One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (1975) review [Revisited]

(9/10)

     One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest is a fantastic film by itself with brilliant performances, script, and film-making. However, in comparison to its source material, it falls a tad flat and unreliable, We lose so many key elements of the theme in the onscreen transition, but gain clarification for the more underlying ones.

PLOT: Randall P. McMurphy (Jack Nicholson) is transferred from a prison work farm to a mental institution after the authorities determine him potentially insane. The asylum, led by the all-powerful Nurse Ratched (Louise Fletcher), takes McMurphy in for an observation period in which he decides to attempt to turn everything upside down and take over. From day one in the asylum, McMurphy tries to manipulate the patients and get under the Nurse's skin. McMurphy tries to prove his insanity, by doing things such as imagining the World Series and teaching the deaf Chief Bromden (Will Sampson) to play basketball. From here on, it's a straight battle between McMurphy and the Nurse as well as between thought control and mental liberation. The plot, just as in the novel, is excellently crafted and well-thought out. The film adds its own twists on a few things, neglecting ones from the book, but nevertheless clarifying a few things the audience may have missed in reading the novel.

ACTING: All of the performances in this film are brilliant and well-worthy of their recognition. The great Jack Nicholson acts in what may be his best role in comparison to The Shining in the eighties. Through his portrayal, the audience is led to believe that no one could have done it any better. Nobody could have been as loud, proud and insane in such a way as he was in this film. Louise Fletcher also did a fantastic job, responding to Nicholson's character accurately as possible. She probably fits the novel's portrayal of her more accurately than Nicholson as McMurphy. Other key performances in this film would include early roles from acting legends Christopher Lloyd as tough-guy Taber and Danny DeVito as the disconnected Martini. Other great performances include Scatman Crothers as nurse's aide Turkle, Syndey Lassick as anxious Charlie Cheswick, William Redfield as the wise Mr. Harding, Will Sampson as Chief Bromden, and (introducing) Brad Dourif as Billy Bibbit. This film for the most part felt like a huge character study with all of these personalities poured into a huge melting pot for the audience to kind of take in and study. Learning how each character reacts is probably the best part of the film.

SCORE: The score was also professionally done by master composer, Jack Nitzsche. The main theme occurring at the beginning and the end of the film is probably one of the most, unique, fitting, and memorable pieces of composition ever made for film. It's truly a beautiful piece, as is the rest of the score by Nitzsche.

OTHER CONTENT: This film can definitely stand on its own without the novel, for the two sources almost feel like very different pieces of artwork when compared. So much is lost in the transition from page-to-film, such as the Chief's all-seeing narration, some of the novel's risky signals of theme, and ample explanation for certain key events in the plot. However, the film gains clarification for irony's role in the source and how each of these crazy characters function under the Nurse's rule. One can clearly see the transition within the patients and how the ones actually committed and not voluntary seem to be the most sane. Both the film and the novel are equally as powerful, but the novel just has so much to offer in substance. The film just makes up for it in form.

     One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest is as strong a film as it was a novel. Each has its own set of similarities and differences, but each works with what it sets up excellently. Through every character, word, and shot of this film, we are introduced to a story that means so much more than is revealed. In the transition, one could even say pertaining to both compositions, one flew east and one flew west. But indeed, one definitely flew over the cuckoo's nest.

Terror of Mechagodzilla (1975) review

(4/10)

   Standing as a grave improvement over Godzilla's Revenge, this movie has a lot more potential to be a great monster movie. However, the movie focuses too much on an overly-preposterous plot and less on the monsters that made the franchise famous, also with a handful of awkward, unnecessary faults in plot execution.

PLOT: After Godzilla destroys Mechagodzilla once more, a group of scientists scavenge the ocean to find all of his scattered parts and discover the dinosaur, Titanosaurus, who's control was harbored by traitorous scientist, Prof. Mafune (Akihiko Hirata), and his cyborg daughter, Katsura (Tomoko Ai). As it turns out, these scientists are actually aliens seeking revenge on Godzilla and the human race, and they're planning on rebuilding Mechagodzilla to ensure dominance over Tokyo. Unless Godzilla steps in and beats the two opposing monsters, Tokyo may be doomed to alien domination. The plot is truly quite preposterous. The writers couldn't leave the plot with the threat of Titanosaurus and Mechagodzilla but had to include a nonsensical story for alien domination. The plot, though preposterous, had some potential. However, the possible potential was squandered on too little of the monsters on camera and too much of the drama with the aliens. Katsura, and Prof. Mafune. It makes no sense to focus on a nonsensical plot when one could focus on the action.

ACTING: The performances in this movie are actually pretty okay. Even the American voice dubs are pretty good and well-matched. Unlike Godzilla's Revenge, the American voices matched up to the Japanese mouth movements more accurately and didn't sound so overdramatic. The best performances and voice dubs come from Tomoko Ai as Katsura and Akihiko Hirata as Prof. Mafune; they didn't do too bad. The acting isn't the saving grace of the movie, but it makes it a bit easier to watch.

SCORE: The score in this movie isn't anything special. You get a few dramatic, action themes but nothing unique.

EFFECTS: The effects in this movie were a tad cheesy at times, but suited the movie overall. The flame effects, monster costumes, and blood effects were pretty cool for your basic Godzilla film, only if that's all you tend to expect.

OTHER CONTENT: This Godzilla movie had the potential to become something great but wasted away on the plot and various awkward quirks. Some scenes were awkward, unnecessary, and unintentionally funny. If not for these fatal flaws, this would be a great Godzilla movie, especially with the always-entertaining monster fights that brought in and closed out the movie.

   All this movie ended up being was wasted potential. The performances were good, the monster fights were entertaining, and the concept was excellent, but they over-exaggerated the plot and left out the pieces to making the movie most worthwhile.

Godzilla's Revenge (1971) review

(3/10)

   As with most older Godzilla movies, this addition to the franchise is not to be taken seriously. The plot twists, voice dubs, and overall motion of the movie is cheesy and laughably bad. However, with the older Godzilla movies, that is only to be expected. The traditional monster effects and monster fights were pretty entertaining to watch at the least.

PLOT: Young schoolboy Ichiro (Tomonori Yazaki) has been dealing with a couple pressing struggles in his school life, such as his parents always being busy and bullies teasing him on his way home from school. Ichiro also idolizes the monsters on Monster Island, including the great Godzilla. After a rough day at school, Ichiro takes a nap in his older friend's, toymaker Inami (Eisei Amamoto), office. While asleep, Ichiro fantasizes himself on Monster Island seeing the many monsters fight each other. He also meets in his dream Godzilla's son, Minilla, who is also dealing with bully troubles from the other monsters and he can't quite get brave enough to face them. Ichiro has these dreams constantly, encouraging him to be brave, and with the local bank robberies going on, that may be just what he needs to avoid danger. The plot is very juvenile, but if done right, might have been fun to work with. However, the execution of the plot was very poor, with awkward dialogue, the traditional, over-dramatized fight scenes, and unnecessary plot twists that make very little sense. Something could have been made out of this, but instead, it leaves its entertainment factor up to laughter.

ACTING: The performances in this movie, both physical performances and the voice dubs, were quite terrible. With unrealistic motions, unfitting voice dubs, and annoying performing vocals, the performances literally create the stereotype of the old Godzilla movies to be off-sync. There was no saving this section of the movie.

SCORE: The score, though unfitting, was actually quite nostalgic. It gave one the feeling of watching an old monster movie, which this was. I didn't have too much of a problem with the soundtrack/score.

EFFECTS: The special effects were cheesy, as usual, but not too awful. If you like Godzilla and its lore, then it would be satisfying to see all of the many monsters, no matter how unrealistic or cheesy the costumes may look. I thought the all of the monster effects were actually pretty good except for the costume for Minilla. Godzilla's son should have looked more threatening and a little less like a worn-out Barney costume. If Minilla wouldn't have been so lazily done, I would be completely satisfied with the visual effects category.

OTHER CONTENT: Everything about this movie proved that the generic Godzilla movie has bad voice-overs and cheap costumes. However, the one thing that inspired a bit of pure entertainment value from this movie was the many monster fights not including Minilla. It's always fun to watch Godzilla beating up another clueless monster, usually brutally to a pulp. This movie is laughably bad and fun to watch only as ridicule. If you're a die-hard Godzilla fan, maybe this movie would fit you. Otherwise, prepare for a terrible treat.

   Most Godzilla movies are cheesy and only entertaining for a laugh. This movie is no exception. Awkward, juvenile and cheesy are just a few words to describe the feel of this movie. Though pretty terrible, I would rewatch this movie just to laugh or to mindlessly drool over the Godzilla fight scenes. My only source of real hate in this movie: Minilla.

The Great Gatsby (1974) review

(5/10)

   The classic novel has never seemed quite as shamed as I've seen it become in this sad attempt at a recreation. Even with the Luhrman version in mind, I have to say this failed to capture the magic the book gave and refuses to even acknowledge its presence. There were a few decently good scenes and performances in this movie, but they all fall like dominoes in succession with the rest of the movie's mediocrity, which tries so hard to succeed.

PLOT: Nick Carraway (Sam Waterston) lives in the western area of Long Island, referred to as West Egg due to the shape. Nick has a rich cousin on the eastern side of Long Island, referred to as East Egg, named Daisy (Mia Farrow), who's married to orderly man, Tom Buchanan (Bruce Dern). Nick also lives next door to one of the wealthiest gentleman on West Egg, Jay Gatsby (Robert Redford), whom Nick has never seen before. One day, Nick gets invited to one of Gatsby's wild parties where they finally meet. Through an anxious chain of events, Nick learns that Gatsby has had a crush on his cousin, Daisy, for years and wants to use Nick to meet her, having her cheat on Tom like Tom's cheating on her. Gatsby and Daisy hit it off eventually after they meet again, but good things never last, for a disturbing chain of events occurs in the end. The plot is excellent, as it is in the novel, but the execution is more than just sloppy. It's purely terrible. Not only does the director add scenes and remove important details from the source material, but he also tries to pass off the mistakes he adds as Fitzgerald's true writing. He smears blasphemy in the name of this great author.



ACTING: The performances in this movie are nearly hit-and-miss. There are a few really decent roles, but the majority of the performances in here were greatly miscast. Robert Redford was far from the right choice for Jay Gatsby. He performed the role with little to no emotion or interest added to it, as compared to his work in that of Jeremiah Johnson; Bruce Dern had this same problem as Tom Buchanan. Mia Farrow I also didn't think play the part of Daisy Buchanan very well. She played the part as a southern belle pretty well, but she overacted her role in general. The same was true of Karen Black who played as Myrtle, Tom's love interest. Sam Waterston actually did a decent job as Nick, but I don't find it as anything too memorable. The performances in here I seemed to enjoy most would be Lois Chiles as Jordan Baker and Roberts Blossom as Mr. Gatz, These two showed a fair amount of emotion and suitability for their parts. I actually wished Blossom would've had a bigger part in the movie, for he gave an effective performance.

SCORE: The score in here, aside from the show music used in the parties to show the era of time, was purely cheesy. The conductor of the score seemed to try so hard to make the themes sound nice and memorable and intense, but they didn't even enhance the scene. If anything, they made the movie seem very cheesy and of cheaper taste. I couldn't stand the score.

EDITING/CAMERA: The editing in this movie feels so much cheaper than it intends to be. The fades from scene to scene at times are greatly delayed and sloppy, but seemed as if they were trying to reveal some kind of inner meaning. The camerwork itself is greatly overdone and shaky. The close-ups are too close and the positions are too far off.



MISC. THOUGHTS: This movie adaptation of the famed novel by Fitzgerald falls flat on its face. It attempts to be a great film adaption of the book, but doesn't pull of the right moves to make it there. Leaving out so many important details and changing them to suit the director's wishes just shows lazy film-making, unless you attempt to do what Kubrick did with The Shining in transforming the movie into something way more than it was intended to be. However, there were some scenes in the movie that I even have to admit were done excellently, such as that of Gatsby's death scene at the pool. Everything in that scene was shot just ominously right that it actually started to come off as a great cinema moment. The flaws this movie has also almost make it the one thing Gatsby doesn't need to be: bland. Aside from the extreme flaws, this movie just succumbs into being a bland attempt at overall film-making.

   This Gatsby is not so great. This is by far not the film version the novel deserves. The execution is all messed up due to subtraction and addition of details, the performances are all miscast or overdone, the score is cheesy, the editing is terrible, and the whole thing just seems badly bland. However, there were a few shining stars and a few excellently done scenes that show the director had at least some kind of comprehension of what he was talking about.

Star Wars IV: A New Hope (1977) review

(9/10)

This really great start to the beloved and ever-famous franchise is actually a very exciting, interesting, and well-crafted sci-fi film with a lot of interesting perks to it.

PLOT:A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away, a great war was going on between the all-powerful Imperial empire and a group of rebels bent on keeping their freedom. Princess Leia (Carrie Fisher) of Aalderon escapes to the Death Star, a great space station that can destroy planets whole, to stand up for the rebel forces. Leading this station is the evil Sith lord, Darth Vader (David Prowse/James Earl Jones). Leia manages to send out a cry for help and the space station's blueprints within droid R2-D2 (Kenny Baker). Accompanied by his counterpart, C-3P0 (Anthony Daniels), the two escape to sandy planet Tatooine where they are captured then bought by young Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill) and his family. While cleaning the droids, Luke finds Leia's cry for help to old Jedi Obi-Wan Kenobi, a.k.a. old Ben Kenobi (Alec Guinness). After the Imperial forces land and slaughter Luke's family, Luke decides to join Ben and become a Jedi warrior like his father was. In looking for a transport, the two stumble upon in-debt Han Solo (Harrison Ford) and his friend, the Chewbacca (Peter Mayhew). In the great ship Millennium Falcon, the group head out on a mission to rescue the princess, protect the rebels, and crush the empire. It's an excellent plot executed greatly.



ACTING:The acting in this film was very top-notch. The best performances had to be mainly from James Earl Jones as the voice of Darth Vader, Mark Hamill as Luke Skywalker, Harrison Ford as Han Solo, Alec Guinness as Ben Kenobi, and Anthony Daniels as C-3P0. Every performance in the film is excellent, but these are the few that really convinced me. David Prowse also played a good job as the suit stand-in for Darth Vader. Aside from these I just mentioned previously, Kenny Baker as R2-D2, Carrie Fisher as Princess Leia, and Peter Cushing as Grand Moff Tarkin were also pretty good.

SCORE:The score in here is excellently done by the great John Williams. The themes in this film score have become well known, memorable, and very greatly composed, from the main title to Mos Eisley to the end title. I really enjoyed Williams' compositions in this film.

EFFECTS:The effects in this film (aside from the extras added in the trilogy edition) were really great for their time. The costumes, droids, and creatures all looked fairly real and creatively new.The original Star Wars effects were excellently done. for the time, from saber to blaster, and were more authentic then the added effects. The effects added in the trilogy edition were pretty cool, but threw me off. It didn't feel as original. Nevertheless, I still enjoyed the effects.



OTHER CONTENT:This sci-fi classic is more than just a blockbuster sci-fi flick with loads of new and creative action; it's also an excellent story with thought-out twists and turns and great performances. I loved almost every part about this film except for the interruption by the unoriginal trilogy scenes. I enjoyed watching them, but they didn't go with the flow of the original film. I prefer the authenticity of the original. Either way, this is a wonderfully crafted sci-fi.

OVERALL,an awesome sci-fi with an excellent plot, top-notch acting, excellent score, really great effects, a lot of action, an excellent story, and great performances all around, but the trilogy edition interrupts the authentic feel of the original's flow.

Carrie (1976) review

(9/10)

This disturbing adaption of the popular Stephen King novel is a frightening and meaningful horror film under the direction of the great Brian De Palma. However, I believe the film needed a bit more back story than it had.

PLOT:Carrie (Sissy Spacek) is a young 17-year-old girl abused by the girls at school and her mother (Piper Laurie), who's an over-religious freak. After getting all of the other girls who bullied her in trouble, one of the girls convinces hotshot Tommy Ross (William Katt) to take Carrie to prom with no good intentions in mind. Meanwhile, Carrie has discovered she has telekinesis, or the ability to move and use things with her mind. Combining Carrie's telekinesis and whatever may happen at the prom, we know this won't end well. It's a great plot executed very well.



ACTING:The performances in this film were excellent. Sissy Spacek did a brilliant job of playing the over-abused teen Carrie White. I believe she did great honor to the role. Piper Laurie also did a great job of playing the over-religious mother, Margaret White. There really wasn't a bad performance in the film, for the cast was nearly all-star. The performances I would like to mention would be William Katt as Tommy Ross, John Travolta as Billy Nolan, Amy Irving as Sue Snell, Nancy Allen as Chris Hargensen, and P. J. Soles as Norma.

SCORE:The score in this film is pretty good and gets the job done right, moving from emotion to emotion well.



OTHER CONTENT:This film was a really good horror with a great message of anti-bullying in it. I appreciated the message and thought the plot execution set everything up well. This film may have a positive message, but it also, however, is pretty disturbing. From the panic in the opening scenes to the climax at prom, this film is loaded with disturbingly scary imagery, which makes a great horror film. I also enjoyed the way De Palma directed this film, adding in all the disturbances and scares nicely. The only problem I seemed to have with the film is that I felt there was too little character development as I felt was needed. We know Carrie's bullied, we know her mother's a religious freak, and we know Carrie's well known as an outcast with a bad mother. However, we don't have as much character development to back that up. I'm sure the novel build up more than this, but overall, this film seemed to be a bit underdeveloped in characterization.

OVERALL,it's an awesome horror film with a great plot, excellent performances, pretty good score, a great anti-bullying message, a lot of disturbing scenes, and enjoyable direction by Brian De Palma, but I felt a little more character development was necessary.

Halloween (1978) review

(9/10)

This horror classic is still full of suspense and creepy as ever, laying down a landmark for modern slasher films, but does it hold through the test of time?

PLOT:In Haddonfield, IL on Halloween 1963, young Michael Myers stabs his older sister to death for no apparent reason. Years later as an adult, Michael (Tony Moran) breaks out of the mental institution that has held him up for years on none other than Halloween night. From there he begins slaughtering unsuspecting teens, mainly targeting unwary young Laurie (Jamie Lee Curtis). There's only one true person bent on going after Michael to stop him, and that is his psychiatrist, Dr. Loomis (Donald Pleasence). Will Myers be contained this Halloween night? It's a good plot executed very well.



ACTING:The performances in this film were very great. Jamie Lee Curtis played a very convincing role as Laurie. For her first film, she really became the part. I find her to be the best performance in the film, along with the great Donald Pleasence as Dr. Loomis. Both were really great in their parts. There really wasn't a bad performance in the bunch. The other performances I'd like to mention would be Nancy Loomis as Annie, P.J. Soles as Lynda, and Sandy Johnson as Judith Myers.

SCORE:The score in here is one of the most memorable and iconic things about the film. John Carpenter really did a great job at creating a unique and creepy theme. It's beautiful and haunting yet frightening and simple all the same time. I really enjoyed it.



OTHER CONTENT:This film is a really great slasher horror film. The film is packed with suspense, superb direction, a smart script, and a lot of creepy moments. I really enjoyed the metaphor of comparing Michael to almost that of fear itself. It's really creepy and cool. This film is also a really good film to watch around Halloween season, for not just the title but the atmosphere overall. However, I have a small problem with the film that most might find disagreeable. The film was packed with many well-directed, creepy moments, but I don't believe the film is as scary now as it was back then. It just doesn't scare me. The film overall is packed with a huge release of suspense, a bunch of creepy atmosphere, and great direction, but I just don't find it truly scary.

OVERALL,an awesome horror film with a very well executed plot, very great performances, memorable and iconic score, a lot of suspense, superb direction, a smart script, a bunch of creepy moments, a Halloween atmosphere, and a cool metaphor, but it's not as scary today as it was then arguably.

The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (1974) review

(10/10)

This original horror classic tops almost all horror films I've seen to date. The emotions captured in this film are amazingly shown with amazing performances and visionary horror direction by Tobe Hooper.

PLOT:A group of friends, including brother and sister Sally (Marilyn Burns) and Franklin (Paul A. Partain), go on a road trip through Texas to visit Sally and Franklin's deceased grandfather's old house. However, weird and disturbing things start happening, including picking up a freaky hitchhiker that looks a lot like Dracula (Edwin Neal). Things get even stranger, especially with the news of graves being robbed and "artwork" of decomposing bodies is being made close by. After their encounter with the strange hitchhiker, the group stop at the house for a while and spot another house out in the distance, which is believed to have gasoline for their van. Upon visiting the house, however, the group finds that the residents aren't your typical neighbors, specifically a psychotic killer brandishing a chainsaw (Gunner Hansen). Now the group must get away or fall victim to the chainsaw. It's a great horror plot executed brilliantly.



ACTING:The acting in this film is excellent. I could see the fear and insanity in each person's eyes during the horrific scenes. The best performances I could mention would be Marilyn Burns as Sally and Gunner Hansen as Leatherface, or the chainsaw killer. I could see perfect horror and insanity in her eyes and actions that it seemed real. Hansen's iconic performance of  Leatherface was just brutal and frightening with beauty in its own ways. Every performance was great because emotion and insanity itself was captured perfectly. The other performances I'd like to mention would be Allen Danziger as Jerry, Paul A. Partain as Franklin, William Vail as Kirk, Teri McMinn as Pam, and Edwin Neal as the hitchhiker.

SCORE:There wasn't much background score in the film except for the music on the radio, which was mainly southern-type. The one memorable theme with the scraping sound effect, however, was very creepy and good in its minimalism. The sound effects worked above everything else because they were insane.

EFFECTS:The effects here were really good for being low-budget in the seventies. The make-up and prop effects for Leatherface and the house were very creepy and well done. The blood effects for the kills and cuts we see are also quite realistic in itself, while not being too brutal.



OTHER CONTENT:This horror film is one of the king's of all horror films. This film captures the feeling of insanity above anything. For more than a couple scenes in the film, I was actually scared due to the scary silences and horrific portrayals of the characters. It takes a lot for a film to really scare me, and this one did just that. I was very convinced. Also, this film is shot so artfully for a horror film, even with some of its flaws. Hooper knew what he was doing going into this boat by angling the camera just right from the beginning to the end. Every thing I believe Hooper wanted to capture was truly captured. Even all of the flaws this film may have make it even better.

OVERALL,an epic horror film with a brilliantly-executed plot, excellent acting, creepy sound-effect score, well done effects, a thundering feeling of insanity that it even scared me, and artful capturing of the film itself.

The Wicker Man (1973) review

(9/10)

This psychological horror was a very intellectual scare through the brain of my faith, acted through very well and executed with brilliant precision.

PLOT:Sgt. Neil Howie (Edward Woodward) comes to an island in Scotland named Summerisle to search for a missing young girl named Rowan Morrison. Neil is a very pious man and doesn't tend to be swayed easily by anything, so when he starts to find out about the bizarre religious practices of this island's residents, he sticks to his Christianity with suspicion of fowl play in the disappearance of Rowan. Visiting with the leader, Lord Summerisle (Christopher Lee), Neil finds out the island is populated by pagans with old ways that could be deadly to him and the missing girl. It's a brilliant plot executed excellently.



ACTING:The acting in this film is excellent as well, with very convincing and serious parts played by Edward Woodward and Christopher Lee as Sgt. Neil and Lord Summerisle, as well as a well done performance by Britt Ekland as Willow, the landlord's daughter. Every performance in this film was done in greatness by the actors and actresses. The other shiners would have to be Dian Cilento as Miss Rose, Irene Summers as May Morrison, and Ingrid Pitt as the librarian, as well as others.

SCORE:The score in here is beautiful and very well done by Magnet and arranged by Paul Giovanni. The music itself was very folk-like and the sung lyrics sounded beautiful and rather Celtic altogether. I really loved the soundtrack, as it was actually very full of song.



OTHER CONTENT:This film is a horror for the intellectuals who believe deeply in God and Christianity, as it involves a martyr being put forth as a possible sacrifice in a pagan-ruled area. I found the film not only a psychologically scary treat but also very well shot with beauty in the cinematography. Even the most crude shots in the film were shot with such precision that it seemed attractive to the eye, from Willow's dance to the burning of the wicker man itself. I felt this was a film that gave the audience something to think about in terms of religion, whether it be a test of faith or scare in itself. The film itself wasn't too scary, but it messed with your mind enough to inspire a shock and come-to-realism in what you are actually watching.

OVERALL,an awesome psychological horror with a brilliant plot, excellent acting, beautiful score, an intellectual scare of a treat, beauty in cinematography, and scares for believers, but the scares are more psychological than easy to spot, so it's thought process and disturbing thoughts aren't for everyone.

Cheech and Chong's Up In Smoke (1978) review

(5/10)

This smoked-out comedy is an unintelligible blast for stoners and simple-minded audiences everywhere, with simple and goofy laughs as well as glory to the famous herb.

PLOT:Cheech Marin and Tommy Chong both meet together in this movie for a road trip of stoned-out proportions. The duo go on a trip across the states, smoking pot and looking for instances to score big dope, including stopping at a rock concert, drifting in and out of drug busts, and finding a whole van made of marijuana. It's a pretty stupid plot executed as well as it could be.



ACTING:The acting in here is okay. For the one-dimensional scripts the actors were given, they did a decent job. Cheech Marin and Tommy Chong both played a pretty decent part as the smoked-out main characters of the movie, playing off each other's dialogue fairly well with simple humor. Everyone else wasn't really that special except for maybe a couple of extras that were funny. Tom Skerritt was pretty good as Strawberry.

SCORE:The score was mainly composed of original songs by the duo themselves about meaningless rebellion and marijuana itself. It wasn't really important.



OTHER CONTENT:This movie was really just a call to all stoners out there to glorify good old Mary Jane itself and the feelings it gives. I didn't really care much about the movie myself, but there were a few scenes I found funny due to the simple, silly slapstick. This movie isn't going to be one of your favorites if you don't smoke weed or find its effects funny.

OVERALL,a neutral drug movie with a bad plot, okay acting, unimportant score, some simple slapstick jokes, and a lot of glory to marijuana, oblivious if you like it or not.

Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory (1971) review

(9/10)

This classic film favorite is a unique fantasy loved by families everywhere just because this film has what it takes to be a classic. However, there are a few scenes that just don't seem to fit into place with the rest of the film.

PLOT:Willy Wonka (Gene Wilder) is the mysterious and proud owner of the Wonka Candies Chocolate Factory. His chocolate has become loved by kids and families everywhere, seeming to be magic in a wrapper. One day, Mr. Wonka announces that he's holding a contest for five lucky people to get a tour of the factory. However, the only way to get into the factory is by winning one of five golden tickets randomly placed inside any of millions of Wonka bars. One specific, good-spirited child named Charlie Bucket (Peter Ostrum) has his eyes on one. His family is terribly poor and they barely have enough to keep going. However, Charlie keeps on pressing. As golden tickets are being found around the globe, Charlie keeps trying. Will Charlie pick up a ticket? If he does, will he be able to get past the raving wackiness of Mr. Wonka himself. It's a great plot executed brilliantly.



ACTING:The acting in this film is very good. Gene Wilder plays an excellent part as the eccentric and sarcastic factory owner, Willy Wonka. He played the role in a very entertaining and unique way. One good thing about this film is that the child actors aren't half bad either. They actually match their roles very well, especially good-natured Charlie Bucket, played by Peter Ostrum. The other shiners would be Jack Albertson as Grandpa Joe, Julie Dawn Cole as Veruca Salt, Roy Kinnear as Mr. Salt, Denise Nickerson as Violet Beauregarde, Leonard Stone as Mr. Beauregarde, Paris Themmen as Mike Teevee, Dodo Denney as Mrs. Teevee, Diana Sowle as Mrs. Bucket, and Gunter Meisner as Otto Slugworth.

SCORE:The score in this film is very uplifting and catchy. The songs in here are very inspired and fun, from the touching ballad of "Pure Imagination" to the well-known tune of the "Oompa Loompa" songs. The soundtrack was just very fun.

EFFECTS:The effects in this film are very fun and well done. The visual effects used for most of the technology in the factory were dated, but still very cool. The make-up effects are also pretty memorable.



OTHER CONTENT:This film has a lot of aspects to it that make up a great film. The musical numbers are fun and catchy, the acting and mood for most of the film is light and uplifting, the comedy behind Mr. Wonka and the situations is still pretty funny today, and the fantasy behind it is still pretty wonderful. However, there were a few scenes in the film that just didn't fit in with the rest. For example, the scene with the paddle boat on the chocolate river. A lot of creepy stuff was going on at that time and could scare some younger audiences and even creep out some older audiences. I love the scene, but compared to the rest of the film, it just doesn't fit in, and it almost turns the film into a cult classic kind of thing. Aside from the couple abrupt tonal shifts, the film was pretty awesome.

OVERALL,an awesome fantasy film with a brilliantly-done plot, very good acting, fun and catchy score, cool and memorable effects, fun musical numbers, uplifting moods, funny moments, and wonderful fantasy, but there are a few odd moments that just don't seem to fit in with the film.

Dawn of the Dead (1978) review

(9/10)

This classic zombie film has enough gore, story, political undertone, and creeps to satisfy every horror film fan and most movie-goers in general. Romero knew what he was doing around the time this was made, but does it stand the test of time?

PLOT:Taking place not too long after "Night of the Living Dead", this film puts us into the chaos of the media and general public dealing with the zombie apocalypse. Our main characters here are two National Guard troops who were sent to clean out any infestation, Peter (Ken Foree) and Roger (Scott Reiniger), and two members of the crew at a local TV station, Stephen (Davide Emge) and girlfriend Frances (Gaylen Ross). These four snitch a helicopter and head for the country, but decide to not to after coming in contact with a few ghouls around that area. The eventually stumble upon a shopping mall infested with the creeps to hide out in, but life isn't easy living on the higher floor's deep recesses. Not to mention a biker gang find out about them and makes life even harder for the four of them. It's a good plot executed greatly.



ACTING:The acting in this film is really good. Ken Foree and Scott Reiniger are really great as the two National Guard officers, as are David Emge and Gaylen Ross as the "happy" couple. The four really added personality to their roles. There really wasn't a bad performance in the bunch. The zombies were pretty well played too.
SCORE:The soundtrack in here is brilliant and composed by one of the kings of horror score, Dario Argento and his band, Goblin. The score was very unique and pretty creepy at times. I really liked it.

EFFECTS:The effects in here were very gory and somewhat realistic for the time period. For the time period, the zombies looked fairly realistic and very creepy. The blood and gore effects are still very well done and rather brutal as ever.



OTHER CONTENT:This film was more than just your basic zombie film. There was enough action, drama, and comedy for it to have been generally accepted among more than just one audience. This film actually deserves a lot more respect than it gets by the general public. The film is also fairly realistic to how life might be and how the world might react if a zombie apocalypse really broke out. However, a lot of the scares and basic make-up effects don't stand the test of time; they aren't scary compared to today's standards. There are a good bit of scares that still leave a lasting impression on the audience, but for the most part, they're really dated. I was hardly scared by this film at all, but it is still a good film, especially for its time.

OVERALL,an awesome zombie film with a great plot, really good acting, brilliant score, very well done gore effects, more genre possibilities besides the horror label, and realistic situations pertaining to any possible zombie apocalypse, but some of the scares and general make-up effects don't seem to stand up to the test of time.

Taxi Driver (1976) review

(9/10)

I had been putting off seeing this one for the longest time for absolutely no reason. Now, I'm glad I saw it and wondering why I put it off so long. It's a hard-hitting, smooth, and truthful film on the dark streets of the world.

PLOT:Travis Bickle (Robert De Niro) has just gotten a job as a taxi driver in the streets of New York. He's smooth, quiet, and hates most of the rabble of the streets. However, he meets a beautiful blonde working in office named Betsy (Cybill Shepherd) and falls in love. It doesn't last long, though, until he makes a big mistake and scares her way. No matter how much he tries to re-kindle things with her, she always turns him away, which forces him to snap. He then comes up with an idea to kill the candidate in office this girl is working for. Meanwhile, he's trying to help a 12-year-old prostitute named Iris (Jodie Foster) escape from her pimp, Sport (Harvey Keitel), and go back to her parents. It's a good plot executed greatly.



ACTING:The acting in here was very great. Robert De Niro did an excellent job of playing our lead, Travis Bickle. I think it was a very memorable performance, Another performance worthy of note is the young Jodie Foster as 12-year-old hooker, Iris. Even at this young age, she was a very talented actress. The other shiners would be Harvey Keitel as Sport, Cybill Shepherd as Betsy, Peter Boyle as Wizard and Martin Scorsese himself in a cameo as the weird, vengeful passenger.

SCORE:The score in here is very smooth and smoky sounding, like a crime mystery in a bar. It fits the mood of the film very well.

EFFECTS:The blood in here flows pretty freely for an action flick. There are a lot of kills, and blood to accompany. The blood effects in here look pretty realistic and detailed as gunshots are fired and knifes are used.



OTHER CONTENT:This film is a very interesting look at the decline of society today. The exaggerated realism of it all shocks you and puts the urban world into what I believe to be its place. The performances lead the plot through with great direction by the beloved Martin Scorsese. However, this film had a plot issue for me. Though the plot was very well thought-out, it wasn't completely solid. You couldn't sit down and tell me the plot without telling me all the twists in it first, like Dazed and Confused. It makes the film open to suprises, but a little complicated to follow for some.

OVERALL,an awesome film with a good plot, very great performances, smooth score, realistic blood effects, shocking realism, and great direction, but the plot wasn't completely solid

One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (1975) review

(10/10)

Have you ever watched a movie so brilliant that it brought tears to your eyes at the end? This is one of those films I'm speaking of. Jack Nicholson gives what might be his best performance in this brilliant film.

PLOT:Randall P. McMurphy (Jack Nicholson) was put in jail for charges of assault and statutory rape earlier in life. Now, he's being carried over the the local mental institution with assumptions that he's crazy. McMurphy plays it cool and says he's not, but they keep him for evaluation anyhow. While here, McMurphy bonds with the patients of the mental ward, including the deaf Chief (Will Sampson), the anxious Martini (Danny DeVito), the insulting Taber (Christopher Lloyd), and many more by doing many illegal things. However, being under rule and watch by the uptight Nurse Rached (Louise Fletcher), McMurphy must plan his schemes right and keep them convinced that he's crazy, whether he is or not. It's a good plot executed brilliantly.



ACTING:The acting in here was great. Jack Nicholson stole the lead as the insane Randall P. McMurphy. His acting in here got him an Academy Award and several others, and I believe that it was a great decision to choose him. The other shiners would be Will Sampson as Chief, Danny DeVito as Martini, Christopher Lloyd as Taber, Louise Fletcher as Nurse Ratched, Scatman Crothers as Turkle, Brad Douriff as Billy Bobbit, Sidney Lassick as Charlie Cheswick, William Redfield as Harding, and William Duell as Sefelt. Each performance was unique and expertly done.

SCORE:The score in here is great and done by the great Jack Nitzche. He does it so hauntingly and beautifully that it brings more emotion to the film.



OTHER CONTENT:This film was pretty brilliant. The visionistic approach in Nicholson's character inspired the whole film as well as an insightful look into the mental institutions of that time. The emotional impact this film contained packed such a hard punch that anyone who really watches the film will feel great delight in it. This film left me with an unforgettable feeling .

OVERALL,an epic film with a brilliant plot, great acting, haunting score, and a powerful emotional impact.

Santa Claus Is Comin' to Town (1970) review

(8/10)

This has always been my very favorite of the Rankin-Bass Christmas specials for its sentimentality and entertaining story.

PLOT:It's Christmastime again, and the children have started sending their letters to Santa. The local mailman (Fred Astaire) sees these letters every year and decides to tell the story of Santa Claus. Discovered by toy-making elves, Kris Kringle (Mickey Rooney) is raised with a determination to take the toys over the dangerous mountain, guarded by the evil Winter Warlock (Keenan Wynn), to deliver to the children of Sombertown. However, mayor Burgermeister (Paul H. Frees) has banned toys from the town due to an injury induced by one. Kris comes to town and learns that he has to distribute the toys in secret. This tale eventually develops into the complete backstory of Santa Claus. It's a good plot executed charmingly.



VOICES:The voices in here are decent for the most part. Mickey Rooney plays an awesome Santa Claus/Kris Kringle. Fred Astaire played a charming part as the narrator as well. The other shiners would be Keenan Wynn as the Winter Warlock, Paul H. Frees as Burgermeister Meisterburger, and Joan Gardener as Miss Jessica. The minor character voicing was the pretty sucky part of the voicing.

SCORE:The soundtrack of songs are pretty dated, but very fun to hear. Such original songs like "The First Toymakers to the King" and "Put One Foot in Front of the Other" are just catchy and fun altogether.

ANIMATION:In today's times, the animation would be pretty bad, but for the time it was made, the animation was pretty good. Even now it's still very nostalgic and unique. Everyone remembers it for how it is.



OTHER CONTENT:This Christmas special runs mainly off charm and cuteness, but it's also nostalgic, heart-warming, and full of good storytelling. This has the power to warm the heart of every Christmas-loving family that has seen it. However, the fact that it makes its base off of cuteness and charm doesn't make up for the missing holiday substance.

OVERALL,it's a great Christmas special with a good plot, decent voice acting, fun soundtrack, nostalgic animation, cuteness, charm, the power to warm a family's heart, and good storytelling, but the minor character voices are pretty bad and the fuel of the special can't make up for what it's missing.

The Exorcist: The Version You've Never Seen (2000) review

(9/10)

To cap off the Halloween season this year, I review one of the scariest horror films there has ever been. This has stood the test of time with abounding horror, brilliant performances, and great effects for the time.

PLOT:Chris MacNeil (Ellen Burstyn) and her daughter, Regan (Linda Blair), are currently living in a big city while Chris is acting in a movie, shot by the drunken director, Burke Dennings (Jack MacGowran). While there, strange things start happening in the MacNeil household, for Regan claims her bed has been shaking and has been swearing heavily like she has never before. The doctors say its a problem with her temporal lobe, but things only go from bad to worse as they try to treat her. After seeing sights such as her daughter growling, levitating, and even changing voices, Chris becomes convinced that her daughter is possessed. She has a tough time find a priest to help, but she eventually stumbles across faith-stricken Father Karras (Jason Miller) and professional exorcist, Father Merrin (Max von Sydow), who has also been on expeditions to Africa for experience. These two must get the demon out of Regan or die trying. It's a great plot executed brilliantly.



ACTING:The performances in here are top-notch. Linda Blair has to be one of the best child actors of all-time for pulling off Regan MacNeil, a possessed child, at only about 9 years old. Jason Miller and Max von Sydow also played a couple great parts as the priests, Father Karras and Merrin; they played off of each other very well and worked intensely. The other shining stars would have been Ellyn Burstyn as distressed Chris MacNeil, Jack MacGowran as drunken Burke Dennings, Lee J. Cobb as Lt. Winderman, Mercedes McCambridge as the demon voice, and Eileen Dietz as the demon's face.

SCORE:The score is creepy and very memorable. The theme song, "Tubular Bells" by Mike Oldfield, has become one of the most memorable horror film themes in history. The rest of the score was pretty good too, and done in part by Jack Nitzche.

EFFECTS:The effects for this film's time were phenomenal, and they still are. The effects in here are super realistic, which makes them all the more scary. The blood, make-up, vomit, bed-shaking, head-turning, and illusioned effects were very great and made everything scary as ever.



OTHER CONTENT:This is one of the best horror films I've ever seen. Along with its previous rises, it doesn't stray too far from the book, has great editing, and is shot to scare. I've read the book before, and after seeing this, I notice only a slight change in dialogue and detail. Otherwise, all is down right. The director, William Friedkin, did a great job editing this film just right, as to add the most effective scares; it's great cinematography. This film is shot to do nothing to its audience but scare, disturb, and unnerve. In its release, it succeeded greatly. Today, it still does. This is truly an iconic horror film. I also appreciate how much awesome bonus material is added in this version, which makes it even better and more accurate. However, the book had a bit more feeling put into its ending as compared to the film. I cried at the end of the book, but the film just got my nerves up. They both come close as ever, but the book has a smidge more feeling in it.

OVERALL,an awesome horror film with a brilliantly-executed plot, top-notch performances, creepy score, realistic effects, most accuracy to the book, great editing, the effect to scare, and plenty of added bonuses, but the book has a bit of a stronger ending than the film.

Magic (1978) review

(8/10)

This is probably the best performance you'll find of Anthony Hopkins before his "Silence of the Lambs" days. It's a very suspenseful tale.

PLOT:Corky (Anthony Hopkins) is a magician and card-trick master. After performing for the first time at a club, he bombs and is told by his mentor to get some charm. Ten years later, Corky's agent named Ben Greene a.k.a. The Postman (Burgess Meredith), brings an NBC talent scout down there to see his new act. Corky now performes his tricks with a little ventriloquist dummy named Fats (also voiced by Hopkins), and it hits with the NBC scout. However, Corky won't take his chance at fame because they demand for a medical exam, which he won't go through; he refuses to admit that there's anything wrong with him. He flees the city and takes refuge at his old school crush's place, Peggy Ann Snow (Ann-Margaret). Things start to get crazy when Fats starts to actually talk back to Corky, telling him things such as to kill. It's a decent plot executed fairly well.



ACTING:The performances in here are pretty great, I'd say. Anthony Hopkins plays a very great part as the schizo ventriloquist and magician, Corky. For a pre-Silence performance, I'd say he did very well. The other shiners would be Ann-Margaret as Peggy Ann Snow, Burgess Meredith as Ben Greene, E. J. Andre as Merlin, and Beverly Sanders as the laughing lady. I just don't think Ed Lauter did a good job as Duke, Peg's husband. His role seemed someone bland.

SCORE:The score was pretty freaky and distinct. I'd say it was pretty well done.

EFFECTS:The effects didn't really look too realistic, but they got the job done, and they got it done well enough.



OTHER CONTENT:This, of course, isn't the best horror movie out there, but it does have a few good aspects aside from it's great performances. This movie is filled with suspense from top to bottom. You could even cut it with a knife, I'd say. It was also very dark with its humor, and even very wry and clever. You could very well watch it for its humor as well as its suspense and scares. However, I could see that much more could have been done with this idea that was overlooked. This left it somewhat bland and unorganized, not to mention the editing was kind of sloppy. It's not the best horror movie, but it's worth a watch.

OVERALL,a great horror movie with a decent plot, great perfromances, freaky score, accomplishing yet unreal effects, lots of suspense, and clever dark humor, but so much more could have been done with the plot and editing.