chris123 Reviews

Angel (2007)

Unsympathetic characters ruin an otherwise well-made movie

[3/10 · 6 December 2007]

I know this is a movie based on a romance novel, so I wasn't really expecting much. I imported it because I'm a huge fan of Michael Fassbender and figured there's at least eye candy. That said, I don't think I've ever seen a female lead character as unsympathetic as Angel. It's not Romola Garai's fault. In fact, I have no doubt she played the part perfectly. The problem is that the part is written to be so selfish, stubborn, contrive and all-in-all annoying that I can't imagine anyone putting up with her at all. Sure, it's a movie; but there is suspension of disbelief, and there's just plain unbelievable, like the character interactions in this movie.

The production values are great. I really liked the vivid colors, the contrasts and the whimsical travel sequences. But whenever the movie stays on Angel for any prolong period of time, I find myself wanting to smack her silly and wondering if I can stand watching more of her. If only they'd re-tuned the script to make her a little less abrasive. That's probably against the director's intention for the movie, but I think it would definitely have made it more enjoyable.

The Calcium Kid (2004)

cute movie

[8/10 · 16 September 2004]

I've read all the terrible reviews; I wasn't expecting much, especially since I'm unlikely to get any British humor (being in the US and growing up in Asia). But the movie really surprised me at how many times it made me laugh out loud.

The performances are great fun to watch. Yes, the characters are cliché and very 1-D, but they are played with enough enthusiasm and charm to make up for the 'weak' script. There are places where the movie falls on the 'wrong/bad' side of cringe-worthy, like some scenes with Herbie(the manager) and Stan (the best friend), but overall, it's an enjoyable way to spend two hours.

And then, there's Jimmy (Orlando Bloom's character), who with his naivete and haplessness, manages to 'preach' without ever sounding preachy or cheesy. I know this is no Oscar movie, but it isn't as mindless as some comedies out there. At its heart, spoken through Jimmy's dad's quotes, are some good really messages. It's almost a shame that the movie isn't cut for a younger audience. It'd be a good diversion from the usual 'teen queen' movies flooding the cinemas these days.

The Bourne Supremacy (2004)

Great, but for the shaky camera

[7/10 · 3 August 2004]

Okay, I am a huge Ludlum fan. I love the book. I know going in that this movie has nothing in common with the book; and that's fine with me. It really shouldn't have claimed based on; that's an insult not only to Ludlum but also the screenwriter, who pretty good job.

Anyway, it's a solid spy action flick. The story is decent; there are arguably holes here and there, scenes that feels very tagged-on (the entire moscow arc), but it's still more thoughtful than most of the movies I've seen this summer.

My one complaint was the camera work. I'm okay with the occasional shaky cam. I'm actually not that annoyed with all the action being blurred, but isn't it a little excessive to shake when a character walks or soft focus blur during every close-up? I ended up looking away from the screen whenever there's a 'walking scene' or a closeup to rest my eyes so I don't throw up. It would have been so much better if I can just watch the whole movie through, without getting sick. Other than that, I really like it. But then, I'm biased, since I'm a Karl Urban fan. I'll give it a 7/10; though it could have been much higher.

The Chronicles of Riddick (2004)

Disappointed

[13 June 2004]

I went in thinking I will like this movie. I've seen a couple of making of documentaries and I've read a couple of articles that interviewed the cast and crew. I was expecting a well-put together, well-rounded movie, instead, I got one non-stop action sequence.

And what's more annoying is that the action looked better in the 'making of' documentaries than in the movie. The use of close-up, shaky camera totally destroyed what looked really cool on TV from a far away pan in camera. Why do they bother doing such great choreography and wire work if they are only going to show the fighter's face and torso... it's such a horrible waste.

The CGI is cool looking; but despite the nice visuals, Riddick lacked a well-paced coherent storyline. So little time is spent on the setup and character backgrounds, it almost feel like the 'story' is just conveniently there just so they can have cool visual effects.

For me, that is the most disappointing part. I mean, in all the documentaries, the cast and crew kept talking about the 'mythology' and history of their created universe, and how they want the audience to get a feel for the different cultures in the sets and so on. At the time, it had reminded me of the attention to details that I see and admire in LOTR.

But in the Riddick movie itself, I saw none of the care I thought they would put in. For example, the background of the Necromongers, there are at least two glaring inconsistencies that should really be caught and dealt with right away.

Riddick could have been so much more than an action popcorn flick. From the production designs, I am sure it is aspiring to be more as well. It's sad that it fell so short from its goal.

Van Helsing (2004)

Flawed, but still loved it

[9/10 · 10 May 2004]

Okay, this movie is no intelligent piece of cinema. It's mindless entertainment, pure and simple. The action sequences are okay, maybe a tad cliche. The CG is decent, again not groundbreaking but not hideously bad either. It is a movie that makes no pretense of taking itself seriously. At times, that goes so far some scenes even feel like a spoof. There are some cringe-worthy moments, like the ending; and the vampires are sometimes so stupid that makes me wonder how they could have survived for so long...

But for all its shortcomings, I thought the movie was great. It's just so funny. I laughed so much; I even applauded after one of Anna's lines near the end. Plus, David Wenham's character Carl is absolutely hilarious; his 'Q spoofs' moments are just so totally precious. For me, he stole the show.

I had a lot of fun watching the movie, and that's enough for me to call it 'good'. I won't mind watching it again; and I'd definitely buy the DVD when it comes out.

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003)

Comments of a Rings fan (contain spoilers)

[30 December 2003]

I have to start the review by saying I'm one of the insane people who has seen ROTK way too many times already. And now, finally, my opinion of the movie has settled and I can write a rewiew. It will contain spoilers so be warned!

I was not impressed with ROTK after my first viewing. All I can think of is, 'They changed this!' or 'They excluded that!' or 'That looks really fake!'. My mind was too caught up in these 'glitches', I just never paid enough attention to the movie to get involved in the story. I came out of that first show thinking TTT is better. At least with that one, I was completely wowed on first sight...

But with the next viewings, my opinion of the movie changed. After the initial 'shock', I went in knowing it's not what I expected. That's when I actually see that the filmmakers made a great movie despite the little flaws.

I am so moved by Faramir's story. The actors who are in that arc, especially David Wenham and Billy Boyd, are just awesome in conveying the emotions of the situation. With one look, Faramir managed to make me forget all the changes they did to the arc. And short as it might be, I found that to be the most touching segment of the movie.

Pelenor Fields is very cool. I love the way Aragorn jumps off the ship; the Legolas/ Oliphaunt moment and Gimli's one-liner. This battle sequence truly exemplifies the epic feel of the trilogy. But I have to agree that in exchange for the sweeping scope, it lost the intimacy and urgency that Helm's Deep possessed. I never got the sense of the entire survival of mankind is at stake during the sequence.

Even the witch-king scene, which is a one-on-one battle seemed a little lackluster. Theoden's death sequence is probably the only 'emotionally engaging moment' for me. It is greatly acted; in general, Benard Hill did a superb job of a king who recognizes his time will soon pass.

Sean Astin is great as Sam. Andy Serkis' Gollum feels so real that I forgot he is cg. Elijah Wood's Frodo feels a little like an object than a character though. It's like he's there to be the reason for Sam and Gollum's actions. I don't know if that's intended... They went a little overboard with the 'touching dialogue', I thought it feels a cheesy at some points in time...

Aragorn at the Black Gate is awesome! Viggo is just so great as the reluctant hero in the trilogy; I'm quite sad there isn't more of him in this movie. I wouldn't mind seeing more of Aragorn's journey and evolution into the leader of men. He has like less than 30 lines total, and this movie is called return of the king... But anyway, at the Gate, when Aragorn gave that speech, you see him complete his transformation into the king. It's great.

I still think the ending could have been handled better. There is no point in making the audience think the movie is over at 5 different times. The transition could have been smoother such that people actually didn't think the movie is going to end.

Despite all its shortcomings, I think the movie is awesome, one of the best I've seen in a while. It has everything: humor, human drama, action and an epic look. So, I'd give it at least a 9/10.

The Matrix Revolutions (2003)

I liked it

[8/10 · 6 November 2003]

I wouldn't say this movie is brilliant like the original Matrix, but it is one really cool action thrill ride. The story is fast paced, with almost non-stop action. Some of the dialogue is a tad cheesy, but the amazing battle sequences more than make up for it. That really was a visual feast.

It doesn't quite have the depth of the original; a lot of the questions asked in the first two movies were left unanswered; and a lot of things introduced in Reloaded wasn't built upon. But when a movie looked as good as Revolutions does, I never really notice any of its flaws while I watched it.

The only complaint I had was that the final confrontation was a bit anticlimatic. I won't say anything about it, but it pales in comparison in terms of visuals to any of the other previous fight sequences done in the entire Matrix series.

Overall, I think this movie lived up to my expectations of a Matrix sequel. Frankly, if they made this movie like 45 minutes longer to explain the premise and cut the entire Matrix Reloaded, I wouldn't have minded.

Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (2003)

an asian action flick fan perspective

[5/10 · 3 November 2003]

I came out of the theatre hating this movie, though I cannot figure out why. Kill Bill, for its story, is actually a very well-made movie; I have to give them that. It is fun to watch, a lot of the scenes are visually cool. The blood is excessive, to the point of stupidity, but it's just so silly that I was kind of laughing at it. It doesn't have much of a plot, but given that I'm really into brainless action flick, that's not the issue either.

In the end, after much discussion with my friends, I realized I hated it because it's a 'hommage' to movies that I grew up watching. I'm from HK originally; being an action flick fan, I daresay I've seen most of the movies/tv shows that inspired Kill Bill. In fact, I still watch a lot of the kung fu/action films and tv series and anime these days. A lot of them are very campy, but a few are really exceptional.

So for many of the 'things' in Kill Bill, I can find an example from asian cinema that does it 'better'. For example, the blood spurting is quite typical japanese samurai and anime. Yet, in better done ones, it doesn't look 'stupid'. It's actually cool. The focus was not the blood, but the tension before and after the sword strike; the spurting is there just to highlight the deadly elegance of the motion, which a lot of times is supposed to be so fast that you can't see.

And a lot of the 'oh-so-innovative' camera tricks, I've seen before in HK or Japanese movies, just not together, all mashed in one movie. I believe, the manga sequence is probably the only portion that I find up to par to the standard of most modern day japanese manga/anime.

I cannot help but feel that instead of paying respect to the asian films that inspired it, Kill Bill was making fun of them by making the scenes look as campy as possible for laughs. In the end, Kill Bill just seemed like an Americanized asian action flick/parody... which is not something I would gladly pay $10 to see.

Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl (2003)

cool and entertaining

[10/10 · 10 July 2003]

Okay, I have been waiting to see this movie forever(being Orlando Bloom fan and a blow-them-up movie fan), but it truly surpasses my expectations. I was laughing all the way through the movie, the action sequences are fun and funny at the same time. I've heard some complaints that the movie is long and the action is a bit repetitive after a while, but each fight is actually different, with their own little signatures that makes them enjoyable and funny.

The fight choreography is great, reminescence of Zorro and Princess Bride(not that much of a surprise, since they all share the same choreographer. Bob Anderson is the greatest=)). And for some strange reason, some part of the movie also reminded me of Princess Bride(battle of wits). Frankly, I actually had to engage my brain to follow that bit, which I didn't expect from this action flick.

And as much as I am 'obsessed' with Orlando Bloom, it is Johnny Depp as Captain Jack Sparrow that makes this movie great. Maybe it's just me, but I find everything he does hilarious and likeable. Anyway, the supporting cast gives solid performances but they all pale in comparison to Depp.

Orlando Bloom is good as Will(very different from Legolas), but his character doesn't give him that much room for development or a chance to shine(just a normal romantic, straight-forward and noble hero). Keira Knightley is cool as the feisty and resourceful female lead, but she doesn't quite stand out as much as I first expected, her being the only 'girl' in the group and stuff. Even Geoffrey Rush's Barbossa seemed a bit lackluster, a villain who's never quite truly evil enough to be the film's major 'bad guy' or nice enough to make people empathize with him.

I paid $11 per ticket(curse online ticket purchasing that charges $1.50 servive fee per ticket), and it's definitely worth the money. I took my aunt, and she loved it too, saying it's very funny and entertaining. I'm definitely looking forward to seeing it again on my b-day.

It's just has the right blend of action and humor that sets it apart. I can't believe I'm saying this for real(as in not because of my obsession with Orlando Bloom), this is my favorite movie of the summer. I used to rank Finding Nemo first for the humor and X2 right after that for the entertaining action; but this one has it all, humor, action and eye candy(at least for me). The story is plausible, i.e. I didn't get distracted by it because it has too many internal inconsistencies or is too 'dumb' to believe. I highly recommend it.

I'm stingent on giving points, so I'll give it a 9/10.

The Matrix Reloaded (2003)

Good, but not great (partial spoilers)

[16 May 2003]

I am a huge fan of the original Matrix, and must say I am rather disappointed by this sequel. It's still an entertaining movie, but it hardly lives up to the hype. It suffers from pacing issues(perhaps it's just me, but it seems that nothing really happens until Neo met the Oracle, which feels like more than an hour into the movie). And the CG in some of the action sequences is obvious and obtrusively fake that it feels more like a computer game than a movie.

The action sequences themselves also suffers from 'pacing issues'. There is a lot of repetition of moves in the same fight. I mean it's really cool at first, but for me, it gets old before the scene ends. I feel like a blasphemer for saying this, but I got tired of watching the 'Hurly Brawl', i.e. fight with 100 Smiths, halfway before it ended.

I think the brilliance of the first movie's visual effects was that they were never 'redundant'; each action sequence has its own 'signature moments' that stood apart from the others. In this movie, while here is more action, most of them are similar, so there is actually less new, exciting things to see or cheer for.

Feel a bit bad for not giving it a higher rating, but I can only give it a 7/10.