Change Your Image
jennoyed
Reviews
A History of Violence (2005)
It was nominated for a Golden Palm, but then so was Fahrenheit 9/11
I can't tell you how excited I was about seeing this movie. Loved the ads, love Viggo Mortenson, and the critics were so enthusiastic about it how could I have ever expected the total suckfest I then endured on a rare 80 degree October afternoon in Minnesota??
There was no exploration of Tom's past and transition into his present - just the feeling that you were seeing the shadow of the guy he once was. A shadow who maintained his lightning fast reflexes and ease of killing with his bare hands in spite of roughly 20 yrs since he escaped his past and started a new life serving coffee and tenderly tending to kiddie nightmares. The sex scenes and close ups of corpses were gratuitous and pornographic. I hate writing that, because I just know some pompous jerk is thinking we midwesterners just can't handle sex. And close-ups of corpses. It's not that, it's that these scenes, while I suppose relevant in illustrating Tom/Joey's contrast and his wife's continued loyalty and more intense attraction to the rawness of the Joey side, felt completely out of place and unnecessary. That's the sex part, I have no idea why I needed to see somebody's caved in, bullet-riddled face.
So you take a slow moving plot, add a scent of a story with no real meat, gratuitous scenes that just made you squirm, and a blonde kid who too closely resembled Christina in Mommy Dearest child-acting her way at the sidelines to the point of distraction and you have an exceedingly disappointing expenditure of both time and money.
The only good thing about the entire movie was Viggo Mortensen himself. I love this guy, he's one of those rare breeds of actor who you never see as the same person. You know how Brad Pitt is always Brad Pitt in a movie, and Tom Cruise is always Tom Cruise? I like Mortensen because I forget who he is when he gets down to business. He's brilliant and well-cast in what should have been a better-written, more fascinating movie. His honest, good-natured, sincere, small town dad is such a contrast to the glimpse you get of who he was in his other life. My favorite scene in the entire movie was when he met the driver at the bar, and the driver introduced himself and said, "Are you Joey?" Viggo responds, "Yeah, I'm Joey." And he says it with this tone that up until then you'd never heard in his voice. There was an edge there, a crack in the Tom Stall facade, and to me this was a more significant crack than any of the violence he exacted on the bad guys. I'd have loved to have seen more of who he was as Joey, I think the contrast Mortensen could have created with a better backstory would have made for a more interesting film.
Monster's Ball (2001)
I'm glad I didn't actually pay to see this.
Watching this movie felt like watching someone peel scabs from a hillbilly's corpse. There was that same thrill of wondering why I was watching and when would it end.
Halle's character couldn't have been more needy. At one point Billy Bob's Hank, who couldn't take care of his own son or wife, tells Halle's Letitia he wants to take care of her. She coos, "Good, cuz I need taking care of." I couldn't have agreed more. Taken care of like a horse with a bad leg.
Billy Bob and Heath Ledger were fabulous. Here are a couple of actors who know how to say volumes with a single look. Every performance was great, and while the movie struck me as a painful examination of ugliness and weakness, there were bits and pieces I did really enjoy. Such as Combs' character, and the family that neighbored Hank's. The screen time was limited for all of those people, but the dialogue was so well written that they endeared themselves to me after only a couple of words.
I wouldn't want to see this one again. I can look at my own life if I feel like picking scabs. Anybody who wants reality to slap them silly will enjoy this film, and we escapists can run off to Lord of the Rings and pretend there is good and there is evil and a nice clean line in between.
Windtalkers (2002)
War is action-packed!
This could have been a really good and intriguing story. Instead I walked away feeling as though I'd just been spoonfed another Hollywood war snack pack. This one disguised as an interesting story about the Navajo code utilized in WWII's Battle of Saipan.
There was plenty of blood and guts, loads of war-like explosions. There was dirt, there was fire, there was screaming and shrieking and human suffering. There was some superfluous and waste of time "love" story. Or at least unrequited-and-inexplicable-strongly-like story. There was music appropriate for letting me know exactly how to feel. Mostly there were a lot of unanswered questions. I left bloated by dessert and wishing like crazy I'd had the scrumptious main course I'd been promised. I really wanted more information on the code and more focus on the Navajo who fought in this battle. The way this movie told it there were a couple of guys protected by another couple of guys but mostly there was lots of hand to hand combat peppered by three moral dilemmas and four radio calls communicating coordinates. It was practically a christmas song, except bloodier and without the seven swans a swimming. C'mon, Hollywood! You've got the money, you've got the talent, tell us the kind of story you could tell us if you weren't so busy trying to cater to every teenage boy's vicarious violence button before Minority Report and Men in Black II come along and steal your audience.
Though the story disappointed and didn't realize its huge potential,
I loved every actor in this movie. Very impressively acted.
Unfaithful (2002)
Why?
You have a loving husband and a kid who doesn't require medication or pre-teen bootcamp. Your husband owns his own company, so you don't have to work. Instead, you can let your maid do the menial housework so you can spend your days wearing cute clothes, shopping, raising money for charity, and picking the kid up from school. You have a gorgeous house, high priced vehicles, and the man you married is utterly devoted. In spite of all this you opt to get it on with some guy with bad teeth and a subleased apartment. Then you get psychotic and possessive about him, even though you have no intention of leaving your family for him. Why? Sure, Richard Gere is old and has beady little eyes, but he beats the hell out of most dads strolling state fairgrounds and football stadiums.
I just don't get it. Maybe it's because I'm single with no family and no money and no Mercedes with a leather interior, so I have trouble understanding why it is that when you have everything, you'd risk losing it for some hot sex. Don't get me wrong, I like hot sex too, and the scenes in the movie almost made it seem worth the risk. On the other hand, I don't understand why in our new HIV world you'd get it on with a stranger and not just get a naughty book or movie and take it home to a husband who'd be more than willing to oblige.
I hated this movie. Diane Lane looked fabulous in it, and you can't help but envy her body and respect all the effort she must put into it. But that ain't worth even matinee prices.