williamknott's Reviews

Antonia's Line (1995)

9/10

13 March 2004

For the intelligent and reflective movie-goer, there is much to appreciate about this film. To begin with, the opening narration, although fantastic, is just about the best opening line to any story out there. It immediately draws one into the world of these weird, wonderful people. And that fantastic aspect is maintained throughout the film, like a fairy tale that provides a surprise around every corner. It is a pleasure to be taken into this kind of world for the 100+ minutes of the film.

I strongly disagree with the comments, which the IMDb is currently (as of March 13/04) displaying as being "representative," which states:

"If you hold dear the innocence of children, respect God and those who serve Him, and hold dear what is beautiful in a spiritual sense, you will probably dislike this film."

That's one seriously narrow-minded opinion the IMDb people have selected as being representative. There was a time when the IMDb was more discriminating in what they allowed through to the site. That they allowed *this* posting through *and* chose it to represent the average response to the film is bad a sign; the ship is sailing but there's nobody at the wheel. Reading those comments, one could easily conclude that there are a great deal of sadly unimaginative people out there who just don't get this film.

It isn't surprising that someone with the kind of insular view of the world as expressed in those "representative" comments wouldn't enjoy this film. I never thought of it this way, but I suppose "Antonia's Line" is not for the polite, ultra-conservative, easily-offendable religious folks out there who, it seems, are more apt to feel threatened by fantastic stories like this than to appreciate them for what they are. "Antonia's Line" is the kind of story that give us permission to *imagine* how things might be if they were just slightly eschew. This film is not a picture of the real world, but, like a good fairy tale, provides one an opportunity to reflect on a variety of human conditions and experiences that everyone in some way can relate to.

In this regard, "Antonia's Line" is a wonderfully rich and rewarding film, and a beautifully well-told story.

It should not be dismissed so easily. (And the IMDb ought to get their act together.)

106 out of 125 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (2003)

8/10

KILL BILL, VOL. 1: Bloody as Hell (as it should be)

13 October 2003

I thoroughly enjoyed "Kill Bill, Vol. 1" for what it is and plan to see it again before it leaves my local theatre, and I'm looking forward to `Vol. 2.' It's a shallow movie with nothing underneath the surface, but the surface is so lovingly made--I just ate it up. It was a fun ride. A good ole fashion revenge flick. Uma Thurman going out to get everybody, and she gets 'em good. And that's it.

Criticizing the movie according a to more complex criteria than that seems foolish.

Which seems to be the case for most of the negative criticisms I've read about the movie. James Berardinelli's review of the movie, for instance, is a perfect illustration of a movie critic taking himself, as a movie critic, too seriously, and the movie, as a `film,' much too seriously--and judging the movie all wrong. (http://movie-reviews.colossus.net/master.html)

For example, the protagonist in a revenge flick is defined more by their ability to kick *ss than their ability to carry on witty conversation. As entertaining as it might be to listen to two gangsters discuss the deeper meaning of a foot massage, that kind of extended dialogue would most likely slow down the kinetic energy of the all cool kung-fu that's going on in `Kill Bill.'

So the movie doesn't have a lot of memorable dialogue. So what? `Kill Bill' isn't `Pulp Fiction,' nor do I think it is meant to be. It is a wonderfully crafted kung-fu, Samurai, kill-em-all and kill-em-good, revenge flick.

When I hear criticisms like `it was too bloody and too violent,' it reminds of something I inadvertently heard Kathy-Lee Gifford say about `Pulp Fiction' one day while I was flicking as fast as I could through the channels: `Did it really need to be so violent?'

That's like asking, `Does a musical really need to have so much singing?' Yeah, it does. It's called `The Sound of MUSIC.' What did you expect?

Quentin Tarantino's latest movie is called `KILL Bill.' Kinda tells you what you're in for, don't you think?

If you don't like gory and violent revenge flicks, you won't like the movie. That's it. Don't go. But for what it is, it is extremely well made, stunning and amazing at times, and--I hate this phrase--but a pure cinematic delight. It's like Homer Simpson discovering triple-chocolate ice cream. Kung-fu revenge flicks don't get any better than this.

0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Identity (2003)

5/10

A Gimmick Movie (contains spoiler)

26 April 2003

Warning: Spoilers

"Identity" is a gimmick movie disguised as a whodunit. It isn't even a scary movie. It's an intellectual puzzle at best and really not that engaging. I knew what was going on almost immediately. The first time I stopped to think, "Why are they showing us this scene that seems to have nothing to do with the rest of the movie?," I realized there was only one thing that could explain what was happening: none of it was real, it was all being made up in someone's mind. I sat there for half the movie waiting for that to be revealed, and then when it was revealed, the movie kept going to a conclusion that was silly. Despite the strong cast, never once during the movie did I care about what was going to happen. Watch a movie like the "Sixth Sense" instead and feel the tension, feel how you don't want to look at what's going to happen next. Now that's tension. Nothing like that happens here. People get killed and it's about as shocking as watching a character in a video game get killed. And when the secret of what's really going on is revealed, I think many people will feel cheated.

0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

The Grey Zone (2001)

5/10

A 'Noble' Effort That Possibly Undermines The Real History

22 April 2003

I just finished watching "The Grey Zone," and I don't recommend it.

Just because it's about the Holocaust doesn't make it a noble movie worth watching. To make a movie about this kind of historical event, you have to do it right or not at all, and this movie doesn't exactly do it right. "The Grey Zone" does seem to be a competent telling of this story (if they got all their facts straight), but it's almost an embarrassment too.

The first mistake--and it's a big one--is having all the "good guys" speak with pure 100% American accents, and all the bad, evil Nazi commanders speak with German accents.

I had no idea there were so many Californian Jews in Auschwitz in 1944. I thought they were mainly Hungarian and Polish. Oh, well...

So anyway, it's the little details like this (and there are plenty of them) that kind of give it away, kind of blows their cover--you know what mean? Two minutes into it, I feel like I'm watching a bunch of actors walking around in Nazi outfits trying to look tough. Some scenes are almost comical--and I really don't think that's the effect you want to go for in a movie like this.

Although this is a story worth telling, certain aspects of this particular presentation of it seem to undermine the profundity the historical facts. And that's something I wouldn't want to risk doing. So I can't recommend "The Grey Zone."

Do some research. Learn about what actually happened and be moved by the facts, the reality. That's what history is all about.

History teachers might be tempted to play this kind of movie for their students. But I think they'd be better off just reading the book.

1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Rabbit-Proof Fence (2002)

8/10

On Par with 'Anne Frank: Remembered'

19 April 2003

Near the end of the 1995 documentary, "Anne Frank: Remembered," there's a two-second clip of Anne Frank--1943, '44, something like that, six months or so before she and her family went into hiding. A wedding was being filmed by someone with an early home movie camera. After taking some shots of the bride and groom in the street, the camera pans up to get a shot of some spectators looking down from the balcony of their apartment at the wedding party below. There is a young girl leaning over the railing of the balcony; we barely get a glimpse of her. She quickly turns her head and goes back into the apartment. They slow the film down and play it back. And it's Anne Frank. Motion picture footage of Anne Frank. The real person.

That was the most powerful and emotionally profound moment I've experienced watching a film. I totally lost it when they showed that two-second clip of Anne Frank. It cut me half. There was no denying that what I had just seen in the previous 100 minutes of the documentary was real. It hit me so hard I couldn't talk about it for weeks afterwards. And I can still get choked up trying to talk about.

"Rabbit-Proof Fence" has a moment like that. For me, not as powerful as that moment of seeing Anne Frank, but for some people it will be. And if for nothing else but that moment, that possibility, I have to recommend this film. Deeply moving.

Entertaining and enlightening.

0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Hollywood Ending (2002)

One Good Laugh

7 November 2002

There's one good laugh in this movie: the scene where Woody falls. He falls and CRASHES. I rewound it and watched it about fives times and laughed until I cried every time. And it happens in the background of the scene. So if you're not paying attention to the background you'll miss it. The rest of the movie is completely forgettable. I can't recommend the movie, but for the one really good laugh, I'll give it a 6 out 10 instead or a 4 or 5, if that means anything. Rent "Decontructing Harry" instead.

0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Signs (2002)

8/10

The "Message" is Besides the Point

5 August 2002

Warning: Spoilers

WARNING: CONTAINS SPOILERS

This was the first time in a long time I was completely hooked (99% hooked) into everything a movie was about. I must have been in the right mood for it, and I'm glad I was, because I thoroughly enjoyed the experience, right to the very end.

When the girl was trying to give the dog some water, and the dog barked, I jumped.

When the guy was watching the video tape of the kid's birthday party, saying, "Hey, little kids, get out of the way," I was saying it with him, because I wanted to see what was on the tape. I was reaching over my seat trying to get a closer look to make sure I didn't miss anything, scanning through those bushes trying to figure out what the hell they were looking at. And then when I saw that flash of the alien on the video, I flipped. Totally creeped me out.

The sound of the aliens on the roof creeped me out. ALL the sounds the movie creeped me out.

When Mel Gibson cut the alien's fingers off in the pantry, I was ready to hide behind my pillow (if I had a pillow)--but I couldn't look away. The tension gradually built up for me as the movie progressed, and there was a point where the tension was so high I almost wanted to leave the theatre. The movie worked on me big time.

The news broadcasts made it too much like "War of the Worlds," but by that time I was too involved with everything to cast off my disbelief. Even the flashbacks of Mel Gibson's wife getting killed worked for me.

At no point was I saying, "Okay, this is stupid" (like I did a thousand times over in "Minority Report"). I went along with all of it, the EXPERIENCE of it all. I don't think I've ever felt more tension watching a movie. By the time I got to the end, I still felt tense; I kept looking around every corner, because I knew something was going to come out of the shadows, but I didn't know what. That's what really kept me involved with the whole thing, not knowing what I was going to see next or what was going to happen.

At the end, when I saw the reflection of the alien in the tv screen, I thought I was going to have a stroke; I wanted to run. And then when I saw the alien holding the kid in his arms, I was in horror. It didn't seem lame, or silly or B-movieish or any of that. I was totally there, in the room with them, frozen, staring at that creepy-looking alien. Totally horrified.

By this time, I didn't care how it ended; I just wanted it to end because the tension was too much to take.

The "faith" message of the movie, I could take it or leave it. There really wasn't much to it, but I didn't care. I walked out of that movie feeling like I had shared in the experience of the characters, that I was there feeling it all with them. The faith message was weak, but how creeped out and terrified they were by the whole experience, I was with them, taking it all in at FACE VALUE by the time I got to the end. That's why the alien at the end horrified me, because to me it wasn't a guy in a rubber suit. That F*%&*ing thing was real. I wanted to get the hell out of there. I didn't want to try communicating in sign language or say, "I come in peace." That was one mean motherf*&^%!ing looking alien, and I didn't want to stick around and make friends. I wanted to grab that kid and run like hell. But the alien was holding the kid--couldn't run. That moment of unbearable indecision was stretched out forever, and, again, I was there. The tension was too much to take.

And like said, I didn't care what happened after that. I just wanted the tension to end. Could have ended with a song and dance number and that would have been okay with me. I just needed relief.

Except for the faith message, the EXPERIENCE of the movie worked 100% on me. I can't remember the last time this happened to me in a movie. Maybe this makes me a sucker, that I could be completely engrossed by such a contrived film, but all films are contrived; enjoying them is partially a matter of suspending your disbelief. And I guess I was primed to do just that. Must have been in the right mood. And I'm glad, because it was the most satisfying experience I've had at the movies in the past couple years.

I remember people talking about how "The Blair Witch Project" totally horrified them--and how I thought it was a waste of time. That's because right from the beginning I didn't believe any of it. I knew it was fake and didn't feel at all involved with it. For some people, "Signs" will be the same--if they don't believe what's going on right from the start, the rest of the movie will probably seem silly. This time for me, however, it was different, and I'm glad, even if it does mean I'm just another sucker. It was SO COOL to look at the alien and react to it as if it were real, to believe it. That was the best.

Arguments over whether or not "God" sent the aliens are secondary, if not irrelevant, to the visceral experience of the film.

0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Minority Report (2002)

7/10

A Masterpiece by Default?

22 June 2002

"Minority Report" isn't a bad movie, but that doesn't make it a masterpiece, certainly not the instant-classic four-star science fiction film most reviewers are making it out to be.

It seems that films which receive the highest praise these days do so by default. If 95% of the movies out there are crap, does that make the other 5% worthy of high praise? NO. But I suppose if I was a professional film critic watching crappy movies all year long and then came across a passable science fiction film like "Minority Report," I'd probably get all excited too and say, "Hey, this one isn't too bad! What the hell--it's a classic!" That's the only explanation I have for the critical praise this film has received. Just add it to the list of highly-praised films from the past five or six years that have been graded on a curve.

"Minority Report" isn't a bad science fiction film. Although there are some huge flaws in its logic, the main concepts it introduces certainly give you something to think about, which is what good SF is supposed to do. However, Spielberg's attempt to compensate for the film's lack of emotional pull by tacking on a happily-ever-after ending might cancel out the introspective aspects of the story for some people; I don't mind happy endings, but this ending was a bit too much.

The film gives you other things to chew on besides the SF concepts: action sequences, special effects, neat little gadgets, a few startling moments, a bit of humour, a bit of mystery, and Tom Cruise's chiselled and well-photographed face if you're into that. It has a little bit of everything to satisfy most people.

Overall, though, "Minority Report" is a science fiction film, the kind that gives you something cool to look at and a few things to think about while you're being distracted by the action. But that's it. It's a passable science fiction film, nothing too spectacular or too profound, nothing to get too excited about.

If you haven't already seen it in the theatres, save yourself some money and wait for the video.

And I repeat: Just because it isn't a bad movie, doesn't make it a masterpiece.

0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

White Room (1990)

7/10

Postmodern Fairytale

18 May 2002

I first saw this film on CBC television several years ago while flicking through the channels late at night. Some films work better at night when you can't get to sleep. All of sudden they suck you in and keep you awake so that you're thankful you were losing your mind with insomnia in the first place. Other great late night discoveries: "Down by Law" and "Red Sorghum." Check 'em out. Anyhow...

"White Room" is a magical film, a magic which begins with the opening narration which imbues the story with a certain fairytale quality, and a feeling that there's a moral to the story, a purpose; just hang in there and watch it unfold. The whole story is pure fantasy, and perhaps that's what makes the film's imperfections tolerable. Imperfections such as: Sheila McCarthy--the wrong actress for the role; Maurice Godin--when he says, "I love you," it just doesn't work; and what the hell's the deal with that pirate outfit he's wearing during half the movie?

Watching the film unfold, though--that's where the magic lies. With the well-placed voice-over narration, I think there could have been even less dialogue. There are essentially only two characters in the film, but the fairytale quality of the film (thanks to the narration) might be considered the third character, because it's that dreamlike feeling that keeps the story alive, makes it feel more personal and potent, just like a dream, even though you know it isn't real.

That's what I loved about the film. I was living in it while I was watching it. And the place it brought me to was unlike anything I've experienced in a film before. Definitely a unique film.

I watched it several times on video for a few years after I first saw it, and it was a rewarding experience every time. Recently, though, I watched it again, and its imperfections began to stand out a little more, and it wasn't as magical--but it's still a special movie, singular, unique, different from most films out there, and well worth looking out for. Especially if you have an appreciation for late night magic.

6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Se7en (1995)

9/10

A Masterpiece

25 December 2001

One of three films I've seen in the past ten years or so which I consider a masterpiece. I don't want to ruin it by commenting any more than that. The other two films on my list, though, happen to be "Down by Law," directed by Jim Jarmusch, with Tom Waits, Roberto Benigni, and John Lurie; and "Henry Fool," directed by Hal Hartley. How's that for a movie review?

0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Down by Law (1986)

8/10

A Masterpiece

25 December 2001

One of three films I've seen in the past tens year or so which I consider a masterpiece. I don't want to ruin it by commenting any more than that. The other two films on my list, though, happen to be "Seven" (aka "Se7en"), directed by David Fincher, with Morgan Freeman, Brad Pitt and and Kevin Spacey; and "Henry Fool," directed by Hal Hartley. How's that for a movie review?

2 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Pay It Forward (2000)

6/10

Disappointing Second Viewing

6 December 2001

When I first rented this movie, I watched it throughout the day in half-hour segments or so. When it was over I hated the lame ending but appreciated the rest of it, especially the performances of the leads. I would have recommended it to anyone. A few months later, watching it a second time and watching it straight through without any breaks, I was struck by how weak and contrived the whole story really is. The first time around I was able to suspend disbelief and get into the story. This time, though, it was slow and boring and not in any way convincing, compelling or emotionally resonating. And I definitely wouldn't recommend it. Even Kevin Spacey's performance can't save this one from it's embarassingly forced pathos.

0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Whale Music (1994)

7/10

Warning: Do NOT Watch The CBC Version

20 August 2001

Anyone who loves the Rheostatics' music is going to enjoy this film. I have some minor complaints, mainly about pacing and the casting of certain actors (not Maury) who aren't really convincing in their roles, but I don't have time write a detailed review. I just want to warn anyone who has seen this film or plans to watch this film as presented CBC television in Canada: The version that airs are the CBC is like the Reader's Digest version of WHALE MUSIC---don't watch it. It cuts out entire scenes and subplots (if you can them that) from the film. The CBC, which presents most of films untouched, took half the guts out of WHALE MUSIC. I don't know why. It's horrible what they did to the film. Rent the video or watch it in a theatre, but DON'T watch it on CBC television.

7 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (2000)

6/10

Rent RED SORGHUM Instead

9 August 2001

I didn't like CROUCHING TIGER, HIDDEN DRAGON (on video, dubbed in English). It looked really good, and I'm sure if I'd seen the non-dubbed version, it would have been more dramatic, but otherwise it didn't do anything for me at all. The scene where they're fighting in the trees, supposedly one of the highlights, seemed silly to me. After the first couple of fight scenes, I began fast-forwarding through the rest of them. I'm sure for some people, the way the characters floated around like Superman and all that was magical, but to me it just looked like a bunch of people swinging around on suspension wires. The effect didn't work for me at all. I've heard people talk about how exciting the action is and the sweeping drama of the story, but the story fell flat for me too; I wasn't into it for a second. I found it predictable and not at all engaging (this might have been different had I not seen the dubbed version). The photography was excellent, lots of pretty scenes, but that wasn't enough to keep me interested; I was bored through the whole thing, and by the time the ending came around, which I didn't think was much of an ending, I just didn't care. When it was over I said, "That's it?" Something happens to one of the main characters in the end, but you *know* the character will be back for the sequel (or prequel, whichever one they're going to make). I think if this movie doesn't grab you from the start with the fantastic way the characters literally move and jump around, it never will. This time next week I doubt I'll remember anything about it.

I know I'm in the minority, but really, beyond all the nice pretty pictures of the mountains and the trees, etc., I wasn't engaged by this film at all. I know most people seem to love it, but there will be others who will wonder what all the fuss is about.

If you want to watch a beautifully photographed, engaging and dramatic film from China, pick up RED SORGHUM; it clashes the fantastic with reality in a way CROUCHING TIGER never even approaches.

0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Hollow Man (2000)

6/10

Had Potential, But Blew It

5 August 2001

Sometimes when I watch a movie, I do it with low expectations; I walk in expecting the story to be dumb. As long as it's mildly engaging and fun to watch, then who cares? This is what pop corn movies are all about. This is why I was able to watch LOST IN SPACE and MISSION TO MARS and enjoy them both. That's how I approached HOLLOW MAN.

But it didn't work this time. The best part of the movie was the joke Kevin Bacon told about Superman having sex with Wonderwoman. The effects are fun to watch, the story is engaging on the level of a comic book---all fine and good. But only for the first half.

There was so much that could have been done with this movie's concept, but about half way through it, it takes a turn and becomes a slasher movie, just watching people get killed one at a time. The change in Kevin Bacon's character was so sudden that it was impossible to suspend disbelief any longer. He becomes completely homicidal and it's just too much to swallow.

Even from comic book movies, there has to be some thread to the action that makes sense. It doesn't have to be a whole lot of sense, but just enough to get you to the end of the ride. This ride stopped about half way through the movie.

0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Short Cuts (1993)

6/10

Skip This and Read Raymond Carver's Short Stories Instead

4 August 2001

This film is based on a poem and several stories by the American short story writer, Raymond Carver, who I think is one of the greatest short stories writers of the 20th century. For a while I used to seek out movies which were based on novels or short stories. Then, if I enjoyed the film, I'd check out the original literary source. Alan Parker's film, BIRDY, turned me onto the works of William Wharton, and Scorcesse's LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST turned me onto Nikos Kazantzakis. But Altman's SHORT CUTS didn't do anything to turn me onto Raymond Carver. I didn't go looking for Raymond Carver after I saw the movie, and I'm not the only one. And that's a shame, because Carver's work deserves better.

I hadn't read any Raymond Carver when I first saw SHORT CUTS. As a film, it just didn't work for me at all. I wasn't emotionally drawn into any of it. Tom Waits was, as usual, fun to watch, but otherwise I didn't feel for any of the characters. They weren't real to me. Now, years later, having read all of Carver's short stories and poems, in the film, the intimacy and the realism of Carver's work and the lingering quality of his images did not translate to the screen at all.

Take a story like "Careful," for instance. That's a story about a guy who's separated from his wife and he's living on the top floor of a house having champaign and doughnuts for breakfast one morning when his wife drops by to have a talk, except he can't hear her very well because he has wax build-up in one ear and they spend the whole time trying to find a way to get the wax out of his ear instead of talking about what she wanted to talk about. I haven't read that story in about 8 months and I can remember it---I can *see it* now---perfectly, like something I actually witnessed.

When I read a Carver story, it leaves an impression---to say the least. SHORT CUTS didn't even come close to having that effect on me. I didn't walk away thinking, "Wow," like I do most of the time when I read a Raymond Carver story. Half an hour later I couldn't remember anything about the film and was glad to forget it. This film pales in comparison to the power of Carver's written words. As a film and as a adaptation, SHORT CUTS is a failure.

Tess Gallagher, Carver's window, was apparently pleased with how this film came out, but I wonder if Carver himself would have approved had he been alive. I sure don't. Reading a Raymond Carver story is like listening to the blues: it might be about a depressing situation, but it lifts your spirit out of that depression in the way it's presented. SHORT CUTS fails to do this. Most likely it'll just bring you down.

On a happier note, I would recommend the films of Krzysztof Kieslowski (BLUE, WHITE, and RED for instance) to anyone who wants to experience the realism and the intimacy of a Carver short story on film. Kieslowski comes as close to it as anything I've seen. Carver's work in Kieslowski's hands would have been a perfect match. Too bad.

3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Tigerland (2000)

7/10

An Accurate Portrayal of Boot Camp

2 August 2001

I wasn't expecting the highest calibre of film-making with Joel Schumacher directing this one, so I was surprised that TIGERLAND wasn't a complete waste of time.

In technique, it's often derivative of SAVING PRIVATE RYAN with the shaky camera work, grainy shots, the film occasionally running like it's skipping a sprocket---all those techniques Speilberg used to make his film seem more realistic but in the end was more distracting than anything else.

But unlike SAVING PRIVATE RYAN, the emotional component wasn't as weak, as the characters in this film seemed more like real people and the story less contrived, not so wrapped up in the American flag (Speilberg gets an 'F' in subtlety).

Next to the first section of Kubrick's FULL METAL JACKET, this is the most realistic portrayal of boot camp that I have seen in a film, and for that I think it's worth watching.

It's not a great film, but neither is it a bad film.

0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Red Sorghum (1988)

8/10

A Singular Chinese Film

26 July 2001

There are several versions of this film available on video. Some are in wide screen, some aren't. The impact of the visuals is lost without the full-shot wide screen. Then there are two different subtitled versions, one that has large subtitles and another that uses smaller but less intrusive subtitles, which is the best of the two. So depending on what version of the video you're watching, your experience of the film can vary. But assuming you get your hands on the good version...

This film is like a quiet fairy tale that transforms into something that I didn't see coming. The visuals are stunning. The story slowly unfolds but is presented so well that it's completely compelling. The acting is as good as it gets. And the ending hits you like a punch in the stomach.

This films stands out from all other Chinese films I have seen. It has a character uniquely its own, and is well worth seeking out.

21 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Anne Frank Remembered (1995)

9/10

Knock out of your complacency

1 July 2001

The Diary of Anne Frank is the second best-selling nonfiction book in the world, and for good reason. Nonetheless, sitting through this documentary about her life, which fills in some of the details where the diary left off, I thought, "Just another documentary about Anne Frank." I found it to be competent but not extraordinary. That was my complacent attitude because I was already well aware of the story of Anne Frank; most of what the documentary had to tell me wasn't news to me.

Everything changed, though, when I got to the end of the documentary---when I saw the motion picture footage of Anne Frank. The emotional impact of seeing this footage, only a second or so long, made everything that came before it a thousand times more real---but not just everything that was in the documentary; everything I had previously known about Anne Frank suddenly became more real to me, more personal. I'd always been moved by her story, but when I saw that footage, what I felt was stronger and deeper and more profound than any other film experience of my life. (I knew beforehand that this documentary contained live footage of Anne Frank, and I'd even seen the footage in a movie review on television, but seeing it in the context of the documentary was a completely different experience. It's not likely that my mentioning it here will spoil it for anyone.)

I realize now that many people still don't know the story of Anne Frank; it's discouraging at times to be witness to this kind of ignorance. I think to myself, "How could someone NOT know the story of Anne Frank?" This being the case, though, ANNE FRANK: REMEMBERED, along with reading her diary, is the best place to start. It's a story that everyone should know.

15 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

O Brother, Where Art Thou? (2000)

7/10

Love it or Hate it

15 June 2001

My favourite Coen Brothers film to date is the Big Lebowski. I thought Fargo, their most acclaimed movie so far, was a waste of time. And that's usually the way it is with their movies. You either love 'em or hate 'em. But this time, with O Brother, I found that I don't love it or hate it; I just like it. I give it a 7 out of 10 so far. I say so far because I've only watched it once, and watching a Coen Brothers movie is like reading a Kafka short story---there's so much there that you can't pick up on all of it the first time. Greater appreciation comes from repeated viewings. And some people will never really get it; it's not for the immediate-gratification crowd and never will be. That said, having watched O Brother only once, my summary is this: There's virtually no narrative to the story; it's just a bunch of stuff that happens. Therefore it's not as engaging as could be had there been a stronger narrative pull, and some people will think it's boring; there are some slow parts. But when it is funny, it's hilarious, especially George Clooney's character who cracked me up just about every time he opened his mouth. At the moment I wouldn't put it up there with the Big Lebowski, but the laughs, when they come, are so strong that it easily worth the price of admission/rental.

0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Henry Fool (1997)

7/10

Masterpiece with a perfect ending

25 May 2001

I love this movie. One of maybe three films I consider a masterpiece. I have read many reviews, though, where the reviewer seems to think the ending is an over-the-top, sell-out happy ending. I disagree. I think it's a great ending, but it's not as clear-cut as some people assume. I won't give it away for anyone who hasn't seen it, but in the very last shot which shows Henry running along an airport runway, watch it carefully: It is not made clear from the background of the shot which direction he is running, whether he's running *away* from something or *towards* it---which I love, because it leaves it up to the audience to decide for themselves what direction he's running in. I don't think it really matters either way; the point is that Henry has made a decision, and he's not just running with it, he's embracing it with all of his being. That's my interpretation of the ending---and I love it. I wonder if Hal Hartley did this on purpose (if so, it's brilliant), and I wonder if anyone else has noticed this.

Also, the score, like everything about this movie, is subtle but powerful.

2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Pay It Forward (2000)

6/10

Excellent, except for the Hollywood ending.

20 May 2001

PAY IT FORWARD is a well acted, well made movie, and it *is* worth watching. In a few spots, though, in pushes the sentimentality almost a bit too far, which is tolerable... until the ending which goes right over the top trying to make everybody cry but had the opposite effect on me. Then it became melodrama and sentimentality on par with James Cameron's TITANIC. Everything leading up to the unnecessary ending, though, is so worth watching that it's hard not to recommend it.

0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

williamknott

Reviews

Tell Your Friends

Recently Viewed