Starring - Kiefer Sutherland; Reese Witherspoon; Amanda Plummer; Michael T. Weiss & Brooke Shields Director - Matthew Bright MPAA - Rated R for strong lurid violence and sexual dialogue, some sexual situations, drug content and language. I used to think that The Conversation was the worse film I had ever seen. Freeway is giving me second thoughts. Freeway is a modern retelling of Little Red Riding Hood. Only in the nineties, Little Red Riding Hood is a foul-mouthed juvenile delinquent played by Reese Witherspoon, and the Big Bad Wolf is a serial killer (Keifer Sutherland). To top that pathetic premise off -- Reese goes to visit Granny and you'll never guess who's waiting under the covers in Granny's bed. Keifer Sutherland is one of Hollywood's most talented, yet underrated actors, and Reese Witherspoon is exceptionally talented and will most likely become a major star. So what are they doing in this movie? After seeing the end result, undoubtedly they are both asking themselves the same question. You might be asking yourself why this is such a short review. The answer is quite simple -- I don't want to waste any more of my time writing or thinking about this movie than absolutely necessary. I wasted enough of my time just sitting through it. Note to Keifer: You wonder why you aren't a bigger star in Hollywood. It's because you keep making movies like this. Note to Reese: You were great in Fear, what happened this time? Note to both: Don't worry about it too much, no one saw this movie anyway. Bottom line -- I'm still shaking my head. Don't waste your time on this turkey. If you want to see a great Keifer Sutherland movie, go rent Flatliners or Young Guns. Reese Witherspoon's abundant acting talents are used to their full potential in Fear, a great thriller. Do yourself a favor and rent one of these movies -- but stay as far away from Freeway as you possibly can. 0/10 - If this isn't the worst movie ever made, it comes in an extremely close second.

¶ 12/29/1997 04:30:00 PM //

Starring - Laura Linney; Dylan Walsh; Ernie Hudson; Tim Curry & Grant Heslov Director - Frank Marshall MPAA - Rated PG-13 for jungle adventure terror and action and brief strong language. Congo is based on the Michael Crichton novel of the same name. Laura Linney plays a scientist whose company has sent an expedition into the Congo to look for a lost city. While the expedition is in contact with their employers in the US via a video satellite link, they are attacked. Before the transmission is cut off, it appears as though the attackers are giant gorillas. Linney is told to mount another expedition to find out what happened. Her character hooks up with another expedition that is also going to the Congo. This one consists of a scientist who is returning his gorilla, Amy, to the Congo. Oh yeah, Amy knows sign language and the intrepid scientist has developed technology that interprets her signs into words. So Amy can speak. Sound kinda dumb? Well, in the original novel, Crichton pulls it off. The movie doesn't. Congo is a disappointment from the get go. Amy, as you might expect, is not a real gorilla -- and it shows. There are very few scenes in this movie were you might actually be fooled into thinking this was anything other than a guy in a bad gorilla suit. The actors are largely wasted in this movie -- especially Ernie Hudson who plays the guide, and Tim Curry as the shady treasure hunter along for the ride. The rest of the cast is almost laughable. It may be as much a fault of the script as it was of the actors. I suppose if I was an actor, it would be pretty difficult trying to give my best effort while acting alongside a talking monkey. Not to mention the fact that Congo doesn't quite seem to know if it is an action movie or if it some sort of environmental cause. The movie seems to instantly switch gears back and fourth from this dangerous search for the lost city, to some sort of animal rights message that Amy should be with her own kind in the jungle and not in captivity. Of course that message is completely forgotten when the killer apes arrive and the cast starts unloading some heavy firepower into them. I'm not even going to go into the somewhat schizophrenic killer apes. For most of the movie they are portrayed as being these highly intelligent creatures, but during the final climactic scenes of the movie all those brains seem to have gone right out the window. Confused? Don't feel bad. So were the filmmakers. The movie isn't a total disaster; it just could have been so much better considering the source of the story; which, in all fairness, is not Crichton's best work. So let's just say this film is no Jurassic Park. The only high point, and we're not talking Mount Everest here, is the fact that some of the special effects weren't half bad. But they weren't good enough to make up for the guy in the bad monkey suit. My advice? If you are a Michael Crichton fan -- read the book. Everyone else should stay away from this movie and check out one of the better Crichton movie adaptations -- like Jurassic Park or Rising Sun. 5/10

¶ 12/15/1997 04:25:00 PM //