Reviews

I just saw this film for the first time (Feb 07). I bought it for a buck on VHS. I'd never heard of it and realized the cast was a definite B-level cast at best, but I thought, what the heck? Just a buck.

I was pleasantly surprised. It's definitely no great film, but I actually enjoyed it. Sure, it's cheesy here and there, and it would've benefited from better direction. But I'd call it a hidden gem for any crime film fan to find.

An original, if bizarre, premise leads to some left-field drama and several genuinely funny moments. It's simply one of those late-night pleasures.

Blood Diamond is a powerful film. It was very difficult to watch due to the subject matter, and cried for the people of Africa not five minutes into the film. I liken the effect to that of Schindler's List, but whereas the Holocaust happened 50 years before that film, the atrocities surrounding African conflict diamonds is happening now. The most disheartening thing is that not much is being done about it.

But Blood Diamond does have heart. It has a big heart that refuses to give in to cynicism and despair. It is an "if only" film--as in, if only more things this world-changing would happen in real life--yet it is far from being idealistic. Hopefully, everyone who sees it will take it with them long after they leave the theater and will remember it the next time they find themselves eying a diamond in the jewelry store.

As for the actors, Djimon Hounsou shows again what a powerful actor he is, and Leonardo DiCaprio has never been better. He has had a great year between this and The Departed, and is becoming better at his craft every time he appears in a film. I love Jennifer Connelly, but she makes little impact here.

Edward Zwick continues to make powerful films. Glory and The Last Samurai are two of my all-time favorites, and now I add Blood Diamond to that list. It is the most important movie of the year.

I'm beginning to wonder about the validity of the star rating system here on the IMDb. I just saw "Snakes on a Plane." It was average at best, or would have been were it not for all the unpleasantness that took whatever there was to like about this movie and negated it. Except for one obviously tacked-on mile-high tryst, some other thrown in gratuitously violent snake attacks, the profanity, and Samuel L. Jackson, this was your average TV movie of the week. That, even without Jackson, would have at least been enjoyable. The death scenes that are played for laughs take any dramatic weight out of the movie when it wants to be serious. "Snakes" has its moments, but overall, it really bites. And with an 8.2/10 or whatever ludicrous score this movie got, I'm sure that bad pun hasn't been overused.

Morgan Freeman is one of the finest actors in movie history. Ashley Judd is a fine actress in her own right. It's too bad she keeps choosing projects below her talent.

Freeman and Judd, reuniting from 1997's Kiss the Girls (another average thriller), have great chemistry, and they are surrounded by a fine supporting cast in Jim Caviezel, Amanda Peet, Adam Scott, and an array of character actors in military uniform.

The direction is good, the suspense often palpable. But it gets bogged down with the same old thriller clichés the closer it gets to the end.

The performances save this otherwise average thriller. The DVD, however, has a bunch of interesting extras that raise its recommendability somewhat.

6/10

Samuel L. Jackson gives one of his best performances in Freedomland. Unfortunately, the movie around him isn't up to his level of excellence. I'm not sure what this movie was supposed to be about. It has no clear direction. Things happen for inexplicable reasons.

Perhaps this movie would have fared better were it not marketed as a thriller. It's not a thriller from anything I could tell. It works much better as a straightforward drama, if still a directionless one.

One critic on the DVD package raved that I'd be at the edge of my seat. Well, I was quite comfortable laying back, absorbing Jackson's performance, and trying to figure out what kind of a movie this was intended to be.

And the title, Freedomland, as well as its placement in the plot, seems arbitrary.

5/10

I am a fan of procedural crime shows, and I am a loyal follower of "House", so of course I watched "Bones" when it debuted. And, overall, I liked it.

I never watched "Angel" so I have no problem with seeing David Boreanaz in this new role. I thought he was a very good choice for the part. I also liked Emily Deschanel, once I warmed up to her style. They seemed to try too hard to introduce her as a real tough girl in the beginning. I think she pulls off being a tough girl and being a bit flaky, especially in social situations, at the same time. Her dialogue reminds of the way some girls I know talk, which might be why I got such a kick out of it.

The supporting cast is a likable group of "squints". The chick, well--they're gonna have to be real careful that she doesn't become annoying, or else I'm gonna start rooting for her to be killed off much the way I root for the demises of characters on "CSI: Miami"--yet they keep taking out the good ones.

The dialogue is crisp and funny, with some nice insightful moments. The tone is dark like other shows of its kind, but I like how they didn't rely on the gore-factor. I think they dealt with the crime committed in a respectful way. As for the hologram computer program, I think it's a cool ingredient--such a thing isn't so sci-fi anymore, but is still amply cool to see.

Now, for the negatives (other than the sidekick chick): I hate the seemingly random pop-song soundtrack. I think "CSI" started this trend of having a song here and there, but these songs should at least fit what we're watching, or, as Tarantino is so skilled at doing, lend an artistic contrast to the scene.

I think they also need to take a little more time refining the dramatic parts of the show lest they continue to come off in a corny way.

Based on just the Pilot, however, I give the show 3 out of 4 stars.

This movie surprised me. It made me laugh out loud a few times, but the reason I really like it is because of the parts where it gets more serious. And that is REALLY surprising, because usually when comedies throw in serious parts they come off as being really cheesy and sappy--the kind of stuff that makes one gag.

But here, it works.

Billy Crystal pretty much just hams it up, and Daniel Stern does some of his usual... uh... Daniel Stern-ing. And Bruno Kirby, well... he's the master of playing characters who are kind of annoying but somehow retain their humanity and a certain level of likeability. That said, they're all playing just about the same character as any character they've ever played. Individually, that is.

The relationship between these three men in the movie is palpable, believable. And they have more depth than the usual comedy characters. The best scene in the movie is when they're simply riding along, talking about their best and worst days ever. This scene could be played for straight-up laughs, but it's not. It is full of humor, but also human understanding. These characters have histories. They've had their ups and downs. They're hesitant to be vulnerable about their worst days, but when they talk about their best days, their faces light up as if they mean it. As a bonus, the dialogue here has some rather profound insight into our perceptions of what makes a day good or bad.

My second favorite scene is toward the end, when Crystal has to save Norman the calf from being washed away in a raging river, and the three men shift into cowboy hero mode. Again, scenes like this in comedies usually come off as silly, the kind of stuff that makes you say to yourself, "Of course they do the right thing and save the day and become better people and learn who they are." But this scene has real suspense and drama. Why? We care about the characters. And good direction always helps.

As for Jack Palance--I'm a little befuddled that the Academy gave him an award for playing Curly. But that's alright. He's fantastic in the role, and it's probably one of my favorite movie characters ever. And the scene when Curly and Crystal's character deliver Norman the calf is very good, and even had me wondering, "How exactly did they film this?"

8/10 stars. A comedy classic.

I'm a white guy who grew up in the suburbs, yet I found myself connecting with just about every major character in this film.

"Barbershop" goes above and beyond expectations, as it refuses to let itself get hung-up on the usual cliches of urban comedy. It's edgy without being offensive, and it's sentimental without being sappy.

Ice Cube is a charismatic lead, but it's the quirky, everyday characters surrounding and supporting him, and the dynamics between them, that really make the film as special as it is.

Cedric the Entertainer does a fine job as the old man with "seniority" who freely spouts out his own unique brand social and political commentary that often comes out of left field. His comedic personality produces more chuckles than belly laughs, but it's genuine, honest humor, a breath of fresh air for a movie of this kind. His character doesn't turn into a clown; he always comes off as an eccentric, but the kind of eccentric that you really might find at a barbershop, and the kind that means well and is easily loveable.

In fact, the whole cast of characters of the barbershop crew has an overall genuine feeling of honesty to it. They're not just two-dimensional stereotypes; they're people with real problems, real feelings--people we can root for and sympathize with.

"Barbershop" is a genuinely funny, well-made, and, I believe, much needed film about people. And not just black people, but about humanity in general, about the things that make us all who we are. It's got plenty of heart AND soul.

8/10 stars

Good first feature film from director Danny Boyle and writer John Hodge. A good, solid thriller with a healthy dose of dark humor.

Interesting dynamic among the three principle characters, though their motivations toward each other could have been made more clear.

The age-old plot of ordinary people getting mixed up in an unexpected acquisition of dirty money and finding their worst tendencies coming to light is done with style and clever wit, with a couple of nice twists that I doubt anyone will see coming. (Although, I'm a little hazy on just HOW it ends up that way.)

Boyle is definitely one of the great, stand-out directors of the 90s-and-beyond crowd, in the upper ranks with Tarantino, Fincher, Ritchie, and a few others.

7/10 stars

Alex Proyas is gifted at crafting fine dark sci-fi cinema. "The Crow" is truly a great movie.

There are a few things that could've been done a little better. For instance, lots of quick cuts rarely work to do anything but confuse and frustrate. But as that may be intentional, why nitpick over it?

Funny that a guy whose resume consists almost entirely of cheap horror sequels could pen this movie, especially with several scenes of genuine good dialogue. But Proyas' cinematic style is what makes the film really great. He took a good story and treated it with respect, taking the time to let the character of Eric Draven develop through a succession of alternating loud and violent scenes, and quiet and contemplative scenes. It's a beautiful balance for such an intriguing character.

Brandon Lee's Eric Draven has secured a place in the history of great, memorable cinematic characters, and he will forever be remembered and loved for his role in this film.

8/10 stars: an excellent film.

Like "The Butterfly Effect" and the "Final Destination" movies, this is a horror-thriller with a great concept that gets confused, misdirected, and otherwise botched.

At the end, I was like, "Wow, this could've been a cool ending if it hadn't had a poor beginning and middle to ruin it." Dang it, it's annoying, because I am so close to liking it and just can't.

Actually, now that I'm trying to review it, I realize that it didn't leave much of an impression on me at all. It's just another teen-horror flick that could've been a good movie in the right hands.

4/10 stars

This is just another mediocre action flick with bad dialogue, bad acting, an iffy plot, and lots of gratuitous explosions.

Plenty of "what the heck were they thinking" material here, too. Like, Rod Steiger playing a Latino (or maybe just a white guy with a Latino accent). Which, I guess, makes Eric Roberts' character Latino. Roberts is, of course, reliably unlikeable--the kind of character that makes you count the seconds wishing for his death scene to just come already.

There's also a laughable scene showing intercut shots of Sly Stallone doing some ballet aerobics (or something) in his house while Sharon Stone just stands in the middle of her own living room doing a Marylin Monroe in front of her open breezy windows.

Stallone and Stone's love scene, which shows plenty of Stallone's icky spider-web shoulder veins, is also pretty strange. It's got Stallone curling up in the most feminine way possible, like something out of a deranged Victoria's Secret catalogue. He makes Sharon Stone look masculine and very unsexy just by being in the same frame with her. Pardon me for a moment, but... eeeeyeck! I think I need a shower now too.

Two more criticisms: 1) This has one of the cheesiest moments I've ever seen in an action film that's supposed to at least have high production value, if nothing else. 2) What the heck happened to the cat at the end? He was the only character I cared about!

Like I said, James Woods is the only thing this movie's got going for it. He gives a great performance as the villain.

Stallone should've stayed away from trying to play macho tough guys and stuck to playing likeable underdogs with tough guy tendencies, like in "Rocky" and "Cop Land"--it's the only time he's ever been good.

3/10 stars (mostly for Woods).

Oh man, where to start. I can barely articulate how truly bad this movie is. It's the leading contender for the worst movie Bruce Willis has ever done (that's including "Armageddon"), and it's not hard to see why director Richard Rush had a 14-year gap between this and his last film.

Sadly, a really good supporting cast of Brad Dourif, Lance Henriksen, Kevin J. O'Connor, and Leslie Ann Warren can't help "romantic leads" Willis and Jane March, who are like zombies going through barely comprehensible dialogue and, for reasons unknown, having something resembling a vague simulation of what might be confused for a relationship--I mean, you know, if you were on drugs or something.

Oh, they're in love? We're supposed to know that how? Because they crashed into each other "accidentally" and both look good and steamy with their clothes off? Sorry, but blatant sexuality does not a success in chemistry make.

Gosh, I wonder why Jane March never became a substantial leading lady of film.

Possibly the worst "comic relief" ever in a movie comes in the form of the usually enjoyable Ruben Blades, who is seriously Mexican-ing here. His "funny dialogue" makes half the movie unbearable to listen to. Oh, and there are enough threads left hanging in the "plot" to weave a throw rug that could cover Los Angeles.

And what the heck is the deal with this random title? They must have picked it out of hat labeled "stupid movie titles".

I give it a generous 2/10 stars, if only to show some love to wasted ensemble supporting cast comprising Willis's therapy group. Oh yeah, I see the irony alright. Ack! Stupid, stupid, stupid movie.

As far as Jean-Claude Van Damme movies go (which usually range from average to awful), this is one of his best. Still, it's only an average actioner, if an enjoyable one.

Van Damme's troubled super-soldier doesn't say much, which is a good thing, as Van Damme has never been much good with dialogue. He actually pulls off some rather good character moments, especially when he is learning how much he enjoys eating.

Ally Walker's heroine is pretty annoying but calms down halfway through the picture and becomes more likeable. The "comic relief" locals who own the various ill-fated pit stops on our heroes' fugitive road trip are downright unbearable. I was just waiting for them to be turned into collateral damage.

As for Dolph Lundgren, he will forever remain a wannabe action star. The man has no charisma, and he's a few big clicks below Schwarzenegger and other tough guys at delivering one-liners. If he'd kept his mouth shut in this movie, he'd have come off as a more menacing, less laughable villain, and the movie as a whole would've been that much better.

There are some truly cheesy moments in this movie, as in all of Emmerich's sci-fi work, and it suffers from the usual Nam-flashback cliches, but it's worth seeing at least once. 5/10