Reviews

I think that Sam Mendes might be one of the most overrated directors of the past five years or so. When all of the praise was heaped upon "American Beauty" I was a little perplexed after seeing it opening weekend.

Now I am equally perplexed in regards to his latest venture. I think Tom Hanks is one of the finest actors in my lifetime. Having said that, his performance in Perdition is not bad but certainly not spectacular. The story itself is unbearably slow with some scenarios and situations that are simply too hard to swallow. This is not a bad movie, but it has absolutley no business being nominated for any Oscars. I am not sure why Sam Mendes receives the accolades he does, but for some reason the critics just love his films. This is a disappointing film which leaves alot to be desired.

After seeing the first two Powers flicks I was expecting more of the same from the third installment. I got what I expected. It was full of the same type of crude (but effective) humor and sight gags. While it was not as funny as the first two I did find it a worthy sequel over all. Having said that, the move does drag for a little bit towards the middle. Also, I am not sure if Michael Caine was cast correctly. Beyonce Knowles did a refreshing job as Foxy Cleopatra in addition to looking smashing baby! Yeah! Bottom line, if you liked the first two you will like this one. If you did not like the first then duh! You will not like this one.

What a great movie! This movie has it all. Supsense, action, humor and some of the best dialogue I have ever heard. The performances are nearly flawless, Jackson, Travolta, Stolz, Thurman, Roth, Keitel, too. The music is also great. The movie is very hard to describe and is not for everyone. This is one of the best films to come out in my lifetime and is unlike any movie I have ever seen before. Truly, a must see!

Just watched this last night with a few other people and was not impressed, although I, along with everyone else, was thoroughly confused. The movie has a number of flaws and plot holes that were not (or could not ) be explained. I like Laura Linney and do believe she is a versatile actress, but a cop? Come on!

When Mary dies from a tumor you are lead to believe that the Mothman tried to kill her because he did cause the car accident. But apparently he was just trying to let the two of them know that she was going to die? Uh, okay. And why did she come back looking for him later in the film when she was already dead.

Also, the character played by Richard Gere is all buddy-buddy with Will Patton's character in one scene when just a few minutes earlier, Patton was threatening to kill him. I could go on and on. Not a good movie.

What can I say that has not already been said? First off, many people love to bash this movie because they loath George Lucas. They say that it does not compare to A New Hope or Empire. Well, maybe it doesn't. But perhaps part of the reason for this is simply that many of us were young impressionable children in 1977 or 1980 and so we were more likely to be overwhelmed by a picture (any picture) than we are today.

Having said that, I will say that this movie certainly has its flaws. Unlike a lot of people, I did not find the visual effects to be as impressive as some viewers. A great deal of the effects reminded of a high tech video game. The performance of Hayden Christensen was not exceptional but okay. Natalie Portman did a fine job. The story still seems a little empty to me, in terms of information that Lucas has yet to cover (i.e.: the Solo family, the conversion of Anakin to Vader, Anakin's children, Grand Moff Tarkin and so on). Worth seeing and certainly an improvement over Phantom Menace but by no means a masterpiece.

After seeing the Sixth Sense, I had pretty high expectations for this film. I was disappointed to say the least. While the performances from Willis and Jackson were good as usual, I was dismayed by the pace of the film (and the story). At times the film creeps along at a snail's pace in a fashion of utter boredom and dreadful silence. I felt like I was in a library.

Also, some of the camera angles that the director used were absolutely irritating! Towards the beginning of the film when David Dunn is talking to the female sports agent, the angle of the shoot was constantly being shifted between the seats on the trains. After awhile the distraction of the seats took away from the conversation between the two characters. In addition when Dunn plays "superhero" and goes to the victims' house to catch the killer, the camera is kept behind a flowing curtain to where the viewer cannot see inside the house. This seems like it went for way too long and was just simply annoying. Disappointing movie.

In what could have been just another sappy romantic comedy, Billy Crystal delivers his one-liners with his usual brilliance and makes this film worthwhile. Basically his character has to give the impression to the public that a couple played by Cusack and Jones who have gone their separate ways, are really still in love with one another. Throw Julia Roberts into the mix and you have a hodgepodge of talent that does not overcrowd each other on the screen since there is really not one main character. It has the basic elements of romance but also some sarcastic humor which blends together nicely. Pretty good movie which is worth a peek.

I saw this movie as a kid nearly 20 years ago and could only vaguely remember it. Saw it again on cable the other night and the movie was worse than I remember. The premise of the film is fairly ridiculous. The thought of anyone believing that a hand by itself has the ability to kill a number of human beings is too much. Of course, the viewer believes this to be explained by the thought that perhaps it was Caine's character (Jon) who was doing the killing all along...or was he? Does anyone care?

The performances are all pretty shallow including Michael Caine. If you are an Oliver Stone fan, then you will be disapointed by this tasteless muck. The truth is that the viewer basically wants the majority of the characters to get wasted since they are all so unlikable. Bland thriller!

Prior to seeing this film, primarily what I had heard was what a great job Michael Douglas did. And indeed he does. Douglas gives another outstanding performance as usual. The rest of the cast follows suit and does an above average job including Frances McDormand and Robert Downey Jr. Tobey Maguire's character is a little bit too one-dimensional. The story starts out with alot of promise but by the end of the film, the film had lost its bite and began to fizzle out a bit. Still worth seeing, but not as great as everyone says.

Nothing intellectually challenging but it is fun. Owen Wilson has a number of good lines and delivers them in a comic style that will cause you to burst out in laughter. Jackie Chan has a number of good stunts/scenes which will cause to hit the replay button on your VCR/DVD. Lucy Lui has a very small part. If you want some harmless crash-bang-slapstick fun then this movie delivers.

This movie gets off to a slow start. The main character is played by Warren Beatty who is, more or less, going through a mid-life crisis. The film gets off to a slow start but it picks up a little steam towards the middle. Charlton Heston is delightful in a small role as a gun-toting, homophobic, mildly deranged over-protective father of Andie MacDowell. Goldie Hawn still looks great and was pretty funny as well. However, the viewer is left to wonder after a number of scenes if they are supposed to laugh or cry. The movie had some potential but most of it is lost by the end.

Ashley Judd is a beautiful woman and a pretty good actress. However, some of the films she picks are simply bland and predictable. This same plot has been seen countless times in Sleepless in Seattle or While You Were Sleeping: a gorgeous woman is "lonely" and cannot seem to find the right man despite the fact that he is right under her nose the whole film. The premise is absurd since women who like Ashley Judd do not have trouble meeting men since most men would give their right ****** to be with her. I will not give away the ending but I am sure you will be able to figure out just by watching the movie trailer. Another wasted five bucks.

If you watch this film and never laugh then you might want to check your pulse. It was one of the funniest films of the 90s and still makes me laugh uncontrollably. Spade and Farley were a comedic match made in heaven. There are a number of scenes in the movie which are simply classic. Describing them does not do them justice. Farley is gone but his slam-bang, slapstick form of humor lives on!

I liked the first Blair Witch. The sequel is a waste of time. The script is pretty bad and there are absolutely no explanations as to why all these bizarre things are happening. It appears as if the writers backed themselves into a corner with what had happened in the first 90 minutes and then realized that they did not have any more ideas so they just decided to end the movie. The performances are all pretty weak as well with the exception of the girl who plays Tristen. Very disappointing film with very little going for it.

Not sure what I can say about this movie that has not already been said over and over. It is a great movie. The acting is strong and sincere. The story or plot is what makes this movie something more that a big fight-fest. You cannot discuss the strengths of the film without mentioning the visual effects as well. This deserves to win the Oscar for Best Picture although I do not think it will.

Watching the cell was an entertaining couple of hours indeed. The show was a visual spectacle of bright colors and outlandish costumes. It was very much like a dream (or nightmare). Although the story never really seemed to come together, the movie is worth watching just for the visual effects. I am sure that it will be nominated for an Oscar. Vince Vaughn's character is simply annoying, although Jennifer Lopez again gives a decent performance. Parts of the film are graphic and disturbing but this movie should be seen by anyone who is a big proponent of visual effects.

Just saw this movie yesterday and left with a feeling of gloom and despair. This movie is not an enjoyable experience. That does not mean that the movie is not well done. It is well done. The script is high quality. Basically all of the performances are high-caliber. However the movie gives the viewer a realistic look at the war on drugs. The reality is that we are not winning the war and probably never will. This is not a feel-good movie. However, if you want a bleak, yet truthful film that pulls no punches, then this movie is for you.

Prior to seeing this movie, I had heard a great deal of negative reviews about it. It is not the best science fiction film ever made but all-in-all, I liked it fairly well. First I felt that all of the performances were surprisingly good. Both Moss and Kilmer turned in credible performances. The special effects were both good and bad. Some of the shots of the computer-animated insects on the red planet were out-and-out laughable. However as far as the shots of the planet itself and the space vehicles, they were well done. Terrence Stamp's role was too brief. The story was fairly good but not without some holes in it. Basically this movie is good but not great. It is worth seeing. Oh, by the way, Carrie-Anne Moss in a skimpy white tank-top can only make your day better.

Very high quality sequel to the original. No, it was not quite as good as the original but the performances and the story were both strong. Just watched it on DVD and forgot about how creepy the underground mutant people were. Especially when they were chanting to their "god". James Franciscus gave a very good performance and Linda Harrison is simply HOT! The ending was a little too abrupt but the movie is well worth seeing and owning on DVD.

I had never heard of this movie. It came on late one night on cable and I watched it. I was very impressed. The performances in the movie are Oscar caliber. George Segal gave probably the best performance of his career. He plays an American stuck in a Japanese POW camp who manages to always make some dough on the side. He is manipulative and arrogant but his performance is credible and appealing. Also, the way the camp itself is projected as a miserable, fly-infested, hot and godawful hellhole is hard to forget.

James Fox also gives an outstanding performance as Segal's British counterpart who come under Segal's spell and begins to do alot of his dirty work for him. This is a movie you will not soon forget. Now, keep in mind that since this movie was made in 1965, it is tame in terms of its depiction of violence but that does not take away from its overall message. Great movie!

I just saw this film at the dollar theatre and I pretty much got what I expected. From the Exorcist to Stigmata to End of Days, this movie borrows a little bit each one of those as well as some others but cannot seem to come up with any one original concept. Winona Ryder plays the stereotypical "troubled" soul who risks all to save mankind from Satan. Of course, no one believes her so this makes her task that much more demanding.

The director must have a thing for dripping water and shots of milk. The film is full of gloomy camera shots which only seem to serve one purpose, although what that purpose is I have no idea. This is not a horrible film but it has been done so many times that there is nothing redeeming about the story or the script. The one lone shining quality in the movie is the performance of Winona Ryder. She gives it her all but even she cannot save this from being just another mediocre film.