FreeLook BookStore

Home

Our Picks

Classics Club

E•Zine

About Us

-Find A Book- Cookbooks Fantasy Mystery True Life Historical Kids Books Romance E-Zine Categories Search Site

COVER  • Contents  • < PREV Page  • NEXT Page >

The Flick Chick: More Film Reviews The first gloss may be off these titles, but the films are still as good (or as bad) as they were the first time they ran in a theater, and every film is new when it's new-to-you. So if you've missed these so far, here's a straight headsup on whether to miss them again. When it comes to flicks, The Chick Rules! kathy@freelookbookstore.com

About a Boy

     Yeah, stupid title. Yeah, hackneyed scenario: shiftless wastrel is redeemed by the love of a good woman and (oh, give it a break) an adorable child. "Oh well," the Chick said, "I'll sit through almost anything for the pleasure of looking at Hugh Grant."
     And right off, she breathed a little sigh of relief, because the visuals had style. And though HG's character was a worthless loser, and HG himself had a disfiguring haircut, the other characters had an oddball charm. There were some mildly good jokes. The Kid was not agonizingly sentimental. And then . . . was the Chick imagining it, or was Grant actually, uh, acting? Nah, surely not. Why would one of the master Sex Symbols of our age want to mess up his act with acting? And yet . . .
      Well, it's not right. There are rules, you know. Cary Grant (the master) never ventured beyond classic CaryGrantness. Sean Connery made a dozen early flicks based on his gorgousness alone. Paul Newman waited until he was old before he learned to act. So who does Hugh Grant think he is, distracting us from his yumminess by learning his craft? Fie!
      Yet it must be admitted — despite the bad haircut, HG did real good. Real good. (5/22/02)

Hollywood Ending

     Woody Allen is up to snuff here. He still writes the smoothest dialogue in town, and if he ran out of steam toward the end of filming a fictionalized backstory of "Bullets over Broadway" (which is what this film appears to be), it is still charming, even though the ending is all the title implies. As usual, there is a star-studded cast. Tea Leone, for example, looks stunning and handles the trademark-Allen-stammer very well, and it was heartwarming to see George Hamilton's glowingly uneasy smile as an affectless (thoroughly tanned) supernumarary.
     At our Sunday afternoon performance, the theater was packed. Justly so. (5/4/02)

Murder by Numbers

     This is a nicelittle picture. Sandra Bullock is always watchable. Ben Chaplin is appropriately attractive. Michael Pitt and Ryan Gosling are very effective as the murderous teenagers. And if it never did ratchet up the fear-flick-factor to the point where my teeth hurt . . . it still provided a really pleasant evening, well worth the time and money. Sometimes you want simply to enjoy the movie without hurting your teeth, you know? (4/23)

High Crimes

      Heyyyy. It's fun to eat hamburgers. And fries. Masses of chocolate chip cookies. Even though you know they aren't particularly good food, and not especially good for you, and you may feel vaguely embarrassed about it later? Okay. Then you know how you'll feel about enjoying High Crimes. Like you're a little embarrassed to have enjoyed it — but you did.
     Ashley Judd turns in a good performance: not Ruby in Paradise, maybe.Not Double Jeopardy. But she's perky, and pretty, and convincing. And Morgan Freeman is his own magnificent self. There are good-enough supporting players, the timing is good, the dialogue is plenty good enough. There's lots of action and some pretty good suspense. Nice satisfying tweak at the end. Even a nice tweak to the tweak — although that very final scene is cute enough to make you gag.
      But unfortunately (yeah, I already telegraphed this) the basic premise is pathetic. I'm not talking about the X-files paranoia, or the original Terrible Incident. Sadly, terrible stuff does indeed happen, and far too often. (Although the circumstances explained in the film seem pretty farfetched.) But when it's all over, you have to ask yourself — why the devil did they indict the young man at all?
     My movie buddy had the best answer: "Because otherwise there would have been no film."
     Yeah! But maybe the film makers should go a little easier on the junk food.(4/15/02)

Iris

     I was terrified by the prospect of seeing this beautiful film. I was terrified while watching it. And justly so. We are treated to a young and glowing portrait of writer Iris Murdoch — brilliantly played by Cate Winslett — just at the outset of her stellar career. The film cuts back and forth from this young Iris, bursting with vitality as she woos her shy, stammering husband-to-be, to the mature Iris, even more brilliantly portrayed by Judy Dench, as she faces the loss of all that she holds most dear and becomes, at last, her own sad ghost, wandering in darkness.
     Never mind the man in the skull mask hiding in the closet: there are worse things than that to be afraid of.
     The film was taken from her husband's book, written concurrently with her illness and death, and it's a powerful story. But my own gut feeling is that love ought to trump art; if someone I loved wrote such a narrative about me, detailing such a terrible decline . . . I'd come back and haunt him. (4/2/02)

Spy Game

     The goal: clickthrough on every link! And that's what SPY GAME provides: Redford and Pitt, excellent stars each doing an excellent job; plenty of suspense; and all the clever little gears and wheels turning with faultless ease. There are few things more irritating than stories of complex intrigue that end with some last-minute hauled-over-the-wall deus ex machina device, and few things more satisfying that the clear-in-retrospect climax of the well-made plot! Here, every little detail falls into place before the final credits roll. First-rate film! (12/01/01)

Life as a House

      First I must say that I really admire Kevin Klein as an actor. He was wonderful in Dave, hilarious in Soapdish, incomparable in Wanda. He's also extremely handsome. So it couldn't have been Kevin Klein. And Kristen Scott Thomas, Hayden Christensen, Mary Steenburgen et al were fine, just fine. And there were lots of star-quality actors scattered through the bit parts — although to tell the truth, there were so many that it was a little distracting. And the film looked good. And it had a guaranteed-to-draw-tears plot, full of love and lovemaking, and broken promises mended, and noble behavior, and a touching collapse or two. I had genuine tears in my eyes several times.
      So why didn't it quite ... convince me? Why did I repeatedly find myself recoiling, as if the coloratura soprano had hit a sour note?
      Because it didn't ring true, that's why. I really wanted to like this film, but not just once, not just twice, but many times the responses were off-key, and in spite of myself I kept thinking, "But he wouldn't do that!" and "She would never have said that — not that, not then!" Maybe those answers and responses play okay in Southern California, but they don't go over in Dubuque. And not here.
      Of course, it could just be me. Other critics liked it.
      But then again they live in New York and Southern California, don't they? 11/12/01

Life or Something Like It

     You know, happiness is one of our greatest gifts. Film after grim film in the past few months has sent us the message that you can't win, that death is the best answer, and that you can't trust nobody, nohow. Well my buds, don't you believe it. This sweet little flick is, admittedly a bit of fluff, but it speaks the life-affirming words that you can win after all, and that the game really is worth the candle. Angelina Jolie is improbably beautiful (and convincing), Ed Green is craggily attractive, and when "prophet" Tony Shalhoub opens his arms to Heaven . . . strange happenings follow. There's also a splendid cameo of Stockard Channing sending up Barbara Walters.
     Happiness is one of the greatest gifts. Go see this film and be happy afterwards. 5/8/02

K-PAX

      Kevin Spacey. Jeff Bridges: remember Starman?
      The above was my original review, and it really should have been enough inducement for anyone, but noooo.
      More seriously, K-PAX has gathered some unflattering reviews here and there, and I want to answer them. First off, I have no rebuttal for those who say flatly that they just don't like Sci-Fi; they're entitled to their opinion. However, this film can be read in a variety of ways — as SF, of which it is a lovely specimen, as an interesting psychological study of an especially tragic patient, and also as a hybred of the two, which is how I interpret it. It's also an allegory about pride, and about how one must go inside a problem to solve it, and perhaps that some problems can be managed only by stepping away from them. To those who say that Kevin Spacey's portrayal was unemotional, I can only say I'd call it calm, confident, splendid. To those who complain that Jeff Bridges has put on weight, I say, "And what does that have to do with anything? His performance was first-rate!"
      In short, see it! (11/4)

The Deep End

     This dazzlingly suspenseful film has no shoot-outs, no acrobatics, no plots to destroy the world. What it has is turn after unbearable turn of the vise, in combination with an emotional impact so broad and so wide that it leaves you breathless! Granted the initial premise, the story unfolds with relentless inevitability, even though no next-step is predictable. Yet it is, in part and in whole, entirely character-driven. Don't bother reading the names of the cast beforehand, you probably won't recognize any of them. But you'll want to watch the credits roll through to the very end, because those names will be in lights again soon. Do see this one! (9/30/01)