Reviews

I have to say I really wasn't reeled in by this movie. It begs to be an epic film, but I just didn't feel that quality in it. I didn't care for the characters, and found most of them generally annoying. The dialogue was awful at times, I almost cringed to hear it. The speeches and conversations about loyalty and honour didn't hold any poignancy or nobility, they came across to me as horrendously cheesy. I can't say much for the acting either. In fact, it was downright appalling in places. The film was also full of action-adventure movie clichés, like all the knights turning their back on the leader only to return and back him up later. Not that I hate this sort of thing, but I've seen it too many times before. It was far too predictable. Throw in a rushed love story between Clive Owen and Keira Knightly and you've got yet another historical movie posing as an epic.

The film isn't all bad though, and what is lacked in substance it made up for in cool imagery. Some of the scenery and settings in the film where beautiful, and infused the film with a fantastic atmosphere. The film is dotted with a few good scenes here and there, and there are a few cool effects, it's just a pity that there weren't many, and even if there were I doubt it'd help out the obvious problems with the dialogue and acting.

Still, with all the problems I had with this movie, it was still watchable at the very least. If you're looking for a deep and involving film with a good script, don't watch this, but if you're bored on a Sunday afternoon then this is enjoyable enough.

Although I enjoyed this film and its story, I have to admit that i didn't really find it very scary. There were a few moments in the film which I found a little creepy, but there was nothing there that got right under my skin and made it crawl. I mean, personally, I don't find water very scary for one thing. Also, I felt that this was another horror movie labouring under the impression that little kids are scary. I'm sorry, but I just don't see what's meant to be so frightening about them. This was a ghost story that delivered little in the way of horror - at least from my perspective. I found the ghost in Takashi Shimizu's remake of The Grudge to be far scarier and more frightening than the ghost in this particular story.

Still, although the horror wasn't quite up to par, there were many elements of the film I still enjoyed. The lead performances given by Hitomi Kuroki and Rio Kanno were really good, they really fleshed out the film. The soundtrack was pretty good too. It definitely lent a certain tension to the story.

Overall, although I didn't find the film particularly horrific in any way, it still kept my attention until the end. It's definitely not Hideo Nakata's best, but worth watching if you're a fan.

This was an entertaining and fun piece of film making from the ever-reliable Steven Spielberg. It is a bit of a depart from his usual full-blown and hugely epic pictures, yet this does not detract at all from the fascinating story of Frank Abagnale Jr. I was interested in this man before I'd seen the movie, and it only served to increase my interest. Although it is important to remember (as with any such film) that this is only 'inspired' by a true story and not told word for word from one, the plot is fascinating and keeps you laughing, crying and wondering until the end.

Frank Abagnale Jr. is an astounding and interesting character. The real life Abagnale originally said that he did not believe Dicaprio to be 'suave' enough to play the role, but he certainly does pull it off. Dicaprio's acting is superb, and totally believable as a man who could lie to, deceive, and con everyone he met without once losing any of his charisma or charm. Hanks is also excellent, he plays the role of the obsessed FBI agent well, and also with a likable quality. The interaction between these two characters was great, it was interesting to see a budding relationship slowly build between two characters who were actually positioned against one another.

I loved the look of the film. It was a refreshing blast to see the 60s portrayed in such a vivid and colorful way. The whole setting and atmosphere of the film gave it a wonderful and almost (I hesitate to use the word) 'magical' sense. This tone appealed to me much more than a darker tone might have.

However, the film is rife with moral ambiguity. As much fun as it is to watch Dicaprio jumping from one place (and identity) to the next, forging checks and spending inordinate amounts of money at a whim, the film never really focuses on the morally bankrupt side of the story. The portion of the film devoted to this at the end still seems to skim over the fact that this man has stolen millions of dollars. It ends on a high note for Frank Abagnale Jr., never fully spelling out the wrongs he committed. Still, this would probably bring the whole film down, and sometimes it's fun just to enjoy a bit of escapism without being told off for desiring such things. I mean, it's hard to be totally strict and upright - you have to love it when Dicaprio's character swindles Jennifer Garner's prostitute for $400!

Overall, this is a fun film and really enjoyable. Not as much of an epic masterpiece as some of Spielberg's other movies, but still a great film!

This was a wonderful and compelling movie. Chan-wook Park as done a brilliant job with the themes he introduces, and I enjoyed it a lot more than I did 2003's Oldboy (which is enjoyable too, if you're able to suspend your disbelief from a great height!). Firstly I'd have to comment on the fantastic cinematography. Byeong-il Kim did such a good job. Every frame seems full of meticulous detail, every scene filled with such an atmosphere that it's hard not to be pulled in to the film without realising it. Every shot was great, and was so carefully thought out.

The plot of the film kept me intrigued. At first I felt that I wasn't being shown enough of what was going on, but i came to realise that although not all events were portrayed with absolute clarity, I knew exactly what was happening. I knew what was going on despite hearing little from the character's mouths and knowing few of their thoughts, such was the quality of Park's direction. It was almost like I was viewing the film from the perspective of a deaf mute myself, hearing little but still picking up on everything that occurred. It was an excellent way of portraying the story.

The narrative revolves around the motivations, intentions and consequences of revenge, and relates these abstract matters in a clever way. It forces us to question the very nature of revenge, and it is hard to come out with any clear answers. On one hand you fully understand the motivations for vengeance, but on the other the film is full of motifs that make us question if it really is the right course of action. This moral ambiguity prevents us from any simplistic moralising, and as we watch good people doing bad things we really have to question the meaning behind the title 'Sympathy For Mr Vengeance'. Who should our sympathies lie with? Is it an ironic title? After seeing the movie such questions were prominent in my mind, and I think that a film that sticks with you like this cannot be regarded as an average attempt.

There was an amount of violence in the film, but I did not find it as shocking as I had expected, and I have seen far worse. The violence was well crafted, and became part of the plot and substance of the film instead of being another reason to splash blood and gore in every direction. Instead the violence built on the already prominent themes, making me wince at times but also aiding me in coming to terms with what the film was trying to say.

Overall this movie is a great study of revenge and its effects on the soul. Check it out!

I've just finished this film and I thought it was excellent. I've never read the book, and based on other people's comments it sounds like it might be a hard book to adapt for the screen, what with it (apparently) dealing with a lot of abstract issues. However, looking at this film from the standpoint of having never read the book I thought the story was brilliant, it engrossed me to the end. Mekhi Phifer was great, he played the part well, personally I thought he conveyed a wide range of emotions and all of them very well. There was some great character development, especially on the part of Delroy Lindo (another great performance).

Lee did a good job in his portrayal of the drug culture in the projects, as well as taking a look into the police's side of the story. The story interested me from the beginning and I didn't feel my interest waver once, in fact is grew steadily throughout the film. The images of dead bodies shown at the beginning made a strong starting point, and served as an immediate reminder that the themes dealt with in the film are occurring all the time.

On a side note, I thought the resemblance of Shorty's game 'Gansta' to today's GTA: San Andreas was pretty funny.

Having just read Vladmir Nabokov's 'Lolita' for Uni, I instantly wanted to see Stanley Kubrick's rendering of the story. Overall I was impressed by what he had done, but I felt some parts of the film didn't quite work. Firstly, although i think Sellers is a great actor and I love him in everything I've seen him in I just couldn't get comfortable with his role here. When reading the book I had a totally different vision of Quilty, so I found it hard to readjust to Seller's performance. Although his acting is great and hilarious as always, it just didn't fit into the plot for me.

I thought James Mason was good, and he played the gradual disintegration of Humbert Humbert with an intensity which i enjoyed. However, i felt that the film did not reveal as much of his character as the novel portrays. The name Humbert Humbert suggests two sides to his nature, and I felt that too much emphasis was placed on his suave and intelligent side, and not enough time was devoted to his burning desire and passion for Lolita. I particularly missed one of my favourite lines that was not used in film, 'Lolita, light of my life, fire of my loins. My sin, my soul.' Although i haven't seen the film in a long time, I think Jeremy Irons from the 1997 version is a much better actor for the role.

Sue Lyon made a great Lolita, although she did tremble on the line between looking young enough for the role and looking too old for it. Still, there were times in the film where she looked so young the odious nature of Humbert's act really struck me. Speaking of this, I felt the film skipped past too much of what really went on between Humbert and Lolita. Although Nabokov similarly leaves this to the reader's imagination, I thought a little more could have been done to stress the nature of Humbert and Lolita's relationship.

Shelley Winters was brilliant, and her acting added so much to the character of Charlotte Haze. I thought she was wonderful; she really fleshed the character out.

Overall, I did enjoy watching this film despite the small niggles I had with it, but I view it as something separate to the novel. In this way it's a more enjoyable experience. I'm looking forward to seeing the 1997 version of the film again (I saw it once years ago!), as I think it is a movie that will benefit much more having been made in a time of a more permissive society, allowing more creative freedom in what can be shown.

I have to say that this is definitely one of my favourite films of all time. Bruce Campbell gives one of the finest and funniest performances i've seen. The film's constant movement from one horrific happening to the next leaves you wondering how Campbell's Ash retains any threads of his sanity. Even when it's just him in the cabin dealing with a variety of gruelling experiences Campbell gives every scene his all, filling them with a strange mix of disgust and humour. The scene where Ash has the entire room laughing at him (including the furniture!) has to be one of my favourite bits, it's almost as if Campbell himself has finally lost it. Raimi's direction is superb, I love the rushing camera movements and angles. This is a great film which relentlessly throws comedy, horror and gore at you (and Campbell) in vast quantities. If you're looking for something which will entertain you, scare you, and gross you out at the same time then this is definitely the film for you.

I knew this was going to be a difficult film when i opened the DVD case to find a list of hints to aid me in 'unlocking' the secrets of the movie. Although I did feel that I enjoyed it, by the end i was beginning to wonder exactly why, and I was frustrated that many of my questions had been left unanswered. Having watched it a second time I have come to feel that this is actually one of the elements I like about the film, and it makes me respect David Lynch even more as a director. Instead of having everything spelt out for you the movie leaves you to figure things out yourself. The distorted plot, strange characters and settings will stick in your mind for days as you try to determine exactly what was going on. The music in the film was great too, with an eerie tune underlying many scenes that filled them with atmosphere and a strange tension, and makes some scenes really creepy. I found myself gripped to the movie at several moments, wondering what was going to be thrown at me next. I thought Naomi Watts was excellent, in my mind this is one of her best performances (and let's be honest, you can't totally knock a film that contains sex scenes between Naomi Watts and Laura Harring). Overall I think this is an interesting movie and extremely thought-provoking, although it's definitely not one to watch if your looking for a straightforward and easy film.

This film is a visual extravaganza. The whole time i was watching it I was enthralled by what the animators had done. I tend to dislike watching foreign cinema in its dubbed form, but I actually turned off the subtitles the first time I saw this because there were just too many visuals exciting my attention. The animation really is that good, with the computer graphics and hand-drawn animation blending together perfectly. The character style may not appeal to some, but I thought that it was well suited to this movie. Katsuhiro Otomo's script is good, but still leaves something to be desired. I would have liked to have seen more interaction between some of the characters. This wasn't a major problem however, as I did still feel some affection for the characters. Overall, this is a unique anime and I would highly recommend it to all anime fans.

When i had first finished with this film i wasn't sure what i felt about it. It was definitely not what I had expected, and i thought many parts of the film where either unbelievable or far-fetched. However, in retrospect I think that it was an enjoyable experience, and I think it is unfair to criticise it so harshly. I thought Min-sik Choi was excellent, finding him genuinely funny at times as well as disturbing in others, and nobody can seriously doubt his talent after seeing the excellent hallway fight scene. Although there were elements of the film I was unsure about it did keep me entertained, but don't expect too much from it!