I recently saw this on Amazon Prime. I'm not sure what attracted me to it, but it is much better than I expected.

Underrated actor, Jeremy Piven (David) plays a fairly stereotypical, joke cracking American Dad living in York, England. For the unitiated York is a Roman City with stunning architecture in the North of England. He has a teenage daughter, Jules (played by Olivia-Mai Barrett) who is a bratty 16-year-old teenager into typical things like boys, backchatting and choir singing! David is a widow trying to come to terms with his wife's death and Jules' grades are suffering as a result. Jules has the bright idea of setting him up on a series of dates after making an honest online profile on dating websites.

What surprised me most is this film wasn't light-hearted Christmas bants and fairytale romance. It is quite tragic and emotional in places. Also, for anyone expecting something family friendly there is some swearing (no F words) and some sexual references which aren't suitable for younger children.

The film is carried by believable performances from Piven and Olivia-Mai Barrett. Well known British face, Joely Richardson is also good as David's best friend, Sarah. It starts off a bit slow and annoying, but stick with it. All in all this is an enjoyable, but not exceptional film which is more likely to make you cry than wet your pants with laughter.

6 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

Surreal rom-com noir.

I have been hearing about this increasingly over the years, and always intended to see what the buzz was about.

A couple of things put me off though, principally Adam Sandler... who's name induces cringes in me, as I really do not like his usual comedic style, or the films he tends to be in.

The other thing being that the "buzz" was a very kind of low level one, so I just kept of forgetting about it. So I was pleasantly surprised when the DVD turned up in the charity shop the other week, when I went to buy a stack of DVDs and books in anticipation of the next lockdown.

It's strange... damn strange!

And probably all the better for it, as it has a bizarre, unsettling quality in the film-making style that subverts the romantic comedy basis of the plot.

Sandler's character is a lonely, messed up, angst ridden, paranoid (certainly mentally ill) "entrepreneur" who works out of an industrial unit in the middle of some drab, nowhere town, and who's hobbies include collecting free air miles tokens from puddings in supermarkets, in bulk, and generally getting fixated and obsessive with things, as well as evading the attempts of his many sisters trying to set him up with a date, or at the very least, pull him out of himself and be more sociable...

...And so one of the women introduced to him: Emily Watson, inexplicably comes to like him, and want to go out with him, in spite of his apparent lack of interest, inappropriate social responses, unpredictably excessive behaviours, and generally insular, festering nature.

In the background is this bizarre and nightmarish sub-plot that develops when he phones a sex line one evening when he feels particularly lonely, and then becomes the subject of a campaign of spiralling persecution and victimisation by the woman he was talking to, and the whoever she is working for.

It all makes for a distinctly uneasy, claustrophobic experience, which is further enhanced by these kind of Rothko inspired art-installation type interludes / transition films, and the clunky, odd, and dissonant, and non-musical random noise soundtrack, which can induce you, the viewer to feel like you're half nuts yourself, or getting there!

Not the kind of film you'd usually associate with anyone in the cast, or even the director, Paul Thomas Anderson....

...It's more the feel of a Charlie Kaufman scripted, Michel Gondry / Spike Jonze directed affair, perhaps inspired by a dystopian Franz Kafka paranoia novel.

So think: Being John Malkovich, Enternal Sunshine Of the Spotless Mind, Synecdoche New York, The Trial, plus one of your own, more low key, disturbing nightmares, and you're in the ballpark of where this is coming from.

And finally, it comes to talking about Adam Sandler... because he for once, gives a very compelling, subtle, understated, brooding, twitchy, oppressed and introverted performance that it turns out he's really rather good at, and which was needed to sell this film, if it was to succeed.

In all, this Noir-ish surreal rom-com is a refreshing change in subverting the usual rom-com ideas, even if it is nuts, and for that, you will probably either like it, or absolutely hate it, but I don't think this is ever going to be an all time favourite of anyone's... more a cult-classic / semi mythical movie hat will be spoken of in certain circles occasionally as being a benchmark of what the possibilities are within that genre, at least.... It's influence probably exceeds it's excellence, but for that reason, worth watching at least once in your life.

6 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

Katrin Cartlidge stars as Claire Dolan a high-class, but jaded Irish call-girl, turning tricks for her pimp, a menacing Colm Meaney (as Roland Cain) after her mother dies Claire wants to become a mother and meets a good-natured if slightly stalker-ish cab driver, Elton Garrett (an emotionally complex Vincent D'Onofrio).

I've seen Lodge Kerrigan's earlier film Clean, Shaven. Arguably one of the best obscure films of the 90s. Claire Dolan has a similar style in that it is social-realist and filmed almost like a documentary. It also has a clinical, sterile approach with minimal lighting,set design and even dialogue. In all honesty this is the film's biggest fault; it feels soulless. The scenes were I should feel more for the characters involved, I just didn't. That's not to say the film isn't engaging. There's enough drama to keep it interesting and with a runtime of just over 90 minutes it moves along at a fair pace. It also doesn't scrimp on the sex scenes with some fairly explicit scenes.

The film is believable in terms of story. I couldn't connect with any of the characters. That's not a slight on the acting, everyone is excellent; I just didn't feel for them. Colm Meaney is good in everything, but it is rare for him to play malicious characters. His roles are often reduced to Irish gangsters, priests or fatherly guys. It's nice to see him being cast against type. Katrin Cartlidge is an excellent and an underrated actress. I first saw her in Naked (1993) and despite having the chops she never really became an A-lister. She is a bit cold and austere in this role, which I'm sure is intentional, but not really convincing as a call-girl. Compare and contrast with "Secret Diaries Of A Call Girl" while a total fantasy much like the book itself in omitting the more sinister aspects; Billie Piper had the look and glamour of a stereotypical call girl.

It's a difficult film to see which is a shame. While not a brilliant film I preferred almost lost British drama, Prostitute (1980), Import/Export (2007) and Call Girl (2012). Claire Dolan does everything right, but it just didn't click with me.

6 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

The illegitimate son of John Waters and the father of Todd Solondz. Neil LaBute with the austere edge. These are some comparisons I've invented to describe this film.

The plot is straight out of a lavish 80s soap opera. Chicano manservant and a body building chauffeur make a bet to see which one can bed their female boss first.

Films about sex are rarely sexy. Scenes manages to be tongue in cheek and surprisingly graphic in its handling of sex, but also funny with it. By going for a campy approach it manages to avoid the usual trappings of being boring. By comparison black comedy, The Opposite Of Sex was more subtle, but h had zero laughs for me. I was also reminded of Clueless another store about middle class suburbia, but without the acrid, briny tang.

Class Struggle is hilarious and biting with its satire and managed to be more than just a send-up of bad Soap Operas and Sitcoms. It has actors who are in on the joke and understand the absurdity of the material and a strong script with genuine heartfelt drama as well as a high hit rate for funny one liners.

6 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

I'm not sure what to make of this one. On one hand it is a very good movie with powerful performances and looks a lot more expensive than its paltry (by Hollywood standards) $2 million budget suggests. On the other I feel a bit disappointed and as though I've seen it all before.

A teenage girl, Kayla (Elsie Fisher) posts Self-help and motivation YouTube Videocasts\V-Logs; subjects like "self-esteem" and "making friends". In real life we learn she is socially anxious and a bit of an outcast. Meanwhile her Dad (Josh Hamilton) is a smothering and finds it difficult to bond with her, mainly because she is getting older.

I'm not sure how much of this film is based on comedian Bo Burnham's own life. Bo is absolutely massive in USA, but in the UK very few people have heard of him and would probably think he was mainly known as a film director; I don't know the British equivalent: David Baddiel maybe?

The acting is believable and it manages to be less annoying than most teen movies. Juno I found irritating due to clunky dialogue. Eighth Grade manages to just avoid "this is how teens talks". I've seen very similar plots in American Beauty with Mena Suvari's subplot, but this is less of a boot in the face in terms of impact. One can't help but be reminded slighted of John Hughes films as they are pretty much the prototype; Eighth Grade is less sugary and more open ended.

It's a solid film with solid performances, but for me it just lacks the magic touch.

6 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

Here's an old review I wrote:

Based on a story by Quentin Blake. Channel 4 marketed this short film as a Christmas event much like: The Tiger Who Came To Tea last year. Clown features the iconic artwork of Quentin Blake. I've been a fan since I read Roald Dahl books as a child.

The story is a simple and derivative one about a clown toy who gets discarded as the owner grows too old to have toys. The clown comes alive and goes on an adventure to find a new owner. Similar themes have been used in Toy Story (1994) and Raggedy Ann (1974 onwards). Given its short running time Clown is the lightest in terms of depth. The star of the show is the animation and music. Largely produced by an Italian company, it is frankly beautiful. Helena Bonham Carter does a fine job of narrating the story.

Given the hype surrounding this it's easy to be disappointed. I think it is style over substance, but it is infinitely charming.

6 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

An extraordinary film.

An historical piece, which serves to record a shameful event in British history, it centres around the immediate aftermath of the victory at Waterloo, where proud and preening aristocracy and ruling classes overtaxed, and underserved the struggling people of Manchester, Lancashire, who having basically delivered this victory through the expense of their blood, sweat, and indeed, tears, were all but forgotten in their demands for some basic subsistence, and the representation in Parliament that would give it to them...

....Naturally, they began to get more than a little agitated, and were threatening to rise up against their government if they did not get what they wanted.

The uncaring government, and the subordinate landed gentry, Industrial magnates and company sought to "Quell" this unrest by sending the Yeomanry (Soldiers / police of their day) to supress and disperse an event held in St. Peter's Field, where the ordinary people of the towns and villages had gathered to hear Henry Hunt speak concerning their rights, and it ended up with an overzealous cavalry charge through a crowd of men, women, and children that left 18 people dead... and so was recorded as the "Peterloo Massacre" of 1819 thereafter by the media of the day.

While this is one of those historical stories that is basically no more than a short article's worth to convey the essential facts, Mike Leigh delves deeper, by fleshing out the story with characters representing the people of the time and place, in a series of home-stead conversations, and set piece public speaking events.

...It is presented, therefore, as a series of discussions a lot like Chaucer's Canterbury Tales, with each conversation more like a small treatise on Civil Rights and Liberties, from home spun philosophies to great speeches and pronouncements on the subject, all leading up to the titular catastrophe, and which serve to give it context, and underline it.

This is not a conventional "drama", or period piece therefore, and is a thinking person's film, like a mediation on civil rights.... a "speaky" - "Talky" film....

...A serious study of a serious subject.

There is no music score, only the occasional piece of contemporary folk music played by characters in the film, and each frame of this movie is shot like an old oil painting by Rembrandt, or Vermeer... truly stunning cinematography!

The "everyday-ness", and ordinariness of the characters, in presenting them as people you might know, and speak to them, and their almost festive mood on the occasion of a day out to journey to the event only serves to heighten the horror of the final disaster, as it too, is unscored, and filled with only the awfulness of the various screams, and random, jutting movements of horses, people and soldiers flashing across the screen in the grim confusion of the situation as the mood turns, and it descends into hideous chaos.

An important film, therefore, and one which people, especially here in Britain ought to see, although wherever you are in the world, it's themes and events may be all too Universally understood.

If there is a criticism I have of it, it's that the film ends rather too abruptly... with no follow up of what becomes of the various characters, almost like they've served their purpose, in telling the story, then ditched... even though they have been well built up, and moulded by the actors through the rest of the film.... seems a little callous, and odd, given the movie itself is about the indifference of some sections of society toward others.

Would make a nice double feature, by way of contrast, to more mannered and reverential: The Madness Of King George... or maybe Blackadder III, as these also feature fat git parasite The Prince Regent (Later: George IV :).

6 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

A boy becomes a man...

...the hard way.

For as this movie makes clear, this is not a love story, it's a story about love... especially how young guys drag their adolescence into adulthood, before "love" or infatuation kicks it out of them...

(sometimes)

As Tom works in a greeting card company, and is basically a young guy with dreams of a life in architecture which seems destined to remain one of those dream not acted upon, all the while hanging out with his friends pretty much the same as he did at school, and with the corresponding level of maturity...

...Until, of course, the mysterious young woman arrives in the company, in the shape of Summer.

Naturally, he gets all moody, goes overboard, and has his heart broken.

The film jumps about across the titular 500 days, contrasting the good days of hazy romantic idealised memory, and juxtaposes them with the gloomy 20-something-noir days of his crushed existence because of her.

And in so doing, he's trying to gain perspective on the events of the 500 days, and their relationship, and come out the other side... perhaps a little wiser.

This film could easily be mistaken for a typical teen-angst, high school style melodrama for a younger audience, but actually, it's much more than that, as it is very innovative, witty, very sharply written, and very funny.

probably for a slightly older 30 something audience looking back (And trying not to cringe at themselves).

For me, at least, this was the role that hanged my perception of Joseph Gordon-Levitt as an actor - no longer a "child star", and moved him into an area that allowed him to go star in Christopher Nolan films and such.

And a brave role for Zooey Deschanel to take, as she is, at least on first viewing (And seeing as this is told from Tom's prespective), cast as the distant, remote ice queen villain of the piece...

(Tom even muses at one point if she is in fact, a robot :)

But you eventually realise that it's mainly Tom being a deluded douche, misreading, and misinterpreting through the prism of his youth.

(So themes older guys and younger gals will recognise, and perhaps be all too familiar with)

Over all, a very sharp, funny, and fun, romantic comedy that is a deprecation of a young guy who takes himself too seriously.

6 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

Donald Fauntleroy Duck gets his draft notice and goes in, past all the amazingly enticing recruiting posters, to sign up. First he has to pass the physical. Despite his flat feet, he makes it. Donald wants to fly, but first he has to make it through Sergeant Pete's boot camp. He has a terrible time with close-order drills, and standing at attention without moving when he's over an ant-hill proves a real challenge. Eventually, Donald ends up on endless KP.

6 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

Michael Winner's Dirty Weekend is his take on films like Ms. 45 as well as a middle finger to the critics who complained about sexual violence in his earlier box office smash, Death Wish.

Dirty Weekend is rarely talked about even among fans of British crime films\Britsploitation. It is cheap, it is nasty and despite Winner's reputation as a bad director (he's not) it's actually well paced and there's some decent performances especially from Lia Williams, the housewife next door turned vigilante. Production wise it has a bit of a TV Movie feel, which is a shame. For some reason it kept me gripped for the running time, maybe because I wondered what I would see next. It does feature graphic violence and sexual assault, nobody seriously believed this is a feminist film; it's exploitation, but that sits great with me.

It's nowhere near in the same league as Death Wish which has an explosive scene on a subway train easily one of the most memorable of the tough crime films of the 70s. By comparison the show stopper in Dirty Weekend is a nasty forced oral sex scene (simulated) with vomiting. See what I mean? Ms. 45 by comparison is dark and gritty, but much more even in its tone; Dirty Weekend is a bit uneven; part seaside postcard, part brutal rape revenge film - even the film's title is an innuendo.

See it if you like this sort of thing, but it's far from a great film. Version I saw was an uncut bootleg VHS, not sure how the DVD from Universal is. Death Wish had a remake in 2018, I can't see this relative obscurity getting the Hollywood treatment.

6 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

Allegedly, this parody of classic horror films is supposed to have a greater appeal to horror fans than the general public. I am a horror fan and found it to be tasteless, un-funny, juvenile and overlong. The directors seem to have limited knowledge of horror film history (or even general knowledge of film.) Their worn film stock attempt, as was properly done in Grindhouse, is woefully illiterate -- in one example, a jerky splice is accompanied by the sound of a needle scratching across a record! Rather than aiming to please horror fans, the film is more obsessed with sex and toilet humor -- both topics from the purview of a teen metalhead. An entire segment is dedicated to feces and farting, while other segments zero in on themes like erections (at times shown in close up), sperm, homo-erotica, and politically correct Nazi satire. Raunchy sex and language far outweigh horror tropes, definitely for adults only. The CG is on par with the worst Asylum films and the screenplay is more inane than a Troma film festival.

These sub-films probably seemed like a good idea on paper when they were dreamed up, but fleshing them out into something effective as horror and satire is a delicate procedure best left to qualified people like Mel Brooks, Zucker-Abrahams-Zucker, (early) Tim Burton, etc. I didn't see affection for horror cinema in Chillerama, more a passion for explicit vulgarity that needed something to be attached to. Lamearama, more like.

6 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

I really have little to say about this low-brow comedy. If your idea of funny cinema is the Police Academy series, this might be up your alley. There's actually some decent performances (and some bad ones, as well), but most of the cast have little more to do than swear and recite shocking lines in front of elementary school children. At other times you're supposed to laugh at the fat kid farting, or kids in the schoolyard playing "drive-by" while speaking gangsta slang. Or a second grader convinced she is pregnant. (sigh) Some gags in the film work, but most get a failing grade.

The budget for Lower Learning was a paltry 2 million; it only played in a single theater (and a single showing!) which pulled in almost $3,000. I suppose I should end with a punchline like Lower Earning or something to that effect. Then I'd have all the skills needed to write rubbish like this film.

6 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

Rookie film-making 101. I was sure this was gonna be one of those SyFy / Asylum mockbusters that can be entertaining even in their weakest hours. Sink Hole doesn't even rise to that level. It's not terrible in a "I can't even endure this" way, just boring fare with a soap opera tempo and characters you don't give a damn about. The script is possibly the weakest link (along with the director) and was probably penned under the title "Plot Hole" (take your pick from many...they should have sent in the rescue team to find them!) And don't even get me started on the junk science that seems to be the root cause of every modern disaster movie.

The ending is a spectacle of stupid, so expect that should you dare to venture into this dangerous territory. I would recommend watching the trailer before making that journey, it may even be worse than the film itself. If you have the DVD, you get a nice cover graphic that is leaps and bounds more interesting than the film itself.

In conclusion, the lack of suspense, logic, and viewer involvement with anything going on results in zero fun factor for this snooze-fest.

6 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

Not sure how this stands up to political correctness these days...

...It was a bit edgy and controversial way back when it first came out, and there's the odd moment Woody Harrelson may now have cause to regret, but that said it is kind of the point of the movie, saying things that people ought not to say, both explicitly and by implication, in an unflinching, naturalistic way.

It came out of the same time frame as Boyz 'N' The Hood, And Spike Lee's films like Do The Right Thing etc., and has that kind of feel and sensibility.

But while I would venture to suggest that perhaps those others have begun to show their age a little, this still feels fresh, due to the razor sharp humour, lean and kinetic plot, and an absolute refusal to apologise for itself, in what it is.... it just goes with it.

It centres on two basketball court hustlers with problems in their lives who team up to hustle everyone else... and each other, and the film just explores their relationship as they do so.

Very funny in places, and generally good fun throughout.

6 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

Not a horror by todays standards more a thriller back then, really only spooky music score no ghouls (zombies).

Pretty much storywise is okay, local towns folk missing more more reports police get sent in too investigate the spooky mansion.

Avrage film avoid unless you like old style films

6 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

When I was younger and had flatmates we used to have a movie night and rent out a DVD and have a few beers. This was one of the films. It is an incredibly crass "gross out" comedy film in the style of American Pie. It relies heavily on stereotypes, so does National Lampoon's European Vacation, but that was made 20 years earlier and it is a lot funnier. Road Trip is the best film in the Trip series, helped by a "Fonzie" performance from Tom Green. I've not seen Boat Trip, but this could well be the worst in the series.

6 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

I saw this recently. I don't think I can top Dr Doom's review. The character of Bulldog Drummond pre-dates Ian Fleming's James Bond novels, but a cut-price Bond is a comparison which can't help but be drawn. Dr No would have been released a few years earlier and had Sean Connery as the epitome of sexy coolness. Richard Johnson as Hugh Drummond is fine, but a bit charmless.

As mentioned robot babes for the plot which is as silly as it sounds. This owes more to camp 60s films like Casino Royale and Dr. Goldfoot and the Bikini Machine than say Goldfinger. On the plus side the scenery and locations are exotic especially for the time, the action scenes little of them as there are (mainly speedboat chases and skydiving) not bad at all, also this one is less dark and probably more family friendly than Bond. To be honest it's not worth a watch. Oh, and the Bluray from Network features an absolutely superb print.

6 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

So bad, it hurts. While watching this, I kept trying to excuse the amateurish attempt at filmmaking because every director has to start somewhere, but Larry Buchanan had previously directed nineteen films! Just wait until you feast your eyes on the monster.

If you watch expecting a horror film, well, just don't do that. If you watch to see how terrible a film can be, you may even find a way to love this assault on the very concept of competence. Even American International didn't expect audiences to actually pay to see this, dumping it straight into their TV package.

6 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

Nostradamus: 2012 is THE go-to documentary that details the events, historical and astronomical, leading to the great apocalypse of 2012 in which the brilliant seer's Quatrains converge science and metaphor to warn of the kismet which lie ahead. I view at it as a yearbook which dramatically returns us to that classic year predicted by many cultures, such as the Mayans. Most of this armageddon was made most clear after the discovery of Nostradamus' lost book, which serves enigmatic illustrations that, as experts inform us, symbolically details the great changes via alchemy, climate change, and planetary transformation. The scholars dance around the speculation of it all and seem confident of the worst case scenarios verified by changes we see in our world -- even incorporating Hopi, Freemason and Christian elements, throwing everything at the wall for a united verification of the urgent, certain doom.

Speaking of religion, the concluding moments feature carefully worded political proposals that Nostradamus was actually warning us -- a wake-up call, if you will -- of what will happen if we don't make changes that affect our climate, financial institutions, global interactions, etc. One expert goes on to suggest the possibility of 2012 being the year in which "the United States transforms itself", since the USA is, of course, the cause of the 2012 cataclysm.

Famine and mass extinction seem(ed) to be a certainty, and it never looked more clinically polished than when viewed through the spectrum of Nostradamus' prophecies. A small portion of the film's 92 minutes discusses real scientific theories of our past, but not enough to leave any credibility to the overall theme. It's a silly pseudo-documentary that repeats the same (mis)information over and over and the "experts" are anything but. Never mind that no contrasting opinions are ever presented. The flimsy nature of Nostradamus' predictions are populated by reverse interpretations of past events aligned with vague passages that could be made to fit any incident. Ever heard of a future prediction of his that came true? My score is largely rewarding the film's audacity.

Personally, I feel the perilous behavior of mankind in response to political and social change is more frightening than any prophecy of holocaust. Global disdain and misadventure magnified via social media would have been a far more convincing forecast of the end of the world as we know it.

6 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

One of Roger Moore's early Hollywood films, and Lana Turner's last under MGM contract. Costing $2.6 million, it did not seem to have enough substance to warrant this. It was a huge financial loss for MGM, and led them to cancel Moore's contract after two years. Moore then returned to England and became a successful TV actor starting with Ivanhoe.
The film is beautifully produced and Lana and Roger are both eyefuls, it was no fault of theirs.

6 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

A primitive relic of it's time that is not without its charms. Some quick interviews with 1968 teens on the beach intercut with musical performances:

Billy Joe Royal performs "Down in the Boondocks" (a great music video-style sequence), "These Are Not My People", and "Hush" and features pre-Paul Revere & the Raiders' Freddy Weller on guitar (!)
The Swinging Medallions deliver their hit "Double Shot of My Baby's Love" (an alternate version with sanitized lyrics!) and "She Drives Me Out of My Mind"...interesting band featuring two singers who cannot stay out of each other's faces.
The Tams, a Southern beach music staple, render their hit "What Kind of Fool", as well as "Laugh It Off".
Color commentary on the beach goings-on is voiced-over by Billy Joe Royal himself.

Two years later, Florida bargain-basement director Barry Mahon dusted off the retired print and tacked on a new title & psychedelic opening credits sequence for seven minutes set to Grand Funk Railroad's "Paranoid", a lifetime supply of heavily distorted drug fuzz. Later, the band performs some more songs, dropped in clumsily in the middle of the film, setup on a stage playing to the camera, then again at the closing.

It's amazing to see the difference in teen music culture over a mere two years. But the true clash is that Mahon didn't seem to understand that the older film was populated with AM pop music, which was in stark contrast to the underground FM rock in his new footage. But we know he didn't care. The idea was to make money from this new film he'd shot and he took the simplest path to making it appear to be a new feature length production.

How does this Frankenstein patch-up job hold up well into the new millennium? I found it to be a likable enough bit of curio that has plenty to scoff at, but still has some merit as a time capsule. The Grand Funk footage made me laugh a lot and surprisingly, most of the 1968 music performances were pretty decent all things considered. For something so obscure and off the beaten path, the print is in pretty darn good condition.

If you liked the teen culture from these two eras, I would definitely recommend seeing this, if you can find it.

6 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

Unbearably contrived anthology that is so bloated with bad acting and poor writing, you'll be yelling at the screen and checking the clock throughout the film's extended duration. Director / producer / writer Tom Holland has some notable films credited to him, but this production has eliminated any respect he may have earned in the horror genre.

Most films have deleted scenes, which director commentary tracks point out, are cut to advance the story. The opposite is true here, with each scene dragged on and on and on for no purpose whatsoever except to fill up screen time -- which is only one of the film's countless issues.

My one-star rating is unusually generous. Waste two and a half hours of your life at your own peril.

6 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

As you watch the opening song performed in concert, your first thought is that it's so over-the-top, no real pop fans would ever accept something so fake and convoluted. Then you remember hair metal, emo, glitter, Eurovision, death metal, the 80s, disco, crabcore! Yes, it's like totally possible. According to this futuristic fantasy, the music was supposed to be disco. Meaning, first and foremost, that the writers believed disco would survive well into the sci-fi future, albeit as "nah-stal-ja!", once mixed with the silly New York 'Fame' thing which thankfully only lasted a few weeks. That short-sighted factor should tell you plenty about what's upcoming. It seems the biggest influences here were The Rocky Horror Picture Show, Phantom of the Paradise, and Grease, if you can imagine, at least as far as musical production goes. Not that its derivative being can compete with those three films. It's bad. Colossal bad. The songs are poor, the choreography is bland, and the whole affair is unfocused. What, you think this was all tongue-in-cheek and a satire? In 1980? A spoonful of sugar...

I would recommend seeing the film if only to witness the song about America (Speed?) because you really will not believe your ears, one of the worst vocal performances in history without a doubt!

Of course any piece of incompetent trash is prime target for cult status by proxy. Because of that, The Apple will manage to live forever, at some point gaining actual notoriety and respect. Until that happens, the truth of the matter is that it's just a bad film, no more, no less.

6 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

So many great lines in this late-model Sid Davis propaganda piece about evil marijuana. Oh, but this isn't the usual Sid Davis fare, as it was shot in 1969 in the miracle of color, as well as getting hip to much groovier slang than past SD hits.

As the father-son lecture unfolds with dad preparing to detail the scourge of pot, he first pours himself a stiff one, then ignites a cigarette.

"It's easy for you to stand there with a cigarette in one hand and a drink in another and tell us not to blow pot."

So father grabs an encyclopedia from the shelf and rationally explains some of the dangers, like "the marijuana user generally experiences an uncontrollable feeling of hilarity, quite without reason". That's a great argument. It must be true; in that Reefer Madness film, the piano player bursts into sporadic fits of laughter only seconds after having a puff without even inhaling. And anyway, pleasure and feelings of happiness are, for the most part, overrated, so why encourage such emotions?

The laundry list of potential dangers, of course, also exists for alcohol, so the main charge is that smoking grass will get you high. Which is the reason -- the only reason -- anyone smokes the stuff. The fact that prolonged use may make you lose your ambition could also be said of relationships.

"Every time you blow a marijuana cigarette," Tom's father adds, "you take a chance on blowing your future."

We also attend a garden pot party by the pool with a bunch of glaze-eyed teens that look like extras from the set of Billy Jack. Some reckless driving while under the influence takes us to an outasite head shop, then to an artist's pad who is toking weed until his brother-in-law gets busted after buying some grass. Tom is, incidentally, impressed with how the law officers never lose their cool and are always helpful. Later, while waiting at the police station, a friendly policeman notices Tom's interest in a display about the dangers of marijuana.

NARRATOR: (Tom) is out after information..."What are the facts?" he asks. Easily, with friendly informality, the officer speaks to Tom. No lecturing, no sermonizing..."

And on and on and on he goes. But before you nod off, you hear him address the parallel with alcohol:

NARRATOR: Maybe there is a similarity between the social drinker and the pot smoker -- yet it's not quite the same! The daily drink may not be the best thing in the world, but a man who takes a drink after his day is done has worked. He has achieved. He has coped. And he wants to relax. Not so, the teenage user. He deliberately seeks to tune-out, cop-out. He uses his grass as a mental crutch because he fears to stand on his own. He may never learn to cope with the inevitable, everyday problems of living. He may well become one of the 'left-behind generation'...And legalizing the use of marijuana is NOT the answer!

We're also told of an unnamed nation that legalized marijuana, only to reverse the decision a few years later and impose the death penalty for mere possession. What?!?

Interestingly, Tom leaves with a friend and they go to a far-out pot party even more explicit than what you may have seen on Dragnet.

After seeing this fascinating docu-thriller, it struck me how really with-it the establishment were...especially parents and officers of the law. The potheads seemed like a real drag. Until the facts are all in, I'm personally going to Keep Off the Grass.

6 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

Richard L. Bare got his start in the early 40's directing a whole bunch of those "So You..." short subjects for Warner before settling into a long career in television, most famously for the seven episodes of "The Twilight Zone" he helmed, as well as most of the run of the wacky rural sitcom, "Green Acres". In an unusual turn, one of his last pieces of work was this R-rated theatrical thriller that introduced a new visual gimmick, Duo-Vision. It's the only instance I'm aware of that an entire film was based around the split screen dual action trick, although it was used in small doses in many major films. Even the stereo soundtrack -- one of the first films in that format -- plays into the effect.

Early on, I noticed similarities to Phantom of the Paradise, which was released a year & a half later. There's the split screen, the way this film's phantom hangs onto the spotlight while beaming it at the girl singer he has a crush on, the fact that the organ score for "Phantom of the Opera" is played throughout the film...and several more indications that Brian De Palma was radically inspired by Wicked, Wicked. Speaking of music, Tiffany Bolling actually sings two songs in the film.

It's mostly played for high camp, which Bare openly admitted, so it's more for fun than chills, despite the lurid horror tone of the poster. Not really a great film, but at the same time, it's not too shabby and worth seeing.

6 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

A few scenes are so bad, they manage to entertain simply for the sheer incompetence of it all. But many, many more are so bad that they are annoying.

Of course the acting is poor, the screenplay amateurish, the camera work, and frankly, even the storyboarding (assuming it was even boarded) are simply the work of first-time rookie wannabes. So if this was made by friends with a 16mm camera, you could forgive and mildly snicker at the shortcomings. But this was a wide theatrical release accompanied by a massive advertising budget...and it's just a really goofy experience to sit through.

6 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

I thought this was nearly great. It's hard to say exactly what it's about without giving spoilers but let's just say that it begins like a straight ahead murder mystery thriller and then takes several turns along the way.

Unfortunately, for me, It doesn't quite take those turns fast enough and seems to drag despite the fairly short running time.

Still, It's well worth a watch. It has a great ensemble cast including a very manic and angry Diana Dors.

The film is especially worth seeking out for fans of The Wicker Man. There are obvious similarities between the two and it's interesting that they were both released in 1973 (in the UK) with neither making a huge impression (at the time!)



6 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

This felt, at the time (to me at least), to be one of the films quietly cashing in on the still then new "Tarantino style"...

...And as such, felt a bit of a pale imitation. But over the years, it's really grown on me, having a warmth in the characters lacking in some of Tarantino's movies.

It's based around a murder plot, that draws all the characters together and is an excuse for a light hearted (occasionally violent) comedic drama... A lot like a Paul Thomas Anderson (Magnolia, Crash etc.) Movie, being driven, as it is , by disparate characters converging around this premise... but not perhaps, as draining, or serious.

James Spader gives the full creepy eighties villain he made his name with originally, and Teri Hatcher was fresh out of Superman tv series, using it, as I recall as her platform for a stellar movie career (ahem)... but also....

"who's that steely blonde girl with the supermodel looks who steals a scene or two along the way...Charlize... erm... Theron, or something... never heard of her, and I doubt she'll amount to much!"

(we thought, at the time :)

Eric Stoltz, Danny Aiello and Jeff Daniels, give reliably excellent performances too.

6 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

This promised much, with a great "last man on earth" concept , but fell foul of the lazy storytelling phenomenon of just turning it into a monster movie with cheap unconvincing CGI.

,,,However, it was only this year, when I finally got around to reading Richard Matheson's brilliant original story in Gollancz SF Masterworks series, that the exact reasons this disappoints becomes apparent:

The book is about vampires (so it was a kind of monster movie story anyway - you live and learn :), but about a man hiding in his home from the growing vampire threat outside, and tormented by one vampire in particular. And it is also, in it's essential genius / original conception, a story with a.... payoff, or to put it another way: A Punchline.

And it so happens that that punchline is what gives the story it's title.... and bizarrely, the exact element of the story has been excised from this movie! (eh?)

This is too long, and too much of nothing in particular, except a vehicle for then megastar Will Smith to continue to be seen kicking (semi) alien ass (again)...

The book, however, is slim, tightly plotted, extremely well written, and you can get through it quick and get much more from the experience!

So my advice:

Don't bother watching this, read the book instead... it'll be worth your while.

(Look at that... a book review and a movie review at once - Blimey, that's value!)

6 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

Great fun.

A satire of / homage to the Poirot / Sherlock Holmes / Clue (Cluedo) gentleman sleuth in manor house stories.

(It even makes very self aware jokes about itself)

As such, it's a chance for the assembled cast to have fun hamming it up to the max as the usual cartoon-ish characters you find in this kind of movie... But that is cleverly balanced and contrasted against characters that are more real, and themselves find this mob perplexing, like the police detective, who is very straight-laced and competent, but who is accompanied by a goofy state trooper and Daniel Craig's extraordinary Deep South Gentleman Sleuth.

And for all it's stock zaniness and cliches, these are wrapped around a central, realistic (ish) human story and believable character played by Ana De Armas.

I'm not sure it quite hits the heights it was hoping to, or if these contrasts gel entirely, but it is very enjoyable, convoluted, with ridiculous plot devices and a fair few good moments of comedy...

And at the very least, it has James Bond, Captain America, and General Zod all in one movie, and you can't say that about many other films! :)

6 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?