Change Your Image
playingkarrde
Reviews
Wimbledon (2004)
Another waste of time rom-com
"From the makers of Notting Hill Four Weddings" comes the tag line strapped onto the trailers for this film, but in all honesty, who is that? Maybe the producers? Last time I checked it was not producers that made a film good.
And this is evident here. Richard Curtis, the real creator of aforementioned rom-coms is nowhere to be seen and we are left with a director and two stars who are self proclaimed to have never played or followed tennis before making this movie. I really feel for Pat Cash that had to act as technical expert on this picture.
Frankly, I won't go into the story as its as dry and lifeless as any other waste of time romantic comedy. The writing is witless and the storyline predictable and characters moronic with no depth at all (save a few fleeting moments from the brilliant Bernard Hill).
Being a tennis fan though I wanted to watch this as we are not treated to many films centered on our sport. Luckily, the action on court was well produced (thanking the producers? Ahem) and the film boasted some nice visual effects. It was not plainly obvious that every tennis ball hit was CG. To any tennis fan or fan of Wimbledon it was obvious that the directors and stars of the movie were not tennis fans. Many glaring inconsistencies with Wimbledon... but I guess this could be overlooked as the film is just a romantic comedy. Clearly written for an American audience (American TV station on a UK TV? Come on...) at least we managed to get the film set in Wimbledon rather than the US Open.
There is little good to say about any of the actors save Hill, although Bettany does a good job holding his first leading role. No good writing to work with and an even worse co-star (its like she isn't even trying anymore - just another pay cheque until the next Spider-Man film?) but he is convincing for his part. There were some nice allusions to Hen-Mania which was good and I liked having David Mercer on the commentary early on. It's a shame McEnroe's wooden performance took over later - but again, obviously written for an American audience (I love you really Mac!).
Overall if you are a tennis fan then its probably worth watching for the nice oncourt action. If you are a fan of romantic comedies then you can find better out there. Don't expect the film to hold up to the "Bridget Jones/Notting Hill/Four Weddings" mantle that the advertisers would have you believe and you may waste a couple of hours while waiting for something better. It's light, its... fun, and its predictable. Not great, pretty bad, but there is worse out there.
Garden State (2004)
Almost brilliant
First time director, writer and comedy star Zach Braff takes on a weighty task to deliver an unmissable and genuine movie, but has trouble making it last.
The themes and overall idea behind Garden State is not one of particular originality, yet Braff seems adamant to take it beyond a simple "boy comes home to discover his true self" plot. The focus is on Braff in more ways than one in this movie and so his ambititousness is noted.
The movie begins with some brilliant characterisation and fantastic film making. The first half of the movie is alive with interesting characters and some genuinely heartfelt moments. Natalie Portman shines like we haven't seen since Leon and the introduction of many other unique characters is both incredibly funny and telling of Braff's depth into the story.
However, midway during the movie the writing and direction takes a bit of a nosedive. No longer are we allowed to see anything of Portman's character as she was built up to be, instead she is denigrated to tag along girlfriend whilst Braff goes on his self discovery journey that we all knew was (although hoped wouldn't) coming.
I am a big fan of Zach Braff though, indeed he was the reason I wanted to see the movie. However his lack of experience in taking on a project of this scale shows as we are left with half of an otherwise brilliant movie. Scrubs is now well into it's fourth season but I am hoping that someone can nurture Braff's writing and directing talent to give him the longevity that many other writer/directors don't have as we have moments of genius, both in his obviously great handle on comedy (although interestingly most of the moments are not directed at his character) as well as allowing the viewer to feel some really true moments.
Ian Holm and supporting cast are excellent where allowed to be, Natalie Portman is again outstanding when given room and Braff, well lets just say he is just Zach Braff and allow that time to mature.
Watch it and love it, but don't be too disappointed when it takes a downward turn and you will be pleasantly surprised.
Shanghai Knights (2003)
Trash of the worst kind
A big Jackie Chan fan. A fan of Owen Wilson. A huge Donnie Yen fan. I simply can't stomach this rubbish though.
I saw Shanghai Noon only once and enjoyed it, although I can remember very little of it. However, after just seeing the sequel, Shanghai Knights, I am going to have to go out on a limb and say it is a great deal worse than its predecessor.
First of all, I am aware that this is just a "fun action comedy". Most Chan films are. However, what most Chan films are not is insulting to just about every nation other than the Americans. In this film, not only do we have a stereotypical English bad guy (come on American's think of something NEW), we also have insults towards to Indians, basically Britain as a whole and even the Chinese. Frankly, why Donnie Yen required fake teeth I'll never know. To be honest, after the way Chan has been treated in the past in his movies I'd have expected more reluctance for such things to take place.
I'll let all the continuity errors and poor set design go due to the nature of the film, and Jackie's choreography is spot on as always. Of particular note is his Gene Kelly homage. Top stuff. Not as fast and funny as his previous films though. Is he getting too old for this? No! Never! But it is a shame we didn't get more out of Yen. His final fight scene showed some essence of pure class, but alas we're not given much before his typical bad guy death (oops, was that a spoiler? Come on, like you can't see it coming).
I won't touch the plot as its just stupid, but its not really necessary to the film. Owen Wilson is on top form though with his comedy timing absolutely spot on. Some lines could have been done without though - not a fault of Wilson's just bad writing. I simply don't buy that Chan's sister would fall in love and want to be the bearer of Wilson's children within the space of 10 minutes (I was left thinking I missed something). Oh, and while I'm here, they escaped London to crash into Stone Henge?! Uhhh...
Jackie Chan has had some luck with his pairings in the States so far. Both Chris Tucker and Owen Wilson have had good chemistry with him. However, although Wilson is the much better of the two, I really don't think Shanghai Knights compares to Rush Hour (either of them). Both of the same formula, but Rush Hour is by far less farcicle in its production. It showed that it is possible to make a "fun action comedy" without resorting to cheap racist jokes like Shanghai Knights does.
I can only recommend you steer clear and rent separate Jackie Chan and Owen Wilson films so that you can get the best of both.
Ong-Bak (2003)
A star is born
Ong-Bak may well be the film that is responsible for the newest martial arts star to hit our screens, and certainly an exciting prospect it is indeed.
For Ong-Bak on it's own merits isn't exactly a film of any worth, the plot, as I'm sure you have read already, is rather tripe and the acting on the whole is plastic and (in some cases) nauseating. Saying that though Petchtai Wongkamlao does a good job as voice for this film so well done to him. However, the film has a well directed feel to it and the cinematography is particularly good, matching the warm open colours of rural Thailand with the dark, neon coated underground of Bangkok.
But of course all that is of really no regard to the real appeal of this film: Tony Ja. "No sling. No computers." is the phrase that follows Ja in his mini promo and that really is what you will get. This isn't kickboxing (as I've seen it referred as) but Muay Thai, and Muay Thai it is at its very best. Ja mixes incredible use of knees and elbows with quite frankly unimaginable athletic ability the likes of which we haven't seen since Jackie Chan first made his impact with Snake in the Eagle's Shadow. While Ja has a long way to go to match Chan's imagination with his stunts, Ja manages to impress just as well as Chan and it is clear what we have here is a diamond in the rough.
Not enough can be said about Tony Ja's impressive array of stunts and martial arts ability, but he also commands strong screen presence. His acting ability may still be in its infancy, and his ability to deliver lines may leave him at a bit of a hindrance if he wants to break out of the strong yet silent character, but there is no question that Ja will put Muay Thai on the map in terms of cinematic aesthetics.
I am sure we will see more of Ja in the future, and this movie is an excellent spring board for him to make a real impact. I hear a US release is in the works which is great as there is potential here for Ja to break through into international cinema if he so wishes as he really is offering something no one else is. Ja is the real deal, so get ready for him.
SF: Episode One (1998)
Over-rated samurai film that can't decide its genre
I feel rather bewildered after reading some of the comments on this board. They all seem rather positive towards this film whereas throughout watching all I could think of was how awful it actually was.
First of all, I felt the ronin-come anime character Kazamatsuri was of particularly poor casting. Tomoyasu Hotei may be a famous singer and guitarist in Japan, but that doesn't make him an ideal role as lead antagonist. first of all, his mannerisms and overall presence on screen was so far beyond anything we have come to expect from samurai behaviour that it comes off looking more like an anime character than a serious master swordsman. Besides his innate ugliness, he commands no presence on screen, certainly not comparable to the great Toshiro Mifune and any comparison is an insult to Mifune's genius. This is even more evident when he comes up against aging samurai Mizoguchi who has his act down perfectly. The good vs the bad here of the characters is mirrored in the actors' performance, screen presence and overall commanding of the samurai behaviour.
Many have also noted the shooting style of director Hiroyuki Nakano. While its obvious in parts he has tried to emulate Kurosawa in style, and in few cases does so very well, too often do we see his true understanding (or lack thereof) of the cinematic artform. His style comes off more like a University graduate than a Japanese professional. The black and white, while understood in its use, is again not used to its fullest as the film was shot in colour and simply desaturated in post. This loses the clarity that black and white film usually allows, leaving us with footage that has all the disadvantages of colour and none of the advantages of black and white.
Lastly, I have to mention the appalling soundtrack. I'm all for putting a fresh spin on an old genre, but this eighties heavy rock simply does not fit. It seems that people are too obsessed with having the music achieve something not done before in samurai films that they don't pay attention to whether or not it is any good.
While it may be perceived that I did not get what the film makers were trying to achieve, I think that is wrong. I understand the need to try and breath new life into an aging genre, but I think that this is not that man to do so, and that this is certainly not the method of going about it. While the film wants to be a comedy in many areas, it also tries very hard to have serious undertones and comes off not knowing which is the most important to the film.
If this is the samurai genre for the MTV generation then I want no part of it. Twilight Samurai is a much better representation of modern samurai storytelling and I think that should be the direction film makers should be taking the genre. Leave the MTV generation Battle Royale and let true samurai fans have quality like Twilight. This amateurish movie isn't needed here.
The Girl Next Door (2004)
Enjoyable for what it is
Lets face it, teen movies aren't exactly rocket science. You have your basic formula of boy meets girl, boy makes a mistake causing girl to leave, boy comes to terms with himself and makes a meaningful speech to win girl back. Insert the occasional fart joke and the cocktail is complete.
The Girl Next Door has all this, but it has a little more as well. It begins in typical fashion but its not long before its playing with the usual teen movie conventions a bit. There are three main facets to the film with it being split up quite obviously, with little running commentary between, but this is what makes this film a bit different and interesting. It wants to be something a little more unusual and in the end it succeeds.
I think overall most of the actors in the film did a fine job although for me Olyphant stole the show as Kelly, even though it seems the writers weren't sure whether we were supposed to like him or not. There are a few nice plot twists here and there which mix it up a bit and Elisha Cuthbert is undeniably cute throughout. It is a little surprising that her part is played down two thirds of the way through the movie though, since it is supposedly about her.
Worth watching if you're bored like I was. Expect the usual teen comedy formula, but at the same time be prepared for something a little different and you should find this an enjoyable 2 hours.
Hellboy (2004)
Please somebody save my kittens!
I saw the trailer for this film quite some time ago and was left feeling with little hope for this film. Nevertheless I decided to watch it with the hope that I would be mildly entertained. I was wrong.
There is very little plot going on here, rather poor characterisation with really anti-climatic events proving the finale to the picture. Hellboy is an odd character at best but the thought of a character coming from hell is an intriguing one. All the other characters (whether they were in the comics or not - I really have no idea having never read them) were extremely droll in their execution and left a bitter after taste in my mouth.
The obvious selling point of this movie was the special effects, but even these were mediocre at best. Not a single "big" shot was done well with the majority of the film looking unpolished and incredibly fake. The supposed hell hounds were perhaps the worst case of this, especially when Hellboy was fighting one the in the train station. Quite clearly it was a man in a suit and looked more like a 1940s B-Movie than a turn of the millennium big budget blockbuster. In terms of visual effects, Lord of the Rings it ain't. Rather think Attack of the Triffids.
Unresolved plot lines, holes in the story, anticlimactic ending along with poor characters and worse special effects. I suggest you miss this unless you're a big fan of the comic or want to have your brain turn to mush for 2 hours.
Not as bad as Hulk but worse than all the other comic book films. Please Hollywood, STOP MAKING COMIC BOOK FILMS!!
The Last Samurai (2003)
An uninspired Tom Cruise vehicle
Having looked forward to The Last Samurai for over a year I can't help feeling a little disappointed with a film that essentially allowed Cruise to do his usual character just in a period setting.
I have to say, I am really finding it hard to watch Tom Cruise these days. His range of characters has been extremely poor, especially when you compare him to other current Hollywood giants such as Tom Hanks.
The story is as cliched as one could expect from a Hollywood adaption of an historical moment in Japanese history and the script follows suit. For anyone who has any interest in Japanese history and indeed Samurai, they will have probably read Shogun by James Clavell and will no doubt see all the similarities that are evidently present. I mean, lets face it, there was really no need to have the ninja attack on the village.
The shining star of the movie was no doubt brooding Ken Watanabe who truly made the movie what it is. Without his performance it really could have been a whole lot worse. Cruise gives way his screentime admirably here and allows Watanabe to really give his best performance.
Costume design and cinematography were both equally stunning and despite being a Hollywood film, a lot of respect was given to the ideals of the Samurai, which is reassuring.
For anyone who finds this as their first taste of Samurai entertainment I emplore you to seek out real quality movies, especially Seven Samurai, Yojimbo, Sanjuro, Ran and Kagemusha to name but a few.
Still, an enjoyable film for all and gives Samurai lovers such as myself enough to feast on, but unfortunately gives us Tom Cruise as well. Still well worth watching though.
Adaptation. (2002)
A misunderstood piece of genius by Spike Jonze and Charlie Kaufman
*Possible SPOILERS*
While I won't go into so much detail as other commentators here have done, I think the movie deserves a special mention as to why it seemed so "random" to seemingly every critic at imdb.com.
The movie certainly isn't for everyone, in much the same vein as 'Being John Malkovich' isn't, but Jonze and Kaufman create another mind-bender here in what is possibly more complex than that of Malkovich, although when taken at face value could be seen as somewhat shallow.
However, that is where the beauty of this film lies. The movie is the continual progression of script that Kaufman himself writes. The film isn't about orchids (despite being based on the book 'The Orchid Thief'); it is about Kaufman's life and his struggle with creating this script. However the script is a living breathing process and as Kaufman grows so does the story. This is why I feel a lot of the meaning of this film is lost on most. The action segment of the film isn't a random addition that was just bolted on, it is a result of the help that brother Donald (whose own scripts certainly entail their fair dose of traditional Hollywood action) and the result of where Kaufman is mentally with the script. Indeed in his own words he states "I don't want to cram in sex or guns or car chases or characters learning profound life lessons or growing or coming to like each other or overcome obstacles to succeed in the end. The book isn't like that, and life isn't like that, it just isn't." yet this segment contains every piece of this due to the anxiety of Charlie Kaufman and the involvement of Donald.
In fact, in what is perhaps an even more obvious indication of this is the point in the film where Charlie attends the lecture his brother attended in order to sort through this block he has encountered. Throughout the film up to this point we are subjected to voiceover by Kaufman giving us his thoughts on each and every situation, yet when McKee yells, "...and God help you if you use voice-over in your work, my friends! God help you! That's flaccid, sloppy writing. Any idiot can write a voice-over narration to explain the thoughts of a character." the voiceover abruptly stops until the very end of the movie, and is thus acknowledged by Kaufman's "I don't care what McKee thinks".
This is indeed the very point behind the movie. It contains many elements, but none of them are random. The film is seen as a thought process and once that is realised then the true enjoyment of the film can be found. Those heralding praises at this movie without truely understanding that may have missed the point entirely and those claiming it is boring - well as I said before, this isn't for everybody. Those who can look beyond what is placed on screen and enjoy the incredible depths of a movie should certainly find this one of the greatest (and most thought-provoking) movies of the last decade.