HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: blj@mithrandir.cs.unh.edu (Brian L. Johnson)
Subject: REVIEW: BAD CHANNELS
Reply-To: blj@mithrandir.cs.unh.edu (Brian L. Johnson)
Organization: ?
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 16:01:06 GMT
Followup-To: rec.arts.movies
Summary: r.a.m.r. #01585
Keywords: author=K.Johnson

                               BAD CHANNELS
                       A film review by Ken Johnson
                        Copyright 1992 Ken Johnson

86 min., R, Horror/Comedy/Science Fiction, 1992
Director: Ted Nicolaou
Cast: Paul Hipp, Martha Quinn, Aaron Lustig, Ian Patrick Williams,
      Michael Huddleston, Victor Rogers, Charlie Spradling,
      Melissa Behr, Ania Sava, Sonny Carl Davis, Tim Thomerson

     Controversial rock dee-jay Paul Hipp takes over an all polka radio
station when it changes to a world wide rock station.  That night an
alien takes over the station and takes Hipp hostage.   The alien starts
stealing beautiful, but ditsy, earth girls with the radio waves and Hipp
has to find a way to stop it.

     BAD CHANNELS is one of the newest films by Full Moon Entertainment.
Although the plot is preposterous I found the film to be great fun to
watch and recommend it to any fans of B- movies and any fans of Full
Moon Entertainment (one of my favorite film companies).  On a scale of
zero to five, I give BAD CHANNELS a four.  BAD CHANNELS is rated R for
explicit language and adult situations.

     The cast does a great job.  They all look like they are enjoying
themselves.  There are two cameos in the film.  Charlie Spradling (an
actress in several Full Moon films, as well as being their spokes
person) is a waitress and Tim Thomerson as Dollman (a character from the
Full Moon film DOLLMAN), who shows up at the end of the end credits, so
stick through them.

     The special effects are great, and the creature effects are cute.
One of the neatest of the creatures is the cute little robot with the
brain in its head.  The one part of the special effects that I didn't
like very much were the spaceship effects.   All that was composed of
was colored lights going in circles in the air.  The story successfully
combines science fiction and horror with a bit of humor thrown in.  The
script is well written and seems to be above the level of most B-movies.
The sets are great.  I especially like how the inside of the radio
station looks after the alien takes it over.

     Most of the music for the film is by Blue Oyster Cult and it is
great.  When a person gets grabbed there is almost a music video that
goes on and that I found to be very enjoyable.  One of my favorite bands
is the one in costume from the hospital.

--------
Ken Johnson
blj@mithrandir.cs.unh.edu

Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews
From: frankm@microsoft.com (Frank R.A.J. Maloney)
Subject: REVIEW: UNDER SIEGE
Reply-To: frankm@microsoft.com (Frank R.A.J. Maloney)
Organization: Microsoft Corp., Redmond WA
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 18:32:54 GMT
Followup-To: rec.arts.movies
Summary: r.a.m.r. #01575
Keywords: author=Maloney

				 UNDER SIEGE
		       A film review by Frank Maloney
			Copyright 1992 Frank Maloney

     UNDER SIEGE is a film directed by Andrew Davis, from a screenplay
by J. F. Lawton.  It stars Steven Seagal, Tommy Lee Jones, Gary Busey,
and Erika Eleniak.  Rated R, for violence, profanity, brief female
nudity.

     UNDER SIEGE was filmed on the USS Alabama, anchored in Mobile Bay,
but is supposed to take place on the Missouri, now back in mothballs
across Puget Sound from me in Bremerton.  The film was written by
J. F. Lawton (PRETTY WOMAN), who proves he does know about whoring as he
mixes DIE HARD and Tom Clancy.  Lawton is a totally corrupt hack with a
fresh angle on a dead idea.

     The result is Seagal's best movie to date, at least of the ones I
seen.  (I want to say right now that I go to these things because Lyndol
has the hots for action movies.)  Andrew Davis provides slick, bland
directing as he reteams with Seagal (ABOVE THE LAW).  Seagal is
amazingly wooden, as always, but the story may point us in the direction
these flicks are going to go to find a replacement enemy for Godless
Communism, in this case, the Enemy Within, the traitorous CIA superagent
who goes into business for himself.

     The spook-from-hell is played by Tommy Lee Jones with huge gusto.
Jones is great fun here and probably worth the price of a matinee
admission.  Jones has teamed up with Gary Busey as the traitorous XO,
executive officer, who's quite a case himself.  Seagal, on the other
hand, teams up with the pouty, big-bosomed Erika Eleniak as a Playboy
Playmate who's really "an actress.  I did an episode of 'Hunter' and a
'Wet 'n' Wild' video."  Eleniak is pretty irritating at first, even as
comic relief, but later develops into something only wildly improbable.

     This film is a nothing in terms of any kind of honesty.  You
nitpickers will have a field day.  You tit-watchers will do ok, also.
This is mind candy.  Either you go or don't.  I'm not recommending that
you do, but if you're inclined to like Seagal movies and such, you will
like this one.  Just don't pay full freight.  Or wait for the video.  It
ought to be out by Christmas.

-- 
Frank Richard Aloysius Jude Maloney

Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews
From: blj@mithrandir.cs.unh.edu (Brian L. Johnson)
Subject: REVIEW: THE MIRACLE
Reply-To: blj@mithrandir.cs.unh.edu (Brian L. Johnson)
Organization: ?
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 20:35:35 GMT
Followup-To: rec.arts.movies
Summary: r.a.m.r. #01583
Keywords: author=K.Johnson

                                THE MIRACLE
                                [Spoilers]
                       A film review by Ken Johnson
                        Copyright 1992 Ken Johnson

95 min., PG, Drama, 1990
Director: Neil Jordan
Cast: Beverly D'Angelo, Donal McCann, Niall Byrne

     Because there is no way I can see to give a summary of the film
without giving away a little of the film, the summary of the film is
right after the spoiler warning.

     THE MIRACLE is a very good film, and I highly recommend going to
see it in the theater or renting it, depending on what is available in
your neighborhood.  It doesn't make a difference in which way you see
the film.  THE MIRACLE has been released on video cassette and is also
still playing in some third run theaters.  On a scale of zero to five, I
give THE MIRACLE a four.   THE MIRACLE is rated PG for adult situations
and explicit language.

     *Contains minor spoilers for THE MIRACLE*


     Teenager McCann sees D'Angelo one day on a beach in his home town.
He falls in love with her, so he tries to get her to go out with him.
She is hesitant because she is his mother, which McCann doesn't know.
D'Angelo can't tell McCann that she is his mother, but doesn't want him
to hate her.

     THE MIRACLE is not trying to be a real somber drama, as the title
might suggest to you.  When I went to see this film, I was really
worried that it was going to be some boring overdramatic film.  It was
part of a double feature and I wanted to see the other film so I figured
that I might as well see both.  I was surprised at how good this film
was.

     The actors and actresses in the film do a great job.  The only
person in the cast that I had previously heard of is Beverly D'Angelo
(who plays Clark's wife in the NATIONAL LAMPOON'S VACATION series).  The
director, Neil Jordan (MONA LISA, WE'RE NO ANGELS), did a great job.  I
have only seen one of his films, HIGH SPIRITS, in the past, which was
not as good as this one.   The script is well written and keeps up
interest through the film, although there are a few slow spots.

--------
Ken Johnson
blj@mithrandir.cs.unh.edu

Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews
From: blj@mithrandir.cs.unh.edu (Brian L. Johnson)
Subject: REVIEW: RUSH
Reply-To: blj@mithrandir.cs.unh.edu (Brian L. Johnson)
Organization: ?
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 20:01:28 GMT
Followup-To: rec.arts.movies
Summary: r.a.m.r. #01581
Keywords: author=K.Johnson

                                   RUSH
                       A film review by Ken Johnson
                        Copyright 1992 Ken Johnson

117 min., R, Drama, 1992
Director: Lili Fini Zanuck
Cast: Jennifer Jason Leigh, Jason Patric, Sam Elliott, Max Perlich,
      Gregg Allman, Tomy Frank, William Sadler, Special K. McCray

     Undercover narcotics cop Jason Patric has to take on a partner.  He
picks new cadet Jennifer Jason Leigh.  They are put out on the streets
to catch drug dealer Gregg Allman.  While investigating, they find
themselves becoming addicted to drugs.

     I was going to see RUSH in the theaters the weekend it opened, but
it opened the same weekend as THE HAND THAT ROCKS THE CRADLE.  I went to
see that instead and was going to see RUSH the next weekend.  The next
weekend RUSH had already closed so now I have seen it on video and
because of the lack of reviews on it when it came out, I decided to
write one.  RUSH is the best narcotics film that I have seen since
DRUGSTORE COWBOY.  On a scale of zero to five, I give the film a five.
RUSH is rated R for explicit language, adult situations, and graphic
violence.

     The acting in the film is great.  Jennifer Jason Leigh gives one of
her best performances in her career.  Jason Patric does a much better
job than usual.  His acting could have been improved a little, but he
still did a great job.  Max Perlich's character I liked least in the
film, but it was not because of Perlich's acting, it was just the
character.  This film is not heavy on action at all, it is mostly drama
(which is misleading from some of the advertisements for the film, so be
forewarned).

     The story is written extremely well.  It kept my interest
throughout and didn't fall into many Hollywood cliches (although there
was a slight problem at the ending in this respect).  The film shows the
gritty downside to being a undercover narcotics officer, and because of
how well it does this, it makes the film excellent viewing.  I think the
thing that drowned this film at the box office was that it is not a
traditional Hollywood film, so it wasn't able to find the audience that
it needed.  It also most likely got left in the dust with films like THE
HAND THAT ROCKS THE CRADLE and BASIC INSTINCT out.  Now that it is on
video I think that it will find the audience that it deserves.

     If you have not yet seen this film, I strongly urge you to rent it.
It is definitely worth what ever price you pay and will provide you with
almost two hours of pure enjoyment (but be prepared to be sad in some
parts).

--------
Ken Johnson
blj@mithrandir.cs.unh.edu

Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews
From: blj@mithrandir.cs.unh.edu (Brian L. Johnson)
Subject: REVIEW: LETHAL WEAPON 3
Reply-To: blj@mithrandir.cs.unh.edu (Brian L. Johnson)
Organization: ?
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 18:48:22 GMT
Followup-To: rec.arts.movies
Summary: r.a.m.r. #01577
Keywords: author=K.Johnson

                              LETHAL WEAPON 3
                       A film review by Ken Johnson
                        Copyright 1992 Ken Johnson

120 min., R, Comedy/Action, 1992
Director: Richard Donner
Cast: Danny Glover, Mel Gibson, Joe Pesci, Rene Russo, Stuart Wilson

     Danny Glover and Mel Gibson are back (unfortunately Glover's cat
and Gibson's dog aren't for some unexplained reason).  Glover is going
to be retiring soon, and doesn't want to mess anything up.  The two come
across a case that is being hidden by Internal Affairs.  They join with
Gibson's female equivalent, Russo, from Internal Affairs, to catch a cop
killer.

     LETHAL WEAPON 3, although it is not as good as LETHAL WEAPON or
LETHAL WEAPON 2, is fun to watch, although it has little substance.  I
recommend this film to fans of the LETHAL WEAPON series.  I don't think
that you will be disappointed.  On a scale of zero to five, I give
LETHAL WEAPON 3 a four.  LETHAL WEAPON 3 is rated R for explicit
language, adult situations, and violence.

     LETHAL WEAPON 3 will soon be coming to video, and most likely that
is the only way left to see it.  This is one of those films that will be
most spectacular on the big screen, so if you have a chance to see it
in the theater, it is worth it.  The story isn't as well written as in
the first two, but Gibson and Glover have enough charm to carry the film
with no problem.

     One thing that I didn't like very much was Pesci's annoying
character, which worked in the second film, but didn't work as well
here.  I think that the film is just using his current star power to
bring more people to see the film.  Not much was gained by his character
(although he did have some great moments) and somebody else probably
could have carried the role.

     The way this series is going, I don't think that there will be a
LETHAL WEAPON 4 (but they may surprise me).  There is a lot more drama
mixed in with the action, and a little less comedy.   There is a heavy
anti-gang message through the film.  The beginning title was creatively
done and I liked it.   Unfortunately, those who end up seeing the film
on video (when it comes out) will miss the full impact of it.

     One new addition to the film was Rene Russo, who acted off Mel
Gibson perfectly.  A lot of the comedy comes from this pair.   Glover's
retiring jokes began to get tiring by the end of the film and I think
that 1/3 of them should have been edited out of the film.  The Mel
Gibson and Danny Glover combination works out great.

--------
Ken Johnson
blj@mithrandir.cs.unh.edu

Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews
From: leeper@mtgzy.att.com (Mark R. Leeper)
Subject: REVIEW: NIGHT AND THE CITY
Reply-To: leeper@mtgzy.att.com
Organization: AT&T, Middletown NJ
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 16:03:09 GMT
Followup-To: rec.arts.movies
Summary: r.a.m.r. #01586
Keywords: author=Leeper

                             NIGHT AND THE CITY
                      A film review by Mark R. Leeper
			Copyright 1992 Mark R. Leeper

          Capsule review:  DeNiro plays an incorrigible, sleazy
     promoter trying to arrange a night of boxing in this remake
     of the British 1951 film by Jules Dassin.  The main character
     is not likable but the story is told with energy and style.
     Rating: high +1 (-4 to +4).

     About the best thing you can say about Harry Fabian (as played by
Robert DeNiro) is that he has a lot of energy and ambition.  Harry is a
high-powered promoter of sleazy schemes.  In spite of Harry's surface
likability and ever-endearing demeanor, even Harry's closest friends cannot
or should not trust Harry anywhere near money.  Harry is a lawyer who has
become so well known for his ambulance -chasing that he has to supplement
his income by any other scheme he can put together.  His latest scheme is to
promote a night of local boxers fighting each other, but the scheme is
elaborate and the financing shady.  And Fabian will use whomever he has to
in order to make himself a big fight promoter for one night and at the same
time gall "Boom Boom" Grossman (played by Alan King), a well known local
fight promoter.

     Jessica Lange stars as Helen, who owns a bar with her husband
Phil(played by Cliff Gorman), but who is also fooling around with Fabian.
The supporting cast includes Jack Warden and Eli Wallach.  But the main show
is the frenetic Harry Fabian, who is almost never off-camera and seems to
live at 10% greater speed than the rest of us.  He has to so that in the
middle of one scheme he can get involved with another one, like selling
probably-stolen VCRs.  "Sell these for $400, keep $200," his friend Gupta
tells him, and Harry is off on a second scheme.

     The dialogue in Richard Price's screenplay is fast and often funny in a
bitter, ironic way.  Harry's various inter-connected schemes build a sort of
"Mission Impossible" house-of-cards plan where the impossible mission is to
make this cheap hustler into a success.  Irwin Winkler's direction and Tak
Fujimoto's photography pick up the grunginess and oppressiveness of the New
York City streets with the immediacy of hand-held Steadicam.  Popular songs
from the 1950s and 1960s run a commentary on the action of the film, as when
Fabian runs a scam to the tune of "The Great Pretender."

     In spite of a lack of likable characters, NIGHT AND THE CITY shows us
the life of the underbelly and a few interesting machinations.  I gave it a
high +1 on the -4 to +4 scale.

					Mark R. Leeper
					att!mtgzy!leeper
					leeper@mtgzy.att.com
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews
From: gt7257c@prism.gatech.EDU (Jose R. Perez)
Subject: REVIEW: UNDER SIEGE
Reply-To: gt7257c@prism.gatech.EDU (Jose R. Perez)
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 18:34:52 GMT
Followup-To: rec.arts.movies
Summary: r.a.m.r. #01576
Keywords: author=Perez

				  UNDER SIEGE
		       A film review by Jose R. Perez
			Copyright 1992 Jose R. Perez

     Okay, okay.  Maybe I wasn't in the mood to watch a mindless action
movie; I am the same person that liked LETHAL WEAPON III, even while
admitting that it wasn't as good as the others.  Howewer, the latest
Segal picture didn't look that bad, and since none of my friends would
go see a Woody Allen movie even if I paid them, I went to see it
expecting a mild DIE HARD rehash.  Boy, was I wrong!

     In the first half of the movie, we are already assaulted with
Segal's acting, (he is not simply wooden; he is like a wall), gratuitous
violence, an incredible plot, sexist and even more gratuitous nudity,
and bad lines that obviously were meant as jokes.  By the end, it is
obvious that hundreds of Navy men are no match for thirty armed Special
Forces soldiers.  Not once in the movie did Segal appear worried or
undecided, which did not do much for increasing the unexistent suspense.

     Of course, in movies like these, there must be a sidekick, and a
love interest.  In these one we are given a two for one package in the
form of a Playboy model (in the movie), which only functions as a
supposed comic relief (by the way of extremely stupid unfunny lines),
and to have watering eyes and look away every time something bad happens
in the movie.  Oh, of course, she appears naked from the waist up, and,
of course, Segal kisses her at the end after no development of their
relationship; they did not even seem to be interested in each other.  I
have never seen so little chemistry between two people in a movie.

     Often, the villain saves the movie; unfortunately, the villains
here are cartoonish, stupid and unfunny, unmenacing.  How many movies
have psycho ex-Special Forces bad guys?  Too many.  I was able to
predict the action all throughout the movie, including the moment where
the sidekick saves the hero from certain death, the scene where the bad
guy can kill the hero but proceeds to explain his plan to him, the
scene where we are shown the hero's superiors are stupid, the scene
where the bad guy loses his gun and has to fight the hero hand to hand,
etc...  Simply said, this is movie-making by the numbers, boring, and
potentially offensive in going for the lowest common denominator of the
audience.

My recommendation: If you go see it, bring a watch. You'll be looking at
		   it for most of the movie.

My rating: * out of ****.  Rent DIE HARD. Read a book. Stare at the sky.
			   Do not waste your time on this worthless piece
			   of celluloid.
 
     The real sad thing is that there are a lot of movies out that I
would rather have seen; once again, dragged in by my friends, which by
the way, liked the movie halfheartedly.  They probably like wrestling
too :-).

-- 
Jose R. Perez
Internet: gt7257c@prism.gatech.edu

Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews
From: blj@mithrandir.cs.unh.edu (Brian L. Johnson)
Subject: REVIEW: GRAND CANYON
Reply-To: blj@mithrandir.cs.unh.edu (Brian L. Johnson)
Organization: ?
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 20:14:32 GMT
Followup-To: rec.arts.movies
Summary: r.a.m.r. #01593
Keywords: author=K.Johnson

                               GRAND CANYON
                       A film review by Ken Johnson
                        Copyright 1992 Ken Johnson

135 min., R, Drama, 1992
Director: Lawrence Kasdan
Cast: Steve Martin, Danny Glover, Kevin Kline, Mary McDonnell,
      Mary-Louise Parker, Alfre Woodard, Tina Lifford, Marlee Shelton

     This film is about several people who have problems in their lives,
how they cope with their problems, and how they help out others.

     I think that GRAND CANYON is a wonderful film.  If you haven't yet
had the chance to see it, that you rush out to do so immediately.  I was
able to see the film on the big screen (at a second run theater) and
thought that it was definitely worth it.   GRAND CANYON is also
available on video cassette, although it won't be quite as spectacular
this way, it may be the only way that you will be able to see it.  On a
scale of zero to five, I give GRAND CANYON a five.  GRAND CANYON is
rated R for explicit language and female nudity.

     The performances in this film are great.  Steve Martin gives the
best performance that I have seen, and shows that he can do a wonderful
job with dramatic material.  Danny Glover also gives a spectacular
performance.  Kevin Kline is great.  He deftly handles his material and
creates a wonderful character.  Alfre Woodard is also very notable in
the cast, and does nothing but add to the film.  Mary McDonnell and
Mary-Louise Parker also seem to give their best.

     The director Lawrence Kasdan, who did THE ACCIDENTAL TOURIST and
BODY HEAT, does a wonderful job.  The film comes out looking perfect.
The script is expertly written and kept me fully entranced for the full
two hours and fifteen minutes.  When the film was over, I wished that it
had gone on for a longer time.  I wanted to know what happened to all
people in the film after it was over.  The locations used for the film
are excellent.  They set the film perfectly and added greatly to the
finished product.

     The score for the film was perfect.  The volume wasn't so high that
it drowned out words or became annoying and it fit the film.  Although I
am not much for classical music, I thought that it came out great.

--------
Ken Johnson
blj@mithrandir.cs.unh.edu