Search
Search results
Stephen Morris recommended Drumming by Steve Reich in Music (curated)
Stephin Merritt recommended Ignite The Seven Cannons by Felt in Music (curated)
Adam Pally recommended The Jerk (1979) in Movies (curated)
Awix (3310 KP) rated Godzilla 1985 (1985) in Movies
Jun 15, 2019 (Updated Jun 15, 2019)
A textbook example of how to take a fairly unimpressive film and make it much worse through cack-handed re-editing and intrusive inserted scenes. Godzilla reappears, somehow (the film ignores the events of all the previous sequels); a subplot about Cold War tensions only making the crisis more serious is significantly de-emphasised in favour of making the Russians into bad guys. The Pentagon (filled with Dr Pepper vending machines) call in Godzilla expert Steve Martin (not that one); he is never referred to by his first name, for obvious reasons. He and the senior Pentagon staff proceed to do exactly nothing but discuss events taking place in Tokyo.
The original movie was a laudable attempt to take Godzilla back to basics, let down by a sluggish plot, weak climax, and underwhelming monster (Godzilla appears to have had one martini too many and seems a bit unsteady on his feet). This one has all those problems too, which are only compounded by the way that all the film's interesting ideas kind of get lost in the re-edit. There are still a few decent sequences of Godzilla fighting the JSDF, including a sci-fi flying tank, but this is hard going for the most part.
The original movie was a laudable attempt to take Godzilla back to basics, let down by a sluggish plot, weak climax, and underwhelming monster (Godzilla appears to have had one martini too many and seems a bit unsteady on his feet). This one has all those problems too, which are only compounded by the way that all the film's interesting ideas kind of get lost in the re-edit. There are still a few decent sequences of Godzilla fighting the JSDF, including a sci-fi flying tank, but this is hard going for the most part.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Love the Coopers (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Love the Coopers is a new movie directed by Jessie Nelson and released
through the collaborative efforts of CBS Films, Groundswell Productions
and Imagine Entertainment.
It has a large and recognizable cast of characters, including Dianne
Keaton (Charlotte), John Goodman (Sam), Ed Helms (Hank), Alan Arky
(Bucky), Marisa Tomei (Emma), Olivia Wilde (Eleanor), June Squibb (Aunt
Fishy) and Steve Martin (the dog, Rags!).
Based on the previews and trailers that I saw, I expected more laugh out
loud comedy than I got out of the film. There was plenty of laugh out
loud comedy, don’t get me wrong, but what I expected out of the trailers
was a “dumb” comedy, rather than a poignant, rather touching (and at
times tragic) love story wrapped up in a comedy.
The basic premise is that Mom Charlotte and dad Sam want to have “one
last” family holiday full of happiness and good cheer and wonderful
memories, before they drop the bombshell on their family that they will
be splitting up after 40 years of marriage.
Charlotte has spent her whole marriage keeping the family together,
making sure everyone is “ok” and of course, as frequently happens, has
grown distant from her spouse Sam in the midst of that.
The story is told from the point of view of Rags the family dog (voiced
by Steve Martin) who has watched the family grow together and then
apart, through the years.
I thoroughly enjoyed the movie, and thought that it was a good story
that showed how a family dynamic can change over the years and how it
isn’t always in the best of ways. It also portrayed how family
relationships are perceived from the point of view of the people that
are actually IN the relationship, as well as from an outsiders’ view.
Some parts were “cheesy” but for the most part, I was really able to
connect with the story as a whole. Even though some of the intertwining
story lines by themselves were a little dis-jointed, when they all came
together under the umbrella of the main story line, somehow, it just
worked.
I liked that I connected emotionally with Charlotte and could FEEL her
connection to her kids and how she loved them “bigger than anything” and
just wanted what was best for them, even though it didn’t always come
out that way, and even though it distanced her from her husband. I think
that happens “in the real world”, a lot more than people realize or
think about.
The movie made me laugh, and it made me cry… It occasionally made me
groan in a “Really?! Did they have to do THAT??” sort of way, too, but
overall I really enjoyed it.
I would give the movie 3.5 out of 5 stars.
through the collaborative efforts of CBS Films, Groundswell Productions
and Imagine Entertainment.
It has a large and recognizable cast of characters, including Dianne
Keaton (Charlotte), John Goodman (Sam), Ed Helms (Hank), Alan Arky
(Bucky), Marisa Tomei (Emma), Olivia Wilde (Eleanor), June Squibb (Aunt
Fishy) and Steve Martin (the dog, Rags!).
Based on the previews and trailers that I saw, I expected more laugh out
loud comedy than I got out of the film. There was plenty of laugh out
loud comedy, don’t get me wrong, but what I expected out of the trailers
was a “dumb” comedy, rather than a poignant, rather touching (and at
times tragic) love story wrapped up in a comedy.
The basic premise is that Mom Charlotte and dad Sam want to have “one
last” family holiday full of happiness and good cheer and wonderful
memories, before they drop the bombshell on their family that they will
be splitting up after 40 years of marriage.
Charlotte has spent her whole marriage keeping the family together,
making sure everyone is “ok” and of course, as frequently happens, has
grown distant from her spouse Sam in the midst of that.
The story is told from the point of view of Rags the family dog (voiced
by Steve Martin) who has watched the family grow together and then
apart, through the years.
I thoroughly enjoyed the movie, and thought that it was a good story
that showed how a family dynamic can change over the years and how it
isn’t always in the best of ways. It also portrayed how family
relationships are perceived from the point of view of the people that
are actually IN the relationship, as well as from an outsiders’ view.
Some parts were “cheesy” but for the most part, I was really able to
connect with the story as a whole. Even though some of the intertwining
story lines by themselves were a little dis-jointed, when they all came
together under the umbrella of the main story line, somehow, it just
worked.
I liked that I connected emotionally with Charlotte and could FEEL her
connection to her kids and how she loved them “bigger than anything” and
just wanted what was best for them, even though it didn’t always come
out that way, and even though it distanced her from her husband. I think
that happens “in the real world”, a lot more than people realize or
think about.
The movie made me laugh, and it made me cry… It occasionally made me
groan in a “Really?! Did they have to do THAT??” sort of way, too, but
overall I really enjoyed it.
I would give the movie 3.5 out of 5 stars.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Army of Thieves (2021) in Movies
Nov 4, 2021
“Did He Just Say Gulp?”
I have Covid-19, and am confined to quarters. So time to catch up on some streaming films. New on Netflix is “Army of Thieves”, a quirky prequel, of sorts, to Zac Snyder’s “Army of the Dead“.
Plot Summary:
Sebastian Schlencht-Wöhnert (Matthias Schweighöfer) is a geek obsessed with the work of legendary safe-manufacturer Hans Wagner whose magnum opus was a series of four intricate safes named after the four parts of his namesake’s Ring cycle: The Rhinegold, The Valkyrie, Siegfried and Götterdämmerung.
Seeking more the glory of cracking the legendary safes (rather than the riches within), high-class jewel-thief Gwendoline (Nathalie Emmanuel) teams with Sebastian to crack the three known safes (in Paris, Prague and St Moritz) before they are officially ‘retired’. Together with Korina (Ruby O. Fee), muscle-man Brad (Stuart Martin) and getaway driver Rolph (Guz Khan) the gang try to stay one step ahead of obsessed Interpol agent Delacroix (Jonathan Cohen).
Certification:
US: TV-MA. UK: 15.
Talent:
Starring: Matthias Schweighöfer, Nathalie Emmanuel, Ruby O. Fee, Stuart Martin, Guz Khan, Jonathan Cohen.
Directed by: Matthias Schweighöfer.
Written by: Shay Hatten (from a story by Shay Hatten and Zack Snyder).
“Army of Thieves” Review: Positives:
I really wasn’t expecting much from this offering. For me, the character of Dieter in “Army of the Dead” was an annoyingly quirky comedy character in a zombie-actioner that you just wanted to punch in the face…. repeatedly. But in contrast, this Dieter-centric film is deliberately quirky throughout and it just all worked for me. Under his own direction, Schweighöfer’s Sebastian/Dieter becomes a genuinely quirky, lovelorn and loveable loser that you want to root for.
The look and feel of the film is utterly glorious. The wonderful cinematography by Bernhard Jasper makes the introduction to the European locations feel Bond-like and the combination of Production Design and Special Effects make the safe-cracking scenes tense, dynamic and beautiful to watch. It’s all nicely rounded off by a quirky Steve Mazzaro / Hans Zimmer score.
Shay Hatten’s script delivers a nice balance of action and exposition. It actually – shock horror – takes time to flesh out some character behind the generic heist-movie stereotypes. Setting the movie in the same timeline as the emerging Nevada zombie-apocalypse as “Army of the Dead” is neat: (although those expecting extensive zombie-action will feel short-changed). And having the Las Vegas safe as the mythical Götterdämmerung is a nice touch. Above all – “SURPRISE!!!” – the script surpassed the essential six-laughs test.
The acting is above par, with Schweighöfer putting in a fabulous turn and the stunningly beautiful Nathalie Emmanuel (best known for being Ramsey in the Fast and Furious series) gets to be a lot more than mere window-dressing here. Stuart Martin is notable here for looking astonishingly like Hugh Jackman…. I mean, really, they could be twins.
Negatives:
I mean, honestly, there are more holes in this story than a St Moritz swiss-cheese. Why would all of the safes, owned by different private institutions, be being “decommissioned” due to a Zombie outbreak on the other side of the world? Can the Interpol team really be that incompetent? And however clever he is, I don’t buy that you can open safes like that!
Although I liked the balance of the script overall, the story is pretty simplistic and linear.
Summary Thoughts on “Army of Thieves”
Sometimes a little movie appears that surprises and delights you, and this was one of those for me. It’s not big and it’s not clever. But it is very nicely made, thoroughly entertained me and was – for me – way better than its source movie. A recommended watch on Netflix.
Plot Summary:
Sebastian Schlencht-Wöhnert (Matthias Schweighöfer) is a geek obsessed with the work of legendary safe-manufacturer Hans Wagner whose magnum opus was a series of four intricate safes named after the four parts of his namesake’s Ring cycle: The Rhinegold, The Valkyrie, Siegfried and Götterdämmerung.
Seeking more the glory of cracking the legendary safes (rather than the riches within), high-class jewel-thief Gwendoline (Nathalie Emmanuel) teams with Sebastian to crack the three known safes (in Paris, Prague and St Moritz) before they are officially ‘retired’. Together with Korina (Ruby O. Fee), muscle-man Brad (Stuart Martin) and getaway driver Rolph (Guz Khan) the gang try to stay one step ahead of obsessed Interpol agent Delacroix (Jonathan Cohen).
Certification:
US: TV-MA. UK: 15.
Talent:
Starring: Matthias Schweighöfer, Nathalie Emmanuel, Ruby O. Fee, Stuart Martin, Guz Khan, Jonathan Cohen.
Directed by: Matthias Schweighöfer.
Written by: Shay Hatten (from a story by Shay Hatten and Zack Snyder).
“Army of Thieves” Review: Positives:
I really wasn’t expecting much from this offering. For me, the character of Dieter in “Army of the Dead” was an annoyingly quirky comedy character in a zombie-actioner that you just wanted to punch in the face…. repeatedly. But in contrast, this Dieter-centric film is deliberately quirky throughout and it just all worked for me. Under his own direction, Schweighöfer’s Sebastian/Dieter becomes a genuinely quirky, lovelorn and loveable loser that you want to root for.
The look and feel of the film is utterly glorious. The wonderful cinematography by Bernhard Jasper makes the introduction to the European locations feel Bond-like and the combination of Production Design and Special Effects make the safe-cracking scenes tense, dynamic and beautiful to watch. It’s all nicely rounded off by a quirky Steve Mazzaro / Hans Zimmer score.
Shay Hatten’s script delivers a nice balance of action and exposition. It actually – shock horror – takes time to flesh out some character behind the generic heist-movie stereotypes. Setting the movie in the same timeline as the emerging Nevada zombie-apocalypse as “Army of the Dead” is neat: (although those expecting extensive zombie-action will feel short-changed). And having the Las Vegas safe as the mythical Götterdämmerung is a nice touch. Above all – “SURPRISE!!!” – the script surpassed the essential six-laughs test.
The acting is above par, with Schweighöfer putting in a fabulous turn and the stunningly beautiful Nathalie Emmanuel (best known for being Ramsey in the Fast and Furious series) gets to be a lot more than mere window-dressing here. Stuart Martin is notable here for looking astonishingly like Hugh Jackman…. I mean, really, they could be twins.
Negatives:
I mean, honestly, there are more holes in this story than a St Moritz swiss-cheese. Why would all of the safes, owned by different private institutions, be being “decommissioned” due to a Zombie outbreak on the other side of the world? Can the Interpol team really be that incompetent? And however clever he is, I don’t buy that you can open safes like that!
Although I liked the balance of the script overall, the story is pretty simplistic and linear.
Summary Thoughts on “Army of Thieves”
Sometimes a little movie appears that surprises and delights you, and this was one of those for me. It’s not big and it’s not clever. But it is very nicely made, thoroughly entertained me and was – for me – way better than its source movie. A recommended watch on Netflix.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Battle of the Sexes (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Tennis and sex, but without the grunting.
Here’s a good test of someone’s age…. ask the question “Billie-Jean?”. Millennials will probably come back with “Huh?”; those in their 30’s or 40’s might come back with “Michael Jackson!”; those older than that will probably reply “King!”.
“Battle of the Sexes” (which I just managed to catch before it left cinemas) tells the true-life story of US tennis star Billie-Jean King (Emma Stone, “La La Land“). The year is 1973 and Billie-Jean is riding high as the Number 1 female tennis player. She is a feminist; she is married (to hunk Larry – no not that one – King played by Austin Stowell (“Whiplash“, “Bridge of Spies“)); …. and she is also attracted to women, not something she has yet acted on. That all changes when her path crosses with LA-hairdresser Marilyn (Andrea Riseborough, “Birdman“, “Oblivion”).
But this is a side story: the main event is a bet made by aging ex-star Bobby Riggs (Steve Carell, “Foxcatcher“); that – even at his age – as a man he could beat the leading female tennis player of the day.
The film is gloriously retro, starting with the old-school 20th Century Fox production logo. And it contains breathtakingly sexist dialogue by writer Simon Beaufoy (“Everest“, “The Full Monty”). Surely men couldn’t have been so crass and outrageous in the 70’s? Sorry ladies, but the answer is yes, and the film is testament to how far women’s rights have come in 50 years.
This is a tour de force in acting from both Emma Stone and Steve Carell, particularly the latter: a scene where Carell tries to re-engage with his estranged wife (Elisabeth Shue, “Leaving Las Vegas”) is both nuanced and heart-breaking. Stone’s performance is also praiseworthy, although it feels slightly less so as it is an impersonation of a (relatively) well-known figure: this is extremely well-studied though, right down to her strutting walk around the court which I had both forgotten and was immediately again reminded of.
One of my favourite movie awards are the Screen Actor’s Guild (SAG) “cast” awards that celebrate ensemble performances, and here is a film that should have been nominated (it unfortunately wasn’t). Andrea Riseborough; Natalie Morales (as fellow tennis player Rosie Casals); comedian Sarah Silverman (“A Million Ways to Die in the West“), almost unrecognisable as the brash publicist Gladys Heldman; Bill Pullman as LTA head Jack Kramer; the great Alan Cumming (“The Good Wife”) as the team’s flamboyant, gay, costume designer; Lewis Pullman as Riggs’s son Larry; Jessica McNamee (magnetic eyes!) as King’s Australian tennis nemesis Margaret Court. All bounce off the leads, and each other, just beautifully.
Cinematography by Linus Sandgren (“La La Land“) and editing by Pamela Martin (“Little Miss Sunshine”) unite to deliver one of the most sexually charged haircuts you are ever likely to see on the screen. For those put off by this aspect of the storyline, the “girl-on-girl action” is pretty tastefully done and not overly graphic: it’s mostly “first-base” stuff rather than “third-base”!
“What a waste of a lovely night”. Marilyn (Andrea Riseborough) and Billie-Jean (Emma Stone) get serious.
Directed with panache by the co-directors of the 2006 smash “Little Miss Sunshine” – Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris – all in all it’s a delight, especially for older audiences who will get a blast of nostalgia from days when sports were still played at a slightly more leisurely pace… and definitely without the grunting.
“Battle of the Sexes” (which I just managed to catch before it left cinemas) tells the true-life story of US tennis star Billie-Jean King (Emma Stone, “La La Land“). The year is 1973 and Billie-Jean is riding high as the Number 1 female tennis player. She is a feminist; she is married (to hunk Larry – no not that one – King played by Austin Stowell (“Whiplash“, “Bridge of Spies“)); …. and she is also attracted to women, not something she has yet acted on. That all changes when her path crosses with LA-hairdresser Marilyn (Andrea Riseborough, “Birdman“, “Oblivion”).
But this is a side story: the main event is a bet made by aging ex-star Bobby Riggs (Steve Carell, “Foxcatcher“); that – even at his age – as a man he could beat the leading female tennis player of the day.
The film is gloriously retro, starting with the old-school 20th Century Fox production logo. And it contains breathtakingly sexist dialogue by writer Simon Beaufoy (“Everest“, “The Full Monty”). Surely men couldn’t have been so crass and outrageous in the 70’s? Sorry ladies, but the answer is yes, and the film is testament to how far women’s rights have come in 50 years.
This is a tour de force in acting from both Emma Stone and Steve Carell, particularly the latter: a scene where Carell tries to re-engage with his estranged wife (Elisabeth Shue, “Leaving Las Vegas”) is both nuanced and heart-breaking. Stone’s performance is also praiseworthy, although it feels slightly less so as it is an impersonation of a (relatively) well-known figure: this is extremely well-studied though, right down to her strutting walk around the court which I had both forgotten and was immediately again reminded of.
One of my favourite movie awards are the Screen Actor’s Guild (SAG) “cast” awards that celebrate ensemble performances, and here is a film that should have been nominated (it unfortunately wasn’t). Andrea Riseborough; Natalie Morales (as fellow tennis player Rosie Casals); comedian Sarah Silverman (“A Million Ways to Die in the West“), almost unrecognisable as the brash publicist Gladys Heldman; Bill Pullman as LTA head Jack Kramer; the great Alan Cumming (“The Good Wife”) as the team’s flamboyant, gay, costume designer; Lewis Pullman as Riggs’s son Larry; Jessica McNamee (magnetic eyes!) as King’s Australian tennis nemesis Margaret Court. All bounce off the leads, and each other, just beautifully.
Cinematography by Linus Sandgren (“La La Land“) and editing by Pamela Martin (“Little Miss Sunshine”) unite to deliver one of the most sexually charged haircuts you are ever likely to see on the screen. For those put off by this aspect of the storyline, the “girl-on-girl action” is pretty tastefully done and not overly graphic: it’s mostly “first-base” stuff rather than “third-base”!
“What a waste of a lovely night”. Marilyn (Andrea Riseborough) and Billie-Jean (Emma Stone) get serious.
Directed with panache by the co-directors of the 2006 smash “Little Miss Sunshine” – Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris – all in all it’s a delight, especially for older audiences who will get a blast of nostalgia from days when sports were still played at a slightly more leisurely pace… and definitely without the grunting.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated The Hustle (2019) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
The Hustle stars Anne Hathaway and Rebel Wilson as a pair of con artists who extract money from men using their feminine wiles. Hathaway and Wilson have a great chemistry on screen and some of the physical humor had me laughing so hard that my eyes were watering from laughter. Other times the jokes fell so flat I cringed, especially early on with the lampooning of male behavior so over the top that it seemed like an SNL bit rather than a part of a story they were trying to tell. It takes the movie a while to get its feet underneath it and really start running, but it does eventually get there.
What I didn’t realize going into this movie was that it is actually a reboot of the Steve Martin, Michael Caine and the late Glenne Headly classic, Dirty Rotten Scoundrels. As soon as you realize this you know exactly how the story will go down to the last punch line. That is a real bummer for fans of the original because you know one of the biggest end reveals about half way through the movie.
Knowing the twist at the end doesn’t ruin the movie, but it did take a lot of the fun out of it and I wish they changed the twist to outsmart the audience who knew they were following the Dirty Rotten Scoundrels playbook.
Rebel Wilson plays off Anne Hathaway really well, I’d actually like to see them do something original together in the future. The chemistry reminds me of David Spade and Chris Farley with Hathaway playing the straight man and Wilson playing the physical comedian. The best parts of this movie are when these two are facing off in a scene trying to outdo one another.
I can’t say this enough; I really wish they changed the twist at the end so that I could have enjoyed it more because I really wanted to like it. Those who have never seen Dirty Rotten Scoundrels may enjoy it more than I did. The lady behind me was so shocked with the twist reveal at the end that her gasp was audible across the theater, so obviously not everyone has seen the original.
Because of the big laughs I did have while watching this movie I can’t say I hated the movie, it was definitely good for some laughs. But the con of the movie is to get you into the theater without you realizing that it’s just a replica reboot of a classic.
What I didn’t realize going into this movie was that it is actually a reboot of the Steve Martin, Michael Caine and the late Glenne Headly classic, Dirty Rotten Scoundrels. As soon as you realize this you know exactly how the story will go down to the last punch line. That is a real bummer for fans of the original because you know one of the biggest end reveals about half way through the movie.
Knowing the twist at the end doesn’t ruin the movie, but it did take a lot of the fun out of it and I wish they changed the twist to outsmart the audience who knew they were following the Dirty Rotten Scoundrels playbook.
Rebel Wilson plays off Anne Hathaway really well, I’d actually like to see them do something original together in the future. The chemistry reminds me of David Spade and Chris Farley with Hathaway playing the straight man and Wilson playing the physical comedian. The best parts of this movie are when these two are facing off in a scene trying to outdo one another.
I can’t say this enough; I really wish they changed the twist at the end so that I could have enjoyed it more because I really wanted to like it. Those who have never seen Dirty Rotten Scoundrels may enjoy it more than I did. The lady behind me was so shocked with the twist reveal at the end that her gasp was audible across the theater, so obviously not everyone has seen the original.
Because of the big laughs I did have while watching this movie I can’t say I hated the movie, it was definitely good for some laughs. But the con of the movie is to get you into the theater without you realizing that it’s just a replica reboot of a classic.
Darren (1599 KP) rated American Graffiti (1973) in Movies
Nov 21, 2019
Thoughts on American Graffiti
Characters – Curt has always enjoyed his time on the strip, he knows everybody and is one of the most popular guys around, he was due to head of the college, but hasn’t made his mind up yet, despite it needing to be read for his next day, he ends up trying to spend his time chasing a mysterious woman around town all night. Steve has always planned his life out, he is going off to college and he is ready to make his relationship more open while they are separated, here he gets to learn about his relationship even if his best friend might not be joining him in college. John is the friend that has always been known for his ability with cars, he has a reputation around town with the police following him around and now he is starting to see the future where his friends are doing a lot more than him and gets stuck with a younger girl for the night, where he starts to see a brighter side to his future. Terry has always been the butt of most of the jokes between the friends, now he gets Steve’s car to look after he spends the night trying to find himself a woman and impress her with his lines.
Performances – When we look at the cast, Richard Dreyfuss is great through the film showing us a character that can get plenty of laughs and is quick on his feet. Ron Howard brings the character we know him for is always going to be easy for him to play. Paul Le Mat brings the typical bad boy to life that does show how he bought us a level of sympathy to the character. Charles Martin Smith brings the geeky sounding character out which become one of the most popular characters in these teen comedies for years to come.
Story – The story here follows four friends on the last day of summer before college is due to start, we see how the four have a different adventure on this night, which will help them discover what they want next in their lives. This is a story that shows just how difficult life is when you take the next step, leaving school is one of the first and biggest anybody will take, with the uncertainty being there for everybody involved, part of you will want to stay close to what you already had, while other sides of this will see you wanting to see what is next. This story mixes all of this together through the film with little effort and makes you believe these people could be real, while certain aspects will have dated here, with a new generation, back n the 1970s this would have been the idea of the house party in the 80s or 90s and wild adventure the modern youth would be having.
Comedy – The comedy in this film would be right up there with any teen comedies, it would have gotten more laughs for when it was released, rather than the ones you would expect to see now.
Settings – The film is set in one hang out location known as the strip, this will be the location where we get all the hang outs you would expect for teens in this generation.
Scene of the Movie – Terry’s attempts to get boozes.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The world involved does seem to have dated.
Final Thoughts – This is a wonderful look at teenage life in the 70s it shows us just how close the friendships were, how hard the changes coming were and just what was left for the people in life.
Overall: Beautiful Look at the 70s.
Rating
Characters – Curt has always enjoyed his time on the strip, he knows everybody and is one of the most popular guys around, he was due to head of the college, but hasn’t made his mind up yet, despite it needing to be read for his next day, he ends up trying to spend his time chasing a mysterious woman around town all night. Steve has always planned his life out, he is going off to college and he is ready to make his relationship more open while they are separated, here he gets to learn about his relationship even if his best friend might not be joining him in college. John is the friend that has always been known for his ability with cars, he has a reputation around town with the police following him around and now he is starting to see the future where his friends are doing a lot more than him and gets stuck with a younger girl for the night, where he starts to see a brighter side to his future. Terry has always been the butt of most of the jokes between the friends, now he gets Steve’s car to look after he spends the night trying to find himself a woman and impress her with his lines.
Performances – When we look at the cast, Richard Dreyfuss is great through the film showing us a character that can get plenty of laughs and is quick on his feet. Ron Howard brings the character we know him for is always going to be easy for him to play. Paul Le Mat brings the typical bad boy to life that does show how he bought us a level of sympathy to the character. Charles Martin Smith brings the geeky sounding character out which become one of the most popular characters in these teen comedies for years to come.
Story – The story here follows four friends on the last day of summer before college is due to start, we see how the four have a different adventure on this night, which will help them discover what they want next in their lives. This is a story that shows just how difficult life is when you take the next step, leaving school is one of the first and biggest anybody will take, with the uncertainty being there for everybody involved, part of you will want to stay close to what you already had, while other sides of this will see you wanting to see what is next. This story mixes all of this together through the film with little effort and makes you believe these people could be real, while certain aspects will have dated here, with a new generation, back n the 1970s this would have been the idea of the house party in the 80s or 90s and wild adventure the modern youth would be having.
Comedy – The comedy in this film would be right up there with any teen comedies, it would have gotten more laughs for when it was released, rather than the ones you would expect to see now.
Settings – The film is set in one hang out location known as the strip, this will be the location where we get all the hang outs you would expect for teens in this generation.
Scene of the Movie – Terry’s attempts to get boozes.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The world involved does seem to have dated.
Final Thoughts – This is a wonderful look at teenage life in the 70s it shows us just how close the friendships were, how hard the changes coming were and just what was left for the people in life.
Overall: Beautiful Look at the 70s.
Rating