CoenHead's Reviews

The Trip (I) (2010)

1/10

13 April 2012

If you are going to make a dialogue piece, here's a clue - make the dialogue interesting. Make the actors interesting. Sadly, this film does none of that. Worse, the actors spend the most time doing an Oxford literary circle jerk. What we're left with is two pompous jackasses, firmly (and utterly mistakenly) convinced of their own genius, and others' inferiority. They are not likable, nor interesting. In fact, they are intolerable.

Now I'll discuss some more of the technical aspects of the film. While there are occasionally brilliant set pieces of landscape, nearly all of the film containing the actors is either out of focus or poorly lit (or both). There are innumerable continuity errors, such as shadows or highlights that appear and disappear randomly, and whoever claims credit for editing this movie should never be allowed in a studio again.

If you are not an insomniac, avoid this movie. If, on the other hand, you have difficulty sleeping, this film will be manna from heaven.

8 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Puccini for Beginners (2006)

1/10

Pretentious twattle

23 March 2009

Yes, we get it. Lesbianism is in. It's way cool and hip.

Thing is, it doesn't make for good movies. And when an entire film is centered upon a self-absorbed lesbian's facile and pointless introspection on her lesbianism, it takes the reasonably intelligent viewer about fifteen seconds to know that spending even another fifteen seconds upon the movie is fifteen seconds wasted. The characters are the typical Manhattanite stereotypes, are acted amateurishly, and aren't the least bit interesting.

Rubbish - pretentious and insulting rubbish. Steer way clear unless you like to watch trash films just for the sake of watching trash films.

5 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End (2007)

1/10

Just a big-budget, old-fashioned mess

16 June 2007

Frankly, this movie isn't worth an in-depth review. It's twice as long as it needs to be, it's consumed by overly loud and unnecessary special effects, there are far too many characters, none of which are adequately delineated, and the plot is puerile and childish at best.

Jerry Bruckenheimer should be strung up by the ankles and stabbed to death with push pins for unleashing this three hours long bit of trash upon the world.

Oh...and Keira? You need to add about thirty pounds to your frame, young lady. You are painfully emaciated and in your current physical condition horribly unattractive.

5 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

God Said, 'Ha!' (1998)

God Said, 'Blah'

2 April 2004

I have nothing against Julia Sweeney personally. I'm sure that she's a nice enough woman and she seems to have at least the rudiments of intelligence. Sadly, though, she seems to possess no insight, not a smidgen of intellectual curiosity or achievement. Certainly she has no discernible sense of humor or wit.

This execrable film is incessantly dull. Ms. Sweeney's anecdotal remembrances from her and her brother's experience with cancer, are excruciatingly childish and unremarkable. It's difficult to imagine how someone could endure these events and yet be so lightly touched by them that in a film devoted to their retelling, the author can recall not one genuine moment of insight - not one interesting story to tell. Not a single moment of humor crosses this film's threshold.

What the audience is regaled with, instead, is a retelling of Ms. Sweeney's neuroses and fascination/obsession with idiotically minute, irrelevant, and soporific issues in her childhood and life. The idea, one presumes, is to transfer to the audience the idea that she has some incredible depth of character and emotion. However, quite the opposite is the result - what the audience comes to realize is that Julia Sweeney, even after being thrown into what should have been a cauldron of emotions resulting in significant insight, is simply incapable of understanding, much less communicating, anything of greater depth than wanting her parents to leave her apartment after her surgery.

This cloying, retchingly obvious and inane movie will make the intelligent viewer reach for the vomit bag within five minutes of the beginning.

1 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Lost in Translation (2003)

Great debut!

4 March 2004

Sofia Coppola, whilst certainly taking advantage of her family connections to get this movie made, certainly stands on her own in writing and directing it. It's an amazing character study of two complex individuals, who break all the Hollywood rules by NOT fornicating within ten minutes of meeting each other.

Instead, we actually are treated to an observation of a relationship evolving and the characters' lives changing as they interact and as their friendship changes each other's outlook and perception of their lives.

I've read numerous reviews below complaining that the movie is too long, that it moves too slowly, and that there's no plot. Well...for y'all who are motivated by that rubbish there is plenty produced by Hollywood which will fill the bill for you. Those of you "gotta have it now" folks who don't appreciate subtlety and nuance will never stand a chance of grasping the value of a film like this which respects its audience and doesn't force feed the story/characters like pablum to an infant.

Those of y'all interested in savoring a film with interesting characters who you haven't seen in every other Hollywood film, who are willing to take a movie on its own merits and just let it unfold, will find exceptional entertainment in this movie. I heartily recommend it.

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

Rosetta (1999)

1/10

Dreadful!!

24 February 2004

I'll be good and damned if I can discern any merit in this film - any aspect worthy of praise - hell - any part of the movie which shows that the filmmaker had even the slightest, most rudimentary knowledge of filmmaking or had even a fragment of a story to tell.

Only those who believe in the emperor's new clothes could possibly have anything positive to say about this most banal and pointless of movies - don't waste your time on this film. If you see it coming up on IFC, go to the next channel - don't spend even a moment of your time on this horribly overwrought, overacted, poorly filmed, and poorly directed dreck.

7 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

The Brothers McMullen (1995)

What rubbish!

3 November 2002

I'm a fan of independent and low-budget films. I've seen quite a number of them, and I'm not necessarily put off by amateurish production quality, poor lighting & film quality, etc. - IF THE STORY AND CHARACTERS are there.

The Brothers McMullen has been lauded in indie-film circles for several years now. I've been meaning to see it for some time, and today did so. What I now can say with certainty is that all the buzz and hype around this film is utterly undeserved. The story is utterly banal, the characters are banal, thinly drawn and not just unsympathetic but entirely uninteresting and self-absorbed, and the "direction" childish. The camera and lighting is not just amateurish but seems nearly to be deliberately self-sabotaged.

Now let's get on to the illustrious Edward Burns - who has derived such attention and acclaim for this little "gem" of a film. In watching other films in which he appeared (Saving Private Ryan, 15 Minutes), I was struck by just how inexpressive, wooden and plastic-like his characters were. Yet he was said to be excellent in this film, so I tried to keep an open mind as I watched this film.

What did I discover? That Mr. Burns was no better in this film than he was in the others. I learned that Burns' sole talent is staring into the camera trying to pretend to convey meaning through his sad-sack eyes, yet he isn't capable of conveying ANYTHING - the man is essentially a mute when it comes to any sort of meaningful communication to the audience.

I can't imagine how any person watching this film could have come away with a positive impression of it - there simply isn't any part of it that I would recommend to anyone else. Give it a wide berth - don't waste your $3.95 renting this dreck at Blockbuster.

8 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Passed Away (1992)

There are many reasons to despise this film...

7 September 2002

And I certainly don't have time to go through them all. But the only reason one needs to avoid this movie is the ridiculous Chinese fire drill in the funeral procession - this scene is so bad, so mind-shatteringly stupid, that one wonders just how many IQ points he or she has lost as a result of watching it.

Passed Away isn't funny, it isn't interesting, and it certainly isn't believable. One can only wonder how such a horrible movie could have been made - it has easily the worst screenplay of any modern "comedy" I've seen in a long time.

1 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Shower (1999)

9/10

Just a wonderful story

27 August 2002

This film is moving without being sentimental - meaningful without being pretentious. It tells a simple story of a family in danger of falling apart as the encroachments of technology and an advancing society make the family-run business increasingly untenable.

The acting is wonderful - though none of us in the west are likely to have heard of these actors, we should have long ago - they play their characters with honesty and reverence - these are flawed characters, each with major weaknesses, but with such utter humanity and kindness that it's impossible not to become engaged in the story.

We need more films like this - we need more western filmmakers creating films such as this.

18 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Stir of Echoes (1999)

10/10

MUCH better than Sixth Sense

25 August 2002

There is an intelligence and honesty to "Stir of Echoes" that doesn't exist within "Sixth Sense" - the entire movie doesn't rest on a singular, easily deducible device either. It took me about thirty seconds to realize in "The Sixth Sense" that Bruce Willis' character was, in fact, a ghost - but in "Stir of Echoes" nothing is revealed ahead of its time.

There is a humanity and sincerity in the relationships as well - no stereotypical, strained single mom/difficult kid relationship like in "Sixth Sense", but in fact an honestly written and acted relationship with genuine tensions and joys and hardships.

Ileana Douglas deserves a special mention for a fantastic performance in a supporting role - as usual. What a wonderful, talented actress she is, and deserves to be more widely known - she can act rings around the Julia Roberts of the world.

22 out of 47 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Austin Powers in Goldmember (2002)

Lame

5 August 2002

The saying goes: "the third time's the charm", right? Well, certainly not in this case. There isn't a single riotous moment in this film - nary a chuckle. It's obvious that Myers is mining the Austin Powers franchise for every last shekel, yet obviously hasn't any fresh ideas to deliver in exchange.

Others have covered the plot, so I'll not get into this paltriness, but suffice to say that it's thin...by any standard. And the star turns are obnoxious. Hard to imagine that Mike Myers thought it would be a good idea to rip off the concept of Get Shorty, but indeed he did. I hope Elmore Leonard is getting his royalties - because they sure ripped his idea off.

Skip this rubbish - spend your money elsewhere and don't feed the Austin Powers beast - you'll get nothing in exchange except the vague realization that you've been violated - rather like being molested while you sleep.

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

Monkeybone (2001)

There are no words...

13 July 2002

If you found this movie in any way funny, amusing or engaging, run, don't walk to your nearest mental health service provider. It is as wretched a film as has been ever created. All involved should feel enormous shame in their participation in this rubbish.

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

Minority Report (2002)

If you've a brain, ignore this one (SPOILERS AHEAD)

22 June 2002

Warning: Spoilers

I'm astonished no one has mentioned the numerous flaws in logic in this film. I haven't read the Philip Dick novel, so cannot say whether he is to be blamed for them; however, that isn't really necessary. I'll take a second again to warn the dear reader that SPOILERS ARE AHEAD.

First of all, the foundation of the movie lies on the issue of the Pre-Crime department operating solely within the District of Columbia - the project is only a test and not nationwide, and certainly not worldwide. Well, riddle me this, Batman - how is it the Pre-Cogs ONLY have information about future murders only in DC? That seems, even in a movie that begs the intellect and imagination, rather fanciful and absurd - even childishly obtuse. You, the viewer, are expected to utterly disregard such a fundamental question.

Going a step beyond, it has been expected as part of the project that it would be expanded to a national project - yet the selection of the Pre-Cogs was shown to be a singular, non-recurrent event. Wouldn't the recruitment of more Pre-Cogs be needed? But the movie makes it clear that would be impossible. Spielberg is asking the viewer yet again to put his or her intellect and logic aside in order to make a simple plot point.

Another key scene in the movie is Anderton returning to the Pre-Crime Laboratory in order to extract Agatha's hidden Minority Report - this after having been revealed as the perpetrator of a future murder and on the run from the Pre-Crime unit. Admission to the Pre-Crime unit is secured by, among other things, a retinal scan of the person's eyes, so Cruise remembers to bring his previously extracted eyeballs with him (fortunately there is no such thing as decomposition in the future). Well now...beside giving Spielberg the chance to include a cheap stunt scene (Cruise chasing his escaped eyeballs as they roll down a ramp), this allows Cruise entry into the facility. Let's see...Cruise is on the run from the Pre-Crime Police, they are chasing him from a future murder....and DON'T TAKE HIM OFF THE ACCESS LIST FOR THE FACILITY??? HUH??????????? Why hasn't anyone mentioned such a childishly obvious problem in the logic and plausibility of this essential part of the plot?

I'll address one more gaping flaw in the film's logical structure. The movie rests on the idea that Cruise is an essentially good man framed in a future murder of someone who he does not know. Cruise is intelligent, and savvy, and the plot draws inexorably toward him chasing the person to prove his innocence. Didn't it occur to him to just STAY THE HELL AWAY from Les Crow??? He is even told to do so several times in the movie yet for reasons unexplained continues to pursue this person - HUH??????? Does Spielberg expect all of us to have been born on the same planet of mindlessness on which he was apparently born? Well, I for one wasn't. I'm surprised not to have read anyone offer these ridiculous holes in the movie's structure and premise. I guess people just refuse to watch movies that Spielberg directs critically any more.

And yes, the trademark sappy, over the top and absurd Spielberg happy ending is in full bloom in Minority Report.

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

Georgia (1995)

A bit about "Bobby"

22 June 2002

[[Her backup band was quite amazing though, the guy who played Bobby alone could have kept on carrying the band. He has a lovely voice.]]

That would be John Doe, of the infamous alternatrash band X. he is indeed a most talented man and the only reason to spend any time at all on this execrable waste of celluloid.

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

The Legend of Bagger Vance (2000)

Just as bad as "The Natural", and worse...

2 April 2002

What do you have when you take an absurd script, marry it with boring subject matter(sports, but not just sports, GOLF!!!!!!!!), and stiff, mannered acting and directing?

You get The Legend of Bagger Vance, a futile attempt to make golf, 1930's style, somehow seem interesting, mystical and worthwhile. Yawn...no....double yawn. This thing could put the world's biggest insomniac to sleep. Were it not for the pulchritude of Charlize Theron, this film would offer no redeeming values of any kind.

I found myself wishing to punch Matt Damon's lights out on repeated occasions - he is perhaps the worst famous actor working today - it is definitely a horse race between he and Keanu Reeves. Damon is probably going to be Redford's replacement as Hollywood's most overrated actor. He is stiff, not believable, and offers the worst southern accent I've heard since Melanie Griffith.

Why all the worship of this film? I have no idea - Redford just reworked the awful "Natural" script and placed the protagonist on a golf course instead - if any sport translates to film worse than baseball, it is golf!

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

The Laramie Project (2002 TV Movie)

1/10

What utter tripe

14 March 2002

This "film" is not worth commenting on. It is abysmal, it is pretentious beyond description, and its premise is offensive beyond belief - that the murder of a homosexual is in some manner more memorable and regrettable than the murder of anyone else. This utter waste of celluloid belongs in the circular file - don't waste your time.

15 out of 37 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Georgia (1995)

Good cripes amighty!!!!! This is an awful film!

9 February 2002

I read with effervescent amusement and disbelief the comments below. Jennifer Jason Leigh the best actress of the color film era? Goodness, where on EARTH are such judgments formed? From "Fast Times at Ridgmont High" ??? She is that rare actress who is unable to communicate either via verbal or nonverbal means - whatever drugs some of you folks might be on, send me some!

This is an unholy MESS of a movie - it has the worst of everything - a horribly written script, a plot with no point, a non-credible storyline and some of the most poorly drawn, stereotypical characters I've seen in a movie. Add to that hamfisted acting, labored directing and you have one royally screwed up-movie!

I think a few of the people below who have thrown laurels this movie's way would love to buy a suit of the emperor's new clothes - rare is the movie that comes along which is as pointless, vapid and obnoxious as this one.

6 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Project Greenlight (2001–2023)

I love this series!!

5 February 2002

I've never seen anything like this before - where the making of a movie is unmasked from start to finish. We see it all - warts, nose hair, the works, all the interesting behind-the-scenes stuff which you really don't get a taste of otherwise unless you are actually in the production side of the movie business, and HBO and the Project Greenlight staff deserve a great deal of credit for putting this together.

The movie involved in this documentary, "Stolen Summer" appears to be a train wreck from hell, with a childish script, a novice, completely untalented director (Pete Jones), and a faux artiste director of photography. It is perfect for a behind-the-scenes expose because there are so many engaging conflicts in its production. Let's start with the "auteur" - Pete Jones, who wrote what from all appearances seems to be a wholly inadequate screenplay and who was selected to direct this for reasons unknown. He is passive-aggressive, clearly hasn't a clue how movies are really made and doesn't have the first idea how to manage the production crew at his disposal. It is hilarious to see how stupidly he directs this movie - throwing his lot behind a director of photography who is clearly only interested in his own self-interest. Further, Mr. Jones doesn't have the first clue how to frame shots or how to obtain good performances from good actors, let alone untrained kids. Then there is the illustrious Mr. Jones pontificating on how he has a "track record" after three weeks of shooting - classic !!!! He truly has no understanding of how lucky he was to have been given this chance to direct a movie and how many other, far more talented writers and directors would have done a far better job on the film. I can't wait for Stolen Summer to be released just so I can see how bad it truly is - I'm thinking it might just be the worst movie of 2002 !!

Now let's deal with the director of photography - who apparently feels that the most important thing in moviemaking is delay, delay, delay - who couldn't set up a shot quickly if his mother was on fire and he had to get the shot in to go put the flames out. His artistic pretensions in full bloom, he spouts off reverently of his "European" orientation, blah blah blah....and Pete Jones trusts this guy??? Please !!!

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

Here on Earth (2000)

1/10

Rubbish...pure, unadulterated rubbish

5 February 2002

Where to start, where to start....hmmm...well how about some of the stiffest, most unnatural, unbelievable and camped-up performances one can imagine? How about stereotypical "characters", situations and locations? Or what about a manipulative, cloying, utterly wretched script? I can't think of one element in this movie that was original, worthy of watching or interesting.

Note to all you Josh Hartnett/Chris Klein/LeeLee Sobieski fans - enjoy their collective fifteen minutes, folks, because they're not going to be famous much longer...

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

L.A. Confidential (1997)

10/10

Great Noir Film

2 January 2000

L.A. Confidential is a wonderful piece of moviemaking with luminous characters, beautiful cinematography, convincing dialogue and a wonderful plot full of twists, turns and surprises.

This is a perfect crime story and I would recommend it to anyone with a love for movies that are wonderfully made and acted.

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

The Muse (1999)

A Big....Mess

29 June 1999

Albert Brooks' latest opus is...well...typical Brooks. Self conscious throughout, you the viewer are in some way supposed to identify with his angst as a successful comic writer with writer's block who enlists the aid of a mysterious woman (Sharon Stone) who professes to inspire artists who have reached plateaus or moments of artistic impasse.

Not to spoil the plot, but the movie is something of a cross between "The Player" and "Barton Fink"....with a RIDICULOUS number of cameos by other directors. Brooks, who established himself as rather an anti-Hollywood figure in filmdom, has fully embraced the worship of popularity and celebritydom.

Take a vomit bag. The humor is stale at best. The acting wooden and lifeless, as though the actors are only too aware of how feeble a movie they are making. Save your $7

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

Meet Joe Black (1998)

2/10

No Doze, Anyone?

15 November 1998

Hmmmmm......Brad Pitt stares at the camera. Brad Pitt displays a counterfeit Jamaican accent so irritating you'll wish Death to come knocking to relieve you of the tedium of this moronic "morality" fable.

That's not to mention the ponderous, humorless and patronizing tone of the film. Pointless and lifeless, it wanders through three hours of your time (assuming you're dumb enough to waste it here).

2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Crime Story (1986–1988)

Best police TV show ever

15 November 1998

If you are lucky enough to live in an area where Crime Story is still shown in syndication, by all means be sure to record every episode. Each one is a great story in and of itself, and Farina is terrific. "Crime Story" is the best tv series ever made about law enforcement. Set in the 1950's, it is authentic and captivating and you'll love it!

11 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

The Waterboy (1998)

Haven't seen it but geez...not even the ads are funny!

9 November 1998

I'm amazed at the uncritical comments I see posted here. I have not (and will not) see this movie. However, I've seen the trailers for this movie, and they are NOT funny, even by the reduced standards granted Adam Sandler. If you are one of the adoring Adam Sandler fans by all means go see this film. I suppose that is healthier than hanging around his apartment building waiting for him to come out.

However, for the rest of us, I can't imagine many films less worthy of $7 per seat.

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

Pleasantville (1998)

A Confused Mess

1 November 1998

A proper editing job could have saved this movie and made it one of the best of the year. However, this overlong (2 3/4 hrs) film appears to have NO cuts of any kind made. At least an hour of this film could have been excised (primarily the goofy, unnecessary, tedious contention between the "coloreds" and the grays) could have been eliminated entirely, leaving a funny, touching warm movie behind. However, they decided to include a very pointless, ham-handed morality play which served no purpose whatsoever other than to allow the writer/producer/director/guru/hack/sandwich boy? to say he made an "important" film.

My advice...show up early...get decent seats..and watch the first hour and a half....then leave...if you want to come back the ending is relatively decent.

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

CoenHead

Reviews

Tell Your Friends

Recently Viewed