Reviews

11 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
4/10
Completely Overrated
26 September 2006
This movie shows the power of marketing. As history clearly records, the Weinsteins shoveled this thing down the throat of every Academy voter - the first instance of a studio bringing the "academy campaign" to the public's attention. They created a false buzz about how good the movie was, immediately setting off a "me too" reaction. No one wanted to be the critic who didn't "get it." The same thing later worked for that piece of high-school drama level garbage - "Titanic."

Before this film was up for Oscar contention, all the payoffs, favors and heavy-handed sales-pitches went on behind closed doors. However, the scheme was a resounding success because this very mediocre film, with very decent, yet not exceptional, performances, took home three Oscars - including best film. To anyone who isn't aware of how Hollywood works, don't for one instance be fooled into thinking this was really the "best picture" of 1998. It just had the hardest-hitting academy campaign. And because it won best picture, some audiences have convinced themselves that what they saw was actually something special. Marketing - it can work miracles.

As for the film itself, it is definitely a lot of fun to watch. While it's got its moments of melodrama, Fiennes is affable and does a nice job of giving a silly story some gravitas. Judi Dench, who laughably won the Oscar for best supporting actress, despite having only minutes of screen time (remember that campaign!) is quite effective - very cold but with a noticeable undercurrent of humor at the absurdity of the existence of a "Queen." The weakest performance is Paltro, who does a fine job, but never draws you in enough to care much about her character. The big finale, which is supposed to be a gut-wrenching separation, never reaches that emotional level because Paltro fails to convincingly expresses inner desire. Oh well. Who cares - it's good clean fun while it lasts!
4 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Fantastic Four (I) (2005)
2/10
Lame!
26 September 2006
Warning: Spoilers
A 6.0? Are You People all MORONS? This movie was crap. Let's review: Crap script - check! Crap directing - check! Crap acting - check! Anyone else see a pattern here? Crap crap, double crap! Ugh - the love story between Mr. Fantastic and the Invisible Girl was less believable than the one about Tom Cruise and Katie Homes. The horrid story drags along for over an hour, then suddenly picks up speed and wraps up all in about 20 minutes. On top of every other bit of ridiculous nonsense that happens in this terd, the plot-line where Ben is "cured" of his hideous affliction, but then goes and ChOoSeS to be an ugly giant rock seals this movie's fate as a piece of garbage.

Awful awful awful. I guess fans have to pretend to love it in hopes that a sequel will be better. It couldn't be worse.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
If I hadn't seen this for free, I'd demand my money back.
24 May 2005
When a movie this horrid receives praise, it simply proves the overwhelming power of suggestion. Apparently, audience expectations for Jane Fonda's 'comeback,' plus their excitement at seeing her on screen, blinded them from the fact that her actual FILM is grade c dog-food.

The writing in this catastrophe is so weak and juvenile, the script couldn't stand up to comparison with an episode of 'Three's Company.' It doesn't help matters that the director/editors realized how horrendous this thing turned out and opted to impose audacious musical cues to remind us that 'this is a funny scene.' These cheesy reminders are just slightly less condescending than a laugh track, but accomplish the same aim. If John Williams were dead, he'd roll over in his grave.

In fairness, the first few minutes are tolerable and Lopez's character is cute enough to prevent you from despising her. Naturally, she is surrounded by her typical 'movie friends' - a freeloading homosexual male and a compassionate female who consistently annoy her, yet are always there when she needs them. This has been done, and often to better effect, a million times.

Surprisingly, Lopez's on-screen chemistry with the male-lead isn't terribly forced. Although their meeting is usual Hollywood nonsense, it is at least decently presented. But much like 'Vanilla Sky,' that showed promise as a simple love story, this car-wreck falls apart when the impetus for the film's title rears her ugly head. In this case, the Medussa is Fonda, an alcoholic, overly jealous, manipulative, raging mother-in-law-to-be who sets out to end Lopez's and her son's relationship. Once the movie becomes hers, things take a sudden and drastic turn towards hell - at least for the audience. Fonda looks great, but she over-acts and over-reacts to every situation, turning what could have been a sly, live-action Cruella DeVille into an awful cartoon character. Further, her motivation never sufficiently explains her behavior. MINOR SPOILER: Had she not lost her high profile, Barbara Walter-type job, would she STILL be such a raving lunatic? We never know for sure.

There are a few moments, mainly in the film's early and later chapters, where Fonda manages to display some level of depth, reminding us who she is and what mastery she truly has of her craft. Unfortunately, these moments are needles in a haystack of sitcom level melodrama.

A scene involving peanuts and gravy is so poorly staged that I had to leave my seat and walk around the theater lobby. At least Wanda Sykes is there to ad some legitimate humor to a film that is otherwise a collection of absurd moments.

The ending is directly out of a horrible sitcom where the writers realize they've reached their limit of screen time and must quickly wrap things up. MINOR SPOILER: Without giving away any details, a previously unseen character enters, explains one possible motivation for Fonda's antics thereby causing Fonda to reconsider her whole approach to child-rearing. Everyone falls back in love and life is once again just perfect! All the ending needed was a big white bow. Please.

Be forewarned. This is utter crap - it belittles everyone involved, especially the audience.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Hitch (I) (2005)
5/10
Ehhhhhhh . . . . Pretty Average Stuff.
24 February 2005
I saw this movie because I promised a friend I would. It was exactly what I expected -- Hollywood is at it again!! Filling a void that doesn't exist, we are confronted with yet another 'romantic comedy.' The unique appeal I guess is supposed to be Will Smith's charisma, but is that really worth $9.50 (in Manhattan theaters)? I guess the answer is - it depends. There is no need to get too involved in the plot. It isn't novel, it isn't even a unique approach to an old idea. The perfect match-maker who is unable to relate to the person of their dreams has been done before(Emma). Is anyone actually naive enough to sit there for two hours biting their nails out of fear that Will Smith WON'T land the babe? Please.

Since the plot is entirely inconsequential, what we have is just a vehicle for Smith to exercise his on-screen charm. He is OK, I suppose, but it takes more than one solid performance to make a movie worth watching. I really don't understand American audiences. Alfie was 1000000 times more thought provoking and engaging than this light-weight fare, yet no one went to see it. Maybe people just don't want to be forced to think anymore at the movies?

Eva Mendes is nice to look at I suppose and can exhibit warmth that catches you off guard in a positive way. The fat guy from 'the king of queens' isn't bad, but he isn't great either.

In the end, if you like Smith and are able to sit back and zone out for a while, you will probably like this movie. If you are a serious fan of cinema, then this movie is like an average slice of pizza. It gets the job done, but you don't really give it too much consideration.

5/10
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
h o r r i b l e
9 January 2005
Warning: Spoilers
America's fascination with all things Sandler proves there is a devil, and Satan purchased this lame comedian's soul about 10 years ago.

Granted, Sandler's performance in 'Punch Drunk Love' was charmingly off-beat. However, his nuanced delivery was more the work of director Paul T. Anderson, who knew to keep Sandler under a tight reign, rather than any innate talent.

What we have here is a single joke (and I use the term 'joke' extremely loosely) 'comedy' that grows tired before the opening credits finish rolling. The very premise of the film, that Sandler essentially ignores ALL responsibilities (including earning a living) for several months to set up an elaborate scheme to restore Barrymore's memory, is purely idiotic. A lot of less-than-brilliant people seem to find this movie romantic, but if this is what passes for 'romance' these days, we are all doomed.

The secondary-characters are caricatures of people that were never entertaining to begin with. In fact, there is not one single thing in this movie that makes it worth recommending -- it's not funny, the plot is stupid, there is not one memorable quote and the characters are all boring, lacking coherent motivation.

Even the ending scene, meant to be endearing, is just plain moronic. SPOILER: Barrymore has a child with a guy that she 'meets' for the first time every single day? Their daughter is going to have some remarkable life with a mother that forgets giving birth daily. Just like the rest of this movie, this theme is pathetic and stupid.

Fortunately for me (and hopefully a few other sane people remaining on this planet), I avoided Satan's command to 'love Sandler no matter what garbage he gets paid $20,000,000 to do.'

If you have an IQ in the double digits, avoid this turd. 2/10
7 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
this movie R U L E S !!
18 November 2004
Warning: Spoilers
There isn't much left to say about this painful rendition of the classic story: boy meets girl, boy loses girl, girl realizes she loves boy and they live forever happily, retold in this disastrous crap-fest.

This quickly produced tragedy; designed to capitalize on the success of television's 'American Idol' (probably the worst concept in history) was universally panned and tumbled to #8 on IMDb's bottom 100. And rightfully so.

MINOR SPOILERS:

From the agonizing opening scenes that attempt to establish a 'party' attitude, setting the tone for a 'fun' spring break, to the awful songs (imagine the writers of "Grease" went insane), to the insipid use of the word "party" to mean "dance like morons" (i.e., "Let's party!!"), this film just fails on every conceivable level. The leads can't act, the supporting cast is horrendous, the dance numbers are absurd and the direction aimless.

But, despite these shortcomings, this film ROCKS!!! It is SO BAD that you can't help but love it for it's sheer crapulence! Chubby ingénues Kelly Clarkson will have you chuckling during every scene with her pointless and flat delivery. The director's lame attempts to make Justin Timberlake, resembling Side-Show Bob from "The Simpsons", seem party-boy suave will have you keeling over in laughter.

The final confrontation between Kelly and her friend who finally admits that she only made a play for Justin out of jealousy is so gut-wrenchingly awful that you can't help but laugh hysterically. Most scenes are not allowed to build up any momentum because the characters' conversations are frequently interrupted by some dork in a bathing suit yelling the afore stated, "Let's Party." And these kids are such a bunch of losers, they listen to this d**k and start dancing in unison! Clearly, the writers didn't have the time and/or talent to draft full scenes, so they just inserted a lot of bad dance numbers to fill in the gaps.

Listen, it's easy to make a bad movie. But you really need utter disdain for humanity to subject audiences to this steaming terd. For that reason alone this is a must see!!
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Alfie (2004)
10/10
What it's All About
9 November 2004
Warning: Spoilers
MINOR SPOILERS:

I saw 'Alfie' weeks before it opened and wasn't going to comment on it. As a single Manhattanite in my early 30's (and a bit of a wanna-be amateur womanizer), I found it engaging, fascinating, sometimes uplifting and ultimately very real. I just assumed it would get great buzz and open very well. I was subsequently shocked by the mixed reviews because my compass is generally pretty good when it comes to predicting audience reaction -- had I seen a different movie?

Then I realized, I had . . from a certain point of view. I unwittingly empathized with Alfie's failed efforts to obtain personal fulfillment through female 'conquests' and recognized the pitfalls and risks of Alfie's behavior. But, as in most cases, by the time you understand that trusting someone can bring happiness, the opportunity to do so could be gone.

Jude Law is fantastic as Alfie. He is charismatic, handsome and tips his hand to the audience JUST enough to keep from being smarmy. Law assures us that Alfie is essentially a good person with simple wants, but he is clueless as to the tremendous impact his actions have on those around him. Because of this blindness, he carelessly romps through life, casting aside all reason and consequence so he can enjoy each moment free of guilt or worry.

Of course, the bubble can only get so big before it bursts. Alfie's brushes with testicular cancer, abortion, betrayal and true love finally force him to confront, and question, the way he lives his life. What is it all about? Alfie asks the question that never gets answered. But I think we are meant to infer from everything Alfie goes through, that life is about whatever we want it to be. The trick is deciding what that is, before it is too late.

Remake? WHO CARES?? Through my eyes, a nearly perfect film. 9/10.
7 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Crossroads (I) (2002)
2/10
Great For Ripping on . .
2 September 2002
As is common on a Saturday night, my friends and I decided to see an atrocity caught on celluloid and tear it to shreds. Therefore, I bought this piece of garbage at my local Blockbuster (with the sale, it was actually cheaper than renting). The ups: You do see a lot of Britney's nubile little body in this miserable vomitous mass of a movie AND Britney's acting isn't bad at all. Only die hard Britney haters will lie and say she was terrible. However (as noted above), the movie itself is a steaming terd. Everyone involved with this car wreck apparently had their own agendas and ideas for what it should be. The simple plot and immature dialogue are geared (intentionally I HOPE) towards younger children, while the strong sexual content is clearly adult oriented. If not for Britney's star power, this movie would have NO audience of its own. I promise anyone with an IQ over 90 will be dumbfounded by this film's absurdity and won't even remember seeing it a month after viewing.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Amazing How Critics Completely Dropped the Ball on This One. A Great Epic That Will Restore Your Faith in the Force.
19 May 2002
Warning: Spoilers
First, I am a fan of the Star Wars series. 'A New Hope' being the second movie I ever saw (when I was 6), I really did not have much of a choice. However, I am not a fan of biblical proportions. For example, although I know the Millennium Falcon will do .5 past light speed, I have never made myself up like Darth Maul. Nor do I have any delusions about the time-line inconsistencies of 'Empire' or the emotional emptiness and overuse of matte backdrops in 'Jedi'. I was also strikingly disappointed in 'Menace,' partly because it has several glaring inconsistencies with the events to come, but mostly because, despite its dazzling visuals, it was flat, with dialogue aimed at a 2nd grader, (i.e., - "Coriscant, the entire planet is one big city," told to us as we are looking at the one big city. Lucas did not trust us enough to see the train when it was 2 feet in front of our noses and felt he had to clue us in on the obvious - insulting).

(MINOR SPOILERS) Yet for all this we have forgiven him, because 'Clones' is a fast paced, visually spectacular, with a wonderful story and dialogue that, while not 'Glen Gary Glen Ross' is never embarrassing, nor out of step with the characters. Hayden Christensen IS Anakin Skywalker. I have read several critics who felt he was emotionally vapid and unable to display the facade of a Jedi with the core of a Sith. Obviously, critics no longer have to know a thing about acting to find work, because Christensen's deep seething, intense gaze and impulsive outbursts are Vader's core. You feel you are actually watching the man underneath Vader's cowl and know that this boy is on the path to evil. Christensen does a fantastic job with his difficult task and deserves accolades. The rest of the cast is also top notch and tight, obviously having a lot of fun, now that the actors have had time to get comfortable in their character's skins. The only misstep is actually Portman. She is gorgeous as Padme and can be quite the action heroine (though her nanosecond recovery from a high fall from a moving gun ship was laughable). However, she never exhibits more than a cute likability, and not enough heat to convince the audience that she is so taken with Anakin, she is willing to overlook his dark nature. Surely, the movie has its silly moments. C-3PO's mishap at the battle droid factory is simply absurd and should have been cut. Actually, the whole factory sequence has a strange incongruity to it, because there's too much going on with no visible means of management or structure. R2's sudden ability to fly also seems an afterthought to solve a minor plot problem. Another weakness is that Lucas is so concerned with visuals, he is willing to sacrifice character development. Anakin had been dreaming about his mother for months, and his delay in acting on his feelings causes him to find her just 10 seconds before she dies - too absurd by any standard. At least there are none of 'Menace's' 4-second scenes with just 1 line of stupid dialogue. However these minor quibbles still do not defeat the story's epic quality or beautifully orchestrated action sequences, which are enough to convert anyone to the Jedi Order. The story has a sweeping feel to it and a grandeur of presence that may not fit with the rest of the series, but on its own, is just fantastic. The plot unfolds to us in pieces sandwiched between glorious battles. I have also read many critics were unhappy with the political exposition. Again, I often agree with critical assessment, but here, they just DID NOT GET IT. The politics of a Republic becoming an Empire IS the plot of the series, just as important as Anakin's turn to Vader and essential to propel the story. If the Republic needs an army, do we not need to see why? Fortunately, Lucas handles these scenes quickly and smartly and they last just long enough for the audience to catch its breath before the next action sequence unfolds. All well done, and great to watch.

The grand finale that finally shows the audience why Yoda is the head of the Jedi Council, will send you spinning. It also sets up the rest of the series and gives away some future secrets. The worst thing about this movie is that it is the next to last one. My score - 8 Congratulations Mr. Lucas, you have done it. May the Force be With You.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
It Will Change The Way You Consider Porn
4 September 2001
First off, I get a tremendous kick out of porn films. Reveling in their crappy production values and atrocious acting is a wildly amusing way to spend a few hours. Although I wouldn't blink twice if the entire industry collapsed, I have certainly seen enough of this genre to know who Sir Ron Jeremy is. Plus, he is an alma madder of my New York High School, having graduated 20 years before I did. So he is like the school's dirty little secret. A would-be school teacher turned porn star who the boys adore and the teachers deplore.

Like other porn stars asked to give interviews about their biz, I assumed a documentary on Ron Jeremy's (born 'Ron Jeremy Hyatt') life would reveal him to be a whacko who ridiculously believes the porn business is a legitimate industry that should be taken seriously. Of course, the billions of dollars is generates annually can't be ignored either.

What a shock it was to learn that Ron Jermey, or 'the Hedgehog' as he is lovingly called, is 'in' on the joke with the rest of us. He knows that his whole celebrity is completely absurd, and even comments that he is so popular because the fans can relate to a 'schlub' like him. The film often follows Ron through his daily life and shows him to be, basically, a really nice guy who just fell into the porn world because a girlfriend submitted his nude photo Playgirl, without even telling him. From there, the adult-film industry basically pursued HIM!! Remember, at the time, he was thin, young, and while still average-looking, his porn star 'equipment' was undeniable.

The documentary is intercut with interviews with others in the porn world discussing Ron Jeremy, the man apart from all the 'glamour.' We learn of his intense cheapness (he is the richest man in the business, but only flies coach, literally uses plastic garbage bags for luggage, wears clothing he purchased from thrift stores 20 years ago, and won't pick up a check if his life depends on it), his excessive living (he eats whatever/whenever he wants, never exercises and indulges in sex - however he is adamantly anti-drug, including Viagra), and his desire to break into the 'real' acting world (he will do ANYTHING related to cinema - he once flew himself to Paris to film a movie where he appeared on screen for less than 2 seconds before being killed).

We even meet his father, who like Ron, treats the whole situation like a huge practical joke. Listening to Ron's dad talk nonchalantly about Ron's abnormally large equipment, and laugh about the embarrassment his son has brought the Hyatt family, is precious. It takes all the 'dirtiness' out of it, and makes the whole idea of a guy having sex on film for a living just seem like a lot of fun.

However, you are still left feeling a bit sorry for ol' Ron. His true life-long ambition is for Hollywood to take him seriosuly, and not use his name as the punchline for so-many bad jokes. Interestingly, he does have an impressive resume, but it's made pretty clear that he is already damaged goods in Hollywood. No matter what he does, or where he goes, he will always be Ron Jeremy, Porn Star. No matter how hard he tries, he will never leave that stigma behind - a victim of his own celebrity I suppose. Yet, it is a little difficult to feel TOO bad for a guy who's slept with over 2000 women, and gotten paid handsomely to boot.

Fun movie, very revealing, my rating: 9
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
GARBAGE
30 May 2001
I just saw this piece of trash on cable a few weeks ago. I checked it out on IMDB, expecting it to get a 1 or 2 rating. I was APPALLED that it scored a 7.5 and the other reviewer actually seemed to like it.

This movie is pure garbage. The acting is atrocious, the dialogue absurd, the plot asinine, and that's the good stuff!

It is just plain awful. Maybe worth a look just to laugh at it. Anyone who actually watches this movie and extracts something positive deserves to be mauled by a werewolf.
4 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed