Change Your Image
bhicks-2
Reviews
Spun (2002)
Schwartzman rocks my socks (but the movie is still lame)
What is it about Jason Schwartzman? I've enjoyed every performance I've seen from him (though I still haven't, and most likely never will watch S1MONE. Yet he hasn't made a great movie post-Rushmore. Even those who didn't like Rushmore, and who knows what drugs they are on, will agree with this. I loved his psychotic loser in SLACKERS though the movie itself was uneven and at many times painfully unfunny. His slimy egomaniacal director character in CQ was also a lot of fun, but the movie was stylish and forgettable. Now he turns out another lead role in SPUN, a movie that fails to show us any enlightening details of drug addiction after TRAINSPOTTING or REQUIEM FOR A DREAM although those two movies don't have any exciting, obscene cartoon sequences or Debbie Harry as a laughable lesbian biker. SPUN'S gritty trailer trash chic style and irrelevant gross-out contest toilet humor becomes redundant early in the movie. Alot of the "campy" performances, notably Eric Roberts' flaming homosexual (gotta love that wig) is laughably outdated. Mickey Rourke is doing Jon Voight 35 years after MIDNIGHT COWBOY. Brittany Murphy plays YET ANOTHER mentally unstable young woman with an innocent girlish laugh. Mena Suvari and Patrick Fugit never surpass their "hey look it's them" cameos. John Leguizamo on the other hand is fierce and energetic as usual, but they reduce his serious acting capabilities to masturbating with a sock. Judging from the director's style, three movies in his personal library is PINK FLAMINGOS, BUFFALO 66 and NATURAL BORN KILLERS. Though this movie is unoriginal and has no point (besides the obvious DON'T DO DRUGS moral), it still entertained me and was short enough to make me feel I hadn't completely wasted my time. Weird scenes like Jason Schwartzman (a good guy and everything) leaving a stripper liaison handcuffed in his apartment for days both puzzled and amused me. I enjoyed the slow and quiet scenes more than the flashy, this-movie's-on-amphetamines-too!-style scenes like the sleeping montage near the end. And I loved how Jason Schwartzman kept me interested with his quiet mannerisms and all-around natural charm injected into an obviously under-developed protagonist.
Vampire's Kiss (1988)
cAGE tRIUMPHS iN tHIS cRITICALLY mISUNDERSTOOD cOMEDY
In my opinion, this is one of Nic's best performance, especially comedically! He's outta control! It's like that off-center gesture he hints at in all his movies explodes into full-force fury and it's all accented in the hilariously, east-side nihilistic accent he is masked with to make one of the few fully fleshed out characters not to be ruined by a dumb jerry Bruckherimer-produced, music video directed yarn of action movie cliches.
The movie was written by Joseph Minion, who also wrote the more brilliant script to AFTER HOURS, another fave. This movie has less characters, but only to pay more attention to the pain going through Loew as he falls deeper and deeper into uncontrolled madness, Loew's a character that's hard to sympathize for, but I still do even as he is a jerk to every woman he comes across (even in his own mind!!--look at how he treats "Sharon" near the end). He just doesn't understand love like so many others, and he's surrounded by those who are deeply and happily in love that it makes him sick. This is sad.
What makes it funny though is the unhealthy direction he takes this problem. Cage turns acts of insanity into a darkly comic ballet and that's where most of the laughs come from, though I can see why some people will find this to be more disturbing that funny. I still find VAMPIRE'S KISS marvelous, especially under a low budget which just inspires for sheer creativity. There are rumors that the movie was an allegory of AIDS, and I can see how some would see that, but I don't think that was the intention at all. I think it's a tragic love story from a mentally-ill narrative- but everyone is entitled to their own opinion, that's what art is for, among other things.
Almost Famous (2000)
perhaps not what some are expecting
Alot of the negative reviews for this movie are accusing ALMOST FAMOUS for sugar-coating what goes on behind the scenes of rock concerts and not showing more explicit and ugly use of drugs and groupies or "band aids" or whatever you define the young rock mistresses. This is true, the movie does. Why? Because that wasn't the point of the movie to begin with.
We've all heard the stories before, thanks to VH1. And I think Cameron Crowe's point was clearly set in the beginning, that this setting was taken place in the decline of rock and roll, where mammoth egos and publicity billings have gotten in the way of the music. It's one long party now, a self-manifested fantasy, and only a very few individuals (like Lester Bangs) can see through that.
Besides, do we honestly expect graphic realism from a director like Cameron Crowe? The creator of FAST TIMES AT RIDGEMONT HIGH? Not to mention the guy who gave us SINGLES, SAY ANYTHING, and, oh God yes, the catch-phrase movie of all time JERRY MAGUIRE. I can honestly say I don't want to. That's all for another movie and another director.
I loved this movie. And I'm planning to see it again. Why? Well, just read the other reviews here or go see it for yourself. More than likely you'll see what I mean.
Natural Born Killers (1994)
back + forth
Every time I see this movie, I form a different opinion, and I always wonder... is this a good thing? I mean, I AM watching it again and again, yet I can't really grasp it the same way I do other movies. I do know I enjoy Oliver Stone's director cut more than the studio cut.
Stone's movies are of an acquired taste for people. You either love him or hate him. I just think he's the kind of controversial director, much like Spike Lee, who either hits the mark, or doesn't. For the most part, he hits the mark here.
NBK is visually groundbreaking and can easily fit into the top ten of inspired movies of the 90s though I'm not quite sure it fits the top ten best. When I first saw it in '94 at the age of 13, I was disturbed by it. I really didn't think Mickey and Mallory had anything in their personalities for the audience to root for as they went on pointless murdering sprees, beating the prison system, killing the "media" (which I always enjoyed:) and getting off with no punishments whatsoever. Stone's explanation is that this really does happen, and perhaps he is right.
The movie starts off with such fiery anarchic energy as it switches from color, to b&w, to 8mm, to sitcom, to commercial, to locked away emotions, to acid trips, and to dreams broadcasted in hell. But, at the same time, I can't help but wonder if Stone's political ax grinding is too loud over what original screenwriter Quentin Tarantino had attended. Any fan can obviously hear QT's notes under Stone's symphony.... "Bad asses never die." And the Indian Shamen's story of the snake, just to mention a few. Plus, the rhythm slows down to a screechy stop near the end when M&M are in prison and attempt to escape. The whole thing with the demon and how love beats the demon sounds like preachy, superstitious b.s., and the riot takes an excrutiating long time as M&M escape.
I think this hole in the movie is distracted by all the controversy this movie carries on its back, and all the ambitious visuals, hyper-editing, and unique style that carries the film to be praised by people.
NBK is also strictly a satire and should not be taken seriously, trust me, you'll enjoy it more when you view it this way. It's over-the-top can't you tell? Just watch the overacting of Tommy Lee Jones and Robert Downey JR., that's a pretty big hint. What can I say, I still don't have a complete opinion of it. So why am I posting a critique? Maybe I'll watch it again and see it through a whole new perception.
The Stepfather (1987)
ORDER!!! ORDER!!!
This is one of those movies with a campy premise that thrives to make the grade. It starts out so well, with decent characters that you might not fully care about, but on the other hand you aren't annoyed by them. Terry O'Quinn is given a role that challenges the audience to take pity on his madness even while disgusted and frightened by him. The writers on the other hand, they could use a nice thick chunk of plywood against the head. The climax lets all the air out of a movie that started to build itself steadily. (Hmm.. let me take a really long time getting my gun here, even though I was preparing myself for this moment for a whole year. Hey Mom are you home? Oh never mind, I'll just take a shower to show off my underaged body for no good reason whatsoever) To be frankly honest I actually did enjoy Jill Schoelen's guilty pleasurable performance and THE STEPFATHER is enjoyable to make fun of. I just wish there were more juicy moments like when O'Quinn stops in his homicidal tracks and asks himself, "Oh, wait a minute. Who am I here?" He also does a dandy impression of Mr. Ed. THE STEPFATHER, overall, is perfect midnight viewing. Just rent something smarter along with it to handle your craving.
Rosemary's Baby (1968)
"He has his father's eyes."
ROSEMARY'S BABY has been with us for a very long time. But it remains to be so creepy and funny and satirical and sexy and very real and very 60's and just a load of fun even if it does keep you distressed throughout over poor, lovely Rosemary being taken control over outside forces.
I don't think Mia Farrow has done anything to surpass her performance here. Great, great heroine. And I love John Casavettes, he's a bit scary himself. But the scene-stealers are, of course, Ruth Gordon and Sydney Blackmer as the eccentric neighbors. When you first see them walking up the street with their tacky, colorful get-up you never stop grinning. Of course, all the old people are devilishly odd and creepy. You can never trust someone who smiles for 24 hours. "Witches. All of them!"
Roman Polanski is a great director and his genius use of narrative really fuels the film. It opens up like a Doris Day-Rock Hudson comedy, and it all corrodes from there. "Are you trying to make me be his mother?" "Aren't you his mother, Rosemary?"
CAUTION: No first-time expecting mothers should watch this movie until the baby is born. And when that does happen... check its eyes!!!
The Exorcist (1973)
Put that crucifix down right now young lady!!!
Why is THE EXORCIST still effective almost thirty years after it was made? Because possessed Regan is both classic horror chic and disturbingly freakish. Because there's so many shocking scenes co-existing with the sophisticated, long attention-spanned "hey we actually have a story here" portion of the film. Because its antagonist is the evil our American Puritan society fears most. Because it's the granddaddy, the original, that's been duplicated again and again many decades after. Because it plays like a documentary, dragging the audience into a bedroom it doesn't want to walk into. Because it holds so many realistic performances, including the treasured scene-stealing by preteen Linda Blair, and Ellen Burstyn doing a great Shirley MacLaine impression before even Shirley herself could master it... not to mention real-life priests in bit parts, a playwright showing marvelous vulnerability, and a legendary Swedish actor who can't stop playing old men (no matter what his age is). Because this is the last great film directed by promising William Friedkin. Because so many squares out there hate it. Because these reasons, and perhaps more (or maybe less), THE EXORCIST, in all it's glory, will not be forgotten any time soon.
P.S. The original cut by William Friedkin is the best cut no matter how many times you've seen it!
Pushing Tin (1999)
untitled
This is the kind of movie that was made for two stars, when you finish watching it you never plan on seeing it again, not that it was bad or anything. It just wasn't good enough. John Cusack is his usual chatterbox self, and Billy Bob is fun to watch (oooh! what a weirdo! He doesn't talk much. He wears a feather. He has an open mind!) As for Angelina Jolie and the great Cate Blanchett, they do good enough with what they're given. Jolie only has two or three scenes, but at least her character's screwed up enough to have fun playing unlike Blanchett's, who's accent is more fun to listen to than what she has to say. The script kind of ping-pongs from the character's personal life and work life, so constantly in fact, that the viewer doesn't really get a good, thorough glimpse into either. There are scenes of gripping computer animated effects through the cyber maps of the air traffic controllers and it just feels like the filmmakers were just trying to make the job more exciting than it really is. Sure there are thousands of lives in the hands of these guys, but come on.... The movie's drenched in such a light comic tone that it never really crosses the mind, even in supposedly suspenseful scenes. There's also some scenes that I think could have been better expressed, like Cusack's breakdown and "depression" after a certain sad and tragic moment. But don't let me be completely negative. There's two great scenes that stay fresh in my mind, both very comical and surprising. One involves a video of Thronton on a one-way and the other involves Cusack coming home to a crying Blanchett and kids. Now what is so comical and surprising about these two scenes, you will have to see (if you still plan on seeing this movie), and I hope no one has mentioned it in their comments yet, because they are the only memorable components this movie has.
Bring It On (2000)
stop bringing on the junk
How did Kirsten Dunst rise from such great artistic achievements like INTERVIEW WITH THE VAMPIRE and THE VIRGIN SUICIDES to become the icon of c***tease Bimbo-dom? She's the star of this umpteenth highschool fantasy of perfect, perky and clear-skinned teenager caricatures portrayed by 20-something magazine models and commercial actors. The plot is pretty much the same as the big football game, but instead is a cheerleader competition, but the movie is basically aimed at preteenager girls disturbingly filled to the rim with sexual innuendo and a message saying the only way to get a guy is to have a hot bod and show it off. The only thing that separates this from other MTV-inspired teenage regurgitated junk food, is the addition of African-Americans playing a bigger part here than in other movies. Still, much like real-life highschool, their not accepted in the in-crowd. This movie is unforgivably lame!
Todo sobre mi madre (1999)
the 4th best film of 1999 (in my opinion)
I have yet to see BOYS DON'T CRY, but I was very much at awe by this film. From the irony of it all, and the cinematography especially. It's all such a celebration of women, even men who want to be women. I'm very curious to check out other Almodovar films but I've heard this is his most mature. Apparently there are a few very cynical reviews of it, and I think I'll hit the toilet in salute for those individuals. We could observe every single little crack in this film or we could celebrate it as something far more superior than Hollywood's attempts at melodrama.
The Cell (2000)
style vs. story
I think LSD-addicts will come running to see this movie. It's visual wonderworld is so lush and colorful and electrifying and intricate and detailed and mindbending. I'm thinking... no HOPING top awards go to set and costume design of this movie.
Unfortunately the reality parts of THE CELL is dull and slow-moving and sadly predictable. I'm so nauseatingly tired of SILENCE OF THE LAMBS and SE7EN rip-offs in place of serial killer movies. It would've been a whole lot of fun without the serial killer subplot or even a subplot at all. Just a trippy full-length dreamscape movie with jaw-dropping, eye-gazing images. Maybe add some music and create a kind of new millennium YELLOW SUBMARINE or TOMMY.
As for Jennifer Lopez and Vince Vaughn. I don't think their acting ability is c-average. Just their performance, rent OUT OF SIGHT and SWINGERS together, and you'll see what I mean. Vincent D'Onofrio is always a good freak (rent FULL METAL JACKET, too) and I wish Pruitt Taylor Vince had a bigger part. Wait a minute? Three Vince's? What's up with that?
My biggest complaints are just the teases or under-developments of this movie. Average shot of Jennifer in panties (coulda been better), why is she lighting a joint, really? Why doesn't her chemistry sizzle more with Vaughn? And with all the supporting characters there, why won't they do something? Especially Dylan Baker, who was just a waste here.
Overall, though, the most creative movie out yet.
The Cell (2000)
style vs. story
I think LSD-addicts will come running to see this movie. It's visual wonderworld is so lush and colorful and electrifying and intricate and detailed and mindbending. I'm thinking... no HOPING top awards go to set and costume design of this movie.
Unfortunately the reality parts of THE CELL is dull and slow-moving and sadly predictable. I'm so nauseatingly tired of SILENCE OF THE LAMBS and SE7EN rip-offs in place of serial killer movies. It would've been a whole lot of fun without the serial killer subplot or even a subplot at all. Just a trippy full-length dreamscape movie with jaw-dropping, eye-gazing images. Maybe add some music and create a kind of new millennium YELLOW SUBMARINE or TOMMY.
As for Jennifer Lopez and Vince Vaughn. I don't think their acting ability is c-average. Just their performance, rent OUT OF SIGHT and SWINGERS together, and you'll see what I mean. Vincent D'Onofrio is always a good freak (rent FULL METAL JACKET, too) and I wish Pruitt Taylor Vince had a bigger part. Wait a minute? Three Vince's? What's up with that?
My biggest complaints are just the teases or under-developments of this movie. Average shot of Jennifer in panties (coulda been better), why is she lighting a joint, really? Why doesn't her chemistry sizzle more with Vaughn? And with all the supporting characters there, why won't they do something? Especially Dylan Baker, who was just a waste here.
Overall, though, the most creative movie out yet.
Men Don't Leave (1990)
sometimes predictability can equal good
This movie is carried by a great ensemble cast that gets better with repeated viewings. Jessica Lange and Joan Cusack and Kathy Bates are strong by first viewing. But you kind of get used to bratty Chris O'Donnel by second or third viewing. At least closer than any of his other lame performances. Oh and other guys are strong enough to compete with the women like Arliss Howard whose just fabulous with the likability quotient. Yeah, yeah it's predictable, there's no denying that. And the third act is probably the worst part of the movie, but the dialogue and acting is great and real sneaky at making you laugh and wince at the parts that seem like their set up to press the audience's buttons for hanky-grabbing at JUST the right second. But it's forgiven, merely because it isn't schmaltzy or cheesy, but a surprisingly good sleeper of a movie. Oh, but the similar ALICE DOESN'T LIVE HERE ANYMORE is better in my opinion. Though I'll follow Jessica Lange (why does she always have fingers over her lips?) over Ellen Burstyn any day of the week.
The Last Temptation of Christ (1988)
deep, man... whoa, truly....
I saw this film for the first time when it came out on DVD, just because I'm a huge Scorsese fan and from what I heard, the story was interesting. I'm not very religious myself, and I find modern society a little bit too cynical to openly and passionately discuss God and religion without the feeling that others would quickly be turned off. I'm not saying everyone, I'm mainly speaking for the people that I know personally.
ANYWAY... I was very intrigued by this movie and found myself thinking about it and revisiting images from the movie in my head. I remember in the beginning I was thinking why the heck is Willem Dafoe Christ and what is Harvey Keitel doing here playing Judas? But when you get past all that and especially the New Yawk accents, you'll find a very underrated masterpiece in this epic story, that blends fiction with the gospels.
The locations and costumes and extras were all marvelously authentic, which is seldomly found in religious movies, well in the past anyway. The camera-movement was pure Marty and I just loved watching a Christian movie with actual thought(!) and really looked upon itself and questioned itself much like Jesus does in this film. Am I really the messiah? Is this meant to be? You can hate this movie if you want or find it blasphemous or whatever. But at least Jesus is portrayed as a real man in this movie, with feelings and emotions like all of us, along with his superior divinity. I also don't think I have to tell you that if Jesus questioned Judaism and changed the ways of worship than the same can be done with Christianity.