Change Your Image
jjlilj
Reviews
The Matrix Reloaded (2003)
Our city is being attacked, lets Rave!
The popularity of this movie and its relatively high rating indicates two things. One, modern movie audiences are filled with gullible idiots. Two, drug use in this group is quite common.
Since the above statement didn't pass IMDB's minimum requirements let me add that the movie's monologue, instead of dialogue, seemed to be written by Charles Manson. The action was passable. The rest of the visuals were ordinary. The story was stupid. The characters were shallow. Read somebody else's review for details.
Man of the Century (1999)
Worthy of Black and White
An interesting idea, a 20's movie and a 90's movie shuffled together. Certain elements, notably the main character are straight out of the 20's. Most of the supporting cast with an exception or two are out of the 90's. The setting is modern Manhattan. Some plotlines are modern, some are relics, some are just the result of the tension of the 20's and 90's sewn together.
Many people won't like Man of the Century. Its subtlety, inside jokes with movie history, and outlook will elude perhaps the majority of watchers. However, some people will see it as a gem. Fortunately, it won't take long to determine its value. If you like the first 15 minutes of it, the next hour will go well, if not, then turn it off or change the channel.
A good example of what is right/wrong with the movie is the silly musical numbers thrown in. Well, if you watch enough old movies, you know that silly musical numbers are thrown in to break up the monotony of watching plot, like TV commercials. They feel out of place because we are used to modern film which uses other cinematic devices to break up monotony. So, perhaps, that is the point of putting the musical numbers in, to point this out.
Finally, it interesting to note the synchronicity of the late 90's cultural and economic boom and the 20's cultural and economic boom as backdrops for the two parts of this movie. I'll leave that analysis for the reader to muddle through with their own time.
Star Trek: Nemesis (2002)
Typical contrived Star Trek movie
Star Trek movies are contrived and seem to be written inside-out which cripples them in several ways.
When most movies are written, the characters are written in as part of the plot and generally serve the story. Star Trek movies are clearly written around the characters. Also, the plot has to provide opportunity for special effects and has to be, dum dummm, dramatic enough for the big screen. In the old Star Trek movies the regulars had to appear and the plot centers around Kirk, Spock, and Bones. In the Next Generation, the secondaries need more screen time, further diluting the story.
Good science fiction uses the future to make a point, explore mythic ideas, or do something interesting thematically or dramatically. Star Trek is very character-centric, adding a heavy dose of soap opera in the sci-fi mix. It worked well on TV, but it is just OK in the theater. The problem is that true fans are interested in the characters and being with them again. A really great Star Trek, the Next Generation, movie would probably be the series regulars just sitting around reflecting about their lives on the Enterprise. Obviously, this would suck for people who don't love the characters and would not be science fiction at all.
The ubiquitous criticism of Nemesis, Insurrection, or the other Next Genereation movies is that it is just a 2 hour episode of the show. But what else can these movies be?
What Nemesis does is remind us of the good old days of Next Generation and makes us wonder why they didn't keep doing the show instead of making these silly movies. I know, stagnant plotlines, series regular salaries, and the need to expand the Star Trek realm to DS9 & Voyager.
Hopefully, Nemesis will end the Star Trek theater franchise for the Next Generation crew. Or perhaps a Star Trek movie without the full complement of series regulars from any particular Trek will be written. That could be promising. It might even be science fiction.
Everyone Says I Love You (1996)
A Comedy and Musical of Limited Proportions
Movie musicals where the actors do the singing are rare these days. I must say I haven't watched a lot of old musicals to try to catch up. This movie probably does these old musicals justice. The music is from or reflective of the golden age of the musical (with a distinct comical exception), not like Grease, Moulin Rouge which attempt to use modern popular music.
From the director's commentary of Moulin Rouge, he describes his attempt to use music to advance and serve story. In Everyone Says I Love You, the musical elements seem to be gimmics and distractions. The use of song definitely has a feeling of overkill at some points, like the singing trick-or-treaters.
The plot lines and characters are mostly simple and trite. There is no significant gravity to this movie at all. The movie lacks any sort of philosophical tone and I don't think it has a point.
The first 5 minutes is the test of this film, as much as you appreciate that, you will appreciate the rest of it about as much.
The Limey (1999)
Gritty Poetry
The Limey is a truly poetic movie. Like poetry, it helps to experience it multiple times from multiple mindsets. Like poetry many people just won't get it and dismiss it. Like poetry others may read much more into it than is actually there. Most movies are prose, scenes arranged to form a storyline and plot. This movie is different in a mostly positive way. There are weird scene shifts and loops and other stuff mixed into the pot that you usually don't see. The Limey is Gritty because unlike typical PG Hollywood action without violence, this movie is much more violence without action. The Limey is an introverted movie in an extroverted movie world.
I enjoy it every time I see it, but I recommend it only with reservations.
By the way, there are two great commentary tracks on the DVD.
The Razor's Edge (1984)
Simply Incongruous
A dangerous film to view with expectations, the Razor's Edge has some incongruities that stick out and get in the way of the story, or theme, or exploration, or whatever this movie was about.
We all love Bill Murray, but this role he's doing alot of the Bill Murray "schtick", you know the funny remark spoken deadpan that highlights his comedic work. Well, he's like that the whole movie, which just doesn't seem to fit W.S. Maugham's story and character.
And then there is this overlay of early 20th century drama, which centers on 3 characters, on top of this existential quest. Compare this to "7 years in Tibet" which is another discussion of West learning from the East, but lacks the soap opera features of Razor's Edge.
This film lacks the trendy "upbeatness" of current film, so its not fun. There is very little action. Visually, yes some mountains are nice and its good to see Paris even in a movie, but mostly this is a person watching film. Therefore, it would be nice to see some sort of positive growth in the characters. Larry's odyssey seems to have done something to/for him, but its hard to put our finger on. He doesn't have any answers at the end either. In the 15-20 years the film spans (WWI, 1916 - Depression, 1930s), the rest of the characters achieve what? Well, Sophie didn't learn enough transcendence through tragedy. Isabel learned how to use people to get by, but she already seemed to have mastered that at the opening frame. Bob learned that the other guy doesn't get lines in a Bill Murray movie. Uncle Elliot learned that its generally really good to be rich.
I can understand why some might see this as an underestimated masterpiece, but I can't agree. Frankly, if you want a Bill Murray movie that discusses the meaning of life, watch Groundhog Day.
Minority Report (2002)
Special only in effects, full of holes
(Some spoiler info)
I walked out of the theater thinking not about Blade Runner, but the Fugitive. The point of it is to follow our main character through this whole "I'm innocent" ride until we finally find out who the rat is. Guess who wins the day, Tom Cruise or the bad guy?
Yes, this has special effects bettering 19 year old Blade Runner. You want eye candy, pick up this and Episode II on DVD, more power to you.
Tom Cruise and Steven Spielberg, the actor and director dream team do well enough with what they're given, but frankly the writing is full of holes. Why would the pre-cogs have a premonition that Anderton was planning to kill Crow? Wouldn't they have seen it as a crime of passion? Had Anderton found out about Crow ahead of time, would he have actually PLANNED to kill him? How exactly could you set somebody up to commit pre-meditated murder who knows that is impossible to premeditate a murder? How come no good examples of a minority report are shown? The drowning scenario was a works-as-design bug, the minority report problem would imply somebody innocent was convicted before they had a chance to (not) act. Never dealt with. Also the philosophical implications are all implied and not dealt with by the movie. Is it ethical to keep the pre-cogs in this state to prevent horrible crime? Is it ethical to prevent crime that removes the possibility of free will? Well to answer these questions, we will have Tom Cruise give a summary judgement at end of movie, till then hold on to your hats and enjoy the ride.
Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones (2002)
No "Star Wars Magic" in episode II.
I was tempted to leave in the middle of this and kept deciding to stay through till the bitter end. It kept getting worse and worse. Bad love story, wooden acting, unsympathetic characters, its all here. At least there was Darth Maul in Episode I, but in episode II, "yawn". There is no "Star Wars Magic" to this movie. None at all. If you haven't seen it yet, avoid it.
A.I. Artificial Intelligence (2001)
Almost three hours you aint getting back
AI opens up the "can machines love humans and vice versa" can of worms at the very beginning and never really deals with it. What about this robot is making it love its mother? Is it simulation or reality?
The main character is a robot that has massive difficult finding any sort of sympathy, but we can't sympathize with him either.
The movie is a bad Pinocchio re-tell. Its horribly long. It ends miserably and then ends again. When the story is this badly written, the acting is meaningless. Who cares how real the characters seem are when you want to get up and leave the theater?
We've seen the future on film so much better. What a waste.
Marian Rose White (1982)
A History Lesson
About 10 years ago I saw this movie as part of a College course on the impact of Darwin. Natural Selection led to the idea of Eugenics, sterilizing the unfit, unpopular since WWII because it was the centerpiece of Nazi ideology. This movie is about Eugenics in America before that. Of course, it is wrapped in a made for TV package but the nastiness of Eugenics comes through. Notable for being based on semi-forgotten American History, other than that its average made for TV.