Reviews

4 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
3/10
I think we've got our first Razzie nominee of the year
15 April 2009
Warning: Spoilers
Don't get me wrong, Hollywood. I realize how difficult it is translating an anime into a live action film for a massive audience, but rule 101 for every movie should be that it has a good story behind it. Dragonball: Evolution not only doesn't have a good story. It doesn't really have ANY story. Substance was definitely sacrificed for special effects and fight scenes for this movie. But the problem is that the fight scenes aren't even that good. The fight scene between Goku and Piccolo had me laughing the whole time, and the final scene where the dragon is finally shown is abysmal and left me longing for the good old days when Stan Winston was still alive. I mean, did these special effects artists have ANY sense of scale? The actors, save Chow Yun-Fat, who was the only thing keeping me from walking out to the box office and demanding my money back, all sound and look like rejects from "The Karate Kid". Although the guy who plays Goku is kinda cute, girls. But I don't blame them so much as I blame the script (or lack thereof) they had to go on. None of the characters are given a sufficient amount of back story. Most of them don't really have ANY back story. Bulma and Yamcha (literally) just popped in out of nowhere. I don't think Mai's name is ever really spoken in the movie. Piccolo only has about seven lines of dialogue and acts like he wants to destroy the universe just for the fun of it. In fact, there's so little explanation as to why everything is happening that only DB fans who read the mangas or watched the series religiously will be able to understand the movie or even care about it (but from what I've seen on the boards, even THEY don't care (don't worry guys, the feeling's mutual)).

Worst of all, in spite of the emaciated script, the one-note characters, and the cartoony fight scenes, this film still managed to leave a lot of unresolved issues. It felt like a starving third-world country child leaving the table of a ten-course banquet held in his honor before the amuse bouche even arrived! I mean, how does that even happen?! Trust me all you DB fans who haven't quite heard the news yet. You're much better off sitting down at the couch, microwaving some popcorn and popping in your old DB/DBG/DBZ tape or catching up on your mangas than you are wasting ten bucks on this movie (unless you're just REALLY into Chow Yun-Fat).
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Wedding (1998 TV Movie)
3/10
A flawed production based on a flawed book.
12 April 2007
I read the reviews of this movie and I am shocked and appalled that so many people found this a worthwhile production. While, it is true that the movie is an accurate portrayal of upper class black socialites in the 1930s-1950s, there are so many elements of this movie and the book on which it was based that I found offensive.

First of all, let me set the record straight for all those who do not know. This movie was based on "The Wedding," a book by the renowned Harlem Rennaissance writer Dorothy West. It is NOT based on a true story in any way, shape or form.

I have read other works by Dorothy West and found them to be very interesting. She set herself apart from the other Harlem Rennaissance writers at the time by writing about black upper middle-class, a social hierarchy that has gone virtually unexplored throughout African-American Literature. However, when I read "The Wedding," I was deeply resentful. The underlying tone of racism against interracial relationships staggers me, as I am a multiracial person. I found the characters detestable and the fact that there is virtually no plot progression throughout the novel is a huge problem. Ninety percent of the novel is backstory.

Many of these same elements are portrayed in the movie version of this book to the nth degree. First of all, Shelby Coles is supposed to be white. She is not light-skinned like Halle Berry. She is WHITE. She has blond hair and blue-eyes. She is the product of so many blends of black and white that her blackness has been genetically wiped out on the surface. The fact that they cast Halle Berry to play Shelby Coles destroys the only redeeming quality I found in the book. This is the scene where Shelby gets lost as a little girl and no one can find her because the police report says that she is black, but she looks white. Using this scene to establish the unequal treatment society puts on whites and blacks was the only redeeming quality I found in this book.

There are several other elements that I found so offensive from this movie (mostly character-wise) that it would be impossible to mention them all.

This is a deeply resentful movie about interracial relations, and should not have been made into a movie. This was the last book that Dorothy West wrote before she died, and I'm wondering if that has something to do with its irregular quality. All I know is that if you are multiracial or biracial, do not, under any circumstances, watch this movie or read West's book. Read some of the other books by West. They are so much better.
11 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Thought-provoking story that keeps you guessing until the end
14 June 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Ron Howard seems to have a Midas touch. I have never seen a movie directed by him that I didn't like, and this one is definitely a plus.

I believe that Tom Hanks and Audrey Tautou did an excellent job portraying their characters and the relationship between them. I've heard complaints about how there was little chemistry between their characters, but I actually think that's pretty true to life. Tom Hanks was portraying a Harvard college professor, and as a college student, I can tell you that the smartest, the most scholarly, and the most pragmatic college professors like to keep things professional. There's no room in the personality of Tom Hanks' character to start any chemistry. Audrey Tautou was also great as the cryptologist struggling to face her past and uncover her grandfather's darkest secrets. Hers was an unspoken strength that I found refreshing for a female lead. I appreciate the reserved, professional-style relationship between Hanks and Tautou. Just because the two main characters are a male and a female doesn't mean that they automatically have to fall in love and embrace in a passionate kiss in every movie. Their closeness was intangible. It was shown through their gestures and their facial expressions, not their words. It was a silent acknoledgement and appreciation of the other's profession and personality, and I don't even think the dialogue between them was wooden at all. These were two characters who were just thrown into extraordinary circumstances, and I think they handled it pretty well.

Hats also should go off to Paul Bettany (Silas), Jean Reno, and Ian McKellen. Bettany's performance gave me chills throughout the entire movie, but what was even more creepy was at times, I actually found myself pitying his character. Jean Reno's performance was above average as the dignified but vicious police officer pursuing Hanks and Tautou. Like many of the characters, he portrayed his emotions mainly through facial expressions and actions rather than words, and he was excellent at it. You could feel the coldness in his eyes as he watched Tom Hanks in the murder investigation sequence. You could tell he suspected Tom Hanks right from the get go, and he wasn't going to stop until he had both Hanks and Tautou behind bars. Ian McKellen is always wonderful in anything he does, and he provided the perfect witty comic relief for this movie. The argument he has with Hanks while Hanks and Tautou are hiding out in his home was great and true to life. It reminded me of my English professors in my college class during a lecture. I could see any two scholars having the same debate over the historical accuracy of the story of Jesus Christ and Mary Magdelene. Where he falls short is a scene he tries to grab the dial that Hanks tosses up in the air. He's supposed to be playing a crippled man, but when he's running to catch the dial before it hits the ground, he barely even uses his crutches. Other than that, his performance was very convincing, but don't get too attached to his character. That's all I'm going to say.

But where this movie shines the most is its cinematography and its plot development. The locations in this film are beautiful, and there is a beautiful scene of Mary Magdelene's coffin in front of a single red rose in a vase with a gleam of sunlight touching the sculpture of her body. It is breathtaking. The plot development is awesome. Just when you think you've figured out a character, something happens or they do something that you never expected. Even when I thought I had figured something out plot-wise, another twist would put me right back to square one. However, when you finally do reach the ending, it all makes sense, and that makes for a great plot. This really is a treasure hunt-style movie.

I must finally acknowledge Hans Zimmer for the amazing original score that shines its best at the very last scene.

Overall, this movie is wonderful. With intelligent characters, beautiful backdrops, an uplifting score, a plot full of twists and turns, and thought-provoking questions on religion, The Da Vinci Code will leave you guessing throughout the film and talking when it's all over.

I give it an A. Great job all around.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Way too short, but not terrible
11 June 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I'm not going to say that this was a bad movie because I don't think it was. It's not nearly as good as the first two, but then very few third installments are. I think the main problem with this movie is lack of character development. The movie is way too short and devotes little time for character development. The story seems to focus mainly on Jean Grey and Wolverine. All other characters act as secondaries with some humorous one-liners and such, but I still see that as a problem. In the first two movies, every character personality was given time to develop, which is how we fell in love with Storm, Rogue, Cyclops, Professor Xavier, and even Magneto and Mystique. Everyone was made an equal part of the team regardless of whose side they were on. The new characters we are introduced to are very hollow. I'm disappointed that I had to look up Callisto's mutant name on-line since she was one of the few characters that was actually given dialogue. Also, for those of you who say that Juggernaut seemed to just run around and smash into things with no development, that's pretty much what he did in the comics. Having read the comics and seen the old animated series, I think that was a pretty accurate representation of Juggernaut, so if you have a problem with him, talk to Stan Lee not Brett Ratner. Angel, however, is a big exception to this trend. Despite the fact that Angel does very little in the film, the scenes involving him and his relationship with his father are excellent. You really get the sense that these two care for each other despite the foreboding public perception of mutants. You feel sympathy for both him and his father.

However, what little character development present in the film is made up for with the special effects. You can definitely tell that the budget made special effects priority one, and given the circumstances surrounding the making of this film (the constant changes in directing and such), it's nice to see that this film did not totally suffer from those circumstances. The Dark Phoenix effect is really cool (even though I would have preferred that they stick to the comics and give her actual flames), and the scene where Magneto lifts the Golden Gate bridge is fantastic (despite the huge continuity error the develops after the effect is done with). These are just one of the many cool effects that will leave you entertained throughout the movie.

I will not totally spoil the movie for the ten people out there that still haven't seen it, but there are also some good scenes that were totally unexpected and very emotional (but again, most of these emotional scenes involve Wolverine and Jean Grey). I guess they really wanted you to know that this was a war, and in a war there are always some casualties. The end of the film also leaves an interesting teaser that the war may not be over just yet (but I'm kinda hoping they don't make another one; I think they've done as much as they can with these characters; you don't want to overdo it) Overall, this movie makes for a good hour and a half. Would I see it again? Personally no. I would probably just wait for it to come out on video, and then I'd rent it. However, I'm not going to sit there and blame the director, the cast, or the crew for any of the very evident problems with this film. Given the circumstances of production, they all did the best with what they were given, and it's a testament to the commitment and enthusiam these people had for the film that is not seen on very many sets in Hollywood these days.

I recommend that X-men lovers see it just for a sense of closure. Just beware that there are some errors and go with them. It doesn't hold a candle to the first two, but then I wasn't really expecting it to. I think an actual grade scale best summarizes how I feel about this movie instead of the numeric system on IMDb, so I'm giving it a personal grade of B-.

PS: Hats off to Brett for his small tribute to the short fan film "I'm the Juggernaut Bitch!" That's how you know that with all the problems, this was still a labor of love.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed