Reviews

7 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Hancock (2008)
5/10
I loved the first half, before they insulted my intelligence *and* ethnicity
19 February 2009
Warning: Spoilers
Man was this movie disappointing. I was Sooooo excited before I saw it.

A Black Superhero (Finally!) Will Smith! (Yippee!) A Black Superhero who is not the sidekick for another White Superhero! (Finally). Short of a live-action Static Shock or Icon, I thought it was likely to be the best depiction of a Black Superhero since Meteor Man and unlike Meteor Man, I thought people would actually watch the movie in droves, giving lie to the belief that a Superhero movie starring a Black man couldn't do well (people seem to forget about Blade - or at least the first one). And then I watched it.

It was great until about halfway through when they insulted my intelligence *and* my Blackness.

Normally, I'm able to overlook *some* racial subtext in a movie unless its a movie like "Plesantville" - whose central message is "color brings life" but somehow doesn't manage put a single Black person in the movie - not even in the beginning stages set in the "real" world!

Even though I knew going in that the movie was a "Whitey saves the Negroes" premise I was willing to overlook that to see an intriguing treatise on what might happen if a superhero was, as (far too) often stated in the movie, an a**hole". They pretty much had me from Hello. . . .until Hancock tells Ray about waking up alone in a hospital and not knowing who he was 80 years ago.

That's where the movie went off the rails and where I was unable to maintain my suspension of belief. I was with them to that point, glossing over the movie's physics (the ground gets ripped up when he lands, yet his shoes are fine, the throwing and catching of the French boy doesn't liquefy the boy's innards nor cause him to blackout - no pun intended, etc.) and its seemingly purposefully color-blind society (White folks in this world don't have a problem with a super-powered N****** with all the inherent threat that entails - but its only a problem that he's a mean drunk and curses a little), the criminals talking mess to Hancock, EVEN AFTER SOME OF THEM HAD FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGE OF HIS ABILITIES, etc. But him being 80 years old was too much.

You're telling me that an 80 year old Black American Man, WHO HAS LIVED THROUGH THE CIVIL RIGHTS STRUGGLE, who has lived through the 60s and the 70s and the 80s is going to dress, speak and act like a 30 year old Black Man? You're telling me that this selfsame 80 year old Black Man needs little White kids to tell him its time to be a superhero? He needs a Great White Saviour to tell him not only when its time, but how to become respectable and even how to talk ("Good Job") to people? In 80 years Hancock didn't figure any of that for himself?

On top of this, compare Hancock to other recent superhero movies: Iron Man (White!) gets to be a wealthy, super-genius. His alcoholism is only alluded to in the movie (even though its a central part of his character in the comic books). Batman (White!) gets to be a wealthy, super-genius. Superman and Spider-Man both get to be productive members of society. The Hulk, when he isn't hulked out is a scientist!

Make the superhero Black and all of a sudden he's a bum, unable to succeed in the world until the Great White Saviour comes in and teaches the savage, but powerful Black Man how to behave and speak. In addition, if you were to change the ethnicity of Batman, Spider-Man, Superman or Iron Man, there's no need to change the movie. Hancock being Black in our world changes this movie (or would have if the writing was better). Case in point, the infamous kiss (some people say they saw it - the version I saw didn't have the kiss in it).

When Hancock goes in for the kiss, she doesn't say no, this isn't right cuz I'm married, she doesn't gently push him away, SHE THROWS HIM THROUGH A WALL. Not only does she repudiate him strongly, they lose their abilities when in proximity to each other. In effect the film is saying "Stay away from the White Woman, Black Man, cuz if you don't you will lose your power". The film is saying the Black Man can't be a productive member of society until a kindly White savior comes along and teaches him how to be (and speak), despite the physical power of the Black Man. The film is saying that Black Men will be unhappy as long as they go after the White Woman, who gets to be happy and raise a family. All of this subtext gets added when you have Will Smith as the leading man and to have all of it ignored on top of the other issues with the movie was a slap in the face to Black folk.

If the movie had remained a comedy, with the initial tone intact, it would have been kewl. If it had stayed on the "drunken, sullen superhero"premise, it would have been kewl. If they had even stuck with the love story angle and not tried so hard to inject comedy and so hard to setup a superhero fight, it would have been kewl. As it was, it was a mish-mash of cool ideas and murky CGI stuff. . . I logged into IMDb to see if David Goyer had written the script cuz Hancock reminded me of Blade III, when Goyer didn't have a good director reigning him in and got to vomit *all* of his ideas onto the screen.
2 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
A few good gags. . but not quite enough
2 September 2008
Warning: Spoilers
I should preface this by saying Airplane! and I'm Gonna Get You Sucka are my two favorite movies of all time. In both cases, I can quote entire scenes and yet, somehow, they're still funny to me.

This movie was no Airplane! I'm sure I could work in an easy joke about it not even being a bomb dropped by an airplane, but I digress.

A few good gags here: The slow motion battle scene The skipping/marching and Hi-fives vs tongue-kiss - both based on the "there's a tone of homoerotic tension here - because they're secretly GAY! HA HA HA". If they hadn't beaten these jokes into the ground, they would have stayed funny.

The FIRST time they booted someone into the pit (had they only done it once, maybe twice and then went straight to the Idol judges, it might have worked better). I watched the unrated version from the DVD and almost all of the jokes, even when midly funny, went on waaay to long, especially the dancing Stomp The Yard parody - which was a funny gag, for the first maybe 10 seconds as the idea of the Spartans and their enemies fighting through dance sequence was rather inspired.

For every decently funny gag here, there were a bunch that fell flat or left me going WTF? (Transformers!?! Black Spiderman?).

I can only recommend this to fans of the genre with a few hours to kill and a Netflix/digital Cable subscription - so that you don't have to pay any extra to watch this.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Behind Closed Doors (2005 Video)
5/10
Lots of Potential. . .
27 February 2007
If you are sterile and want a child, would you allow your brother to sleep with your wife to get it? This is the central question raised (and answered) by this film, which is Part 1 of a three-part series.

The nicest thing I can say about it is that it plays like a decent student film: In the blocking, acting and lack of camera movement, it reminds me of the early Tyler Perry efforts where I felt like someone stuck a camera in the audience and filmed a play. It shows a LOT of promise and also a LOT of room for improvement.

If I were the Director, I would work on : 1) Sound Design – there were a lot of scenes where characters talk to each other and the background noise changes. I kept getting distracted while trying to listen to what the characters were saying. . . and speaking of saying, 2) Writing – Do Nigerians really talk like this? There's a LOT of needless exposition (like in the scene where Oasis mentions that he is sterile, and then his wife re-states that he is sterile and then later in the movie his brother Phil re-states that he is sterile, etc, etc) and a lot of characters re-stating the same thing over and over. I was boggled when I found out Isong, who wrote and produced, is a woman as I had chalked up the idiosyncracies in the conversations to a male point of view of how women interact. Rule of thumb in movies - SHOW, don't tell. If you want to tell, make a radio play.

3) Editing – I feel like I watched the Director's Cut of the movie rather than the theatrical release. Case in point: Why did we have to see the ENTIRE song at the beginning of the movie? I understand Imasuen wanted to establish she was a singer but a) that wasn't necessary to the plot and b) a much shorter version of the song would have sufficed and c) you could have eliminated her having trouble with her bandmates and not hurt the movie, since it had very little to do with the overarching plot. There was also a scene with two elders talking outside of a church. WHY was it in the movie? (another point about Sound Design, it would have been better to re-do the song in the studio and synch it in editing or simply re-do the audio to eliminate the muddy from-the-camera-mic sound during the song).

4) Blocking – watch some American films or even American Soap Operas and see how they introduce a scene and then cut into it to create action and movement. There were some camera shots (i.e. the wide shot of the models at the beginning) that were just plain boring and went on too long. There were shots where characters talked to each other and the camera stayed in a long medium shot rather than moving in on the faces. It almost seemed as if the scenes were shot the way they were because that's where the electricity for the camera was, so that's where they set it up.

Maybe Nigerian film audiences need their plots spoon-fed and don't mind static cameras and bad sound and I'm willing to concede that I might have lost some things in translation, but overall, I found it laborious to sit through and the acting laughable at parts. However, I see lots of room for improvement and foresee a glorious international future for Nigerian movies.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Gang of Roses (2003)
4/10
So bad, its GOOD!
31 August 2005
I should have known when I looked at the box in the video store and saw Lisa Raye - to me, she's the female Ernie Hudson A.K.A. "Le Kiss of Death" for *ANY* movie. Its almost *guaranteed* the movie will be bad (e.g. Congo)if Hudson is in it (with the exception of the Ghostbusters films, which were intentionally campy and bad). Despite my instincts, and the fact that I just saw Civil Brand, yet another cinematic "tour de force" starring Lisa Raye, I rented it anyway. After all, I ignored my "Hudson instinct" on OZ and ended up watching a very quality series so I figured I'd give this movie a chance.

If you are a lover of bad movies, this is a definite must see! This has got to be the most unintentionally funny movie I've seen in a loooong time. The plot is fairly straightforward: Racheal's (Monica Calhoun) sister is killed by a band of brigands (Led by Bobby Brown!) and, like many an action movie before this, she straps on her guns ONE LAST TIME and vows to avenge her sisters death. To do this, she reassembles the titular Gang of Roses (supposedly based on a true story of a female gang) and they go out and exact revenge and, along the way, there's some subplot or something or other about some gold that might be buried in the town. One nice thing I will say about this movie is that from what I could tell, the stars did their own riding and they looked GREAT galloping.

The funniest (albiet unintentionally funny) scenes? Look for when they introduce Stacy Dash's character or when Calhoun's character rescinds her vow not to strap on her guns (replete with a clenched fisted cry to the heavens) or Lil' Kim's character joking with Lisa Raye's character or Stacy Dash's character being killed or Lil' Kim's character convincing Lisa Raye's character to rejoin the gang or the Asian Chick or Macy Grey's character talking bout "The debt is paid", etc. With the exception of Calhoun's Racheal and Bobby Brown's Left-Eye, I can't even remember the names of the other characters cuz I was laughing so hard when they were introduced.

If the director had gone for parody and broad comedy this would have been a great movie. Unfortunately, he tries to take it seriously seemingly without first taking exposition, sound design (in his defense, Hip-Hop is notoriously difficult to work into a period piece), set design, script writing nor period historical research (was it me,or were these the cleanest people with the whitest teeth in the old west?) seriously. Usually when I see a movie that's not so good, I ask myself "Could you have done any better?" This is the first time in a long time where the answer is an unequivocal "YES!"
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Underwhelmed
22 August 2005
Overall, its worth watching. . . once.

Most of it looked and felt like someone had just stuck a camera in the audience for a recital of his play. There were moments where I cringed at the writing and overacting - especially when Kimberly Elise's character has it out with her husband near the beginning of the movie. These, however, are balanced with moments of real comedy (most of the scenes with Madea in 'em), feel-good Black family comedy (the cookout) and *some* really good acting (Kimberly Elise's character near the end of the movie). The guy who played her husband was really good in this as well, but I can't remember either character's name. Tyler Perry also managed to add in some preaching without being overtly preachy in how he had the character's react to different situations - it shouldn't turn off watchers who aren't Christians and the ones who are will recognize the themes.

One thing I'll give this movie, instead of inhabiting some mythical "BlackLandia" where no one ever seems to go to work but everyone (except for the comedy-relief character) can afford a split-level townhome in New York, the characters here actually work at jobs.

Overall a C+, but still worth a rental, if for no other reason than the blatant Officer and a Gentleman homage near the end.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Vampiyaz (2004 Video)
This Blade is dull.
6 December 2004
Generally, even in the worst of films, I can find something positive to say - i.e. with 30 Years To Life, it had a good plot, with several unbelievable aspects to it, but it was good overall with decent acting. Like most viewers, I got sucked in by the box art, which promised a Blade-esque Black vampire flick. Well this movie is no Blade. This movie isn't even a *dull* Blade. This is easily one of the worst movies I have seen this year.

The nicest thing I can say about it is that the music was pretty good - generally Hip-Hop soundtracks are limited at best, but the songs fit the movie well. Also, I really *liked* the in-jail sequence early in the movie, although the way it was shot makes it seem the character was only in jail in his mind (or its the world's least populated jail).

Which makes the rest of the movie that much harder to bear. After the decent setup (the two main characters hit-and-run a girl after a botched robbery) the movie goes downhill, with bad special effects (forgivable with good writing/plot - see the Doctor Who TV series), bad writing (the interrogation scene with the baseball being the one exception - small flash of brilliance there!), bad editing (wait is he going up the stairs? down the stairs? Is there a room *on* the stairs, wait, somebody is shooting? What happened to the other guy on the stairs?), inane character actions(he gets the bling and WALKS DOWN THE STREET WITH IT *boggle*), unintentionally comical scenes (when the main vampire gets exposed to sunlight and dam near does the Harlem Shake or the levitating wheelchair scene at the end that should have been very emotional - and *would* have been in a better-written movie), feeble attempts at comic relief (the character that helped the main vampire or the throwaway line about the rap song when the two Vampire-hunter characters are in the car), horribly-shot action scenes (the final blurry, mis-edited fight scene) *sigh*

Look, just avoid this one like the plague. I hope that the filmmakers take the time to study some more action flicks and improve their craft - I saw some good ideas at work in this movie, but they were ruined by really really really faulty execution.
5 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Seriously silly fun.
1 November 2002
I think the previous commentor missed the point of the movie. This movie is intended to be silly fun, not a serious superhero movie. Granted, Townsend's comedy is not always ROFLMBAO hilarious, but the movie has a good message about coming together to fight evil and the showdown at the end, where both antagonists use the powers gained from various books to fight each other, almost makes the movie worth the price of admission. Its a "I've got nothing better to do and some time to kill" matinee movie, but still worth watching once.
16 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed