Change Your Image
zza99tmk
Reviews
The X Files (1993)
I'm beginning to like it less
I should start with making the statement that admittedly I'm not a die-hard fan of "The X-Files" (but, blimey, Chris Carters second and unfortunately cancelled second show "Millennium"
simply GOT me), yet I still like to watch "The X-Files". I've started to watch the show regularly since the second season and that's my impression of the progress of the show so far: the second and third season were really exciting to watch and though it wasn't exactly new I've had high expectations for the seasons to come. Sadly, the decline of the show started right with the beginning of the fourth season: some scripts included countless plot holes and were totally uninspired. But then again, the fourth season also delivered my all-time favourite "Home" from James Wong & Glen Morgan as well as other memorable episodes. I remember season five mostly for Kings and Gibsons episodes, but I also realized that this season already had less good stories than the fourth one. The movie "Fight the Future" was disappointing and indecisive, so I hoped for recompensation in season six. Since the BBC still has to air most of the S6 installments, my conclusion might not be fair, but so far, the sixth season has been a big letdown, apart from "Triangle" and the "Dreamland" twoparter. Season seven is no improvement: only the Millennium crossover and Jeffrey Bells "The Goldberg Variation" really rocked so far. Like the fifth and sixth season the latest one offers more mediocre episodes (even terrible ones like "Orison") than one can bear. To make it short: the reader who complained about the inconsistent quality of "The X-Files" got the point. Don't get me wrong: I still want to watch the show. I love Gillian Anderson and the show undoubtedly offered us some of the most thrilling moments in 90s television. But I'm beginning to admire it less and I just hope that the upcoming stories are equally good as "Millennium" and "The Goldberg Variation" (Andersons own "All things" and William B. Davis "En Ami" sounds intriguing) To be honest, I'm not sure whether I really want an eighth season (if reports are to believed Duchovny signed for 11 episodes, after the lawsuit against Fox was ended). I'd rather want to see some really good movie sequels instead of watching an eighth season where even the greatest fans might realise that in terms of quality the show is biting the dust..
Gladiator (2000)
Ridley Scott finally delivers the goods again
I saw "Gladiator" three weeks ago, but only now I've got the opportunity to write a comment: the opening battle sequence alone is absolutely impressive and perfectly sets the tone for Maximus' story. Russell Crowe was good but with his powerful Jeffrey Wigand (from Michael Manns modern classic "The Insider") still in mind, he didn't impress me as much this time around. Yet, I can't think of another actors to be more suitable for such roles as Russell Crowe and it's clearly to his credit that "Gladiator" is such a fine movie. Joaquoin Phoenix is much less convincing, I actually found him pathetic. But that is as well one of the few minor weak points in an otherwise decent script: they should have come up with a tougher, more dangerous emperor - Commodus never convinced me as a serious nemesis for Maximus. Richard Harris, Connie Nielsen, Oliver Reed (if much of his appearance in the movie had to be computergenerated due to his death during the shoot, then I must say, the result is baffling - it's never obvious, though you might guess where they used CGI) and particularly Derek Jacobi as the senator who strives to dethrone Commodus were so good in their roles that they easily compensated for the shortcomings in the characterization. Visually, "Gladiator" is ravishing to look at and the battle sequences are some of the best I've ever seen (dull remake of Braveheart? Bah! Braveheart is self-indulgent and plain idiotic - eat your heart out, Mel Gibson).
Admittedly, there were some images in the movie similar to those in Leni Riefenstahls NS propaganda movie "Triumph of the Will" but so what? There is no fascist ideology (neither obvious nor hidden) in Ridley Scotts film to worry about. If Scott borrowed images from Riefenstahls propaganda piece then in the intention to establish the sense of epic proportions, to show the power and glory of the Roman Empire, nothing else. "Gladiator" has been compared to "Ben Hur" and "Spartacus" - time will tell if it once will be hailed as a classic. I personally like it more than "Spartacus" (from which maestro Kubrick distanced himself), but it comes nowhere close to Wylers "Ben Hur". But it must be said that it is Ridley Scotts best movie for a long time (though, by no means as good as Alien and Blade Runner), exciting and breathtaking. Bring up "Hannibal"(8,5 out of 10)
The Million Dollar Hotel (2000)
disappointing
I agree very much with the review coming from the Italian reader: Wenders' latest film comes nowhere even close to the wonderful "Himmel ueber Berlin" or the director's first american movie "Paris, Texas". The characters are underdeveloped, most of them unbearably freakish (those who dismiss "American Beauty" for its character spleens will find it comparatively reserved after having seen "The Million Dollar Hotel", I'm sure).
Jeremy Davies, who can be a very good actor (if I remember it correctly, he was in Terence Mallicks "The Thin Red Line"), but Tom Tom is just too childish as a character to be taken serious. Well, we know he is meant to be the typical innocent Wenders so often portrays in his films, but it doesn't work. Sadly, this can be said of practically every part of Bono's and Nicholas Kleins' script: the film fails both as a love story and a whodunit, though Mel Gibson played Skinner really well (and I usually really despise Gibson, having played in some self-indulgent roles and really idiotic movies). Milla Jovovich gave a decent performance and Jimmy Smits did the best with his role of Geronimo - if only they had get a better script. Admittedly, the movie offers some worth seeing cinematography and Bono wrote some really atmospheric score, but all in all "The Million Dollar Hotel" didn't live up to my expectations. Though "Der Himmel ueber Berlin" (or "Wings of Desire" as the film is called in english) is also rather slow, it is still the most poetic and artistically successful german film of the last 15 years and instead of going to see "Million Dollar Hotel" I recommend you to watch "Himmel ueber Berlin" on video. (4 out of 10)
Galaxy Quest (1999)
sci-fi-spoof of the better sort
I quite liked "Galaxy Quest": it is an amusing take on Star Trek which treats its subject with respect and offers a lot of visual references: Alan Rickmans alien doctor reminded me with his look very much of Spock of the classic Star Trek and Neelix from Voyager while all the special effects are basically similar to those used in the Trek series (not to mention the alien ships), yet up to date and quite convincing. Especially in the first 45 minutes or so, offers the movie some really hilarious scenes, the long introduction scene at the "Galaxy Quest" fandom meeting where the crew turns up to give autographs, is one of my favourites. The cast was perfectly chosen with Tim Allen (unexpectedly good and subtle performance), Sigourney Weaver (showed that she has no problems to make fun of the character she became famous with, Ripley from the Alien series) and Alan Rickman. Yet I'm not quite convinced: for one thing I found the friendly aliens too much protrayed as caricatures and secondly the ending is too stretched (I don't want to spoil it, I think when you watch the movie, you'll guess what I mean). It doesn't come close to the likes of "Toy Story 2" and is not really good overall, but yet I could sit back and enjoy it despite the slightly flawed script. (6,5 out of 10)
Scream 3 (2000)
don't bother
To be honest, I wasn't sure what to expect from "Scream 3". I found the first enjoyable and if it wasn't for the over-acting of Matthew Lillard and the unsatisfactory ending as a whole, I would have even said that the first "Scream" is a really good horror flick. The opening sequence with Drew Barrymore is one of the scariest scenes I've ever, ever seen. That said, I hated "Scream 2". I hated it so much that first I didn't want to see the third part at all. Now to "Scream 3": I'll do it without a plot synopsis now, all you need to know is that the script by Krueger (by the way, why is everyone bemoaning the fact that Kevin Williamson was not involved in the making of S3? Williamsons script for the second one was -to put it politely - impoverished; yet I'm somehow curious to see his directional debut "Teaching Mrs. Tingle" which is still to be released in the UK) includes in fact a lot of plot holes and inplausibilities, but then also a few surprises. So there should have been more effort put into the story in general, but what actually disappoints me most about "Scream 3" is Wes Cravens direction. Even from lazy scripts you can make out an at least enjoyable thrill ride if you do it right and with enthusiasm for the thing. It seemed to me that Craven lost all interest in the trilogy and more engaged in making films with Meryl Streep and entering new territory. But that's just speculation: in the end "Scream 3" has far less suspense than hoped (well, there were, admittedly, two or three "I nearly jumped out of my seat"- moments). So do we get at least some decent gore scenes? Er, no.(But then again, a film doesn't really need to be gory in order to be thrilling) I should also mention the very annoying score which ruins every possible development of tension, the only moody piece of music was, as always, Nick Caves "Red Right Hand". What can I say in favour of the movie? Neve Campell is ravishing to look at, Parker Poseys obsession with being Gail Weathers (it goes like "I'll follow you whereever you go so that I don't get killed") and of course the gorgeous scene with the knife. Is that enough? To me, it wasn't (though it was still slightly better than the totally botched second one). As it often goes with trilogies: the sequels never match the achievement of the first part... (4 out of 10)
in comparison: "Scream" (7 out of 10); "Scream 2" (er, can I also give a 0 out of 10?)
Rosetta (1999)
An important film in social terms, but not a deserved Palme D'Or-Winner
I think the headline says it all already:It becomes pretty clear that the Dardenne brothers don't see cinema just as a matter of entertaining the audience, but they use it to make their point about our society. "Rosetta" is by no means what you would call a crowd-pleaser, it is instead a very bleak portrayal of working class life, obviously with no glimpse of hope for either the girl or the audience. It has undeniably some intense sequences thanks to Emilie Duqenne (hope I quote her name correct) and in reminding us of the social hardship of such people like Rosetta and her mother this movie already achieves much more than a bunch of Hollywoods mainstreamfilms. The film is saying that the social hardship can be so overwhelming that it destroys human relationships, namely in the scene where Rosetta tells her boss that Riquet is cheating him. You don't have so many films making such statements (not that it would be something new to us, but at least the movie reminds us of it). So why isn't it a masterpiece or at least a recommendable picture? The crux lies first of all in the camerawork: the handcamera movements are even more unbearable than the cinematography in "The Blair Witch Project". It is something I really can't get used to and moreover, it destroys any possible distance. The film stays so close to his heroine that it left a sour taste in my mouth. Sure the lack of distance is what makes the film so tense in parts, but it also makes it so unpleasant. "Rosetta" is too much documentary in its approach. A great film must convince me in visual terms as well, it must leave a shape in my mind. "Rosetta" doesn't. How David Cronenbergs Cannes jury could give the Palme D'Or to this film and oversee such wonder- ful films as David Lynchs "The Straight Story", Pedro Almodovars "All About My Mother" and Atom Egoyans "Felicia's Journey" is beyond me. Every single of these three movies was more faithful to what makes cinema so great than "Rosetta". I only hope that this year the jury knows to appreciate the true winners of the competition. "Rosetta" has a certain appeal, but it is way over-praised. If you want to see a good film about today's society, stick to Mike Leighs "Naked".
Magnolia (1999)
enjoyable, but hardly one of the greats
Again there is an american film which divides opinions in a remarkable way, among critics and audiences alike. And again, as it happens so often, I'm neither hating nor loving this film, I simply think that to a certain degree everyone is right with his judgement about "Magnolia". P.T. Anderson,whose previous films "Hard Eight" and "Boogie Nights" are unknown to me, has made an undoubtedly ambitious film and despite the flaws - and there are some in his new movie - I couldn't help but to admire the effort.
The narrative structure of "Magnolia" is comparable to Robert Altmans "Short Cuts": It portrays a dozen of characters, combining and summarize their stories as the events of one day and night in the San Fernando Valley (Julianne Moore also reminds of Altmans film). So you get drama and emotions on a big scale and as it is reflected in the reactions of critics and the public alike, the emotionality of the movie proved too much for some. It is indeed hard to watch, because the pain and the sadness of the characters is shown very explicitly. I must admit that I also had problems with that direction and critics like John Petterson simply can't dismiss other people's reaction to "Magnolia" as unimaginative. Sure, the extent of this emotionality is what makes "Magnolia" so unusual, but also so unpleasant in some scenes. For example, when Frank mackey (Tom Cruise) has to do this interview and the reporter wants him to tell the truth about his family life and to tell what he feels about it - that's a scene where the voyeuristic approach of the film becomes clear. Moreover, in revealing the family tragedies of his characters, Anderson unfortunately sticks with old and over-used incest and exploitation cliches. Some words about the casting: we get a terrific ensemble though not every performance is as good as one might have hoped. I'm not so much talking about Julianne Moore (well, the scene in the pharmacy was bad, but apart from that I think the reaction of most people to her performance was a bit harsh). I must say folks, personally I found Melora Walters way more unnerving: the scene where Claudia goes nuts in front of her father, with Walters really screaming all the time, I was really tempted to shout back "No, YOU shut the f... up!". Philip Seymour Hoffman, Philip Baker Hall and William H. Macy are always worth seeing, but Tom Cruise amazed me most (blimey, he can really act). He was simply unbelievable and I really hope we'll see him in more unexpected roles like this one. Though the film is problematic at times, it also is to the same degree stylish and ingenious in many scenes (particularly in the first hour). "Magnolia" is partly inventive and undeniably intense but it has too many flaws as that I would really recommend it. All in all, not one of the best of the year, but no failure either.
The Hurricane (1999)
worth seeing mainly because of Denzel Washington
"The Hurricane" was after "Magnolia" (decent, partly inventive work with some flaws) and "The Cider House Rules" (indecisive and boring take on abortion and incest) the third movie I've seen this weekend and in terms of quality it is somewhere in between the other two. Norman Jewison has made a moody, sometimes incredibly intense, but also predictable and somehow unsatisfying movie. It owes SO MUCH to Denzel Washingtons performance as Rubin Carter that one actually has to see it to believe it. I've always thought of Washington as one of the most reliable actors around, but in this film he was simply superb. He was so good that often I forgot how conventional the movie actually was. Don't misunderstand me, I really felt with Carter and was absorbed into the story of his life, but mainly because of Washington. The film relies on well known premises: You get the racist detective (I can't remember the actor's name right now, but he's played corrupt characters before, so that's just another case of lazy type casting) and you get the good ones, here in form of the Canadians and the black boy Lesra Martin and of course the Salomon-like judge in the courtroom finale. So "The Hurricane" does nothing more than corresponding to usual plot lines and characterizations. Well, that's not so bad in this case, but it prevents Jewisons film from becoming the outstanding experience it could have been. Furthermore I would have liked to see much more about the public and celebrity support Carter has got during his sentence; to play Bob Dylans song twice or three times and only to show a three minute demonstration scene is not enough. And there is an another scene which doesn't work for the film; it is the one where the canadians visit Carter in jail and he says that they can't imagine the inhumanity and the hell of the prison. Well, that might be the case, but we can only rely on Washingtons intense portrayal, the film itself never really gives us an impression of what Carter is talking about. After all, it is one of these movies, which when you are seeing them, amazes you and makes you want to value them better as they are. When it's over and you've got some distance between you and the movie, its conventional approach and treatment of the story becomes clear. I liked "The Hurricane" for its handful of truly ingenuine scenes and it's worth while for Denzel Washington, but the film itself is rather mediocre.
The Cider House Rules (1999)
disappointing
This is going to be one of my shortest imdb reviews: "The Cider House Rules" is a major disappointment, though it was directed by Lasse Helstrom (who made the recommendable "What's Eating Gilbert Grape?") and had Michael Caine starring as the doctor of the orphanage. Moreover, John Irving is said to be a good novelist (I don't know any of his books). Why then, is this film so uninteresting? It tackles abortion, incest and racism. Really? No, not really. It never really deals with these issues, it actually is strangely indecisive. This lack of focus ruins the film for me. What we get instead, is an another sentimental and pathetic mainstream movie, conventional and seen a thousand times before. Tobey McGuire is way too static and uncharismatic for the leading role (he fits more into roles like the one in "Pleasantville"). Apart from Michael Caines performance (he was good, but Tom Cruise should have got the Oscar for "Magnolia" - and I'm saying that though I usually don't like Cruise), there was absolutely nothing outstanding about "The Cider House Rules". Of all the oscar-nominated pictures, this was the weakest - not that it was really bad, I just found it pretty much superfluous. There are better movies out there to buy a ticket for..
The Insider (1999)
Cinema at its very best
There are moments in life you never forget. I had such moments when seeing "The Insider". Though the storyline doesn't sound really exciting at first, it was a great surprise to find that Michael Mann has made a drama of overwhelming intensity and quality. The fact, that of all current "based on a true story"- Hollywood films "The Insider" is the one which stirred up
controversy the least, also shows that Mann was very precise in the treatment of the facts (note: there is no criticism of "The Hurricane" and "Boys Don't Cry" intended, simply because I haven't seen them yet and I don't forget that in adapting a true story for cinema it's simply necessary to compromise). "The Insider" convinces in nearly every detail: Manns direction is straight to the point and always finds the appropriate tone. There's always a feeling of danger and threat in his film, keeping the tension on a high level. Also worth to mention is how the film deals with questions on integrity and responsibility. Its depiction of the working procedures of the american corporation system is accurate and as Russell Crowe has put it in the Sunday Times interview, it is miles away from the paranoid conspiracy theories of the likes of Oliver Stone. That brings me to the actors: the supporting actors -among them Christopher Plummer and Philip Baker Hall (also to be seen in "The Talented Mr. Ripley" and "Magnolia") - are all very good and Al Pacino does a good job as Lowell Bergman, but the one who beats them all is Russell Crowe as Jeffrey Wigand. Crowe (who was already great in L.A.Confidential) is simply outstanding! I honestly think that Russell Crowe should get the oscar and not Kevin Spacey (well, Spacey is great in American Beauty, but he already got an academy award for The Usual Suspects). To me "The Insider" is just a perfect film and I already consider it as one of my alltime favourites. It is a real gem, flawless, essential. The very best film of the year. A well deserved 10! Can't wait to get on it DVD.
The Green Mile (1999)
a terrible would-be successor to "The Shawshank Redemption"
I really wanted to like this film, I really tried to. But in the end I heavily regretted having seen it and personally I think of "The Green Mile" as the first appalling film of this year. This saddens me the more as the director of that film is Frank Darabont who brought us the wonderful "Shawshank Redemption". The parallels to his debut from 1994 are obvious: a prison story full of optimism(a friendship between the two main protagonists (one black, one white)) written by the same author (King) and again overlength (this time you've even got a running time of 3 hours+).I would argue that already the story itself is problematic in its conception: the characterisation is implausible. The prisoners (with the exception of one) are all portrayed as good natured men who obviously could do no harm to other people. It makes the fact that they've been sentenced to death for heinous crimes the more unlikely. For a grim and dark place like a prison the green mile is a unusual harmonistic place.This depiction of a prison and the characters is not just naive and almost laughable, it also reminded me of how more realistic and appropriate in such terms "Shawshank Redemption" was. People could say that the film generally is not very realistic since John Coffey has supernatural powers but I honestly think that capital punishment is a too serious subject to treat it as an element of a fairy tale. Moreover the film never questions the death penalty, the message rather seems to be that death row is a necessity. Again I was reminded of an another film, Tim Robbins' "Dead Man Walking", arguably one of the best and most important american films of the last decade(if you want to see an appropriate and artistic convincing account of the death row, then you're in for a treat).There's basically nothing to say against an optimistic approach when you're talking about such a sad, disturbing and important issue, but what made me really upset about "The Green Mile" is the unbearable extent of sentimentality and naivety in the film. Sure, "Shawshank Redemption" was emotional, too; but there it felt right, there Darabont managed to find the right tone - here it is just pure kitsch. When Coffey says towards the end something along the lines that people shouldn't treat each other badly and that he wants a peaceful world, I almost started to giggle. Moreover the contrast between the harmonistic, light- hearted scenes with the mouse and the execution scenes doesn't work at all, it destroys the film. Moreover these three scenes (particularly Percys revenge on Delacroix) are not just
disgusting(and believe me, I can really bear a lot),they perfectly fit into this unpleasant mixture of feel good- mentality and pathos. There were good performances in the film (Doug Hutchinson, the "Polaroid Man" from Chris Carters "Millennium", Michael Duncan Clarke, who made the best out of his cliche role), but in the end I didn't care about the one or two good things I could say about this film. And Tom Hanks? Well, Hanks should really try something new-he's played the clean, good-natured guy so often, that it starts to get on my nerves and not just on mine.I just can't put into words, how much better, how superior "Shawshank" was than "The Green Mile". The difference is not just striking, it really hurts. When I was watching "The Green Mile" I heard people in the audience crying - I was tempted too, but not because I was moved, no, in my case it would have been out of sheer disgust. What a missed opportunity...
The Talented Mr. Ripley (1999)
Impressive visuals and good acting, yet a lack of suspense
After having seen "The Talented Mr. Ripley" last Friday I really had some problems how to value this movie. It certainly is a stylish work thanks to the cinematography, the italian location and the wonderful jazz soundtrack. Matt Damon, Cate Blanchett, and Philip Baker Hall gave some good performances, but the ones who amazed me most were Jude Law as Dickie and particularly Philip Seymour Hoffman as Freddie: Hoffman was already superb in Todd Solondz' much overrated "Happiness" and if I had to pick a single scene to show you how brilliant this man was it would be the one in Dickies apartment, when Freddie senses that something is wrong. Absolutely marvellous! (I look forward to see Hoffman in Andersons "Magnolia") And yet, despite of these qualities, I felt disappointed by the film. Gwyneth Paltrow was the only in the cast whom I rather found weak, though to be fair, there wasn't actually much to do for her. For a thriller "The Talented Mr. Ripley" lacks too much of suspense. Yes, there are some thrilling scenes but as a whole I wasn't that excited. I would say that this film rather works as a drama, but not as a thriller. Having said that, are the comparisons to Hitchcoks works really inapproriate. Minghella succeeds in telling us about Ripleys loneliness and his search for love and affection and doing so without making any concessions to mainstream audiences demonstrates his understatement. Though "The Talented Mr. Ripley" didn't live up to my expectations, I still regard Anthony Minghella as one of the most interesting filmmakers of today and it'll be exciting to wonder where he's going to next.
verdict: mediocre
Topsy-Turvy (1999)
enjoyable
"Topsy-Turvy" is a decent film, but it failed to convince me completely. To be fair, I have to say that I'm not really interested in films about musicians or the victorian theatre. That said, I still think Mike Leigh (of whose films I've only seen the Palme d'Or-Winner "Secrets and Lies" so far) has a done fair job. The cast was worth seeing(especially Gilberts and Sullivans alter ego Jim Broadbent and Allan Coultier, but also Timothy Spall) as basically Leighs account of the "culture clash" between Far East and West is both respectable and entertaining. Since you also get a fine cinematography for your money I could understand to a certain degree why New York's film critics were so in favour of this picture. But yet it has some flaws: Leigh could have easily shortened the first half at least a bit without doing the plot too much harm, but even the more important second part of the film is simply too explicit: he shows us more of these rehearsal scenes for example than we actually need to see. To me, a film has to be really good and moving on forward in order to justify his length (though Topsy-Turvy is with 160 minutes not as long as upcoming movies and I'm not sure whether to look forward to "The Green Mile" and company or not). Don't get me wrong: I'm basically open to most issues film directors wants us to participate in, and I like classical music and this film doubtless has certain appeal. Eventually the fans of the famous duo and of operas will appreciate this one at most, others should decide for themselves if they give "Topsy-Turvy" a chance.
verdict: enjoyable
The Beach (2000)
mediocre
When I went to see "The Beach" I did so rather curiously than with high expectations, though it was the latest work of Boyle, Hodge and Macdonald. There were so many negative headlines surrounding the picture (the -according to the press- disastrous shootings in Thailand and Ewan McGregor going public with his disappointment about his friends jumping ship on him when they decided to give Leo the leading role), that I was just wondering if the film would reflect all this. First of all is the story basically interesting: the protagonists look for new excitement in their life and try to redeem themselves from the boredom of life in a society, which can't offer them new perspectives (a story element which had been described in Finchers "Fight Club" before). In the first half, "The Beach" is a decent film: you really get a sense for this alternative society and lifestyle thanks to Boyles understatement. Darius Khondjis cinematography is -as always- most impressive. The crux is the sudden change in the second part of the film: Since we haven't been given any clues before about the dark side of Richards character, this change in his personality and therefore the change in the tone of the picture comes the more unexpected and not plausible. There's a reference to "Apocalypse Now" but since the film leaves it to that, this storytwist simply doesn't work at all. I haven't read Garlands novel but since Hodge admitted to have shortened the plot (running time and so on..)I just suppose that the novel goes far more into details about Richard's innerlife and gives you a better preparation for what is to come. Moreover Boyles stylistic methods are inappropriate for the climax of the story: the video game references are ludicrous as basically the second part as a whole is strangely uninvolving. The result is a film, which -as "Fight Club"- starts off in style but then derails terribly in the end. Truly, you recognize it as Danny Boyles film and not as Fox's picture, but despite that I hope that the trio comes back to Britain and make again the good films they became famous for ("Shallow Grave" and in parts "Trainspotting").
Bringing Out the Dead (1999)
Not Scorsese's best, but still a good film
I saw "Bringing Out the Dead" on the day of its british release and it lived up to my expectations. I think the people who are criticising the "lack of the plot" seem to miss the crucial point:a conventional, "straightforward" (like one reader said) plot wouldn't have been appropriate for the themes Scorsese and Schrader are talking about here. The film deals with the psychological impact the ambulance work has on Nic Cages character and this simply requires a rather abstract, "delirious" way of storytelling. The characters are all convincingly portrayed as in general Scorseses description of NY is highly absorbing. The well- chosen soundtrack, Richardsons photography and Thelma Schoonmakers' editing are -as always in Scorsese's pictures - brilliant. Nicolas Cage and Patricia Arquette give solid perfomances though one reader was totally right in saying that, given that both are a real-life couple, there is indeed not very much chemistry between them (but maybe that's because it's supposed to be; due to the distance between their two cha- racters). The supporting actors were brilliant: John Goodman is always reliable, but Ving Rhames was simply SUPERB. His appearance is in combination with the portrayal of the city the highlight of the film.
And yet, though Scorsese is on his terrain with the religious theme of salvation and christian motives -the Holy Mary symbol in front of the hospital, the drug dealer in a positon comparable to Christ on the crucifix -, it lacks the drive and the energy of his seventies and eighties' films "Taxi Driver", "Mean Streets" and "Raging Bull".
But in the end the film has so much style and quality that I consider "Bringing Out the Dead" (besides Tim Burtons "Sleepy Hollow") as one of the first good films in the new year.
Millennium (1996)
Give "Millennium" a Chance on Video
Just because "Millennium" was so different from other shows it should have deserved more attention than it actually did. It was such a welcoming contrast to most of the other shows. The atmosphere and the setting were superb and the characters seemed so real. Lance Henriksen was ideal for the role of Frank Black, but the rest of the crew was really convincing as well. I also want to mention Mark Snows great music (it is a shame that we' ll never get a CD with his amazing pieces).
The chance to get "Millennium" back are practically zero, but at least we fans should have the chance to get the complete series on video or DVD. So I want to ask all the fans of the show to write to Chris Carter or to Fox Home Entertainment and to ask them for the release of the 2nd and 3rd season on video (the first one is available, as far as I know, at least in the UK). For some of us - including me - it is the only chance to see the second season completely and the third one at all (since in Germany they dropped "MM" halfway through season two and in the UK Sky One didn' t buy Season three). It would be great if I could get some support from the rest of you fans out there for the video/DVD release. As soon as I get the addresses of Carters production company Ten Thirteen Productions and Fox I' ll write them down here.
As one reader said: Long live Millennium
Millennium (1996)
Give "Millennium" a Chance on Video
Just because "Millennium" was so different from other shows it should have deserved more attention than it actually did. It was such a welcoming contrast to most of the other shows. The atmosphere and the setting were superb and the characters seemed so real. Lance Henriksen was ideal for the role of Frank Black, but the rest of the crew was really convincing as well. I also want to mention Mark Snows great music (it is a shame that we' ll never get a CD with his amazing pieces).
The chance to get "Millennium" back are practically zero, but at least we fans should have the chance to get the complete series on video or DVD. So I want to ask all the fans of the show to write to Chris Carter or to Fox Home Entertainment and to ask them for the release of the 2nd and 3rd season on video (the first one is available, as far as I know, at least in the UK). For some of us - including me - it is the only chance to see the second season completely and the third one at all (since in Germany they dropped "MM" halfway through season two and in the UK Sky One didn' t buy Season three). It would be great if I could get some support from the rest of you fans out there for the video/DVD release. As soon as I get the addresses of Carters production company Ten Thirteen Productions and Fox I' ll write them down here.
As one reader said: Long live Millennium