Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Cold War’

Howdy, Uh, How’re You Guys Doin’?

Posted in General Comments, Movie Review, Movies, Reviews, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on March 16, 2026| Leave a Comment »

“The Abyss – Special Edition” (1989) — movie review
Today’s review is for the science-fiction underwater adventure “The Abyss – Special Edition” (1989), written and directed by James Cameron and starring Ed Harris as Bud Brigman (the foreman of an underwater drilling platform trying to hold his crew together under extreme pressure);  Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio as Lindsey Brigman (Bud’s estranged wife and the designer of the rig — brilliant, stubborn, and usually correct);  Michael Biehn as Lt. Coffey (the Navy SEAL leader whose stress and paranoia escalate the danger);  Leo Burmester as Catfish (Bud’s loyal right-hand man);  Todd Graff as Hippy (the tech specialist with a pet rat and a healthy distrust of authority);  and Kimberly Scott as One Night (a steady presence who keeps the crew grounded).  Together, they form the core of a story that mixes deep-sea tension, Cold War nerves, and first-contact wonder.
Background:  I first saw “The Abyss” on TV and VHS back in the early 90s, but it was the theatrical cut — the shorter version that trims out a major subplot and changes the tone of the ending.  I’ve seen this extended version on TV / cable, but I’ve had to wait several years now for it to fall to my price point to buy the streaming version.  This Special Edition restores almost 28 minutes of footage, including the entire “tidal wave” sequence and the broader Cold War context.  These additions make the story feel more complete and give the ending a lot more emotional and thematic weight.  Released in 1989, the film earned four Academy Award nominations and won the Oscar for Best Visual Effects — impressive given the era and the technical challenges of underwater filming.  Historically, the movie is significant for pioneering digital water effects (the “pseudopod” sequence) and for being one of the most difficult shoots in Hollywood history.  This was my first time watching the Special Edition all the way through, and it definitely changes how the film plays.
Plot:  The story begins when an American nuclear submarine crashes near a deep ocean trench.  A Navy SEAL team is sent to investigate and commandeers an underwater drilling platform (“Deep Core“) as their base of operations.  Bud and Lindsey, who are in the middle of a divorce, are forced to work together as the crew tries to support the SEAL mission.  As a hurricane approaches the surface support ships, strange events begin happening around the wrecked sub and platform, including lights, currents, and an encounter with a mysterious water-based entity.  As tensions rise, Lt. Coffey becomes increasingly unstable due to pressure sickness and the stress of a potential Cold War confrontation.  He attempts to use a recovered nuclear warhead to “neutralize” the unknown presence.  Bud and the crew try to stop him, leading to underwater chases, near-drownings, and a desperate attempt to disarm the warhead.  Bud volunteers for a one-way dive into the trench to disable the bomb manually.  The Special Edition expands the ending:  the alien species – “Non-Terrestrial Intelligence” (NTIs) reveal they have the power to destroy humanity and nearly do so with massive tidal waves — but they stand down after reading Bud’s messages to Lindsey and seeing examples of human compassion.  The film ends with the NTIs raising one of their enormous ships to the surface, bringing Bud and the crew safely back to daylight.
So, is this movie any good?  How’s the acting?  The filming / FX?  Any problems?  And, did I enjoy the film?  Short answers:  Yes;  strong across the board;  impressive for its time;  a few;  yes.
Any good?  Yes.  The Special Edition is a much better film than the theatrical cut.  The added scenes give the story more context and make the ending feel more emotionally earned rather than abrupt – as in the original.  The movie balances tension, character drama, and a sense of discovery in a way that still works today.  The underwater setting feels dangerous and claustrophobic, and the emotional core — Bud and Lindsey’s relationship — holds the whole thing together.  The restored Cold War subplot also gives the NTIs’ final decision more weight.  Overall, it’s a strong mix of sci-fi, adventure, and human drama.
Acting:  Harris and Mastrantonio carry the film.  Harris plays Bud as a working-class leader who cares deeply about his crew, and his emotional scenes feel honest rather than forced.  Mastrantonio is excellent as Lindsey — sharp, determined, and vulnerable without losing her edge.  Their chemistry sells the relationship even when they’re arguing.  Biehn does a convincing job as Coffey, showing the gradual slide into paranoia / depth related psychosis without turning it into a cartoon.  The supporting cast is steady, with Graff and Burmester adding some needed humor and warmth.  Nobody feels out of place, and the ensemble works well together.
Filming / FX:  The production was famous for being one of the hardest shoots ever, and it shows — in a good way.  The underwater sets look real because they are real.  The sense of weight, pressure, and danger comes through in almost every scene.  The digital water effects (the pseudopod) were groundbreaking at the time and still hold up surprisingly well.  The Special Edition’s tidal wave sequence is ambitious and adds scale to the story.  The lighting, sound design, and practical effects all contribute to a believable underwater world.  Some shots look dated now, but most of the film’s visuals still work because they’re grounded in physical sets and real water.  As an aside, I’d heard of “super‑oxygenated” fluids in the 1970s when I was high school, but I’d never seen the technology demonstrated in a Hollywood film before.  I thought that was “cool”!
Problems:  A few.  The movie is long — especially in this Special Edition — and some viewers may find the pacing slow in the middle (I didn’t).  The Cold War subplot, while important, can feel heavy-handed at times.  Coffey’s descent into paranoia is effective, but the film leans on it a bit too much to drive the conflict.  Some of the underwater dialogue is hard to hear (a common issue with diving scenes).  And the final rescue / revival scene, while emotional, stretches believability.  My personal problem is the use of “NTI“, implying they are from outer space (like “The Day The Earth Stood Still“) rather than a parallel or more advanced Earth species which just happened to evolve in the deep-water ocean (like “Atlantis” in various Aquaman films).  Other than superior technology, there was nothing to indicate the “aliens” were from off-world.  None of these issues break the film, but they stand out on a first viewing.
Did I enjoy the film?  Yes.  The Special Edition feels like the version Cameron probably always intended.  The story is more complete, the themes are clearer, and the ending lands better.  The underwater setting is still unique, and the characters feel real enough that you care what happens to them.  The movie has tension, heart, and a sense of wonder that many modern sci-fi films lack.  I fully enjoyed it – as I expected to — especially the expanded ending, which gives the film a more hopeful and thoughtful conclusion.
Final Recommendation:  Highly recommended. “The Abyss – Special Edition” is a well-made, ambitious sci-fi adventure that holds up remarkably well.  Its Oscar-winning visual effects were groundbreaking, and the restored footage adds depth and meaning to the story.  Rated PG-13 for language and some intense scenes, it’s suitable for most viewers.  If you like character-driven science fiction, underwater adventure, or James Cameron’s earlier work, this version is definitely worth your time.  The Special Edition is the better cut — more complete, more emotional, and more satisfying.
.
Click here (16 March) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

A Colder Savior

Posted in General Comments, Movie Review, Movies, Reviews, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on August 1, 2025| 3 Comments »

“The Day the Earth Stood Still”  (2008)  —   movie review
Today’s review is for the 2008 science fiction remake:  “The Day the Earth Stood Still“, starring Keanu Reeves as Klaatu (the alien), Jennifer Connelly as Dr. Helen Benson (an exobiologist who tries to save Klaatu and the world), Jaden Smith as Jacob Benson (Helen’s stepson by marriage), Kathy Bates as Secretary of Defense Regina Jackson and John Cleese as Professor Barnhardt (the “smartest” man in the world).
Background:  If the 1951 original was a Cold War sermon presented as a silver saucered UFO, the 2008 version is a post-9 / 11 eco-parable dressed in nanotech and CGI.  This remake exchanges the threat of nuclear weapons in space for environmental collapse on Earth.  It recasts Klaatu not as a galactic diplomat, but as a cosmic “Silver Surfer” herald / exterminator who develops a conscience.  Humans are no longer just violent — we are the destroyers of Earth’s sustainability.  Klaatu arrives not to warn, but to execute.
Basic Plot:  A mysterious large orb lands in Central Park in New York City, along with a host of others spread around the globe.  Klaatu, a humanoid emissary of an alien coalition, emerges and is promptly shot by some unidentified panicked soldier.  He’s detained, healed, and interrogated.  He escapes with the help of Dr. Helen Benson, a scientist who believes humanity deserves another (and another) chance.  As global panic spreads, Klaatu witnesses human behavior firsthand, especially through Helen and her stepson Jacob.  The question looms:  will he spare us / save us based on watching family interaction, or allow planetary cleansing based on watching TV news?
So…  is this movie any good?  The acting?  The filming / FX?  Any problems?  Did I like it?  Short answers:  VERY so-so;  Reeves is robotically bland, Connelly unaccountably emotional;  the FX are impressive enough visuals;  loads – mainly the story doesn’t really make much (any) sense;  and, it’s more “just” okay than “Wow! I liked that!“.
Acting:  Keanu Reeves plays Klaatu with icy detachment — no diplomat and not a messiah from the stars.  He seems to suddenly develop a conscience as a moral algorithm.  His monotone delivery suits the alien role, but it is also an emotional flatline.  Jennifer Connelly anchors the film with conviction, but while she is compassionate, rational, and deeply human, there was nothing “there” for me.  Jaden Smith as Jacob is…  important in the plot, but his character’s transformation (like Connelly’s) just didn’t make sense to me.  Kathy Bates is a bureaucratic model as the Defense Secretary (with another uneven conversion), who is more a narrative device to explain why humanity cannot trust aliens to be “good and peaceful” towards us – hint:  because we wouldn’t be towards them.  Finally, there is John Cleese who makes a brief, earnest appearance as a Bach-loving physicist making a plea for humanity.  He’s okay in the role, but he’s a poor Einstein substitute and the blackboard scene (which is lifted from the original movie) loses it’s context in this remake.
Filming / FX:  The film has the advantage of 50+ years of development in production design / FX.  The alien spheres are interesting visually — silent, glowing, and ominous.  GORT, the iconic robot, is re-imagined as a nano-tech swarm capable of global destruction. In this film, “GORT” is an acronym for “Genetically Organized Robotic Technology“, which is assigned to the object by the military – even though there is no evidence of genetics or robotics.  Both are just assumed (I guess).  The nanite destruction sequences — Shea Stadium, trucks dissolving into dust — are visually appealing even if they don’t make any sense logically.
Problems:  The main problem with this film is you have to WANT to believe the story for it to make any sense.  In reality, it’s a loosely connected remake of a “classic” Sci-Fi movie which loses the thread by trying to update the reason for the alien visit to a modern day motive.  Reeves / Klaatu’s conversion from executioner to redeemer is too abrupt.  Smith’s / Jacob’s role seems like it’s pivotal but badly written.  And, Bates / Jackson starts out as a believable Defense Secretary, but she ends up completely unable to communicate with “someone” (we assume is the President) and they inexplicably try to bomb a “cloud” of nanites.  [Spoiler Alert:  the spheres are dispersed around the planet because they are mini-Arks (as in Noah’s “Ark”) meant to collect various animal species for preservation.  And, yes, the practicality of this is just as laughable as is the Noah story.]
Final Recommendation:  Moderate (at best) — worth the time watching for sci-fi fans curious about remakes of “classics” and less worth it for trumped up moral dilemmas about world ecology.  It’s a film which (I think) tries to frame and ask big questions, but in the end fails the framing and answers none.  Sit for a viewing with the hope of a decent remake and get up with the feeling:  “Well, at least the special effects were decent enough…”
Other thoughts:  I’m a fan of most of Reeves’ work.  I’ve liked him since the “Speed” days…  This was not some of his best work.  I AM thoroughly convinced about the dangers to humanity from “Climate Change”.  I believe this type of representation of the danger is (was) not helpful as it only served to trivialize the immediate and long term issues and problems in the mind of the public.   Seventeen years on from this film and we (a significant number of anti-intellectuals AND corporatists in the United States) are still acting / sounding as if there is no danger.    Maybe, Earth (and humanity) will need a savior from outer space…  Okay, I’ll now get off of my soap-box.
.
Click here (1 August) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

What If…?

Posted in Leadership, Movie Review, Movies, Politics, Reviews, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on August 4, 2023| Leave a Comment »

“Seven Days In May”  (1964)   —   movie review
Today’s review is for the black & white political drama “Seven Days In May” starring:  Burt Lancaster as Gen. James Mattoon Scott (the “bad-guy” military officer);  Kirk Douglas as Col. Martin ‘Jiggs’ Casey (the “good-guy” military Officer);  Fredric March as President Jordan Lyman (unpopular because he is trying to get a peaceful disarmament treaty with the USSR);  Ava Gardner as Eleanor Holbrook (the former mistress of Gen. Scott);   Edmond O’Brien as Sen. Raymond Clark (a longtime personal friend of the President);  Martin Balsam as Paul Girard (White House Chief of Staff);  Andrew Duggan as Col. William ‘Mud’ Henderson (a loyal officer who comes to the aid of Sen. Clark);  Whit Bissell as Sen. Frederick Prentice (a “bad-guy” Senator who supports the military coup).
Basic plot:  When the President seeks to negotiate a nuclear disarmament treaty with the USSR, the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the Pentagon develop a plan to stage a coup to overthrow the government.  The coup plot is discovered by an aide (Col. Casey) who then convinces the President the plot is real and about to happen.  The White House then scrambles to prevent the coup.  Through a fortunate finding of evidence, the coup is narrowly prevented and the nation’s democracy is maintained.
Is this movie any good?  The actors?  The drama / plot?  Is it worth your time viewing?  Yes;  Good to Very Good;  Very Good;  Absolutely!
Any good:  This is a surprisingly good movie!  At almost sixty-years old, it presages our times as well as or better than “The West Wing“, “The American President“, “Dave” and “White House Down“.  The former two demonstrating the eloquence of a “good” President and the later two political and / or military corruption as a narrative for the destruction of American democracy.  It is worth noting this movie came out at a time when the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. were still very engaged in the “Cold War” and the American public was still practicing nuclear attack drills.  At the start of the movie, there is a riot between protesting groups in front of the White House.  While watching it, all I could think of was 6 January 2021 and the attack on the U.S. Capitol by the Trump supporters.
The actors:  I felt the actors in this movie were almost all good to great.  It would be hard for me to pick out any one of them for their superior performance.  If I had any objections, it would be John Houseman’s portrayal of Vice Admiral Farley C. Barnswell.  Between Houseman’s accent and the unrecognizable (to me) uniform he was wearing, I just went:  “Huh???”  He (sounded) and the uniform (looked) – too British!  And it wasn’t that Houseman couldn’t / didn’t carry off with the role (acting wise).  I just didn’t buy him.  (Can an actor “look” believable – in role, but not be believable?)  Other than that, all of the actors were (IMHO) well-known to famous actors who played their roles brilliantly.
Drama / plot:  These were (60 years ago) great actors in well cast roles.  There is buildup, conflict and resolution.  Is it a perfect movie?  No.  But, the film was nominated for two Oscars including O’Brien for Best Supporting Actor.
Worth your time:  This movie is well worth your time!  If nothing else, just to see the Lancaster vs Douglas face-off near the very end of the film!  Gardner was also outstanding as the hurt mistress struggling to find herself.  I never realized what a good actress she was until I re-watched this movie. Now I’ll have to be on the lookout for her in other films.  LoL
Final recommendation:  Highly recommended to MUST see cinema.  As much as this movie is a fictional drama, coups remain a realistic “threat” to our democracy.  This on-going threat from within is obvious from the felonious activities of real-life senior officers like Col. Oliver North (during the Reagan Administration) and General Michael Flynn (before, during and since the Trump Administration).  The threat is also obvious by the “dark money” constantly pouring in to our elections with the hopes of buying seats at the table when social / political options are being weighed and decisions are being made.  Even in “fiction” America only barely survives based on the resolute actions taken by a few agents-for-good;  individuals who happen to be at the right place at the fortuitous moment in history.
.
Click here (4 August) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started