Had my attention all the way to the final credits. I can think of at least 3 different endings that don't include finding the rapist/killer.
Reviews
35 Reviews
Testament
(1983)
Life in the simple days
1 October 2005
I just watched this film (OCT 2005) and after the fanatical panic this country (USA) went through after the 9-11 attacks, I found the film boring. Not to belittle the impact of 9-11 but if there was a nuclear attack rather than a couple of buildings being blown up by terrorists I would suspect something ala Mad Max or Blade Runner rather than the bland view this movie gives us. There was just enough blood and bodily function to horrify the timid and complacent. But that's not what would have or will happen if we are ever subject of attack that threatens to wipe out the entire country.
To it's credit, it does mention Marshall law once in a fleeting moment in the film but that's about as close as this movie gets to being real.
To me this was a feel good made for TV type film and not a very interesting one.
To it's credit, it does mention Marshall law once in a fleeting moment in the film but that's about as close as this movie gets to being real.
To me this was a feel good made for TV type film and not a very interesting one.
Napoleon Dynamite
(2004)
Whew! made it through until the end
9 April 2005
I laughed out loud at the very first funny part at the beginning of the movie. I chuckled 4 more times waiting for it to end. Once the first bit of humor is done, it's redone over and over again. There is absolutely nothing clever about the film. The actors all did a great job with the script they were given. The production was good, timing was good. Just that the story has been told better many times before.
As a previous reviewer stated, there was no balance to the characters and no character development. I probably would think it was really funny if it was broken down into 20 segments as a MAD TV skit that you saw once a week. But as a feature comedy film? Didn't cut it for me. If I'm going to voyeur into a high school dorks life, I at least want someone in it to be remotely interesting.
You're just stuck with this movie. Which maybe is the whole point of it but I didn't really get it.
As a previous reviewer stated, there was no balance to the characters and no character development. I probably would think it was really funny if it was broken down into 20 segments as a MAD TV skit that you saw once a week. But as a feature comedy film? Didn't cut it for me. If I'm going to voyeur into a high school dorks life, I at least want someone in it to be remotely interesting.
You're just stuck with this movie. Which maybe is the whole point of it but I didn't really get it.
Mystic River
(2003)
What were they thinking?
12 November 2004
Is there such an animal as a script reader in Hollywood these days?
First off, this is MY kind of movie. Kind of a psycho thriller who-done-it mystery. I've seen TV shows pull it off better.
The acting? The Characters were written well so pretty much anyone decent would have done a good job. Tim Robbins probably had the only really good performance yet he was the only one given a challenging role. I don't really buy the "guy crying" or "physically challenged" best actor awards Hollywood gives out. One scene you'll hear an actor with a brooklyn accent, the next with a california accent and the next with a Boston accent. And how much did they get paid?
The plot? This could have been a GREAT movie. With just a few little changes. There were enough twists and turns to make you wonder a little but after having to battle through the flaws, I didn't really care who did it at the end and was ultimately disappointed at the unconvincing attempt to name a killer. So weak and powerless.
The Direction? Eastwood must be getting really old because there were so many obvious flaws it was distracting. Maybe if he'd come off his high horse and let someone with talent direct it (like someone his grandsons age) it would have at least let the cameras do some talking so the actors didn't have to do the "wink wink" thing.
The Ending . LOL!!. When I thought the movie was going to end, I was thinking "ok, not a bad ending, I get it, mystic river. Not bad." That was before they actually said the words Mystic river and before the real ending came. I'm still in awe that they ended the movie that way. Don't get me wrong, I was very glad that it ended but I couldn't help to laugh at the ending. So utterly pathetic and meaningless and drove what could have been a sort of decent film far into the depths of mediocrity
First off, this is MY kind of movie. Kind of a psycho thriller who-done-it mystery. I've seen TV shows pull it off better.
The acting? The Characters were written well so pretty much anyone decent would have done a good job. Tim Robbins probably had the only really good performance yet he was the only one given a challenging role. I don't really buy the "guy crying" or "physically challenged" best actor awards Hollywood gives out. One scene you'll hear an actor with a brooklyn accent, the next with a california accent and the next with a Boston accent. And how much did they get paid?
The plot? This could have been a GREAT movie. With just a few little changes. There were enough twists and turns to make you wonder a little but after having to battle through the flaws, I didn't really care who did it at the end and was ultimately disappointed at the unconvincing attempt to name a killer. So weak and powerless.
The Direction? Eastwood must be getting really old because there were so many obvious flaws it was distracting. Maybe if he'd come off his high horse and let someone with talent direct it (like someone his grandsons age) it would have at least let the cameras do some talking so the actors didn't have to do the "wink wink" thing.
The Ending . LOL!!. When I thought the movie was going to end, I was thinking "ok, not a bad ending, I get it, mystic river. Not bad." That was before they actually said the words Mystic river and before the real ending came. I'm still in awe that they ended the movie that way. Don't get me wrong, I was very glad that it ended but I couldn't help to laugh at the ending. So utterly pathetic and meaningless and drove what could have been a sort of decent film far into the depths of mediocrity
The Human Stain
(2003)
Now that you know what this is supposed to be about....
8 October 2004
I have to blame the lack of story line for the mediocre performances of the actors. However it was the actors performances that kept me watching the film.
Classic case of trying to do too much with too little. There were about 5 potential plots that the writer could have followed yet tried to give each a little too much time. Had the writer decided to follow just one plot - any plot - and develop it, It would have made the film much more enjoyable to me. It completely failed in trying to integrate the sub plots into whatever the main plot was.
I'm not exactly sure how this script was sold to talents like Hopkins, Sinise, Harris and Kidman but unless they were hurting for money, the points never quite came across. Had these actors not been in the film, this may well have been one of top 10 worst films I've ever seen.
I would urge writers to see this film if only to see how important it is to follow and develop a story line. The dialog was great but profound statements does not a good movie make.
Classic case of trying to do too much with too little. There were about 5 potential plots that the writer could have followed yet tried to give each a little too much time. Had the writer decided to follow just one plot - any plot - and develop it, It would have made the film much more enjoyable to me. It completely failed in trying to integrate the sub plots into whatever the main plot was.
I'm not exactly sure how this script was sold to talents like Hopkins, Sinise, Harris and Kidman but unless they were hurting for money, the points never quite came across. Had these actors not been in the film, this may well have been one of top 10 worst films I've ever seen.
I would urge writers to see this film if only to see how important it is to follow and develop a story line. The dialog was great but profound statements does not a good movie make.
In Cold Blood
(1967)
Is it over yet?
23 June 2004
There were only 2 things that kept me from cleaning my kitchen while this movie was playing on the DVD. The cinematography which was beautiful, and the Quincy Jones soundtrack.
Even though this film was made when blood and guts and overt pornography weren't as tolerated in mainstream Hollywood movies as they are today, I did appreciate the lack of it. There is nothing more horrifying or sexy as your own imagination and this film like many other older films asks you to rely on your brain rather than feed you garbage. I can only hope that hollywood writers and directors can figure out once again learn to direct an emotional or sensational response from an audience rather than throw it in their laps.
But the story was bland. Maybe the book was better but the film did little to hold my interest. I didn't feel anything for any of the characters. Maybe if Hitchcock directed it.....
I'd give it a 8/10 for technical film study and a 4-10 for entertainment value.
Even though this film was made when blood and guts and overt pornography weren't as tolerated in mainstream Hollywood movies as they are today, I did appreciate the lack of it. There is nothing more horrifying or sexy as your own imagination and this film like many other older films asks you to rely on your brain rather than feed you garbage. I can only hope that hollywood writers and directors can figure out once again learn to direct an emotional or sensational response from an audience rather than throw it in their laps.
But the story was bland. Maybe the book was better but the film did little to hold my interest. I didn't feel anything for any of the characters. Maybe if Hitchcock directed it.....
I'd give it a 8/10 for technical film study and a 4-10 for entertainment value.
Bully
(2001)
Who's the bad guy?
2 June 2004
A sad story of reality where stupid people always lose. A tale of how a homophobic society and judgemental parents can turn a gay man into a machine of hate. An honest look at how parents have lost control of their children in modern day America.
So Who's the bad guy?
Is it the product of parenting by people who grew up in the "me" generation of the 70's?
Is it the monetary policies of the U.S. Government which manufactured the economic bubble?
This film was kind of boring when I watched it and I would much rather have seen a movie about the criminal trials of these characters. But the overall impact still makes you think and try to place blame and lets you know, you will never blame yourself.
Raise your hand if you think you have the right answer.
So Who's the bad guy?
Is it the product of parenting by people who grew up in the "me" generation of the 70's?
Is it the monetary policies of the U.S. Government which manufactured the economic bubble?
This film was kind of boring when I watched it and I would much rather have seen a movie about the criminal trials of these characters. But the overall impact still makes you think and try to place blame and lets you know, you will never blame yourself.
Raise your hand if you think you have the right answer.
Gothika
(2003)
Everyone thinks they are sane. Even you.
27 March 2004
Probably most enjoyable to people who actually believe we can be possessed. Is it the Sixth Sense or The Shining? No. And hardly Silence of the Lambs or 8mm. But it was a pretty good conglomeration. It did rely on the soundtrack and special effects to make it scary, but what's wrong with that? That's called film making.
I liked this film from beginning to end except for a small part of the dialog near the end of the film that gave up too much too soon. It moves at an even pace, the performances were good, and has enough little twists to keep you occupied. Which is much more than I can say for a lot of films which got a much higher rating on this site.
What's interesting is looking at the Gender of the voters on this site and their rankings. After seeing this film you will not be surprised that females under 18 to 44 like this much better than males did. Hmmm, I wonder why? Let's ask Miranda Grey.
I liked this film from beginning to end except for a small part of the dialog near the end of the film that gave up too much too soon. It moves at an even pace, the performances were good, and has enough little twists to keep you occupied. Which is much more than I can say for a lot of films which got a much higher rating on this site.
What's interesting is looking at the Gender of the voters on this site and their rankings. After seeing this film you will not be surprised that females under 18 to 44 like this much better than males did. Hmmm, I wonder why? Let's ask Miranda Grey.
Lost in Translation
(2003)
I guess I'm immature
20 February 2004
Or maybe it's that I've seen way to many hollywood films with 60 year old leading men and 28 year old leading women. Not that it doesn't happen in real life, but enough is enough. Unfortunately as the population ages we are probably doomed to see more of this stuff.
Seems the only thing that saved this film was they didn't have sex and Americans can chuckle at Japanese Culture. Which was done very well by the way.
Copland is a great director and the story was pretty good. Casting was horrible and in my opinion made what could have been a decent movie into this one.
I have an idea Sophia. Why not do that movie again and use a 60 year old woman (or make up one to look 60)as the lead playing Bill Murrays part and a 25 year old man to play Scarlett Johanssons part.
Maybe then it would be interesting.
Seems the only thing that saved this film was they didn't have sex and Americans can chuckle at Japanese Culture. Which was done very well by the way.
Copland is a great director and the story was pretty good. Casting was horrible and in my opinion made what could have been a decent movie into this one.
I have an idea Sophia. Why not do that movie again and use a 60 year old woman (or make up one to look 60)as the lead playing Bill Murrays part and a 25 year old man to play Scarlett Johanssons part.
Maybe then it would be interesting.
In a Glass Cage
(1986)
Breaking the cycle
9 January 2004
I was expecting to be horrified by this film. I knew what it was about. After watching the opening scene I thought I wouldn't be able to get through the whole film without having nightmares.
I read some reviews about how this film was banned in some places and though I can understand henious nature of the crimes committed, this is the first in your face film that I've seen that deals with the reality of abuse and how these cycles continue unless they are broken. Sometimes you have to be blatantly crass and over the top to get the point across which this film does in an unwavering manner.
Personally, I thought most of the film was boring only because it was predictable. The soundtrack is the standout. But overall, it was fairly well made film and I think anyone who thinks this film should be banned should look in their own Glass cage. They are probably the one's who have children hanging from racks in their basement.
To anyone who has been a victim of abuse and has chosen to break the cycle, will understand what I mean. Others will probably be disturbed.
I read some reviews about how this film was banned in some places and though I can understand henious nature of the crimes committed, this is the first in your face film that I've seen that deals with the reality of abuse and how these cycles continue unless they are broken. Sometimes you have to be blatantly crass and over the top to get the point across which this film does in an unwavering manner.
Personally, I thought most of the film was boring only because it was predictable. The soundtrack is the standout. But overall, it was fairly well made film and I think anyone who thinks this film should be banned should look in their own Glass cage. They are probably the one's who have children hanging from racks in their basement.
To anyone who has been a victim of abuse and has chosen to break the cycle, will understand what I mean. Others will probably be disturbed.
Urbania
(2000)
Gay film makers should see this movie
9 December 2003
I can't say much more than has already been said about the film, but this is only one of two gay themed movies I've seen that is actually a movie. I say that meaning you could actually plug any straight or gay character into any role and the movie would still have an interesting story and time line reference. It was very well thought out and put together and in my opinion had every element of a good film which I can't say about any other gay themed movies. Some are good because of the story, and most are just plain bad (except for the costumes and sets - lol).
I don't think this is a film for everyone but I do think Gay film makers should take a look at this movie and understand that just a steady camera and an every day drama do not a great film make.
I don't think this is a film for everyone but I do think Gay film makers should take a look at this movie and understand that just a steady camera and an every day drama do not a great film make.
21 Grams
(2003)
the Under 18 crowd likes it
7 December 2003
I should have looked at the age group of voters who ranked this movie so high before I decided to see it. I can totally see why they might like it.
The Good: All the performances were good to excellent. Naomi Watts in particular. The Cinematography was very effective and the sound track and audio also very good.
The OK. The premise of the story was ok. Had nothing to do with the 21 grams. I know they try to make you think it does but they only do it by tying to get you to believe the story has something to do with the weight loss that occurs at death. You could have watched "Cinderella" and said the same thing to get some people thinking "woah dude, that was deep". Not very thought provoking or profound for most adults though.
The Bad. The Editing and direction. Why they decided to try the "Memento" thing and go back in time, I have no idea. It was borderline insulting and aggravating. There was absolutely no rhyme or reason for having it in the film other than to make it more artsy. In Memento, it was brilliant. Now all these film makers who didn't get the reason why it was a necessity in Memento, try to use it to enhance a bad story. It does a great job of taking you to the wrong conclusions early on but the trick to a good movie would be to lead you to a great ending. This ending was not only drawn out, but a complete let down.
The Good: All the performances were good to excellent. Naomi Watts in particular. The Cinematography was very effective and the sound track and audio also very good.
The OK. The premise of the story was ok. Had nothing to do with the 21 grams. I know they try to make you think it does but they only do it by tying to get you to believe the story has something to do with the weight loss that occurs at death. You could have watched "Cinderella" and said the same thing to get some people thinking "woah dude, that was deep". Not very thought provoking or profound for most adults though.
The Bad. The Editing and direction. Why they decided to try the "Memento" thing and go back in time, I have no idea. It was borderline insulting and aggravating. There was absolutely no rhyme or reason for having it in the film other than to make it more artsy. In Memento, it was brilliant. Now all these film makers who didn't get the reason why it was a necessity in Memento, try to use it to enhance a bad story. It does a great job of taking you to the wrong conclusions early on but the trick to a good movie would be to lead you to a great ending. This ending was not only drawn out, but a complete let down.
funny with great fX
18 November 2003
Warning: Spoilers
I'm a fan of the T films. This was the funniest and had the best effects. I agree with another poster about the soundtrack which was very weak but the sound mixing on T films is always superior to most other films. Good entertainment.
*****possible spoiler********
The only thing I didn't like was the ending. given that Arnold was looking old and is now Governor of Calyfornia, the film still left itself open for a sequel. Arnold IS the Termynator. It will take much more crafting than any of the 2 sequels have so far provided to continue without Arnold.
*****possible spoiler********
The only thing I didn't like was the ending. given that Arnold was looking old and is now Governor of Calyfornia, the film still left itself open for a sequel. Arnold IS the Termynator. It will take much more crafting than any of the 2 sequels have so far provided to continue without Arnold.
Hedwig and the Angry Inch
(2001)
How did this escape?
14 November 2003
I guess it must have put on a wig and wandered past all the politics of the Motion picture academy.
I just looked up all the nominees and winners in 2001 and I can't anything except for "in the bedroom" and "black hawk down" or "Memento" that even compares to this film. I guarantee you all the trash like Gosford park, and Beautiful Mind will be forgotten long before this film ever is.
But that might have been the best part because films that make a difference that are shunned are often used as a base of future hollywood films. In fact, the story in this film points it out in a not so obvious way.
Music is great if you like more than Fleetwood Mac or Boston or snoop doggy dog.
If you watch this film, pay attention to the lyrics of the Gnosis version of "wicked little town" near the end of the film.
Brilliant film making. thank you to all involved.
I just looked up all the nominees and winners in 2001 and I can't anything except for "in the bedroom" and "black hawk down" or "Memento" that even compares to this film. I guarantee you all the trash like Gosford park, and Beautiful Mind will be forgotten long before this film ever is.
But that might have been the best part because films that make a difference that are shunned are often used as a base of future hollywood films. In fact, the story in this film points it out in a not so obvious way.
Music is great if you like more than Fleetwood Mac or Boston or snoop doggy dog.
If you watch this film, pay attention to the lyrics of the Gnosis version of "wicked little town" near the end of the film.
Brilliant film making. thank you to all involved.
There is a reason why sequels shouldn't be made for certain movies
13 November 2003
And this film proves it. The first "legally blonde" was a great movie. This was of the same caliber in my opinion. maybe even better. If you saw this movie first, you probably will hate the first one. And vice versa.
Probably the most unimaginative sequel I've ever seen.
Probably the most unimaginative sequel I've ever seen.
Jesus' Son
(1999)
Holy Metaphor Batman!!
10 November 2003
The acting was great in this film. It got a little caught up in the "I'm stupid so I'm cool" aspect and was very slow to start but half way through I caught myself trying to pick out every metaphor in the film. I think I counted 15. If I go back and watch it again I'm sure I'll find at least 20 more. Worth watching for the performances and to see how many metaphors you can catch.
Anyone who has tried to overcome an addiction of any kind will probably see more in this film than those who don't think they are addicted to anything.
Anyone who has tried to overcome an addiction of any kind will probably see more in this film than those who don't think they are addicted to anything.
Bowling for Columbine
(2002)
What was the point again?
9 November 2003
Warning: Spoilers
Moore does a masterful job of manipulation through out the film. Of course it's easy to see why the anti gun people would love this, but he also manages to get others thinking "hmmm, yeah.... I wonder why?" He uses a lot of misinformation and the occasional heart breaker to do it, but when you're watching something on film or on the news, be aware of your state of mind because they can mesmerize you. The reason why this film leaves many questioning their views is because there is a dichotomy in his own mind that he doesn't understand or know it exists.
*** POSSIBLE SPOILERS**********
Moores ultimate quest is to find out exactly why Americans kill each other with guns while other countries which he tries to compare to the U.S. don't. As the film unfolds, it becomes clear that he believes it's the Governments fault in one way or another which I don't necessarily disagree with. But he makes a point to make fun of some of the second Amendment advocates and through the whole film he shows his anti gun stance. What I don't get is, if the Government is so bad, then why on earth would you want to take guns away from the citizens? As many second amendment advocates claim, the right to bear arms is to protect yourself from an over bearing government.
There were some great parts to this, and I did like it if only for the way Moore manipulated people who watched it. For example, he goes to Canada and mentions they have a 17% ethnic(?) population and while he's saying it, we see black people walking by the camera. The obvious point he's trying to make is that Canada is just like America in terms of ethnic diversity. Nothing could be further than the truth. 17%? If you're assuming Caucasian as the majority in the U.S., I think it's closer to 50% or higher.
And aside from the manipulative efforts and un truths, I would have like it if he had mentioned things like even though 11,000 people have been killed by guns in the US, 175 million people world wide have been killed by Governments who's citizens were not allowed to bear arms and that Hitler was the first Government leader to require that fire arms be registered. We all know now that it was in order to seek out those with weapons, take them away and start the Nazi party.
I'm no gun slinging Militia guy, but a good documentary presents both sides of the story.
*** POSSIBLE SPOILERS**********
Moores ultimate quest is to find out exactly why Americans kill each other with guns while other countries which he tries to compare to the U.S. don't. As the film unfolds, it becomes clear that he believes it's the Governments fault in one way or another which I don't necessarily disagree with. But he makes a point to make fun of some of the second Amendment advocates and through the whole film he shows his anti gun stance. What I don't get is, if the Government is so bad, then why on earth would you want to take guns away from the citizens? As many second amendment advocates claim, the right to bear arms is to protect yourself from an over bearing government.
There were some great parts to this, and I did like it if only for the way Moore manipulated people who watched it. For example, he goes to Canada and mentions they have a 17% ethnic(?) population and while he's saying it, we see black people walking by the camera. The obvious point he's trying to make is that Canada is just like America in terms of ethnic diversity. Nothing could be further than the truth. 17%? If you're assuming Caucasian as the majority in the U.S., I think it's closer to 50% or higher.
And aside from the manipulative efforts and un truths, I would have like it if he had mentioned things like even though 11,000 people have been killed by guns in the US, 175 million people world wide have been killed by Governments who's citizens were not allowed to bear arms and that Hitler was the first Government leader to require that fire arms be registered. We all know now that it was in order to seek out those with weapons, take them away and start the Nazi party.
I'm no gun slinging Militia guy, but a good documentary presents both sides of the story.
Nightstalker
(2002)
Serial killing with a Latin flair
1 November 2003
I don't know much about the real nightstalker so i'll take others word for it that his life and capture were nothing like the real story. But I've watched a lot of serial killer movies and I have to say that I've never seen one that was good. Reason? Because real life is boring. After you see "Silence of the Lambs" or any of the sequels pretty much all serial killer movies are bland regardless of how much blood and guts they put into them.
In this film, the story of Ramirez was secondary if that. It was a vehicle to promote a Latin agenda of racism, sexism and the reality of it in Los Angeles. The fact they used latins that didn't talk like newscasters or wanna be rappers that weren't thugs was a positive thing. Even the whole religious thing with satan and the Catholic statue worship was great. Very true to life.
There is only one good true to life serial killer movie. "Henry- Portrait of a serial killer". This one is just as good if not better than all the rest I've seen. Gein, Gacy, Dahmer and a few more. As a MOVIE MOVIE, it's not very good. But I do think it's important to the latin film community.
In this film, the story of Ramirez was secondary if that. It was a vehicle to promote a Latin agenda of racism, sexism and the reality of it in Los Angeles. The fact they used latins that didn't talk like newscasters or wanna be rappers that weren't thugs was a positive thing. Even the whole religious thing with satan and the Catholic statue worship was great. Very true to life.
There is only one good true to life serial killer movie. "Henry- Portrait of a serial killer". This one is just as good if not better than all the rest I've seen. Gein, Gacy, Dahmer and a few more. As a MOVIE MOVIE, it's not very good. But I do think it's important to the latin film community.
Good outweighs the bad
29 October 2003
There was a song at the end of the film that had the line "I'm older in my head, my innocence is gone". That pretty much sums up adolescence right there. Too bad the film couldn't convey it without a nudge.
I have a problem with Hollywood and older writers writing dialog for young teens. They write what they might think, but not what they would say. It becomes way to over dramatic. Dialog for a film that is supposed to be set in the 70's having the kids say "whatever!" or "I sucked at it" is just un excusable for professional writers. It's like they are trying to understand their own adolescence as an adult and talking it through. They might as well have had one of kids say "yo, Knowhat i'm sayin?" Either write for the times or move the time to your writing. I didn't once hear the word groovey. That kind of writing can ruin a movie for me.
Story was great, production was great, cinematography was great, acting was great. Fusion of animation with the story was tremendous. In my opinion the best aspect of the film. Watch it for that alone just for film study.
If you ever grew up in the 70's as an alter boy in a catholic environment, you will probably be less amused.
I have a problem with Hollywood and older writers writing dialog for young teens. They write what they might think, but not what they would say. It becomes way to over dramatic. Dialog for a film that is supposed to be set in the 70's having the kids say "whatever!" or "I sucked at it" is just un excusable for professional writers. It's like they are trying to understand their own adolescence as an adult and talking it through. They might as well have had one of kids say "yo, Knowhat i'm sayin?" Either write for the times or move the time to your writing. I didn't once hear the word groovey. That kind of writing can ruin a movie for me.
Story was great, production was great, cinematography was great, acting was great. Fusion of animation with the story was tremendous. In my opinion the best aspect of the film. Watch it for that alone just for film study.
If you ever grew up in the 70's as an alter boy in a catholic environment, you will probably be less amused.
Chuck & Buck
(2000)
"HE MADE ME THIS WAY"
28 October 2003
Warning: Spoilers
I watched this film thinking knowing nothing about it. I thought it was pretty good but a little boring. Somewhat interesting psycho drama. It wasn't until I read the reviews of it here that I really appreciated it.
I don't think I've seen another film on this review board that received such broad and passionate reviews. I can only imagine the type of lives people live, their past or the cobwebs in their mind who found this movie the least bit disturbing. I can see if people felt they were lied to by the jacket notes why they would be disappointed, but hey, if you rent a movie with a picture of 2 guys on the front usually it's going to be a little gay.
Not a film I'd see again. But not bad if you're into psycho dramas with a touch of humor. But I rarely find a cross genre film that pulls it off and this wasn't one either.
****Possible spoiler******
Through the movie I was sort of hoping there would be an attempted murder, which would have made the movie better - regardless of which character did it to which ever other character. Sort of a gay fatal attraction. Little too sappy for my tastes but hardly disturbing.
I don't think I've seen another film on this review board that received such broad and passionate reviews. I can only imagine the type of lives people live, their past or the cobwebs in their mind who found this movie the least bit disturbing. I can see if people felt they were lied to by the jacket notes why they would be disappointed, but hey, if you rent a movie with a picture of 2 guys on the front usually it's going to be a little gay.
Not a film I'd see again. But not bad if you're into psycho dramas with a touch of humor. But I rarely find a cross genre film that pulls it off and this wasn't one either.
****Possible spoiler******
Through the movie I was sort of hoping there would be an attempted murder, which would have made the movie better - regardless of which character did it to which ever other character. Sort of a gay fatal attraction. Little too sappy for my tastes but hardly disturbing.
Dreamcatcher
(2003)
Not a masterpiece but very entertaining
22 October 2003
Like another reviewer, I'm not sure why this movie got so many negative comments. The humor throughout the movie completely worked with the cheezyness. If you're able to separate preconceived notions of the genre of the movie and have a sense of humor, I think you'll find it very enjoyable.
Not one of Kings best Novels nor one of the best film adaptations of his novels but I think that's a good thing for this movie. It has a life of it's own outside the novel. It has a little of everything which can be numbing but that numbing lets you experience the film in the way it was meant to be viewed.
Not one of Kings best Novels nor one of the best film adaptations of his novels but I think that's a good thing for this movie. It has a life of it's own outside the novel. It has a little of everything which can be numbing but that numbing lets you experience the film in the way it was meant to be viewed.
American Psycho
(2000)
One joke that drags on and on
24 September 2003
his movie was fairly watchable because of the dialog but you could pretty much have turned it off after the first half hour and not missed anything. IMDB has this listed in the Horror/Drama/Thriller genre. It is a comedy. Unless you don't get it. There is not an ounce of horror, drama and rest assured, nothing thrilling about this movie.
The acting was great, and some great lines but this movie has no plot.
The flaws happen early when the story uses all it's humor weapons and waits until the last 10 minutes to attempt to get serious. The writer obviously wanted to over convey her contempt for the lead character. It just doesn't work regardless of the greatness that surrounds the story. If you want to see a blood and guts thriller, rent anything else. If you want to see a good movie that expresses the same sentiment, rent "In the company of men." If you want to watch a comedy, rent a comedy.
The acting was great, and some great lines but this movie has no plot.
The flaws happen early when the story uses all it's humor weapons and waits until the last 10 minutes to attempt to get serious. The writer obviously wanted to over convey her contempt for the lead character. It just doesn't work regardless of the greatness that surrounds the story. If you want to see a blood and guts thriller, rent anything else. If you want to see a good movie that expresses the same sentiment, rent "In the company of men." If you want to watch a comedy, rent a comedy.
Beau Travail
(1999)
boring documentary
3 September 2003
I did like the pseudo ballet dance in it and the disco dance at the end but more to laugh at. I also liked the french version of trailer trash ironing.
Was this supposed to be some kind of lesson about men? One that 75 billion people already figured out 5000 years ago?
If you are gay or closeted and have some military masochistic fantasy then by all means, well, still don't watch it because it's boring. The story is way below average and the acting is non existent. And it's all down hill from there.
Was this supposed to be some kind of lesson about men? One that 75 billion people already figured out 5000 years ago?
If you are gay or closeted and have some military masochistic fantasy then by all means, well, still don't watch it because it's boring. The story is way below average and the acting is non existent. And it's all down hill from there.
Best serial Killer Movie I've seen so far
3 September 2003
I've watched quite a few in the last few months. They all tried but this one is the best so far.
I've pretty much decided that you can't make a great true story serial killer movie because there are so many fake ones out there. It's all about focus and the writer captured it. The MIND of a serial killer.
Acting was great. Directing was great. No wonder this film originally got an "X" rating with less blood and guts than "Alien". It was because it was too real.
I've pretty much decided that you can't make a great true story serial killer movie because there are so many fake ones out there. It's all about focus and the writer captured it. The MIND of a serial killer.
Acting was great. Directing was great. No wonder this film originally got an "X" rating with less blood and guts than "Alien". It was because it was too real.
Defying Gravity
(1997)
After School Special
30 July 2003
This reminded me of those After school specials that were on TV when I was a kid, except for the swearing. This barrage of out of work straight actors trying to play gay roles is getting a bit out of hand. You have to be GOOD to do it. Gay actor Rock Hudson was great at convincing the audience he was passionate about his female love interests. There are other to be nameless gay actors who have also managed this task. It's very rare that a straight actor involved in a love scene with another man can pull it off. This movie is no exception. That said, I'm sure it's not that easy to cast leads in film like this as good gay actors won't touch them out of fear and good straight actors don't need them.
I still got teared up at points, but it only because the story was very personal to me. Anyone else might find it boring, but these stories have to be told. If you're interested in this story, I would suggest a film called "Get Real". Much better film dealing with a similar subject.
I still got teared up at points, but it only because the story was very personal to me. Anyone else might find it boring, but these stories have to be told. If you're interested in this story, I would suggest a film called "Get Real". Much better film dealing with a similar subject.
Tell Your Friends