Review recently seen movies on this popularly enduring item.  You know what
you like, don't you?  Put it into words: We've been eager to hear just what
you think.

284 responses total.

Le Goût des autres (A Taste of Others)  This is a french comedy playing 
at the Michigan Theatre. Very funny and pretty cynical. The dog may 
have been one of my favorite characters. All the characters are 
perfectly cast. Go see it!

"Orphan Train: An American Melodrama"  This is a new play showing at 
the Purple Rose Theatre in Chelsea. I give it an OK. I don't generally 
respond to melodrama very well --it just isn't my thing. However, the 
play was very good. It kind of reminded me of a Jane Smiley book. Like 
a 1000 Acres and the summer heat.

The only thing I think that would definitely improve it is to get rid 
of the extraneous characters on the stage. I think they are supposed to 
give a dream-like feeling to the play but I just found them to be 
distracting. 

The characters were all cast very well. Good actors. :-)

I recently viewed two films.  _Three Kings_ and _The Patriot_.

My tai-tai (principal wife) and I have come to an agreement where we
will view a 'boy flick' and a 'girl-flick' one after the other and we
alternate figuring out which is what.  The film in the interval
was _High Fidelity_ (so I guess it is three films not two). I actually
insisted at one point (near the end) that we stop viewing _High
Fidelity_ as I was sure that it was headed towards the typical
'hollywood' ending and I was wrong (with suitable astonishment and
no wonder it was not a 'hollywood boxoffice success' not really, I
understand full well why it was not, and thus a 'must see').  _Three
Kings_ is interesting in that one doesn't get a particularly flattering
view of most anything.  Who are the good guys?  Nihilism has a point?
(In theory no, thats the point.  So it does, it a way....)  _Three
Kings_ is still a good flick - judge it in that it was not a box office
success.

_The Patriot_.  Well.  What can I say.  I have not shed tears viewing
a flick since Jim Brown did his immortal scene in _The Dirty Dozen_ when
he was shot in the back while dropping grenades on helpless Nazis
trapped in a below-ground bunker doused with gasoline. One tear-squeaker
per film -v- {this}.  I tell yah, if there is another flick to 'prove'
you are in fact a 'new age sensative guy' by squeaking a few and thereby
get some I don't know what it is.  This long film has lots of 'squeaker'
scenes many of which have nothing to do with the plot - it could have
been even longer if it actually explained the scenes that it could have
been a lot shorter by eliminating without effecting the film in the
slightest.  Time and time again it 'explored' a 'dimension' without
exploring anything while ingnoring a dimension that might have easily
been worth exploring.  (I *am* trying not to post spoilers.)

I personally found certain scenes in _Three Kings_ that I felt the need
to look away (although they were technically excellent and I did not)
while 'tai-tai' and I both agreed such scenes in _The Patriot_ were
merely gratutious if in fact they were far less 'gross'. (Coulda done
without them and the flick woulda been the same.)

In addition, I found no technical 'details' with _Three Kings_ unlike
_The Patriot_.  For one, I found it hilarious in the 'fixed piece'
battles between british and 'rebel' aka 'american' forces that the
british would fire the 'brown bess' (standard arm of the British army
for more years than was prudent, and then sold to various other 'third
world nations' at the time although they didn't have that term) from the
shoulder as that was and is pattently absurd.  If you load a 'brown
bess' with the proper powder charge and actually fire it while holding
it to your shoulder and actually aim down the barrel (it had no
'sights') it would knock you on your ass and likely as not break your
collar-bone.  It was designed to be fired in 'volley' (in mass) while
held in both hands at the waist.  The shoulder stock was merely there
to assist in marching, it was intended as a pike that happened to be
a 'firearm' - it was never intended to be actually 'aimed' (thus the
poor performance of the mexicans armed with said 'surplus' arms who 
rotinely undercharged said) (Texas would be part of Estados Unidos de
Mexico to this day if the mexicans understood modern arms)


A good hour could have been well spent chopped from _The Patriot_.  In
addition I found it irritating that the principle character (aka 'the
hero') portrayed in the film as 'englishman' by the name of 'martin'
I know to be a frenchman by the name of 'francis marion' who wasn't 
married in any church until after.  (Perhaps he had 'bastards' earlier
but there is no record.)  The 'Bad Guy' an 'englishman' was not the
'heir' of a titled lord who had 'squandered' all the money, but was
the 6th child of a living (at the time) Lord who's mother purchased
a 'commission' (for 100 times monthly salary) at the time to get him
'out of the house' and the 'villan' lived and died of old age - quite
secure and quite rich (although he was not scotch and thus was not as 
rich as he could have been had he died scotch).  Further,
the 'bad guy' who 'pillaged' and had a problem with no 'collateral
damage' was not in command of a regular british unit, but was instead in
command of an unit composed of 'loyalists' (in a state most northern my
own ancestor did so and was although never committed terrorist acts and
was himself subject to two 'terrorist acts' consisting of two 'mock
executions').  Not only were there few other 'british' officers but the
majority of his 'troops' were 'native americans' - at that time it ment
their mother didn't 'give birth' in britian.  In the flick there is one
'native american' while the rest are 'british' - in fact with the 
exception of few and perhaps one the rest are 'native americans'.

For me, "Three Kings" and "High Fidelity" were two of the more
enjoyable movies of recent years.  I've avoided "The Patriot".

"Three Kings" was surprisingly good, for a movie that so drastically switched
mood. I couldn't even sit through "High Fidelity," I thought it was wretched.
"The Patriot" was adequate.

That is funny. I thought that "Three Kings" sucked. 

To each their own. =}

I really enjoyed "High Fidelity"... I have not seen "Three Kings", and I found
"The Patriot" to be interesting enough.

Very much liked "High Fidelity" and found "Three Kings" to be really 
interesting and fun... haven't see "The Patriot"

If you've seen "Braveheart", you've seen "The Patriot" - "Braveheart" is
better.

Perfect Storm was not as bad as I was expecting.  I wisely elected not to hope
for (or care about) the characters, and I was rewarded with some impressive
man vs. weather conflict.  And some interesting breaks with realism.

(haven't seen Braveheart either)

(And in Braveheart you can see my brother-in-laws twin. The Irish man 
Stephen. Chip is so much like him, looks and personality :)

I don't believe that Braveheart is the same as The Patriot.  Both war flicks
starring Mel Gibson.  I've seen them both and I don't think they're "the same
movie" or even close.

I will agree that Braveheart was better, though.

(They are the same movie just in different time periods.  And I think
_Braveheart_ is shorter and with better plot development (more
concise).  Both flicks are blatant 'republicanism' and the only
difference is in _The Patriot_ there are guns and perhaps more 'gore'
(and that may merely represent that the latter was released later where
the 'over the top' level one must attain was higher))

They're both war movies starring Mel Gibson, both epics. They're not the same
movie. If you want to see an example of the SAME movie, see Escape from New
York and Escape from LA, where the only real differences were in the dialog
and the wraparound plot... there are enough similarities that, were the second
made by a different company with a different star, the first could have won
an Intellectual Property infringement suit.

Ok - stop the presses.  Someone on grex is related by marriage to David
O'Hara????  No fucking way!!  I love him!!!  My only question is:  is he
single?

I think the best movie I have seen this year would have to be SwordFish. It's
still new so I won't disuss it in detail, but I love the whole idea of this
group existing.
Braveheart vs. Patriot? Yeah, same movie.

Oh, good lord.  SwordFish?  You've got to be kidding.

A.I. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE--  This is the movie Stanley Kubrick was 
developing when he died, that Steven Spielberg took over.  A tale of a 
dark future when scientists have developed a race of androids, robots 
designed to look and feel human.  A "boy" robot is designed, intended 
to be marketed as a child replacement, for couples who have lost their 
children.  The prototype, a boy robot named "David" is given to a woman 
whose real child is injured.  The boy is programmed to love the woman 
as his mother, but ultimately he realizes that his "mother" can't love 
him because he isnt real.  One day he reads Pinocchio, and believes 
that story is true and that if he can find the blue fairy, she will 
turn him from android to a real boy and then his "mother" will love him.
So the boy robot ends up on a search, through a desolate, dark world-- 
a world where humans have become bigoted against androids, for the blue 
fairy who can make him real.   But life isnt a fantasy, he can't be 
real, and his "love" for his mother can't be real, because that love is 
programming.    

This is a great movie, but if you are going in expecting E.T. or 
something you'll be disappointed.  Its a dark, disturbing story about a 
twisted future, quite typical of Stanley Kubrick.  It is NOT some 
lighthearted fantasy film.  Think Clockwork Orange or Blade Runner.  

The boy android is played in a great performance by Haley Joel Osment, 
the kid from the movie the Sixth Sense.  (He's too good an actor to be 
a kid-- I think he's a midget  :)  )  William Hurt plays the scientist 
who designed him.  This movie is a visual feast, with Spielberg giving 
an intricately detailed vision of a not too distant future society.  
Its one of those movies you can't see just once and that keeps you 
thinking well after you've left the theater.     **** (four stars)

David chases a woman around with a bobbing penis and makes miniature origami?

Agora 9 <-> Cinema 44

I can pretty much tell my sister Nancy how much she'll like
a movie.  She wants to like the characters and leave the theater
feeling she "got it".  She doesn't mind being emotionally manipulated
as long as she also gets to feel good about the experience.  
And the movie has to have a point but not a point that's open
to wide interpretation.

She'll love "AI".  It's "Blade Runner" for the mall set.

Nice special effects though.  

I can't remember if I reported seeing and liking "The Claim".

I did.

"AI" was odd.  Much of the way it had the hard edge of a
Kubrick film.  Then it went mushy and turned into a
Spielberg film.  I must confess I enjoyed watching it,
and the special effects are amazing, but I ended up
wishing Kubrick had lived long enough to make it
himself.

I thought it was very interesting, raised a lot of fascinating issues and
such.... it's not such a dark future world... Most of these "future" flicks
involve some kind of nuclear holocaust.. this one involved the greenhouse
effect.

I think the coolest thing about this movie were the Manhattan scenes.

Not that I've run specific numbers, but it seems to me that most futureshock
flicks don't involve some kind of nuclear holocaust. Going through them:
Omega Man -- plague
Silent Running -- I don't remember
Logan's Run -- overpopulation
Soylent Green -- pollution
A Boy and his Dog -- nuclear holocaust
THX 1138 -- totalitarianism
Blade Runner -- pollution (as with most cyberpunk; I've heard Blade Runner
referred to as the first major cyberpunk work, although I'm sure that's
debatable)
Terminator -- pollution, overpopulation, being taken over by robots
The Matrix -- ditto, although I think there was a nuclear holocaust in there
Alien Nation -- pollution
The Lathe of Heaven -- overpopulation, pollution, racial tension
Quintet -- nuclear holocaust
Mad Max -- unclear, but usually not said to be nuclear holocaust
Planet of the Apes, 1984, Brave New World -- to be fair, the books all predate
the cold War (1984 just barely), but these war all just the march of society;
ironically, The Time Machine DOES involve global destruction by war, although
I'm not sure how much of that is in the book.
Total Recall -- just the march of society

In the bulk of the futureshock movies, the world ends by pollution or
overpopulation, or both, not by nuclear attack. Quintet illustrates one reason
why this is -- while the movie itself is decent, how many snowstorms can one
person watch?

Terminator definitely involved nuclear holocaust, or do you forget all the
judgement day references?  

My impression is that melting the polar icecaps would put NYC under water,
but not the several hundred yards of water depicted in AI.  I understand that
it would be more along the lines of 50 feet.  Can someone back this up or deny
it with facts?  Waterworld is totally out there.

I too wonder about 'global warming'.  Even if the pudits are correct it
seems to my recollection we are talking about matters of inches not
hundreds of feet? (not even 50 feet)  We are also debating 'warming'
-vs- 'cooling' in that the oceans might get shallower as more heat is
reflected by the same cited mechanism as chicagoland was unusually cold
this past month.

#28> Oh yeah, you're right... all those nightmares she had of kids melting
on playgrounds. My mistake. All the same, the general point remains...

Omega man -Bio-warfare agent
Silent running - pollution, but no one cared, they had synthetics
Logans run - don't know, but references to some holocaust
Boy and his Dog - Nuclear war
THX1138 - overpopulation mixed with totalitarianism
Bladerunner - Movie - Unknown, most of Earths population has left for the
stars.
Terminator - Nuclear holocaust by intelligent machine.
The Matrix - Alien invasion
The lathe of Heaven - don't remember
Quintet - no idea
Mad Max - total collapse of society brought on by loss of energy leading to
war.  Possibly nuclear.
Soylent Green - pollution, overpopulation.

The Lathe of Heaven - nuclear bombing of at least one city.

Many of those movies I don't consider "futureshock" movies... the future on
earth in Total Recall didn't strike me as particularly bad at all...

Also, Terminator was nuclear holocaust (caused of course by the Robots, but
a nuclear holocaust nonetheless).

Many of the other movies you mentioned I didn't see.

Logan's Run, Mad Max, and Apes movies definitely involved nukes. (Can't speak
for the Apes novel.) Lathe of Heaven included an alien invasion *and* a
plague, created by the protagonist; but I don't remember a nuke going off in
that one.

The futureshock element of Lathe of Heaven has to be based on the "original
state of things," which was mainly overpopulation and racial tension. The
alien invasion and the bombing (which may have involved nukes, I don't recall)
were "solutions." For those unfamiliar with it, "The Lathe of Heaven" is
Ursula LeGuin's version of "The Monkey's Paw." In some future world, a dreamer
discovers that whatever he dreams comes true -- he dreams, for instance, that
his sister dies in a car crash, and when he wakes up, he discovers that the
world has actually changed to accommodate his dreamed version of it. He goes
to a psychiatrist, but instead of trying to "cure" him, the psychiatrist
inserts "suggestions" into his mind as he sleeps... all of which "backfire."
For instance, the doctor suggests that racial tension should end; when the
dreamer wakes up, everybody's gray. The doctor suggests that there be an end
to overpopulation; when the dreamer wakes up, a plague has knocked out 90%
of the world's population. ("overpopulation" may have been "world hunger")
The movie version was a made-for-TV that appeared on PBS, IIRC (I may be
confusing it with Brave New World, as far as where it first appeared; I was
a wee tot of 11 or so).

The alien invasion was actually the most clever of the solutions, IMHO. The
doctor wanted an end to conflict between nations. He got an alien invasion,
which led to all the countries coming together to face a common external
enemy.

Are you sure about Silent Running, bru? The movie takes place on a greenhouse
ship, with the last Earth plants aboard. Or are we thinking of different
"Silent Running"s?

Oh, I also forgot Waterworld and The Postman, never of which I've seen (Dances
with Wolves was enough Costner for one lifetime). [never>neither]

It's been too long since I saw the first Apes movie, though I don't remember
him figuring out "what happened" except that -- OMIGOD, IT'S EARTH! when he
sees the Statue of Liberty's arm. I do recall some of the sequels (Below the
Planet of the Apes, especially) having some weirdness about mutation, which
was probably attributed to holocaust. And it'll be a few weeks until the new
one is at the dollar show for me to see it. ;}

(Back to Silent Running: IMDB's description is consistent with bru's comments.
All I remember is the greenhouse and the cute lil droids.)

It's been a long time since I've seen most of the movies, though, and I admit
that Total Recall doesn't really count as "futureshock," although I think all
the rest do, as does Johnny Mnemonic, which also didn't have any nukes in it.

My understanding is that most of the sea level increase from global warming
would be due to thermal expansion, not melting ice.  For one thing, much of
the ice in the polar icecaps is floating, which means it's *already*
displacing an amount of water equal to its weight.

The nuke in "The Lathe of Heaven" is sort-of an alternate reality as part of
the "effective dream which changes everything" theme.  It's alluded that the
bulk of the story occurs in a non-nuked world dreamed up by the main character
after barely surviving a nuclear attack.  Of course it's possible that it was
only in the PBS movie... I haven't read the book in a very long time.

I read the book several years after having seen the movie, myself. I'm also
told that it's atypical of LeGuin's work, which is too bad, because it's an
excellent book.

Gods, I also can't believe that in a discussion spawned from AI, I haven't
mentioned A Clockwork Orange, which is also futureshock (although less so with
the "British" chapter included)... no nukes there, either. Just very violent
kids (moreso if you realize that the actors were about 10 years older than
Burgess' characters... I recall that Alex is 13 at the start of the book, not
the 20-something that MacDowell is).

 Re Global Warming:

 The global warming will be from sea water expanding AND glaciers 
AND ice caps melting. Scientists predict that global warming will 
likely raise sea level by 50 cm (based on a possible range of 15- 95 
cm) by 2100.

 Nearly half of the U.S. population lives in coastal counties (SAUS, 
1994, Table 38).

 The EPA estimates that a one foot sea level rise would erode 
shorelines by over 100 feet throughout the Southeast (U.S. EPA, 1989, 
p. 334).

 Egypt, which depends on the Nile delta and lakes just inland of the 
coast for much of its food production, could face a displacement of 16 
percent of its population if sea level rises just 1.5 feet (Corson, 
1990, p. 233).

A rise of just a few inches could completely inundate island nations in 
the South Pacific and the Caribbean (Revkin, 1992, p. 130). 

The Netherlands would have to spend billions of dollars to supplement 
its extensive dike system (Goemans, 1986). 

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss