Change Your Image
joelmbain
Reviews
Il regista di matrimoni (2006)
Counted the minutes until it was over.
I checked this out at the Vancouver International Film Festival and was not impressed.
The only area of the film I enjoyed was the commentary on film-making. For the most part, this film seemed random and somewhat fantastical (I don't say that in a complimentary way, however) and just silly. It was as if he was mixing fantasy with everyday life, which may sounds intriguing in some films, but the fantasy merely seemed needlessly perverse.
My criticism of this film is not upon the actors, rather the story itself. I found it boring and narcissistic. I wanted my money back, but considering it was a Film Festival, that wasn't about to happen.
The Office (2005)
A little dry...
I watched Apprentice and then this came on. It sounded like it was going to be amazing, but I must say I was left disappointed. I didn't find the main dude very interesting or funny. Just seemed like cheesy humor. I also found the humor a little dry and boring. Maybe if I had an office job I would enjoy the humor, but I just found it kind of boring and unengaged. I know its obvious I'm stretching for ten lines, but in all honesty, I don't really have much more to say than what I've already said. I give it 4/10 overall...Any other opinions? I realize I don't always seem to go with the flow, but hey thats whats great about discussion. -WhatsGoingDown
Spring Break Shark Attack (2005)
3/10 Stars from this bored individual!
I watched this movie with low expectations and was not really disappointed. It was at times predictable, but it was a good time passer for a bored evening for me.
I think they were capable of making a much better movie than they did, but it was a made-for-TV movie so you cannot complain much I guess. If you watched the movie expecting an Oscar performance, then you need to give your head a shake and realize that this film was not made for that. It was made for some entertainment, simply that. =)
I gave the movie 3/10 stars and if you think its better than that, so be it. Lets just get along =P
Fahrenhype 9/11 (2004)
Interesting...
I have now watched both Fahrenheit 9/11 and Fahrenhype 9/11 and it is evident that both films, in my opinion contain biases that influence largely the desired end of the film.
The problem with contrasting the two films is the discussion of who has the burden of proof? Many reviewers state that Fahrenhype 9/11 has no proof to disprove the accusations and conclusions of Fahrenheit 9/11, but Fahrenheit is lacking the clear, solid proof to justify Moore's speculation of the Bush administration's activities. Who has the burden of proof? Is it the producers of Fahrenhype 9/11 who are trying to refute Moore's film or is it Michael Moore who speculates about the various alleged lies of the Bush administration? Neither film clearly proves their opinion, but instead gives usually shaky evidence, although both at times have critically thought out premises of their arguments.
After watching Fahrenheit 9/11, I must admit I felt largely like there was a much more concerted effort on Moore's part to get me to believe what he believes about the Bush administration, perhaps Moore feels some urgency for people to examine the actions of President Bush. With Fahrenhype 9/11, I can't say I felt the same pressure to believe what they are preaching.
Both films are effective in that they both raise discussion about the known facts and what we know about the surrounding events. Neither, however, are give good enough grounds to truly influence one's political doctrine. Both films prey on the viewer's naiveness and they both challenge the viewer to question what is being told to them, whether it is the US Government speaking or it is Michael Moore.