Reviews

16 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
Disappointing
7 February 2013
I love Tarantino, but this one was so far over the top, you couldn't even see the top from where I was. Although there were a couple of good Tarantino-esque scenes of dialog, there wasn't enough to sink my teeth into. Jamie Foxx was solid. Christoph Waltz was excellent as usual. Leo D. had his moments. Samuel L. Jackson was terrific as the house slave, playing somewhat against type (although subservient, he was still irascible and no pushover, so that was in keeping with his usual persona.) The characters' actions were generally uninteresting and the action was predictable. The violence was over the top, even for QT. How many times can he show a bullet causing someone's head/chest/leg/arm to explode? It wasn't boring by any means, it just didn't live up to my hopes for it. QT is so in love with playing with the filmic conventions of his youth, he sometimes forgets to make a good film.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Just OK
1 December 2008
NB: I've only seen this film once, and it may be the type of film that grows on you the more you watch it. However, at this point I don't understand the raves. The Coen brothers are incapable of making a boring film, and this was no exception. Whether it's a great film (Fargo, Blood Simple, No Country for Old Men, Miller's Crossing, to name a few) or merely a puzzling one (Barton Fink comes to mind), their films are inventive, interesting, and memorable. Lebowski is closer to Barton Fink than the great films. There were many wonderful scenes, lines, and performances. However, to me, the overall effect was less than the sum of the parts. Even putting aside the numerous plot holes (because this film was clearly not about its plot), I found myself waiting for some narrative thread or theme to tie together the nearly random eccentric scenes. I left feeling the movie was strange, interesting, but ultimately unsatisfying. It wasn't a waste of my time, mind you, but no way should it be ranked as high as it is.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
I loved this film
18 October 2007
Everyone's entitled to their opinion, but I loved this flick. Julie Taymor is a genius, and the visuals alone were spectacular and imaginative. The songs were (for the most part) used brilliantly. "Let It Be", "Strawberry Fields Forever", and "Happiness is a Warm Gun" were absolutely riveting (I was blown away by "Happiness"--she actually fit in that bizarre song so it all made sense in the plot.) Sure some of the songs were repurposed ("If I Fell" sung by a girl), but they worked. Some of the symbolism was too obvious ("Dear Prudence"), but it still worked for me. The performances were also generally first rate, especially the three leads. I rate this a must-see.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Solid film, not as good as the book
20 April 2004
Ludlum's book was a dense, sometimes bizarre, story that focused not only on action but psychology: why was Bourne doing what he was doing? What was the CIA thinking as it tried to bring him in? Would Carlos the Jackal kill him, even though Bourne couldn't remember who he was? etc. The film dumbs down the plot considerably, and loses much of what made the book a terrific read. That said, the film is quite enjoyable. Damon and Potente are good as the leads, Chris Cooper is always terrific, and Brian Cox and Julia Styles are fine in smaller roles. The action sequences are fun. The portrayal of the African leader borders on the offensive, but... All in all, a good film, but not nearly up to the level of the book.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Modern classic
12 September 2003
One of my favorite films of the last 20 years. No more than one or two weak notes in the whole film. Crowe's performance was, I think vastly underappreciated--he makes his character's animalistic ferocity something terrible to behold. Pearce is solid, Spacey is great as always, and Cromwell was terrific. Danny DeVito provides some comic relief. And of course, Basinger was beautiful, in a role perhaps somewhat overrated. The script crackles, the scenery and background music pitch perfect. A movie that improves upon repeated viewings.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Monsignor (1982)
1/10
Just dreadful
20 June 2003
One of the worst films ever made by big Hollywood. Sometimes it's so bad, it's funny, but not funny enough. Reeve is out of his depth, but the script is so bad no one could have saved it. Genevieve Bujold is a fine actress and tries gamely, but this part nearly destroyed her career. Classic scene: when the postulant (Bujold) discovers (in church) that the man who seduced her (Reeve) is a priest. We're supposed to feel her pain, but it plays as comically absurd rather than tragic. A complete miscalculation on all fronts.
5 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Special effects and nothing else
26 May 2003
I enjoyed Matrix. Matrix Reloaded suffered from the same stupidity that the latest Star Wars movies did: all special effects, no intelligent story, and acting to laugh at. Yes, the effects were exciting (better than Star Wars). But the Wachowskis seem to have fallen for the trap so many action film makers do: if you have a great 5 minute fight scene, making it 10 minutes long doesn't make it better, just longer. If you have 5 Agent Smiths, why not 500? More is not necessarily better. And the plot? The philosophy sounded like something a good SNL writer would have great fun with. "We must believe, or else we will not believe. The frammistat of life has many mysteries, but none as mysterious as life itself." (OK, I made these up, but the actual dialog is just as silly.) Disappointing, since the setup in the first film had many possibilities. Seeing this film is kind of light seeing a laser light show--it's really pretty, but ultimately meaningless.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Tedious and disappointing
28 May 2002
The CGI graphics are terrific (and loud), but what a disappointing film! The dialog could have been bettered by any freshman screenwriting student, the acting ranged from competent to awful, and it was long, long, long. How many times can we see the same light saber duel? The romantic plot between Anakin and Amidala was embarrassingly bad. The plot has become obvious, and the final film has nowhere to go--every plot turn is now dictated in order to sandwich the film into the series. If you're interested in a two-hour special effect, see the film, otherwise, save your money and eardrums.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Terrific sensitive film
16 April 2002
A wonderful little film. It could easily have drifted into "American Pie" sophomoric sex humor, or gone soft and sentimental, but instead it plays absolute real. Jessica is a "nice Jewish girl from Scarsdale" who's fed up with the men she's met, and becomes bi-curious. She hooks up with a more free-spirited art gallery operator, and their courtship and the complications are great. Tovah Feldshuh is outstanding as Jessica's mom.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
A gem
10 October 2001
A true gem, sadly overlooked and under-appreciated. Well produced and acted, looks terrific, and pulls every heart string. If the ending doesn't bring a tear to your eye, you have no feelings. I never saw the Shirley Temple original, so I can't compare them. If you haven't seen this one, catch it. It may be a little too intense for young, sensitive children (my sensitive 7 year old nearly lost it at the end of the film; even my less-sensitive 10 year old was visibly moved.)
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Awakening (1980)
1/10
So bad it's painful
27 February 2001
Other than Susanna York, badly acted, horribly plotted, even horribly edited. (There's one scene that just sort of appears out of nowhere, and ends just as quickly, with no connection to the rest of the film). No suspense, no laughs, just plain bad.
5 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Overblown mediocrity at best
4 December 2000
Very disappointing. The story is predictable, the acting and writing mostly awful. Judd Hirsch and Jeff Goldblum have a couple of moments, as does Mary McDonnell. Robert Loggia is excellent as always. Will Smith is Will Smith, and Vivica Fox is beautiful. Bill Pullman is wooden as the President. The ending is a virtual rehash of Return of the Jedi (which was itself a rehash of Star Wars.) The patriotic (read "jingoistic") speeches fall flat. A major waste of moviemaking money and talent.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Fail Safe (2000 TV Movie)
9/10
Tense, taut drama--well done
9 April 2000
Excellent television production, done live, but it didn't matter. Excellent performances, great direction. Compares well with 1964 film version starring Henry Fonda. Kudos to George Clooney as the driving force for making this happen. Bring back live TV!
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
One of Woody's Best
3 March 2000
Among the best of Allen's films (Along with Annie Hall and Manhattan). Terrific script (as usual) great performances from Caine and Wiest (both Oscars), and a more sentimental feel than most of Woody's work. Perhaps his most accessible film, yet there's plenty of meat there. A must see.
1 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Wonderfully enjoyable film
2 March 2000
One of those rarities--a true family film that remains viewable time and time again. Great cast, great story, exciting, romantic, and extremely funny. One of Rob Reiner's early efforts. Mandy Patinkin, Billy Crystal, Carol Kane, and Christopher Guest are all terrific. Robin Wright (Penn) is lovely. Just plain fun.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Pretty awful
18 January 2000
The fun old TV series becomes a tired series of special-effects scenes. Will Smith tries, but is miscast and utterly unbelievable. (And I'm sorry, but having an African-American as a "top government agent" four years after the end of the Civil War simply cannot be made believable, despite valiant attempts to try.) Kevin Kline, a fine actor, does what he can as Artemus Gordon, but seems to be recapitulating his "In and Out" persona (Ross Martin was never that prissy.) Kenneth Branagh, as the villain, plays it so far over the top you can't even see the top from where he his. Salma Hayek is undeniably lovely, but is wasted (she's basically an afterthought). Special effects are good, plot is stupid, script is awful. As a fan of the old series, I was very disappointed.
40 out of 70 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed