Change Your Image
anithyng_gose
Reviews
Century Hotel (2001)
Century Hotel succeeds for what it is.
Anyone who reads the back of the movie sleeve will have some idea of what Century Hotel is about. ONE ROOM, SEVEN STORIES, etc. For the most part, every major event in the film takes place in room 720, as if the room (or a ghost who inhabits the room) is telling us each of these tales.
Since all seven stories are being told from the ROOM'S perspective, we can only expect to know what goes on in that room and nothing more. Not all the stories are completely wrapped up in room 720 and we shouldn't expect them to be. Just as we don't see everyone check in, we shouldn't be surprised that we don't see everyone check out.
What Century Hotel provides for viewers are glimpses into different people's lives from different time periods. Each of these stories is about a different form of LOVE and it is interesting to see these sides of love, even if each story only occupies about 15 minutes of film.
To quote the great Roger Ebert, "I prefer to evaluate a film on the basis of what it intends to do, not on what I think it should have done." On this basis, Century Hotel succeeds for what it is: Seven glimpses into different forms of love, complimented with good acting, great cinematography and beyond.
The Matrix Revolutions (2003)
Dark & Depressing
*May contain spoilers* We all know from watching the previous two films, that the "real world" is not a pretty place. There's no sun under the thick cloud cover and tarantula-like machines rule most of the world. Knowing that part three's final battle with the machines would occur in the real world, this dark, depressing atmosphere was to be expected.
What was not expected, however, was that the Wachowski brothers would abandon so many of the elements that made the first two films so popular. There are far less "bullet time" scenes, and where they do exist; they fall short of the level of creativity and awe of the first two films. One may argue that fans that feel this way were jaded from the amazing ideas of the first two films, but I feel this is an objective perspective. The scenes just aren't as exciting or innovative this time.
Most of the movie is what we expect. There are next to no real plot twists, other than seeing some of our favorite characters die. The machines invade, there is a fireworks-gun power battle in Zion and Neo does what he feels he must do to save the world.
In the end, we're left with the confirmation that the war has ended, but for how long? There is also an uncertainty with what truly becomes of Neo. I thought a final film in a trilogy is meant to put together all the loose pieces, but this one may create as many as it solves. It feels kind of like the end of Terminator 3, that there is more ahead? or at least should be.
All in all, the action was intense throughout and the acting solid as usual. It's just not like the first two films, not as fun. The first two films are the kind of movies most people will watch time again because they are awe-inspiring and take the viewer to many different places. This film takes us on a one-way path into the darkest depths of hell, which I'm uncertain the vast majority of people will be excited about revisiting.
IMDB Score: 6/10
Yat goh ho yan (1997)
Review from a Jackie Chan fanatic
Most fans, new and old will enjoy the action scenes and comedy of this film. While the majority of Jackie's movies are weak in plot, (no big surprise), this one falls a bit below average.
***WARNING: POSSIBLE SPOILERS FOLLOW ***
The main plot of the film is Jackie and company being hunted down by a gang called "Demons" for a video that accidentally falls into Jackie's possession, and then into the hands of his friend's child.
The video was of a drug-deal gone bad, taped by the cameraman of Diana (the redhead). After being smacked to the ground in about the 12th chapter (out of 20), this main character of the film is never seen or heard from again! Let me repeat, SHE TOTALLY VANISHES FROM THE MOVIE! What is that???
Jackie goes on to totally demolish the mansion of Giancarlo (rival of the Demons) who seemed less of Jackie's enemy than the Demons until the end of the film ...and that's IT!
I realize that a good 20 minutes was chopped out of the US version, but really, what little plot the film has just falls out of the bottom in the end ...as if the average viewer wouldn't notice!
Great action scenes and Jackie as a famous chef was memorable. But if you are a serious collector and only want Jackie's best films, this one may be strictly rental-only.
Resident Evil (2002)
Compared to the game, it falls way short.
Okay, I am going to warn you that the following comments may contain spoilers, because I'm not sure if comparing scenes from the film and the game could be seen as such.
Anyway, Resident Evil is less like the video game and more like Event Horizon (by the same director, Paul Anderson) meets Dawn of the Dead (by the man who basically invented zombies, George Romero). Here's the bad first, as it is a lot easier to recall the bad than the good.
Screw Up #1: Changing the script! Our Event Horizon director must have really liked his old film, because he decided to rewrite the RE script and make the Umbrella lab a slave of some AI computer, just like the "living spaceship" in EH. It felt more like the team was in battle with the lab instead of the zombies. And to think they initially had George Romero on the staff and let him get away!
Screw Up #2: The zombies (what's left?)! There were no zombies in the mansion like in the game, it was basically "zip right to the lab to make the movie easier to shoot i.e. more contained." The zombies that were in the film were not scary or gory (except for a couple) and unlike older (Romero) zombie films, there was little violence in their destruction. No humor, no creativity, terribly crowded camera work on many of the "zombie" sequences, etc.
Screw Up #3: The plot (now what's left?). The plot was a total rip off of Dawn of the Dead, yet Dawn was a much more entertaining, well-rounded movie. One major difference is that Anderson didn't take any time to develop ANY of the characters, so we really could care less who gets killed. When the good guys do die, most viewers won't even remember their names at that very moment.
Screw Up #4: Translation (yep, that's right). They did not use ONE character from ANY of the games! Anderson claimed that using characters from the game would make the film too predictable. I (and I hope you agree) think that was a BAD move. I think his reason was that he didn't know JACK about the characters, so instead of doing some hard-nosed research on the games to "get it right" he decided to do it "his" way. Ouch!
Screw Up #5: The ending. I won't give that away though...
The Good: If you saw the commercial or trailer you saw most of the good stuff i.e. the dog getting kicked in the head, the lab sets were great, Milla is so beautiful I think she was the only reason most guys watch the film to the end, and there are a FEW other parts of the movie relative to the game which aren't worth mentioning. I had mixed feelings about Tomb Raider when I saw it, I thought it was good, but not very deep. But compared to this, Tomb Raider looks like gold. Anderson did much better with Mortal Kombat, I'm not sure what happened here.
Overall score: 1.5 out of 4 stars