"It's Christmastime Again, Charlie Brown"

"It's Christmastime Again, Charlie Brown" (TV short), 1992. Christmas-related sketches. Directed by Bill Melendez. Written by Charles M. Schulz. Starring Jamie E. Smith, Phillip Lucier & Lindsay Benesh.

Concept: 1/4 (Bad). Why does this exist? More importantly, why is it on video?
Story: 0/4 (Terrible). No story.
Characters: 3/4 (Good)
Dialog: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Pacing: 1/4 (Bad)
Cinematography: 1/4 (Bad)
Special effects/design: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Acting: 1/4 (Bad)
Music: 3/4 (Good)
Subjective Rating: 4/10 (Eh, 2/4). A relentless barrage of four-panel "jokes," animated for no apparent reason. All the faults of the 60's special, magnified, with none of the charm.
Objective Rating (Average): 1.6/4 (Eh)

"A Charlie Brown Christmas"

"A Charlie Brown Christmas" (TV short), 1965. A depressed kid is talked into directing the school Christmas play. Directed by Bill Melendez. Written by Charles M. Schulz. Starring Peter Robbins, Christopher Shea & Tracy Stratford.

Concept: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Story: 1/4 (Bad)
Characters: 3/4 (Good)
Dialog: 3/4 (Good)
Pacing: 4/4 (Great)
Cinematography: 1/4 (Bad)
Special effects/design: 1/4 (Bad). Points off for conspicuously absent sound effects.
Acting: 2/4 (Indifferent). The voices are perfect.
Music: 4/4 (Great)
Subjective Rating: 7/10 (Good, 3/4). Mildly wonderful. I probably saw it as a kid, but I have no memory of watching it before yesterday. So, I was quite pleasantly surprised to find out how good it is.
Objective Rating (Average): 2.4/4 (Okay)

Hellboy

Hellboy, 2004. A demon raised by the US Government fights supernatural badguys. Directed by Guillermo del Toro. Written by Del Toro; story by Del Toro & Peter Briggs; based on a comic book by Mike Mignola. Starring Ron Perlman, John Hurt, Selma Blair, Rupert Evans & Karel Roden.

Concept: 4/4 (Great)
Story: 1/4 (Bad)
Characters: 4/4 (Great). The development is pretty terrible, but there's enough Awesome that I have to give full points in this category.
Dialog: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Pacing: 3/4 (Good)
Cinematography: 3/4 (Good)
Special effects/design: 3/4 (Good). The CG is mediocre. The practical effects and design are great.
Acting: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Music: 3/4 (Good)
Subjective Rating: 6/10 (Okay, 2/4). It's fun. There's some great action. But I remembered it being a lot better than it is. Maybe I had lower standards for a superhero movie back in 2004. Or maybe now that I've seen it enough that the cool bits aren't novel anymore, I'm less distracted from the mess of a story.
Objective Rating (Average): 2.7/4 (Good)

(update of a previous post - original is here)

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, 1982. An old enemy of Kirk wants vengeance. Directed by Nicholas Meyer. Written by Jack B. Sowards & Meyer; story by Harve Bennett, Sowards & Samuel A. Peeples; based on a TV show by Gene Roddenberry. Starring William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, DeForest Kelley & Ricardo Montalban.

Concept: 4/4 (Great). Revenge is a great motive for any action movie. And on top of that, this movie's a polar opposite of the first one - not that it's necessarily a better direction, but it's great that it's such a different direction. You'd never get that kind of change of pace from a modern franchise.
Story: 3/4 (Good)
Characters: 3/4 (Good)
Dialog: 3/4 (Good)
Pacing: 4/4 (Great)
Cinematography: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Special effects/design: 3/4 (Good). The effects are great, but why are the bad guys a hair band? Maybe in the remake Khan will be emo. If only it had been made in the 70s, they could have been punks.
Acting: 3/4 (Good). Ham sandwich! But I'm okay with that.
Music: 1/4 (Bad). Oh, James Horner, you so awful.
Subjective Rating: 8/10 (Great, 4/4). It used to be one of my favorites. Usually when I like a movie this much, it gets better with every viewing, but this one seems to get a little worse every time. There's no subtlety; what you get is just what's there on the surface. Still awesome, though.
Objective Rating (Average): 3.0/4 (Good)

The Wizard of Oz

from my 1st Ebert’s Great Movies Marathon, part 8 of 13



The Wizard of Oz, 1939. A witch and a lost girl fight to the death over a sparkly pair of heels. Directed by Victor Fleming. Written by Noel Langley, Florence Ryerson & Edgar Allan Woolf, based on a book by L. Frank Baum. Starring Judy Garland, Frank Morgan, Ray Bolger, Bert Lahr, Jack Haley & Margaret Hamilton.

Concept: 4/4 (Great)
Story: 3/4 (Good)
Characters: 4/4 (Great)
Dialog: 3/4 (Good)
Pacing: 4/4 (Great)
Cinematography: 3/4 (Good)
Special effects/design: 4/4 (Great)
Acting: 3/4 (Good). Garland is great. The rest are entertainingly hammy.
Music: 4/4 (Great)
Subjective Rating: 8/10 (Great, 4/4). Whenever I watch this, I try to imagine what it would be like to see it for the first time. I can never tell, but I do usually notice things that have previously been invisibile-due-to-familiarity. One thing I managed to pull out of it this time around was just how good a song and performance "Over the Rainbow" is. I mean, yeah, I've always known it's great, but this time it struck me how much it probably would have floored me if I'd never heard it before.
Objective Rating (Average): 3.6/4 (Great)

(update of a previous post - original is here)

Serenity

Serenity, 2005. Space fugitives have government secrets. Written and directed by Joss Whedon. Starring Nathan Fillion, Summer Glau & Chiwetel Ejiofor.

Concept: 1/4 (Bad). A TV show with a large cast and a slowly developing plot is supposed to make a watchable movie how exactly?
Story: 1/4 (Bad)
Characters: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Dialog: 3/4 (Good). Great with banter, often bad with plot-related stuff.
Pacing: 1/4 (Bad)
Cinematography: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Special effects/design: 3/4 (Good)
Acting: 2/4 (Indifferent). Mostly good, with some key moments of awful.
Music: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Subjective Rating: 6/10 (Okay, 2/4). There are moments of greatness, and moments of embarassingly bad crap. But even if the crap weren't there, the great bits wouldn't come together into a coherent movie.
Objective Rating (Average): 1.9/4 (Eh)

Finding Nemo

Finding Nemo, 2003. A fish swims through the ocean to find his son. Directed by Andrew Stanton & Lee Unkrich. Written by Stanton, Bob Peterson & David Reynolds. Starring Albert Brooks, Ellen DeGeneres, Alexander Gould & Willem Dafoe.

Concept: 1/4 (Bad)
Story: 3/4 (Good)
Characters: 4/4 (Great)
Dialog: 4/4 (Great)
Pacing: 4/4 (Great)
Cinematography: 4/4 (Great)
Special effects/design: 4/4 (Great)
Acting: 4/4 (Great)
Music: 4/4 (Great)
Subjective Rating: 9/10 (One of my favorites, 4/4 5/4). I would go on about how good it is, but whatever, you've seen it. Everybody's seen this, right?
Objective Rating (Average): 3.6/4 3.7/4 (Great)

(update of a previous post - original is here)

"The Flying Mouse"

"The Flying Mouse" (short), 1934. A young mouse wishes for wings. Directed by David Hand. Starring Clarence Nash.

Concept: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Story: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Characters: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Dialog: 3/4 (Good)
Pacing: 3/4 (Good)
Cinematography: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Special effects/design: 3/4 (Good)
Acting: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Music: 3/4 (Good)
Subjective Rating: 5/10 (Indifferent, 2/4). Heavy-handed moralizing, but with some nice animation.
Objective Rating (Average): 2.4/4 (Okay)

"Elmer Elephant"

"Elmer Elephant" (short), 1936. Other animals make fun of an elephant's trunk. Directed by Wilfred Jackson. Written by Earl Hurd, Bianca Majolie, Ted Sears & Roy Williams. Starring Bernice Hansen.

Concept: 1/4 (Bad)
Story: 1/4 (Bad)
Characters: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Dialog: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Pacing: 3/4 (Good)
Cinematography: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Special effects/design: 3/4 (Good)
Acting: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Music: 3/4 (Good)
Subjective Rating: 4/10 (Eh, 2/4). Um... who cares?
Objective Rating (Average): 2.1/4 (Okay)

Dumbo

Dumbo, 1941. A circus elephant has embarrassingly large ears. Directed by Ben Sharpsteen. Written by Joe Grant, Dick Huemer, Otto Englander, Bill Peet, Aurelius Battaglia, Joe Rinaldi, Vernon Stallings & Webb Smith, based on a book by Helen Aberson & Harold Pearl. Starring Edward Brophy, Cliff Edwards & Verna Felton.

Concept: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Story: 3/4 (Good). The plot could potentially have been very tedious, but this movie is a model of economical storytelling (without ever rushing anything).
Characters: 4/4 (Great)
Dialog: 3/4 (Good)
Pacing: 4/4 (Great)
Cinematography: 3/4 (Good)
Special effects/design: 4/4 (Great)
Acting: 4/4 (Great)
Music: 4/4 (Great)
Subjective Rating: 9/10 (One of my favorites, 4/4 5/4). Sad, and beautifully uncomplicated. When everything turns out happy in the end, it's so sudden and arbitrary and absurdly thorough, it doesn't feel real - like someone was telling a sad bedtime story and realized at the last minute that if it didn't have a happy ending the kids would be up crying all night. The adults in the audience are left to decide for themselves what really happens.
Objective Rating (Average): 3.5/4 (Very good) 3.6/4 (Great)

(update of a previous post - original is here)

Doctor Who #132: The Awakening

Doctor Who: "The Awakening," 1984 (the second story of seven from season twenty-one). An historical reenactment awakens a buried psychic entity. Directed by Michael Owen Morris. Written by Eric Pringle. Starring Peter Davison, Janet Fielding, Mark Strickson, Polly James & Denis Lill.

Concept: 0/4 (Terrible). I don't see how it could possibly make sense.
Story: 0/4 (Terrible)
Characters: 1/4 (Bad)
Dialog: 1/4 (Bad)
Pacing: 1/4 (Bad). It's two episodes, from a script that was originally meant to be four. The re-writing process must have involved a paper shredder and some scotch tape.
Cinematography: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Special effects/design: 1/4 (Bad)
Acting: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Music: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Subjective Rating: 4/10 (Eh, 2/4). It's crap, but at least it's not boring. On the contrary, you're kept very occupied trying to figure out what any of this is supposed to mean. You don't know what the monster is (except that it comes from another planet), or why it's there until the very end of the episode where The Doctor explains everything (and it's a pretty weak explanation with gaping holes in it) and also mentions that, "Oh, by the way, I've just defeated it." How? "Because I said so."
Objective Rating (Average): 1.2/4 (Bad)

Star Trek: The Motion Picture

Star Trek: The Motion Picture, 1979. A giant, deadly spaceship is headed for Earth. Directed by Robert Wise. Written by Harold Livingston, story by Alan Dean Foster, based on a TV show by Gene Roddenberry. Starring William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, DeForest Kelley, Persis Khambatta & Stephen Collins.

Concept: 4/4 (Great)
Story: 2/4 (Indifferent). I want to give them credit for trying - a sci-fi movie this expensive, post-Star Wars, with no action of any kind. And to be fair, there is quite a bit of suspense, considering how long the movie takes to get going. But for all the good intentions, there isn't much of a story at all, and what little there is is lifted directly from episodes of the TV show.
Characters: 3/4 (Good). I would say they're bad, but then there's Bones. Being awesome. And apparently not having anything to do on the ship but pace through the halls and occasionally insult people.
Dialog: 1/4 (Bad)
Pacing: 1/4 (Bad)
Cinematography: 3/4 (Good)
Special effects/design: 4/4 (Great). Douglas Trumbull is pretty much the best thing to ever happen to science fiction.
Acting: 3/4 (Good)
Music: 3/4 (Good). I kind of hate Goldsmith's version of the theme. A lot. But the V'ger music is pretty cool.
Subjective Rating: 7/10 (Good, 3/4). Although there's only one credited screenwriter, it was in fact written by committee, and it hurts for it. Script-wise, it's more like Star Trek's Greatest Hits (minus the action) than a story of its own. But the visuals! Trumbull should have been credited as the star; I'm pretty sure his effects get more screen time than the actors.
Objective Rating (Average): 2.7/4 (Good)

"Christmas Comes but Once a Year"

"Christmas Comes but Once a Year" (short), 1936. A cackling old man builds an impromptu Christmas for orphans. Directed by Dave Fleischer. Starring Jack Mercer & Mae Questel.

Concept: 1/4 (Bad)
Story: 0/4 (Terrible)
Characters: 1/4 (Bad)
Dialog: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Pacing: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Cinematography: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Special effects/design: 3/4 (Good)
Acting: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Music: 2/4 (Indifferent). Good score, terrible singing.
Subjective Rating: 4/10 (Eh, 2/4). Not funny, but I enjoy the animation style - probably because I haven't seen many Fleischer cartoons from this era.
Objective Rating (Average): 1.7/4 (Eh)

Santa Claus Conquers the Martians

Santa Claus Conquers the Martians, 1964. Martians kidnap Santa. Directed by Nicholas Webster. Written by Glenville Mareth, story by Paul L. Jacobson. Starring John Call, Leonard Hicks, Vincent Beck, Bill McCutcheon, Victor Stiles & Donna Conforti.

Concept: 0/4 (Terrible). A terrible idea, yes, but in a good way.
Story: 0/4 (Terrible)
Characters: 0/4 (Terrible)
Dialog: 0/4 (Terrible)
Pacing: 0/4 (Terrible)
Cinematography: 0/4 (Terrible)
Special effects/design: 0/4 (Terrible)
Acting: 1/4 (Bad)
Music: 3/4 (Good). I like the theme song, and the score is surprisingly okay.
Subjective Rating: 1/10 (Eew get it away, 0/4). Despite appearances, it's not a campy fun sort of bad movie. How can a movie about Santa Claus vs. Martians not be campy fun? It's just so damn bad. It makes Ed Wood look like a master craftsman.
Objective Rating (Average): 0.4/4 (Terrible)

The Third Man

from my 1st Ebert’s Great Movies Marathon, part 7 of 13



The Third Man, 1949. An American in post-war Vienna tries to clear the name of his recently deceased friend. Directed by Carol Reed. Written by Graham Greene. Starring Joseph Cotten, Alida Valli, Orson Welles & Trevor Howard.

Concept: 3/4 (Good)
Story: 3/4 (Good)
Characters: 4/4 (Great)
Dialog: 4/4 (Great)
Pacing: 4/4 (Great)
Cinematography: 4/4 (Great). Visually, this movie is as good as it gets.
Special effects/design: 4/4 (Great). Bombs are a great set designer.
Acting: 4/4 (Great). Oh man, Welles' grin alone could earn this movie a 4. It's surely one of the Top Ten Moments of Acting.
Music: 4/4 (Great). It's my second time watching the movie, and I've had a complete reversal on my reaction to the music. It had seemed so completely wrong for the movie. It is wrong for the first half of the movie, and by the time it starts to fit, I had already rejected it. But on the second viewing, the effect has changed so much it's like a different score. Watching that first half of the movie knowing that the title character is on his way - knowing the character and how Welles plays him - the score is absolutely perfect. It's hard to imagine the movie with a traditional mystery/crime score. It would still be a great movie that way, but... I don't know. Maybe Welles' performance wouldn't seem so great without that music to prepare you for him.
Subjective Rating: 8/10 (Great, 4/4). An all-around damn good movie.
Objective Rating (Average): 3.8/4 (Great)

(update of a previous post - original is here)

The Night of the Hunter

from my 1st Ebert’s Great Movies Marathon, part 6 of 13



The Night of the Hunter, 1955. A mad "preacher" is after money that two kids have hidden. Directed by Charles Laughton. Written by James Agee, based on a novel by Davis Grubb. Starring Robert Mitchum, Shelley Winters, Lillian Gish, Billy Chapin & Sally Jane Bruce.

Concept: 3/4 (Good)
Story: 4/4 (Great)
Characters: 4/4 (Great)
Dialog: 4/4 (Great)
Pacing: 3/4 (Good)
Cinematography: 4/4 (Great)
Special effects/design: 4/4 (Great)
Acting: 3/4 (Good)
Music: 4/4 (Great)
Subjective Rating: 8/10 (Great, 4/4). Powerfully suspenseful and visually beautiful. Mitchum's preacher is one of the scariest movie characters of all time. It's a strange movie, combining expressionist horror and noir crime thiller - taking the best from both worlds without much regard for the audience's expectations. I appreciated and enjoyed it a lot more the second time around.
Objective Rating (Average): 3.7/4 (Great)

(update of a previous post - original is here)

Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom

Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, 1984. Indiana Jones discovers an evil cult in India. Directed by Steven Spielberg. Written by Willard Huyck & Gloria Katz; story by George Lucas. Starring Harrison Ford, Kate Capshaw, Jonathan Ke Quan & Amrish Puri.

Concept: 3/4 (Good). If it weren't for the fact that it's a sequel to a great movie that demands a sequel, it would be a pretty bad concept.
Story: 1/4 (Bad). "Quick, we must escape through these plot holes! What's that? No, we can't go out the front door like everyone else. That's not exciting enough!"
Characters: 1/4 (Bad). What's with these people? It's like Lucas went out of his way to think up the most annoying characters possible. Granted, none of them are played by Shia LaBeouf, so it could be worse.
Dialog: 1/4 (Bad)
Pacing: 4/4 (Great)
Cinematography: 3/4 (Good)
Special effects/design: 3/4 (Good)
Acting: 2/4 (Indifferent). Grating. Not that they could have done any better with this writing.
Music: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Subjective Rating: 7/10 (Good, 3/4). It's a reluctant 7. It's ever so slightly better than a 6. Partly it's nostalgia; I watched this a lot as a kid. And partly it's the scary bits; there are some moments of greatness in there.
Objective Rating (Average): 2.3/4 (Okay)

Star Trek: The Animated Series: Season Two (wrap-up)

Star Trek [The Animated Series]: Season Two, 1974.

Concept: 3/4 (Good). The concept of the show as a whole is good, although the episode-by-episode concepts only average out to about 1.8/4.
Story: 1/4 (Bad). Rounded down from an average of about 1.3/4.
Characters: 1/4 (Bad). Average: 1.0/4.
Dialog: 1/4 (Bad). Average: 1.0/4.
Pacing: 2/4 (Indifferent). Average: 2.0/4.
Cinematography: 2/4 (Indifferent). Average: 2.0/4.
Special effects/design: 3/4 (Good). Average: about 3.2/4.
Acting: 2/4 (Indifferent). Average: 1.5/4.
Music: 4/4 (Great). Average: 4.0/4.
Subjective Rating: 3/10 (Bad, 1/4). Average: about 4.7/10. Although I only thought one episode was really bad, the rest are all mediocre. The unrelenting barrage of mediocrity has a cumulative effect of A Very Bad Show Indeed.
Objective Rating (Average): 2.0/4 (Indifferent)

The Episodes, sorted by subjective rating (objective rating in parentheses)
5/10
- "The Pirates of Orion" (2.3/4)
- "Albatross" (2.0/4)
- "How Sharper Than a Serpent's Tooth" (1.9/4)
- "Bem" (1.9/4)
- "The Practical Joker" (1.9/4)
3/10
- "The Counter-Clock Incident" (1.8/4)

Star Trek: "The Counter-Clock Incident"

Star Trek [The Animated Series]: "The Counter-Clock Incident," 1974 (the last episode of six from season two). Time moves in reverse in a another universe.

Created by Gene Roddenberry. Directed by Bill Reed. Written by Fred Bronson. Starring William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, DeForest Kelley, Nichelle Nichols & James Doohan.

Concept: 3/4 (Good)
Story: 1/4 (Bad)
Characters: 1/4 (Bad)
Dialog: 0/4 (Terrible)
Pacing: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Cinematography: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Special effects/design: 4/4 (Great)
Acting: 0/4 (Terrible). The first ten minutes of the episode, before shit gets ridiculous, might have been good. Horrible performances by Nichols and Doohan ensure that it's not.
Music: 4/4 (Great)
Subjective Rating: 3/10 (Bad, 1/4). It hurts. It physically hurts to watch this one. So little of this episode is logical, it's remarkable that Spock's brain didn't explode.
Objective Rating (Average): 1.8/4 (Eh)

Star Trek: "How Sharper Than a Serpent's Tooth"

Star Trek [The Animated Series]: "How Sharper Than a Serpent's Tooth," 1974 (the fifth episode of six from season two). A former Mayan god is a found to be a conceited space monster.

Created by Gene Roddenberry. Directed by Bill Reed. Written by Russell Bates & David Wise. Starring William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, DeForest Kelley & James Doohan.

Concept: 1/4 (Bad)
Story: 1/4 (Bad)
Characters: 1/4 (Bad)
Dialog: 1/4 (Bad)
Pacing: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Cinematography: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Special effects/design: 3/4 (Good)
Acting: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Music: 4/4 (Great)
Subjective Rating: 5/10 (Indifferent, 2/4). How many times has this plot been done on Star Trek? Enough already. It wasn't a good idea to begin with.
Objective Rating (Average): 1.9/4 (Eh)