Reviews

I get what they were trying to do here; the human stories of nine Parisians--during the night the cathedral burned and how the event was a common factor in all of them.

Except ... not really.

In theory, it could have been very good, and some parts, like the skill of the producers in integrating real footage of the fire with their film, is good.

It has a few excellent dramatic moments but although some of the story lines jell, others don't and most have nothing to do with the fire except as a momentary distraction.

I also get that in making a TV drama you have to take some license with reality. But the howlers about the firefighters pointed out by others here are valid. That lackadaisical treatment might have passed in 1960s or '70s but audiences are much more sophisticated now.

And I get that in real life, even during unfolding disasters, people aren't always focused on the event. The French pride themselves on their style and skill with psychology.

But the character who keeps saying that 'everyone remembers what they were doing when Michael Jackson died' is jarring. I don't. A lot of people don't. And in the context of a story what does this even mean?

Are we supposed to compare the burning of Notre-Dame of Paris to Jackson's death?

Good psychology in that it sticks on my mind but bad in that--besides the interspersed footage of the real fire--this maudlin comparison is going to be my takeaway.

That and the haunting suspicion that this whole thing was employed by the screenwriters as a vehicle for a lot of leftover plot notions rejected from other scripts and all crammed into this one.

Considered as a soap opera this would pass. As a soap opera with a fire in the background it stumbles along. As a drama about the fire itself--which is how it was sold to us--falls flat on its face. You're much better off just watching archived news reports.

Very much enjoyed this film. A dark, languid tale about two hitmen whose assignment appears to have been pre-empted by someone else--but who? Minimalist production style adds to the noir feel; beautiful piano soundtrack music. This is one to watch late at night with a glass of wine.

I would have given it four stars but I had to deduct one for the insane Irish jig they play for the credits. What th' bejabbers does Ireland have to do with any of this, unless someone thought that Sean Bean must be Irish because he's named Sean and has a Yorkshire accent, never mind that Yorkshire's in England last I checked ... *sigh*

Another low-budget found-footage haunted-house movie of the familiar type, with shades of understated British quirkiness that recall some of the Brit horror films of the '80s. A student of paranormal research and his girlfriend are on a road trip to find a haunted house for him to study. Well, this is Britain and Dartmoor to boot, so it's no surprise that they come upon a choice example. But when the weird-o-meter starts rising into the red zone, they call in a professor and a medium for damage control help, and all playing out against the backdrop of an "unfolding" world nuclear crisis. What's the point of the nuclear crisis when a spirit or spirits are on the prowl? Here is the '80s throwback concept: More of scary! Just add nuclear crisis to any situation for instant tension! My wife and I have watched probably a couple of thousand horror flicks between us since the '60s, and we've seen far worse films, many of them made by more famous names on much bigger budgets. Despite the rants of the ever-increasing "It-sux-dude" tribe in these parts lately, we give it a pair of likes.

Workmanlike Danish crime/human interest drama that ticks pretty much all the boxes we've come to expect. Young (-ish = late 30s/40s) professional female protagonist, check. Hipper and funkier than other people her age, as against more conventional friends and co-workers who seem occasionally bemused or irritated with her behavior, check and check. With her career, has to juggle raising one or two children more or less alone, and then a mystery crops up, check. Old boyfriend or ex-husband lurking around for color, check. Bad guys, if any, most likely to be right-wing, religious, or foreigners, check. A cast with familiar faces such as Iben Hjelje (from "Dag,") Laerke Winther Andersen ("Den som draeber," "Bankelot"), Dar Salim ("Broen," "Borgen," "Livvagterne," "Game of Thrones,") and Lars Brygmann ("Borgen," "Bankerot," "Rejseholdet") has crewed the show through three seasons now, very watchably. If you are not already a Nordic drama fan, this show is unlikely to win you over; if you are, however, you will enjoy it.

In this terse indie effort by Peter Pontikis, Vera (Jenny Lampa) and Vanja (Ruth Vega Fernandez) are two sisters in a Swedish city who share a secret; they are vampires, although far from the kind we've become accustomed to in this age of "Twilight" and "True Blood." We do not find out much about them but are plunged straight into the story--on an evening when Vanja has promised to reveal a major life decision to Vera, a biker gang leader tries to molest Vera in a nightclub toilet and she kills him, sucking his blood. The sisters must run and try to stay one step ahead of the vengeful bikers, until a fateful confrontation.

Everything about the story is brief and understated. These vampires do not appear to be undead, have no super-powers--not even fangs--and are as vulnerable as anyone else. The fact that they live on human blood seems to be the only real difference between them and ordinary mortals, but that simply emphasizes HOW different that one thing makes them.

The locations are all real due to the low budget; rain, wind, etc., are all real and give this film a very immediate impact. The story leaves behind a simple, poignant feeling. Look out for an appearance by David Dencik, familiar from "Forbrydelsen," both "Girl With The Dragon Tattoo" movies, and "Those Who Kill." The acting from both principals is excellent, and I give it a 9 only because of a few scripting decisions I don't agree with artistically. Still, one of the best films I've seen in a few years.

What else would you expect from Stewart St. John, whose career was made writing and editing kids' fare like "Mighty Morphin Power Rangers" and "V.R. Troopers??" This film is aimed directly at the newly-adult audience who grew up thinking those shows were cool. If you were one of those, you will think this movie is cool, you will be revelling in the wooden, eyeliner-plastered actors (villains suitable indicated by underlighting), and you will be eagerly awaiting the next installment in The Creations Wars Saga, or The Chronicles Of Hollow Earth, or whatever Mr St. John is calling it this year. If you can't wait for it, I recommend watching "Skyline," which you will also love.

As a connoisseur of bad movies, I have to say this one was a kind of gem, "Seinfeld"-esque in that there was precisely nothing to it. The aliens are guys in rubber suits snatched up at a garage sale; the women are supposed to be virgins--but sexy ones--but whether they are or not is entirely pointless as there isn't a shred of sexiness in the entire thing. If this director, Tim Kincaid, DOES direct porn under another name, as has been said, it has to be the blandest 'porn' in the world. If you enjoy sexy nudity, don't bother; the nude women are just women who happen to have no clothes on.

Don't look for any sort of meaningful film-making; it looks as if each scene were banged out on a typewriter, rushed to the set, and filmed in the first take, which was used no matter how poor it was, and spliced in with no editing at all. Effects and makeup are tolerable, considering that the makeup guy apparently had a $200 budget to work with (by the way, he also appears as an actor, which tells you something right there).

For personal reasons I appreciate the exteriors, which are of the Manhattan I lived in the year this film was made, and also the minimalistic electronic soundtrack, one star each for those. I'd say it's not entertainment--it just makes 77 minutes of your life go away. If you like your horror bland, your acting wooden, and your production values those of an undergraduate college film project, all the while listening to some nostalgic '80s electronica--that would be me when I'm in certain moods--this one's for you.

Another dystopian future, in which corrupt privatized police snoop everywhere and surveillance is universal. But a series of murders begin in which the surveillance technology doesn't work; the murderer/s don't seem to be human. The main character's most emotional relationship is with a holo-video of his departed wife. The intended effect seems to be Dickian (as in Philip K. Dick) paranoid moodiness, intensified by many of the scenes taking place through set surveillance cams; this certainly saved a lot of money by enabling stock shots to be used over and over again and gave the production a "techno" feel which can get a bit wearying, not unlike techno music. That being said, the whole is a competent student effort--very derivative, like all student efforts, but I would like to see more from these people.

This movie is a classic low farce ... which is becoming a lost art in this age of political correctness. I thought this art had died with Benny Hill, the British cult comedian; thankfully, Jaime Pressly had the "ovarios" (=female "cojones")to have a stab at it.

The editor of a struggling fashion magazine hires a ditzy consultant (Pressly) to stage a tropical "shoot" with the world's top five supermodels. What no one knows is ... the "shoot" is going to be just that, with results reminiscent of "Airplane!" and Monty Python.

Everyone in the cast clearly had fun making it; it features egotistical, mentally unstable models, hilariously "asexual" photographers, and crusading lesbians. It lampoons the fashion/publishing world with the sort of crude humour that everyone (except the completely brainwashed) indulges in secretly these days, and along the way takes pot shots at everything from rap music to self-help culture to neo-naziism, not forgetting at least one sitting US Senator. Anyone who doesn't find any laughs here needs to be condemned to eternity with Garrison Keillor, Rosie O'Donnell, and Al Franken.

Still-timely plot involving a female Middle Eastern terrorist who is caught and re-programmed to go after her former comrades ... all well and good, until the programming goes awry. Straightforward, simple plotting, the action is never allowed to lapse, AND ... this will never happen again ... NO political grandstanding on who is right and wrong in the Middle East situation. Suitably unpretentious production and very workmanlike acting all around, and Sandahl Bergman turns in a rather unnerving performance as Samira, the death machine; the only other actress this good in such a role at the time was Claire Wren in "Steel and Lace," another movie which will appeal to those who like this one. This movie cries out for a remake, maybe with Michelle Rodriguez, though it won't happen; a DVD release of this one would be better.

Stars Bruce Davison (X-men), David Naughton (An American Werewolf In London), and Claire Wren as the rape victim/suicide turned killer cyborg. The story is rather unsettling, especially the way it careens back and forth between the dark revenge scenes, over to some fascinating comic bits (such as the forensic scientist who starts to enjoy the creativity of the murders), to dealing with Davison's character, who seems more like a robot than the robot. Perhaps it is unsettling because juxtapositions like that are so often a hallmark of real life as it is lived. The viewer really is kept in suspense about how the next victim will be claimed, and I defy anyone to guess all the deaths correctly beforehand. The dialogue verges on self-parody at times, and elements of several other flicks from Blade Runner to Robocop are borrowed with little attempt at disguise. Yet it all hangs together somehow, perhaps it is the thread of bad romance. A quirky gem.

Thoroughtly enjoyable and rather classy action/sci-fi/costume flick featuring many well-known characters borrowed from classic novels; Tom Sawyer, Captain Nemo, Allan Quatermain, the Invisible Man, Jekyll/Hyde, and Dorian Gray, and Mina Harker (from "Dracula"), with sidelights on a few others, all set in an alternate-reality Late Victorian milieu. Allan is persuaded out of retirement in Africa to head up a team of 'extraordinary gentlemen' (yes, I know about Mina, but if she weren't a lady, she certainly couldn't be a gentleman)to stop a super-villain who is planning to start a World War.

James Robinson's screenplay successfully walks a line between the characters' literary antecedents and their later comic-book incarnations; the result is reminiscent of the the TV show "The Avengers" in its wit and style. Are there absurdities? Of course: technology which would have created a sensation in real life passes unremarked by those around it, and a battleship-sized vessel is able to navigate tiny waterways with ease; but this is the comic-book ingredient playing its part. The characters themselves, with the exception of Allan and Tom, are absurdities on legs. Those who have enjoyed both comic books and novels will understand.

Visually the film is very satisfying, (think 'Sin City' played by Merchant-Ivory characters), conveying fin-de-siecle decay in Europe, contrasted with the natural beauty of Africa and Asia; the musical score by Trevor Jones does its work unobtrusively and well. The plot twists are there, but not too taxing--this writer had it figured out before the group left London--and good performances are turned in all the way around, with tongues ever-so-slightly in cheek; especially suitable are Naseeruddin Shah as the inscrutable Indian and Peta Wilson as the edgy Mina. Connery has been roundly criticized for his performance, but he is true to the way Rider Haggard wrote Quatermain--the merit of which is very open to separate discussion--and he certainly has nothing to prove to anyone as an actor. He seems to have enjoyed the performance, which also appears to have been the case with the rest of the principals. This writer also appreciated the lack of gratuitous language/sex/gore/political grandstanding which so many movie makers seem compelled to include these days. All in all a great lark.

This movie's screen credits say it is based on the novel of the same name by Ed Kelleher and Harriette Vidal. This is true only to the extent that both feature a beautiful woman who is out to murder a group of men for a crime committed in the past. Do not look for a well-articulated plot or deep message here. Everything is subsidiary to the main character's drive for revenge; that being said, do look for good acting from a supporting cast of unknown Canadians, and lots of good location shooting which is all the more effective because of the film's minimal production values. All of this action looks very much like it could be taking place in your neighbourhood right now, featuring people very like your neighbours. Not everything is explained, but that is also how real life often is. All this gives it an impact which goes beyond its unpretentious style. (The original novel is also a good read, but, as I said, it has practically nothing to do with the movie.)