DoctorStrangelove's Reviews

The Adventure of Sherlock Holmes' Smarter Brother (1975)

5/10

22 October 2009

I saw this movie a long time ago. Let's say it was the mid '80s.

ALL (to camera): "It was the mid '80s."

That's the kind of kidding around you typically find in a Zucker/Abrams type comedy more than a Brooks venture (which this is not, but maybe as close as it gets)... and no matter your taste, I think we can agree this movie needed more of it. Sly and subtle worked much better on Gene Wilder in "Young Frankenstein" and it would've worked much better here as well.

The only thing I remembered about TAOSHSB from the first viewing so long ago (before seeing it again last night) was the ridiculous hopping song and the presence of Marty Feldman. And, with the exception of Albert Finney's cameo - which is the funniest bit in the movie, sadly, and not because of the writing - I'm hard pressed to remember anything else only one day after watching it again.

I can't imagine anyone really appreciating TAOSHSB - except a die-hard fan of the Wilder/Feldman/Kahn team-up who's already seen "Young Frankenstein" and really really wants to get this one under his belt. It's just not very funny at all. Most people should definitely avoid it... trust your instincts this time.

6 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

The Bear That Wasn't (1967)

4/10

Severely over-rated

20 February 2008

This is an interesting short from the WB gang, since it's message-driven. (See other comments below for plot descriptions from the fawning fans.) Frees' voice work is nice, and the characteristic Chuck Jones facial expressions on the bear are endearing, as usual... but "interesting" is about as far as I can go in praise of this 'toon.

With a sledgehammer's subtlety, the message is made clear about one-quarter of the way into this short. After that it's repeated... and repeated... and repeated. And then, a full minute in the middle is spent rehashing what you just watched while the theme song (from the opening credits) plays... yet again. Some of the animation here is done beautifully, like the birds; while other parts are strange and utterly unnecessary, like the bizarre floor-arrows. There are very few characters, none of which have any real characterization; and what little conflict there is (necessary to ANY story) simply vanishes about halfway. The predictable ending comes with almost zero difficulty, plot-wise, and has me completely puzzled as to why a story so simplistic had to be ten minutes long?

I'm a big big fan of classic WB and H&B animation, and I thought at first I was about to be exposed to a hidden gem; but it's pretty understandable why I've never heard of this short. I can only assume that it appeals to young children and the memories of those who saw it when they were very young. It probably deserves a 2-vote when compared to everything else Jones et al did, and a 6-vote when compared to other animation... so, on average, 4 out of 10.

6 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

The Brothers Carry-Mouse-Off (1965)

2/10

Godawful

27 January 2008

DANGER! DANGER! IF YOU LOVE TOM AND JERRY, AVOID THIS!! This is one of those shorts that makes you wonder if watching three or four hours of cartoons a day might be a waste of your time. Clearly the people involved in the creation of this garbage were wasting their time, since they had no clue what they were doing. It's like a tone-deaf marmoset tried to compose an aria.

I recorded this in the middle of a Tom and Jerry marathon... it's so painfully awful, starring two characters with only a passing resemblance to the real T&J, that I hit fast-forward after about 90 seconds. An abomination that never should've seen the light of day.

One star for spelling "Tom" and "Jerry" correctly, and one for coloring within the lines.

0 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

The Mansion Cat (2001 TV Short)

1/10

Horrible.... splash sulfuric acid in your eyes instead!

27 January 2008

Who told Karl Toerge he was funny? This question will keep me up nights. He and Diana Ritchey, J. Eric Schmidt, Jay Bastian, Andy Lewis, Linda Simensky, Chuck Harvey and Alan Zegler will please keep 1000 yards away from any Tom and Jerry material for the rest of their lives.

I can only assume Joe Barbera did his line readings from a reclining position, in bed at his home, after being handed a five-figure check. And then Karl Toerge kissed the feet of the master, backed out of the room reverently, and sped away in his Beemer. Of course, after finishing his work I am sure he made (successful) Herculean efforts to keep Joe from seeing this filmic feces until he died in 2006.

This is the anti-Tom-and-Jerry. If you have this recorded, toss it into a lake of fire where it belongs.

3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (2007)

3/10

Worst of the lot, and that's saying something.

4 January 2008

If I hadn't previously known this movie had been adapted from a book, I would've expected to come here and find a trivia item stating: "filming started before the script was finished." There's no storytelling here - it's just a collection of scenes put on film so ineptly that one must have read the book AND watched all four prequels IMMEDIATELY PRIOR TO VIEWING! Assume that you're about to see an intelligent, engrossing tale which stands on its own as far as emotional investment goes... and you'll be as lost as I was.

The first two HP movies were decent fare, although clearly geared to younger fantasy fans. And I'll admit - it'd been a while since I saw the previous installment in this 'septilogy'... but ten minutes into this film I was seriously starting to wonder - a) if I'd somehow missed the last one; or b) if I'm going senile 40 years too early. How lazy can a director get? I knew all the characters, general histories and motivations; the settings were familiar; and I knew the basic plot from seeing the trailers... but I had not a clue as to what in the blue blazes was going on. I had to stop the DVD, go online and check to make sure I'd actually seen "Goblet of Fire". Cripes!

Do not pay money to see this - especially if you've never read the books! Halfway through the movie, you'll still be wondering where it's going. There is SO much wrong with this film, not least of all the length -- it must've taken four hours for me to stagger through this dreck, what with all the clarity-rewinding, sleep-resisting coffee-brewing, and sanity-requiring break-taking.

I could keep ranting on, but you get the idea. Now, since almost no movie is *perfectly* lousy, and since I give this one 3/10 (for the visuals and general theme) I feel I should say something positive. Okay, hmm... I'm positive I'll never watch this again. (Hey, the good comedy isn't free.)

2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Beowulf (2007)

9/10

Lives up to the hype.

3 December 2007

I saw "Beowulf" in IMAX 3-D... and at the risk of sounding like a teenager, I just gotta say: it was, like, totally awesome! Not a life-changing experience, mind you - and I'm sure the 3-D would've been more effective if I'd been in the center of the theater - but no matter how you slice it, this is one of the best movie events of the year. Although it's possibly just as good (and certainly cheaper) if you see the regular 2-D version.

The CGI is better than ever, although you may not be able to forget the film's animated (which could be by design - it's nearly aware of its own legend status) and you will certainly NOT forget that it is PG-13. "Beowulf" never devolves into anything dirty - there are some metaphors and double entendres (kids won't catch these; some adults in our packed theater clearly didn't) but there's nothing as offensive as what you'd find in a rated-R comedy. There are a couple of bare male rears and a pseudo-nude CGI Angelina Jolie for a minute or so... which didn't look very realistic. It was like an extraterrestrial's rendering of the perfect woman - beautiful, yes, but artificial (which would make sense, story-wise). More like a drawing from an anatomy textbook than a living human.

There's some good humor, and the action is simply unbelievably cool - this is one area where the 3-D might have played a major part. Take my word for it - as in "300", when it comes to manly men doing manly things, this movie lets it all hang out and does its fair share of earning its violence rating. Grendel is horrible, pitiable and looks amazing - as does the dragon. The battles are as epic, swooping and visually eye-popping as the best parts of the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy... you simply need to see for yourself. Just keep in mind that this is all about legends, glamour and exaggeration, and you'll have a total blast.

9/10 -- a big BIG recommend.

2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Dark Water (2005)

6/10

I'd watch a movie titled: "Jennifer Connelly Does Her Taxes".

20 May 2006

I'd also watch a weekly TV series titled, "Jennifer Connelly Mows The Lawn"... even if it aired at 4am. Heck, I'd probably tape it.

So I'm a little biased in her favor - and IMO, it paid off here because she's a joy to watch as an actress - more than just a pretty face. The ensemble is GREAT... Camryn Manheim, Tim Roth, John C. Reilly and Ariel Gade all do spot-on work; and Pete Postlethwaite is perfect for his part. I do agree (with many others) that Jennifer looks like she should regain a few pounds... screw Hollywood and its all-women-must-be-stick-figures mentality.

Ultimately I gave this movie a 6/10, which means I thought it was better than average but not worth owning; and I'll probably never see it again. Worth a watch though.

1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

The Core (2003)

3/10

This movie has pretty colors !!!!!!

19 May 2006

OK people - 5.4?!? Wow. That's an EXTREMELY generous score for this 'cinematic' turd. I'm truly shocked to find The Core's rating is that high... after being here for 5 years, I thought IMDb was at least half-full of snobs and movie nerds (like myself). Maybe not.

This is truly Bottom 500 material. The DVD cases should be labeled: "WARNING: Core is a noun and a verb. Exposure to this movie may result in the sensation of having your skull cored out." The reasons The Core more closely resembles the core of what's wrong with Hollyweird than a movie about the core of planet Earth are detailed everywhere else, so I won't repeat them here. Frankly, how anyone (even the "just turn off your brain and have fun!" apologists) can justify giving it anything above a 4 is beyond me... yet a significant number of voters must have given it 7s and 8s! I turned off my brain, wanted (and tried) to enjoy it and STILL feel my 3 vote is generous. You've heard the phrase "eye candy", right? The Core is eye arsenic.

My only theory is that most people who actually possess brains have avoided this 'movie' entirely (unlike myself) and have not voted - while those who found it enjoyable are the same people who were unable to detect its stench from a mile away... thus, the above-average ranking. It gives me hope to think that if the same cross-section of viewers saw The Core as saw The Godfather, this video vomit would have the 3 it deserves.

The Core: as in, "rotten to".

0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Red Planet (2000)

6/10

No crying aliens! *whew*

8 August 2002

Warning: Spoilers

** Spoilers below **

I saw "Mission to Mars" in the theater, and rented "Red Planet" - just finished my 2nd viewing and read a bunch of these posts... I'll try to say what hasn't been said yet. Positives:

1) NO CRYING ALIENS a la "Mission" - I nearly did a spit-take in the theater thanks to that scene. And the Hollywood eco-preaching was hardly noticeable... I think that's a good thing (?)

2) On a second viewing, "Armageddon" was unbelievably ignorant - oh, the pain! I can suspend my disbelief to allow for earthlike gravity on Mars, but NOT a stinkin' asteroid. Sci-fi doesn't have to be perfectly scientific; but RP did OK here.

3) Fire in space sequence: accurate! Hey folks, remember the fire on MIR? Anyone watch PBS? All fire needs is oxygen - no gravity required - and it can form weird floating globules. (See the book "Dragonfly" by Bryan Burrough, about the MIR disasters.)

4) AMEE the robot - lots of complaints like "why didn't they just delete the military mode?" Gee... it's a mission to figure out what went wrong on Mars - shouldn't we have some kind of just-in-case protection? It makes complete sense. You'd rather they wear pistols?

5) Poster "andykleinendorst" complained about too-advanced computer technology... oh please! It wasn't nearly advanced enough. We nearly have that technology NOW... pick up a science magazine, dude.

Negatives:

1) Even with oxygen, Mars would still be WAY too cold - even in sunlight

2) So the bugs create oxygen, fine - where will we get the nitrogen that makes up 70% of Earth's atmosphere?

3) We seem to totally forget the lessons of the past, and abandon redundant computer/landing/liftoff systems (as with most future-space-exploration movies)

4) Isn't it convenient that the farthest distance they travel on Mars is 100 km? Not too far, planet-wise - and they nearly crushed poor Sojourner when landing!

5) The cliff scene is just done terribly... contrived with forced dialogue... later, a totally wasted opportunity for a great subplot

6) Carrie-Anne Moss manages to be a turn-off as a female (bleah!) AND an actor... but the love scene was still better than in The Matrix (*gag*retch*)

Overall... it has its problems, but RP is generally believable (the bugs are much more original than any Big Bad Martian Threat). Why was the mission deemed a success? Call it a "successful failure" - like Apollo 13 (the reality, not the movie).

Red Planet could've been better, but it's decent compared to most of the intelligence-insulting nonsense Hollywood thinks we want.

0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964)

10/10

Women sense my power, and ... seek the life essence

26 March 2000

This definitely deserves to be in the top ten movies of all time! There are too many reasons to love it: Peter Sellers, Stan Kubrick, Slim Pickens, Peter Sellers, Dimitri Kissof, P.O.E., The BOMB Dimitri the HYDROGEN bomb, Buck Turgidson, Colonel Batguano if that really is your name, PETER SELLERS.

I finally got my roommate to watch it ... he started cracking up 5 minutes in and never quit. It was about my 5th time to see it - I wised up and bought it - and I keep discovering more hilarious touches. (I just noticed that the only reason Major Kong ever opens the safe is to trade his helmet for the cowboy hat!!) It gets better with every viewing. DON'T MISS THIS ONE. A classic by any standard, in any millennium.

1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

DoctorStrangelove

Reviews

Tell Your Friends

Recently Viewed