lordhack_99

By that I mean that the actors are pros, the cinematography is superior, the music is excellent, the opening scene under the credits is neat, the underlying idea is very good - and this mess is like watching someone trying to paint a landscape on a bucking horse. Jamming the mysterioso together with a domestic spat can be heavenly if done right - and I had just watched THE THIN MAN. After watching that film, and then this dog's dinner was painful. And I so wanted it to work!! But how can a film go off in three directions in 96 minutes and still bore us?

To think that the screenwriters were blacklisted because they were Reds almost begs the idea that they ought to have been blacklisted for stirring up this junk.

Unrelenting propaganda piece, excellently photographed and narrated. Was Robert Altman laughing, though, when he had his narrator speak the words "murder" and "death" about a hundred times, all to hammer home the idea that we need highway construction? The guys at Caterpillar, who sponsored this, must have swooned. Maybe side roads really WERE awful, but by the end of this, you want to shout "I get it!" I get it!" (The faked images of dead children are disturbing.) Anyway, an interesting artifact from the Eisenhower years. Some fun can be had by identifying cars. And as with all such glimpses, I always wonder where and when the sections were filmed.

NOT for the children! Good vocal mimickry add to this admittedly lewd, gross and vulgar film that I have watched about twenty times. I'm a VIEWER, not a doctor, Jim. But I can say that the perils of the Enterprise as it nears destruction in the gaseous crack of Uranus is a nine-minute blast. Ahem. Oh, and the Ken-doll substitute for Chekov, with its for-legal-reasons-of-course blanked eyes was a stroke of genius. The stardate, by the way, is a list of L.A. highways. Inspired!