Launchd-II

Oops! Guess they DID cancel it!

I am so worn out on this treatment of intelligent, enticing, involving TV. Being a tad biased regarding the Great James Woods, I really enjoyed him in a weekly outing with a great cast. Even Jeri Ryan did great, totally shedding the bloat-image "Seven of Nine" boring image. Every time I see people from Shark on other series I still head over to IMDb to see what they went off to since departing one of the more fun and well done series in the past 20 years. ...love to see the TV gods fold Shark's characters into occasional appearances on the new "The Defenders". Yeah that's it- that could be the ticket!

Happy 2011 to all.

BP

What's really cool is that ALL of the footage was real- no substituted DC-7s or some wrong aircraft. Obviously they had SAC's cooperation- even to the point of footage shot through the refueling tech's picture window showing an actual docked probe with a B-47 going askew and almost snapping! I imagine the show's writers customized their story to available film. All of the cabin work (...the main setting for the story) was in a real 47. It's an impressive story accuracy wise- except perhaps the General who gets riled back at Group HQ and basically takes over the mic, barking orders to the 135 crew and to the 47 as long as they can receive. Every once in a while some production has personnel aboard that strive for accuracy in fact basis (another example- an episode of "U.F.O." that backed up a piece of space debris as a S-IVb from a particular Apollo flight that went into solar orbit, that was being "cleaned up" as an effort to rid the space ways of junk. It does end up being blown up by the bad guy aliens; an example of the opposite is just about anything on episodes of "JAG"....).

I did not read the novel, but the trailer showed promise and I was not let down. Bana, whom I immediately took a liking to in "Troy" and "Star Trek" delivers as do all the cast. Great romance, great fun, original, and truly a beautifully executed film. In particular, the casted children do a marvelous job. This is one the type films that had me completely absorbed and involved. I fully empathized with the quandary posed by the biological anomaly of the prime character. It is my fervent hope that no sequel is made, leaving this in the category of unique, special movies, as once was done decades ago. That all movies were so fine....

BP

"Astro Boy" the original series not only broke ground but was a fun and a much loved series for kids at the time, much more so than what passes for "animation" or cartoons now days. It and "Gigantor" apparently just zoom over the heads of people that need to be hand fed all aspects of cartoons, etc. These were entertainment that kept the viewing child's mind involved instead of hypnotized by blatant meaningless tripe like so much on Adult Swim. The new movie, which approximates the overall intent and background story of the series is somewhat fun, with a good look. I do however recommend the series to new viewers. It is something I would introduce my kids to.

I bought the entire series on DVD recently and have spent many evenings watching two or 3 episodes each. While I grew up during the shows original run, I'd only watched a few then. So for a while, due to the invariable trappings of the times it was filmed during, I was taken back a bit. However I was really involved with the adventures and characters of the two main characters (and the venerable Kenneth Tobey as their most frequent handler). This show being compared to any of the numerous other espionage series is not a serious comparison. The location filming and abilities of cast and crew made this as special a show as another series from the same time period that made such an impact on me. Culp and Cosby will forever be unique for a multitude of reasons, together they made a good entertainment greater. Long live "I, Spy".

BP

Admittedly I am spoiled when it comes to the Coen Brothers films. They reek of professional lensing, production values, etc. The set their own bar for comedy with "Raising Arizona". And ditto for serious, violent films in "Blood Simple". Am I a fan of No Country...? The jury's still out. However those things opined, it was the most captivating of all their films I've viewed (R. Arizona is at least on bar). And it was the most pointed story they've told yet. But, and I should state here I neither read the book upon which it is based, nor have I ever believed reading the original printed matter a film is based on should be done to enjoy or at least digest a movie- but, it just tapers off, with no satisfying resolution. And maybe that's OK. Carpenter did it with his film of the complete "The Thing from another World" movie "The Thing". That story like this could conceivably just go on and on. And in terminating No Country when they did I suppose they showed more of how the real world of violence and crime is then almost any film one could name. Nasty events do go unsolved and unresolved. But as I said I am spoiled- most of their films that are described as "comedies" leave me not laughing. Raising Arizona could never be that way I was convinced new masters of comedy had been unleashed. Nope. After waiting some time to see No Country I was excited- the ads, the talk, the Oscars- I was ready. I went, I saw, I laughed at times and was similarly urged to be repulsed. But. But- No Country as it turns out IS a good tale, with fine performances and the usual fine camera work. I'm just a tad programed to see a film not hang, but conclude. Hey! Maybe in the sequel, huh?

Rick Berman just placed a clamp on creativity that went outside his or Jeri Taylor's blinder-framed vision, altered the heck out of established Trek canon, and in the process made space as boring as Moscow under the Soviet reign. Bland, gray, stodgy, uninspiring universes and often characters abound throughout the show- "Q", established from the opening pilot forward is so god- awfully uninteresting; Jordie LaForge is such a dimension-less bore, who's only emotion is a switch stuck on "anger-riddled response"; Dr. Crusher is so unconvincing that she actually makes the galactic-ally morose Counselor Troi interesting. The saving grace(s) on the series have been Riker (a character that should have been promoted to ship's Captain by the second season, discharging miscast Patrick Stewart into some parallel dimension) and Worf and yes- even Wesley Crusher, and the fantastically talented Brent Spiner's interpretation of Data (surely Spiner's take- as Berman would have made him as interesting as a clothes hanger). Under-utilized is Chief O'Brien played by the immensely talented and incapable of being a bad actor, Colm Meaney. Denise Crosby was a hoot and just great as well as Whoopi Goldeberg and Patti Yasutake and the underutilized Michelle "Ensign Ro" Forbes (who became the Commander of the Battlestar Pegasus years later- and who in that role was just fabulous). But to continue a trend of boring characters, casting very boring mean spirited actors like Rosalind Chao and dullness personified Armin Shimerman just proves to me that Berman is clueless about what something as potential as Trek calls for when it comes to talent. Great sets, effects that improved season to season (and pioneered techniques for the whole industry), with a cast half capable and stories that more often than not just blew, coalesced into a series that unfortunately never approached the story quality or ensemble chemistry of the original series. None of the after-original series came close to that until the one where Berman finally did back away from "managing" on a daily basis- "Enterprise".

For an L.A. native, disgusted with what has happened to a very influential and potentially great city, knowing that there are attempts to show alternate ways of life to the gang-riddled youth is in itself hopeful. The film may seem formula-like, however it presents a true story in the trappings of such formula without the often seriously candy-coated drippings of maudlin ways. There are good performances here, and including but not limited to Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson, who comes close to but never totally dominates what is an ensemble of future stars. This is not only a youths-gone-bad movie and sports as panacea film but a look at how, on occasion, the right intentions can override the wrong pursuits.

I liked it and I didn't like parts. Overall story is good, the homages to all generations of Superman film/TV and even comic book are plenty- Look for framed pix of Pa Kent Glenn Ford on the mantle at the Ma Kent (legendary Eva Marie Saint) house, plus Noel Neill in the opening scenes, and Jack "Jimmy Olsen of TV" Larson as the bartender, the score using John Williams passages from Richard Donner's 1st Christopher Reeve film throughout. When I'd first read about Lois Lane having a kid, I was not so pleased- however it works AND it's an important device- that I actually was rather thrilled with- Kate Bosworth as Lois is just OK- too flat a portrayal, especially when I still have Margot Kidder's Lois stuck in my mind. When I try to come up with a more fitting choice, I think Kate Hudson- she's got the spunkiness a Lois Lane requires (beside, I'd like to see her with dark hair!). Frank Langella (who remains one of the 2 best Draculas ever on the screen, Bela) as Perry White was OK- and even a bit of a hoot. I loved the reuse of Brando's Jor-el in both voice and footage. The script was rather decent, though having reuse of exact lines of Lex Luther from Donner's film bugs. And therein lay the problem with this film- Kevin Spacey's Lex Luthor. He was vicious- beyond nasty- he was vicious and very twisted. I am very biased by Gene Hackman's Lex, however that's not what is going on here- Spacey's portrayal is wife-beater vicious. And after enough of that I had no desire to continue seeing his role- period. They director and writers even confirm he's over the top by having his girlfriend Kitty (portrayed by Parker Posey, stalwart of those gawd awful Christopher Guest movies) realizing she's hooked up with a total madman and wanting out, only too late. She does a good job in the film- taking on a role that is complimentary to Valerie Perrine's Miss Teschmacher. The flying sequences are the most seamless ever, and the nice touches- busting the sound barrier, etc, are just great. In fact all of the FX are rather tremendous in this film. Brandon Routh's Kal-el/Superman/Clark Kent is decent enough and Somewhat reminiscent of Chris Reeve's portrayal. He can hang around for sequels. To be fair- the storyline this time out didn't give much audience exposure to Clark- most was as Superdude. Sequels will hopefully be well written and retaining Bryan Singer as director would be alright. However since production is no longer under the control of the Salkinds, so there wouldn't be the tiff to deal with, I wonder if anyone at Warner has asked Donner to take the reigns again. That would be super, man.

The final aired episode of the still critically attacked third season of the only Star Trek Series ends up being one of the finest displays of William Shatner's acting range, and an episode that meets the definition of what a Star Trek universe set story can be. Trek was meant to be a backdrop to good speculative story telling, but what a bonus for the viewers of the series- we got characters we loved, portrayed by actors with something oh-so-rare in filmed productions, be it television or the silver screen: perfect chemistry. Admittedly I can no recall ever seeing another story portraying male and female characters that swap their internal, natural genders our Captain, er, our Mister Shatner pulls it off with a verisimilitude equal to or surpassing his finest Trek moments (and to be fair and lauding, Sandra Smith as Dr. Janice Lester does a bang up job as Captain Kirk in, er, female clothing....). This final episode is clearly science fiction and reminds one of the initial season of ST- with moments here and there of pure involving meaningful sci-fi, the type that makes the hair on the neck stand up and the mind and heart wrap around the ideas coming from boffo writers of the ilk. As a student of the first school of Star Trek, in other words a person who saw it all first run (and in color!) I recall not so much being impacted that the episode could make one forget some of the "ugh" episodes of the third season ("Spock's Brain" and "And the Children Shall Lead") but that something super extraordinary was ending. But the story stuck with me and over time additional viewings have shown that it (and so many more episodes of that season) maintained the Star Trek patented ability to conjure, entertain and, if I may be so droll as to pay a minor homage- fascinate.

I had not been able to catch the 12 episodes of the show on Fox prior to it's cancellation. A week back I found the entire series with two unaired eps and making of extras at a store for under $35. I watched all, and by the end am a firm fan. I can hardly wait for the feature that is lensing right now. What a strange journey- Joss Whedon, who gets "creator" credit for the "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" series based on the earlier rather so-so film, as well as for the spin off series "Angel". I am not a fan of either- just not my interest. Firefly is good-to-great at moments. Sort of a wild west humanized portion of the galaxy. There are NO aliens. Hand weaponry resembles 19th century western handguns. There is a "Federation" or alliance that most of the time are portrayed subtly as possible bad guys. The Captain of the "firefly" class ship named "Serenity" (which is also the name of the upcoming theatrical film) is an ex-Sgt from battles not fully explained. His 1st officer is another enlisted type, a woman (...that happens to be black) who kicks ass, is an expert shot and dedicated to her Captain. The pilot is a Hawaiian shirt wearing ( and happens to be "white") guy who is also the 1st officer's husband. The grunt/not so bright muscle guy who is VERY good in a fight, named Jane is played by Adam Baldwin. The female engineer would have been called an earthchild at one time. She's a babe. In the original pilot, a 2-parter, they pick up a shepard- or priest played by "Barney Miller's" Ron Glass- an actor I have always enjoyed. He's mysterious and may actually not have anything to do with being a man of the lord. And they pick up a Doctor and his sister- both on the lam from the Feds- she had been kidnapped and mistreated by all possible means. She is getting her act back together but has foresight abilities, which start to be valuable. She also has a scorching IQ (and is very cute). Last but not least the "companion"- also known as a prostitute. She's classy, tender, smart and makes lots o' mula per customer (she takes a leased shuttle- there are two attached to the outside of the ship- to spend a few days to those who pre-arrange it). She is a valued member of the crew and secretly is in love with the Captain.

Apparently earth is no more. Humans are all over the exploited galaxy. A Chinese corporation has influenced things for a long time- most people are bilingual. The crew utters a lot of insults in Mandarin. This show is about human-ness. The crew makes dough by transporting cargo- for ANY paying person- so of course the cargo isn't necessarily on the up and up all the time. There are some repeat villains. There are encounters with the Feds, and also with their secret reps- the "blue people" (watch it- don't ask)- who are after the Doc and his sis. The CGI in this show is just great- intentionally done to look like camera action isn't perfect- to lend to the rough, westerny look. Serenity has main engines that have a cool exhaust visible all the time in space- and it's very nicely done- sort of a lazy exhaust, if that's possible.

If you decide to check this show out, rent more than the 1st 3 eps. It grew on me. ALL the crew did, and so did a lot of the worlds envisioned. Heck who couldn't like a show that shows a bad guy, confronting the Captain and about to shoot him, getting suddenly sucked into an engine intake- it was a very excellent moment. Even the simple sung westerny theme grew on me. The show captivated my Japanese spouse- and that's a complement in that a lot of the story telling IS unspoken. A supposed idea in regards to the feature film is that if that does well, the series will get a new life on the tube. That'd be great. And of course, periodically making a feature would be fine too. It's not another post-original series follow on [boring] Trek or (the quite excellent) B5. It's rather original and fun and thoughtful and very heartfelt. A universe (or "verse" as they say on the show) of humans showing themselves to be no more and everything plus. Very cool.... BP

Another comment posted here says "...the best scifi story ever...." Hardly. There is not a lot of scifi element in STTWOK. It is however a rip-roaring Adventure tale set to the Trek backdrop and there is nothing wrong with that. Original Trek had plenty of adventure tales, speculative fiction tales, and the like. The contributions by the principle original series members here are glowing, even when the great William Shatner steps fleetingly into his infamous moments of over-acting. People like to claim this as the first real Trek movie- usually citing so many problems with ST The Motion Picture. I say to them that STTMP IS a Scifi story and the Directors cut version repairs, completes and makes a truly wonderful FIRST Trek film. Wrath of Khan takes us where the original cast (vice any of the following ST series casts) alone can take us- to a story of loyalty, introspection, disgust with convention and reminders of why tradition is important and why innovation in all situations can be both a marvel- and terror. Love of family, and all intelligence is an underlying theme here and respect for the universe (including leaving things be!). STTWOK coupled with ST The Search for Spock and ST The Voyage Home make for a complete tale that expand on these themes and show us all why caring and striving to achieve are the ultimate themes- human and perhaps other as yet undiscovered species themes for life, that drive us, please us and define us.

I can't explain WHY I am watching this wretched excuse for a Bond

flic on Spike TV tonight- I guess the pickin's ain't easy on

Thansgiving evening. When I first saw this Roger Moore Bond flic in theatre, and when

he showed up in the clown makeup, I basically said to myself

"Self! That's it! No more Moore!". Don't get me wrong- I am the

world's No. 1 fan of Moore as "The Saint" (and even as the British

Cousin in the "Maverick" TV series). And, to be even more

even-handed- I really liked his 1st Bond- "To Live and Let Die".

Why? He played it, for the most part- with an air of seriousness.

After that, ugh. Bond turned silly doesn't work. Yes, I did plod

through the total amount of Moore Bonds, and yes it's not all his

fault. When finally, after a seemingly long while, Bond turned up in

the 4th incarnation, Timothy Dalton (or is that the "5th"- if you are a

purist and rate Barry Nelson as Bond One?). I was so impressed-

a Bond of the Novels and early Connery- serious when it required

it. (Imagine my delight when TD only got to do 2 films; Brosnan is

OK- "Goldeneye" being the best of that Bond). If, for some reason

you are reading these comments and are considering "Octopussy"

for viewing, I recommend viewing any of the first 7 Connery and

Lazenby Bonds, or either of the two non-Moores mentioned above. I prefer my Bond to stir me- not leave me shaken....

Not slow, but paced just right- this story of human conflict, doubt, despair, love and confusion is the perfect movie to watch and maybe even get involved in. This film is fun to watch and also use a bit for self analysis. Performances are Good to great from the multi-national cast. No rookies here- everyone delivers and does so convincingly. One of the rare films for the present day- where you forget you are watching actors. See this, but don't bother with the popcorn- you'll forget you bought it.

I have not and have no intention of reading the books- nothing against them, they just aren't my cup o'tea. I hesitated seeing this film not because of no interest in those books- but because of the director- I have found his films to be trite and cheap and very formula- straight from the Speilberg school of "once I've made my first ba-zillion I can sell out and never have to be creative again". This film has good camera work. It has current state effects. It has a pace akin to running a 24fps film at 1000fps. It's shallow- it asks you to buy into all of it without explanation. There's a fakeness to it leaving me feeling like I had molten Saran-wrap poured over me. I don't care about the characters because they were simply place-holders- no personalities. Harry is so two-dimensional as to make a sheet of paper more intriguing. Perhaps the "genre" just doesn't appeal here. Fans (and most people are either a fan or not- no "in-betweens") ballyhoo this film with that glazed-eye look of cult religionists. Yuck.

18 comments on IMDB so far praising this film. Hmm- must really be a winner. This film is worse than the thought of being vomited on by a baby. I am a major Jack Black fan, and he wasn't given a role in this film- he was given a potential career death sentence as a mindless doper clown. The rest of the cast has to fill the "assignments" of being vile, uninteresting putrid examples of dysfunctional Americans (or at least Southern Californians). Catherine O'Hara in the past has put me off with her oddness as well as really made me laugh with the same oddness (see "Beetlejuice"). Here she's a haggard bag of barf. John Lithgow- for someone who started his film career as something of an ingenue, he consistently ("3rd Rock" excepted) has taken more and more cartoonish roles. This film role is actually somewhat nominal in that sense- at least he appears as an acceptable (in So. Calif) normal money-driven cold father- nominal also for the region.... The rest of the cast? Names aren't important- being entertained by a film is and this film ain't doing that folks. Old reliable TV vet actor George Murdock portrays a drooling wheelchair bound rich hubby for O'Hara's shallow gal. (He isn't going to ever get another honorable job in this town again!) It was so bad my seat was squirming to get the hell out of the theatre (which afforded me the only potential pleasure of the evening). Save your bucks, save your eyes, don't wait for cable or video. Watch something as disgusting as "Erasurehead" and have a nice evening with that!

Hatch and the gang that assisted with the new CGI stuff and editing in the finer points from series footage have made a trailer that says- YEAH!!! I saw this at a private home showing almost 2 years ago and was simply delighted. Talking with Mr Hatch there, his enthusiasm was very apparent but so was a glimmer of doubt as he talked of being thwarted here and there on the way to presenting the trailer to Universal. And we hear a new series and or film from elsewhere may come to pass (Please leave Glen Larson out of it! I thank him for spawning the series and damn him for letting it become what all his series do- crap). BG's potential was in performances compelling, stories occasionally great but often good and an overall backdrop that could replace the excitement of a movie serial as we once thought would be (George). I want to see this project become a full big screen treatment. We'll see....

Having been a fan of Jackson Pollock since my early teens (mid-1960's) and a fan of Ed Harris since "The Right Stuff", it was to me an extreme pleasure to see Harris' magnificent directorial debut with the film biopic "Pollock". Harris has brought the severity of a true American artist (as Harris himself is) to the screen- and does what few films do- make you forget you are viewing a film- and make you believe you are viewing a life. The casting choices are extremely good here- not because I think the actors displayed the persons they represent to the "t" (and I wouldn't know that- I've neither known them or read up on any of them except to read about Pollock himself)- but because they bring their own professional honesty with them and into the viewer's heart. But Harris- continues to amaze, and delight and evoke empathy for addiction to alcohol problems while showing a genius pulling something out his own mind- without trying to say- "Hey! This is what he was thinking!" as so many biopics try to do. An artist's center can never be fully seen by others as HE saw it, so why try? The film shows the outcome of the artist's emotions and thoughts and the impact of his uniqueness on the world (the world of art and art lovers anyway). And that is satisfying enough. Marcia Gay Harden does an adequate job as the companion who seems to be the only match for the soul of the man-artist. However- do I think her portrayal to be of Oscar caliber? She's a good actress for sure but my own personal theorem "Yell in a film, garner an Oscar" may have been proven once again. I found myself so involved with Jackson Pollock that I didn't notice local time going by. A great film to watch, curled up at 1a.m. May Pollock's art never be lost in time.

An upcoming life of spaceflight was effectively sealed by a group (not just Stanley's) effort of minds technical, imaginative, artistic, inventive and most of all: passionate. These traits combined in that super-rare manner (akin to what, to this single mind, the original Star Trek also did)- beautifully. And like all originals- 2001 stands untouched, unequaled, unique in showing what man can, can't, should, could and even would do in a future of truly moving "out there". 2001 probably became for me the final nail in the coffin of the fantasy world of religion/fablistic tripe and all the other rubbish/baggage mankind heaps upon youngsters like myself. Fortunately space, beautiful music (thanks Mom), a lust for true human emotional incursions into the universe as a whole had prepared me for the first major demonstration of what could be- 2001. Less science fiction than human spectrum illustrated this is the true poetry of man unleashed- beauty and conflict, astonishment and disgust intertwined in such a compelling manner than the mundane will have to discard it, minutia appreciators embrace and theologians scoff. I suppose the film taught me too to open my mind to potential, good or bad- and says not to explore the darkness with a screen but with a light. It shows, in summary form what lay ahead for science minds (which we ALL have, I believe) to unravel and embrace and even accept. In a world of the troubled (Viet Nam, beloved leaders being assassinated) and "miracles" (Humans into space, and to the ends, literally of the planet) the portrayed universe at home becomes low priority, humans mere players on someone else's stage. 2001 didn't become just the fodder for acid-taking youth but inspiration, of a type that isn't really make-believe. It shows the potential of the mind to soar, imagine, put mere people into a higher calling and realizing the ages-old desires of true human spirit.

If you've never seen this film, an entertainment and a damned good tale, see it uninterrupted, phones off the hook, kids alseep, dog outside. Journey with the brilliance of Arthur Clarke, Stanley Kubrick, Frederick Ordway and artisans a plenty to a past of hope and conflict, a present of discovery and potential and a future not perfect into your home that awaits you- the universe. After 15 viewings in Cinerama, so far television doesn't do it justice- but you can find a reward in viewing even in that format that let's you know- intelligence does find it's way to the screen- and into that most important universe of the mind.

It may be a Bruckheimer production and that single point made me cringe, but he produced and stayed away from the director (apparently). Yes, some historical facts are juxtaposed, but so what? Even the much "docu-drama-ballyhooed "Tora! Tora! Tora!" wasn't perfect and is rather drab and boring. This tale surrounds 3 people but they are the adhesive for linking a backdrop that quickly overtakes that subplot at the right moments. The 1st 45 minutes are worth admission price and that is BEFORE the attack. The Japanese sequences are more minimal than maybe I'd have liked and seem to be more of a lesser budget expenditure- but hey! This story is involving the attack vice the planning- for that, see "Tora!". That opening 45 minutes is about the bond between two friends and the warfare that draws one away from the other- it's great friendship stuff. The two kids through to adulthood is fun: getting a plane airborne as runts to doing daredevil maneuvers in fighter training school (which of course plays during the attack later on).

This is THE film that shows what CGI should be all about: creating what isn't any more. "Jurassic Park" did it too- but can we really relate? Modern times that are extinct due to the on-slaught of human history should be recreated. Maybe then we can get the damned concept across: war is NOT good or divine or ultimately better. Someone once said (referring to the Viet Nam war peace talks) that so what if we sat forever at negotiating tables- it beat killing one another. Well, maybe next round of talks at the next conflict, people should see this movie and the opener of "Saving Private Ryan". Maybe then they'll get the clue- There are moments during the attack that are frightful, yet stunning for the ability to thoroughly convince that we are seeing the real thing. For a plane buff as myself- just the footage of A6M's ("Zeroes") flying by is majestic. Seeing the Arizona lifted out of the water as the lower-deck munitions go up in a singularly massive explosion is traumatizing to the point of exhaustive sadness. The attack on 7 December 1941 was a sneak attack, a cheap attack, and a very far eastern attack. It should not be accepted as though it were a product of it's day. But it shouldn't be forgotten- ever. The film reminds us that man and machine can bring horror and fascination. Humans that strive to entertain and enlighten as those who manufactured this film ARE of a breed different from that day. I don't see any of them doing this just for the paycheck though- it's a message and an entertainment movie.

The performances are good and solid and yes, some may call this a "guy's" film but the women doing double, even triple duty as the mavens of life-saving deserve the honors shown here- they too fought the good fight and are all-too-often not recognized in war epics. I was glad to see that here. I wasn't however glad to see the technique utilized to show hospital horror- it DIDN'T work. It just didn't. I thought that the projection equipment was malfunctioning. How ridiculous- in the midst of presenting with the finest effects material ever achieved, the focus goes nutso and I began to wonder if that was LSD the counter kid placed on my popcorn. Dumb. Just dumb. However I didn't let that ruin the film- taking the story out to the Doolittle Raid on Tokyo, the first retaliatory move by the US some 4 months later was good and awesome in it's light manner of saying that the U.S. was ready and going to demonstrate that we were ready to fight that good fight. Seeing the B-25's swooping down over Yokusuka's factories was simply breathtaking- it became believable that we'd actually filmed it all.

This is a human film about the worst and best of humans- 3 times only are foul words said (and two of them were "SOB's")- and the worst was out of what is SURELY to be a nominated performance by John Voight as President Roosevelt. His is a great role- as are many. I must put in a plug for Mako as Yamamoto- his performance translates the reluctance to wake the sleeping dragon known as America of this sad military career man very well.

Don't wait to see this on a small screen.