Movie Review: Saboteur

Stars: 4 out of 5

Pros: Good characters in an entertaining mystery

Cons: A few dated elements in the production

The Bottom Line:

Barry is accused

Goes on run to clear himself

Decent Hitchcock film

Trying to Clear His Name of Sabotage

It’s been a while since I watched any of Alfred Hitchcock’s movies. I think I’ve seen his most well regarded at this point, so I picked one of the DVDs I own I hadn’t watched yet. I’m glad I did because I found Saboteur enjoyable. 

The movie was released in 1942 and introduces us to Barry Kane (Robert Cummings), a young man doing his part of the war effort by working at a Los Angeles based airplane factory. In the middle of one of his shifts, a fire breaks out and his best friend winds up dying as he tries to fight the fire. Worse yet, the police quickly determine that the fire wasn’t an accident and think that Barry was responsible. 

So Barry does the only thing he can in this situation - he goes on the run to try to find the man he thinks is responsible in order to clear his name. Along the way, he meets up with Patricia Martin (Priscilla Lane), who doesn’t quite believe in his innocence. Can he figure out a way to bring the real saboteur to justice?

This is a classic Hitchcock innocent man story. Barry and Patricia wind up encountering several complications on their road trip to clear Barry’s name. Patricia’s loyalty switches, but all of these switches are believable based on what she’s just seen. This is definitely the kind of story you’ll only find in Hollywood. I mean, we meet circus performers at one point and the climax is over the top in a way only Hitchcock could pull off. 

There are a few times that the movie makes a leap and expects us to keep up. While I was able to do that, a line or two explaining what had happened off screen would have been nice. I have a feeling this is a case of dated story telling. 

Also dated was the acting. It is in keeping with the times but it was still a bit bigger than we are used to seeing these days. Nothing against the actors, who are all fine. As I said, it was the style of the day. 

Speaking of things like that, this is a black and white movie. 

Given all the talk these days about female characters, I couldn’t help but notice how Patricia came across. She starts out strongly of one opinion, but we see her struggle with that as the story goes along. The end of the movie is as much as result to her actions as it is Barry’s, and yet she was never doing anything that didn’t feel realistic for a woman. Both of them contribute significantly, and positively, to the resolution. It’s the result of their character growth over the course of the film. It’s so different from how characters fare in modern movies, and, frankly, it was refreshing. Okay, so their romance felt a little forced to me, but that’s a minor complaint overall. 

Those looking for some of Hitchcock’s thrills will be disappointed. This is more mystery than suspense although there are still a few moments that will draw you in. 

No, this isn’t the best movie Hitchcock ever made. But it is still entertaining. Sit down to watch Saboteur and you’ll find yourself entertained. 

Movie Review: Superman IV - The Quest for Peace

Stars: 1 out of 5

Pros: Um…some moments of late 80’s cheesy fun

Cons: Abrupt ending makes me not willing to forgive the film’s many flaws

The Bottom Line:

A lecture on peace

Film filled with late 80’s cheese

Feel free to skip

“Why Are There No Air Travel Expenses For You, Kent?”

Oh, I’d heard it was bad.  But, in my quest to watch all of the Christopher Reeve Superman movies, I still felt the need to watch Superman IV: The Quest for Peace.  Actually, I didn’t think it was a complete waste until we reached the end.  But then I started thinking about it, and the more I thought about it, the more I realized it’s bad.

This movie finds Clark Kent/Superman (Christopher Reeve) facing changes.  He’s selling his farm back in Smallville.  Meanwhile, The Daily Planet has been bought out by a publishing magnet (Sam Wanamaker) who focuses on tabloids.  The new publisher has put her daughter, Lacy (Mariel Hemingway) in charge of the paper, and she has a huge crush on Clark.  Meanwhile, Lois Lane (Margot Kidder) is still madly in love with Superman, but she has become friends with Clark.

Things start to really get going when a young boy writes to Superman, asking him to do something about nuclear war.  Meanwhile, Lex Luthor (Gene Hackman) escapes from prison with the help of his nephew Lenny (Jon Cryer) and starts plotting his revenge on Superman.

The movie is cheesy in a way that the first two movies aren’t.  I won’t deny that.  But, somehow, it feels a bit more on purpose than the tone I called out in Superman III.  Gene Hackman, especially, is having fun really playing it up.  Granted, his Lex was never exactly a super grounded, menacing villain.  But his attempt to fight Superman this time around, Nuclear Man (Mark Pillow) does nothing for the film.  It’s almost painfully cheesy.  Still, I was willing to buy into it.

What I did have trouble swallowing was Superman’s sudden announcement that he’s going to rid the world of all their nuclear weapons.  Like that’s going to help at all.  People will just create new ones.  And, I guess what we were seeing was people going along with it as they shot them into space for him to collect?  That just seems odd as well.  I remember how big a concern nuclear war was in the 1980’s.  But this movie, instead of attempting to address it in a meaningful way, just falls back into wishful thinking.  Just proof that Hollywood using “entertainment” to lecture isn’t something new.

It was really hard to follow the world that these characters were living in, too.  Lois seemed to know Clark’s secret a few times.  And then, the next minute, she was as clueless as always.  Meanwhile, Lana Lang isn’t even mentioned despite the fact that she was supposed to be working at The Daily Planet at the end of the previous movie.

I’ve seen some complaints that the special effects are a step down from the first two films in the series.  I actually didn’t find that to be a problem.  My problem was, there are a ton more of them.  Superman fights Nuclear Man quite a bit in the second half of the film, with both of them flying in and out of the atmosphere.  There are entire sequences that are just them fighting.  All of that requires effects.  And the more effects there are, the worse it is going to look.  Not to mention, if you see the effects for 30 seconds vs. minutes on end.

I found the acting to be a bit uneven.  Clark and the crew at The Daily Planet were fine, and I bought their performances.  Lex Luthor and his cohort were over the top, really playing up the cheese.  Somehow, it worked for me.  I’d forgotten that Jon Cryer was in this movie as Lex’s nephew.  It’s fun since he would go on to turn in a fantastic performance as Lex in the recent Supergirl TV show on The CW.

Then there’s a scene where Superman and Clark are supposed to be on a double date.  It was a bit of mindless fun, but it went on far too long. 

Honestly, I was chalking some of this up to late 80’s cheese.  No, the movie wasn’t especially good, but when viewed through that lens, I was a little more willing to let it go.

Then we reach the ending, when the movie pretty much just stops.  I wish I were joking, but I’m not.  I’m unclear on how we permanently stopped Nuclear Man.  Not to mention how the person Superman rescued was even breathing in space.  I’m willing to buy Superman note needing to breathe, but a human?  Then, we get quick wrap ups to several storylines that make little sense and certainly weren’t set up by the earlier events of the film.  Not to mention how I found what lead to Superman’s recovery to be a cheap plot device even if it was set up early in the film.

A better ending would have let me chalk up the flaws with being a late 80’s movie.  But the rushed stop we get to Superman IV: The Quest for Peace makes me much less forgiving.  Yes, this pretty much is as bad as you’ve heard.  Don’t bother unless you feel the need to watch all of these movies.

Movie Review: Jaws - The Revenge

Stars: 2 out of 5

Pros: Acting

Cons: Just about everything else

The Bottom Line:

Shark stalks family

Film mostly ridiculous

Feel free to skip

The Jaws Franchise Goes Out with a … Roar?

I’d heard it was bad. But I still wanted to see for myself just how bad Jaws: The Revenge is. Maybe my expectations were low because I thought it wasn’t as bad as I expected. Not saying it is great, either. 

We start up in Amity where a tragedy befalls the Brody family, leaving widow Ellen (Lorraine Gary) grieving over her second loss. Her son, Michael (Lance Guest), invites her to go with his family back to the Bahamas where he is conducting research on sea snails. 

Ellen agrees to go, even meeting the charming pilot Hoagie (Michael Caine) along the way. But she is certain that a great white shark is stalking her family. At least it seems crazy….

The movie is set around Christmas, which left me scratching my head. I wonder if that was the original release day, and it got moved. I mean, it just doesn’t seem like this franchise would fit into the Christmas season. 

So, where do issues with the move start?

First, let’s talk about the lack of continuity with the previous movie. Michael is suddenly a biologist instead of an engineer of some kind? Honestly, I don’t mind so much that we’ve got our fourth actor playing the character. I kind of expect it at this point. 

Then there’s the premise of a shark with a vendetta being out for revenge. I know animals are smart. But that smart? As smart as the plot requires it to be? Please. Not to mention the travel involved. 

On the other hand, I will give this shark credit - it only goes after its targets. Some of the killers in slashers should learn from this shark and leave the extra characters alone. 

Of course, horror fans will complain that the body count is low, and they do have a bit of a point. Especially with the ending I saw. Apparently, there are two endings to the film, and I’m going with the slightly happier one since it is the one I saw. 

And that’s one of the other flaws with this film, the tone. Even for a creature feature horror movie, this is a dismal movie. I get it considering how the movie opens, but the sad tone keeps it from being enjoyable. 

Now, this isn’t to blame the actors. They are doing the best they can with the material they have. And Lorraine’s performance is phenomenal. 

Back to what doesn’t work. There’s the script. For the plot to work, Michael has to be incredibly stupid. I mean, anyone with a brain and all his family has been through would never go along with what he agrees to here. 

Not to mention some improbable escapes. 

There are a couple of suspenseful scenes, but the rest of the movie is so crazy that we can’t take them seriously. 

Finally, can we talk about the roar? Yes, the shark roars during the climax. Now, I’m not a biologist, and I know some animals can make noise when you don’t expect them do, but this seems a little silly. Then again, I don’t have any issue with the metallic sound effect the knife makes in the Scream movies when it is pulled out, so I’m willing to turn a blind eye when I love a franchise.

The special effects are okay. A few don’t hold up, but a few of the scenes are quite effective. 

I can’t say the same for the opening. It’s so dark, it’s hard to follow. And, honestly, that character deserved better. 

Jaws: The Revenge is on par with the third movie for me. Unless you are a diehard fan of the franchise, there’s no reason to watch it.

Movie Review: A Royal Wedding - A Prince in Paradise III

Stars: 4 out of 5

Pros: Nice caper to a fun trilogy

Cons: Plot could have been more original; low-budget cheese

The Bottom Line:

A wedding on hold

Revisiting characters

Who are still charming

Will Politics Stop a Wedding?

When I was perusing Great American Family movies a few years ago, I stumbled on A Prince in Paradise, and immediately fell under its charm.  I was there to watch the Christmas themed sequel that aired in 2024.  And I’ve been keeping my eyes opened for the promised third movie, A Royal Wedding.  It was exactly what I expected, which means I enjoyed it.

If you haven’t been following the franchise, romance writer Olivia (Rhiannon Fish) met Prince Alexander of Trovia (Mitchell Bourke) while both were vacationing on a tropical island.  Despite the differences in their stations in life, they fell in love, getting engaged at Christmas.  Now, the time has come for them to finally wed, and they and their families are thrilled the day has arrived.

But not everyone is happy about it.  One of the lords of Trovia has rallied a few other nobility to invoke a little-known law and stop the wedding the night before it is to take place.  While Alexander’s mother, Queen Patricia (Andrea Moor), attempts to find a legal way to get the wedding back on track, Olivi and Alexander take their own paths to overcome the obastcle.  Will the couple ever get married?

It would have been nice to see them come up with some kind of new obstacle for the couple here since this has been a theme in the first two movies.  And, I get it, this is a real issue for royals over the centuries.  But I feel like they could have found something new to threaten the wedding.

Because, let’s face it, we know where this movie is going to wind up.  It’s right there in the movie’s title.  And it’s what we’d expect from a light romance.  I suspected the how, but I didn’t mind because I was enjoying hanging out with the characters again as they tried to figure things out.  And yes, I might have shed a tear or two.

And this is due to the characters.  They continue to be charming.  I loved getting to spend time with them again.

Obviously, this is due to the acting from the cast.  They bring their characters to life wonderfully and make us want to see what happens in this next chapter.

Now, this isn’t to say the movie (and franchise) don’t suffer from low-budget cheese.  If that bothers you, you’ll want to steer clear.  But if you can accept that, you’ll have fun with these films.

With how this movie ends, I feel like we are saying goodbye to the characters.  I do feel like this is a good place to stop because I feel good about where we left the characters.  But if they decided to revisit Olivia and Alexander, I’d certainly watch.

A Royal Wedding is a fun ending to the A Prince in Paradise trilogy.  Fans will definitely want to tune in to see how it ends.

Movie Review: Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom

Stars: 3 out of 5

Pros: Action, entertaining enough

Cons: Plenty of flaws in just about every department

The Bottom Line:

Aquaman returns

In this uneven sequel

Don’t rush to see it

“Are You Calling Me One in a Million?”

I always intended to watch Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom.  I just wasn’t interested enough to watch it in the theater.  After all, by the time it came out, we already knew that the DC Superhero movies were getting a reboot, so there was no rush.  But thanks to cable I finally got to see it.

The movie picks up several years after the first one, and we fortunately get brought up to speed, which also helped me remember who all the characters are.  Arthur Curry, aka Aquaman, (Jason Momoa), has married Mera (Amber Heard), and the two have a baby.  He’s finding fatherhood very rewarding.  And yes, they are living on land.  Arthur is finding his job as the king of Atlantis to be much less rewarding than he’d hoped, mainly because he keeps getting tied up in bureaucracy and meetings.  Seems life under the sea isn’t that different from life here on land.

But, over the course of five months, greenhouse gases rise to the point that they are greatly disrupting weather on Earth, both for land dwellers and Atlanteans.  What Arthur doesn’t know is that it is the word of David Kane, aka Black Manta (Yahya Abdul-Mateen II).  He’s out to get his revenge of Arthur.  But to track him down, Arthur will have to turn to an unlikely ally.  Will it be enough to defeat him?

I enjoyed the first one, so I had hoped to enjoy this one as well.  Sadly, it wasn’t nearly as good as I hoped it would be.  I did appreciate the run time of just over two hours.  There wasn’t much wasted time, and the action scenes, while still frequent, weren’t overly drawn out.

Unfortunately, they could have cut out one action sequence to given the characters a bit more time to be developed.  That said, I did like how one relationship grew, but most of the characters felt like pieces being moved around by the plot instead of fully fleshed out characters.  This is a script problem instead of an actor problem.

Not that all the acting was good.  It seemed just about everyone had a moment where the acting was off.  Yes, some of that was definitely the writing, which was weak all the way around.  Some of the lines the characters had?  They were cringe worthy no matter how they were delivered.

Which brings us to the climax.  Much of it worked, but there was one aspect that had me rolling my eyes.  Hard.

Plus, we had to get a couple of lectures in about climate change.

Even the special effects are a mixed bag.  Once again, I loved the illusion when they were under water.  But some of the effects looked downright cheesy.

Now, all of this sounds like I hated the movie.  That’s not true.  It was entertaining enough to keep me engaged the entire way through and get caught up in the third act.  I’m glad I finally watched it.  But, it’s just a case of the flaws being obvious and distracting, which kept me from getting fully invested.

I’m not sorry I finally watched Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom.  But it’s not a movie I’ll be rushing back to watch any time soon.  Only if you are trying to keep up with superhero movies would you need to seek this one out.

Movie Review: The African Queen

Stars: 4 out of 5

Pros: Strong acting and interesting story

Cons: Definitely shows its age

The Bottom Line:

Trip down a river

Filled with plenty of danger

Dated but good film

Treacherous Trip Down the River

I’ve heard of The African Queen for years.  It’s a legendary classic movie, after all.  When I spotted it on Turner Classic Movies, I decided to watch it.  While it definitely shows its age, I did enjoy it.

The movie is set in Africa in 1914.  Rose Sayer (Katharine Hepburn) and her brother, Sam (Robert Morley) are missionaries in a remote village until World War I finds them.  Germans come in, kidnap the natives, and destroy the village.  In the aftermath, Sam dies, so when Charlie Allnutt (Humphrey Bogart) returns with his boat, The African Queen, Rose is all too willing to leave with him.

Charlie is all for hiding out since the Germans would want to take his boat for the supplies he carries from location to location up and down the river.  However, Rose has another idea.  She wants them to take the boat up the river and use it to destroy a German ship patrolling a lake there.  Will they make it?

This movie was made in 1951.  You’ll want to keep that in mind as you watch.  The storytelling and acting are definitely different than we get now.  I got impatient as the movie took a while introducing the characters and setting up the story.  But once the duo left on the boat, things picked up.  It was fairly episodic as they faced one set back after another and had to figure out how to overcome it.  But it does entertain as it does so.

The movie was filmed partially in Africa and partially on a soundstage.  You can definitely tell when they are using a sound stage because the effects are obvious today.  However, the fact that it was filmed on location, something that wasn’t done nearly as much back then, makes much of the movie look wonderful.

One last thing I found annoying; the characters called each other by name in most lines of dialogue.  Please, just stop!

With Rose being a missionary, I was expecting a refined woman who shied away from adventure.  Yes, she is refined, and she and Charlie do butt heads upon occasion (more so before they fall in love) because he isn’t nearly as refined as she is.  However, she is much more adventurous than I, or Charlie, gave her credit for being.  That leads to a couple of funny scenes.  Yes, they both have moments of weakness.  I liked that.  It’s realistic that at some point you’ll want to give up.  But I appreciated that the other person stepped up and handled the situation.  That teamwork was fantastic.

While there are some other actors in the film, the majority of the time, it is just Humphrey Bogart and Katharine Hepburn on screen.  They rise to the occasion perfectly.  I buy their performances, even with the script gives them some sudden turns.  Bogart won an Oscar for his performance here, and Katharine Hepburn was nominated for one.  It’s easy to see why.

If you enjoy classic movies and have missed this one, it is worth going back and correcting that oversight.  As long as you remember how old the movie is, you’ll appreciate The African Queen.

Movie Review: Toy Story 5

Stars: 3 out of 5

Pros: Good message; nice to see old friends again

Cons: Missing the charm of the first three

The Bottom Line:

It’s toys vs. tech

Tackles subject thoughtfully

But lacking the fun

Surprisingly Nuanced

It’s been several years since I watched any Disney or Pixar animated movie.  And my feelings on Toy Story 4 have changed over the years (I don’t like it as much as I tried to convince myself I did when I first saw it.)  But I have seen all the Toy Story films in the theater (not counting the Buzz Lightyear movie), and I knew I’d kick myself if I didn’t go see Toy Story 5 while it was still in the theater.

After letting Andy grow up in real time, Bonnie (voiced by Scarlett Spears) has stayed a young girl.  And, as we rejoin her and her toys, she is too shy to make any friends, even with her neighbors.  Of course, soon Sheriff Jessie (Joan Cusack) learns that a plague is sweeping through the world, technology.  It is turning all the kids into mindless zombies who just stare at their screens.

To Jessie’s horror, Bonnie’s parents get her Lilypad (Greta Lee), Lily for short.  This device connects Bonnie with some girls from her dance class.  Will they be good friends for Bonnie?  Or is there someone better out there?

Yes, this is Jessie’s movie.  Honestly, I’m okay with that.  They do give Woody and Buzz (Tom Hanks and Tim Allen) a substantive subplot, while many of the familiar toys are reduced to extended cameos.  I do miss them, but I get it.  If you are going to tell new stories, you can’t keep all these toys in the story, too.  It just gets too cluttered.

This movie really plays on Jessie’s background, first introduced in Toy Story 2.  Again, I’m not sure we needed to go there, but I did feel like it worked, and I appreciated it.  And I especially appreciated the growth Jessie got as a result.  I feel like it’s something that has been missing from the franchise, but maybe I just need to rewatch the original trilogy.

Which brings us to something I especially appreciated.  In the discussion about devices and technology, it starts out fairly black and white, but it becomes gray as the movie goes on.  After all, like almost anything else, technology can be good or bad.  I also appreciated that it clearly showed adults just as addicted to technology as the kids because it is true.  (Admits the guy who spends so much time working on internet reviews.  And thanks for reading them!)

Having said all of this, the movie was missing that spark that made the original trilogy so special.  I’m not sure what they had to say about technology was worth a new entry in the franchise.  I still would have been okay if they had stopped at the original trilogy with the occasional special.

Then there’s Buzz’s storyline.  I’ve always appreciated his romance with Jessie, but I felt like they were trying too hard for laughs with him.  He’s never been the sharpest, but he felt especially clueless here.

On the other hand, there are a couple of running gags with Woody that I enjoyed.

I guess part of the problem is the things that made the originals feel so special, all those little details, are now such a familiar part of the world these characters live with, they’ve lost the special feeling and they’ve lost the ability to make us laugh and smile.  Instead, the majority of the humor came from a new potty-training device.  Yeah, you can guess where those jokes are going.  I wasn’t a big fan.

There is a mid-credits scene you’ll want to watch.  And there is something at the end of the credits as well, but I didn’t think it was worth sticking around for.

I’m glad I saw Toy Story 5, but I’m glad I went on a discounted night to see it.  It’s fun to see old friends again, but the spark that made the original trilogy so special is still missing.

Movie Review: Upgrade

Stars: 2 out of 5

Pros: Interesting premise

Cons: Several overly violent scenes; ending doesn’t quite work

The Bottom Line:

Creative premise

Marred by violence, ending

So does not quite work

When Technology Seems Too Good to be True

I hadn’t heard of the movie Upgrade until a friend suggested it for a movie night.  It sounded intriguing from his description, so we gave it a try.  There was certainly an interest premise in the movie, but the execution didn’t quite work.

The movie is set is the near future and tells the story of Grey Trace (Logan Marshall-Green).  He’s happy with his life rebuilding classic cars while his wife, Asha (Melanie Vallejo) brings in the big bucks working for a tech company.  They are happy until one night when their self-driving car suddenly crashes in the bad part of town.  They are attacked after the accident.  Grey is left a quadriplegic, but Asha is killed.

Grey is offered a chance at a normal life from billionaire Eron Keen (Harrison Gilbertson).  Eron has a new technology that could help Grey walk again just like nothing had ever happened.  Grey is supposed to keep this a secret from everyone, however.  But when he returns home, Grey discovers that he has a few unexpected upgrades in his life.  Will they help him find the men who killed his wife?

This movie can’t quite decide what it wants to be.  It is part mystery/thriller.  As an avid mystery reader, I enjoyed that aspect of things.  It is part science fiction movie, with the near future setting and the upgraded technology.  And there are another couple of genres mixed in as well that I don’t want to get into so as not to spoil things.  It’s not that these parts can’t mix.  They just don’t quite seem to completely mix here.

I did like Grey.  The more he is pulled into his strange new life, the more I was pulled into the movie.  I couldn’t figure out where exactly it was going, which was a good thing.  The credit for this goes to Logan Marshall-Green.  He has to carry much of the movie on his shoulders, and he does a great job of it.  This isn’t to diminish the performances of the rest of the cast.  They just don’t have the same amount of screen time he does.

Despite the futuristic setting, there aren’t a ton of special effects.  What there are work well, however.  Likewise, the stunts are good.

There are two places where the movie falls apart.  One of the violence.  There are several pretty graphic scenes that weren’t needed.  They could have gotten the story points across with much less graphic images.

The second is the ending.  It many ways, it felt like the movie just stopped instead of ending.  Part of that comes from some late breaking twists that don’t wrap everything up and make us question why some of the earlier things that happened happened.

The premise for Upgrade was good, but there were some flaws in the execution that made me feel the writing needed an upgrade.

Movie Review: Supergirl (1984)

Stars: 1 out of 5

Pros: Brenda Vaccaro’s performance is fun

Cons: The rest of the movie is a mess

The Bottom Line:

Story has plot holes

Honestly, not much works here

You can skip this one

“You’re Superman’s Best Friend?”  “No, He’s My Cousin.”

I’d heard bad things about 1984’s Supergirl, but I was still curious about it.  And, since it was available on one of my streaming services, I figured I should give it a chance.  You know those bad things I’d heard about it?  They were all true.

Our story opens in Argo City, a giant floating ship filled with refugees from Krypton.  Among them is Kara-El (Helen Slater), who, when we meet her, is playing with the sphere that powers the entire ship.  Shocking, it gets away from her, dooming all those on the ship unless it is retrieved from Earth, where it landed.  So, Kara-El goes to retrieve it.

Unfortunately, before she lands, it is found by Selena (Faye Dunaway), a witch.  It actually makes her able to do magic, so Selena wants to keep it, figuring it will help her plans to take over the world.  Will Kara-El be able to find it?

This movie had so many plot holes you could have floated Argo City through each of them.  Okay, so Kara-El wasn’t the one who took the sphere in the first place, but still, why would anyone do that if it is what is keeping everyone alive?  Why, when Kara-El lands on Earth, did she bother taking on a secret identity since her parents and friends’ lives were dependent on her bringing the sphere back as quickly as possible?  How did Selena find a way to tap into some of the Superman mythos at random?  Why did Kara-El emerge from her pod in a costume so much like Superman’s?

Okay, so Kara-El’s secret identity was there to introduce us to characters from the Superman stories.  Her roommate is Lucy Lane, as played by Maureen Teefy.  And Lucy just happens to be dating Jimmy Olsen, as played by Marc McClure, the only actor from the Superman movies to show up here.  But still, that seemed to slow down what was supposed to be a ticking clock story.

I don’t know that I feel like the plot ever made up for the plot holes.  While it wasn’t quite as bad as a random series of events, it did throw in some truly random things, as if the writers really didn’t know what to do and had to fill screen time while including things Superman fans know about.  Even so, you can pretty much guess where it is going early on.  It’s just the details you’ll have no way of predicting.

Then there’s the acting.  Most of the cast is playing things so over the top it doesn’t work.  There’s fun camp, and then there’s this.  The exception to this is Brenda Vaccaro who plays Selena’s sidekick with the right level of camp and sarcasm.  I found her fun.  I’ve seen Helen Slater in other things, most noticeably in the recent TV show Supergirl, so I know she can do a wonderful job when given good material.  This wasn’t it.  Same holds true for others in the cast.

Of course, the effects are dated.  This came out in 1984, after all.  Even then, I’ve seen better effects from that time period.  Or maybe, I was just enjoying those movies more so I was more forgiving.

There’s a reason you haven’t heard much about 1984’s Supergirl.  And there’s no reason to seek this out to watch it.

Movie Review: Superman III

Stars: 2 out of 5

Pros: Some acting

Cons: Uneven, cheesy, just generally disappointing

The Bottom Line:

Good performances

In subpar super movie

Overall cheesy

“I’m From Metropolis.  I See Superman Every Day.”

While I’ve never watched the Christopher Reeve Superman movies, I knew their reputation.  So, even though I wanted to watch Superman III, I also knew not to set my expectations too high.  Even so, this movie disappoints.

After spending several minutes on an unexplainable series of near misses and hits in Metropolis, we meet up with Clark Kent (Christopher Reeve) as he pitches a story about a man attending his fifteen-year high school reunion.  Yep, Clark wants to head back to Smallville.  Inexplicably, Perry White (Jackie Cooper) agrees to the idea, and Clark sets out.  While there, he reunites with his high school crush, Lana Lang (Annette O’Toole).

Meanwhile, computer programming savant Gus Gorman (Richard Pryor) catches the eye of his boss, evil rich mogul Ross Webster (Robert Vaughn).  Ross wants to use Gus’s abilities to program computers to bend others to his will.  And his will is making more money.  Will Superman be able to stop him?

You might be wondering where Margot Kidder’s Lois Lane is in all of this.  That’s an excellent question.  She heads off on vacation near the beginning of the movie, and pops up in the last scene to set up a romantic triangle that I’m assuming doesn’t pay off in the next movie.  Essentially, she has a glorified cameo. 

They were setting up Lana as a new long term love interest here.  It’s very obvious to anyone paying attention.  Honestly, I would have liked to see that play out in another movie.  Sadly, Annette O’Toole wasn’t invited back for the next one because she was excellent as Lana.  Fortunately, she was able to transition this to playing Martha Kent on Smallville.  Because of knowing that connection and enjoying her work on that show, I was curious to see this movie.

So that’s covered the romance of it all.  What about the rest?  Honestly, the movie is just strange all the way around.  There are long sections that don’t really add much to the movie.  Some of them were attempts at humor that fall flat, at least today.  Some of them are character moments, but they go on too long.  One extended scene is used as set up for the climax, but I feel like we could have gotten something without the extended time.

Part of it is because Clark/Superman is in a parallel story to the villains without really knowing much about them or what they are up to until it is time for act three.  It feels like we are just plodding along as a result.

In the middle of the movie, Superman gets broken.  Again, this part of the movie went on too long, and I found the resolution to it a bit unsatisfying.

Which brings us to the climax, where the movie devolves (if that is possible) to a cheesy science fiction movie, complete with an all-powerful computer.

And the effects?  Can we say 1983?  Okay, so I’m sure they were state of the art at the time, but they are dated now.  I’d be more willing to go along with them if the movie were better overall.  But there is one part of the climax that is nostalgically bad, if that makes any sense.  Well, old video game players will get it.

Having said all this, I couldn’t help but think how modern some parts of the film felt.  Even back then, we were talking about the dangers of computers and what they could do to our society.  Then there’s the fact that the villain is a rich guy who wants to get richer.  Somehow, he didn’t feel nearly as much a lecture as an equivalent villain would in today’s movies.  Maybe because he was part cartoon.

And no, I don’t think any of the actors were bad.  They were playing the parts as they were supposed to.  It’s the way they were written.  Those who are playing their characters straight were pretty good.  And I did like the scene where Superman/Clark had to confront what he’d turned into from an acting standpoint.  Christopher Reeve was good there even if the scene was pretty hokey.

I do want to circle back to the humor.  While much of it fell flat for me, there were some moments I enjoyed.  And, overall, I did appreciate the lighter tone of the film.

I know the fourth movie is viewed as even worse than this one.  I’m almost afraid to watch it.  But I’ve come this far, so I’ll give it a watch.  Know what you are getting into if you decide to watch Superman III.  Yes, what you’ve heard about it is true.

Movie Review: Eye for an Eye - A True Justice Mystery

Stars: 4 out of 5

Pros: Good mystery

Cons: Took a while to remember characters; what season is this?

The Bottom Line:

Sequel finally

Murder among parents’ group

Overall, I liked

“We Are Going Back to High School.”

I was a bit surprised when I saw that we were getting a second True Justice movie on Hallmark.  Then again, I was also surprised to find that it had been two and a half years since the first one aired.  Somehow, I was thinking it had been longer.  Anyway, we revisited these law student detectives in Eye for an Eye.

For them, it’s been a few months since the four friends cleared Casey’s (Katherine McNamara) brother of murder.  They’ve been filling their time with true crime shows and their school work when Liam (Alexander Nunez) finds them another case.  Seems that a parent association in a small town about half an hour away has erupted into murder.  The president was killed, and another mom has been convicted of the crime.  But as the friends start looking into things, they find evidence that makes them think justice hasn’t been served.  Can they figure out what really happened?

There was one thing that bothered me.  It was small.  But it kept driving me crazy.  The murder happened three months before our characters got involved.  The body was found in the snow.  During that time, the trial had already taken place.  Granted, right there, that is very fast.  But it was just as snowy in the present day as it was during the flashbacks.  Now, granted, I don’t live where in snows, but the characters (and production) acted like it was a few weeks at most instead of months.

I do wish we’d had a bit more of a reintroduction to the characters in this movie.  The assumption was made that we remember exactly who everyone was.  Now, I could have rewatched the first movie, but I didn’t, so it has been almost two and a half years since I met the characters.  I think I got everyone and their relationships figured out as the movie went along, however.

The mystery itself was good.  There were enough suspects to keep me engaged.  The characters’ attempts to gather evidence was fun without being too cartoonish.  Realistic?  No.  But I’m not watching these movies for realism.  The ending made sense, and I liked how the subplot wrapped up.

The acting was decent as well.  If you are familiar with Hallmark movies, you’ll know what to expect here, and you’ll be able to get lost in the story.  I should mention that Hallmark staples Benjamin Ayres and Nikki DeLoach reprise their supporting roles.  And Nikki DeLoach helped write the movie once again.

It was nice to revisit the True Justice characters with Eye for an Eye.  I hope if we get a third movie, it doesn’t take as long to get to us.

Movie Review: Jaws 3

Stars: 2 out of 5

Pros: A few decent scenes

Cons: Too many bad one and laughable effects

The Bottom Line:

Shark in water park

A few sequences are good

But it’s mostly bad

“Let’s Go Swimming.”  “No, I Hate the Water.”

I knew fans point to the Jaws franchise as one where quality declines all the way through, but especially in the third and fourth films.  I’ve always been curious just how far things dropped.  Having now watched Jaws 3(D), I can say they fell pretty far with this one.

While none of the actors from the first two are back, we do get two of the characters.  We catch up with the Brody Brothers in Sea World in Florida.  Mike (Dennis Quaid) is working there building the various enclosures the park needs.  He’s also dating Dr. Kathryn Morgan (Bess Armstrong), who is in charge of the animals in the park.  Sean (John Putch) wants nothing to do with the water.  In fact, he’s visiting while on break from college in Colorado.

The park is connected to the ocean, although the animals and performers are usually in a lagoon that is fences off from the ocean proper.  However, unbeknownst to everyone, a great white has gotten into the lagoon.  How long will it be before anyone realizes what has happened?

I will give the movie this.  Yes, it took a little bit of time before the characters realize they are dealing with a shark, but they weren’t dumb for long.  Yes, so they make a few dumb choices once they know, but that’s a different discussion.  But I appreciated that they didn’t drag out this early part of the story.

I do think the idea of a shark in a water park has potential.  And, it was nice to get away from Amity.  That poor island needs a break.  It also allows them to not have to bring back any of the actors, who weren’t interested in returning.  But fans of the franchise will struggle since we have nothing familiar here.  This really is a sequel in name only.  The Brodys mention a few of the events from the first two movies, but it really could be anyone.

Anyway, as I was starting to say, I did like the water park setting.  I’m a bit surprised that Sea World allowed their name and location to be used in the film.  I wouldn’t think this would be the kind of publicity the park would want.  Even saying there is no such thing as bad publicity, I wouldn’t think they’d want to be associated with this film.

But back to my main point.  The setting had some creative touches that brought some new action sequences and set pieces to the movie.  I enjoyed them for what they were.  Usually, we could see them coming, but they were still entertaining.

I will also give the cast credit.  While it appears Dennis Quaid was high the entire time they were filming (he’s admitted as much), I found the performances fine.  A couple of real-life animal handlers and trainers were in the film, which is fun.  Among the cast I haven’t mentioned already are Louis Gossett Jr. and Lea Thompson.  This is actually Lea Thompson’s debut.

So far, it’s sounding like I mostly enjoyed the film.  Sorry to mislead you, but that’s not the truth at all.  The original Jaws is famous for not showing the shark early on.  That’s a wonderful story telling choice, as long as the director knows how to handle it well.  That’s not the case here.  We get a few good sequences, but most of the time, we don’t get the buildup and tension we need to actually be in suspense.

There’s a reason I put the D in quotes earlier.  Yes, this movie was originally released in 3D back in the 1980’s, so the technology was very different from what we have today.  I watched the movie on TV, and it was converted to 2D.  Yes, we could definitely see some of the 3D shots and what they would have been.

But here’s the problem.  Some of the regular shots just don’t look good because of the conversion.  We got cloudy and out of focus scenes as a result.  It’s distracting and takes away from the film.

And some of the effects?  Even by 80’s standards, they are pretty cheesy.  I’m thinking especially of the climax, which had me laughing.  Frankly, I have several questions about how realistic most of the climax was, in fact.  Yes, I’m nitpicking over a movie about a killer great white shark.  I realize that is just crazy, but it made me roll my eyes as I was watching.

Unless you are looking for a D monster movie, there’s no reason to see Jaws 3(D).  It adds nothing to the legacy of the franchise and the couple of entertaining sequences aren’t enough to justify sitting through it.

Movie Review: Best Served Cold - A Hannah Swensen Mystery

Stars: 4 out of 5

Pros: Creative mystery for Hannah to solve

Cons: A few low budget moments

The Bottom Line:

Missing attorney

And case of fraud at trial

In this fun movie

“Maybe It’s a Mannequin.”  “It’s Never a Mannequin”

We’ve gotten two Hannah Swensen mystery movies in fairly quick succession on Hallmark this year.  Two months after we last checked in with them, we get Best Served Cold.  And yes, this is another fun mystery in the franchise.

After a brief prologue from six weeks ago, we check in with the characters as Hannah’s boyfriend, district attorney Chad Norton (Victor Webster), has just been given a big case.  The pawn shop in town was selling fake gold coins, and he’s prosecuting the owners.  He’s taken on the case at the last minute since the attorney assigned to it, Lucas, has gone missing. 

Hannah (Alison Sweeney) thinks something fishy is going on, so she starts trying to find Lucas.  Instead, she finds a dead body.  How will it impact the case?

This book is theoretically based on Triple Chocolate Cheesecake Murder, one of the more recent entries in the novel series.  I say theoretically because I don’t remember any of these elements in the book.  Granted, it has been five years since I read it.  But the teasers for the book don’t sound like anything in this movie.  As an aside, I think Hannah’s opening monologue explains a lot of what went wrong the one time I tried to make the title dessert.

But that’s no criticism of the mystery we got here.  I found it very creative and different in a good way.  I was engaged the entire way through, and I loved how the movie ended.  Very creative and well done if implausible in real life.

Hannah works with her mother, Delores (Barbara Niven) several times, and she gets some scenes to shine.  The rest of the usuals get only a very supporting part here, and there are some we don’t see.  I feel like we are dealing with some budget issues with these movies at this point, but I could be wrong.  While I missed seeing more of the regulars, I did like the story we got.

Yes, this is a Hallmark movie, so we get more of the low budget issues, but they are kept to a minimum.  Most of the acting and writing are well done.  Alison Sweeney once again wrote this movie, as she’s done with the last several.  I’m sure that’s one reason the dialogue is so strong.

Best Served Cold is another hot movie in the Hannah Swensen franchise.  Fans will be delighted watching these characters back in action.

Movie Review: Guardians of the Galaxy Volume 3

Stars: 3 out of 5

Pros: Action and acting

Cons: Pacing in mostly predictable story

The Bottom Line:

Guardians are back

Fighting to save one of them

Predictable film

Quest to Save Rocket

Somewhere along the way, I got behind on Marvel movies again (and newer movies in general).  Part of it is the cable movies I’ve been watching.  But part of it is pure laziness.  I wasn’t going to see stuff in the theater and I wasn’t even trying to catch it on streaming.  But I’m trying to catch up now.  We’ll see how long it lasts, right?

All of that to say that I finally sat down to watch Guardians of the Galaxy Volume 3.  And I may have found another reason why I let myself get behind.

When this movie opens, it finds the Guardians on a planet, trying to recover from a recent, devastating loss that has hit their leader, Peter Quill (Chris Pratt), especially hard.  But when an outside force attacks, leaving Rocket (voiced by Bradley Cooper) fighting for his life, Peter and the rest jump into action to try to find a way to save him.  But the only way forward is going to put them on the radar of a truly evil man.  Will this mission cost all of them their lives?

As I was watching this movie, the biggest thing I struggled with was the fact that I didn’t care.  I mean, you know where the story is going to go, the only question is the how.  Now, I will confess that a couple of things along the way did surprise me, but most of the big questions fell into this predictability.

It also didn’t help that we had extended flashbacks finally filling us in on how Rocket became the racoon we all know and love.  I will give them this, it was definitely relevant to this story.  But I still felt like we could have gotten that same information in less time.  Considering the movie is two and a half hours long, finding something to leave on the cutting room floor would have been nice.  Then again, it wouldn’t have given Bradley Cooper as much to voice in the movie.  I feel like one purpose of these many flashback scenes was to show how truly evil the villain was, but we got that from the modern storyline.  We really didn’t need to devote as much time to the flashbacks as we got.

I think another part of the problem was that we just had too much randomness in the film.  Some of the stops along the way felt weird just to be weird.  Maybe these stops served a purpose, but it just felt like a chance to visit another alien planet.

Now, I will give the film this – the effects looked good to me.  Sadly, we can’t always say that about modern special effects.  And the acting was all good.

And this isn’t to say that the film was bad.  I did get drawn in.  I found the action scenes lots of fun.  And a few moments of humor made me smile and chuckle.  But it wasn’t enough to really make me feel like I’ve missed anything by waiting this long to watch the movie.

Guardians of the Galaxy Volume 3 definitely continues the struggles that Mavel has had in the post Endgame era.  It’s not that this is a bad film.  But I’m also not sorry I haven’t watched it sooner.

Movie Review: Avatar - The Way of Water

Stars: 2 out of 5

Pros: Visuals are cool

Cons: Movie is slow and relies too much of the cool visuals

The Bottom Line:

The old threat returns

Movie too long and plodding

Not a much watch film

Sequel Does Little to Change My Mind on the Franchise

I wasn’t one of those who feel under the spell of the original Avatar.  I didn’t watch it in theaters and waited until I could record it on TV.  I wasn’t planning to watch the first sequel, Avatar: The Way of Water, but when I spotted in on TV, I changed my mind.  It did little to change my mind on the franchise, however.

For this movie, we are back on the planet Pandora.  Jake Sully (Sam Worthington) has fully embraced his new life living with the Na’vi.  He and his wife, Neytiri (Zoe Saldaña) have several children, and he is happy. 

That is, until the old commanders return to the planet.  Earth is still trying to colonize it.  But the leader is a clone of Miles Quaritch (Stephen Lang), and he is out to personally get Jake.  So Jake takes his family and flees to the islands.  Will they make their new realm their home?  Or will the Sea People reject them?  What will happen when Miles tracks him down?

Now, I fully admit that part of my issue with the film was the fact that it had been five years since I saw the original.  I was hazy on the details of the characters and their relationships.  That backstory might have helped me connect with what happened here.

But that wasn’t the only issue.

Most of the characters are blue aliens brought to life by motion capture CGI.  It might just be me, but I have a hard time telling them all apart.  When you are spending much of the film going “Wait, is that…?” it makes caring about the outcome harder.

Not that I’m blaming the actors.  They do a good enough job of bringing their characters to life.

There is a lot of debate right now about villains.  Do they need backstory, especially something that shows how they became evil?  While I subscribe to the view that we don’t, I really felt like the villains in this film were very one dimensional.  I had to wonder why everyone was going along with some of what they were being told to do.  There just seemed so little point.  So, some backstory here would definitely have helped.

Visually, the movie looks good.  It’s a lot of CGI.  I’d say the movie is more animated than real.  Most of it looks great, including the fanciful sea creatures we meet along the way.  Yeah, my eye starts to get more critical the further I go, but even so, there are some shots that are just outstanding.

But here’s the biggest issue I have with the movie.  It’s long.  Too long.  The movie clocks in at over 3 hours, and I could easily get 30 minutes cut without too much effort.  There’s an entire sub-plot that could have been trimmed.  And, I’m sure some other cuts could have been made to tighten things.  Having said that, there is a lot going on here, story wise.  It is complex, so trimming things further might have meant a major rewrite.  It certainly does seem like we have one more storyline than we need, especially when things slow down in the middle.

Yes, I’ll probably wind up watching the third Avatar movie at some point.  But I don’t think I’ll be rushing out to watch it.  The Way of Water has too many flaws to make me want to jump right into more of the franchise.

Movie Review: The Flash (2023)

Stars: 2 out of 5

Pros: Emotions at the end work

Cons: Very little else does

The Bottom Line:

Flash gets solo film

But more time spent on others

He deserves better

“Do You Want to Get a Bite?  I’m Still Hungry.”

Yes, I’d heard all the issues with The Flash and the rumors of reshoots even before it came out in 2023.  But, I always intended to give this movie a shot at some point.  It was pretty much as bad as I’d heard.

No, I don’t remember all the behind-the-scenes drama and delays at this point.  But it was one of the last movies in the failed Zack Snyder DC Universe.  That killed interest as well since, by the time it came out, we knew we were getting new versions of these characters.  Really, the movie was doomed.  Not that it was good.

Anyway, the story sort of focuses on Barry Allen, aka The Flash (Ezra Miller).  He’s a science tech in a crime lab who is attempting to clear his father (Ron Livingston) of a crime he didn’t commit – killing Barry’s mother Nora (Maribel Verdú).  But then Barry gets the idea to go back in time to keep his mother from being killed.  What could possibly go wrong?

Of course, we all know what could go wrong.  But in this case, it means a movie that is mostly set in an alternative universe.  Act one sets things up in pretty good fashion.  Yes, there’s an action sequence that could have been cut if they really wanted to speed things up, but that’s a minor issue.  It does what it needs to do to get the story going.

Act two is where the movie really falls apart.  Yes, it is fun at first watching Barry figure out what he’s done and then have to start interacting with a new version of himself.  But here’s the things.  This is called The Flash.  It’s supposed to finally be a chance for us to get to know the big screen version of the character.  But we quickly go meet Michael Keaton’s version of Batman and then rescue Supergirl, as played by Sasha Calle.  And who is our villain?  General Zod (Michael Shannon).  If we were going to have a Flash movie, shouldn’t these cameos from other characters be kept to a minimum?  And shouldn’t we have had one of his villains as the threat we are facing for much of the movie?  Barry felt like a supporting character in his own movie, which is ironic given his complaint early on during that first act action scene.

Now, I’m going to contradict myself.  The movie could have done with less Barry.  Essentially, we have two versions of the character through much of the film, both played by Ezra Miller.  And I found both versions annoying much of the time.  Now, I’m not talking about the acting.  This is the way the character is written to be played.  But seriously, could we make him less awkward?

And, to be clear, none of the complaints are aimed at any of the actors.  It is the script that lets them down.

Meanwhile, if I hadn’t watched the show, I wouldn’t have gotten that Kiersey Clemons’s Iris West is a pretty important character in Barry’s life.  She’s an afterthought.  Yes, the lead character’s comic book love interest is sidelined in his big movie.

The special effects are also poor.  Laughably poor at times.  You get a sense of where how things are going to look from that first act action sequence, and they don’t get any better.  For a big budget movie like this, it’s very surprising.

Given all I’ve been saying, I was surprised at just how much the climax touched me.  Yes, we still managed to get the emotional impact we should have.

Going into this movie, I did try to separate my expectations from the TV show The Flash, which I mostly enjoyed, especially the first few seasons.  While not exactly a story that show told, I still feel like that show did the similar story so much better.  Granted, they have multiple episodes to tell a story instead of only two and a half hours.  But this movie didn’t really even try to tell Barry’s story.

And yes, we get more cameos from various versions of DC characters, including those from the Zack Snyder series.  We could have done without most of them since they didn’t really add anything to the story.

The only reason to watch The Flash is if you are a die hard superhero fan, especially since this version of the character is no longer important.  You can just skip this mess of a film.

Movie Review: My Dream is Yours

Stars: 3 out of 5

Pros: Great singing, entertaining while watching

Cons: Pacing over emphasizes job, making romance seem forced

The Bottom Line:

A singer’s big break

Light, fun film with great singing

Story needs focus

“He Was the Man I Used to Work for a Long, Long Time Ago.  Day Before Yesterday.”

Diane Vallere has a new book in her Madison Night series coming later this month.  As always, in order to prepare, I watched the similarly titled Doris Day movie.  In this case, that lead me to My Dream is Yours, her second movie from 1949.

This movie opens in Hollywood, where we meet agent Doug Blake (Jack Carson).  His star client (his only client) is singing sensation Gary Mitchell (Lee Bowman), who is set to renew his contract for the radio show he is on.  But Gary doesn’t want to do it.  He’s negotiated his own contract with a different show, in fact.

So Doug sets off for New York City to find a replacement for Gary.  And he does when he stumbles on Martha Gibson (Doris Day).  But can he land her a job back in Los Angeles?

Given that two of the three lead characters are singers, there is lots of singing, mostly from Doris Day.  And most of the songs are in the context of their jobs.  With one exception, I enjoyed the songs.  Doris has a fantastic voice, and I loved listening to it.  Hal Derwin, who was the singing voice of Gary, was just as great.  So, which song didn’t I enjoy?  Sadly, it was the title track.  Which, naturally, means we heard it the most.

Oh, and there’s that dream sequence.  I don’t see how anyone thought it was good to put into the film.  It was more something out of a cheesy sitcom.

As is often the case with Doris Day movies, I was entertained while watching, but I didn’t feel like it was that good.  We get lots of time spent on Doug trying to find a job for Martha.  I liked the fact that it didn’t come easy, but it also felt a little drawn out.  Yeah, I know.  I’m hard to please.

There is also supposed to be a love triangle.  I say supposed to be because they only hint at this storyline before the last 20 minutes or so of the movie, when we suddenly focus on that.  Honestly, if they had given that a little more time while not spending as much time on the repetition of Martha not getting a job, I think it would have been better.  As it is, the romance feels forced when we start focusing on it.

I suspect most of that is just because of the age of the film.  We look for something different in the storytelling now vs. what they did back then.  I’m sure the focus on the pacing the story would be better if it were made today.

Overall, this does represent something we don’t see from the major studios any more – a light romantic movie.  I wish we would see more of that.

None of this criticism is directed at the actors.  They are all great at bringing the story to life for us.  Those involved in the dream sequences even commit fully to it. 

For me, My Dream is Yours is another mixed bag.  It’s entertaining enough when you sit down to watch it, but it isn’t worth going out of your way for.

Looking for the DVD?  Looks like it is part of this Doris Day collection.