Change Your Image
MrBook
Reviews
Broken (2005)
A noble effort that is few aspects short of being a good movie.
First of all, most of these reviews were obviously planted by the filmmakers themselves. I'm not saying that because I'm jealous, and I'm not trying to be a jerk, but that's what I think. I noticed two of the reviews (there could be more) were the exact same review under two different names. Next, I don't think that this many people would bother to give that much of a glowing, wordy review.
Pros: The movie looks AMAZING! This is what gives indie filmmakers, like myself, hope of achieving a big-budget look. The production, costumes, locations, and shots were all great. Visually, it reminded me of Saw (which is reminiscent of Se7en). I show Broken to people, to show them the potential of the DVX.
Cons: There is an ending that most first-year film students are told to NEVER do: "It was all a dream." It is a HUGE cop-out! To make it worse, the movie breaks the "4th wall" with the antagonist smiling directly at the camera. It was a moment that really didn't need to be in there. The acting was very below-average. The lead actress almost seemed like she was laughing, when she was supposed to be upset. You hear her crying, but there are absolutely no tears. The villain was EXTREMELY hammy, and didn't have an ounce of truth to his performance. The boyfriend was very flat, and I didn't feel an ounce of chemistry between him and the girl.
Like I mentioned, a very noble effort that, despite falling short, had a lot of heart put into it. You can see that in MANY extras that are featured on the disc. The amount of extras alone are almost worth the full price of the DVD.
Best of luck to these guys in the future.
Bubba Ho-Tep (2002)
Movie that doesn't know what it wants to be.
Bubba Ho-tep was an entertaining movie, but it felt too uneven. The movie
went from campy comedy, to campy horror, to serious drama, etc., etc. It had
many great elements: Bruce Campbell's Elvis, Ossie Davis's JFK, good
cinematography, great music, some funny moments, and some touching
moments. But somehow none of these elements were fused together well. 70%
of the movie drags, the tonal shifts are almost schizophrenic, and many of the
jokes fall flat. Despite the negatives, I thought it was a good effort by
Coscarelli and company. Points for originality, but I probably wouldn't see it
again. 6/10
A.I. Artificial Intelligence (2001)
Brilliant film
I've only met three other people who like this movie, and appreciate it on the
same level that I do. Everyone else thinks the movie is boring and/or
sugarcoated (it seems that 90% of these people think that the movie has aliens
in it). I was completely engrossed into the world of A.I., and found the subject
matter to be very dark; especially the open-to-interpretation ending (despite
what many think). Great performances throughout (especially Jude and
Haley), excellent score, and superb FX. The movie isn't flawless, but still a
classic in my eyes.
Hopefully more people will come to appreciate it. 10/10
Kill Bill: Vol. 2 (2004)
Different from Vol 1., but still good.
I keep hearing everyone bitch about how Vol. 2 was "boring and didn't have
enough action." It definitely does not have the amount of action as Vol. 1; but what it lacks it action, it makes up for in character development and dramatic tension. Watching the Pai Mei sequence, which I particularly enjoyed, showsthat Tarantino has watched a lot of the old HK flicks (the shooting style and the use of snap-zooms were perfectly mimicked). It would also seem that David
Carradine is back on the "cool list," as Tarantino seems to do with many actor's (especially one's with the faltering careers). A very satisfying second half to the movie. 9/10
Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (2003)
I was pleasantly suprised! Great movie!
I'm not a huge Tarantino fan but I do enjoy his movies. I just don't worship Pulp Fiction like everyone else does. Anyways, I got to see Kill Bil vol. 1, at a free screening and I was very impressed! I love old school Kung-Fu cinema, and this movie was a great throwback to the martial arts/ action movies of the 70's. I have more respect for Uma after seeing all the stuff that she had to go through for this movie. The cinematography was great, the action was cool, and all the actors
did a great job of pulling it off. Some people claim this as the "goriest movie ever," but they obviously haven't seen Peter Jackson's Dead-Alive. Great movie 8/10.
House of the Dead (2003)
Not even good-bad. It's BAD-bad!
I rented this movie knowing that it would be bad. As long as a bad movie
hassome cool action in it, then I'm okay. This movie didn't have anything going for it. The acting was worse than a junior high play, the action was boring, the FX were bad... the list goes on and on. In one scene, a girl is "upset" that her friend just turned into a zombie, but the actress actually turned her head away from the camera because it appeared she was laughing. In a forest scene,you
actually see the springboard that is launching a zombie into the air for his super- zombie jumping ability. I even spotted the damn dolly track that the camera was on! The Matrix shots were overused to the point of irritability, and the director even openly called them "Matrix shots" in the commentary (nope, I only listened to a little bit). There are even shots from the actual game intercut as transtion points. That has got to be a new ultimate low. I've heard that Uwe Boll has his own production company. That's the only explanation I can think of, as to why this guy is even in the entertainment industry. This made House of 1000Corpses and the new Texas Chainsaw Massacre look Oscar worthy. 1/10
Secret Window (2004)
Nice little movie.
When I saw "little movie," I mean that Secret Window didn't feel too overblown, or tried to be more than it was. It was simple, with very few locations, and very nice performances. For some reason, I could almost see this story be done on a stage. Depp, as always, was awesome. Very few actors can carry the weight ofa whole movie like he can. Yes, the "twist" kind of felt like it came out of nowhere but it made for an interesting performance on Depp's part. Definitely worth a viewing.
Mystic River (2003)
Not worth the glue that holds its Oscars together.
I HATED this movie. The story was EXTREMELY contrived. The pacing was very
slow (could've had at least 30 minutes cut out). The cinematography was dull. Very Shakespearean and pointless character turns were made towards the end
of the movie. Most of all, the performances were cartoonish AT BEST. If a
performance that consists of screaming is what earns an Oscar these days, then by all means, go for it. If you just won an award for looking doe-eyed, walking around slow, and talking like the Mayor in The Simpsons, then good for you. If anything, I appreciated the effort by Eastwood, but I really don't understand the praise that this movie is receiving. Overrated trash. 3/10
Hidalgo (2004)
Great adventure movie.
Nope. I don't really believe very much of this movie. I guess it has been
confirmed that Hopkins had a habit of telling very tall tales. The movie is still a fun one though. Viggo Mortensen, as usual, gives a wonderful performance.
Has some exciting moments, and some touching ones. Might have had some
Arabic stereotypes, but nothing that portrayed them in a bad light (as many have claimed). Well done by-the-numbers type adventure flick. Well worth a viewing. 7.5/10
Hellboy (2004)
Coming from someone who has never read it, I was still disappointed.
I thought the movie was very uneven. The story didn't flow very well, the action wasn't that great, most of the characters were too underdeveloped to care about, the emotional relationship stuff (with the exception of HB and Prof. Broom) was kind of cheesy, and despite being the coolest character in the movie, they didn't seem to do enough with Kroenen. Selma Blair was the worst thing about the
movie. The love subplot was extremely dull. I guess I'm the exception because everyone seems to like this movie. At least it wasn't as bad as Daredevil. 6/10
Drive (1997)
HEAVILY borrow from DM2, but very entertaining.
This movie shows that Mark Dacascos is a very overlooked prospect. Drive showcases the talent that he is capable of (and he is VERY capable). As I mentioned, this movie has moves borrowed straight out of Drunken Master 2 (or Legend of Drunken Master to the newer U.S. audience), but is definitely better than half of the crap you see released in the theater. Supposedly, Brotherhood of the Wolf is going to introduce Dacascos to the mainstream. He deserves to be in better than straight-to-video films. Rent it, it's definitely worth repeated viewings. 8/10
Bringing Out the Dead (1999)
I love Scorcese, but this....
I found this movie to be extremely tedious. Nicholas Cage driving around, acting like Nick Cage, driving around, stopping for something, driving around, more Cage, driving around, "I didn't kill you Rose", driving around, driving around, driving around; now repeat. All of this with a cd player on "shuffle" serving as the soundtrack.
This is a movie I've always wanted to see again, to see if my opinion will change. When I saw it in the theatre, I was almost refusing to believe that I was watching a bad Martin Scorcese movie. I guess I still am denying it. There's one thing I love about the movie, and it's the cinematography. That was amazing. Everything else...ehhh..
Jurassic Park III (2001)
Fairly entertaining summer movie. A lot better than part 2.
***Warning: Possible Spoilers*** This movie seems they took some of the actions sequences from the first book that didn't make it into the first movie, and they put it in Jurrassic Park 3. While the plot isn't too good, the movie is pretty entertaining. I heard that the movie was the darkest and most violent in the series, but after seeing it, I hardly agree. I think the first is the most violent (and darkest for what the series is). I expected to just see dinosaurs chasing, fighting eachother, and eating people... but it almost seemed like they didn't have enough of that. Well... there was a lot of chasing, but in terms of eating people or anything else, the movie was a letdown. The hyped up Spinosaurus vs. T-Rex fight was a disappointment, and was about 15 seconds long. I expected the Spinosaurus to be truly frightening... to dwarf the T-Rex in comparison of being scary and mean... and although he did cause some suspense, he didn't gather up nearly enough to compare to the first JP. I don't know... maybe the effect has worn off after 2 movies. Or maybe it was the cell phone thing that killed the element of suprise. There also wasn't enough extras to be eaten. While the Spinosaurus, Raptors, and Pterodactyles were good FX, everything else seemed to need work.
I actually liked all the characters with the exception of Tea Leoni, who was extremely annoying. I was at a point where I wanted to see her get chomped. I blame it mostly on the writers.
Despite all the negative aspects I've mentioned, the movie is entertaining in being more of a tv pilot than an epic summer action. It was like "this week on JP: the series, we find out that the raptors can talk to eachother".
I still give it a 6.5, or 7 out of 10.
Marked for Death (1990)
Kinda dumb, but kinda fun too.
Haven't seen this in a while, but I used to see it a lot. The fights are kind of cool (and sometimes makes you cringe at the joint-breaking sounds), but is just a typical action movie. This is also back before Steven Seagal was a has-been. The twist at the end really has no point, but it gave an excuse for more fighting.
The Crow: City of Angels (1996)
Compared to The Crow or not, this movie is still horrible.
When the first Crow came it, it blew me away. It sparked my interest in dark film-noir type movies, and it also was one of the movies that made me want to be a movie director. When I first heard about a sequel being in the works, I was a little apprehensive. I thought, "Well, okay. As long is it has nothing to do with the original". Later on, I read the producers as saying "This isn't trying to copy the original. It is its own movie". I even read the movie novel before the movie came out and thought that it would actually be very good. But as I watched The Crow: City of Angels, I couldn't believe the horror that was unfolding before my eyes: It was a complete retread of the original, with different characters. You could probably parallel each character in this one, with someone in the original movie. The dialogue was laughingly bad. The worst was the "Hush little baby" scene. I was actually dying laughing. The screenwriters also majorly overdid the "lets have the hero repeat everything the bad guys said to him before they killed him". I believe they were trying way to hard for that sense of irony.
This movie isn't completely without good points. I actually think Vincent Perez is a good actor (especially for English not being his 1st language), and could tell he was trying his best to dig himself out of this hole of a movie. The cinematography looked good, but used too much of that pee colored lense filter. And Graeme Revell's musical score was awesome.
The whole commercialism of this movie was sick. James O'Barr (the creator of The Crow) wanted nothing to do with it. Alex Proyas (the director of the original) was sickened for the same reason as I: The creators of COA actually digitally altered the poster, to make Vincent Perez to look more like Brandon Lee. That's a line that shouldn't be crossed.
If you want to see a better sequel, see The Crow: Salvation. Wasn't anywhere near perfect, but should've been released theatrically, instead of this stinker. Oh well, at least this isn't as bad as the atrocity known as The Crow: Stairway to Heaven.
Cats & Dogs (2001)
Okay, but an overly long kids movie.
Cats & Dogs starts off hilarious, and manages to put in some clever ideas throughout (such as the whole underground military base), but it just gets a little old. The animations for the talking animals was impressive (as was many of the animatronics), but the scenes with completely CGI characters (such as a lot of Mr. Tinkles) just looked way too cartoony. The movie felt as if it was stretched out, and could've had about 20 minutes shaved off of it. I was a little disappointed, but otherwise, it was entertaining.
Kiss of the Dragon (2001)
Finally! A good Hollywood Jet Li movie!
I have read that Luc Besson and Jet Li wanted this movie to be sort of a cross between The Professional and Fist of Legend. While K.O.D was not as good as either of those movies, I think they definitely achieved that tone. If you've seen Fist of Legend, you can definitely see that they heavily borrowed from it's fights; and the movie sort of has the same ambience as The Professional.
I have been waiting for several years now, to see an American movie that really shows more of Jet Li's ability. While he was cool in Lethal Weapon 4, it really didn't show us enough. Romeo Must Die was just a major disappointment; seemingly more focused on the rap music (and stars) than really showcasing Jet Li.
Now we have K.O.D., while not perfect, is a definite positive step towards an awesome Li movie. As you watch the fights in this movie, you can really see the pain in the punches, so to speak. Corey Yuen, although a good fight coreographer, needs to work with the director on showing the action as a whole, more then in a bunch of quick-cutting closeups. I tend to notice this in a lot of his coreography (especially in his U.S. movies). It also seems he put in an "ode-to-Wolverine", with the chopsticks scene (he did the coreography for X-men).
Bridget Fonda was (and although I think she's okay) just wasted. She always just seems a little too nice, and she spent a good deal of the movie whining. I found myself waiting for her scenes to be over so we could move on to the next.
Another element, even though it was cool, that seemed thrown in was the dojo scene. That was almost certainly taken right out of Fist of Legend, with the leg hitting techniques of Bruce Lee's Chinese Connection (which FOL was a tribute to).
And when, oh when, will we ever see a modern martial arts movie without rap music. Soon I hope. This movie almost made it, but it was still scattered throughout.
To sum it up, the movie had a decent plot (although full of holes) and had some good fights. A solid 8/10.
One more thing.... when will people learn that an actors ability to fight in movies, is in NO WAY a reflection of how he fights in real life?! That's like saying that an actor really acts like the character he's protraying. Jet Li does Wushu Kung-Fu which is a really "showy" martial art and is heavily used in movies. I happen to know people who know close connections to Jet Li which in fact, admit that he's not that good of a fighter. In fact, they said if anyone, Jackie Chan is a better real life fighter ( and Sammo Hung is known to be a better fighter than Jackie). In terms of movies, Jet Li is up there, if not better than Bruce Lee. But out of the movies, Bruce was known for being the real thing.
Dracula 2000 (2000)
Wasted Potential
This could've been an awesome horror movie. First of all, if they didn't have that horrible title. They also shouldn't have made it to help sell music (I see this common trend in movies. They focus more on the soundtrack than the movie). Christopher Plummer and Jonny Lee Miller were both good, but they seemed so much above everything else in the movie(and I mean that in a good way). Gerard Butler was decent, but sometimes he just kinda looks like a dorky guy trying to be suave; maybe if he didn't concentrate so much on whispering all his lines. Some of the action looked like it was trying to be Matrixy, especially the wire-work at the end. The redeeming qualities about the movie were the gadgets (Van Helsing's silver stake guns were cool), and the plot twist at the end. The plot twist, if used in a better manner in a better storyline, could've been awesome; but it failed. Watchable movie, but like I said, wasted potential. 6/10
Scary Movie 2 (2001)
Liked the first, but this was excruciatingly bad.
I admit, I liked the first one. It had some clever jokes, and funny movie spoofs. But this has to be one of the worst movies I've ever seen. I've haven't been this tempted to walk out of a theatre since I saw Batman & Robin. It was like the Wayans took all of the gross-out gags from the first one, and decided to make the sequel completely based around that. This time around, the cast is in a haunted house spoof, that consists of so many unfunny jokes, that you throw your arms up in the air saying "what were they thinking?". The humor in this movie is extremely desperate and contrived; even going as far as to spoof movies that aren't even horror movies. As my local newspaper said, Chris Elliot "milked out every scene as much as he could without garnering a single laugh". The only funny part of the movie was the Exorcist spoof (especially the party scene with Andy Richter playing the piano). After that, your waiting for the movie to be funny, until the halfway point when you just give up. For the remainder, your subjected to an annoying parrot that gets old really fast, Chris Elliots deformed hand, Anna Farris's very Jan Brady like disposition, recycled ejaculation jokes, and other very redundant examples of toilet humor. Don't get me wrong; I think toilet humor can be funny if it's done well. But this was just ridiculous. Worst movie this summer.
Chuck & Buck (2000)
Pretty good, but what's the big deal?
Entertainment Weekly named this and Dancer in the Dark (still haven't seen it) the "Number 1 movies of 2000". The movie was somewhat fascinating, had a very real feel to it, and had a bit of grittiness to it, but I don't see what's so great. When a movie is filmed with a video camera, you'd think someone would concentrate more on cleaner looking shots & angles, but I wasn't too impressed with the look of the movie. I guess they wanted to concentrate more on characterization, which like I said, was pretty real. Mike White's delivery as Buck was great, and I did feel very sorry for him at certain points in the movie. Anyways, the movie seemed like it was hinting at some big secret between Chuck & Buck. Like it was something more than what you think. But there really wasn't anything else, and the movie just sort of ended. Not a bad movie, pretty watchable, but nothing too special.
The Perfect Storm (2000)
I felt cheated
This wasn't a bad movie, but I usually expect more from Wolfgang Peterson. The acting was good (with the exception of Diane Lane trying to hard), and the special FX were decent, but other then that I don't see what all the praise is about. I was expecting a sad tear-jerker, and instead got a ho-hum action movie. People mention how "exciting" the movie is, but the last third consists of waves going up and down, with the occasional ship or person in the water that needs to be rescued. I'll tell you why I felt cheated, but it involves a spoiler:
****SPOILER WARNING******
When it's revealed at the end that everyone on the ship died, I felt totally cheated. This pretty much says that any dialogue shown on the ship didn't really happen, and they added it in there just to make a movie. If I was the family of George Clooney's character, I would be mad for seeing him be protrayed as a pig-headed captain who was the reason the whole crew died. The final scene with Mark Wahlberg and George Clooney was just way to sappy. If your going to make a movie based on a true story, don't make it out more than what it really was. This is just an example of Hollywood making a true story into Hollywood.
Hannibal (2001)
Darkly Humorous, and went over many heads
I saw this movie at a 12:30am show with a theatre full of ASU students. I was seated in the 2nd row, looking straight up. After the movie, I didn't hear one good comment come out of the mouths of these students. "It was boring" and "Geez, that movie really sucked", were just some of the comments I heard. I just think this movie went over a lot of people's heads. Sir Anthony Hopkins plays Hannibal with the same intensity as he did in SOTL, and made me uncomfortable everytime he even neared someone. Usually, Julianne Moore bugs me, but she was a very worthy replacement to Jodie Foster. But it was Gary Oldman, whom I enjoyed just as much as Hopkins (If not better). His potrayal of Mason Verger was as hilariously funny as he was visually sickening ("Nothing beats the Ris"). A very worthy follow-up, and a very different movie than SOTL. I went to this movie expecting something different than SOTL, and I was very satisfied. The movie, as a whole, wasn't as gory as I expected; but the ending (I won't spoil it), was so outrageous and disgusting, that I was in tears laughing (and I don't consider myself a sick person).
Batman (1989)
Dark Classic
This movie will forever in my mind be a milestone in my life. I was 9 when this movie came out, and it was the first movie to make me take notice of a director and a movie score composer: Tim Burton and Danny Elfman. This will always be THE Batman of the movies, not the flashy schlock which Joel Schumacher thought would do justice to the Dark Knight's image. Michael Keaton is the only one to play Batman with any conviction. Jack Nicholson as the Joker, is the epitome of a villain you love to hate. I think I saw this move 5 times in the theater. Although the FX might look a bit dated, the movie still stands the test of time as the best Batman movie ever. You can see that every Batman spin-off, whether it's on TV or the big screen, is trying to capture the feel of Burton's Batman (including ripping off Elfmans great score). I'm awaiting the release of Batman: Year One directed by Darron Aronofsky (PI, Requiem for a Dream), and I hope he does the series some justice with an original, gritty take on it.
Dungeons & Dragons (2000)
Worst Film of 2000
I rate this as the worst film of 2000, only because Battlefield Earth was slightly more entertaining. I really don't understand how a movie like this is made. This has some of the worst overacting you'll ever see in a mainstream movie (with the exception of Thora Birch, who manages to make Queen Amidala look like an Oscar worthy performance). People said this movie was at least "fun" but I hardly even found it to be that. I can enjoy a bad movie as long as it's entertaining, but D&D managed to be bad and unentertaining. The FX were mediocre, and the ending (having much potential for a cool Mage Vs. Dragons scene) was wasted. I thought Jeremy Irons was at least a little fun to watch, only because he looked like he realized what kind of movie he was in, and decided "act along" as to mock the rest of the movie. Scenes of spinning scenery kept appearing reminding me very much of the Mortal Kombat movies (but probably had more than both of those combined). This movie had very much potential to bring back the medieval fantasy genre, but it looks like we have to wait for Lord of the Rings. MST3000 material. 2/10
Wo hu cang long (2000)
Poetry in Motion
I went to go see this movie with high expectations, and wasn't disappointed at all. I would have liked to have seen more development between Michelle Yeoh and Chow Yun-Fat, but other then that, it was a great movie. I see that many people don't like it because of the "flying", and it could've been done very cheesy; but I've seen many Kung-Fu flicks and Ang Lee has pulled it off very beautifully. Characters soar and even fight with a grace that is very balletic in nature. I didn't find this movie boring at all, but very engrossing. I love movies that take me to "another place" and that's exactly what this did. The fight between Zhang Ziyi and Michelle Yeoh was amazing, the bamboo forest scene was hypnotic, and the score was haunting; I can't say enough. It makes me happy to see amazing action sequences combined into what's actually a very good character driven movie. Ang Lee has opened a whole new door to the American audience, and has redefined the typical martial arts flick. Amazing, beautiful movie.