Reviews

17 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
9/10
Mesmeric....
28 February 2005
Several days following viewing the film, I am still thinking about some of its content. It is rare indeed to be doing so. Even though the film is terribly confusing and disjointed, it has to go down as an all time great for the sheer bravado and daring of Mr. Lynch in daring to pronounce it complete as is, and having the self-belief to accept the inevitable mixed reviews and criticism.

The acting was first rate, and, although the film is long and slow paced, it still leaves you thirsting for more.

various parts still confuse me. First, what is the dreamy attendance at the "Silencio Theatre" all about? Second, who is the dead woman in the swapped apartment. Is it a chance resemblance with the heroine? Third, why are the elderly couple from the airport screaming at the heroine? Fourt, what is the significance of the adultery scene? And so on and on. No doubt, I shall be watching my DVD a few more times.

If you want to watch a standard thriller, don't bother with this film. If you want some food for the mind, it'll be hard to beat.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Sicilian (1987)
2/10
Really awful
4 April 2003
This must be one of the really awful films of all time, which belongs in the bottom 100. Must admit to having ignored the score and comment on the site here and purchased the DVD. Terrible mistake.

I figured a Cimino directed Puzo film couldn't be that bad - it was. The acting is generally poor with a few exceptions. Notably, Joss Ackland, John Turturro and Giulia Boschi come out with some credit. Christopher Lambert, however, fails to carry the movie, and is as wooden as it gets. Even the Sicilian swagger fails to impress. Barbara Sukowa also is a let down, despite the odd sight of flesh.

Cimino is a mega let down. It is as if there were a few scenes left over on the cutting room floor from the Godfather - marvelous scenery though it is - clipped together with a hastily put together script. To add to it all, the editing leaves a lot to be desired.

I gave it 2/10, but only due to the scenery and score (which also may have been a hand-me-down from the Godfather).
15 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Awful
5 February 2003
This is quite simply one of the worst films I have ever seen. Even my children (whom I assume it was aimed at) didn't like it.

Whoever is advising Sandra Bullock on her choice of scripts needs changing pdq! As good as she was in The Net, 28 Days and A Time to Kill, she is equally ill suited for this film and role.
5 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
7/10 or 10/10?????
5 February 2003
I enjoyed the movie, except for the ongoing gratuitous bad language throughout. I accept that some of it was needed to portray the characters as salt of the earth east end nasties, but they have a greater degree of decency and pride in their linguistic skills than that portrayed in the film.

I was going to give it 7/10, but then I thought maybe Vinnie Jones may track me down for a word - so the official score is 10/10 but......
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Score (2001)
8/10
Double pleasure
6 January 2003
I watched this film with my son whom I am trying to introduce to more adult/serious/better acted films. We enjoyed it enormously. I am not sure to what extent I was influenced by the fact that I watched it with my sibling, but it worked for us.

First, the plot may not be the most extraordinary to hit the screen in years, but it is satisfactory, without going into excessive sex, violence or gadgets to satisfy the audience. Second, the acting was as good as you may expect from two of the biggest giants in modern cinema. The biggest surprise was the film-stealing performance of Ed Norton. It must have been like playing tennis doubles with your grandmother against Borg and McEnroe yet beating them in straight sets. The film is worth watching for Norton's performance, if nothing else.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Haven't seen anything similar for years
6 January 2003
The film is a real throwback to the 1970's. It captures the pervasive feeling of nihilism perfectly well, particularly on the subject of drugs.

The not so great colour and sound strangely add to the experience in making the film seem more documentary than a tale of two young people caught in the vortex of addiction.

Pacino and Winn both play remarkably believable leads.

It may not be an uplifting experience to watch the film, but in watching it, you cannot help feeling that it's a privilage to watch such mastery of directing and acting.
32 out of 46 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Life Stinks (1991)
9/10
Surprisingly Enjoyable Film!
5 December 2002
I have not read the other comments on the film, but judging from the average rating I can see that they are unlikely to be very complementary.

I watched it for the second time with my children. They absolutely loved it. True, it did not have the adults rolling around the floor, but the sound of the children's enjoyment made it seem so.

It is a true Mel Brooks farce, with plenty of moral content - how sad it is to be loved for our money, not for whom we are, and how fickle are our friends and associates. There are many other films on a similar subject matter, no doubt, many of which will have a greater comic or emotional impact on adults. It's hard for me to imagine such an impact on the junior members of the family, however.

Hence, for the children, a 9/10 from me.
7 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Taxi (I) (1998)
8/10
Funny old world
5 November 2002
I cannot begin to comprehend how (at the time ow writing) the votes cast by females is higher than that of males!!!! This is an out and out boys film. Car chases, humour, decent acting (even if somewhat shambolic editing) and a film long love angle that does not really get off the ground. Simply put, a boys toys film.

It also serves as a reminder that non-English language films should be given the benefit of the doubt by us Anglo speakers. The subtitles may not have been true to the script, but were more than adequate to create a sense of enjoyment in watching the film.

A thoroughly worthwhile view.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
War Live (2000)
9/10
Incomplete, but defenately worth watching.
4 November 2002
The first two thirds of the film were excellent and most watchable. Sadly, the editing of the last part is rushed and leaves one confused, unsure of what it really is trying to say.

Anyone who is fearful of this being a propaganda movie will be happy to learn that the central (bad guy) character represents the prevailing regime. I cannot possibly agree that it is a Serbian nationalist flick.

For a glimpse of what it may have been like to be in Belgrade whilst bombs were dropping around you, this is a great and interesting portrayal. It may not have been the bombs themselves causing havoc, but politics, opinions, love, hate, alcohol etc. The drunken scene in the restaurant with the bombing in the background is terrific.
7 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Salvador (1986)
8/10
Magnificent
4 November 2002
A really excellent Oliver Stone directed movie. Even though I watched the film 16 years following its premiere, it still has a lot to say about many things: war, violence, US foreign policy, Quislings, journalists (good and bad), human nature, humanity.......
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Very, very, very poor.
21 October 2002
Despite the hype, and having watched the TV series, I can honestly say there were no redeeming features for this film. The script is cringemaking, the acting wooden, the attempts to add a bit of sexiness utterly failed, the humour was unfunny etc etc etc.

I must admit to having given it 2/10, however. This is so because my children enjoyed it. In the circumstances, anyone with a mental age above 8 should avoid it.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Brilliant.... after all these years
21 October 2002
This film is so good, even after 25 years it is as good as I remember it when it was originally released. It does not sink to the unnecessary blood and guts gore to create the feeling of fear and loathing.

The acting and directing are first class - so real and believable all round. This should be a must for film schools.
3 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Brilliant
16 October 2002
This film may bear little or no relation to reality or history, but it really does not matter. It is extremely entertaining, and a perfect way to relax and feast the mind and eye for a couple of hours.

Pure entertainment, and highly recommended, even for us boys!
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Being There (1979)
10/10
Just brilliant!
10 October 2002
A highly entertaining and thought provoking film. Sellers plays the fool who fools all around him as only he could do. There is so much dialogue which has become an everyday expression: "I like to watch", "Can I have my dinner now", "After the fall comes the spring" and so on. A fantastic testament to a great comic actor, as well as all others involved in the production.
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
12 Angry Men (1957)
10/10
Masterpiece
10 October 2002
If ever there was a film to inspire a youngster to take up law, this is it. I know, it did me.

The plot and scenery could hardly be any simpler, yet the tension and social commentary could hardly be any greater. This film should be a must for any film studies curriculum. It shows what can be done with skillful acting and direction without resort to the gratuitous cinematography so popular with modern day film makers.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Proof of Life (2000)
10/10
Really enjoyed it!
3 October 2002
I was particularly interested to see Russell Crowe. He impressed me as an actor in Gladiator, and I know of his high esteem in Hollywood. Frankly, I was a littel disappointed. He seemed to be the same person in Proof of Life as he was in Gladiator, but in a different time, place and clothes. This, however, does not detract from the film itself - just brings the question to my mind how able RC is to portray varying characters.

The film itself was a joy to watch. Colour, sound and direction were great. The scenery was breathtaking. The Director did not even fall into the trap of resorting to gratuitous sex and/or violence when dealing with subject matters which could easily have veered that way. The greatest compliment one could pay a film is that it could have been a bit longer. I felt that way when it ended.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Extraordinarilly......
3 October 2002
Must confess to having seen a few howlers in my time, but this one is up there with the worst of them. Plot troubling to follow. Sex and violence thrown in to disorient and distract from the really poorly put together film.

I can only imagine that the cast will look back on the end product and wish it to gather dust on a shelf not to be disturbed for a generation or two. Sadly, in my case, I have the DVD. It will sit on the shelf and look at me from time to time.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed