Change Your Image
James McK
Reviews
Vertical Limit (2000)
It has it's moments but...
Yes, there are moments of pure icy fear - especially the stunner of an opening scene, plus an extremely well shot and cut together montage of two harrowing cliff hanger sequences. There is even a surprising (and interesting)addition of drama and dubious morality at times. But overall this is too much of a plain old disaster movie to be interesting. Martin Campbell has talent obviously, witness his terrifying and dizzying mountain side shots in this film (though sadly the best bits were shown in the trailer), and the romance and spirit that he injected into Mask Of Zorro making it the best adventure film since Indiana Jones.
This script however too often relies on disaster movie clichés - e.g. anything that can go wrong, will, and leaves it just a little predictable and hardly memorable. Unless something changes, this genre cannot live on much longer. There are far worse ways to spend a couple of hours, it is certainly on of the more thrilling on-edge-of-seat movies on offer for a while.
Lost Highway (1997)
Pretentious, post-modernist pap.
Mmmmmmm... post-modernism. Here to save us from the Hollywood clichés. But I'd take Hollywood cliché over this any day. Because although this new cinematic method has brought us several gems, American Beauty, Fight Club, Resevior Dogs, it also brings us films such as this. Don't listen to the fans who will tell you how sophisticated and complex this is, because this is the cinematic equivalent of masturbation. Films can be sophisticated and complex without being as smart-alecky as this one, which undermines everything that cinema is about. The video jacket states this can "never be explained, only interpreted". This is true, the film does have some interpretative significance, but really, we all know this is so introverted and pretentious, in the end its only about itself.
The Perfect Storm (2000)
Slow start... but Oh Lord when that storm starts blowing
I'd read the reviews before I saw the film, so I was prepared for bad dialouge (hey, it's a disaster film) I was prepared for weak characters and I was prepared for the slow build up, I was prepared to see amazing visual affects and hopefully some excellent action (this from Wolfgang Peterson, cause hey, I liked Air Force One!). No one told me the build up was that long, its 40 minutes till that boat even hits the water let alone it being past the one hour mark before that storm comes in. Yes, I know it was character building- but most of it was so superfluous that it was just boring, and in the end, not much character was developed, only, situation, and that could have taken half the time.
...BUT OH LORD ONCE THAT STORM STARTS BLOWING. Computer digital effects have never truly impressed me since Jurassic Park, no major foward steps have been made since then. Until now, the clouds, the waves, the spray, while of course not totally believable, were jaw dropping, amazing, and in context with the storyline, terrifying. Once that storm kicks in its just drawdropping and I was terrified, and suspended... that boat, those waves, you just have to see it, on the big screen believe me, it is truly freaky stuff. And Peterson can handle the action scenes, such as the piece with the out of control anchor, and lets not forget the Coastguard scenes, never before have I seen people, and their technology, so frail, compared to the raw power of nature.
Yes, some of the dialouge is truly banal, the character situations such as the feud between two of the fishermen, and again, thrills are along time in the coming, but when they come, they come, and the development at the start does come in handy, these are after all real characters, and despite some two-dimensionality, we must sub-consciously feel for them, and their plight. To know it is true, that makes it all the more moving, and all the more scary.
On the other hand, when the credits began to roll, and the lights came up, my friend beside me said "Didn't that suck". So there you go.
Mission: Impossible II (2000)
Apparently, making a "new" action film is mission: impossible
OK, we'll get this out of the way, first thing, I liked the first Mission: Impossible. A lot of people do not. I did. A lot. Mainly because it was tricky, it was unpredictable, it made something new by playing on audiences expectations of the old, but its these expectations of old that M:I2 sticks directly to. Right to a fault.
You may say, hey, its a proven formula, why not stick with it. So, yes, M:I2 does have some good action, some great action. If that is what you came to see, that is what you are going to get. Some good action.
The thing is, I expected so much more from John Woo. I knew he was going to destroy everything the original stood for and turn it into an action movie with kung fu, explosions, and who can forget, pigeons, and I was absolutely blown away by Face/Off, and excitied by the M:I2 trailer, so what then was the problem. Well... I suppose my expectations may have been too high, exciting yes, but new, different or special, no. Just above average really.
Then the plot... uh, well, usually in action movies they spend as little time on the plot as possible. This, however is a Mission: Impossible film so you must, must include all sorts of espionage and hi-tech bits and pieces and face swapping (what do these people conveniently walk around with a bag with other peoples faces in it). So a lot of time is spent on plot, while it is paper thin they've tried to complex it up, but they still cannot save it. Just another terrorist thriller plot. Should have just left it as an excuse for more action. And the romance, the supposed backbone of the story, well, although Thandie Newton is one sexy lass, it is a thoroughly rushed, unbelievable, and subsequently indifferent romance. Who cares? I didn't. And John Woo, master of the over the top, who pulls of brilliant action scenes, explosions and slow motion hero shots in Face/Off, which was just over-the-top to begin with so it was a lot of fun, here though every thing is taken to seriously and Woo's direction just seems off the mark, tacky, and in the case of Tom Cruise's hero shots, dare I say, homoerotic. All this and the returning characters from M:I were bastardized along with the rest of it. If you want good action, see the movie, if you want to see a landmark action film, wait for another.
Mission: Impossible (1996)
Just a bit different from your average action film.
Action films, they come and go, thrill you while you sit there in the seat and when they're finished, they're gone from your mind. Some however, stick in your mind a little longer, and some you can even watch again, and again, and again.
Mission: Impossible is one of those action films. What is it that first made it stick in my mind? Well, it starts off as a typical, though rather high technical, espionage thriller, albeit one with a flashier than usual opening credits sequence. But from this the film plays on your expectations, bred by years of action and thriller movies that have run together on the same clichés, and of course, the original series, and within 40 minutes the audience is left bewildered, breathless and with absolutely no idea where this thing is going to go next. And it lives up to these expectations, throwing the audience into increasingly complex situations, casting questions on the morality of all of the cast members, even Tom Cruise. It delivers surprises right until the end.
Of course some of these things are big no-no's for Hollywood, and a lot of people are left confused and in the dark by this movie. Yes, there are some problems with dialouge, and it does sometimes go a little over the top and a little "Yeah Right!" but, hey, it's Mission: Impossible isn't it?
OK so riveting on first viewing, but what would make us want to see it again once you know all the surprises waiting? You could argue for director Brian De Palma and Screenwriters excellent build-up of paranoia, but then of course there are the set pieces, the trap at the start, the CIA break in, and of course, that train sequence, implausible, but brilliant stuff.
12 Monkeys (1995)
Repetitively enjoyable.
I have a lot to say about this film and I'll doubt I'll get it all out. Who would have thought Bruce Willis can act? I mean, he is always a very entertaining action hero- but despite all the kudos that went to the maniacal Brad Pitt for his role, it was Bruce as the lost, intense, quite possibly insane but vulnerable James Cole. They say you'll never forget your first time, and this is true for Twelve Monkeys, who wasn't caught up in the relentless, intense and fascinating plot that tightened up around the characters? Who's mind wasn't left shattered at it's finale? But this movie isn't to be discarded as a one time thrill ride, no, for as James Cole himself says while watching Vertigo- the film is different every time you watch it. Sometimes it is the funniest of comedies, sometimes a great tragedy, sometimes just breathlessly intense. And every time I watch it I appreciate the care and intelligence that has gone into every aspect of it. The script by David Peoples (and wife), who also wrote the perfect Blade Runner, is brilliantly structured, complex, but too much so, and peppered with great humour. Director Terry Gilliam is great at creating an intense paranoid, what-is-going-on-am-i-crazy world and without him the film could have been totally ruined. The acting, Brad Pitt, yes is entertaining, memorable and riveting, but he rips a lot off Dennis Hopper in Apocalypse Now. The real respect should be going to Madeline Stowe (subtle, but the more you watch her the better she gets) and Bruce Willis, who is absolutely brilliant. OK, time to shut up now, even though there is plenty more to say, if you haven't watched it, watch it, if you have and enjoyed it, buy it and watch it over and over, and if you didn't enjoy it... well... it's your loss.
Lawrence of Arabia (1962)
Old and long yes- but brilliant all the same!
First, yes, it is very long. Secondly though it is brilliant.
I sat down to watch a 1962 heroic romanticized epic. What I got was one of the more complex, visually stunning and arresting films I'd ever seen. Half of it's brilliance was that it took me by surprise by being quite an intelligent, and sometimes dark character study. It is however, first and foremost an epic and it does live up to it- it has so many visual moments- people approaching from the wide empty deserts, full scale charges, exploding trains, and of course, the stark beauty of the desert. That and it has tons of quoteable dialogue. So don't be put off by its age or its length- Lawrence of Arabia is brilliant. And to use a cliché, they don't make 'em like this anymore.
American Beauty (1999)
Perfectly made, but that's only half its brilliance.
Right, let us get this right out of the way. American Beauty is absolutely flawless technically, perfectly directed, perfectly acted, perfectly scripted, perfectly shot.
These factors however, are only half the charm- because it wasn't the technical brilliance of the film that had me walking out in absolute awe- it was the films message, its plea to the world, especially to America, floating just beneath the surface, which, as the film says, is the nature of beauty itself. We may already know the things that the movie teaches us, but the point is not to teach but to affirm what you already suspect, or knew, but the routine of life had made you forget. After watching depressing films such as Blade Runner and Full Metal Jacket, (which of course are still brilliant in their own right), American Beauty is affirmation that life is indeed beautiful, and worth living.
That said, and the movie is also hilarious and Kevin Spacey is possibly the best actor of the decade.
L.A. Confidential (1997)
So good, it makes me jealous
When I watched L.A Confidential for the second time, my mouth just hung open. The first time I watched it, yes I enjoyed it, but it wasn't until the second viewing that its true brilliance sunk in. For the first time while viewing a movie I was actually jealous of the talent of the people who made it.
Mainly because of the script, I'm sure one of the most complex storylines ever brought to film- a pretty nifty tale which comes together only when the viewpoints of three different police officers are joined together.
This movie has some of the coolest shots and lighting I've ever seen, the pace is relentless and intense (how else could they fit the HUUUGE plot in) and the acting is just as hot as the script. And amongst all the action and plot twists we find ourselves understanding, and even heavily emoting for the characters, who hold together a wildly chaotic storyline. With the relationship between Russell Crowe and Kim Basingers's characters- it even has time to be touching.
Blade Runner (1982)
Deep, stunning, flawed- but who cares??
Blade Runner, is one of those films, that even though it may have a few flaws in its acting, script and production (funding forced script changes) you can forgive it and love it as you can clearly see its vision of what it wants to be.
The film is terrifying, sad, beautiful, and on every viewing gets deeper and deeper. I'm still learning its full meaning.
Visually stunning, mostly well acted, superbly directed, and undeniably influential, Blade Runner works on many levels- including philosophical (What is it that makes us human?) and geek-sci-fi-scrutiny (Is Deckard a Replicant), it may not answer these questions, but it definitely gets you pondering.