Scott's Movie Reviews

Nothing like spending a Friday night at home channel surfing, which is what I did last night, when I came across a movie that sounded interesting, which I decided to watch. The movie was on TCM, and it was The Cheap Detective, a comedy from 1978 with a good cast and written by the great Neil Simon. Peter Falk (TV's Columbo) plays a man named Louis Peckinpaugh that encounters many interesting women and plot twists as he tries to solve a murder case. The movie is a parody of the wonderful Bogie films Casablanca and The Maltese Falcon, and kinda goes back and forth interweaving these two plots. This is one of the strangest films that I have ever seen, just so incredibly weird. I thought at first that it would be a Naked Gun type movie but it ended up just being more complex and bizarre. There were a few funny scenes, including one in Rix's Cafe (I wonder what that's supposed to be) in which the song that ties Bogie and Bergman together (in this movie Falk and Louise Fletcher), instead of being As Time Goes By, is Jeepers Creepers. I almost fell off the couch laughing during this scene, but I went through the rest of the movie with just a few snickers here and there and plenty of "this is so odd!" comments. I would say if you want to have a little comic relief on Friday night and you're not very discriminate about what you want to see, give this movie a try, but otherwise steer clear.

Scott's Rating:
The Cheap Detective : 2 stars (out of a possible 4)

#97 on my AFI Top 100 quest was Double Indemnity, directed by the great Billy Wilder. I am a sucker for these film noirs involving murder, corruption, and greed, and this movie certainly did not disappoint. It is a wonderful example of the genre. You know in a nutshell what is going to unfold in the first 5 minutes of the film, as insurance salesman Walter Neff, played by Fred MacMurray, begins to speak in his dictaphone about what has transpired. What transpires (through flashback) is that he meets a beautiful woman (played by Barbara Stanwyck), they conspire to take out accident insurance on her husband, then murder him and collect $100,000 that the insurance company that he works for will pay. Of course, there is no perfect murder, and complications arise. The beautiful thing is that even though you know what the end result is going to be from the beginning you don't know how it's going to get there. There are plot twists that I did not see coming, and I always enjoy that. I also loved the performance of both leads, but especially Edward G. Robinson, legendary tough-guy actor, playing Barton Keyes, the claims manager at Neff's company. What makes the movie, though, for me, is the dialogue. The conversations between the MacMurray and Stanwyck, and MacMurray and Robinson are so well crafted, as statements are traded back and forth that leave you aghast at the ability of the writers. In the conversations between the latter the dialogue, especially the lines uttered by Robinson, could be found in a comedy sketch, but they are not funny because of the situations that they are pressed under. What a masterful use of dialogue!
All together, the film is wonderful, and a must see for film noir fans.

Scott's Rating:
Double Indemnity : 4 stars (out of a possible 4)

Over the weekend, while I was in Pennsylvania, I saw the new movie The In-Laws. The movie stars Michael Douglas, who is perhaps more famous for his marriage to Catherine Zeta-Jones than his movie career, playing a CIA agent at an attempt at comedy. To my surprise, Douglas was actually able to pull it off. He had great charisma throughout the movie and worked very well off his co-star, the always hilariously funny Albert Brooks. Ever since his role as the sweating, bumbling anchor in Broadcast News, Brooks has excelled at playing the neurotic character that is afraid of just about everything, and this is no exception. Brooks makes the movie. The villain in the movie is played by David Suchet, whom I know from his portrayal on TV of Agatha Christie's detective Hercule Poirot. His character detracts from the movie in my view. His character is gay and comes on to Albert Brooks, creating scenes which disgusted me and lame jokes that I did not find funny. Several parts of the movie were also a little far-fetched for me and the ending is rather cheesy, but I was pleasantly surprised at the number of laughs. The In-Laws is a fun movie and a good choice for weekend moviegoers.

Scott's Rating:
The In-Laws : 3 stars (out of a possible 4)

In my seemingly neverending quest to watch all of the American Film Institute's Top 100 Movies #96 was All Quiet on the Western Front, based on the book of the same name by Remarque. It's hard to figure this movie. Some have called it the greatest antiwar film of all time. For me, films that contain shocking images and gruesome deaths are stronger statements against war than All Quiet's, which rely on the reactions of its characters to the war situation to provide the statement. The movie was made in 1930, and one of the few films that I have ever seen about World War I. When we think of antiwar films, we immediately think of Vietnam, and even WWII, but not too many about WWI because there wasn't a whole lot of negative press about the war. The film does not contain background music, so it allows the viewers to simply soak in the sounds of gunfire and the screams of the near-dead. The complete transformation in viewpoint that the young soldiers endure so quickly is very poignant and stands at the root of the film. The soldiers in the film are German ones, and we don't know where or whom exactly they are fighting; it doesn't matter. The horror on the men's faces is enough to make the point. One thing that detracts from the movie for me is that there really is not much of a flow; the sequence of events sometimes doesn't make sense: one minute the main character, Paul, is left behind his troop, and the next he has found his way back and is with the troop, and then the next scene takes place in some German canteen. I wish there had been a little more rhythm.
Although there are no major stars in the movie, the performances are solid, and the message is definitely powerful enough to make its point. I am also impressed by the sophistication of the movie for being filmed in 1930. All in all it's a very solid war film.

Scott's Rating:
All Quiet on the Western Front : 3.5 stars (out of a possible 4)

When the whole world started to get swept up in the Harry Potter craze, I distanced myself from the whole thing. I refused to read any of the books, see the movie, or get involved in the hype. When the first movie, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone, came out on video, I still worked at Hollywood Video, and we played it in the store. I would catch bits and pieces while I was working and thought to myself “hmm, that looks pretty good.” So I decided to rent the movie. I was hooked. Since then I have seen that movie several times, read the first two books of the series, and seen the latest movie, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. I rushed out to see it the first night that it came to theatres and just recently watched it for the second time, as it just made its grand appearance on DVD.
Where the first movie is wonderful, the second movie is even better. The plot is more complex, there are more challenges facing the young wizards, new characters, and Harry faces the possibility that he is the vaunted Heir of Slytherin. The typical cast is there, with Harry, Ron Weasley, Hermione Granger, foe Draco Malfoy, and Hogwarts cast Dumbledore, McGonagall, Severus Snape, and the lovable Hagrid. Among the new intriguing characters is Lucius Malfoy, Draco’s father, and one of the more purely evil characters that we have seen on the big screen. A welcome addition to the movie is the great Shakespearean actor Kenneth Branagh, who plays the egocentric Gilderoy Lockhart, new Defense Against the Dark Arts Professor, who adds some comic relief. One character that I did not really enjoy in the movie was the house-elf Dobby, who appears at various points in the movie, wreaks havoc on Harry’s life, and, in my opinion, on the movie as well. He is an annoying nuisance that the movie (and book) could have done without.
The movie has many memorable sequences, including trouble with a flying car, a wonderful Quiddich match that is even more exciting than the one in the first movie, an encounter with spiders that will leave you cringing and curling up in your seat, and a thrilling climax with many surprises.
The Harry Potter series of films (and books) has become one of the most popular series in history, and for good reason. The creativity that J.K. Rowling brings to each one of her books is mind-boggling; I have no idea how she came up with half of the things in her book. The movies, and the books, are rare examples of entertainment nowadays that can be enjoyed by people of all ages. I can’t wait to read the third book in the series, as well as the rest, including the fifth book, which comes out later this year. Unfortunately, the remaining films have many questions surrounding them. Richard Harris, who played Albus Dumbledore in the first two films, died after filming the second movie. Who will replace him? There is also the issue that the actors that play the three main kids will be too old for the parts when the next movie is filmed. How will they deal with this? I personally feel that it would be tragic if they cast new actors in these three roles, and I don’t think I would enjoy the next installment as much. There are many questions yet to be answered and hopefully they will be able to deal with this in an expedient manner so we can enjoy Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban as soon as possible!

Scott’s Rating:
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets: 4 stars (out of a possible 4)

Hello anyone who wants to read this, I will be using this as a forum to post some of my thoughts on movies that I have recently seen. First one up: Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets!