rumpole16

I saw the DVD today and was so enthralled, I watched it twice. I sort of knew the story but since this event occurred during the beginning of the media venerated clinton administration; the whole story was never explained. The movie only makes a passing reference to the major reason why 19 soldiers died needlessly. Clinton and his minion, les aspin refused to allow light armor and c-130 gunship support for the troops; so delta force and the rangers were left to fend for themselves against a rampaging horde of somalis.

Hollywood would never say anything to disparage clinton so we are left with a cryptic statement regarding "Washington" refusing the aforementioned mechanized support. The fact of the matter is that if the soldiers had went in with support, the sad event would never have occurred.

This is clearly not what any good clinton-left winger want's to hear. That doesn't mean it isn't true.

I usually don't go into the politics of something but this needs to be said.

Now back to the movie: visually the movie is stunning, the cinematography and battle scenes are amazing. War should never be depicted as something glamorous; it is bloody and brutal. The violence in the movie is absolutely positively necessary.

I have heard 2 major complaints about the movie, one that the characters are not well developed and that the movie is one sided and racist.

Making some type of central character with a love story and other Hollywood clichés would truly detract from what this movie is about. It is about a group of soldiers fighting for their lives, not some inance piece of fluff in which the battle takes second place to some ridiculous love story.

The movie is one sided to an extent. It is not about the Somalis; it is about US soldiers. I agree that it would have been nice to have them explain themselves. Is it racist to point out that the US went in to help these people and had it's proverbial hand bitten. These people do not value life as most people. The Somali's statement to the effect that killing is negotiation is emblamatic of their belief system. If they valued life, they would not practice middle age tribalism. 1000 Somalis died in the raid; I have heard ad nauseum about those people. What about the 300,000 Somalis that starved to death, are those people not worth as much as the 1000 terrorists who died? Think about that.

Oh, by the way, have you noticed that the comments from the UK and Europe are overwhelmingly negative? Interesting isn't it? I saw a few comments from Denmark. What the hell does Denmark have to contribute--besides something rotten?

Finally, this is a story that needed to be told in a gritty, brutal way.

A 9/10

Uncle Buck is a great movie. John Candy (God bless you--we miss you) gives his character the warmth and humor that only he can. I don't think anyone else could pull this role off. The plot is straightforward; a dysfunctional family gets into a bind and Uncle Buck, the shiftless uncle comes in to babysit the children. Buck is initially introduced as an irresponsible slob without a plan but he becomes the loving uncle. When Buck goes the house to watch the children he becomes very responsible right away. It is too much a curve ball too soon. I think a little buffer between the initial introduction of Buck to when he starts to become responsible would have been helpful. This is a relatively minor quibble. The other quibble is the language, it should have been toned down a little. The famous Q and A scene with McAuley Caulkin and Candy is hilarious.

My favorite scene has to be when Buck is talking to Bug when Bug rags on Buck's car. "Have you ever heard of a tuneup?-hee, hee, hee ,hee? Hee, hee, hee have you ever heard of a ritual killing? hee, hee, hee Again, this would have been hard to pull off for anyone except Candy.

Jean Luisa Kelly is excellent as the angry, acerbic tongued teen. Amy Madigan has a small role; but she still manages to add something to the story. A great turning point is when Buck is going to take to take the children to a horse race but stops when he realizes what he is doing. The transformation of Buck is then complete. There are some great ending scenes. Overall, I give this movie a 9.9+++++/10. Please see it.

I won't go over the plot. I would have liked a little more explanation of the aliens and their effect on humans. The white devil is plain weird. I don't think the movie works on that level. The first 45-50 minutes of the movie is great with the evaluation of the ship and the implications of the alien presence. The actual results of the presence are a little disappointing. This is a major problem with the movie. That being said, I have the DVD and periodically watch this movie. I liked Andrew Keir's Quatermass and James Donald's Romey. Julian Glove is good as the pompous Breen. The sacrifice that Romey makes is neat, nobility still exists. Barbara Shelley doesn't have much to do in this movie. Is it just me, or is she really HOT? Overall, I really liked this film. A 7/10