Reviews

4 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Source Code (2011)
2/10
Bad. Terrible. Awful. Repugnant. Unacceptable. Stupid.
21 June 2011
Warning: Spoilers
OK so Gyllenhal is good in this movie. Lets get that out of the way first. Now onto the roast.

What a terrible steaming pile of dung this movie is. It simply makes NO sense. Lets examine the two possibilities for the "world" that they are operating in.

In the first, they have developed code that allows them to put a person's consciousness into the body of someone else in a mock-up of the world as it was at that time an infinite number of times. Fine - Where did this mock-up come from? They implied that it was from the the guy who Gyllenhal is inhabiting, but the train exploded... his brain would be peanut butter (along with everyone else on that train). OK so lets say magically his head got tossed away from the train and they retrieved it, how exactly does this guy manage to have complete knowledge of everything that exists in that world? He didn't go into the bathroom and open the ceiling and find the bomb there, so there would be nothing there in his version of the world. He either got off the train or stayed on it, so there's no way he could know what happened after the point that the train moved on. He might continue to believe that the Middle- Eastern stereotype guy was the terrorist - there's no way he could have any knowledge of what happened after those two events diverged. So of course, the virtual world example is ridiculous and makes no sense.

Alright so what about the idea that it is an alternate reality? This is even harder to believe. If its an alternate reality then of course there is no way to believe that the events would have unfolded in the same way as in the reality the movie takes place in. Every alternate would be different and none would reliably provide information about the reality of the movie. The guy that Gyllenhal "inhabits" maybe doesn't even exist in the alternate reality. Maybe he died of cancer. Maybe he works in Japan. Maybe he called in sick today. Who knows???

If its a virtual construct then all the information is already there, just parse the data. If its an alternate reality then by the definition of the word ALTERNATE you can't rely on it being even marginally similar to your reality. And if its time travel you could literally send him back an infinite number of times in succession. Just by the odds you would eventually get the data you needed by reading his brain (which is silly by itself, don't get me started...)

And then there is the annoying obfuscation that moves the plot along but is entirely unnecessary for the movie. There's no need to hide facts from Gyllenhal's character -- Just tell him what he's doing! There's no need to get his permission -- Just send him back! Why the writers play these stupid games with their audience I haven't a clue.

Stop being stupid movie-going zombies! Be critical! Ask questions!

If you keep consuming this kind of crap and saying its a filet mignon, the studios will continue to feed you CRAP.
83 out of 171 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Forrest Gump in reverse
21 June 2011
Warning: Spoilers
This. Movie. Was. Terrible.

It was quite literally Forrest Gump with a change of disabilities.

In it, we follow Forre.. er.. I mean Benjamin as he experiences his life in reverse. It is, of course, full of fantastical occurrences that most compilations of 20 men wouldn't meet in their lifetimes, but of course, Forrest (oops I did it again, I mean Benjamin!) just manages to fall ass-backwards into every piece of luck he possibly can. Father is a millionaire -- Here take all this free money!

Its full of stereotypes -- The cruel white businessman who doesn't accept his son because of his appearance, the elegant and beautiful mother dying during childbirth, the loving black mammy taking in the unwanted child, the hard-working and stressed out surrogate father asking "Why are we taking care of someone else's child?!?", the neglected, spoiled businesswoman jumping in bed with Benjamin as much to punish her husband as because of her desire to be with Benjamin, and the oft-returning love interest that's made a family for herself but never stopped loving! Oh! So original! If you can't piece this film together yourself from about 3 or 4 other better films then.. well.. you just haven't seen enough movies in your life.

Watch a couple of good films and don't waste your time on this one.
7 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Lust, Caution (2007)
1/10
A truly terrible film that I really wanted to like
21 June 2011
Warning: Spoilers
So. In the interest of full disclosure I should probably point out that my wife is Chinese, had heard good things about this movie, and half- drug me to the theater to see it. I wasn't opposed to seeing it, I just didn't have any strong feelings about it one way or the other. Boy oh boy, did that change after I stumbled from the theater, noticeably dumber. How an exceptional film maker like Lee could make a movie like this with so much potential and fail on so many levels I have no idea, but this movie is a meteoric rocket crashing to earth with a dull, lifeless thud.

Of course, my wife (again, being Chinese), loved the movie. Well, maybe she didn't love it, but she liked it. Its probably not on her top 10 list or anything, but she might like to watch it again.

Long review short, if you're a Chinese woman, you might like this film. If you're a discerning movie goer that is critical of what you see and doesn't take anything at face value, you very well might hate this film.

So how does this movie fail?

The problems with the movie are almost unilaterally a reflection on the motivation of its characters. They continually choose to do things and act in ways that are utterly and ridiculously opposite to how a real person might really act in that situation. The group refuses to act out their plan unless their prey makes 3 steps forward. Mak runs screaming down a street like a child when the group succeeds in the murder of a target. Mak falls in love with Yee while he treats her like trash, property and an object. Mak progresses from just standard female stupidity into full-blown sexist stereotype when she sells out not only herself, but the entire group, for the gift of... wait for it... a diamond ring! Was this movie bought and paid for by Zales?? "Oh, here's a big diamond, THIS proves my love for you (not when I was smacking you around a while back...)"

Its weird, but the movie works better as a cautionary tale for women and their notorious materialism -- "Watch out ladies, if you think a diamond is the same thing as love, you might find yourself getting shot in the back of the head in a ditch" -- than it does as a drama or suspenseful film. Of course, there's no need to sit through almost three hours of beautiful garbage to get that point across. Even the heavily publicized love-making scenes were difficult to enjoy. Wei has a beautiful body, but the way she accepts being treated like a punching bag/sex-toy is just uncomfortable to watch and never sensual or erotic as it is meant to appear. If you enjoy those love-making scenes, you've probably also considered tying up a woman in your basement. And really, her accepting that treatment makes sense from the perspective of a spy trying to kill Yee, falling in love makes ZERO sense.

Which is of course the final straw that broke the camel's back of realism. The fumbling inanity of this group of rebels fits better in the 3 stooges than in a serious drama/suspense. The silly requirements they put on themselves for killing Yee are laughable and CLEARLY represent an effort by the writers to extend the story. None of their reasoning or efforts make any sense. Why must Yee step inside the house on the dark, deserted street with no one for miles around before they kill him? Why must Yee be at a perfect spot in the jeweler's store and have been there for X minutes and have everyone be given the Go to kill him before killing him? Why can't Mak smuggle in a gun, or a knife, or some poison, or a ligature, or SOMETHING into their numerous lovemaking sessions to kill him with? Its all done in the service of extending the story, and if one thinks about it, as the writers are hoping you will not, the whole story falls apart.

The ending brings us welcome release - FINALLY those incompetent fools that wasted three hours of our life are dead and we can stumble back to our cars. Save yourself! If you're doing it for the nudity, just rent a porno! If you're doing it for a wife... well... sorry to hear that. Grin and bear it I guess.
28 out of 47 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Worst Movie of All Time? Maybe not, but close.
21 June 2011
Watching the film "The Legend of 1900" is by definition a trial of patience. Every aspect of the movie strains believably to its breaking point, to such an extent that you wish to watch a movie like "Star Wars", just so you can watch a movie without having to question the silliness of everything that happens.

Like many movies that feature phenomenal music, not-so-bright people mistake that music for a quality movie. That is a shame. The music truly is exceptional, and is one of only two redeeming aspects of the film. The other is the acting of Tim Roth, who desperately attempts to pull this movie out of the depths it is falling into. But unfortunately, all of his acting chops cannot save this movie.

The movie falls apart quickly - the eye-rolling begins at the beginning, with the unlikely discovery of the baby, and quickly turns to out-and- out groans when we find that the child has the magical ability to play the piano at a professional level without ever having touched the instrument or having been given any introduction to music, chord structure, formal training or any other aptitude building of any kind. Since the movie is built on this concept, everything that follows lacks any punch since none of it is in any way believable. By the time 1900 and Max are sliding around on the ballroom floor during a huge storm while deftly playing the piano, you'll likely have realized that this movie is pure silliness. That stuff works in anime movies, but not in films like this where the audience really needs to believe that the events depicted could have happened.

The movie isn't helped by the terrible, terrible acting of much of the supporting cast. The awful Pruitt Taylor Vince hams it up to the best of his (meager) abilities, and every scene he appears is dragged down into boredom, eye-rolling, and laugh-inducing dialogue. I guess its no surprise when the co-star of the films only other notable role was as a patient on "House". Other than Clarence Williams III as "Jelly Roll" Morton, and Bill Nunn as 1900's adoptive father, there's really no other actors to speak of anyways (and applying that term to anyone in the film other than Roth is a stretch, to say the least).

If you're able to stick this terrible movie out to the ending, you will have progressively been deadened time and again by the schlocky, pointless, unbelievable story to the point that the final ridiculous scene won't even surprise you much. Although when you think back on it, you'll find yourself chuckling to yourself and wondering what you were thinking by not turning it off earlier. And that's really where we get in this movie - Nowhere. Turn it off before it starts and you'll be happier.

So its maybe not the worst movie of all time, there are movies like "Plan 9" and "DeathBed" which deserve that title more. But when a movie takes itself so seriously and comes off so pretentiously, as "1900" is wont to do, you really want to rank it below the movies that are worse, if only to punish it for its excesses. Watch something more believable, like "Men in Black", or "Spy Kids"... or even "Cars". The idea of talking cars is so much more believable than this tripe.
14 out of 43 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed