Everyone involved in this movie should never be allowed to work again. I am serious.
Reviews
13 Reviews
Scary Movie
(2000)
Unthinkably bad
18 November 2000
This is absolutely one of the worst parodies, if not one of the worst movies, ever made. It isn't hard to make a succesful parody, it's a two step process:
1. Take elements/scenes/dialogue from the movie you intend to parody. 2. Change the element/scene/dialogue so it: a) Pokes fun at the movie you are parodying, or b) Pokes fun at something else that is subject to humor.
Keenan Ivory Wayans, however, doesn't understand this. He makes a parody using this process:
1. Take a random line from Scream/Scream 2/Scream 3 and copy it word for word. 2. Throw in a shot of/joke about a penis.
This does not make good parody. He is avoiding actually making fun of Scream, and is simply just mixing dialogue from Scream and then making jokes about totally unrelated things. He needs to focus more on wit than gross out humor. Now don't get me wrong, I have nothing wrong with gross humor; I found There's Something About Mary and BASEketball very funny and enjoyable movies. I also don't have a problem with stupid-funny flicks ( I consider Tommy Boy and Happy Gilmore classics). The problem with Scary Movie is that instead of gross-funny, it's just gross, and instead of stupid-funny, it's just plain stupid.
On a last note, I found the parody of The Usual Suspects VERY unneccisary (spelling). Usual Suspects is a classic, and not one that is intended to be parodied. It wasn't even a good parody.
1. Take elements/scenes/dialogue from the movie you intend to parody. 2. Change the element/scene/dialogue so it: a) Pokes fun at the movie you are parodying, or b) Pokes fun at something else that is subject to humor.
Keenan Ivory Wayans, however, doesn't understand this. He makes a parody using this process:
1. Take a random line from Scream/Scream 2/Scream 3 and copy it word for word. 2. Throw in a shot of/joke about a penis.
This does not make good parody. He is avoiding actually making fun of Scream, and is simply just mixing dialogue from Scream and then making jokes about totally unrelated things. He needs to focus more on wit than gross out humor. Now don't get me wrong, I have nothing wrong with gross humor; I found There's Something About Mary and BASEketball very funny and enjoyable movies. I also don't have a problem with stupid-funny flicks ( I consider Tommy Boy and Happy Gilmore classics). The problem with Scary Movie is that instead of gross-funny, it's just gross, and instead of stupid-funny, it's just plain stupid.
On a last note, I found the parody of The Usual Suspects VERY unneccisary (spelling). Usual Suspects is a classic, and not one that is intended to be parodied. It wasn't even a good parody.
Shadow of the Vampire
(2000)
Excellent
16 October 2000
I can't believe that some people on this board didn't appreciate this movie. The premise is one of the best we've had in years, a break from...well, almost every other film that's been released this year. Malkovich is excellent (but isn't he always?), and Willem Dafoe is better than I've seen him before (I haven't seen him in much, but still.) Everything about this movie is great--the directing, the music, the acting, and ESPECIALLY the set design/locations. Granted, I've never been in 1921, but if I was, that's what it's gotta be like. I really felt as if I was there, and the movie itself, while a 2000 movie, really felt like it was filmed in 1921. I would definately recommend seeing this when it is widely released on December 29 (I saw it at a festival). If you know what it's about, you will NOT be disappointed.
Good, but...
7 September 2000
Don't get me wrong. This was a good movie. However, it doesn't even hold ground to the first one. I've heard people say "Better than the first!", and I think, "What??"
The biggest problem that this film suffers is the commerciality of it. The fun of "International Man Of Mystery" was that it was quirky, non-mainstream, and a little weird (in a very good way). However, Mike Myers apparently decided to abandon the cleverness of the first film and write a bland commercial movie instead. An example is the recycling of jokes. Now, Mike Myers is a very funny man, and I KNOW that he could have easily come up with new pieces of humor. Unfortunately, most of the bits in this movie are recycled from the first ("Zip it!", "You're one groovy baby...baby" and the opening sequence come to mind, among countless others).
I think the reason he did this is because it a) takes less effort, and b) takes less risks. While this is good for a mainstream audience, people like myself, who were fans of Austin waaaay before it got popular, feel cheated.
I know many people will kill me for this, but Mini-Me might possibly be the worst part of this movie. I admit, I do get a kick out of seeing a small fellow like him, but stretching that gag throughout the movie is tiresome. There's no wit involved, just physical comedy.
I'm not saying I hated this movie. There are two very funny bits: The tent scene (I was laughing my a** off during that) and the brilliant scene with the rocket in the air...you know what I'm talking about. But these original bits of humor were too few and far. I hope that for the third "Powers", Myers resorts back to his fresh and original writing, instead of just trying to please the general audience.
The biggest problem that this film suffers is the commerciality of it. The fun of "International Man Of Mystery" was that it was quirky, non-mainstream, and a little weird (in a very good way). However, Mike Myers apparently decided to abandon the cleverness of the first film and write a bland commercial movie instead. An example is the recycling of jokes. Now, Mike Myers is a very funny man, and I KNOW that he could have easily come up with new pieces of humor. Unfortunately, most of the bits in this movie are recycled from the first ("Zip it!", "You're one groovy baby...baby" and the opening sequence come to mind, among countless others).
I think the reason he did this is because it a) takes less effort, and b) takes less risks. While this is good for a mainstream audience, people like myself, who were fans of Austin waaaay before it got popular, feel cheated.
I know many people will kill me for this, but Mini-Me might possibly be the worst part of this movie. I admit, I do get a kick out of seeing a small fellow like him, but stretching that gag throughout the movie is tiresome. There's no wit involved, just physical comedy.
I'm not saying I hated this movie. There are two very funny bits: The tent scene (I was laughing my a** off during that) and the brilliant scene with the rocket in the air...you know what I'm talking about. But these original bits of humor were too few and far. I hope that for the third "Powers", Myers resorts back to his fresh and original writing, instead of just trying to please the general audience.
The Blair Witch Project
(1999)
These people are stupid.
2 August 2000
Warning: Spoilers
Ok, I saw BWP on Showtime a few weeks ago with low expectations. It was actually better than I thought it would be. However, it was far from perfect. First and foremost, I have to bring up how unprepared the students were. If I went into the woods I would bring flairs, two cel phones and four batteries, an emergency phone, matches, a lighter, a radio, a GPS and tons of food. Also, everyone knows that when you plan on going into the woods (or mountains, or anything like that), you tell all your friends when you intend on coming back. That way, if you are gone for even a day extra, you have a search team looking for you.
SPOILER >
Second of all, how STUPID would anyone be to throw away the only map they had? I couldn't believe that anyone could be that dumb. Oh, yeah, and not to mention the continuity errors which ruined any sense of realism that I had. For example, after Josh dissapears, there is a shot of Heather and Mike leaning on a tree, next to each other. Suddenly, the camera cuts to a shot of them rocking back and forth. Ok, so who turned off the camera? Josh? No, Josh was gone. It didnt' turn itself off. There are many instances of this, but I won't mention them all.
One thing that many people complained about was the swearing. People say, "The whole movie was just three kids swearing". Well, I hate to break it to you, but that's how kids act. I don'tswear any less around my friends than they did in the movie, and that added a touch of realism to my perception of the film. And, to the film's credit, the ending was superb. So basically, It was worth seeing, but not a classic or anything.
SPOILER >
Second of all, how STUPID would anyone be to throw away the only map they had? I couldn't believe that anyone could be that dumb. Oh, yeah, and not to mention the continuity errors which ruined any sense of realism that I had. For example, after Josh dissapears, there is a shot of Heather and Mike leaning on a tree, next to each other. Suddenly, the camera cuts to a shot of them rocking back and forth. Ok, so who turned off the camera? Josh? No, Josh was gone. It didnt' turn itself off. There are many instances of this, but I won't mention them all.
One thing that many people complained about was the swearing. People say, "The whole movie was just three kids swearing". Well, I hate to break it to you, but that's how kids act. I don'tswear any less around my friends than they did in the movie, and that added a touch of realism to my perception of the film. And, to the film's credit, the ending was superb. So basically, It was worth seeing, but not a classic or anything.
Arlington Road
(1999)
So much potential
21 July 2000
Warning: Spoilers
When I saw the trailers with this movie, I thought it was going to be AWESOME. I'm a pretty big Tim Robbins fan, and the plot seemed great. It had so much potential. Sadly, it fell quite short of the mark.
The problem with this movie was that, while the idea and premise were excellent, the actualy script wasn't as good. I think that almost any movie, no matter how dark or disturbing, should at least have SOME comedy, just to balance it out. This, however, had none. It just had a down feeling the whole way through.
That, in and of itself, would not ruin a movie, in any way. However, the movie suffers more. For, I would have liked to see more on Farraday's classes that he taught, I was entertained by those scenes, but they were too few and far.
Something that always bugs me about a movie is when everything goes wrong for the main character. Don't get me wrong - a sad event here and there is fine - but this movie almost had a sort of sadistic quality. His girlfriend didn't believe him, his FBI friend didn't believe him, no one believed him, despite his evidence. It just felt unrealistic. Another movie that suffers in the same department is "Brokedown Palace". If you've seen it, you know what I'm talking about.
But the thing that weakened this movie the most was the last, I don't know, 20 minutes or so.
**SPOILER ALERT**
While the idea that Lang had planted the bomb in Farraday's car and all that was cool, the end relied on so many coincidences it wasn't even funny. For example, how did Lang know that Farraday's car would get hit by the bus? Or that he would follow the wrong van and drive inside the parking garage? The unrealism really detracted the enjoyment for me.
The saddest thing about this is that the ending was ingenius. While not happy by ANY stretch of the imagination, it was extremely creative and (sort of, kind of) made you think. It makes you look at the news in a whole new light.
In conclusion, I thinkt that while this movie had it's moments, the overall film didn't add up. It would be great if someone remade this movie in, say, ten years, and the script had a bit of polishing up.
5/10
The problem with this movie was that, while the idea and premise were excellent, the actualy script wasn't as good. I think that almost any movie, no matter how dark or disturbing, should at least have SOME comedy, just to balance it out. This, however, had none. It just had a down feeling the whole way through.
That, in and of itself, would not ruin a movie, in any way. However, the movie suffers more. For, I would have liked to see more on Farraday's classes that he taught, I was entertained by those scenes, but they were too few and far.
Something that always bugs me about a movie is when everything goes wrong for the main character. Don't get me wrong - a sad event here and there is fine - but this movie almost had a sort of sadistic quality. His girlfriend didn't believe him, his FBI friend didn't believe him, no one believed him, despite his evidence. It just felt unrealistic. Another movie that suffers in the same department is "Brokedown Palace". If you've seen it, you know what I'm talking about.
But the thing that weakened this movie the most was the last, I don't know, 20 minutes or so.
**SPOILER ALERT**
While the idea that Lang had planted the bomb in Farraday's car and all that was cool, the end relied on so many coincidences it wasn't even funny. For example, how did Lang know that Farraday's car would get hit by the bus? Or that he would follow the wrong van and drive inside the parking garage? The unrealism really detracted the enjoyment for me.
The saddest thing about this is that the ending was ingenius. While not happy by ANY stretch of the imagination, it was extremely creative and (sort of, kind of) made you think. It makes you look at the news in a whole new light.
In conclusion, I thinkt that while this movie had it's moments, the overall film didn't add up. It would be great if someone remade this movie in, say, ten years, and the script had a bit of polishing up.
5/10
Echh.
20 July 2000
Warning: Spoilers
"Scream" is one of my all-time favorite movies. The thing that made "Scream" great was the self-parodying nature of it, e.g., the characters were aware that they were in a horror movie, and therefor avoided the regular cliches. However, IKWYDLS does not have that, and comes out as a dry, unentertaining horror movie. The scariest thing about this movie is that it has been compared to "Scream". I'm sorry, but there is NO comparison. Scream had a great plot, clever dialogue, very complex characters and was unpredictable (for me, at least). IKWYDLS has none of the above. The characters were bland and one dimensional, the dialogue was nothing special and a moronically simple plot. But the worst part of all is when we find the identity of the killer (Spoiler). I'm sorry, but I predicted the killer, I don't know, maybe 20 minutes into the film. One fun part about "Scream" was that there were subtle clues throughout the movie as to who the killers were. But in IKWYDLS, there are no clues. Clues arent' needed, since the ending is so predictable.
The only reason this book was made into a movie is because of the runaway success of "Scream". If "Scream" was never made, do you think they would have made this movie? I don't think so.
The only reason this book was made into a movie is because of the runaway success of "Scream". If "Scream" was never made, do you think they would have made this movie? I don't think so.
The Kid
(2000)
Cute
14 July 2000
"The Kid" was an all around fun-film. Nothing fantastic, heavy, or meaningful, but it was entertaining and funny. Spencer Breslin is wonderful as youngster Rusty, and Bruce Willis shows some great comedic talent. By the way, watch for a small cameo by Matthew Perry...IMDB didn't catch this, and I barely did. He's the loooong haired software producer. Anyway, I would recommend this movie to everyone, it's a nice, light comedy.
Clerks
(1994)
Inspirational
24 June 2000
This movie shows that even without any money, stars, or sets, you can still make an excellent movie based on screenplay alone. Hilarious, yet also mildy thought provoking at times, this film serves as an inspiration to young and aspiring film makers. I only have one question: IMDB says that "Clerks" is referenced to in "Scream". Both of them are among my favorite films, however, I cannot find this reference that they speak of. If anyone knows of it, I would love a response. But "Clerks" is a must see for anyone.
Eye of the Beholder
(1999)
Terrible!
19 June 2000
This has got to be one of the worst movies I've ever seen. I honestly can't complain about the acting because, simply, the script didn't call for any. The plot was unbelievably, unthinkably thin, it makes...well, let me put it this way: Think of the movie with the thinest possible plot ever. Got it? Now make it 10 times thinner, and you have an idea of this film. And what happened to the dialogue? Did anyone else notice this? I swear, there's maybe about 10 lines in the whole film. Well, I guess that's good, because it is deaf-friendly. Not that ANYONE would ever want to see this. It might be worth it to see Ashly Judd naked, but if you want that, you can see "Double Jeopardy," "Norma, Jean and Marilyn," or...hell, any movie with her! Just make sure that if you do rent it, skip right to the end of the second scene, and then the bathtub scene. Then stop watching.
eXistenZ
(1999)
Very good
4 June 2000
I happened to catch this movie on the Sundance Channel. I was skeptical at first, but I found it very entertaining. I read another review that said it was straight to video. For some reason, NO ONE remembers that this was in theatres, albeit for a short time. Compared to the Matrix? Well, the Matrix remains one of my Top 5 movies, and while good, eXistenZ doesn't beat it. It is, however a good addition to the sci-fi genre. Also, the ending is beautifully done because it was so obvious, yet it never crossed my mind. Check it out.
The Talented Mr. Ripley
(1999)
Terrible!
31 May 2000
Until I saw this movie, I never before noticed BAD directing. There's great directing (Brian DePalma or John Woo), there's OK directing (most movies), but this is the only time I've seen BAD directing. This movie was horrible. There's no way around it. For example, if you happen to miss the first line of the movie, then the rest of the movie will not make any sense at all. Speaking of that, I think that if you start a movie with narration, you should continue the narration throughout the movie, not just stop. I never quite understood any of Mr. Ripley's motives, nor did I see why he killed so many people. Maybe I'm not looking deep enough, but I don't really think that I have any want to. I honestly cannot understand why everyone loved this movie...someone help me. Avoid this movie at all costs.
8MM
(1999)
Sick........Just sick
15 May 2000
Ok, don't get me wrong, Nicholas Cage is one of my all time favorite actors. Unfortunately, he is attracted to dark, seedy movies (8mm, Bringing out the Dead, etc.). "8mm" has got to be one of the most disturbing movies I've ever seen. Now, I admit, movies like "Starship Troopers" had more BLOOD that this, but there's a crucial difference: In Starship Troopers, the blood was gross, but not unsettling or disturbing. In 8mm, however, the very knowledge that innocent people were being killed for the sake of porn was downright disgusting. I have no idea how this film got an R rating, while films like American Pie originally got NC-17. If you have a tough stomach, and are interested in snuff films, you might want to consider this.
Tell Your Friends