FreeLook BookStore

Home

Our Picks Classics Club E•Zine About Us

COVER  • Contents  • < PREV Page  • NEXT Page >

The Flick Chick

The Flick Chick
Films with titles beginning with "G" and "H"

In the dark of the night , the Chick roams the vast wasteland! Far into the outermost reaches of the Box, where mere mortals hesitate to tread, the Chick, intrepid as ever, searches the night for gems, seeking to bring you film jewels buried in the desert . . . Yet there is hope!

Garden State

           Here's an interesting phenomenon: Take a fairly ordinary-looking young man, give us the illusion that we are understanding what moves him, what frightens him, what hurts him, what bewilders him, what makes him angry, and what he needs. And let us acquire this information mostly by staring at him while other things happen around him, no matter how wierd they are . . . and the Chick begins to feel interest, concern, sympathy and even affection for said young man. Wonder why that takes place. The Chick feels no corresponding emotion for the well-being and future welfare of similarly presentable young women, no matter how frightened, hurt, bewildered, angry, or needy they may be. Inexplicable, isn't it!
           Zach Braff wrote, directed, starred. Also starring Natalie Portman with Ian Holm. (10/04)

Gattaca

     This 1997 release is already a classic. Three or four cuts above standard SF fare in structure, stars, and acting, with the talents of Ethan Hawke, a luminous Uma Thurman, and Jude Law as (most believably) a man perfect in all ways except one, it also has a deeply moving premise: that we are all of us far more than we think we are. Even if you don't care for science fiction, see this for its suspense and emotional power.

Gladiator

      Russell Crowe, you'll remember, played the cig. company stoolie in The Insider, in a poignant, low-key performance. And of course he Oscared in L.A. Confidential, as he did in this role. He is Gladiator's appealingly buff protagonist. The contrast between the Insider role and the others shows his impressive versatility. As to the flick itself, I' m a sucker for the strong silent type — but history this ain't . And there's lots of blood, of course. Bit too much for my taste. Others complained of that, and said they disliked the slow-mo & blurry treatment of the violence during the battles. That aspect of it didn't bother me. I would think that kind of fighting might truly seem blurry & slow-mo, in retrospect.
      Overall I liked the film (saw both film and video) and found it moving each time I viewed it, but I must add some strongly felt criticisms of its historical accuracy. For one thing, the Emperor Commodus did not die in the arena. More importantly, Emperor Marcus Aurelius was one hellova warrior as well as one of the greatest philosophers in history. Here he comes off as a wimp. Pity. His own story is better that the film's plot. And, unlike the fictional Maximus, Marcus Aurelius really existed! The FreeLook Classics Club has a copy of Aurelius's book "Meditations" — Good stuff to read on an airplane (. . .especially during severe turbulence!) (8/00)

Godzilla XVIII

           Each of us has a right to his or her own taste, and I am a real fan of the most recent Godzilla — the one that starred Matthew Broderick. See, in all the other ones, the hero is a big-chinned beefcake guy. Now realistically . . . if a guy who comes on like Kirk Douglas tells you he's got the solution to your probs, you're going to believe him, right? And that fact lent a certain lack of versimilitude to earlier Godzilla vers. But when a cute, wimpy young innocent like MB tells you he knows how to kill the big, bad monster, the character actors have maybe the right to look dubious. So why did the flick-folks build in that problem? What can I say; did they make me casting director? They did not — The dummies!
           The scene I absolutely loved best was the one in which MB comes face to face with the Monster. Broderick looked so thrilled! Exactly the way a real enthusiast would have treated such a situation. And then, as he began to realize that this large and fascinating creature might represent some personal danger to himself . . . his expression of longing, mingled with a certain degree of anxiety. Rather like courtship — though the possible outcome of a courtship is usually less fatal. So anyway, when you see this one at the video store, consider its rental. As a Horrid-Monster-Flick, this one takes the scaly green cake.

Gone in 60 Seconds

      Ah, the Great Nicholas Cage; elegant, prolific, and accomplished. (And speaking of versatile!) I enjoyed this, even though I'm not a big car nut. Nor a car-thief nut. But I fault it for the same reason I fault Gladiator: it's immoral. I just hate rooting for the perps! True, our hero is a Good Guy. And the plot makes a case for his being Forced Into doing this Bad Stuff. But the whole time these flicks are decrying violence, they keep serving up bigger and bigger dollops of the very Bad Stuff they pretend to abhor. That's a no-no!

Gosford Park

     Altman has a winner here. It's not M*A*S*H, but it is certainly a charming, bitchy, three-dimensional and sometimes poignant film that keeps you scrambling to maintain mental contact with a broad cast of memorable characters. Everywhere you look, there's a star: Maggie Smith, Alan Bates, Jeremy Northam, Kristin Scott Thomas, Clive Owen, Kelly MacDonald, and the splendid Helen Mirren, to name a very few.
     One literary convention after another is overturned in this story. The English-country-house-murder frame, complete with a corpse that has been both stabbed and poisoned, appears at first to be no more than a clever setting — yet it is the crux of the film. The greatest no-no for the budding playwrite, that of carrying the plot by means of servants' dialogue, is brilliantly employed. And although there is hardly a single sympathetic character, the watcher must empathize with them all, both upstairs and down.
     No doubt this film will win prizes. Whether or not it will win the big-grosser gold medal is still in question. In the Sunday afternoon crowd who saw it with us, there were many gray heads and few young people. Maybe the teasers should be featuring the constant intrigues and dozens of sexual encounters that make this plot run. Hey guys — Sex and violence at Gosford Park! Come and get it! (1/13/02)

Hannibal

     Miss it! Tony Hopkins is just as ravishingly seductive as billed — but do you really want to go around rooting for a cannibal serial killer? (2/01)

Harry Potter and the Sorcerers Stone

      What's not to love about Harry Potter? The young actors are excellent and very good looking. The adult actors are warm (or appropriately cold) and involved, and they never put their tongues into their cheeks and descend into camp. The visuals are gorgeous. The story line deviates hardly an iota from the book. And once the feature appeared, the noisy theater audience became silent as stones themselves. (Except for occasional cheering!) What more could a Harry Potter fan ask? 11/16/01

Harry Potter II

      Harry is taller now. He looks a little more mature. He has learned a couple of new spells, and he's a little braver. Otherwise, he is still the same blue-eyed noble-hearted, innocent, earnest, honest, thoughtful, jock-enchanter he ever was. The good guys are still good-clean-through, and the bad guys are still distinctly ba-a-a-a-d. And there's the same gorgeous castle of a school, the same moving staircases, the same ghosts and talking pictures, even the same Dumbledor as before. (New Dumbledor next time, I guess.) And Harry wins at Quidditch again. Why are you not surprised?
     The flying car is new, however, and you get to meet Ron's family. Kenneth Branagh (as in THE Kenneth Branagh) does a comic guest bit that is worth the price of the ticket. Also Hermione's hair looks nicer, and at one point she throws herself into Harry's arms, at which, they both stop and look embarassed. The monster is a great monster, and the spiders made even the Chick's skin crawl. So overall, if you want more of the same, you'll be as wild about Harry II as you were about Harry I. Even if not, you may as well see it and enjoy the phenomenon. (HP fans will be glad to note that earlier spelling errors have been corrected, thanks to contributing writer, Amanda Meredith. Sorry HP fans; the Chick is fallable.) (11/15)

Hero
Subtitles

           It was extremely beautiful, what I saw of it. But the plot kept putting me to sleep, so I may have missed some ugly parts. (2/05)

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)

Hitch

           Some actors have that special Something.
           Example: All Cary Grant ever had to do was stand there onscreen and look dumbstruck — and the men and women in those dark popcorny seats just melted. He could do no wrong.
           Only Real Stars have that quality. It's a gift.
           And Will Smith has that gift. Whether he's hotdogging it after bug-eyed monsters or getting himself chased by mad assassins, he always has that big-time Meltdown Factor working for him. And Hitch is no exception. With only a moderately cute plot and one very good second banana, Smith turns this film into a great, long-running feature. Although we have to admit that it's easier to believe in the Hitch character as Mr. Supercool, rather than as his Stumblebum-in-love alter ego, we both melted, right on schedule. Cute film. See it if you've missed it.(3/05)

Hitchhiker's Guide

          Maybe you have to be an SF nut to like this film . . . but I don't think so. Maybe you have to be an afficianado of the books to be nuts about this film . . . but I don't think so. Maybe you have to have the sense of humor of a crazy person to have afficion for this film . . . I don't think that either. I think all you really need is to be a citizen of the Galaxy. Any Galaxy.
          Funny, wierd, mildly touching, innovative, exciting to the mind, dazzling to the eye, provocative to the imagination . . . bang-up laughs. Gotta see it! (5/05)

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)

The Hours

     It's hard to criticize a film that includes Meryl Streep, Nicole Kidman, Julianne Moore, West Wing's Allison Janney, and the great and spooky Ed Harris.
      This one was brilliantly acted throughout.
But . . .
Hmm . . .
Too brilliantly acted, somehow. One could never lose sight of the fact that the three-count'em-three leading ladies were Movie Stars, all Brilliantly Acting. Ed Harris did convince me that he was nuts. Allison Janney, what we saw of her, did look wonderful with curly hair. The Big Three really Showed their Stuff. But Virginia Woolf, that strange, splendid, cruel, tender, and tortured writer, never made it to the silver screen that day. Good movie, but I only saw Stars. (2/03)

House of Sand and Fog

       Brilliant performance by Ben Kingsley — he should walk away with an Academy Award. Jennifer Connelly was excellent. First-rate supporting performances. Wept like a baby. Beautiful film. Don't see if you are at all depressed.(12/03)

The Flick Chick Reviews New Films
More Film Reviews. Click the appropriate letter for films whose titles begin with . . .
A-B #  C-D #  E-F #  G-H #  I-J #  K-L #  M-N #  O-P #  Q-R #  S #  T-U #  V-W  #  X-Y-Z
A few choice foreign films (subtitles)


COVER  • Contents  • < PREV Page  • NEXT Page >


HOME  •  Search  •  Picks  •  Classic Club  •  Contact Us!  •  Top Of Page

Copyright © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 FreeLook BookStore.All rights reserved.Comments always welcome!