Change Your Image
zumbertinho
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
King Kong (1933)
Amazing and influential movie
I'm really glad I saw this movie, I was stunned by every minute of it. From the incredible musical score, to the special effects, this was so well put together that no wonder it caused all this noise. The story wouldn't pass as a B movie today; the way Kong is treated, the presence of all the dinosaurs and Mesozoic animals and the depiction of the aborigines and the Chinese cook really show that this wasn't really trying to be accurate or even to pass a message (beauty killed the beast doesn't count), but just to be plainly an adventure movie, filled with thrills and awes from the effects. This is very hard to achieve today, because audiences aren't easily impressed anymore with effects, but surprisingly I was tense and amazed all of the time. Even when the ridiculous giant face of Kong appeared (the operated one, that bites entire people in close-ups), it didn't take away the mood. I found myself jumping from the chair from everything that happened, from deaths to battles between Kong and the other beasts. My only complain was from the depiction of some characters, and the apparent utter lack of remorse from imprisoning Kong, however this is totally understandable considering the time this movie was made. This is an amazing movie that deserves its status.
Rating: 7/10 (I round ratings down)
Ben-Hur (1959)
Epic and pretty movie, but inferior to many of its contemporary classics
This is one of what I call the "untouchable" movies and, along with other pieces, this is very hard to rate and review, so I usually avoid that (specially because of the usual aggression that comes from people who think high of those movies). In this case there is one particular aggravation: the quantity of Academy Awards this movie got. As we all know, this is, for many people, a measure of how good a movie is or isn't. Not seeing how much the Academy Awards is biased is, at least for me, a matter of choice (and also a lack of any sense). Being biased or not in this case, and as much as I don't want to, I feel like I should say something about this movie, so here it goes.
This movie is as shallow as the ideals of those it tries to please, filled with the standard hypocrisy and bigotry you'll find in most of their minds. It's so pretensions and the acting is so hideous and corny that it's hard to believe that all of the hype around it can still exist, as you think that as time passes people would be more intelligent and critical, and would reject an abomination like this. Charlton Heston is nothing special, but he is particularly bad in this movie. This is a movie that was made to be BIG, and this is where everything revolves for it. It's an epic movie, with an epic number of extras, an epic spending on costumes and setting and equipment and an epic (debatable) soundtrack, which was specifically designed to snatch Oscars. However, from the story to the character development, this is incredibly inferior to many other epics of that time that are much more historically accurate than Ben-Hur and much better executed, with better acting and with more solid plots.
The film considers itself to be not only an epic "historical" account, but also thinks it has a deeper meaning. It relies heavily on an appeal to some values, while it tries to develop in the background a story of love, friendship and revenge. It fails miserably in all of those aspects.
It fails to convey a meaningful message because its values are devoid of any deepness and usually end up in contradictions. Thus, all of the actions that happen in the movie that are supposed to be linked with these values become meaningless: the conflict of the urge for revenge, etc. The childish notions of love and goodness that it conveys end up spoiling the movie, because this was clearly made for (and to impress.. and sorry for the bluntness).... Christians. It ends up being like a big Sunday school, with artsy cameos by JC himself (in the distance, or off screen, and never showing his face because, you know, it's more artsy that way, and it's also deep, like the "message" of this movie). Some religiosity in movies won't bother you that much, but this one just overdo it, and shows that this was clearly devised for Christian audiences.
However, it also fails in the underlining story of Ben-Hur. His love and friendship relationships do not convince, maybe because of Academy Award winner Charlton Heston's (his performance in SOYLENT GREEN is better than this one, seriously) performance, but probably because of the poor development of the characters, which the movie clearly sacrifices to try and push its values to the audience.
The costumes, the editing, everything is incredible (except the acting and the plot), and also the infamous chariot race is very well executed, so even if this movie is very slow paced it's still watchable. However, it's dull, with an acting that is hard on the eyes, and very pretentious for a movie with values so shallow and devoid of meaning.
Rating: 6,5/10 (I round ratings down)
What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962)
Incredible thriller with two wonderful actresses. A must see.
Wow. What can I say about this movie? The premise is ridiculous, but it's so well conducted that it turns out this is a very good movie with a very silly plot. I admit that some of the situations are very tense, but the whole thing is so absurd that half of the time I wasn't able to take this seriously. Some of the scenes made me jump from the chair or feel very tense, while others left me with a feeling of indignation, sometimes even like the movie was mocking me with its absurdness.
Joan's acting is prime, but her character is so dumb that, despite all the harassment, you won't be able to feel any sympathy for her (well, maybe in some moments you can, but most of the time you won't). Although the ending might explain some of her character's behavior, something doesn't really quite fit and it ends up looking like she's dull and apathetic for the course of the entire movie (and seeing that this is a very long movie, this is something that will bother you until the very last second).
Believe or not, this is my first Betty Davis movie. Her character is clearly the most interesting, specially when you compare the two sisters. I think she nailed down her unstable and problematic character, and I enjoyed her performance very much (and I'm really eager to see more of her movies).
The thing that was most displaced in the plot was the neighbor. She doesn't really have a part to play in the story (well, maybe once or twice), and I don't wish a neighbor that stupid to anyone. Overall, the acting, editing and soundtrack for this movie are really impressive, and I really don't understand how they made a plot like that into a very nice movie. This is really its biggest accomplishment, turning a very absurd and silly premise into a exciting thriller. If you watch this movie you won't regret it, and you'll see its 3 hours fly by.
Rating: 7,5/10 (I round ratings down)
Sybil (1976)
Nice and underrated movie, with an amazing Sally Field performance
This is a movie that really impressed me with how much it is able to draw you in, make you relate with the characters and shock you with the psychological elements of it. Although the validity of the diagnosis of Multiple Personalities and Repressed Memories are still subject of debate, and until this day a lot of controversy exists over the book (apparently most of it was fabricated, specially the part of multiple personalities, which was mostly the result of suggestion by Dr. Wilbur to make things more interesting and monetize over the story), this is a very involving movie, with incredible acting and that dated very well. Kudos for Sally Field and her amazing rendition of a psychiatric patient, and also for Joanne Woodward and Brad Davis, and their respective moving performances as Dr. Wilbur and Sybil's neighbor.
This was initially made for TV, shown in 2 parts and having a total run of 3 hours. I strongly recommend that you get the DVD with the whole 198 minutes (I didn't see the abridged version). The cuts for commercial breaks show, but they won't bother you too much. It's very well directed and edited for its time, and everyone's acting is incredible.
Some people say that this movie was a breakthrough in treatment of Multiple Personalities (called DID nowadays, which stands for Dissociative Identity Disorder), while others blame it for the creation of an "industry of Repressed Memories". I strongly advise that you do your research about it, so you'll be aware of the controversy and the lack of consensus that those themes still face between professionals of the area (if you're interested about my opinion, I'm very suspicious about repressed memories, and it surely sounds to me like something that could be used to take advantage of people, but I don't have an opinion about DID, although it is said to be one of the most controversial dissociative disorders). However, do it AFTER seeing this movie, so it won't impair your ability to relate with the character of Sybil and prevent you from enjoying the movie. There are some really shocking things that will happen, so be prepared. The plot unravels very nicely, and it also treats the relationships between the characters very delicately, so the film never feels hushed and, although its running time is long, this is not boring or hard to digest, and it's a really enjoyable experience. Definitely worth the watch.
Rating: 7,5/10 (I round ratings down)
Magnolia (1999)
Mixed feelings about this one
I don't really have much doubt that this is a good movie. However, as many people regard this movie as one of the best movies of 1999, I'm not really sure what to think or say about it, specially with all the aggression that comes with criticizing an (possibly, I'm not sure) over-hyped movie (this is for sure not the best movie of 99 for me).
The way the plot is conducted (and all of the interconnections between the characters, which is something the director establishes as one of the main points of the movie right in the beginning), the editing and acting are really superb, but I have 2 main complains about it. I really don't care much about Academy Awards, but the nomination for Tom Cruise is SO wrong. There is so much good acting in this movie, and they nominate Tom Cruise? Isn't that weird? (I'm not saying that he isn't good, he is actually very nice in this movie, but from all of the actors he is definitely the worst). Apart from that, the other thing that bothered me is that this movie takes itself too seriously, and this is a movie that shouldn't be doing that (I don't really think that ANY movie should do that). It takes itself as deep and meaningful, trying to be an 'artsy' movie, but it's actually somewhat shallow, not really overly complicated (as it clearly wanted to be), and I really think it relies a lot on hype for its fame (I have my reasons to believe that and they're all easily identifiable elements of the movie, but this is a spoiler-free review so figure it out yourself). This movie isn't half as deep as American Beauty, a movie that was released in the same year and in which you can really connect and be moved by the characters, so it baffles me how people think so high about Magnolia. Nevertheless, this is a very well executed (albeit shallow) movie and, despite the long running time, worth a watch. I'm not sure about seeing it again, though.
Rating: 7,5/10 (I round ratings down)