Reviews

Well I'm sure the Academy will just love this. This film (if it could be called that) makes me wonder why there isn't a one word synonym for "man-hater." I mean, we have "misogynist" for woman-hater, but no equivalent nomenclature for the reverse. As a married heterosexual male, I felt oppressed the entire time I sat watching this boorish display of woe-is-me women who wish they could shuffle loose the terrible burden of living in a world infested with men and their ways. For Christ's sake, they take the only talented male actor in the film, make him gay, and then throw him out of the window, literally. This was a monumental waste of time for me - the title of the film a constant reminder of the hours spent watching this effete garbage that I will never get back. Unless you straight men out there are just troweling for abuse, beg your wife, girlfriend, sister, mother, etc. to wait until this hits the video store. By then I'm sure the Academy will have given this crap Best Picture honors, which will only serve to remind the sensible ones that Oscar sacrificed all its credibility long ago.

I have voted for this movie before, and besides expressing some confusion for IMDB losing that information I'm tickled pink that I get to vote for it again and give it the perfect "10" it so deserves. Hands down the very best cops and robbers film ever conceived and delivered to the celluloid medium. Think I'm wrong? All you "French Connection" fans can kiss it. "Seven" fans, sorry: I love David Fincher, but Michael Mann hit a homerun here. Pacino and De Niro share the screen together for less than ten minutes, and they are the best ten minutes of the movie. Not that there aren't noteworthy contributions all around (and this is one hell of an ensemble cast), but the two grizzled leads are nothing short of masterful. I won't bore everyone reading this with the 900+ word summary I gave Heat the first time I wrote one, but I will say to those of you reading this who haven't seen it: see this film. It's a little slow to start, takes a while to pick up speed, oh but the payoff... Go rent it now. Or better still, buy the DVD which is usually no more than $14.99 at Best Buy. The only reason to hold out would be a special edition with lots of goodies on a second disc, but until then, believe me it's worth it. You could do a hell of a lot worse.

It's just a crying shame the Academy will never recognize the sheer brilliance of this watershed film. Okay, I'm sorry - it will probably garner an insane amount of nominations for cinematography and "special" awards for technical achievement. If you ask me, the only thing "special" here are the members of AMPAS come decision time. They're the kind of special that rides on the short bus if you get my meaning. Fellowship of the Ring (along with its forthcoming sequels) is a film with the ability and charisma to define a generation of moviegoers, young and old alike. But really, if you'd rather go see the Royal Tennenbaums because you want an "intellectual experience" instead of the popcorn flick you heard Rings was going to be, that's fine: you can burn in hell too along with the Academy for all I care. Fellowship of the Ring: 10. AMPAS: -2

Sound like a bold statement? Devotees of classic cops and robbers flicks of old will no doubt take exception, but I believe that Michael Mann achieved some measure of perfection with Heat. To break this three-hour gem of a film down to its core, this is a film about men - strong men - and the supporting role that he women of the film have on them for better or worse. Take Pacino as good cop Vincent Hanna: one of the most intense characterizations of the tragic hero that I have ever witnessed, as he laments the demise of his third marriage to a pill-junkie wife. A fact which he discusses with his archnemesis (De Niro) in what history will regard as one of the most frenetic scenes in the history of film. The dialogue in this scene (at the very end of the first tape, if you own the VHS version) sets up the last half of the film beautifully, as our two rivals come to the joint realization that they have no hand in choosing the paths that will lead them to their ultimate confrontation: their very natures so define their respective actions that any attempt to do otherwise would simply be a waste of time. While I have heard others (who I am ashamed at times to call close friends) say that Heat drags in places, I will concede that there are moments in the film that require more than the cursory attention that they give to the movie they happen to be watching at any given time (I'm sorry not every director is Jerry Bruckheimer), there are poignant developments of character in Heat that many would casually disregard. I am thinking of the interaction between the ex-con who finds conditional employment in a diner with an opportunistic scum of a boss, and whose girlfriend is so proud of him for swallowing his pride and not simply giving the sonofabitch a good pummeling. But there is a catharsis that I felt for that same ex-con when De Niro's character presents him with the opportunity to take just one more score, for old time's sake. Who doesn't feel for this guy - this minor character in a film with big-time heavyweights who gets to shine for a few brief moments. That's what Heat is really: a series of brief moments, some touching, others traumatic, and still others incredibly horrifying in the feelings that they inspire in the romantic who, like me sees not black or white portrayals of protagonist and villain, but a montage of grays that combine to create a vivid spectrum of film characterization that could not be found in hundreds of films combined. One of my five favorite films of all time, Heat is a cinematic banquet of intense imagery and pulse-pounding action. Come hungry.

I suppose I won't win any popularity points for saying this, but I actually enjoyed Brian DePalma's concept for the first MI film. The technobabble was present, but not pressing with lots of fun gadgetry and the suspense and intrigue one might associate with a film about espionage. Unfortunately, John Woo flushes all those elements in the first twenty minutes of his Mission Impossible concept. Instead of gadgets, we have everyone running around in latex masks pretending to be someone else, and theatergoers (many of whom didn't look particularly shiny) audibly guessing at the obvious "plot-twists" that the writers of this fetid pile of filmmaking would have us believe passes for intrigue. All I saw was tired, uninspired dialogue with poorly executed timing on the parts of actors who should know better (well, maybe not Dougray Scott - he's not too shiny either). It became very obvious that Paramount spent so much of the film's budget letting John Woo blow sh*t up that they didn't have enough money to hire a decent script doctor. The first half hour, I was wondering when Cruise was going to stop romancing the love interest and start getting on with the mission. In short, a giant waste of time IMHO, but don't take my word for it. One recommendation though, you might rent Armageddon before going to see MI:2 - oh, you remember that one from two summers ago that everyone was carrying on about how lame the story was and how it was an insult to the collective intellect of the masses: yeah, MI:2 makes that look like the Godfather by comparison. Seeing is believing, but I would wait to see MI:2 on video. (4 out of 10 stars)

the characters of Riker and Counselor Deanna Troi to a couple of flirting adolescents in an "intimate" scene in which the two share a bubblebath. No passionate embrace, no fireworks (within the constraints of a PG film of course) and what the average Trek fan like myself is left with are thoughts of what might have been. Star Trek needs direction as the writers refocus their vision for the future of this franchise. This film had promise, but the comedic attempts that fail so miserably with non-fans who are just looking for a cheap thrill should never have made it off the cutting room floor. Ultimately they end up costing the movie some of its credibility ("manual steering column" anyone?) Star Trek must return to its roots of exploration for the next film with a big budget to attain that level of believability that can't be harnessed by Maudlin overacting. I want to see better special effects shots (the CGI Enterprise looked like s*** compared to the model ILM gave us for First Contact) and less emphasis on making sure each character gets equal screen time. (If you have to take away someone's screen time, for God's sake blow Riker and Troi out the f***ing airlock.) All in all, Insurrection is a flawed attempt, but with some fine moments turned in by Patrick Stewart and with kudos to Donna Murphy, who plays well to Picard's gentlemanly graces as his "love interest." Although the two share little more onscreen romance than holding hands, it's preferable to the aforementioned bubblebath scene.

First off, let me say that I was looking for when I bought my ticket and what I found after seeing this film were two completely different things.

Fight Club is the best movie I've seen this year, and there have been a few gems of cinema that have been considered in making that statement. I won't ruin the experience for anyone, especially since the first and second rules of Fight Club are you do not talk about Fight Club, but I feel that to fully experience this film requires that you see it more than once. I haven't yet so I won't shoot my mouth off about how profoundly it affected me, but I will say that this film is a truly visceral indulgence of the senses that demands your full attention to appreciate it.

Go see Fight Club and be surprised as I was to see a film with tremendous depth and meaning and not just two hours of shallow platitudes on how to live a happy life. Because as Tyler Durden says in the movie, we've been brought up with T.V. to believe that we're all going to grow up to be rock stars and celebrities, etc. ... but we won't. A wake up call for the "me" generation that assumes that success is everything. It isn't. Go see Fight Club. You won't be sorry.