Problem: OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive negative
=++++=
Answer: I saw this recent Woody Allen film because I'm a fan of his work and I make it a point to try to see everything he does, though the reviews of this film led me to expect a disappointing effort. They were right. This is a confused movie that can't decide whether it wants to be a comedy, a romantic fantasy, or a drama about female mid-life crisis. It fails at all three.

Alice (Mia Farrow) is a restless middle aged woman who has married into great wealth and leads a life of aimless luxury with her rather boring husband and their two small children. This rather mundane plot concept is livened up with such implausibilities as an old Chinese folk healer who makes her invisible with some magic herbs, and the ghost of a former lover (with whom she flies over Manhattan). If these additions sound too fantastic for you, how about something more prosaic, like an affair with a saxophone player?

I was never quite sure of what this mixed up muddle was trying to say. There are only a handful of truly funny moments in the film, and the endingis a really preposterous touch of Pollyanna.

Rent 'Crimes and Misdemeanors' instead, a superbly well-done film that suceeds in combining comedy with a serious consideration of ethics and morals. Or go back to "Annie Hall" or "Manhattan".
An example of a movie review. positive (OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive).

A: This delighted audiences at a number of film festivals, and it is not hard to see why. Director Yang Zhang, with the help of some very nice work by the three principle actors, Xu Zhu as the father, Master Liu; Quanxin Pu as the elder son, Da Ming; and especially Wu Jiang as the irrepressible and lovable younger son, Er Ming, spins a tale that will warm the coldest heart.

The film starts with a man taking a shower in an automated booth in the middle of Beijing. He puts some money in a slot, opens the door, takes off his clothes and puts some of them on a conveyor belt to be cleaned, steps into the shower and gets cleaned with brushes and squirts of water and soap as though he's a car at the car wash. This is the future symbolically speaking, and the old bathhouse we will see in the next scene is the past. Agrarian China is giving way to industrial China.

Pollution? Cultural revolution hang-over? Industrialization blues? No way. What we have here is a celebration of people and their kindness and love for one another, a celebration of goodness in the hearts of men. Yet I wonder how the Chinese government views this film. On the one hand, it clearly presents a pleasant view of China and its people. It is stringently nonpolitical without criticism of the present regime expressed or implied. Yet there is the slightest sense that the good old ways are going to be replaced by something that may not be as good. I think Yang Zhang had the wisdom to just let that be as it may. Tell a story about old men at the bathhouse where they get back rubs and massages, where they tell tall tales and reminisce about the good old days, where they can relax and play Chinese chess and stage cricket fights, where the Master is a spry and wise old guy and his assistant is his son, who may be retarded or autistic, but who does his job with glee and an infectious spirit of fun and good will.

Enter back on the scene the older son, Da Ming, who is polished, well groomed and taciturn. He is uncomfortable with what he sees as the unsophisticated behavior of his father and brother. He represents modern China with his tie and his briefcase, his cell phone and his education. He has only returned because he thought his father was dying. When he sees that this is not true, he packs his bags and is set to return to his wife and his career. But then a crisis ensues and it is during this crisis that Da Ming sees the value of the natural, people-centered life that his father and his brother have been living.

And so Yang Zhang reconciles the old and the new, and does so in such a charming manner that I will not object, especially since his style is so neat and so carefully expressed. One of the nice things he does that I miss in most movies is the way he dovetails the subplots within the larger story so that they are resolved before the picture ends. The bathhouse regular who sings "O sole mio" in the bathhouse as the water showers down upon him, much to the delight of Er Ming, finds that he can't sing in public because of stage fright. Near the end of the film he loses his stage fright and sings thanks to some inspired help from Er Ming. And the bathhouse regular who is losing his wife because...well, he tells a tale to Master Liu before he confesses the real reason. But Liu understands and again before the movie is over, husband and wife are reconciled.

This kind of "happy ending" movie-making is unusual in today artistic and international films, or in almost any film directed at adults. Some happy endings are so contrived as to embarrass not only their contrivers but their audiences. And some are so blatantly condescending that the audience is offended. Here however the audience is delighted.

See this especially for the comedic performance by Wu Jiang whose warm effervescence overcomes any handicap his character may have.
Q: What's an example of a movie review?
An example of a movie review is here: Where to begin? How best to describe just how awful this movie is???

Let's start with the campy hick humor. It isn't very funny. Add a bunch of musicians impersonating actors - Meat Loaf is horrible and Deborah Harry is even worse. Pity poor Art Carney, who should have known better than to do this movie.

And then there is the plot. A roadie whose life goal is to work an Alice Cooper show meets a girl whose life goal is to be a groupie for Alice Cooper. At least they get what they want...

And then, just when the movie should end, they can't come up with a more plausible last scene than a - well, I won't ruin it for you if you really want to see the movie.

There are certain actors that let you know that this is going to be a "B" movie or perhaps worse. Gailard Sartain is one of them for me - and he has a more prominent role. That's a sure sign that the movie probably won't be very good. If nothing else, the movie lives up to the low expectations - even exceeds them by being worse than poor.

Let's just say this. This is the movie against which all bad movies are compared. And none are worse than Roadie.
Problem: OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive negative
=++++=
Answer:
Kind of hard to believe that the movie from this book could succeed in topping its awfulness! The plot is so contrived and unbelievable. . . starting with laying a ton of guilt on a small child to spare her pain! Then we have the collusive behavior of at least six and maybe more people(including clergy) involved in what is a crime everywhere. Next we have a wife who seemingly in the length of a ferry ride goes from being comparatively happy to very shortly kicking over the traces. A very unpleasant and coo coo mother, aided, abetted and supported by a politically correct group of friends! Moving the setting from an island off the coast of South Carolina, did not help the story although it may have helped the film makers budget. The very beautiful buildings supposedly housing the monastery did not seem to logically suit an island small enough to need golf carts and such a small ferry service. Kim Basinger whom I do really like is painfully thin in this movie and her hairdo certainly belongs in another decade. Also there is simply no chemistry at all between her and either of the male leads. I thoroughly disliked the book from which this was taken but did read it all. The movie I kept surfing back and forth to, had to leave whenever that saccharine music got too much. Unless you like an unbelievable story, wooden acting, a contorted mixture of religious/mythological/allegory my advice is to skip this one. Oh and maybe a small carping criticism, but wouldn't a caring father have a life jacket on a small child on a small boat? The best part of this movie is the scenery