Change Your Image
blue_blue
Reviews
The Brothers Grimm (2005)
Don't get sucked in.
This movie was a huge mess of bits and pieces of what was mostly garbage. The pieces that weren't total garbage were in such tiny fragments that they had hardly any impact at all. To call this movie "complicated" would be a compliment of which it is totally undeserving. A landfill is complicated, but not really worth worrying about. You just want to avoid it. Quite similar to this movie.
I'm not saying that the acting was terrible---although I don't understand what was wrong with Jonathan Pryce. It's hard to believe that mess was caused by direction alone, but it's the only excuse I can think of other than the unlikely possibility that his acting has seriously and surprisingly declined. I can't stand Matt Damon, but he was perfectly fine, as was Heath Ledger, and the very pretty Lena Headey. The rest of the cast ably fulfilled their roles, though it seemed like a lot of them had some trouble in looping. And of course the special effects were well done. If only there was some reason to watch those special effects, things would be much better.
But as it is, this seems like a school play-level script written by a bunch of teenaged boys into extreme gross-out gore, paid for any snippet of any fairytale they could shove into it, whether or not it made sense, mattered, or added anything at all. Oh, I forgot---they also had to set it in French-occupied Germany, and throw in bizarre relations between the conquering French and the oppressed Germans. For history class, I suppose, since it didn't perform any significant function. Or maybe just to include wretched fake French accents. I don't know if they were supposed to be funny or what, but they certainly weren't. I'm also confused as to why the "Germans" had British accents. The ineffective, embarrassing caricature of the political/historical angle is actually one of the more attended-to aspects of the film: a sad commentary on how little anything else is developed.
As for the fairytale aspect, it seems like whoever wrote this is the one person who either doesn't remember fairy tales, or thinks that they're better off when horribly mutated or debased into freakish, meaningless, repulsive, bastardized, sludgy bits. Mixing up a few fairy tales might be a good idea. It sounds like it. Even a heavy dose of fairytale references could come together in a witty and cohesive way. But if that is the goal, especially if you don't have much material apart from that, you have to actually use enough of a fairytale or character to make sense or tell a story in some way. Taking what amounts to a particle from each and indiscriminately throwing them into a blender on HIGH makes. . . this movie. It takes atoms of fairy tales and smashes them to create some sort of black hole of a movie that warps them and itself. And you don't get anything out of a black hole. It basically just sucks.
Dead Birds (2004)
One FRIGHTENING Film
This is one frightening-as-heck film. I saw it in my apartment, in a city, and I was still completely freaked out. If I'd been in the situation these characters were in, I'd have easily shot myself if I couldn't ride away. I wouldn't be able to take it. I agreed with the character of Todd, who said "No more. . . there are worse things than dying, you know?" I still feel like there's something behind me or in another room. Literally, honestly, I feel slightly sick with residual fear.
The movie is really effective. One reason why is that the characters aren't constantly doing a lot of things you wouldn't do. I mean the stupid moron moves where you get caught or killed. Well. . . sometimes they do. But the outcomes aren't the same as in other horror movies.
The period dress means that the film doesn't rely on a lot of tight clothing and skin shots to pad out the story---they have to rely on the story. And the scares. They do it well. The story is a good one. Sounds like it could be "true," but you haven't heard it before. Best of all, the actors do a really good job. They are actually talented actors, which is unusual for a horror movie.
The end is a bit cryptic, but after a thought or two, you'll get it, and it might actually make you feel a bit less frightened. . . depending on what kind of person you are.
I'd give it 9 out of 10 for a horror movie, which I think is often difficult to pull off successfully. The absent star is for improvement (there's always room!) and a couple of trivial things like ridiculously unrealistic lighting for a Civil War era setting.
Now if only my room wasn't so dark, and I didn't hear that scuffling noise. . .
Around the Fire (1998)
Not even good enough for an afterschool special
This is a most ridiculous attempt at drama. A spoiled brat rich kid feels like he got the short end of the silver spoon, and decides that he needs the "freedom" and "sincerity" of a bunch of drug-hungry '90s-era hippies following SOMEone around on Tour. . . the Dead were long gone by the time this was released, so perhaps we mean Phish? Either way, it's crap, and if anyone dressed like the kids in this movie, they'd be dismissed even by pseudo-hippies. Of course it wants you to wait around for a learned-my-lesson change of heart and life, but who really cares if or where these people turn? You'd get more depth from a coloring book. It seems like it was written by a 22-year-old who spent two days doing drugs with some hippies and felt like s/he had a handle on some kind of magical scene that would lure in poor neglected trust fund children. To be perfectly fair, if you happen to be a well-to-do, feeling-sorry-for-yourself teen or pre-teen, you might like this. Especially if you haven't had enough anti-drug messages crammed down your throat, because this is yet another. Although if you're looking for any REAL reasons why you shouldn't do drugs, or any idea of what they are really like, that isn't here at all. It's as fake as the sparkly-bright tie-dyes and Tara Reid's perfect lipgloss-hippiedom.