Reviews

I've never seen a film that started out good take such a dive into complete and total awfulness. Seriously. I'm not kidding. The first third of the film, I'm thinking "why does this have such bad reviews?" It's visually spectacular and it's got an intriguing set up. But then you find out. For a while you doubt it'll get that bad. Maybe it'll just be mediocre. Eventually you wish you'd never even turned it on because now you're far enough in that no matter how bad it does get, you have to see how it ends. When you get to the end, you wish you'd actually turned it off when you first realized it was going downhill. Yeah, that bad.

The characters were underdeveloped and there was only one moment of good suspense. If they'd followed the science angle more it probably wouldn't have so bad. But instead they went into monster movie territory and ruined any potential for an interesting story.

It's not that often that I delve into movies past to find something to watch, but I've been so impressed with Lena Headey's work in "Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles" that I've been checking out her past work. Boy am I glad I saw this one. What an outstanding film. Aberdeen is a pretty heavy character-driven drama, so I'm sure it's not for everyone, but I was pulled into this film from the start and it never let me go. Every time I thought I knew where the story was going to go next, I was happy to be wrong. And the performances alone from Stellan Skarsgård and Lena Headey really make this emotional journey well worth taking. Highly recommend.

United 93 was nothing like I expected. It wasn't a slick Hollwood movie and it wasn't a sappy movie-of-the-week kind of thing. It was raw and intense and gripping. What the director seems to give us is as close to a real-time accurate account as possible. I didn't get the sense there was much embellishment and there are no unbelievable heroics. Instead, we see confusion and fear that lead to desperation, courage and incredible determination.

The film spends as much time on the ground, in air traffic control towers and NORAD, as it does in the plane. But you really feel the drama, shock and utter chaos of that day from perspectives that you probably wouldn't expect. The really interesting thing is how much of the tension is created, not by the film, but by the viewer. You know what's going to happen, so every moment that it's not happening, reality is playing as this contrasting backdrop in your mind.

It was a truly powerful film.

I'm not one to knock a good drama, but this movie was simply not enjoyable. It's a decent enough story and certainly the performances are excellent, but the

presentation is too bland and subdued. The style of the film would seem to be intentional to sort of punctuate Al Pacino's character's perspective (he's a

stressed out cop with insomnia), but that's just not enough to keep the viewer interested. The plot itself is actually pretty simple and straightforward, so the fact that it feels so long and drawn out is inexcusable.

After a solid and intriguing opening (about the first 30 minutes), Bourne Identity deteriorates into a rather typical thriller. That might not be so bad; but because it leads you to believe you're in for something good--something a little different than your run of the mill Hollywood chase flick--it's a major disappointment. There's simply no suspense created and no surprise as to how this movie ends. Yawn.

Steven Spielberg needs to stop trying so hard to make a masterpiece. Minority Report was a good movie, but it felt forced, obvious and even preachy some of the time. Social commentary should never be at the forefront of a film or it

detracts considerably from the story. A statement should be the subtext--the

"read between the lines" part of a movie. But Spielberg seems to think it's the other way around: the social statement is your film and your characters and

story are just coming along for the ride. It just doesn't work well when you do that, though.

When you overlook all that, there is something worth seeing here. It's nice to look at, displays a dizzying array of gee-whiz futuristic gadgetry and, of course, you've got Tom Cruise. So, you know, it's not bad.

After reading about MIB2, I was expecting it to be really lame (let's face it, most sequels are), but I was pleasantly surprised by this. No, it's not as good as the first one. Partly, that's because there's no real surprise--we already know

everything and so do the characters. There is some attempt to recapture the fun intro of the first movie by having J return to the agency, but that fails in

comparison to K's enlistment last time. What MIB2 amounts to is really just a new assignment for our MIB guys. And sadly, Linda Fiorentino is absent from

the cast. We do get the worm guys and the talking dog again, though (even if

he's a bit over-used). Overall, MIB2 is done well enough to be fun and enjoyable without feeling like a second-rate rehash.

If, like me, you passed up Training Day in the theater because you

thought it looked stupid, but after Denzel Washington won the Best

Actor Oscar, you thought about renting it because, you know,

maybe it's not so bad, then DO NOT RENT THIS MOVIE!

I'm by no means a movie snob. I can appreciate a nice, slick,

Hollywood film. But Training Day is the epitome of bad scripting.

The characters are painfully cliched and the story is completely

unbelievable--the movie is just plain awful... painfully awful. As for

Denzel Washington's character, well, think John Travolta in Broken

Arrow.

Series 7 is a really enjoyable, darkly comedic and satirical film. But

I think the only people who will really get it are those that love

reality TV. I don't mean people who like to just watch reality TV, but

the ones who yell at the TV screen, laugh at the people on the

shows and get completely involved, all the while, being fully aware

of the cheesiness and drama being presented to you. This movie

plays off all that in a remarkably clever way.

The Gift is a really well crafted film from beginning to end. It's

woven so nicely and presented with such wonderful visual detail

that it truly rises above your average, run-of-the-mill thriller/murder

mystery. The climax wasn't exactly shocking, but it didn't need to be

for this movie to succeed. It's really more of a character study that

happens to revolve around a murder. Outstanding performances

all around, top it off to make this a movie well worth seeing.

While vacationing with his stepfather in Costa Rica, Twelve

year-old Eric Kirby (Trevor Morgan) is stranded on the island of Isla

Sorna (Jurassic Park "Site B") during a boating accident.

Desperate to find him, Eric's divorced parents, Paul and Amanda,

come together to organize a rescue mission with paleontologist

Alan Grant as their unwitting guide. But the mission is poorly

planned and things go wrong almost immediately, stranding the

Kirbys and their rescue team on the island as well. Though

unprepared for the dangers ahead of them, they must somehow

find Eric and get off Isla Sorna alive.

If you can believe for a moment that a 12-year-old might

could survive on a dinosaur infested island for 8 weeks (that's how

much time lapses between his accident and the rescue mission),

the set-up for Jurassic Park III is pretty good. Unfortunately, the

story deteriorates rapidly after that, jumping from one mediocre

dinosaur scene to another. At a mere 85 minutes in length,

director Joe Johnston rushes us through interesting plot devices

(a replicated raptor vocal bone, for one), focusing instead on the

easy and obvious (like a satellite phone). And, of course, there's

the "family" story, which manages to resolve itself without any effort

whatsoever.

For the most part, the characters are as flat as the paper they

were written on (the Raptors have more personality!). Fine

performances by William H. Macy (Paul Kirby) and Michael Jeter

(Udesky) do bring a little life to the screen, but given the material,

it's not enough to help this movie. In fact, every bit of depth they

provide is destroyed by Sam Neill (reprising his role as Dr. Alan

Grant), Téa Leoni (Amanda Kirby) and Alessandro Nivola (Billy),

who largely perform as if reading straight off the script.

Jurassic Park III isn't a complete failure, but it's definitely

bland and unsatisfying. After a solid first act, the chopped up action

sequences and rather abrupt ending that follow make it feel

unbalanced and unfinished. Sure, the dinosaurs are cool to look

at, but that's about all this movie has to offer.

Liu Jian (aka "Johnny") is a top level cop from Bejing on temporary assignment in Paris to aid French police in a sting operation to take down a Chinese heroine kingpin. But things go bad and a double-cross ensues, leaving Liu Jian framed for murder and running for his life. One is thing certain, though, our hero won't be taken without a fight... a really good fight... and a few more after that. Luc Besson's screenplay isn't exactly creative, but given the genre, it's pretty darn good. I know I sure sighed with relief that Liu Jian (played with subtle excellence by Jet Li) wasn't driven by some emotionally haunting past, like the death of a wife and child, as is so typical in super-cop action films. In fact, we get just the opposite--a man who simply loves his job and does it very well, but is still human enough to make mistakes, feel pain and make realistic choices (well, mostly).

The story isn't without its flaws, however. Mindless thugs do play their part and there is an utterance of the most over-used villain line of all time: "Bring him to me alive; I'll deal with him myself" (or something to that affect). But somehow, it doesn't sound quite so corny coming from actor Tcheky Karyo (as Inspector Jean-Pierre Richard), who manages to play the heartless villain with a great deal of intelligence. Rounding out the cast is Bridget Fonda's Jessica, the prostitute with a good heart and, yes, a young daughter in jeopardy. But despite its few formulaic shortcomings, Kiss of the Dragon still delivers.

What really stands out in this film is the way the fight sequences flow with the rest of the story, unlike so many other movies that seem to be constructed around a few preconceived action scenes. It's a martial arts action film done right. Thanks to the superb direction of Chris Nahon, Kiss of the Dragon is classy, well paced and gives us a near perfect blend of drama and levity (no ridiculous one-liners here, but definitely some laughs along the way). Best of all, Nahon engages the audience and makes the story work to a reasonable level of believability.

I caught a sneak preview of A.I. tonight and I must give it 2 BIG THUMBS DOWN. I've heard it's getting very mixed reviews and I can see why. There's a lot of great stuff in this film, both visually (very Blade Runner-esque) and with the story (not original, but interesting enough). Steven Spielberg, however, manages to ruin it all by the end of this meandering, contrived, REPETITIVE and ultimately boring 2 1/2 hour fiasco. In fact, about 2/3 of the way through the movie, almost everyone in the theater was shifting and fidgeting (myself included), which is a pretty good indication you've lost your audience. Through the first hour, it's an interesting story that really seems like it's going to go somewhere. But it goes way downhill from there and then keeps digging. The entire character base changes, thin sub-plots emerge and loose ends get left all over the place. And probably my biggest complaint: almost every scene is way too long! The pace of the film is unbelievably slow. What this film needs is some major re-editing. If cut right, it could be good. I mean there's certainly potential there--good acting, many great individual scenes and lots of emotional set-up. As is, though, it's a runaway train that takes too freakin' long to finally wreck. ...And once the aliens show up (oh yes, there are aliens!), you know they're grasping for how the heck to end this thing. It might as well have been raining frogs (anyone see Magnolia?)

Blow is a rather good film until about 2/3 of the way in. It's stylish, well-paced and thoroughly engaging. But then it takes a major dive. The problem isn't so much with the story, but rather with the presentation of it. It's just completely unbalanced, losing it's pace and direction in that last third. Granted, it's based on a true story, but that's no excuse for the dull, s-l-o-w, hum-drum final scenes director Ted Demme throws at us.

Don't go looking for a masterpiece and you'll like MI2. It's

your basic action movie, with fun techno-gadgets, great

explosions and some intense fight sequences. Sure there

are ridiculous and unbievable moments, but all-in-all it's a

good ride.

The Blair Witch Project was, without a doubt, one of the most intense films produced in a very long time. It's documentary style not only gave it a real feel, but also allowed the audience to experience the entire story first hand. As the characters spiral into terror of unimaginable proportions, you take the journey right along with them.

Story and character development are superb and the acting is surprisingly realistic. You'll actually have to remind yourself that it isn't a true story. But the nicest thing about this creepy little film is how much is left to your own imagination. With the massive budgets of most commercial films, we're so used to "seeing" everything that nothing shocks the average movie goer anymore. In Blair Witch, it's what you DON'T see that really scares you.

Having read a number of critic reviews before seeing Phantom Menace, I was sort of expecting to be disappointed. But what I found instead was quite an enjoyable film. It was attractive to watch as well--the costuming was superb, the vehicles very stylized, and some of the scenes were just downright breathtaking.

There were definitely some flaws. The acting was rather flat, with virtually no emotional pull at all. We really didn't get to know any of the characters except little Anakin (a writing & directing problem more than anything). But since this was Episode I, I suspect there will be considerably more character depth in the next installment (I hope, anyway).

Another problem was with all the computer generated characters. I may be alone on this but, with the exception of the Battle Droids, they left a lot to be desired when compared to old fashioned puppetry (or even a guy in a costume). And speaking of computer generated characters...

One can only pray that Jar Jar Binks meets with an untimely death before Episode II. I had been forewarned about this character, but in my wildest dreams I could never have imagined just how annoying he actually was. The film needed some humor, but Jar Jar just didn't cut it.

I guess it sounds like I'm ripping this film apart, but I really did like it and would definitely recommend it. Maybe my low expectations helped!

Believe it or not, Private Parts is a classic success story in which the audience is compelled to root for Howard Stern as the unlikely hero. And while you need to be able to at least tolerate some of Stern's antics to sit through this movie, you don't need to be a "fan" to enjoy it.

From his upbringing to his early years on radio, Howard Stern's future seems a bit, well, dismal. But as he begins to discover his voice and allow his personality to come through on the radio, things change. And we, the viewers, are cheering as he overcomes every hurdle to success.

That's the magic of this film--that someone as crude and overtly immature as Howard Stern, can be the hero of the story. But regardless of how you feel about the man, this movie wins you over.

This is without a doubt, one of the most intelligent films to come out of Hollywood in quite some time. The script is masterful, with intrigue and rich, three dimensional characters. They have such history and meaning that their motives are abundantly clear, without being too obvious. Even Kim Bassinger did an outstanding job (her Oscar was much deserved).

It really is a beautiful film to watch, too. Everything from the color to the wardrobe, help give this film it's voice and immerse you in the story . Few films pull viewers into their period with such realism as LA Confidential.

Cleverly scripted and surprisingly full of suspense, this is one horror movie that really leaves all others in the dust. Even the first Nightmare on Elm Street can't compare.

What this film does, above all else, is renounce the cliches of horror movies past. There are, of course, a few moments of digression when you know what's coming and who's going to get it next. But for the most part, this one really keeps you on your toes, rather than yelling "don't go in there!" at the screen.

Scream is certainly bloody, so it's not for the squeamish. But if you've ever seen even one slasher film, you'll really get a kick (and a scream) out of this.

Let's begin with the "in your face" gore. Guts on film don't bother me and I'm sure it was historically accurate. But as a movie, it played out like a predictable horror film after the first few heart-pumping minutes. Who didn't see it coming from a mile away when a guy Tom Hanks is dragging gets blown in half? Pure shock value, not story value.

Also, the film doesn't look good. From scene to scene we endure a barrage of styles--everything from choppy POV (whose?) to grand panoramics. I assume the drastic changes in cinematography are meant to represent character experience, but I found them a major distraction to becoming absorbed in the film.

Characters are poorly defined and even stereotypical: the hothead who doesn't want to follow orders, the 98 lb. weakling who's never shot a gun. We've never seen those before! The only thing that really surprised me was that he didn't find his "inner strength" by the end.

The modern-day bookends were quite bothersome as well. This device rarely works because it does nothing more than hinder the audience from being in the moment. I also had a VERY hard time empathizing with the character who appears in those scenes (I won't spoil it for anyone who hasn't yet seen it). We're not given a reason to believe he would feel so strongly later in life, so I simply couldn't share in his drama.

There were certainly some great moments in the film, especially in the final battle sequence--the stabbing death of one of the soldiers, and another shooting at a tank with his pistol in desperation. Overall though, the film just didn't flow and I wasn't drawn in.

I think audiences are confusing what they think was a shockingly realistic war movie with what was actually just plain shocking for a Spielberg movie. For a good war movie, I'll take Platoon anyday.

Angela Bassett delivers another wonderful performance (is she not one of the greatest actors of out time?), but unfortunately, it's not enough to raise this movie to the level of greatness I expected from it.

There's no doubt, the film is beautiful to look at and the performances are good all around. But the script is lacking that certain something that makes you believe the whys and hows. We can certainly understand why Stella fell in love with that 20 year old--he's gorgeous, sincere and very mature for his age. But the crucial information we're missing is why he falls for her.

He approaches her because of her physcial beauty, but stays for an unknown reason. Why WOULD a 20 year old be so willing to pursue a woman twice his age after a casual meeting? Why is he so mature and understanding at such a young age? We'll never know and that's what kept me from believing this film.

Another problem is the seemingly pointless demise of one of the characters (I won't say who). This event didn't carry the story forward and acted more as a detractor from the plot that anything else. It should have been used to help the other characters develop, but it instead that little subplot dissolved into oblivion.

Overall, I would certainly recommend Stella. It was an enjoyable and sincere story. But it could have been so much better.

Never before has the essence of a genre been so perfectly captured and portrayed on screen. Yet Boogie Nights manages to handle the subject matter quite tastefully, without glossing over its crudity.

The ragtag gang of characters were surprisingly well defined and performances were above-average across the board. Burt Reynolds, for one, really impressed me with his character strength. I've never been a big fan of his work, but he gave an undeniably great performance as the anchor/father figure that held everything together.

The directing is outstanding as is the script itself (one particularly great moment is the masterful transition from '70s to '80s). The film's soundtrack is perfectly laid to each scene and even gimmicks, like fast choppy cuts, slow motion and long uncut shots work well, enhancing the feel of the movie. Boogie Nights just pulls you in immediately and never lets you go.

I think most people who've seen this film would agree--the cuts to present day son and daughter dealing with their miserable little lives does nothing but take away from the beauty of this forbidden love story.

Clint Eastwood and Meryl Streep did a magnificent job at putting together a joint performance that made me cry as much as the book. That little tidbit might scare away some male viewers, but let me assure it's not a sappy love story. Even my husband thought this was a "really good movie."

We are absorbed by these two characters and feel their chemistry almost immediately. By the time we remember that there's a family out there to consider, it's too late. We're dug in deep and feel the pain of having to choose between what's always been and what could be. And it's a powerful moment when that choice is finally made.