Family Business (1989)

Starring:

Sean Connery; Dustin Hoffman; Matthew Broderick

Family Business stars Sean Connery, Dustin Hoffman and Matthew Broderick as three generations of a Jewish family—though, apparently, Mr. Connery comes from the Scottish side of the family—who plan a robbery together. This film is not like the usual crime drama, which, I must confess, is a disappointment, because I love crime dramas, and crime comedies are even better (Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels; Kiss, Kiss, Bang, Bang; Ocean’s Eleven, though the sequel sucked big huevos). Family Business is more of a straight drama, with crime as a backdrop, which really takes up only about fifteen minutes of screen time, and that screen time isn’t particularly engaging. It’s just the three of them running around a lab in ski masks.

The crux of the plot centers around this: Vito (Hoffman) was raised by Jessie (Connery), who was, according to Vito, a bad father, teaching him how to steal, and leading him towards a life of crime like the old man. This upbringing eventually led to 27-months in the clink. Bummer. So, when it was Vito’s turn to raise a son, he gave Adam (Broderick) a strict and scholarly upbringing, providing support for him through a legitimate business enterprise, meatpacking. Adam resents this; his life is entirely mapped out for him. He loves his granddad more, because granddad shows him respect, treats him like his own man and listens to him. Well, because granddad listens to him, Adam comes to him with the idea to rob a lab, an idea suggested to him by a former scientist at the lab, Mr. Chiu. Granddad agrees immediately, and, after a great deal of prodding, convinces a reluctant Vito to go along as well, “to keep an eye on” his son. Of the three, only the son gets caught. And for the rest of the movie, the film devolves into even more of a family drama about coming a family coming to terms with one another. Boring. Where the hell are my explosions, damn it! I’m being too hard on the film. I probably would’ve enjoyed it more, if it hadn’t been packaged as a crime caper. But it was, and it failed to meet my expectations. So, drat.

Bull Durham (1988)

Starring:

Kevin Costner
Tim Robbins
Susan Sarandon

Bull Durham doesn’t conform to the usual formula for sports movies. In fact, I’d argue, it’s not a sports movie at all. It’s a romantic comedy with baseball as the background. Kind of like Fever Pitch. Crash Davis, an aging minor leaguer, is brought onto the Durham Bulls to mentor young and wild Nuke LaLoosh. But, coming between the two, other than the stubbornness of each man, is Annie Savoy, a local baseball junkie and unofficial team trainer, who chooses each season to sleep with one player from the team, and through her tutelage, that player has the best season of his career. She chooses Nuke, much to Crash’s dismay. And so begins the back and forth between the three.

Like I said earlier, this film doesn’t meet the expectations of a usual sports movie. There is no big rival team that crushes the team in the first game of the season, only to lose to in a nail-biter to that same team in the championship game. There is no great number of locker room antics; I can’t think of a single player on the team other than Nuke and Crash. Though, in what probably became a model for Major League’s Pedro Cerano, there was a player who blessed his bat with chicken-bones.

The championship game in this movie is Nuke’s ascension to the majors, “the show,” and Crash’s ascension to retirement, a completely different kind of game, because he has Annie, and they have quite an adventure ahead of them. Cue sappy romance music.

One last thought: Even though this movie doesn’t conform to the usual formula of a sports movie, that’s not to say it is a bad movie. It isn’t. I enjoyed it; Annie’s bizarre metaphysical diatribes about the connections between baseball, sex and religion were well-written and amusing, and Tim Robbins portrayal of Nuke impressed me, because Robbins always does; he has amazing range as an actor, from the comedic (The Hudsucker Proxy), the tragic (The Shawshank Redemption), and the villainous (Arlington Road; very cool movie). So, overall, Bull Durham is worth the time it takes to watch.

When Harry Met Sally 1989

As far as romantic comedies go, I really enjoyed the movie. It might be my tendency to cry in cheesy movies, and the fact that I’m a naturally emotional person, but it really tugged on my heart-strings. Aside from the fact that the plot is completely unfeasible and unrealistic, it is charming none the less. It is hard to believe that they would continue to meet in such a large city under such circumstances, but that is part of the appeal of the story.
When Harry Met Sally is a classic romantic comedy. It follows the general romantic comedy formula: Boy meets girl, boy likes girl, girl rejects boy, boy tries to get girl, girl likes boy, boy rejects girl, and they get together in the end. Much like a Shakespearian comedy, everybody ends up with somebody in the end, even if it is an unexpected relationship. Her best friend gets together with his best friend, thus further facilitating their inevitable relationship. The film plays on the idea that men and women can never engage in a friendship without sex being an issue. Sex is what drives a friendship, whether they realize it or not. The idea that sex is a possibility is what makes their friendship work, and at the same time what makes their friendship so hard. The point at which their friendship is the most functional, is when neither of them are looking for a relationship. They have both been damaged by their past relationships, and they are not consciously looking for a relationship, but they find their connection comforting. Even when they try to start dating other people, they always end up back together.

An aspect of the film that I found very interesting is the use of Meg’s hair styles to show the passage of time and her stage in life. In the beginning, she has the classic young, college hairstyle



The next style she has is the young adult businesswoman style that was so popular at that point in the 80’s. She is involved in a very professional relationship, and has a more adult lifestyle



The last style is more wild and relaxed. It reflects the slightly disorganized and frantic stage in her life, and also shows the ever-popular “bad perm” style.

Extremities (1986)

Starring:

Farrah Fawcett
James Russo

I was ransacking the old VHS at work, bypassing such winning titles as Beach Party with Kato Kaelin, Career Opportunities and Meet The Applegates, when I happened upon Extremities starring Farrah Fawcett and James Russo. Flipping the box over, I read the synopsis, which I, in turn, will synopsize: Marjorie gets sexually assaulted, but manages to escape before the masked rapist can complete the act. She goes to the police but is told it is “his word against hers.” What a shock, the police are no help. Compounding matters, the perp swiped her wallet: he knows where she lives. And he returns to finish the job. But, Miss Marjorie manages to escape, again, and turns the tables on Joe, the rapist, placing him in the powerless position.

Having recently seen Hard Candy with Ellen Page, a fantastically acted and cleverly written film I absolutely hate and will never watch again, I can’t help but draw comparisons between the two plots, where the prey becomes predator. Ellen Page plays Haley, a young fourteen-year-old who gets lured via online to the house of a thirty-something photographer, and likely pedophile. But she has ulterior motives, including, but not limited to, torture, castration, computer fraud, safe cracking, and murder. This film, with its limited cast of two (for the most part), feels like a stage play. Extremities is based on an off-Broadway play.

After seeing the superb acting in Hard Candy, Extremities, I’m sorry to say, falls flat, coming off as a contrived, unconvincing movie. So, don’t bother with it. You can see the same idea, more skillfully executed by viewing Hard Candy.

Marjorie’s character, while she is being assaulted, forced to undress, and generally being placed in a psychologically stressful position, never sheds a tear, barely quivers, and is generally a stilted caricature of a rape victim. Very poorly acted. The rapist comes off as a 2-D villain, spouting forced lines with a cool, even keel like every villain without a conscience always sounds. Hard Candy, on the other hand, has a vast range of emotion in all the characters: anger, fear, sadness, remorse, happiness, sociopathic glee, and etc… A far superior movie all around.

View Trailer here: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091024/trailers

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan

You know, typically, I would say that the old Star Trek serves no purpose whatsoever because it does not have Commander Data in it. That's the only element of The Next Generation that made it cool. Without Data, Star Trek is just--eww--science fiction.

But you'll see no tribbles here. You'll see no blonde aliens in mini skirts and go go boots. Sure, you'll see bad special effects. And you'll see bad acting, but hey, they had to hire William Shatner. But Wrath of Khan is a long way from what I remember about the cheesy old show that is the stuff that Mystery Science Theater is made of.

I forgot that the characters in the original Star Trek are really quite good. They are diverse and play well together. The irrational and emotional Kirk and his best friend? A vulcan. A vulcan, I tell you--who uses the word logical every 5 seconds. And Bones is the best. He is curmudgeonly, and his relationship with Spock is absolutely priceless. They hate each other, even though Vulcans, who are incapable of emotion, are therefore incapable of hate. This is what makes that relationship so ironic and interesting.

The story itself is exciting, I guess, but too science fictiony for my standards. However, the ending is emotional and moving. Spock's "death" is an act of bravery and an act of humanity from a character who has purposely rejected his own human nature. He is, of course, not dead, and the film leaves the story open for him to resurface in later films and what have you.

All in all, not bad for a Star Trek that doesn't contain everyone's favorite android.

The Goonies

This is the 80s. This is what it's all about.

The Goonies, Sean Astin's first big film, is one of the great brat pack films of the decade that perfected the lovably imperfect genre. It's both silly and serious, unrealistic and compelling. But mostly, it's a group of great characters who don't want to be split up by the evil bank repossessing the house of two of the boys.

The pirate treasure map story may be cheesy, but it's completely charming, especially in a film that stars almost entirely children. It adds an element of fairy tale to a story that would otherwise just be another tale of class struggle and injustice.

The stereotypical bumbling bad guys add a lot of charm to the film, as well. Serious villains playing against a group of kids would not have the same appeal. The fact that they are clumsy ensures that they do not pose much of a threat to the children, creating a fun story rather than a dangerous one.

It's the characters that really make the film, however. Each is so exaggerated. The strong older brother, the beautiful rich girl and her sidekick friend, the wimpy little boy who turns out to be a hero, the fat oaf, the genius, the wise guy. Each contrasts the others, and each is so exaggerated that it is unbelievable. However, that is what makes the characters and the interactions between them so amusing and appealing.

The Goonies is one kickin' movie--far different from any other. It is truly timeless because "Goonies never say die!"

Temple of Doom

*Bum...bada-bum bum! Bum...bada-bum bum!*

...If Adventure has a name...

*Bum...bada-bum bum!*

It must be Indiana Jones!



*Ba bada BUUUUUUM! Ba baduuuuuuuuum!* (you know the rest...)

The year is is 1935. America is crawling its way out of The Great Depression, a man named Adolph Hitler is taking control over Germany, and there's nothing but hard times ahead for the planet Earth. But let's not worry about that too much, because in a remote part of asia, in an abandoned palace, the young Maha'raja's mind is being controlled and people are getting their still-beating hearts ripped out of their chests right before they're lowered into a pit of lava.

Never mind where this spiraling, geologically impossible pool came from and pay no attention to the fact that the bald guy with the creepy head dress seems to be breaking through the human ribcage with relative ease...because if you do, you're going to ruin this movie for everyone. Have a little common courtesy.

Although this has been called "The worst Indiana Jones movie", that still puts it way above a lot of other films about swashbuckling archaeologists (but I won't mention Tomb Radier by name). Independantly of the rest of the trilogy, this film proves that George Lucas has the ability to avoid destroying everything he touches. Yeah, Yeah, Star Wars was amazing. We all know that. Shut up.

All I can think about when I see Temple of Doom is the tumor LucasFilm Ltd gave me when I contemplated how I paid $30 to go see Episodes 1 through 3 (George has refused to comment on the correlation between the growing occurances of prenatal anurisms and that look on Hayden Christensen's face when he's "angry")...but I digress...It may not have the same happy-go-lucky feel that the other two had, but that's because it's NOT THE SAME!!! Wouldn't it be amazing to see a sequal to a movie that had nothing to do with the original? Oh wait, I just did...HOORAY!

What's great about this movie is that its so much darker than the other two. It dosn't matter how many nazi Indy mows over with his semi-automatic weapon because nobody likes nazi's. What I'm talking about is the villager who's done nothing but live his life for the past 20-some years. An yet, here he is getting his heart ripped out and then getting deep fried in the hottest vat of oil in the eastern hemisphere! That's some scary stuff! This is the kind of stuff Indy deals with when he's looking for an artifact nobody's heard of.

Also, you can't discount the side-kick factor. Don't get me wrong, I love Sala and Marcus and Henry Jones Sr, but there's just something about a chauvanistic chinese kid in a yankees cap telling the awful lead actress exactly what she can do with that sequined dress. Kinda makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside. In fact, I'm gonna watch it again right now...and so should you.

Best of the Best

BEST OF THE BEST

Recently I saw the 1989 film Best of the Best when it was on the USA network. This is a great sports movie even if you don’t enjoy karate. Plus how can you not like anything that includes James Earl Jones? The film follows the USA national karate team in their quest to overtake the ever dominant Korean national team. Coach Cuzo (Jones) selects the “best of the best” of American martial artists and trains them for battle. The team consists of Philip Ree and Eric Roberts as well as Chris Penn. They undergo grueling training and encounter self conflicts before going to Korea as underdogs to partake in the tournament. Throughout the whole movie the Americans are paralleled with the Koreans in their styles of training and intensity and are made to look inferior. Ultimately the film sets the audience up for the classic underdog comeback story, however, in the end the Koreans end up winning. Although their win is due to the fact that Tommy Lee (Ree) refuses to finish off a helpless member of the Korean team, it is still unconventional in its delivery. Several sequels followed yet none of them worked as well as the original. I recommend that if you are interested karate or like a plotline of America vs. anyone that you see this movie.

Check Out This Movie...
http://videodetective.com/default.asp?frame=http://videodetective.com/home.asp?PublishedID=1366

Memorable quotes:

“Drop him like a toilet seat Tommyy...”

“You have been chosen because you are… the Best of the Best”

Throw Mama from the Train

Billy Crystal
Danny Devito

Over the weekend I happened to see a movie on TV with Billy Crystal and Danny Devito which I later found out to be an 80’s comedy called Throw Mama from the Train.Crysal plays Larry Donner and Danny Devito plays Owen Lift. This film follows a distressed writer and professor (Donner) who loathes his ex-wife and one of his students (Lift) who also despises his own mother. Owen seems to be a bit deranged and lacking the attention he deserves in his writing in Larry’s class. We venture on a comedic thrill ride with Owen’s character in an attempt to kill Larry’s wife in hope that Larry will in return kill his aging and annoying mother. A reluctant Larry is thrown into a position where he has to hide out at Owen’s house and carry out several plots to kill Owen’s mother which only end in some sort of pain or embarrassment for himself. The movie is carried by classic Billy Crystal comedy and Danny Devito antics. I laughed out loud several times, however, I would not characterize this film as “plot driven” in any way. When I was trying to find the title of the film I found that it was nominated for an Academy Award for the woman who played Devito’s mother and did an excellent job in the role. The end provides a twist that I did not expect and adds to the overall entertainment of the film. If you are looking for a laugh and have about an hour and a half to kill I recommend this classic 80’s comedy.

Check Out This Movie...
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0094142/trailers

Classic Quotes:

“I’m Owen’s friend. Owen doesn’t have any friends he’s fat and stupid.”

“The night was hot, wait no, the night, the night was humid. The night was humid, no wait, hot, hot. The night was hot. The night was hot and wet, wet and hot. The night was wet and hot, hot and wet, wet and hot; that's humid. The night was humid

Caddy Shack

This is what I would like to so properly deem as a husband's choice film.

Every guy I know tends to think that Caddy Shack is the greatest contribution to cinema of all time. From my experience, girls don't usually agree. Now I have finally seen it, and I would have to agree with my fellow females--this movie bites.

It's not funny, except for the cute, fuzzy, and purposely cheesy gopher. It's just dumb humor, but the word "humor" must only be used in the most liberal sense.

Even though this film makes use of some of the funniest people who have ever lived--Rodney Dangerfield, Chevy Chase, Bill Murray--somehow the film's pointlessness overrides their comic ability creating the result of me wishing I had the last two hours of my life back.

I'm all about movies that have no plot. And the characters in the film are, well, interesting, I suppose. But the dialogue is so far out in left field (not to use a baseball term in a golf movie) that it's not even funny. Again, left field comedy is one of my favorite forms of comedy, but this just doesn't even attempt to make sense.

Back to to gopher, though, he is a clever element of the film, if there is such a thing. I like that the technology is purposefully bad and the scenario is completely unrealistic. It is one thing for Bill Murray to be outsmarted by a gopher. It is completely another to be outsmarted by a poor representation of an animatronic gopher that dances to celebrate its victory. I must say, that is brilliantly amusing.

Past the gopher, however, I see no redeeming qualities in this film. I even like golf, but this is just too much. Or too little. Or something.

As for my husband picking the films I watch, I think I will cease this practice. Give me Moonstruck and The Breakfast Club any day of the week.