Reviews

While the colorists did an amazing job, the lack of story and over-reliance on slow-motion made this movie one of the most boring I've seen in a long time. Essentially, this movie is a long battle, intercut with pointless back story that is so facile that it provides absolutely no depth to the one-dimensional characters. While the battle initially has some mild entertainment value (although it's a pale imitation of violence in the Matrix), it quickly becomes fatiguing. Unless you enjoy exaggerated blood splatter sounds and seeing limbs cut off for the sake of limbs getting cut off, there isn't much to engage the audience.

The director seems to think audiences don't appreciate the difficulty of fighting human foes, so it pits the Spartans against numerous monsters and hyper large beasts. Yet, with no context and an unending stream of slow-motion violence, the monsters and gigantic beasts don't provide any thrills: they're not scary or menacing. They come, they get killed, they are forgotten.

The movie has other problems, but I fear mentioning them will have readers discount how boring the action is.

While there may be movies that have worse acting, technical

accomplishment, or stories, none of those films have cost as

much or desecrated a cherished childhood memory the way

"Phantom Menace" does. While Lucas has committed many crimes with this film (replacing character and story with CGI, for

one; vaguely veiled derogatory racial stereotypes for another), the

cardinal sin of this film is that is unbearably boring. I suspect

"Cannonball Run" on a worn-out VHS tape would be more involving.

There's a lot to like here, but ultimately this film should have been

an hour shorter. The plot is incredibly repetative: the heroes face

horrible danger, fight their way out, and then barely escape--repeat, repeat, repeat. There is almost no character

development, or for that matter, development of anything other than

thrills. But thrill after thrill eventually gets boring, and two hours in, I

couldn't wait for it to be over.

All is not a loss, however, as the magical environment and special

effects are dazzling and almost succeed at keeping the film going.

While "Brother" has most of the directoral signatures that mark the

brilliant Takeshi Kitano films of the past, it feels adrift without

meaning. This film feels much more violent that his past films

(whether this is true or not), mainly because about halfway through

the film, the plot turns into a simple blood bath. Is there a

message here? Yes, but it is the simple-minded "violence begets

violence," which doesn't do anything to discourage real life

violence. Say what you will about this film not masking the horrors

of violence with prettiness (i.e., this film will make empathic

viewers cringe constantly), the people who perpetuate this kind of

violence will not find it off-putting. To truly violent people, "Brother"

is a celebration of their hateful lifestyle. To the rest of us, this is

merely extremely uncomfortable viewing.

When turned loose on a pointless story like this, Takesi's writing

seems childish, and his camera work and pacing pointless.

Where "Fireworks" was a stunningly beautiful film that occasionally

drifted into the realm of pure art, this film only provides us empty

pauses between its empty violence. There are no insights here,

nothing to take away once you leave the theater.

I hope that "Brother" is a film created by a brilliant artist struggling

with where to take his films after a large commercial failure

("Kikujiro") seems to have cut off his new direction, and that his

next film will return to the thoughtful beauty found in his previous

films.

Working backwards from his suicide, this film never flinches as it shows the how Songho is stripped of his humanity by a government whose police and military brutally repress its citizens. By showing how Songho gets to his complete loss of self, Peppermint Candy demonstrates how easy it is for people to lose themselves in the face of repression. Thoroughly unpleasant to watch, but an important reminder of what happens in the world.

I was expecting "Go" to be entertaining, if not brilliant. I liked Doug Limon's "Swingers" a lot--it was witty and hip. "Go," on the otherhand, tried to be hip and witty, but often was just boring and predictable. Watching on video, I found my self fighting the urge to fast forward. A definite to-be-missed flick.

Charles Burnett's "Killer of Sheep" is a true masterpiece--an unsentimental look at ghetto life, rich in detail, marvelously flirting with an unexpected and regarding nonnarrative structure. "Selma, Lord, Selma" doesn't offer the same joys--it too obviously is a television project, with clearly identifiable "good guys" and "bad guys" and a strong sentimental thrust. Burnett seems to have been forced into removing the subtleties of the historical events he portrays by the limits of working with Disney. In the end, this movie is greatly affecting--it is hard to watch it with dry eyes--but it is not likely to make someone who isn't ignorant of the struggle for civil rights in the U.S. to think about the events in a new light.

Too few Hollywood films give the audience credit for having the patience, intelligence, or whatever it is they think we are lacking, to create films which demand second viewings. Three Kings demands not just a second viewing, but many more. There is so much here that needs to be absorbed and thought about that one viewing will only scratch the surface.

Like all of David O. Russel's films, Three Kings provides humor that is wickedly funny, until you pause for a second and realize how horrible what your laughing at is. The ambivalence runs deep. There are few "good" guys in this film, and the film often implicates the (American, at least) audience. How innocent are we? This film suggests we are naive, but not innocent when it comes to the way the U.S. interacts with the world.

I was quite surprised at how good this film was. The way the film handled a story that could have been so sentimentalized or turned into a Lynchian freak show was outstanding. The direction never rushed through scenes, giving them time to impact the audience, and allow the audience to absorb what was happening. The cinematography and set and sound design were also beautiful.

So few American films have the nerve to be either patient or original: this film is both.

While this isn't the best movie I've seen, it certainly is one of the most entertaining movies I've seen in recent memory. Thoroughly engrossing and funny.

I had relatively low expectations for this film--although I thought that by keeping my expectations low, by the time the marvellous soundtrack started to roll, I would be whisked out of my cynicism and into at least a reasonably enjoyable movie experience, somewhat akin to seeing a decent Bond film. However, rather than casting aside my doubts, I ended up being bored in long stretches, as the bloated, uninteresting plot plodded along.

Only 2 characters approached being developed, and they had to share time with not nearly as good as I expected special effects, pointless comic episodes, and plot misturns. Ultimately, this film succeeds only at maintaining the "Star Wars" feel, and adds nothing positive to the legacy of the original.

The few scenes which were interesting were a nice race scene, which maintained suspense throughout and a well staged fight betweeen the largely wordless and completely undeveloped Death Mall (or whatever his name was) and the two Jedis.

As for the rest of it, Puh-leez! Lucas had, what, 10+ years to write this? How did Darth Vader become the boy genius, troubled Savior (a virgin birth is implied for little Ani) we see here? He's so outstanding that he argues to his mom that it is their moral obligation to help the Jedis, and never does anything selfish. The Jedi stuff was always simpleton philosophy, but Lucas gives us enough additional information here to realize it is spirituality for the stupid and lazy only.

Kudos are due to Liam Nelson for his great presence, and Natalie Portman's fine, minimalist job portraying the Queen.

I'm not sure this film, as filmmaking, deserves the rarified company the "9" I gave it, but Potter captures the passion, beauty, and joy of the tango so well, that I cannot imagine myself ever tiring of this film. A marvelous experience.

This could have been, should have been a very good film, but the filmmakers decided to focus on not on Teena Brandon/Brandon Tenna--a woman who passed herself off as a man, even to some of his girlfriends--but instead the rape and murder which occured in his last week of life. While the rape and murder were horrible, the filmmakers never got into the killer's heads enough to make that aspect of the story interesting or informative (film message: some people are bigots and do horrible things). The fascinating questions, such as how could a woman be sexually involved with another woman and not know it, were touched on, but not nearly enough.

I wish the filmmakers had looked into the relationship aspect of this story more. How have Brandon's ex-girlfriend's been affected by knowing that they were involved with a woman? Why did Brandon hang out with the people who killed him?

But then again, the film seemed decidedly amatuerish in most aspects, with little insight in how to use the camera to tell the story. I can't figure out what about the material demanded a film. A book would have allowed a deeper exploration of the interesting material without sacrificing any of the (nonexistant) visual appeal.

Grierson set out to make "propaganda," and this film--with it's voice-over proclaiming the great value of the British industrial worker, without a hint of ambiguity or doubt--fits that category well. The authoritatarian narrator feels out-of-date and unsophisticated, but the footage is well shot and interesting, and the transparency of the propaganda aspect is almost a reflief at a time when so many films have hidden agendas.

I'm not entirely sure what to make of this film--I suspect I need to view it at least once, and probably several more times before I can get a good hold on it. However, my inability to fully comprehend what "Sonatine" is about doesn't strike me as a flaw. Rather, the film is much more complicated than the usual gangster film.

It begins with very unsentimentalized and nonglorified violence. People hit and kill each other and it isn't much different than toast popping out of the toaster. It is fast, moderately bloody, and there. Kitano doesn't seem to be interested in thrilling us with either the danger, grotesqueness, or thrill of violence--another, not clearly defined agenda is at work here.

At perhaps a third of the way into the film, it makes a sudden transition from this gangster life to a period of forced inactivity. I suspect this section, which is delightfully playful, is at the heart of this film.

While the bracketing two segments are very good, the middle segment, "White Geese"(?) is the one which stood out. It is a story about two aviary biologists who are visiting a game preserve to find the last of a species of white geese. In long takes, the film shows the beauty and value of the preserve, and takes the viewer into the heart of the game warden. When poachers come hunting, the segment reaches a startling climax.

This is a beautifully shot movie, with interesting stories and solid acting. Information about what is happening is slowly reeled out, keeping the audience thinking and engaged.

Wow! Sam Raimi scores a huge win here. This film is amazingly well conceived and executed. The portrayal of three men in rural Minnesota who discover $4 million in cash at the site of an undiscovered small airplane crash, and their slow descent into evil is remarkably well paced. Raimi shies away from portraying any of the characters as either good or evil--they all are implicated as the simple plan to keep the money begins to unravel.

In many ways, this films covers the same territory as "The Treasure of the Sierra Madre," but comes off as more believable. Raimi's greatest triumph may be crafting a drama which the viewer can project himself into--suggesting that anyone could fall prey to the temptation presented by a quick fortune.

This movie, the story of a Belgian boy who likes to dress up as a girl, is delightful. It richly develops the boy, his family, and his neighbors to give an insightful portrait of a child who isn't bound by gender norms. The filmmakers use a beautifully realized, cartoony fantasy sequences to broaden the story and give the viewer insight into the boy's mind. A most highly recommended film.

"Day of Wrath" is a hauntingly stark film about religious and familial repression. The film is beautiful, but the version I have seen, both screened and on video, is in terrible condition. This is a masterpiece that deserves restoration. Amazon.com says its sale VHS version was released in June 1998, so it may be a better version.

While not as thoroughly awe-inspiring as "Ulysses Gaze," "Eternity and a Day" is one of the most masterful films I've seen. It is full of beautiful, haunting images that have stayed with me long since seeing it. Like the other Angelopoulos films I've seen, it is a somewhat dense, contemplative film, but it shouldn't be seen as intimidating or unaccessible. The storyline, despite the frequent flashbacks, is easy to follow, the the emotional impact never ceases. An impressive, inspiring film.

While it is hard to credit any of the technical virtues of this film, the overall portrayal of these sexually dysfunctional portrayals came off to me as mean-spirited and priggish. Too often, Solondz undercuts his scenes with cheaply ironic 70s pop love songs (Air Supply, etc.) to keep the audience from identifying with them. The constant back-and-forth between bitterly dark comedy and hyper-realistic portrayal prevented real insight, and instead encouraged an almost snide, voyeristic amusement.

On the other hand, this film is to be applauded for attempting to deal with subject matter. I didn't get the feeling that Solondz personally views his characters as spiteful or pathetic, but instead that he wanted to "lighten" the burden on the audience by creating ironic distance. If he can keep the same very high level of acting and writing in his next film, without relying on cheap irony, he'll produce a film which is hard to ignore.

This is an ambitious film, covering a lot of characters with very different backgrounds over many years. Sayles pulls it off perfectly. He gives a great sense of place, and shows each of his characers as people. As always, Sayles asks you to think, and gives you something worth thinking about.

I have never seen a film which promised so much. I can imagine that ten viewings from now, I will have only begun to understand all that is buried in this dense, complex, contemplative masterpiece.

This isn't a quick-thrill film, but the rewards it offers to its viewers are immense. If nothing else, it demonstrates what a true master of cinema can produce. Few directors have reached this height, perhaps Dryer, Welles, and Kirasawa. If you love the art of cinema, with all of the complexities its varied language can offer, see this film.

This is a delightful film. Master Sayles presents the viewer with a tale of changing the conditions of rural communities as they become part of the "global village," with a spry hand. This film is as accessible for 30-something intellectuals as it is for 10-something children.

The 6 I gave "City of Hope" is the lowest rating I've given any Sayles film. I'm a bit loathe to give any of his films a poor rating because he makes such though-provoking films, but "City of Hope" never came together for me. Unlike the many different characters and situations he pulled together in his masterful "Lone Star," "City of Hope" felt disjointed, as if the stories where connected only superficially. I suspect it needs another fifteen minutes to pull everything together, but since Sayles has complete control over his films, the lack of end coherence must be blamed on him.

There are some wonderful performances in this film, especially Vincent Spano, who seems to have disappeared from film.

Well worth checking out, but I'd suggest watching "Lone Star," "Matewan," "Passion Fish," and "Men with Guns" first.