Neil-63 Reviews

The Shawshank Redemption (1994)

Truly a Masterpiece

[10/10 · 9 January 2001]

The Shawshank Redemption affords us the opportunity to experience the unique magic of hope, ironically, found in a setting not conducive of such hope: a prison.

Simply put, this transcendent film explores the human condition ranging from blinding rage and sinister avarice to hopeful realism and utter disenchantment.

Played by a selection of actors supplying a wealth of talent to the film, the supporting characters, though differing on the surface, share the one trait of disillusionment, either through glib, passive resignation or fiery, active disgust.

But the principal character, Andy Dufresne (Tim Robbins), does not share this disenchantment, at least not totally. He clings to hope and basic transcendental principles while facing adversity after adversity. Though even Andy becomes shaken from time to time as he is pummeled by the events of life, either induced by the nefarious calculation or hopeless despair of others, he continues with the battle.

Andy is the consummate individual, disallowing what others say to him, invalidating what others do to him, and ultimately defying what would appear to be reality itself in what seems to be a simple effort, primarily, to better his life and, secondarily, to shine the light of hope into the lives of those around him. Indeed, though it would seem that the fates occasionally step in and lend Andy a hand, the awe-inspiring potential for hope must have been intrinsic and innate. And the fact remains that those same fates damned him in the first place. But perhaps, it was all part of the journey...

Well, enough of my thoughts! See for yourself--I easily rate this film as a ten. :-)

Alien: Resurrection (1997)

It's Ripley, believe it or not!

[25 August 1999]

Okay, so this movie doesn't match up to Alien or Aliens. But it certainly makes up for Alien 3's lack to carry the series. But after all, it would be difficult to carry the series from what Ridley Scott and James Cameron have done. Alien Res. does provide more insight into the lives of the denizens of a later era. We meet Elgyn and his irrepressible crew, as well as the almost psychotic General Perez and his slimy scientists. We get another great character, Call (played by the very talented Wynona

Ryder), and finally, we get Ripley, believe it or not (!) back from the dead (played by the fantastic Sigourney Weaver. An Alien film just isn't an Alien film without the Erica Kane of the Alien Legacy. What a great heroine!) This film brings Ripley to a new plane on the evolutionary scale. This new Ellen Ripley, part Alien, part human, is unsure about her destiny at first, but the film ends up giving us the Ripley we've come to know and love. Alien Res. does take the series' show piece, the Alien, to a new level with the disgusting Newborn. If the Queen in Aliens didn't even terrify you, this creature will! The pace is somewhat uneven, but the action is high, the film's sequences are interesting. The movie is a excellent blend of the dirty pirates shifting to virtue (well, somewhat) while the clean scientists turn evil, Ripley's dynamic return, and an interesting prophetic commentary on cloning, evil and good. My thinking, 20th Century Fox can take this series now in two different directions:: 1) Alien 5 could catalogue a new discovery of aliens after Alien Res. with or without Ripley (and Call) or 2) Alien 5 could write off the two most recent films as a

dream sequence (Fox's original idea for Alien 4). After

all, it makes sense that Ripley would dream about dying with the aliens, and her resurrection with the aliens is testimony to her growing ever close to the alien race.

Bottom line: We met one derelict ship in Alien. Isn't

interesting, the prospect of more? I would think the aliens had to originate from somewhere, right?

Let Ripley, Hicks, Newt, and Bishop embark on new adventures with our unfriendly aliens, or show all new characters. The cosmos is the limit for this series now!

Alien 3 (1992)

I feel like Annie Wilkes from Misery...

[25 August 1999]

I would like to begin by pointing out the most glaring error of this movie--the Queen Alien simply could not have brought eggs on board. I have watched both Aliens and Alien 3 enough to know. Either she laid them (which could not have happened since we saw her after she exited the drop-ship, and she probably needed her reproductive apparatus), or she carried them on board (another impossibility, she wasn't holding them, and even if she was and simply tossed them out while the camera wasn't looking, why would the blasted face-huggers wait for the 30 min - 1 hr period it would take for Ripley to shower, change, fix Hicks up, clean poor Bishop up, and enter the cryo-tube before they {or it} jumped out to latch on. That is assuming they even found their way to a part of the ship close enough to the cryo-tubes.) Phew! I feel like Annie Wilkes from Misery when she railed about the chapter plays--that simply isn't what happened. As a friend of mine pointed out, 20th Century Fox needed to know then they didn't need Ripley to continue the series. The need to include (and bump off) the series' leading lady landed them in that difficult, albeit impossible storytelling position. Alien 3's previews hinted at a possible earth-battle, the epic Alien story we all imagine in the future, but it obviously failed to deliver. The special effects of the alien were sadly lacking in this film--the prequels succeeded far better. The feel of the movie is somewhat unusual, dreamlike, but not what I would call good or bad. I do believe the movie's attempt to provide modernism is a little over the top. My goodness, Alien and Aliens weren't "overly Romantic" because Ripley survived. Good Lord, virtually everyone died in each film! To the remainder of the character, Hicks, Newt, and unfortunately Ripley was truly a waste to me. It totally nullified the second film. It cheaply tried to mimic the first film by providing the suspense of a hopeless group stumbling in the dark against the perfect predator. All too familiar, right? The other films at least tried to add to the series with some new idea. I can't totally bash the move though. It does continue the tradition of providing colourful characters, although they all do perish. My overall thoughts--the movie, apart from the series, could stay afloat as a B class science fiction thriller.

But it fails miserably as an attempt to carry on the series called "The Alien Legacy." It attempts to be so much, but achieves so little... My suggestion--watch it and attempt to wade through the pretense. But watch the other three, too, because... We know Alien can do better!

Star Trek: Insurrection (1998)

Star Trek at an all time low!!

[13 June 1999]

Star Trek: Insurrection by far is the worst of the nine existing Trek films. No, no, worse than that--it doesn't deserve the name Star Trek.

Its focus on the evils of transplanting of a small group of people is somewhat enlightening, but this was simply not a compelling story. For the first time ever with a Trek movie, I was bored to death in the theatre. At least in Generations, the second worst film, I could await the much anticipated appearance of Kirk. Insurrection fails, I think, because the storyline lags behind with virtually no action. The cutsie little attempts at making this movie entertaining with the Next Generation crew is simply terrible---the writers of Star Trek need to think some things through before they depend on Riker's beard-shaving, a navigation joystick, and Data's playing to carry a Star Trek film. In my own opinion, the plot fails because the storyline is not far-reaching enough---most viewers I presume want to see Earth in danger, then the Enterprise (or whatever ship they'll use later) swoops in to save the day. The Star Trek shows that get the worst reviews (V, Gen., Insurrection) were event driven in some remote corner of the galaxy that was virtually unimportant. First Contact, The Undiscovered Country, and the rest create an Armaggeddon of a storyline, then our heros swoop in to save the day. Sure it makes for predictability, but most movies are predictable these days. Insurrection is by far, a miss. I hope Rick Berman gets it right next time! :-)