Change Your Image
pallasma
Reviews
The Deer Hunter (1978)
One of the biggest disappointments EVER!!
Despite all of the rave reviews and the academy awards, this was a real stinker. While I haven't seen any of the other nominees from 1978, they have to be better than this. It was tremendously long with unnecessary sequences that did absolutely nothing to advance the plot (which was thin at best). I can't believe that this picture won an Oscar for best film editing either. A film student could have done a better job. The acting was mediocre, the script was horrible, and the award for best director is an absolute travesty.
From the perspective of a film aficionado, this one has very few, if any, redeeming qualities. In fact, I can't think of one reason to recommend this to any of my friends. If you haven't seen it, don't waste three hours.
Fahrenheit 9/11 (2004)
The Truth?
I have read a large number of user reviews for this movie and am astounded by how many people seem to believe they know "the truth". I may not be the smartest man in the world, but I can tell you that anyone who believes he or she knows the truth, is deluding himself/herself.
This movie is just one more piece of information that should be taken with a grain of salt along with all the other information that we use to inform ourselves. Whether you believe it or not, the fact is, no source of information is unbiased. The news media are all biased to one degree or another. News media outlets have owners, editors, and, yes, even reporters who align themselves with political viewpoints and may have political agendas. Reporters also have deadlines for stories and if a key piece of information is not uncovered before deadline, it is left out of the story. Editors may also cut out key pieces of information because they only have 90 seconds of air time or 60 lines of text.
We are too busy to take the time to research things ourselves, so we rely on the media to educate us. It is our responsibility to question all the information we receive from every source. Question the information from the networks, question newspaper columnists and editors, question investigative journalists, question Michael Moore, question your congressman, question yourself and your own beliefs. Why do you believe what you believe?
Nobody will ever really know the truth, but we can all try to seek it by holding our information sources accountable for the information they release, broadcast and publish.
If we blindly trust the news media, why should we not trust Michael Moore? Why question one but not the other? Each source presents us with information, it is up to us as individuals to develop informed opinions about that information. The key word is "informed" -- how many of us truly take the time to become informed?
As a documentary: 6 out of 10
As a movie: 6.5 out of 10
As a credible information source: 5 out of 10
As something to provoke thought and further research: 10 out of 10
The Matrix Revolutions (2003)
Profit-Motivated Sell Out Movie
The Matrix (part I) can stand alone as a fine piece of cinema. What made it good was the story, not the action. While the action was excellent, it was only a part of the movie, not the entire movie. The story had depth, the characters were interesting and dynamic; the action was a bonus that complemented the other aspects of the film.
Reloaded put too much emphasis on action. The action sequences were extraordinary, but the story suffered as a result.
Revolutions is a complete waste of time. It relies entirely on CG, has no story and an abysmal script. The story was over after the first movie. It looks as though the concept was purchased and then milked out into three movies simply to make as much money as possible. They essentially took a excellent recipe and then watered it down to make it last as long as possible.
Unfortunately, Revolutions will survive at the box office purely because of a fan base from the first movie. The Matrix trilogy is a study in good marketing, not good film making.
The first Matrix is worth owning (with Revisited), but the two sequels are only worth renting -- if that. Revolutions is certainly not worth full price at the theater.
Find something else to do with your 2 hours -- it's two hours you'll never get back.
Red Dragon (2002)
Better than Hannibal, but not as good as Silence of the Lambs
It's been awhile since I read the novel, but from what I remember, the movie respects the novel quite well. My only disappointments were in the casting of Ralph Fiennes as Dolarhyde (much to small a man to fit the true description of Dolarhyde), and Anthony Hopkins did not have the same level of subtle darkness that existed in Silence of the Lambs. No complaints about Edward Norton, he did a fine job as always. Final analysis; 8/10.
The Truth About Charlie (2002)
Bad, bad, bad, bad!!!
This is easily one of the *worst* movies I have ever seen. It was painful to sit through and I really wish I could get those two hours back. There are no redeeming features to this film. I must admit that I have not seen "Charade", which may have some bearing on my review. The story in "Charlie" is incredibly thin, there is zero suspense, the acting is poor, and the ADR is brutally obvious in places. I know people in film school who have produced, directed, and edited better movies than this. I kept waiting for something to happen to improve the film, but nothing ever did. From the first few moments, IT SUCKED!!! Don't waste your money. If you want to see Europe on film, get "Ronin", "Bourne Identity", or "Amelie".
Viva Las Nowhere (2001)
Fantastic, unpredictable, original
I saw this film at the Calgary International Film Festival. I have to admit, it was not high on my list when I looked at the other films that were being shown. I was pleasantly surprised. The story is not complex, but it is unpredictable. The cinematography is wonderful and the acting is good - except for a couple of scenes. It was a very funny film, definitely worth seeing.
Best in Show (2000)
Definitely one of the worst in show
I didn't get up and shut this movie off, despite the absolutely riveting plot, because my girlfriend fell asleep on me and I couldn't get up to press stop on the VCR. I have no idea why this has such a high rating, but I have to say that it was annoying and very thin. I have much better things to do with my time than watch the idiocy surrounding the lives of the completely irrational characters. Not interesting, not funny, not worth watching.
Tomcats (2001)
Entertaining
Don't expect this one to be much more than entertaining. Shannon Elizabeth is no thespian here, but that's not the point of the movie. I didn't expect much, and I was pleasantly surprised -- not at all disappointed to pay full price. It wasn't quite what "American Pie" was, but it's in the same ball park. Good date movie, good movie for the boys or for the girls, but don't forget your sense of humor.
Traffic (2000)
Gripping and real, this is an excellent film
From start to finish, this film is fantastic. The cinematography is wonderful and really adds to the feel of the locations and the characters. The soundtrack is conspicuously absent for many parts of the film and there are a number of times when the reality of the situations can be felt through the silence of the theatre patrons. It is a commentary on a familiar topic, but it does not preach a message, it just makes a point. Really should be seen on the big screen.
Random Hearts (1999)
One of the most plot-challenged movies of the decade
I'm sorry that Harrison Ford had to put his efforts into this film. This is one of the poorest attempts at cinematic drama that I have come across. Incredibly slow moving with very underdeveloped characters. The only highlight of this movie was recognizing the National Hotel in Miami Beach because I've been there - otherwise a waste!