Reviews

42 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Juno (2007)
3/10
This movie is like the twilight zone without the funny special effects
14 April 2009
Warning: Spoilers
Who on earth would actually want to know someone like Juno? Her indier than thou monologues are just lame. I've seen episodes of Gilmore Girls and Dawson's Creek with better precocious run on rants (I think we all know what I mean). Most of the time she's offensive. The scenes with Jennifer Garner are hard to watch because the silly lead character tries to belittle her.

The two weak subplots are sub par. I found the whole "husband wanting to get with Juno" ridiculous and creepy. I love the way she blows him off after wanting him the whole movie through. I felt no sympathy for Juno at any point. I agreed with the ultrasound technician. As for the boyfriend thing, I can't believe he got back with her. She's unbelievably obnoxious.

This movie is so far removed from reality it should be classified as science fiction. Everything from the parent reaction to the constant pithy dialogue - it seems like an imitation of twee teen shows imitating life. Nevertheless, a lack of reality is acceptable if it's what you're going for. I'm not sure what Juno was trying to achieve. It's not funny, insightful or interesting.

Kudos to Garner. She pulled the odd rabbit out of the hat. I've now finished watching the trio of baby movies - Waitress, Knocked Up and Juno. Trust me, this is by far the weakest.
6 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Bitterly disappointed
14 April 2009
I so wanted to believe in this movie after the only form of mainstream comedy this country recognises is slapstick and stereotypes.

Of course, it went completely the other way - let's be cool and edgy - and came out the other side with little to show for it. I bet One Small Seed went nuts for this. I know SL did.

None of the main characters have the comedic chops to pull it off. Even Danny K had better timing. I'm actually being serious. Every time they introduced a bit character I kept thinking, "Darn, this person should have been the lead!".

Independent doesn't mean that the camera work needs to be horrible. Black and white did nothing for this movie - actually with such flat dialogue it hurt this even more by bringing the boredom into sharp relief. The black and white also wasn't crisp. The composition was horrible. The use of music was horrible. Strangely enough I watched Little Miss Sunshine after this movie and the composition on that was superb - maybe that's why the deficiencies in this movie stick out in my mind.

I think Corne (who was funnier than the leads before he even said anything) was speaking to this movie and not David - see it and you'll understand. I bet the guys who organise Oppikoppi were dismayed. One would think nothing happens there at all. I got the feeling it could have been filmed in someone's back garden. I know regular guys who have much funnier, raunchier and wittier conversations than any of these "comics". The dude who they hooked up with end was OK though.

Guess SA comedy's gonna stay in the stone age a little longer. Nice work guys.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Rambo (2008)
3/10
What happened?
5 May 2008
This movie is incredibly strange. Even the most pointless b-grade actioner has some feeling of purpose. I read the interviews about how this was supposed to convey the horror of war, etc. I'm just not getting it. From the comments, I gather many people feel showing the nitty gritty of genocide is going too far. I would disagree. Showing it in a Rambo movie, however, is unforgivable. This franchise is not the right platform to be making "serious" commentary on social issues.

Rambo 4 fails to be an entertaining spectacle or a considered exploration of an important issue. It's just a short, utterly meaningless thing. With an absolutely absurd final set piece. It's terrible how a movie about genocide can be so unintentionally funny.

How come everyone's head explodes when they get shot? Why is Rambo unintelligible? Why does he speak in empty platitudes? Why is the sound so bad on this movie? Why do missionaries go to help a fully functioning village with a few backpacks of stuff in a war zone? How ridiculous can an explosion and the subsequent running away be? I love the way Rambo kills in so many colourful ways. His profession at the start of the movie is awesome. As well as his boatman role. Awesomer and awesomer.

Watching this movie is a bizarre experience, you really walk away going "What did I just witness?". It's one of the most unnecessary movies I've ever seen. I did laugh quite a bit though, so 3 stars seems about right.
5 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Aiming for mediocrity is worse than failing totally
29 April 2008
I haven't read the book or studied the history surrounding the events in any detail, so I'm not really concerned with those aspects (which seem to have been the major gripe with the movie judging from the comments). The problem I found with this "bodice ripper" is it's just a bit dull. Although the costumes are quite pretty, the only way the film maker seems to convey excitement is by cutting to scenes of people riding horses... hard... with dramatic music. There are no set pieces in the movie. It's just a soap opera really. I started to feel like the castle had four or five rooms in it.

I'm usually fond of Natalie Portman. She was terrible in this movie, incapable of extracting sympathy or condemnation from the audience. Totally miscast and out of her depth. I was quite surprised anyone bothered casting Eric Bana in the movie - they could have got by with a much cheaper option since his role is very small. Scarlet wasn't bad. Kristin Scott Thomas actually stole the show.

The script was odd. I kept getting that sense of anachronism - like when Anne says "You'll have to show me how you did that sometime". This is acceptable if you're making a movie set during a historical period with a different slant (see A Knight's Tale or Marie Antoinette). It's a bit jarring if you're playing it straight.

It's quite a short movie, and that's a good thing. If it hadn't been, it would have been far more ponderous with its curious lack of passion. What a strangely wasted opportunity. Oh well. I guess I've seen worse. Although some of the worst movies I've seen have at least been memorable.
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
all the more sad for scoring a four instead of a two
16 March 2006
there is almost no reason to see this movie, unless you are an absolute, can't live without 'em fan of the limited genre of investigation fairy tale movies... a better bet would be "sleepy hollow", which didn't have the disconnected feel of this film, and actually had more of gilliam's trademark weirdness... this is ironic because it was directed by fellow oddball tim burton...

i'm a great fan of terry gilliam, but this movie treads water where he's usually surging ahead with powerful, frog-like strokes... the humour is sporadic and lame at times, although there are glimmers of the bizarre that is a trademark of this ex-python's work... simply not enough i'm afraid...

the acting is the standard pork product for this type of movie, but matt damon deserves a whisper for his good work with a limited script... the effects are OK, but a little too much CGI...

basically, you've seen plenty of movies like this... the odd dark touch does colour it, but instead of surrendering completely to an off-key feel, it flounders in a mixture of the mainstream and the wacky... straddling the fence is a great tactic in politics; it makes for dullness of the most terminal kind in a fluff movie... the brothers grimm is all the worse for not being a spectacular failure.. at least i could have said the director was trying...
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
those who forget history
15 March 2006
the highly effective "a history of violence" uses a number of tactics to create a sculpted sense of unease...

from the opening scene, of two relaxed and jaded men with an off key drone in the air, to the presence of a shiny obsidian car creeping around a small village in the green of the country, "a history of violence" lets us know something is wrong behind paradise...

it is an interesting study of natural dynamics... do we survive because we have something worth surviving for, or are the ruthless among us more powerful because they never lose their edge, their natural capability for action?... are these fighters equipped only for the short term?... is the vulnerable family in fact a powerful stabilising force that extends life?... if we bury our past, will it not put us in a position which forces repetition?... viggo mortensen (who never fully convinced me in LOTR) has put in a nuanced, considered performance... the final scene in this movie is probably one of the best moments of body language i've seen... he is lean and economical in the action scenes, and handles fractional transitions of his character with skill...

although the subplot of his son's battle with a bully provides a good secondary theme, i would have to say that the dialogue and performances in this section were not of the same standard as the rest of the movie... much of it was cliché or unbelievable (although as a whole the movie did require a certain amount of suspension of disbelief)...

on the other hand, the sexual dynamics of the two main characters were exceptional... the ideas of a missing history for a couple that forms later on in life, innocence, coyness, attraction and repulsion to power, violence... it's all there... i've read comments that say the sex was unnecessary, but i'd argue it is one of the most relevant uses of sex to propel and explain a theme that i've seen in a movie... don't believe the naysayers, just consider the acting, the physicality, and the context...

despite being an "ideas" movie, it also does manage to create suspense and a dense, thriller atmosphere... this ability to combine entertainment with depth makes it a satisfying and challenging movie... i would say the son's story jars, and interrupts the flow to a degree which made it hard for me to fully appreciate the film... it could have been more compact and efficient, but perhaps something too important would have been lost... the main strength of such a film is that you are entitled to make that decision because cronenberg leaves space (amidst the cloying pressure) for breathing and thought... this is a great privilege and we should use it well...
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Serenity (2005)
6/10
enjoyable romp
6 March 2006
having heard good things via word of mouth regarding "firefly", the TV series which spawned this movie, i had high expectations... after reading the reviews on this site, my curiosity increased... the previews looked good and the hype seemed to suggest this was going to be something special, something groundbreaking...

of course, it's not... serenity is damn entertaining though, transcending its modest, "slightly better than TV movie" look to deliver some nice action, good momentum, and a little Saturday morning swagger...

acting ranges from slightly embarrassing (summer glau) to genuinely endearing (nathan fillion)... there are definitely moments when you know this was designed by one of the pillars of teen TV, joss whedon, as it gets mighty teenie at times... the obvious downer is the way every culture had such American trappings... it's like they didn't have time to flesh out inara's character and make her stand out from the others (and the deleted scenes did nothing to help)... she's supposedly the product of a completely different lifestyle, but you wouldn't know it!...

but still, it's got an irresistible charm, some cool one liners (which made the movie for me) and quite a considerable shock near the end... let's just say it's not often something happens in a movie like this that takes you completely by surprise... i also liked the whole western meets sci-fi thing, although some may find it hard to resolve primitive projectile weapons with ships that can traverse the depths of space...

watching this reminded me of the superb anime "cowboy bebop", which somehow managed to appeal to me even more... but serenity is definitely a good rental for those missing han solo (and that includes me) in the new star wars movies... enjoy!
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
horrible male lead
14 February 2006
call me crass, but i preferred the higher titillation factor of "Cheeky", another anally fixated comedy from tinto brass...

although "all ladies do it" has some witty moments (when compared to say, "cheeky"), they are destroyed by the hateful dubbing... i'm sure this movie has more appeal in its native language... next time someone transfers this to a boxed set, USE SUBTITLES! there are not enough genuinely erotic or explicit moments... it teases, to be sure, but the centerpiece of the movie is distinctly uninviting... a huge carnal disco on the outskirts of town, with enough freak factor to fuel the warhol factory... unfortunately, the synthesis of 80's dance music and bopping italians may make for some good laughs, but little excitement...

the story is virtually identical to "cheeky" and "monella"... the bored wife of an "uptight" man (in brass world, anyone who doesn't get excited by his wife cheating on him) is intrigued by all the sexual tension around her, and decides to live in a state of hedonism... she does maintain that she reserves her love for her husband, but it takes awhile for him to come around to the idea...

the main male character is horrible to watch... during the sex scenes, he grits his teeth, strains his neck muscles, and basically freaks out... not something you'd like to witness...

once again, brass uses all his trademarks... mirror shots, overheads of black and white corridors, seduction in the toilet, urination, plenty of derrière, and laughable philosophy... normally i would smile and accept his vision of an impossibly ripe world, but this movie somehow disappoints, even with low expectations... some crisp and bold colours though... tinto could make a fortune filming washing powder ads...
31 out of 53 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
the culmination of wes anderson's work
13 February 2006
the life aquatic is essentially very much the same movie as "rushmore" and "the royal tenenbaums", the first parts in a trilogy of wes anderson films focusing on fatherhood...

to me it seems the culmination of everything anderson has learned making these movies... there is a faintly more defined plot (which is still pretty irrelevant) with which to frame the self-realisation the characters go through, the humour is even more deadpan and oddball, and the beautiful sets are as insane and charming as is required...

coupled with fantastic, cute special effects that look as if they are the synthesis of 1920's and 2000's aesthetic values...

bill murray plays an ageing jacques costeau type, steve zissou, who makes adventure and wildlife films that have been steadily decreasing in quality and relevance... his crew are actually a team, with uniforms and a sense of structure more akin to a group of freedom fighters then a professional film-making organisation...

in the decline of his powers and with all things going wrong for him, he meets ned, who feels he may be steve's son... steve, desperate for an admirer and protégé, takes ned on his latest mission, to kill a mystical shark that ate his friend...

of course, this is not really the point of the movie, as it delves into the ideas of the bad father, of relationships, family, mortality, and legacy... the humour is once again a series of absurd events, greeted by the characters of the film with the implacability of Chinese pottery warriors... you either love it or hate it, but it is more restrained than most American comedies and actually, in some ways, more classy and inventive than many British ones...

all in all, it's a fitting end to fine series of films, but i do hope wes breaks the mould a little on the next project... for those new to his movies, i would suggest "the royal tenenbaums" as a starting point (still has the most affecting scene of them all, when Luke Wilson shaves to the unsettling strains of elliot smith), but this one seems fitting as the final piece of the puzzle...

to all those who find the movie boring or short on laughs, do not watch it as if it's a comedy, and suspend your disbelief as if it was an action movie... in this state of mind, it becomes a stew of rich and delicious variety...
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
the strength of the acting
13 February 2006
the BWP does little to terrify me, as i'm not convinced by the supernatural... relying so heavily on inbuilt fears instead of presenting a framework i can immerse myself in would always result in my apathy regarding "scares"...

having said that, BWP succeeds in a completely different way... it is (to me at least) a fantastic example of utterly convincing acting... completely organic and believable (except for kicking the map into the creek)...

having said that there are some memorable visuals, and the final scenes are creepy if you allow them to play on your fear of real dangers... by this point though, you either feel the threat is supernatural or not... i felt it did stem from an otherworldly source, and thus it was critical to the idea of what type of "horror" movie i was watching...

this movie is out and out a drama centering on group dynamics in the face of a life threatening situation... the disintegration and loss of the "public face" is brilliantly done... as a small survival drama, the BWP is bleak, unforgiving, and hard to bear...

it also touches on the impact of the camera, what we show and hide, how we see the world and our right to report from behind a lens...

i would never recommend this as entertainment... it is a tour de force, but it is demanding... watch with care...
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Cheeky (2000)
6/10
it's a hard genre to make good movies from
13 February 2006
tinto brass has made another of his cardboard copy comedies, with plenty of shots of the rump, and eccentric morality...

cheeky follows the exploits of a young woman travelling to London, and dealing with the jealousy of her boyfriend... as she seems to put up a very weak resistance to all advances, perhaps his response is justified... however, brass has a moral to the story, and when the young man learns his lesson, he realises HE was at fault the whole time... his lover was just keeping the spark alive in icy old england!... watch the interview with brass on the DVD and all will make sense... sort of... well not really...

basically, i think that the erotic genre is a place fraught with danger... move too slowly, and it becomes dull... too excessive, and it becomes... well, very stupid (or vulgar)... cheeky definitely flits over the line a few times, but i'll forgive it, because despite all the borderline perversion threatening to creep in (flashers, raincoat voyeurs, and old, seedy men), it's basically a harmless bit of fluff that is almost charming and innocent in its simplicity...

what's more, brass brings a richness of colour and imagery seldom seen in the soft-core arena... and frankly, that's mostly what it's all about... i've never seen a cheap, soft porn movie that looks as good as this film does...

brass has definitely upped the explicit side of things, stopping short of the unsimulated act, but focusing far more on genitalia and intrusion... personally, i prefer a little rawness, but some may find it a little too crass...

the dubbing is an absolute crime against humanity... it is hilarious to hear the bad English accents in place of the usual silly 50's American drawl, however....

this is an extremely slight movie, with highly unsophisticated comedy (in fact, much of the movie is simply our lead actress prancing around naked)... however, this does beat an 80's movie featuring some guy with a square haircut rubbing himself against a girl with a big perm... watch it with low expectations, and it may be a bit of fun... otherwise, avoid it like English pizza...
19 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Baise-moi (2000)
6/10
nasty and cheap, but strangely compelling
11 February 2006
Warning: Spoilers
BM will polarise viewers... it is not a pleasant movie, and has unlikeable characters... it may be compared to recent "shockers" like "romance" and "9 songs", but differs vastly in approach and intention...

i admit that i may ascribe more importance to scenes that were never intended as anything more than controversial... BM presents an unlikely but acceptable scenario which allows you to draw out what you like... possibly nothing...

instead of having careful moments in which characters expound and reflect, BM flings an act in your face, and coolly dismisses it to present the next one...

flaw wise, BM has many... the plot is simple, characters have little depth, the acting could justifiably be deemed lacking... the actresses are apparently porn stars... if you feel that automatically disqualifies them from being able to act, the acting will leave you cold... at times it is amateurish, at others organic...

the camera work and cinematography is unpolished, at times below TV movie standard... i'm unsure if this was done consciously... accept that this not a work of art visually... some of the scenes are still memorable, however vile... there is plenty of over the top violence and unsimulated sex, which may offend many...

some of the film could be typical porn... however, during the sex, the camera does not linger, and shots are brief... the rape scene is grotesque, and the mix of violence and sex is not treated as a fantasy... they simply "are" and response is your prerogative...

another point of contention is whether it is a misguided attempt at feminism... i'm no expert but i didn't think it was about feminism or empowerment at all...

BM centres on two unrelated women, both seemingly trapped in poor, sleazy lives and surroundings... manu is bullied by males, and together with a casual friend, she is raped by some men... this scene illustrates, literally, the means with which some men express violence towards women... sex as a weapon... manu takes it "like a man" and stoically resigns herself, while harbouring her anger at their vile actions... she robs them of their satisfaction...

her friend reacts in a way that may be considered "typical"... she cries, she is beaten (her reaction excites her attackers, although it is not acceptable to say she justifies their actions), she feels shame and violation... she even transfers guilt to her friend, because of manu's blank reaction... this illustrates, to me anyway, the condemnation of women by some fellow women...

manu informs her brother of the rape, and without pausing to show concern, he calls for blood... manu is confronted with an immature show of power... this scene is particularly striking as it leads to manu killing her brother... and highlights the cycles of violence and inappropriate reactions...

nadine is a prostitute... her character is easier to despise, it seems, because nothing "happens" to her... she loves a desperate junkie, and lives with a flatmate who judges her, however subtly... this is another interesting example of destructive relationships...

nadine is shown with a client... the standard porno action unfolds, but slipped in are shots of nadine looking at the television, showing a sausage being sliced... at the end of scene, her client's face is shown, not the standard "money shot"... once again the movie uses sex to say some things about porn, and male fragility...

in a fit of rage, nadine murders her flatmate... many would say this is unforgivable, and it is an immoral and terrible act... however, one does understand that she has lived through much assumption and moral grandstanding... her fury makes sense in the movie's context...

nadine and manu meet and bond in a strange dancing scene... one gets the feeling of girls, not battered women... this moment has been called superfluous, but i disagree... instead of ending in lesbian orgy, it is the only expression of innocence...

after manu and nadine kill a random woman for money, all audience sympathy is lost... manu and nadine are "baptised in sin"... they are locusts, and dispense death or pleasure with indifference...

nadine and manu also demonstrate female domination and abuse towards what is perceived as a weak man... they encounter the perennial object of some female scorn, a man who is not confident, sexy or rich... they take him back to their room and he cannot deal with the situation... they kill him for his lack of performance and "bad boy" attributes... the shallow desires of some (not the majority, but some) women are on display here too...

finally they exact a bloody, violent retribution in a sex club, against those who feel excess is a mark of "coolness"... are these people excited by sex, or by the idea that engaging in unconventional practices makes them somehow special?... manu and nadine seem comfortable with the idea that sex is what it is, and they find the people in the club to be repugnant posers...

i never felt like men were on trial on this movie, just attitudes and violence as a whole were being put on display...

this is not an easy movie to swallow... i do feel it is more effective then others, like the sentimental, thrill-chasing (BM is rarely sentimental) "battle royale" or the pretentious "romance"... i think it's brave for strange reasons, not concerned with feminism, craft, or much else... just being horrible and punk to make us think, if we choose to...

i won't claim that BM would be acceptable to everyone's taste, and could certainly understand if it does nothing for you... if i criticised it beyond its technical and script limitations, i would say this...

do all sexually explicit movies have to be porn, or present sex in a sad or unhealthy way?... why can't sex on screen ever be healthy, enjoyable and explicit, without degradation?...
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Species (1995)
4/10
bad because of what it could have been
10 February 2006
species has an interesting premise, and apparently had the involvement of HR giger... according to another reviewer, the plot was stolen from an old BBC production... i can't say how true that is, but one thing is for sure... plagiarised or not it could have made a great movie, and with giger on board it could have been the "alien" of the 90's...

it seems to be content with being a b-grade killer monster flick, with tired clichés and a lack of suspense...

i loved the idea of the aliens propagating themselves by a signal, which other civilisations use to bring the creature into being... i loved the "alien dreams" scenes, and natasha henstridge is a good choice to be the lethal seed bearer... instead of delving into the fascinating realms the premise offers, like the alien's character and feelings (and the internal struggle with its human aspects), it merely hints and tantalises us with them...

instead we get the standard "race against time"... a squandered opportunity, and probably the reason why this movie fails rather for what it could have been, as opposed to what it is...

contrary to what other reviewers have said, i think this is one of the few horror/sci-fi movies that actually required nudity... although i think gratuity is a ridiculous concept when applied to nudity in films anyway...
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Moulin Rouge! (2001)
7/10
post modern
6 February 2006
moulin rouge seems to be a movie that fiercely divides people...

although i am not a great fan of musicals, moulin rouge manages to force feed you absinthe and drag you through the streets of Paris that never were... yes, it is not a deep movie... the performances are over the top... that is baz luhrman's modus operandi.. this movie establishes its agenda early and does not apologise for it... it is a sumptuous honey drowning visual romp...

the use of modern songs is, in my opinion, brilliant ... i've read lots of comments vilifying the movie for its incorporation of modern pop culture, and to those people i'd like to say: 1) contemporary pop music has some good, witty lyrics (admittedly not everything in MR fits the bill)... no less than many older, "classic" musicals...

2) all genres adapt... just because this is "not done" in musicals, according to some arbitrary panel of experts, doesn't mean anything... it's been done now, and it is a post modern film... that's what it set out to be, and importantly, it pulled it off... it may not work in every movie, but the skill of the director has made the difference...

3) i'm not going to pretend that hearing "smells like teen spirit" mangled didn't hurt, but as used in the film, it fits the context and is a justifiable choice... i'll deal with it...

4) if some people would be objective, they would concede that the arrangements in MR show that popular music translates easily into the light opera setting, with the correct treatment...

5) this is a possible springboard to convert people who don't like musicals...

now, the editing and camera-work is frenetic, but it displays a sense of style completely unique to the director... people compare this to music videos, but apart from the speed and energy, i don't see it... luhrman may use common elements but he does impart his own sensibilities... the music video business is categorised by how similar all the products are (and some music videos do break the mould and provide exceptional visuals anyway)...

the sets and costumes are magical... there is no denying it... jim broadbent is superb, and those who say mcgregor can't sing are just fools, or bitter...

if you accept that just about nothing is original (certainly not the churned out musicals of the early days of Hollywood, that quickly established stereotypes and parameters that are still being used by bollywood) and that post modern works can be valid, vital entertainment, then you will accept that moulin rouge is wildly enjoyable... it is a slight movie in some respects, but there are flashes of gravity amidst all the noise, fervour and pomp...

i think baz luhrman has pushed the genre of screen musical forward (kicking and screaming), and this is commendable... i think he has even prophesied the backlash in an earlier movie (the brilliant "strictly ballroom") which had the dancer hero chastised for "flashy, new steps"... the light musical has often been a platform for light, sparkling entertainment, and a little injection of flash can be easily dismissed by purists... but those adventurous viewers in pursuit of a good time will find it, come what may...
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
killed the series dead
6 February 2006
i've heard plenty of complaints about the exactly-what-i-expected "alien vs predator", but frankly, "alien resurrection" is one of the most unforgivable travesties in film history...

this movie is so bad that i'm going to make a generalisation (which i know is invalid, but still): french directors should not make big action blockbusters... see "the fifth element", "leon" and "brotherhood of the wolf" as exhibits A,B and C...

sigourney weaver is just terrible in this... shades of a bad linda hamilton impersonation... winona ryder is dire... the rest of the actors looked like bit players in a bad terry gilliam rip-off... the finale has to be the worst execution of a potentially interesting idea i've ever seen...

i'm going to give it a point or two just because it's good to see the phallic wonderbeast back on screen... this movie is frenetic, "zany", banal and lacklustre... it lacks any sense of pacing that the three earlier films exploited (in different ways) brilliantly... the visuals are very "green"... this is obviously the edgy colour of the day...

in fact "AR" managed to avoid just about everything that made the other films stand out in the crowded "space monster" flick genre... i suppose you have to give credit for trying to do something new... but the bawling, putrescent creature at the end was plain embarrassing... what a waste of money...

if you like slime and bullets, give this a go... otherwise, wait for it to be tacked onto an alien box set or to appear in a bargain bin sale...
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
King Kong (1933)
5/10
age vs. entertainment
6 February 2006
a definite problem with movies like "king kong" is that time is not kind to them... i refer of course to a few things... the attitudes of the day filtering through, the style of acting, and the special effects...

"king kong" is a superb mine of iconic images... standing on tallest skyscraper, breaking through the forest, the screaming woman in his hand, the mysterious island... i think the legacy of kong is trapped in the stills, not the movie itself...

i'm notoriously biased against older movies, and i'm trying to be objective with this one, as it is a greatly loved piece of work... but, to be fair, it is not one that weathers well...

the score is a piece of pure nostalgia and a textbook example of one of the things i find hard to bear about older movies... no subtlety, just a jarring, intrusive mess of brass...

the special effects do not hold up, but they must have been breathtaking in the day... i realise there were limitations but there are some great shots... my biggest quibble would be the close-ups of kong's face... perhaps those should have been left out, as he seems to be incapable of any expression besides that of a wind-up cymbal monkey doll...

story wise, kong is a finest example of "it was better in my day" syndrome... people will swear blind that modern creature movies are dull and pointless... kong had the benefit of freshness, but the story stinks... all these years (i saw it recently) i think i had built up a myth of what i would find inside the DVD case... the sad tale of a misunderstood beast...

instead, kong is simply a giant fighting machine... nothing more... he destroys randomly, and has nothing to offer besides violence... the movie ends with a trite, pithy one liner!... and the character that brought about kong's death (and indeed the deaths of many people), denham, is not even taken into custody for his disregard for safety... and no-one even says anything to that effect!...

one of the worst moments was when the crew first encounter a dinosaur... not one of them seem surprised AT ALL, after slaying one of the creatures... nothing was believable, and i'm not talking about giant apes and dinosaurs... the plot was simply ridiculous in the manner which it is presented...

there were some moments of horror which do retain some of their power, and this i give the production credit for... i wonder how those scenes were received in the day... i found the effects impressive considering their age, but unconvincing to the jaded modern eye...

i suppose i expected too much, as this was one of the firsts of its kind... but the acting was poor, the script weak, and the story thin... it is a piece of film history and should probably be seen by anyone serious about movies, and must be viewed heavily in context...

as for entertainment, i think the recent remake is probably a good idea... a movie built on special effects probably needs to be updated every fifty years to stay relevant... both socially and technologically... perhaps that is the best way to ensure the legacy of such a groundbreaking but hollow movie remains strong and vital...

one last point... it is clear that no-one involved in this movie considered presenting the gorilla as anything remotely like the actual creature in terms of behaviour... i suppose we must accept its exceptional size as a reason for its unpredictable and unlikely actions... quite a lot to swallow with your popcorn, isn't it?
2 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
great movie
3 February 2006
Abre Los Ojos is a dark, beautiful film that can be quite harrowing in parts... it effectively melds a mix of styles into a sharp, thought provoking whole... i've seen comments that claim the plot has been ripped off from one of the science fiction greats... i'm certainly not going to dispute the possibility, as this film does play with some interesting concepts... nevertheless, i think the craftsmanship and strong dramatic development of the characters deserves recognition...

the lead character is an unlikeable playboy, who is selfish and handsome... nevertheless he has good friends and a lifestyle which is satisfying in at least a superficial way... something traumatic happens to him which upsets the balance of his comfortable life... his resulting struggle with a new reality leads to a bizarre decision, which has consequences he could only imagine in his scarred dreams...

the early parts of the movie set up a dramatic shift, which changes the tone and genre without breaking continuity... all the separate pieces of the movie are well done, without a drop in quality...

the supporting actors are excellent, and there are some heartbreaking scenes that have that iconic feel to them... watch for Penelope Cruz as a mime together with Eduardo Noriega in the park... lots going on without a word... although Noriega's character is not the most pleasant man, i felt genuine sorrow for him and his ruined life, and this is an achievement that is hard to match... watching the American remake "Vanilla Sky", you can see Crowe (or Cruise) simply sidestepped this and toned down his main man's shortcomings...

special mention should be made of Fele Martinez who formed a complex and good foil to Noriega's character... also Najwa Nimri who had little time on-screen to establish herself, but brings darkness and frailty to her role... Cameron Diaz manages to absolutely butcher her equivalent part in the American remake...

although the movie plays in the sci-fi pool, the ending is bittersweet, and mature... not to suggest sci-fi is not mature, but the final moments are in keeping with a drama... and the shots are heartbreaking, in a quiet, reflective sense...

i can't say much more without giving away the plot, but it's an unusual movie, and it deserves attention...
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Rushmore (1998)
7/10
quirky
3 February 2006
rushmore is a very good film... i can't decide if it's worth 7 or eight, if the IMDb allowed decimals i'd put it at about 7.9...

bill murray (in training for lost in translation), is a perfect supporting cast member... he doesn't try to steal the movie, but he doesn't phone it in either... schwartzman is excellent...

the movie traces the life of a boy (max) who is talented by virtue of drive... he epitomises the idea of academic excellence being somewhat overrated by certain centres of learning... despite lacking the faculties to succeed academically, he has the creativity and passion to pursue other interests in outside realms... even involving himself in sport (to which he is also unsuited)... this glorious exaltation of well-roundedness is inspiring, and unusual... max is smart, but in a special, unique way...

the movie is quirky, and very unlikely, but the warm characters are fabulous, and you can easily go with them for the ride... one of the general complaints seems to be the movie doesn't live up to the "OR they" line seen in the preview... the trailer was somewhat misleading... it's a funny line but it probably shouldn't have been used to promote the movie...

it is a subtle comedy that relies on understatement juxtaposed with ludicrous, OTT events... it handles this almost surreal setup brilliantly... this movie is the pre-cursor to the equally superb "royal tennenbaums", as both movies exhibit remarkable style...

the search for focus and acceptance is an underlying theme in this tale... through max's struggles, he discovers that his passion for all things should be tempered by focus in the areas he is truly talented in... he also learns it is good to dream, but also wise to accept that there are those things that cannot be changed, however much we want them to... we need to control how we interpret absolutes and potential...

if you are a fan of off-beat, unusual comedy, with a degree of subtlety, then you can't go wrong with "rushmore"...
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Commando (1985)
6/10
so bad it's good!
3 February 2006
i can't honestly give this more than a six (and objectively, it should get a 1), but i believe, with all my heart, that this movie is intentionally cheesy...

arnold is not the greatest actor, but he can deliver a one liner like few others... clint is the king, but arnold is the boss...

this movie has one of the fastest setups i've ever seen... the plot is compact and lean, geared towards getting it up and running as soon as possible...

nothing in this movie is believable... every frame that goes by brings more absurdity to the table... yet everyone looks like they're having fun... no-one is scared of ruining their careers because unlike some people (i'm talking to you, christophe gans), they wear their hearts on their sleeves... it is obvious from the get go THAT THIS IS NOT MEANT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY...

my personal highlight would have to be the one liner after arnold drops a bad guy off a cliff (after crashing into a pole at 70 kms per hour and simply getting out the car as if nothing happened)...

this is big dumb 80's action fun, from the time when you had to have muscles to kill bad guys, and scripts didn't have to PRETEND to be anything other than a vehicle for action and laughs...

there's a part of me that's glad that 80's action flicks are a thing of the past, but when i watch "commando", i feel a twinge of guilt... i know something as bad as this is wrong, but honestly, when arnold is taking names so hilariously, i don't want to be right...
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
awful... but not as awful as i expected...
1 February 2006
i think perhaps my expectations were suitably lowered... i kept expecting it to be a lot worse than even the most ridiculous, steroids driven movies...

sure the cuts between scenes were amateurishly abrupt, tara reid is possibly the most miscast museum curator in history, the script is as fetid as old cheese, it's a bit dull for an action movie, and it hasn't really got any scares... but it's just standard fare... i can think of a few movies that are equally bad or worse (bad boys 2 springs to mind... and resident evil 2)...

uwe boll seems to have his own distinct style... it's a bad style, but you can see it coming like a neon pink volkswagen...

i kept wondering if Christian slater and stephen dorff were blackmailed into this movie, or had gambling debts (mind you, dorff was in feardotcom... infinitely worse than this)... Christian's comments in the "making of the movie" featurette made me sad...

the story is silly, but it's not really as hard to follow as some would have you believe... it is derivative and threadbare (but how many aren't in this genre?)... the creatures do look like bad lifts from many monster flicks of yore... in fact at times i had deja vu, like i was seeing the relic again (the marines dropping into the museum, etc etc)... but hey, some of those movies are only a few points better than this...

i think my biggest problem is that i can discern no connection to the games... unless the 4th game is a little different?... carnby has too many friends and helpers... the biggest sin is he is not truly alone in the dark...

although i sort of stood up for this, it really is a very bad film... it's reasonably short (probably the best thing about it) but it's not as boring as say, ghost of mars... rent this only if you're curious, or you really want to watch a guns and monsters movie that requires no mental participation on your part...
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Happy Gilmore (1996)
7/10
lowbrow classic
30 January 2006
happy gilmore lives in a strange place, now inhabited by ben stiller and the cast of American pie... that lowbrow, idiotic type of comedy that requires very little work from the viewer to generate laughs...

however, happy gilmore is funny because of a few reasons... movies like this are steam trains; they need to be fed jokes, one liners, visual gags and zany scenes the way a burner needs coal... without them, the movie slows down and slides back down the hill...

happy gilmore is relentless in its provision of funny moments... it's a juggernaut, wielding a crazy protagonist and an absurdly unlikeable villain... somewhere, the chemistry was just working...

happy gilmore is not intellectually challenging... however, it does not pander exclusively to the bodily fluid and innuendo craving audience... it's hardly very mature, but it's not mindless either... it rather choose to play on the fairways, in the interesting world of pro golf...

taking on a subject like golf was a stroke of brilliance, because it is a fertile area for basic humour... it's very nature makes it ideal... instead of drugs or relationships, we are given the gentlemen's game...

it's the same old sport movie cliché, but it just seems so fresh... the jarring juxtaposition of the common man in a sport characterised with big money and a sense of elitism... it works brilliantly...

adam sandler is excellent at physically conveying uncontrollable, explosive anger... it's hammy in its own way, but few do it as well... he's zany, he has good timing and delivery, and he doesn't let it dip too far into sentimentality... this movie had great pacing, a decent script for a film of its type, and it blows some of his later films out of the water...

if you can put yourself in the right frame of mind, few movies of this genre could be as satisfying as happy gilmore... the formula is tired now, but this movie is a cut above...
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Battle Royale (2000)
3/10
if lord of the flies sucked, it would be this movie
29 January 2006
if "lord of the flies" sucked, it would be this movie... i quite liked the premise of "battle royale", sort of an update and extension of the ideas in william golding's novel, melded with orwell's "1984", or stephen king's "the long walk/the running man"... it falls short of those tales in many ways...

i longed for more explanation of where the battle royale law came from... i expected the shots of the school that housed the children to be absolutely horrific... to me, it seemed it would take a shocking drop in quality of life for a society to revert to "battle royale"... some background or principle guiding force needed to be explored... the movie seemed to happen in a vacuum, too eager to set up the hyper violence its audience craves... and what did anyone expect the game to achieve?...

the children's responses to the game were at times interesting, but needed more exploration... some were simply laughable... the psychopathic character was obviously just supposed to look like a ultra cool "crow" type being... i wanted history, case files, background... when pushed too hard, the concepts of the back stories fell over like a cardboard set... what of expansion on the fascinating "teacher" character?...

although the bloody special effects were not convincing, i found the death parade somewhat obscene after awhile... the obsession with girls and boys in school uniforms decorated in blood and assuming twisted poses rings vaguely suspect... is it art?... or a cynical pandering to some unhealthy obsessions?... i suppose i'll have to give the director the benefit of the doubt...

this movie seems to be aimed at an immature audience, longing for non-stop violence and childish declarations of teenage emotion... it would be inconceivable to show this to the age group that the film actually deals with...

one needs to view this movie (armed as it is with some arresting shots and provocative ideas) with the question: what is it trying to say once the plot of the story has been established?... is it a profound statement on violence; or on how a society treats its children, or perhaps even how children interact... or is it a low budget shock-horror masquerading as social commentary?...

the violence is the stuff of cartoons and graphic novels, the pace is that of a video game... perhaps you could say that the intent is metaphorical, and i wrestled with the purpose and meaning of this movie with every frame my eye could digest...

however, i took away nothing i could agree with, or disagree with, or even question... there was nothing to discuss... there was no outrage (save on a paedophilic platform)... my mind was clean, untroubled by an endless trainride of child slaughter...

when ralph breaks down into tears at the end of the "lord of the flies", (a very relevant touch point for this movie) i was ready to join him... if i did not see the rich vein of ideas, i could at least see the terrible, final sadness the protagonist carried... if my mind did not engage, my heart did... battle royale has not tried to be wellspring, it is merely a mirror to a poor, shallow reflection...
29 out of 51 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
porcelain cliché time
26 January 2006
this movie is a porcelain vase... beautiful to look at, but empty...

interlinking the fight scenes are very ordinary, stilted bouts of dialogue, the worst being a silly flashback in the desert...

i was doubtful about this movie, but i loved ang lee's "sense and sensibility" and "the ice storm"... so i thought i'd give it a try... it's like a bad kung fu movie trading the humour for great visuals and a pseudo-deep story... i know the flying was in line with an ancient storytelling tradition, but it looks awful in a "serious" movie...

i've heard that this movie has deep philosophical meaning... i don't see it... it's a weak, minimal story with wooden acting... it's boring (especially the love story in the desert... AWFUL)... i turned to my friend who had come with me, and i apologised for picking the film... she just looked at me and said "what am i watching?... no-one acts or talks like this!"... we had a good laugh about it afterwards...

i read one of the comments here that said no western writer could match the "amazing beauty" and "exploration of heroism" of this story... all i can say is, it ain't Shakespeare... if you feel the urge to watch a compelling Chinese movie, try "raise the red lantern" instead...
2 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Dogma (1999)
4/10
mediocre to weak
26 January 2006
i'm not sure what to give this one... it seemed like a really safe bet when i purchased tickets for dogma... i liked Kevin smith's other movies, and i love jokes about religion... and yet...

dogma is not funny... Kevin's previous attempts (except for maybe "mallrats") relied on funny dialogue... it may have been crude, but it was smart and sharp, and had a good flow... dogma is like the unpleasant cousin of the earlier movies, who thinks farting is a valid form of entertainment...

i think Kevin smith was suffering from too much success... he gets a ton of mid to top level names, and what does he do?... he bases his humour on giving them unlikely biblical roles... it's just not funny... even Alan Rickman needs a kick in the head, and he made robin hood watchable...

every now and then a character stops to give a speech as if it's a public safety announcement... Chris Rock delivers his lines like he's in a nativity play at his pre-school... jay and silent bob are overused... come on Kevin, don't wear out your secret weapons!...

there's some cheesy special effects, sight gags and some lightweight gore (just so Kevin can look like he hasn't lost his edge)... the odd jabs at religion are so inconsequential that it'll probably improve the church's image...

for some reason i enjoyed Matt Damon and Ben Affleck's little part in the story, and i did laugh at the odd thing... but its cardinal sin is a weak script... say 20 snoochie boochies and 12 death stars tonight, Kevin!
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Abyss (1989)
8/10
superb
25 January 2006
the abyss is one of the finest adventure/sci fi movies i've seen... ed harris brings such warmth and dignity to his character, and Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio is every bit his equal... michael biehn is one of my journeyman heroes, and turns in a good performance as the tragically misguided lt. coffey...

although a cynic could claim this movie is emotionally manipulative, somehow i never felt used at the hands of the director... the final descent is wonderfully acted, with fragility, love and isolation emanating from every scene... as the revival scene is wrenching...

the movie also has some amazing visuals, and some thrilling action sequences that never feel excessive...

while not at all hard science fiction, i found one or two of the ideas to be interesting, and the movie seemed to blend very distinct, separate elements into a cohesive whole...

this movie has an enormous, throbbing heart, and a beautiful sense of wonder... seek it out...
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

Recently Viewed