Jared-Harris Movie Reviews

Don't get me wrong - this is a fine movie. It's full of feel-good moments and light, humorous touches. It's beautifully photographed and each scene is shot and editted with equisite care. It has colorful costumes and exotic street scenes of old Beijing. It's a charmingly-dressed tableau of traditional China at the turn of the 20th century.

But perhaps it is a little too charming, from the spotless costumes to the immaculate sidewalks. Our hero bounces through life encountering a cast of well-intentioned characters who conveniently come around at the most opportune moments. The movie aspires to serious drama, but delivers mostly cliches. It reminds one of Cinema Paradiso at places but is much more like Mediterraneo in tone. At least Cinema Paradiso has some real heartbreaks. In this film our hero gets the girl, keeps the job, and to top it off, the closing credits tell us he went on to make a fortune.

Perhaps that's The Arnold's reality. But it sure ain't ours.

Loosely based on the Chinese cinema history, "Shadow Magic" portrays the people surrounding the first showing of moving picture in Beijing, China in 1902. But the film is more about the fictional chacaters involved in it rather than about the event itself, so do not expect any historical accuracy. And "Shadow Magic" succeeds as the former kind of picture.

Jared Harris (son of late Richard Harris) is in the film as a British entrepreneur Raymond Wallace, who is eagar to make some money, showing the films he brought from the West, but, good as he is, it is not Harris who carries the whole picture. It is Chinese actor Xia Yu as Liu, a technician at photography studio who is really remarkable in "Shadow Magic," and he is just wondeful. Liu, interested in anything new from the West, is a kind of misfit in the traditional Chinese society, and naturally, is the first one to get hooked by the idea of Raymond -- showing the "Shadow Magic" in China. They gradually begin to understand each other, and the rapport between these likable fellows is definitely the best part of the show.

The story written by director Ann Hu, I must say, needs some trimming, sometimes filled with clithed moments. And some viewers object to the way the Chinese society or culture is depicted here, claiming inaccuracy in the film. Probably, the film's director Ann Hu is already conscious of that, for she is born in China, and lived through the time of Revolution and Chiarman Mao, and then she left the country to study abroad, in USA where she lives now. Any production designs should be taken, I assume, as her own creations. If the story or atomosphere of the film looks like a blend of the West and the East, it is probably her intention, or the result of her cultural background. And I just do not think that the portrayals of Chinese people are seen through patronizing eye of Westerners. True, they sometimes suffer from clithe, but fairly done, showing enough variety of people among them, avoiding one-dimentional characterization of the East.

The most moving scene of the film is, of course, the first moment in which the people first see the picture and react joyfully. You might have heard some famous episodes about the first viewers in Paris cafe where the Lumiere Brothers showed a short film of a train arriving at the station. The same thing happens to the Chinese people. The theme is thus universal.

And again I say, the most joyful experience for us is to see the truly believable character of young Liu, who must decide his way of life between the two cultures. His character and the performance of Xia Yu well deserve the name of "Shadow Magic."

Usually I use the term "feel good" movie as a pejorative but not in this case. This is a slightly fictionalized version of the difficulties of the first Chinese film maker Liu. Having suffered humiliation at the hands of foreign colonialism, the Chinese are understably a bit xenophobic around the turn of the 20th Century. Liu has to struggle against this tendancy and the rigid confucianism of his day to follow his passion...film making.

In addition to the interesting historical and biographical material of this film, we also get a glimpse at our own fascination with film...there is nothing new in film that doesn't
exist all around us...but film viewing allows us time to just sit still and take notice. Everyone will love this film!

Thomas

Don't get me wrong - this is a fine movie. It's full of feel-good moments and light, humorous touches. It's beautifully photographed and each scene is shot and editted with equisite care. It has colorful costumes and exotic street scenes of old Beijing. It's a charmingly-dressed tableau of traditional China at the turn of the 20th century.

But perhaps it is a little too charming, from the spotless costumes to the immaculate sidewalks. Our hero bounces through life encountering a cast of well-intentioned characters who conveniently come around at the most opportune moments. The movie aspires to serious drama, but delivers mostly cliches. It reminds one of Cinema Paradiso at places but is much more like Mediterraneo in tone. At least Cinema Paradiso has some real heartbreaks. In this film our hero gets the girl, keeps the job, and to top it off, the closing credits tell us he went on to make a fortune.

Perhaps that's The Arnold's reality. But it sure ain't ours.

Loosely based on the Chinese cinema history, "Shadow Magic" portrays the people surrounding the first showing of moving picture in Beijing, China in 1902. But the film is more about the fictional chacaters involved in it rather than about the event itself, so do not expect any historical accuracy. And "Shadow Magic" succeeds as the former kind of picture.

Jared Harris (son of late Richard Harris) is in the film as a British entrepreneur Raymond Wallace, who is eagar to make some money, showing the films he brought from the West, but, good as he is, it is not Harris who carries the whole picture. It is Chinese actor Xia Yu as Liu, a technician at photography studio who is really remarkable in "Shadow Magic," and he is just wondeful. Liu, interested in anything new from the West, is a kind of misfit in the traditional Chinese society, and naturally, is the first one to get hooked by the idea of Raymond -- showing the "Shadow Magic" in China. They gradually begin to understand each other, and the rapport between these likable fellows is definitely the best part of the show.

The story written by director Ann Hu, I must say, needs some trimming, sometimes filled with clithed moments. And some viewers object to the way the Chinese society or culture is depicted here, claiming inaccuracy in the film. Probably, the film's director Ann Hu is already conscious of that, for she is born in China, and lived through the time of Revolution and Chiarman Mao, and then she left the country to study abroad, in USA where she lives now. Any production designs should be taken, I assume, as her own creations. If the story or atomosphere of the film looks like a blend of the West and the East, it is probably her intention, or the result of her cultural background. And I just do not think that the portrayals of Chinese people are seen through patronizing eye of Westerners. True, they sometimes suffer from clithe, but fairly done, showing enough variety of people among them, avoiding one-dimentional characterization of the East.

The most moving scene of the film is, of course, the first moment in which the people first see the picture and react joyfully. You might have heard some famous episodes about the first viewers in Paris cafe where the Lumiere Brothers showed a short film of a train arriving at the station. The same thing happens to the Chinese people. The theme is thus universal.

And again I say, the most joyful experience for us is to see the truly believable character of young Liu, who must decide his way of life between the two cultures. His character and the performance of Xia Yu well deserve the name of "Shadow Magic."

Usually I use the term "feel good" movie as a pejorative but not in this case. This is a slightly fictionalized version of the difficulties of the first Chinese film maker Liu. Having suffered humiliation at the hands of foreign colonialism, the Chinese are understably a bit xenophobic around the turn of the 20th Century. Liu has to struggle against this tendancy and the rigid confucianism of his day to follow his passion...film making.

In addition to the interesting historical and biographical material of this film, we also get a glimpse at our own fascination with film...there is nothing new in film that doesn't
exist all around us...but film viewing allows us time to just sit still and take notice. Everyone will love this film!

Thomas

B. Monkey is a movie that has its flaws, but it's entertaining nonetheless. The director was replaced halfway through filming, and although Michael Radford (the credited replacement) does well, the movie does have the certain vague feel of, well, a film whose director was replaced halfway through filming. There are also a few scenes that go on too long, one or two shots that are inconsistent (for example, the title character walking somewhere in a red dress, only to be at work in a black dress in the next shot), and some dialogue that sounds distinctly written, rather than natural. However, I still really enjoyed this movie. The performances (not to mention the great cinematography) are what really sell it. Asia Argento as B. (Beatrice) is beautiful, charismatic, and a strong screen presence. I expect she will only get better as her career progresses. Jared Harris does a fine job, although (and this is not his fault, just an annoyance of mine) I found his character rather unfeeling in how quickly and completely he expects B. to drop her old life and friends. Those friends/partners-in-crime are played by Rupert Everett, sleazy and clearly having a high time of it as Paul, and Jonathan Rhys Meyers, very effective as temperamental, nearly desperate Bruno. The one thing this movie really left me wishing for was a more in-depth look at the relationship between these two and Beatrice. It's an unusual dynamic--Paul and Bruno are lovers, but Bruno is clearly also in love (or at least obsessed) with B., who is the only person to ever truly care about him. Overall, yes, it does have shortcomings and it's not the greatest thing I've seen, but B. Monkey is still a fine movie, plenty of fun, and worth checking out.

b.Monkey (Michael Radford, 1998)

Michael Radford is one of those directors whose work gets a lot of press, but no one ever thiks to ask who the guy behind the camera was. From the 1984 version (starring John Hurt) of _Nineteen Eighty-Four_ to the Oscar-winning Il Postino, Radford has quietly built an impressive body of work.

Radford's follow-up to Il Postino is B. Monkey, a crime-drama-...-romance based on Andrew Davies' amusing novel about a young criminal lass (played here

by the delectable Asia Argento) who tries to break free of her small-time criminal pals (rising stars Jonathan Rhys-Meyers and Rupert Everett) after meeting, and being wooed by, a primary school teacher (the ubiquitous Jared Harris) who is the very essence of stolid middle-class morality.

Don't get me wrong-- the main reason to watch this movie is Asia Argento, who (as I've said before) has since turning eighteen adopted the "early Helen Mirren" style of acting-- wear nothing but a come-hither glower and look really good. But if you can get your tongue off the floor, both Everett and Rhys-Meyers give us performances that show exactly why they're becoming two of the hottest properties on the British film scene. Everett is charming and urbane, even while being tracked down by a psychotic crime boss; Rhys-Meyers throw temper tantrums with the best of them, but slides into a cool professionalism when it's time to pull off a heist.

A gorgeous (if somewhat slow halfway through-- it does pick up, honest) way to kill an hour and a half. *** 1/2

...I've got to put Asia Argento on my list of Much Watch Actresses: she puts to mind a combination of Angeliina Jolie and Thora Birch, but with way more fire than Jolie ever goes for...Jolie is kinda 'mellow', y'know?

But, I caught this on one of my cable stations one Sat. evening 'cause I'm a big fan of heist cine, and this *is* one, albeit wrapped in a rather odd love story. Tawk about opposites attracting! The grade school teacher trails live wire Beatrice one day and asks her out for a drink. What follows is one of the most passionate and interesting court ships I've ever seen on film. They go to Paris to find their love. I thought that was a rather nice touch. But, always, always, one muddy alley away, one warehouse loft away, one scummy tavern away are the boosters and druggies threatening to pull her back in the mire. Beatrice does one more job out of a since of obligation to her ex-partners and to help her pallie (played with greatness by Rupert) pay some drug bills.

The heist at the jewelry shoppe nearly gets botched when her companion loses nerve: they are saved when the driver slaps a man with a car lug wrench. And Beatrice comes away with a 'well, I did get a rush from this, but I can't afford this type of rush anymore. They are 'way too risky'. So she and the teacher find a way to get a house in the country side. And one day, in a break of monotony and ennui, Beatrice calls up Rupert from a road side phone...just to check up on her pallie, you know?

You can just about guess what happens next, but by the time this part of the film happens, if you are anything like me, you find yourself into the story so deeply that you let the obvious cliches run their course. That's what I did.

Also, this is one of the most attractive of the modern British gangster/heist cines I've seen. Many of them have that dark or greyness as if the directors were trying to capture years of sooty, foggy decadence on film. My overall opinion is that if you see this, it will entertain you....

... ten years ago was because I heard from a friend that Ione Skye had a pair of nude scenes in it. However, I found myself completely taken in by the movie...One scene in particular was priceless. Rachel has just climbed into a taxi and closed the door but left open the window. Just as Charles works up the nerve to try to kiss her through the window and leans foreward, the cab pulls away. The look on his face is pitiful. But when you see her smile back, it's just magical...Oh by the way, Ione Skye DOES take off her clothes repeatedly, so guys who normally shun this sort of movie have a valid reason to watch it, too!

A very good movie, not quite up to the standard of the book it is based on (and follows rather closely).

The book was written from the point of view of the main character, but it has two voices. One was Charles Highway's inner meanderings and pronouncements, the other (still by Charles) was the unadorned, unanalysed description of the things that happened to him. And generally there is a glaring difference between the two - they don't match up. In the view of the first voice, Charles is a wise and funny schemer. But the events related in the second voice show him to be inept, unlucky, and chronically unsure of himself. The ending was similarly riven. You can't tell if things ended-up the way they did by choice or design. Perhaps the author didn't know.

So anyway, the movie has to deal with that dichotomy, and it does it by pretty much ignoring the second voice. Charles comes across as boastful and shallow, for the most part, and a lot less likeable. The film also has to drop a lot of his hilarious caustic monolgues, so it's less funny than the book, too. That being said, there's enough left to allow fans of the book to fill in the blanks, and it doesn't attempt to force in a standard Hollywood ending. Plus the three main actors and the supporting cast were very good - Jonathon Pryce as Charles' deranged uncle is so good that it's hard to keep your eyes on Ione Skye in the few scenes they have together.

Perhaps not on par with the novel but more accessible. Although brilliant and highly original, I think Martin Amis' first book contains some obscure passages and insider English schoolboy jokes. Also, the 1970's setting of the book has been replaced by the 1980's in the movie.

Ione Skye and Dexter Fletcher portray the growing relationship between Rachel & Charles rather well. James Spader fills in nicely as DeForest, the rival boyfriend. The college scene with Michael Gambon as Doctor Knowd is particularly humorous.

A good study in adolescence.

... ten years ago was because I heard from a friend that Ione Skye had a pair of nude scenes in it. However, I found myself completely taken in by the movie...One scene in particular was priceless. Rachel has just climbed into a taxi and closed the door but left open the window. Just as Charles works up the nerve to try to kiss her through the window and leans foreward, the cab pulls away. The look on his face is pitiful. But when you see her smile back, it's just magical...Oh by the way, Ione Skye DOES take off her clothes repeatedly, so guys who normally shun this sort of movie have a valid reason to watch it, too!

A very good movie, not quite up to the standard of the book it is based on (and follows rather closely).

The book was written from the point of view of the main character, but it has two voices. One was Charles Highway's inner meanderings and pronouncements, the other (still by Charles) was the unadorned, unanalysed description of the things that happened to him. And generally there is a glaring difference between the two - they don't match up. In the view of the first voice, Charles is a wise and funny schemer. But the events related in the second voice show him to be inept, unlucky, and chronically unsure of himself. The ending was similarly riven. You can't tell if things ended-up the way they did by choice or design. Perhaps the author didn't know.

So anyway, the movie has to deal with that dichotomy, and it does it by pretty much ignoring the second voice. Charles comes across as boastful and shallow, for the most part, and a lot less likeable. The film also has to drop a lot of his hilarious caustic monolgues, so it's less funny than the book, too. That being said, there's enough left to allow fans of the book to fill in the blanks, and it doesn't attempt to force in a standard Hollywood ending. Plus the three main actors and the supporting cast were very good - Jonathon Pryce as Charles' deranged uncle is so good that it's hard to keep your eyes on Ione Skye in the few scenes they have together.

Perhaps not on par with the novel but more accessible. Although brilliant and highly original, I think Martin Amis' first book contains some obscure passages and insider English schoolboy jokes. Also, the 1970's setting of the book has been replaced by the 1980's in the movie.

Ione Skye and Dexter Fletcher portray the growing relationship between Rachel & Charles rather well. James Spader fills in nicely as DeForest, the rival boyfriend. The college scene with Michael Gambon as Doctor Knowd is particularly humorous.

A good study in adolescence.

If you're a fan of "Best in Show" and "Waiting For Guffman" you will enjoy "A Mighty Wind." It does for/to the folk music scene what "Spinal Tap" did for/to heavy metal and "rockumentary" films. The cast is largely the same as in the other Guest offerings, but this time Harry Shearer and Michael McKean (Guest's Spinal Tap bandmates) join the ensemble. As usual, they create a hillareous set of offbeat characters.

This time around, the gags and satire are a bit more subtle. Eugene Levy has a more central role in this one and he gives a great comic performance. Perhaps the folk music subject matter just toned things down a bit, but there were fewer side splitting moments and more in the way of giggles and chuckles to this movie. The psuedo documentary formula was the same and Guest's improvisational approach to filmaking gives this a similar look and feel to Best in Show and Guffman.

Fans of this stuff have different favorites. I happen to think Best in Show is the funniest thing Guest has done. I would rate this as the second best offering with Guffman pulling up a very close third. Opinions differ even among fans of these movies, but it's all very funny stuff. If you like this group's earlier work you will not be disappointed with A Mighty Wind.

My brother has a saying: The more you know, the more jokes you get.

If you have a vague notion of the "folk" movement, this movie is amusing. If you can identify The Limeliters, The New Christy Minstrals, and the The Serendipity Singers, this movie is hilarious.

It's Christopher Guest's usual well-researched mockumentary. Guest does a scathing imitation of a middle aged Noel Paul Stookey. (Peter, Paul and Mary.)(Or was he imitating Peter? they made money on the fact that they looked so the same...) Harry Shearer pontificates just like Lou of The Limeliters. (Lou, by the way, KNEW he was pontificating--he was a professor and spoke 5 languages and could poke fun at himself and his stuffiness in all 5 of them.) Their group, "The Folksmen," looks like the Kingston Trio and sounds like the Limeliters, which is a horridly funny combination if you know that people used to choose one or the other the way they divide today over Sondheim and Webber.

The irritatingly false high spirits of the New Christy and Serendipity Singers are well parodied in the "New Main Street Singers," who try to give the impression of spontaneous music while onstage, and nag at each other about whether the harmony is a "6th" or an "8th" when in rehearsal.

I can't figure out who "Mitch and Mickey" are supposed to be, but I do remember reading about how silly it was for Bob Dylan to pretend not to be Jewish while Pete Seeger was singing in Hebrew, and here Eugene Levy seems to be playing a Jewish boy in a "mainstream" folk duo. "Mickey" performs the wistful "how far away is my love" songs Peter Paul and Mary did, only with Judy Collins's autoharp. Maybe it's a liability that Guest mixed so many real groups into the three pretend ones in this movie.

There's a sweet moment, showing both how non-spontaneous ANY form of music is once you start performing for an audience, and how a real musician loves what he does. It's the night of the big performance, all three groups paying tribute to their impresario, and David McKean's character hears that "Mitch and Mickey" are about to start. He recognizes the song, and says, sincerely, "Oh, this is that pretty one." Then he realizes that the song involves a kiss (between people now long divorced), grins, and says, "I wonder how they are going to handle THAT!"

I thought A Mighty Wind was funnier than Spinal Tap. Then again, in Spinal Tap, which I enjoyed, I knew I wasn't getting the jokes.

When it comes to mockumentary parodies, no one does it better than Christopher Guest. With A Mighty Wind, Guest adds a fourth satire to his resume. The topic this time around is folk music - a genre that reached its zenith of popularity during the late '60s. Like Western movies, however, it has become something of a relic. Occasionally, some aging star will come out with a new album, but, for the most part, folk music went out of vogue long before vinyl ceased to be the medium of choice for music-lovers. Of course, there's still a limited audience for this sort of music, but Guest's movie is no more aimed at them than Best in Show is targeted at dog show participants. The comedy here is pretty universal. You don't have to like folk music to appreciate A Mighty Wind, and that's what makes it so special.

The film chronicles a reunion concert featuring three once-popular folk music bands. Organized as a tribute to recently deceased music producer Irving Steinbloom by his son (Bob Balaban), the concert is headlined by three of acts from the '60s: The Folksmen, a trio (Christopher Guest, Michael McKean, Harry Shearer) whose lone hit is more than thirty years old; The New Main Street Singers, a "neuftette" of nine whose image is pure Pat Boone even though one of their members (Jane Lynch) is an ex-porn star; and Mitch & Mickey (Eugene Levy, Catherine O'Hara), fondly remembered but no longer America's sweethearts. The concert is to occur live at New York's Town Hall and be broadcast nationwide on Public Broadcasting. In typical Guest fashion, not everything goes smoothly.

For the most part, the comedy in A Mighty Wind is more amusing than hilarious. The movie provokes a lot of smiles and chuckles, but few belly laughs. Guest's camera captures everything with unblinking and unflinching honesty. As was true of his previous films, that's a key to A Mighty Wind's success. The folk music, like the heavy metal songs in This Is Spinal Tap, are both satirical and faithful to their inspiration. The lyrics poke gentle fun at the genre, but are not wildly over-the-top. Several are performed in whole or in part during the film's final 30 minutes, and they stand up well under the microscope.

The majority of the major players in A Mighty Wind are Guest regulars - those who have appeared in one or more of his previous films. As the Folksmen, Spinal Tap companions Guest, Michael McKean, and Harry Shearer reunite. Catherine O'Hara and Eugene Levy, who have worked together since SCTV, are back for their third outing with the director. Bob Balaban is once again the "straight man," and Fred Willard is the most off-the-wall of the performers. And, despite not having much to do, Parker Posey has signed on again (she plays one of the New Main Street Singers).

Those with an appreciation of Guest's previous work - This Is Spinal Tap, Waiting for Guffman, and Best in Show - will enjoy A Mighty Wind. The movie probably isn't for those who define a comedy as a series of fart jokes and gross-out gags. A Mighty Wind is another affectionate parody - one that delights in gently poking fun at its subject rather than tearing it to pieces - with plenty of amusing moments and one-liners that vary from lily white to off-color. And, despite not being a laugh-a-minute riot, it's nevertheless one of the most consistent comedies to reach theaters thus far this year.

It's a terric film with an inspired cast giving terrific peformances, and plenty of crowd-pleasing moments. Jennifer Coolidge, in her almost cameo role, is exceptional, and Eugene Levy is absolutely brilliant. Kudos to the rest of the cast for their superb fun and wacky performances. "A Mighty Wind" is a mighty must for those who appreciate great comedy.

To begin, when I first rented this film I was so engrossed that I watched it a second time the very next day. It is a small low-budget film that shows what you can do without money or big studio backing. Elina Lowensohn is breathtaking as Nadja, daughter of Dracula. Peter Fonda adds a humourous tone as Prof. Van Helsing. And the rest of the cast is very very strong. This is a thinking persons vampire flick with equal parts 40's film noir and 90's disconnected self exploration. The dearth of a spirituality to call ones own is the major theme here. Combined with the gorgeous soundtrack, kitch humour and glorious black and white film this is a keeper that has not collected much dust since I purchased it. Another film that stars Lowensohn and Martin Donovan from Nadja is Amateurs by director Hal Hartly. It is also well worth watching if you enjoyed this one (or even if you didn't).

This arthouse vampire film from the very talented Michael Almerayda is a wonderfully offbeat, loose retelling of the Dracula story, except that here, the focus is on the title character, the daughter of the famous Count. The setting is updated to New York's East Village, given a positively Transylvannian feel by the terrific black and white photography. Themes of existential identity questions, and dysfuctional, incestuous family relationships (both among the humans and vampires) run throughout the film, and there is a lot of clever, dry humor as well. The humor doesn't detract from the lush, earie atmosphere, though, or from the subtle and beautiful erotic mood centered around Nadja's relationship with a young, married woman, who's uncle-in-law, by the way, just happens to be a crazy, alcoholic who knows about vampires, and just happens to be named Van Helsing (Peter Fonda is terrifically wierd and funny in the part). The rest of the cast is superb too, especially Hal Hartley veterans Elina Lowensohn as Nadja and Martin Donovan as Najda's lover's befuddled husband. Galaxy Craze, an actress I'd never seen before, is mesmerizing as Nadja's human love, Lucy. "Nadja" is the best of Almerayda's films to date, but also worth checking out is his recent variation on the Mummy theme, "The Eternal", and his earlier film "Twister" (not the flying cows movie). "Nadja" is, by the way, my personal pick for all-time favorite vampire movie.

This is definately a classic vampire movie. The story is unique & facinating. The director used a Pixel 2000 when telling the story through Nadja's eyes...hence the pixel usage. (The Pixel 2000 was a toy video camera Fisher Price released in the 80's). Personally, I think it gives a fabulous perspective to the film. If you are into films that are gothic, intense, & have many layers, you will like this film.

What a waste. It's terribly filmed and aimless. It also suffers from shoddy editing. Harvey Keitel is great, I don't think I've ever seen him in a bad film. But many charachters, such as the one played by Michael J. Fox, are only seen for a few brief minutes. There is no narrative, this movie is shameful compared to it's predecessor. I understand the directors wanted too do an ode to Brooklyn, but why, oh why, did they have to do it around a sequel to smoke?

All events go on in one of the most famous districts of New York- Brooklyn.
Ozzy's shop with tobacco is the centre of the action. People come there not only to buy cigarettes but also to talk, to meet some friends. A lot of funny, absurd situations take place in Ozzy's shop. We can see some famous faces such as Jim Jarmush who is giving up smoking, Harvey Keitel (Ozzy), Madonna and her provocative dance...
"Brooklyn Boogie" is also a specific description of american city, inhabitants and their attitude towards living there. Lou Reed talks about New York, why he still lives there despite all that danger he meets everywhere.
It's really interesting film. It has nice, relaxing atmosphere, good for sad winter evenings.

I had no idea who this guy was...but his bit on Nazis and movies and cigarettes has caused me to recommend this movie to friends. I saw Smoke first and enjoyed it, but Blue in the Face will leave you rolling on the floor laughing..promise!

This mediocre effort is disappointingly unfunny. Considering the comedic caliber of its two stars, Billy Crystal and Robin Williams, I was expecting a laugh riot, but that's not what this is. It's not their fault, it's the scriptwriter's. I guess maybe it was just one of those scripts that read funny on paper, but that humor just didn't translate to the screen, despite the best efforts of Mssrs. Crystal and Williams. They deserve better, and so do we.

The premise of Fathers' Day sounds like one of those ideas that was hatched in a boardroom rather than a creative mind. A woman tells two former boyfriends that they are the father of her teenaged son, who has run away. Naturally, these guys become instantly paternal, reluctantly join forces, and set out to find the kid who may or may not be theirs.

The teaming of Robin Williams and Billy Crystal provides some good moments, although at times Crystal seems to be too much of a straight man. Williams has plenty of scope to be...well, himself - which means that some sickly sentimentality is eventually allowed to creep in. In fact, the film is quite promising until the pair of wannabe dads make contact with their supposed offspring. The kid turns out to be such a snivelling loser that any sane person would disown him rather than try to save him from the conveniently cartoonish drug dealers he owes lots of money to. Junior is also infatuated with a girl who couldn't care less. When she finally tells him that he is boring, you find yourself shouting "Yes!" at the screen.

Even so, Williams and Crystal provide plenty of pleasant and undemanding entertainment along the way. But the film is so built around them that it wastes the talents of Julia Louis-Dreyfus and Natassia Kinski. Having said that, there is a nice uncredited cameo by Mel Gibson.

Not a bad film if you're looking for a nicely mindless comedy. But everyone involved has done much better work elsewhere.

This movie is about a runaway 16-year-old named Scott. The mother goes to two men that she knew and tells them they are the father. First she tells Jack Lawrence (Crystal), a lawyer and he doesn't want to go look for him. Then she tells Dale Putley (Williams) who is a retarded, lonner, and empty life writer who decides to look for him. So the two end up traveling together to find Scott. See what goes wrong next after Dale passing out, crying constantly, getting HOT coffee poured on his nuts, and being a idiot.

This mediocre effort is disappointingly unfunny. Considering the comedic caliber of its two stars, Billy Crystal and Robin Williams, I was expecting a laugh riot, but that's not what this is. It's not their fault, it's the scriptwriter's. I guess maybe it was just one of those scripts that read funny on paper, but that humor just didn't translate to the screen, despite the best efforts of Mssrs. Crystal and Williams. They deserve better, and so do we.

The premise of Fathers' Day sounds like one of those ideas that was hatched in a boardroom rather than a creative mind. A woman tells two former boyfriends that they are the father of her teenaged son, who has run away. Naturally, these guys become instantly paternal, reluctantly join forces, and set out to find the kid who may or may not be theirs.

The teaming of Robin Williams and Billy Crystal provides some good moments, although at times Crystal seems to be too much of a straight man. Williams has plenty of scope to be...well, himself - which means that some sickly sentimentality is eventually allowed to creep in. In fact, the film is quite promising until the pair of wannabe dads make contact with their supposed offspring. The kid turns out to be such a snivelling loser that any sane person would disown him rather than try to save him from the conveniently cartoonish drug dealers he owes lots of money to. Junior is also infatuated with a girl who couldn't care less. When she finally tells him that he is boring, you find yourself shouting "Yes!" at the screen.

Even so, Williams and Crystal provide plenty of pleasant and undemanding entertainment along the way. But the film is so built around them that it wastes the talents of Julia Louis-Dreyfus and Natassia Kinski. Having said that, there is a nice uncredited cameo by Mel Gibson.

Not a bad film if you're looking for a nicely mindless comedy. But everyone involved has done much better work elsewhere.

This movie is about a runaway 16-year-old named Scott. The mother goes to two men that she knew and tells them they are the father. First she tells Jack Lawrence (Crystal), a lawyer and he doesn't want to go look for him. Then she tells Dale Putley (Williams) who is a retarded, lonner, and empty life writer who decides to look for him. So the two end up traveling together to find Scott. See what goes wrong next after Dale passing out, crying constantly, getting HOT coffee poured on his nuts, and being a idiot.