Reviews

14 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Not all it's cracked up to be
5 October 2003
Usually I can move past the plot and situations of a movie and appreciate at least the themes, acting talent, and character development. Sadly, this film was severely lacking in all above areas.

The highly predictable climax eliminated its possibility of generating suspense, as most of the movie lacked any sort of tension anyway. The trite assignations of badguy immigration police, completely twisted and evil boss, completely goodhearted and innocent main characters caught in a big mess, etc. just didn't do it for me. Then the sudden turn of each innocent main character to undesirable practices just didn't work; perhaps a different script and better director could've done it, but the script simply didn't allow for it.

I'm willing to ignore such questions as, why flush a heart down the toilet? Why isn't the heart just with the rest of the body? I was trying to invent interesting situations, such as the other body parts having made it down the piping, but that didn't sit well with me, and I doubt the writers thought of it anyway. Why didn't Ogwe just call in anonymously to the police, and bring the whole thing down, or at least try?? So many questions like this, the answers to which either didn't exist or made no sense. This had more plot holes and less character development/sympathy than a lot of American summer blockbusters I've seen. Pirates of the Caribbean comes to mind!

And if it had the character development and empathy and such to back it up, I could forget about things like that. But it doesn't. Ogwe will never take money to keep quiet, but he will steal a kidney and 10 grand to save himself? alright, I can buy that... NOT!

And just to let you folks know, the entire concept upon which the movie is based, organs on the black market, is completely farce and ridiculous. I believe other people have mentioned why it simply doesn't work and would never work.

3 out of 5. Not really high up there as far as dramas go. Too many holes and overall lack of substance to ignore.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Charming but fell short of great
6 September 2003
This movie is reminiscent of virtually every Hollywood blockbuster I've ever seen. It did its job: charmed the charmable, roused those appreciative of trite, forced humor, wooed those susceptible to petty, undramatic romance, and overall, won people over by general appeal and advertisement rather than by substance. Granted, a lot of people like that sort of thing. And frankly I should have expected it. But I went in expecting something a bit more riveting, involved, and overall, something that perhaps would take itself seriously.

I was looking for more of a period action film with its own aspects of fantasy that remain consistent and serious (Lord of the Rings trilogy comes to mind, though that's not technically a period action film, it falls into the category right up there with Braveheart, Last of the Mohicans, Gladiator, etc. and still has its fair share of humor). I was interested to see how this would be done. The trite humor and cleches in the beginning, I thought to be something that would pass. Then I realized that they were to remain and then I of course saw the wonderfully comic CG skeleton pirates! And said to myself, "oh, it's one of these."

So I'd just like to let everyone else know, this is a Hollywood blockbuster and nothing more. Don't expect it to stick with you for long or to make you think about anything. Also, the plot twists just got annoying after a while. However, some good points: Geoffrey Rush and especially Johnny Depp in some roles that they obviously enjoy, and can overact wonderfully with reckless abandon! Great job by the two of them, very entertaining. Especially when Barbosa grunts, simply, "ARRRR!" The action is superb, with some brilliantly choreographed sword fights and wonderful effects throughout. Plenty of eye candy and humor for the whole family.

I'd hardly call it great cinema, but it was certainly fun. Go into the theater in the mood for a fun movie and you'll probably enjoy it much more than I did.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Prophecy (1995)
Great concept, shabby delivery
8 December 2002
Like others have pointed out, this movie is based on a wonderful concept but the delivery is just poor. I'd say the best part about it was the casting... maybe. But misidentifying the archangel Gabriel as the angel of death? Come on now, most christians can see that one. Not to mention a celtic bible from the 2nd century, sure. And to add to the other flaws pointed out, the characters were just so NOT human that it was boring. "I just saw satan." It wouldn't have surprised me if she added "Wow, he was scary. Phew!"
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Duel (1971 TV Movie)
Less is more: pure suspense
18 June 2002
Get rid of the flashy intertwined characters, complex plots and subplots, and riveting action of modern film and thrown in two characters (only one of which we see), a desert backdrop, and pure suspense. The result is the best Spielberg film I've yet seen. And made for TV!

The truck becomes the embodiment of evil and torment in our everyday lives. The various license dirtied and charred license plates on the front of the truck signify that it has done this sort of thing before and won. Despite the fact that I could usually predict what would happen next, this film remained suspenseful to the end.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Se7en (1995)
Brilliance already praised... some flaws
9 June 2002
Warning: Spoilers
*A few SPOILERS*

It's been said before: this film is brilliant, unique, etc. but I couldn't get over the fact that such a wonderfully written and directed film has some stupid, obvious flaws in it, that I picked up on during my first viewing AND while half asleep!

The "keep out" sign on the INSIDE of the door? How did it even get there? How did Somerset know to slip his knife through the door at that exact point in the door? I bet the editors were kicking themselves after they missed this one...

The conversation in the bathroom when they are shaving their chests for the wires. I believe Mills said something like "uhh" and then somerset says "huh?" I thought I had dozed off and missed something but the person I was watching this with had the same thought: "What the hell was the point of that?" I was waiting anxiously to find out what Mills was holding back only to be left hanging. Now a big flaw but noticeable.

When Doe dropped his grocery bag and started shooting I was definitely surprised. I believe the only reason for this was to give the detectives a reason to chase him, and thus get Mills in the situation where Doe puts the gun to his head for a few seconds and then leaves, foreshadowing that Doe still has some purpose for him. I could easily conceive of a few better ways to write that part... and I'll have to echo someone else's response that it seemed like they were chasing the phantom of the Opera. This was the only "cheesey" part of the film, and compared to everything else, it just didn't fit.

Other than that, the film was incredible. For me a movie has to be flawed to be good anyway... so it works out. 9/10.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Nice Japanese romantic comedy
15 May 2002
I've always liked Japanese comedy but this one tops my list. Very real characters combined with a very unreal situation can always bring out the best in a film. And reversal of roles is also prevalent: the head nurse getting greedy and the mob boss struggling with full body casts.

There's dark, light, and every other kind of humor in this film, and the situation is very enjoyable. I've always liked mischievous dark comedy and if you're tired of what's come to be common "American Dark Comedy"(Very Bad Things, Something About Mary, etc. etc.)this will be a great and refreshing film to watch. It's so fun that you won't even notice the subtitles.
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Subtle = Powerful
14 May 2002
Everything in this film is about subtlety... I think that's why it has such a lasting effect.

It's definitely one of those "mischievous" films... sort of an escape from reality that makes you wonder why you and others take themselves so seriously. It's something that will most likely linger with you for a while. This film made me re-evaluate the seriousness of my life. I think this is among the only films that actually has changed my life somewhat.
18 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Wow... not only bad but seems a ripoff
11 May 2002
There are only two movies in which an "inferior" race is pushed around in the distant future by foreigners much larger than and with better technology than them. There are only two movies in which a member of this inferior race receives a "knowledge machine" and learns about the superior race. Only one of these movies is based on a book, and it's called Battlefield Earth. The other is a sci-fi animation classic, known as La Planete Sauvage, or Fantastic Planet. Having watched these movies about 3 years apart, and still noticing drastic similarities, I'd say L Ron Hubbard was a little blocked for ideas when he wrote this book...

The movie itself was mildly bad. It's only terrible if you are watching it thinking it should have been a lot better with it's big name actors and high budget.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
An Animation Masterpiece
11 May 2002
This is an incredible work in the science fiction category, but an absolute masterpiece in terms of animated film.

Deep thematic probing and philosophical questions dot the story. Characters that are cyborg-humans question their existence... this is a true potential problem for the far future. Is something created outside of a womb without a soul? Do souls even exist? Set all this against some incredible action sequences, plenty of eye candy, and a very dark, acrid backdrop of the future of civilization. This is a summer blockbuster and more. It's ashame that most people are too close-minded to consider a film like this.

Bad guys and good guys? No clue. I had to watch the film 3 times to

-Understand the plot fully -Understand the motivations of the characters -Realize the depth of the film -And still I'm left with questions

If you open your mind, Ghost in the Shell settle itself within you... it will linger far after your first viewing. You will realize that a movie can have action, incredible effects, and STILL be deep.

Drama, mystique, philosophy, intrigue, "going out on a limb" quality, action, adventure, deep characters who don't fall into bad or good categories, beautiful imagery, mind-boggling plot... even some comedy! I just can't get over the fact that I have never before seen a more perfect mix of the elements which make a masterpiece. EVER.

10/10.
66 out of 77 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Memento (2000)
Arty and Interesting but lacking in some areas
16 April 2002
It's all been said before so I won't bother with detailing how the movie plays out.

Overall I enjoyed this movie, and I immediately could see why many people just get frustrated watching it. You need a LONG attention span for something like this, and it requires a constant use of short-term memory(interestingly enough)in order to understand what's going on. The more the 'backwards' scenes (colored part) play out, the more you have to keep in mind when discovering the precluding events. It becomes more difficult as the film progresses but eventually the 'past' (black and white part) fades into the 'present' and all is well in the 'conclusion' (or middle, depending on how you look at it) of the film.

One thing I didn't enjoy was the flatness of Natalie and Teddy. As characters, Teddy was a tad more interesting than Natalie, but neither really held my interest. It was more Leonard's perception of them that made one think; not the character itself. Then again the mere fact that Leonard only remembers them for a few minutes at a time really inhibits the possibility of him developing any sort of relationship with them.

Other than that, the film was very good and I believe deserving of the honors it received. You need to be looking for a psycho drama and have a very good attention span. I was in a particularly analytical mood when I saw it so that might help too :) Not for people looking for a fast-paced action thriller with good guys and bad guys clearly labeled :)
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Outlaw Star (1998–2001)
A seemingly original anime...
29 January 2002
When I saw this anime, I was fairly impressed. It touched on some interesting ideas and achieved a "feel" or "atmosphere" that was unique. The quirky and varied characters come together in search of a common goal, thought the plot takes its time in getting to that point, the way it came together was nicely done.

Upon further scrutinizing, it's my opinion that this show borrowed many elements from Tenchi Muyo and the comedic anime category while still stayin 'serious'. You could look at this as negative or positive, but I found it positive since the damned seriousness of some shows is just overbearing; this was a nice refreshing change.

I recommond this to anime buffs looking for something new, or a regular old tv-viewer looking for a change of pace.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Expert film adaptation of the Book
29 December 2001
Absolutely incredibly. My family members, none of whom have ever read a bit of Tolkien's work, absolutely loved this movie, as did I, and they are also fond of such hollywood garble as the common person. A very unique experience, and as my brother puts it, "it's like Harry Potter but for smart people."

They picked exactly the right details from the book to enhance upon, and usually, the perfect ones to remove, such as Tom Bombadil. Granted, he's a wonderful character, but he's something right out of a children's book. Like stated before, the Hobbits being eaten by tries and then magically let go through the singing of a strange goofy being about his Goldberry is just not something people accept nowadays, Elijah Wood or not.

The most common complaint is that coupled with the removal of certain scenes, the alteration of certain events(like having Arwen bear Frodo to Rivendell rather than Glorfindel), and the like. The casting was great, and it's amazing to see how closely the characters come to my mental images from the story and indeed, the images many of my friends also pictured for them. That just goes to show the skill of Tolkien in giving you 'detail' without 'going into detail', so to speak.

I have a few gripes however, which could easily have been remedied by the filmmakers and wouldn't have caused much problems. In fact I'm surprised no one noticed these particular peculiarities.

Gimli, where the heck is Gimli in the movie? The Legolas/Gimli relationship in the book, which was well on its way by the end of the Fellowship, is now 90% Legolas and 10% Gimli. Hopefully this was somewhat intended and they will pick up more on this in the next film. It was really sad to see such a great actor as John Rhys-Davies get so little lines in the film, when all his life he's been stuck with horror films and B movies, and now at his first chance to inspire awe in millions, they give him a whole 2 lines in the entire film!! Ah well, I just hope he gets more spotlight in The Two Towers, which Legolas certainly has had enough of!

Second gripe: the fight scenes. I think my eyes really started to ache at the end of the Moria battle. What is with all the camera action?? It was just way too fast; perhaps they wanted to show off the fact that "yes, we CAN have a computer image stay still when the camera is experiencing 10 on the Richter scale! YAY TECHNOLOGY!!" Sheesh. Anyways I hope they're a little easier to follow in the next film. The filmmakers could, for a change, take a few pointers from the Hollywood fight scene choreographers. Brave Heart, First Knight, and a slew of other Hollywood films, despite their flaws, had wonderful battle-filming techniques, which Fellowship seemed to completely ignore.

Third and last, yet the most minor: the fight between Saruman and Gandalf. Though no such fight took place in the book, or at least was said to have taken place, I'll say this once: if you're going to add brand new stuff in, do it right!! They accomplished this with the Riders chasing the hobbits throughout the woods and to the ferry, and with Arwen at the Fords. But with this fight scene, I'd say it was a bit off. Keep in mind that Gandalf has a ring of power, and that Saruman is the most powerful of all the wizards. This makes for a great contrast of powers combined with Gandalf's surprise and Saruman's jealousy. All we get is a few seconds of wall-crashing and that's about it. Ah well, my sanguinism was appeased at the Moria battle at least.

Overall, a great fantasy film despite its flaws. I've never seen one film without flaws, and this one at least has a chance to correct them in two future films!
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Caught this by chance, and all the better...
29 December 2001
Funny that I too caught this film by chance on a movie channel(cinemax I think)one late late summer night in 2001. Perhaps we saw the same showing...

This film is just like that: spur of the moment, definitely watch it at night, and anime buffs, probably won't like this. I watch anime now and then and this one is particularly interesting because of its "in the dark" atmosphere... you learn what's going on along with the characters, and that makes it all the more fun. A sense of mischief almost broods in the scenes of our antihero darting around the city. What Goku does with his bestowed powers is what some of us might do had be also been given such a gift.

Though short, this film is very unique. I've yet to see an anima quite like it, with such a down to earth and sort of "in your face" story-telling feel. Usually we get the ol' Macross and Gundam style, which leaves you as a watcher of wars and conflicts that are incredibly larger than your own. Goku however has in him a bit of us, of our mischief that we don't let out and which gives us great pleasure when it's shown. If you liked this I recommend Vampire Hunter D.
10 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Dark and creepy; I like it!
7 August 2000
This movie was the first anime I had ever seen. It was an early Saturday morning when this came on the television, and I got up to turn it off. But the unique eerie feel of the movie caught my interest, so I decided to watch it.

The animation quality wasn't great, but what do you expect in 1985? I loved the mood of this film: overall gothic and creepy. And some of the music just brought out the scenes even more wickedly and vividly. Most memorable is when D is storming the castle of Lee with great speed and determination.

There are some very complex characters in this movie, although more childish folk might suggest that it was a "Castlevania Ripoff" or that D is an "Alucard wannabe." Well, this movie was being conceived long before Castlevania was made, so we can rule that out.

The classic anime style of VHD is astounding, as is the intense gore and surreal landscapes. D is not the typical "loner". He is much more complex. Being a vampire and human hybrid, he can choose to live as a human or a vampire. This brings about great conflicts within D, and the fact that his father was Count Dracula himself probably doesn't make him feel any better. Also there is a strange being attached to D's left hand that offers advice and can restore D when he is down.

The strange and grotesque monsters in the film add to the dark, gothic mood. I'd say this movie was one of the better, deeper anime flicks I have seen. If it the animation quality of, say, Ghost in the Shell, I believe it would have been more popular. Hopefully the remake/sequel will live up to today's technology and animation standards set by such anime as Ghost in the Shell and Macross Plus.

The Vampire Hunter D Videogame(which is due for US release soon)will have mixed opinions, as some might say it is a blend of Resident Evil and Castlevania. For this reason I don't think it will be received well in the U.S., but that's just the way things are.

All that aside, Vampire Hunter D gets two thumbs up in my book.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed