lima-2

This is a review of "American Conspiracy: The Octopus." Not a debate over Danny Casolaro's manner of death. I am still undecided, primarily based on tainted evidence presented here.

One has to wonder about the objectivity of its author Christian Hansen. Did viewers not notice, as the film progressed, how Hansen made himself look more and more like Casolaro himself? He seemed not only obsessed but perhaps possessed by Casolaro.

Then there is the fact that he is a journalist investigating the death of another journalist. When a journalist's death is suspicious, why is it such a major catastrophe?

Not to disparage anyone's violent death, but so many dedicated first responders, fire fighters, police officers, military personnel, die violently almost every day in the line of duty. I don't see their deaths being reported on, with such intense hyperbole.

I lost track of the many names and faces and stories of those involved. Hansen presented so many confusing facts and interviews, I lost track of his point.

I think Hansen really skewed his narrative when he came up with an alleged witness who saw a shadowy figure enter Casolaro's room, with a key card, on the night of his death. This witness only came forward after most of the Octopus key players' identities were made public. Then the "witness" completed a composite sketch to match Hansen's choice of the most likely suspect. Manipulating the facts to suit his narrative?

Admittedly, Hansen interviewed his prime suspect's son. That implied to me that the suspect was deceased. Indeed, he was, but Hansen never mentioned that. Nor did he mention that the suspect was buried with full military honors at Arlington National Cemetery, ten years before (my own research). I'd like to hear the complete, uncut, unedited, uncensored interviews with the son (and others) to know what Hansen is keeping from us.

I know, this is supposed to be a review of the movie and not a book review. Nobleman includes a lot more detail in his 2012 book that should have been included in this film. A more balanced view of the Kane/Finger dispute. I'm not sure if he tried, but Nobleman should have interviewed key Batman writer Denny O'Neill, who was still alive when this film was made. And Batman artist Neal Adams, one of the best. Adams was all about the creativity rights of comic book artists and writers. I'm sure he would back the campaign to give Bill Finger proper credit. Neal, if you're reading this, please respond and correct me if I'm wrong. Sadly, artistry-wise, Bob Kane was no Neal Adams, but Bill Finger was a writing peer of the late, great Denny O'Neill. To sum it up, Bob Kane was to Bill Finger, as DC Comics was to Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster, regarding Superman.

I can't say a lot about this mini-series that hasn't already been mentioned, pro and con, by other reviewers. With over five hours of broadcast time, a lot of major and minor details about TR were covered. The most knowledgeable scholars were interviewed. Even his family members were given an opportunity to speak.

I was severely disappointed, though, that there was no mention of his Nobel Peace Prize, the first earned by a sitting American president Or of his Great White Fleet sent on a round-the-world tour, to project American sea power to all parts of the globe. TR put the world on notice that the United States was now major military force to be reckoned with. If you blinked, you also missed the quick visual reference to his posthumous Medal of Honor award, posted at his grave site just before the closing credits. It would not have taken much time to include those important points to such a monumental tribute to his life.

I was lucky enough to find this film on a streaming service used by the college where I teach US history. It appears to me to be a high-quality National Geographic production, which puzzles me about the negative reviews and claims of inaccuracy. The Housatonic was targeted because it was the flagship (command and control) and the largest vessel in the flotilla blockading Charleston harbor. No, the Housatonic was not a battleship, but larger ships with bigger guns, of that era were, designated as "Ships of the Line of Battle" which was shortened to "Battleship" in the twentieth century. So, yes battleships did exist at that time. The film's narrative was based more around the science of recovery and excavation as well as the value of the Hunley as an historical artifact, than anything else. Not as bad as others would have you believe. Historically accurate and not melodramatic.

Wait what? The first half was a re-cap.of all four seasons of Lois and Clark: The New Adventures of Superman, even with a baby at the end. With a slight twist. Twins! We knew that was coming.

And the switch? Morgan Edge reading Clark's past? Didn't see that coming. WOW! Great way to weave that into the story line. As another reviewer mentioned, maybe Clark did give up too soon. Or did he? I wonder what secret plan he has to defeat Edge, save his family, and the world.

I can't help but remember the ending of Superman II, and the look on Christopher Reeve's face when he stepped out of the chamber in the Fortress, that supposedly took away his powers forever. That was a true switch! But, got to wait three weeks to find out.

Great homage episode to past iterations of the character.

What can I say about this episode that hasn't already been said, by other reviewers? I agree, this has to be one of the best episodes of the series. I won't re-hash the details of the investigation, so please watch!

You catch a glimpse into the real personality of Joe Kenda. No, I never met the man. But when he recounts the hazing he received as a rookie homicide detective, it has a strong ring of truth. Especially when he gives back as good as he gets.

When the veterans haze him by saying, that as "college boy" he must be smarter than they are, Kenda breaks his deadpan narrative delivery and flashes an uncharacteristically genuine grin (which I have never seen before or since, in the series) and agrees. "Yeah, I must be smarter than you guys."

At the end, you get a quick view of a young Kenda (not the re-enactor) in a group photo with the other detectives. You get a sense of his youthful arrogance. But it is tempered by an expression that he knows he has finally been accepted by his peers.

Worth watching several times!

As a huge fan of the original series, with Edward Woodward. I was hoping for more insider homage references. No, it does not translate directly from the original, but you can tell who the characters are supposed to be: Chris Noth, roughly as Robert Lansing/Control, and Adam Goldberg as Keith Szarabajka/Mickey Kostmeyer. The plot and story line of this pilot pretty much align with a lot of the original Joel Surnow scripts. Exactly how a such a case would fall into Robert McCall's lap. Out of left field. Robyn McCall has a better support infrastructure than Robert McCall. Not as much of a true loner. Queen Latifah's fight scenes remind me a lot of Christian Bale's in Batman Begins. They are filmed so close up and so fast that you can't tell what's going on. Maybe a good thing? I have not watched any of the Denzel Washington iterations. to make a comparison. After what Tom Cruise and Paramount did to Mission: Impossible, I did not want to chance being severely disappointed again. This is worth a second look.

The parts are all here: a spacey premise, intricate plotting, quirky characters, lots of eye candy for both male and female viewers. Salli Richardson and Erica Cerra are so HOT! For good or bad, in real life, I work with several female co-workers just like Deputy Lupo. But, the sum of all the other parts just didn't deliver. Lead actor Colin Ferguson reminds me of a bland version of Hugh Laurie (HOUSE). His delivery just didn't convince me that he wanted to be in this series. Jordan Hinson as his whiny, teen-aged daughter came across perfectly as ... just that, even kind of annoying. Small screen favorite Matt Frewer (Max Head Room) was perhaps the most interesting male character. Too bad I know him from so many other things to credibly accept him and his wonderfully bogus Australian accent. Who was the superb actress who played Walter Perkin's shrewish wife? I didn't see her name in the credits. Too bad she was killed off during the pilot's epilogue. With all the weirdness going on, perhaps she will be brought back. She fit perfectly with this odd ensemble. The plot's pace did pick up immensely about thirty minutes before the climax, but too late to salvage the overall feel of the pilot. I really do want to like this series and will continue watching, hoping for some spark of life.

I have complained so bitterly in other IMDb venues about the recent Tom Cruise film versions of this franchise, I thought it was time to add my comments about the REAL "Mission: Impossible." Everyone knows the premise of the show, or they wouldn't be reading this, so I won't re-hash the details. After nearly forty years, I can vividly remember sitting in my living room at 7:30 on a Saturday night in September of 1966, by chance watching the local CBS affiliate. I had no idea what to expect when I saw a disembodied hand, holding a match, light a fast-burning fuse. What followed was a collage of previews for the coming sixty-minute adventure. So superb was the plotting, dialog, and characterization, I was hooked for the next seven years! This series was such an intellectual exercise, it was like watching a fast-paced chess match, if you can imagine such a thing. Three of my favorite episodes come immediately to mind. "The Mind Of Stefan Miklos" was Peter Graves' personal favorite, and mine. It was the the true epitome of this series. To the uninitiated, it may have appeared confusing, but this was quality television. Unlike so many current television shows and movies, this episode, and the entire series, credited viewers with having a brain. If you were paying attention, you could actually follow the supremely intricate plotting. Next was "The Glass Cage" with guest villain Lloyd Bochner as the warden of a high-tech Iron Curtain prison. IMF scammed Bochner's character into releasing a high-profile prisoner after convincingly planting false evidence of mistaken identity. Finally, there was "Doomsday" with Alf Kjellin as the incumbent "baddie" auctioning off a stolen atomic weapon to the highest bidder. IMF cleverly rendered the weapon inert just as the Kjellin was being paid for his now-useless goods. I can name at least five other episodes that are, far and above, superior to the three big-screen versions recently released. Perhaps Paramount is listening. For the next big-screen venture, I suggest a retro-cold-war plot set in the 1950's or 1960's when IMF was first formed, tied to contemporary headlines like the Suez Crisis, Berlin Wall, or Cuban Missile Crisis complete with Peter Graves or Martin Landau look-alike actors. Any others suggestions out there?

I am a HUGE Superman fan! But there is so much alliteration I could toss out about this movie. Routh reprises Reeve. Singer salutes Salkind. Kate kopies Kidder. Sorry about that last one. The first 90 minutes are an homage to "Superman The Movie" and "Superman II" ... even some of the dialogue, and scene updates. Take it from someone who has seen both predecessor films at least 20 times each! This made for a somewhat boring movie, least for me, for the first hour and a half. The remaining 75 minutes or so, is somewhat original and moderately enjoyable. Routh does a remarkably uncanny personation of Christopher Reeve as Clark Kent, but his Superman is totally new and improved. As such, he seems genuinely bemused and bashful about all the attention he receives upon his unintentionally flamboyant return to Earth. Kate Bosworth is a pass as Lois Lane. She's no Margot Kidder, or even Noel Neill, who by the way, at age 86 has a small, but key speaking part. As does 76 year old Jack Larson, TV's Jimmy Olsen. I even thought I saw Marc McClure (Reeve's Jimmy Olsen) in a walk-on, through a revolving door scene. Who is the superb, young actor who play's Jason, Lois Lane's son? He's not listed in the IMDb credits? I'm not totally convinced he's really Clark's son though. Lots of people exhibit feats of extraordinary strength in times of crisis and fear, as he does here ... and only once. He also showed discernible no reaction to Luthor's kryptonite either. The best scene in the whole film is when, after the unnamed villain gives up on shooting Superman with the Vulcan 20 mm Gatling Gun, he then ... hmmm. I should leave some surprises for those who haven't seen it yet.

If you had told me that I would actually enjoy a movie with so many of the Hollywood celebrities that I dislike (Alec Baldwin, Susan Sarandon and producer Tom Cruise) I would have laughed at you. I'm even Luke-warm to Kirstin Dunst. The true test was when the ending credits started rolling. I felt good after watching this film! Orlando Bloom is a superb actor. His non-native American accent never faltered throughout. A very likable actor. I didn't think Kirtsin Dunst was up to this type of role but she surprised me. Even though the first part of the film moved so very slowly (it took about 50 minutes for the Drew and Claire characters to properly "hook-up") both were so likable that the plot held your interest, and you wanted them to connect. The initial plot set-up, casting Bloom as the failed, corporate wonder boy contemplating suicide, was as dark of a start as Nicolas Cage's performance in "The Weatherman." Fortunately, for "Elizabethown" the plot took off in a more positive direction. Alec Baldwin as Bloom's sleazy, self-absorbed, finger-pointing boss was not a big stretch for him. His speech to Bloom: "No, you're not fired. You don't even have to leave the company. But by Monday morning, everyone in the world will know this is YOUR fiasco, not mine." Susan Sarandon's performance as Bloom's neurotically quirky mother was a real hoot, especially her tap-dancing, stand-up comedy routine at her deceased husband's memorial service. Even better was Paul Schneider's performance as Bloom's never-before-seen cousin Jessie, with his band playing Lynyrd Skinnard's "Free Bird" at the same memorial. I howled when the band's fireworks caught the big white, paper mache bird on fire, as it slid down the rope into the audience and set the auditorium on fire as well. The quasi-scavenger hunt that Claire (Dunst) set up for Drew (Bloom) to find her, near the end of the movie was a nice, heart-warming touch. "Elizabethown" is such a feel-good movie! You may think it starts out slowly and even somewhat darkly, but give it until the end, to pass such a judgment.

This is a delightful gem of a movie, unfortunately pigeon-holed as "just for kids." The plot revolves around a young man, Roy Eberhardt, newly arrived in southwest Florida from the Montana mountains. Trying to fit in with the other kids at his middle school, Roy discovers a brother-sister team trying to protect endangered burrowing owls at an illegal construction site. Look for Carl Hiassen, the author of the book upon which this movie is based, as the male secretary to the evil boss at corporate headquarters. Writer/director Wil Shriner is also the clerk at the Public Records Office where the intrepid teen-detectives discover that the incriminating Environmental Impact Report is missing. Luke Wilson nearly steals all the crucial scenes from the charming teen actors who have most of the best lines. Wilson is the bumbling police officer, in his three-wheeled electric police cart complete with blue light and funky siren. As Officer Dave, he tries so hard to do well, but usually ends up falling in the muck, literally! Several times! Jimmy Buffet is pretty low key as the tacitly supportive science teacher. But, young actors Logan Lerman (Roy), Brie Larson (Beatrice the Bear), and Cody Linley (Mullet Fingers) are superb as the teens who finally put Officer Dave on the right track, following the paper trail left by the evil corporate boss. I hope you come away from this movie feeling as good as I did. Just plain fun! One small complaint, though. I hope all non-Floridians realize that not everyone from Florida is as surly to newcomers as depicted in this film. We're really a friendly bunch! Just ask Carl Hiassen and Jimmy Buffet!!

First, let me mention all the positives, there are so few. Sam Golzari's performance as would-be, "screw-up" terrorist Omar Obeidi, steals most of the scenes from the better known actors. Next, Noureen DeWolff as his thoroughly Americanized cousin Shazzy, is SO HOT! Why isn't there more information on her in IMDb? Finally, the most sympathetic character is Shazzy's brother Iqbal, portrayed by Tony Yaldi. Great acting here, as he grudgingly agrees to help Omar, who arrives on the scene and shatters Iqbal's dream. Through strange plotting, Omar quickly usurps Igbal's chance to appear on the sleazoid TV show "American Dreamz." These last two characters have realized the true American Dream in this film, but don't quite realize it yet. I guess the only way that the writers and producers of "American Dreamz" felt they could keep the interest of viewers, no matter who they were, was to insult them. Once you figure this out (I did in the first 3 minutes of the movie), then this film was soooo... boring! I can only wonder what these other fine actors were thinking when they signed on to this project? Dennis Quaid has the quirky ability to bounce back from virtually any box office fiasco. I hope he can. Not so for Hugh Grant. His star is falling fast. I really like Hugh Grant, but feel so sorry for him in this movie. This is a far cry from his superb performances in "Notting Hill" and "Four Weddings and a Funeral." And Mandy Moore? Why do I get the feeling, that in real life, she is SO much like her character here, Sally Kendoo? Not a big stretch for her. If I hadn't spent so much money for the movie tickets, I probably would have walked out in the first 30 minutes out of sheer boredom.

I attached such high expectations to this last episode! As it played out, it was like watching an over-inflated balloon deflate from a slow leak. It will be as shows to watch and re-watch to glean more through inferences. I was hoping for more loose ends to be tied up. Red retired in an earlier episode of the 8th season after selling his muffler shop to a huge retail chain. But in the last episode Kitty was dressed in her nurse's uniform. I guess she is still working. Since they are not moving to Florida, I suspect she will continue to work until she retires. Bob sold his house and is still moving to Florida to open a bait shop. Fez is still working at the hair shop. Will he marry Jackie? Who knows? She's older and maybe not as flighty. What work will she do? Maybe she will be the make-up and nail girl once Fez opens his own shop. Hyde owns the record store, thanks to his father's "bequeath." Since his "wife" already had a husband, that marriage is null and void. Who will he hook up with? The biker girl from earlier in the show's history? With his new attitude, maybe he can straighten out Leo … NO WAY! Kelso is just plain Kelso. He's kept his job at Playboy in Chicago for a whole season now, and actually got promoted. Maybe he and Brooke will finally tie the knot, and she will elevate his intellect. He is still a devoted father to their daughter. Donna is starting college right after New Years. I couldn't picture her being a DJ for the rest of her life. If she majors in communications or journalism (remember her story writing episodes?), she might be a broadcast journalist. I'm puzzled at Eric's part in this last episode. He said he had so much hope when he left for Africa, but now he's not so sure. Surely he won't waste his internship there and NOT go to college! Obviously he and Donna have matured. Their intense feelings for each other are still there, as evidenced by that kissing scene. I see their relationship heading toward marriage. It just has to!! If they can get past their college days without killing each other. Kitty casts some doubt on that possibility (before Eric's return, though) when she tells Donna she's sorry things didn't work out between her and Eric. The show has not one, but two, characters who suffered from the "Chuck Cunningham Syndrome." Fans of "Happy Days" know what I'm talking about. Laurie, Eric's older sister, and Tina, Donna's little sister from episode 6 of season1. They both just disappeared from the show. I'm trying to remember an episode that explained Laurie moving away. She trained for a while as a hair dresser. Maybe she will return, and go to work for Fez and Jackie. To Kitty's credit, she DOES ask where Laurie is, in the last episode. It was always mentioned that Jackie was a year younger than the rest of the gang. And THEY graduated from high school in a 2003 episode that had "1978" on the license plate. Ergo, she had to graduate in 1979. This last episode is set on December 31, 1979. She's about 18. Eric, Donna, Hyde, and Fez are about 19. Kelso is 20 if he was held back a year. Two characters who joined the show in the last season, Randy and Samantha, felt the wrath of devoted fans on internet forums. They just didn't seem to fit in with the established ensemble cast. Their parts just sort of fizzled out. Casey Kelso, Michael's older brother, deserves an honorable mention. How can he be so lovable and annoying at the same time? Internet forums have discussed favorite episodes or characters. When the show first started, I couldn't stand the Fez and Jackie characters. He was too much of a mousy, clinging vine. She was too much like the girls I wanted to date in high school, but couldn't. As the show progressed, that switched and I found Donna to be condescending and Eric kind of whiny. As the series matured, I slowly understood that's how they all fit in to the overall "big picture" of the show. All members contributed to the success of the show. That's the meaning of "ensemble cast." They are like the building blocks of a pyramid. All serve to form a solid structure. Unfortunately, in the last season, two primary cornerstones of the foundation were removed when Topher Grace and Ashton Kutcher left. The structure wobbled severely and nearly tumbled down. Favorite episodes? IMPOSSIBLE! Favorite scenes from different episodes, maybe: When Red and Eric visit Laurie at her apartment, and catch her shacked up her current boyfriend. Eric laughing at Laurie at the end of that scene is classic! Kitty and Hyde at Fenton's jewelry store, when Kitty realizes "her ring" is actually Donna's engagement ring. THEN Hyde declaring he "just now" found out. Even better, later in that episode when Red finds out Eric is engaged and Kitty declares the same. That look on Hyde's face! In the 100th episode "That Seventies Muscial" when Jackie loses at Rock-Paper-Scissors, and has to put more dog poop on the music teacher's porch. That look on her face and her flighty arm waving in "fast-forward" when she drops it off and runs away. And the all time best: At Bob's and Midge's re-marriage ceremony, when Midge is reading the vows that Donna wrote, Eric realizes she's writing about them. He slowly turns to see Donna mouthing "I Love You" just as Midge says the same thing. This started as a review of the last episode. It ended as a review of the entire series, and an attempt to extrapolate possible futures from the momentum of past episodes and analysis of the final show. Hopefully a success.

I WAS going to start out saying something like, "What was Tom Cruise thinking?" But recent publicity has proved that he doesn't. Think, that is. If Mission: Impossible 3 enjoys any sort of financial success at the box office, then I blame the movie-going American public. Cruise and Paramount have turned an intellectually stimulating franchise into a mind-numbing mish-mash of action and violence. A sad commentary on the intellectual level of the average movie fan. Paramount teased those of us who care, by hinting that it would be releasing the television series on DVD, coinciding with the release of M:I3. Instead, Paramount released the first two Cruise installments as a boxed set. Is Paramount hoping to bury any and all memory of the best, the original , television version of Mission: Impossible? Hear me Paramount Studios! I would NOT EVER waste my money buying any Tom Cruise version of Mission: Impossible. I would however, spend BIG BUCKS on buying all seven seasons of the TV series if it were ever released on DVD.

I saw part of "The Search" on television in the early 1960's. It wasn't until I watched it again, recently on Turner Classic Movies,uncut and uninterrupted, that I remembered seeing it so long ago. Clift plays a post World War II GI responsible for locating parents of misplaced refugee orphans. I understand that this was Montgomery Clift's second movie, but the first one released and the first one seen by the American public. To be sure, Clift is a magnificent actor, but little Ivan Jandl as the displaced boy searching for his "lost" mother is truly superlative. Jandl's engaging performance very nearly overshadows Clift's debut. So worthy was Jandl's acting, that he received both the Oscar and Golden Globe awards for best performance by a juvenile actor in 1948. Several scenes are so memorable. In particular, when Clift's character gives the little boy a new pair of boots, Jandl's enthusiasm at receiving such a simple gift, is so genuine. Another touching scene is set around the dinner table of Clift's neighbor. Jandl is dressed in a pint-sized replica of Clift's army uniform complete with jacket and tie (such an endearing image), when he starts to recall memories of his "missing" mother. Superb acting! Surely this movie has a happy ending, reuniting a lost little boy with his searching mother. It is truly a major human tragedy that Ivan Jandl's life didn't have such a happy ending. It seems to make this film even more poignant in retrospect.

I first learned of this film back in the early 1980's, while watching an episode of the "Siskel and Ebert" movie review show on PBS. One of them (I can't remember which)favorably reviewed it as one their undiscovered gems. Miraculously, it appeared on HBO a few weeks later. My wife and I both thought, "What a charming movie!" I didn't realize until much later that it had been re-dubbed with "softer" Scots accents for American audiences. I just thought the dialog was a bit stilted due to colloquial speech. For me, this just added to the charm.

Gordon John Sinclair performance as Gregory is a classic. The anguish displayed on his face when he finally garners enough courage to ask Dorothy (Dee Hepburn) for a date, just as she enters the shower room is pure, teen-age angst! Any man or boy, who has experienced the same dilemma, anywhere in the world, can empathize superbly with Gregory. Even better is his feigned indifference when he realizes Dorothy stands him up, while waiting beneath the huge clock at the union.

Dee Hepburn's performance as Dorothy displays the same infuriating ambivalence any boy has experienced when asking out a girl, he truly knows is indifferent to him.

Perhaps the best performance is that of the script, with the subtle clues, thrown in by director Bill Forsyth, as to who really is "Gregory's Girl".

The viewer is not even sure at first, who Madeline (Gregory's sister)is. The knowing glances stolen by Susan (Clair Grogan) and her furtive and clandestine conversations with Dorothy begin to tell the tale.

The supporting performance by Robert Buchanan as Gregory's best friend Andy, almost steal the show. I always remembered his classic line: "Nine losses in a row and what do they do? Sack the goalie and put girl on the forward line!" In his Scottish brogue "girl" comes out as a rolling "gare-ell." Great stuff!

Perhaps the best scene in the entire movie is Gregory's and Susan's "gravity defying" dance in the park near the end. What imagination and how utterly, typically, and wonderfully adolescent! I almost wish I was a teen-ager again.

In a slick change from the sledge hammer tactics of Michael Moore, actor George Clooney and writer-director Stephen Gaghan attempt to turn Bush-bashing into high art. Were they successful? Trying so hard to hide the true intent of the film, Clooney and Gaghan use subtlety to the extreme, hoping their subliminal message is perceived by the movie-going public. The result is a miasma of disconnected plot threads with dreadful attempts to tie them together in a confusing, cinematic climax very near the end of the film. I read Baer's book, upon which this film is supposedly based. "Syriana" has as much to do with Baer's book as Robert Downey's comedy, "Air America" had to do with Robbins' historically researched work of the same name. See "Syriana" if you must. I say skip it, like I should have.

Fahrenheit 9/11 reads much like a kidnapper's extortion note pieced together from snippets clipped from other sources. Such a note can be made to say anything the extortionist wants. This is what Michael Moore has done, kidnapped the truth. His job is made that much easier when the sources are from a news media already heavily arrayed against its target, George Bush. It makes for a good movie, however, but this method is similar to Hitler's propaganda tactics used during World War II: the bigger the lie that is told, the more it is believed. I could say don't go see this movie, but that would be an invitation to do the opposite. PLEASE, go see this movie just to see how lame it looks, pieced together from scrap sources.

"Saved!" is a funny movie. Pungent, biting humor. It is good comedy, much like Oliver Stone's 1995 movie "Nixon" is good drama. Both films' however, are gross distortions of fact. I challenge writer/director Brian Dannelly to find any truly Christian teen-ager of today, without the compassion to deal with a friend's (or even an aquaintance's) pregnancy as depicted in this film, in a more humane way. Mandy Moore truly has the freedom of expression to choose her movie roles as she sees fit, just as the movie-going public has the freedom ignore films they find lame. Surely, God has a sense of humor and will find this movie funny as well. So much so, that it will die a slow, agonizing box office death along with Mandy Moore's career. Did she really say she was ashamed of being typecast as dumb a blonde, and that's why she dyed her hair brown? Go figure.

A year after I saw the remake, I finally got to see the original for the first time. This movie was released during my freshman year in college, but I certainly don't remember it ever being in any local theaters. From a 35-year hindsight perspective, it has an "Austin Powers" feel to it, primarily because of the sound track and the period-attire worn by the players. The 2003 re-make has a more imaginative yet believable plot, while this original has a sly, tongue-in-cheek undertone of humor to it. Benny Hill as the computer-geek obsessed with "large-boned women" is a real hoot! I think that sub-plot could have been played out further in the form of it creating more complications for master planner Michael Caine. Although I like "Marky" Mark Wahlberg and most of his movies, Michael Caine imbued the Charlie Croker role with more personality. The mini-Coopers are still the centerpiece of both movies, though: good chase scenes! This movie has merits that the re-make does not, and vice versa. It's hard not to compare the two, but try watching both again, as individual movies.

American Wedding was just as funny as its two predecessors, but it seems to have an even lower-budget feel to it. There were some passing references to occurrences in the previous films, but where were Oz (Chris Klein), Heather (Mena Suvari), Vicky (Tara Reid), and Nadia (Shannon Elizabeth)? Couldn't the producers afford their salaries since the "PIE" franchise made them stars? At least there was a conversational reference to Nadia. The other characters weren't even mentioned. The debate will rage for ... the rest of the summer ... (?): "Too much Stiffler? Not enough Stiffler? Just enough Stiffler?" Seann William Scott is the next Jim Carrey but don't burn us out on him by overexposure here. I can't wait to see his next film co-starring "THE ROCK". By the way, "Bear" the gay dancer, was NOT The Skipper from Gilligan's Island. He was "The Mighty Thor" from Marvel Comic's "Incredible Hulk" (Bill Bixby) reunion TV-movies of the 1990's.

MILD SPOILERS. I didn't see the original, so I had nothing to compare it to. I actually saw this film twice at a sneak preview. I liked it so much I had to go back and be thrilled all over again. It is intelligently written and acted. You are actually given clues throughout the movie that tell you what, exactly, will happen. BUT, do you figure it out, or just go with the flow? The first time, I went along for the ride. The second time, the clues just about knocked me in the head like a sledgehammer! I can favorably compare this film to classic episodes of the vintgage television series Mission: Impossible of the 1960's and 1970's. Mark Wahlberg is an intelligent but affable master planner. Edward Norton is made to look like Sean Penn, so he plays out at the perfect sleazeball. Charlize Theron is an ethical, moral, pleasant-looking locksmith/safecracker whose character involvement moves the plot forward without distracting from the flow of events. If you are familiar with the old Mission: Impossible series, look for the similarities, like the choosing of the team, the brief outlining of the plot when all are together, and even the confrontation with the "bad guy" when he realizes he has been beaten by a superior intellect. Very entertaining and stimulating.

When I first saw this movie, I immediately thought of the classic Mission: Impossible television show. I thought it was made with such similar characters and plotting, that it was meant to gauge public interest in a re-make of that series. Redford as Phelps and Poitier as Barney? It only lacked Schwarzenegger as Willy the strongman, and perhaps Martin Short as Rollin the disguise artist or even Meg Ryan as Cinnamon the major babe. In fact, if you read the book "The Complete Mission: Impossible Dossier", several scripts were actually submitted to Paramount for an "Impossible" revival, remarkably (or even suspiciously) close to the plot of this movie, with the IMF team "free-lancing" their services. Hiring Ben Kingsley as the villain was the casting director's stroke of pure genius. Dan Ackroyd as the blind driver of the surveillance van? Superb comic relief!

The television series was better than both M.I. movies. I'm annoyed at Tom Cruise for hi-jacking the title (and musical score) to draw, and perhaps mislead, an unsuspecting audience. Having said that, as a stand-alone movie regardless of title, Mission: Impossible 2 is a major disappointment. The plotting in the first half of the movie is so tedious and convoluted as to make it incomprehensible. The fight scenes at the end of the movie are unfavorably comparable to those found in the children's television show "The Power Rangers"... remember them? I hope Tom Cruise gets beyond this quickly. He's capable of much better.