MadMax-47 Reviews

Haven (2010–2015)

Poor Man's Lost

[4/10 · 20 March 2024]

The title really says it all.

I had watched the first few episodes when the show premiered, and I wasn't impressed. I don't think it was the acting; in general, the actors whose work I'm familiar with have always left me at least entertained. Nor do I think the problem was directing, although that's harded to get to the root of. My guess is that the issue lies in the writing.

Early on, when we're first meetng te characters, they're interesting enough. Like Lost, we've got a huge mystery which is being spoon fed to us as we learn about wh these people are, what they're up to, and what they're hiding.

All too soon the honeymoon is over. The story starts to make some miraculous twists and turns which make little sense, except that they're what the writer needed to have happen. Finally, also like Lost, the conclusion is meant to make people feel good without adequately explaining what is happening. In the case of HAven, however, the story dictates characters actions in ways which make no sense.

H.P. Lovecraft: Two Left Arms (2013)

What happened? Why?

[2/10 · 31 May 2023]

When I was in college I was assigned to read a piece of native American literature. For me, it made no sense. Something happened, the lead character set off on a journey, one ine which he traveled always due East. When he came to a tree, he cut it down so he could travel due East. When he came to a lake he made a canoe so he could travel due East across it. Then he got to his destination.

This story made no sense to me. I'm sure it had loads of meaning to native Americans hundreds of years ago. To me, it meant nothing.

Being overly kind, that's a lot like Two Left Arms. I understand basically what happened, but nothing of the why. This may be a result of it being written and produced in Italy, in Italian, for Italians. Maybe there's stuff that didn't make it through the translation. Dunno. All I can say is that it didn't make a lot of sense.

As a final note, most people who try to make Lovecraft films don't really get Lovecraft. The horror in his works is, simply, that it engages the perceived pointlessness of human existence. If they can't get that, they'd be better off doing Twilight films.

The Man from Earth (2007)

No sense of story at all

[3/10 · 26 July 2015]

This film is the perfect expression of old school science fiction.

There are a lot of knowledgeable people, who spend the movie talking and debating. Remember, when you were in High School, how you'd sit around and wonder about things like "What would have happened if you invented a time machine, went back in time, and your parents had never met?" This is the same kind of stuff. There's precious little human interaction and motivation, just a scientific exploration of an interesting concept that's never developed as human experience.

I'm not saying I have to have Independence Day, but just some changes of scenery for the pretentious dialog would have been an improvement.

Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace (1999)

A theory about why this film failed

[1/10 · 8 August 2011]

This is less a review of The Phantom Menace and more a review of George Lucas.

Lucas dreamed big. That's a good thing, because without that big Dreaming we would never have had Star Wars (before it was ever called A New Hope) in the first place. But that big dreaming is indicative of a big ego.

And A New Hope hit big, and fed that ego. Lucas had not only succeeded, but succeeded magnificently, as a filmmaker and as a businessman. When it came time for what many others have referred to as the "inevitable sequel," Lucas was on top of the world. He made a pair of interlinked decisions that would prove to be the best thing that happened to his series: he hired Irvin Kershner to direct, and Leigh Brackett to write.

The film was an enormous success. But if you're Lucas, and more to the point if you have Lucas' ego, what do you make of the fact that the creative decisions in this very, very successful sequel were all made by other people? One potential answer is that you're resentful.

I've often wondered why Lucas picked Richard Marquand to direct RotJ. Arguably, this was one of the most important films to be made in its day, and yet Marquand seemed to lack any credentials that would qualify him for this role. (Yes, I am aware that Lucas pursued David Lynch, and while I think the result would have been interesting, I agree with Lynch's own statement that he was not a fit for the material.) It's almost as if Lucas was trying to torpedo his own franchise.

And I think that sentiment may explain the prequels. Lucas has been quoted as saying that he wanted to change how films were made. While he succeeded with Star Wars (aka A New Hope), he failed in his ultimate goal. All he did was transfer the Hollywood system to San Francisco. Lucas wanted to be remembered as an innovator in the process, but instead, he would be remembered as the man who created Star Wars...and not even all of that. So many of the important decisions were made by other people. He'd be remembered as the guy who created the IDEA behind Star Wars, which other people then perfected.

It's not hard to see how that could engender resentment. Star Wars simultaneously made him successful and in his mind highlighted his own failure to achieve the goal he had set for himself. If this theory is valid, then there's little surprise that he would go about creating a trilogy of prequels designed to tear apart the mythology that had lead to the successful of the original trilogy, and in particular to the success of The Empire Strikes Back, a film that must almost be a slap in the face.

The Rose (1979)

Very sad, in more ways than one

[3/10 · 8 August 2011]

I'm at a loss to explain the success of this movie. It's not that it was awful, but I didn't see anything that special about it. Maybe there was something groundbreaking in 1979 that I'm missing, having not seen it then.

Short form, I feel like all I saw was Bette Midler alternately crying and screaming. This may well be what such people go through, and to her credit, Midler cries and screams with the best of them, but I'm exhausted, and not in a cathartic way. I'm exhausted from trying to find some reason to care about this character, who never seems to be empathetic, and never seems to make any good decisions. To make matters worse, I've watched the film on This TV, which pads movies with extra commercials, so I've had three hours of crying and screaming.

If this truly was Janis Joplin's life, if there was never a happy moment for her to just relax and enjoy, then I feel for the poor child.

Yesterday Was a Lie (2009)

Move along, there's nothing to see here

[3/10 · 6 August 2011]

I had very low hopes for this movie, and it managed to fall below even those.

Short form, if you've seen other films noir, you've seen this one, except done better. If you've seen a lot of film noir, you've seen everything in this one, because it seems to be little more than a visual mash-up of what's been done before.

That in itself is bad enough, but the acting and the writing are atrocious. If you saw Super 8, at the end of the film you get the see the project film that all the kids are working on throughout the movie. "Yesterday was a Lie" is very slightly better than that. Given that the writer is also the director, and based on the fact that every performance is flat and fails to engage, I think the direction must also be at fault.

There is philosophy to be found here. I would urge you to read up on mysticism and physics (particularly quantum mechanics) instead of spending your time on this movie. You'll learn a lot more, and in the end you will have spent your time more wisely.

South Park (1997– )

Funniest thing I've ever seen

[20 October 2003]

About once every ten years there's television that you can really get behind watching, twice if you're lucky. This is that television for the 90s. It's rare for me to laugh out loud, and I do so at least once every time South Park is on. God bless you, Matt and Trey!

Taken (2002)

Most people won't get it

[17 December 2002]

I'm forced to disagree with the previous comments, although I understand where they come from. Most sf fans are pre-conditioned to look for science/magic as the raison d'etre for a movie, and Taken was about human beings. The aliens and the abduction plot existed solely as a backdrop the explore four generations of three families. While perhaps disappointing from an sf perspective, it was well-executed as a piece of film literature.

Dark City (1998)

This movie is what The Matrix could have been

[9 November 2001]

This movie is what The Matrix could have been, if its producers had been less concerned with Jet Li-type elements of style and more concerned with substance. Highly recommended to anyone who came away from The Matrix feeling like there was meaning hiding somewhere amidst all the karate kicks and special effects.

Cop Rock (1990)

Ahead of its time

[6 November 2001]

Quite like Twin Peaks, this was an idea so far ahead of its time that most viewers just don't get it. Add this to the fact that the average TV junkie is looking for either soap operas or shoot-em-ups, and it's easy to understand how Cop Rock was doomed from the start.