Change Your Image
![](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BZmViNmM3ODUtNmY5Mi00NTFjLWFjNzktZTVhNzlhZjQ2NTgzXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMDQ1Njg3Mw@@._V1_SY100_SX100_.jpg)
shadowbox_nz
Reviews
Midnight Mass (2021)
A refreshing slow burn that doesn't always work.
I admire Mike Flanagan's resolve to create slowly-unfolding pieces of television in this age of jump scares and immediate gratification.
This story is a slow burn which, for the most part, works reasonably well, the middle episodes being the only ones that suffer here - they feel a little bloated and indulgent.
The long monologues that many of the main characters are given are a factor here, Kate Siegel's one being the most monotonous (it's a pity Flanagan didn't think beyond his own wife for this part as I feel Siegel was too "lightweight" for the part, all girlish smiles and hopeful dreams).
The script meanders a bit in episodes four and five, feeling vaguely unanchored, and some of the sentimental material feels a little like Darabont, Zemeckis, or Spielberg at their worst. Some performances are remarkably good however, and my hat goes off to Samantha Sloyan for her superb take on anally-retentive, Machiavellian religious zealotry in the character of Bev Keane.
Some of the themes of the work feel undercooked, but this is frequently a North American script problem, the US generally being averse to too much subtext or nuance (Flanagan needed to aim for a little less Netflix and a little more HBO in tone, I think).
Well worth a look though. Enjoyable.
Superhost (2021)
Lacks finesse, but watchable.
The actress who plays Rebecca nails it. Beautiful nuance in her performance - genuine menace.
The cinematography lacks finesse, but does solidly enough given the low budget. I would have liked more satire embedded in the script to give the overall theme of the film more prominence (and to make the ending bite harder).
Overall, a bit average, but the director shows definite promise. Very watchable.
The Last Horror Movie (2003)
Patronising, Smug, Naive, Bland.
I've been a fan of horror movies and thrillers since I was a child. I'd like to think I know a little about the way they work, having studied film at university (not that that makes me an expert, mind you). In the post-modern world we live in now, there is a glut of cinema verite in our televisual entertainment, what with the plethora of reality TV shows and so on. Horror movies seem to have moved in a similar direction in some ways: witness The Blair Witch Project, Rec, Cloverfield etc. There is also an emphasis on taking the horror to its "logical" extreme by exposing the viewer to total violence and sadistic torture - note for instance the current trend of torture porn with films like Hostel and Saw. All these movies aim to place us in the action and make it seem more "real".
Taking this theme of placing-the-viewer-in-reality, the writer of The Last Horror Movie would like to think he is being desperately clever, but the script in this film is so patronising and transparent it can't even pass as "art".
The lead actor is just plain awful - his performance is incredibly affected and bland, with almost no nuance. Others give good performances however, especially the Assistant.
The serial killer constantly looks at the camera intensely and asks us "insightful" questions like "why are you still watching?" and "don't you want to see what happened?" and so on. Utterly tedious. We KNOW why we watch horror - we don't need to be lectured about it. Horror performs a sort of ritual of exorcism for our daily lives - it enables us to live vicariously through the fictional suffering of others, knowing we would never do it ourselves (and hoping that it will never happen to us). This sort of thematic material was explored with so much more finesse and artfulness in Henry: Portrait Of A Serial Killer (which is truly shocking in its coldness), Pasolini's incredible Salo (the end sequence where we are looking through binoculars at soundless torture scenes), Belgium's excellent "Man Bites Dog" (which was ahead of its time) and even less graphic movies like Hitchcock's Rear Window and the excellent "Peeping Tom" from the early 60s. Voyeurism being explored in film is nothing new. The premise of The Last Horror Movie therefore appears incredibly naive to me, with nothing new to say. The murders are rather silly, and the whole "I followed you from the video store" line just tacky. It's one thing to take the tack of "the viewer is complicit in this murder" theme, it's quite another to shove it down their throats.
The Waiting Place (2001)
Interesting, Unique, Chilling.
I found a solitary copy of this NZ film on the shelves of my local video library in Auckland, NZ. I'd heard a little about it and so decided to hire it.
"The Waiting Place" possesses a definite air of chilling realism, starkly promoted by the use of digital video cameras. The acting is good, if not a little indulgent at times. The film is inventive though, and the use of the recently-abandoned Lake Alice psychiatric hospital in the central North Island (which has a notorious history to we Kiwis) is a stand-out. It's almost a character in itself, and the shots of empty, darkened doorways and dusty halls is genuinely eerie. Almost a "Blair Witch Project" feel to it, with some unique New Zealand Gothic sensibility thrown in for good measure. This is "Vigil" and "Sleeping Dogs" on the cheap - but still just as compelling. The lack of funds doesn't really show through - if anything it adds to the grittiness of the images.
I won't spoil the ending, but suffice to say I wasn't expecting it... It's a chiller!
So, if you're a fan of independent cinema, and want to see what else NZ has done in the last few years apart from "Lord Of The Rings" then take a look at this one. Recommended!
Elephant (2003)
The Point Is There Is No Point
Looking for meaning in this film? Don't. Van Sant has structured a film in the style of cinema verite - it takes a long time to say very little to most people, however this is where the majority of reviewers make their mistake: this is not a traditional film and should not be viewed as such.
Don't search for character development, revealing dialogue or loose ends tied up. The whole point of this movie is to show you that terrible things can happen in the most innocuous of environments. The characters in the film merely show you real people, doing boring, predictable things, and the violence itself at the end is not intended to shock, or revolt - it is simply violence: brutal, inexplicable violence. In short, sh*t happens, and people generally never know why.
Having said that, I experienced a sense of absolute dread that grew in intensity during this movie. It was like watching a car crash in slow motion, but strangely impassive in many ways. The characters weren't supposed to be easily connectable with - you don't get a sense of "oh, that poor girl - she got shot in the library". It just happens, and that's that.
A cold, haunting movie, beautifully shot. Highly recommended.
Unbreakable (2000)
Eerie, complex, and original.
The director of the Sixth Sense once again brings us a story of invisible powers furthering one man's understanding of himself.
Unbreakable is the slower, more uneven descendant of the former movie, however it definitely has more atmosphere than most thrillers produced today. The frights are somewhat manipulated, however occur at times when the audience least expect it, heightening the originality of the storyline.
The story itself could have been developed and polished a little further I feel, but on the whole Unbreakable is reasonably rewarding. Bruce Willis is excellent, as is Robin Wright Penn. Samuel L Jackson's performance is a little too affected and self-indulgent, but maybe this is what the director intended given the them of comic-book good versus evil.
Overall, more original than most of the dross Hollywood feeds us, and well worth a view. We can watch M. Night Shymalan's career with interest.
The Matrix Reloaded (2003)
Trying very hard, but entertaining nonetheless
This film must have felt enormous pressure being the sequel to one of the most inventive and surprising sci-fi flicks of the 90s.
As a film itself, it is solid enough entertainment, however as a Matrix film it endeavours to fill itself with too much, in my opinion. It contains a lot of portentous psychobabble (I'm a psychology student, and have also studied philosophy and it went way over my head) and some of the fight scenes, while fun to watch, have been done before.
Carrie-Anne Moss is excellent, and Keanu is passable again, but I must admit I found Laurence Fishburne's character to be extremely irritating. Then the Oracle comes along with her completely unenlightening babble, then the key guy, then the Architect (God?).
Disappointing, and a bit dull. 7/10
Before Night Falls (2000)
Elegant, dreamlike, involving.
After hearing many good things about this film, I finally sat down and watched it. I was impressed on the whole with its lyricism, and the way it told the story simply, but with a definite emphasis on visual poetry. Javier Bardem was outstanding, reminding me very much of a younger Al Pacino, and Olivier Martinez was believable as his good friend. The Cuban music was rapturous - loved it.
Definitely not for everyone, this film is beautiful to look at and involving on most levels. It works as a standard narrative, but also fishes for something more, for the art-house film-goers out there.
In the Bedroom (2001)
Sterile, interesting, flawed.
I rented this movie last night, somewhat begrudgingly as I'd heard the hype, and this always tends to put me off.
I thought the opening half-hour was solid and interesting, and on the whole it seemed to possess a sort of Ang Lee "Ice Storm" feel.
After the son's death though the film begins to falter. The father's character begins to lose its depth, not so much the fault of the actor (who is fairly good), but more of the script. His argument with the mother in the kitchen is a bit unconvincing for me. He didn't seem to fire on all cylinders.
Sissy Spacek was good - her character demanded a fairly insular, controlling performance, and she pulled it off. Marisa Tomei though was miscast - she applied all the standard Hollywood affectations - gulping and blinking. She came across like a person playing grief, rather than living the grief.
Overall, a good watch, but beware the deliberate (and effective) sterility and emotionally repressive feel! It's not a cheerful movie!
Signs (2002)
Still not convinced....
Firstly, I loved the Sixth Sense - I thought it was original, scary and moving. Secondly, I was disappointed by Unbreakable - good concept that didn't quite work. Again, sadly, I feel this is the case with Signs.
It's a good premise with loads of potential, however to be blunt I feel M.Night is probably overestimating his own talent. He needs to work with someone else's material I believe as his own material is beginning to mystify me. I am a paranormal freak, and the promise of this movie was greatly anticipated by myself, however the story didn't seem to flow. Some of the dialogue was clunky, and Rory Culkin was gravely miscast - he is certainly no Haley Joel. The funny bits were often mistimed, and again to be blunt, I found M.Night's self-casting to be somewhat overindulgent.
On the good side, the video footage of the sighting in Brazil at the birthday party was genuinely clever, and frightening. Indeed the looks "outward" from life in the house were often the best moments. The appearance of the alien at the end was also quite shocking, but again the dynamics were extremely odd.
In short, I simply feel that this is a good idea that again failed to fire. Mel Gibson was good, but the script did him no favours. The ebbs and flows of the story just didn't work for me.
Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones (2002)
Dense, superficial, with good points....
How does one pierce the Star Wars universe with all its mythology and history in order to review one film?
Overall, I found this to be another George Lucas affair - when he directs there are ALWAYS some serious pacing issues, and the dialogue at times brought the audience into fits of giggles. Culturally, as a New Zealander I cringed as I heard our accent on screen too, but maybe I was being a bit sensitive.
Yes, this film advances the plot further, and it IS better than the lamentable Ep 1, but taken as a whole it's a good Star Wars film, but not a good FILM. It has its moments, such as the moment we see Anakin actually "turn" after the death of his mother (also thanks to John Williams' frightening score at this moment too), but I thought the movie was overlong and flat in tone.
Still, it'll make millions. I'm still looking forward to Ep III.
Finally, a challenge to the boys at ILM and Lucasfilms - if we Kiwis can make three Lord Of The Rings films in 18 months, then why not try making Ep III in less than the prerequisite three years? Dare ya.
Candyman (1992)
A little more cerebral than most.
I loved this movie not just because I like a good thriller, but because the story goes deeper than most and contains ideas that most hack horror movies wouldn't bother with. The whole concept of something gaining power through belief is well-explored, and the frights are not too predictable, so on several levels the movie works well. The tension is palpable at times, and on a base human level we relate to this movie because we've all heard stories like it - the boogieman and other urban myths etc. Well directed (obviously by a Brit - it's subtle with good acting!) and well shot. Leaves you wanting more, which is the sign of a good movie, I feel.
Unbreakable (2000)
Eerie, complex, and original.
The director of the Sixth Sense once again brings us a story of invisible powers furthering one man's understanding of himself.
Unbreakable is the slower, more uneven descendant of the former movie, however it definitely has more atmosphere than most thrillers produced today. The frights are somewhat manipulated, however occur at times when the audience least expect it, heightening the originality of the storyline.
The story itself could have been developed and polished a little further I feel, but on the whole Unbreakable is reasonably rewarding. Bruce Willis is excellent, as is Robin Wright Penn. Samuel L Jackson's performance is a little too affected and self-indulgent, but maybe this is what the director intended given the them of comic-book good versus evil.
Overall, more original than most of the dross Hollywood feeds us, and well worth a view. We can watch M. Night Shymalan's career with interest.
The English Patient (1996)
Beautiful, haunting, sensual
I've grown to love this movie more and more. I first saw it at the cinema when it came out, February 1997. I was recovering from a broken heart so it shot the hell out of me! I've since seen it two more times and don't get tired of it's slow-moving, compelling sensuality. The performances are great - subtle, understated, and the more-than-adequate handling of a very difficult book by director Minghella is to be commended. My favourite scene? The bit at the end when Katherine tells the Count that she has always loved him..... that pulls tears from the ol' ducts every time.
Gods and Monsters (1998)
Haunting, beautiful, exquisite
I rented this movie last night after wanting to see it for ages. I was not disappointed - McKellan was outstanding as always, Brendan Fraser displayed remarkable subtlety for a "Hollywood actor" (and I commend his bravery in taking on the project), and the direction was clear-cut, but just sentimental enough to let loose a couple of tears. The gay element was also beautifully, honestly handled with no fuss. Good to see some genuine sexual tension of a non-heterosexual sort on the screen. I highly recommend this movie as a masterpiece of character-study and low-key direction.
Death Becomes Her (1992)
Dark, funny, witty!
I loved this film from the first time I saw it, and I was never a big fan of Streep, Hawn, or Willis. I think the reason many Americans bag this film is because it's humour is very Hitchcockian, i.e. British, subtle, dealing with death and desire, dark. Meryl Streep brings an amazing amount of subtlety to what is basically a shallow character. Goldie Hawn is adequate, and Bruce Willis is obviously having fun in his role. Isabella Rossellini is great as the pale, voluptuous immortal Liesl (love the "keep your ass handy" line!). The story chugs along quite happily, and Zemeckis' direction is sharp, again loaded with subtleties which were obviously lost on many audiences when the film was first released. The ending is a cracker, and the film definitely has a moral attached (be careful what you wish for.....immortality is not fun!). Rent it, and don't expect a "Friends"-type movie. Enjoy!