The Andromeda Strain (2008)

TV. I'd been anticipating this remake of the classic movie The Andromeda Strain (1991) because we’re talking about Michael Crichton’s first bestselling novel (1969). I read the book at age 13 or 14 and it has remained with me, along with Fantastic Voyage (1966 with a remake in 2010) and 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), as the three foremost masterpieces of late-60s science-fiction literature and cinema. I was concerned to hear the remake would be a product of the Sci-Fi Channel (historically a purveyor of low-budget mealworm-ridden schlock). Early press said the remake was hamhanded, brassy, and preoccupied with virulent as well as violent body counts. (These charges are true: Video of the initial recovery team’s death is played five times and several snuff fests with a jacked-up rock-music soundtrack have been added to the script.) I watched it anyway -- and I'm glad I did. For one thing, the top-secret Wildlife biomedical laboratory deserved better than 1960s computer technology -- and this remake delivered on many of my dreams: x-ray-film-like laptops, virtual-3D touchscreens, natural-language voice-based command-and-response, etc. (The scriptwriter may have simply cadged these ideas from Star Trek: The Next Generation and The Minority Report but, if so, the Sci-Fi Channel folks did a great job of bringing the technology to life.) As I feared, the acting was yeomanlike -- unimaginative, yet no one tripped over their shoelaces, with the most talent glimmering through Gen. Mancheck (Andre Braugher) and Dr. Angela Noyce (Christa Miller). The script proved better than I expected at presenting seminal scientific concepts from the book and a few updated issues (esp. national security, paranoia, etc. -- though the premise of a black hole was singularly unnecessary). (What is it about the Sci-Fi Channel and black holes?) The Clinton/Bush mashup of a president (Ted Whittal) had faith in his star scientists' professional acumen and a great line ("I'm not going to risk going to war on some half-baked evidence and a hunch") as did Dr. Noyce about our mortality ("There's something to be said for its linearity. If we could examine all of our choices like a box of chocolates, what would we have at stake?"). TV reporter Jack Nash (Eric McCormack) had the meatiest role, even if he was supposed to be in rehab for cocaine abuse and fell off the wagon. Having escaped a nefarious government assassin yet facing imminent microbial death, he ventures a prayer and forswears drugs. A pot-smoking good-ol' girl fleeing the same death later offers him a toke: “No, I took a vow.” The climactic ending in the Wildfire facility gets mangled with two unnecessary scientists’ deaths and a rescue crawl that’s both mawkish and gruesome. (Sitting up lets you reach a computer display better than laying down. Chicken fingers anyone? And what is it with nuclear countdowns always ending with 7 seconds on the clock?) As is common to Sci-Fi fare, the remake’s explosions all look hokey as do the microbial advance and retreat (followed by the inevitable “We did it!”). The ending is a wakeup call as to how politicians are never content to leave science to the scientists. I give the classic 4.5 stars and this fairly riveting remake 4 stars.

The Andromeda Strain (1971)

Michael Crichton's 1969 novel, The Andromeda Strain, reads like a chatty medical geekfest team-written by Isaac Asimov, Tom Clancy, and Robin Cook. The movie hews closely to the novel, even to the point of (gasp) presenting science on an equal footing with fiction. (Here brainy and collegial male and female scientists are the saviors of the human race instead of action-figure alpha males in the military-political command chain.) Like any Jacques Cousteau film, it makes perfect sense to portray (rather than gloss over) the multileveled descent into the bowels of the Wildfire laboratory. The whole narrative is presented as a biomedical detective story, from the aerial photography flyover of the town of Piedmont to the hazmat-suited Wildfire team performing a field biopsy on the wrist of a corpse to the recovery of two survivors and the satellite to the clinical and molecular-biology work in Wildfire itself. "Hard" science fiction novels and movies such as The Andromeda Strain are less about fatuous or syrupy entertainment and more about intellectual and ethical education -- less about providing a wild if forgettable ride and more about delivering a meaty and cogent examination of the hows, whys, and wherefores of human decisions and actions (esp. those that will determine whether we as a species survive or become extinct, largely from our own ignorance). While technology has certainly advanced rapidly since their day, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Fantastic Voyage, and The Andromeda Strain remain the premier science-fiction novels and movies from 1966-1971. (By the way, 2001 and Andromeda both received G ratings while Fantastic Voyage got a PG, which only shows that Republicans have made significant advances today in their ability to complain about three seconds' worth of viewing a female cadaver's breast and soapy male butt cheeks -- so expect the same amount of complaints about the same number of seconds of soap-covered skin in the Sci-Fi Channel remake, which I review separately.) 4.5 stars.

Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989)

Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, as the third episode in the series, is my second-favorite Indiana Jones movie (not a hard choice since the first movie is unassailably excellent, I may never watch the much-reviled second movie, and I won't see the new fourth movie until tomorrow). Last Crusade has a passle of Indiana's feats of derring-do but they are slightly less adrenaline-inducing than his take-no-prisoners stylings in Raiders of the Lost Ark. The Nazis are back as villains (fronted by a phone-it-in femme fatale) as Indy seeks to obtain the magical Holy Grail before they do. The best part is the pairing (and near parting) of Sean Connery and Harrison Ford as Senior and Junior Jones, father and son. Their comedic interaction is understated and satisfying with sufficient plot twists and turns. Though more contrived and less organic than Raiders, the discovery and recovery of the Holy Grail is a ripping good yarn as it goes -- esp. since a healf-hearted attempt is made to explain how "only the penitent man shall pass." (Ultimate supernatural power is not obtained when man's might makes right but when God accords grace and mercy.) "Choose wisely!" 4 stars.

Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)

"It's not the years, it's the mileage." Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark is virtually *the* perfect action-adventure blockbuster. It's hard to imagine anyone who hasn't seen this movie (between 1 and 50 times) and loved it! Like the first two Star Wars films (and similarly with all my friends), Raiders of the Lost Ark sure caught my imagination and set my adrenaline pumping! (I still get jazzed just thinking about the movie.) These three films were made by the two "bad boys" of independent cinema at the height of their imaginative powers. Raiders was a perfectly crafted showcase of what the best scriptwriting, acting, editing, sound effects, and pre-CGI special effects can do. The first ten minutes set up the story but so much happens that you've seen as much as in 30 minutes of any previous movie -- and it only gets more exciting! I love Indy's derring-do panache, all the script's humorous bits ("I don't know, I'm making this up as I go"), and Marion's infectious spunk (two words which in another context would be malodorously unhygienic). Don't tsk-tsk the shooting of the swordsman; that scene is not a slam against Arabs, just a (cheap) shot at the duel or swordfight as a cinematic convention (which is why it was funny in 1981). Indy is after all the ultimate pragmatist who doesn't believe in anything but his own fists -- until he and Marion are saved by "the power of God, or something." The audience is happy when the maudlinized Nazis get their comeuppance from the Ark (for which kids under 10 may want to cover their eyes). All this and there's no sex -- now that's pure unadulterated storytelling and an action movie for the ages! 5 stars.

Turner and Hooch (1989)

Turner and Hooch came out the year after Big -- so Tom Hanks was golden. Here he does a nice-guy turn as Scott Turner, a small-city detective poised for a big-city career move. He's also a compulsive neat freak who is particularly put out when forced to take in a junkyard mutt (named Hooch for his favorite drink) that is the only witness to the murder of his master Amos. Turner shows Hooch the ropes and lays down the boundaries in his home ("This is not your room!") but Hooch quickly demonstrates that he knows no bounds: The whole house is his squeaky toy and the inside of Turner's car is his lunch ("No! Don't eat the car!"). This aspect of the movie is simply hilarious esp. since the production team enhanced the viscosity and flingability of the dog's saliva -- it goes everywhere -- and Hanks comes to commune with the mutt on the same level (even sharing a knosh and a kiss). Objectionable to family-values folks 20 years ago and still today are the scenes where Turner's police partner tells him he needs "the big R" and "to relax" (that is, get laid) and where Turner precipitously takes up post-panky bedroom and kitchen space with the town vet (Mare Winningham) in the sartorial splendor of his tighty-whities. These flaws notwithstanding, Turner and Hooch is a comedic classic that slings saliva like you have never seen before (and may never want to again). Hooch is a natural for the part; he's all heart. 4 stars.

Hitch (2005)

I was interested in the "dating doctor" premise of this movie but ultimately Hitch left me less than satisfied. It was good but not great. Will Smith is always superb -- I'd say he's on my can-do-no-wrong actors list -- but the allergic-reaction scene and a few others just struck me as reaching too far (the script's fault not Will's). Sorry but except for the jetski kick, Will's interactions with Eva Mendes were ultimately forgettable, as were most of the scenes with Amber Valletta, who played the dishy celebrity who inexplicably falls for the schlubby Kevin James. The meat of the movie spins (like toasted lamb on a spindle) around Will's dating tutorials with Kevin esp. where the former nixes the latter's jiggy moves and chews him out for completing a practice kiss (never a comfortable sight for any straight male). In a word, Hitch was unbelievable. Its genuine laughs were balanced by as many or more cheesy or queasy moments. Enjoy it but you probably won't be back for a second viewing unless you're a big Crocodile Dundee fan. 3 stars.

Enigma (2001)

Enigma is Infinity meets Contact halfway as World War II codebreakers at Bletchley Park struggle to break the Nazis' Enigma machine-based code and win the war. Here we see the brainy side of how the war was actually won -- with a modest attempt to accurately represent the intellectual underpinnings of the Enigma project. As with Infinity, a romantic relationship trumps mathematics as the key storyline in Enigma; still, the Tom Stoppard screenplay is much better than wilted tripe and the characters do a clean job with it. Dougray Scott's face is as emotionally impassive as any math prodigy's so it is left to Kate Winslet to understatedly play the intellectual -- oh those hornrims! -- who becomes his serious love interest. First, however, his uninitiated nerdy heart (and a different pound of flesh) is given a workover by the blonde strumpet played to perfection by Saffron Burrows (in one short scene of prone waist-up dalliance plus lots of wrapping him around her finger). Enigma is better than Infinity and almost as good as Finding Neverland not to mention Pearl Harbor. I had to obtain it via Blockbuster since it has been out of stock on Netflix for at least two years. 3.5 stars.

The War Lord (1965)

The War Lord starring Charlton Heston (not to be confused with The Lord of War starring Nicolas Cage) lends a whiff of familiarity to Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, King Arthur, and Kingdom of Heaven. Though relegated to a swampy domain, Heston is the Duke of Ghent's landed steward -- yet one who reflects beyond the easy answers and tends to forgo the brutish path to prestige and power (that is, taking what he wants from his subjects). Nevertheless he allows his grasping second-in-command and the obsequious priest to rationalize his desire for a comely virgin, which ultimately weakens his command. Though betrayed by others, he is loyal to the end, even at the risk of his life. Here is Heston in another noble role, choosing his words carefully as well as chewing them while proving to be a hero with one tragic flaw -- or two, if you count his betrayer. This movie is available only on videocassette; I acquired a copy through the public library system. 3.5 stars.

Beyond Tomorrow (1940)

20080511 Also known as Beyond Christmas, Beyond Tomorrow is a sweet sleeper of a Christmas classic. It's A Wonderful Life meets Ghost but with less stringent scripting and production values -- though its hokiness doesn't get in the way of its heart. Three wizened business partners find a creative way to replace two no-show guests for their festive Christmas dinner then virtually adopt the young man and woman (Richard Carlson and Jean Parker), who have fallen in love at first sight. Success is devious for the dashing young Texan crooner named James Houston but the couple's trio of guardian angels continues to intervene and intercede for them even after tragedy strikes. (Think of Charles Winninger as an Irish luminous Obi-Wan Kenobi or Patrick Swayze interceding before a heavenly cloud, who at one point responds, "O'Brien, you are the most stubborn soul we have ever loved.") Truly luminous, however, is the trio's aged housekeeper (Maria Ouspenskaya), an exiled Russian countess; her every word and expression is golden. Small gems, if you appreciate these sorts of things, include a festive singing of Jingle Bells in a handful of languages and the movie's leisurely approach to continuity and pre-Blob special effects. Bonus materials include the original (noncolorized) movie plus public service messages for war bonds by Bette Davis and for Easter seals by Bob Hope. 3 stars.

Galapagos: IMAX (1999)

Documentary. My youngest son and I saw Galapagos 3D today at the Houston Museum of Natural Science's IMAX theater. It is a fine and inspiring documentary reminiscent of most films in the IMAX genre. The 3D effects are especially fun since you feel you could reach out and touch the various creatures basking or swimming in front of you. (Here's how you can tell a 3D production as it ends from a non-3D: When you remove the stereoscopic glasses, the movie titles are superimposed, offset, and quivering.) However, I have no idea what film other Netflix members saw because I have to disagree with 40 of the 44 previous reviewers who criticize the film as boring and insubstantial. In fact, from their litany of complaints, I get the distinct impression they are mostly homeschooling families that have specific (and oft-stated) objections to women as scientists, women as narrators, women scientists who enjoy their work, women in shorts, women in bathing suits, and the theory of evolution itself. They also complain that 90% of the film is underwater -- it's more like 33% -- and that having a narrator gets in the way of the film, esp. when she comments on how unique or wonderful this most unique and wonderful habitat on the face of the earth truly is. Wakeup call to the kewpie-brained folk: Half of all human beings are women, half of all college graduates are women, half of all professionals are women, half of all scientists are women, half of all narrators are women, half of all shorts-wearers are women, half of all swimmers are women, etc. Furthermore, wearing shorts is appropriate since the Galapagos is an equatorial archipelago; wearing a bathing suit is appropriate when swimming (unless you would prefer nudity); exploring lava caves on a volcanic island is appropriate because -- well, it just is, even if you aren't the first person to go there, which the narrator was; exploring the ocean bottom around this unique ecosystem is appropriate when you discover 12 species of amazing creatures previously unknown to humankind; and discussing the theory of evolution is appropriate HERE, if no other place on earth, since the Galapagos are the foundry and showcase of the theory, as anyone with a brain should know! Also, the last time I checked, every other IMAX film has employed a scientist narrator and, rather than having them get technical on the schoolkids or cite textbooks verbatim, it makes the subject matter more accessible when they emote ("This really is amazing") about how their groundbreaking discoveries make them feel. The only persons who would fail to understand all these points must lack a true sense of wonder and empathy (esp. towards women who are not barefoot and pregnant). Science is awe-inspiring, and the more so to people of faith -- when they have not set up a false dichotomy between faith and science, which many believe are two sides of the same coin. The music in this documentary is visceral and inspiring, as I expect and appreciate in all other IMAX films. 4 stars.