Reviews

6 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
A Travesty
12 November 2007
Warning: Spoilers
This thing is just ridiculous; saw it on home video as my first Godfather experience and couldn't figure out why it was so plodding. Turns out it edits everything into chronological order, so you start with all the De Niro scenes from G-2, then see G-1 (minus some R-stuff but plus some deleted scenes), and then get the rest of G-2. The De Niro scenes, out of context, are just repetitive and make little sense. The one bonus was getting to see the deleteds back when such opportunities were rare. It's not quite BAD, because the underlying material is still beautiful, but it could easily lead one to go through life thinking The Godfater was No Big Deal because you'd endured or walked out on this.

There are films I'd be interested to to see a chronological cut of (Pulp Fiction, Memento). Godfather 2 is not one of them.
49 out of 149 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Very funny unique animated film
19 February 2002
This film is a great deal of fun, especially for anyone interested in either vampires or Cuban music. Some of the sight gags involving the vampires still crack me up even though it's been years since I saw this, and the use of music and just plain latin exuberance are both excellent.

(Wracking my brains for flaws) The animation looks a little primative (although one might also consider it "stylized"), and the pacing isn't always as snappy as it might be.

But all in all, it's great and there's really nothing like it. And I believe US viewers will be amused rather than put off by the rather obvious "Capitalists = Vampires" symbolism.
13 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Thoroughly trashy but a lot of fun
3 May 2001
I'm sure that even when this came out a lot of the stuff in this serial seemed pretty silly. But if you watch it, especially if you watch it as it was meant to be watched, one chapter at a time with a break in between, you'll probably find yourself getting into the cliff hangers, and occasionally dazzled by the occasionally sumptuous production values (huge pile of writhing dancing girls, snow mountain photography) and the sometimes ingenious special effects (those mud men always make me jump).

The rest of the time, sit back & laugh.

They must have known that they were stretching the premise when they made this, the third and last Flash Gordon serial, but the plot pretty much hangs together if you choose to pay attention to it (which can be hard, a lot of explanations are pretty rushed), and the performances are mostly good.
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Quitter (1934)
6/10
A certain kind of movie
3 May 2001
The first things that will strike a modern viewer about The Quitter are the very austere sound (no background music, very little noise other than people talking), the "stagey" sets and performances, and the morality-play structure of it all in which most plot developments are telegraphed long before they occur.

If you can't get past these trappings, I don't blame you. If you can, there are some very interesting characters here and a plot that takes the characters' merits and flaws to their logical conclusion. It's not great, and it's not high tragedy, but it is a glimpse into the way people once thought (or once thought they thought).

Also it has Mary from the original Little Rascals playing a "loose" young woman who is nevertheless shown to be good. Better, as it turns out, than the man who attack her for her promiscuity.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Stand (1994)
Unfortunate change...
9 April 2001
On the whole I liked this show, particularly the acting. The whole cast is giving their all through the whole six hours.

One thing I didn't like was that although Ed Harris did a great job as the general, the writers sanitized his role. In the book sleeplessness, drugs, pressure, and panic lead him to order various morally questionable measures, such as deliberately spreading the superflu to Russia and China so that they won't have an advantage over us.

This was, I thought, one of the most chilling acts comitted in the whole book, all the more so because from his point of view it seemed to be his duty to do it. I'm convinced that they took this out because they didn't want him to seem too "mean". In my experience, this reasoning often leads to the very worst alterations to adapted stories (see also Valmont in _Cruel Intentions_).
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
I liked it, but I might not recommend it...
29 August 2000
Warning: Spoilers
As you can probably tell from the other comments, this is an easy movie to dislike. It's disjointed, it has no pace, and bits of the plot have way too little explanation.

But, on the other hand, their is a lot of gorgeous camera work and editing. Plus, more importantly, it's a great character exploration. While other people have noted that the characters almost never talk about what they're doing or why they're doing it and are also rather expressionless (which is very much in character for both of them), the movie uses a different means of revealing character: it allows the characters to do absolutely anything. SPOILER ALERT Thus, you learn about who the Eye is not through the explanation at the end but moreso from what he does: abandons his job, escapes his daughter's memory, puts his life in danger, shoots at the police, even commits two homicides, one of which is not remotely justifiable. These show that he is protective of and jealous for Eris, and that there is no limit to what he'll do for her; few hollywood heroes have been able to prove their emotions so fully.

Basically, I'd say that it's the story of someone who is already outside the law (for his job) and who takes a step further and becomes a law in and of itself. There have been a lot of stories where heroes have done this for revenge or for their perception of the good of society. Here he does it for himself and for a woman he loves (in his own sick twisted way).

So I wish this film were better, and I wouldn't recommend it to anyone who didn't know what they were getting into, but it is very different, and as such I'd rather watch it than a better plotted film which is just like films I've seen before.

The one film I would compare it too is also very flawed: Romeo is Bleeding.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed