studiojudio

IMDb member since August 2000
    Lifetime Total
    25+
    IMDb Member
    20 years

Reviews

The Spanish Main
(1945)

Let's See Who's on MY Side!
I have never appreciated the manly-jawed Maureen O'Hara. I never thought she could act, and I never particularly thought she was pretty. She was NO Rita Hayworth, nor was she even a Rhonda Fleming, if you're going to compare redheads. BUT! Paul Henreid was the most gorgeous creature ever to don a pirate costume. His only flaw in this film was, that he actually could ACT. Walter Slezak was, as usual, the Evil Walter Slezak, so I didn't appreciate him, either. He's always the same.

It's a greatly enjoyable flick, especially if you are a Henreid fan. Have fun!

studiojudio

The Nutty Professor
(1963)

It IS a masterpiece; you just have to "get" it...
Some people just don't get it. Buddy Love is not SUPPOSED to be funny. He's SUPPOSED to be obnoxious, and shockingly opposite to the true identity of our man, Professor Julius Kelp.

This was all the brainstorm of Jerry Lewis, who has admitted that Buddy Love is really the true self of JERRY LEWIS. It was the first time that Lewis allowed this side of himself to be seen. And, the way he dances in and out of it is sheer genius.

Maybe Stella Stevens was a bit 'lame' - she was never a great actress, anyway. But it is the diversity of performances given by Lewis, that makes this film a 'masterpiece'....

If you prefer the Eddie Murphy re-makes, then you did not understand the original at all.

Sorry.

Kung Pow: Enter the Fist
(2002)

This is SHEER GENIUS!!!
I am an adult. I've had a good education and I am regarded as somewhat intelligent! SO! When I say this movie is sheer genius, you can BET on it!!!! Yes, it has some slow spots. However, it is so hilarious that it had me rolling on the floor in front of my own couch. If you can't "GET" the humor in this, you have no sense of humor at all. I think Steve Oedekirk is one of the funniest men alive. FOUR STARS! And, incidentally, I USUALLY prefer very serious movies...but my husband, one early Saturday morning, called me in and said, "You gotta see THIS one." He was right. I LOVED it!!! There are some lines in here that can cause you to nearly collapse laughing. There is slapstick, lunacy, and every beautiful aspect of laughter in this flick. It should've gotten some award for funniest piece in a long time. I must've watched it seven times, and then I bought it!!! And, when I watch other Kung Fu type movies with my hubby, I'm always yelling out "Oh, CHOSEN ONE!!!!" GREAT FUN! SIMPLY GREAT, BIG FUNNN!!!

Eagle's Wing
(1979)

Not So Strange...
The mere presence of Sam Waterston as an Indian, is enough to put this movie in the must-see category. He is both beautiful and very subtle, with no lines whatsoever. He is tender with his kidnappee, and yet we can see he is among the proudest of all young Indian Men. Martin Sheen is just a dumb cluck who decides to challenge Waterston (White Bull) for a gorgeous white horse. Other sub-plots are really unnecessary. I don't understand the part played by Caroline Langrishe, as the poor girl who White Bull kidnaps...I don't know how she keeps her hands off this beautiful Indian man! It's a lot of fun, though; especially if you're a Waterston fan. Man, he looks GOOD in this one!!! Harvey Keitel's role isn't even worth mentioning, to tell the truth! But, rent it and enjoy! Actually, I do believe that if the music score was better, it would've been a more dramatic film...the music is so bad, it's distracting. Still - there's Mr. Waterston!

Scrooge
(1951)

The Best, and The ONLY
Even as a movie-lover, this version of "A Christmas Carol" (or "Scrooge") is, my personal, sentimental favorite of all time. There has NEVER been a version of this lovely tale that even COMPARES to Alistair Sim's. He was, by far, the finest ever. He was pure genius in this role of roles; he made it alive like no other actor before nor after him. Christmas is just not Christmas without sitting down and watching this exquisite film, in its entirety...for MANY people, Alistair Sim's brilliant and expressive gestures are the ones with which we associate Ebenezer Scrooge. His fantastic delivery of lines, whether comic or tragic, has come to be THE way in which we hear the character of Scrooge, in our minds. No one, despite several VALIANT attempts, has come near Sim's performance. Some of them are okay, some of them quite embarrassing...but next to the genius of Alistair Sim, NO ONE can hold a HALF-candle. This role DOES belong to Alistair Sim. It always has, and it always WILL. And - God bless us, everyone!

Jake Speed
(1986)

No Redeeming Factors...
This could be a strong candidate for "The Worst Flick Ever". Perhaps without the presence of John Hurt, it could be tolerated as a kid-film. However, the TRAGEDY of this entire endeavor, is that John Hurt, one of the screen's greatest actors, diminishes himself in this....I gave it two points just because Mr. Hurt SHOWED UP...I take AWAY 8 points, because he didn't run from it fast enough. As far as the rest of the cast, they are, simply, terrible. Janine Turner, as pretty as she might be, cannot act to save her soul. And the lead actor is, for all intents and purposes, AWFUL. If you can spare yourself this embarrassment, please do so. It's so bad, it almost HURTS.

Experiment in Terror
(1962)

I Almost Didn't Believe This...
I have heard about this movie since I was young, but never managed to catch it. Finally, I got to see it, this weekend. I always thought Glen Ford was a darned good actor. After having watched this slow-moving tale, I was convinced that he was wasted in it. It simply was too long. The young Stefanie Powers was as bad as the current Stefanie Powers. And Lee Remick? Well, what can one say about Lee Remick? She was very pretty. Sometimes she was very good. This wasn't one of those times, but I don't think it was all her fault. It seemed to me her character was more of a moron than she should've been! Anyway, I really failed to see the three-star rating this film garnered in TV Guide. To be perfectly honest, I thought it was awful. Poor Glen Ford. Trapped in a quagmire of clichés, and overly-long (by the end, WHO CARED, already?!) vehicle....

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King
(2003)

Thanks, Eviltimmy!
Wow. Eviltimmy, who commented on this film before I did, said a lot of really accurate things about this wonderful film. Sean Astin DID give the performance of his life (not to mention the LOTR Trilogy) here! And, YES: Frodo (Elijah Wood) DID get a little MONOTONOUS with the same desperate look on his face for the last two movies....but, it was still a great film. Some, here, have said it was better than "Citizen Kane" and "Casablanca" (someone said "Crapablanca", which is a SIN). No. Sorry. WRONG. It was a great film, but you cannot compare 3+ hours of battling and CG to the great drama of those two old classics. I thought the Gollum was one of the best actors (!) and I thought the Oliphaunts were NOT up to snuff...the battle scene with those huge creatures reminded me of the first Star Wars...the Imperial Walkers, I believe??? It worried me for a moment; I didn't want to compare LOTR and Star Wars in my head...anyway, the only thing I might add is, there COULD have been a warning about that NINETEEN FOOT SPIDER...Lord, I hate those things! Anyway, this long-but-worth-it motion picture is worth every penny you could possibly spend on it; whether it's seeing it on The Silver Screen, or buying the DVD - you will be AMAZED at how good it was. I was!

The Monster That Challenged the World
(1957)

This is Worth the Popcorn!
HEY! Has NO ONE noticed that "Buffalo Bob" Smith, from the old Howdy Doody tv show, is IN this flick??? I can't believe it. Although - I DO respect the fact that MOST people would NOT watch this epic...however - it was a rainy Saturday and I wanted a good giggle! This is one of those "SO BAD IT'S FUN" movies! The creatures (giant sea snails) are so hilarious, expect to fall over laughing! Did YOOOOOOOOU know that SNAILS had INSECT-LIKE JAWS, or, MANDIBLES??????? WOW! Neither did I! And, these mandibles MOVE like a CLOCK! Open, shut! Open, shut! Like a toy, honestly...it was great to watch these things (Yes, they DO look more like caterpillars than snails) attack people. It was even funnier to watch a seaman poke one in the eye and have slime gush out of the eye-socket....what a FUN time!! Get the popcorn, kick off your slippers, and have a HOWL at this one!

Lincoln
(1988)

STOP CRITICIZING, IF ONLY FOR THE PERFORMANCES!!!
This is NOT "unbelievable garbage", as some other critics, here, would say.

I am tired of those who would compare books to the movies made from them. For God's sake, a movie is INTERPRATIVE!!! When you read "The Nutcracker Suite", do you criticize the very beautiful ballet because EVERY WORD of the original book is not adhered to?

The PERFORMANCE given by Mr. Waterston is enough to launch this vehicle into greatness. He is simply wonderful.

You can HAVE Mary Tyler Moore. But Waterston is astonishing. And he always IS.

If people insist on criticizing films because they don't "match" the book from which they are taken, I suggest that they do NOT call themselves "film lovers".

This theory has been argued for decades, but still, people do not understand.

It is IMPOSSIBLE to put every thought, every line from a book, into a film. Please get used to this.

Thanks so much. -Studiojudio

Journey Into Fear
(1975)

If it Wasn't for Sam...
The cast of this movie is utterly amazing. From Sam Waterston, to Zero Mostel. From Joseph Wiseman to Donald Pleasance. Vincent Price. And yet, it seemed much less than it could've been, due to some VERY poor editing...

The story, briefly, is about a U.S geologist (Sam Waterston) who discovers something about Oil that proves VERY threatening to the Turkish and Arab business people...so, we spend 90 more minutes, watching Sam in absolute terror, while several people try to kill him.

Sam Waterston is WONDERFUL in it - but all the other big names seem to be really uninterested. Price is good - but what else is new? Zero Mostel, usually referred to as a genius, is so annoying you want to knock out his teeth. Ian McShane, believe it or not, has a rather significant part, but NO LINES...strange. The very worst of it is Yvette Mimieux. If you liked her as Weena in the original Time Machine, don't even bother to watch her here. She is simply awful. She does a song in a nightclub, with a voice-over, and she makes nearly NO attempt to synchronize her lips to the words. It's downright comical.

But, she does do a good job of seducing Mr. Waterston. And, so would I!

If it wasn't for Sam Waterston, this movie would be almost comical. But Sam, you know...he's the only one who cares enough to put his heart into it...what else is new?

David's Mother
(1994)

Poor David...
Although Kirstie Alley is normally a very good actress, in THIS particular production, I found her to be rude, obnoxious, and a down-right SLOB. She is so bitter that she relies on sarcasm to get her through life. Her son is Autistic, she's a Pig....how's that for a summary?

Her sister (portrayed by the ALWAYS-wonderful Stockard Channing) decides it's time for Kirstie Alley's character to meet a man. This is depsite the fact that her home is a pig-sty and she looks like a bag lady...

She is introduced to a character named John Nils, portrayed by the EVEN MORE ALWAYS WONDERFUL Sam Waterston. He is sweet, gentle, kind, and bloody beautiful. He tries his heart out to help her change her attitude towards her handicapped child, and give him a chance to get some treatment, as well as enter a program for children with Autism. Of course this enrages Ms. Alley's character. However, after bedding down with Mr. Nils (Mr. Waterston looks divine in a black velour bathrobe), she realizes he's right about her kid - but wrong for her....naaaah. She doesn't love him enough to stay with him. And she decides to tell him this in his store. What a TERRIFIC CHICK this is...of course, he loves HER, so you can see the pain in his eyes when she tells him, for all intents and purposes, that it's over between them...

In my personal opinion, I was kinda hoping they'd commit HER along with her poor son. She was simply boorish, and of course wasn't helping the poor boy anyway.

I came away from this with a "yecch" expression. If you're going to put someone opposite the ever kind/generous/loving/extremely talented Sam Waterston, let it NOT be Kirstie Alley. If only they'd allowed Stockard Channing to play the part, the whole movie would've had much more class to it..

Flagrant désir
(1986)

If You Like Sam Waterston....
...It's worth it. Just to see him practically trembling with desire was enough to fit the price of the video. One barely ever sees Sam Waterston in a role not staid, stoic, nor dignified. And, frankly, that's a shame. He is simply wonderful in this (as he is in everything else he's ever been in), but THIS time we get to see a more SMOLDERING side of him. It's a very welcome sight, I must add.

Beat the Devil
(2002)

It's Easier to Beat the Devil, Than it is to beat Gary Oldman!
No matter what Gary Oldman does, he is simply the most exciting actor in the world to observe! And, not only is he marvelous as the devil in this little thriller - but he looks good enough to digest! This man can NEVER do anything wrong; Bravo to his making yet another movie HIS!

A.I. Artificial Intelligence
(2001)

COMBO: Pinocchio, 2001, and Super Mario Brothers...
Wow. What a mess. Poor Haley Joel Osment; he deserves MUCH better than this. It could've been a wonderful movie; it had a great concept. But no; Mr. Spielberg was more concerned with turning the lovely story about a robot boy who wanted to be real - into an overdone carnival. When Mr. Spielberg made "The Contender", 2 years ago, he absolutely BULLIED the genius actor, Gary Oldman, because of some political disagreement...it was THEN that I realized that Mr. Spielberg sold OUT his love of art, for politics. "Artificial Intelligence" is another example of Spielberg's selling out. I have absolutely NO idea what he had in mind, when he went over the top with this story. This movie is an absolute fiasco, a flop. Don't waste your time. If you want to see this kind of special effects, and not have a care about characters and story-line, buy a video-game. Mr. Spielberg? Get a GRIP.

Hannibal
(2001)

It's Ten Years, Later - REMEMBER, People???
I'm sick to death of hearing "It's not like the FIRST one", meaning "Silence of the Lambs".....of COURSE it's not like the first one! It's TEN YEARS LATER!! How COULD it be like the first one? Circumstances are TOTALLY different! And it's WONDERFUL... Ridley Scott brings out such a glorious mix of nasty and nice; he makes each actor's time on screen MARVELOUS.

Anthony Hopkins is FABULOUS this time around, too! Julianne Moore is terrific; and she had a TOUGH act to follow, replacing Jodie Foster.

But - Gary Oldman, as the twisted, hideously deformed Mason Verger -

is INCREDIBLE.....not surprisingly; Mr. Oldman is USUALLY incredible.

During the one scene where you are shown how Mason Verger's misfortunes came to pass, he is also exquisite.

The movie is a rough ride. It's gory - but, PLEASE REMEMBER! It's NOT about Mickey Mouse! It's about Hannibal (the Cannibal) Lecter! If you expect anything less than gore, you are not being realistic. Besides, it's done SO well.

Bravo. Wonderfully done. Wonderfully fun!

The Contender
(2000)

A Good Movie, Made Great, by Gary Oldman...
Joan Allen is terrific. Jeff Bridges is marvelous. But...it is Gary Oldman who steals the film away from both of these actors, with his ELECTRIFYING portrayal of the snakelike, sinewy adversary to Joan Allen's possible confirmation for Vice President of the United States.

By now, most of you know the storyline of this film. She is

up before the senate hearings, for confirmation as Vice President. Senator Shelly Runyon (Gary Oldman) is her foe, who thinks she is unworthy because of many reasons - but uses a past sexual incident in her life, attempting to discredit her, and, ultimately, destroy her.

There is a magical thing that happens when Gary Oldman is on the screen. Were he not in this film, one might be tempted to ask, "Who cares?", in regard to whether Joan Allen's character gets the Vice Presidency or not. When Gary Oldman is on the screen, you CARE. You care, because he MAKES you care. His performance is so gripping, that you become interested in everything he says or does - and therefore, you are drawn into the plot, actually caring about its outcome.

Gary Oldman is probably the best actor alive today. He is never given the credit that is due him (without a doubt), and he is, quite often, misunderstood by common critics. They mistake the absolute purity of his performances, for "over-acting". This is because these critics, themselves, have not the depth to understand what it is that Gary Oldman does. And that is simple. He gives it his all. He is so convincing, so utterly brilliant, that one is sometimes embarrassed by relating to him. One can

almost feel what he goes through, right or wrong, and that is

often too painful for some of those who do not have a clue as to what true, raw emotions LOOK like. They look like what Gary Oldman makes us feel - uncomfortable or not.

The film is good. The story is good. The cast is good. But it is Gary Oldman who gives this film - and other films in which he appears - greatness.

There is some rumour that Mr. Oldman had a tough time as Executive Producer of this film. IF that's true, it's a shame. He deserves more integrity from those with which he works; he is the one who so markedly GIVES that integrity in his performance.

The Contender
(2000)

A Good Movie, Made Great, by Gary Oldman...
Joan Allen is terrific. Jeff Bridges is marvelous. But...it is Gary Oldman who steals the film away from both of these actors, with his ELECTRIFYING portrayal of the snakelike, sinewy adversary to Joan Allen's possible confirmation for Vice President of the United States.

By now, most of you know the storyline of this film. She is

up before the senate hearings, for confirmation as Vice President. Senator Shelly Runyon (Gary Oldman) is her foe, who thinks she is unworthy because of many reasons - but uses a past sexual incident in her life, attempting to discredit her, and, ultimately, destroy her.

There is a magical thing that happens when Gary Oldman is on the screen. Were he not in this film, one might be tempted to ask, "Who cares?", in regard to whether Joan Allen's character gets the Vice Presidency or not. When Gary Oldman is on the screen, you CARE. You care, because he MAKES you care. His performance is so gripping, that you become interested in everything he says or does - and therefore, you are drawn into the plot, actually caring about its outcome.

Gary Oldman is probably the best actor alive today. He is never given the credit that is due him (without a doubt), and he is, quite often, misunderstood by common critics. They mistake the absolute purity of his performances, for "over-acting". This is because these critics, themselves, have not the depth to understand what it is that Gary Oldman does. And that is simple. He gives it his all. He is so convincing, so utterly brilliant, that one is sometimes embarrassed by relating to him. One can

almost feel what he goes through, right or wrong, and that is

often too painful for some of those who do not have a clue as to what true, raw emotions LOOK like. They look like what Gary Oldman makes us feel - uncomfortable or not.

The film is good. The story is good. The cast is good. But it is Gary Oldman who gives this film - and other films in which he appears - greatness.

There is some rumour that Mr. Oldman had a tough time as Executive Producer of this film. IF that's true, it's a shame. He deserves more integrity from those with which he works; he is the one who so markedly GIVES that integrity in his performance.

Pumpkinhead
(1988)

A Most Misunderstood Film
This story was INDEED a complicated tale of a demon and the price one paid for conjuring it up. I thought most people could not get a true handle on what was happening. Thusly, I feel the film was under-rated. I found it a true horror GEM.

Lance Henricksen is marvelous in it, and if you ever want to see a horrifying witch, Florence Schauffler gives a TERRIFYING performance.

It's not as bad as the critics said; give it a chance! Try the night before Hallowe'en - you'll need 24 hours to get over it!

Criminal Law
(1988)

Give Credit Where Credit is Due...
As the last review (by a Mr. J. Sommersby) states, there are some dramatic flaws with Martin Campbell's direction of this film, and, hence, the story line. But if it's got ANYTHING, it's got the magnificence of an early Gary Oldman performance, which is worth just about anything to see. Gary Oldman may play a character who is not very well developed, but he plays him with his usual genius. No matter what movie Gary Oldman is in, he improves it completely.

Screen Two: The Firm
(1989)
Episode 8, Season 5

An Ugly Tale, Performed Beautifully...
Even though this tale of Grown-Up Gang Members is ugly, violent, and at times, shocking, nothing is more startling about it, than yet another brilliant performance by Gary Oldman.

Most people who follow Gary Oldman's works, will know that this is a role very far from the real Gary. Yet, as usual, he puts his entire being into convincing us that he is, in fact, a semi-psychotic with a passion for physical violence.

I recommend the film ONLY to SERIOUS Oldman-fans. Others will probably not like the material, nor the look of this dark film.

Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead
(1990)

More "Brilliantism" from Gary Oldman...
This is truly a delight for people who are in love with the English language. Tom Stoppard gives us a brilliantly funny tragedy - not easy to do.

Gary Oldman gives us a brilliantly sweet and gentle person to

love - easy to do, for HIM.

Tim Roth is wonderful.

Fabulous movie. Good fun... watch for Oldman's tears near the end. They'll kill you.

The Scarlet Letter
(1995)

Was it SO Bad???
Good Grief. This particular version garnered nothing but bad reviews. Personally, I don't see why it was SO hated - and films like the Austin Powers movies are LOVED...beats me.

First of all, I give it nine out of ten points for the mere PRESENCE of Gary Oldman - who, looking EXTREMELY beautiful, tried so hard to give the movie some credibility, with his excellent performance as the Reverend Dimmsdale.

One other point for Demi Moore - who is a really wonderful actress, and tried her best, TOO.

I fail to see why this picture got SUCH bad reviews. Okay, so they DIDN'T follow the book..many movies do NOT - and don't get panned like this one. WHY?

Immortal Beloved
(1994)

A Most Beautiful, and Under-rated Film.
Despite many critics' comments to the contrary, this movie is exceptionally beautiful. Panned for not being "accurate" to Beethoven's Life (whatever happened to Poetic License?", the music, the cinematography, and the PERFORMANCES in this film are MAGNIFICENT. Speaking of "magnificent", there IS Gary Old- man - who transcends just about anything. The man is a genius, his performance reflects it, and he is absolutely beautiful as well. Some people talk about the loveliness of the leading ladies in this movie, but with Mr. Oldman on screen, it is very difficult to look at anything else. He is simply electrifying, as he is in most of his movies. Please give this wonderful film another chance - and forget about the critics who didn't appreciate it. Gary Oldman should've received an Oscar, but what else is new?

Romeo Is Bleeding
(1993)

Yet Another Great Performance
Romeo is Bleeding is a tale of a fallen man. And, portraying this fallen man, is possibly the world's finest actor -

Gary Oldman.

He lives the story of a bad cop, turned worse, with no chance for redemption.

Nobody does it better. Lena Olin is wonderful, too, as the psychotic hit-woman who leads Oldman's Jack Grimaldi down the trail to Hell.

The combination of a faboulous story-line, and acting like this, should've garnered much more attention than it did.

A wonderful film with spectacular acting.

See all reviews