Jetty Maguire (1996) Re-visit

 

How I almost completely forgot that I saw this movie at the State Theater this summer is beyond me. It was actually a very pleasant screening and my memories of the movie were validated by how much I enjoyed it and admired the writing. There are times when Tom Cruise comes in for heavy criticism, but this movie was an example of one of the few times that people seem pretty confident that he had done a good job and deserved some recognition for it.

The story of a sports agent who grows a conscience and tries to find a way to make his life work within the confines of those guidelines is a surprising one. Cutthroat operations around him and the competition he gets from his former colleagues it's easy to despair and feel that people are only out for a buck and will stab each other in the back regardless of what they say. Of course it should have raised a red flag, when the number one draft pick prospect agrees to be represented by Jerry but his father refuses to offer a written statement of such an agreement. Fortunately it's not our agent character who breaks his word, and it's an example of one of the things that forces Jerry to confront his own unwillingness to commit fully.

Renee Zellweger practically steals the movie as the assistant who has a heart of gold and is willing to give it to Jerry both personally and professionally. The fact that Jerry is unable at first to recognize that he has in fact fallen in love is one of the most frustrating things in the story. The thing that makes it so satisfying at the end is that Jerry's realization comes before he has made the crucial decision to end his marriage. He really did commit to the relationship because of his love of the little boy and the feeling that it gave him, but the more he struggled to succeed with his lone client, the more he begins to recognize how a commitment such as he is made professionally really is comparable to the one that he has in his personal life. When people give romantic comedies a bad name, I think all you have to do is throw this movie down on the table and challenge their presumptions. 

The reconciliation scene is often mocked because of the two great lines that make it work so well. * you complete me" is one of the best expressions of love that I've heard in a screenplay.. The only reason people can continue to joke about it, is because it is a true statement of love which stands up to any mocking they might try. The follow-up from Dorothy's character is also parodied, " you had me at hello", is the release of a pressure valve in Dorothy and Jerry's relationship that makes us feel great. It's another one of those lines that Cameron Crowe deserved all the credit for and earned the award he did not get. (He had to wait until “Almost Famous”).

Cuba Gooding Jr. steals whatever movie Renee Zellweger didn't get, with his egotistical self-centered receiver, who also learns that commitment goes two ways. He always had it at the personal level, but not so much at the professional level. After all, the key line that everybody remembers from the movie, is" show me the money", and it takes a moment on the field connecting with the crowd to make him realize that he needs a commitment to the audience as well as his family. This movie may seem light on the outside but then on the inside it's pretty deep. I'm not sure you can ever go wrong recommending “Jerry Maguire" to anybody..

Star Trek III: The Search for Spock (1984) Star Trek Anniversary

 

Since I have clearly been on a nostalgic kick, traveling back to my hometown in Alhambra and visiting my houses in South Pasadena and El Sereno as well, it is an interesting coincidence that this is the 60th anniversary of the premiere of Star Trek the television series. Star Trek was one of the first TV shows I saw in color after we got a color TV and connected it to the antenna on the roof. My brothers and I had watched TV upstairs in our house on Kendall Avenue on an old black and white, and I remember my dad struggling with one of his friends, I think it was Lou Lancaster, putting up a new antenna on the roof and trying to get the color TV to have clear reception.

Although I know I saw an episode or two in our house on Kendall it wasn't until the show went into syndication and we had moved to Alhambra that I became a regular viewer of the TV series. It played in the afternoons after I got home from school and we watched it right before dinner time. I was excited when I heard but they were going to make a new series and then they turned it into a movie instead with the success of Star Wars. 

For a lot of years people believed that the best Star Trek movies were the ones that were even numbered. In spite of the success of the first film, it's often criticized for how slow paced it is. I however have always thought it was great but it is true that the second film “The Wrath of Khan" really captured the spirit of Trek effectively. Apparently the first six films were played in local theaters last weekend, and I just happened to find a chance to see “Star Trek III:The Search for Spock”. I've said it before, as far as I'm concerned this is an excellent film in the series and does little to say that the odd numbered films are weaker than the even numbered ones. This also has the advantage of coming out in 1984 , perhaps the greatest year of movies in my lifetime.

In spite of his absence on screen for 90% of the movie Spock continues to be a central character in the story. This movie gave Dr McCoy a chance to have a bigger role and explore the depth of his friendship with Mr Spock. Maybe there is a slight disadvantage in having to replace Kirstie Alley in the role of Lt. Saavik, but that character was not as clearly prevalent in this film. There is also a melancholy which hangs over the movie because the character of David, who is Captain Kirk's son, disappears from the storyline in a dramatic fashion. Also, the Enterprise itself is destroyed, so maybe the bummer of losing the captain's son and ship in the same movie is what gives many people a negative vision of this film.

While there are several dramatic and tragic points in the film there are also a few quite humorous moments. The other main characters in The Star Trek story all get a minute or two to shine. I love the moment when Mr Scott smirks as the Excelsior fails to even get out of the space dock to pursue the Enterprise when the crew hijacks it. If we were to make a list for the villain characters played by Christopher Lloyd in the 1980s, Commander Kruge would certainly be somewhere near the top. His dispassionate murder of David, and his feigned language of Honor make his character memorably loathsome.

The visual effects are very effective although they don’t stand up against some of the more advanced images in the Star Wars saga, they certainly did the job. The Practical effects on the Genesis planet are rendered very effectively. The battle between Kirk and Kruge, which takes place when the planet is destroying itself, looks terrific as they Teeter on the edge of a cliff, and part of the edifice is breaking off. 

Because the screening was connected to the 60th anniversary of the TV show, it was accompanied by an episode of the show which had a connection to the events of this story. “Amok Time" was the episode where we visited Spock's home planet of Vulcan, and circumstances led to a battle between Kirk and Spock. I suspected it was the fact that we had returned to Vulcan in Star Trek 3 that led to this being the episode which was featured. It looked terrific on the big screen too.

There were maybe two dozen people in the theater with me for a Sunday afternoon screening of A 42-year-old film. I happened on the screening by accident, so I was a little surprised at how many people showed up. But I was also quite happy to know that my childhood Heroes continued to live long and prosper on the Silver Screen.

Cars (2006) 20th Anniversary Screening

 

For some reason among the fans of Pixar, “Cars” appears to be a project that is widely dismissed. It may be because the movie was so successful at marketing toys that it was not taken seriously as a drama or a comedy. I frankly love the movie and my daughter Amanda marks it as her favorite Pixar film. So there, take that internet!

This revisit was a pleasant experience because I got a chance to go with my niece and her family and they all enjoyed the experience immensely , in large part because we were seeing it at the El Capitan theater in Hollywood. This venue is Disney's premiere theatrical location where all of their films get a special launch or in this case return visit. I have a little video to include to show you how cool the display is when they show a movie at the El Capitan.

I know that “Cars” creeps out some people because the idea of a car being alive is just alien to them, and let's face it if you think about it too hard there are some weird things that would be required. Fortunately for me I never think about it that hard, I just go with the flow and enjoy the experience that I'm watching. The song soundtrack is a blast, featuring a combination of soft rock and country music that works perfectly for the aesthetic of a Southwestern town being confronted by the NASCAR aesthetic.

It's so fitting that Paul Newman voices the veteran Hudson automobile which we discover late in the film was a champion from a bygone era. Newman of course was known as a racing enthusiast, and at this point in his life his voice conveyed not only confidence but an authority of age which worked perfectly for the character. I know there are people who are put off by the laid-back Surfer / stoner quality of Owen Wilson's persona, but I have always found him quite entertaining, and in the role of Lightning McQueen he seems to have found a niche that fits him quite well.

Maybe the reason that I appreciate the film so much is that I remember traveling with my family on Route 66 when we would go back to Battle Creek each year in the Summers. I think we did four or five trips in the early 60s before the interstates wiped out the old Route 66 Mother Road. Frankly for me, the magic hour is that Twilight moment in the summer when the sun has gone down but it is still light outside and the sky is a combination of Orange, purple and pink. In the desert of the Southwest it is phenomenally beautiful. This film takes advantage of the desert locale in the evening lighting. When the neon lights went on at the start of the third Act I was just delighted.

I can recognize  “Cars 2” is an abomination. It gives us too much of a secondary character and misses the spirit of the first film. It may also be that people resent the fact that “Cars” got two sequels and even though the third one restored the quality of the film story, there are other pics that people might have liked to have seen a sequel to First.

The look of the film, The Music, and the voice cast are enough to sell me when I was glad to revisit the movie in such a spectacular location.

Amadeus (1984) Hollywood Bowl

 

I had a special experience last week. I had a chance to see my favorite movie of the 1980s, which is also my seventh favorite movie of all time, on screen accompanied by a live Orchestra, and it just so happens that the movie is about classical composers and orchestral music. Isn't that perfect? The movie of course is “Amadeus”, the mystery / thriller / musical about the rivalry between Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and Austrian Court composer Antonio Salieri.

As an extra bonus , the presentation was at my favorite place in Southern California, the Hollywood Bowl. This outdoor venue was my destination for a recent trip to Southern California. I made it to two shows at the bowl, as well as getting to celebrate my daughter's 40th birthday.  The Los Angeles Philharmonic Orchestra accompanied the film along with a choir which sang sections of choral music presented in the film. And of course they were all consummate professionals who did an outstanding job.

The film version of this play has significant advantages over the stage presentation. The way the music can be visualized is more elaborate and creative, and the music can be edited into the film in a way which allows it to add more life and make the story more vivid. When it plays out on the scale that it does in the movie this is incredibly rich and memorable.

The greatest strengths of the film however are the two central performances. Tom Hulce, as Mozart, is delightful and frustrating simultaneously. Headstrong and egocentric, and a bit of an infant, Mozart can't see his own best interests, and continuously trips himself up with the Austrian musical hierarchy. Regardless, it is clear that he is a superior musician and composer to any of his contemporaries, he's just not a better man.

Salieri could be the better man, but his professional jealousy prevents him from finding a place in the musical hierarchy that is satisfying. F. Murray Abraham, is one of the greatest performances of the last half century, as a conniving rival who seems to be the only person of his era who recognizes that Mozart is not only talented but on a completely different level musically than anybody else. Salieri’s frustration at being able to recognize genius but not replicate it is conveyed by Abraham throughout the film, and his performance in the end is ultimately heartbreaking in spite of his uncharitable behavior.

Let me happily recommend you to a post I wrote a dozen years ago when I was covering the year 1984 on a different project. You will find a much more complete description of my thoughts about this film there. Meanwhile you can appreciate a couple of moments from the bowl experience, cuz I celebrated with my daughter and connected with one of my friends from the Lambcast.

The Dog Stars (2026)

 

I'm not sure why a Ridley Scott film, featuring some terrific action sequences, isn't hitting with audiences or why it's being released in late August. Theatrical presentation is a little uncertain these days, which is too bad because I think this film hits on most of the points that it's trying to make and many people would find it entertaining if they took the time to seek it out instead of seeing Spider-Man for the fourth or fifth time.

Maybe the reason the film isn't working for audiences is that it is repeating a dystopian future that seems less likely now than it did a few years ago. The world is still a screwed up place, but it doesn't seem as likely that we're going to get wiped out by a plague or nuclear war or chemical accident, which for all kinds of reasons seemed possible a decade ago. 

Jacob Elordi is the star of this film and he's good at quiet and mournful,  he still manages to to convey a sense of decency in spite of his PTSD. I am going to warn you right now Jasper, his canine companion, does not make it out of the First Act. That's probably a spoiler but it's a spoiler that people who are sensitive to these things probably should be aware of. Although I'm never a fan of seeing an animal being sacrificed in a story like this, it is better that it comes early in the film, so that the dread does not hang over the entire Enterprise.

Anybody unfamiliar with the three act structure that is often found in films is not going to have any trouble picking it out in this particular movie. The location literally changes twice, giving us a series of events in three different locations with occasional flashbacks to our original launching point. Josh Brolin is the co-star in the first third, and he basically plays the grumpy Josh Brolin version of himself, which seemed completely acceptable to me. Guy Pearce is in the second act along with Margaret Qualley, as a father and daughter trying to survive on their own in a completely different environment.  Elordi's ability to move from place to place because he has a plane and is a pilot, is what makes this dystopian movie a little more unique. 

The third section of the film reminded me a lot of the second half of “A Boy and his Dog” from 1975. As usual the point of the movie here is to show the different ways that people try to cope with disaster. Some become predators, some become isolates, and others try to remain as normal as possible. I thought there was enough creativity in the story to justify one more of these dystopian nightmares. It looks however from the reviews and box office returns that I am one of the isolates.

There are two or three very exciting sequences in the movie, and a couple of very satisfying outcomes to conflicts. There is however some sacrifice that comes along with this, which is only natural in a movie of this type. I did think there was a little bit of a cheat at one point, but in the long run I felt better about that and if it had played out the way I expected it to. This movie is not going to win any awards, and it won't take a place on the top shelf of all these kinds of films, but it's at least as good a movie as the Will Smith version of “I Am Legend”. If you wait to see it at home it won't destroy the experience for you, but I kind of like the idea of extending summer with a movie like this.

Coyote vs. Acme (2026)

 

As usual, I'm late to this because I've been so busy.  I have however done a podcast on it so I will include that at the end so that my comments here don't feel too brief.

“Coyote vs. Acme” is a completely delightful mixture of live action and animation, it's not as elaborate as “Who Framed Roger Rabbit "and I frankly can't compare it to the Looney Tunes Space Jam movies because I've never seen them. Not being a basketball fan I didn't care much about Michael Jordan against Daffy and Bugs.  I am however interested in a good argument and the idea of litigation by Wile E. Coyote against the Acme company was very intriguing.

We talked a bit on the show about why this film almost got canned for tax purposes, the people in charge of Warner Brothers don't seem to know what the hell they're doing. Maybe that's why they are ripe for acquisition by Paramount. Anyway this film was extremely well made and I frankly tell you, it was funny. I mean I really laughed quite a bit during the movie. Being an old school Looney Tunes guy, it fit my expectations perfectly.

There's a nice twist about halfway through the story, which helps maintain the consistency of our Title Character, and I appreciated that. I also appreciated the way they used all the other Looney Tunes characters by not treating them as if they are movie stars but rather they are just characters in the story. Even Bugs and Daffy, who do appear in the movie, are just secondary characters and not celebrities at all. For the most part the film avoids being too politically correct, all though Speedy Gonzales never gets an on-screen credit and Pepe Le Pew does get labeled as if he was being judged by 2020 standards . It doesn't matter because there was a good joke there.

Being a bit behind gives this film an opportunity for me to look at its box office returns. I think it is doing extremely well given the expectations and it demonstrates why sometimes the bean counters in the tax department should not be making the decisions about what films ultimately get distribution. I suspect the Batgirl film would have done perfectly fine, so it's disappointing that it didn't get a chance to escape the way this movie did. 

If you want to know more of my thoughts and what I appreciated in the film, take a listen to or watch the podcast. By the way, I was not alone in my appreciation. We had pretty much a unanimous opinion that this movie rocks.

The End of Oak Street (2026)

 

It's great when we get to the end of summer and there are still movies coming out that treat the summer as if it is an endless opportunity for fun. “The End of Oak Street” is one of those movies that makes August bearable in spite of the heat ( which by the way in Texas has been 103°) , and the pending gloom of fall, and for those who care, a return to school.

I am a big fan of a previous film from David Robert Mitchell ( although I'm not sure you should trust somebody who has three first names), "It Follows ".  That film would truly classify as a horror movie, I'm not so sure however if “The End of Oak Street” fits that category. In many ways it is a horror film because it is a Creature Feature and humans are being hunted by monsters in the story. However because the monsters in this story are dinosaurs, I may be inclined to call this an adventure story rather than a horror movie. This is a distinction I plan on talking about with my friends on the LAMBcast later this week.

There have probably been other people who have said it, but from my perspective this is the best sequel in the Jurassic Park series, since Jurassic World.  Technically of course it's not a Jurassic Park story at all, but its roots are clearly grounded in the same kind of Summer adventure and thrills that those movies have mined successfully for the last 30 years. This one sort of reverses the scenario, and instead of visiting a park with Dinosaurs, the Dinosaurs show up in your backyard.

Eventually we do get a discussion of how this whole thing happened, but that's the least interesting part of the film. What works best is the family dynamic, of two parents and two teen children struggling to survive in a clearly hostile environment, one in which many of their neighbors do not survive. The dinosaurs in this movie represent a wide variety of species, and many of them seem to have very aggressive tendencies, which I suppose is exactly what you want if you're creating a summer thriller.

Ewan McGregor and Anne Hathaway star as the parents, who are of course struggling with adult issues in the 1980s setting in which the film takes place. Hathaway is fully invested in the film and she is the focal point for the dramatic arc of the story. There are all sorts of moments that add a bit of humor to dire circumstances, but expect some gruesome deaths and PG-13 violence.  Some people will have an issue with the resolution, but don’t think too hard about it all. Just sit back and enjoy a fun family thriller with enough bite to keep it real.