Change Your Image
Rimmer-10
Reviews
The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)
Great adventure - but not a masterpiece
I went into the cinema expecting an adventure. And adventure was what I got! I have never seen EVIL as evil as in LOTR. And good is really, really good. That is how it should be when we are dealing with adventures.
Good things: The monsters are spectacular - especially the Balroc (WOUV), the special effects awesome, the fighting scenes are quite good - although I must admit I always have troubles believing this "one good guy kills bad guys by the hundreds". But then again - it is an adventure, and I guess this is just how it should be. Like Legolas being able to fire arrows throughout the entire movie :-) I also have to mention the scenery - it was breathtaking. I am absolutely positive that New Zealand is one of the worlds most beautiful places.
Bad things: The ending - it just leaves you hanging there. It is just a big, big letdown. The acting is not convincing - especially Elijah Wood as Frodo never comes through the screen (to me anyway). The romance between Aragorn and Arwen Undomiel is just annoying and seems totally separated from the rest of the movie - I mean - where did it come from. Words like "I choose a mortal life to be with you" needs a little more explanation than 2 minutes of sudden romance.
I am not surprised that LOTR has climbed to the top of the IMDB top-250 movies. After all this movie is the kind of movie that really has a broad appeal. But is it a masterpiece and does it deserve to be ranked above classics like Casablanca, One Flew.., The Godfather, Schindlers List and Shawshank??? HELL NO! It is a good and very recommendable movie, that's it. But a true classic!?!? No. This movie is just an adventure and it does good at this, but if you want the number 1 movie to be more than just "the fight between good and evil" - if you want a disturbing movie with top notch acting, then LOTR is not it. And I am sure, that when the casual LOTR fans see the movie, then the movie will start a decline down the list.
Rating: 7 of 10.
Bridget Jones's Diary (2001)
Renee steals the show
Bridget Jones's Diary is one of the best comedies I've ever seen. Why? I assume it's because every character is so relatable - none of them are cartoonish - maybe a bit clicheed (especially Hugh Grants character) but still they're so human that most of them resemble somebody you know if not yourself.
The love affair between Bridgets mother and this TV shop host is hilarious to say the least - but still there is a human angle on the whole thing. There's a wonderful scene when the mother returns to the father hoping for forgiveness. It's film making at its best.
But the real gem in this movie is off course Renee Zellweger - she's just perfectly cast as the vulnerable and unconfident Bridget Jones. You can't help sympatizing a lot with her character - she's so genuine, so sweet, so real - so fantastic. I cannot imagine one single other actress that could have been better in this role. And you can bring them all: Julia Roberts, Meg Ryan, Cameron Diaz, etc. etc.. Show me a guy that leaves the theater without a light crush on Renee, and I'll show you a guy with restrained emotions.
Rating: 9 of 10.
Mission: Impossible II (2000)
Good ole nonstop action
Well - you can't really expect this movie to be anything else but a gadget filled action adventure. And it is - and I found that it did a great job with a few flaws along the way.
Tom Cruise has worked out - no question - but I somehow find it a bit hard to appreciate his Bruce Lee wannabe tendencies. Some of the villains that gets manhandled by Cruise are very, very slow. Their reactions (or lack of) to a sidekick/whatever from Cruise adds new meaning to the term "a sitting duck".
All in all though - I liked the movie - I was entertained. However I would like John Woo (and/or the writers) to think about the following, if they would like to make MI:3.
- Why are villains bad shots? A villain with a machine gun was not able to hit Cruise with 100+ shots, but Cruise was able to hit the villain flying through the air, head down/feets up with ONE single shot.
- Why does villains have to talk when they have the hero on target? Why not just shoot the SOB instead of trying to talk him to death? The hero does not seem to have those tendencies when wacking the bad guys.
- Why does the "number 1 villain left for dead" have to wake up for the final scare?
The above is so-so cliched I cannot believe that they are still used - and I would really appreciate a Hollywood action movie without them - they don't add anything to a movie - except annoyance.
Rating: 7 of 10 - a good score - most of all because of the gadgets and Thandie Newton (woooohaaaaa).
The 6th Day (2000)
Too much Arnold
The subject cloning is interesting - and I also think that THE 6TH DAY treats the subjects quite well - the pros and cons are discussed. Maybe it's a bit black and white, but at least they try.
But the main problem is Arnold. I've said it before and I'll say it again: he cannot act (quite a flaw for an actor). Whenever he gets intimate with his wife or has to be upset about something (show his emotions) - it gets painful to watch. And when he jokes with his helicopter partner - oooooohhh my God - it's bad beyond imagination.
It's not a coincidence that the best Arnold movies are Terminator 1 and 2 - the less he talks the better the movie. Rating 4 of 10.
American Psycho (2000)
Christian Bale lacks something
************ SPOILERS ******************** My mistake was that I've read the book before I saw the movie - big mistake. My image of Pat Bateman was a hyper violent nutcase in perfect disguise - controlling and manipulating his environment in his "normal" life and murdering and torturing at nighttime. But the insanity should be visible throughout - in every move he makes.
The movie and Christian Bale *tries* to make that image, but they just don't make it - Bale is not able to balance on the edge between insanity and normal - he does not convince me at all. And that is a major flaw since the entire movie is based upon this image.
I don't want to see the gore, the blood or the rat thing - it would have made me really sick (I almost vomitted when I read the book) - that is not what I'm lacking in this movie. I want Christian Bale to convince me as Pat Bateman - that's not easy I know - I guess only two or three actors could have pulled it off and Christian Bale is not among those. Sorry to say it but it really ruins the movie.
The ending of the movie is strange but it really just follows the book. I believe it wants us to ask this question: "was all this just a dream in Pat Batemans sick mind - that he in need for some action just invented the whole thing ... or has the society just accepted that these brutal murders are OK - a sort of apathy as seen in Se7en?".
The book: 8 of 10, the movie: 4 of 10.
Wo hu cang long (2000)
I didn't get it
** SPOILERS AHEAD **
This is just a plain stupid movie. People flying and hovering - but where is the plot - where is the story? So many characters were just thrown into the movie without any explanation. What does Yu, Sir Te and Bo do for the story? How about some good ole character development instead - for instance a flashback scene with Li Mu Bai and his master and the Jade Fox would really have helped understanding the basis for the movie? I really did not care when Li Mu Bai died in the end.
Then there is this stupid desert romance between Jen and Lo - it goes on for half an hour!!!!! The scenery is beautiful - if I wanted that I would go to a museum.
One more thing - why does Jen ride for the anti poison - why not fly - it seems a lot quicker?!?!
My rating: 2 of 10.
Crossworlds (1996)
Horrible beyond imagination
**** SPOILERS AHEAD **** Sometimes I wonder what the drive is for making a movie. In my world there is supposed to me some sort of reason for spending millions of dollars on producing a movie. In the case CROSSWORLDS I am lost. I am not able to grasp why on earth this movie is made. It is so bad so bad.
Most of all because the movie does not even *try* to tell us what is all about. I can deal with movies that *tries* to tell us something very unbelievable. I find THE MATRIX a great movie and I can even appreciate STARGATE because both movies *try* to persuade their viewers to go along with a unbelievable story. In the case with CROSSWORLDS they just blabber around with scepters, warlords, keys, gates and trans-dimensional armies. There is absolutely no meaning in all this and they don't even try to make a meaning of it.
If that wasn't enough there is so many horrible scenes and bad acting in this movie that it would feel like a pleasure to sit through even the worst Jean Claude Van Damme movie. How about:
*1* The army of Ferris that is supposed to have conquered an entire dimension - but where is it????? Nowhere. Apparantly it consists of two handfulls of arab warriors. And they can't even beat a fat Rutger Hauer - I have trouble seeing them and their kind conquer an entire dimension unless that dimension was populated with blind dwarfs with no arms. *2* How is Joe able to fight (and win over) these lame arab warriors shortly after he almost fell unconsious to the ground and was sick to his stomach - caused by transdimensional jetlag (no kidding). How about that for a sudden cure! *3* A.T.s little workshop dissappears suddenly and turns into an ordinary motel room. But when Joe comes back the workshop is there again - he has apparantly done something different. But what is it?? The movie don't even try to explain it. Well I guess the workshop is transdimensional too. *4* Why did Ferris save Laura and Joe when they fall to the ground after he has pushed them of the roof. Instead of killing them? The movie offers no explanation. *5* What is it with these ravens that are scattered around in the movie? The producers offer os no explanation.
And I really could go on - the nonsence just continues in this "movie". The last 10 minutes of the movie are almost unbearable. The acting and the writing and the nonsence reached record depth. I almost cried out "WHY WHY WHY". The movie offers no explanation.
Rating: 1 of 10.
Unbreakable (2000)
Really enjoyed this one
This movie is overall a great one. Stellar performances by Samuel L. Jackson and Bruce Willis. But the real gem is the camera work which I have not seen anything like in the past. Especially the scene where the young "Mr. Glass" opens his present from his mom. Here the camera goes around his head 540 degrees along with him turning the present. Also when he stands on top of the flight of stairs. The zoom out is absolutely brilliant and very effective.
The ending really caught me off guard.
Rating: 8 of 10.
The Patriot (2000)
After all it is Roland Emmerich
I am just surprised of how people can be fooled into thinking that this is a great movie. I have not seen such cliches, one-dimensional characters and flagwaving BS since Independence Day. Oh - what a coincidence - Roland Emmerich. Ta-ta-ta-ta-ta.
What would expect from the creator of Independence Day and Godzilla? A believable, non-xenophobic, no BS story? Off course not. It is a "we are the good guys" typical Hollywood epic - take it or leave it.
Rating: 5 of 10 (loved the battle scenes after all)
The Siege (1998)
This is poor cinema
The last half our of this movie is so lousy I cannot grasp how on earth any intelligent human being can even think that it is going to work. Bruce Willis as the general is so-so-lousy I cannot believe it.
The first one-and-a-half-hour is almost all right if it had not been for Denzel Washington, who does a very bad job of acting like Mr. Pursuit - Tommy Lee Jones. He - Denzel that is - has one facial expression and he uses it in every scene. He does not convince me at all that he is capable of pursuing a man.
Annette Bening is the only living thing in this poor movie.
The closing redeeming scenes are very unbelievable and seems like "hurry - hurry - we need to wrap this thing up".
Rating: 3 of 10.
Bowfinger (1999)
Eddie Murphy rules
The scenes where Eddie Murphy is "keeping it together" are comedy at its best. He is really paranoid.
I would recommend this movie to anybody wanting a light and very funny movie to watch.
Rating: 7 of 10.
The Negotiator (1998)
Somehow a good movie
This movie is kept up with two great performances by Samuel L. Jackson and Kevin Spacey even though you can sense it is not Samuels cup of tea to be intimate with his wife. Those scenes seem phony to me.
But all in all they deliver great performances.
The theme of the movie has been seen a thousand times before. A man gets framed and is all alone in his pursuit to find the guilty ones. And off course this one has a happy ending too.
The main problem with this movie is that you do not know the bad guys until very late in the movie and when you finally know the names of them, then you cannot remember who they are and what role they have had until that point in the movie. That makes the closing scenes a bit like Scream 2 - "Hurry - we only have 5 minutes left - we need a couple of villains - any volunteers?".
If I had loathed either Samuel, Kevin or both of them I would have given this movie 3 out of 10. But I admire both of them and they can be proud of their performance in this movie so I give it a 6 on the same scale.
The Long Kiss Goodnight (1996)
Unbelievable action
The makers of this movie have one request for the audience: "Please - leave your brain at home when you go seeing this one". The plot is so disconnected and unrealistic that you simply cannot ignore it. For instance:
* How did Sam/Charly and Mitch first find the home of Daedalus? Did they just drove by or what? * Is it possible that a big time crime boss is completely unguarded and is standing chopping wood at his house?
This is just covering 5 minutes of this movie and I could go on and on taking the plot apart, but I will spare you.
I know that this is an action flick but they could at least *try* to make the plot believable and connected. It seems to me that the main objective was to make the explosions and special effects look very impressive and after that they thought: "Hhhmm - what should be the story between explosion 1 and explosion 2?? Anybody?? OK - we move directly from explosion 1 to explosion 2 with no story in between"."
And because it is an action flick I will not switch my brain totally off - there has been made action movies that actually is very well connected and somewhat realistic. This one is not. Rating: 4 of 10.
The Big Lebowski (1998)
The Coens at their best
I have always liked the work of the Coen brothers and to tell the truth, I found that THE BIG LEBOWSKI did meet all of my expectations - and more.
Many commentators are disapointed with the movie because they find it very difficult to follow the plot and/or the characters are not fully developed and/or too many characters, etc..
Well - these things are what you would expect from a drama and THE BIG LEBOWSKI is not that at all. It is not FARGO - it is a comedy with a great deal of surrealism. There are no higher moral issues and no lessons to be learned (besides: never spread the earthly remains (ashes) of your friend against the wind!).
The three main characters are all great. John Goodman is perfectly cast as the "can't-get-over-it Vietnam vet" Walther and the scene where he jumps out of a speeding car with a Uzi in order to pursue the kidnappers is slapstick at its best.
The best scenes though are the ones with The Dude, Walther and Donny arguing what to do with The Dudes personal problems. It cannot get any better.
If you haven't laughed long and loud during this movie I will suggest brain surgery in order to find the lost sense of humour.
Rating: 9 of 10.
The Stupids (1996)
Review of the first 45 minutes.
I only saw 45 minutes of this .... film?
I cannot believe the people behind it. It is so bad and awful, that somebody MUST have seen: this is not going to work.
Every - and I mean every joke - is so, so obvious that you can see them coming a mile away. They are not funny at all. At best I will agree to call them embarrassing.
If you consider to rent this... film? Please don't.
Rating: 1 of 10.
Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi (1983)
Best of the Triology - not!
Most Star Wars fans can't see, that this is really a semi-quality movie. If it was named Titanic II (and the story looks a lot like it) every fan would hate it.
But when it is the sequel of the two excellent episodes A NEW HOPE and THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK everybody thinks that it is a magnificent movie.
It is not. I find it a waste of special effects and otherwise good acting skills. And the ending is ooh-aargh-toooo-much. Sorry to say it - even though I am a big Star Wars fan - this movie stinks in many ways.
Rating 5 of 10. (I gave ANH 8 and TESB 9)
Payback (1999)
Great atmosphere
This movie is very much alike OUT OF SIGHT. They are both very violent, they are both narrated and the director in both movies succeeds in making a dark and thrilling atmosphere.
Mel Gibson does a great job both as a narrator and as a player. His character - Porter - is a bit unbelievable. On the one hand he is so mean that he robs a beggar and on the other hand he is able to really love a woman. I don't believe that combination is possible.
The main problem for me with this movie is that I can't relate to any of the characters. I really did not care if they lived or died. The movie did not get under my skin at any time (perhaps it did not aim to do that either).
But all in all - a fair movie that should be watched in a theatre in order to be able to catch the atmosphere.
Rating: 6 of 10.
My Cousin Vinny (1992)
Joe Pesci best comedy
This is without doubt the best Joe Pesci comedy (Goodfellas is the best Joe Pesci movie). He is just perfectly cast as Vinny Gambini. Marisa MY BIOLOGICAL CLOCK IS TICKING Tomei also delivers a convincing performance as his girl friend - Mona Lisa.
If you want big laughs from a movie - this is one for you.
Rating 8 of 10.
Dead Man Walking (1995)
A great story.
Most people believe in the capital punishment - in theory. We often say things like "if anybody harms my children, I would kill him/her".
But what if it suddenly were the case. How would you react? Most people don't know (and would not like to know). The one thing, that makes this movie special is, that it brings us a very believable impression of how it would be. You can actually feel the pain of Mr. Delacroix.
And it also showed that behind every "scum" on death row there is a person, a family and a mother.
Great performance by Susan Sarandon and Sean Penn.
Rating: 8 of 10.
La vita è bella (1997)
Buengiorno Principessa
I don't know if my italian in the summary is correct, but those two words pretty much sums up my impression of La Vita é Bella. Those are the words that Roberto Benignis character in the movie uses to conquer the heart of the adorable Dora and they mean "good morning princess".
Those words are the foundation for the whole movie because what this movie is really about is something like: "enjoy your life and make other people happy". And Roberto Benigni really means it - he lives by it as far as I can see.
I agree with him and that is probably why I liked this movie. There are some truly magical moments in this movie as well as there are funny moments - after all it is a Roberto Benigni movie. But above all you will find a lot of honesty, purity and innocence in the movie. Benigni wants to tell you that "Life is beautiful no matter what".
Some of the commentators find that you should not make fun of Holocaust. To those people: get a grip. If you cannot find the tragedy in this movie you won't be able to find an elephant in a phone booth.
Rating: 9 of 10.
Festen (1998)
You are missing the point
Many of the comments on THE CELEBRATION state that you ought to use modern technique and special effect for filmmaking in 1998.
True - if you think that most Hollywood mainstream are great moviemaking that really makes a difference. False - if you think that there is a tendency of focusing on the pictures and sounds instead of the story.
This movie and the other Dogme 95 movies are making a statement. Forget the pictures and the sounds. Make a good story and you have a good movie.
Well - can't you do both?? Sometimes - if your first priority is the story and not the special effects. And I think that when you have such a strong story as the one in THE CELEBRATION you really do not need the rest. Besides - it helps you as a viewer to focus on the story. There are no decoys to catch your attention and that is what makes this movie so good.
The performances by the actors are excellent. You can really tell that they are liberated when they do not have to worry about camera positions, light and settings. They just give it their best shot in every scene.
I am looking forward to other movies in the Dogme series. Learn Hollywood - learn - please. You have the means to make all movies great so why make bad movies???
Rating: 9 of 10.
The Game (1997)
Disappointment from Fincher
When David Fincher made Se7en I instantly had him among my favorite directors. If he makes more films like "The Game" I will have to exclude him from the list again.
- The Game is uninteresting. What was the point of making it besides the entertainment. We have seen this "cruel man turns into a softy" theme a thousand times before, so why make another movie about it, if you cannot add something new. I like a movie to question my view of the world and this movie is not even close to do so.
- The Game is unbelievable. How can the people behind the game predict the actions of the participant (Michael Douglass) so precisely. Where he goes, jumps, runs, shoots, etc..
- The Game is boring. It is more than two hours and the first hour nothing happens. The entire story is told within the last hour.
- The Game is superficial. The characters in the movie have no depth and therefore they become uninteresting for you.
Some of the commentators on this movie, have stated that The Game is in the same category as Se7en. Stay away from me, if you really mean that. You should not even compare the two movies. It's like comparing apples and oranges.
Rating: 4 of 10.
In & Out (1997)
A few laughs
This movie tries both to be funny and educating (it's OK to be gay - you know). But the problem is that it tries too hard on both matters and then it gets annoying.
I hate movies that wants to force political-correctness on its viewers and this movie really, really does that. You almost feel like a criminal as a straight heterosexual.
And the end of the movie is a total copy of "Dead Poet's Society" - try to be original instead.
But there are a few laughs: Kevin Kline hopeless effort to stop dancing to "I will survive" and Joan Cusack's desperate search after a heterosexual. She cries "Is this the twilight zone" after being rejected twice by gays.
Rating 5 of 10.
Scream (1996)
It scared me
The first 10 minutes in this movie are 10 of the most scary minutes of my movie watching life. I was on the edge of my seat and swallowed a pound of popcorn without noticing it.
The rest of the movie is also good, but it does not come close to the prelude.
Neve Campbell is perfect as the killer's *delicious* hors deuvre. Yummie.
Rating: 7 of 10.
One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (1975)
A classic movie drama
Movies come and go. Some touch you - some don't.
This one will touch you - I promise. And it will stand forever as a movie classic. Milos Foreman's and Jack Nicholson's best movie so far.
A masterpiece of a movie. Rating 10 of 10.