imposed nationally.

This is discussed in the current issue of The American Conservative, for July 16, 2007, currently not online. In “My Body, My Choice,” James L. Payne, a retired Yale professor, says that although he’s 68, he doesn’t even use Medicare. He has saved up money precisely so that it could take care of medical emergencies. For less drastic care, his lack of insurance makes him look on it as any other purchase, figuring whether, for example, his cold is bad enough to go to the doctor.

By contrast with insurance, even with a co-pay we all know the “insurance company” will pay for most of the bill, so why not just see the doc? Payne writes:

We are not freeloaders. We believe we have a moral obligation to pay for the medical care we receive, and we always pay for it. I put no burden on doctors, hospitals, or taxpayers, and politicians are wrong to assume I am part of America’s health-care problem.

What about it, liberaloc.com? Liberalism is, or used to be, about liberty. Shouldn’t Prof. Payne have the liberty of opting out of any insurance system?

(Update: Cato has begun The Anti-Universal Coverage Club to maintain liberty of health insurance. What a great idea!)

What’s with Edwards/Regal theaters?

Monday, July 9th, 2007

traingleWhen my friends and I went to see “Ratatouille” last night (see previous post), we first went to the Edwards/Regal theaters at Triangle Square in Costa Mesa at about 6:40. The show was about to start at 6:50. But after waiting in line to buy tickets for 15 minutes because there was just one ticket teller, we missed the beginning of the movie and left.pier

We then went to the Pierside Surf City 6 Cinemas in Huntington Beach and got right in.

Even though Triangle Square was a redevelopment boondoggle that didn’t have enough patrons to do well, I always liked it. But such “service” is inexcusable.

Movie review: Ratatouille

Monday, July 9th, 2007

ratSome friends and I saw the new movie “Ratatouille” last night. It was a cartoon about rats in Paris, so I figured it might be an updated take on Orwell’s “Animal Farm,” with the rats being politicians.

Turned out it was a children’s movie. Which explained why my friends brought their young daughter.

But the movie turned out to be a lot of fun. It is curious that, although the rats and people in the movie all are supposed to be French, some had French accents, some American, and some British. They must have figured kids wouldn’t notice, or care.