Change Your Image
mhajs
Reviews
Aliens of the Deep (2005)
An unusual look at Jim Cameron. The director in his deep diving expedition.
I've been always a fan of James Cameron and his movies. And I will never forgive myself for taking so much time to watch this one. I wish I could had seen it before his newest masterpiece, Avatar, which I'm looking forward to write about too.
I'm still overwhelmed by the whole thing. Cameron presents us some of the people he worked with in this movie and they're all illuminated and wise human beings. It's a pleasure too see these people working together to give us a fantastic adventure. The way Cameron works, how he talks to his crew, how he describes some life forms (''look at this creature, it's beautiful, looks like a dancer'' or ''I could watch this guy all the time, it seems it is glowing from within''), how he films the diving sequences, it's all amazing.
Cameron is a visionary, a surprisingly talented filmmaker, who is also bold and courageous like no other director. This film is inspirational. Watch it for beautiful underwater sequences, the energy of Jim Cameron and the talent and knowledge of all these people that worked with him.
24: 12:00 a.m.-1:00 a.m. (2001)
24 : Season 1, Episode 1 Review
24 has got to be the best spy/adventure series TV had ever aired. The whole idea of telling a story in a 24 hour real time period is dazzling. The style of filming and pacing is what hooks us to watch it. And Jack Bauer is one of the greatest protagonists in a TV series in a long time. I rate this, along with The Simpsons and The X-Files, my three most favorite TV series.
This first episode begins with the conspiracy to assassinate US Senator David Palmer who is also running for president. Bauer is called to his office in order to discover who is behind all this and, at the same time, figure his daughter's path to the unkwown after fleeing from her bedroom. Thus, begins an adventure on the best political style and, what's best of it, is that it always takes place in real time, which makes this TV series a real work of originality in a time where almost every program on TV seems to be showing us the same things over and over and over.
300 (2006)
Only the beauty of photography and visual effects out-stands in this film.
Zack Snyder's second picture advances little or doesn't advance at all on the plot, has a poetic, but joyless and objective-less narrative. The movie, based on Frank Miller's graphic novel, emphasizes most of the time on the battle between spartans and persians and also on some spartans war habits. Therefore, the characters are not very well developed and the script is a little repetitive. There is even a sub-plot about despised women power on the senate, but without much context also. The only good quality of the film is its beauty, thanks to the great visual effects, nice photography and good performances (some of them, anyway). Too bad post-production modified Rodrigo Santoro's original voice, making his tone somewhat harder. I guess, in the end, it was necessary for the film.
The Da Vinci Code (2006)
Horrible adaption to the big screen...
*
*** Some minor spoilers ahead ***
Ever since I finished reading all 4 Dan Brown novels, I've been expecting that a filmmaker would deliver a masterpiece on the big screen. To begin, I wish they could have just shot Angels & Demons first, then The Da Vinci Code. But rather than that, they did Da Vinci first instead. In my opinion, the result is a disaster.
For those who haven't read the novel, the story is about an American teacher, Robert Langdon, who is an specialist in old history, symbols, religion tales and some other interesting stuff. He's famous in the academic world and whenever there's some fanatic trying to figure some possible hidden meaning in a painted picture, or a text in a book, they seek him. There's just a single scene in the entire movie I really loved and that was when Langdon is presenting some symbols to the public in a presentation.
Both movie and book tell the story about a man who is brutally murdered and Langdon is asked for help by the french police. The main problem with this movie is that director Ron Howard simply took the book and threw it away to the big screen. The scenes seems rushed (Langdon and Neveu in the book have great chemistry and even share a kiss at the end, but in the movie, there's no chemistry at all and maybe it was even wise not having shot a scene where this happens).
Besides that, Howard changed some details here and some other details there. Audrey Tautou as Sophie Neveu is horrendous! Ian McKellen as Teabing is another let-down too. In the book, he's very charismatic and even when he takes over, Dan Brown never expects us to believe he is evil. In the movie, in a failed attempt to try giving climax to it, Teabing rises like some traitor, with almost no purpose at all, threatening Langdon and Neveu as we never would have imagined.
This movie seems to have been made as if the actors interpreted it like it was some stage script show, making everything artificial. The flashback scenes are not that great and the characters are not believable at all. The book is much better. The only two actors I sincerely enjoyed were Alfred Molina and Paul Bettany. Not even Jean Reno saves the show in this one, and let me tell you: I was really looking forward to seeing Fache.
The Grudge (2004)
We're never involved.
**
I know it would probably be nicer if I reviewed this movie after having seeing the original Japanese motion picture. But since the director is the same, the story is practically the same, overall, it's just an adaption, I watched The Grudge, yesterday night. Unfortunately, I wasn't pleased at all...
The story is about a girl who goes to Japan for a living, working for some medical institution which gives support to helpless people, such as sick people. The girl is Sarah Michelle Gellar. After one of the other girls goes missing from work, Sarah is requested to take the girl's place by working at the house of a creepy family, who all have the bad luck of having bought the house. Well, it just happens that it's a cursed place.
This is based on those Japanese legends where they say that when a person dies with rage or anger as the last feelings of life, the place becomes cursed itself. The main problem, I guess, with this movie, is that it takes a powerful legend such as this one, but doesn't show us almost anything interesting throughout the picture. We're never really involved and when something's about to happen, the scene cuts itself. Over and over and over again. All we have left to do is wonder, but never be frightened.
There are many other flaws in The Grudge. The script is not so bad, I sincerely didn't think that way. The way the story is told, sometimes, in the present, flash-backing, and then moving forward again was quite interesting. However, The Grudge feels more like an experimental movie concerning situations where the characters seem completely lost and their actions don't have the impact of attitudes from characters of much better horror movies.
Irréversible (2002)
Original idea, but lack of climax after the climax ....
**1/2
*** Spoilers ahead ***
Now this is a really intense drama. Great performances, great plot, great atmosphere. What's with the rating then? It's not because this is an intense drama, it's supposed to be good. Irreversible is a movie about a rape occasion that's starts a whole mess. The main message of the movie is to show us that sometimes that's nothing else than vengeance for a solution. But this movie is very uninteresting.
Since the movie is told backwards, we feel really bothered by it after a couple of scenes. What was supposed to be a story told normally, developing the climax of the movie to the end, is actually a story which shows us the climax in the beginning and then shows us what really happened before that. There's simply nothing wrong with that at all, but the main problem with Irreversible is that there are not much interesting things to find out, after you realize what is it about.
Examples: the only actually good information we can come up with is that Alex and Pierre were once together. Their sex wasn't really good, or at least not as it should be, Marcus taking drugs and at the very end of the movie, Alex's pregnancy. Not much else.
This was really well directed. Performances by Belluci and Cassel are simply terrific. But if this movie really intended to keep us in the edge of our seat the whole duration of it, the rating would definitely be a little higher. Still, it's just my opinion. See it for yourself, you might enjoy it.
Hollow Man (2000)
Verhoeven follow-up to S. Troopers isn't worse, but is still a failure attempt.
**
After watching two Paul Verhoeven movies in a row in two days (Starship Troopers and Hollow Man), I'd like to report something: I'm sad. Paul Verhoeven is simply an unique director. In my opinion, one of the most gifted and talented science fiction directors of all times, a man who uses violence so artificially, that you believe even more on the craziness of the whole thing concerning a motion picture of his. After the big let-down that was Starship Troopers, I decided to rent and watch Hollow Man. What a waste.
The story is about a crew of scientists who are working on an experiment concerning the ability of making animals invisible. The complex has tons of laboratories with cages all the way to the end of a corridor, where they lock invisible animals, like dogs, monkeys, etc. When an experiment of making a gorilla invisible and then bringing it back to visible succeeds, we find the key to the madness in this movie. Kevin Bacon, the leader scientist in the project decides to test the serum in himself in order to change into a hollow man.
That's when the movie falls into an abyss. The rest of the crew, including Elizabeth Shue and Josh Brolin, after making the Kevin Bacon experiment a success, can't find a cure to make him visible again. Having the opportunity to create an amazing plot, where they would eventually find a cure and make this movie a much more intelligent motion picture, Hollow Man does the opposite. They can't find a cure perhaps because of the complex human DNA. Obviously the character of Kevin Bacon which besides his huge ambition, is a lovely character, goes mad and starts killing everyone.
What should be an intelligent suspense, became just a mindless bloody body count feature with no better premise after it self destructs. I'm hoping after all these years, Paul Verhoeven, which is a director I admire a lot, will come up with something better.
Starship Troopers (1997)
Silly Verhoeven movie, horrible follow-up to his previous movies.
*1/2
Starship Troopers is a big let-down from director Paul Verhoeven. It's not even a good science fiction movie, it's very silly most of the time. The movie doesn't open very masterfully, but it turns out even worse when it gets to the point that it intends. The story is about a society divided into two groups: citizens and civilians. In a futuristic world, citizens usually have more privileges than civilians. The very first scene of the movie describes perfectly what's the main difference between the two classes. So far so good. What does it take to be a citizen? You have to join the military forces.
This is a perfect example of a movie which begins interesting (although you feel very unsafe about what's going to happen next) and self destructs completely later on. The characters (although I loved Clancy Brown!!) one more stupid than the other, go on a voyage to a military system where they'll begin training. When they hear of an alien threat that may destroy the planet Earth they go on war with the aliens. Casper Van Dien and Denise Richards look like two children on a mission to save the world, how fun!! It wasn't their performances, I guess, but their roles which dragged them down to kiss the floor.
The aliens themselves are actually quite interesting. They're pretty huge bugs with deadly arms & legs which will give the movie a little sample of gore. The special effects are also stunning! But the main problem here is the alien planet itself. It's just a simple desert with lightened skies and sand everywhere. Before watching this movie, I always thought its story was told on earth.
Science fiction movies which explore other planets must be innovative. They must show us something completely different than everything else we once saw or learned in order to be believable as a place light-years of distance from where we are. If a science fiction movie can't deliver that, for me, it's just lack of good imagination. Starship Troopers can't decide whether it is a serious movie or a humorist one. Those commercials are just plain stupid, giving a funny mood to the movie, taking away its credits of being a masterpiece.
Paul Verhoeven is a great director though. Working with him may be very fun, because he's a really crazy man on set. He directed some classics before like RoboCop, Total Recall and Basic Instinct. I haven't seen Showgirls yet, but since he won the award for worst director for that movie (at the Razzie Awards Ceremony), I don't surprise myself so much by knowing this movie was just so uncreative. His next movie, Hollow Man is another big let-down. Read my review about it!
Wo de fu qin mu qin (1999)
Beautiful !!!!!!
**** out of ****
First of all, I'd like to say that there are simply not enough words to describe who beautiful this movie is. I'll tell you! It seems it even has life! Ziyi Zhang plays Zhao Di in this film, a lovely character, one of the most captivating characters I've seen in a motion picture. What she does in this masterpiece is equally to what an angel would do! Zhang Yimou is simply a great director. He created this story which is told in the present time in black and white and in the past in color. Perhaps he wanted to say that it was much more lively to watch the Zhao Di screening-time (the past) rather then the Yusheng screening-time (the present). But since we are talking about Zhang Ziyi, she's a lovely girl who would do everything for a person. She doesn't show love habits in this film, she displays it like it's real. You really believe her. Sure this movie was what made her a real star!
She meets the new teacher of the village she lives in. And falls in love with him right away. What's interesting in this movie, is that it never shows both of them together. They're always apart from each other. That makes you really down. And gets even worse. This is a true drama. And you keep cheering for them never stopping.
The present time tough (on black and white) tells the story from the point of view of Yusheng, her son! Here, the teacher, who later married Di and lived with her until his death, died and Di wants her son to help him carry the body of his father from the city back to the village. And there begins another crying story (which now will make you twice as down) that tells us about the concept of the movie title. The Road Home. What is it? It's another great thing, for sure. Chinese culture is heaven.
From all of those Chinese movies i watched: The Road Home, Chrouching Tiger Hidden Dragon, Hero, House Of Flying Daggers and Memoirs of a Geisha (well, this one is American, but at least the cast is still Chinese), the one I liked best is The Road Home. Maybe tied with Memoirs. I will still write reviews for the other ones, but keep this in mind: this movie is really beautiful and you must watch it! It's a true art! Congratulations, Mr. Zhang!
Edit: After reading another IMDb's user comment for this film, I forgot to say what matters most. Ziyi, in this one, looks prettier than any of her future roles. You must watch this movie in order to start liking her. It's perfect.
Walk the Line (2005)
Great biography movie !
**** out of ****
I was really doubtful concerning my vote for Walk The Line. Should it be 9 or 10? Then I realized there was no reason at all for me to rate it with a 9. This is a perfect love story. There are moments you really feel bad about this movie, scenes which you wish shouldn't be as they are. But that's what's so good about it! You cheer for Johnny, even though it's bad that wrong steps are made throughout the path. But the title synchronizes perfectly with the ending.
This movie is even greater when there is the fact that you may not have listened to Johnny Cash songs yet. I, myself, just listened to two songs: "Ring Of Fire" (I only listened to that one because of the movie trailer) and "The Wanderer", a song which Johnny recorded with U2 in the album Zooropa. My only regret for Johnny's songs is that somehow they look all the same. The rhythm is always the same! There was this song I found remarkable, written by June Carter, "Time's A Wasting". Perhaps the best song in the movie for me.
This movie is a story. You listen to Johnny's songs in it, but it's a story. And you don't really have to KNOW Johnny Cash in order to appreciate this movie the right way. For last, Phoenix and Witherspoon performances are simply great! Both of them! I really hope they do win the Oscar! At least, just Reese! Also James Mangold is a gifted director. I watched Girl, Interrupted, and must say: both movies are great! Walk The Line far surpasses Girl, which I rated 9.
Johnny's life story is really a story to tell in a movie! It's a shame it hasn't been nominated for best picture, but I haven't seen the nominees yet! Watch this movie with your heart! It's beautiful!
Contact (1997)
Do you believe in aliens? I do !
**** out of ****
The reason I like sci-fi movies better than fantasy movies (two of the genres which most tells fictional stories) is that the sci-fi movies gives us a vision of the future. It may be about how the world will look like a few years from now or what are we doing at the moment which will result in something even bigger in the future. Contact follows that pattern.
Jodie Foster plays Eleanor Arroway, most of the time, called Ellie. Her character is simply amazing, she's a scientist who, since childhood developed interest in the search for extra-terrestrial intelligence and communications. To see her working is a delight. I find it really an art to study the outer space, listening to sounds in earphones and marking stars as already checked and negative as a result for alien search.
While she meets Palmer Joss, played by Matthew McCounaughey, a theology student, writer and believer of God's existence itself, the movie show us a conflict between science and religion from the point of view of the two characters, since she believes only in science, while he believes in god, but also thinks science is important, although not at a point where you might give your life for it. This movie reminds me a lot of the Dan Brown novel, Angels & Demons. It's about a discovery made by Ellie, concerning life outside our planet. The story unfolds really amazing. Director Robert Zemeckis is one of my favorites. The ending though might surprise people in an unexpected way.
I recommend it to any sci-fi freak. This movie is a-must-see.
PS.: just for knowledge, I BELIEVE IN LIFE OUTSIDE OUR PLANET.
Ondskan (2003)
Greatly developed, this foreign movie makes you cheer for the good guy!
***1/2 out of ****
If I ever was a bad guy in school nowadays or a victim of those bad guys, it surely wouldn't have the same impact as if I was studying in a 1950's school. At first, I hated Ondskan. Probrably meaning "evil" in Swedish, the foreign movie, nominated for best foreign film in 2004, tells us the story of a boy who lives in that environment. A environment where boys and girls were divided and there were severe punishment for those who refused to obey some orders.
At first, I hated this movie, because it felt too unreal. Just like the Brazilian TV Series, "Malhação", where we get to see some students in a present-day school act themselves like they're in a fantasy school, Ondskan does almost the same. This unreality is due to the senior students who punish other students for no apparent reason, just for fun, but then, you remember you're watching a movie about a 1950's policy.
After having had many fights all over his life (improving his skill in that), Erik Ponti (Andreas Wilson) takes his last chance to move to the next grade. If he fails, he won't pass. He falls victim to some senior students who just want to make fun of other students, maybe because they like the use of power.
This movie is good, reminding sometimes a lot of Dead Poets Society, but this one is much more rough. My only regret throughout the movie, even though its development was good is that Erik should have been with the girl. But the letter he gets returned to himself suggests that this movie might have a happy ending, after all.
The Matrix Revolutions (2003)
Why Revolutions IS a great movie!
**** out of ****
The Matrix Revolutions is the final chapter in the saga created by the Wachowski brothers and I must say I am very happy by being completely satisfied by watching it.
While the previous two movies relied more inside the virtual "matrix" world, the third installment takes place almost all the time at the real world. Good? Bad? No. Not even close. It's perfect! There aren't too much fight scenes in this movie, this time it's more like a war between the machines and the Zion defense army. How this was done was masterfully done, by letting us see the sentinels invading the docks, characters showing differences of opinions about how they should defend the city, and the best of all: Neo returning to the source.
For many, this may feel to much like a fantasy story, but you have to see that the matrix movies are a fantasy story. By imagining a futuristic world where the horizon is fully populated by robotic buildings, dark lightning-striking skies, an underground city and a virtual world where you defy the rules and laws of physics, Larry and Andy really created such a fantastic sci-fi trilogy.
It wouldn't be the same if this movie had been done the same way as the other two... it had to innovate, to show something different, to focus on what hasn't been yet and all the events in it: the death of Neo and Trinity, Neo returning to the source, the machines and humans peace agreement, the conversation between the oracle and the architect, the defeat of Agent Smith, everything was great! The ending might have lacked something, but still, this is my all-time favorite sci-fi trilogy.
The Matrix Reloaded (2003)
A more inside look into the Matrix.
**** out of ****
The Matrix Reloaded follows the story that The Matrix told us back in 1999 and it's the first part of a single 3-4 hours movie (with The Matrix Revolutions). This movie entertained me just as much as the first one did and if the Wachowski brothers had to die tomorrow, they'd still be remembered only for the matrix.
In the second movie, we get to see with much more details the greatness of the futuristic world. Set underground, near the earth's core, where the heat is much more high, the human race has managed to build a world I haven't seen in any other movie yet. There are other worlds which resemble a little. The futuristic world of Chrono Trigger (1995) (VG), for example, where you get to see in every sight possible, everything destroyed and the only remains where the humans may still refugee themselves are inside old domes.
The main difference between this movie and the next one is that this one focuses a little more on the matrix than the real world and Revolutions does the opposite. For that, many may have disliked the movie, stating that it was less interesting than the others. But the story was almost complete except for one thing: the end of the war must be shown in every way it can be. If the matrix movies focused only on the matrix world and less on the real world, it wouldn't be the same thing. Revolutions saves the trilogy brilliantly.
The Wachowski brothers have done it again. The sequels features new characters, more plot improvement, great special effects and many surprises. I loved it!
The Matrix (1999)
A great sci-fi movie, that maybe almost matches Star Wars.
**** out of ****
What a fantastic movie this one is! I'm so amazed at how the Wachowski Brothers were able to imagine such a creative science-fiction world like this one, probably the most fictitious, unbelievable, strange, yet, interesting futuristic world I've seen in a movie. Perhaps I became even more fascinated with this futuristic world than the computer-generated dream world that is the matrix. The way the story is told is simply brilliant! I can't believe this hasn't even been nominated for a "best screenplay" written directly for the screen award, but never mind.
For me, this might be the next Star Wars. Many will disagree with me, complaining that Star Wars is much more classic, but the Matrix is a huge achievement in science fiction film-making.
I really enjoy these post-apocalyptic movies where some kind of disaster has changed humankind's fate forever and now, it's up to them to fight in order to survive in a much more life-challenging world. In The Matrix, people now live miles and miles below the ground, near the earth's core, because the surface is all controlled by machines. Inventive, isn't it? The Matrix is the finest example of how good writing can really create worlds.
Legend (1985)
Ridley Scott: one of my favorite directors. Legend: one of his worst movies.
** out of ****
It's because of the fact that Legend is so weird, weird to a point of even being misunderstood (my case, for example), that makes this movie, one of the least spotted to gather the family and watch a true spectacle. And that is even weirder to have as a conclusion to it, since the movie is directed by Ridley Scott, director of classics such as Alien, Blade Runner and Gladiator. Unfortunately, after the success of Alien and Blade Runner, it wasn't this time that Scott proved himself once again author of another masterpiece. This fantasy movie can get a little confusing, since we don't really know how to absorb it.
The cast includes actors such as Tim Curry, Tom Cruise and Mia Sara, mainly. There are credits also for David Bennent, who plays Gump, the leader of the forest group which gathers the protectors of the unicorns.
The movie tells the tale of a prince of darkness, lord of evil, who cannot live under the effects of the sunshine of the dawn. He commands his goblin slaves to destroy the unicorns living in the forest, beings that contain so much power, that "one could rule the universe with it".
We meet the main characters, Jack (Tom Cruise) and Lili (Mia Sara), he, a young warrior, who there's not much to tell, since the movie can't explore the main character in a significant way, she, the princess of the kingdom which rules the region, visits the houses of the forest, where she meets her friends, poor residents of the place, who inspire sympathy for her, as she is sweet and of good heart. These are the actors who almost don't have a job in here. Sometimes, seems like guilt of those bad elaborated productions of the 80's. Some actors play so insignificant roles that we even think we're staring at mannequins. That's well shown, in the scene where Lili enters the room and finds a man on a sleep. No, he doesn't have any lines on the movie, only snoring.
Legend could be a much more interesting movie, if we could see beyond what we actually can, a horizon with borders not so distant, limited by sets that almost look like theater stages like forests without skies, the inside of caves and castles and swamps with such concentrated fog that even the actors might have had difficulties walking through it. We could have seen the princess' castle, the dining room with the king and queen, we could learn more about the characters. That's what the movie, mainly, lacked.
On to some other characters. Blix, one of the lord of evil's goblins, captures one of the unicorns, one of them falls victim of his own horn's cut. It is part of a sacrifice done by the lord of darkness in order to eliminate light once and for all so that he can become immortal. The trailer almost convinces. Looks like we're dealing with a movie that will present us a truly living hell, sinister and dark as the spaceship Nostromo or as the constantly nocturne city of 2019's Los Angeles. But no. In the beginning of the movie, there are thousands of musical scenes, practically, all of them, uneven. The unicorns are captured and Jack and friends must go to the lord of evil's castle, find a way to destroy him, rescue the princess and save the unicorns. But almost nothing of what happens on screen is acceptable. Jack finds a gear composed of a sword and an armor in the middle of nowhere. Thank god if a had that same luck and have found a bullet-proof vest in the middle of a gunfighting.
When Lili meets the prince for the first time, she doesn't convince, making it clear that her character can't control her emotions, once she smiles, once she cries, a completely artificial performance. Brown Tom and Screwball are other two characters who are so clumsy, that have a horrible synchronization between them. Oona is a fairy who doesn't know if she must helps or if she bothers. In a scene where our heroes get trapped in a dungeon cell, she refuses to set them free just because of a kiss that Cruise denied giving her. Two seconds later, she is opening the doors. The flaws go on forever.
Credits go only to make-up and art direction/set decorations categories, which are perfect as always. The special effects are forgivable, but it is only with Gladiator and Kingdom Of Heaven that Ridley Scott proves he has the talent to direct an epic movie.
Lord of War (2005)
One Of Cage's best movies!
**** out of ****
Let me tell you that this movie is one of the best I've seen this year. Nicolas Cage is a great actor and he's the type of performer who for me is one of the best: just the ones who can act expressing themselves in a very convincing way, not only by facial expressions or body language, but also by very strong lines throughout the entire movie. His narration is amazing. He plays Yuri Orlov, an arms dealer, who although risks his life very often (he travels to many distant and dangerous places including many locations from the east lands and even finds himself locked up in a room with two hookers, with no rubber and in a country where 25% of the people is infected with AIDS), is lucky at being good at it, since he gains money, has a beautiful wife and a son.
Like said before, most of the film is narrated by Cage. Even by paying attention to the self limit, it's not possible to absorb all of the great lines in this movie, and I must say I need to watch it again, however I won't pay to go to the theaters again, I'll wait it on DVD... The movie is about the life of an arms dealer, the difficulties of it, the advantages of a life like his own, consequences, and most important thing of all: not only a visionary movie about weapons, wars, injustice and etc., but, at the same time, a masterpiece of a protest, like a slap on the faces of the government people, or even, as the beginning of the movie suggests, a bullet in the head.
The cast includes actors like Jared Leto, who plays Orlov's brother, who, although is not an arms dealer like his older brother, do other acts in the movie that helps us see another point of view, which is very interesting, since we don't get bored just with the main plot of the movie. Bridget Moynahan plays Cage's wife in a much better role than hers in I, Robot (not that it means it was bad, not at all) and Ian Holm, who I admire since the good old times of Alien.
For people who didn't like the movie (like I checked on the IMDb's forum, this movie is for people who pay attention, have good tastes in movies' genres, not for people who aren't grown enough to see this movie's qualities yet).
Kingdom of Heaven (2005)
Watch Gladiator instead.
**1/2 out of ****
I could easily rate even lower this movie. Sincerely, Kingdom Of Heaven is not, by any means, the follow-up that Gladiator deserved. That movie was a true masterpiece, and it seems that other epic movies are great also, but none of them matches what's Gladiator. In Ridley Scott's newer epic movie, Orlando Bloom stars as the leading character, the hero Balian, the new baron of Ibelin. What moves this movie is his quest to reach the holy lands, Jerusalem and there find forgiveness for his sins, those of his wife and also (there had to come to that, obviously) to protect the people of that place by fighting their enemies.
The movie takes place in the 12th century France. There is raging a war between christians and muslims, historical fact which defines how Kingdom Of Heaven should be. First, to begin this review, I must say that watching it for the second time made me feel a little better, but not completely. The movie is very well made, shot, produced and directed. It may be nominated for a very good couple of academy awards. But the low points of the movie seem to be the very same of those of Ridley Scott's 1992's 1492 : Conquest Of Paradise, starring Gerard Depardieu, where he plays Christopher Columbus, in a quest to discover for the first time the American lands. Scott shows for most of the time, fights between the two opposite sides, forgetting that sometimes he must center some attention in the characters of the movie.
Gladiator showed many different scenes. It began with the last of the fights of a war, continued shooting fighting scenes on a coliseum and centered its attention on Maximus, the guy who Russel Crowe plays. We know that Maximus' main objective is to avenge his wife and son, but also there's the story centered on Lucius, Commodus, Proximo, all characters have a goal in the movie. We learn about each of them and the movie becomes much more interesting. That leads to the viewers of the movie to cheer for Maximus and pray that Commodus gets a very deserved death.
In Kingdom Of Heaven, the characters disappear like a flash of light. Tiberias (Jeremy Irons) says he'll be headed to a different direction than of Balian's. Sibylla (most pretty girl Eva Green) is kicked in the butt by Balian when she tries to make it up with him when he says that a soul of a man cannot be sold. And it's a little confusing to know what actually happens to Guy (Marton Csokas). Is that his head next to Reynald's (Brendan Glessom) after Saladin (Ghassan Massoud) slashes his throat? Green keeps staring at Balian most of the time through a window room, completely speechless of anything. At least Connie Nielsen in Gladiator has a much better role, as she is one of Commodus victims.
I hate movies with those low points, but since I love Ridely Scott, I shall be a little fair with him. I guess that his best qualities, tough, as a director lies in development of other movies like Alien, Blade Runner and Gladiator.
Torque (2004)
The action sequences are spectacular... but many, many things doesn't make sense...
**1/2 out of ****
Torque has its moments. Moments of great action sequences, including at most of the time, motorcycle chase sequences. At the beginning of the movie, there is a slight feel of a Mad Max world, but with bikes, instead of cars, and in present time. Unfortunately, it ends there. The plot is quite good also, but the acting is a little weird. I'll start right off from the beginning.
Ford (Martin Hendersen) is a bike repairer and driver. He works with the beautiful Shane (Monet Mazur), well, at least, used to. Until the time that he finds drugs inside the bike of the leader of a motorcycle gang, the Hellions, Henry, played by Matt Schulze. What happens here, is that Ford was already been chased by the federals, because they once thought (and keep the idea) that he's a drug dealer. The only way that Ford can prove his innocence is to show the federals Henry's bike along with the drugs (I forgot the name of it).
Well, the flaws begin here. Ford could easily report Henry to the federals, but, first, he needs to get to the bike and the drugs. Without doing it, he can't prove anything. Makes sense. But the acting is terrible! When the Hellions kill the brother of Trey (Ice Cube), one of the members, Henry's girlfriend presents herself to the police as a witness of the crime scene, reporting Ford as the killer. So the federals begin chasing him. He can't report Henry without the proof that he needs. But as an action movie of many, many absurd stunts, the actors seem to perform like they were in a fantasy world.
Ford shows no fear driving bikes. He may be a professional in it, but as he gets the so called Y2K at the end of the movie, the so called faster bike ever, it can go from 0 to 200 km/h in 10 seconds, even there, he shows no fear in driving. Henry's girlfriend, the witness of the crime scene, has face expressions that lie 100% to what she says about Ford. No witness would testify like her, but hey, this is an action movie! Woo!! And Trey doesn't show almost nothing at all of regret or anger for his brother's loss. The only thing that the makers of this movie seemed to care for was to shoot the action stunts, kill the bad guy and end this movie as quick as possible. (It doesn't run even 90 min).
This might be fun watching, but it is nothing compared to the real action movies, like James Bond's, or Schwarzenneger's or Bruce Willis' or many others, which run longer (this is not necessary, but opens doors for a more detailed, richer plot), have greater plots and, most of all, greater performances as well. I liked watching Torque. But there are many other better action movies out there.
Lost in Translation (2003)
Puaba! Puaba! Puaba!
**** out of ****
I wasn't even going to write reviews anymore. Reviews are written in order for us to register our thoughts, and for those who haven't seen the movie or have, to read our reviews and make conclusions to whether they agree or not. Lost In Translation is a movie that must have a review written for it.
I can't deny that I rented this only because of Scarlett Johansson. I already knew that Sophia Coppola won the Oscar award for writing directly for the screen, already knew this was a good movie, but got it just because of her. And I must say... she's gorgeous in this movie. I disagree 100% with those who say that her rusty voice sucks and that she's a horse faced with big lips. I find nothing wrong with all of that at all. She's the most cute girl I have ever seen! Those Japanese girls next to her for me were the same as men. But I have been very delighted at the end of this movie, because it was great.
The story is about a girl named Charlotte, played by Scarlett, who travels to Tokyo, Japan, with her husband John (Giovanni Risbi), because he's a photographer and he's traveling on business and since she doesn't have anything important to do without him, she goes with him. But loneliness announce itself with doubts and sadness as she gazes at the buildings of Tokyo, alone at her room... lost in translation. Scarlett is exactly in this movie as I always imagined her to be. A delicate person, with a rusty, but beautiful voice, simple and beautiful, only wearing her underwear lying on her bed, decorating the room and hurting her foot. Even when Anna Faris (Kelly) introduces herself on a scene where she meets the John and Charlotte couple, there's a huge difference on personality, beauty and presence between herself and Scarlett. By the time Kelly goes away and Charlotte starts talking, rusty voice and all, the boring and stubborn girl has just gone and the angel started speaking.
Well, if I'm about to just talk about Scarlett throughout this entire review, I won't get to the movie itself. So, here it is. Charlotte meets a man, an actor, Bob Harris, played by Bill Murray. (I personally prefer much more the dramatic and serious Bill rather than the comedian one of the past). Both of the characters are alone in Tokyo, meet themselves and then begins a relationship between the two like no other you could imagine. The locations of the shootings are beautiful. The soundtrack is perfect! Sophia Coppola in the behind the scenes section of the DVD, Lost On Location, is also gorgeous, beautiful, talented and fun. Lost In Translation is a movie like very few others. A unique masterpiece. Quite difficult to put all the words here. Looks like I'm lost too....
PS.: I cried the two times I saw this movie. The ending is very sad, as we know that the goodbyes can be very hard. Specially when you're saying goodbye to a wonderful person you met... and also, someone you might never meet again...
Alien Resurrection (1997)
The weakest chapter of the saga.
Alien : Ressurrection (1997) by Alan Sampaio
* out of ****
This movie is deadly awful. First, the worst thing they could have ever done: to resurrect Ripley. Ripley's dead, man! Why resurrect her only to make another movie? Money, anyone? Great possibility. At least, they could have cloned her, but stay with her personality of the past, the great, powerful, kick-ass Lt. Ellen Ripley. But they changed the character completely! Now Ripley's more humorous, smiling all the time, giving us an idea that she's enjoying what's happening around her. And to kill an alien is as funny as it is to kill a monster in a video game for her. Bad consequences? The movie lost all the true alien elements from the previous movies: horror, suspense, fear emanating from the characters, all the essence of the alien movies has gone. And even Alien³ was too, an awful chapter in the quadrilogy, at least, Ripley still has Sigourney Weaver's great performance on her side. Weaver really did a horrible job, playing Ripley in Alien : Ressurrection, and that's a shame and at the same time, funny, since she was nominated for best actress in a leading role for Aliens (1986). And there's still people who think that this movie is "not great as the others, but still good". I don't believe it. This movie sucks in every way.
I haven't watched other Jean-Pierre Jeunet movies yet. But if you consider this one, the others must be a disaster. (Or maybe not, because in every artist, there are high and low points). But to insert humor elements in a horror/science fiction saga must have been the idea of a god! Ron Pearlman plays Johner, one of the few great characters in the movie. His presence on screen would be much better, had the movie sustained horror and dark elements from the previous movies. His performance is great, but why kill a spider with a gun and kiss Vriess in the mouth? Must be that god-idea thing. The rest of the cast includes Winona Ryder, Michael Wincott, Gary Dourdan, Brad Dourif and some others. They make a very good list of great actors, but some roles in this movie are pathetic! The action of the movie is quite good, but with no horror elements, like the ones we see in Aliens. When the creatures sneak in the complex right at the end of the movie, when all lights go out and all we see is a red light, we notice how the characters are frightened. They shoot, while at the same time shouting like they'd really die right there. But in A:R, it seems fun to kill aliens. I wonder why they didn't do that Luke Skywalker thing in Episode IV, when Luke and Han are escaping from the death star and fighting some ships in outer space: "Ha ha! I got them!"
The story might be good, but is completely unnecessary and added nothing to the saga. Breed more aliens using human victims. Then they escape, and... let's hunt some buggies! And, also, the special edition DVD added nothing interesting and I even dare say that it's become even worse than the original version. That beginning credits where the title appears? What the hell was that bug, being squashed by that guy? And the ending was much worse than the original. The dialog's is almost the same, but this time, Ripley and Call actually land on earth. I preferred much more the original where we only see the skies from a high height.
I really do hope they don't make another alien movie. Because the truly good ones were only the first two.
Hannibal (2001)
Nice sequel, but much inferior to the silence of the lambs.
*** out of ****
I wouldn't become bothered at all if this movie has never been released. The Silence Of The Lambs already showed us everything. The characters that are Hannibal Lecter and Clarice Starling, the great performances of Foster and Hopkins and... Buffalo Bill. Hannibal didn't manage to give us a story in the same level or higher than the Silence's. Hannibal is very less frightening than he truly is in the first movie. (Actually, the first one is Manhunter, but I'm talking about those which have Hopkins in the cast). And Starling, now played by Julianne Moore is also less intriguing.
I love the Ridley Scott movies, I won't deny this. But this is one of his few disappointing works. In Hannibal there isn't much character development, instead, the movie takes too much time on characters trying to find clues about where they can find Lecter. Moore listens to past recorded conversations with Lecter in headphones, a cop, played by Giancarlo Giannini, sits in front of his computer, believing that he has already met Lecter in person. And there are other secondary characters, partners of Giancarlo, who do whatever must be done in order to catch Lecter. And, also, there is a guy named Mason Verger, played by Gary Oldman.
The movie, itself, is based on a plot where Verger wants Lecter captured in order to torture him, like he never could believe, because of a personal vendetta. This is a good story, but no match to the silence of the lambs. I wasn't too shocked either about the brain scene. For me, at most of times, what really counts for a scene to be shocking, is that there must be suffering. When Liotta has his head cut open and eats his own brain, there's no suffering at all, only gore. This might be nasty and shocking too, but not as shocking as Catherine Martin trying to climb that well, screaming desperately, or Marvin Nash, the tortured cop in Reservoir Dogs, when he's groaning like hell.
Hannibal is a nice movie to watch, not a bad sequel at all. Its only problem might have been that it simply is a sequel to one of the most successful movies ever made, a best picture motion picture, and it's hard to get to the same level, but it's worth watching it, anyway.
The Silence of the Lambs (1991)
Few movies need few words like The Silence Of The Lambs.
**** out of ****
Awesome would say it all. This movie is brilliant as it shows two actors in great performances like Anthony Hopkins and Jodie Foster. But these two have become so overrated, that we even, sometimes, may forget the others from the great cast, like Ted Levine, Anthony Heald and Brooke Smith, all of them in great performances. I tried to watch this movie for the second time without anything nearby disturbing me like sounds, phone conversations and lights turning on and off. Glad I am as those things didn't happen the first time I watched it, so I could absorb the movie quite well. In conditions like that, I became completely frozen when I saw Hannibal Lecter for the first time, on screen, standing up, still, in that green prisoner outfit, in his prison cell, saying only "Good Morning".
Well, Hopkins has proved himself he can deliver quite a good performance, whether he stands still or not, whether he's silence of not. The movie features many brilliant scenes like Lecter's escape from his cell in the police department, his conversations with Agent Clarice Starling and the breathtaking few scenes of Catherine Martin screaming for being held hostage by the never ending sinister psychopath, Buffalo Bill, played by Levine.
The Silence Of The Lambs' plot is one many people might already know. But this review, of course, like all my others, are intended to be read by people who have already watched the movie. Foster goes on an assignment to meet Hannibal Lecter and take from him clues in order to catch the assassin. But Lecter gives Starling the chance for them to perform the "quid pro quo", which suggests that whenever he gives her information, she will have to tell him about her life. This makes character developing take place in most of the entire movie.
This won 5 Oscars, as I think it deserved. The only thing I didn't like in it was when Foster withdrew her pistol in order to arrest Buffalo Bill, as she did it very slow, a minus for a winning performance like Foster's. But that's the only bad thing about this movie. What counts is the presence of professional people like Foster, Hopkins, Smith, Levine, and of course, the director Jonathan Demme.
The Island (2005)
If you can get past some stuff...
***1/2 out of ****
This might be a fun movie, if you get past some things. For example, in the beginning of it, you may not like much, since it's a completely rip-off of George Lucas' THX-1138 (1971) where there's also a controlled society living in an underground city, with more rules than privileging, and everyone is dressed on white. I like to think that this wasn't an imitation of THX at all, but a remake of the movie, at the same time, with the originality of a new movie. People might think that Michael Bay wanted to do exactly what George Lucas didn't in THX, and that we find out not too late. There's even a scene where we see Ewan McGregor and Sean Bean in a room where Bean is the spiritual and medical helper of McGregor considering his dislodgement of some of the rules in the establishment.
The Island is a movie which has high influences on science fictions movies such as THX-1138 (1971), Blade Runner (1982) and even The Matrix (1999). It gets some of the ideas of each of these movies, but adds others too. That's what saved the movie. I must say also that I liked a lot McGregor and Johansson... together. Not performances as somewhat to win an Oscar, but they make a nice couple throughout the movie. The story goes as a society living in an underground city (same thing as THX), where people who live there are monitored everywhere (even in their rooms). Men can't have their rooms in the same sector as the womens'. There's a proximity limit for a man and a woman to obey and in some scenes when Ewan and Scarlett are almost kissing each other, a guard comes nearby and separates them. They live there, because there has been a contamination in the outside world and when they're brought in, they are treated the same way as of The Matrix's, when they're released from a cocoon bag or something like that and start to "breathe" for the first time. But everything is just a lie made up by the people who control those who live there. They're actually clones of original people who live in the outside world. They are made up, because when a person needs to make a transplant of something, they will need the clones. This is a truly brand new idea in a science fiction movie and The Island scores big in that.
In order to like this movie, you must be patient. Don't get frustrated too much on the many, many bizarre action sequences of the movie, or you may dislike it. Specially the one that involves a building and an "R". The rest of the cast includes Djimon Hounson, Michael Clarke Duncan and Steve Buscemi in a role most like the others typical of him. His funniest line might be: "Just because you wanna know from where the hamburgers came from, doesn't mean you wanna meet the cow". There's a scene involving him and Ewan and Scarlett and there's a dialog exactly the same from one of Blade Runners'. As I said. The Island has many influences on other movies. But as long as it has something new to present, it won't be considering by some as a +1 in the sci-fi genre.
Ned Kelly (2003)
If you don't have anything useful to do, it might be fun watching it.
**1/2 out of ****
On the other hand, wouldn't you prefer trying to find something better? Because Ned Kelly isn't any kind of masterpiece, but it's fun. Even so, there are many other better movies. The movie takes place in Australia, 1871. We immediately get to know how Ned's life (he's played, masterfully, by Heath Ledger) is full of bad luck. I usually hate this type of bad guys like the ones we find in Ned Kelly. The Victorian police. All they do is cheat on Ned's family, specially the one called Fitzpatrick. In the beginning of the movie, Ned's arrested because he stole a horse. But he's not arrested like "hey, you're under arrest. If you have anything to say, then say it at the police station". No. It's sort of like "hey, you're under arrest, now, get down on your knees because I'll punch you the whole day".
Other of those situations happens a lot and because of that, as some sort of personal vendetta in response to this treatment, Ned says, he and his brother, Dan Kelly (played by Laurence Kinlan) plus three of their friends, Aaron (Joel Edgerton), Joe Byrne (Orlando Bloom) and Steve Hart (Phil Barantini) must become outlaws. They start robing banks, killing police officers and practicing with guns. Unlike "Monster" (2003) where we see Aileen Wuornos aka. Lee (Charlize Theron) murdering people in the streets, almost all that Ned and his friends do in the movie is repetitive. Lee murders people, but at each murder, a developing of the character starts to co-exist within the movie, one of the main reasons of why to join this movie so damn much! But in Ned Kelly, Ned robbers banks and in two of them, he makes the same speech. "Any of you can shoot us down and not be charged by it, no questions asked". No character developing. Not much, at least.
There are many other scenes which should be cut from the movie. There was no apparent reason for Aaron to be a traitor. He wasn't a bad guy at all. He dies in the movie all of a sudden by a shot of Joe. Geoffrey Rush is good in this movie, but has very little presence on screen. In a movie like this, he actually didn't need much of it, let's admit it. And Naomi Watts, my favorite from the cast (she's beautiful like hell and what a performance in The Ring!) fades away from it. Overall, Ned Kelly has its great performances, specially by Ledger and great landscapes too. But something lacked. As the movie ended and the credits began to roll, all I could just enjoy was the ending theme song, "Shelter For My Soul" which is not only a good song, but a sad one too, just like this movie.