Reviews

8 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
9/10
Brilliant Small-Budget Adaptation
26 March 2008
Warning: Spoilers
A friend of mine received "Call of Cthulhu" as a Christmas gift a couple of years ago and called me a few days later feverishly insisting that I must have a go at it. As an avid reader of Lovecraft I wanted so badly for his lavish praises of the film to reveal themselves upon viewing. So many of us have seen the mediocre, sophomoric efforts that have defined the Lovecraft cinema genre and I feared this would be just one more in this long, sad line.

To my great surprise though, the film is a minor masterpiece. Making the work an homage to the great silent era of cinema is perhaps the best choice the filmmakers made. Since they were hamstrung with an obviously low-budget, the use of black and white and grainy effect allow for the use of cheaper special-effects without making the whole thing a cheap, campy affair.

The way in which these effects are employed provide both a conduit for suspense and create the "cyclopean" architecture of R'lyeh, the land from which Great Cthulhu ascends after a terrible storm exposes the terrible island from its dead sleep. A group of Norweigen sailors run aground on the island and we see the shadowy figure of Cthulhu emerge from his layer and terrify the sailors of the schooner, "Emma".

The scene at sea is probably the most dramatic but the film deftly utilizes these effects in the scene of the cult in the Louisiana Delta, and in its portrait of the Inuit Cult worshiping the same hideous figure that was found aboard the Emma.

It felt like everything in this film came together in such a manner to produce a truly genuine and truly masterful cinematic version of Lovecraft's classic of horror literature. I only hope now that Guillermo Del Toro will persevere in making "At The Mountains of Madness" and then perhaps we will have a big-budget Lovecraft masterpiece to complement the small-budget "Cthulhu".

Obviously, I found this film to be a triumph on the grounds that no big studio had anything to do with it and the budget was raised in a grass-roots type of effort.
26 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Mystic River (2003)
10/10
Perfect in every aspect.
8 November 2003
I was skeptical about this movie after seeing the previews a few months ago. I like Clint Eastwood and I think he has both acted in and directed many superb films over the last 40+ years; his last few films have not lived up to his high standards though. Blood Work, Space Cowboys and True Crime...you've seen, or at least heard of, the evidence. I honestly believed he was finished making movies one could consider great. I thought Unforgiven would be remembered as his swan song. I was very wrong.

Mystic River has to be the best Hollywood movie this year. If I see one that tops it it would have to be great on the level ofLawrence of Arabia or Dr. Strangelove. While this film is not on par with Lean or Kubrick's masterpieces, it is definitely one of Eastwood's finest and may surpass Unforgiven, one of the finest Western's I've seen.

I can't think of much I can write about the story or plot that wouldn't betray something of importance. Every piece of information given to the audience somehow seems vital to the story's weaving and unravelling. The story unfolds over what seems to be four or five days at the most. It involves three men who were once best friends in their youth until an horrific event splinters their tight cell. They remain in Boston as adults and thirty years later they are reunited by a single event that pits one against the other.

This synopsis is a little vague--for a reason though. Once you see it you will realize why the previews were just as ambiguous in their revalations. Trust me. You should see it. It will not disappoint.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Best film I've seen this year
18 September 2003
I must admit that I had never heard of Harvey Pekar or "American Splendor" before seeing this movie a couple of nights ago. In fact, this film would have slipped by me entirely had I not seen the review by Ebert & Roeper. That being said, it is an ingenious piece of filmmaking in every aspect--from the directing to the acting to the cinematography.

I have been a big fan of Paul Giamatti since first seeing him in "Private Parts." After seeing "American Splendor" my entire view of him has changed. He isn't just a great character actor as I had previously believed; he is as solid a leading-man as I've seen. Seeing Giamatti's portrayal juxtaposed with the real Harvey Pekar proves this point perfectly.

A movie that, on the surface and pre-judged, will sadly be overlooked may just be the best film of the year. The film is difficult to categorize as it straddles the line between a fact-based drama and a documentary. Wherever one decides to place though, the fact remains that it is pure genius. It is a film deserving the highest of accolades. Hopefully it is not overlooked as so many quirky independent films are. If nothing else, Giamatti's performance deserves any award being offered for lead actor.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Timeless Adaptation of Classic American Literature
24 April 2003
This film, made in 1962, is perhaps the only archive that keeps the

name of Ambrose Bierce alive today in the world of secondary

education. When I was a junior in high school we read "An

Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge" and subsequently viewed Robert

Enrico's film. Both were amazing. Though I was widely read for

my age, I mainly concerned myself with more contemporary

American authors, e.g. Vonnegut, Irving (John not Washington),

Heller, Asimov and Bradbury. Bierce set my reading course in a

whole new direction. I bought "The Collected Writings of Ambrose

Bierce" and read it cover to cover. I then delved deeper in to the

more prevalent authors of the time: Twain, Hart, Howells, James

and Adams.

Since my graduation from high school in 1995 I have continued to

study the life and works of Bierce. Last December, I presented my

thesis paper, "Ambrose Bierce: Contrasting Views on Two Wars,"

to the Department of History. Had my junior English teacher not

assigned the short story and showed the film, the name of

Ambrose Bierce might be as lost to me as it is more than half the

United States today. If you can get your hands on a copy of the

film, I highly recommend it. If not then just visit your local Borders

or Barnes & Noble to pick up a copy of Bierce's short stories; it is

well worth the $10.00 you'll have to part with. If you have access to

the newspaper archives at a major university or live in the San

Francisco area you can also find Bierce's journalistic writings for

Hearst's San Francisco Examiner.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Lets us see the war through the eyes of those fighting
20 September 2002
"Band of Brothers" is unquestionably the greatest film or series about

World War II ever produced. It is probably the best about war period.

Having read the book a few years before the series premiered, I waited

on pins and needles for this to be released. The series is even better

than the book by Stephen Ambrose. The style of filmmaking used makes

you believe you are moving right along with the men of E Company, 504th

Parachute Regiment. The grainy film is reminiscent of documentary style

and its use pays off as we almost believe that the action is taking

place in 1944-45 and we are just lucky that the film was saved for

posterity. "Band of Brothers" will undoubtedly be remembered as the

greatest mini-series ever produced and I believe it to be one of the

greatest films in Americ
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Evolution (2001)
8/10
Nice Comedy--Even if the critics don't agree
12 August 2002
Evolution is one of those movies that critics love to hate. Sure, its not The Fellowship of the Ring or The Royal Tenenbaums (two of the best movies of 2001). On the other hand, its not near as bad as say, Glitter or Moulin Rouge. Evolution is a movie that accomplishes what it set out to do--make you laugh. Ivan Reitman wasn't trying to garnish Oscars with this film; he was trying to entertain America for a couple of hours. And there is nothing wrong with that. Isn't that what movies are supposed to do? When we go to the movies we want to escape the mundane trials of life. We want to forget whatever problems or hassles we have for two hours and just be entertained. Well, Evolution accomplished that goal. I left the theater feeling my $7.00 was well spent. I had a few laughs and enjoyed myself. It seems many people just don't understand this concept. Every film released is not meant to be high art. Evolution is not high art. It is a great escape from reality though. And in that sense it was one of my favorite
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Interesting premise
4 May 2002
Obviously fake but nonetheless a compelling take on those who look to sado-masochism for mind-expansion. The main character is well written as a big city moron totally out of touch with his own and everyone else's reality
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Bad Taste (1987)
9/10
Excellent early work by Lord of the Rings and Heavenly Creatures director.
9 January 2002
"Bad Taste" is a small, b-picture that is both grotesque and hilarious. It's director, Peter Jackson, fills every role from editor to special effects designer to lead role. The movie is phenomenol for it's achievements on such a shoestring budget and the fact that it's humor can be recycled for viewing after viewing. Be sure to check out the scene of Derek's body being severed at the torso near the end of the movie.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed