Change Your Image
jockreby2000
Reviews
Night at the Museum (2006)
Scandalous waste of time, talent and money
It's much easier to break something than it is to make it. Criticism is a cinch to hand out, but in the case of Night at the Museum, it's well worth it.
The amount of money that must have been spent on this film may be enough to fund a town in Africa for a long time. In some aspects of Night at the Museum the budget was well spent. The general design and special effects in particular were both beautiful and imaginative. The money paid to the various high-profile actors would have been substantial, and it's a credit to the producers of this film that they were able to assemble such a high-profile cast.
But no matter how much of a budget is available, it's still impossible to create a successful, satisfying end product without a good set of fundamentals. The plot of Night at the Museum was lame at best. Characters were some of the most predictable, unimaginative and one-dimensional that I have ever encountered. (Attila the Hun for example). This was particularly disappointing in that much of Night of the Museum purports to be about the importance of learning, whereas the audience are treated like a bunch of ignoramuses. The intended audience of children is no excuse: the most successful children's films are those who actually treat their audiences with respect, not purely dishing up half-baked intellectually-vacant crash-bang as is the case with so much of this film. There's nothing wrong with a lot of action, but it needs to be underpinned by more substance that was in the case here.
The stellar cast alluded to earlier was largely wasted. There was a strong sense of the actors 'going through the motions' - particularly Owen Wilson and Robin Williams: the latter of whom needs to be advised that he's done enough pseudo-deep-and-emotional roles now. However the plot was so bad that one can hardly blame them for delivering shallow performances. Even a comic genius such as Ben Stiller was trying hard, but his heart just wasn't in it.
To top it off, the myriad of cutesy, saccharine interactions between Ben Stiller and his fictional son were positively vomit-inducing. (Suspension of disbelief aside, do children and their parents in the US actually communicate like this? Are children to be negotiated with as if they are little adults?) But this was purely symptomatic of the general malaise and laziness of so much of Night at the Museum. The only positive thing from this two hours of my life is that I fell asleep for half of it.
Disneyland: Sunday Drive (1986)
A very pleasant surprise
There are many moments of laugh-out-loud humour in this film. The writing is excellent, with many very funny twists and turns throughout. It just goes to show that a film need not be adult-oriented to be funny.
Also of note in this film are the performances of the actors, particularly the child actors.
Well worth seeing - a fun hour and a half!
In & Out (1997)
Formulaic
I would have loved to have said some good things about this film... oh, I suppose Tom Selleck was pretty good with the (poor) lines that he was given. But altogether, "In & Out" struck me as being formulaic. All of the characters were pretty much unlikeable, from the absurdly selfish (Kline) to the vapid (Matt Dillon) to the pathetic (Joan Cusack) to the reticent yet loving (father). There's every bland and boring stereotype in here that you will recognize from other formulaic comedies.
There are some important issues in this film, for certain. It would have been nice if they had been presented with more depth and substance rather than the glib treatment in which they meted out. Comedy need not be surface deep - indeed, the best ones generally aren't.
What was interesting though, was seeing how the writers would finish the film as the climax seems to come half-way through. Unfortunately, in my opinion, the ending was botched big time.
Reading comments on this movie from other viewers, the trend seems to be that if you're from the US, you have a much greater chance of liking this film. If films in the manner of "Mr Holland's Opus" or "What Women Want" appeal, then "In and Out" may be worth watching. Otherwise, steer clear!
Holy Smoke (1999)
First half promising, then...
There are plenty of other comments already written concerning the plot problems in this film, and they are comments with which I'd agree. What begins as a very interesting and involving power struggle between the two lead characters quickly degenerates into farce, an excruciating one at that. The story ends up lurching from place to place, adding little and lacking impetus. There are indeed some shocking moments, but they seem to be more intent on the shock value itself rather than further developing the characters or plot.
Be warned, there is some horrible, horrible dialogue littered throughout Holy Smoke, delivered in most disappointing, amateurish, stage-y ways ("Be kind, yes, be kind!" and "Man-hater!" immediately spring to mind). The stereotyped Australian characters were so tiresome - think Muriel's Wedding without the humour, depth, charisma or development.
On the positive side, there are some excellent visuals (the Shiva image at end was exquisite). The photography etc. was beautiful to look at throughout.
Kate Winslet did an excellent job of an Australian accent, probably the best I've ever heard from a non-Aussie. The gorgeous Sophie Lee reprised her Muriel's Wedding-type role with characteristic aplomb, doing the best she could with the supplied dialogue.
In conclusion, this movie is worth viewing for the first hour. It's such a shame that the very interesting initial premise was not followed through to a satisfactory conclusion - this film could have been a masterpiece.
K-PAX (2001)
Interesting film
In brief, as someone interested in science fiction, this is one of the better films recently released in this genre. Whilst there are the usual suspension-of-disbelief-moments required, it is a quite intelligent exploration of madness vs. sanity, and how far one can or should go when confronted with the possibility of the unknown. Perhaps these ideas could have been explored more fully, and I wonder whether the final quarter of K-Pax could have been reworked to greater effect. Some extraneous plot lines, for example, could have been easily excised.
The music for this movie was truly outstanding. Congratulations on the composer for his work in this film. I found it to be both evocative and moving, particularly that which accompanied the opening credits.
Muriel's Wedding (1994)
Great movie.
It's been very interesting reading the comments of other people from throughout the world on this movie. It's hard to know if the humour will translate across the globe, because even within the English-speaking world there are huge cultural differences. To an Australian (i.e. myself), this movie is wonderful.
The thing about "Muriel's Wedding" is that it's absolutely spot-on in its portrayal of so many features of Australian life. You have the corrupt local councillor taking kickbacks from developers, the lonely guy working in the video shop, the vicious gang of clubbing young women making hell for anyone who doesn't fit in, the wannabe's losing their dignity trying _to_ fit in, etc. etc. etc. If you want to know what life is truly like living in coastal Australian towns, this is it. (Not that this is a bad thing, necessarily, it's just that this is how it is.)
What makes this movie great, apart from its accuracy of portrayal, is that fact that it is so multi-layered. There are moments of supreme hilarity, pathos, triumph and sadness, and they work so well within the total package. As another reviewer pointed out, the moment when you see Mrs. Heslop at the church is truly heart-wrenching.
Highly recommended - one of the best Australian movies ever.
Forrest Gump (1994)
Schmaltzy patronizing pap, for the most part
You've got to give it to the makers of this film, they certainly tried every trick in the book to wheedle reactions from viewers. A person with a disability who manages to triumph through the most extreme and traumatic situations thrown at him. Was this meant to be some sort of metaphor for "the American Dream", whereby citizens by rights should triumph through whatever adversity is thrown their way, coming out the other side richer and stronger? Give me a break - or at least, show it to me in an intelligent, thoughtful, non-manipulative way!
The scenes with Forrest intercut into historic footage were quite nice, though.