Change Your Image
avsfan33
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Attack (1956)
The Harsh Realities of War
If Hollywood is looking for a remake, this is one that should definitely be done...and I mean a gritty Hanks/Spielberg remake at that.
I wonder what impact this film actually had on the 1956 movie going public back then. Me thinks this story may have had a huge impact on their general well being. I mean it's that intense!
The U.S. Department of Defense wanted no part in the making of this film. Maybe the reasoning behind this was from the type of war films that were out at the time; Mister Roberts (Jack Lemmon), To Hell and Back (Audie Murphy) and Screaming Eagles (Martin Milner). All straight up good films in their own right but certainly not an Attack!
Attack! is a very powerful picture, it has very powerful acting and a very, very powerful message. A nam vet once explained that the main premise of this film actually did play out a decade later in Vietnam...more than once!
This film features mental angst, conspiracy, and the absolute horrors of war. The general movie going public who saw this film in 1956 had absolutely no idea what they were in for and were probably completely wrecked afterwards.
Chernobyl (2019)
Bangers & Mash...Chernobyl Style!
Come on now, really? Was Chernobyl good enough to win an Emmy? Apparently so because that is what in fact it just did. First of all I was just put off by the British accents. The production team asked the Brit actors to "take the edge off" their British accents...really? Also saying they didn't want the actors portraying Russian accents to get in the way. Well if they are good actors then it shouldn't be that big of a deal one would think. Most films I've seen where actors speak English with a German or Russian accent seem to give the film credibility.
So with that said Chernobyl is a story that needs to be told and remembered. Good cinematography and editing.
Roma (2018)
A Collection of Memories
Ok, first of all this film is not for public consumption, second of all is that it might be wise to preface ones self before seeing this film. Please allow me to explain.
This film is more like a slice of blue cheese on your roast beef sandwhich...it's an aquired taste. What the director Alfonso Cuarón has done is to take a brief look into his childhood memories and he has successfully place them on film.
This film is a visual epoch which, if you allow, will unfold before your eyes. It is more of an experience rather than watching a movie. It takes patience and the understanding of where the film is coming from before viewing.
The Time Machine (2002)
A disgrace to the original
This "modern" 2002 version of the original book and film is an utter disgrace. I have seen this film twice, once in the theater and once again last night just to make sure I wasn't poorly judging the movie. It is safe to say they blew it! Hello...the title of the film is "The Time Machine" so one would think they would elaborate on the subject of time travel...right?...WRONG! In less then 10 minutes he travels 80 thousand years into the future. In the book and the original film, half of the movie is dedicated to the subject. In the original film, there is a slow build up, he slowly travels into the future stopping along the way to view World War One then again to see the nuclear destruction of the planet. In this version they take no time to actually give the viewer a feeling for what it would really be like to time travel, something the original does quite nicely. So to this version I say Balderdash and Poppycock! I'll stick with the original version and keep my fond memories of it.
Art of Darkness: A Night Gallery Retrospective (2002)
Well written retrospective
This well written, smoothly directed debut by up and coming producer Michael J. Gallegos was a hit. The commentary and interview segments blended nicely to create an aura that Mr. Serling himself would surely approve. At approximately 30 minutes, it captures the sense of distorted reality Night Gallery provided during it's weekly run. Having seen this retrospective, I now have a better understanding of how the show was conceived and a look into the thoughts of Rod Serling.
(Edit to correct Mr. Serling's name almost 20 years later. Forgive me Rod for my foolish mistake, you are forever embedded into Science Fiction lore.)