Reviews

When I first saw the comercial for this new TV show, I though it might be interesting. At the very least, it would provide a relief from all the reality-television crap. The concept seemed rather interesting, a crime that is seen from different characters' point of view. Unfortunately, the writers rely too much on this all in all only half original idea. The stories are too obviously crafted to fit this style. The storylines of the few episodes that I did watch reminded me of those of first year film students. All they needed was for everyone to commit suicide and they'd be good (oh, wait, I think they did that). All in all, I found it very difficult to get into and stay in the stories, so I give it a sad 6/10. Still not a terrible grade, I gave them extra points for at least trying something different.

I was a bit unsure of whether or not I was going to like this film. I had hopes that I would, being a big fan of most of Clooney's work (i.e. Out of Sight, Three Kings). I was rooting for him to succeed with his directorial debut. However, I was afraid that Steven Sodderbergh's influence might have stained him with unnecessarily artsy styles and plot developments. We all know he has a knack for adding in filters and using jump cuts for no particular reason (at least in his more recent work, his earlier films are great). However, I'm happy to say, Clooney seems to have a developed a very interesting and all around original style (although it does seem to stem at least in part from Sodderbergh). I was rather impressed at some of the techniques Clooney used in this film. Some of his framing broke every rule in the book and would have had any film teacher screaming, but it fit very nicely into the style of the production. His use of interchangeable TV sets to combine two places into one (as you see in the trailer, when Chuck Barris is on the phone with a representative of NBC) allowed for an added aspect to the storyline that is rare in films nowadays. Some could say it throws the audience out of the story, but I appreciated the originality of it. Though I've been told that many people could not stand this film (I work at a movie theatre and I was surprised to see how many people walked out), I had no trouble getting into the movie. The overall storyline does seem a bit thin when you look back on what actually happened, but its still more then enough to keep the audience entertained. My only real negative comment would have to be Clooney's overexposure of the interview footage he had sprinkled throughout the film. Personally, I didn't see the point to doing this. I can understand that he wanted to separate the apparently real-life interviews from the general storyline, but this seemed to be an excessive attempt at being artsy (Sodderbergh must have tricked him into doing it). All in all, a very good film that I recommend to anyone who likes slightly offbeat films. I give it a good 7.5/10.

It's refreshing to see a film like this after such a disappointing year in movies. An excellent, involving plot, superb acting on the part of the entire cast and an all-around impressive production, Charlie Kaufman's screenplay "Adaptation" is, by far, one of, if not the best film of 2002.

I was a tad skeptical when I went to see this movie, unsure of what Nicholas Cage would do with the leading role of Charlie Kauffman. God knows he's given us reason to doubt him in the past with films like "Gone in 60 seconds" and "Con Air", but he has redeemed himself in my book. It's hard to believe it's actually him at some points, which is fairly rare nowadays.

The screenplay is one of the most impressively crafted works I have ever seen. It is pretty much beyond explanation. If I had to compare it to something, I'd have to say an onion. This film has so many layers, from the basic story and development of the characters, the influences of the book, "The Orchid Thief", the script that Charlie Kauffman (N. Cage Kauffman) is writing, the script the real Charlie Kauffman is writing and all of the plot twists added in to give you a sense of Kauffman as the puppeteer of the entire production. Fantastic. I strongly recommend it to any avid movie fans. In my book, an easy 8.5/10.

I was so excited to see another Tom Tykwer film (Run Lola Run, Winter Sleepers), and even more to see a Krzysztof Kieslowski story (Three Colors: Red, White & Blue) by Tom Tykwer. Unfortunately, I found it rather boring. I should have seen it coming. Tykwer, best known for his quick action montages seems to have tried to mimic Kieslowski's long and pensive style, to no avail. The story is thin and fairly uneventful. The long pensive shots I was talking about are stretched to awkward proportions. The acting is alright, but not terribly special. The cinematography was good, but not terribly interesting. I would have expected more from Tykwer. Unfortunately, I have to give "Heaven" a 6/10, and I think my grade is somewhat biased due to my appreciation of Tykwer's other works.

Jesus Christ must be spinning in his grave. I have never, ever, ever seen such a terrible religious movie. Scratch that, I don't think I've ever seen such a terrible movie...final. The beginning of the movie is so terrible, I felt like walking out after 10 minutes. The feed you information without even trying to have it make any sense. They rush you through over 5 years of important info in less that 15 minutes. And the plot. P.U. It's so cliche. Oh, dear, a little girl is born with incredible powers but, those powers can serve evil as well as good. Come on! Like I haven't heard that one a million times before. And at least the others managed to produce something interesting. As for the acting, I think its worse than the story. I don't know what Kim Basinger has been doing all these years, but she certainly hasn't been practising. She delivers such a monotonous performance, I had to check for my pulse a few times. Sometimes to no avail. I'm not saying it was all bad(I'm lying, it was). Some parts were partially interesting. But only for a total of 5 minutes. The rest is pure crap.

My rating: 2.3 on 10

When I planned to go see Gladiator for the first time, I knew it would be good. But to be honest, I never expected such an incredible motion picture. Russell Crowe delivers his best performance yet. Joaquin Phoenix, a relative newcomer to the movie industry, does an incredible job as the lauded Emperor. It tells the story of a General(Russell Crowe) who is betrayed by his new Emperor(Joaquin Phoenix). His family butchered and his life destroyed by the Emperor, General Maximus finds himself in the ranks of an ex-gladiator who trains slaves to fight in the rink. But Maximus is bent on revenge. And so an epic battle between good and evil unfolds in those heart-pounding two and a half hours. The battle scenes are terrifically put together. They even rival the ones from Saving Private Ryan. And as for the casting, I don't think anyone could have been better cast. So far, Gladiator is my top vote for best picture of 2000(And I've seen everything). A little bit of friendly advice. Go see it twice. You can enjoy the awe of it all the first time, then enjoy the terrific dialogue even more the second time(at least that's my theory)

My personal vote: 8,00$/8,50$(It's a long story, but that is my rating system)

How to see: Cinema

What is the measure of a good movie? What does it take for you to walk out of a movie theatre and say: "wow". Obviously, it's different for all of you. For some, it takes Mel Gibson jumping off a building while handcuffed to another man. For others, it takes Barbera Streisand falling in love with Robert Redford. After seeing U-571, I told my sister it was an incredible movie that she absolutely had to go see. She answered that she had seen it all and that action films didn't interest her. Well, I'm here to state that this goes beyond "Action". I will admit, there are quite a few explosions and gun shots, but this movie is so much more than an average action flic. Suspense, thriller, war movie. It is all those things and so much more. U-571 tells the story of seven men, trapped on an enemy submarine during war time, that much you know. But it also tells the tale of an ambitious Lieutenant looking to command a ship of his own. Though he may not be ready, Lieutenant Tyler is thrown into a difficult command situation where he must learn that, with great power there must also come great responsibility. If you are a love story kind of person, I'm afraid you won't find that in U-571. But give it a try. Differ from the infernal for two hours and go see this movie. If you're not satisfied, you can sit in your car and humbug your way home and tell yourself David Di Francesco was wrong. Tell yourself Matthew whatisname gets on your nerves. But please, don't judge this excellent movie by it's genre. Then and only then can I guarantee that, if you keep an open mind, you just might enjoy it.

Genre: Drama/Suspense/War Rating: 7,50$/8,50$ How to see: Cinema