setzerman's Reviews

Rocky Balboa (2006)

Good fun laced with blow-in-your-face-subtlety life-lessons

7 January 2007

I went to see "Children of Men" and as it was sold out, and was too bummed to come home without seeing something, picked this one. My hopes going into this one were quite low. I needed some pumping up and it delivered.

So Stallone wanted to make this, and he did. I am not sure if it was because he sincerely felt that his Balboa alter ego really had more to tell, or his own personal dwindling personal wealth. The result is absolutely 100% formulaic. The various messages are punched through you with the tact of an uppercut, and can't be taken seriously. My grade is skewed by the amazing training montage, which is just beautifully cliché, and required.

So unless you need an urgent dose of pumping up, wait for it to come out on DVD and then rent it when you want to have a laugh with your friends.

Sylvester Stallone (Rocky Balboa) - 7/10 - It's hard to rate the man on his acting skills, as he seems to be acting as "himself" more than anything. I am giving him more credit for getting in such great shape at his age, and managing to convince producers and us that we needed this in the first place.

Burt Young (Paulie) - 9/10 - Convincing performance, very, very good.

Antonio Tarver (Mason 'The Line' Dixon) - 6/10 - The bad guy boxer, hard to take anywhere as a role, unfortunately for him, but also not really taken anywhere either.

Geraldine Hughes (Marie) - 9/10 - Amazing performance. Unfortunately very convincing as a down-on-her luck single mom.

Milo Ventimiglia (Rocky Jr.) - 8/10 - Very good job, playing the snobby ingrate son, who turns around.

0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Children of Men (2006)

Great original piece but well short of a masterpiece

7 January 2007

Children of Men takes a new spin on the sci-fi disaster scenario and does it in style. The cheesy special effects are left in the closet, and the focus is on the story. While the movie is ultimately uplifting, (though it seems not for everyone as some of my movie goers can attest to), there are some deeply depressing/troubling passages, which should be left to a mature and prepared audience.

The result is all in all very convincing, thanks in no small part to competent acting by Owen and a well-written script. Owen's empty whiskey-soaked stare is worth a thousand words and Cuaron seems to have understood this only too well.

I highly recommend this movie, though I was bored by the prominent religious imagery and concept, and a bit annoyed that plenty of ends were left untied. This is still well worth being seen at the theater or rented on DVD. I would not waste my money on a DVD purchase though, as its re-playability is frankly limited.

Clive Owen (Theodore Faron) - 9/10 - Convincing stuff, good job, hope he doesn't drink as much in real life.

Julianne Moore (Julian Taylor) - 7/10 - Good, but she's frankly a short forgettable bystander in this movie.

Chiwetel Ejiofor (Luke) - 8/10 - Once again, Ejiofor delivers, though it would be nice to see him play some other role beside the super-action figure all the time.

Alfonso Cuarón - 8/10 - Turned a great movie from a great idea, but the religious overtones won't/can't be appreciated by all.

2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Dubai Return (2005)

Good Stuff - Snooze Subtitles

5 November 2006

A friend of mine invited us to one of the first screenings of this Bollywood nouveau-gangster comedy at the South Asian Film Festival in the East Village. This movie was surprisingly entertaining, despite blasting you with unfamiliar sights and sounds, and placing you squarely outside of your comfort zone, if you are not from South Asia. If you are not a Hindi-speaker, you probably will not be a big fan of the (oddly-colored) subtitles.

The cast in this movie is either amazing or very well directed: probably a combination of both. A special mention must go out to both Irfan and Razak, who are uncomfortably convincing in their roles, though not understanding their language, I can't be the ideal judge.

Frankly, unless you understand Hindi, this is a difficult movie to fully enjoy at the theater. Rent it out or borrow it from your Indian friends, as it definitely is worth it: a lot of laughs, originally set up and a sweet message.

Irfan Khan (Aftab Angrez) - 9/10 - Hilarious guy.

Vijay Maurya (Nandu/Johny) - 7/10 - Solid supporting guy.

Razak Khan (Khilji Bhai) - 9/10 - Freaky psycho.

Aditya Bhattacharya - 7/10 - Good job.

5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby (2006)

Disappointingly Average

21 October 2006

Will Ferrell and Sacha Baron Cohen together in a comedy about NASCAR? I could not resist, but obviously I now wish I had. I suppose that the Anchorman team had to deal with high expectations but I believe they flunked here, by forgetting to crank up the insanity that made their previous efforts so good. There are some good laughs, but too few and far between and most of the best parts already made it to the trailer.

As far as acting goes, every one is pretty much comfy and in character, except for Sacha Baron Cohen, who despite being amazing as a Kazakh, does not deliver the gay Frenchman very well. That may be to his credit, but it still makes his parts surprisingly boring, considering that at first glance at least, a gay Frenchman in NASCAR should be a rather fertile background.

There's not much here to warrant a theater outing or purchasing the DVD. A rental may be particularly interesting in a pre-frat-party context, where copious amounts of various legal intoxicants were not forgotten. On an empty stomach and a well rested mind, this fell rather flat.

Everyone but Sacha Baron Cohen - 7/10 - Pretty Decent.

Sacha Baron Cohen (Jean Girard) - 3/10 - Sacha, start studying some gay Frenchman's behavior, mannerism and accent for the sequel. There should not be a lack of potential test subjects.

0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

The Prestige (2006)

Great Movie Despite Surprisingly Average Acting

21 October 2006

After reading the plot, I knew I had to see this at the theater and all in all, I must say that I was not disappointed. Solid story well presented and edited in a way that ensures the viewer is constantly surprised and interested. The script is excellent and so is the basic storyline. Kudos to the Nolan brothers for delivering yet another masterpiece.

I agree with many other reviewers that this film deserves at least some kind of Oscar nomination, but I must criticize the movie for the very average acting demonstration of the two main characters. Jackman and Bale are both so-so in their roles, and this movie will not be remembered thanks to their performance. Johansson and Caine on the other hand are great as usual.

I highly recommend seeing this at the theaters and actually also buying it on DVD, though I believe that it will mostly be enjoyed by mature audiences (i.e. 21+): little violence or nudity here, but a very dark subject matter.

Hugh Jackman (Rupert Angier) - 5/10 - Not too impressed with his non-wolverine abilities.

Christian Bale (Alfred Borden) - 6/10 - Gave an eerie Batman-esquire feel to his character, which though can be argued to be in character felt inaccurate to me.

Michael Caine (Cutter) - 9/10 - Showing the young ones how it's done.

Rebecca Hall (Sarah) - 8/10 - Strong performance from this newcomer.

Scarlett Johansson (Olivia Wenscombe) - 8/10 - Strong performance, though by now, regulars should know that I am a big fan.

Christopher Nolan - 10/10 - Excellent work, once again.

0 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

The Count of Monte Cristo (2002)

Shameful Destruction of the Original

4 June 2006

Warning: Spoilers

There are two ways to look at this movie. You either read or did not read the book, on which it is based, before seeing it. It so happens that I did, and I really enjoyed it (the book). I cannot condemn the movie on its entertainment merits, which frankly are either on par or above current standards: good story, characters, action, etc. The problem is that for one to call this movie "The Count of Monte-Cristo" it should at least convey the main message of the book, that is the purpose behind Alexandre Dumas spending some time writing it, aside from being paid by the line as it is claimed. I may stand corrected, but the message of the book was to illustrate the devastating effects of the search for vengeance on one man. That is why the book has a sad ending, that is why a movie based on this book cannot have a great hollywoodian ending. The idea of the book is that Edmond Dantes is in fact dead and that a monster has replaced him. Now, 50 movies may be made in the next ten centuries on this book, but I doubt anyone will remember the ones who attempted to hijack the story, and steal the notoriety that goes along with its title. Had the book had the same ending as this movie, I am afraid that it would neither have been a success in its days nor been read more than a hundred years after it was written.

The acting is decent in this movie, with the main actors delivering reasonably well. I felt that Jim Caviezel was very weak as the naive Dantes, it may be a compliment on his intellectual abilities that playing dumb is hard for him, but that being said, as the elder impassible Count, he is much better. Guy Pierce is nothing short of outstanding, he has an un-enviable ability to make the viewer despise him more and more with every passing scene. It gets to a point, where one just feels like stepping onto the screen and shoving his British accent where the light does not shine.

In a nutshell, if you've already decided that you will never read the ca. 1,000 pages of the book, it may be the next best thing to it, but be warned that many liberties have been taken, and not just superficial understandable ones, but major morality amendments, which though much more pleasant to the focus groups and the pockets of the producers of this flick, are not what the main message was about. In the book, clearly the evil beings in Dantes' past do not come out as angels, but by the end, one ends up despising Dantes as much, if not more than everyone else, and that is, in my view, the main idea of the book. It is a morality tale, not a feel good slap yourself on the back let's get back at them mission-impossible-ish tale.

James Caviezel - 6/10 - Pathetic when dumb and naive, but excellent when ruthless and deranged.

Guy Pearce - 10/10 - Extremely strong performance.

Luis Guzmán - 8/10 - Strong performance.

Kevin Reynolds - 6/10 - Directed a decent movie.

Jay Wolpert - ?/10 - If ending was amended against his will to satisfy the financial objectives of his producers... otherwise...

0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

X-Men: The Last Stand (2006)

Not a Disaster, but not Amazing either

4 June 2006

The third installment of the X-Men franchise was a big disappointment for me, though it must be said that I did have rather high expectations for it. The story's basic premise is actually solid: a newly discovered serum can remove one's mutant (super)powers. There was a lot to be done with this from a scriptwriter's point of view, and it seems that the production team really tried to touch upon everything. The result is a total lack of focus, bits and pieces of various importance are sown together as if to tell the viewer: "Hey, yes, we thought of that too, no worries." It is not so much that the movies seems very superficial at times, after all it's a swashbuckling sci-fi comic book inspired adventure, but that by attempting to be something more, it sort of sacrifices its origins, and frankly achieves nothing in any higher purpose or message.

The acting is not a major weakness nor strength in this movie. It is very unequal throughout. Before singling out some characters for praise or blame, in their defense, the dialogue is below pitiful, reminiscent of the recent Bond movies. For some reason, Halle Berry's Storm is stuck with some of the most preposterous bull^Y%& lines of the recent past. She doesn't do a great job delivering them either, but how much one can blame her is up for grabs. I wonder where this franchise would be without the decent performances from Jackman, Stewart and McKellen.

All in all, a significant step back from X2, still decent by say "Fantastic Four" standards, but well below the other installments in the franchise and recent comic book gems such as Batman Begins. Skip it a the theaters, rent it instead.

Hugh Jackman - 8/10 - Thank god, he's still here.

Halle Berry - 2/10 - Her eyes say where's my cheque, her acting deserves one of those raspberry awards, though before giving it to her, we should probably wait to see if Madonna produces something this year.

Ian McKellen - 8/10 - Thank god, he's still here.

Famke Janssen - 7/10 - One of the better female mutants.

Patrick Stewart - 8/10 - Thank god, he's still here.

Brett Ratner - 4/10 - Probably could have done much worse, but still.

Simon Kinberg - Zak Penn - 3/10 - A bit of focus would help these gentlemen.

0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

American Dreamz (2006)

Well-Intentioned Botched Effort

6 May 2006

American Dreamz is good fun. It features a decent story with a few twists. It dares to ask some uncomfortable questions, despite it being a comedy. I found the main weakness of the movie to be its U.S. President connection. This entire dimension, though clearly important to sustain the movie's political message, is not realistic even by Hollywood standards, and not as entertaining as it could have been. I have no quarrels with the current conservative establishment being mocked, but it could have been done much more effectively.

The acting in general is well above par in American Dreamz. The "Middle-Eastern" crew is very efficient, and one can't help but wonder what could have been had they been blessed with a better script.

Don't see it at the movies as it is not worth it. I am reasonably convinced that the good laughs and convoluted story line can be as effective on your TV. Borrow or rent the DVD. Or receive it as a gift. If you do receive it as a gift, consider that it would make a prime candidate for a subtle re-gifting campaign.

Tony Yalda (Iqbal Riza) - 10/10 - Steals every scene in which he appears.

Hugh Grant (Martin Tweed) - 9/10 - Very polished performance, dangerously close to perhaps his current real-life situation?

Mandy Moore (Sally Kendoo) - 9/10 - Can sing, can act, can act Machiavellian and blood-thirsty. Great performance, hope it's just an act.

Sam Golzari (Omer) - 9/10 - Aside from the weird (clearly not Iranian) accent, delivers a rock-solid performance.

Shohreh Aghdashloo (Nazneen Riza) - 8/10 - Strong performance, but playing the overbearing Iranian mother? Isn't that just part of who she is by definition?

Dennis Quaid (President Staton) - 6/10 - Stale borderline performance. Efficient but far from outstanding.

Willem Dafoe (Chief of Staff) - 7/10 - Excellent by anyone else's standards, but has done so much better in the past.

Chris Klein (William Williams) - 6/10 - Sadly being typecast in this white-trash dumb dude role, that though he does very well, must be like drinking water by now.

Paul Weitz - 6/10 - Could have done so much more in my opinion with this movie.

1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

V for Vendetta (2005)

Imperfect Masterpiece

29 March 2006

This is not a typical comic book to big screen adaptation movie, though I realize that I wrote something similar for "Batman Begins". The fact is that the action in this movie takes a back seat to the political message, which is blunt and to-the-point. Most of the stunts, effects are instruments of this message, and thankfully the budget was not spent there. It is conceivable that fans of current right-wing governments may totally disagree with the value of this message. Regardless, they will no doubt acknowledge that McTeigue has crossed the line and stepped where no man has gone before (not Uranus), at least this side of 9/11. He and his team must be commended for this courageous stand.

The acting in this movie is totally unbalanced, facing Hugo Weaving's now-legendary heart-wrenching tirades and one-liners, is Nathalie Portman, who seems to be in a hurry to cash her paycheck. Watching her on-screen, one cannot help but wonder if she did not feel that considering she was sacrificing her hair for the movie, she should not be asked for much more. I was disappointed because I really like her "attributes", prior work and genuine personality when interviewed. Having said that, the good news is that the movie was well-crafted around this disastrous Paula Abdul-style performance to minimize negative effect on the movie. Hey, Star Wars still became Star Wars, despite Mark Hamill, right? so who knows.

This movie is in addition beautiful in terms of cinematography, and one will definitely miss a lot by watching it on a TV screen. Watch it at the theaters, then buy the DVD, to drown the inevitable sorrows resulting from George W.'s next two years in office.

Natalie Portman (Evey) - 3/10 - Terrible. Though less terrible in the part of the movie where she is bald.

Hugo Weaving (V/William Rookwood) - 9/10 - Only downer is not being able to watch his clenching teeth as he delivers his Shakespeare.

James McTeigue - 9/10 - Impressively manages to deliver a great movie, despite being handicapped with an absent lead actress.

1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Inside Man (2006)

Good Job Spike!

29 March 2006

I found this movie's premise to be novel. The bank robbery hides a complex story that will encourage much subsequent debate on ethical and moral issues. Racism is a main driver throughout, though it is not presented in a patronizing way, but instead in a comical manner. It is refreshing to see a movie, where none of the main characters is presented as being anything but fragile, imperfect humans. For all its merits, there is something missing here to make it a true classic and I think it lies in its perfect Hollywood-style ending.

The acting is throughout above average. Denzel and Jodie shine, though their roles are clearly more challenging to begin with. Owen, whose face is pretty much covered for most of the movie, doesn't really get an opportunity to impress us, neither does the rest of the cast. That being said, they deliver solid performances and let the stars bring it home.

Inside Man is definitely worth being seen at the theater. I suspect that it makes equally a decent date movie, family outing or night out with the guys/gals. For those unlucky ones who missed/will miss it, plan to rent it as soon as it comes out on DVD.

Denzel Washington (Detective Keith Frazier) - 10/10 - Denzel can do no harm.

Clive Owen (Dalton Russell) - 7/10 - Great performance that I am penalizing, considering the role seems to me at least rather not the hardest to play.

Jodie Foster (Madeline White) - 9/10 - Excellent pair of... uh...performance. Always manages to stay classy and on cue.

Christopher Plummer (Arthur Case) - 8/10 - Same as for Owen.

Willem Dafoe (Captain John Darius) - 7/10 - Same as for Owen.

Chiwetel Ejiofor (Detective Bill Mitchell) - 8/10 - The next Denzel, though I was disappointed in the scope of his presence in this one.

Spike Lee - 9/10 - Kudos for challenging the genre, spinning it on its head and delivering something fresh.

0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Leila (I) (1997)

Very Good

9 March 2006

This is a touching love story starring a sterile Iranian woman, who has to deal with her in-laws' continuous desire for a grandchild. It is by no means Hollywood-friendly: the story unfolds as it would in real life. It is a perfect example of art imitating life.

The cast is very proficient. Leila does an amazing job of conveying her deep yet veiled anxiety, annoyance and anger every time she speaks to her mother in-law. Sheikhi is equally proficient at making us scorn her. I did feel that Ali Mosaffa stole the show: he is flawless in his role of trying to keep the different protagonists happy, yet staying blind to their actual feelings.

This movie may lose a lot of its punch for non-farsi speakers.

Leila Hatami (Leila, the Wife) - 7/10 - Great when acting, not as great at narrating.

Ali Mosaffa (Reza, the Husband) - 10/10 - Compelling flawless performance.

Jamileh Sheikhi (Reza's Mother) - 8/10 - Successfully makes us shriek every time she speaks.

Dariush Mehrjui - 8/10 - Very good script and good rhythm, though I felt that the movie was unusually dark. I am not sure if this was intended, poor cinematography or my failing TV set.

6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Russian Dolls (2005)

Not Really a Sequel but Good Nevertheless

26 February 2006

It recently came out on DVD, and I could not resist, considering how much I liked L'Auberge Espagnole. Very soon, it becomes obvious that it has nothing to do with its predecessor. Some of the characters are the same, but that's about it. At some point, you get the feeling that it is more about Romain Duris getting it on with every single actress he meets on screen than anything else. Though there are some hilarious moments, this is definitely not a comedy.

The cast is amazing and definitely has screen chemistry. The dialogue is also very good, which is all to Klapish's credit. Unfortunately, I felt that it was way too long, and peppered with too many annoying flashbacks, screen special effects, etc, for its own good. Were it not for the above-average last 30mn, I am not sure that I would have been as kind in the grading of it.

In summary, unless you are a big fan of Klapisch and/or Duris, or that you are fond of French movies, I would avoid it. It really has nothing to do with L'Auberge Espagnole, so consider what it was exactly that you may have liked about its predecessor. It does make a decent date movie, but definitely not a group event among guys or girls. Now then, renting the DVD is one thing, buying it is another. I would not recommend a purchase.

Romain Duris (Xavier) - 10/10 - Amazing performance once again.

Kelly Reilly (Wendy) - 8/10 - Very good.

Audrey Tautou (Martine) - 8/10 -Very good.

Cédric Klapisch - 7/10 - Great movie, which would have benefited from not being dubbed a sequel to L'Auberge, and less funky camera editing twists.

2 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Underworld: Evolution (2006)

Not as Good as First One

31 January 2006

I watched the first installment on DVD, and loved it. I went to the theaters for this one, and though I did not find it to be disastrous, I thought it was much inferior to the first one. The story is pretty bad. The dialogue is only OK. Without disclosing much about the movie, my feeling is that it loses out compared to the first one, by not being set as much in an urban environment, where your vampires and lychens could interact with humans more freely. You also had a nice "Gotham-City" like atmosphere that you totally lose in this one.

Having said that, the cast has to be somewhat blamed here. Decent, at best performances, from everyone, aside from the truly evil looking Bill Nighy, can't pull this average story anywhere. Kate Beckinsale in particular should thank her lucky stars that she looks amazing in tight latex spandex-o-pant-o-glue-on-thingies, because unfortunately her acting skills were clearly saved for another movie (hopefully not Underworld 3).

I don't think anyone will find this movie satisfying at the theaters. For the die-hard fans out there, if you haven't seen it already, wait until it comes out on DVD. For anyone who has not seen "Underworld" (i.e. the first installment), save your money and rent that on DVD instead.

Kate Beckinsale (Selene) - 4/10 - Gorgeous actress who looks great in latex tights, but really doesn't show much acting skill here.

Scott Speedman (Michael Corvin) - 5/10 - Decent, but should not quit his day-job.

Tony Curran (Marcus) - 6/10 - Decent, but non-issue.

Derek Jacobi (Corvinus) - 6/10 - Decent, but non-issue.

Bill Nighy (Viktor) - 8/10 - Scary as always. Check him out in the Constant Gardener.

Len Wiseman - 5/10 - Must bear some blame for pretty bad acting throughout.

1 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Munich (2005)

Great but not a Classic

13 January 2006

OK, so it's from Spielberg, which means that it's above par. That being said, it's not one of his finest work, and not because it's controversial: there's something missing. I can't pinpoint it, but though the message comes through loud and clear, and the ca. three-hour affair goes down easier than a pint of Guiness, there is a tiny little something missing, which probably will preclude it from winning an Oscar or being remembered in 1000 years.

So the cast is not to blame in this one, Eric Bana is rapidly becoming one of my favorite actors, after his awesome performance in the pitiful Troy, he really delivers the goods here, so do Croze, Craig, Kassovitz and the rest of the gang. The acting is top notch. The cinematography and the story flow down smoothly, there is just nothing bad to be said. The final scene and closing picture is memorable and without letting any spoilers escape, I will just say that as I left the theater, it survived in my psyche for a good half an hour, and I am not even American.

Had this movie been made by anyone other than Spielberg, I probably would have built it up to the ceiling. Considering his body of work, and the expectations he now commands, (all to his credit), this is a satisfying effort, that could have been better. The message is well-taken and nevertheless appreciated in these troubled times. It definitely should be seen at the theaters and it probably should be bought on DVD as well.

Eric Bana (Avner) - 10/10 - Hypnotic work, this guy is scary.

Daniel Craig (Steve) - 7/10 - Decent work, it still is not too late to give up that Bond work. Mark my words, it will destroy you.

Mathieu Kassovitz (Robert) - 8/10 - Almost forgot that I was watching one of the best French directors alive.

Geoffrey Rush (Ephraim) - 8/10 - Unrecognizable, yet effective

Marie-Josée Croze (Jeanette) - 9/10 - Very nice performance. (And what a pair of breasts if I may add)

Steven Spielberg - 8/10 - Excellent by any standard, only very good for this gentleman.

1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Hoodwinked! (2005)

Avoid

13 January 2006

OK, so this is not a blockbuster of a Mission Impossible or Shrek type. I heard about it about two days before going to see it (kudos for the marketing effort). I felt generous, and brought my 8-year old brother along. This movie is weird in the sense that it is an animation that definitely feels like it was made for adults, not children. I doubt my brother even understood what was going on. He had a good time, but I'm not sure how much of it was due to just watching a bunch of animated characters being naughty on stage, and how much of it was due to watching a great animation. (I'm glad HE had a good time)

This was no Shrek. Hoodwinked has major rhythm and sound problems. I saw folks walking out on it, and I couldn't really blame them. It sometime feels like a child was directing, as well. Most of the musical pieces are loud, obnoxious, ill-timed, oddly-rhythm-ed, etc... Anyway, the story sort of falls into place, and I probably am being generous by rating this a 4 out of 10. All in all, it gets bonus points for being sort of original, totally off-beat and all-in-all weird.

I do definitely regret having seen it at the movies, and reading back some of the comments on this movie on IMDb, I really wonder how "independant" some of the early reviewers are, which is sad because it weakens the whole point of IMDb in the first place. It is worth a rental, though I'm sure that a lot of folks are not going to survive past the first 10 minutes of it. Awful editing, awful rhythm, awful sound, awful music, borderline script, and all not supported by a strong enough story. I laughed maybe twice in the whole thing, and it's was not because I can't laugh. I'm the type of guy who was on the floor for Dumb and Dumber and Shrek, so... one word... AVOID (watch this comment being drowned in the many other "fake" positive comments)

Cory Edwards, Todd Edwards - Guys, was anyone sober during the final screening? - 4/10

10 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Syriana (2005)

Unbalanced Self-Indulgent Effort

28 December 2005

This movie wants to be too many things, and in so doing, botches up arguably its main message, a commendable warning to western societies to avoid mistakes of the past. I found that many subplots were either useless to the story or frustratingly left undeveloped. The sad thing is that they eventually end up, in my humble opinion, destroying this movie, especially when you consider that Stephen Gaghan no doubt had to trim a lot of content to fit this whole adventure into 126 minutes. I am convinced that he left out a lot of material, which could have assisted us, poor viewers in following the main plots of this movie.

I don't want to spread the blame where it is not deserved, and I really felt that the cast delivered strong performances throughout, though no actor deserved any specific honorable mention either. I did not understand though the added value in having George Clooney take on this extra weight for the movie - I bet that most viewers of this film won't know/care what the actual Robert Baer looks/ed like before watching it.

In a nutshell, we have here a complicated movie, where little attempt is made to vulgarize anything for the uninformed viewer, yet a lot of film reel is wasted on useless scenes. Though I do not feel that I am the biggest fan of any of the parties negatively painted in this movie, I couldn't help but comment that it does paint a rather naive portrait of all the "good guys" being caricaturesque innocent angels, which I doubt is a true depiction of reality. This, I believe ultimately weakens Syriana's message, as it comes out biased. Rent it if you are well versed in history and financial/legal jargon, avoid it at the theaters. I am overrating this movie with a 6/10, but I feel that we need more of this type of historical critical movies, even though I wish they would be better made.

The cast - 7/10 - Nothing terrible, but nothing terrific either.

Stephen Gaghan - 3/10 - Needs to take the blame for terribly indulgent editing work.

Robert Baer - I feel bad for him, I think he would have preferred a more poignant focused rendition of his book, considering the pain he had to go through.

2 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Zathura: A Space Adventure (2005)

Decent Children Movie

12 November 2005

I found Zathura to be a light-hearted children movie. My half-brother who is 8 loved it, but I was kind of disappointed considering the number of children movies nowadays, that actually do an amazing job of entertaining adults as well. There is no second-level humor, and come to think of it, nothing in Zathura reaches any second level at all. Assuming you had a glimpse at the trailer, you'll probably find the story and the characters to be very predictable.

The cast may be partly to blame in this one, the three adult actors are very forgettable. As a rule, I refrain from commenting on performances from children, unless I find them utterly amazing. I don't want to down Jon Favreau too much, because I really loved him in Swingers, and I do wish him well, and in this movie, I think he delivered to the audience's expectations. Unfortunately, and I believe mostly as a result of the story being so close to Jumanji's concept and the script not being really rich in content for whoever is not 8, I don't think Zathura can be considered to be anything more than decent by any standard.

If you have a child who is less than ten in your group, and that he or she happens to be the main motivation behind the trip to the theaters, this may be a good choice for the big screen, otherwise wait for it to come out on DVD, and rent it, assuming you find this type of board game movie entertaining. I will probably end up having to buy my brother the DVD, and endure it continuously on all Summer 2006' road trips, but that's just my situation.

Dax Shepard (Astronaut) - 5/10 - Decent at best

Kristen Stewart (Lisa) - 4/10 - Terrible, gets extra points, thanks to her mild good looks.

Tim Robbins (Dad) - Doesn't need a grade, considering his vast portfolio, but let's just say, that a clip of him in this movie, probably won't show up in the montage they will make at the Oscars, when time comes for his lifetime achievement award.

Jon Favreau - 5/10 - Did good with the script he had, I hope he raised some decent money from Sony for this since I doubt it will do much for his credibility, as a director. (It definitely hasn't done wonders for his waistline.)

4 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Jarhead (2005)

Very Confused Terrible Movie

11 November 2005

I had high expectations going into Jarhead, and I found it very disappointing. Considering that it's one of the few American movies to come out on a topic close to America's current involvement in the Middle East, I expected it to have at least a rigorously argued message, even though it would perhaps not be in agreement with my own personal views.

Jarhead is really not very deep at all in fact, it has very little message, and is more like a collage of army clichés, strewn together with potent performances by Jake Gyllenhaal and Jamie Foxx. They both do a great job, and so do the rest of the cast. It seems to me that Sam Mendes' number one objective in this movie was not to hurt any audience member, and to basically be all things to all people. Though I have not read the novel on which this movie is based, and Mendes could argue that he was only doing the book justice, by putting on reel its lack of clear conviction, he clearly could have chosen one of the book's key dimensions and stuck to it. In any case, the failure of this movie lies squarely in the lap of the director and/or screenwriter. The story goes nowhere. I did find especially annoying some wannabe-artistic-deep scenes that fall totally flat and seem to come out of a cinema-student's scrapbook/study camera reel.

I regret having seen Jarhead at the theater. I must admit having been, once again, totally suckered into a half-baked movie by a good trailer and surrounding marketing efforts. I would barely recommend a DVD rental to anyone on this one, unless you have never been un/fortunate to see any war movie. This is the type of movie, where I really wish the theater would provide the disgruntled unhappy viewer, such as myself, with a refund, or at least a credit. Jarhead is the best demonstration of the reasons behind's Hollywood's current slump.

Jake Gyllenhaal (Swoff) - 9/10 - Very strong performance, even more deserving considering that his director clearly had no idea who Swoff was.

Jamie Foxx (Staff Sgt. Sykes) - 8/10 - Good performance, but somewhere down the line, you feel that either Foxx realizes that he's wandering in useless cinema territory or that the tough sergeant role, he's portraying has been done to the bone, and that as a result, his input can be at best marginal.

Sam Mendes - 2/10 - The good news about his direction in this movie, is that you could probably cut this movie up into 5-10 superior short movies.

William Broyles Jr - Should just stop writing scripts, or return to his day job. Having checked his portfolio, I can now better understand all my prior comments, we are talking about the genius, who brought us Entrapment and the appalling Planet of the Apes. Plea to the studios: please do not give this gentleman any work, and if so, provide a clear advisory in the trailer or poster.

0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Layer Cake (2004)

Good Complicated Movie

13 October 2005

My friend had his wisdom tooth removed and I helped him KO appropriately by renting this amazingly complicated Brtish gangster flick. I saw it a about a month ago, but was reminded to write this review, after reading that the main actor, Craig, was being considered to be the next James Bond. First word of advice is to turn the subtitles on, unless you're a British Isles native, the accents involved will very quickly make you lose track of the story. Second word of advice, do not watch this if you have a short attention span, little patience, or are looking for a comedy. I have yet to watch a more complicated movie, think of it as: Snatch multiplied by Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels to the power of Snatch plus three Snatches.

Daniel Craig is very good in his smarty-pants gangster role, good enough for me to sincerely wish him well, and therefore, not to obtain or pursue seriously this James Bond role. The rest of the gang also performs well, and I really can't criticize much on their side... The main problem with this movie is the level of complication, brought by thousands of side-characters and subplots, etc. It all is believable, though I can't really confirm, considering my lack of mob connections, but Vaughn could probably have directed a much superior movie, had he cut a lot of the crazy twists. Connolly's script is full of great gotcha dialogue, but again, he probably should have either cut more from his novel or told the movie dudes, that considering the density of stuff happening, his novel was un-filmable... again despite this, if you hang on to your helmet, you'll probably end up entertained.

I would not call this a very good DVD purchase, though this would have the merit to allow you to re-watch the whole thing enough times to understand what is happening. A Rental for a rainy afternoon is a good idea... not for when you have a bunch of friends laughing with beers, cause nobody's going to understand much.

Daniel Craig (XXXX) - 8/10 - Great, please don't become the next James Bond, leave it to someone really desperate.

George Harris (Morty) - 8/10 - Great.

Colm Meaney (Gene) - 8/10 - Great.

Matthew Vaughn - 6/10 - Seems to overestimate the intelligence of his audience - then again, I tend to overestimate my intelligence.

9 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Serenity (2005)

Great Movie

12 October 2005

Saw Serenity at the theater, not having heard about or seen an episode of Firefly. I thought it was a very good movie, not falling into typical sci-fi movie traps, such as (i) no story, (ii) extra-complicated story or (iii) millions of dollars of useless special effects. The story is rock-solid, the acting is potent and I expect viewers who would typically avoid sci-fi movies, may be pleasantly surprised if they give Serenity a chance.

Nathan Fillion was excellent, and so were the rest of the cast, though you can argue that they were all extensively honed into their character thanks to those Firefly episodes. I would criticize Joss Whedon for forgetting to close a few minor story/plot loopholes. It seems to me that Malcolm totally forgets about Inara, the second she steps into his ship, highly surprising considering he used to look at her pictures with such pitiful puppy eyes.

In a nutshell, definitely worth an outing at the theater, even for your reluctant girlfriend who wants to go see Reese Whiterspoon in Just Like Heaven or Cameron Diaz in In Her Shoes. I would buy the DVD when it comes out, but again, as much as I liked this movie and am pleased for the whole crew, I am surprised that it is making the top 250 IMDb movies list (as of Oct. 12, 2005).

Nathan Fillion (Mal) - 9/10 - Good in his Hans Solo style hero role, again, I am not sure how threatened Harrison Ford needs to feel, as far as other roles are concerned. Bonus points for great delivery of one-liners.

Gina Torres (Zoe) - 8/10 - Gorgeous, enough said.

Alan Tudyk (Wash) - 7/10 - Bonus points for great delivery of one-liners, but all in all very small role.

Morena Baccarin (Inara) - 7/10 - Cute, good performance, not much more, not much less.

Adam Baldwin (Jayne) - 8/10 - Bonus points for great delivery of one-liners. This guy somehow disappeared off the map it seems. Hope he gets more roles.

Jewel Staite (Kaylee) - 8/10 - Ultra Gorgeous, enough said.

Sean Maher (Simon) - Non-person in this one, could have been replaced by a droid.

Summer Glau (River) - 10/10 - Does a spooky job at getting in the skin of her character, I would walk on the other side of the street if I ever cross her downtown.

Chiwetel Ejiofor (The Operative) - 8/10 - Although the parallels between the depiction of his character and Lawrence Fishburne's in the Matrix seem rather easy, I am a big fan of this new actor, who was also amazing in Four Brothers.

3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

House of Sand and Fog (2003)

Strong Movie

3 October 2005

I felt that the ending was "easy", though well made, choreographed and expressed. Aside from this semi-satisfying ending, I found the movie as a whole, very well-made, original in substance and form, and I would recommend it to all, though one must consider that this is rated R for a reason, there are a lot of things in here that should not be seen by minors, teenagers, and young adults, almost I would argue.

The cast was great, though I disagree with the choice of Ben Kingsley. Aside from the fact that he barely looks Iranian to me, his reluctance to speak farsi in the movie, although understandable on a real-world point of view, makes no sense in the movie. I can't really think of any of my Iranian relatives who would be so fond of his Caspian Sea cottage, but not very fond of their farsi language, especially considering that at some very emotional times, English seems to be the language that would come up before his mother tongue. Aside from this minor weakness the story rolls, and keeps on delivering unpredictable moments. The strongest morale to this story, was in my opinion: the sheer stupidity of man putting fore material possessions to well-being and health.

I regret not having been able to see House of Sand and Fog at the theater at the time, which I trust would have been a gratifying, though sad experience. The DVD rental was more than welcome, but considering the dramatic, tragic nature of the movie, buying it for your collection does not make much sense to me, unless (i) you exchange a lot of movies with your friends, (ii) you're deeply depressed, (iii) you're somehow immune to depression, but love to watch sad movies.

Jennifer Connelly (Kathy) - 9/10 - Amazing nuanced performance, and she's just drop-dead gorgeous.

Ben Kingsley (Behrani) - 8/10 - Does a great attempt at emulating the farsi English accent, but I am pretty sure that it does not really work for all Iranian viewers. Aside from this, very strong performance.

Ron Eldard (Lester) - 8/10 - Newcomer little known to me who delivers.

Shohreh Aghdashloo (Nadi) - 8/10 - Strong performance but I did not understand why it deserved an Oscar nomination.

Vadim Perelman - 8/10 - Extra points for convincing major studios to do such a courageous picture.

4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

White Chicks (2004)

Shooting Blanks

3 October 2005

Once in a while, you rent the wrong movie. It just happened to me. I remembered seeing the trailers for White Chicks and thinking that it would probably be hilarious. Boy was I wrong! Believe it or not, I was actually in a good mood, before watching it. By the end of it, I was cursing and thanking IMDb for giving me an outlet to vent my anger at having spent valuable cash on this junk. The Wayans should really thank whoever they hired to stitch up the trailer from this junk, that guy really did an amazing job. Although, to give credit where it is due, one must also consider that I am very naive, and get easily sucked into a good-looking trailer.

You can't really blame any of the actors, as the jokes don't really fall flat because of their lack of conviction or lack of believability: the script is just not funny. Considering that there's not much action, story, drama or substance, there's just not much left, is there! Terry Crews manages to steal the show, it must be said in all fairness, in all of his scenes, ...so come to think of it, he either is getting better material than the others or delivers it better.

Thank god, I did not make the terrible mistake of watching this one at the theaters, but even for a rental, it is very disappointing. It isn't even bad enough to be funny in itself. The only way, I managed to remain awake during White Chicks, was by thinking of the various ways, that I would express my disappointment in this review, and that says a lot about me and the quality of this movie. Stay away from this unless you want to know (i) how not to make a comedy or (ii) you feel bad for Terry Crews and want to see how one can stand out amazingly from a terrible movie. Do not rent or buy it, unless (i) you're a vegetable, (ii) you're not actually planning on watching it.

Shawn Wayans (Kevin Copeland) - 4/10 - Should stay away from his brothers' movies, and do his own thing.

Marlon Wayans (Marcus Copeland) - 4/10 - Should stay away from his brothers' movies, and do his own thing.

Terry Crews (Latrell Spencer) - 9/10 - Fantastic in a losing cause.

Keenen Ivory Wayans - 2/10 - Should be ashamed of this. At some point, when it is this bad, regardless of the amount of money you have spent on a movie, you have to have the decency to pull the plug: for your credibility's sake.

8 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

A History of Violence (2005)

Great Premise but Somehow Unravels

30 September 2005

It all starts out very well, the story pumps you up, the rhythm is a bit slow, but knowing Cronenberg a bit, you put it on the account of his efforts to drag us into his crazy world. Though, there are a lot of amazing moments, and the cast shines throughout, the more the story develops, the less you are satisfied. When it all ends, you can't help but think that had Cronenberg done this or that teeny weeny bit differently, the whole affair could have been a masterpiece or something close.

Aside from Maria Bello, who needs to either learn how to cry, or stop crying on screen, (although in all fairness, her role was not the easiest to fill), the rest of the cast, clearly tried and mostly succeeded in pulling this out of the parallel universe where Cronenberg lives, and gives top notch performances. I found Mortensen slightly unequal, at times, he seems in a different movie, on a different continent where the laws of gravity are different, at times, he is perfectly on cue, delivering a semi-Oscar worthy performance.

I found it all in all not very satisfying for a big screen outing, and I really don't believe that the DVD would be worth it. Having said that, it surely would make for an interesting DVD rental and spirited debate thereafter on what amazing universe Cronenberg resides in.

Viggo Mortensen (Tom Stall) - 7/10 - While not always brilliant, all in all strong performance.

Maria Bello (Edie Stall) - 5/10 - Eye candy more than anything unfortunately.

Ed Harris (Carl Fogarty) - 8/10 - Strong albeit short performance.

William Hurt (Richie Cusack) - 9/10 - Very strong albeit short performance.

David Cronenberg - 6/10 - Although probably would deserve more were we all living in his universe.

1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Lord of War (2005)

Excellent Movie

26 September 2005

Andrew Niccol must be applauded for this masterpiece, not only for its entertainment value, but also its message, especially considering the lack of media interest on the topic of arms dealing.

After having for some reason watched recently his appalling work in Snake Eyes, where he was conceivably running after a hopefully large career-damaging paycheck, this movie should also strengthen/build Nicolas Cage's reputation as a serious lead man. He is throughout this feature on cue, and convincingly delivers Niccol's polished, urgent text. Moynahan and Hawke also deliver strong performances. Special mentions must be made for Leto and Walker, who both carry their ambiguous supportive roles, with distinction, and who were both less well known to me.

This is neither a date, nor a family movie, but for friends. It is definitely worth being seen at the theater, and should become one of those essential components of any respectable DVD collection, in my humble opinion.

Nicolas Cage (Yuri Orlov) 8/10 - Very good performance, but hard to believe his supposedly Ukrainian origin.

Bridget Moynahan (Ava Fontaine) 8/10 - Gorgeous, just gorgeous.

Jared Leto (Vitaly Orlov) 9/10 - Scene stealer.

Ethan Hawke (Jack Valentine) 7/10 - Good performance, but rather one-dimensional character to play in the first place.

Eamonn Walker (Andre Baptiste Sr.) 9/10 - Scene stealer.

Andrew Niccol 10/10

3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

The 40-Year-Old Virgin (2005)

Amazing

9 September 2005

Never considered Carell an essential component of the Daily Show with Jon Stewart's cast, but thought he contributed a fair deal to "Anchorman"'s cult status. With this one, I think he proved himself to half of the galaxy, this is a smart, funny, feel-good movie, that never gets dull, even when it needs to develop its story line.

The jokes will keep you on your feet, and for once, the trailer only shows you the tip of the iceberg. You barely suspect most of the best funny moments.

I am pre ordering the DVD on amazon, and will probably watch it again and again, but then again, I have no life.

Steve Carell (Andy Stitzer) 9/10

Catherine Keener (Trish) 7/10

Paul Rudd (David) 8/10

Romany Malco (Jay) 8/10

Seth Rogen (Cal) 9/10 (This guy is hilarious, watch out for him)

Judd Apatow 9/10

1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

setzerman

Reviews

Tell Your Friends

Recently Viewed