Change Your Image
experten
Reviews
Timeline (2003)
Big time adventure
1. Paul Walker does not ruin the movie. Btw., it is rare that an actor alone ruins a movie, the director and the story are usually more important.
(True are that some actors can make a movie a lot better. Paul Walker may not be one of them.)
2. The acting is good. Director Donner knows what he is doing.
3. Those reviewers on this site complaining about plot holes, stating that the movie makes no sense have no good examples of this.
4. Those reviewers are always complaining about time travel movies because time travel in itself makes no sense, it is almost as hard to understand as eternity or trying to imagine the end of the universe.
5. It is an action movie based on time travel. If you do not like action movies and/or can not accept time travel because it is illogical you will not like the movie.
6. However, if you like action, Timeline has a lot of good action, impressing battle scenes, good enough acting, fantastic music, no boring parts, lots of suspense and an unusually interesting storyline.
7. DeNiro, Pacino or other big names are not in the movie, but if that makes you think that a movie can not be good or the acting has to be bad, then do not watch the movie.
8. It is an American mainstream movie. This means that Crichtons scientific explanations are not present in the movie. I have read the book and found the theories about light beams interesting, but I can understand that it would be too hard to follow for a lot of people and it would also ruin the movies high tempo. However, the lack of explanations does not make the movie illogical it only means that everything is not explained.
9. It is entertainment, not a science documentary that a lot of the reviewers seems to think, complaining about why an actor who is not a Scotsman is acting that he is (it is his job), why people can understand each other and those standard language faultfinders arguments. Would you clever faultfinders prefer a movie where everyone spoke medieval French or English that you could not understand? Of course you would have preferred that, also without subtitles because in real life there are no subtitles when people speak.
To me it seems that you do not want to be entertained you want to show that you are too intelligent to accept any compromises and that you can find faults. I feel sorry for you guys in the nitpicker wolfpack.
Anger Management (2003)
Very funny. Not ruined by Sandler.
Adam Sandler have made a lot of crap and he has made those movies even worse by speaking in a very ridiculous but unfunny way.
I hated Waterboy and Big Daddy was easily forgotten. I saw him in another easily forgotten movie where he inherited money and I do not even care what the name was. It would only take me a few seconds to check it out here on IMDb but I prefer not to remember the title.
Anger Management is very funny though. The story is clever, the ending is clever (better than something some whiners here could come up with, that's for sure) and the dialogue and acting is even better.
The pacing is high, there are no unnecessary or boring scenes.
I have seen the flight scene several times and the therapy scenes are also absolutely brilliant. And the traffic disturbance scene. And the bar scene... You get the picture.
Adam Sandler is actually very good in this movie. Anger Management shows that good directing and a good story can reveal hidden talent.
Jack Nicholson is good as always. He was perfect for this role.
But I have to mention John Turturro, even though he only has a small role. This guy can act, drama or comedy does not matter. He is very good here. I think he should get more and bigger roles.
Anger Management is for you who like odd people and people getting into uncomfortable situations. It's for you who demand more than Rat Race or Johnny English. (Rowan Atkinson was funny as Mr. Bean and Black Adder in small doses on TV, but his movies sucks.)
My rating is 10/10, according to the IMDb rating system, of course. This is a movie I will see several times.
I Am Dina (2002)
Emotionally strong drama you will not forget.
I am Dina is intended for mature people. If you like drama and if you like too see strong scenes, odd people and good actors in a movie that does not resemble anything from Hollywood, or any other movie for that matter, then you should watch this movie.
The acting is very good throughout. The fact that the dialogue is in english and the actors are not english native speaking does not matter, unless you are a sissy.
The norwegian landscape is very dramatic and the photography is absolutely breathtaking. Usually I do not even comment on the photography, because I think the story is more important, but the photography in I am Dina is really impressing.
This is a movie you will not forget.
Rating: 8 / 10, according to the IMDb rating system of course. If the ending would have been as strong as the beginning (really strong) my rating would have been even higher. Why do people here invent their own rating systems?
Bruce Almighty (2003)
A masterpiece that will become a classic.
In my opinion Dumb and Dumber is Jim Carrey's funniest movie but Bruce Almighty is his best.
BA is not a pure comedy like Dumb and Dumber, one that only works because of the comedic genius of Carrey (together with a brilliant Jeff Daniels).
BA has quite a few typical Carrey scenes that indeed are very funny, but BA is more than the sum of those scenes, it is brilliantly acted, masterfully directed and the story is very clever too.
BA is a feel good movie in the tradition of Stewart/Capra, enhanced by the comedy genius Carrey in top form.
It is very good to see Carrey back in the comedy genre, even though his more dramatic movies has been very good (Truman Show) or good but easily forgotten (the rest). Comedy is what Carrey does best and he does it like no other.
The casting of Morgan Freeman was perfect. He is always good, but here he is perfect. The only pity is that he will never get a Greater role :) . Jennifer Aniston was also good and it is irrelevant that she has an easy role.
My rating is 10, according to the IMDb rating scale of course.
Finally some remarks to other reviewers: If there is a God I'm sure He/ She/the Neutrum is mighty enough to take on whatever form or color God wants, no matter descriptions of God in the Bible. In front of Bruce God may have found it best to look like Morgan Freeman, in front of you God may want to look like a pink elephant. Who knows? The answer is not in the movie. The purpose of BA is not to answer teological questions or support one religious belief in front of another. (BA is based on the monoteistic belief, but that is hardly the purpose of the movie).
The message of the movie is not, like at least one reviewer stated, the conservative thought that we should be content with our place (other than being content we are not gods). If you have to try to find messages in a comedy movie I think they will be more like this in BA: You do not have to be content with your place, but don't expect God to fix everything for you (a more radical thought, maybe BA is unsuitable material for you americans) and there might be other things than your position that are more important. But the movie is not about sending out messages, it's purpose is to entertain and it is a success.
If you are looking for symbolism, messages and such you may be better off watching another kind of movie. If you don't like Carrey, Seagal or Eastwood why do you watch their movies? Does not seem very intelligent to me.
May (2002)
Psycho study for adults. A masterpiece for me and few of you.
Depending on who you are, this is what you will think about May:
Young people or action oriented adults: you will think it takes to long before any action takes place. Most of the movie is a character study of a very unusual personality. When the murder finally starts, it does not resemble ordinary slashers, although somewhat gory and with a grotesque ending, there are no chase scenes and it is not intended to be suspenseful. The action is also not completely chronological, but interrupted and with flashbacks, if i remember correctly. If you like 13 Ghosts you will probably hate May.
Mainstream audience: you will not be amused of the black humor and you will feel that the ending is too grotesque and revolting.
People looking for suspense and horror: May does not even try to be a suspense movie. Stay away.
But if you recognize yourself in the following description I think YOU WILL LOVE MAY: You feel you belong to a small minority who appreciates to see something different, something odd far from Hollywood mainstream. You don't mind violence and grotesque images. Maybe you like myself even find it to be an asset. You do not demand action all the time, on the contrary too much action can often ruin atmosphere and good storytelling. You like black humor and appreciate odd characters like Udo Kier, Klaus Kinski and Brad Dourif. You like movies from directors like for instance David Lynch, David Cronenberg and Dario Argento. Watch May and apart from movies from the above mentioned directors I will recommend some other titles: Crawlspace (see my review), Flesh For Frankenstein, Blood For Dracula, Man Bites Dog, Headless Eyes, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 and Driller Killer. All very funny. At least in my opinion.
My rating of May: 9/10. Really impressing in every aspect. It made me smile a lot.
Signs (2002)
Very suspenseful, actually rather scary, always interesting and never boring
There are always people out there complaining about faults in good and entertaining movies, faults that they are so clever to pinpoint. Do not listen to them.
Signs is actually almost a horror masterpiece. I'm not a Mel Gibson fanatic. For instance, I hated The Patriot with Gibson and I thought Shyamalan's previous movie Unbreakable was rather bad. On the other hand I loved The Sixth Sense from the same director. If you agree with me on those I'm sure you will agree that Signs is very good.
Signs has many strong points, The story is captivating from the beginning, the pacing is high and there is not a boring moment in the entire movie. The acting is also very good. Last but not least: Signs is actually a scary movie and that is not very common.
The weak points are few and minor: The unneccessary comic relief with the aluminium foil protection, the boy's a little to clever lines and perhaps a little too much sentimentality.
Rating 9/10. According to the IMDb rating system of course.
Finally a few words to all you fault-finders and joykillers out there:
SPOILER WARNING
You think you are so clever. But with sarcastic summarys like "They forgot their raincoates" and remarks about the effect of water you show that you are actually not very clever at all, not understanding that you are giving away important parts of the plot and thus ruining the movie experience for others.
One reviwer for instance makes a big deal out of the fact that it is not likely that aliens, who are intelligent enough to travel to earth, would need crop signs as guidance. Of course not. Our cities are not hard to find, glowing like giant lightbulbs, sending out lots of heat and signals etc. And of course the aliens would have some coordinate system to find their way without crop signs. But how do you know the purpose of the crop signs? I don't know. All I know is that I heard a theory in the movie that it was for coordination. But did an alien explain the purpose of the crop signs? No, thought not. Maybe you are not that clever after all? Maybe the real purpose of the crop signs have to do with the aliens culture, maybe it is their warpaintings? Or maybe it is psychological warfare? Who knows?
The same reviewer thought the ending was far fetched. But like Gibson said in the movie; there are two types of people. You are free to believe the ending was an act of god or that it was coincidence and only act of man. I thought the ending was very clever and I'm sure it is a lot more clever than something you can come up with.
Last: Is it so hard to think that an alien species who has never had any contact with water could be surprised of the effect of water on themselves?
Ghost Ship (2002)
Rather gory and unusually good
I did not like House On Haunted Hill (the remake) and Thirteen Ghosts (same director) but Ghost Ship also from Dark Castle is a lot better (although that doesn't say much). It is not a masterpiece, it is not art and maybe not even very scary but it is atmospheric enough and entertaining from beginning to end.
Ghost Ship have high production values, with an unusually good cast lead by Gabriel Byrne (The Usual Suspects, Miller's Crossing) and the setting is moody, reminding me of the superior game Resident Evil (and the acceptable movie based thereon).
The version I saw was rather gory (not like an Argento movie of course, but gory for being a recent American movie) and there were more good gory scenes than the one everybody is writing about (even though that scene alone makes the movie worth seeing for gorehounds). The pacing is high and it never gets boring, but thankfully there is not too much going on, so it never degenerates to a cg action horror MTV style movie for kids like Thirteen Ghosts. The special effects make up and the special effects are well done.
Sure, we have seen similar stories before (this is not even the first movie named Ghost Ship and who has not seen a ghostmovie?), but it is a little more well written this time and there is a reason for the supernatural things going on. But more than the story, it is the atmosphere, created by good directing, good acting and what looks like a big budget that makes the movie good together with the gore.
Do not expect The Shining, expect decent entertainment and you will be satisfied. If you are a snob looking for faults, I'm sure you will find some and then you can be satisfied too, writing a review showing how clever you are that found a plot hole or realizing Ghost Ship is not directed by Kubrick based on a novel by a Nobel price winner.
One last note: Fellow reviewers; why do you have to keep revealing too much of the plots and tell us about the key scenes or describe the goriest scenes and why do you have to keep inventing your own rating systems when IMDb already has a rating system? My rating according to IMDb system is 7/10.
Rat Race (2001)
The very first scene is funny, the rest is not.
There is only one scene worth watching in the whole movie, it is the very first, checking out from hotel, scene. Younger people and people who likes "jokes" like slipping on a banana will probably like the movie though.
Mr. Bean (Atkinson) is a lot more fun in the TV episodes and John Cleese was a comedic genius in Fawlty Towers (and Monty Python of course), but their talents are wasted here. I had high hopes but Rat Race turned out to be crap. Watch Freddy Got Fingered instead.
Oi yue shing (2000)
Highly recommended HK triad gangster movie
A War Named Desire is a well done Hong Kong triad gangster movie (set in Thailand). It is rather violent, but it is not a non-stop action movie, it is a violent gangster drama. This is a movie similar to the gangster movies by Johnnie To (Milkyway productions) and if you like The Longest Nite and A Hero Never Dies, I am convinced that you will also like A War Named Desire. There is no silly HK humor in A War Named Desire, it is serious all the way.
The story is never boring or too slow but Alan Mak, the director still manages to develop the main characters so that they become real people with emotions, people to care about which makes the movie more engaging. It is interesting to see the two main characters, the brothers played by Daniel Chen and Francis Ng. How will the younger brother (Chen) react to his brothers gangster activities? Is the older brother just an emotionless gangster? Both Chen and Francis Ng does a fine job acting, they are unusually believable and Gigi Leung is also good as a dangerous femme fatale. It is also nice to see the locations in Thailand for a change and there are good scenes from the celebrations of the traditional Thai New Year (in April if I am not mistaken),especially the knife scene with Gigi Leung.
The last 30 minutes of the movie consists of one of the best final gun battles ever filmed and we get to see many nice bloodsquibs when the bullets enter the bodies. Before that there is one of the best death scenes I have ever seen, a tragedy on the back of a Toyota pickup. Scenes like these makes this movie hard to forget.
The photography is also very good, sometimes beautiful and it is obvious already from the very first scene that this is a well made quality movie with high production values.
If you like A War Named Desired, I can also recommend The Odd Ones Die and the thai gangster movie 2499 antapan krong muang (2499 Dang Bireley's And Young Gangsters) who is about a real life thai gangster, active in the 50's (hence the title, the thai year 2499 is approximately 1950).
Don't Say a Word (2001)
Entertaining and well made but without the twists
Don't Say a Word is entertaining from the very beginning (with a very good robbery scene) all the way to the end.
Pros: The pacing is high. Sean Bean is very good (as usual) as the villain, he is like Danger on two legs (excuse me Donald Pleasence for borrowing your line) and he lifts this movie to a higher level. Michael Douglas is always entertaining to see and it does not matter that he is always doing the same role (rich, powerful, competent Stand up guy). Miss lolita psychohead, brilliantly played by Brittany Murphy, is another character that lifts the movie, she appears to be so twisted it is almost scary. Don't Say a Word is also very well directed, apart from getting the best from the actors and the already mentioned robbery scene, the director has done a good job throughout, especially with the train scene and the ending who are very effectively staged. There is also some (not much) well done brutality in DSAW, apart from the initial robbery we have a brutal fight in an apartment.
Cons: OK. Michael Douglas has to uncover a secret from someone but other than that we have seen this story before. There are no unexpected plot twists. The female cop (Jennifer Esposito) was probably designed as an attractive woman in order not to compete with Douglas about who is the hero, but the character is hard to believe. Child in danger may be an effective theme but let there be more traumatising danger, let the child suffer from real danger with a gun in the mouth and it will be even more effective. Why does the movie children always have to be small, clever heroes? Let them be weeping, abused victims instead.
Summary: You will not be bored. The director has done what can be done with the story. If you want more story than this, watch the masterful A Perfect Murder or the unbelievable but entertaining The Game instead. DSAW will satisfy most audiences. Rating: 7 / 10.
Mulholland Dr. (2001)
Non mainstream surrealistic atmospheric drama
If you dislike movies that are not explaining everything to you, that leaves you with questions unanswered and different possible explanations of what was actually happening then you better avoid Mulholland Dr. The same thing goes if you are demanding a lot of action, but if you appreciate a superbly directed drama where you get to think for yourself without getting everything spelled out for you, then Mulholland Dr. might be something for you.
Mulholland Dr. has so many highly entertaining scenes if you appreciate the combination of good dialogue and good acting, but if I am forced to mention a few it would be Adam Keshers meeting with The Cowboy (excellent dialogue) and his meeting with the Castigliane brothers (the expresso scene is so marvelously twisted). Normally I hate when movies shows musical performances to fill up the screen time but the audition scene in MD is very well performed and the singers are sexy and charismatic. Another favourite scene is when the big bully enters Adam Keshers house like a living bulldozer or when Cookie tells Adam that whoever he is hiding from they know where he is or... there are so many favourite scenes, I can't mention them all.. OK, but just a couple more; the hitjob scene is very funny if you have a sense for black humor and the ability to laugh when people are getting murdered and the very short scene with the hooker asking for a cigarette is simply marvelous, she is so genuine and still I can't help being amazed that there are people like her right here on Earth. (She appears to be like a child mentally but she has the oldest profession in the world and she "takes a cigarette though").
Lynch also uses music masterfully, creating a thick and mysterious atmosphere, just to sit back and enjoy. Now I came to think about a couple of more scenes that I just have to mention; the lesbian scene is very believable and very hot and the scene where a man and his friend follow up on a dream, it would not be in a normal Hollywood movie, it is not essential for the story, but it is good, it is highly entertaining, mysterious and Mulholland Dr. is not your normal Hollywood movie.
I don't claim that I have understood everything in Mulholland Dr., I am just a human and I have only seen the movie once (although I have seen some of the above mentioned scenes at least five times), but MD is so entertaining that it is not necessary to understand everything. My unanswered questions only acts like a bonus, a motivation to watch the movie again.
The sheer number of reviews on IMDb of Mulholland Dr. (663 at the moment) is an indicator of the fact that this is a movie with impact, you will no be indifferent after seeing it, I think you will either love or hate it. Recommended for mature audiences only. Kids and action fanatics will be bored. My rating is 9 / 10, with more violence it would have been a 10.
Ali (2001)
Good, but not The Greatest
Do not expect to see a boxing movie, expect to see a movie about a boxer. And not only about any boxer but probably the greatest boxer of all times and also a great civil rights fighter, probably one of the most important and influential ones, which at least surprised me when I saw Ali.
There is not a lot of boxing in Ali, but the boxing you will see is ultra realistic (forget the Rocky-style boxing, blocking with the face) and I found the scenes very exciting and well done. There is also a good assassination scene.
The combining of sound and pictures is brilliant in Ali and it shows already in the beginning, good enough to give you shivers and the music works as an ignitor of feelings in the same way as in a gospel church.
Even though the movie is more about Ali himself than his achievements in the ring, we will not follow him for more than about ten years and (unfortunately) there is nothing about the beginning of his career or what happened afterwards (maybe just as well).
The acting is absolutely first class, Will Smith is phenomenal, which shows that a good director like Mann (remember Heat, the movie that among other things contains the best robbery scene of all movies, except The Long Riders) can bring out hidden talent. Of Course Jon Voight is very good, but he is always good even if the movie is not (Anaconda) and when the movie is good (i.e. Runaway Train) he is remarkable.
I would have preferred an even longer movie with more boxing and maybe a little shorter scenes from Zaire prior to the Rumble in the Jungle, except the scene where Ali is moved by the support from the common people in the street of Zaire, which I found emotional and important for the movie.
I was disappointed that we didn't get too see the whole match against Joe Frazier and nothing of what happened in the rings after Zaire. I also think that it would have been beneficial for the excitement if Mann had chosen to show us how Foreman crushed his opponents prior to the Ali fight.
My rating is a weak 8 / 10. Younger people and those who only want action will be disappointed. Otherwise I think Ali can interest the mature viewer even if he/she is not a boxing enthusiast.
Thir13en Ghosts (2001)
Tiresome action horror suitable for kids
I think the younger audiences will appreciate all the action in this movie. The audience who thinks movies like Brain Dead (Dead Alive) and From Dusk Till Dawn got better in the second half, who likes John Carpenters crappy Vampires and the ultra bad Faust: Love of the Damned, you guys will love Thir13en Ghosts (ridiculous spelling, ditto movie).
The biggest problem with this movie is that it lacks atmosphere and there are too many ghost attacks, too much shouting and screaming and the actors are constantly overacting. Too much of everything ruins the movie. Think about it, a ghost movie with ghosts constantly attacking, how can you be surprised or scared ? The story is very predictable but it does not matter because the movie is revealing itself as worthless already in the first scene and it does not take very long until you get bored. The mature viewer will give up on this movie long before the pathetic turkey ending (probably approved by stupid american test audiences).
There is one good scene in the movie, the bathtub scene (stolen from The Shining)plus maybe two short but OK gore scenes. The special effects make-up is good and they seem to have put some money on creating the house. The music is tiresome, it is too much.
Here are some recommendations of much superior horror movies: The Thing, The Howling, The Brood and An American Werewolf in London. If you are a little older and appreciates good creepy atmosphere you should not miss The Others, Mute Witness and A Stranger Calls Back. If you want gore I can recommend some of Lucio Fulcis movies (The Beyond, House By The Cemetery and New York Ripper) and many of Dario Argentos movies. If you want really twisted and demented movies I can recommend Crawlspace, Beyond The Darkness and Combat Shock. Most people will not appreciate those movies. A more recent movie that actually was surprisingly good is Jeepers Creepers (even though it is best during the first half and a little too much in the second half).
My rating of Thir13en Ghosts: 3 /10.
Joi gin a long (1999)
Odd romantic drama with some bursts of violence
This is a movie from highly acclaimed Milkyway movie production company, made by the master director himself, Johnny To. Some consider Where A Good Man Goes to be an overlooked masterpiece but my personal opinion is that it is a good but not great movie.
I prefer some of Johnny To's other movies such as Running Out Of Time and especially A Hero Never Dies which is much more violent and also very stylistic with many very nice shootings with bloodsquibs. I can also recommend some of the movies produced by Johnny To; the exciting thriller The Intruder, the odd masterpiece The Odd Ones Die and the extremely violent and well written The Longest Nite.
Where A Good Man Goes is not very violent, but it has some sudden bursts of violence. It is more of a romantic drama about the relationship between a newly released ex-convict and an attractive widow hotel owner. If you are a little more mature movie lover who doesn't expect to see a heroic bloodshed gun ballet movie (there is no gun action here) but want to see a well directed well played drama, but still have the stomach too see some violence, some ugly beatings, then I think you will enjoy this movie.
The pacing is not high, but there are enough going on all the time to keep mature viewers entertained. The ex-convict Michael is played by Ching Wan Lau and he is one tough bastard and here he is good as always. Ruby Wong is attractive but also believable in her role as the hotel owner, she has a certain dignity with her. Lam Suet is also very good as the nasty policeman who wants to catch Michael.
Where A Good Man Goes is also interesting because the character Michael, although believable, is hard to understand. His point of view is that we live in a dog eat dog world and you better be mean because there are so many mean people out there that otherwise will take advantage of you. This is his philosophy and he lives like he preaches, he treats everybody bad including the widow hotel owner. It is interesting to watch the relationship between them develop despite the way he is treating her. Michael is a more multidimensional character than is common in Hollywood movies, To is not afraid to make him complicated, to show us his bad sides as well as his good qualities.
Rating: 7 / 10. Recommended for mature people only.
Ocean's Eleven (2001)
Good actors, bad and boring movie
The big problem with this movie is the story. It takes too long to get going, the preparations before the robbery are not very interesting, there are too many characters so none of them becomes interesting and the robbery turns out to be unrealistic and very little exciting.
George Clooney does the same role as he always does, the cool guy, but he is not very cool or impressing here. Elliot Gold is more interesting and odd but gets very little screen time and the chinese guy amuses us a few moments. Brad Pitt has done many impressing roles (12 Monkeys, Kalifornia, Snatch, Fight Club and Seven just to mention some of his best movies)and the same can be said about Matt Damon but none of them get anything to work with in this movie. Andy Garcia is as good as he can be in his role as the bad guy, but why doesn't we get to see him actually do anything bad ? Julia Roberts character is only boring too see, she could have been replaced with any female actor and it would not have made any difference. But replaced with Halle Berry we would at least have had someone beautiful to look at.
Ocean's Eleven is a remake of the 1960 movie with the same name. You can see the oldfashioned overlaping of scenes and you can here it from the oldfashioned crappy music. I have not seen the original but the new version is a typical example of replacing good story with a bunch of star actors. No one would bother with this movie if the actors were not so famous.
I recommend that you watch The Score instead, it has the three greatest actors in the world and here the actors really make a difference, especially Edward Norton but it is always a pleasure too see De Niro and Brando as well. The Score has a much superior story, a very exciting robbery and a superb ending.
My rating of Ocean's Eleven is 4 / 10.
The Others (2001)
Do not read too much about it, just watch it
The only weakness of The Others is if you know too much about the plot so I will not give away any details about it.
Here is what you need to know: The Others is not aimed at the younger audiences, it is not an action movie nor does it contain fancy special effects make up or monsters. It is not a violent movie, but it is creepy and have some scares. It is very well acted and directed, it manages to create a very interesting and moody atmosphere, it uses sound effects skillfully and it will keep you interested and entertained throughout the whole movie.
The story is clever and so is the ending. Unfortunately the same can not be said about those reviewers who are giving away too much about the plot here on IMDb and who make obvious comparisons with another movie which also can ruin your experience of The Others, so don't read any more, just watch The Others. I urge you who are writing reviews here to stop inventing your own rating systems and use the official 10 grade scale of IMDb. My rating of The Others: 9/10.
Training Day (2001)
Nice to see Washington when he is not so nice
Very good cop movie. I was tired of seeing Denzel Washington as Mr. Nice Guy in movie after movie so it feels very refreshing to see him get his fingers dirty. But is he a little dirty or very dirty ? Maybe he is only doing what is needed in a society gone bad ? Training Day has a brutal and serious atmosphere. The dialogue and acting is good, the pacing is rather high and there is some good violence and very threatening and suspenseful situations. U.S.A. sure seems to have some really dangerous neighbourhoods. Training Day is certainly better than most Hollywood cop movies. I also want to recommend 15 Minutes and The Negotiator. Rating: 9/10
Faust: Love of the Damned (2000)
Cheap and ridiculous disappointment
I like the outrageous Re-Animator movies. I like the paranoid Society (except the ending that is too much and ruins the atmosphere). But I am sorry to say: Faust is crap. If you are under the age of 20 you might like Faust but otherwise you should be prepared for one of the worst horror movies of all times.
The only good thing I have to say about this movie is that it contains some gore, but the movie is so bad that you will not care. The story is worthless and contains downright ridiculous elements like the red rubber demon. There is absolutely no suspense at all. The music does not help to create any atmosphere, instead it contributes to ruin the movie. (I believe the only director that have managed to successfully use hard rock music in horror movies is Dario Argento, see for instance the superb Terror At The Opera).
The actors are never convincing and the movie never feels realistic nor is it funny, that is why it is impossible for an adult to even appreciate the gore. I liked Andrew Divoff in Wishmaster and Wishmaster 2 and he is doing exactly the same role here, only now he has nothing interesting to say or do. Jeffrey Combs was well suited in the Re-Animator movies but it is no fun seeing him in Faust, he is not a good actor.
Some reviewers talk about good sex in this movie but there is nothing good in Faust, not even good sex scenes.
The ending also contains laughable computer graphics. I think cg has become the plague of horror movies and would like to address all directors with an urge not to use cg if you don't have a very big budget. Why can't you make horror movies with good effects any more, movies like The Howling, An American Werewolf In London, The Fly (the remake) and The Thing (the remake) ? Why can't you make exciting movies like Invasion of the Body Snatchers (the 1978 remake), Mute Witness and A Stranger Calls Back ? Summary of Faust: crap 1 / 10.
A.I. Artificial Intelligence (2001)
Unusual, thought provoking, visually stunning, entertaining and well made movie
Positive aspects: A.I. is an unusual movie with an original story, it is not a typical Hollywood movie even though it is made by Spielberg, the Hollywood icon (and that is why it was not a boxoffice success, it is too intelligent and too tragic). A.I. is also visually stunning with excellent performances from the actors, especially Haley Joel Osment (who was so brilliant in the Sixth Sense) but also Jude Law are very good. It is a movie for adults and it contains disturbing scenes. (I.e. the scenes were humans are making a show out of destroying humanoid robots reminded me of Romeros' Dawn of the Dead and Savinis' remake of Night of the Living Dead.) There are also some scenes that are absurdly humoristic (I was laughing at the teddybear). You will see New York like you have never seen it before (very impressive) and hopefully never will in real life.
The plot is well made and thought provoking. I know that some reviewers on IMDB do not share my opinion on this (or pretend that they don't) but I think most of them are real snobs who are comparing A.I. with how they think the movie would have been if Stanley Kubrick would have made it, the kind of people who say that they don't like the excellent Saving Private Ryan and who thinks that The Duel is Spielbergs best movie (Because it was low budget, not so commercial etc. Sure it was good, but it was not logical as far as I can remember and it was not an important movie, just a good thriller). The sheer number of people who has written reviews of A.I. is also an indication of the importance of this movie, it has emotional impact, you will not forget this movie soon after you have seen it.
The movie is very good from the beginning (the scenes involving William Hurt are impressive) and the pacing is good through most of the movie (but not towards the end). It is also possible to make a comparison between the humans treatment of the robots with the nazi Holocaust (and Spielberg is jewish I believe).
Negative aspects: I felt it was about half an hour too long. The ending felt tucked on and was unnecessary. Sometimes Spielberg tends to be too sentimental and he has a weakness for the supernatural which shows during the ending of the movie (thankfully only in the ending).
Final comment: The ending is the weakest point, but I felt that there are two earlier moments in the movie were it could have ended and if it had the movie would have been better so I just pretend that it did. I think the ending was tucked on as a crowd pleaser but it is not a total disaster since it is not without tragic. It could have been worse. This is a must see, some love it some hate it, no one is indifferent. Rating: 8 / 10
Gik do chung faan (1998)
Exciting, excellent drama thriller with good action
If you are looking for an excellent HK suspense movie, look no further: The Suspect is exciting from the beginning with the voice over full of feeling, through the chases to the action packed gunplay ending. You will never be bored, the story is unusually good (it is not a ripoff from Assassins as my friend Stefant21 stated in his review) and the pace is high. The beginning of the movie is not slow paced, as one reviewer stated, there is a lot going on throughout the whole movie but it is true that most of the gunplay occurs during the long and excellent ending.
If you are only looking for gunplay and explosions you will be disappointed. Don't expect a so called heroic bloodshed movie even though the theme of friendship and loyalty is classic to the genre (see for instance The Killer). The Suspect is not so exaggerated as the movies of John Woo, the action and everything else in The Suspect is more realistic but you will still see some blodsquibs.
The Suspect is masterfully directed and the acting is superb in spite of the fact that the actors have to speak a lot of english instead of only cantonese. For those of us that have seen him before it comes as no surprise that Simon Yam manages to make a big impression even though he is not on screen very much, but I was thrilled that the rest of the cast is also unusually good. The characters are multi layered, they are not cartoon figures either black or white and even the ruthless Simon Yam seems to have something good in him, he is not only ruthless and bad. The tone is serious throughout the movie, we don't have to suffer through any ridiculous HK humor. 10/10
Sacrifice (2000)
Surprisingly violent, fast paced and entertaining
This is a violent movie. We get to see bloody knife stabbings and throat slittings, grisly aftermath pictures of murder victims and some shootings with big, beautiful bloodsquibs spraying blood over the victims. I especially liked when the killer came running towards the victim, aggressively attacking with a knife. It is surprisingly violent especially considering that it is made for TV.
The pacing is high and you will never be bored. You will not marvel over the clever story, but it works even though the dialogue sometimes is unimpressive. The acting is nothing special and I was not so happy with Bokeem Woodbine as the black detective, but it is Michael Madsen who has the leading role, as usual as a tough guy, and he knows what he is doing. I will not reveal the identity of the killer but it is nice to see someone so demented and the portrayal of the killer is excellent. The acting is not deserving an Oscar but it will not ruin the movie.
This is not art, Sacrifice is made as entertainment, so the film snobs better stay away. If you like violent movies you can do a hell of a lot worse than watching Sacrifice.
Seng fat dak ging (1988)
Warning: Extremely brutal high paced HK police action
Big Heat is no masterpiece, the editing is sometimes sloppy, the music score is stolen fragments thrown together, there are a few seconds unnecessary comic relief here and there (but only seconds), the acting is often mediocre (even though Waise Lee is okay), the camerawork is not very impressive, the dialogue is nothing special and the story is nothing new.
But despite the obvious flaws, if you like your movies violent you will be entertained.
This is one brutal movie. You will see people get massacred and torn to pieces, you will see gunshots to the head, gunshots with beautiful bloodsquibs and much more extreme violence well scattered from the shock beginning to the brutal ending. I can assure you that the incredible death by car scene is the most violent you have ever seen. The other reviewer Brian Camp has already mentioned the exciting and of course extremely violent elevator shaft scene. Not even the children are safe in this movie, unlike Hollywood movies were they don't even dare to get a dog killed. The pacing is good so you will not be bored and the story is no masterpiece but it works. It is about revenge and those stories seem to work no matter how many revenge movies you have seen. We need bloody revenge. If you do not like brutality do not see this movie. 8 / 10.
Ginger Snaps (2000)
Half baked Carrie clone mixed with Howling but without the gore.
Don't be fooled by the other reviews. When you read their reviews it is easy to think that Ginger Snaps is a gory masterpiece with an original story. The truth is that it is not gory, it is not very original and it is nowhere near being a masterpiece. Let me explain.
First of all, it is a somewhat entertaining horror movie containing mostly of half interesting well acted teenage problem drama (Mimi Rogers has a small easy role but the sisters are good and they look like normal people which make you care more about them). But the story is half baked, the pacing is sometimes a little slow and there are some scenes that feels unnecessary and some scenes that hurt the movie.
The beginning of the movie resembles Carrie, telling the story of two oddball sisters that don't go on very well with the other students in school, but unlike Carrie, this part never leads anywhere and it has no importance for the conclusion of the movie. It would have been more interesting if the problems in school had been more severe and if this had had an impact on the story, for instance if the sisters really had been suffering from the other kids abuse and they resorted to evil deeds to revenge (but then it would have been Carrie). Also thrown into the mix is the theme of menstruation but this was done so much better in Carrie (remember the shower scene ?) and here it has no importance at all. After the Carrie part comes the rather unoriginal transformation part of the movie including the not so interesting and too easy hunt for a cure, followed by a standard horror movie ending, only more kind than usual and not gory at all (influenced by ET ?)
A couple of reviewers make comparisons between GS and the movies by David Cronenberg. Do not think for a minute that GS is in the same league as for instance The Brood. The only similarity is the tail scenes (you will understand if you see the movie) that are a little grotesque but Cronenberg is of course the master of the grotesque. The movie is not funny like some reviewers has stated, but there are a few ridiculous scenes like the one with the school nurse and the one with the partly transformed boy that only looks stupid. GS would have been better without those scenes.
Now to the matter of gore content. Here are a couple of quotes from other reviews on IMDB that I find misleading: `it sloshed out gore by the gallon', `very gory and disturbing in places', `the extensive gore may deter some squeamish viewers, which is too bad'. You don't have to compare GS with extremely violent movies like Italian splatter movies from directors such as Dario Argento and Lucio Fulci, it is enough to compare GS with almost any horror movie and it is obvious that it is not a brutal or gory movie. MINOR SPOILER ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF VIOLENCE IN GS: Yes, there is blood in the movie, but no on screen killings only aftermaths (mostly of animals) including fake death pictures. As a matter of fact, there is not even any on screen violence except for an accidental death, a not so brutal beating and the tossing around of a victim (standard procedure when movie makers don't have the guts to let someone be brutally killed on screen). Did I forget any violence ? Then it was not worth remembering. END OF VIOLENCE SPOILER.
SHORT SUMMARY Good things: No computer graphics, good sound effects, and the teenage school drama is OK with good acting. Bad things: The story is half-baked, there is no gore and not many scares, it drags in the middle, some scenes feels unnecessary, the humanoid werewolf make up is ridiculous and not at all scary, the werewolf make up has been done better before, the transformation scene is no good we hardly see anything (probably because of lack of money), the werewolf is not dangerous enough and not very powerful.
Alternate recommendations: Carrie (better movie, better teenage drama), The Brood (more disturbing), Howling and An American Werewolf In London (better werewolf movies). If you want gore: check out the movies by Dario Argento.
Fact is: the trailer is much better than the movie. I think many will be disappointed by GS. Rent. Don't buy. 5 / 10
Lan se pi li huo (1991)
Well made entertaining drama-thriller
Poor little kid; mommy gets murdered and his father is a bad tempered ex. cop alcoholic who could not care less that his ex. wife is murdered. He does not seem to care much for his son either, but maybe he will change ? Can the father shape up, stop drinking and start taking care of his son ? Will he even try ? Will his son accept him if he does not help him to find his mothers killer ?
Blue Lightning is a well made and entertaining dramathriller. The murder mystery is nothing special in itself (we will never see any impressive detective work), but this movie contains more than a murder mystery. It is well written and there is caracter development through very good acting and good dialogue that makes the viewer care about the characters so that it gets more exciting when they are in danger and that happens a lot. Another good thing is that some of the things that happen here we seldom get to see in a Hollywood movie (from small things like a main character throwing up on screen to more important stuff, see the movie and find out yourself).
Famous actor Danny Lee (that has done so many routine roles in other movies) is good as the alcoholic father and the kid (Kwan Yuen Wong) is even better as his son, he is actually brilliant. Tony Leung Ka Fai is also good and believable in his role as a police officer trying to solve the murder case.
The pacing is good and it never gets boring. The suspense scenes works and they are never far away. We don't have to suffer through any H.K. humor scenes and the whole ending is good (not only the final confrontation). There is violence in the movie, it starts with a well made bloody but not gory murder scene, there are beatings and some gunplay (including a nice shot in the head during a suspense scene in an apartment and bloodsquibs in the final shootout), but nothing extreme, this is a movie about emotions with several exciting chase scenes.
You will be entertained. My rating is 7 / 10 (If the movie would have had more extreme violence it would have been an 8 or 9 and if the murder mystery was a little more complicated to solve it could have been a masterpiece.)
Chung gik tin ji moon sang (1991)
Well paced gangster fighting action
Hong Kong Godfather is more of a action movie than a gangster drama. The story is very simple: Two triad (H.K. mafia) gangs join to eliminate a third gang, Hung Hing Society, whose leader Mr. Koo have to escape H.K. because the police (wrongly) suspects him to be involved in the killing of another triad leader. Mark, York (Andy Lau) and the hot tempered Michael now have to take care of "business". Officer Leung (Roy Cheung) from the H.K. police has returned from U.K. and starts to interfere in the gang war.
There are no surprises or clever script writing and the story is very thin, as a matter of fact that was the whole story, now it is only the question about who is going to win the gangster war. The good thing, for those who like action, is that most of the movie contains of gangfighting. There are some bloodsquibs, but this is not a heroic bloodshed movie, there is much more fighting than gun play. The violence sometimes get bloody and brutal, like stabbing in the ear (somewhat hidden) and an axe that impales a back (on screen). Sometimes (only sometimes) it is hard to see who is attacking who, there are just a lot of gangmembers fighting it out in the streets. Among the best scenes are when York alone is attacked by a huge gang and the scene where Michael leads an attack on enemy leader Woody and his gang, plus of course the final battle between the gangs, a battle also joined by the police.
The tone is serious throughout the whole movie and we don't have to suffer from any childish H.K. humor. Unfortunately, the sound effects during the fights are like old fashioned kung fu movie sound effects, maybe a little toned down, that more often than not are out of sync with the movements. The music is very good though (probably stolen from another movie, as usual in H.K. movies) and contributes to somewhat lift the movie. Andy Lau is good but has an easy role, Roy Cheung is also good but I think he is better as a ruthless criminal.
There is hardly any character development and it is sometimes hard to understand the logic. Why is York hesitating to take over the leadership when it is obvious that Michael is too hot tempered and not intelligent enough to be a good leader ? Why does not Hung Hing Society let the other gang and the police finish their fight before they join the battle so that they only have to fight the remains ? How can gangleader Fred so easily manipulate gangleader Woody? But this is not about story, character development, smart tactics or logic, it is simply about action.
H.K. Godfather is well paced with a lot of action and some (not much) brutal violence. You will not be bored but don't expect a masterpiece. 6 / 10.