Movie & Video reviews

Ben Dugan

1/12/2006 - K2 (1992)

This film is based on a play of the same name. It is about the first two Americans to reach the summit of K2 in 1978. A Seattle attorney (Michael Biehn) is an arrogant, avid climber. He and his friend, a physics instructor (Matt Craven), often climb mountains together. They get a shot at joining an expedition to K2, the world’s second highest and most dangerous mountain. There is excessive drama associated with the details of the climb, and the movie does tend to get wrapped up in this, but still manages to move along at a good pace. It is a fairly well done action adventure film.

  Taylor (Biehn) and Harold (Craven) are replacement climbers who join an expedition to climb K2 in the Himalayas. Taylor is a climbing fanatic who has remained single in order to pursue his passion. In contrast, his climbing buddy is married and has a son. Time spent climbing is time spent away from his family. The climbers have issues with the porters and there is a well-done scene where two porters crossing a crevasse fall in and are dramatically saved by Harold. Taylor, on the other hand, burns the porters' money when they refuse to go any further and is considered to be a jerk. All of these events aside, the climbing continues.

  On the trek to the summit, the leader gets altitude sickness and must come down off the mountain. The others go higher, but after a few are killed by getting caught in a storm, it comes down to two climbers. These two climbers run into problems of their own but are able to find the other climbers' gear, which saves their lives. K2 is a fun-filled, exciting experience. The views of the Himalayas are spectacular. If you can get past the over-dramatized portions, it really is a gem of a film. I have known this movie for more than ten years and it is still one of my favorites.

Bridges of Madison County (1995)

  Director/star Clint Eastwood and screenwriter Richard LaGravanese transform Robert James Waller's book into a classic romantic tearjerker about mature people falling in love over a four-day period, and making some tough decisions that cost themselves happiness in order to make life better for those around them.

  It stars Meryl Streep as Francesca Johnson, an Italian war bride turned unhappy '60s Iowa farm wife, who falls deeply into romantic love with National Geographic photographer Robert Kincaid (Eastwood) while her husband and teenage children are away for four days at an out-of-state fair. She must then decide whether or not to abandon her family in order to spend the rest of her days with the love of her life.

  In the film the children are grown and they're going through their recently-deceased mother's papers and find her diary, which contains their mother's story of the affair. The story is really as simple as that, as the true joy of this film is not in surprising and witty plot machinations but in watching two mature and interesting people talk and relate to each other in a realistic manner. Everything in this film is hauntingly memorable, from the amazing Streep's Oscar-nominated performance.

  The film is beautifully shot and stunningly edited by Eastwood regulars, Jack N. Green and Joel Cox, making the Iowa landscape and the title bridges vital characters in the film. In fact, Eastwood and company create an indelible sense of time and place; after viewing this film you may actually feel you've been transported to 1960s Winterset, Iowa. This has been labeled as a chick flick but it can be enjoyable for everyone.

The Bounty (1984)

  Mel Gibson and Anthony Hopkins give the performance of their careers in this film. The realism and accuracy of the Mutiny on the Bounty story is surreal.

  In 1778 Captain James Cook made the first landing in Hawaii with his ships Resolution and Discovery. He had visited Tahiti the summer before. He was killed in the Hawaiian Islands after he returned to repair a broken mast on his ship that had been damaged in a storm. The English had made the Hawaiians angry at them after the English stayed for a month and stocked their ships, taking all of the Hawaiians' food and resources. James Cook even ordered the removal of a sacred ceremonial fence for the ships' firewood. That did not go over well.

  When the English first arrived, they were greeted on the beaches by thousands of welcoming natives. When they returned after leaving, no one greeted them. Then they were ambushed on the beach by several hundred natives and Cook was stabbed in the back. Captain William Bligh was also on this voyage, serving as sailing master.

  The Bounty sailed with Lieutenant William Bligh in 1789 on a mission to Tahiti to obtain cheap breadfruit for their holdings in the West Indies. The lure of Tahiti became overwhelming for the crew, and when Bligh’s rigid enforcement of the rules became too much, the crew mutinied.

  Roger Donaldson (who also directed Thirteen Days) directs a sensational cast with brilliant acting. Mel Gibson, Sir Anthony Hopkins, Sir Laurence Olivier, Liam Neeson, and Daniel Day-Lewis turn in sensational performances. The script by Robert Bolt takes a revisionist tack through the well-charted waters of an oft-told tale. Sir Anthony plays Bligh as a hard-nosed imperialist explorer simply trying to get the job done in the time-honored manner: on the backs of the poor crew under his command. Christian supports the crew but obeys his commander and friend. Bligh pushes and pushes and finally the powder keg of anger explodes. This is also a remake of an earlier version starring Marlon Brando.

  The suspense in the film is tantalizing. The scene rounding cape Horn is intensely real and is one of the best “at sea” storm sequences I have ever seen. The music is by Vangelis, who also produced the score for Chariots of Fire, and is very well done. The cinematography is amazing and The Bounty is a film you’ll not soon forget; it's a DVD you’ll consider adding to your collection. Well worth buying and seeing more than once.

SHREK 2 (2004)

  Some sequels are better than the original and some sequels to not match up to the uniqueness and enjoyment of the original. This is the case with Shrek 2. It is in most ways like the first one but it tries too hard and comes up short. It is still enjoyable but does not meet the originality of the first one.

  Shrek's and Fiona's newfound happiness together is put to the test when Shrek's royal in-laws, the king and queen of Far Far Away, invite their daughter and her new husband home for a marriage celebration. The folks expect Prince Charming, of course, and are less than prepared for the ogre factor. The real Prince Charming is none too happy, either, and his mother, the glamorous Fairy Godmother, sets out to right the wrong caused by Shrek's unexpected rescue of Fiona. The king is a willing accomplice, even going so far as to contract a hit on Shrek with the renowned feline assassin Puss in Boots (Antonio Banderas). In order to keep Fiona, Shrek makes the ultimate sacrifice, turning himself into a handsome man, but the Fairy Godmother thwarts him at every turn. Even with the help of his friends from back home in the swamp, it looks like the honeymoon - and marriage itself - is over. Everything works out for our lovable hero and all's well that ends well.

  This film is enjoyable and is recommended for all. It is not as good as the first film but is still excellent. The new Puss in Boots character really adds to this movie. Recommended. Good but not great.

Enemy at the Gates

Review by Travis Lavan 

  Set against the backdrop of the German invasion of Stalingrad in 1942, Enemy at the Gates would seem to have great promise as - if nothing else - a thrilling war drama. The Battle of Stalingrad was one of the bloodiest engagements of World War II; it more or less represented the Red Army's last stand against Hitler's relentless onslaught.

  The loss of Stalingrad would mean the collapse of the Soviet Union and the elimination of one front in Hitler’s push for world domination, which would threaten to make his Nazis unstoppable. By winter of 1942 the Russians were on the brink of defeat - starving, scrounging weapons and ammo from the bodies of the fallen, and morale was at an all time low.

  The Red Army needed a hero, and this they found in the person of a poor shepherd boy named Vassili Zaitsev (Jude Law). Zaitsev was a sniper, and there were few other battles in history in which the role of the sniper was as prominent as the Battle of Stalingrad. The Germans had captured most of the city, while their artillery and aerial bombardment simultaneously reduced it to rubble. Hitler's attack was brutal and pitiless; he wanted the Russians to capitulate, even if it meant the destruction of their entire civilization to get it. Both sides fought in the ruins like rats and it wasn't long before the most brutal urban combat of the war elevated the sniper to the top of the food chain.

  Soon, Zaitsev had racked up a hundred kills and had become a legend amongst the rank and file of the Red Army and more importantly, the Russian people. There was hope again, and the Russians fought with renewed vigor.

  Then (according to legend – up to this point it is actually a true story), the Nazis sent their greatest sniper to Stalingrad with explicit orders to find and terminate Zaitsev. This man, known only to history as 'Major Konig', proceeded to engage Zaitsev in a cat-and-mouse battle of wits in the ruins of Stalingrad. Spurred on by his love of country - and for fellow officer Tania Charnova (Rachel Weisz) - Zaitsev bravely meets his destiny.

  There's evidence Konig never existed and although Zaitsev was clearly a true war hero, the legend of his battle with Konig may have been a fabrication of Soviet propaganda. No one will probably ever know for sure, but it makes such a great story it is hard not to want to believe it, and the movie (as well as Jude Law's own performance) actually does do a great job of making you believe in Vassili.

  But the movie has its flaws - a love story between Zaitsev and Charnova is wildly exaggerated from its real life version and is forced into the film like a square peg into a round hole. In my opinion all it serves to do is drag the story down the way you would be if you tried to swim across Lake Michigan in a Santa Claus costume.

  I'm not unaware of the fact that to Hollywood, we the movie-going audience apparently can't sit through a movie of any kind without the addition of an extraneous love subplot, whether the story needs it or not. So, is the population of this country so utterly starved for affection that we need it pumped into us like a drug every time we sit down to watch a movie?

  Maybe, maybe not. But trust me - it just doesn't work here; the juxtaposition of Russia's desperation and the adolescent lust Zaitsev and Charnova wallow in for much of the film ends up being unintentionally comical more than anything else.

  But giving in to the temptations of play-it-safe, focus group filmmaking happens all the time in Hollywood, and it can certainly be forgiven here. This film's main problem is that, like the critically acclaimed 1965 drama Dr. Zhivago, the viewer is forced to endure two hours of Russian people twittering to one another in haughty British accents as if they're just sharing a bowl of strawberries and cream at Wimbledon.

  If you think this isn't a big deal, then you obviously haven't tried to sit through it. Dr. Zhivago is a very good film that keeps me on the verge of laughter every time I see it because I can't get over the misplaced accents. You just haven't lived until you've heard British people pretending to be Russians trying to pronounce Russian names in English, but with a British accent.

  But as I said, Dr. Zhivago is at its heart a very good film and that does count for something.

  On the other hand, Enemy at the Gates is an extremely average film whose flaws are only magnified by such things as Bob Hoskins playing Nikita Khrushchev, pompously waddling in and out of scenes like a giant, angry penguin (not unlike the real Khrushchev), only to sound like a Cockney street punk on his way to deejay a midnight rave every time he opens his mouth.

  And don't get me started on Ron Perlman, whose every utterance almost had me rolling on the floor in stitches. They might as well have cast Wesley Snipes as a Russian officer; it wouldn't have been any less ludicrous.

  Worse still, director Jean-Jacques Annaud seems to have further coached his actors to deliver their lines with the overbearing bravado of the stage, often over-projecting themselves as if they needed to be seen in the dark and heard over a jackhammer. Sadly, this is with the notable exception of Ed Harris, a normally reliable actor - and one of my favorites - who delivers Major Konig's dialogue in some sort of incoherent, disoriented haze as though he's not sure how to sound German, so he felt it was best to simply mumble and hope for the best.

  Enemy at the Gates is at times moving, at times uplifting and at times thrilling. But there is a constant lack of credibility that pulls like an undertow on every scene, haunts every line of dialogue and ultimately reminds me of that icon of misguided 1970s kitsch, Tab cola.

  Not that bad, but definitely not that good. There are far better war dramas to be seen, and far better beverages to drink. My suggestion is you find one of each and enjoy them together.