Change Your Image
Rachmaninoff28
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Dreamgirls (2006)
Brilliant talent wasted
I can't believe that so much acting and singing talent went into making this dud. No amount of vocal gymnastics (and Dreamgirls is full of it, to the point that it becomes meaningless) could have brought off the film's tiresome succession of plastic, mass-produced songs with corny lyrics and barely a hint of the Motown sound. And no amount of skilled acting could have made anything out of the film's lifeless script and flimsy story line.
Interestingly, one scene parallels what the film as a whole does: Edie Murphy has his new song stolen by the white recording industry, which sanitises it and removes all traces of soul from it to make it acceptable to the mainstream teenage audience of the day. This is exactly what Dreamgirls has done with the black music culture of the '60s and the Motown sound.
The result is a film that's an emotional flat liner with characters and situations you simply don't care about. The filmmakers did do some good work, though, in recreating the look of the period.
There was some really great music being made back then, but from this film you'd never guess it.
Red Dog (2011)
Should have been better...
Oh dear... I would have liked to have given this film more than 2/10 since I did like it: There was definitely something likable and enjoyable about its atmosphere and a few of the characters. What ruined it for me was the script writing. In fact, there were some of the lamest, most cringe- inducing, cliché-ridden lines in this film that I've heard for many years. In general, the actors did well in pulling them off, but I was still left feeling very, very unsatisfied by this aspect. In parts, it reduced what should have been quite a good film to second-rate Disney. But despite that, the film is still emotionally engaging.
Salò o le 120 giornate di Sodoma (1975)
The discussion here is far more interesting and intellectual than the film itself!
I don't believe art's role is to "entertain" (although it can do that) but to engage, stimulate, inspire, confront, challenge, etc. And it certainly doesn't have to be nice about it! If a work of art does any of those things for me (and, of course, this is highly subjective), then it works for me.
This is why I believe that Salò is very flimsy artistically. The craft of it, including the excruciatingly wooden acting and equally wooden script, simply weren't sufficient for me to ever suspend disbelief, and I was therefore never engaged by what was going on. There's no plot development, no journey, no character development, no emotional insight into characters. Nothing. Like its subject matter, the film itself is dehumanized. No doubt this was intentional, and its almost "anti-art" aspects are part of the film's "art" (for other people...), but its effect on me was that I was always aware that I was watching (second rate) actors reading a (second rate) script. And I just didn't care about any of it.
The shock value was kind of minimal, too. I came to this film already aware that it focuses on horrible depravity. I watched it and saw a depiction of horrible depravity. So what? It needed a framework to have meaning and, therefore, rise above the level of a splatter movie (but see below).
I don't believe Pasolini was commenting on Fascism or any -ism, but simply on the darkness within human beings (and certainly within himself) and used that period of Italy's history as an appropriate context and pretext. I guess someone needed to make a film that showed this. It's been done now...
If there is artistic merit to this film, I believe it's because it's so open to interpretation: Pasolini shows us human depravity, leaving it up to us to make of it what we will, to bring our own frameworks with us to give it meaning. (Some people even see a criticism of fast food in the pooh-eating scenes!) How much of this was part of Pasolini's design, though, I have no idea. But as art, it's right up there with, say, putting a mutilated animal carcass on display in an art gallery and calling it, say, "Installation 38b." That's pretty shallow art. (And, in 2013, quite dated -- which is another criticism I have of this film. Good art doesn't date.)
The only real moral stand (and intellectual substance) I can find here is that by not providing a framework, Pasolini is rejecting the mind-control philosophy typical of the Fascists and other totalitarian regimes. Again, though, I'm not really engaged, stimulated, inspired, confronted, or challenged by that. But it is a nice idea.
Kingsman: The Secret Service (2014)
A film with an identity crisis
There are times when Kingsman is almost a sophisticated The Saint-style thriller. Other times, it's a Bond-style tongue-in-cheek action film. Other times again, it's a Hot Fuzz-style comedy gore fest. And then there are bits when it's more like a comic book action film. By trying to be all of those things (often not very well), it's none of them, and the film fails to create its own distinctive "world" in the way that good films do. The result is a disjointed and strangely unsatisfying film that, to its credit, also has a few quite enjoyable bits along the way.
Matthew Vaughn said he wanted to inject a sense of humour back into spy films. If that's the case, he has the sense of humour of an adolescent.
Eraserhead (1977)
One of my watch-it-again-and-again favourites!
Here's my take on this incredibly disturbing delight of a film.
The film is an aural and visual depiction of Henry's nightmarish mental struggle with the idea of abortion -- of "erasing" the mistake of his and Mary's baby.
A few examples:
The lady in the radiator represents abortion/an abortionist. The first time she appears, she's "cajolingly" standing on fetuses/sperm/babies (they're all the same in the symbolism of the film, I belive) while there's the sucking sound of the abortion procedure going on in the background.
More evidence of that is that she's both repugnant and beautiful, like the idea of a abortion to Henry.
More evidence is the scene in which Henry finally touches her. She's been "wooing" him throughout the film with the idea of an abortion with her sweet smile and her song about heaven, and when he finally touches her (accepts the idea of abortion) he's released from the dark, troubling place depicted so well in the film (worry, fear, guilt over the pregnancy) into pure light. Not only that, after he touches her/accepts the idea of an abortion, you hear the suction used in the abortion procedure once again, and see what looks like a fetus, umbilical cord and placenta being sucked away across the stage.
BTW, I believe the little chickens are Mary's sexuality: They're tiny and underdeveloped, and when Henry sticks his phallic fork into one, it bleeds, like breaking the hymen. Mary's mum's reaction to the bleeding chicken and her announcement that Mary's had a baby straight afterwards make perfect sense, if that's the case. So does Henry's amazement that the baby's already at the hospital!
If you agree with me, or anyone else, or not about what it all means, it doesn't really matter" This film succeeds in creating its own incredibly engaging "dream" world (emphasis on the word "dream" because that's precisely what the film is depicting: Henry's dream) even without a thought about what it might all mean. That's quite an achievement!
Knowing (2009)
Could turn you off going to the pictures forever...
This film should have been much better than it is. In fact, the premise is quite intriguing: A time capsule is opened and found to contain a page of seemingly meaningless numbers written by a strangely spooky girl 50 years ago. By chance, a professor discovers that the numbers are the dates, locations, and the number of the dead of disasters around the world since the time that the capsule was buried. And there are some major disasters just around the corner, including (as we find out about two-thirds of the way through the film) the end of the world.
By the time your bum is well and truly sore (this film drags on for two hours), you eventually discover that the spooky girl was receiving the numbers from some Swedish-looking alien dudes, who know all about the end of the world. In fact, they've come back to earth to save the professor's son and his girlfriend from global Armageddon. Nice.
Not only do the angelic aliens take the kids, but also two fluffy white bunny rabbits. (Seriously!) We eventually find that these two kids are apparently not the only ones being saved, since as the spaceship takes off, we see lots more Noah's Ark spaceships taking off from all over the planet. Presumably on those ships other kids are carrying pairs of elephants, giraffes and wildebeest.
Meanwhile, the whole planet is engulfed in flame. But not to worry because the blond aliens drop the two kids off on an idyllic looking planet. It's a regular Garden of Eden, in fact, complete with its own Tree of Knowledge -- presumably an ever so biting and cynical suggestion that we humans will again fall from grace in this new world. With no groundwork established in the film to suggest that we ever did fall from grace in the first place, this "meaningful" bit at the end comes across as utter pretentiousness.
"Knowing" is essentially an extremely boring and silly film. The premise could have been developed intelligently. And things do go quite well until about the time that the second disaster foretold by the numbers comes to pass. But after this, the film soon grinds to a tedious halt, crushed under the unbearable weight of its own ridiculous self-importance, laughable script, and preposterously overblown score.
Kingsman: The Secret Service (2014)
A film with an identity crisis
There are times when Kingsman is almost a sophisticated The Saint-style thriller. Other times, it's a Bond-style tongue-in-cheek action film. Other times again, it's a Hot Fuzz-style comedy gore fest. And then there are bits when it's more like a comic book action film. By trying to be all of those things (often not very well), it's none of them, and the film fails to create its own distinctive "world" in the way that good films do. The result is a disjointed and strangely unsatisfying film that, to its credit, also has a few quite enjoyable bits along the way.
Matthew Vaughn said he wanted to inject a sense of humour back into spy films. If that's the case, he has the sense of humour of an adolescent.
Salò o le 120 giornate di Sodoma (1975)
The discussion here is far more interesting and intellectual than the film itself!
I don't believe art's role is to "entertain" (although it can do that) but to engage, stimulate, inspire, confront, challenge, etc. And it certainly doesn't have to be nice about it! If a work of art does any of those things for me (and, of course, this is highly subjective), then it works for me.
This is why I believe that Salò is very flimsy artistically. The craft of it, including the excruciatingly wooden acting and equally wooden script, simply weren't sufficient for me to ever suspend disbelief, and I was therefore never engaged by what was going on. There's no plot development, no journey, no character development, no emotional insight into characters. Nothing. Like its subject matter, the film itself is dehumanized. No doubt this was intentional, and its almost "anti-art" aspects are part of the film's "art" (for other people...), but its effect on me was that I was always aware that I was watching (second rate) actors reading a (second rate) script. And I just didn't care about any of it.
The shock value was kind of minimal, too. I came to this film already aware that it focuses on horrible depravity. I watched it and saw a depiction of horrible depravity. So what? It needed a framework to have meaning and, therefore, rise above the level of a splatter movie (but see below).
I don't believe Pasolini was commenting on Fascism or any -ism, but simply on the darkness within human beings (and certainly within himself) and used that period of Italy's history as an appropriate context and pretext. I guess someone needed to make a film that showed this. It's been done now...
If there is artistic merit to this film, I believe it's because it's so open to interpretation: Pasolini shows us human depravity, leaving it up to us to make of it what we will, to bring our own frameworks with us to give it meaning. (Some people even see a criticism of fast food in the pooh-eating scenes!) How much of this was part of Pasolini's design, though, I have no idea. But as art, it's right up there with, say, putting a mutilated animal carcass on display in an art gallery and calling it, say, "Installation 38b." That's pretty shallow art. (And, in 2013, quite dated -- which is another criticism I have of this film. Good art doesn't date.)
The only real moral stand (and intellectual substance) I can find here is that by not providing a framework, Pasolini is rejecting the mind-control philosophy typical of the Fascists and other totalitarian regimes. Again, though, I'm not really engaged, stimulated, inspired, confronted, or challenged by that. But it is a nice idea.
My Big Fat Greek Wedding (2002)
A film of two halves
Up until around the 50 minute mark, this is a fun and engaging film. I cared about the characters until then and cared about how the conflict surrounding their relationship and wedding was going to be resolved. But once it was resolved, there was nothing left to engage the viewer. Not only that, somehow the main characters then drifted off into the background and were lost behind the fairly boring, clichéd and uninspired depiction of the "Greek wedding" itself.
In the end, this is a flawed film. Every story needs a conflict. Resolving the conflict too early eliminates the need to continue the story. The Greeks knew this.
Red Dog (2011)
Should have been better...
Oh dear... I would have liked to have given this film more than 2/10 since I did like it: There was definitely something likable and enjoyable about its atmosphere and a few of the characters. What ruined it for me was the script writing. In fact, there were some of the lamest, most cringe- inducing, cliché-ridden lines in this film that I've heard for many years. In general, the actors did well in pulling them off, but I was still left feeling very, very unsatisfied by this aspect. In parts, it reduced what should have been quite a good film to second-rate Disney. But despite that, the film is still emotionally engaging.