I think this surface documentary was an excuse to tell the world how King felt about Donald Trump, and serves as his coming out as a hardcore Liberal, if your reading of his work hasn't told you that. The writer is rich enough not to care about losing fans.
Any fan, or former fan, knows the biographical basics of his upbringing in Maine, before scoring his first hit novel Carrie. The film makers use old, readily-available online interview footage as King covers his best, early works. Clips from his filmed novel adaptations are shown to appease horror fans, but it was nice to see some love for George Romero's underrated version of The Dark Half. Any writer would kill for the success and productivity of King, but the film only covers his successes. He mentions his dislike of religion, Republicans, and guns, without mentioning the number of works where a convenient cache of firearms appears out of nowhere. He mocks the "common" American reader who gave him his success in the first place.
I read every King book I could find when I was younger, until I stopped halfway through the ironically-titled Insomnia. I tried again, but gave up on the child-hating Doctor Sleep. I've read On Writing twice, something I don't normally do. His hatred of Trump and us right-wing kooks is well-known thanks to social media. The documentary meanders through grainy C-SPAN speeches and Today interviews (where his first name is misspelled), and you learn nothing new- "He's written seventyish books, and here's a half dozen of his really good ones!"
"Stephen King: A Necessary Evil" is unnecessary to watch.
Sunday, June 29, 2025
Saturday, June 28, 2025
Book Review: "The Civil War: Strange & Fascinating Facts" by Burke Davis
*Get The Civil War: Strange & Fascinating Facts by Burke Davis on Amazon here*
*Get Ken Burns' "The Civil War" on Amazon here*
Despite the title, these strange and fascinating facts may interest Civil War buffs, and not many others.
Burke Davis, the author of several history books, takes the little stories and factoids he has collected in research and puts them all here in small anecdotes. To appreciate the value of these stories, the reader should have more than a passing knowledge of the Civil War. Many names, dates, and battles are tossed around by an author who knows his subject, and requires his readers to know some, too.
The stories here are very entertaining, covering various subjects. The Civil War was full of "Firsts," First: successful submarine, hospital ships, tobacco and cigarette taxes, and U.S. presidential assassination. The book also mentions Confederate States president Jefferson Davis more than Abraham Lincoln, possibly because Davis is barely a footnote in high school history books today. Stonewall Jackson, Ulysses Grant, and Robert E. Lee are also profiled. One entertaining chapter debunks many myths surrounding Grant's drunken war behavior. Davis also gets serious, writing about widespread venereal disease, and atrocities committed on civilians by both sides.
Davis' book was published in 1960, and the publishers decided to reprint the book many times without updating it. Davis mentions the upcoming centennial of the war, and descendants of the major figures of the war and what they are doing today, or at least today many decades ago. Another drawback is the lack of an index, leaving a serious researcher to have to skim the book looking for useful information. The author mentions prices for Civil War memorabilia at current auction prices- again from many decades ago. Davis writes that more people lost their lives in the Civil War than in all the wars from the Revolution to our most current conflict- Korea. I will recommend this book as a cursory page turner. As a displaced Texan who descends from Confederate and Yankee soldiers, I appreciated Davis' balanced view of both sides of the conflict. Too often today we lose sight of the fact that over 600,000 people lost their lives in this war, and not many people know much about it.
*Get Ken Burns' "The Civil War" on Amazon here*
Despite the title, these strange and fascinating facts may interest Civil War buffs, and not many others.
Burke Davis, the author of several history books, takes the little stories and factoids he has collected in research and puts them all here in small anecdotes. To appreciate the value of these stories, the reader should have more than a passing knowledge of the Civil War. Many names, dates, and battles are tossed around by an author who knows his subject, and requires his readers to know some, too.
The stories here are very entertaining, covering various subjects. The Civil War was full of "Firsts," First: successful submarine, hospital ships, tobacco and cigarette taxes, and U.S. presidential assassination. The book also mentions Confederate States president Jefferson Davis more than Abraham Lincoln, possibly because Davis is barely a footnote in high school history books today. Stonewall Jackson, Ulysses Grant, and Robert E. Lee are also profiled. One entertaining chapter debunks many myths surrounding Grant's drunken war behavior. Davis also gets serious, writing about widespread venereal disease, and atrocities committed on civilians by both sides.
Davis' book was published in 1960, and the publishers decided to reprint the book many times without updating it. Davis mentions the upcoming centennial of the war, and descendants of the major figures of the war and what they are doing today, or at least today many decades ago. Another drawback is the lack of an index, leaving a serious researcher to have to skim the book looking for useful information. The author mentions prices for Civil War memorabilia at current auction prices- again from many decades ago. Davis writes that more people lost their lives in the Civil War than in all the wars from the Revolution to our most current conflict- Korea. I will recommend this book as a cursory page turner. As a displaced Texan who descends from Confederate and Yankee soldiers, I appreciated Davis' balanced view of both sides of the conflict. Too often today we lose sight of the fact that over 600,000 people lost their lives in this war, and not many people know much about it.
Book Review: "Famous Movie Stars and Directors" by Joseph Stewart
*Get Famous Movie Stars and Directors by Joseph Stewart on Amazon here*
*Get "Kramer vs. Kramer" on Amazon here*
I had reviewed the nightmarish book from Santa Monica Press entitled Guide to Home Video and Movies by someone named Ryan Reed. That self-proclaimed ultimate video guide was full of misspellings and absent films, and an embarrassment to all the better video guides out there. At the same thrift store where I picked up that tome, I found Famous Movie Stars and Directors by Joseph Stewart. Also from Santa Monica Press, also exactly 128 pages, this sad book did not have as many misspellings, but the factual errors alone make it an awful choice for anyone out there writing a film studies paper, interested in movies, or just looking for a brief read.
This book is a collection of one and a half page profiles of well-known performers and directors- at least well-known when this was published in 1993. I decided to bring up some of the glaring errors from the Actor section only because if I corrected everything here, I would have enough material for a book of my own. I will mention that Faye Dunaway has been rechristened Faye "Dunawaye" every time she is written about, including the table of contents and her own profile.
From Dustin Hoffman's entry: "Hoffman has been nominated for four Academy Awards, for his performances as Ben Braddock in The Graduate (1967), Ratso Rizzo in Midnight Cowboy (1969), Lenny Bruce in Lenny (1974), and Raymond in Rain Man (1988). He finally won for this last film..." Good for Dustin, except he won his first Oscar for 1979's "Kramer vs. Kramer", and was also nominated for "Tootsie." Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sylvester Stallone each get just one page for their entries. The longest entry is Bette Davis, who gets a whopping two and a half pages. Burt Reynolds' page and a half has only one of his films mentioned- "Deliverance." After naming James Stewart's films "Bell, Book, and Candle" and "Anatomy of a Murder," author Stewart writes "Arguably, he has not had a significant role since these films..." Pardon me while I get arguable, but did our author simply forget about "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance," "How the West Was Won," "Shenandoah," "The Flight of the Phoenix," "The Shootist," and "Airport '77," or did he not possess his own simplest film reference book?
Finally, he gets John Wayne, one of my favorite actors, all wrong. Back to the work: "Throughout the 1940's, he appeared in several uninspired movies, mostly Westerns and war films." While most of Wayne's output in the 1940's was Westerns and war films, see if you recognize some of these "uninspired" flicks: "Flying Tigers," "They Were Expendable," "Angel and the Badman," "Fort Apache," "She Wore a Yellow Ribbon," and his uninspired Oscar-nominated role in the uninspired "Sands of Iwo Jima." Whether a Wayne fan or not, you have to agree that Joseph Stewart has no idea what he is talking about, and Leonard Maltin, master of the film guide, had nothing to worry about.
So what did I do with these horrible reads? I donated them to the local library in my former hometown for their annual book sale. This was decades ago, but I'm willing to bet the quarter each I paid for these that they never sold.
*Get "Kramer vs. Kramer" on Amazon here*
I had reviewed the nightmarish book from Santa Monica Press entitled Guide to Home Video and Movies by someone named Ryan Reed. That self-proclaimed ultimate video guide was full of misspellings and absent films, and an embarrassment to all the better video guides out there. At the same thrift store where I picked up that tome, I found Famous Movie Stars and Directors by Joseph Stewart. Also from Santa Monica Press, also exactly 128 pages, this sad book did not have as many misspellings, but the factual errors alone make it an awful choice for anyone out there writing a film studies paper, interested in movies, or just looking for a brief read.
This book is a collection of one and a half page profiles of well-known performers and directors- at least well-known when this was published in 1993. I decided to bring up some of the glaring errors from the Actor section only because if I corrected everything here, I would have enough material for a book of my own. I will mention that Faye Dunaway has been rechristened Faye "Dunawaye" every time she is written about, including the table of contents and her own profile.
From Dustin Hoffman's entry: "Hoffman has been nominated for four Academy Awards, for his performances as Ben Braddock in The Graduate (1967), Ratso Rizzo in Midnight Cowboy (1969), Lenny Bruce in Lenny (1974), and Raymond in Rain Man (1988). He finally won for this last film..." Good for Dustin, except he won his first Oscar for 1979's "Kramer vs. Kramer", and was also nominated for "Tootsie." Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sylvester Stallone each get just one page for their entries. The longest entry is Bette Davis, who gets a whopping two and a half pages. Burt Reynolds' page and a half has only one of his films mentioned- "Deliverance." After naming James Stewart's films "Bell, Book, and Candle" and "Anatomy of a Murder," author Stewart writes "Arguably, he has not had a significant role since these films..." Pardon me while I get arguable, but did our author simply forget about "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance," "How the West Was Won," "Shenandoah," "The Flight of the Phoenix," "The Shootist," and "Airport '77," or did he not possess his own simplest film reference book?
Finally, he gets John Wayne, one of my favorite actors, all wrong. Back to the work: "Throughout the 1940's, he appeared in several uninspired movies, mostly Westerns and war films." While most of Wayne's output in the 1940's was Westerns and war films, see if you recognize some of these "uninspired" flicks: "Flying Tigers," "They Were Expendable," "Angel and the Badman," "Fort Apache," "She Wore a Yellow Ribbon," and his uninspired Oscar-nominated role in the uninspired "Sands of Iwo Jima." Whether a Wayne fan or not, you have to agree that Joseph Stewart has no idea what he is talking about, and Leonard Maltin, master of the film guide, had nothing to worry about.
So what did I do with these horrible reads? I donated them to the local library in my former hometown for their annual book sale. This was decades ago, but I'm willing to bet the quarter each I paid for these that they never sold.
Book Review: "The Good Little Mermaid's Guide to Bedtime" by Eija Sumner, illustrated by Nici Gregory
*Get The Good Little Mermaid's Guide to Bedtime by Eija Sumner, illustrated by Nici Gregory on Amazon here*
*Get Crocodile Hungry by Eija Sumner, illustrated by John Martz on Amazon here*
This charming book was a perfect fit for my two daughters, then ages 6 and 4, who make it their nightly campaign to not go to bed.
An unnamed "good" little mermaid gets ready for bed. She thinks of herself as a predator who doesn't have time for such niceties as tidying up her room and brushing her (razor sharp) teeth. She's too busy striking fear into other marine life...while yawning...and will only go to sleep on her terms.
My daughters were enraptured throughout the book, even my sometimes distracted four year old. My six year old is obsessed with mermaids (she had recently suggested the name "the Mermaids" for her soccer team), and this was a perfect fit. Gregory's illustrations are bold and splashy (sorry), with a lot of blues and greens. The book is large, and the illustrations pop off the page. This was a fun book to read, as well. I used a nice, calm voice to read the story about the good little mermaid getting ready for bed, and then a funny voice when the mermaid complains why she can't get ready. As the good little mermaid, I yawned at one point in the story and my six year old did, too.
The Good Little Mermaid's Guide to Bedtime is a delightful book perfect for the three to seven year old in your life. I read this a lot in the following couple of years.
*Get Crocodile Hungry by Eija Sumner, illustrated by John Martz on Amazon here*
This charming book was a perfect fit for my two daughters, then ages 6 and 4, who make it their nightly campaign to not go to bed.
An unnamed "good" little mermaid gets ready for bed. She thinks of herself as a predator who doesn't have time for such niceties as tidying up her room and brushing her (razor sharp) teeth. She's too busy striking fear into other marine life...while yawning...and will only go to sleep on her terms.
My daughters were enraptured throughout the book, even my sometimes distracted four year old. My six year old is obsessed with mermaids (she had recently suggested the name "the Mermaids" for her soccer team), and this was a perfect fit. Gregory's illustrations are bold and splashy (sorry), with a lot of blues and greens. The book is large, and the illustrations pop off the page. This was a fun book to read, as well. I used a nice, calm voice to read the story about the good little mermaid getting ready for bed, and then a funny voice when the mermaid complains why she can't get ready. As the good little mermaid, I yawned at one point in the story and my six year old did, too.
The Good Little Mermaid's Guide to Bedtime is a delightful book perfect for the three to seven year old in your life. I read this a lot in the following couple of years.
BOOK REVIEW INDEX
BOOK REVIEWS: (alphabetical by primary author's last name)
READING
- Reading in 2026
- Reading in 2025
A
- Tijuana Bibles: Art and Wit in America's Forbidden Funnies, 1930s-1950s by Bob Adelman
- Hollywood Babylon II by Kenneth Anger
B
- Ghost Towns of the American West by Raymond Bial
- The Simple Truths of Service: Inspired by Johnny the Bagger by Ken Blanchard & Barbara Glanz
- The Big Wave by Pearl S. Buck
- Clinton: Portrait of Victory by Rebecca Buffum Taylor, photography by P.F. Bentley
C
- Don't Sweat the Small Stuff...and it's all small stuff by Dr. Richard Carlson
D
- The Enormous Crocodile by Roald Dahl, pictures by Quentin Blake
- Gothic: Four Hundred Years of Excess, Horror, Evil, and Ruin by Richard Davenport-Hines
- The Civil War: Strange & Fascinating Facts by Burke Davis
- A Call to Purity by Richard and Brittni De La Mora
- Jack the Ripper: Monster of Whitechapel by Joe Dickinson
- Turn Back the Night by Jennifer Drew
E
- Love and Desire: Photoworks by William A. Ewing
- Sons... by Helen Exley
F
- The Horror Film Handbook by Alan Frank
G
- Shot in the Heart by Mikal Gilmore
- Movie Monsters in Scale: A Modeler's Gallery of Science Fiction and Horror Figures and Dioramas by Mark C. Glassy
- Which Lie Did I Tell?: More Adventures in the Screen Trade by William Goldman
- Edward Albee: A Singular Life by Mel Gussow
H
- You'll Never Nanny in This Town Again: The True Adventures of a Hollywood Nanny by Suzanne Hansen
- Young Goodman Brown and Other Short Stories by Nathaniel Hawthorne
- Scenes with My Son: Love and Grief in the Wake of Suicide by Robert Hubbard
J
- H.N.I.C. by Albert 'Prodigy' Johnson with Steven Savile
K
- Rich Dad's Retire Young, Retire Rich: How to Get Rich Quickly and Stay Rich Forever! by Robert T. Kiyosaki with Sharon L. Lechter
- I Hate You--Don't Leave Me: Understanding the Borderline Personality by Jerold J. Kreisman, MD & Hal Straus
L
- Kops and Custards: The Legend of Keystone Films by Kalton C. Lahue and Terry Brewer
- The Little Guide to Your Well-Read Life by Steve Leveen
- The Call of the Wild by Jack London
M
- An American Dream by Norman Mailer
- How to Judge Motion Pictures, and How to Organize a Photoplay Club by Sarah McLean Mullen
- Blondie, From Punk to the Present: A Pictorial History by Allan Metz
N
- Opportunities in Religious Service Careers by John Oliver Nelson
- How to Write Horror Fiction by William F. Nolan
P
- Star Wars: R2-D2's Mission: A Little Hero's Journey by Jane Paley
- Come Swiftly to Your Love: Love Poems of Ancient Egypt, translated by Ezra Pound and Noel Stock
- Bush Must Go by Bill Press
R
- Guide to Home Videos and Movies by Ryan Reed
- How to Be a Christian Without Being Religious by Fritz Ridenour
S
- Famous Movie Stars and Directors by Joseph Stewart
- The Good Little Mermaid's Guide to Bedtime by Eija Summer, illustrated by Nici Gregory
T
- "The Later Wittgenstein and Classical Pragmatism: A Critical Appraisal" by Dr. William G. Toland (abstract plus bibliography)
- Verses That Hurt: Pleasure and Pain from the POEMFONE Poets, edited by Jordan Trachtenberg and Amy Trachtenberg
- Drummer Boy: Marching to the Civil War by Ann Turner, illustrated by Mark Hess
W
- Legends and Lies: Great Mysteries of the American West by Dale L. Walker
- English Diarists: Evelyn & Pepys by Margaret Willy
Z
- An Underground Education by Richard Zacks
READING
- Reading in 2026
- Reading in 2025
A
- Tijuana Bibles: Art and Wit in America's Forbidden Funnies, 1930s-1950s by Bob Adelman
- Hollywood Babylon II by Kenneth Anger
B
- Ghost Towns of the American West by Raymond Bial
- The Simple Truths of Service: Inspired by Johnny the Bagger by Ken Blanchard & Barbara Glanz
- The Big Wave by Pearl S. Buck
- Clinton: Portrait of Victory by Rebecca Buffum Taylor, photography by P.F. Bentley
C
- Don't Sweat the Small Stuff...and it's all small stuff by Dr. Richard Carlson
D
- The Enormous Crocodile by Roald Dahl, pictures by Quentin Blake
- Gothic: Four Hundred Years of Excess, Horror, Evil, and Ruin by Richard Davenport-Hines
- The Civil War: Strange & Fascinating Facts by Burke Davis
- A Call to Purity by Richard and Brittni De La Mora
- Jack the Ripper: Monster of Whitechapel by Joe Dickinson
- Turn Back the Night by Jennifer Drew
E
- Love and Desire: Photoworks by William A. Ewing
- Sons... by Helen Exley
F
- The Horror Film Handbook by Alan Frank
G
- Shot in the Heart by Mikal Gilmore
- Movie Monsters in Scale: A Modeler's Gallery of Science Fiction and Horror Figures and Dioramas by Mark C. Glassy
- Which Lie Did I Tell?: More Adventures in the Screen Trade by William Goldman
- Edward Albee: A Singular Life by Mel Gussow
H
- You'll Never Nanny in This Town Again: The True Adventures of a Hollywood Nanny by Suzanne Hansen
- Young Goodman Brown and Other Short Stories by Nathaniel Hawthorne
- Scenes with My Son: Love and Grief in the Wake of Suicide by Robert Hubbard
J
- H.N.I.C. by Albert 'Prodigy' Johnson with Steven Savile
K
- Rich Dad's Retire Young, Retire Rich: How to Get Rich Quickly and Stay Rich Forever! by Robert T. Kiyosaki with Sharon L. Lechter
- I Hate You--Don't Leave Me: Understanding the Borderline Personality by Jerold J. Kreisman, MD & Hal Straus
L
- Kops and Custards: The Legend of Keystone Films by Kalton C. Lahue and Terry Brewer
- The Little Guide to Your Well-Read Life by Steve Leveen
- The Call of the Wild by Jack London
M
- An American Dream by Norman Mailer
- How to Judge Motion Pictures, and How to Organize a Photoplay Club by Sarah McLean Mullen
- Blondie, From Punk to the Present: A Pictorial History by Allan Metz
N
- Opportunities in Religious Service Careers by John Oliver Nelson
- How to Write Horror Fiction by William F. Nolan
P
- Star Wars: R2-D2's Mission: A Little Hero's Journey by Jane Paley
- Come Swiftly to Your Love: Love Poems of Ancient Egypt, translated by Ezra Pound and Noel Stock
- Bush Must Go by Bill Press
R
- Guide to Home Videos and Movies by Ryan Reed
- How to Be a Christian Without Being Religious by Fritz Ridenour
S
- Famous Movie Stars and Directors by Joseph Stewart
- The Good Little Mermaid's Guide to Bedtime by Eija Summer, illustrated by Nici Gregory
T
- "The Later Wittgenstein and Classical Pragmatism: A Critical Appraisal" by Dr. William G. Toland (abstract plus bibliography)
- Verses That Hurt: Pleasure and Pain from the POEMFONE Poets, edited by Jordan Trachtenberg and Amy Trachtenberg
- Drummer Boy: Marching to the Civil War by Ann Turner, illustrated by Mark Hess
W
- Legends and Lies: Great Mysteries of the American West by Dale L. Walker
- English Diarists: Evelyn & Pepys by Margaret Willy
Z
- An Underground Education by Richard Zacks
Book Review: "The Simple Truths of Service: Inspired by Johnny the Bagger" by Ken Blanchard & Barbara Glanz
*Get The Simple Truths of Service: Inspired by Johnny the Bagger by Ken Blanchard & Barbara Glanz on Amazon here*
*Get "Superstore: The Complete Series" on Amazon here*
This very short book is full of platitudes praising going above and beyond the customer service call. While sometimes inspiring, I was suspicious that either author had ever worked in a corporate retail environment. The book reads like the notes taken at a human resources seminar.
Johnny the Bagger was a bagboy with Down Syndrome who worked at a grocery store. He would print positive thoughts on his computer, and put one of these "thought of the day" slips in the customers' bags. This proved so popular that customers would line up in his cash register line just to get a new thought. The authors then follow up Johnny's story with other stories about employees who would go out of their way, doing that extra mile, in order to keep a customer for life.
While the book is short and sweet, Blanchard and Glanz have not set out to solve every problem you might have in the working world. Difficult customers, lazy coworkers, clueless human resources personnel, stupid corporate decisions, and micro-managing supervisors are not addressed. Some of the ideas are nice, showing the positive side of giving perfect customer service, but I read the stories with a lot of harumphing and rolling my eyes.
I worked retail most of my adult life, with the greatest chunk of that time spent at Target- nineteen years. I always thought about writing a book about my many experiences, entitled He Really Loves That Dog featuring a true story about a boss who made me cancel a medical appointment for my son so I could work, but called in sick that very shift when his mutt was ill. When I complained, I was told my proposed title by another boss. I only thought about writing these incidents down but I figured "who would read them?" Every employee has stories like this, what would set me apart? I was no angel, threatening to punch that same boss after being constantly harassed by him at work (HR ignored my complaints until I was the one who got in trouble, of course), so I kept my head down and trudged through. Could these simple truths of service inspire me to be a better employee? No, because they still wouldn't inspire the various companies I worked for to be better employers. Maybe an HQ corporate higher-up, whose "surprise" visits we had to clean up for, can glean something from these little stories, but the Level 1 peon grunt out there will probably have the same reaction I did- "yeah, right."
The Simple Truths of Service seems sincere, if a little overly obsessed with this Johnny guy, and maybe the book and accompanying video (in some editions) will give that boss in your life the warm fuzzies, but the truth is in the three decades I worked, I can't think of one situation where incredible customer service would help me love my job, much less make it tolerable. This "truth" hurts.
*Get "Superstore: The Complete Series" on Amazon here*
This very short book is full of platitudes praising going above and beyond the customer service call. While sometimes inspiring, I was suspicious that either author had ever worked in a corporate retail environment. The book reads like the notes taken at a human resources seminar.
Johnny the Bagger was a bagboy with Down Syndrome who worked at a grocery store. He would print positive thoughts on his computer, and put one of these "thought of the day" slips in the customers' bags. This proved so popular that customers would line up in his cash register line just to get a new thought. The authors then follow up Johnny's story with other stories about employees who would go out of their way, doing that extra mile, in order to keep a customer for life.
While the book is short and sweet, Blanchard and Glanz have not set out to solve every problem you might have in the working world. Difficult customers, lazy coworkers, clueless human resources personnel, stupid corporate decisions, and micro-managing supervisors are not addressed. Some of the ideas are nice, showing the positive side of giving perfect customer service, but I read the stories with a lot of harumphing and rolling my eyes.
I worked retail most of my adult life, with the greatest chunk of that time spent at Target- nineteen years. I always thought about writing a book about my many experiences, entitled He Really Loves That Dog featuring a true story about a boss who made me cancel a medical appointment for my son so I could work, but called in sick that very shift when his mutt was ill. When I complained, I was told my proposed title by another boss. I only thought about writing these incidents down but I figured "who would read them?" Every employee has stories like this, what would set me apart? I was no angel, threatening to punch that same boss after being constantly harassed by him at work (HR ignored my complaints until I was the one who got in trouble, of course), so I kept my head down and trudged through. Could these simple truths of service inspire me to be a better employee? No, because they still wouldn't inspire the various companies I worked for to be better employers. Maybe an HQ corporate higher-up, whose "surprise" visits we had to clean up for, can glean something from these little stories, but the Level 1 peon grunt out there will probably have the same reaction I did- "yeah, right."
The Simple Truths of Service seems sincere, if a little overly obsessed with this Johnny guy, and maybe the book and accompanying video (in some editions) will give that boss in your life the warm fuzzies, but the truth is in the three decades I worked, I can't think of one situation where incredible customer service would help me love my job, much less make it tolerable. This "truth" hurts.
Book Review: "Blondie, From Punk to the Present: A Pictorial History" by Allan Metz
*Get Blondie, From Punk to the Present: A Pictorial History by Allan Metz on Amazon here*
*Get "Blondie- Live" on Amazon here*
"Blondie, From Punk to the Present: A Pictorial History" is a massive 512 page book chronicling the rise, the fall, and the rise of the musical group Blondie, covering their start through their late 1990's tour in support of their album "No Exit."
Allan Metz is credited as "compiler" on the book since that is exactly what it is- a compilation of hundreds of newspaper clippings, magazine articles, interviews, and photographs of the band. With Deborah Harry on vocals, Clem Burke on drums, Jimmy Destri on keyboards, and Chris Stein on guitar, Blondie proved some bands just need a twenty year break in order to collect their thoughts and come out with a strong album.
The book is divided into four parts: Then, Between Acts, Now, and In Retrospect. Each section features tons of articles, as well as some average black and white photography of the group. There are even different indexes, categorizing names, band and performer names, and song names. My reservations about the book are due to its repetition and some cosmetic complaints. The most interesting part of the book was the first section, chronicling the Punk music movement as an American phenomenon, before the rightfully angry Brits took it and made it a political statement. The American Punk movement had similarities to the "slackers" of the '90's, including such famous names as Television, Lou Reed, The Ramones, and Patti Smith. One of the writers justified Blondie's inclusion in the Punk group by labeling their music "subversive pop." Blondie was never a group to pick a genre and stick to it, branching into rock, disco, country, reggae, ska, pop, and they can be credited- I prefer the term "blamed"- for bringing rap music to mainstream listeners. The opening history of the New York Punk scene is fascinating stuff. I was enthralled, and read the entire first section in one sitting. Once Blondie got together, the infighting began. They released some great albums, broke up, and got back together again.
Chris Stein's near fatal skin disease. Blondie is a band, not Harry. Deborah Harry sang with the Jazz Passengers at one time. Harry was almost another victim of one Ted Bundy- a story I've seen debunked a couple of times now. Two of the original Blondie founders sued the band when they reunited, but lost in court. The album "No Exit" is not a comeback, just a continuation. All of these facts and more are literally repeated dozens and dozens of times throughout the articles. Maybe the book was not meant to be read from one end to the other like I did, but I was soon bored with reading some of the exact same things in every article. Deborah Harry's film past is touched upon, but is never as thoroughly discussed as I would have liked to see. While billed as a pictorial history, the grainy black and white photos are nothing ground shaking, consisting mostly of candid and performance shots. However, having the photographers talk about their thoughts and reactions at shooting Blondie is interesting. Also, the book measures 8 1/2 by 11 inches, but the text is on one continuous line across each page. Columns may have broken up the monotony, as my eyes would sometimes repeat a line. The book is compiled by an obvious fan, but there are a few negative articles amongst all the praise. The cover is a mess of fonts and type.
"Blondie, From Punk to the Present: A Pictorial History" is like a really cool textbook from a really cool popular culture class given at a really cool liberal arts college back when they existed.
*Get "Blondie- Live" on Amazon here*
"Blondie, From Punk to the Present: A Pictorial History" is a massive 512 page book chronicling the rise, the fall, and the rise of the musical group Blondie, covering their start through their late 1990's tour in support of their album "No Exit."
Allan Metz is credited as "compiler" on the book since that is exactly what it is- a compilation of hundreds of newspaper clippings, magazine articles, interviews, and photographs of the band. With Deborah Harry on vocals, Clem Burke on drums, Jimmy Destri on keyboards, and Chris Stein on guitar, Blondie proved some bands just need a twenty year break in order to collect their thoughts and come out with a strong album.
The book is divided into four parts: Then, Between Acts, Now, and In Retrospect. Each section features tons of articles, as well as some average black and white photography of the group. There are even different indexes, categorizing names, band and performer names, and song names. My reservations about the book are due to its repetition and some cosmetic complaints. The most interesting part of the book was the first section, chronicling the Punk music movement as an American phenomenon, before the rightfully angry Brits took it and made it a political statement. The American Punk movement had similarities to the "slackers" of the '90's, including such famous names as Television, Lou Reed, The Ramones, and Patti Smith. One of the writers justified Blondie's inclusion in the Punk group by labeling their music "subversive pop." Blondie was never a group to pick a genre and stick to it, branching into rock, disco, country, reggae, ska, pop, and they can be credited- I prefer the term "blamed"- for bringing rap music to mainstream listeners. The opening history of the New York Punk scene is fascinating stuff. I was enthralled, and read the entire first section in one sitting. Once Blondie got together, the infighting began. They released some great albums, broke up, and got back together again.
Chris Stein's near fatal skin disease. Blondie is a band, not Harry. Deborah Harry sang with the Jazz Passengers at one time. Harry was almost another victim of one Ted Bundy- a story I've seen debunked a couple of times now. Two of the original Blondie founders sued the band when they reunited, but lost in court. The album "No Exit" is not a comeback, just a continuation. All of these facts and more are literally repeated dozens and dozens of times throughout the articles. Maybe the book was not meant to be read from one end to the other like I did, but I was soon bored with reading some of the exact same things in every article. Deborah Harry's film past is touched upon, but is never as thoroughly discussed as I would have liked to see. While billed as a pictorial history, the grainy black and white photos are nothing ground shaking, consisting mostly of candid and performance shots. However, having the photographers talk about their thoughts and reactions at shooting Blondie is interesting. Also, the book measures 8 1/2 by 11 inches, but the text is on one continuous line across each page. Columns may have broken up the monotony, as my eyes would sometimes repeat a line. The book is compiled by an obvious fan, but there are a few negative articles amongst all the praise. The cover is a mess of fonts and type.
"Blondie, From Punk to the Present: A Pictorial History" is like a really cool textbook from a really cool popular culture class given at a really cool liberal arts college back when they existed.
Book Review: "How to Be a Christian Without Being Religious" by Fritz Ridenour
*Get How to Be a Christian Without Being Religious by Fritz Ridenour on Amazon here*
*Get St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans: A Devotional Commentary by W.H. Griffith Thomas, D.D. on Amazon here*
This 1967 paperback takes the apostle Paul's epistle to the Romans and does a deep read, translating his words to the modern churchgoer. The text I had was punctuated by some fun illustrations by Joyce Thimsen, and Ridenour had me almost all the way throughout the book
Paul wrote ahead to the Romans to prepare them for a visit he would be making, and doing a little preaching about how to deal with Jews and Gentiles. Ridenour quotes from the Living Letters paraphrase, as well as a couple of other writers. The provocative title is easily explained throughout the book, as believers are told that good works and saintly appearances do not necessarily equal being a "good" Christian, and that some are so busy being a flawless churchgoer, they lose sight of Who we are seeking fellowship to worship. Every chapter takes a section of the epistle, quotes it, and then Ridenour explains what Paul meant. The chapters end with "For Further Thought"- a series of questions that incorporate what you just read, other related verses in the Holy Bible, and some critical thinking on your part. There are no right answers. I did a deep read of this deep read, filling a small notebook with over thirty pages of notes, "For Further Thought" answers, and quotes. Paul's words are heavy on who can have God's salvation, and what must be done to achieve it through faith and not just show.
Ridenour does a great job of answering many "yeah, but what about...?" questions. Jesus died for our sins, but not the temptation of sin. You must be very strong with your gift of salvation to the point where sinning isn't be an option. "I can still sin a little, God will just forgive me again;" no, you are saved from the penalty and guilt of sin but fight the power or draw. The "For Further Thought" questions would confirm what Ridenour wrote, but also allowed me to question some of what was written. I had huge problems with one chapter, however. Paul tells us to love our neighbors as ourselves, but "Chapter 11: The Only Law You Need" also says to obey the government because God is the one who put it there. As I read this in the spring of 2024, and considering this fall's election, I could not wrap my head or heart around this idea. Yes, be a good citizen and pay your debts, but considering some of what members of our government do, they make it VERY difficult. God may be using them to challenge the believer, which Ridenour says will make us a better person, but this was very hard to accept- and I think I speak for many people across the political spectrum. I gave up social media completely, one of the best decisions I ever made.
I was reading this book and taking notes while waiting for my children to get out of school or while sitting in waiting rooms during appointments, so it took me almost a month to complete. It was humorous to see many people staring into their phone screens for whatever reasons, while I was using my phone to read recommended Bible quotes. This is a nice introduction to non-fiction Christian reading, especially when the thought of reading The Holy Bible all the way through with little context is so daunting. I even jotted down some notes for a short article about some stoic wisdom from Marcus Aurelius, and how some of Paul's words relate. This is a very readable little book, and I recommend a deep read of this deep read to broaden your horizons.
*Get St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans: A Devotional Commentary by W.H. Griffith Thomas, D.D. on Amazon here*
This 1967 paperback takes the apostle Paul's epistle to the Romans and does a deep read, translating his words to the modern churchgoer. The text I had was punctuated by some fun illustrations by Joyce Thimsen, and Ridenour had me almost all the way throughout the book
Paul wrote ahead to the Romans to prepare them for a visit he would be making, and doing a little preaching about how to deal with Jews and Gentiles. Ridenour quotes from the Living Letters paraphrase, as well as a couple of other writers. The provocative title is easily explained throughout the book, as believers are told that good works and saintly appearances do not necessarily equal being a "good" Christian, and that some are so busy being a flawless churchgoer, they lose sight of Who we are seeking fellowship to worship. Every chapter takes a section of the epistle, quotes it, and then Ridenour explains what Paul meant. The chapters end with "For Further Thought"- a series of questions that incorporate what you just read, other related verses in the Holy Bible, and some critical thinking on your part. There are no right answers. I did a deep read of this deep read, filling a small notebook with over thirty pages of notes, "For Further Thought" answers, and quotes. Paul's words are heavy on who can have God's salvation, and what must be done to achieve it through faith and not just show.
Ridenour does a great job of answering many "yeah, but what about...?" questions. Jesus died for our sins, but not the temptation of sin. You must be very strong with your gift of salvation to the point where sinning isn't be an option. "I can still sin a little, God will just forgive me again;" no, you are saved from the penalty and guilt of sin but fight the power or draw. The "For Further Thought" questions would confirm what Ridenour wrote, but also allowed me to question some of what was written. I had huge problems with one chapter, however. Paul tells us to love our neighbors as ourselves, but "Chapter 11: The Only Law You Need" also says to obey the government because God is the one who put it there. As I read this in the spring of 2024, and considering this fall's election, I could not wrap my head or heart around this idea. Yes, be a good citizen and pay your debts, but considering some of what members of our government do, they make it VERY difficult. God may be using them to challenge the believer, which Ridenour says will make us a better person, but this was very hard to accept- and I think I speak for many people across the political spectrum. I gave up social media completely, one of the best decisions I ever made.
I was reading this book and taking notes while waiting for my children to get out of school or while sitting in waiting rooms during appointments, so it took me almost a month to complete. It was humorous to see many people staring into their phone screens for whatever reasons, while I was using my phone to read recommended Bible quotes. This is a nice introduction to non-fiction Christian reading, especially when the thought of reading The Holy Bible all the way through with little context is so daunting. I even jotted down some notes for a short article about some stoic wisdom from Marcus Aurelius, and how some of Paul's words relate. This is a very readable little book, and I recommend a deep read of this deep read to broaden your horizons.
Thursday, June 26, 2025
Bride Hard (2025)
*Get "Bride Hard" on Amazon here*
Rebel Wilson and Anna Camp try to rekindle some "Pitch Perfect" onscreen chemistry magic in this colossal missed opportunity.
Sam (Rebel Wilson) and Betsy (Anna Camp) are childhood friends reuniting for Betsy's upcoming wedding to Ryan (Sam Huntington). Sam has set up an elaborate bachelorette party in Paris featuring the other bridesmaids: Ryan's sister Virginia (Anna Chlumsky), Betsy's college roommates Lydia (Da'Vine Joy Randolph) and Zoe (Gigi Zumbado), and Ryan and Virginia's mother Diane (producer Colleen Camp). Sam is actually in Paris on a secret mission as a government agent, leaving the drunken partiers early to take care of some business. Betsy gets upset, and Virginia swoops in to take over the maid of honor role. Ordered on vacation, Sam still shows up at the private island wedding months later at Virginia and Ryan's family estate just in time for villain Kurt (Stephen Dorff) and his henchman to take the wedding party hostage. Sam goes "Die Hard" on these uninvited guests, and tries to mend her relationship with Betsy and the other bridesmaids.
The film is a frustrating exercise in mid. Ryan and Virginia's family are megarich, the terms "elite" and "elitist" are bandied about, but their privileged cluelessness at how the real world works falls flat. Sam and Betsy's deep friendship is glossed over in a strange opening credits montage, and the film makers must punch up a few onscreen credits to let everyone know who these people are. Dorff's Kurt is a bore, and despite the title, there is no winking acknowledgement to "Die Hard." Handing the comedy reins to action director Simon West (Con Air, Lara Croft: Tomb Raider, The Expendables 2) was a mistake. Some of the fight scenes are nicely coordinated but the slapstick falls flat. Wilson can't nail down whether Sam is a tough-as-nails hired killer, or funny gal who backed herself into getting in harm's way. Every character is a type: Virginia is a weak schemer, Lydia is oversexed and sassy, Zoe is extremely pregnant and hates her meek husband Dave (Remy Ortiz), and Diane is the inappropriately foul-mouthed old lady. West's direction is listless as he seems afraid to question what is written on the page. His final airboat chase, previewed in the trailer (which pretty much gives away the entire film) is badly directed and edited with weak special effects and leaps in logic. The villains' process to move the twenty-seven pound gold bars from the giant mansion to those airboats defy all laws of physics- another humorous opportunity wasted (what if their foolproof plan wasn't foolproof?). Automatic weapons fire never hit their mark, and large baking pans are impervious to bullets. For the record, I kept mistakenly referring to this as "Bride Wars," even after I bought the tickets at the theater.
Throw in two too many false endings, and "Bride Hard" is a mess. Wilson and Camp were so good in the "Pitch Perfect" series, the soundtrack sometimes scores, and Chlumsky is a revelation to watch as she tries to mold her non-character into something more than a name and occasional shifty behavior, but this is one of those films tailor-made for "background" as you're playing games or texting on your phone. I thought for sure this was rated (PG-13), a cut here or there might have opened the film up to a wider audience since it bombed hard at the theaters.
Rebel Wilson and Anna Camp try to rekindle some "Pitch Perfect" onscreen chemistry magic in this colossal missed opportunity.
Sam (Rebel Wilson) and Betsy (Anna Camp) are childhood friends reuniting for Betsy's upcoming wedding to Ryan (Sam Huntington). Sam has set up an elaborate bachelorette party in Paris featuring the other bridesmaids: Ryan's sister Virginia (Anna Chlumsky), Betsy's college roommates Lydia (Da'Vine Joy Randolph) and Zoe (Gigi Zumbado), and Ryan and Virginia's mother Diane (producer Colleen Camp). Sam is actually in Paris on a secret mission as a government agent, leaving the drunken partiers early to take care of some business. Betsy gets upset, and Virginia swoops in to take over the maid of honor role. Ordered on vacation, Sam still shows up at the private island wedding months later at Virginia and Ryan's family estate just in time for villain Kurt (Stephen Dorff) and his henchman to take the wedding party hostage. Sam goes "Die Hard" on these uninvited guests, and tries to mend her relationship with Betsy and the other bridesmaids.
The film is a frustrating exercise in mid. Ryan and Virginia's family are megarich, the terms "elite" and "elitist" are bandied about, but their privileged cluelessness at how the real world works falls flat. Sam and Betsy's deep friendship is glossed over in a strange opening credits montage, and the film makers must punch up a few onscreen credits to let everyone know who these people are. Dorff's Kurt is a bore, and despite the title, there is no winking acknowledgement to "Die Hard." Handing the comedy reins to action director Simon West (Con Air, Lara Croft: Tomb Raider, The Expendables 2) was a mistake. Some of the fight scenes are nicely coordinated but the slapstick falls flat. Wilson can't nail down whether Sam is a tough-as-nails hired killer, or funny gal who backed herself into getting in harm's way. Every character is a type: Virginia is a weak schemer, Lydia is oversexed and sassy, Zoe is extremely pregnant and hates her meek husband Dave (Remy Ortiz), and Diane is the inappropriately foul-mouthed old lady. West's direction is listless as he seems afraid to question what is written on the page. His final airboat chase, previewed in the trailer (which pretty much gives away the entire film) is badly directed and edited with weak special effects and leaps in logic. The villains' process to move the twenty-seven pound gold bars from the giant mansion to those airboats defy all laws of physics- another humorous opportunity wasted (what if their foolproof plan wasn't foolproof?). Automatic weapons fire never hit their mark, and large baking pans are impervious to bullets. For the record, I kept mistakenly referring to this as "Bride Wars," even after I bought the tickets at the theater.
Throw in two too many false endings, and "Bride Hard" is a mess. Wilson and Camp were so good in the "Pitch Perfect" series, the soundtrack sometimes scores, and Chlumsky is a revelation to watch as she tries to mold her non-character into something more than a name and occasional shifty behavior, but this is one of those films tailor-made for "background" as you're playing games or texting on your phone. I thought for sure this was rated (PG-13), a cut here or there might have opened the film up to a wider audience since it bombed hard at the theaters.
American Tragedy (2019)
This polarizing documentary tells the story of Sue Klebold, the mother of Columbine school shooter Dylan Klebold, and her efforts to come to terms with what her son did that changed a nation.
Josh Sabey talks to Sue, but no one else in the family. She is still trying to understand what her son was thinking, and her reactions to the raging hatred and lawsuits that were generated. She visits the memorials, looking into the forever high school-age photos of most of her son's victims. She speaks to people now (she was not renumerated for this documentary), bearing her soul, and talking about the signs she and her husband missed. She is an advocate for mindfulness and good mental health, even in kindergarten-age classrooms. Many people don't remember that Columbine happened before social media became a force, and a detriment, in our lives, so blame fell squarely on the Klebold and the Eric Harris families. The film features reenactments of Sue and her husband finding out about the shooting and its aftermath, which seem to be universally hated by many viewers from what I have read online.
The actual shooting is barely touched on because this documentary is not about the minutiae of that horrible day. The documentary is about a mother and the horrors brought on by her son and his friend. It is also about mental illness and suicide. If this could happen to a seemingly normal family, why couldn't it happen to you or a family you're close to? No one is immune, suicide and mental illness has affected everyone, my family included. Mental illness is still brushed aside today, with its effects not just felt in violent situations. Homelessness, PTSD, substance abuse, and self-harm are some of the major issues that can occur, but many people suffer in silence when their condition or the condition of a family member doesn't seem "that bad," (usually covered by the phrase "get over it"). Sue had to confront what happened, and is working to change things. One interview subject pointed out that the national attitude about smoking finally changed, despite the millions of dollars in advertising and propaganda from giant tobacco corporations. Why can't we mainstream mental illness conversations without being embittered, mocked, ostracized, or looked down upon, especially in the narcissistic world of social media?
I found the reenactments unobtrusive and helpful in explaining what Sue was going through. Mary Dyer does a very good job portraying Sue, and their physical resemblance is uncanny. One strong scene portrays Dyer as Sue hanging in midair, portraying the helplessness of dealing with mental situations. Sue doesn't push an agenda, but in this divided nation each side is going to find something to nitpick about the film- I read some of the comments on a film database site, and while everyone can have a different take on a piece of art or media, some of the arguments were way off, in my point of view ("get over it..."). I would hope we can agree that Columbine was a terrible, as was every school shooting before and after, every life taken in hatred, and so on but we still get into arguments over semantics, race, finger pointing, elitism, and the Constitution instead of facing the real issues. Sue is ringing the alarm bell about mental health in this country, and it's a cause we should all take up and endorse instead of angrily starting a comment with "yeah, but...". Sue Klebold loved her son, but that love could not stop the absolute worst thing that could happen to a parent's child.
Josh Sabey talks to Sue, but no one else in the family. She is still trying to understand what her son was thinking, and her reactions to the raging hatred and lawsuits that were generated. She visits the memorials, looking into the forever high school-age photos of most of her son's victims. She speaks to people now (she was not renumerated for this documentary), bearing her soul, and talking about the signs she and her husband missed. She is an advocate for mindfulness and good mental health, even in kindergarten-age classrooms. Many people don't remember that Columbine happened before social media became a force, and a detriment, in our lives, so blame fell squarely on the Klebold and the Eric Harris families. The film features reenactments of Sue and her husband finding out about the shooting and its aftermath, which seem to be universally hated by many viewers from what I have read online.
The actual shooting is barely touched on because this documentary is not about the minutiae of that horrible day. The documentary is about a mother and the horrors brought on by her son and his friend. It is also about mental illness and suicide. If this could happen to a seemingly normal family, why couldn't it happen to you or a family you're close to? No one is immune, suicide and mental illness has affected everyone, my family included. Mental illness is still brushed aside today, with its effects not just felt in violent situations. Homelessness, PTSD, substance abuse, and self-harm are some of the major issues that can occur, but many people suffer in silence when their condition or the condition of a family member doesn't seem "that bad," (usually covered by the phrase "get over it"). Sue had to confront what happened, and is working to change things. One interview subject pointed out that the national attitude about smoking finally changed, despite the millions of dollars in advertising and propaganda from giant tobacco corporations. Why can't we mainstream mental illness conversations without being embittered, mocked, ostracized, or looked down upon, especially in the narcissistic world of social media?
I found the reenactments unobtrusive and helpful in explaining what Sue was going through. Mary Dyer does a very good job portraying Sue, and their physical resemblance is uncanny. One strong scene portrays Dyer as Sue hanging in midair, portraying the helplessness of dealing with mental situations. Sue doesn't push an agenda, but in this divided nation each side is going to find something to nitpick about the film- I read some of the comments on a film database site, and while everyone can have a different take on a piece of art or media, some of the arguments were way off, in my point of view ("get over it..."). I would hope we can agree that Columbine was a terrible, as was every school shooting before and after, every life taken in hatred, and so on but we still get into arguments over semantics, race, finger pointing, elitism, and the Constitution instead of facing the real issues. Sue is ringing the alarm bell about mental health in this country, and it's a cause we should all take up and endorse instead of angrily starting a comment with "yeah, but...". Sue Klebold loved her son, but that love could not stop the absolute worst thing that could happen to a parent's child.
Thursday, June 12, 2025
Two Much (1995)
Antonio Banderas plays Art Dodge (*snort*), a struggling gallery owner and frustrated painter. He makes money by taking paintings to rich widows' homes and telling them their husbands had bought the art before they died. He goes to one house and ends up in the middle of the funeral for the father of Gene (Danny Aiello). Art hooks up with Gene's ex-wife Betty (Melanie Griffith) thanks to some hokey business with a ring from above, and Betty decides on a whirlwind romance and a wedding. Art meets Betty's spiteful sister, Liz (Daryl Hannah), and he falls in love with her immediately for some unknown reason since she acts terrible to him. Art makes up a twin brother, played by himself, to romance Liz. Gene still loves Betty and sends henchmen after Art. Juggling all the antics and brou-haha is Art's secretary Gloria (Joan Cusack, the only bright spot here). Art also has a senile dad (Eli Wallach), who makes "The Golden Girls"'s Sophia seem subtle. You see where the movie is headed in a climactic wedding scene.
How awful is this film? Awful. Trueba's direction consists almost exclusively of closeups. Banderas, perhaps sensing he is on a sinking cinematic ship, mugs and runs around like an over-sugared five year old, trying to elicit some humor. Hannah's and Griffith's characters are clueless. Cusack is trotted in with Griffith for some "Working Girl" magic, but they only have one scene together, and no chance to regenerate any of that chemistry.
"Two Much" is a couple of minutes shy of two hours, and I could only stomach it in twenty minute increments spread out over a week. Chopping at least half an hour off of this would have helped immensely, since the back half of the film consists mainly of Banderas running around and trying to be in two places at once. I know I wanted to be anywhere else besides finishing this.
How awful is this film? Awful. Trueba's direction consists almost exclusively of closeups. Banderas, perhaps sensing he is on a sinking cinematic ship, mugs and runs around like an over-sugared five year old, trying to elicit some humor. Hannah's and Griffith's characters are clueless. Cusack is trotted in with Griffith for some "Working Girl" magic, but they only have one scene together, and no chance to regenerate any of that chemistry.
"Two Much" is a couple of minutes shy of two hours, and I could only stomach it in twenty minute increments spread out over a week. Chopping at least half an hour off of this would have helped immensely, since the back half of the film consists mainly of Banderas running around and trying to be in two places at once. I know I wanted to be anywhere else besides finishing this.
Friday, June 6, 2025
The Worst Horror Films of the 1980's (as of 2003)
*I wrote this in 2003, so I guarantee this list has changed.*
Out of 157 horror movies ranked on my IMDb.com page, an astounding 43 had a vote of "1" out of "10." Over twenty five percent! I picked a few out, the worst horror films of the 1980's might make a long book one day.
5. Silent Night, Deadly Night Parts 1-3 1984, 1987, 1989 (Directed by various)
The first one sucked, the second one sucked as badly, and the third one sucked even more. This loser series' first entry made a lot of parents mad back in the day, depicting a killer dressed as Santa Claus. Forget psychologically scarring little Timmy with the preview, parents really should have protested the sheer awfulness of the film itself.
4. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 1986 (Directed by Tobe Hooper)
Hooper makes both the best and worst lists I wrote back then, using this ill-conceived dung heap to cash in on some of that home video slasher sequel cash. You know those are leftover sets from his equally awful remake of "Invaders from Mars," and Dennis Hopper turns in his worst performance ever, and that is saying a lot.
3. The Final Conflict 1981 (Directed by Graham Baker)
Hmm, let's go ahead and kill off "The Omen" series with this depressing lost opportunity. Sam Neill plays a grown up Damien, but he looks lost most of the time, as director Baker throws in everything he can think of to match the first two superior films, except a cohesive plot and suspense.
2. C.H.U.D. II- Bud the Chud 1989 (Directed by David Irving)
There's a special place in hell for the creators of this disastrous zombie comedy that has little to nothing to do with the first "C.H.U.D." A zombie loose in suburbia is okay, but throwing in lame comedy, dumb effects, and a Bianca Jagger cameo just proves how desperately the film makers were hiding the fact that they knew this was one of the worst films ever.
Let's keep riding the sequel train right to the worst of the worst:
1. Amityville 3-D 1983 (Directed by Richard Fleischer)
This was a tough choice, but this third installment of the loser series was an unintentional laugh-fest. Meg Ryan is in it, and she obviously made a deal with the devil to keep her career afloat after this polluted theater screens. Other cast members like Tony Roberts and Candy Clark were not so lucky. If the Amityville house holds the gateway to hell, somebody throw this film in it.
Well, that's that. With the amount of videos I rent, this list could change, and I am readying a best and worst of the 1990's as well. I do love horror films. When they are done right, they should be cherished. Trust me, after reviewing my votes, I know that better than anyone.
Out of 157 horror movies ranked on my IMDb.com page, an astounding 43 had a vote of "1" out of "10." Over twenty five percent! I picked a few out, the worst horror films of the 1980's might make a long book one day.
5. Silent Night, Deadly Night Parts 1-3 1984, 1987, 1989 (Directed by various)
The first one sucked, the second one sucked as badly, and the third one sucked even more. This loser series' first entry made a lot of parents mad back in the day, depicting a killer dressed as Santa Claus. Forget psychologically scarring little Timmy with the preview, parents really should have protested the sheer awfulness of the film itself.
4. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 1986 (Directed by Tobe Hooper)
Hooper makes both the best and worst lists I wrote back then, using this ill-conceived dung heap to cash in on some of that home video slasher sequel cash. You know those are leftover sets from his equally awful remake of "Invaders from Mars," and Dennis Hopper turns in his worst performance ever, and that is saying a lot.
3. The Final Conflict 1981 (Directed by Graham Baker)
Hmm, let's go ahead and kill off "The Omen" series with this depressing lost opportunity. Sam Neill plays a grown up Damien, but he looks lost most of the time, as director Baker throws in everything he can think of to match the first two superior films, except a cohesive plot and suspense.
2. C.H.U.D. II- Bud the Chud 1989 (Directed by David Irving)
There's a special place in hell for the creators of this disastrous zombie comedy that has little to nothing to do with the first "C.H.U.D." A zombie loose in suburbia is okay, but throwing in lame comedy, dumb effects, and a Bianca Jagger cameo just proves how desperately the film makers were hiding the fact that they knew this was one of the worst films ever.
Let's keep riding the sequel train right to the worst of the worst:
1. Amityville 3-D 1983 (Directed by Richard Fleischer)
This was a tough choice, but this third installment of the loser series was an unintentional laugh-fest. Meg Ryan is in it, and she obviously made a deal with the devil to keep her career afloat after this polluted theater screens. Other cast members like Tony Roberts and Candy Clark were not so lucky. If the Amityville house holds the gateway to hell, somebody throw this film in it.
Well, that's that. With the amount of videos I rent, this list could change, and I am readying a best and worst of the 1990's as well. I do love horror films. When they are done right, they should be cherished. Trust me, after reviewing my votes, I know that better than anyone.
The Video Store Grab 'n' Run: Oh, I Got Your Variety Right Here
*This was written about twenty years ago, when video stores were still "a thing."*
The five films I picked this time out have one thing in common- ain't never seen 'em before. I hit the Classics section before heading over to the Action category, so here are this week's picks: from Classics- the original "Cat People" and "The Picture of Dorian Gray," from Action- "Deathcheaters" and "The Retrievers," and from Music- "Running Out of Luck." Which one has Rae Dawn Chong undressing yet again? Oh, yeah...
Jim Broadbent won the Oscar for "Iris," and he also has a bit part in "Running Out of Luck," a bizarre long form music video from Mick Jagger and Julien Temple. The film is a chain of over half a dozen videos from Jagger's "She's the Boss," solo album, all held together with a dumb story about Jagger being kidnapped and stranded in backwoods Brazil during a video shoot. In addition to Broadbent, Rae Dawn Chong is the often naked love interest, Dennis Hopper is the video director, and Jerry Hall tries to act as Mick's wife, a role she did not keep in real life, either. This is a vanity project with mediocre songs and pretty Brazilian scenery, but by the time Hall murders a senator she had been dating, and Chong breaks Jagger out of prison in a unique way, I was fascinated with the sheer badness of the thing.
Jim Broadbent is nowhere to be seen in "Cat People," the original black and white suspenser that was remade in 1982 with Natassia Kinski. The original has lovely Simone Simon not consummating her new relationship for fear of turning into a big cat and devouring her new lover, something the women I used to date suffer from as well. The cinematography and direction are gorgeous, I sometimes paused the film just to look at an individual frame, but this suffers from a talky script that takes forever. The swimming pool stalking is here, too, a superior scene that was copied in the remake.
"The Picture of Dorian Gray," is the best film of the bunch so far. Hurd Hatfield stiffly plays a man who wishes a newly painted portrait would absorb his aging so he could look young forever. The portrait also seems to replace his conscience, growing more and more hideous as Gray mistreats those around him, eventually resorting to murder. This is a wonderful movie, full of great performances and Oscar Wilde's urbane lines. The director keeps the film in black and white, except for two insert Technicolor shots of the portrait. Simply wonderful- except for Hatfield, who is too bland and stilted in the main role. He disappears altogether whenever George Sanders comes onscreen and deftly steals the film.
Here's a great pitch! Two ordinary stuntmen are recruited by a government agency to be secret agents! We could get some unknowns in the lead, throw in a cute dog, and do a few seasons of this! Call the network! Actually, "Deathcheaters" is mild enough to be a pilot on a television network, and little else. The stunts are good, but routine, the actors likable enough, the Australian locations are pretty, and I knew where the entire ninety-six minute film was headed from the opening seconds. This is not technically bad film making, but lazy film making that seems to have forgotten an audience might want to be entertained and not bored stupid.
I'm woozy after being violated by "The Retrievers," a stupid actioner from the 1980's that sucks on more levels than I can count. Big dumb Max Thayer decides to help perky Shawn Hoskins find her missing brother and help get the brother's tell-all about the CIA published. When the most exciting scene involves the loading of cases of books into a truck by a morbidly obese man, you know you are in trouble. This is an ugly film that deserves to remain unseen and unheard of.
Of the five, only one or two would be considered really worthy of a repeat viewing, unless you are in the mood for Mick Jagger's bony bare butt.
Best to worst:
1. The Picture of Dorian Gray
2. Cat People
3. Running Out of Luck
4. Deathcheaters
5. The Retrievers
That's it for this week. Next week, I will return like the warm potato salad you ate for lunch.
The five films I picked this time out have one thing in common- ain't never seen 'em before. I hit the Classics section before heading over to the Action category, so here are this week's picks: from Classics- the original "Cat People" and "The Picture of Dorian Gray," from Action- "Deathcheaters" and "The Retrievers," and from Music- "Running Out of Luck." Which one has Rae Dawn Chong undressing yet again? Oh, yeah...
Jim Broadbent won the Oscar for "Iris," and he also has a bit part in "Running Out of Luck," a bizarre long form music video from Mick Jagger and Julien Temple. The film is a chain of over half a dozen videos from Jagger's "She's the Boss," solo album, all held together with a dumb story about Jagger being kidnapped and stranded in backwoods Brazil during a video shoot. In addition to Broadbent, Rae Dawn Chong is the often naked love interest, Dennis Hopper is the video director, and Jerry Hall tries to act as Mick's wife, a role she did not keep in real life, either. This is a vanity project with mediocre songs and pretty Brazilian scenery, but by the time Hall murders a senator she had been dating, and Chong breaks Jagger out of prison in a unique way, I was fascinated with the sheer badness of the thing.
Jim Broadbent is nowhere to be seen in "Cat People," the original black and white suspenser that was remade in 1982 with Natassia Kinski. The original has lovely Simone Simon not consummating her new relationship for fear of turning into a big cat and devouring her new lover, something the women I used to date suffer from as well. The cinematography and direction are gorgeous, I sometimes paused the film just to look at an individual frame, but this suffers from a talky script that takes forever. The swimming pool stalking is here, too, a superior scene that was copied in the remake.
"The Picture of Dorian Gray," is the best film of the bunch so far. Hurd Hatfield stiffly plays a man who wishes a newly painted portrait would absorb his aging so he could look young forever. The portrait also seems to replace his conscience, growing more and more hideous as Gray mistreats those around him, eventually resorting to murder. This is a wonderful movie, full of great performances and Oscar Wilde's urbane lines. The director keeps the film in black and white, except for two insert Technicolor shots of the portrait. Simply wonderful- except for Hatfield, who is too bland and stilted in the main role. He disappears altogether whenever George Sanders comes onscreen and deftly steals the film.
Here's a great pitch! Two ordinary stuntmen are recruited by a government agency to be secret agents! We could get some unknowns in the lead, throw in a cute dog, and do a few seasons of this! Call the network! Actually, "Deathcheaters" is mild enough to be a pilot on a television network, and little else. The stunts are good, but routine, the actors likable enough, the Australian locations are pretty, and I knew where the entire ninety-six minute film was headed from the opening seconds. This is not technically bad film making, but lazy film making that seems to have forgotten an audience might want to be entertained and not bored stupid.
I'm woozy after being violated by "The Retrievers," a stupid actioner from the 1980's that sucks on more levels than I can count. Big dumb Max Thayer decides to help perky Shawn Hoskins find her missing brother and help get the brother's tell-all about the CIA published. When the most exciting scene involves the loading of cases of books into a truck by a morbidly obese man, you know you are in trouble. This is an ugly film that deserves to remain unseen and unheard of.
Of the five, only one or two would be considered really worthy of a repeat viewing, unless you are in the mood for Mick Jagger's bony bare butt.
Best to worst:
1. The Picture of Dorian Gray
2. Cat People
3. Running Out of Luck
4. Deathcheaters
5. The Retrievers
That's it for this week. Next week, I will return like the warm potato salad you ate for lunch.
Thursday, June 5, 2025
Running Out of Luck (1987)
This kooky ninety minute music video blitz showcases Mick Jagger without any Rolling Stones gathering around. It is truly bizarre.
Mick plays Mick, a huge rock star who is in Rio de Janeiro to shoot a music video directed by Dennis Hopper (none of the characters, aside from Mick Jagger, have proper names). Mick gets jealous of Jerry Hall during the shoot, and goes off alone with three women to his trailer. The three women are, in fact, transvestites who rob Mick and throw him on the back of a meat truck headed out of town. The three transvestites then fight amongst themselves, one is killed, and they put his body in a car and roll it off a pier. Mick wakes up, abandoned in the middle of nowhere, trying to find a phone. He wanders, until he's kidnapped and held as slave labor on a banana plantation, where he meets a local prostitute played by Rae Dawn Chong. Chong tries to help Jagger escape. The transvestite's body is found, mistaken for Mick, and Mick is assumed to be dead.
The film features about nine songs from Jagger's solo album "She's the Boss," all shot complete in music video format. These are standard looking MTV fodder, it is the story filling in the blanks that is so truly bizarre. Jagger cowrote this, and gives himself lots of screen time. Jerry Hall proves once and for all that her acting career was a fluke. Chong is okay, Hopper is wasted, and the Brazilian scenery is nice. Temple directs the conversations the same way he directs videos, trying to hide the weird story. At one point, Hall is dating a senator while Jagger cools his heels in prison. The senator has Hall kidnapped, but she escapes and gets her revenge by killing him. The banana plantation owner's wife beds Jagger immediately, so Jagger dresses in drag to escape with the other prostitutes. Oscar winner Jim Broadbent has a tiny role, figuring out Jagger is not dead. This thing is unbelievable.
While it claims to be a musical-comedy-adventure, it is none of these. Jagger's songs all sound the same. The laughs aren't funny, unless you take into account Hall's "acting." There is no action or adventure. Thank goodness for the extended sex scenes between Jagger and Chong, and Chong's unique prison break plan.
"Running Out of Luck" was probably meant as a video album for the fans. Instead, it is so bizarre, so out there, so weird, so bad, that I could not take my eyes off of it. You won't care about the story or characters, but you will be hard-pressed to forget such an odd film.
Mick plays Mick, a huge rock star who is in Rio de Janeiro to shoot a music video directed by Dennis Hopper (none of the characters, aside from Mick Jagger, have proper names). Mick gets jealous of Jerry Hall during the shoot, and goes off alone with three women to his trailer. The three women are, in fact, transvestites who rob Mick and throw him on the back of a meat truck headed out of town. The three transvestites then fight amongst themselves, one is killed, and they put his body in a car and roll it off a pier. Mick wakes up, abandoned in the middle of nowhere, trying to find a phone. He wanders, until he's kidnapped and held as slave labor on a banana plantation, where he meets a local prostitute played by Rae Dawn Chong. Chong tries to help Jagger escape. The transvestite's body is found, mistaken for Mick, and Mick is assumed to be dead.
The film features about nine songs from Jagger's solo album "She's the Boss," all shot complete in music video format. These are standard looking MTV fodder, it is the story filling in the blanks that is so truly bizarre. Jagger cowrote this, and gives himself lots of screen time. Jerry Hall proves once and for all that her acting career was a fluke. Chong is okay, Hopper is wasted, and the Brazilian scenery is nice. Temple directs the conversations the same way he directs videos, trying to hide the weird story. At one point, Hall is dating a senator while Jagger cools his heels in prison. The senator has Hall kidnapped, but she escapes and gets her revenge by killing him. The banana plantation owner's wife beds Jagger immediately, so Jagger dresses in drag to escape with the other prostitutes. Oscar winner Jim Broadbent has a tiny role, figuring out Jagger is not dead. This thing is unbelievable.
While it claims to be a musical-comedy-adventure, it is none of these. Jagger's songs all sound the same. The laughs aren't funny, unless you take into account Hall's "acting." There is no action or adventure. Thank goodness for the extended sex scenes between Jagger and Chong, and Chong's unique prison break plan.
"Running Out of Luck" was probably meant as a video album for the fans. Instead, it is so bizarre, so out there, so weird, so bad, that I could not take my eyes off of it. You won't care about the story or characters, but you will be hard-pressed to forget such an odd film.
Deathcheaters (1976)
Steve (John Hargreaves) and Rod (Grant Page) are two Australian stuntmen. They are hired by the mysterious Culpepper (Noel Ferrier) to infiltrate a power plant in the Philippines to steal some important papers. A slight film deserves a slight plot summary.
Trenchard-Smith is an old hand at the Australian action pic, and this '70's relic is not badly directed. Trenchard-Smith's story, on the other hand, leaves something to be desired. The film makers may have scored some points if they had turned this into a heist picture. Instead, the first third of the film sets up the fact that Steve and Rod are stuntmen, and they get set up by Culpepper in a fake bank robber chase. The audience is let in on this right away, so we must sit back and revel in some good but mild stuntwork from the two leads. Culpepper is a bumbling guy who is supposed to be this film's equivalent to James Bond's M. The supporting cast is nothing you have not seen before- Steve has worrywart wife Julia (Margaret Gerard) and Rod has a basset hound he talks to when not trying to bed women. The main set piece, at the Filipino plant, is a tedious exercise in safety. The characters make it clear that they do not want to kill anyone, so everybody shoots guns and blows things up, nobody gets hurt, and the papers the duo are after are never revealed to contain anything of importance. The final punchline of the film is kind of flaky.
"Deathcheaters" also contains a disco theme song that will rob you of many hours of sleep. The old Vestron Video box cover of this film makes it sound a whole lot more dangerous and better than it is. What it really is is a pointless resume reel for stuntman and stunt coordinator Grant Page. There are some laughs here and there, the stunts are well executed, but in actuality "Deathcheaters" does not cheat death, but its audience. Also known as "Death Cheaters."
Trenchard-Smith is an old hand at the Australian action pic, and this '70's relic is not badly directed. Trenchard-Smith's story, on the other hand, leaves something to be desired. The film makers may have scored some points if they had turned this into a heist picture. Instead, the first third of the film sets up the fact that Steve and Rod are stuntmen, and they get set up by Culpepper in a fake bank robber chase. The audience is let in on this right away, so we must sit back and revel in some good but mild stuntwork from the two leads. Culpepper is a bumbling guy who is supposed to be this film's equivalent to James Bond's M. The supporting cast is nothing you have not seen before- Steve has worrywart wife Julia (Margaret Gerard) and Rod has a basset hound he talks to when not trying to bed women. The main set piece, at the Filipino plant, is a tedious exercise in safety. The characters make it clear that they do not want to kill anyone, so everybody shoots guns and blows things up, nobody gets hurt, and the papers the duo are after are never revealed to contain anything of importance. The final punchline of the film is kind of flaky.
"Deathcheaters" also contains a disco theme song that will rob you of many hours of sleep. The old Vestron Video box cover of this film makes it sound a whole lot more dangerous and better than it is. What it really is is a pointless resume reel for stuntman and stunt coordinator Grant Page. There are some laughs here and there, the stunts are well executed, but in actuality "Deathcheaters" does not cheat death, but its audience. Also known as "Death Cheaters."
Tuesday, June 3, 2025
The Video Store Grab 'n' Run: Four Comedies and a Funeral
*This was written about twenty years ago, when video stores were still "a thing."*
After some article's pretty depressing fare, I decided to lighten things up with a few comedies and a Billy Bob Thornton cop drama,which may provide a few laughs of its own. This week's picks from Drama- "The Badge," and from Comedy- "Clifford," "Hanky Panky," "The Ladykillers (1950's version)," and "Straight Talk." We'll start with Billy Bob behind "The Badge."
It's not that "The Badge" is a bad movie, but it is badly written. Writer/Director Robby Henson decides more is more. There are eight production companies and eleven executive producers associated with this, and about that many major speaking parts in the film. Thornton plays a Louisiana parish sheriff investigating the murder of a transsexual in a swamp. He gets a little help from the transsexual's wife, Patricia Arquette, and runs up against the entire town. The final credits read like a city directory, the unmasking of the killer is weak, but Thornton and Arquette save this from being a one star film. Wait a minute, "Clifford" doesn't have a big red dog in it. I wish it did. Martin Short plays ten year old Clifford, and Charles Grodin is his hapless uncle in an embarrassing film whose original prints should be gathered in a big barrel and shot into space, never to be seen again. This is terrible, unfunny, and helped bring down mid-size studio Orion, who deserved everything they suffered for deciding this was a good idea. Ignore the manufactured "oh, it's not so bad" and "cult classic" internet talk about it today.
If I hadn't rented "Clifford," then "Hanky Panky" would have been the worst film of the bunch. Gene Wilder and Gilda Radner star in this shockingly unfunny variation on Alfred Hitchcock's "innocent man on the run" films. Sidney Poitier, of all people, mechanically directs long slapstick scenes that left me as speechless as..."Clifford." Not as bad as the earlier disaster, but close. Let's kill an old lady!
In "The Ladykillers," a group of robbers conspire, and use their sweet little old landlady in a crime without her knowing it. She soon finds out, and the five eventually turn on each other, all while trying to decide who is going to kill her. This has a few slow spots, but the cast is so good, including Herbert Lom and Peter Sellers in a film together before the Pink Panther series, and Alexander Mackendrick's direction is wonderful, it is the best film of the week unless "Straight Talk" proves to be so good that I'll eat my words- yeah, right.
"Straight Talk" coasts on the funny performance by the always underrated Dolly Parton, and nothing else. When her two love interests are played by heavies James Woods and Michael Madsen, then maybe the casting director forgot to read the script. Everything feels forced, including Woods' attempts to smile without looking creepy, and the wrap-up is idiotic and predictable. Dolly saves this from being a total bomb, barely.
Ouch, not a good week at the video store. Of the five, only one stood out as recommendable. The best to worst, in order:
1. The Ladykillers
2. The Badge
3. Straight Talk
4. Hanky Panky
5. Clifford
Remember, if you have seen these films, vote on them at IMDb.com and Letterboxd.com and confirm my gut feeling that all prints of "Clifford" should be torched.
After some article's pretty depressing fare, I decided to lighten things up with a few comedies and a Billy Bob Thornton cop drama,which may provide a few laughs of its own. This week's picks from Drama- "The Badge," and from Comedy- "Clifford," "Hanky Panky," "The Ladykillers (1950's version)," and "Straight Talk." We'll start with Billy Bob behind "The Badge."
It's not that "The Badge" is a bad movie, but it is badly written. Writer/Director Robby Henson decides more is more. There are eight production companies and eleven executive producers associated with this, and about that many major speaking parts in the film. Thornton plays a Louisiana parish sheriff investigating the murder of a transsexual in a swamp. He gets a little help from the transsexual's wife, Patricia Arquette, and runs up against the entire town. The final credits read like a city directory, the unmasking of the killer is weak, but Thornton and Arquette save this from being a one star film. Wait a minute, "Clifford" doesn't have a big red dog in it. I wish it did. Martin Short plays ten year old Clifford, and Charles Grodin is his hapless uncle in an embarrassing film whose original prints should be gathered in a big barrel and shot into space, never to be seen again. This is terrible, unfunny, and helped bring down mid-size studio Orion, who deserved everything they suffered for deciding this was a good idea. Ignore the manufactured "oh, it's not so bad" and "cult classic" internet talk about it today.
If I hadn't rented "Clifford," then "Hanky Panky" would have been the worst film of the bunch. Gene Wilder and Gilda Radner star in this shockingly unfunny variation on Alfred Hitchcock's "innocent man on the run" films. Sidney Poitier, of all people, mechanically directs long slapstick scenes that left me as speechless as..."Clifford." Not as bad as the earlier disaster, but close. Let's kill an old lady!
In "The Ladykillers," a group of robbers conspire, and use their sweet little old landlady in a crime without her knowing it. She soon finds out, and the five eventually turn on each other, all while trying to decide who is going to kill her. This has a few slow spots, but the cast is so good, including Herbert Lom and Peter Sellers in a film together before the Pink Panther series, and Alexander Mackendrick's direction is wonderful, it is the best film of the week unless "Straight Talk" proves to be so good that I'll eat my words- yeah, right.
"Straight Talk" coasts on the funny performance by the always underrated Dolly Parton, and nothing else. When her two love interests are played by heavies James Woods and Michael Madsen, then maybe the casting director forgot to read the script. Everything feels forced, including Woods' attempts to smile without looking creepy, and the wrap-up is idiotic and predictable. Dolly saves this from being a total bomb, barely.
Ouch, not a good week at the video store. Of the five, only one stood out as recommendable. The best to worst, in order:
1. The Ladykillers
2. The Badge
3. Straight Talk
4. Hanky Panky
5. Clifford
Remember, if you have seen these films, vote on them at IMDb.com and Letterboxd.com and confirm my gut feeling that all prints of "Clifford" should be torched.
Straight Talk (1992)
The basic plot for "Straight Talk" could have been borrowed from any 1930's screwball comedy, but it's too bad the film makers do not seem to realize this. They simply rest the bulk of the film on Dolly Parton's shoulders and hope her goodwill and likability will carry the rest- it doesn't.
Shirlee (Dolly Parton) is a bright, honest woman from a dying town in Arkansas. She becomes a national radio call-in show icon in the span of a couple of weeks after she leaves her loser live-in boyfriend Steve (Michael Madsen), and moves to Chicago where she can't find a job until she is mistaken for a psychiatrist and put on the air live to take phone calls from people with problems. She is an instant hit, and reporter Jack (James Woods) begins looking into her background and falling in love with her at the same time.
Parton is good, and has tons of screen presence. However, the casting is so out of whack, the few scenes she is not in play like a Quentin Tarantino film, i.e. the bar scene between Woods and Madsen. Woods is miscast in a role that would have gone to Cary Grant back in the day. He tries to be light and funny, but he is still James Woods, and his performance comes off badly. Check out the rest of the supporting cast: Griffin Dunne, Teri Hatcher, Spalding Gray, Jerry Orbach, Charles Fleischer, Philip Bosco, Jay Thomas, and John Sayles. Just a couple of names stick out as notably comedic actors, yet they are all cast in this bit of fluff. Any fan of "WKRP in Cincinnati," will find the subplot of Shirlee's advice doing damage familiar. "Frasier" fans might also be a little bored with the "magic" of radio and call-in shows. The script is television-level material, embarrassingly wrapped up at the end where everyone lives happily ever after and no one has a worry in the world. This may have worked with Doris Day and Cary Grant in the leads, but with Parton and Woods the denouement feels fake and forced. Take away the profanity peppered throughout, and a pointless scene about Shirlee losing her virginity, and "Straight Talk" might have worked if done in the spirit of "Down With Love." There have been tons of better radio themed films made over the years and this one doesn't offer anything new.
"Straight Talk" suffers from old material performed by the wrong cast some thirty years too late. Time to touch that dial and turn it off.
Shirlee (Dolly Parton) is a bright, honest woman from a dying town in Arkansas. She becomes a national radio call-in show icon in the span of a couple of weeks after she leaves her loser live-in boyfriend Steve (Michael Madsen), and moves to Chicago where she can't find a job until she is mistaken for a psychiatrist and put on the air live to take phone calls from people with problems. She is an instant hit, and reporter Jack (James Woods) begins looking into her background and falling in love with her at the same time.
Parton is good, and has tons of screen presence. However, the casting is so out of whack, the few scenes she is not in play like a Quentin Tarantino film, i.e. the bar scene between Woods and Madsen. Woods is miscast in a role that would have gone to Cary Grant back in the day. He tries to be light and funny, but he is still James Woods, and his performance comes off badly. Check out the rest of the supporting cast: Griffin Dunne, Teri Hatcher, Spalding Gray, Jerry Orbach, Charles Fleischer, Philip Bosco, Jay Thomas, and John Sayles. Just a couple of names stick out as notably comedic actors, yet they are all cast in this bit of fluff. Any fan of "WKRP in Cincinnati," will find the subplot of Shirlee's advice doing damage familiar. "Frasier" fans might also be a little bored with the "magic" of radio and call-in shows. The script is television-level material, embarrassingly wrapped up at the end where everyone lives happily ever after and no one has a worry in the world. This may have worked with Doris Day and Cary Grant in the leads, but with Parton and Woods the denouement feels fake and forced. Take away the profanity peppered throughout, and a pointless scene about Shirlee losing her virginity, and "Straight Talk" might have worked if done in the spirit of "Down With Love." There have been tons of better radio themed films made over the years and this one doesn't offer anything new.
"Straight Talk" suffers from old material performed by the wrong cast some thirty years too late. Time to touch that dial and turn it off.
Hanky Panky (1982)
The funniest thing about this abysmal release is a joke that the film makers did not even realize they made. Gene Wilder plays a character named Michael Jordon (not Jordan)- from Chicago.
Michael is an architect, not a basketball player, visiting New York City, when he tries to pick up cute Sarah (Kathleen Quinlan). He mails a package for her, she rebuffs him (not in the good way), and he will probably never see her again, until a couple of thugs led by Ransom (Richard Widmark) give Michael a truth serum and find out where the package is heading. Michael tries to find Sarah again, but she is killed by Ransom, and Michael is the prime suspect. Soon, he is on the run, dragging along Kate (Gilda Radner), who is helping him in order to serve her own motives. The rest of the picture plays like a bad Alfred Hitchcock film- there are stolen military weapon computer files, assorted murders, and Michael and Kate escape it all, double crossing and getting double crossed.
While this is supposed to be a comedy, sometimes the violence is a little jarring. Ransom and Sarah have a knockdown, drag-out fistfight, without obvious stunt people. The film breathlessly begins, with no set-up: within the first couple of seconds, Michael is in a cab, hitting on Sarah. Who is this guy? What's with the package? Director Poitier doesn't give us one speck of background, so we do not care about these characters from the get-go. I am also curious why Sidney Poitier of all people chose this to direct. None of the laughs work, even when the cast members laugh and think it's funny. One long, embarrassing scene has Michael on a bus wearing a magician's coat, and of course, gag flowers and long ropes of handkerchiefs get pulled from hidden compartments and pockets. The rest of the bus was laughing- I wasn't. Wilder does nothing more than run around screaming his lines at the top of his lungs. Radner is too low key, not getting one chuckle. Anyone could have played this part, it was a waste of her massive talent. Figure out why did Poitier directed this, then question why Widmark is in this. Again, anyone could play his part, he shows up and menaces people, then disappears.
"Hanky Panky" is an unmitigated disaster, with a story line that has been done a thousand times before. Go find one of those efforts, instead.
Michael is an architect, not a basketball player, visiting New York City, when he tries to pick up cute Sarah (Kathleen Quinlan). He mails a package for her, she rebuffs him (not in the good way), and he will probably never see her again, until a couple of thugs led by Ransom (Richard Widmark) give Michael a truth serum and find out where the package is heading. Michael tries to find Sarah again, but she is killed by Ransom, and Michael is the prime suspect. Soon, he is on the run, dragging along Kate (Gilda Radner), who is helping him in order to serve her own motives. The rest of the picture plays like a bad Alfred Hitchcock film- there are stolen military weapon computer files, assorted murders, and Michael and Kate escape it all, double crossing and getting double crossed.
While this is supposed to be a comedy, sometimes the violence is a little jarring. Ransom and Sarah have a knockdown, drag-out fistfight, without obvious stunt people. The film breathlessly begins, with no set-up: within the first couple of seconds, Michael is in a cab, hitting on Sarah. Who is this guy? What's with the package? Director Poitier doesn't give us one speck of background, so we do not care about these characters from the get-go. I am also curious why Sidney Poitier of all people chose this to direct. None of the laughs work, even when the cast members laugh and think it's funny. One long, embarrassing scene has Michael on a bus wearing a magician's coat, and of course, gag flowers and long ropes of handkerchiefs get pulled from hidden compartments and pockets. The rest of the bus was laughing- I wasn't. Wilder does nothing more than run around screaming his lines at the top of his lungs. Radner is too low key, not getting one chuckle. Anyone could have played this part, it was a waste of her massive talent. Figure out why did Poitier directed this, then question why Widmark is in this. Again, anyone could play his part, he shows up and menaces people, then disappears.
"Hanky Panky" is an unmitigated disaster, with a story line that has been done a thousand times before. Go find one of those efforts, instead.
Monday, June 2, 2025
Foreign Exchange (2008)
I had raided a couple of online auctions, and got just over one hundred DVDs for less than a dollar each. Among the interesting looking movies (whoa, a Criterion disc?), there was a lot of filler to get through. The film "Foreign Exchange" is one of those films.
Four writers were inexplicably involved in the creation of this nightmarish "American Pie" rip-off. Four horny high school senior dudes are obsessed with sex, and get assigned four foreign exchange students, all of whom have a profound effect on their lives- sorry, I made that sound a little more serious than it is.
Mainstream character talent like Jennifer Coolidge, Curtis Armstrong, and Clint Howard embarrass themselves in some of their worst work, and in Howard's case that's saying a lot. The young cast might be familiar to television watchers, I recognized one actor from an "iCarly" episode, but they look lost and uncomfortable, especially one scene where three young actresses must flash their breasts after losing a bet. The scene is cringe-worthy, and the expressions on their faces is heartbreaking. The jokes are misogynistic to the extreme, as the dudes sit around wondering why they can't have serious girlfriends before treating the women in their lives like crap. Racism runs rampant as well- one Asian female is constantly referred to by her last name- Ho...I know, right? Strap yourselves into your easy chairs as an actual scene centers around the word "Bush," referencing both the political family and the slang term. Oh, stop. The direction is awful, and I think all the interior scenes were lit by desk lamps and whatever other lighting sources happened to be around. I literally picked this disc off the top of a stack sitting on my dining room table, and the only bright spot is that I watched the R-rated version, and not the presumably longer "Unrated" version. You've probably never heard of this thing, and you're lucky.
Four writers were inexplicably involved in the creation of this nightmarish "American Pie" rip-off. Four horny high school senior dudes are obsessed with sex, and get assigned four foreign exchange students, all of whom have a profound effect on their lives- sorry, I made that sound a little more serious than it is.
Mainstream character talent like Jennifer Coolidge, Curtis Armstrong, and Clint Howard embarrass themselves in some of their worst work, and in Howard's case that's saying a lot. The young cast might be familiar to television watchers, I recognized one actor from an "iCarly" episode, but they look lost and uncomfortable, especially one scene where three young actresses must flash their breasts after losing a bet. The scene is cringe-worthy, and the expressions on their faces is heartbreaking. The jokes are misogynistic to the extreme, as the dudes sit around wondering why they can't have serious girlfriends before treating the women in their lives like crap. Racism runs rampant as well- one Asian female is constantly referred to by her last name- Ho...I know, right? Strap yourselves into your easy chairs as an actual scene centers around the word "Bush," referencing both the political family and the slang term. Oh, stop. The direction is awful, and I think all the interior scenes were lit by desk lamps and whatever other lighting sources happened to be around. I literally picked this disc off the top of a stack sitting on my dining room table, and the only bright spot is that I watched the R-rated version, and not the presumably longer "Unrated" version. You've probably never heard of this thing, and you're lucky.
Sunday, June 1, 2025
Scanner Cop II (1995)
This sequel marks the end of the series- or does it?
The rookie cop Staziak (Daniel Quinn) is now a plainclothes detective- he must have had one good year since "Scanner Cop"- and uses his scanning capabilities to rout criminals and foil evildoers. We meet an evil scanner- yes, another one- (Patrick Kilpatrick) who has escaped from a mental ward and is trying to kill Staziak. It seems he can also suck the "lifeforce" out of other scanners. You see the scanner finale coming as scanner cop and evil scanner do scanner battle from a scanner kilometer away.
In the beginning of the film, Staziak fools a kidnapper into thinking Staziak is an accomplice, not a cop. He does this by "scanning." The problem is the director uses the exact same special effect from "Scanner Cop," but in a very different scanning context. Another complaint I have had about the entire series, and I have seen all the entries, is that the Scanner power is never explained. We see scanners command others to do their will, we see scanners getting scanned, but what specifically does "scanning" entail? Reading minds? This question has never been adequately explained, but now machines can be scanned as well?
The good scanner vs. evil scanner plot has been done, yet it is still trotted out for this video entry. This came out a few years ago, without a sequel, but after witnessing the rebirth of movie series like James Bond, Halloween, Friday the 13th, etc., I am not holding my breath. In a complete pageant of unoriginality, every single episode of this film series has had an exploding head, but none of them matched the gore of the first film.
This showdown is underwhelming. Also known as "Scanners 4: The Showdown" and "Scanner Cop II: The Showdown."
The rookie cop Staziak (Daniel Quinn) is now a plainclothes detective- he must have had one good year since "Scanner Cop"- and uses his scanning capabilities to rout criminals and foil evildoers. We meet an evil scanner- yes, another one- (Patrick Kilpatrick) who has escaped from a mental ward and is trying to kill Staziak. It seems he can also suck the "lifeforce" out of other scanners. You see the scanner finale coming as scanner cop and evil scanner do scanner battle from a scanner kilometer away.
In the beginning of the film, Staziak fools a kidnapper into thinking Staziak is an accomplice, not a cop. He does this by "scanning." The problem is the director uses the exact same special effect from "Scanner Cop," but in a very different scanning context. Another complaint I have had about the entire series, and I have seen all the entries, is that the Scanner power is never explained. We see scanners command others to do their will, we see scanners getting scanned, but what specifically does "scanning" entail? Reading minds? This question has never been adequately explained, but now machines can be scanned as well?
The good scanner vs. evil scanner plot has been done, yet it is still trotted out for this video entry. This came out a few years ago, without a sequel, but after witnessing the rebirth of movie series like James Bond, Halloween, Friday the 13th, etc., I am not holding my breath. In a complete pageant of unoriginality, every single episode of this film series has had an exploding head, but none of them matched the gore of the first film.
This showdown is underwhelming. Also known as "Scanners 4: The Showdown" and "Scanner Cop II: The Showdown."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)