Reviews

I saw this movie with an open mind, having read parts of the novel when much younger (most of which I didn't remember). My elder sister recommended it, she gave me a heads-up on what it was all about. The visuals are very nicely done, the initial part with the dwarf being obsessed with his "possession" caught my attention. But all in all - I simply felt I was watching one of many tales of my youth (so this movie is on par with : Narnia, Wizard of Oz, and a good many other classics). My only beef is with the utter/total fawning of many viewers (people here at work) and some reviewers (titles like : Best movie _Ever_). I've seen too many excellent movies that spoke to me, moved me, made me feel intense emotions that pertain/relate to my life - so that any movie that deals with fantasy/sci-fiction cannot rate as a 10/10 or best ever. My 0.02$ worth. To prove my point, would I be saying this at a viewing of this movie - I would be quickly stoned to death for having had the gall to criticize it. To each his own. So - it was entertaining, but still something that amuses the child in me - no great revelation.

Cheers,

JM.

With all the hype about it being a Cronenberg movie, and the infamous exploding head part - there are so many nice touches to the movie that makes it stick in your mind, a few things come to mind :

1) The mood of the movie - shot in a way that doesn't feel like everything's been "touched-up" afterwards to make it look nice.

2) the score, that adds to the creepy/spooky theme

3) I also thought the level of emoting from Cameron Vale - was on par with what you would expect from a vagrant who is now told that he has exceptional and deadly skills and now toys with it a bit like a kid who has found (god forbid) his daddy's rifle (i.e. the scene with the yogi).

4) It has a constant menacing undertone - without having to do much, and that to me is both compelling (for that type of movie) and points to someone behind the helm that knows what they are doing.

5) The 50's / 60's touch with the Ephemerol publicity, the early 80's with Mainframe Computers ...

6) And the outcome of the duel between Vale & Revok was original (nobody that I saw it with originally figured it out - some even after "it" was done, and nobody when I had it on VHS (I would actually stop it right before and pop-quiz them), for you others out there - you must be psychic ... or scanners ;-)

Enjoy - in this day of non-stop action, don't think, don't feel - just look and suck-up the CGI, it's refreshing to have a movie that tries to scare you because of what you think and feel.

I saw this last Saturday (Aug 21st)....and this is what stayed with me, starting with the negative - so I can end on a positive note :

n1] If one bothers to make a movie, one should endeavour to remove the most obvious plot-holes as to not "alien-ate" (sorry - couldn't help that one) the movie-goer. On that topic : -> Why did the Preds bother doing so much hand-2-hand combat ? When they picked off several lesser human opponents in P1 and P2, with lasers, heat-sensing, ..etc ?? -> Having used them to {I guess prove the worthiness/courage in combat - don't they already know they likely will not survive with odds of X (read more than 20) to 3. While _NOT_ using their cloaking/armour and technology ??? -> Another thing that also annoyed me was the clothing - although it could be debated that below the surface - some insulation is provided by the snow - like an igloo...still on the surface ?! -> Also, a mission that seemed somewhat risky, would have seen the risk factor go waaay up, after noticing a brand new hole - going straight there and some energy activity... send in the marines (maybe the ancestors of Hicks, Vasquez, and all the other really cool crew). -> Time to throw in some techno-stuff, like a woman - deciphering some scripts, and some binary code on the walls - they could have nicknamed "mother"... etc.

p1] For the all the maligned reviews, the action and cgi - were eye-catching and well done. p2] I enjoyed the combat scenes and the way the lead-lady "be-friended" the Pred#3. p3] I liked the dynamic aspect of the movie.

All in all - I enjoyed it ... especially since my expectations were low and the movie delivered the basics (no storyline, minimal character development) but kick-butt mano-a-mano.

Hope AVP-2 is better defined though - so much more can be done....

... and never really come close.

How can one be the witness to this much acting, such a strong storyline about greed (which makes us appreciate human qualities - all the more), and not be touched/moved by this ?

Combined with part II (which really is not optional - considering it's dramatic revelation) - it makes for superbe movie-going experience that is barely 1 notch short of GodFather quality, as far as drama goes. Character development is excellent, pretty much all of it is plausible, nothing really grates, except to see a good man suffer.

Jean is good, an erudite - but he cannot understand nor smell a conspiracy - as this makes no real sense to someone with his principles. And when is all said and done - what matters most once you are heading to the pearly gates (should you be so lucky) the amount of wealth you've amassed or how you lived ? How do you hope to be remembered ?

As cunning and sly as Soubeyrand is - I guess he never figured it out....

A cruel, stunning classic, with impeccable french nuances. A must-see.

J.M.

I did - what many listed here - have done. And rented it against my better judgement : since the previews had done little to entice me.

As objective as an analysis goes : (here's my 0.02$)

Positives : 1) The movie is original 2) the way the multiple stories intersect is probably the high-point 3) It contains seasoned actors that perform the role as well as can be expected. 4) I did smile during the door shooting scene with Travolta & Jackson, and few others humours one-liners/conversations.

Negatives : I) There is *way* too much foul language ... is it possible to let the clock tick with hearing an f-word, I can even commend times it should be used to underline/emphasize ...etc ... but every 45 seconds !!!

II) Individually, some stories might have become interesting - but by just skimming on the better ones (Bruce Willis) - and digging deeper in the blander ones (Travolta's)and the dude "bagged" in the car = you come away with a : Yeah - so what ? lingering in your mind.

III) A few original lines and skewed timeline doesn't a movie make. One has the sense of a hyped up boxing match where the Champ get cut in the 1st minute of the 1st round, thus ruled a "no-contest" ...

I can see it appealing to some MTV-type crowd or some that desperately cr ave something original (which it is) , but gives me nothing to "digest" once over, VS something one can really connect (and sink his teeth into like : The Shawshank Redemption, Gattaca, American Beauty - that one is a rose, by any other name ...

And it **Certainly** doesn't deserve to be in the Top100 of all times !

Enjoy the show, Folks !

Jerome M.

I saw this movie many years ago, cannot recall all the details, but it was one of those french movies one gets to see on a rainy saturday afternoon. At first you watch it without paying any real attention, then it starts :

get funny, funnier, the plot is well thought out, and finally it becomes memorable. ### A lady (Albine) works in a jewelry store, one day 2 robbers break in. In the confusion of the ill-planned heist - one of them is killed. The other leaves, but plans to exact revenge. Enters the Inspector Tarnopol, who must not only figure out the deed, but also how to win pretty Albine's heart (he is also married). At the same time Tarnopol is also being hunted by an ex-con... and so the plot thickens. ### Well acted, great pace, delectable dialogue (rambo movie-goers will want to pass on this one, 3 aisles down, go to T2 - Judgement day).

• The kind of movie (like "The Majestic") that I believe the movie industry should produce more of.

JM.

PS: I did see T2, and liked it also.