Exile-Inc's Reviews

The Dreamers (2003)

Better known to audiences as: "The Sleeper"

14 July 2004

Taking a high-school film class definitely isn't what you would call an in-depth class when it comes to being preparing me to successfully analyze and critique films. However I felt with The Dreamers, it didn't even take a high school film class for me to realize that about half way through the movie I was bored to tears.

I've seen many a review citing mis-en-scene and the camera work as the pillar and a base holding this film up. Well that's fine. However, it can be the most artful movie created, however if it doesn't hold the attention, then it has nothing.

My main problem with this film is that it went NOWHERE. Michael Pitt meets up with two Parisians, befriends and moves in with them. From there, a bit of character growth occurs between the trio of actors, however the plot of the film never takes off. It felt more like the plane stalled in the hangar. After a bit of sexual intimacy and growth between the three, the director seemed like he was out of options and opted for a bit of moral conflict. Well this would've been fine had he intertwined it with the character growth. This was not the case as he basically threw the three into the apartment the first half - then for the second half had them debate beliefs and moral standards, all while making it seem as uninteresting as possible.

I wasn't watching for the mis-en-scene or the camera angles, so I'm willing to concede whatever it is you believe about it to be true. However when it comes to being able to sit through the entire film and it's entertainment value, bring a magazine or something to fiddle with. Because it's a long 2 hours.

0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Léon: The Professional (1994)

10/10

Stunning Movie Surprisingly Overlooked

5 June 2004

I'm honestly surprised that this film isn't more well-known that it is, for it is honestly an incredible and well-done movie.

Jean Reno is a "Cleaner" - a graceful and smooth hitman employed with the Italian mafia. Natalie Portman is a young girl from an abusive household that comes home to find her family murdered and enters Reno's life seeking both sanctuary and revenge. Upon learning what Reno really does for a living, Portman encourages him to teach her the ways of being a professional assassin, and starts her studies under the hands-on teaching of Reno.

Surprisingly enough, there is much, much more to this film than the simple misgivings and actions of a hitman who is forced to care for a young girl. Despite its obvious violent backdrop, the film not only chronicles her growth in his art, but also the bond and relationship that comes between them, not only as adult and child but also as father and daughter.

Natalie Portman only seeks to be cared for while Jean Reno finds his love hard to give, finally culminating in the ultimate sacrifices being paid for each other - sacrifices which only love could bring about.

The acting is done superbly, with Leon's childlike wonder amidst his very mature profession being played to a T by an incredibly under-rated actor Jean Reno. And Mathilda's child-like habits, yet her adult maturity being performed amazingly by an only 13 year old Natalie Portman, this film definitely is a must see, not only for the superb craftsmanship of Luc Besson, but also for the heart-felt story and its "star-crossed" love between the characters themselves.

With support acting from Danny Aiello and Gary Oldman, this well-done film doesn't receive its due enough, in a time when films have lost what quality such films like these had.

2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Troy (2004)

9/10

Fulfilling in every sense.

14 May 2004

Someone previously mentioned that it really was a pity that they condensed 10 years of fighting into 3 hours of film. However, despite whatever the condensing left out, Wolfgang Peterson still left audiences with a good basic core of a movie.

The movie itself doesnt feel like 3 hours, with battle scenes and dialogue aptly balancing each other out. The viewer never feels dulled down with morals or the vast knowledgeable meaning of life, and vice versa, is never overwhelmed by the fighting that occurs over the span of the film.

The battle scenes themselves are enjoyable and believable enough. They dont push realism to the extreme with blood spattering the camera and Brad Pitt coming out of the fight looking like Mel Gibson from "Braveheart" or "The Patriot," covered in blood, intestines, grey matter and anything else they threw at him that would stick, and yet they still capture the raw feel of foot soldiers of two warring nations running by the thousands into battle. Likewise, almost none of the combat (save some certain extremely accurate spear throws) ever feels staged or unrealistic.

The director also does the film a favor by balancing the sides out with screen time, and at the same time, not assigning a good guy/bad guy role to either side. Sure, you definitely get the bad guy vibe from Brian Cox, however Brad Pitt's Achilles still has you rooting for Greece at the same time, while Eric Bana and Orlando Bloom keep your hopes alive that Troy will not fall to the advancing enemy.

All in all - the cast, plot, direction, action, and feel of the movie definitely all lend themselves towards the making of a good film and enjoyable movie to watch. The 3 hours it takes to portray the story seem to fly by as well, provided you dont drink too much soda, and make you leave the theater feeling entertained and fulfilled by a good movie.

1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Dawn of the Dead (2004)

9/10

A Well Done Horror

19 March 2004

Let's face it - the whole "undead" plotline has been done and then done again, from movies like Army of Darkness to Resident Evil and all the ones in between, there have been the good, the bad, and the ugly.

The 2004 version of Dawn of the Dead definitely qualifies as one of the good ones. The basic storyline is one that is done in all horror movies: survival. Incorrectly labeled as a "plague" by some of the previous comments, this zombie hysteria is one that spreads from bite to bite. A small band of survivors manage to make it to a shopping mall where they hide out and figure out what to do and how to survive. Right from the beginning, the movie doesnt waste time setting up character roles as it does this during the different situations that they must face.

With unwaivering amounts of zombies, tension filled scenes and comedic relief, this film definitely was something that is worth your time. If you're a survival horror fan, don't miss out on this above-average film.

1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

House of the Dead (2003)

1/10

Run Run RUN... From this movie.

15 March 2004

Dear God, I havent even heard of the video game itself, but it looked interesting enough in the previews. However when I rented this abysmal film, I had no idea what I was getting into.

First - there's the plot itself. 5 People head out to an island to be a part of the hottest rave of the century (which by the way, looks like it would've sucked to begin with) only to find a handful of survivors and an island full of the undead. From here, survival becomes their only thought as they desperately try to escape the island. It's possible that this could have been successfully written despite most video game to movies being rather unsuccessful however this movie fails rather adeptly. Plot holes are large enough for an army of zombies to march through as issues such as how the virus is spread, how there seem to be more zombies than originally started on the island and many more are never addressed.

Second - there's the absolutely terrible acting. These people mustve just been hired out of a college acting class because they hardly bring across any of the emotions your supposed to feel. Along with this comes the special effects: overdone, repetitive and taken almost right out of the Matrix itself with no effort made to bring originality into the mix.

This movie, terribly done and a pain to watch, deserves nothing more than a 1 as it really isnt worth the 5 bucks to rent.

0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Samouraïs (2002)

Dont buy it, dont even rent it.

8 March 2004

Warning: Spoilers

You should run screaming from this movie.

Let's start off with the good things about this movie:

-I loved it when the credits started rolling

Now onto the bad parts of this movie...

First of all - there isnt any remote attempt at cinematography or decent camera work, as the entire film is done in sound-bytes. I wasnt expecting Lord Of The Rings panoramic-esque shots, but I mean come on... lets at least try and make it visually appealing?

Second - the storyline was terrible. Basically - this old samurai who's about to get killed by an enemy army summons the war god and has it kill his enemy. Come time to kill it so that it returns to hell, he is unable to accomplish his mission and the war god lives on throughout the centuries only to be stopped by this samurai's decendants later on in present day.

Major plot failures (and dont worry, these plot points can be read on the back of the case, so they arent spoilers)

The present father accepts the fact that he has to kill his daughter way too easy. In fact, he doesnt even bat an eye when this Japanese Samurai shows up in a secure building and tells him he must murder his daughter. Way to have family ties...

-The main character was a wimp. He couldnt even take on the war god's henchmen through out the movie, and then at the end, he's expected to fight the war god twice and win? Sorry.

-Third, involving the war god. He plans to totally take on the world and dominate all of mankind (as does every other antagonist ever - boring). His means of domination? A video game for the PlayStation2. A small and sad attempt at advertisement maybe? The unfortunate thing is that the game for PS2 doesnt even have the correct visual graphics style, leading the viewer to the conclusion that the games visuals were really just something concocted as an after thought.

The plot holes in this movie, as well as it's complete lack at anything resembling subtitles and language preferences, the even worse acting, and the absolutely abysmal presentation of this movie earns it an enormous thumbs down.

Just skip this one on the movie rack and keep on looking...

1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Matchstick Men (2003)

8/10

An amazingly well done film

5 March 2004

Ridley Scott did an amazing job transfering this movie from the novel and delivers a wonderfully entertaining and enjoyable film.

Nicholas Cage's performance of a man riddled with tics and phobias deserves high praise as does Alison Lohman for being able to pull off being a 14 yr old despite actually being 10 years older. Sam Rockwell adds the finishing touches in what was most definitely an entertaining and mouth-dropping film.

Both Cage's and Lohman's on-screen chemistry fittingly akward for the film as Cage plays a con artist reunited for the first time with his daughter Lohman. Soon after, finding that raising a daughter and being a con artist are both too demanding on their own, he decides to integrate the two and teach his daughter some tricks of the trade. Rockwell rounds out the cast as Cage's con partner, delivering just the amount of comedic acting to balance out Cage's entertainingly interesting tics and movements on camera.

The film itself was very well done, providing a sound and believable story between father and daughter all through out the film and makes this film a delightful watch. By the end, Ridley Scott ties up all the loose strings and finishes up his film "Matchstick Men" with an ending that is sure to surprise and amaze.

Well delivered, well performed and highly pleasing, this is a film for anyone who enjoyed "The Sixth Sense" or "The Usual Suspects" but with a lighter and more comedic approach.

4 Stars

0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Returner (2002)

10/10

OK Film Still Delivers Big

16 February 2004

Yes, there is no denying it. Takashi Yamazaki's "Returner" is a an OK film. Not something that was ever going to win any academy awards or even set a new standard for filmmakers everywhere. But it certainly was an awesome OK film.

The story, which can be seen to pull itself from some 5 other movies, still makes it interesting to watch with only a few small holes visible if you watch and re-watch it. Takeshi Kaneshiro delivers a solid performance as a mercenary for hire who is forced to befriend Ann Suzkuki's character (Milly) who also provides a stellar performance as a "Returner" despite the fact that Ann was only 14 when the film was made. Being able to show both emotion as well as chemistry together, the two really elevate the film into a good movie.

While some may put down the storyline that draws from all the other movies, it is none-the-less entertaining and worth the while to rent. With the strong lead characters, and eye opening special effects and CG including a variation of the famous "Bullet Time", "Returner" is not a film you will be disappointed with.

4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Exile-Inc

Reviews

Tell Your Friends

Recently Viewed