Change Your Image
Everton_Paul
Reviews
Batman Begins (2005)
Utter drivel
After reading the numerous good reviews of this film, I was expecting a seriously made, deep movie that explored the batman character in a meaningful way. There are so many things wrong with this film, but basically it just quickly degenerates into the typical brain dead Hollywood teen-pleasing crapola. I think all the A list actors were just collecting fat pay checks. I know Bale was probably looking for a blockbuster movie to propel his face a bit more into the mainstream, but he picked a turkey here. I really think Bale is a brilliant actor (as he showed in American Psycho) but he is wasted in this movie.
The action sequences suffer from the modern Hollywood 'X-box' editing desease, where no shot stays on screen for more than a split second. This simply confuses the viewer as to exactly what he's supposed to be seeing. The score is good, but pervades far too much throughout the film. The plot is pretty ridiculous.
I won't carry on criticising it, but this movie DOES NOT deserve to be anything like #80 in the IMDb list (as it presently is). Is this really a better movie than Midnight Cowboy??!!??!! I think not.
Does absolutely NOTHING to restore my nearly extinguished hope that Hollywood is ever going to make brilliant mainstream movies again, like it used to do in the 70s (Godfather, Deer Hunter, Deliverance, etc. etc. etc.)
Armageddon (1998)
Armacrappon
This 'schlock-buster' should carry a government health warning. If you play it in your DVD machine, you are in serious risk of opening a rift in the space-time continuum and disappearing without trace into it - so bad is this 'movie'.
The fact that this movie was so successful is evidence of the true desperate state of modern Hollywood cinema, and the continual commissioning of films that appeal to the 'lowest common denominator' - although I truly dread to think of the 'lowest common denominators' that this film actually appeals to!!
I think Hollywood were just conducting some kind of proving trials when they made and screened this film! I can imagine the executive boardroom meetings at the studio ... "Just how bad a film can we actually get away with making - and STILL make loads of money!??! Holy cow, I didn't realise we could go THAT bad!! Woooo hooooo!!"
The only films worse than this that I can think of (and trust me it is close) are Die Another Day (RIP the Bond franchise as I knew it) and Independence Day!
AVOID - AVOID - AVOID!!!!
Midnight Cowboy (1969)
A TRUE classic. Brilliant.
I find it truly depressing that this movie is not even in the top #250 of the IMDb (at the time of writing). Mind you, I wonder what the average age of the IMDb voters is! This film is one of the finest of Hollywood, although it was directed by British genius John Schlesinger - who also directed one of my favourite ever films - Marathon Man.
I think in a way, this movie opened the way for the tirade of classic, daring, gritty, realistic and superbly acted/crafted movies that followed in the 1970s - an era where the frequency of truly brilliant films from Hollywood has never been higher.
I won't delve into the plot (the movie is more a character study than a plot driven film anyhow), but I will say that the acting by Hoffman and Voight is incredible, the direction and photography superb, and the music wonderful ('Florida Keys' is an unforgettable melody, by genius John Barry).
Too many great moments and scenes - and great dialogue! The scene where Joe Buck (Voight) meets 'Father' O'Daniel is absolutely hilarious.
If you think 'Independence Day' and 'Armageddon' are cinematic masterpieces, then do yourself a favour and don't watch this movie - and moreover, don't vote on a movie you obviously are not equipped to appreciate! If on the other hand you enjoy intelligent and daring (for the time) cinema, with sensational acting performances you must watch this film.
Finally, I can't believe this film was X-rated - but then again, a sign of the times it was made perhaps. It is an extremely powerful film, but I would be happy to let a 15 year old see it. Any 'sexual' scenes are always put in the context of an emotional response, you always see the effect/impact of any sexual situations on the characters involved. I view the Oscars with some suspicion, but they definitely got it right by awarding Midnight Cowboy the best movie award.
Best quote .. "I ain't a for real cowboy, but I sure am one hell of a lover!!"
Deliverance (1972)
One of the finest films ever
Deliverance is, in my opinion, one of the finest movies ever made. Several other reviewers have passed comments like 'boring', Obviously subscribers to the brain dead, 2 minute attention span, machine gun edited film school of (much of) modern cinema. Oh dear!
Many other reviewers have passed comments like, "for the 70's, an excellent film.." Err.., hang on a minute, the 1970s was probably the finest era of Hollywood cinema!! An era when there were; numerous, super talented leading actors who were noted for their ACTING rather than their looks, great directors, and interesting plots - coupled with a coming of age of cinematography and film/camera techniques. The 70's was an era when so many topics (war, love, crime, drama) were made into true classic, gripping must-see movies.
Oh HOW I wish the same could be said today!! Getting back to Deliverance! I won't talk about the plot, as other reviews here talk in depth about that. I will simply say that this is one of the afore mentioned 'must-see' movies!! The acting throughout (by the leads and the support - many of whom were genuine locals) is extraordinary. Burt Reynolds in particular blew me away, simply because I never realised (when I first saw it) that he could be so utterly brilliant as an 'straight' actor - rather than a comedic actor. The cinematography is jaw dropping, and the editing is seamless (so unlike today movies today)- slow and relaxed in parts (allowing the film to 'breath') and tight and fast when needed.
The sheer beauty of the photography is a joy, and the wonderful scenery and beautiful surroundings belie the horrible situation the four central characters find themselves in.
Like all great movies, the movie contains COMPELLING sequences and in Deliverance there are two of note - 1) the dualling banjos scene, and 2) the infamous rape scene. Like the Russian Roulette scene in the Deer Hunter, or the 'Is it safe' dental torture scene in Marathon man - these scenes are utterly gripping, so brilliantly acted and believable, you cannot divert your attention from the screen. Such moments pass into movie legend. Such scenes are full of human drama - a drama that is intensified by the ACTING - and not ruined (as is often the case today) by needless, superfluous fast and rapid editing. The camera is allowed to dwell on actors faces, or actors as a group - so that the interaction is more realistic, and the movie watcher feels more like an 'observer' (instead of just being made to feel dizzy and sick - as is often the case with the over the top editing typical today!) I am 32, and how I envy the cinemagoer of the 70's. Thank god for DVD!
The only down side of this movie is the negative image it portrays of the 'South'. I have seen several documentaries of life in the south, and have visited Georgia and the Carolinas. The majority of people I met (and observed on the documentaries) from the region are very friendly and helpful. For many 'southerners', two truths pervade, religion and poverty. Life is very, very tough for many of the people in these regions and they are suitably hardy and phlegmatic about life's struggles and death. There is a gritty and raw side to their character.
I have travelled widely throughout the US, and the many of the people of the North Eastern US have not got a clue about life in the South.
I don't want to get political, but George Bush Jnr could do with addressing some REAL social concerns (i.e. poverty) in his own country before 'preaching' to the wider world about 'democracy' and 'freedom'.
The movie Deliverance portrays the poverty and hardship of the South (that still exists today) accurately, but it gives a disproportionate image of the 'evil' side of the region. Having said that - it is a story!!
Signs (2002)
Mostly dreadful, with some redeeming features
This film could have been so, so much better. Its greatest weak points are 1) the overly religious theme and the complete pap that links coincidence, fate and religious faith, and 2) completely stupid and illogical storyline regarding the Aliens attack of the earth.
The cinematography is good, but nothing special. Mel Gibson's acting is laboured. Joaquin Phoenix is better, and has real talent, but is wasted in this. The dialogue is cringe-worthy in many over the top sentimental scenes between Gibson and his kids.
The best thing about this movie is the genuine build up of tension for the 1st hour or so. Like some of the best monster/alien movies, the creature(s) are only revealed a tiny bit at a time and old (but good) tricks are used to keep the suspense high. Up until this point I was quite enjoying the film, and it 'had me going' a little.
The finishing 30 mins does not do any justice to the build up, and the plot at the end is just silly and lame. I don't really know where to begin .. Well, OK, for starters, it seems absolutely ridiculous to me that an extremely advanced race of Aliens (as they must be to build space craft that can travel great distances in space and that can also be rendered invisible to our eyes when they get here) have to
i) create crop circles to navigate the earth ii) cannot work out ways to smash down wooden doors and battened windows of a house.
You would think that had they come millions of miles to 'harvest (????)' humans they would have come prepared with some sort of hi tech guns that paralyse us, or at the very least some suits that make themselves invisible (like their ships) or maybe carry some hi-tech equipment to aid them in their task. But oh no, they wander around our planet surface butt naked thereby enabling us to lock them in wooden pantries! Perhaps if we were told that the Aliens are giving us a sporting chance (a la the Predator alien that hunts Arnie) then we might be willing to suspend disbelief regarding their apparent incompetence in 'harvesting' an inherently inferior race (i.e. us) a little more, but we are not led to believe that they are doing any such thing.
You would also think, that such an advanced race of Aliens would probably work out a way to feed themselves without having to travel round the galaxy looking for beings to 'harvest', assuming that they are 'harvesting' us for food (we are not really told). And if it's meat they want, you'd think they get better value harvesting cows, sheep and pigs, no? In fact, if they'd just have asked us, 'hey we need some food', I'm sure planet earth's leaders would have given them a good supply of meat. But no, they attack us and risk themselves in the process!
Also why, if water is like acid to them, are they wandering around butt naked on a planet that has most of its surface covered in water and whose atmosphere is full of water droplets and vapour??!!? Are we supposed to believe that bulk quantities of water 'melt' the aliens, but they can quite happily breathe our air complete with the high levels of water vapour that is in it?!? And if they don't breathe (we are never really told much about the aliens) then still the high levels of water vapour in our air would surely be a bit of a problem to them, no?
There are just so many stupid inconsistencies in this film, it is almost quite laughable. And it is a shame really, because (as I said initially) the film is genuinely scary and suspenseful in the 1st hour. It's just that when the final credits roll, you think, 'hang-on a minute, that ending was just complete nonsense!!!'
For all the hype M. Night Shyamalan is getting for writing, producing and directing his films, he really should learn a bit of science before trying to write a plot involving science fiction