Reviews

I had no idea what this series was about before I watched it. Even though the poster shows some chess pieces, I thought it was only used for some symbolic reason like she's a master manipulator of people. To my surprise, it really was about chess. The acting, directing, & production were all top notch for the budget, but then there were some things that really shined for me. I liked that it did not try desperately to make you feel sorry for the main character, even though she was an orphan up against some heavy odds. Some scenes were so touching and well done because it just revealed itself to you, instead of trying so hard to make you feel something - it was in a word, "beautiful". The portrayal of all the characters in her life was also something worth recognizing because they were not made to be stereotypical characters of parents, men, teachers, opponents - instead they actually seemed normal and not taken to the extreme, like the men are all salacious pigs, the teachers are all mean, and the step parents are evil. And, last, I would just like to say, Anya Taylor Joy looks amazing in1960's make up and clothes - especially in that last scene when she wears all white, sitting in the back of the limo - "what is this thing of beauty?" - she's absolutely stunning.

Without a doubt, Teens have a more difficult time today due to Social Network. One slip-up, and your life could be ruined until the end of time. Anyway, about Hannah. She could be dissected for a long time, and we could still not really understand her - that's what makes this such a great watch. I'm glad the writers made her do some things that a lot of people would not understand - that makes her more human. Even when she explains herself, she could not be completely believed. The thing is - she believes it, which makes it more complex. And the rest of the characters are amazing - I mean, really good acting. I thought the guy who played Clay, did a stellar job, and will get pats on the back along with roles. But what is really outstanding, is the casting - it was almost perfectly cast. It reflected the diversity of the "Bay Area", and made absolutely nothing of it - in other words, all is normal here, man. That is so, F'ing cool, because I don't think you could find a cast like that in films/ shows made anywhere else in the world but here in the USA. Hollywood will continue to dominate the world because of their diversity.

This movie is awful and insulting to all the Thai Women in Thailand. My biggest complaint with the movie is their depiction of every main, female, character in the movie as rude, antagonistic, and bitchy to complete strangers. Anyone who's ever been to Thailand knows that Thai Women would never act the way they were acting in the movie with a total stranger. As a matter of fact, most Women anywhere in the world would not act so rude to a person they've just met, and expect them to buy their coffee beans. Also, the American Male, who's the coffee buyer in the movie is also portrayed like an push-over, idiot. The Writer should go back to writing class or give up writing anything that has to do with people. It's not because his characters are one dimensional - they're worse, and more like half dimensional.

The Main Characters are "deader" than the murder victims, and the story is just as vapid. The murder victims are staged by the killer in what is described as "artistic", and I agree, which makes them more exciting than the actual living characters in the film who are by far some of the most unsympathetic, disengaging, unemotional, boring people to grace the screen. Now on a more positive note, the Art Direction makes the film watchable, but the pretty Actress is what's keeping me watching. Other than that, this movie has nothing to offer, and is like a nicely wrapped box with a polished stone inside. Don't waste your time unless you are one of the following: A film student who must watch everything, A film critic who must watch everything, Someone who enjoys watching paint dry, or an unlucky fool. Of course I'm joking because I'd be the unlucky fool.

It is not a perfect movie by far, but it's worth watching, never-the- less. The story could have been less pat, and could have taken more risks. Which makes me wonder, what were they afraid of?

The visuals are beautiful, and that includes the Cast of Emmy Rossum, Patrick Wilson, & Gerard Butler. Given these three beautiful people, it is easy to understand why we would want to sit through this movie, but when it comes to the singing, Gerard Butler is not on par with the rest of the cast. I do not blame Butler, since his singing could have easily been enhanced, dubbed, and even perfected with today's existing technology. Instead, they chose to go with a Joey Buttafuoco sounding, Phantom. Well, not that bad, I mean, most of the time he was just fine, it's just sometimes that he would sound like Buttafuoco, but that was enough to ruin any emotional investment one would have had in the movie at that moment.

Another issue with the movie is the Makeup. I really don't see anyone receiving any noteworthy, awards for this work. It is not so much the actual application of the makeup, because the actors look good. The makeup on Emmy Rossum is breath-takingly, beautiful, when she sings, "Think of Me", but then again, she probably doesn't really need any makeup to look beautiful. However, it's the continuity of the makeup that throws people for a loop. The phantom's disfigurement (more like a rash) seems to appear less & less grotesque as the film progresses, and then appears grotesque again, and then less so again - it's a mess. Then there's Emmy Rossum, who miraculously changes from a fresh, faced innocent, to a sexy, eyeshadowed seductress, all within the same scene where she takes a ride on the gondola with the Phantom. Did she check her makeup on board? Not to be unkind to Emmy Rossum, if anything, she is the star, and the heart of this film. It is as if the universe all conspired to bring us this unique talent, for a brief moment, and we could all fall in love with her in the Phantom.

Overall, the movie is absolutely worth watching, because Andrew Lloyd Webber, and his Lyricist (Charles Hart) are geniuses. The music & songs are beautifully, written and the Director did a great job bringing it from stage to screen.

Don't let the "Jaded Critic" fool you into skipping this by saying things like, "unoriginal, melodramatic, boring, & corny", because the movie is very good. The "Critic" who said those words must not have a pulse, and is hooked up to an IV drip. I mean, seriously, the guy really must not have seen the movie, because he spends practically no words explaining why it's bad - he should at least "back-up" his critique. My guess is that he has a stake in a similar movie which he boasts about that is better than Sanctum, but I have not seen that movie, so I will not comment. However, Sanctum may not be original, because it's about being trapped in a cave, but it is definitely not boring. How could incredible, high definition, shots of breath-taking, caverns and life threatening dangers around every corner be boring? The acting & story is not "melodramatic, & corny" - it's captivating & entertaining. It's about the will to survive, and endure incredible odds of suffering just to see the light of day. I've seen a lot of movies, and I could easily have been bored, highly critical of the acting, but I saw none of that in this movie. The Actors are not American and not Big Stars, but they do well enough, and gets you involved in their world of cave, diving, and exploration. As a matter of fact, I was feeling claustrophobic watching them dive in the tight spaces. Also, the dangers they face just being there was enough to make you wonder how people actually do things like cave diving - it's incredibly dangerous.

"Kill Point" is a very, intense movie and worth the watch. I really don't expect TV Mini Series to be worth watching unless they're on Pay Cable or something, but I don't think this was on Pay TV, which means this should have "sucked". Anyway, this was a "nail-biting" suspense that delivered from start to finish. It was a very addicting watch, and I just wanted to know what was going to happen next. There was no ridiculous Character development, or far fetched scenes that stinks of lazy/ stupid writing. All the Characters were well written and behaved as if they were really in a hostage situation. This movie is good enough that after watching it, all the parties involved are seen in a new respectful, light. I also gained new respect for all the Actors in the movie. Donny Wahlberg who is pretty much dismissed as Mark Walhberg's, less talented, older Brother is actually fantastic. John Leguizamo was also very good as the Hostage Taker who has to manage an intense situation, and try to maintain his honor. Of course, it's not an Academy Awards acting job, but they were worth watching because this was a great movie, and I would recommend it to even the hardcore action/ suspense movie goers.

This is a movie that is actually saved by the Stars, Katherine Heigl & Josh Duhamel, and that doesn't happen very often (these 2 saving any movie that is). The movie is so cliché that you really don't get anything new except the combination of the two leads, and they look really good together. Everything about this movie is so "done before" for a Romantic Comedy, that you wonder if the Producers used "software" that automatically wrote, produced, & directed this movie for them, and all they had to do was punch in the names of the two lead characters. Sure, you know everything that's going to happen before it happens, but Heigl & Duhamel look so good together, that it's still worth watching. Even the soundtrack is "cookie-cutter", and leans more on the "bland" side, which is a bad thing, because you're actually not supposed to notice the soundtrack unless it's really good or bad. And then there's the "Title", which is sooo... forgettable, that if you went to the theater, and saw, "Life As We Know It", on the marquee you might think you were at night school for the Learning Annex. Someone, somewhere in the Marketing Dept., must be secretly laughing with great satisfaction, because they must have protested the use of this awful Title only to be ignored by the idiot boss.

The concept is good, and worth looking at for a movie, but any good Science Fiction Movie worth a damn, must be able to do one thing: create a suspension of disbelief. Through out the whole movie, I kept finding flaws so outstanding that I just could not find myself to enjoy this movie. Flaws in plot, character, and story just drags this movie down like a ton of bricks. Had this movie not taken itself so seriously, perhaps it might have been saved by some humor, but this movie was not funny either. I also did not get "involved" in the main character, Vincent's, struggles, and could care less if he got caught, or succeeded in his plan to go to space. Although, I do not blame Ethan Hawk's performance in the movie, and more the Writer than anyone. Watching a guy constantly, collecting his own personal DNA in CSI-like fashion, and not display any emotions about it, makes for a pretty boring movie.

Strange thing about this movie is that it has a lot of things wrong with it, but it is still a good movie, because it has a lot of "charm". Not the kind of charm in a movie that is overly contrived, but an actual sincere charm - which is hard to find. Most credit goes to Brittany Murphy for the charm, because she is such a naturally, sweet girl that she just delivers that quality to the whole film. The first problem I would love to address is the Cover of the DVD/Poster/Ad, because it is really awful. It has a "reverse stereotype" of Brittany Murphy in a Kimono with hands clasped. This would be okay for a film that one would think is about a soft-porn, submissive female on Cinemax, but it is not - it's more in the line of Karate Kid, and Shall we Dance. The People who watch expecting to see some White girl in Japan in hot, sexy escapades will be disappointed, and the People who usually watch more cultural, art films would avoid it thinking it's just soft-porn, so this "Cover" just disappoints everyone. The Marketing Dept. should learn from the people who market Fast & the Furious, because those movies sucks big, but always pulls in the audience because people know what to expect.

What is the worse thing about a bad movie? Is it the crappy Special Effects, the lousy Story, or maybe the Directing? I am usually very generous to Actors, and blame the Director, because he is responsible for everything that happens in front of the camera. The Actors, I think, really do try their best, and it is a job that is harder than most people think. And then I watched, "Living Hell", a straight-to-video, B- Horror, that I have zero expectations. One particular element of a movie is the Acting, and for some reason it just really, sticks out if it's done, very, well, or done, really, really, badly. Unfortunately, for Erica Leerhsen, her acting in this film was perhaps the worse acting I have ever seen in movie history. I mean, it was not the kind of "bad acting" that makes you laugh out loud, because you know that the Actor is the Producer's Girl-friend. It's also not the kind of "bad acting", that is from an Actor who's just a big, "Ham", like William Shatner, over-acting, because he's wearing tight, spandex clothes on a space-ship, and needs to bring more attention himself. No, this is the kind of "bad acting" that is for all the acting schools out there to study for an entire year. The Director, Richard Jeffries, should be ashamed of himself for directing a performance worthy of 10 Raspberries, combined.

As the first person to actually review this movie, I am surprised that there are no others before me. This is a pretty good, commercial, movie, with universal appeal and sensibility. Although, it's nothing ground- breaking, it's pretty entertaining and worth watching. To think that IMDb actually links a "free" viewing of the movie via HULU is amazing.

The Story is good, Characters are likable, but I am surprised that the two, main lead, male, actors, Huy Khanh (Hieu), and Binh Minh (Khang) seem a bit old for college students, but they did a solid job acting. However, I was totally, surprised with Ngoc Diep's performance as Jennifer. I usually see the Ditzy-Asian-American Girl performance, and think they give the worst job acting because they all do the same forgettable act - the, "I don't know anything about my language/ culture, and you should really get a laugh". Either Diep is a really good actor, or she really is that helplessly, ignorant about her culture. Fortunately, she really does seem to show vulnerability and get sympathy for her character, and is funny, too, so she must be a good actor.

I guess the Director, Victor Vu did a pretty good job getting the comedy performances out of the cast without them over-acting. The performances were also good because they were able to get sympathy without looking unnatural. A movie like this seems like so many things could go wrong, but over-all was done well.

What is a real shame is that even commercial movies like these are not finding a market audience here in the US, and the fact that it was made at all is pretty amazing. Even worse is all the good performances from the actors are not being seen by enough people.

This movie tries desperately to be in so many other movies footsteps that it just winds up tripping all over itself. This movie is essentially The Joy Luck Club's, Ugly Twin Sister. Although the writing is bad, it's not completely a mess. I do like that it tries to show that Chinese Americans are progressive in American society, but it never departs from some serious jingoistic dialog that seems borrowed from a bag of fortune cookies. The Family is actually a bore, but the writer thinks that by making one a lesbian, and another marry a Black Man would make them more interesting. Also, having all the non-family members play completely humble, somewhat quirky, incredibly understanding, and knowledgeable to the family's "attitude" is just unbelievable. The Directing is somewhat amateurish but better than some Chinese Soap Serials. The actors are all so stiff in their performances - I've seen better performances with claymation. On the bright side, Russle Wong's acting has improved just enough to be the best performance in the whole movie - that's bad.

This movie just does not work on any level, whatsoever. I mean, given the premise is high concept, it still falls flat on execution. Maybe it's the Director, Jonathan Mastow, who really might be a Razzie's winner, for sure. Perhaps it's Bruce Willis who summons his tough guy persona only to have you really not give a sh*t. Needless to say, in order for a movie of this sort to work, one must be eased into a "suspension of disbelief", but not for SURROGATES, it tries desperately to pull you into its world, but only with the weakest of traction. A world and time where technology can produce a Surrogate, but yet still have everyone driving around in mid 2000's, model cars. I guess the Art Director didn't do his homework either, because the film is chock full of inconsistencies. Did I mention the story, of which only a writer with no name would have dared write, yet this guy actually put his name on it - don't worry, because I won't mention his name. The story has plot holes big enough for a stadium, zero character development, and an ending that will leave you screaming for your money back. Surrogates is clearly a Razzies film if they can bare to screen it.

This movie is really great at revealing how some women are just insane, and they drag their husbands down like a ton of bricks. April, Kate Winslet, is great at playing a depressed, housewife, who has unfulfilled dreams of being an actress, let ruin both her and her husband's, Frank, Leo DiCaprio's, "perfect life" in the suburbs. Unfortunately, this is a story that is played out everyday by men and women who live together in reality. Frank has no idea what he has done to cause April to stop caring for him, after all, he really loves her, does his job as the supporting husband, and even tries his best to understand her. Yet, despite all he does for her, she is still unphased, and could care less about him. For Frank, April's resentment towards him is unbearable, because he does not know what he did wrong. Frank even blames himself for April's absurd behavior, but it is really April's self-loathing that is ruining their lives. The end pretty much sums it up for Men who want to stay in a relationship. Watch the movie before you decide to get married.

Compared to his earlier work, this film seems to lack the "punch" of a usual Michael Moore film. Perhaps he's getting nicer with old age? I expected him to really go after the "Corporate Greed Meisters" with everything including the kitchen sink, but it was rather a subdued attack. Focusing more on the everyday out of luck person, and the few rare examples of Socialists work environments. The tone of the film was almost like he had tried his best through out his career, and now he's tired, but he has to keep going even with false hope. If anything, Moore is a man who tried to fight the good fight for the little guy, and in my opinion, made a difference.

Oliver Stone should fire his Casting Agent, because the only actor that was cast correctly was "Josh Brolin" - everyone else was not even close in appearance or behavior. Dana Carvey would have been a better choice for George Bush Senior, Barbara Bush was too young, Condoleeza Rice was way too pretty, Laura Bush was not pretty enough, Carl Rove was way too short, Colin Powell was playing the Godfather with the cotton balls in the cheeks, Donald Rumsfield didn't look anything like him, unless you consider the glasses only, and Dick Cheney, well, he was OK. The most disappointing was Bush Senior, because there are possibly a hundred or more actors out there that could have done a better job than James Cromwell (probably in their sleep). Cromwell played Bush like he never saw or heard the real Bush before in his life, which is impossible, in todays media filled world. If it wasn't for Josh Brolin, this movie would be like a joke, because it is so poorly cast for a professionally made movie.

This movie is pathetic not because it's poorly directed, acted, sung, danced, filmed, etc ... but because it's really difficult to ruin a movie using an ABBA soundtrack - yet, unfortunately, this is the only thing the movie succeeds in doing. The musical presentations in the movie, SouthPark, was much better than in Mama Mia. The director of Mama Mia is proof that you don't need talent to be a director - all you need are ABBA songs.

Just to give a sample of the awfulness: An aging Meryl Streep is shot with close-ups in the harsh sunlight singing and just ruining the song with all the distracting wrinkles on her face. Why do that to one of the most talented Actresses out there?

I was really hoping Jim Carey would knock this one out of the park and have a really good movie. I understand he actually settled for "points" and did not get paid any money upfront for this movie - that's risky, and he should fire his manager. The movie has an interesting concept and good message, but it falls flat for so many reasons. The movie was very contrived, lacked originality, and did not know how far to go with the comedy. Things were conveniently happening just to move the story along even though they were lazily thought up and could have been better. The comedy was not screw-ball enough and failed to capitalize on Carey's strong points. I like Jim Carey, but that's just about all this movie has going for it. This movie is definitely not for the analytical type, because your suspension of disbelief required to enjoy a movie like this would not be met.

I am totally surprised that "Clint Eastwood" chose to make a movie like this - I mean, he has the clout to do "anything" he wants, yet he did this funny, little, odd, but honest, and contemporary movie about the changing face of America. Although Eastwood does fall victim to his own type-casting as, "Mr. Tough Guy". The risk of taking on a story about an angry, Old Man, living next door to a Hmong Family in the Midwest isn't exactly the usual "Hollywood" movie. Yet, the movie opened to better than competitive ticket sales. Also, the Hmong cast members were just right - Eastwood as Director does an excellent job not stereotyping and getting the generational points across. This movie is definitely worth watching for its original story. And though it has insight into race relations, race is not the pretentious message here.

If You are into horror this movie is "definitely" worth a watch. There are of course some minor things to take into consideration like ... well, the acting, the dialog, budget, story, and almost everything technical. BUT, but really, that's not why you should watch this "gem" or "hidden gold treasure". You should check this movie out because there is something about the "feel" of this movie that is what "horror" movies are all about. The movie also does not shy away from the sex or what's allowed of it back then, and of course the "Devil Doll" is as creepy as evil dolls get. The filmmakers may not have got everything right, but they definitely nailed the coffin shut with a genuine feel of horror.

"Belly", the film, has been rated poorly by the critics, and for a simple reason - the critics are mostly White. Whites do not share the culture of the film's characters, and will probably just write this film off for it's exploitative elements. However, if you are Black, this film will probably be rated much better than the "White" critic's ratings. Take the OJ Simpson verdict of, "not guilty", the White Audience's response was that of a funeral - silence, moans, and shock. On the other side, the Black Audience's reaction was just the opposite - cheers, and jumping with joy. Film and Art is very subjective, and is not like math, where if you are right, you can be proved right, but in Art, there is no such proof. Also, there is something I think that many would not agree with me, is that when White people see a movie that is not made by a White Person, they have subconscious prejudices that are transferred to the film, and in some cases may rate a film poorly, just because they feel a Black Person can NOT make a movie better than a White Person. "Belly" is a "great film", and there should be more Black Film Critics.