Change Your Image
sungwon444
Reviews
The Godfather Part III (1990)
I'm tired of all these bad reviews. Godfather Part III is a worthy end to the sequel!!
I'm going to be short with my comments...
I would just like to say that I'm tired of hearing all these horrible, negative reviews about The Godfather part III. While I respect everyone's opinions, It's just hard to comprehend how people could trash this beatiful and high-drama movie.
Is there that much of a difference and deviation with this movie and Godfather Part I, and II? Francis Ford coppola stays genuine to his style of directing, and the writing for this script was great, while the cinemotography was amazing, and the storyline was intruiging. There isn't too much of a difference between The Godfather Part III and the other ones, so I don't see why critics find this one conspiciously different from the first two.
I actually thought The Godfather Part III was better than Godfather Part II.
Godfather Part I was the best by far. It's a perfect, beautiful movie that astounds me every time i watch it. I love the storyline that Michael Corleoni evaded the family's "business affairs" in the beginning, but then as the family was dwindling, he assumed responsibility and the RISE of Michael Corleoni begun. AL Pacino is amazing in this movie and so is Marlon Brando's. ****
Godfather Part II- A worthy sequel, but fell short for several reasons. The storyline is complex and obscure. The "business" references are odd and almost nonexistent. And most of all, the suspense and the tension is not there, unlike Godfather Part I. Nevertheless, i liked this movie. I thought the flashbacks to the young Veto Corleoni was awesome. While Veto Corleoni was justful and on the rise....Michael Corleoni was suspiciosly unmerciful and on the DECLINE...as he lost Fredo, Kay....***
Godfather Part III- definitely a good end to the trilogy. The suspense and tension is back in this one. It is interesting how Michael Corleoni has matured since his days in the Godfather Part II. He is reconnecting with his family and searching deep within his soul. He repents for his wrongdoings (very powerful scene)...and concedes his trust in Andy garcia, the new godfather in case anything happens. ***1/2
American Beauty (1999)
Do not misconstrue this film. It's simply a social, satirical film
Spoiler Alert! I watched American Beauty for the first time last night, and I had mixed feelings about it. I was disgusted with the movie, but at the same time deeply moved. I hated the movie, but also liked it at the same time. It's very hard to describe how I really feel about the movie. One thing about American Beauty is sure. It is thought-provoking and disturbing. Sam Mendes was bold to create a movie that defied the moralistic messages and "happy endings" usually found in the best movies such as the Shawshank Redemption.
In my opinion, I believe American Beauty is a satirical movie that depicts the personal problems that can wreck an American family in our society. The thing that baffles me the most is how so many people on this site have said that the characters in American Beauty are all characters we can identify with. Are you kidding me? Sam Mendes never meant for these characters to act as the most ridiculous, base people that can exist in our society. We SHOULD NOT be able to identify ourselves with these pathetic characters.
Look at Lester for example (Kevin Spacey). He represents a father who has absolutely no responsibility or direction in his life. He is a father who lives a life of debauchery and pleasure (shown by sexual passion toward Angela). He is a father who shouldn't even be called a "father" since he dosen't care a tad bit about his wife or daughter. Next, we have Karolyn (Annete Benning).
Karolyn represents those people who have no stability in their lives. These are the people who are too systematic, materialistic (shown by the "Don't spill you beer on this $4000 couch" incident), and shallow at the same time. She is too obsessed with success and the American Dream, that anything less will surely depress her.
Let's analyze Angela (Mena Suvari) next shall we? Angela, a prideful cheerleader, represents those people who are excessively obsessed with self-image, self-worth, and significance. She's only friends with Jane because she can feel good about herself (since she's "supposedly" prettier and more sexualy active than Jane is"). She rants on about her potential to be a model and even lies about her "active sexuality" in order to build herself up.
Haha, finally comes the Kernel (or Rikki's dad, played by Chris Cooper). The Kernel represents those people who are unreasonably stubborn and act as "CONTROL FREAKS." These people like Rikki's dad only see things their own way and they dictate other people's lives. In fact, the Kernel is so freakin oppresive that he shows no love to his wife, and later, we find out that he's gay (not surprising why).
Like I said, I do not know how people on this site say that they can identify themselves with Kevin Spacey's character, Lester, or Mena Suvari's shallow chracter, Angela. For Heaven's sake, you're not supposed to be! Man, if you can relate to them, I'm kind of concerned about you. These are farcical characters that we're supposed to laugh at while we watch the movie.
Keep in mind, that I haven't talked about all the characters. There are two characters (Thora Birch's role, Jane....and Wes Bently's role, Rikki) whom I respect very much. I respect Jane because she grows up so much in this movie. In the beginning of the movie, she also cares too much about self-image and always depends on her shallow friend, Angela for advise, but as the movie progresses, she learns that self-worth cannot be found by what society tells us that it can be found in (sex, popularity, drugs, money). I feel sorry for Jane since she has horrible, pathetic parents and she has every right to criticize them, because they don't give a d*mn about her. Fortunately, Jane does meet someone she whom she can relate to (Wes Bentley) and we hope they can live happy lives.
The most significant character in my opinion is Wes Bentley as Rikki, a son of a repressive father. Rikki is not a perfect character (he lies, does and sell drugs) but he has true emotions and sees beauty in things that most people don't. He fully appreciate's God's creation while everyone else is ignorant to it. He finds beauty in simple things, a dead bird, a floating plastic bag, and even Jane (whom most people do not find beautiful). I believe Jane and Rikki are the two real and focal characters in this movie.
While everyone else is mentally breaking down, these two chracters have self-worth and composure. They have something to hope about. I think too many people take this movie to far and misinterpret it. This is not a movie shwoing us the truth and realities of American families (if it did, we would be feeling insulted). Instead, it's a satirical movie that pokes fun at people who we would hope not to be like (I sure do hope you people think the same too!).
What a weird and disturbing movie, but at the same time, a beautiful movie.... man, this one is a fun movie to talk about.
A good, but not brilliant movie (movies like Godfather, Shawshank Redemption, and the Green Mile surpass this one). I give this one 8 out of 10 stars.
The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002)
Are you people nuts? what's with the 9.1 average rating? Not a good movie at all!
To all the obsessed Lord of the Ring fans who keep raving this movie as if it were the best movie ever made...
I'm sorry, I can't get over it. I"m just so disturbed with yall voters. I can't believe this movie is at the top of the TOP 250 list, with a 9.1 voting average. That's crazy, that's insane. I mean, I could understand that yall obviously loved the movie, but why such a high rating? This is crazy...it's not that good of a movie ( I personally didn't like it and suffered for three hours), but do you people realizing what movies yall are putting Lord of the Rings ahead of?
ahead of the....
Godfather Trilogy Shawshank Redemption Braveheart Star Wars Original Trilogy Memento and other fantastic movies
I mean, these movies that I have just listed surpass Lord of the Rings by far, and to say that Lord of the Rings is better than movies such teh Godfather or Shawshank Redemption is atrocious, an insult to humanity.
Here are the reasons why I didn't enjoy Lord of the Ring- The Two Towers....
1. We don't get anything out of this movie...it's just a lame adventure fantasy sequel, nothing more. I mean, I understand there are symbollic elements in this movie like Good vs. Evil, the light and dark, and all that other crap, but after seeing this movie, I said to myself, "Did I gain anything from watching this movie?" The answer is no
2. shallow characters- once again, we don't get to understand or get into these chracters. Peter Jackson does an absolute horrible job of character development and we don't get to know anything about these people! I mean, because he failed to do so, I simply do not care if Froto or any of his hobbit friends die...
3. A showcase of graphics, nothing more- Peter Jackson concentrates too much on Computer graphics and cinemotagrophy that direction is lost...and the storyline just kinda rolls on without any real direction. The audience sees nothing but a bunch of random trees going around, a bunch of water gushing...blah blah blah, and a bunch of random slash- and tear battle scenes. I mean, I admit, the CGI and the cinematography in this movie was amazing, but the movie can't expect those to satisfy movie goers like me.
4. Crappy character interaction- Once again, like my comment #2, this movie displays poor and artificial character interaction. I just can't feel any sense of connection between the characters. I mean, I could really feel the interaction between Red and Andy Dufraine in the Shawshank Redemption, and the interaction between the Star Wars chracters...but the interaction and dialogue in the Two Towers really stink.
5. Too long, too boring, drags too much- Is this movie actually fun and entertaining?....no!!!! final answer. It's 3 hours for heavens sake! And it's too slow....and drags too much
6. Why do we get bombarded with annoying characters? - um, I don't even know his name, and I don't care to remember, but that bulgy eyed skinny mutant creature was so freaking annoying! 10 X more annoying than Jar Jar Binks, now that's an insult!
7. No humour- When a movie has absolutely no humor in it, it has a small chance of being good. Man...how stupid were the punchlines in this movie....really stupid!! It's sad when the only guy that's attempting to be funny is that dwarf dude with the ax. You notice that I don't even remember the character's names?...(that's because I don't care). Well, i do remember the names Froto, and Aragon, i think.
8. pathetic romance- man....what pathetic romance. Why can't the movie be more detailed about Aragon's romance. That's sad.
9. 10. 11. .......I could go on and on...but there's no use. You Lord of the Rings fans are just too crazy and hyped about this movie, that it's no use. I wish you could appreciate deeper movies like Brave heart or the God father, or more creative and aesthetic movies such as Memento, but no no no, you people think it's the best movie all time (that's pretty sad, I still can't believe that it's the #1 movie in the top 250).
i suffered through this nerdy pointless movie, and i give it 3 out of 10 stars, just for the cinematography... yes, that's the only thing good i can say about this movie, the nice scenery.
Illicit Lovers (2000)
Not very rowdy and shallow at all, there's a point!
I must admit, I usually avoid these adult-oriented films, after all, they're very lowly, and plus, it's wrong looking at them. I felt guilty when I took a look at this one, Illicit Lovers, that is, at first....before even knowing what it was about.
After seeing the movie, I was impressed. This movie does not have explicit sexual material, and at the same time, everything is clean and cut, and you may not believe this, but there is actually a moral message! I mean, seriously... The movie ends nicely, with a nice message.
It's about this guy losing his job, and he comes home with the bad news. His selfish wife ( a beautiful actress named Michelle Perry) is really distraught, so she basically forces her husband to escort other women for some big dough, some quick cash. Usually, in these lowly adult films, we would expect the guy to take advantage of this offer, this so called "rent" available for women, but the guy in this movie feels really bad, and he's actually loyal to his wife. He really loves her, and has no interest in fulfilling his fantasies. His wife meanwhile is really indulged in earning some money, and has little concern for what her husband does.
Yes, there is a point. The point is, marriage is a lifetime, yet fragile commitment. If marriage isn't nurtured, and taken seriously, life could be a big mess. Basically, cheating relationships outside of marriage don't get you anywhere.
I was really impressed with the message.
Also, of course, Michelle Perry is just a pure hottie, a beauty, and she has a nice body with nice breasts.
But that's all i have to say about this movie. Not worth talking more about...
Red Dragon (2002)
A creepy terrifying movie that keeps you thinking
I hadn't expected so much out of Red Dragon before checking this movie out. But the movie turned out to be top quality notch, a supreme suspense movie, and a horrifying movie that keeps you glue to your seat, as your heart keeps pounding.
Most of my friends didn't consider this a horror movie, but I would say this is a crime-suspense-horror movie, all three put together. I know I'm going to have nightmares after seeing this one.
The plot is very interesting, creepy, and intricate, which is definitely a plus. This movie starts out with the introduction of Hannibal Lector (Anthony Hopkins), and we have a glimpse of what a horrific beast this guy is. His name, "Hannibal the Cannibal" is after all, very suitable. However, the name "Tooth Fairy" is not appropriate, as viewers will find out...because the Red Dragon (played by Ralph Fiennes) is the ultimate evil carnage. Now, after two gruesome murders of innocent families, it's up to Detective Graham (Edward Norton) to track this killer down.
What the movie Red Dragon does is portray evil. Basically, this movie is about evil, a study of evil. Yes, i have to admit, it was a very disturbing, unsettling for the movie to be so gruesome, so terrifying, and the whole evil...thing in the movie can really disturb viewers. So I strongly advise that people who cannot handle gruesome images and situations to not watch this movie. But if you can handle the plot about evil, and the horrifying images, then, watch it! It's a top notch quality film, that has a great plot, and ends very satisfyingly.
Yes, the movie scared the crap out of me. Along with a great director, Brett Ratner, the movie boasts terrific actors and actresses!! Hooray for Edward Norton especially, who deserves an Oscar nomination for his role. I think he played his role magnificently. Also...wow, Ralph Fiennes creeped me out. His sensitive and mysterious personality was scary. Of course, Anthony Hopkins did good, as usual, and so did Emily Watson.
That's my review. It's a good movie, but not the best of the best, that's why I give this movie 9 out of 10 stars.
Signs (2002)
Signs is a scary, creepy movie, that leaves you stunned and satisfied at the end
Congratulations to the director, M. Night Shyamalan, for an excellent movie. Signs really distinguished itself from most of the shallow and ordinary movies of the summer (except Minority Report and Road to Perdition of course!). I am serious, if you want to see a movie that has a substance, quality, and lots of suspense and heart pounding horror, watch Signs!!!
**Possible SPOILERS**
The movie is about a retired reverend named Graham Hess (Mel Gibson), who has lost faith ever since his wife died in an accident. He refuses to have a family prayer during dinner, and he doesn't like it when people call him "father" (pertaining to the church). He lives with his two children (beautifully played by Rory Culkin and Abby Breslin) and his brother (Joaquin Phoenix, of Gladiator). One morning, the dogs are barking violently, and the kids have discovered an eerie, complex pattern on their crop field, better know as of course, a crop circle. It turns out that the rest of the world reflecks the situation going on at Buck County. There are crop circles in many other parts of the world, in India, Brazil, etc... As a tv commentor says, "There are only two ways to explain this phenomenom, either this is inexplicable...something that cannot be explained...that is supernatural, or this is the most elaborate hoax" Graham Hess takes his children to the town, expecting everyone to be happy, but it turns out that bookstore owners, the pharmacy lady, and other people have lost their faith, and are freaking out over the extraterrestrial invasion...
That is basically the plot.
Now, I will explain why this movie is so great.
-Great acting!! Mel Gibson delivers another hearty performance. You always like this guy. He's so good at playing the father, like he does in the Patriot, We Were Soldiers, etc. Joaquin Phoenix was also good, and he surprised me. He was good at being funny also. Now, the kids were just excellent. Rory Culkin appears to have a promising future ahead of him. As for Abby Breslin, who plays the little girl, she is the CUTEST girl I have ever seen in my life. She's adorable, that's a fact.
-The movie is SCARY, and touches on our biggest fear, the UNKNOWN! I mean, seriously, this is why the movie is so darn scary, it's about the unknown. The movie doesn't have aliens chasing people or flying in their spaceships like in Independence Day. This is all pure suspense and TERROR! There are plenty of JUMP-OUT-OF-YOUR-SEAT moments, I can think about at least 5 or 6. SO creepy! Nail biting terror!
-The movie is smart and original. I mean, think about it. There has never been a movie about crop circles. The plot is smart, and Shyamalan has his own style that makes him unique.
-Surprisingly, this movie touches our hearts. I mean, this is something The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable didn't do. At the end, we are exposed to elements and pointers concerning spiritually and the importance of faith and hope.
-This movie is enjoyable and appealing to everyone. The problem with The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable was that it was boring at times and so stretched out, that the audience had to struggle to pay attention. Not the case this time.
-Worth your money big time!
Go see it for yourself, and enjoy this movie.
I can't give it 10 out of 10 (the only criticism I have for the movie is that I wished to see Shyamalan use the Crop Circles to extend on the plot, but the movie did not actually focus on the Crop circles)...
So I give it 9 out of 10 stars
The Fast and the Furious (2001)
Boring and Shallow!
Wow! what a horrible film. You'll be a better person if you don't watch this movie. reasons why you shouldn't watch it: -It's boring, literally boring! I fell asleep after the first 30 minutes of the movie. Even caffiene didn't help me stay awake. This is a shallow film... -The antagonists. One word to describe them; LAME! Are the chinese gang people suppose to be a threat? -No plot. Everything was random...All they do is waste time. The racing scenes were very lame. The trailers made this movie look tight...but it's NOT! -Characters. Van Deisal and Paul Walker are not even protagonists. I thought they were losers who didn't have a life! They didn't stay true to the game. Conclusion: Don't watch this film. Save your money. This film was so bad that i wanted to hit the books instead. The only credit to this film was that the racing scenes was somewhat interesting...But otherwise, this movie stunk! 2/10 stars (accurate)
Windtalkers (2002)
What is wrong with the critics? This movie was surprisingly good!
Ok, before I went to see this movie, I listened to what the critics had to say. The guys on Entertainment tonight trashed it saying it should definitely be on the NOT HOT list. Then, the local movie review guy from my town gave it 2 stars out of 4, and a lot of people on IMDb don't seem to like it either.
Anyway, keeping in mind that sometimes, critics are idiots (which is true!), I gave this movie a shot and watched it.
The ending was kinda slow, the first battle was sorta lame and unconvincing, but the storyline picked up well. Why you say?
Here are the reasons why this movie was good...
-The acting was surprisingly good. Nicholas Cage gave an above average performance, and the star was surprisingly Adam Beach!! He acted really well in portraying the young Navajo, and so did the whitehorse guy. Christian Slater also had a good part.
-John Woo came up big! Ok, i've watched all his movies, Face off, broken arrow, mission impossible 2. These are pretty entertaining movies, B movies, with lots of fun and action, but no real substance. Yet, John Woo finally gives us some substance! Yay! good job john woo. He actually gave us a historical part of history that hardly anyone knows about, and then, we do find out about the battles in Saipan and the navajo code. once again, congrats to Director woo.
-This movie is historical. I thought John Woo would overdue his comic-violence, but it didn't turn out that way. Instead, we get a good feel for the Navajo codetalkers, and we are able to see exactly what these guys did.
-The war scenes are intense and you are exilirated! These war scenes are heavy and very realistic.
-Ending ends very nicely. I won't give anything away, but John Woo really does show us the cultures of the Navajo.
very good movie, just not as good as Saving Private Ryan and We Were Soldiers (which i give 10 starts both), so I give Windtalkers 9 out of 10 stars!
-
The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)
A very tiresome nerd flick, that does not appeal to everyone. Bad movie!
Wow, I was pretty excited about seeing this movie. The previews looked impressive and convincing, and most of my friends told me that this movie is awesome. So, I decided to give go watch it myself.
Oh my gosh, what a dissapointment! What a boring movie! Why was this movie even nominated to the Best Picture Category. Here are my reasons that this movie totally stunk!
1. The Dialogue- Ok...now, the dialogue is my biggest criticism for this movie. All the characters seemed like they were acting from script, not true to their character. Also, the dailogue was so nerdy and unappealing. Dialogue is the reason why Star wars episode 4, 5, 6 was so awesome and terrific!! We can really believe and enjoy the conversations of Princess Leia, Han solo, and luke skywalker. But, never could I enjoy the dialogues of loser Froto, Gandolf, etc. etc.
2. Unappealing- This movie is very unappealing. The dialogue stunk, and the movie fails to touch our hearts or actually make us care about this movie!!! I was bored, i hated the characters, and i tuned out of the movie fast and wanted to leave the movie theatre!! it was torture
3. The static, unchanging characters- Wow, what a horrible job of having good characters in this movie. What makes movies great is when the director allows the audience to identify themselves with the characters (this is the reason Spiderman was such a success!) Yet, let's take our supposed "protagonist" Froto, the loser kid who always freaks out about the ring. He had to have been one of the worst protagonists i have ever seen. I never rooted for him once in the movie. He never appealed to me. and most of all, He did nothing to make me care about him. All he did was whine whine whine. ok, Gandolf was descent, but no, he was no mentor like Obi Wan Kanobi. Now, the villain stunk!! he fell flat. We don't know enough about him. He's nothing compared to Darth Vader for that matter.
Three big criticisms, please consider them. People praise this movie, but i don't. It was a huge dissapointment, and i do not know what the hype is all about. If you want to see a good trilogy that appeals to everyone, go watch Star wars episode 4, 5, 6.
Bad movie. Falls flat. 2 out of 10 stars!