Reviews

I'm very sorry to report that Unbreakable is not what it seems to be. It seems to be a movie about a man who is, well, unbreakable... Bruce Willis's character, Dunne, appears to be some sort of superhero.

Like the other reviews, I'm afraid I can't give away much of the plot without giving away the film. I will say that the overall main plot is a fine idea, but the execution - particularly in the final third of the film - is a yawner. The director tries to surprise us as he did in The Sixth Sense, but comes up short.

Subplots, which are few and far between, are filled with characters you won't care about. Only Dunne's son turns in a fair performance, but that's only due to one scene. We don't get more than a glimpse into the other people: Dunne's wife, Price's mother, Dunne's son. That'd be fine if the concentration on Dunne was intense and interesting enough to sustain the film. It's not.

I can not overstate how very disappointed I was in this film's all-too-neat wrap up. It felt, honestly, like I was watching an hourlong TV show that had just 2 minutes left before the credits. As an added bonus, the overall point and theme of this movie is shrouded in mystery... which, again, would be fine if the film itself was gripping, moving, or soul-stirring. Too bad it's not.

There's no doubt that M. Night Shyamalan is blessed with talent. That talent comes off as an unexciting attempt at some sort of story, here. Maybe next time. I want my money back.

Rating: 1.5 stars (out of 5.)

Magnolia.

I went into this movie with just about no clue on what it was about, and now that I've been through three hours of it (yes, the whole thing), I still have no clue on what it was about. Perhaps it was a serious take-off of Seinfeld in that it was about nothing. Perhaps it is an attempt to make an artsy film that has crossover appeal in its actors. Perhaps it is an attempt to make a statement without really saying anything.

The entire thing was too long, for one. I actually NOTICED time, which is a personal sign for a not-so-good film. There are roughly nine plotlines to follow. That'd be fine if said plotlines had interest. I ended up not caring about any of the characters whatsoever, even though this movie is allegedly all about the characters.

There are a few pluses, but just a few. My favorite number, 82, makes quite a few appearances at the outset. Tom Cruise's character has an entertaining testosterone-based persona. The young quiz show boy really called the adults on many things. It was great to hear Aimee Mann's music, even if some of its positioning was corny. And, of course, who would expect to see something other than rain or snow fall from the sky?

But just a small bit of pluses in a three hour attempt at a magnificent movie do nothing for me. I firmly believe Magnolia would have been better if it had a point.

1.5/5.0 stars.

What could this movie had said that wasn't already said in the original movie?

The movie was a clone of the original. The plot was painfully obvious. This film belongs in the $1.99 Bargain Basement Video Rack.

1.0/5.0 stars.

Are you the type of person who wants everything spelled out for you? Are you the type of person who must have every single question a movie raises, answered? Are you the type of person who wants tons of blood and gore to scare you?

If you answered yes to any of these questions, do NOT see this movie.

The Blair Witch Project is a rare film, perhaps the only one I've seen, that doesn't give you everything you want to hear. It will scare the pants off of you, but only if you let it. Seeing the website ahead of time works.

But if you're like me and didn't see the site, the very style of the movie will draw you in. It's a Real World-cum-documentary device that's used, and it's used to perfection. The point of view of the movie gives us an almost intrusive angle on the entire story. Instead of giving us detailed bios on the characters, the movie lets its own technique draw us in. Brilliant. (If you NEED detailed bios, or anything of the sort, see the site.)

The whole thing is eerie. The images from the film are with me a week after seeing it, and it scared me quite nicely. There are people who don't get it, don't understand it, or simply don't like the way the movie "looked". Great. Go see something flashy, then. (Heck, one guy I know complained that the film didn't take up the whole screen!) If you're looking for minor appearance details, you'll hate this film.

If, on the other hand, you want: a creative story that gives you enough but not too much, a set of characters you grow to bond and identify with, and a suspenseful ending, this is the one to see.

4.5/5.0 stars.

Having seen Blair Witch last weekend and now Sixth Sense, I tell you, I will have problems sleeping for the next week or two.

The Sixth Sense is a wonderfully crafted and executed tale about a young boy (Cole) who has (surprise!) a sixth sense: he can see and talk to the dead as if they were right there with the living. A neat twist of a psychic nature, no? The boy finds that he himself has a mission of sorts after dealing with horrific visions of the dead. I won't divulge anything about the mission.

Willis' character, whose name eludes me at the moment, also finds that he has a mission. His wife is growing distant, and it's up to him to get refocused on his wife instead of his career. I mean, having someone attack you probably would provoke you into correcting a career-based mistake, don't you think?

The ending is 100% pure shocking and I will say that it was excellent.

But as a side note, lots of people are quick to compare this to Blair Witch. I've got to say that to do that is, to me, quite silly. Blair Witch works on a VERY different level than The Sixth Sense. This particular film is a tad slow, but patience is a virtue. If you can be patient with it, you'll reap the rewards.

Also great acting all around. This gets 4.0/5.0 stars from me.

What can I say about A Cool, Dry Place?

No, really, what can I say? The plot was, uhm, oddball. I often say that plots twist and turn, but this one kind of flatlined its way through. Vaughn's character is initially offensive, but he gets this fuzzy glow about him later on. Adams turns in a great performance.

But the characters are uninteresting overall, and the whole thing is befuddling. I don't get it. What's so great about A Cool, Dry Place? Well, it's a heck of a place to store your perishables.

2.0/5.0 stars.

There's nothing too offensive about Waking Ned Devine. It doesn't go for ultra shock humor; instead, it counts on a good plot, a solid cast, and genuinely FUNNY events.

Good plot: the story is probably no surprise to you, but the whole thing moves along quite nicely. There are no enormous subplots to take you away from the action, and no one to really lose track of. It's a small town setting, after all; everyone knows everyone.

Solid cast: Believable, all around.

Funny events: Heh, can't spoil them to be sure, but there are many laugh out loud moments. Plus something about a certain type of soap....

All in all, a movie that won't shake the world with its humor but is still quite good. Well worth the viewing.

4.0/5.0 stars.

I was surprised. I had seen the trailers, as did everyone, supposedly giving away the movie's finer moments. A few are in there, but there are many more enjoyable ones.

The plot is a little thin, I'll give it that. (I like a little meat on my plots ;) Acting is sufficient, casting is about on-target, and the whole thing is a little too long.

But is it funny? On the whole, yeah. It's not sophisticated humor by far, and it's very much in-your-face, but a good number of the scenes had me laughing out loud. The biggest caveat is that I probably would have enjoyed it more if I was about 16 and still in high school.

But male high school seniors as virgins? Proof that this is fictional. 4.0/5.0 stars.

Entrapment is a solid movie if you like heightened drama. Entrapment is a solid movie if you like a very twisting, turning plot that keeps you guessing. And Entrapment is a solid movie if you find either one of the two stars attractive.

But outside of that, it's kind of bland. First off, the romance between Connery and Zeta-Jones seems forced and unnecessary. I wasn't unable to suspend reality to believe that those two could have a solid romantic interest, no matter what their ages. Zeta-Jones' character, who is otherwise somewhat strong, comes off as whiny and just waiting to grasp at any man who comes her way. Yawn.

Character development is also a sticky spot; we don't get very much of it. This movie is about the here and now, which is just before the end of the millennium (well, actually, the end of 1999.) Why are these two doing this? How did they get started? And most importantly, why is this romance so tacked-on?

While I as a guy enjoyed the scenes of Zeta-Jones practicing moving through a laser-filled room (ha ha), the scene itself was incredibly stupid and roughly 3 minutes too long. It seems to have been written for two reasons: 1. to please men (which it does nicely! ;) and 2. to show off the actress's amazing gymnastics skills (which it also does nicely.) That's fine, but it has precious little to do with the movie.

Entrapment hits the mark in some places, but misses in so many others. Better than some films, but it could have been so much more. Lose the poor attempt at romance, shorten it, and you've got something.

3.0/5.0 stars.

One Flew Over is an amazing book/movie combo in that both pieces interact somewhat, but stand on their own well. The book is amazing and well worth the read. The movie is different enough in point of view and events to make it stand on its own.

Nicholson is, as almost always, incredible in the McMurphy character. It's amazing that you can laugh at something in one scene ("Little dab'll do ya, huh?") and then see the results of this same character in the final scenes. The character of Chief is perfectly portrayed, and in fact every patient comes through with his or her character intact.

It's also great to watch! Truly a classic. 5.0/5.0 stars.

...how do some people get careers in this industry? This almost seems textbook: take two currently popular stars, put them in a standard plot device with a typical beginning, middle, and end; market it directly towards teenagers, and BINGO! You've got a movie that has no soul, yet is wildly popular.

Mad Love is an ineffectual, hopeless, counterproductive piece of movie making. My hopes and dreams for the future of Hollywood have been dashed... I guess 1995 just wasn't a banner year for some pictures.

A waste of film, time, and oxygen.

0.0/5.0 stars.

This noxious, fecal, rancid excuse for a film had me terribly disgusted throughout. The plot feels much like something out of a poor NBC sitcom; in fact, NBC might've done a better job with it. The cast was totally stereotypical and unexciting, the idea was formulaic, and I felt cheated out of my time and money by seeing this movie.

0.0/5.0 stars.

Rushmore is one of those films that's tough to peg down. I enjoyed a lot of it: it was a dark, funny movie. But the plot really stayed in neutral, and by the end, I had no idea whose corner I was in. Early on, the film reminded me of my days in a private high school, which might not be a good thing. The character of Max is a solid one, but I wonder if this is the right vehicle for him. Bill Murray puts in a surprisingly generic performance. Might be worth a cheap show or a rental.

3.0/5.0 stars.

Considering how wide open both the first and second movies in the Austin Powers series are for sequels, you'd better be able to back it up. Myers delivers the goods. Unlike most SNL alums from the 90s, Myers has actual comedic talent, and Austin Powers 2 shows it off.

The plot? Full of holes, but at least Myers's characters acknowledge this and even PLAY with it. Speaking of which, Myers is everywhere - from the laugh-out-loud Dr. Evil to the only real misstep, Fat Bastard.

Speaking of which, here's why he's a misstep: he takes every single stereotype of fat people and puts them up for people to laugh at. It's backward thinking that really doesn't belong in our present year, to be honest. One scene in particular involving Fat Bastard and Shagwell (Graham) together in bed is played strictly for disgust. Then, of course, Fat Bastard ends up feeling bad about himself at the end because he's fat. Sigh.

That's why I dock the movie a half star.

The rest of it is really enjoyable, laugh out loud type material. Just about worth full price. Can "Shagfinger" be far behind? 4.5/5.0 stars.

This ranks in my mind with 12 Monkeys and The Truman Show insofar as being able to muck with your perception of reality. An incredibly great idea finally executed well on screen. And surprisingly, Keanu Reeves is... good! Not great, but... good! (He does get a trademark "whoa" in once, however.)

The plot kind of slumps towards the end, and Moss's character deevolves from a strong one to near typical, which I was disappointed with.

The effects are incredible, plain and simple. You sit there and believe it's real... yet it's unreal. That's impressive stuff.

This movie might not be perfect, but it comes mighty close. 4.5/5.0 stars.

I had heard of this movie, loosely good comments, and thoroughly enjoyed it. Furlong and Ricci were very good. The story was off-kilter, fun to be a part of, but never really zoomed into the atmosphere. Maybe it didn't NEED to, though. Worth the rental, probably not worth admission. 3.5/5.0 stars.

I've seen better. DeNiro is (yawn) yet another stereotype. Crystal is okay... this isn't great material to work with, though. Kudrow is simultaneously repulsive and forgettable.

There are moments (DeNiro's comment in the hotel's bar about crying during a commercial had me doubled over in laughter) but moments do not a movie make. Saw it at the cheap show and wanted a refund. 2.0/5.0 stars.

Surprisingly, this movie became a favorite of mine. Jackson is incredibly strong and proves his worth as a premier actor of the late 90s. The entire plot twists and turns, and keeps you guessing till the end. Plus, plus, you get action! Broken windows! Guns, guns, guns! All that Hollywood movie stuff. Hostages, even.

Totally exciting and enthralling. 4.5/5.0 stars.

...though I think watching paint dry might be more interesting. Sometimes you see a movie that makes you wonder, like The Matrix. Sometimes you see a movie that makes you laugh, like There's Something About Mary. And sometimes you see a movie that moves you inside, like Schindler's List.

The Immortals made me want to do nothing. In fact, I nearly fell asleep. The acting is roughly fifth-rate, the plot forgettable, and all in all, the movie is a waste of tape.

0.0/5.0 stars. Yuck.

I worked in a video store for 2.5 years. In that time, I was able to rent many many movies for free. Hence, I have seen many movies. None - with the exception of Empire Records - come to the level of disdain I got from this movie. I thought this was the worst movie ever because of poor acting, poor plot, and poor cinematography. In roughly the two hours that this movie span, I had no desire to see what ended up happening to the two stars of the movie - for all I care they could have died and I would have cheered. I have never walked out of a movie before, but if I had to see this one again I definitely would.

I can not believe this made it to film. Truly a disgusting piece of work. It was colorful, it was poorly acted, it was pointless, and the entire plot was something like a joke. The only reason to see it might be Renee Zellweger, but even THAT is a stretch. Highly unrecommended.