THE LIVES OF OTHERS (2006) - Feb. 28, 2007
A very well made but very slow-paced film about a writer in cold war-era Germany who finds himself under government surveillance by a man who slowly comes to identify with him, and who begins to almost live vicariously through him. The film features some really good direction and cinematography, and a couple of really stellar performances from Sebastian Koch and Ulrich Mühe. It was quite slow, though. ***
Short reviews of all the movies I see, rated out of four. Reviews containing spoilers are marked with an (S).
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Monday, February 26, 2007
300
300 (2007) - Feb. 26, 2007
Jeez, what a disappointment! After the trailer, which was, quite frankly, awesome, this film couldn't help but disappoint. But even disregarding that trailer, this just wasn't a very good film. As a matter of fact, that's too kind: this was a bad film. The stylized visuals are surprisingly drab; with the limitless possibilities of the entirely CG backgrounds, you'd think the filmmakers could come up with something a bit less bland-looking (though I guess that's expecting too much from the guy behind the awful Dawn of the Dead remake). And I don't know if they had to cut out a lot of stuff from the comic, but the whole thing feels a bit disjointed -- it just sort of lurches from one scene to the next without all that much narrative momentum. Some of the scenes were better than others, but I spent the bulk of the film in boredom. The battle scenes were okay -- they were quite violent, though I don't think I've ever seen faker looking CG blood. The problem here is that they were too flashy for their own good (lots of quick cuts, quick zooms and jarring shifts from slow-motion to fast-motion to regular speed). Boo-urns. *1/2
Jeez, what a disappointment! After the trailer, which was, quite frankly, awesome, this film couldn't help but disappoint. But even disregarding that trailer, this just wasn't a very good film. As a matter of fact, that's too kind: this was a bad film. The stylized visuals are surprisingly drab; with the limitless possibilities of the entirely CG backgrounds, you'd think the filmmakers could come up with something a bit less bland-looking (though I guess that's expecting too much from the guy behind the awful Dawn of the Dead remake). And I don't know if they had to cut out a lot of stuff from the comic, but the whole thing feels a bit disjointed -- it just sort of lurches from one scene to the next without all that much narrative momentum. Some of the scenes were better than others, but I spent the bulk of the film in boredom. The battle scenes were okay -- they were quite violent, though I don't think I've ever seen faker looking CG blood. The problem here is that they were too flashy for their own good (lots of quick cuts, quick zooms and jarring shifts from slow-motion to fast-motion to regular speed). Boo-urns. *1/2
Letters from Iwo Jima
LETTERS FROM IWO JIMA (2006) - Feb. 26, 2007
About the battle of Iwo Jima, this time from the Japanese point of view, this was a really well made but slow-paced film. The performances were all really good, and Clint Eastwood's direction was what you'd expect (very good). There were some scenes that were quite powerful, but overall I think Flags of our Fathers was the slightly superior film (and I didn't notice all that much overlap, but it would be interesting to watch the two movies back-to-back). ***
About the battle of Iwo Jima, this time from the Japanese point of view, this was a really well made but slow-paced film. The performances were all really good, and Clint Eastwood's direction was what you'd expect (very good). There were some scenes that were quite powerful, but overall I think Flags of our Fathers was the slightly superior film (and I didn't notice all that much overlap, but it would be interesting to watch the two movies back-to-back). ***
The Queen
THE QUEEN (2006) - Feb. 26, 2007
This was actually better than I thought it would be -- more than just a showcase for Hellen Mirren's performance (which was exceptional), this was a very good character study and a film I've found myself thinking of quite a bit since I watched it yesterday. Mirren is certainly deserving of all the accolades; she gives a really subtle, moving performance. It's probably one of the best I've seen in a while. The other actors, though not quite up to her level, were excellent as well. Michael Sheen in particular, as Tony Blair, gave a really good performance. It was also very well written and directed. ***1/2
This was actually better than I thought it would be -- more than just a showcase for Hellen Mirren's performance (which was exceptional), this was a very good character study and a film I've found myself thinking of quite a bit since I watched it yesterday. Mirren is certainly deserving of all the accolades; she gives a really subtle, moving performance. It's probably one of the best I've seen in a while. The other actors, though not quite up to her level, were excellent as well. Michael Sheen in particular, as Tony Blair, gave a really good performance. It was also very well written and directed. ***1/2
Saturday, February 24, 2007
To Live
TO LIVE (1994) - Feb. 24, 2007 (Second Viewing)
About the Chinese revolution as seen through the eyes of a working-class family, this is a really well made film by Zhang Yimou. It features some really excellent performances from both You Ge and Gong Li, though it's Li who really stands out, giving a truly phenomenal performance. Yimou's direction is of course, superlative. This is a really great film; it's moving and powerful and one of Yimou's best. ****
About the Chinese revolution as seen through the eyes of a working-class family, this is a really well made film by Zhang Yimou. It features some really excellent performances from both You Ge and Gong Li, though it's Li who really stands out, giving a truly phenomenal performance. Yimou's direction is of course, superlative. This is a really great film; it's moving and powerful and one of Yimou's best. ****
Thursday, February 22, 2007
The Best and Worst movies of 2006
THE BEST:
10. The Proposition
9. The Descent
8. Little Children
7. The Fountain
6. Brick
5. Riding Alone for Thousands of Miles
4. Superman Returns
3. Little Miss Sunshine
2. Marie Antoinette
1. Children of Men
THE WORST
10. Miami Vice
9. Pulse
8. Poseidon
7. You, Me and Dupree
6. Invincible
5. The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift
4. The Benchwarmers
3. Silent Hill
2. The Hamster Cage
1. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning
10. The Proposition
9. The Descent
8. Little Children
7. The Fountain
6. Brick
5. Riding Alone for Thousands of Miles
4. Superman Returns
3. Little Miss Sunshine
2. Marie Antoinette
1. Children of Men
THE WORST
10. Miami Vice
9. Pulse
8. Poseidon
7. You, Me and Dupree
6. Invincible
5. The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift
4. The Benchwarmers
3. Silent Hill
2. The Hamster Cage
1. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
Little Children
LITTLE CHILDREN (2006) - Feb. 21, 2007
About a man and a woman who begin having an affair, this was a very good film. Impeccably directed by Todd Field, the film was almost always a pleasure to look at. It was also really well written, and featured some excellent performances (Kate Winslet
deservedly got an Oscar nomination; Patrick Wilson probably should have got one as well). Good stuff. ***1/2
About a man and a woman who begin having an affair, this was a very good film. Impeccably directed by Todd Field, the film was almost always a pleasure to look at. It was also really well written, and featured some excellent performances (Kate Winslet
deservedly got an Oscar nomination; Patrick Wilson probably should have got one as well). Good stuff. ***1/2
Thursday, February 15, 2007
Ghost Rider
GHOST RIDER (2007) - Feb. 15, 2007
Cheesy. I think that's the best word to describe this movie. It wasn't particularly good or bad, nor was it ever outright boring, it was just cheesy. The dialogue was cheesy, the bad guys were cheesy, the special effects were cheesy (that flaming skull may look okay on the printed page, but on screen it just looks ridiculous)... Cheesy cheesy cheesy. **
Cheesy. I think that's the best word to describe this movie. It wasn't particularly good or bad, nor was it ever outright boring, it was just cheesy. The dialogue was cheesy, the bad guys were cheesy, the special effects were cheesy (that flaming skull may look okay on the printed page, but on screen it just looks ridiculous)... Cheesy cheesy cheesy. **
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
The Hamster Cage
THE HAMSTER CAGE (2006) - Feb. 13, 2007
Oh the humanity! I haven't seen a film this bad in a long, long time. Sweet Jesus was it bad. I honestly cannot think of a single redeeming thing about this big, steaming, fly-infested pile of rhinoceros poop. This was a thoroughly unpleasant film filled to the brim with unlikable, broadly-drawn "characters" (and I use the word "character" very very lightly). It was badly acted (though to be fair, even the finest of actors couldn't do much with this material), blandly directed, atrociously written (I don't think there was a single line of dialogue that seemed like something a real human being would say, nor was there a single action performed by any of the characters that seemed authentic)... My God. It was just so bad, and so annoying. Every single moment of it felt contrived and phony; it almost felt like it was written and directed by some kind of creature from outer space, someone who had a limited amount of contact with humans and thus had only the most vague idea of how people really act and talk. I absolutely, positively hated this movie. No, I despised this movie. Is there a word stronger than despised? ZERO STARS
Oh the humanity! I haven't seen a film this bad in a long, long time. Sweet Jesus was it bad. I honestly cannot think of a single redeeming thing about this big, steaming, fly-infested pile of rhinoceros poop. This was a thoroughly unpleasant film filled to the brim with unlikable, broadly-drawn "characters" (and I use the word "character" very very lightly). It was badly acted (though to be fair, even the finest of actors couldn't do much with this material), blandly directed, atrociously written (I don't think there was a single line of dialogue that seemed like something a real human being would say, nor was there a single action performed by any of the characters that seemed authentic)... My God. It was just so bad, and so annoying. Every single moment of it felt contrived and phony; it almost felt like it was written and directed by some kind of creature from outer space, someone who had a limited amount of contact with humans and thus had only the most vague idea of how people really act and talk. I absolutely, positively hated this movie. No, I despised this movie. Is there a word stronger than despised? ZERO STARS
Saturday, February 10, 2007
Hannibal Rising
HANNIBAL RISING (2007) - Feb. 10, 2007
I think I first suspected that this wasn't going to be a good movie when the bad guy -- I guess to make sure that the audience wasn't confused about how truly evil he was -- took a big, enthusiastic bite out of a dead bird, feathers and all. The clincher came at the moment when Hannibal Lecter put on a mask that bore more than a passing resemblance to the one he famously wore in Silence of the Lambs. You could just see the director furiously winking at the audience, "hey, remember how good Silence of the Lambs was??" This was a bad movie, witlessly directed by Peter Webber, and written without an ounce of subtlety by Thomas Harris. Everything about this movie was just so over-the-top, from the raw bird-eating bad guy to Hannibal himself. It probably didn't help that Gaspard Ulliel sneered his way through the entire film, giving a performance that can best be described as one-note (and that doesn't even begin to hint at the depth that Anthony Hopkins brought to the part). The film was also quite slow-paced, and I'm really not sure why -- it certainly wasn't to develop the characters, as they were about as fleshed out as the people in a straight-to-video slasher film. Blech. *1/2
I think I first suspected that this wasn't going to be a good movie when the bad guy -- I guess to make sure that the audience wasn't confused about how truly evil he was -- took a big, enthusiastic bite out of a dead bird, feathers and all. The clincher came at the moment when Hannibal Lecter put on a mask that bore more than a passing resemblance to the one he famously wore in Silence of the Lambs. You could just see the director furiously winking at the audience, "hey, remember how good Silence of the Lambs was??" This was a bad movie, witlessly directed by Peter Webber, and written without an ounce of subtlety by Thomas Harris. Everything about this movie was just so over-the-top, from the raw bird-eating bad guy to Hannibal himself. It probably didn't help that Gaspard Ulliel sneered his way through the entire film, giving a performance that can best be described as one-note (and that doesn't even begin to hint at the depth that Anthony Hopkins brought to the part). The film was also quite slow-paced, and I'm really not sure why -- it certainly wasn't to develop the characters, as they were about as fleshed out as the people in a straight-to-video slasher film. Blech. *1/2
Wednesday, February 07, 2007
Music and Lyrics
MUSIC AND LYRICS (2007) - Feb. 7, 2007
Meh. About a has-been '80s pop star who enlists the help of a spunky author when a popular singer asks him to write a song; they, of course, fall in love, have a fight, and then kiss and make up just in time for the end credits. Hugh Grant and Drew Barrymore are both old pros in the genre and were expectedly charming. The film was competently made, it just wasn't all that interesting. It probably didn't help that pretty much every section of the film felt like it could use some trimming. So yeah, like I said: meh. **1/2
Meh. About a has-been '80s pop star who enlists the help of a spunky author when a popular singer asks him to write a song; they, of course, fall in love, have a fight, and then kiss and make up just in time for the end credits. Hugh Grant and Drew Barrymore are both old pros in the genre and were expectedly charming. The film was competently made, it just wasn't all that interesting. It probably didn't help that pretty much every section of the film felt like it could use some trimming. So yeah, like I said: meh. **1/2
Children of Men
CHILDREN OF MEN (2006) - Feb. 7, 2007 (Second Viewing)
Awesome. Super mega awesome. This was just as good the second time as it was the first. Maybe better even. Everything about it is great: the direction (Alfonso Cuarón's use of long takes is absolutely stunning), the script, the cinematography, the acting (Clive Owen was robbed of an Oscar nomination)... It's completely riveting throughout. It really is rare that you get to see a film this good, one that reminds you what a truly great film is capable of. ****
Awesome. Super mega awesome. This was just as good the second time as it was the first. Maybe better even. Everything about it is great: the direction (Alfonso Cuarón's use of long takes is absolutely stunning), the script, the cinematography, the acting (Clive Owen was robbed of an Oscar nomination)... It's completely riveting throughout. It really is rare that you get to see a film this good, one that reminds you what a truly great film is capable of. ****
Saturday, February 03, 2007
Pan's Labyrinth
PAN'S LABYRINTH (2006) - Feb. 3, 2007
Well, that was a bit disappointing. Not that it was bad, but it wasn't exactly the movie of the year that some people are making it out to be. About a little girl in post-war Spain whose mother marries a brutal general, and who concocts elaborate fantasies to escape from the horrors around her. This was definitely a well made film; Guillermo del Toro's visuals were quite imaginative, and the whole movie looked really nice. It was also well acted and all that jazz, but I just never found myself all that drawn into the story. Good but not great. ***
Well, that was a bit disappointing. Not that it was bad, but it wasn't exactly the movie of the year that some people are making it out to be. About a little girl in post-war Spain whose mother marries a brutal general, and who concocts elaborate fantasies to escape from the horrors around her. This was definitely a well made film; Guillermo del Toro's visuals were quite imaginative, and the whole movie looked really nice. It was also well acted and all that jazz, but I just never found myself all that drawn into the story. Good but not great. ***
Friday, February 02, 2007
Hearts of Darkness: A Filmmaker's Apocalypse
HEARTS OF DARKNESS: A FILMMAKER'S APOCALYPSE (1991) - Feb. 2, 2007
An interesting documentary about Francis Ford Coppola's struggles in making Apocalypse Now. I really wish I had seen the movie before I saw this, as I'm sure I would have appreciated it more (plus the movie has essentially been spoiled for me). Oh well. It was still an interesting documentary. ***
An interesting documentary about Francis Ford Coppola's struggles in making Apocalypse Now. I really wish I had seen the movie before I saw this, as I'm sure I would have appreciated it more (plus the movie has essentially been spoiled for me). Oh well. It was still an interesting documentary. ***
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)