Reviews

4 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Broken Arrow (1996)
1/10
Straight out of the "Cinema Merde" movement.
24 July 2009
Warning: Spoilers
What a pointless piece of crap. A film whose dialog is comprised exclusively of "tag-lines". Acting as nuanced as that which might be found on an infomercial. A plot as contrived and preposterous as any one might find in a rejected RoadRunner cartoon script.

This film has it all, culminating in a death scene as silly as you'll ever see. The plot involves the theft of a set of nuclear weapons which Christian Slater is trained "to disable". These nuclear weapons have a keypad you can set for thirty minutes. Can you, dear reader, explain to me the rationale for such a feature on a nuclear warhead? This film's plot devices come from a world where physics and logic have not yet been invented.

This film does make you think.

It's horrible.
25 out of 50 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Watchmen (2009)
10/10
The Mythology is Translated with Elegant Perfection
23 July 2009
Notorious for its 24 year, serpentine path to the big screen, Watchmen has finally, and definitively been realized as the astonishingly complex piece it was originally conceived as. There is elegance in the moral ambiguity of the source material, and it would have been a desecration to forgo this in order to bring yet another cardboard "Comic Book" film to the theaters (e.g. The Fantastic Four, The X-Men, last two Spiderman films, etc.). The Watchmen was never a comic book, but a deconstruction of the superhero mythology. Deconstruction is not just a fancy term for "things are gonna explode", movie patrons. Jerry Bruckheimer's name is not attached to this film. This is brilliance.

With no shortage of thrills the action, like that in "The Dark Knight", has a point. It is reassuring that a director understands the difference between pyrotechnics and plot. The Blu- Ray Director's cut provides extra footage which enhances the story for the uninitiated.

And for the record, Jackie Earle Haley defines the role of conflicted freak as only Heath Ledger had before.
2 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Just Wretched
19 April 2008
I really like the genre (huge fan of House of Flying Daggers, Curse of the Golden Flower, Crouching Tiger, etc.), so I went to this film on opening day with great expectations. I mean, until now I had never seen a Jackie Chan film that I DIDN'T like, since his infectious good- natured(ness) is usually enough to carry a film through mediocre material. Not this one. In a feat of digital wizardry which rivals any of the others in the film, his natural humor has been electronically erased. I couldn't bear another CGI assault to my sense of good cinema and left after about an hour.

Not content with being light-hearted fun, the film is laden....HEAVILY laden with myth upon myth upon myth, as if the director feels that every action has to have a new "Legend has it that..." attached to it. Everything. I half expected a character to go off to take a leak only to be confronted by the Exposition Gods warning him that "Legend has it that if the Chosen One urinates before the Hour of the Golden Stream, that he will have to face two challenges...." , like that. And there is ALL of the other dialog; all the useless-wooden- pseudo gravitasity you can fit into your Gi.

Myths, legends, flights-of-fancy are all given a license to be a little dumb. After all, they are SUPPOSED to be entertaining or illustrative or at least distracting. This film took this license and borrowed its daddy's car and got drunk and ran over puppies.

It is written: From the West shall come a film which shall challenge all to a duel for your ticket sales, and you shall succumb, and regrets you shall have for a thousand years.
10 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Crank (2006)
1/10
Horrible waste of time
17 February 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Nothing in my wildest imagination can come up with why this film garners more than one star. There are so many errors, both factual and contradictory to what "plot" has been established, that one must believe this was edited by monkeys. Monkeys on crank, maybe. Okay, so ONE part of this movie, the title, makes sense.

Preposterous is fine, when the director signals the viewer that "what is to follow is preposterous", but this movie doesn't have the decency to do even that. There is no irony; no sense of fun, just dopey, badly conceived crap. Just crap. Which would be a better title. Just leave off the "nk", substitute a "p". A precious 87 minutes might be saved for thousands.

The discerning viewer might ask, for example: "Why is it possible for the gang of thugs to make it to the roof for the final action scene, but the cops just muck about on the street WHERE NOTHING IS HAPPENING?" or..."How did a helicopter attain such a height that would give Chev the ability to dispatch his enemy on the way down, then make a phone call (waiting through an answering machine message)? Six and a half minutes of free-fall...that's pretty darned high (falling from a height of 27,000 ft.-a technical impossibility for a helicopter-your free-fall time is under two minutes) for someone to have his skull still intact after the pavement kisses it." This film is not made for the discerning viewer. It is made for those viewers who are amazed by flickering lights. Do yourself a favor and buy a strobe light, park yourself in front of it for an hour and a half, and walk away 9 dollars richer, and after the seizure subsides, a whole lot wiser.
19 out of 37 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed