Bill Cosford

The movie is at its most chilling, oddly enough, when one or another chase isn't going on. The real fun begins when Ryan becomes desperate and goes for help to his old pals in intelligence. This is prime Clancy material -- high-tech surveillance, computerized image enhancement, Intelligence with a capital "I." [5 June 1992, p.G5]

Hot Shots isn't quite that bad, but given the material -- the military mind is certainly, in military parlance, a target-rich environment -- it ought to be funnier. [31 July 1991, p.D1]

It's a big, likable movie without quite enough jokes, but the stars take turns with the burden, carrying the thing in relays. They're fun to watch. [16 Dec 1986, p.D4]

For a while, director Joe Dante spins some daft gags off the situation, and Hanks and Fisher deliver their droller lines with a deadpan sincerity that produces genuine unease. But it turns out that there isn't really much of a script here, and soon The 'Burbs has devolved into a slow build to the big anti-climax. [17 Feb 1989, p.10]

For the most part Blame It on Rio is witless, predictable and bland, despite Donen's fascination with the topless-beach scene (his camera combs the shore for breasts with the unsubtle fervor of a pig rooting for truffles). [18 Feb 1984, p.D7]

Penny Marshall proves deft at blending the silly stuff with enough action to generate a bit of suspense; the mix is that of Beverly Hills Cop. And the script, though the work of a whole crowd -- almost always a bad sign -- has marvelous moments. [10 Oct 1986, p.D1]

The writing is good and the direction rarely flabby, but the real strength of Buckaroo is in a large and enthusiastic cast, led by Peter Weller, who plays the title character with a perfect deadpan. [11 Aug 1984, p.B7]

Soapdish is a spoof of soap operas, and the problem should be apparent from the start: It is very, very difficult to parody that which dwells already in the land of self-parody. [31 May 1991, p.G5]

There are jokes in this story of a 7-year-old adoptee from Heck, but most of them are funny despite the clumsiness of their telling. The rest aren't funny at all. [1 Aug 1990, p.D7]

The film is cold, and despite the principals' considerable thrashings, utterly uninvolving. The overarching theme, gunplay notwithstanding, is tedium. [02 Jun 1989, p.5]

Homicide fails, finally. But its early success is so complete that the film is a must-see anyway. It changes the rules for cop movies. And when it is good, it is brilliant. [18 Oct 1991, p.7]

If the story were not already stupid and cynical, the casting would kill the film in any case. Garner is utterly lost as a top sergeant; he doesn't even swear well, and some of the movie's most uncomfortable moments are those in which he tries. [16 Mar 1984, p.D10]

Laughs are widely spaced, and hardly seem worth the trouble. [22 Apr 1985, p.D4]

Supergirl was directed by Jeannot Szwarc, whose previous big credit was Jaws II. The two films have something in common beyond their status as sequels to successful originals; both have a curiously flat, almost stale feel about them. And both are as disposable as Supertissue. [21 Nov 1984, p.C1]

Astoundingly, considering the fall of this film series from low aim to no aim at all, the original cast remains aboard. [8 Apr 1987, p.D8]

Crazy People is one of those sky-high-concept titles, you know? A film with that title had better deliver, had better be stone crazy, wacky to the bone, nuts. With a title that blunt, you don't want to wind up with warmed-over farce of the sort that used to cast Dudley Moore opposite a tall, blond beauty....Uh-oh. [11 Apr 1990, p.D1]

In New Jack City, director Mario Van Peebles seems determined to show that he can make a movie as shallow and violent as any white Hollywood hack. No problem: He did it. [8 Mar 1991, p.G12]

Douglas' performance is surprisingly dull, and he has a script to match (by Diane Thomas). Moral: Remaking Raiders is harder than it looks. [04 Apr 1984, p.B6]

Smokey aims very low and still doesn't hit. [17 Aug 1983, p.D4]

What goes on in Streets of Fire is not quite stupid -- it's saved from that by the remarkable love for style of its director, Walter Hill -- but the film doesn't show an intelligence to match its style, either. [04 June 1984, p.C6]

This is also the first of the s-and-s films to give sex nearly equal time with disembowelment, a story concept we can only cheer. [6 Sept 1983, p.B5]

Under Siege is never at all convincing -- everything about the battleship (except the exterior shots) seems small and understaffed. There are supposed to be 30 bad guys, but they appear to outnumber the crew, and the interior scenes of the battleship's command stations are barely more ambitious than Star Trek's bridge. [12 Oct 1992, p.C3]

Beaches is the never-less-than-maudlin soap opera about two childhood pen pals who meet again as adults, enjoy triumphs and endure failures, and wind up watching their story climax via a Fatal Illness straight out of Terms of Endearment. It's what used to be called a "women's picture." [13 Jan 1989, p.C5]

The unfortunate aspect of Class, which is glossier than Private Lessons and marginally more believable than My Tutor, is that its laughs are built around the suffering of a prime candidate for intensive therapy. Thus while the kids are watching one movie -- boy loses virginity, ya-hoo -- adults in the audience will be watching another -- wife and mother has an emotional breakdown at the hands, literally, of a 14-year-old. The latter, of course, is not funny. [25 July 1983, p.C6]

"Ghost movies" have been a Hollywood staple at least since It's a Wonderful Night, and this is one of the better of them. It's a tearjerker, though. Go prepared. [13 Aug 1993, p.G5]

A measure of redemption is offered in an opening montage and in the climactic bike-race sequence; in each, the stunts of the stand-ins are breathtaking. In all other respects Rad, which was directed by Hal Needham (a former stunt man who "directed" the Smokey and the Bandit series) is crudely made, the visual equivalent of a 10-speed with training wheels. [2 Apr 1986, p.D6]

This is what we call a movie-movie, a movie that throws nuance and self-consciousness and artiness to the wind and concentrates on the slam-bam. It's richly entertaining, it's big, it moves fast. [10 Aug 1984, p.C1]

The movie is full of holes, but there's never time to worry about them, and everyone's having too good a time ducking in and out of the subplots anyway. [23 Oct 1987, p.D5]