Reviews

About one year ago, in that strange hour when you are half-asleep and half awake, I envisioned something. I envisioned a movie so grand that it would change the face of the motion-picture industry forever. A movie that would combine lavish effects, a seasoned screenplay, and very important themes about good and evil- and seamlessly integrate these aspects into one coherent whole. A movie that would be transgenerational in its appeal, so that a 5 year old youngster could sit side by side with a 90 year old and be linked by a common bond. On May 17th, 1999, this vision of mine came to life. This vision was "The Phantom Menace".

Phantom Menace is the most interesting, thought provoking, and entertaining films ever to grace the screen. It's unfortunate that people can't enjoy it for what it's worth, instead of constantly comparing it to the original trilogy. As much as i like the original trilogy, this movie is definitely on a different level. The screenplay, special effects, acting, cinematography- these are all better in Phantom Menace than any of the originals. Furthermore, Lucas does a wonderful job of setting up what's to come in the future(i.e the rise of the empire and the downfall of Anakin). Every single scene in this movie has a definitive purpose, and only after a few viewings can a person decipher this. The plot works so seamlessly it is amazing.

I think people hate the movie because they are too stupid too understand it. In the first trilogy, Lucas got criticized for making his movies too simple. Now he has put together a wonderfully complex story, and yet now in ironic fashion the viewers want a simpler story. They don't have the attention span for a movie this complex, and they take out this anger by bashing this movie. I am sorry folks, but Lucas didn't make this movie for idiots. He made it for people who like to think, true fans who are willing to analyze films.

And for those people bashing Jar Jar, I think you are pathetic. It is clear Lucas made this character to appeal to young people, and he needed this because this plot was too complex for the average child(or even adult unfortunately) to understand.

George, if you are reading this, I want to thank you personally for creating such a thought-provoking, entertaining and imaginative film. I know that many people are ripping down your film, but don't worry(I don't think you are). 10 years from now people will look back at this film in awe, not only for its amazing special effects but for its masterful storytelling and thought-provoking ideas. I have seen this movie 7 times and loved it every time, and I plan to see it at least 3 more times. People love to tear successful people down because they are jealous. Well, you are truly a genius, in every sense of the word. I have an incredible amount of respect for you. Just keep sticking to your roots and everything will turn out fine.

I must admit I was quite impressed with Bob Rafelson's adaptation of the depression era novel, "The Postman Always Rings Twice". Jack Nicholson plays Frank, a vagabond who eventually falls in love with a sexy waitress named Cora,played by Jessica Lange, who reciprocates this love. However, there is one problem standing in the way: Cora is married, unhappily married, but married nonetheless.

Aside from an intriguing story, "The Postman Always Rings Twice" is a wonderfully put together film, as Rafelson does a splendid job delving into the characters and their relationships, as well as examining the problems associated with forbidden love. As a viewer, you truly feel the passion between Lange and Nicholson,(who both won academy award nominations), and you almost feel for their pain. In the 1930's women in America were at quite a different position than they are today. They were expected to stay with the husband no matter what the circumstances, as divorce was quite uncommon. Lange was very convincing as this trapped 30's woman who eventually broke free the only way she knew possible..

I definitely recommend "The Postman Always Rings Twice" for any fan of entertaining and thought-provoking movies. Although the character development is not quite as extensive as some of Rafelson's early work, particularly the 1971 classic "Five Easy Pieces", the movie combines an intriguing screenplay with superb acting to make its own statement.

Stanley Kubrick's 1962 classic "Lolita" is a rare movie that is both entertaining and full of symbolism- a movie that keeps the viewer happy but also forces him/her to think about important themes. In this particular movie, the theme is sexual obsession, specifically the obsession a middle aged man has for a teenage girl. The genius of Kubrick is that he is able to take a seemingly hideous act of statutory rape and portray it in a comical way. In fact, if I were to classify "Lolita" externally I would call it a comedy.

But there is more than meets the eye in this movie. Kubrick's screenplay is surprisingly ambiguous as it leaves much of the interpretation to the viewer. However, Kubrick does give the viewer hints as to what he is talking about. For instance, in one of the first scenes a female asks the professor if he is "broad-minded". From her sexual tone of voice and her obvious attraction to the professor it seems as though she is wondering whether he is willing to experiment with different sexual acts. How else are you supposed to interpret the word broad-minded in such a situation?

In another scene, which was undeservingly lambasted by critics, the professor and a janitor are trying to uncoil a cot and have trouble doing so. The uncoiled cot represents the sexual frustration(limp phallic) of the professor as he was not able to act on his fantasy with Lolita. Surprisingly, many critics(including people on this web-site) did not pick up on some of this symbolism. There are countless scenes in Lolita that give these subtle sexual messages. Kubrick knew, given the conservative mood of 1962 and the censors, that he would not be able to be as blunt as perhaps he would have liked. Kubrick countered this by making a movie that appeared on the surface to be a comedy, but was in actuality a movie that revolved solely around sexual hints and symbolism. In other words, he achieved his goal by fooling the censors and the people. And the end result was a legendary movie.

Upon the first viewing of Goodfellas, one has to be struck by its fast-paced and entertaining nature. This is a rare kind of movie that makes you feel as though you are part of the action, and it doesn't do this through incredible special effects. Rather, Goodfellas wraps you in because of superb acting and filming, a captivating screenplay, and an engaging soundtrack- all the elements of a great movie.

There is no denying this is one of the best films of this decade. However, I do not think this movie is flawless, as many on this website believe. While the first hour of the movie is entertaining, the second half gets bogged down with overly extended scenes- in particular the one where Henry Hill thinks he is being followed. The movie loses the punch that it had in the beginning. It's as though Scorsese got sick and tired of making the movie and he decided to speed up the process a bit, and this results in the last hour of the movie being a bit cumbersome.

Nevertheless, Goodfellas is a fine move that is worth seeing for anyone interested in entertaining films.

Back to the future has to been considered one of the greatest films of all time. There is no other movie that can match its entertainment value, isn't that why we see movies in the first place? It is that simple. The movie keeps you in suspense from the moment it begins to the very end. The characters are creative and amazing. The chemistry between Marty and Doc is both funny and eery, probably the best duo in film history. It appeals to both young and old as well.

Dr. Strangelove is perhaps the funniest and most creative movie to ever come out of the film industry. The parody of the cold war and the supposed "doomsday device" pokes fun at a serious issue in global politics at the time, yet manages to steer clear of actually criticizing the idea of nuclear warfare. The main characters, Jack Ripper(the psychotic general infatuated with preserving precious bodily fluids), Chief of Staff Ingridsen(a crazed politician afraid of "commies"), and Dr. Strangelove(an insane nuclear scientist with interesting ideas about man's future), are all crucial in turning this interesting story into a memorable film event. Kudos to Kubrick, who also co-wrote the screenplay, as well as producing and directing the film.

Titanic is simply the best movie ever, and it will stay that way forever. All you hear about is the incredible special effects of the movie(which I admit are great) However, what makes Titanic so memorable is the engaging love story. Leonardo DiCaprio gives the performance of his career as an enthusiastic, unselfish bum who saves a young woman(Kate Winslet) from leading a shallow, predictable life. I am sick and tired of people ripping DiCaprio's performance because he was simply perfect for the role. I am hardpressed to find another actor that could exhibit the freshness and excitement of DiCaprio. Kate Winslet was incredibly believable as a spoiled, rich brat who wants to lead a more exciting life. The movie also had light touches of humour which helped to balance its serious nature. All in all, a wonderful movie. Kudos to James Cameron!

Schindler's List is undoubtedly one of Spielberg's finest films, and there countless reasons why. Spielberg is able to portray Oskar Schindler(Liam Neeson) as a womanizer, shrewd businessman, and profiteer of the war in a way that does justice to the character's complexity. Through the use of black and white he brings you back to the time of the Holocaust, while using color in the present to bridge the gap between past and present. In particular, the use of black and white to identify the Holocaust is appropriate given the brutal nature of the event. People dream in color, but they have nightmares in black and white. The scenes themselves help show the facelessness of the Holocaust and the horror it brought to its victims. In particular, there is one scene in which a number of Jews are forced into a shower expecting to be gassed. The looks on their faces, along with the moving music, makes this scene one of tremendous fright. Although in this scene the Jews are not gassed, the message of this scene is there- even when Jews were not being killed, they were subject to horrors beyond the imagination of the human mind- everyone was a victim, including those who were not killed. All in all, Spielberg uses the medium to his advantage and recreates in vivid detail much of the Holocaust, while also telling a story of how one overcomes his ignorance to help others in the end.

I know you probabably think I'm crazy by saying that the Phantom Menace is underrated (given its incredible hype), but I feel content with my statement. I have read a number of the previous user comments on this movie, and I disagree with about 90% of them. There have been a number of people who have criticized the lack of emotion in the movie, especially with the young Anakin Skywalker, and I can't understand why. Jake Lloyd plays an incredibly convincing young boy who is full of innocence and eager to become a Jedi, and his unbridled enthusiasm makes this all believable. People expect him to act they way an older, more mature person would act. But you have to understand that he is a 6 year old boy, and children tend to display their emotions quite differently than adults. As for the other actors, they all added an equally impressive emotional impact to the film. When you combine the emotional impact with the incredible special effects in the film, you can truly understand why Phantom Menace is so special.