Change Your Image
martin_lange
Reviews
Signs (2002)
What was the guy on who invented this ridiculous story??? ***Spoiler Alert***
*** Spoiler Alert **** Spoiler Alert *** Spoiler Alert ***
OK, this movie has a good cinematography and one cannot argue about the good craftsmanship.
However, who invented this ridiculous story???
Let me get this right:
a) Aliens can travel millions of light years in their space crafts, but lack the technology of breaking into a wooden house. b) For that matter - a seven-foot-tall alien, who can run like an Olympic athlete, can be locked into a wooden kitchen pantry without being able to escape. c) Aliens (able to travel space) run around naked and cannot deal with water. Does this imply that a raincoat is a more sophisticated invention than a spaceship? d) Aliens come to `harvest human beings', but can be scared off by wooden clubs. Aehhh . the human body consists 90+% of water, which the aliens cannot handle . does this qualify for the `real dumb plot award'??? e) A referent looses his faith when his wife dies (which is fair), but regains it when he remembers her last words which tip him off that Aliens doesn't like being beaten with wooden clubs . are there more people who think this is crap???
Also:
f) When confronted with an imminent Alien attack, board yourself into a lonely wooden house in the prairie - don't go into the next town, arm yourself and join the local militia / military organisation.
g) Don't have the asthma medicine your son's life is depending on handy. h) After you boarded up your house, just hang around in the lounge. Don't fortify your cellar basement and shift all your water, food and medicine there. i) Lacking fire arms, don't arm yourself with knifes, axes or whatever you can find. Leave your vicious guard dogs (who detect aliens earlier than you and could scare them off) outside the house.
.. And the top price goes to:
j) Alien communication can best be observed on baby monitors!!! . sophisticated civil air control and military radar equipment cannot spot them.
Well, they don't make movies like that one any more. Hopefully, no-one will never ever make a movie like that one again!!!
My opinion - right down there with `Battlefield Earth' and `Giggli'. 1 out of 10.
Battlestar Galactica (2003)
Surprisingly good remake, better than the original
I found the Battlestar Galactica (2003) remake a lot better than the original series from 1978/1980. Actually, I watched the original series, showing how old I am ***grin***.
The 2003 series is bleaker, grimmer and more eerie than the original. Acting is good, the plot more subtle and logical.
*** Possible Spoilers ahead ***
Especially, I like the non-Hollywood feel of the series. Technology is not the only answer to anything. Firepower becomes useless through clever enemy infiltration. There are losses. People are sacrificed, civilians and wounded left behind. Just as in real life. Adama has to make hart decisions and is wondering if it is worth it. Edward James Olmos gives the Adama character a surprising depth.
Therefore keeping in mind that we are talking about a TV-mini series and not a mega-budget film endeavour I think 9/10 are justified.
Let's hope that the Battlestar Galactica (2003) will be continued, and not loosing is consistency and bleak realism.
Guess we all remember what happened to the Matrix franchise
***shudder***.
Fight Club (1999)
Prediction of the future ?!?!?
*** Contains Spoilers ****
I think the `Fight Club' is one of the best movies I ever saw.
Interestingly, even after watching it a couple of times, I don't even know if I `like it'. No doubt it is a fantastic flick, but in the `being hit by a sledgehammer' kind of way.
Other users have already pointed out the how the `Fight Club' mirrors the American Way of Life - or what it has become.
Every time I see the movie, it feels to me like a prediction of the future. For example, in hindsight `The Siege (1998)' ( http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0133952/combined ) was like a prediction on 9/11 and the government reactions. OK, this time the US Government didn't create a concentration camp as depicted in `The Siege'. However, personal freedom was severely curtailed by the `Patriot Act'.
Thinking about what `Fight Club' predicts: is it really so far fetched that `Joe Average's get drawn together by an underground men's club? That they slowly start breaking the rules, beginning with bare-knuckle fighting, and from there (nearly by coincident) start challenging `the rules' more and more?
In today's world, Joe Average is only here to support the economy as a consumer and to work in a - usually - mindless job. For that, he gets a useless vote (don't start telling me that voting `conservative' or `liberal' really makes any practical difference - that's why 60% of the population don't even bother voting in the first place).
As so often in history, the system works because hardly anyone questions it.
In the `Fight Club', the members start challenging `the rules' and develop an amazing dynamic that leads to a major 9/11 style terrorist attack. Since the attacks are aimed at credit companies records, million's of people's debts are effectively eliminated. Human casualties are deliberately avoided. How would you call that - `democratic terrorism ***grin***' ???
All it takes is a leader, who sets things in motion.
Far fetched? I don't think so. I would not be surprised if `Fight Club' will one day be regarded as one of those `clairvoyant' flicks who depicted it all long before it really happened.
Otherwise . I hate Brad Pitt - but in this movie he is superb. Couldn't think about a better actor for the role.
My opinion: 9 out of 10.
The Blair Witch Project (1999)
A student film project gone horribly wrong *** Contains Spoilers ***
*** Contains spoilers *** Contains spoilers *** Contains spoilers ***
The Blair Witch project is arguably the first Internet marketed movie, and will be noted in history as the breaking new marketing grounds.
Therefore: 10/10 for innovative marketing, transforming this low budget flick into some kind of cult movie.
Unfortunately, `Blair Witch' itself is nothing more than a student film project gone terribly wrong. Bad acting, horrible camera work (OK, it is supposed to look authentic, but even by documentary standards it is bad), a story line that fits under a closed door and none-existing narration.
I cannot think of one redeeming feature that makes the `Blair Witch' worth watching.
I noted the `suspense' and `innovative plot' remarks in other user's comments.
Actually, while I appreciate other people's opinions, I personally don't even begin to understand where they are coming from.
For example - what was spooky, frightening or suspenseful about this movie???
OK - I've been in the Army and spent time deep in the bush . not just in a park like setting like the `Blair Witch' guys were strolling through. I have seen more frightening and intimidating things on Army training grounds like what's pictured in the movie. Does anyone really think that `witch' thing was frightening??? Well, I hope they never meet a drill sergeant in their lives . especially not in a forest!!!
Also, how could these guys possibly get lost? A road is a continuous line, which divides any given area. If you know in which direction the road is (these guys even had a compass), just hike in a straight line towards it. You cannot miss it. OK, these guys walked in circles (how you do this with a compass is a mystery (maybe the only one in `Blair Witch')). Why didn't they just walk up or down one of plentiful streams they passed?
Therefore, the summary of `Blair Witch' could be:
Three resource less idiots (played by abysmally bad actors) go into a forest looking for signs of witchcraft or a witch and get lost. They get scared, and even the little intelligence they displayed in the beginning evaporates. After that, they do everything wrong, bicker a lot with each other in the most senseless way and finally disappear is an abandoned house in the forest that may or may not have anything to do with the witch they were looking for.
The whole think is played out in about 80 tedious minutes, filmed with poorly handled handheld cameras, bad sound or no refinement commonly associated with film making.
Or, as a one-liner:
A student film project gone horribly wrong.
My opinion: 10/10 for the marketing, ***minus***5***/10 for the movie. Don't walk - run while you can!!!
The Pianist (2002)
Boring and missing the point
Contains Spoilers.
Roman Polanski committed one of the cardinal sins of the film and entertainment industry: never revisit a topic if the ultimate contribution has already been made.
The ultimate holocaust movie is `Schindler's List'. Polanski's `The Pianist' falls way short of it in every respect.
The only way `The Pianist' could have made a difference (and covered new ground) is in explaining how the main characters, Szpilman, could life with the fact that while he was hiding, people died on his behalf.
He hid during the Nazi destruction of the Warsaw Ghetto. From his room, he could see his fellow Jews fight and die.
He hid during the Polish uprising just before the Red Army arrived. Polish resistance fighters died in front of his eyes.
People who hid him, died on his behalf. His helpers were caught, handed over to the Gestapo (WWII Secret German Police), tortured and killed.
So, how did Szpilman cope with this during and especially after the WWII?
Not even an attempt of an explanation is made by Polanski. In failing to do so, he has (in my opinion) completely missed the point of his own movie.
The result is an undistinguished Holocaust movie with all the usual trappings. Sorry, Mr. Polanski, but Mr. Spielberg has been there before and has done a lot better.
My advice - safe the movie ticket and borrow `Schindler's List' on video/DVD instead. If you feel like a depressing genocide movie in the first place, that is.
My rating 3 out of 10.