An absolutely awful and creepy fictitious love story rather than the circumstances surrounding the disaster is at the center of this movie. Bad acting, a confusing story (or rather stories) with propagandist elements and no feeling of the impact of the disaster. It feels like a generic hero movie.
Reviews
9 Reviews
War of the Worlds
(2005)
Inferior to the 1953 version
26 February 2006
Warning: Spoilers
The 2005 version of "War of the Worlds" is inferior in almost all respects to the 1953 version (except F/X of course), the acting is bad, the script lacks, the pacing is awkward and some of the plot elements are outright stupid
(SPOILER: the Tripods being buried in the ground without anyone ever stumbling across one???) and the movie felt a little like M. Night Shyamalan's "Signs", especially with the focus on one family). The F/X wasn't all that impressive either (and it's nominated for an Academy Award in the Special Effects category? ILM deserves it, but not for this movie).
Because it's Spielberg and John Williams' score, I give the movie 3 out of 10.
(SPOILER: the Tripods being buried in the ground without anyone ever stumbling across one???) and the movie felt a little like M. Night Shyamalan's "Signs", especially with the focus on one family). The F/X wasn't all that impressive either (and it's nominated for an Academy Award in the Special Effects category? ILM deserves it, but not for this movie).
Because it's Spielberg and John Williams' score, I give the movie 3 out of 10.
American Graffiti
(1973)
One of the greatest movies ever made!
3 November 2004
American Graffiti stands as one of my favorite movies. Perhaps the most personal movie made by George Lucas, a celebration to his youth and the time before the Vietnam war. Filled with great music, beautiful cars, believable characters, an excellent cast, strong script and directing (perhaps the first movie made to feature multiple story-lines) American Graffiti is truly one of the best movies ever made. This movie opened up the careers for many young talented actors: Ron Howard (who plays Steve Bolander, the Class President, an all-American kid) later went on to play Richie Cunningham in the television sit-com Happy Days set in the '50s, a product of the nostalgia that came following the release of this movie, and not to forget Richard Dreyfuss and Harrison Ford (who it seems more or less had given up the movie business). American Graffiti is strongly recommended for everybody!
Rose Red
(2002– )
Great King mini!
20 December 2003
Warning: Spoilers
***IS NOT DESIGNED TO DO SO, BUT MIGHT CONTAIN SOME SPOILERS*** "Rose Red" is the perfect blend of earlier works of Stephen King. Take a little "The Shining", add a little "Carrie" and you've got "Rose Red"!
THE PLOT: A university professor, Joyce Reardon (played by Nancy Travis) wants to have proof about paranormal activities, so with the help of a number of psychic people, they go to the haunted mansion Rose Red (which Reardon is obsessed about).
THE REST: The acting is generally good. The visual effects are excellent. The house is spooky, and the CG enhancements are great, even though they're sometimes quite evident. At times, the prosthetic effects are not that efficient, but are generally better than usual when it comes to this kind of mini series.
I wonder what the result might have been if Steven Spielberg had chosen to remain with the project...
8/10
THE PLOT: A university professor, Joyce Reardon (played by Nancy Travis) wants to have proof about paranormal activities, so with the help of a number of psychic people, they go to the haunted mansion Rose Red (which Reardon is obsessed about).
THE REST: The acting is generally good. The visual effects are excellent. The house is spooky, and the CG enhancements are great, even though they're sometimes quite evident. At times, the prosthetic effects are not that efficient, but are generally better than usual when it comes to this kind of mini series.
I wonder what the result might have been if Steven Spielberg had chosen to remain with the project...
8/10
The BEST of the Star Wars movies (yet)!
20 December 2003
Warning: Spoilers
***MIGHT CONTAIN SOME SPOILERS***
Yes, you've read the summary correctly. In my opinion, this is the best Star Wars movie yet, now that only Episode III remains. I am sick and tired of all people bashing this movie. The negative reviews are centered on three main issues: the use of CG, the dialogue and the acting. Well, things have progressed since the Original Trilogy was made. CGI is a tool to tell a story, nothing more. By the way, I do not like LOTR, and I think that Gollum is awful CG. Lucas understands this. About the dialogue, Lucas has always stated that the Star Wars movies are centered around its visuals. Look at the original trilogy, was the dialogue any better? No. The same goes for the acting.
THE PLOT: After a failed assassination attempt of Senator Amidala (former Queen of Naboo), Obi-Wan Kenobi and his Padawan Anakin Skywalker are given the roles of protecting her life. After yet another failed attempt, Anakin is ordered to take her to her home planet of Naboo while Obi-Wan is ordered to find out who is responsible for the plot to kill her.
Yes, you've read the summary correctly. In my opinion, this is the best Star Wars movie yet, now that only Episode III remains. I am sick and tired of all people bashing this movie. The negative reviews are centered on three main issues: the use of CG, the dialogue and the acting. Well, things have progressed since the Original Trilogy was made. CGI is a tool to tell a story, nothing more. By the way, I do not like LOTR, and I think that Gollum is awful CG. Lucas understands this. About the dialogue, Lucas has always stated that the Star Wars movies are centered around its visuals. Look at the original trilogy, was the dialogue any better? No. The same goes for the acting.
THE PLOT: After a failed assassination attempt of Senator Amidala (former Queen of Naboo), Obi-Wan Kenobi and his Padawan Anakin Skywalker are given the roles of protecting her life. After yet another failed attempt, Anakin is ordered to take her to her home planet of Naboo while Obi-Wan is ordered to find out who is responsible for the plot to kill her.
Great Star Trek movie!
16 December 2003
Warning: Spoilers
***MIGHT CONTAIN SPOILERS***
Star Trek V, the most underrated of the Star Trek movies is easily one of the best of the franchise. I'm only a casual fan (I prefer Star Wars) and don't care for the goofs in this movie, which I consider to be minor and doesn't affect the movie. Some of them are considered serious (a.o. the number of decks and how the Enterprise was able to reach the center of the Galaxy going at Warp 7) but as I said, don't care about them. The acting is great for a Star Trek movie. William Shatner is as stiff as always, but I like that. Nimoy is good, but the real gems are James Doohan (as Scott, who else?) and Laurence Luckinbill (as Spock's half-brother Sybok). Luckinbill is very convincing and sincere and seemed to have good fun. The visual effects are at times horrendous, with that budget (nearly 28 million dollars) why didn't they use ILM instead of Associates and Ferren. Yes, ILM was producing the f/x for Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, but did ALL the staff at ILM do so? I would very much like to see an updated version of Star Trek V, though Paramount has said that won't happen. Let's see what the future holds.
Star Trek V, the most underrated of the Star Trek movies is easily one of the best of the franchise. I'm only a casual fan (I prefer Star Wars) and don't care for the goofs in this movie, which I consider to be minor and doesn't affect the movie. Some of them are considered serious (a.o. the number of decks and how the Enterprise was able to reach the center of the Galaxy going at Warp 7) but as I said, don't care about them. The acting is great for a Star Trek movie. William Shatner is as stiff as always, but I like that. Nimoy is good, but the real gems are James Doohan (as Scott, who else?) and Laurence Luckinbill (as Spock's half-brother Sybok). Luckinbill is very convincing and sincere and seemed to have good fun. The visual effects are at times horrendous, with that budget (nearly 28 million dollars) why didn't they use ILM instead of Associates and Ferren. Yes, ILM was producing the f/x for Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, but did ALL the staff at ILM do so? I would very much like to see an updated version of Star Trek V, though Paramount has said that won't happen. Let's see what the future holds.
The Langoliers
(1995)
A very good adaptation
9 December 2003
Warning: Spoilers
***MIGHT CONTAIN SPOILERS***
In my opinion, this is one of the best adaptations for any of King's work (made for television), this being based on a short story.
THE ACTORS/THE ACTING: Some very excellent choices were made. David Morse (as captain Engle) and Bronson Pinchot (as Craig Toomy) stands out. The only actor who I think was miscast was Patricia Wettig (as Laurel Stevenson). At times she was very unconvincing and annoying. The rest of the cast was good. And, of course, it's always fun to see Stephen King making a cameo.
THE STORY: The story stayed very true to its original and was handled very well. The ending was of course a bit tamer than the original, but that is understandable (in the short story, Toomy gets his legs bitten off by the Langoliers, but tries to flee running on his stumps).
THE EFFECTS: Not that much of F/X. I've seen many people bashing the CG works near the ending, but I do not have any problems with that. I mean, it is made for television, not the big screen so what would you expect from 1995? It works for me.
I give "The Langoliers" ****½ out of *****
In my opinion, this is one of the best adaptations for any of King's work (made for television), this being based on a short story.
THE ACTORS/THE ACTING: Some very excellent choices were made. David Morse (as captain Engle) and Bronson Pinchot (as Craig Toomy) stands out. The only actor who I think was miscast was Patricia Wettig (as Laurel Stevenson). At times she was very unconvincing and annoying. The rest of the cast was good. And, of course, it's always fun to see Stephen King making a cameo.
THE STORY: The story stayed very true to its original and was handled very well. The ending was of course a bit tamer than the original, but that is understandable (in the short story, Toomy gets his legs bitten off by the Langoliers, but tries to flee running on his stumps).
THE EFFECTS: Not that much of F/X. I've seen many people bashing the CG works near the ending, but I do not have any problems with that. I mean, it is made for television, not the big screen so what would you expect from 1995? It works for me.
I give "The Langoliers" ****½ out of *****
Magnum Force
(1973)
The best of the Dirty Harry movies!
5 December 2003
Warning: Spoilers
***MIGHT CONTAIN SPOILERS*** This is by far the best of all Dirty Harry movies (the worst, in my opinion, being The Enforcer)! Great character development coupled with good action and really good performances of Hal Holbrooke and David Soul (although we doesn't really see that much of him). Eastwood is really convincing and it seems as if he's more settled in the part than in the first.
The Shining
(1980)
A masterpiece
2 December 2003
Warning: Spoilers
---MIGHT CONTAIN SPOILERS---
I love this movie, not as an adaptation of King's excellent novel, but as a Kubrick/Johnson collaboration. While they kept the basic story, they came up with other themes than King (a.o. the native American theme)which works beautifully. Besides Shelly Duvall, the cast is fantastic. Sadly, Scatman Crothers appearance is highly reduced in the International version which cuts several scenes, especially in the beginning and during Halloran's journey to the Overlook. I haven't seen the U.S. version, but I do hope some day I will. It's hard to imagine that the interiors were done in soundstages, they're so elaborate (not to mention eerie). For the soundtrack, I'm glad that Kubrick didn't choose the music which was written for the movie (which appears in the DVD/Laserdisc documentary), but instead opted for Dies Irae. As for the 1997 mini series based on King's screenplay. I think it's great. Both that and this version are highly recommended (but not the latter for the faint of heart).
I love this movie, not as an adaptation of King's excellent novel, but as a Kubrick/Johnson collaboration. While they kept the basic story, they came up with other themes than King (a.o. the native American theme)which works beautifully. Besides Shelly Duvall, the cast is fantastic. Sadly, Scatman Crothers appearance is highly reduced in the International version which cuts several scenes, especially in the beginning and during Halloran's journey to the Overlook. I haven't seen the U.S. version, but I do hope some day I will. It's hard to imagine that the interiors were done in soundstages, they're so elaborate (not to mention eerie). For the soundtrack, I'm glad that Kubrick didn't choose the music which was written for the movie (which appears in the DVD/Laserdisc documentary), but instead opted for Dies Irae. As for the 1997 mini series based on King's screenplay. I think it's great. Both that and this version are highly recommended (but not the latter for the faint of heart).
Tell Your Friends