The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 72, No. 17, Ed. 1 Friday, January 18, 1985 Page: 9 of 20
twenty pages : ill. ; page 20 x 14 in.View a full description of this newspaper.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
THRESHER FINE /4RTS
Carpenter's Starman surprisingly original and quite enjoyable
Karen Allen and Jeff Bridges in Las Vegas, trying to avoid the autopsy table
Starman
Directed hy John Carpenter
Starman is, with out trying to
sound condescending, a nice little
film. By that 1 mean that it is
neither mediocre nor trite, but
rather a pleasantly entertaining,
somewhat original extraterrestrial
film.
Jeff Bridges stars as Starman
who, upon finding Voyager II,
decides to accept the invitation to
visit Earth. Unfortunately, the
U.S. government, perennial enemy
of little green (or blue) men from
outer space, shoots down his space
craft in North Dakota. At first,
Starman is merely a shade of blue
but upon finding a scrap of hair of
Jenny Hayden's dead husband, he
transforms himself into a clone.
Ms. Hayden (played by Karen
Allen) wakes up from a night of
drinking and discovers Starman,
now fully transformed. She faints.
She is ushered into her car by
Starman and told to drive to
Meteor Crater, Arizona, 2000
miles away.
Although it is quite predictable
that the government tries to stop
her using the army, the national
guard and state troopers, and that
it is equally predictable that
Starman and Jenny will fall in
love, the manner in which this is
done is quite original. To begin
with, Starman knows nothing
about Earth except how to say
"Hello" in over 70 languages. As he
learras how to communicate, he
also has to learn how to move in his
new body. Mr. Bridges must be
Richard Jaeckel, the bad gov't guy, can't wait to get his hands on Starman
given credit for his wonderful
portrayal of this procedure.
Anyway, the good guy on the
government, Mark Shermin
(Charles Martin Smith) tries to
help while the gad guy on the
government, George Fox (Richard
Jaeckei) does his best to get
Starman on the autopsy table.
One example of the originality
of the film is the scene where
Starman is driving after assuring
Jenny he knows how to. He comes
to some traffic lights which are
yellow, he floors the mustang,
drives right in front of an eighteen
wheeler, and causes a massive
wreck. When Jenny yells at him,
accusing him of not knowing what
he is doing, he replies he did what
she did: see red light, stop; see
green light, go; see yellow light, go
very, very quickly.
The special effects, quite
adequate, do not dominate the
film. This is a much welcome break
from the all to prevalent a 11-
special-effects-and-nothing-
else sort of film which Hollywood
regularly cranks out.
Starman is not a spectacular
film, but neither is it merely
mediocre. Lacking major flaws,
the film, under Carpenter's
surprisingly good direction, is
entertaining, and generally
enjoyable. All in all. a nice little
film.
— Ian E.T. Neath
De Laurentis' Dune disappointingly weak, confusing, sloppy
Dune.
Directed by David Lynch.
Arrakis... Dune... Desert
Planet...
Dune... Dino de Laurentis...
Dune is the epic (in cost anyway)
film adaptation of Frank Herbert's
truly epic work of twenty years
ago. This film was years in the
making and in some areas
(especially sets and scenery) it is
outstanding. However, for all of its
assets, the film has some
outstanding flaws, especially in the
areas of acting, editing and plot.
The acting in Dune is
surprisingly poor. Even with
accomplished actors like Max von
Sydow, Linda Hunt, and others
appearing in supporting roles, the
leads' shallow performances
severely hamper the impact of the
film. In many cases, it appears astf
the characters were nothing but
shadows acting out a show on an
elaborate stage.
Kyle MacLachlan, who played
Muad'Dib, displayed surprisingly
little emotion considering the
importance of his role. This
contributes to the overall lack of
"umph" and precludes the chance
for the film to really succeed.
Sting did manage to bring to the
character Feyd-Ruatha the
maniacal aura of the character, but
even here. Sting was not really
acting, more overacting.
Baron Harkonnen, the dirty-
ugly-fat-floating chap with all the
running sore, deserves mention
because of the fine make-up job. In
fact, it appears that more money
was spent on make-up than on
such mundane chores as acting
coaches, editing lessons, and
screenplay writing. Nevertheless,
wherever they spent the money,
such as make-up, costumes, and
sets, the effects were remarkably
well done.
The screen play has several critical
flaws. We do not fault it for leaving
out parts of the novel. That is to be
expected, especially as the book in
question is some 500 to 600 pages
long with attatched appendices
and glosary. Its fault came not
from removing too much from the
novel, but from not removing
enough.
In many instances characters
not directly in the flow on the
movie's adaptation (but
nonetheless important figures) are
referred to but not identified.
Other supporting characters are
introduced for cameo appearances
after which the chacters are killed
off without apparant rhyme or
reason.
These faults may not have been
due to the screenplay itself,
especially as we understand that
over four to six hours of unique
scenes were filmed for release.
Indications are that the guilt lies
with editor who reduced this stock
to the approximately T40 minutes
of the final product. Most of these
cuts are apparantly random. In
some cases, they are so discordant
that the audience loses a-ll sense of
the plot's time-flow.
For example, it appears that
Paul manages to become leader of
Fremen in a matter of minutes.
Even though the movie-comes
off as a version of War and Peace
viewed through the wrong end of a
telescope, we do recommend that
people consider seeing it, at least
for the imagery (even though it
verges on the grotesque and
macabre at times). We must warn
you, though, that if you have
already read the novel, the odds
dictate that you may not enjoy the
movie. Conversely, if you haven't
read the novel, you'll probably get
a fair amount of enjoyment from it
(if you are lucky enough to get the
cheat notes that some cinemas, like
the Galleria, handed out to help
confused patrons).
—James Galbraith
and Paul Lee
HAIR DESIGNS FOR MEN & WOMEN
cev
COUPON
50 % OFF
YOUR FIRST VISIT
to
Darrel's Corner
X
<11
t—
ra
.c
oo
Roddy's
524-0302
1836 Branard
Baptist Student Union
HOWDY PARTY
Free Supper
Concert by KATHY BAUM
Everyone Welcome
January 24 5:30 pm
Baptist Student Center
6530 Fannin
The Rice Thresher, January 18, 1985, page 9
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
Havlak, Paul. The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 72, No. 17, Ed. 1 Friday, January 18, 1985, newspaper, January 18, 1985; Houston, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth245579/m1/9/: accessed July 18, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu.; crediting Rice University Woodson Research Center.