Change Your Image
degecko13
Reviews
Margot at the Wedding (2007)
Pseudo Dysfunctional Family Drivel
Don't waste your time or money-this one stinks really REALLY BADLY!! This film makes the Royal(flush it down the toilet)Tenenbaums look like a masterpiece!! The only reason I rented this smelly turd was because we live in the very town-East Quogue, where some of it was filmed...so naturally we had to check it out. Boy, what a mistake that was!! Can even remember having Main Street(Montauk Hwy) closed down for a day or two while they filmed-thanks Noah, the inconvenience and intrusion definitely wasn't worth it!! Plus they shot some other scenes nearby, I believe it might have been Red Creek-a really beautiful area-such a waste of some great scenery. I think I even stood behind the food crew on the "express" checkout line one morning at the local supermarket-I swear!! (buying what seemed like a half million dollars worth of food-at least ten cases of bottled water, must have been for Nicole's sustenance). I even saw the van as they loaded it up, I guess Hollywood has to make a big production out of everything. Sorry-I'm beginning to sound like this movie-haha. Anyway...
This film pushed our patience, in the sense of "when is this movie going to start getting interesting". My wife and I unfortunately had to wait until nearly the end before the one scene that showcased our tiny town revealed itself. Ouch, what an agonizing wait. Even my wife thought this was painful to watch, and she gravitates towards these kind of flicks. Awful, AWFUL dialogue. Silly, banal bickering one minute, followed by seemingly hollow, half-hearted apologies and reconciliations the next. Over and OVER and OVER again-the whole movie was pretty much that. I'm not sure what Baumbach was thinking when he wrote the screenplay, and then directed this junk. Sure he had some success with "The Squid and the Whale"-which we both liked... But I guess he thinks he can just expand the wackiness-dysfunctional-kooky factor and sprinkle in some dull, laughless humor and voilà, he's got a viewable movie-well WRONG!! This movie tries too hard to be off-center, dysfunctional and wacky. I agree with other posters that while some people find these introspectives of nutjobs' lives amusing, most of us find them dull, boring and almost unlifelike. Main stream folks have their problems, but not like this.
Want more? Really dopey dialogue throughout most of this film(did I just say that-well it's worth repeating), bad casting-read Jack Black, that Pais kid was rather pathetic too, horrible editing at times, several shots that just totally did not match up, hey that should never happen in this day and age, and a lousy plot... This film is just a total waste of time and space(on anyone's DVD shelf). Avoid this stinker at any cost!! Even a 99-cent rental!!!
Cloverfield (2008)
Let's Add It All Up...
I did see this movie, with the same anticipations that many shared, it looked like it would be great from all the hyped TV ads...(But please read through to my second paragraph!) And then I actually saw this monstrosity-pardon my pun. Awful doesn't begin to describe this "steaming pile" as so many others have affectionately called it. Yeah, the CGI was cool in spots, but it had almost no plot, weak acting and had too many gaps of logic, well beyond what a good movie does to suspend one's believe in reality--> that "rebar" event highlights this completely. (Keep READING!!)
My REAL reason for this post is to take IMDb to task for giving this PoS such an unusually high rating...7.4 to date. I back my thoughts with evidence from their very own site... I perused through the "Post your review" pages, sorting them using the "Hated it" filter. There are 106 pages of reviews that "Hate it", 1060 responses. The first 50 pages of these reviews carry only one or two stars. By page 75 (yeah, 75 out of 106 that hated it) the reviews manage to give it six stars... Now, I sorted all the reviews by "Love it" and you get just 90 pages and 894 reviews out of the 2010 reviews in total, as of the time that I wrote this. Funny that the two figures add up to 1954 reviews in total, I guess a few of you are on the fence... and IMDb does have a Love/Hate category...for the 56 of you out there...LOL.
But still, how can there be more negative reviews than positive reviews (by 166), and this thing still ends up with a 7.4? And like I said, the first fifty, yes 5-0 pages(one quarter of the total pages of reviews) contain reviews with only 1-2 stars!! Something more that this movie smells fishy to me...didn't that monster have gills??
SO, MY QUESTION TO YOU, the reader of this post is, who is IMDb really working for? I would think this movie deserves maybe a four or five overall rating at best, and IMDb tells us it's a 7.4. Is it because someone is perhaps stuffing the ballot box, so to speak?... I can't see how a movie can get such overwhelmingly bad reviews, in VOLUMES, and still generate a 7.4?
I know math does not seem to be a strong point for most people anymore, but the math on this one really REEKS of something awful. So what's the scoop IMDb, care to respond? I'd be shocked if this post makes it to the main page, but I will applaud them if they let it fly, if for nothing more than freedom of speech... But I think my point is valid. Let me and IMDb know what you think of my thoughts, VOTE ON THIS REVIEW!!
The Abbott and Costello Show (1952)
Classically Funny Stuff !!!
I must rebuff the previous comments made in the Feb 04 and Feb 06 reviews. First off, the individual who thought this was poorly written and predictable is entitled to his opinion, regardless of how unfounded it may be. But to call this classic comedy duo boring is grossly unfair. A comedic legend that inspired Jerry Seinfeld? What credentials are you going by? That person writes--"How about a joke"...the joke is on you!! This is sketch comedy at its finest!! I can't see how anyone cannot find humor and at least one good laugh in Costello's birthday skit between Lou and Mr. Fields. How Fields turns Costello's every word against him is just grand farce!! Or when Lou walks the old lady across the street. To see that old lady bonk Lou over the head, breaking her cane not once but twice is priceless. Throw in Mike the Cop several times in the same routine and you have a surefire recipe for laughter. And how one can overlook the banter between Lou and Stinky is beyond me, those two provide the show with many of its finest moments.
And for the reviewer who thought Joe Besser's "Stinky" character brought the series down, come on!!! Stinky's interactions with Costello are hilarious. To see the two of them beat upon each other, interjecting witty comments along the way-"I'll harm you" (from the Susquehanna Hat Company routine) is riotous.
It seems that no matter how wonderful a performer is, how universally recognized, a forum such as this is always bound to bring out the few dodos who have to go against the grain... Give these two comedy giants their complete due and give them a break!!!
The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada (2005)
Amusing film, but too many flaws...
I found this movie to be a quirky story of friendship, retribution, commitment and forgiveness. Some of its positives are the beautiful scenery, and some of the acting portrayals were very good.
One of the biggest problems I found with this film, and this is symptomatic of Hollywood in general, is that it tries to get the viewer to accept certain basic premises that are truly ridiculous. While I applaud Tommy Lee Jones effort as a first time director, the lack of credibility of certain parts, in addition to serious storyline ambiguities make this a movie that falls well short of its 7.8 rating.
MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS:
For example. The scene where Tommy Lee Jones makes Barry Pepper dig up the body from the town plot. A keen eye will notice that Pepper's character is wearing FLIP-FLOPS!! As someone who's done some digging in his day, there's no way in hell this guy digs a 4x4x8 foot ditch in flip-flops. You use your feet to dig... Totally ridiculous. How hard would it have been to have him wearing work boots? While we're on this digging, to dig out a ditch like that would have taken hours, even if it was recently excavated by a backhoe. And yet Jones, the director, pans out to some sporting event while the digging takes place, which leads one to believe that it's still early evening. To further reinforce this awfully ridiculous compression of time, a few scenes later, outside of Melquiades apartment, Jones pans to the distant twilight-signifying that it's been dark for a relatively short period of time, giving further proof that this ditch digging took maybe an hour at most, in flip flops, no less...And did I mention that Pepper's character does all this digging wearing hand-cuffs...silly me.
In another scene, we see Pepper tearing up his blue jeans, using the material to craft some makeshift footwear. Ever try tearing denim, while wearing handcuffs no less? Usually, when you tear something apart, your hands move away, in opposite directions... Then, to think that Pepper crafts these denim moccasins that miraculously stay on his feet for the rest of the movie. Couldn't he just have gone barefoot? Was I supposed to applaud Pepper's ingenuity, was that supposed to make me sympathize for him more or despise him more? I guess I'm supposed to check the analytical part of my brain at the ticket window of the theater? Or perhaps Hollywood thrives on the dulled senses(and shrinking craniums) of the average American moviegoer...hmmm.
The anti-ant alcohol fire remedy scene was also a big stretch. As was the one where Jones and Pepper were out on a ledge, plain as day, and the Border Patrol chopper flies nearly on top of them without them being spotted. I realize that Jones the director needed to give Jones the character an impetus for making the deal with the Mexican guide during that scene. But couldn't Jones the director have chosen a shot of the chopper from a mile away, in the relatively silent desert, seeing as choppers tend to be very noisy machines. Just a thought...
Want more...okay. Pepper's character is a border agent, who is very familiar with firearms. Do you think just once that he would try to wrestle the gun from Jones, or perhaps do it while Jones was asleep? Especially since he believes that Jones is going to kill him, as he later confesses in the movie. Also, wouldn't you think that Pepper would make a serious attempt to gain control, for his escape, seeing the gorgeous wife he has awaiting him back home, in addition to saving his own life?
Finally, the whole thing with the Polaroid picture of Melquiades "family", what was that all about? And what's with Jones not being able to find the town of Jimenez, despite having a map and receiving directions from the locals? Perhaps it can be explained that Mexico is a big country, and the desert terrain must start looking all the same after awhile. I have to say that the ending did not make much sense either. Pepper does break down, but wouldn't he have done that much earlier in the "trek"? And for Pepper to have no thought of revenge for Jones is hard to fathom, and yet he ask Jones in the movie ending statement-"Are you going to be alright?". Who's forgiving who? And to think that Jones goes through all this trouble to take the body back, as he promised, only to never fully carry out his mission-(Jones never finds the right place nor tells Melquiades' wife about his death). Jones character would have been better off leaving the body in Van Horn's cemetery, at least he could have visited his buddy's grave whenever he felt the urge, but that wouldn't do much for the story. I guess that's life for you.
Well, you get the picture, pardon the pun. In my eyes, a film cannot be considered great if it contains basic flaws of logic. I admire and enjoy a film that maintains a strong sense of basic realism. In my opinion, this film does not do this, and cannot be considered even very good, much less great. I'm sure Jones will be behind the camera again, and perhaps will produce efforts that far surpass this one. Why should one buy into a film where Hollywood insults the intelligence of the viewer over and over again is beyond me. Millions and millions of dollars are spent on films to make them appear so real, and yet this is all undone by simple story ideas that don't make sense, which end up shattering that high priced illusion of reality. There's irony for you... Chalk it up to the idea that a film is supposed to be a vehicle for escapism-fantasy I guess, even if the movie is supposed to portray a real life storyline.
The Survivors (1983)
Great film on several levels...
What a great film!!! A true sleeper! Foremost, I think this film works on a comedic level mainly because Matthau and Williams play off each other so well. Williams plays his comedy in that typically frenzied style of his, injecting a good dose of physical humor to boot(pardon the pun). Matthau plays more of a straight man, but with his own style of deadpan humor figured in. Vigard's daughter character has her moments as well, her facial expressions(especially during the staircase scene) are very funny.
This film also works as a commentary on the early Eighties scene, touching upon a number of issues faced by American society. This is the real reason why I believe this film is such a great movie, it gives a funny glimpse at what was happening in America on many different fronts. It covers topics such as losing your job, job hunting, and that interesting social-economic phenomena, unemployment compensation. It sheds light upon big corporate America's lack of allegiance towards its employees, a concept that was just beginning to take hold of the employment scene at the time. I'm sure that just about everyone(in middle class America at least) can relate to what Matthau's character experiences in the job montage sequence in the film. It also shows examples of the ever changing face of American society, such as the Spanish immigrant trying to collect unemployment and the Indian clerk Matthau encounters upon his application for unemployment, touching an issue that has gained tremendous momentum at the present day. It also covers the concept of Americans becoming so disenfranchised with their own society that they are driven to para-military lifestyles, which William's character explores through several really funny moments--"you shot my gun"!!. It also examines America's never ending fascination with guns.
The film also covers ground on relationships,(as all good films do) mainly between the two main characters and the ways they try to help each other through their personal woes. Matthau helps Williams on a more direct level, but Williams helps Matthau's character in the sense that his antics help to distract Matthau from his own unemployment dilemma. Also covered, to a lesser degree, is the relationship between Williams and his fiancée, which underlines the balance between devotion and sensibility. The scene between Reed's character and his wife is both funny and insightful as well.
Finally, the film's comedy itself is a very good blend of slapstick that will make you howl(the staircase scene!!) as well as the verbal aspects of well written comedy(police station,phone booth to name a few). Matthau and Williams are constantly playing off each other quite humorously. This film has several catchy lines, I find myself and my brother recalling them from time to time for a really good laugh--"Tell young Kojack what he done" and "...you've got the technique down". So, these are the reasons why I believe this film deserves a good look, it provides a rather serious look at American done in a very funny way. 10/10
Pieces of April (2003)
Neat little film about a dysfunctional family that brings it all together...
My wife brought this video home one night and we both sat down after dinner to watch it. It started a bit on the slow side, but after about ten minutes, it began to hold you interest. It did this by doing a rather good job of developing the characters, with a good dose of humor mixed in. You quickly discover that this is not your typical family, for a variety of reasons. I won't include spoilers, I'm sure other commentors can do that for you. Just suffice to say that this was a "smallish", lower budget film that carried a good message about what it means to be a family. Good, catchy music supplied mainly by Stephin Merritt also made this film more enjoyable. My wife gave it a 9/10, I'd say it deserved a solid 8. Also, with the film being shot around NY City and the greater New York area (and we being from New York), it was neat identifying the various locations the film was shot at, if that means something to you...