OPEN WATER (2003) - June 29, 2005
A surprisingly suspenseful movie about a couple who go scuba-diving and get left behind by their boat. The film essentially consists of the two divers floating in the water and talking (or bickering) and yet it manages to be really entertaining and suspenseful throughout, particularly towards the end. Particularly effective was the scene that took place at night, with only periodic illumination from bolts of lightning. The film was done on a shoe-string budget and it looks it (it looks like it was filmed with a camcorder, and the two leads - though certainly not bad - weren't all that great, either). Despite that it is well made and remains very engaging throughout, which makes it easy to overlook its shortcomings. ***1/2
Short reviews of all the movies I see, rated out of four. Reviews containing spoilers are marked with an (S).
Wednesday, June 29, 2005
Tuesday, June 28, 2005
Live from Baghdad
LIVE FROM BAGHDAD (2002) - June 28, 2005
Michael Keaton gives a really good performance (no surprise there) in this film about CNN's struggle in Iraq in the weeks leading up to the Gulf War. The movie was entertaining and well made, and of course it's always nice to see Michael Keaton in a lead role. I don't get why he isn't a bigger star. ***
Michael Keaton gives a really good performance (no surprise there) in this film about CNN's struggle in Iraq in the weeks leading up to the Gulf War. The movie was entertaining and well made, and of course it's always nice to see Michael Keaton in a lead role. I don't get why he isn't a bigger star. ***
Monday, June 27, 2005
Duel
DUEL (1971) - June 27, 2005
Considering that this is Steven Spielberg's first film, and a TV movie at that, it's certainly above average. However it comes as no surprise to find out that this was based on a short story, as the premise is pretty thin and the movie feels overlong even at ninety minutes. It was certainly well-made, though. The truck becomes a really sinister presence even without ever seeing the driver. But the movie is just too one-note to ever really get into. It probably doesn't help that Dennis Weaver isn't all that great in the main role, and his occasional panicked narration is more annoying than anything else. **1/2
Considering that this is Steven Spielberg's first film, and a TV movie at that, it's certainly above average. However it comes as no surprise to find out that this was based on a short story, as the premise is pretty thin and the movie feels overlong even at ninety minutes. It was certainly well-made, though. The truck becomes a really sinister presence even without ever seeing the driver. But the movie is just too one-note to ever really get into. It probably doesn't help that Dennis Weaver isn't all that great in the main role, and his occasional panicked narration is more annoying than anything else. **1/2
Monday, June 20, 2005
Cyber Seduction: His Secret Life
CYBER SEDUCTION: HIS SECRET LIFE (2004) - June 20, 2005
A ridiculously bad TV movie about a teenager whose perfect life is destroyed when he becomes addicted to internet pornography. Is it really necessary to say anything else? This movie's only redeeming feature is that it occasionally strays into the "so bad it's good" category, as it is laughably bad. The movie is so outrageously over-the-top it borders on parody, and if there is any justice in the world everyone who was involved in this stink-bomb will never be allowed to work again. I missed the first ten minutes, so I can't really give it a rating, but if I were to rate it I'd give it half a star. NO RATING
A ridiculously bad TV movie about a teenager whose perfect life is destroyed when he becomes addicted to internet pornography. Is it really necessary to say anything else? This movie's only redeeming feature is that it occasionally strays into the "so bad it's good" category, as it is laughably bad. The movie is so outrageously over-the-top it borders on parody, and if there is any justice in the world everyone who was involved in this stink-bomb will never be allowed to work again. I missed the first ten minutes, so I can't really give it a rating, but if I were to rate it I'd give it half a star. NO RATING
Friday, June 17, 2005
Batman Begins
BATMAN BEGINS (2005) - June 17, 2005 (Second Viewing)
This didn't hold up quite as well on a second viewing as I had hoped it would. That's not to say I didn't enjoy it; I did. But I definitely felt the length this time, and was even a bit bored in parts. It probably didn't help that I was pretty tired. I don't know. The movie just seemed a bit more unremarkable this time around. I definitely really liked Cillian Murphy as the Scarecrow, though. He stole every scene he was in. And I hope Christopher Nolan improves his action-directing skills next time around. ***
This didn't hold up quite as well on a second viewing as I had hoped it would. That's not to say I didn't enjoy it; I did. But I definitely felt the length this time, and was even a bit bored in parts. It probably didn't help that I was pretty tired. I don't know. The movie just seemed a bit more unremarkable this time around. I definitely really liked Cillian Murphy as the Scarecrow, though. He stole every scene he was in. And I hope Christopher Nolan improves his action-directing skills next time around. ***
Monday, June 13, 2005
Batman Begins
BATMAN BEGINS (2005) - June 13, 2005
A worthy Batman film. Christian Bale proves to be almost perfect as Bruce Wayne / Batman. In fact, all the actors are really good; I also really liked Cillian Murphy as the Scarecrow. Though it quickly becomes apparent that Christopher Nolan is not the best director of action (the old shaky-cam / quick cut standby -- I am so sick of this. It's just lazy filmmaking. Can't figure out how to direct that action scene? Just shake the camera a lot and show lots of close-ups and the audience will just assume something exciting is happening. What a crock.), the film still manages to be quite good. It probably helps that the action level is surprisingly low (it's probably around an hour into the movie before Bruce Wayne first dons the Batsuit). There were a few minor things I didn't like -- the Batsuit, for instance. It looks too bulky and cumbersome; I don't really know if I buy that he could run around and fight crime in that thing. I think that something closer to what it looks like in the comics could look really good if done right (that internet Batman short film was on the right track). I didn't really like the Batmobile either. But those are really minor complaints. The movie was really long, and while it did feel like a long movie it never felt overlong (so much stuff happens it almost feels as though you could split it up into two movies). As far as superhero movies go this was right up there with Spider-man 2. ***1/2
A worthy Batman film. Christian Bale proves to be almost perfect as Bruce Wayne / Batman. In fact, all the actors are really good; I also really liked Cillian Murphy as the Scarecrow. Though it quickly becomes apparent that Christopher Nolan is not the best director of action (the old shaky-cam / quick cut standby -- I am so sick of this. It's just lazy filmmaking. Can't figure out how to direct that action scene? Just shake the camera a lot and show lots of close-ups and the audience will just assume something exciting is happening. What a crock.), the film still manages to be quite good. It probably helps that the action level is surprisingly low (it's probably around an hour into the movie before Bruce Wayne first dons the Batsuit). There were a few minor things I didn't like -- the Batsuit, for instance. It looks too bulky and cumbersome; I don't really know if I buy that he could run around and fight crime in that thing. I think that something closer to what it looks like in the comics could look really good if done right (that internet Batman short film was on the right track). I didn't really like the Batmobile either. But those are really minor complaints. The movie was really long, and while it did feel like a long movie it never felt overlong (so much stuff happens it almost feels as though you could split it up into two movies). As far as superhero movies go this was right up there with Spider-man 2. ***1/2
Sunday, June 12, 2005
The Sugarland Express
THE SUGARLAND EXPRESS (1974) - June 12, 2005
A well made but somewhat slow-paced early film by Steven Spielberg. About a young couple who kidnap a cop and set out across the country to get their child. At 110 minutes, the movie feels a bit on the long side, exacerbated by the fact that it is essentially plotless. In fact this feels more like a later Spielberg effort than something out of his prime, as it is overlong and a little pointless (which is surprising given that this is his first theatrical film). **1/2
A well made but somewhat slow-paced early film by Steven Spielberg. About a young couple who kidnap a cop and set out across the country to get their child. At 110 minutes, the movie feels a bit on the long side, exacerbated by the fact that it is essentially plotless. In fact this feels more like a later Spielberg effort than something out of his prime, as it is overlong and a little pointless (which is surprising given that this is his first theatrical film). **1/2
Friday, June 10, 2005
Timeline
TIMELINE (2003) - June 10, 2005
Uggh. Yet another film in a long line of lousy Crichton adaptations, and quite possibly the worst yet (which is no small feat, considering that other Crichton adaptations include Sphere and Congo). I just don't get it. All they have to do is adapt the story without changing it too much. Why is that so difficult? Why do they have to make it so... well, stupid. For one thing, the screenplay was absolutely terrible, and featured some of the worst dialogue I've heard in a while. And then there were the performances, which were at about the same level as a straight-to-video movie (which, I suppose, went well with the dialogue). Paul Walker and Francis O'Connor were both particularly bad. Paul Walker is normally a lousy but passable actor -- not here. He has absolutely no charisma and stumbles through his lines like he's reading them for the first time. O'Connor is equally bad. Gerard Butler is the only person here able to give something resembling a decent performance, but even he isn't all that great (though that's probably the script's fault -- there's only so much an actor can do when the material is this bad). Then the movie ends with a long battle scene that seems to go on forever, and boy was I bored. If Michael Crichton were dead he'd be rolling around in his grave. But I guess instead he's swimming around in his money bin. *1/2
Uggh. Yet another film in a long line of lousy Crichton adaptations, and quite possibly the worst yet (which is no small feat, considering that other Crichton adaptations include Sphere and Congo). I just don't get it. All they have to do is adapt the story without changing it too much. Why is that so difficult? Why do they have to make it so... well, stupid. For one thing, the screenplay was absolutely terrible, and featured some of the worst dialogue I've heard in a while. And then there were the performances, which were at about the same level as a straight-to-video movie (which, I suppose, went well with the dialogue). Paul Walker and Francis O'Connor were both particularly bad. Paul Walker is normally a lousy but passable actor -- not here. He has absolutely no charisma and stumbles through his lines like he's reading them for the first time. O'Connor is equally bad. Gerard Butler is the only person here able to give something resembling a decent performance, but even he isn't all that great (though that's probably the script's fault -- there's only so much an actor can do when the material is this bad). Then the movie ends with a long battle scene that seems to go on forever, and boy was I bored. If Michael Crichton were dead he'd be rolling around in his grave. But I guess instead he's swimming around in his money bin. *1/2
Monday, June 06, 2005
Howl's Moving Castle
HOWL'S MOVING CASTLE (2004) - June 6, 2005
A typically creative and engaging film from Hayao Miyazaki, who is without a doubt one of the best animation directors around. About a young girl who is cursed with the body of an old woman, and her adventures with a magician. The film is set in some kind of odd fantasy world, and is almost always compelling just on a visual level. It is, however, slightly overlong, and it lags a bit towards the end. But aside from that it was quite good. Even the dubbing was well done, though I still would have preferred to watch the original version with subtitles. ***
A typically creative and engaging film from Hayao Miyazaki, who is without a doubt one of the best animation directors around. About a young girl who is cursed with the body of an old woman, and her adventures with a magician. The film is set in some kind of odd fantasy world, and is almost always compelling just on a visual level. It is, however, slightly overlong, and it lags a bit towards the end. But aside from that it was quite good. Even the dubbing was well done, though I still would have preferred to watch the original version with subtitles. ***
Saturday, June 04, 2005
The Longest Yard
THE LONGEST YARD (2005) - June 4, 2005
Adam Sandler stars in this film about a disgraced former NFL player who gets another chance to play football when he finds himself in prison. This is definitely one of Adam Sandler's worst films. For one thing it is completely plotless -- the whole film consists of the preparation for the game, and then the game itself (which goes on far longer than it should, but then that can be said of the whole movie, which is way overlong). It would have been nice if there were at least a couple of good characters; Sandler's character is way underdeveloped, and the rest of the people are essentially not developed at all (which is surprising given how long the movie is). It would have also been nice if the movie had been funny, but aside from a couple of chuckles there aren't many laughs to be found here. Plus something happens right before the big game which seems unnecessarily harsh for a cheesy movie like this. But if there's one thing I can say about this movie, it's always nice to see Sully from Commando on the big screen. **
Adam Sandler stars in this film about a disgraced former NFL player who gets another chance to play football when he finds himself in prison. This is definitely one of Adam Sandler's worst films. For one thing it is completely plotless -- the whole film consists of the preparation for the game, and then the game itself (which goes on far longer than it should, but then that can be said of the whole movie, which is way overlong). It would have been nice if there were at least a couple of good characters; Sandler's character is way underdeveloped, and the rest of the people are essentially not developed at all (which is surprising given how long the movie is). It would have also been nice if the movie had been funny, but aside from a couple of chuckles there aren't many laughs to be found here. Plus something happens right before the big game which seems unnecessarily harsh for a cheesy movie like this. But if there's one thing I can say about this movie, it's always nice to see Sully from Commando on the big screen. **
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)