Skip the movie and just listen to the album. The good reviews are coming from nostalgia lane. The script is terrible, most of the acting amateurish and cringeworthy. The story is boring, silly and just an excuse for the fantastic music. I really wanted to love the movie because I love the album but it was torture to watch. A waste of time
Reviews
5 Reviews
The Longest Day
(1962)
Extreme disappointment
8 August 2008
I have just come back from visiting the D-Day beaches, museums, memorials and cemeteries for the second time in 4 years. This time with my wife. I find the subject fascinating.
I saw this movie a very long time ago, I must have been a kid. I have just seen it with my wife, hoping to help her put some order in all the things she has seen in Normandy.
I was sadly shocked to see such poor acting and above all, extremely terrible directing for the English and American scenes and "just" bad directing for the German ones.
Other films from the same period and older portray battle scenes and the soldier soul with far superior credibility.
I can imagine the directors telling the poor actors "look towards the horizon with dignified face" and other rubbish of that sort. No attention to logic, coherent acting or historical research. This resulted in empty, soulless characters.
It was really hard not to turn the film off. The stupid comical acting in the middle of a battle made my whole body cringe. Why did they need to invent things like paratrooper John Steele hanging for 10 hours and being deafened by the church bells? That is not true and looked stupid! He was shot in the foot BEFORE landing, he was hanging there for ONLY 2 hours until taken prisoner by the Germans to be liberated by the 82nd and 101st Airborne. And he was not deaf for hours or days, he even said that the tension and the pain in his foot did not allow him to hear the bells. In the town of Sainte-Mère-Église you can read all about this. Do not rely on the internet because sadly it mostly considers the scenes on the film as historical facts.
And why did the actor play him as if he was a silly clown? I guess the directors thought that they needed some comedy in the movie in order to keep people entertained.
If they paid 1/4 million $ in 1962! to John Wayne to appear and ruin the movie, they could have used a small fraction of that sum on historical research or a proper director.
A positive note is that the Germans spoke German amongst themselves, and not English with German accent, which sounds imbecilic. The same applies to the other languages, although they are all very stereotyped.
Quoting freely from "To Be or Not to Be" (1942) what this movie has done to Cornelius Ryan's book is what the Germans did to Poland.
I saw this movie a very long time ago, I must have been a kid. I have just seen it with my wife, hoping to help her put some order in all the things she has seen in Normandy.
I was sadly shocked to see such poor acting and above all, extremely terrible directing for the English and American scenes and "just" bad directing for the German ones.
Other films from the same period and older portray battle scenes and the soldier soul with far superior credibility.
I can imagine the directors telling the poor actors "look towards the horizon with dignified face" and other rubbish of that sort. No attention to logic, coherent acting or historical research. This resulted in empty, soulless characters.
It was really hard not to turn the film off. The stupid comical acting in the middle of a battle made my whole body cringe. Why did they need to invent things like paratrooper John Steele hanging for 10 hours and being deafened by the church bells? That is not true and looked stupid! He was shot in the foot BEFORE landing, he was hanging there for ONLY 2 hours until taken prisoner by the Germans to be liberated by the 82nd and 101st Airborne. And he was not deaf for hours or days, he even said that the tension and the pain in his foot did not allow him to hear the bells. In the town of Sainte-Mère-Église you can read all about this. Do not rely on the internet because sadly it mostly considers the scenes on the film as historical facts.
And why did the actor play him as if he was a silly clown? I guess the directors thought that they needed some comedy in the movie in order to keep people entertained.
If they paid 1/4 million $ in 1962! to John Wayne to appear and ruin the movie, they could have used a small fraction of that sum on historical research or a proper director.
A positive note is that the Germans spoke German amongst themselves, and not English with German accent, which sounds imbecilic. The same applies to the other languages, although they are all very stereotyped.
Quoting freely from "To Be or Not to Be" (1942) what this movie has done to Cornelius Ryan's book is what the Germans did to Poland.
Groundhog Day
(1993)
A masterpiece of cinema magic.
10 February 2008
Do you know that feeling when a movie connects with you so much that you identify with the characters and your thoughts and feelings are stirred?
It might have some continuity or factual errors, it might not deserve an Oscar for lighting, soundtrack and so on, but the magic of cinema really happens here.
I got out of the theater going over the movie in my head and wondering what I would do if I lived the same situation. I still do when I watch it on DVD.
I find the movie very funny, very intelligent and with a very good and uplifting message.
For all that, I consider this movie truly excellent.
It might have some continuity or factual errors, it might not deserve an Oscar for lighting, soundtrack and so on, but the magic of cinema really happens here.
I got out of the theater going over the movie in my head and wondering what I would do if I lived the same situation. I still do when I watch it on DVD.
I find the movie very funny, very intelligent and with a very good and uplifting message.
For all that, I consider this movie truly excellent.
Die Hard with a Vengeance
(1995)
This movie is not underscored, and this is why
26 August 2007
I have seen a lot of fuss about how underrated this movie is. One has to admit that it is a very entertaining, action-packed and sometimes very funny film. It was great to watch and I had a good time doing so, but honestly, it is not a clever picture.
In order to enjoy it, one has to give to it the same license as one gives to a James Bond or Harry Potter movie. If one concentrates on the fact that it is impossible for a taxi to fly in the air all through Central Park and continue working fine or that magic does not exist, then you will not enjoy certain types of films.
If you think about it, there are more holes in the plot, storyline and overall logic than bullet holes in total.
And I am not talking about how easy it would be to dismantle the bombs or if McClain would have died at the initial tasks, the fail-proof diversion would make no sense. I refer to situations such as when everyone in the police force, FBI and even public servants in the NY metropolitan area knew that there was a 10KT bomb in a school where one of their sons, grandsons, or nephews was studying and the story did not leak. Absurd! Or when McClain realizes that it was all a diversion and the idea is to rob the Federal Reserve. He does not tell his boss because he is not 100% sure; instead he goes inside the bank to check. And when he sees what has happened, he still thinks that chasing 14 trucks driven by an army of mercenaries with an old compact car is a better idea than calling for backup. Only when the trucks escape at the Bridge he decides it is time to tell his boss.
There are movies that have all the thrill and excitement of Die Hard 3 without all this nonsense. Take for instance Inside Man. That is a clever action movie. That is why it is rated better than this.
In order to enjoy it, one has to give to it the same license as one gives to a James Bond or Harry Potter movie. If one concentrates on the fact that it is impossible for a taxi to fly in the air all through Central Park and continue working fine or that magic does not exist, then you will not enjoy certain types of films.
If you think about it, there are more holes in the plot, storyline and overall logic than bullet holes in total.
And I am not talking about how easy it would be to dismantle the bombs or if McClain would have died at the initial tasks, the fail-proof diversion would make no sense. I refer to situations such as when everyone in the police force, FBI and even public servants in the NY metropolitan area knew that there was a 10KT bomb in a school where one of their sons, grandsons, or nephews was studying and the story did not leak. Absurd! Or when McClain realizes that it was all a diversion and the idea is to rob the Federal Reserve. He does not tell his boss because he is not 100% sure; instead he goes inside the bank to check. And when he sees what has happened, he still thinks that chasing 14 trucks driven by an army of mercenaries with an old compact car is a better idea than calling for backup. Only when the trucks escape at the Bridge he decides it is time to tell his boss.
There are movies that have all the thrill and excitement of Die Hard 3 without all this nonsense. Take for instance Inside Man. That is a clever action movie. That is why it is rated better than this.
The Guns of Navarone
(1961)
Good story, poor directing and average acting
22 June 2007
Warning: Spoilers
This movie has two indispensable elements for a good war movie: good story and good actors. But it just does not work. It is not convincing. Looks like they did not rehearse or think about the scenes for more than five minutes.
Many scenes are incoherent, like when they are hiding from the Germans in Navarone but still are shouting at each other very loudly. Or when they find the traitor and are faced with the dilemma of what to do with her. They engage in a very dramatic discussion about the inevitability and the moral dilemma of killing her when they could have very easily tied her up for a couple of hours.
One has to forgive the special effects for it was done many years ago, and some of them are actually not that bad, but some action shots and fights just look silly.
This is not in my list of unmissable classics.
Many scenes are incoherent, like when they are hiding from the Germans in Navarone but still are shouting at each other very loudly. Or when they find the traitor and are faced with the dilemma of what to do with her. They engage in a very dramatic discussion about the inevitability and the moral dilemma of killing her when they could have very easily tied her up for a couple of hours.
One has to forgive the special effects for it was done many years ago, and some of them are actually not that bad, but some action shots and fights just look silly.
This is not in my list of unmissable classics.
Tell Your Friends