Reviews

22 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Fight Club (1999)
A rare action flick
28 August 2003
This is movie is a great action movie, because it is, despite the constant brutal violence, not really the typical action movie. It is very original, and is a great study of a protagonist with schizophrenia. This movie IS realistic. People with schizophrenia (I know this because both my parents are shrinks) often feel the need to beat themselves and other things to a pulp because of the emptiness they feel.

This movie is tricksy in the way that A Beautiful Mind was tricksy, and I like movies that turn the tables like this.

Fight Club is entertaining and is a rare great action flick. It's also based on a great book, I hear (which I should have read beforehand), so I suppose that helps.

Chaw. Bloody Brilliant.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Citizen Kane (1941)
Bloody brilliant
26 August 2003
Warning: Spoilers
Citizen Kane uses lots of nifty camera work, with longer shots and such. Also, it's one of the few films I've seen that doesn't manufacture cheap answers.

(potential spoilers ahead.)

Charles Foster Kane, a rich and powerful man, has just died. His last word was "rosebud" and a reporter is searching for its meaning.

Rosebud is the word embedded on Kane's childhood sled. It, and the glass ball, represent his childhood, his innocence, and life before fame and riches twisted him and turned his heart black.

Chaw. Citizen Kane is a great movie, and anyone who says otherwise knows nothing of cinema. Perhaps not the greatest film in history, but in my books, it is the greatest American film in history.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Moulin Rouge! (2001)
Great film, great music
25 August 2003
An old fashioned love story and flamboyant musical, filled with a diverse mix of jazz, gypsy, ballad, hip hop, and techno.

It's way up there with Fiddler on the Roof pour moi, and I liked the music even BETTER.

Ewan McGregor's voice is spectacular, specially in upper range-- it's so full and pure. Kidman's is also great, and I am sure they had to go through a great deal of musical training to reach such a full, precise sound.

A great story, a great film, and great music.

Bravo, wot, wot! 10/10
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Booooooo
23 August 2003
Another crappy war movie romanticizing American soldiers that fought for "their country, their loved ones, and their freedom..."

A shallow black and white picture (figuratively speaking) of good vs evil that glorifies Americans trying to take over the world. Vietnam was a mistake. This movie was a mistake. If you want a Nam movie, see something like Born on the Fourth of July, Tigerland, or the Deer Hunter.

2/10
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Shine (1996)
Grrrrrreat
23 August 2003
Warning: Spoilers
(potential spoilers ahead)

One of my top 5. Geoffrey Rush delivers a terrific performance as David , a piano player driven to madness by the shunning of his father, and by playing the Rach 3, supposedly the hardest piece ever written.

A complex, moving masterpiece about the effects of pressure.

chaw. 10/10
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
S.W.A.T. (2003)
1/10
HAHAHAHAHA
22 August 2003
I'm not sure if this movie is intentionally one big joke, but I found it absolutely hilarious. It sports some of the worst writing I have ever seen. The whole thing is laughable, even the french bad guys are played by Italian mobsters!

"I've done a few stewardesses." "Just a few."

Some guy points a gun at Olivier Martinez's character's head. "What are you gonna do, shoot me?"

Even the acting is bad, which is surprising, since Samuel L. Jackson and Collin Farrel are usually pretty good. But none of them have any on-screen chemistry, which takes away from an already-bad movie.

Okay. This movie is either police-movie bile or satirical genius. I am not sure. But I'm pretty sure it's the former.

1/10
17 out of 33 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Tigerland (2000)
Interesting.
22 August 2003
A great movie showing us the barbed underbelly of training in the U.S. army. This movie is low budget, provocative and risky, and hence earns my respect. Good acting, good writing, action-packed (though not stupidly so) and over all an enjoyable experience. One of my favorite war movies of all time. 8/10
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Braveheart (1995)
Chaw
22 August 2003
Mel Gibson's accent slips from time to time, but he is still good as William Wallace and he's just down right sexy. The film strays close to cheesiness when Wallace makes his pre-battle pep talks but thankfully, the score is awesome, so the screen doesn't get lacquered in strings and cheddar, and you almost don't notice how bad the writing is(for the speeches).

The writing, overall, isn't too bad (though not that accurate, historically), and there are some really well-written scenes; such as the "wits of men."

The romance between William and his wife feels quite rushed, but it's not that much of an issue, since the Braveheart aficionados only like it for the gory battle-scenes (in general, faw!).

There are flaws, yes, but Braveheart is still a mind-blowing movie of epic proportions. The cinematography (though I'm not quite an expert) is phantasmagorical, and there are several Bee-eautiful scenes; such as the scene with the deer, the love scene by the waterfall, the scene where William takes off Robert's helmet, the scene where Robert walks among the dead bodies, the torture scene (Gibson seems to have a fondness for S & M), and the final scene with the flying sword, although the writing there is excruciatingly bad: "They fought like warrior-poets--they fought like Scotsmen." Bah.

Good acting, okay writing, great cinematography. 7/10
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
they don't make 'em like this anymore
22 August 2003
Movies these days are usually either no-brain action movies, no-brain comedies, no-brain cheese dramas or just plain pretentious crap.

Lilies of the Field is a fairly simple story about faith (in God and in each other) and after watching SWAT, it was a relief watching something as charming as this. It is easy-paced, calm and delightful with wonderful performances all around.

I really like Sidney Poitier, so I suppose it adds, but this film is a real treat. I'm not really religious, but this movie wasn't at all the Bible preach I was expecting. It's a treasure. One of my top ten of all time. Timeless classic--too bad they don't make 'em like this anymore. 10/10
12 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Good for an American film
21 August 2003
I am thoroughly surprised that simpletons (so I thought) such as Matt Damon and Ben Afleck wrote this. The story is perhaps a little predictable, but I wouldn't call it cliché. It shows interesting character development and bonding, therapeutic techniques, and the windows and barriers of a genius.

Maybe I enjoyed this because I'm not a genius, and could somehow relate to the writing of two American rednecks.

Good movie. 7/10
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Pumpkin (2002)
GENIUS
20 August 2003
This movie is frickin great and remains one of my favorites. Hank Harris is brilliant, and it's a relief to encounter writing such as this in our shallow age of comic book movies, inflated breasts, and massive car explosions.

Bravo!
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
faw! Bile!
18 August 2003
I would have enjoyed this had I not read it beforehand.

The events in the movie are completely changed around to the point where both plots are almost completely incoherent.

The central themes are almost wasted, and it seems like the movie is just simply another (Star Wars-esque)fight of good vs evil.

Poor Kesey!
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Cheesy
17 August 2003
Some memorable moments, phenomenal acting, but when it starts snowing brie and camembert, and the screen is flooded with Ritz crackers and Cheese Whiz, it looses everything.

Well written, beautifully shot, Great acting, but the cheesy score really gets in the way.

Even Henry Fonda's acting can't save this one.
1 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Johnny Depp saves this shallow piece of crap
13 August 2003
It's based on a theme park. What can you expect?

Nothing much. And I didn't expect much at all.

And it was worse than I expected.

Reasons:

Endless sight gags. No depth. Predictable. Monotonous sword-fighting scenes. Too long. Pretty much like every pirate movie ever made.

Things that save it from being a Gigli:

Keira Knightly. Johnny Depp!!! Geoffrey Rush (One of my favourite actors), who didn't get enough screen time.

Some good acting, but just horrible otherwise.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A sloppy sack of bile
7 August 2003
Warning: Spoilers
Warning: Potential Spoilers ahead.

First off, I have to say I'm not a Star Wars fan. I hated Episode 1; I was 12 when I saw it, and I guess I was just too old to appreciate the genius. *Sigh*

Anyway, the title for this dump says it all. Attack of the Clones. Bah. It's aptly named. It is an attack of clones; they cloned another crap Star Wars movie. The story: Anakin hits puberty late, or is actually a girl, and is PMSing-- I'm not sure. He has a fetish for killing...maybe he's Satan. No wait, he's Darth Vader. The Satan of Uber-shnerd sci-fi land, in a big plastic suit. Anyway, he doesn't become a walking, talking robot just yet. He has to save his girlfriend Padmé, lalala. Big light-saber. Buzzing. Severs robot limbs. Yawn. Anyway, then there's stuff about clones. Army of clones? Yes. Then Samuel L. Jackson-- how did he get in here? And why didn't he get nominated for an oscar-- Alec Guinness did. It's Racism, I tell you! And because this movie sucked. And because Samuel sucked.

The only thing worse than the garbage story, is the acting. Wow. The acting blew me away. It's soap-opera worthy. Emotionless, monotonous, expressionless. Ugh. It'll make you wince. The best acting by far comes from Yoda. I liked him better as a puppet though. He was just so much cooler. But he couldn't do kungfu as a puppet. Yes. You've probably heard. He jumps around, screaming, with a mini-light saber. The best scene by far. Just fast forward to this bit. Then don't watch the rest.

Anakin (Hayden Christensen) and Padmé (Natalie Portman) fit perfectly together, a cute couple of terrible actors. An unrivaled on-screen chemistry. This movie is fun to laugh at. One out of ten (0.5 for Yoda, and O.5 because I'm a good guy).
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Jack Nicholson at his best.
7 August 2003
Warning: Spoilers
Warning: potential spoilers ahead.

I don't like most hollywood movies. Especially hollywood romantic comedies. Urgh.

But anything with Jack Nicholson is a masterpiece, since I want to have sex with him. No, but really, this film is unusually meaningful for Hollywood. And oh that adorable dog should have been nominated for an oscar.

Charming performances all round. Greg Kinnear is well suited for a gay role, (no offense). Helen Hunt is quite good as well. And Jack, with his enormous scruffy eyebrows, and chillingly charming smile (that only makes sense to me, don't worry about it), is at his best here.

Anyway, I can personally relate to this movie, which is why I enjoyed it so much. I am an asshole. Very much like Melvin (Jack Nicholson) is here. I also meet people (not a certain one just yet) that make me want to become a better person. I haven't made much of an effort as of yet, but I know what I want to do. Yes, I'm a very confused human being, much like that last sentence.

As Good as It Gets is probably just that, in terms of Hollywood romantic comedies. I don't think I should even call it that. Because it isn't sappy, it isn't a chick flick, and it's one of my favourite movies of all time.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
miscasting
6 August 2003
Warning: Spoilers
Warning: potential spoilers ahead.

Leonardo Dicaprio:

No. NO. He is not suited for this role. At all. There's not even a hint of an Irish accent anywhere throughout the film. I admit, he was incredible in What's Eating Gilbert Grape, but here...he lacked the presence, the accent and the soul and is reduced to a shallow puddle compared to the roaring ocean that is Daniel Day-Lewis' William Cutting.

Cameron Diaz:

Much the same here. No accent. No presence. No soul. Admittedly, it's a fairly limited character, but she was noticeably bad in the way Queen Amidala was in the last star wars movie.

Also:

There are some minor problems to do with effects and the like.

1) In the opening battle scene, there are some moments when you really notice that the actors are not really hitting eachother at all, when no blood spurts out when a man is cleaved by a butcher knife.

2) When the riots start, the rocks being thrown seem to float in the air and are noticeably made of styrofoam.

On the plus side...

1)Daniel Day-Lewis delivers. Of course he does. Has he been bad in anything? Not that I know of, and I've seen most of his movies, being his obsessed stalker 'n all. I am probably biased...but, no one can say that his performance here wasn't powerful. The thick boston irish accent, the curled mustache, the greasy hair plastered on his sweaty forehead, and his comical but menacing manner...he is transformed. His performance here by far outweighs that of Adrien Brody in the Pianist.

"It was the finest beating I ever took...my guts was pierced...my ribs was all mashed up..."

One of the most memorable moments in cinematic history, that scene was (dans mon opinion).

2) There's no doubt about Scorcese's talent as a film maker. He takes us, entrances us, immerses us in another world. Unfortunately, the terrible miscasting almost ruins this film for me. Thank God for Daniel Day-Lewis, or this film would be completely wasted.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Dicaprio...who da thunk it?
6 August 2003
Warning: Spoilers
Warning: potential spoilers ahead.

Leonardo Dicaprio is masterful as the autistic 18 year-old Arnie Grape. I never would have thought, after seeing the crap he's doing now. Wow. His acting here, though not quite in the league of Daniel Day-Lewis' Cristy Brown in My Left Foot, rivals that of Geoffrey Rush in Shine and Dustin Hoffman in Rain man. I do not hesitate to say this. Rush and Hoffman are huge actors, and Dicaprio was just a boy at the time, but his performance is just as moving, just as comfortable, and just as mind-blowing, real and believable. Wow. He can act. It's a shame he's so terrible now. Maybe he just needs a suitable role. He's just no good at the squinting tough-guy stuff. He's no Clint Eastwood (which could be a compliment, I'm not sure).

Anyway, the rest of the movie doesn't quite measure up to Dicaprio's tremendous acting, which doesn't make it necessarily bad. I don't want to seem shallow or closed, but I'm not into the cliché romance stuff. Yawn. I've heard it all before. Juliette Lewis is just boring, but her character is boring, being the perfect girl savior. She's not noticeably bad, though. Johnny Depp isn't bad either. He's not outstanding, but he's believable. Gilbert Grape is a complex character, that doesn't come around too often. He's conflicted, with himself, his mother, his autistic brother, his secret lover's husband, and the people that mistreat Arnie. He's a good kid. And he is human (unlike Juliette Lewis' character, faw!). He loses it. He runs away when things get hard. But he can come back. At one point, he hits Arnie, trying to get him to take a bath (like Dustin Hoffman in Rain man, Arnie is afraid of water). And he runs away, ashamed. But he comes back to Arnie's party, and they make amends.

Gilbert's mother is overweight. Which is an understatement. He's embarrassed of her, and frequently refers to her as a beached whale. Really a rude analogy coming from her own son. She never moves from the couch. Never goes anywhere. But she loves her children, and when the police take Arnie away (after he climbs the tower for the last time), she gets up, and fights to get him back. Sniff, sniff. Touching. Anyway, she dies later during the party, and Arnie goes up to visit. This is a beautiful scene. A horrible scene. A beautiful scene. "Haha, you're hiding, momma," Arnie says. He thinks it's a game, but when it lasts for too long, he's scared. He's shaking her. He's crying. He's yelling for her to stop hiding. He's crying. What do you know...I'm crying too.

Anyway, I don't want to bore myself (or you) by going on and on about the plot. Lalala. I didn't like the cliché romantic part of this film, but the rest is quite good. Good acting overall, not a bad story actually, though slightly predictable, the relationship between Gilbert and Arnie is thorough, moving and developed, and well, Leonardo Dicaprio is outstanding. And to think, stone-boy Tommy Lee Jones won best supporting actor over him. Faw, what balonee. Dicaprio delivers simply one of the best performances I have ever seen.
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
the first realistic American war movie I've seen in a long time.
6 August 2003
Warning: Spoilers
Warning: potential spoilers ahead.

Finally. Finally. Finally an American war movie that doesn't glorify America trying to rule the earth. Finally.

Vietnam was a mistake. This film nails it. (Finally.)

Tom Cruise plays Ron Kovic, a crippled Vietnam veteran. Yes, the thought is shocking. But I was surprised. He was quite good, though limited by his squeaky, whiny, boyish voice. He by all means deserved the oscar nomination he received, but of course lost the award to Daniel Day-Lewis (as Cristy Brown in My Left Foot; in my opinion, one of the most beautiful performances in cinematic history).

Willem Dafoe was brilliant, but unfortunately didn't get enough screen time.

It also helps that I agree with Ron Kovic's views. But I also found the direction quite good. All the spinning camera angles...wavering...confused...illustrate the horrors and insanities of war beautifully.

I do not find this film insulting to the American men who died in Vietnam, but of course I'm not a war-crazed redneck. Anyway, the men who fought were young, filled with romanticized views and dreams about fame and glory associated with going to war. Young men deceived by the government, told that they were fighting for a good cause, to stop Communism, to fight for their country.

Overall, a good film, with a good message, and good out-look on war. Outstanding for an American film.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Rain Man (1988)
Yes!
6 August 2003
Yes. I join the chorus. Go Dustin, go! Wooooooohooooo!

Moving story, though slightly predictable. Cruise isn't bad as Charlie Babbit, which shocked me, since I'm used to him being terrible. I'm not a big fan.

Anyway. Very good film. Outstanding performance from Hoffman, and a good one from Cruise, who surprisingly, wasn't swept away in his wake, just hooked on, water-skiing out behind. He's a good water skier.

Go, Dustin, go!
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Stunningly bad picture.
5 August 2003
Wow. This is a stunning picture. The only dialogue is long, tedious speech-making, quoting the Bible, blah blah blah... I don't want to seem like an inarticulate gameboy addict like most of the users here, but, this movie is the epitome of all that is bad in a motion picture. It even romanticizes the bad guys. the South. The racists. The people fighting in favor of slavery. I hate black and white movies; movies that depict people as either good or bad, but I also hate colourless movies; movies without sides at all. And this movie, this terrible 3 and a half hour movie, is completely and utterly colourless.

The war scenes are good, let you feel immersed, part of the battle. Robert Duvall is always good, I don't care what some people say about him in this picture, he has a presence, a strong presence, whatever role he's playing.

Yawn. It's two o'clock in the morning. The movie's over. Why did I sit through it all? To see more of Duvall. Did he show up again? No. I'm tired.
0 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
My Left Foot (1989)
10/10
best acting I've ever seen. period.
5 August 2003
Daniel Day-Lewis is the most versatile actor alive. English aristocratic snob in A Room With a View, passionate Irish thief in In the Name of the Father, an impudent, violent butcher in Gangs of New York (in a performance ten times stronger than Adrian Brody's in the Pianist) and as the outrageous Cristy Brown with cerebral palsy in My Left Foot (just to name a few). His roles all influence eachother, but each is seperate, and utterly unique. He changes completely, with each character he takes on. And I'm beginning to believe that he can act as anything. Anything.

As Cristy Brown he is stunning. He does not ridicule the character, and he does not pity the character. A difficult achievement. And Cristy Brown comes to life. A smart man. An outrageous man. Human.

This movie, despite small scene-transition faults and the like, is an inspiration. Yes, it's predictable. But is it stupidly sentimental? No. I laughed. I cried. Not a single moment of cheese. Proof that this isn't a Hollywood movie.

My favourite scene is the scene in the restaurant, when Cristy is discussing painters with Eileen, Peter and her friends. Here's where Daniel Day-Lewis reaches an acting climax. "I'll kick you in the only part of your anatomy that's animated." "Wheel out the cripple!" And his performance never slows down, never falters, and is beautiful. Simply. He has a lot of screen time here. I watch it again again, and I never get tired of Cristy's perspicacious eyes, twitching and guttural speeches.

A must-see. Fo sho, yo!
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed