David Sterritt

While the story takes some clever turns, its psychology is far from convincing and its momentum flags long before the finale.

The satire is crammed with sexual and scatological humor; some may find this Rabelaisian and refreshing, while others will detect the end of civilization as we know it.

This uneven drama might have been more effective if someone with more on-screen charisma than writer-director Elster had played the main character.

It's fun to watch the gifted Marisa Tomei and the lively Rosie Perez, but Christian Slater is less engaging as the waif of the story, and the screenplay is loaded with sentimentality. [26 Feb 1993, p.14]

All this amounts to a badly wasted opportunity, since global warming is a serious issue that deserves thoughtful treatment. So stay home and read a scientific journal instead. This is a disaster movie that lives up to its label.

Only part of it is in 3-D, but youngsters should enjoy pulling their special specs on and off at appropriate moments.

Its metaphors are too obvious (as before, Cimino's analogy for death is more death) and its treatment of social problems is skin-deep. Although the screenplay throws sops to many cultural and ethnic groups, it's riddled with racist and sexist attitudes. [23 Aug 1985, p.25]

It's regrettable that director Costa-Gavras puts more of his storytelling energy into simplistic psychology and suspense-movie action than historical depth and philosophical insight. This prevents Amen. from becoming a Holocaust drama for the ages.

You might expect "Seabiscuit" meets "Lawrence of Arabia," but overall, it's a big, beautiful bore.

Many moviegoers may find its colors and effects delightful enough to make the experience a thrill. Look beyond the tinsel, though, and you may be disappointed.

Directed by Joel Schumacher with occasional gestures toward social commentary, and enough spectacle to mask the movie's deep down emptiness.

Junger spins hilariously written scenes with split-second timing, although the story sags during its long middle portion.

Peter Greenaway's unorthodox drama treats the movie screen less as an entertainment device than a postmodern canvas upon which he writes, photographs, and records an intricate multicultural collage. [06 Jun 1997]

Costner is convincing as the hero, ably supported by Joe Morton as a short-tempered supervisor and Kathy Bates as a feisty neighbor. Dragonfly has little chance of "Ghost"-like popularity, though.

All so fast and frenetic.

Moretti's acting skills aren't up to the demands of the main role, and his portrait of family life is too simplistic to be credible.

The adventure is well-acted by Mira Sorvino and Giancarlo Giannini, among others, and imaginatively directed by Guillermo Del Toro, who gives a new twist to old science-fiction effects.

Rodriguez's acting almost scores a knockout even though the movie's directing and dialogue are fairly routine.

The movie takes fascinating material and transforms it into a routine soap opera.

Few of its loosely linked vignettes have enough visual or emotional power to be very memorable.

This is a subdued and sometimes subtle exercise in ghostly doings, going against the horror-movie grain by relying on quietude and understatement.

Some scenes in a Manhattan hotel have the amiable ring of old-fashioned farce to them, but most of the going is noisy and obvious. [10 Jun 1988, p.21]

What a waste of a fine cast.

Unnecessary profanity for PG, a little slow for grown-ups, but good for laughs and promoting sibling peace.

The plot is predictable, and the humor is uncreative and often crude. The heroine, however, is endearing in her quirkiness.

Has touches of quirky style to match its slightly edgy content.

The story has inherent emotional power, but Jeremy Brock's formula-bound screenplay rarely soars beyond cliches.

The action is mild enough for fairly young children, and grownups may enjoy its old-fashioned spirit.

The filmmakers can't decide what sort of picture they're trying to cook up, so they keep oscillating among shallow psychological drama, high-tech action sequences, and comedy scenes that are themselves an uneasy mixture of sitcom-style dialogue and self-mocking campiness.

The movie has moments of breathtaking suspense, at least until it lapses into cartoonish implausibility in the second half. With good acting and good dialogue it might actually have been a good picture.

You'll enjoy this sentimental drama if you feel good intentions are their own reward, at least where movies are concerned; but it'll exasperate you if you want your entertainment to have some connection with the world we actually live in.

It's interesting to see a movie of this kind based on a single gospel, with no additions or interpolations from other sources. But except for a few scenes that evoke the reverent beauty of Renaissance painting, the filmmaking and acting are awfully stiff -- certainly not worthy of the timeless story being told.

A View to a Kill plods along dutifully, observing the rules of the series with dull consistency.

A promising feature-film debut.

Laurence Fishburne and Tim Roth play the main characters with conviction, but Bill Duke's punchy filmmaking style banishes any hope of storytelling subtlety or psychological nuance.

Desplechin wants to film an adventure of the human spirit in the manner of a Hitchcockian drama, but he doesn't have a solid enough grasp of English culture to equal the complexity of his French productions like "The Sentinel" and "The Life of the Dead."

The end result smacks more of Hollywood melodrama than true compassion for the suffering poor.

Add a lot of dull acting -- except Sir Ian McKellen and Andy Serkis -- and you have an uneven movie with yawns aplenty.

Bland, amiable, innocuous.

The story often seems unfocused, and the talented cast doesn't appear to be fully in synch with its heart-wrenching material.

The only aspect that emerges a winner is the gorgeous Mediterranean scenery.

It's so slavishly similar to its predecessor - right down to the symbolic lettering on Marion's license plates - that there's little to spark fresh discussion except the acting.

The picture almost overwhelms you with sheer niceness. Unfortunately, this effect doesn't last; eventually the movie goes too far and overdoses on its own saccharine. [2 May 1989, Arts, p.11]

Always is a nice try for Spielberg, and the cast gives it a game try... The movie's generally dull effect makes it clear, however, that Spielberg still has some maturing to do before he's ready to scan the depths of human - not to mention cosmic - psychology.

Closer to an infomercial than a serious study, but it serves up plenty of rowdy humor.

It's fun to see the regular gang on hand for new adventures, joined by fresh characters who add touches of novelty and spice. But the secrets in this chamber aren't all that amazing once you get a glimpse of them.

No "JFK," but the story is weirdly compelling when it focuses on the journalist's growing paranoia as he plunges ever more deeply into a world of conspiracies that may or may not really exist.

Brest deserves credit for letting the story unfold at a thoughtful pace, but the drama falls apart in the last half-hour, gushing with exaggerated emotions and abandoning its fairy-tale premises for an unconvincing feel-good finale.

Its view of spiritual healing is closer to Spielberg fantasy than religious insight. Still, its good acting and good intentions will be enough to please many viewers.

Labors mightily to be as offensive and obnoxious as possible. It's inventive in an idiotic sort of way, though, and pauses occasionally to make serious points about movie violence and censorship.

It's rare for an Egyptian movie to look so closely and unflinchingly at class conflict and other forms of social disarray, but lively acting keeps the story engaging even when it wanders and meanders.

The screenplay has some amusing punch lines, and Samantha Mathis steals a scene or two as a park ranger who never expected so much excitement on her usually peaceful turf. [9 Feb 1996, p.13]

A deluge of funny, inane jokes.

Director Koepp relies more heavily on editing tricks than old-fashioned atmosphere.

Tries to be a new "Something Wild"; ends up being tamer than tame.

Funny dialogue, crisp black-and-white cinematography, and a well-chosen cast of mostly stage-trained actors raise this eccentric fantasy a notch above the ordinary.

The first half is high-quality science fiction, the rest is a high-tech chase adventure with a gleeful yen for destructive thrills.

This indirect rehash of "To Catch a Thief" trades Hitchcockian shrewdness for the slickest kinds of Hollywood glitz, gloss, and vulgarity.

Adam Sandler is funny as the volatile hero, and the screenplay is just abrasive enough to keep the story surprising.

The action is carefully calculated to captivate a wide audience while allowing hard-core trekkies to savor nuances of plot and personality.

Directed by John Landis with a surprising amount of class, though he lets some of his old ''Animal House'' vulgarity slip ostentatiously into the action.

At a time when most movies try far too little, I don't like berating Excalibur for taking on too much. It's just that Mr. Boorman never quite achieves what he attempts. [23 April 1981, p.19]

Most of the laughs come near the beginning, before Rick Friedberg's klutzy directing becomes annoyingly monotonous.

Its eventual failure to make sense indicates that it's intended more as a surrealistic fable than an ordinary sex-and-violence adventure.

Spacey is almost as swinging as Darin was, but his filmmaking leans toward tried-and-true formulas.

Gooding and De Niro bring their characters to vivid life despite the unsubtle screenplay and hyperactive music score.

The mood is awfully dark for an escapist fantasy, though, and the high-tech mayhem gets repetitious.

Enough odd twists to be mildly interesting.

At a time when much public education is in a state of perilous decay, one wonders whether this sentimental ode to old-school dignity and privilege is in touch with today's pressing realities.

Has good intentions, but its exaggerated celebration of quick-witted improvisation ultimately trivializes the human and historical horrors evoked by the story.

Intermittently insightful, but a disappointment from the talented Munch.

Darkly elegant cinematography helps compensate for awful dialogue and lackluster acting.

The pacing soon grows dull and the frequent narration is a nonstop string of clichés, platitudes, and truisms that should have been flung out the cutting-room window.

Petroni's directorial debut is too bittersweet and atmospheric for its own good, wrapping a potentially strong story in too many layers of misty emotion.

Roberts brings a sense of personal conviction to her part -- she's quite a feminist herself -- and as much sense of humor as the corny screenplay allows.

Cobb would be a more persuasive picture if the filmmakers had a clearer idea of their intentions.

This time it's just chasing, fistfighting, and shooting. A disappointment from the director of "Bloody Sunday."

Wargnier chooses a sweeping title and a sweeping topic, then turns everything into half-baked melodrama, heavy on over-the-top emotion but light on subtlety and ideas.

The atmosphere is more compelling than the plot, but the story does pack a surprise or two.

Rowlands is superb, as usual, and Garner partners her with the grace of a dancer. Cassavetes's directing style is slow and stilted, though, indicating yet again that his notion of moviemaking is the opposite of everything his father, the great John Cassavetes, stood for.

Woody Allen wrote and directed this inventive comedy, which has some good laughs but a very nasty edge.

Beneath its regrettably banal surface, White Noise raises the creepy question of whether intimidating, even malign forces may be lurking in those fancy gadgets that fill our living rooms and offices.

Moviegoers tired of ethnic humor will find plenty to complain about.

Frances McDormand and Patti LuPone are solid as his girlfriend and ex-wife, respectively, and James Franco is just right as his wayward son. They're a talented team. Too bad the movie doesn't live up to their abilities.

This is basically a 10th-tier rehash of the Indiana Jones genre, laced with moments that are actually clever and exciting. Dawson is alluring, Scott is smug and bratty, Walken is terrific, and The Rock is, well, The Rock.

The movie gains a few points for its colorfully filmed Boston background and bright bossa-nova music. But it's filmed in a fake-spontaneous style that's as stale and artificial as the relationships between the characters.

Different viewers might find different portions worthy of anything from zero to four stars, but anyone with a faint heart or weak stomach should stay miles away from it. [24 Oct. 1997, p.13]

Fans of the genre will enjoy it if they're not distracted by trite plot twists.

After arousing high expectations, Runaway Jury turns out to be a trial to sit through.

This disaster film has action from the get-go; but its awesome special effects hide a laughably corny plot, and for a picture about terror from the depths, its characters are ridiculously shallow.

The movie raises more interesting issues - often connected with the hazy lines between appearance and reality - than it's prepared to coherently explore.

Fans of ultraviolent sword-and-sorcery nonsense will have a good time; others will head for the exit. [19 Feb 1993, Arts, p.10]

[The Coen Brothers] sweat and strain to deliver more of the same cinematic ingenuity, but the result seems more nervous than inspired. Relax, fellas! [13 Mar 1987]

Written and directed by Mark Waters, who strives for David Mamet-style punchiness but doesn't develop the quirky momentum that would carry the deliberately out-of-kilter story past its implausibilities.

This sentimental drama is wildly uneven as it switches between ballpark scenes, which are very involving, and romantic episodes, which are badly overplayed.

The filmmaking technique of writer-director Kevin Smith has matured since the raunchy "Clerks," his popular debut movie; but although his dialogue is often witty, he still relies on blunt sexual humor to get his point across.

The story soon lapses into familiar private-eye formulas, though, and the characters aren't interesting enough to hold much attention on their own.

The picture is intriguing and obnoxious in equal measure; even Berkowitz gets tired of the game before it's over, but there are some laughs and surprises along the way.

Bids for originality by focusing on an offbeat profession. Every other aspect is pretty stale, though, from the smart-alecky characters to the romantic-triangle plot.

(Kerrigan) remains an insightful stylist with impressively high artistic standards.

The movie has homophobic touches, though, and with so many Asian characters, some viewers may wonder why every single one is portrayed as either a hapless victim or a wicked villain.

Shyamalan remains a stilted screenwriter, but Roger Deakins's cinematography is spooky, creepy, eerie all the way.

The premise is promising, but Herzfeld cares more about sensationalism than substance, and portions of the picture are far nastier than they had to be.

Matt Damon and Robin Williams give touching performances, but Gus Van Sant's filmmaking is surprisingly ordinary.

True-blue golf buffs should find it a treat. For others it's no deeper than a tin cup on a putting green.

Bernardo Bertolucci's romantic drama has great visual beauty but little new to say about life or love.

This throwback to the outmoded blaxploitation genre is skillfully filmed by Dickerson, but has little else to offer besides cheap, violent thrills.

The story is a retread of the old "Exorcist" and "Omen" formats, but it delivers as much action and spectacle as fans of the genre could want.

Provides a compassionate look at problems of old age that Hollywood rarely bothers to treat seriously.

Too bad the action scenes rarely rise above standard kung-fu comedy, diluting the film's otherwise considerable entertainment value.

The action is as grisly as it is surrealistic.

The mood is often more coarse, crude, and nasty than needed to make his cautionary points and also by that "distancing effect," which diminishes whatever feelings of empathy or sympathy the story might otherwise inspire in its audience.

The plot is familiar from decades of earlier bank-robbing sagas - the classic "Bonnie and Clyde" seems to have been a particular inspiration for its overall tone - and neither the action nor the dialogue rings meaningful changes on the genre.

It's a pity that such vital, thought-provoking material has been rendered so lifeless and inauthentic on the screen.

The material is familiar and the ending is corny, but Huston's acting and directing keep the comedy-drama likable if not very imaginative.

The movie tries to outdo "Thelma and Louise" by upping the number of heroines, but it lacks the moral seriousness to tackle its sensitive material.

George Clooney looks great in a cape, but this fourth installment in the series has invested so much capital in razzle-dazzle special effects that it hardly matters whose head is under the pointy-eared helmet.

Its screenplay veers in highly questionable directions before reaching a mean-spirited climax that outweighs Ron Howard's workmanlike filmmaking and the contributions of a star-powered cast.

All of the actresses are fun to watch, and as much attention appears to have been lavished on their outfits and hairdos as on their high-flying fight scenes.

Uneven but always energetic and sometimes very funny.

Wong Kar-Wai, whose energetic and inventive style isn't enough to give the shallow story the substance and resonance it needs.

If the picture is often less spellbinding than it wants to be, it's partly Hoffman's fault for creating fantasy moods through traditional stage devices -- lavish props, cute makeup, peek-a-boo costumes -- that seem rather tame for this age of morphed-up visual surprises.

Well acted and ably directed, if not very probing about its subject of underclass youth.

The plot is sordid and predictable -- indiscriminate nightclubbing leads to escalating drugs, promiscuity, and violence. Things perk up cinematically in the last few scenes, but by then it's almost too late.

Foster is fine, but the story's outcome would seem a tad more uncertain if another actress had the part. How scary are three New York tough guys when you've handled Hannibal Lecter in your time?

Some of the material is dramatic, other bits are dull.

Energetic acting and directing make it a less exasperating experience than it might have been.

The humor is more childish than raunchy, but it's interesting to see that becoming a big-time Broadway impresario hasn't led Waters to sell out his affection for gross-out gags.

Araki graduates from his usual obsession with teenage angst in this neon-lighted comedy, but fails to hit the visual and verbal high notes he strains so hard to reach.

Hackman gives a powerful performance as the killer, and the storytelling is often gripping. But the film contains much extremely offensive language and gratuitous depictions of violence, some of it aimed at children, not needed to get the plot across.

Its main value is the prolonged look it gives of the late artist Basquiat.

Loses its way in a crime-movie subplot and a less-than-believable love affair.

Is this misogyny, as some insist, or a critique of misogyny, as others say? Many moviegoers, grossed out by the film's gothic approach to medical matters, won't watch long enough to find out which is the answer. [30 Sept 1988]

It starts with a promising angle, portraying the perennial conflict between the Federation and the Klingons as an allegory for real East-West relations. But the screenplay does little to capitalize on this. The result is an ordinary science-fiction adventure. [12 Dec. 1991, p.14]

You meet some fascinating personalities during this uncomfortable voyage.

Films borrow tricks from pictures made years ago -- try to watch Bourne without thinking of "The Manchurian Candidate."

A spicy critique of tabloid TV is buried in romantic-comedy material that strains too hard for cuteness. Ditto for Murphy's acting.

This isn't a Ferrara classic like "King of New York," but even his less- memorable pictures carry an eccentric kick no other director could duplicate.

This is standard plot material in most respects, and Kasdan has done little to make it seem new. Fans of time-tested formulas may applaud his fidelity to the genre, but others will wish he'd come up with a few original notions to energize this very long picture.

Frivolous but fun, somewhere between a comic "French Connection" and the craziest Nascar race you never saw.

Oliver Stone's imaginative style runs rings around John Ridley's idiotic screenplay.

The movie has a broader range of emotions and visual effects than any "Star Wars" installment since "The Empire Strikes Back," but the writing and acting are as stiff as R2-D2's metal torso.

The story is hardly original, but this well-directed Taiwanese drama paints an intermittently vivid portrait of life on the Chinese mainland in the 1930s era.

The trouble lies in its stereotypical style, its schmaltzy emotionalism.

Most of the time we see her through Hal's idealizing eyes, though -- no surprise, since Hollywood won't let glittery stars like Paltrow play down their sex appeal for long.

Livelier, more absorbing, and generally better acted than "Dangerous Liaisons," which arrived a year ago. But it runs out of inspiration long before it runs out of plot twists, and we've seen the twists too many times before.

Ramis doesn't reach the comic heights of his "Groundhog Day," but the acting is excellent and the screenplay offers some hearty laughs if you can stand bursts of violence and language as foul as a Mafioso's business agenda.

Plays like a warmed-over "Last Tango in Paris," with more explicit sex but a lower level of originality and acting skill.

Danny Boyle's dark comedy has stylishly filmed moments, but overall it's a queasy blend of amusing, pointless, and sometimes quite nasty material.

Too much repetition and an unconvincing finale take a toll on the film's overall effectiveness.

More emphasis on computer-generated gimmickry than on persuasive acting and ideas.

McClelland is a joy to watch, even when the story strains too hard for lovable whimsy, which happens much too often.

Good acting and an effectively claustrophobic mood compensate for a story that doesn't add up to much in the long run.

Egoyan is one of Canada's most ambitious and original filmmakers, but the power of this intricate drama falls short of its aspirations, despite his personal investment in the subject, since he is of Armenian ancestry himself.

The first hour is eloquent and true. Once the story takes its big turn toward tragedy, though, it becomes predictable and sentimental.

Some scenes of Ulrich Seidl's first fiction feature (he's already a respected documentary maker) are so brutal and degrading that they're hard to watch. Others are highly atmospheric and sometimes quite funny.

Endearingly silly, but nowhere near as original or amusing as Pee-wee's Big Adventure a couple of years ago. [22 Jul 1988, p.19]

Delivers enough action to please Saturday-night crowds, if not the surreal wit that made the first two "Batman" movies, directed by Tim Burton, so entertaining.

All the old Disney trademarks are here, except the wit and surprise that were once the studio's stock in trade. There's little appeal to grownups, but kids should enjoy it.

This tragicomic tale doesn't have the supercharged brilliance of "Run Lola Run," which it occasionally resembles, but it's certainly fast-moving and action fans should enjoy it.

There are a few hilarious moments, and a few more that are foolish and even disgusting. [15 July 1988, Art and Leisure, p.21]

Pat O'Connor directed this likable but unmemorable comedy-drama, which creates some vivid moments without quite managing to flesh out its commonplace characters.

Sir Walter Scott's novel is turned inside-out by Michael Caton-Jones's movie, which transforms the title character from an elusive rogue into a conventional hero who swaggers across the screen from beginning to end.

Makes up in solid acting what it lacks in Hollywood-type frills.

The story is unmemorable, but the characters are engaging and their predicaments are all too recognizable.

The psychology of the story is shallow, but the action scenes pack a good visual punch.

Wildly irreverent fantasy.

For a while, it's like really cool, with lots of energy and stuff, but then it gets like major repetitious, and you wish it was like over, y'know? As if!

It's all energetically filmed, but I miss the cool, modest clarity of the first version. Bigger isn't always better, even at the movies.

With the exception of a few laughs - including a hysterical footsie scene and another that involves Saran Wrap - this one's a no-brainer.

A genuine PG, gentle and wholesome almost all the way through. It's not a great movie, but it should attract family audiences.

What damps down the psychological power of One Hour Photo is director Mark Romanek's reluctance to let the film become as idiosyncratically unnerving as its main character.

Documentary about stock trading, with some vivid images but no clear perspectives or opinions on the material it presents.

As a zoological spectacle the movie is riveting. But the narration tries to make us think of these adorable animals as if they saw the world in human terms.

Virtually every person in the story is fabulously cute, picturesquely forlorn, adorably ditzy, or winsomely philosophical. In short, there's plenty of smooth storytelling but not a hint of reality here.

The comically tinged action is as lively as it is brainless, and it revels in violence a bit less eagerly than many thrillers of its ilk.

Konchalovsky keeps the action reasonably quick, but sentimental storytelling eventually swamps the picture.

The story wants to be a sort of "Last Tango in Paris" redux, but it falls into mere melodrama after a brilliant beginning.

Directed by Martin Sheen, the picture works hard to be socially and psychologically penetrating but doesn't quite make the grade. [15 Mar 1991, p.12]

The movie's concept is amusing, but much of the acting and dialogue is as uninspired as the story's deliberately bland suburban setting.

The story raises challenging moral and legal questions but loses energy in a miscalculated romantic subplot.

The film has plenty of shortcomings, but it's fun to see Caan back in action.

At least Dennis Hopper plays the bad guy with wildness and wit. Costner's stolid hero seems a washout by comparison.

Annie turns out to be a reasonably entertaining movie.

Solid acting and an intriguing plot compensate for some dull spots.

The action is fast, furious, and loaded with explosive effects, but the theme is a regrettable return to the us-against-them paranoia that dominated much science fiction in the cold-war era.

Akerman is among the most imaginative filmmakers in her native Belgium or anywhere else, but here she doesn't get very far beneath the surface of her subject.

This offbeat drama has more atmosphere than logic, but a few sequences are strikingly well acted and filmed.

This dark psychological story falls short in terms of filmmaking and acting, but it's original enough to stand out from the crowd.

Caine puts all his formidable talent into pulling this off, but Jewison's directing and Roland Harwood's screenplay (based on Brian Moore's novel) provide a regrettably shaky foundation for him to build on.

The movie's heart is in the right place, but it looks and sounds regrettably bogus.

Along with its try-anything-for-a-yuk screenplay, the worst thing about Hitch is its running time of almost two hours. Did the studio forget to edit this flimsy thing down?

Often trite and predictable but grudgingly likable in the end.

Pop-music biopics have a great history, but 8 Mile is for Eminem fans only. They're sure to make it a huge, huge hit.

While it may supply giggles and shivers to preteens, grownups should think twice before entering this all-too-haunted house.

Lively acting and an amiable comic atmosphere offer partial compensation for generally lackluster filmmaking.

As clumsy as its title.

This sort of cinema is as dehumanizing as the aliens who serve as its intergalactic bad guys.

The mixture of humor, suspense, and ominous undertones is effective but rarely inspired.

Olyphant steals the show as a cheeky porn producer. The rest is gimmicky and predictable, except for a clever surprise near the end.

Effective at times, and Gyllenhaal shows a new side of her talent, but the main impression is of first-rate performers doing second-rate work.

The movie works hard to be naughty, but its sub-David Lynch style doesn't quite click. Gyllenhaal is excellent and Spader effectively adds to his roster of creepy characters.

Has moments of real visual creativity.

Moviegoers deserve more than the racism, sexism, and all-purpose mayhem on view here - failings that offset the razor-sharp action and technical brilliance also visible.

The overall effect is too self-worshipping to be of lasting interest. The guy sure isn't shy!

The picture has more charm than credibility, and its conquistador-like attitude toward women is mighty questionable; but the story becomes resonant if you see it as a fable about Brando vicariously regaining his youth by teaming with Depp in this all-stops-out movie fantasy.

While it roots the heroine's compassion in her Christian beliefs, it suggests Indian occultism is equally powerful. And the last third is a lackluster barrage of stalking, shooting, and fighting. Too bad the movie doesn't ride into its own sunset about an hour earlier.

If moviegoers really thought about the violence, sexism, and materialism at the core of the series, the whole shebang might vanish overnight.

Tamer than tame in every respect, which makes it great for little kids, if not for the grownups who bring them.

The first half is full of verbal and visual surprises, but the later scenes are talky and dull, as if filmmaker Steven Soderbergh had lost interest in his subject and his characters. Which would be understandable, since the story often seems more calculated than heartfelt. [4 Aug 1989, Arts, p.10]

The subject is intriguing even if the dialogue is stilted and the acting is uneven.

The adventure is vulgar and violent, although the special effects are impressive.

The film's touches of unconventional style interfere with its emotional effectiveness at times.

What's missing from this Vanity Fair is the sense of plucky, anything-goes adventurousness that abounds in Thackeray's novel.

Cube is cute and Long is lovely, but the youngsters are too brash and smug to bear. At least there's a heartwarming end to the excursion.

You don't see such feisty acting very often.

This situation hardly provides a clever or original metaphor for the failures of communication that perennially plague the human race, but the drama's heart is in the right place.

Eric Stoltz and Julie Delpy have some effective moments, but energetic acting isn't enough to redeem the movie from its pointless excesses. [02 Sep 1994, p.11]

Woo's customary action-film pyrotechnics gather more substance than usual from the implausible but inventive plot, drawn from a Philip K. Dick story.

Still, much of the thrill-a-minute story is more frantic than really clever, and much-loved comedians like Bill Murray and Wayne Knight don't get much chance to shine amid the gonzo goings-on. Even sports-lovers may be disappointed by the small amount of genuine athletic action that's been squeezed into the picture. [18 Nov 1996, p.14]

I'd like Head of State better if it had less cartoonish violence, and if its gags weren't so predictable. Rock is in fine comic form, though, and his directing debut shows real promise.

Fails to score a checkmate.

Its most impressive aspect is its visual style, patterned to some degree on Sergio Leone westerns. A picture this long and dense should work harder to be cogent and coherent, though.

The most entertaining scenes focus on the lovable louts and losers who share the boardinghouse where the protagonist - based on a comic-book character billed as a superhero without superpowers - prepares his grisly exploits. The rest is mayhem.

It's fun to watch for a while. But the movie runs much too long, and a few funny bits aside, most of the comedy writing is lame.

Kitano's first major comedy is loose and likable.

Long, bombastic, and violent, but fantasy fans may enjoy its fast-moving energy.

In sum, it's a quintessential summer film, especially if you're 8 years old and in the mood for a quick dose of mindless fun.

It's a standard science-fantasy fable, but the visual effects are mighty impressive.

A pleasant experience, if not the dazzling entertainment Lopez fans were hoping for.

Fans of Jacquelyn Mitchard's novel may find enough echoes of the book to justify the price of admission. But others can see this sort of thinly crafted melodrama in TV movies every week. For free.

As a story, Wild at Heart is even less coherent than “Blue Velvet,'' to the point where whole characters and subplots disappear into a murky haze at the end. [17 Aug 1990, Arts, p.11]

Broderick and Witherspoon give perfectly matched performances at the head of a first-rate cast.

The pop-music star Prince makes his movie debut in this bizarre drama about a rock singer with a troubled career and a miserable home life.

The story never gathers much dramatic momentum despite an impressive cast and a lot of dank Middle Ages atmosphere.

The movie's moral messages are all on target. Too bad the movie is much, much too long and Jackson gives one of his dullest performances ever.

The screenplay is foolish and Michael Keaton overplays the title role badly, but director Tim Burton gives the comedy a heap of visual imagination. [22 Apr 1988]

It works better as a nature and historical study than as a drama, though.

Dark, eccentric, silly.

Keaton doesn't have quite enough filmmaking savvy to balance the story's heart-wrenching and smile-coaxing aspects.

The end product is so clunky, scattered, and all-around soggy that sometimes you can't help laughing. At least Connelly and Reilly give their all, and Tim Roth is terrific as a weird lawyer.

No amount of technical skill can substitute for genuine shivers, and in the fright department this picture rarely lives up to its hype.

Auteuil is a superb actor. Still, the real-life Sade would be dismayed to see himself portrayed more as an eccentric old codger than the world-changing firebrand he worked hard to be.

This variation on the "Rear Window" format works best when director Noyce gives free rein to Washington's thoughtful charm.

May not always make sense, but it's crammed with flamboyant images and frisky cinematic pranks -- It's far from a great movie, but there's nothing like it on the current scene.

The movie is visually impressive, but Ishii's virtuoso style can't overcome the flatness of the comic-book story he's telling.

The stars are appealing and the filmmaking is imaginative at times, but the picture never builds much dramatic momentum.

Sometimes they're truly hilarious; sometimes they're lazy enough to milk laughs from scattershot vulgarity.

Undermines its serious undertones with an avalanche of smirky cynicism designed to flatter the hipper-than-thou fantasies of adolescent moviegoers.

Resembles a fast-and-flashy variation on "The Sixth Sense," with touches of "The Matrix" as a bonus.

The humor is as crude as the characters, but the picture has energy.

Interesting as anthropology, although the subject won't appeal to many people.

The movie has promise as a psychological thriller, but the filmmakers show far more interest in chases and shoot-outs than characters and ideas.

Although it has a good heart and a warm spirit, this prettily filmed drama is more sentimental and manipulative than earlier Iranian films on youth-related subjects.

It's all very colorful, but the movie's diverse elements clash as often as they cooperate.

The acting is weak, largely because many of the performers seem uncomfortable speaking English. The last half-hour works up a fair amount of action and suspense, though.

The cast works hard, but Jordan's directing is too ponderous and slow to build dramatic energy.

Nora Ephron's comedy tries to be sweet, hip, innocent, and sophisticated all at the same time, and it doesn't take long for these contradictory goals to cancel one another out.

Woo's patented pyrotechnics - intricate editing, acrobatic camera movements, slow-motion mayhem - lend intermittent sparks to the violent action sequences, but the two-dimensional characters have little personality.

The pace of this Bolivia/US coproduction is slower than that of a snail, but it gathers some interest as the themes of the vignettes dovetail near the end.