Reviews

Almodovar have made it again. "Bad Education" is arguably his best movie ever. After All About My Mother and Talk To Her, if Bad Education was the final part of a trilogy about human shame, it would be the best trilogy ever.

Some people who have read the plot summary will think this movie is an attack on Catholic church and Pedophilia, but its nothing like that. Its just a simple story apparently based in part on Almodovars life. Not autobiographical, I'm sure, but still a nice story.

Its hard to debate plot details without giving it away, but I can tell you you're up for a great thrill, with plot twists and surprise after surprise.

Gael Garcia Bernal have finally silenced his critics and clear all doubt; despite the fact he is not Spanish (rather Mexican), looks like Almodovar have finally found a replacement for Antonio Banderas. Bernal is a great actor, and only 26. Beware Johnny Depp.

And is it just me or Bernal in a drag looks like a young Julia Roberts?

`Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Sex' is a landmark, and of course a great exercise in comedy. Dividing the movie in 7 different segments (with some not including himself in the leading role) was the best Woody Allen could do, and this movie works better than his previous attempt (Bananas) and his posterior `Sleeper'.

In a way, it's less ambitious and targets all audiences. All short films are hilarious, in a crescent order. My favorite is the last, which satirizes the humanly body functions during intercourse. A must see, for all generations of movie likers. Rate: 5/5

When you expect this much from a movie, you get disappointed. There's nothing seriously wrong with `BASEketball' (the blind kid, the drinking session before the operation, the SF team…) but you have to expect more from the creators of South Park and the director of `Airplaine!' and `Naked Gun' movies. This is an ambitious project, and it falls flat at being ambitious. Perhaps Trey Parker and Matt Stone should have kept faithful at the formula used in `Orgazmo': simplicity and sheer mockery. The plot: two losers enroll in a new sport that combines Baseball and Basketball (hence the title) and make it to the big leagues, and are seen as the ultimate sport heroes in a world where money and greed are in charge. Joe Cooper (Trey Parker) and Doug Remer (Matt Stone) are owners of that sport's most successful team, and have to fight against the evil in tempts of tycoon Baxter Cain (Robert Vaughn). Meanwhile Cooper falls for social assistant (?) Jenna Reed (Yasmine Bleeth). Meanwhile Cain manages to corrupt Remer and Cooper is on his own to keep the sport genuine.

Overall, it's not without his charm; there are some funny scenes, and famous faces roll up every time (which makes one wonder how some movie makers have so many friends and others don't) but the final result leaves a bad taste in one's mouth.

I consider Roger Ebert, of Chicago Sun Times the greatest movie critic alive. But after reading his critic on this flick I realized he didn't get its meaning. `Orgazmo' is not about wit, cleverness or anything. It's not even an attempt at making a good movie. `Orgazmo' is any movie-amateur's dream. Here it is: a movie that is daring, funny, full of inn-jokes, and stuff you can use in your day to day life and make friends laugh at it. Anything better than the Japanese duo that struggles with the pronunciation of English sentences? We've seen it; we know it's true. This movie has absolutely everything. Let me tell you what you're in for: a vulgar exposure of American Society trough Mormons; a sent up of porno flicks (in a scene a black guy is used as a double for a white guy); Hollywood's lifestyle…I mean, keep an open mind and you'll enjoy this one. Rate: 4/5

I've watched this movie several times; actually I watch every time I need to be reminded of the cruelest and most vicious disease that has ever graced the face of the Earth. It was made for TV, most unfortunately, because that limits it's viewing to few, when it should be played as more than a movie, an infomercial about the disease itself. The all-star cast lives up to itself, we see Matthew Modine, Richard Gere, and even cameos by Steve Martin and Anjelica Houston. The movie it's never boring, and it's quite intriguing and informative. I specially enjoyed Saul Rubineck's performance as the cold and realistic head of the CDC.

I had the chance to watch this on VCD, and I encourage everyone who hasn't watched it to do it, it will change your views on the disease just as it changed mine.

I've seen this movie a few times. Every once in a while I want to watch it by myself, it never gets tiresome, sometimes I show it to a friend, a relative, or a partner. This movie is made in documentary style, so no wonder it was made for TV as well. The all-star cast and the depth of the plot probably deserved a wider range of viewers. It tells us a story, in a simple, familiar way about the outbreak of an unknown disease in the U.S. in the early 80's. This disease seemed to aim at a particular section of the population, the homosexual. No wonder AIDS was soon labeled as `gay cancer', but soon it was found it reached a wider section of the population, and we see the day to day drama of a fully aware doctor trying to convince the average Joe that AIDS was everyone's concern, against prejudice and discrimination. The movie star Matthew Modine and Alan Alda in main roles, and brilliant cameo/guest star appearances by Steve Martin, Richard Gere, Anjelica Houston and Phil Collins, among others, Worth taking a look at. 8/10.

I've read some very negative comments on this movie before I watched it, but I tried to keep an open mind. Still, this is one of the worse movies I've ever seen, an utter waste of money. Though it was a senseless `comedy', there was not a single laugh in it. I remember Dana Carvey with a smile, from the `Wayne's World' days, and if he were there today he'd say: `I'm having fun.not!' I don't believe this is the end of Dana, I've seen him acting naturally, and he's one hilarious chap. He was just caught with his pants down this time, or worse, with his pants in his hands. I don't think anyone involved in this film had any fun at all, and the after-movie bloopers are just a sham. Better luck next time Dana.

Steven Spielberg, who has always fascinated us (not me,always) with his stories of the superhuman and the supernatural, capable of bringing a tear to our eye, triumphs this time with a well told story (apparently a true story, too) about a con-artist who managed to escape from the law for several years before he was caught and redeeming himself by helping the same law he once bended. Some of my friends who watched the movie before me have told me `it's nothing special'. After watching it myself, I understand why: they were expecting a comedy with unexpected send-ups and goofy turn of events. Thank God they were wrong. `Catch me if you can' doesn't try to teach us a moral lesson, or make us think a lot. It's just a story. And well told too. The cast is superb: Di Caprio has never been better (at least since `What's eating Gilbert Grape') and Tom Hanks and Christopher Walken have given an excellent support to the main character. You can sense Spielberg's hand in some parts, but overall it's a movie with a story you can enjoy without thinking what to expect next. My Rating: 4/5

It's hard to picture this movie without Jack Nicholson in the main role. `About Schmidt' is a movie about an uninteresting person, and the script might have been written on a rainy October afternoon. But what makes `About Schmidt' such a winner? Jack Nicholson's on screen presence is why. Any other actor would have made this movie a dully. Nicholson's manic facial expression, the way he expresses surprise and shock, his energy and wit. Besides Nicholson's there is also an excellent supporting appearance by Kathy Bates, who plays a multi-divorcee whose sexual urges seem to play the most important part in her life. Overall, it's worth watching `About Schmidt' if you're in for some great acting.

I've seen this movie at least 4 or 5 times. I see at least once a year and try to figure out what's missing. The answer is always: nothing. And everything. This movie is over hyped, overproduced, and overacted. My friends who liked the movie say I missed the entire point. I don't think so. It starts with some shocking vulgar scenes of Forrest's youth such as his mother sleeping with the school's principal in order for her son to be accepted at a `normal school' and other kids bullying him around because he can't walk -or act- normally. Throughout the movie we see Forrest succeeding at everything he tries, not because he really tries, but because things seem to fall from the sky right in his hands. Example: he becomes wealthy after investing in an `apple company' which was in fact Apple computers. Oh, oh the irony. Plus to most viewers annoyance (yes even the ones who think the movie is a classic) he keeps faithful to his girlfriend Jenny, a personification of the decadence of 60's America, even after she dumps him badly a couple of times.

He have taught Elvis to dance, he was a hero in Nam, he met President Kennedy, John Lennon, he unveiled the Watergate Scandal, he played ping-pong in communist China.question is.what didn't he do? The message seems to be: "No matter how hard you try, there'll be some idiot better than you at everything". Topped with some cheap tavern philosophy (life is like a box of chocolates) this movie is a butt aching doodle. Avoid it at all cost.