Cube_TX Reviews

Inglourious Basterds (2009)

My favorite Tarantino film since Pulp Fiction

[9/10 · 23 August 2009]

This was one of the movies I had been very eagerly anticipating. I've been a fan of many Tarantino films and this one looked to me to be something I'd enjoy. My 16-year-old was also pretty excited to see this. We finally got to go today to an earlier showing that was STILL completely packed.

First and foremost, this movie is not for everyone. The tone is very ugly and the entire setting gives the film a disturbing tone. Brad Pitt is great in this film, but believe it or not is totally upstaged by Christoph Waltz. Many will find this film too long and will wonder why Brad Pitt isn't in more scenes. The people who wonder this wouldn't be familiar with Tarantino's films, which always feature backstories to other secondary characters and use many cheesy techniques, effects and music reminiscent of old spaghetti westerns and kung fu movies. Tarantino has also been one to stretch scenes out in order to increase tension and anticipation. Some people would find this tedious, while many others would find it to be brilliant filmwork -- it's up to you to decide.

I found the film to be very intentionally funny, while at the same time keeping with its disturbing tone. I truly hated the villains, which is always a sign of good writing. I WANTED to see these villains get what they deserved. The heroes are not totally clean-cut likable people, nor are they meant to be. None of these people would be a "role model" type, but this too is common in all Tarantino films.

All in all, I'd say this movie was better than Kill Bill, but nowhere near Pulp Fiction (though I'm biased in that I thought Pulp Fiction was outright fantastic).

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD DO NOT TAKE YOUR CHILDREN TO THIS FILM! I was amazed that a couple next to me took their son who could not have been more than 6 or 7. The graphic violence and language alone should be enough to convince you to find someone to take care of your younger kids for the afternoon. We left our 3-year-old with my mom. The kid in the audience kept asking loud and annoying questions too.

I very much recommend this movie and would gladly see it again on DVD or even in the theater again if I have nothing else to see and extra time/money. You will not be disappointed, but be warned that if you are already not a fan of Tarantino or his style you will not like this movie and find it too long with frustrating and tedious scenes.

G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra (2009)

More proof that critics are worthless

[7/10 · 16 August 2009]

Originally I was very excited to see this movie; until I saw the first trailer -- which looked awful. Because I had been a fan of the comic book, toys and cartoons when I was younger, I still went to see the movie. I would probably have gone closer to opening day if not for the lousy trailer.

I'm very glad I did see this movie. It was much better than I anticipated. The action scenes were very well done and kept a good level of intensity. The humor worked as well. The movie completely changes the mythology of the comics and cartoons (which were very different from one another themselves), but that's pretty typical in these kinds of movies. They didn't try too hard to make the movie serious and instead turned it into complete comic book fantasy.

I did enjoy the movie, but it helped to have very, very low expectations. I'll say this flick was worth watching and I was never disappointed or bored (which is my main criticism of many movies -- the worst thing any of them can be is boring).

Despite being based on a toyline, cartoon and comic it is NOT as much a kiddie movie as you would expect. It gets pretty violent and there are a lot of deaths, injuries and explosions. Being that it was made by the same guy who made The Mummy flicks you'll see a whole bunch of references to those movies; including a few of the actors and many plot references.

From a fan perspective, they could have used a few of the more popular characters rather than the ones that were in the movie (Snake-Eyes, Duke and Scarlett were main characters, but Breaker, Ripcord and Heavy-Duty never really were). They also could have chosen actors who looked more like their comic book, toy or cartoon counterparts for just about all of the villains.

Overall I'd recommend it and would buy the DVD. Not great, but good enough to see again.

The Love Guru (2008)

Another reason to ignore arrogant critics

[7/10 · 20 June 2008]

I saw this movie today (opening day) because I just felt like getting a good laugh. This movie is beyond stupid and very over the top, but guess what? It's still funny. It's simple humor and cheap laughs that doesn't rely on overdone profanity and never takes itself seriously. Some people may prefer "intelligent" comedy, and I'm all for that... go rent a Woody Allen flick from the 70s. If you like simple sight gags and silly comedy you'll like this movie. Mike Myers may not have been as funny as he was as Wayne Campbell or Austin Powers, but he can still get laughs. I have been critical of Justin Timberlake in the past, but he finally seems to have found a movie style that fits him.

No, this movie will not be sweeping the awards shows or breaking any box office records, but if you're able to appreciate simply laughs you may want to check this movie out. While I found nothing offensive about the movie at all apparently some disagree. If you're easily offended then stay home or stay outside the theater holding a sign.

Funny cameos also make this film and Jessica Alba looks her best in a long time. Not great, but there's a lot of fun to be had if you don't mind turning off your logic for awhile.

Iron Man (2008)

Wow! A heavily hyped movie that DIDN'T disappoint me!

[9/10 · 3 May 2008]

I was fortunate enough to get tickets for Iron Man on its opening day. I had been eagerly anticipating the movie since seeing the first trailer months ago and was excited by the strong cast and having Favreau as director. With all this hype I was fearful of being disappointed. Thank God I wasn't. This movie met and eventually exceeded all of my expectations.

Robert Downey Jr. is outright amazing in this movie and is definitely back in the A-list of his career. Even Gwyneth Paltrow, who I have NEVER been a fan of, was believable and very likable as Pepper Potts. One thing I liked was the way this movie was able to change and poke fun at the Iron Man mythology of the comic books without completely altering the character. The script took advantage of having such a strong cast and let them dominate the film rather than making the special effects the star; which usually happens in superhero films like this one. The fight scenes, while fantastic, were secondary to the growth of the Tony Stark character. The final fight scene was exciting and never overdone. Many other superhero movie franchises could learn from this film. Just because much of the audience is fanboys doesn't mean the film has to be silly or even pretentious.

Non-fans of the comic book will like this movie as well. It was very well done and I'm now looking forward to future Favreau projects. I'll happily buy this on DVD. It was never overly violent or bloody and had only semi-strong language at most. Take the entire family. You won't be disappointed.

Cloverfield (2008)

Not very original, but much better than I thought I it would be

[7/10 · 21 January 2008]

I saw this film yesterday with my wife and oldest son, mostly because my son wanted to see it so badly. My wife and I both expected a total fanboy blood & gore monster/disaster flick with a bunch of characters only there to die in a loud and gory manner. Granted, for the most part it WAS a fanboy monster/disaster flick but it did manage to impress all three of us and somehow live up to the hype. I hadn't seen or read any websites or message boards so I was able to see the film without knowing any outside theories or leaked information.

Yes, this film borrowed heavily from other films of its kind. I was reminded often of Aliens, The Blair Witch Project (itself an idea copied from Cannibal Holocaust) and the original War of the Worlds. I even saw some parallels from 9/11 video clips. It also had the generic disaster film elements of the troubled relationship that was being saved in the midst of disaster (just like Independence Day and Twister) and the heroic protagonist who disregards safety for the woman he loves. I think everyone knew that the end (spoiler alert!) would show the two troubled lovers one last time to remind us that they were happy not too long before. Despite all of this, I was still impressed with how the film was put together. They did manage to keep it all entertaining and I was never bored. I legitimately cared about these characters and the viewer felt like part of the disaster. I wanted them to escape even though the very beginning of the film had already suggested that they wouldn't make it.

I've seen better films of this genre, but I still recommend Cloverfield to anyone who likes these kinds of movies. Not exactly family-friendly (our 1-year-old didn't come with us) but an entertaining way to spend an evening. I'd probably buy it on DVD. The only complaint I'd have would be the fanboy audience made up of skinny wannabe punkers who wore jeans so low they looked like they'd pooped their pants and identical-looking underage goths talking and answering cell phones during the movie.

Beowulf (2007)

This is the future of cinema?

[1/10 · 21 November 2007]

I didn't make it past the first scene. Yes, many people will say that means I can't comment on the movie, but here's a sad fact -- I have NEVER walked out of a movie in my entire life until now. The animation is flat out annoying. If I wanted to see Shrek I'd buy the DVD. If this is the future of cinema then Hollywood will be bankrupt in a few years. Who actually wants to see movies that look like this? It looked stupid, the same way Final Fantasy and Polar Express looked completely ridiculous.

Grendel looked like a giant booger. It was the worst depiction of Grendel I'd ever seen. The thing looked like a CGI Leatherface, only more mentally challenged.

I'm sure the fanboys will love this film, the theater was full of them. I'm sure they were all dying to see Angelina Jolie in some kind of CGI erotic scene.

I'm sorry, but this movie was stupid. I've sat through some HORRIBLE films in my life -- I even made it through that pathetic Dragon Wars flick, but this was just too much. Save your money and go rent Shrek 3.

The Brave One (2007)

Great job by Foster and Howard

[7/10 · 14 September 2007]

I only went to see this movie today because my wife and mother-in-law wanted to see it and I'm always willing to tag along -- if only for the popcorn. I have to say that I was very impressed with Jodie Foster's portrayal of a disgruntled former victim. Terrence Howard has impressed me since Crash and looks to become a future star if he continues performances such as this one. Even the supporting cast did a great job. This movie was not fantastic, but very good and worth checking out.

If I have any complaint it would be the message itself. While I'm not one to campaign for the rights of criminals (I think they're given WAY too many breaks, but this isn't a political commentary), I can't agree with the message of this movie; that being: don't wait for the police to do nothing, go out there and get revenge! Many people in the theater I saw this movie at were outright cheering every time a criminal was shot. While they probably did deserve what they got, I don't agree that someone gunning down people with an automatic pistol should be glorified. I also disagree with any police officer who aids in such "justice".

That being said, the movie itself was very good. I'd recommend it over many of the other films that I've spent money on over the past month or two. You won't be disappointed by the film itself, as long as you can separate it from your personal views on the subject matter.

Kickin' It Old Skool (2007)

I actually laughed a lot

[5/10 · 2 May 2007]

I didn't go into this movie expecting to see the 2nd coming of the Shawshank Redemption or Casablanca as far as film-making. I just wanted to see something lighthearted enough to get some cheap laughs with my family. In that sense, this movie succeeded. No, it wasn't a "good" movie by any stretch of the imagination, but I did enjoy the time I spent watching this flick. The first half hour or so stuck in some corny jokes and I was beginning to think "Uh oh... this is going to be lame." Then the movie seemed to take a turn and STOP trying to be witty. Instead it then focused on silly sight gags and cheap laughs. Yes, it was juvenile and cheap... but it was also FUNNY. I'm of the minority who finds Jamie Kennedy funny and did like his old television show.

It seemed that very much of the plot and storyline borrowed from other movies, namely Big and Dodgeball. While this wasn't as funny as either of those movies it still had me laughing on many occasions. I particularly liked the individual jokes involving the roach, the date-preparation and the crude vomit scene. I've seen too many "comedy" movies that try to take themselves seriously and they get annoying. People like me who were teens in the 80s will probably like this more than the pre-teen to mid-20s audience of today. We lived most of the references, so we'll get a few more of the jokes.

You really have to be a fan of silly and braindead type of comedies to enjoy this. I won't say that it's worth buying on DVD or anything, but if you want some simple laughs without worrying about any overly obscene language or scenes you might enjoy this. It won't challenge you mentally or have you raving about it to your friends, but you might enjoy turning your brain off for awhile for a few laughs.

If your kids don't get embarrassed by you laughing about something they don't get, then take them along. It's actually fun explaining the references to them.

Pan's Labyrinth (2006)

Outright incredible

[9/10 · 21 April 2007]

I wasn't sure what to expect from this movie. My family and I had waited a long time to see it and the advertising was somewhat vague. It appeared to be a fantasy for children based on the commercials, but the people I'd spoken to said it was nothing of the kind. Finally, we saw this yesterday and I was outright blown away by the story. Guillermo Del Toro's writing crafted an incredible fantasy world while keeping the movie dark and serious. Ivana Baquero's lead role as Ofelia was also amazing. This girl was able to carry the movie and look strong despite being so much younger than the other characters.

One of the best things about this movie was the way the characters were given personalities without being pushed ahead of Ofelia. I was very impressed with the "Pale Man" character. He was legitimately creepy and evil-looking. I can't believe the imagination that was put into this film. Usually such imagination is only in children, and since this story was from the point of view of a child Del Toro did a fantastic job.

Yes, this is a foreign film so you'll have to read subtitles. I actually am able to read and speak Spanish, but read the subtitles anyway. It never distracted from the film. The film seemed to be influenced from many other fantasy stories and films such as Alice in Wonderland, Chronicles of Narnia, Excalibur, and even Beetlejuice. However, the homage to these films was done in such a fantastic way that I felt it was on par, and often even better, than those films.

This is not a film for children, despite the fantasy images, but it also isn't a bloodbath so violent that your young teenagers will be mortified. My 14-year-old also enjoyed it. I highly recommend seeing this in the 2nd run theaters or picking it up on DVD very soon.

The Wicker Man (2006)

What the heck did I just watch?

[3/10 · 2 September 2006]

I saw this movie for free at the local premiere along with a packed theater. The movie starts out very strong and draws the audience in immediately. I was very intrigued to see more, the plot seemed interesting and began to lure the audience in more when Nicolas Cage reached the island of Summersisle and threw even more twists. Then suddenly the plot went completely haywire and the movie turned into a spoof. The comic relief was witty at first, then took over the movie and turned into an unintentional laughfest. I found myself laughing more at this than I did at some comedy movies that I've seen! First off, this movie is NOT a horror film. I'm tired of these movies being advertised to appear as horror only to disappoint the viewer. This usually is reserved for M. Night Shyamalan films, but now appears to have expanded to others. The film is never scary a single time. Are these advertisers doing this on purpose in order to get money from the fans of the horror genre? Was Cage's dialogue SUPPOSED to be so funny? Toward the end when he's being hauled off by the island residents he begins screaming like a madman and tossing out comments that made the entire audience erupt in laughter. When he snapped earlier and began punching out female islanders the movie seemed to lose control. He even has a fistfight with one that should have lasted about 2 seconds, but instead was turned into a drawn out scene. What was even more hilarious was watching the woman he'd just knocked unconscious begin to overact and have wild facial expressions. I began to wonder if William Shatner had helped coach the actors.

This movie was worthy of Mystery Science Theater 3000. I felt almost betrayed. I was actually drawn to care about the lead character before the script seemed to run out of ideas and drop dead. Why were so many plot lines given that went nowhere? This movie had more dead ends than a ghost town. Was there any point to the whole bee analogy? The opening scene was great, but what the heck did it have to do with the rest of the movie? It made no sense at all! Why was the teacher given some odd twin that served no purpose? What was the deal with the old woman twins who talked in unison the entire time? Why did they keep going back to the stupid cell phone that had no service, and why did they have it ring toward the end? Did they just need to fill time? Toward the end why was Ellen Burnstyn painted up like Mel Gibson in Braveheart? I kept waiting for her to shout "FREEDOM!"

Finally, when they showed what the wicker man really was I wanted to faint. It looked like a Lego Wishnick Troll. I couldn't believe how fast this movie had deteriorated into a b-grade comedy. By the time the women were all chanting "The drone must die" I wanted to die myself. What a ridiculous and unintentionally funny scene.

For your own sake, skip this movie! I saw it for free and even I felt ripped off. If you really feel that you have to see it, wait for it to be on cable or borrow the DVD from some Nicolas Cage fan.

Lady in the Water (2006)

Shyamalan's best in years

[6/10 · 18 July 2006]

I expected absolutely nothing from this movie after being bored to death by The Village. It seemed that Shyamalan was writing the ending twists to his movies first, then writing the story around it. I didn't really want to see Lady in the Water, but had free tickets to the local premiere. This movie, however, breaks from Shyamalan's regular scripts and has sense of originality about it. I was impressed by how outright funny this movie was at many times. I was very impressed by the writing because it showed a different side to M. Night Shyamalan's talent. Shyamalan plays a larger role in this movie and does a decent job.

The star of this film, and the outright reason that it was enjoyable, was Paul Giamatti. I have seen him in many films, but never in the leading role. He was funny, emotional and strong throughout the entire film. This film is a testament to his greatness as an actor. I would hope that this will result in another Academy Award nomination for him. Perhaps it was because of Giamatti's lead, but many other lesser known actors were also impressive as a result. Bryce Dallas Howard did a good job in her role, but it was probably better that Giamatti was given more camera time and lines.

True, the monsters look fake... but what does a "real" monster really look like? This movie, however, is NOT horror. Much like The Village, the trailers are misleading. Shyamalan should hire someone new to do his promotions. Anyone expecting a scary movie will be very disappointed. Unlike The Village, this movie was never boring. Believe it or not, it's safe to take the kids to this one. There is no gore or graphic violence.

Is this a fantastic movie? No, but you will be entertained and surprised by some of the great acting jobs. I would call this Shyamalan's best work since The Sixth Sense.

Poseidon (2006)

Okay flick, nothing great

[5/10 · 9 May 2006]

I was lucky enough to see a sneak preview of this film yesterday. As far as entertainment the movie is successful, but that's about it. While I enjoyed the film it was nothing great and I've seen similar films that were much better.

Kurt Russell and Josh Lucas do well in this film for what it's worth. Unfortunately the film never quite explains why the two are rivals. In fact, character development in this film is lacking badly. I understand that in a film such as this one the special effects are the real star, but I still would have liked to have gotten more insight on the characters. Ten minutes into the film the tidal wave hits inexplicably and completely cuts off any backstory. The characters are pretty much interchangeable and "cookie-cut". We have the selfish guy who becomes a hero, the protagonist father-type, the heroine daughter, her misunderstood love interest, the single mom and the brat kid. Of course, nowadays we also have the obligatory and unnecessary gay character.

***MAJOR SPOILERS*** One problem I had was the behavior of a few characters. After all they'd been through, why did the stupid kid go exploring at the time he did? Of COURSE he gets lost, which is why the kids are usually put in these kind of flicks. I also wonder how he managed to get behind a steel grating that had no access.

When Kurt Russell's character is trying to shut off the engine he sees the broken emergency stop, then is pounding on all of the computers and machinery in desperation... then suddenly as he dies he calmly hits the correct button? That was just ridiculous. It didn't help that his entire death was similar to Bruce Willis' death in Armageddon.

What was the point of the hispanic woman? It seemed like her whole purpose in the film was to do nothing worth mentioning then die.

Emmy Rossum was great in Phantom of the Opera. It seemed a waste to have Fergie singing when Rossum was in the film.

****END OF SPOILERS**** All in all, this film is never boring and is a good film to take your whole family to. While it won't win any Academy Awards it won't feel like a total waste of money. I don't think I'll ever buy it on DVD, but I'd probably check it out again on cable.

Pride & Prejudice (2005)

Wow!

[9/10 · 23 February 2006]

I only went to see this movie because it was at a theater opening for free and my wife had wanted to see it. My expectations were very low and I was ready for another stuffy British romance full of boring scenes and pretentious behavior. I was proved completely wrong. I never imagined that this film would be so outright funny the entire time! While the acting and script were very sophisticated they never dragged on nor treated the audience as low class. Keira Knightley was outright fantastic in her portrayal of Elizabeth. She completely deserved her Oscar nomination and it is unfortunate that this movie happened to come out at the same time as Walk the Line. It appears that Reese Witherspoon will be the one to win.

The story was very descriptive and never left anything open. This was a true tale of a couple separated by circumstance. The final love scene, while brief, was very emotional and so beautiful that the viewer can almost feel how much Darcy loves Elizabeth. Because this film is not "politically correct" it didn't receive all of the attention that Brokeback Mountain did, when in fact this film was outright EVERYTHING the boring Brokeback Mountain claimed to be.

Cinematography for this film was very underrated. The shots of the landscapes and backgrounds were so beautiful that I wished I could visit England. The scene where Elizabeth stood on the cliff alone deserved the Oscar nomination.

When the scenery, costumes and acting were not being featured the movie kept the audience entertained with its comedy. This film was never boring at any point. I've seen several comedies where I have laughed less than I did watching this film. Though listed as a drama, this movie was actually the true definition of a romantic comedy. Also, the characters and acting were so incredible that I found myself rooting for the protagonists and legitimately hating the snobby or deceptive characters. This was truly a great film.

This was a true date movie. Seeing this movie with my wife made it even more emotional. I look forward to buying this film on DVD eventually.

Trading Places (1983)

Murphy and Aykroyd at their best

[7/10 · 11 December 2005]

Could this movie honestly have been any more funny? I saw it again, as I have repeatedly for years, and still laughed. My new son had never seen it before and liked it as well. Murphy was at the top of his game back then and Aykroyd is the perfect snob-class elitist. Some of these jokes are so timeless that I still refer to them from time-to-time and they STILL get laughs, both from people who have and haven't seen this film.

Yes, the jokes are a bit dated and somewhat slapstick, but this was a sign of the times. Most 80s comedies were full of slapstick moments. Jamie Lee Curtis was at the height of her sexy image and I'd forgotten how well she'd played her role. The late Don Ameche is so animated that it played perfectly into the mood of the film.

You can find this film in the bargain bin of most stores these days. I saw it for sale for only $5.50. It's worth owning.

Doom (2005)

Exactly what I expected

[4/10 · 18 October 2005]

I just saw an advance screening of this movie promoted by the radio station I work for. While this wasn't a total waste of a movie I was glad I didn't have to pay for it. While the Rock looks the part of a real action hero he has a long way to go as an actor. During scenes in which they tried to feature some frail attempt at a plot I found the Rock to be the 2nd least believable character behind only the laughably blank female doctor. The special effects were the star and they should have stuck to that. This was a mindless shoot-'em-up and that's fine, but don't try to turn it into anything more.

The space marines were your typical characters in any sci-fi or action movie featuring a group. We had the handsome rogue, the jerk, the preacher, the psycho leader and the interchangeable deadmeat characters who are only there to die in a loud and grotesque manner. The makers of this movie watched Aliens and the remake of Night of the Living Dead then made their movie out of a mixture of the two. I was waiting for Sigourney Weaver to make a cameo. The plot was a total ripoff! I wondered if this was done on purpose after awhile. There was a character named Patricia Tallman, who was the lead actress in the Night of the Living Dead remake. Perhaps this was done on purpose.

The most interesting character aside from the leads was Goat, the preacher -- unfortunately he was killed off about 30 minutes into the movie. They left the deadmeat cannon-fodder guys for last which led to some blank scenes.

Again, I wasn't expecting the next Gone With the Wind. This movie will entertain you if you don't put any thought into the plot whatsoever -- since the writers obviously didn't either. I was very surprised to see so many parents bringing their small children to this flick. This is NOT a movie for kids AT ALL. The R rating is rightfully earned and parents should take heed. The advance screening I went to actually had parents walk out due to their children being scared or even nauseated by all of the gore. The radio station even received calls of complaint about the violence. Parents should research what they let their kids watch.

If you're looking for a good movie, go see something else. If you like braindead bulletfests then this is the movie for you. Good sound and special effects make this at least worth watching on DVD.

Batman Begins (2005)

The way Batman was MEANT to be!

[9/10 · 13 June 2005]

I was lucky enough to have seen the premiere of the movie on Monday evening and I was very impressed. This is easily the best Batman movie I have ever seen. This movie completely disregards the previous 4 Batman movies and begins its own franchise. The scenes are dark and foreboding, as is Batman himself. This film makes the previous 4 Batman films look as campy as the old TV show. There are no wild costumes or over-the-top freak characters. Scarecrow's costume consists of nothing more than a burlap sack yet it is more effective than the ridiculous outfits worn by Mr. Freeze or The Riddler in the last two terrible Batman movies.

The movie is outright action. The fight scenes are realistic in that there are no stupid one-liners being dropped during the fight, nor does the fight pause for one of the characters to crack a cheap joke. Christian Bale is the best Batman I have ever seen. The supporting cast is incredibly strong; with especially solid performances by Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman, Rutger Hauer, Liam Neeson and even Gary Oldman (who I have been very critical of in the past). I hadn't seen much of Katie Holmes before this film, but her performance was every bit on par as those of the seasoned veteran actors mentioned above. Lastly there is Cillian Murphy, whose performance reminded me of the chilling characters played in the past by Christopher Walken. I can see Murphy becoming a much bigger name in film in the near future.

This was not a children's' movie in any way, though the film is not overly violent or gory. I don't recall seeing any blood at any point in the film. I saw many parents bringing children to the premiere, but I believe these people were expecting a movie like the previous 4 that added corny jokes and enemies that bordered on slapstick with their appearance.

The movie distances itself immediately from the others by showing the audience a different version of Bruce Wayne's parents being murdered. The origin is told well and gives us a much better insight on the character of Bruce Wayne/Batman. This Batman is realistic. We see how he is trained and hear what his beliefs are. He even bruises and looks athletic without looking TOO big to hide his appearance when not in costume. I applaud Christopher Nolan for breaking out on his own and not submitting to the campy formula of the other movies.

I would gladly see this movie again in the theater. It looks to be the best film of the summer and easily the best film I've seen this year. Because there is no sex or gratuitous violence the film is okay to take the kids to, but don't expect them to be as entertained as they were with the previous films. At no point does this film even pretend to be targeted at a younger audience.

The Shawshank Redemption (1994)

Just plain amazing

[10/10 · 15 May 2005]

I can't believe I waited 11 years to see this film. I often saw commercials advertising the film on TNT, but never had enough interest to sit and watch until I bought the movie for my fiancée. I'm so glad I finally got to see this film. This is easily one of the greatest films of all time. I couldn't believe the outstanding job done by all of the actors. I've seen very few scripts on the level of this one, but have never seen so many strong performances from the entire cast.

Morgan Freeman is incredible as Red and narrates the action better than any other voice-over I've ever heard. I was very surprised with Tim Robbins. For some reason I still thought of him as Nuke Laloosh and never dreamed he had this kind of acting ability. The story is incredible and the dialogue keeps the entire film rolling. Two and a half hours go by like nothing. I also have to applaud William Sadler, who showed great versatility (watch Bill & Ted's Bogus Journey or Die Hard 2 to see what I mean). The film is intriguing as well as inspiring at the same time. I found myself inwardly cheering for Andy to escape from Shawshank and was even happy when he is shown emerging from the sewer tunnel. His reunion with Red is almost tearjerking. The movie managed to have a happy ending without it seeming to be another unrealistic Hollywood Ending.

This film is definitely a must-see. I have seen Braveheart, and though I thought it was fantastic it doesn't come anywhere near the power of Shawshank Redemption. I doubt another cast ensemble of incredible acting talent will ever match this one. Easily a 10 on the IMDb.com scale.

Guess Who (2005)

Simple light comedy

[6/10 · 29 March 2005]

This wasn't a movie that immediately grabbed my attention, but I was interested in seeing it. It would be best described as Meet The Parents Lite. Ashton Kutcher does a good job by playing the handsome guy who isn't afraid to be goofy, which pretty much seems to also describe him in reality. He has come a long way as an actor and I have enjoyed the movies I've seen him in, with the exception of "Dude, Where's My Car?". Bernie Mac is enjoyable and an underrated comedy actor. He played the role of the overprotective father perfectly and VERY believably.

Don't expect this film to become a staple of comedy or to win any awards, but it is worth seeing and will provide you with some good laughs. Some scenes are memorable enough and the race issue isn't exploited. I actually found the reactions among the characters to be very believable. The jokes aren't pure slapstick, which helped very much. This movie never takes itself seriously and this is probably the reason the chemistry between Kutcher and Mac works so well.

Decent film. Take the kids. There are a few moderately adult jokes, but nothing too blatantly sexual or controversial unless you're easily offended.

The Devil's Advocate (1997)

Painfully bad

[2/10 · 5 March 2005]

Where do I start? This movie was so dry and blank that it nearly put me to sleep multiple times. I'm glad I didn't see it until 8 years after its theater release and I hope I don't see it again for at least another 8 years. I was embarrassed for Al Pacino the entire time. The script was weak and every time the movie looks like it is going to get interesting it drops the ball. The story moved horribly slow and got nowhere. Was there any point to the ridiculous plot elements regarding Reeves' character having a half-sister?

How is Keanu Reeves famous? This guy has to be the most overrated actor of our time. He's horrible. I've yet to ever see a good performance from him. His ridiculous accent came and went repeatedly. At least Clark Gable had the sense to not even try an accent. We hear Reeves' accent very pronounced at the beginning, then it vanishes and comes back briefly about midway through this snoozer.

The real John Milton should be glad he never had to see this dreck. The second the Pacino character was introduced as Milton it was only a matter of time until they used the famous quote from Paradise Lost -- "Better to rule in hell than serve in heaven."

Weak plot, weak dialogue, weak acting... this movie was the triple threat. Avoid this crap.

Hotel Rwanda (2004)

Brilliant

[9/10 · 1 March 2005]

This movie was outright fantastic. Having seen both this film and Ray I felt that Don Cheadle deserved the Academy Award for Best Picture over Jamie Foxx (and, mind you, I think Jamie Foxx did an EXCELLENT job himself). The fact that this film wasn't nominated for Best Picture is outright ridiculous. This important film is very emotional and will leave you wondering what you were doing while all of this was going on. Most of us were watching OJ Simpson's trial.

Don Cheadle's emotional performance deserves high praise. The scene where he is arguing with the general in the office of the Hotel Diplomat is his best work overall. I couldn't believe the outright emotion this man put into his strong performance. The death scenes are tear-jerking while abstaining from graphic violence. Death is never glorified in this film. You'll also be amazed by the driving scene by the river.

I especially liked the mise-en-scene (did I spell it correctly?) that showed issues of Time Magazine in the background with Bill Clinton's face featured prominently. I don't feel this film bashes Clinton or the United States specifically -- instead it makes us all feel guilty for being blissfully unaware the entire time. The media coverage here in the United States was centered around OJ and 2 deaths while 800,000 were dying elsewhere. While the film never states this, it becomes obvious when one finally realizes what they were watching on TV during this time.

This film is a must-see for anyone who was an adult in 1994. While it is not a "feelgood" film it is powerful and emotional. Easily the best film I've seen in quite some time.

Troy (2004)

Proof that critics should be ignored

[7/10 · 8 September 2004]

I finally got to see this movie in the bargain theaters here in El Paso on Labor Day. I originally hadn't thought much about the movie, but as time went on it had left the regular theaters here in town and I realized that I'd wished I'd gone to see it. I remember hearing several outside critics blasting the movie as horrible and wanted to judge for myself. I'm very glad I finally saw this movie.

This movie is not the usual Clash of the Titans/Jason and the Argonauts type of movie where the gods are constantly shown and portrayed as more important and powerful than the lowly humans. In fact, this movie completely ignores the so-called gods and instead places the focus where it belongs -- on the warriors themselves. I have studied the Iliad as well as other stories surrounding the mythical Trojan War since my days as an elementary school geek obsessed with mythology and Dungeons & Dragons. Instead of being targeted toward that audience this film demystifies the Trojan War and treats it in a manner in which it could have actually happened. We see that the elders who continually refer to their so-called gods come across as fools. One of the most telling lines is when Hector (Eric Bana) refers to the fact that Apollo did not strike down Achilles (Brad Pitt) for desecrating the statue. It is very telling that Hector seems to doubt the gods he has been taught to worship.

I have been a longtime critic of Brad Pitt as a second-tier talent who became famous only because of his looks, but in this film he surprised me. He is the TRUE star of the film. Achilles is easily the most interesting and entertaining character. I applaud Brad Pitt's effort in making his character a tragic hero. Achilles acknowledges that he is NOT the son of a goddess and is not immortal or invulnerable. The movie basically shows us how a rumor can blossom into a legend unto itself. Achilles' legend BECOMES immortal. He even refers to this in my favorite scene when he is inspiring his men and starts the invasion heavily outnumbered and still triumphs. Later in the same scene he scoffs at the so-called gods the Greeks and Trojans worship by decapitating the statue. I found this scene symbolic of the movie itself. The gods are nothing to both the characters and audience.

Instead of supernatural powers and impossible feats we're treated to realism. Even Achilles' death is more realistic than in the myth. In the myth Paris does kill Achilles with an arrow, but because he has no battle skills his hand is actually guided by Apollo.

If there was one thing I did not like in this film it was the transformation of Paris into some kind of hero. Paris was a coward in the original myth and I saw no reason to transform him into an overnight hero in the movie. I guess Orlando Bloom fans wouldn't be able to bear seeing him as the bad guy and were given the uninspired transformation of Paris into a better archer than Robin Hood.

While this movie was nowhere near the epic masterpiece that the producers had hoped or that it was advertised as, it did not deserve the bad publicity it received from critics. I applaud the makers of this film and look forward to buying it on DVD.

Open Water (2003)

Not bad at all

[7/10 · 28 August 2004]

Open Water is definitely not a movie for everyone. Most people are now used to the big budget films with monster effects and incredible sound. This movie was very simple and pretty much everything that The Blair Witch Project claimed to be. I can see where many would be bored by the very simple plot and the fact that there isn't much they can do as far as subplots. The plot of the film is exactly as it was advertised -- a couple abandoned out in the ocean.

The basic fear of not knowing what is beneath someone in the water is used much the same way as the original Jaws. The sharks were real, which helped greatly. I was especially impressed by the different phases of dealing with the situation that Susan and Dan go through. It begins as almost funny, then moves on to realization. From here the emotion moves to anger and blame. This leads to despair, then the re-emergence of hope. Finally comes the acceptance. This movie was much more entertaining and thrilling than other supposed horror/thrillers of this summer -- especially the borefest that was The Village. Open water throws out the supposedly "deep" plot elements and flat out is as advertised. It was amazing how less budget was used to such a better end.

Many will dislike this movie, and I understand why. I happen to disagree only because I enjoy movies of this kind. If you able to enjoy a movie that has a simple plot with no special effects then this movie is for you. The ending of this film was about 100 times more surprising than that of The Village as well, but I won't spoil it for anyone.

This wasn't exactly a good film to take children to see. There is an unnecessary nude scene and some semi-strong language that only the the tooth fairy could really find offensive. The main problem would be the simple cinematography boring younger viewers. This wasn't the best movie of the summer, but I have to admit I enjoyed it very much.

The Village (2004)

Disappointing, boring and predictable

[1/10 · 8 August 2004]

****** SPOILERS ******

The previews to this movie had me excited. I was expecting great horror. What I got was a complete borefest of the slowest developing movie I've seen in years. I spent most of the movie wanting to yell at the characters to DO SOMETHING. This is horror? The so-called "monster" is seen twice and does nothing thrilling or scary.

Was ANYONE surprised by the horrible excuse for a twist ending? I think it came as no surprise to anyone who had ever seen a movie before. I saw it coming, my girlfriend saw it coming and my brother saw it coming. I think this Shyamalan guy wants so badly to think of himself as some master of fooling the audience that he forgets to make an interesting story to go with his twist ending. The characters stand around talking and talking and never get anything done.

The talking scenes were too long. We got the picture as to what they were getting at, but yet the scenes continued on for no reason. It was like using a fire extinguisher on a fire that had already burned itself out.

What a lame movie monster as well. It looked like one of the creatures from The Dark Crystal. I was startled twice, more by the screeching music that accompanied the sudden movement than anything -- once when the monster is spotted from the watchtower and once when the blind girl falls into the pit.

Luscious was a boring character who did nothing. Noah was probably the only thing worth watching due to his comical moments. He's the only thing that originally kept me from giving this movie a 1. I changed my mind since then.

This is easily the worst movie I have seen in about three years -- and that includes the borefest that was In The Bedroom and the stupidity of Not Another Teen Movie. Skip this over-hyped piece of trash and go see one of the many other summer movies that are thousands of times more entertaining. I gave this a 3 out of 10, and that was being generous so I eventually lowered it to a 1. If you want to sleep, watch this dog of a movie.

The Manchurian Candidate (2004)

Not bad, but not great either

[6/10 · 31 July 2004]

Since I have never seen the original Manchurian Candidate I was able to view this film without the bias of comparing it to the original. Good acting jobs by Denzel Washington and Meryl Streep highlight the film, but many other characters are left bland. Jon Voight was horribly underused and his character was so obscure that I was unable to feel any sympathy for him. The same can be said for his character's daughter. We never are told what happened in the past with her.

*****SOME SPOILERS*****

One of the key plotholes was the climactic scene at the end. Marco is about to shoot President-elect Arthur, but Shaw somehow is able to fight off the brainwashing enough to prevent the assassination. How did Shaw manage to keep from falling back into the brainwashing? This is never explained. He knows where the assassin is and purposely prevents the shooting. Was his mental will more powerful than anyone else who was in the same brainwashing?

Why did Marco shoot Shaw instead? He was brainwashed to kill Arthur, so did the brainwashing have a contingency plan to kill Shaw? We know he didn't fight off the brainwashing because he still was going to shoot himself afterward.

What was the deal with the voodoo-looking ladies with the symbols all over their faces? The brainwashing was done with electronic implants, so why the black magic?

Was there any reason for implying an incestuous attraction Shaw's mother had for him?

This movie was not at all bad and worth checking out, but don't expect it to be as thrilling as it could have been. The last half hour was hyped to be so intense, but left me disappointed. It wasn't a total letdown, but not so shocking and fast-paced that it excited me.

Fright Night (1985)

A real horror movie

[7/10 · 19 July 2004]

I just finished watching this movie again for the first time in years. I remember loving it as a junior high student who didn't know much about film and being able to watch it much more deeply today than I did back then did not kill the movie at all. This was before CGI took over so the effects were outdated, but somehow this made the movie even better. Evil Ed's wolf was much more realistic than the terrible modern CGI wolves of the blockbuster The Day After Tomorrow released just this year. The scene where he is stabbed and reverts back to human form was fantastic. Yes, the bat was cheesy but the transformation was well done. I also liked the makeup used on Amanda Bearse and Stephen Geoffreys for their characters as vampires.

The real strength of this movie, however, is the ability of the actors themselves. William Ragsdale carries the movie well. He's what most people picture when they think of a young b-movie fan. Stephen Geoffreys is hilarious and the perfect choice for the annoying sidekick. Amanda Bearse was great as the shy, virginal girlfriend. Chris Sarandon was the best 80s update of a vampire I'd seen. He was manly, making it obvious why women would fall for him, and very ominous. His character of Jerry was funny, but still dark and mysterious enough to be intimidating. I especially liked his use of the trenchcoat as a modern vampire cape. Finally, the late Roddy McDowell fit the movie perfectly as well. Not many will remember this film as part of his legacy, which is sad. He was the transformation character who goes from non-believer to scared believer to strong ally.

The movie did have a plothole or two, but don't let this detract from the timelessness of this film. This film was TRUE horror. It was in no way like the MTV-generation junk that is spewed out today and called "horror" like the remake of Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Urban Legend, and the like. I especially liked how the film briefly poked fun at the typical "horror" films of the 80s that featured "men in hockey masks hacking young virgins."

This film is for fans of true horror and worth another look. The amount of humor was perfect and never detracted from the horror. The gore was present, but never overdone or glorified. This was easily the best horror of the 80s and among the best all-time vampire films ever.