Hanover Reviews

Sense8 (2015–2018)

A TV Show about Heroes Who are Super Together

[16 June 2015]

Imagine an origin story about a team of heroes where you get to learn about them an extremely detailed level. It's not a ten minute flashback to who they were before they became extraordinary. The realization that they are linked mentally comes slowly so that we can get a good idea of who these people truly were before the inevitable happens and they start using their combined strengths at will.

It also has dialog on the same level as all three of Linklatter's "Before" Trilogy. Sometimes these characters just need someone to talk to and the characters discuss how they arrived in their current predicament. Sometimes its simply about the places they are visiting through the other Sen-sates. Sometimes they just share advice. Fortunately the dialog isn't boring, especially if you really take the time to listen to what they are saying and learn who they are.

The nice thing about this is by the time the main conflict finally rears it's head, we know who these people are. In this way, they can then focus on the action and we have true empathy for these characters so that every victory will really count.

All eight characters have a different story. This is where you can see the Wachowski's graphic novel/Anime/comic book style come into play. People use the word cliché', but these are classic genre characters. The cop, the DJ, the thief, the hacker, etc. It's like watching a graphic novel unfold. Eventually they reveal their real-world talents (Kickboxing, Gun Training, Driving Expertise, etc) which they are able to lend to each other. First it happens by accident, and then later it happens at will. These scenes are exhilarating to watch and you will cheer the first time they all work together as a team to get something done or help when one of them is in trouble.

That leads me to the best thing about this TV show. It's sense of optimism. At one point, two characters mention that despite the crap that just happened to them, the world is still a beautiful place. That's the one thing I loved about Sense8. You never felt like the other shoe was going to drop. It was always about overcoming, and not giving up in despair. It demonstrates that sometimes you are safer in a place you don't want to be and things turn out okay anyways and you forget you didn't want to be there in the first place. This is the kind of show we've needed for a long time and it's great to see that despite the awful reviews it received from the "expert" critics, the viewers are embracing it.

If I had two gripes:

1. Sometimes they hit you over the head way too many times about certain points. There's thirty second scene where Nomi gets up from her computer to hug her girlfriend saying, "I just needed to do that." My only problem is by that time we UNDERSTAND she loves her. We've seen the proof many times before including a scene preceding that one. We didn't need anymore proof, and it just felt like filler. It didn't really add anything other than, yep, she still loves her.

2. Some of the dialog does fall flat. For example, one of the characters tries to explain the strange things going on in her mind, using the dialog, "I know this is coffee, but when I took a drink just then, it tasted like a sugary dessert!" Oof. So I dock one star for sugary dessert. :)

Anyways, unless you are a cynic, a homophobe, or a puritan, I recommend checking it out, but give it at least four episodes before. What happens at the end of "Whats going on?" might be that scene that makes you want to see more.

I eagerly await season 2!

Rock Jocks (2012)

Justin Chon ruins this film

[25 August 2013]

Employees for a secret organization that polices the skies for asteroids are threatened to be replaced by a computer unless they can justify the reason they are needed.

Could have been a cute little movie if Just Chon wasn't so annoying. This is another case of where a single character makes the whole move a very unpleasant experience (unless you're like five years old or something). I almost turned it off half way through.

The rest of the cast is pretty good. Its always nice to see Felicia Day. Jason Mewes seemed more like a "guest star" than anything else as his role is definitely a throw-away role and not even really needed. I think he was more or less added to have a somewhat big name on the cast.

Some of the special effects are better than average as well.

Unfortunately Justin Chon's "In-Your-Face" performance through 98% of the film makes the movie pretty much unwatchable. Did nobody on set realize he simply wasn't that funny?

Prometheus (I) (2012)

Hope they had insurance...

[9 June 2012]

Most of the bad reviews on here pretty much sum up my feelings...especially where the leaps of logic are concerned.

I will sum up how bad this film is with one scene.

Years ago, I saw a comedy sketch where someone was about to be run over by a steam roller that was six feet away and traveling about 5mph. Instead of getting out of the way, this person just stands there screaming for the entire duration the steamroller slowly approaches and rolls over them.

There is a scene in this movie exactly like that. Yet, instead of a steamroller, its a space ship that crashes into the earth and then slowly rolls over someone as it topples over. Yes, a person gets run over by a spaceship in Prometheus. Not killed by an Alien or from exposure on an alien planet...literally squashed by a space ship.

And here's the worst part....this almost happens TWICE. Seriously Damon Lindelof? You couldn't come up with something better than that?

John Carter (2012)

Where's the Queen soundtrack?

[10 March 2012]

The director of this film obviously has no idea how to direct human beings because whenever a human was on the screen, the movie would drag. When the Tharks were on the screen, the fun-level of the film instantly increased.

This is the number one problem with this move. I didn't care less about what happened to John Carter. The guy playing him had no charisma or screen presence. He was dull as beige. He just had a nice body and kinda smirked once in awhile, but that's about it. The queen wasn't really that much better. The rest of the human cast were as equally boring.

As I was watching, I was also reminded of movies like the early 80s version of Flash Gordon, and the late 70s version of Buck Rogers. Perhaps if the director shot for that kind of camp, John Carter could have been a rip-rousing good time. Instead, we have some great CGI characters that are upstaging their human counterparts.

The Time Traveler's Wife (2009)

Horrible Film Adaptation

[22 July 2010]

I saw this film immediately after reading the book.

First of all, the acting was terrible. It felt like Eric Bana delivered his lines without even trying to embody the character he was supposed to be playing. I didn't believe him at all.

The script was horrible. Sure, there were quite a few scenes in there that were also in the book...but a lot of them were changed and not in a good way. They also dropped a lot of characters that were important in the book. There is no Kimmy. Ingrid was a tragic character that showed you just how much of a jerk that Henry could be. How could she not be in this film? In fact, they took most of the dark parts out (Henry never loses his feet from frostbite) of the book in order to make a sun-shiny film where it seems the characters had no flaws. Even his death at the end, which was foreshadowed by a scene early in the novel, was changed and carried absolutely no emotional weight.

Other characters in the movie had absolutely no characterization. Gomez and Henry's scene where Henry, knowing he's going to die, is thanking Gomez for being such a good friend was laughable as they had like two scenes together in the entire run of the film.

The biggest deal breaker for me was when Claire yelled at Henry for disappearing for two weeks and missing Christmas (something that didn't happen in the novel). She yells at him, saying, "Sorry Henry, but life keeps going despite your time traveling!!" HUH?! In the book Claire enjoyed the quiet time by herself. That somewhat selfish trait is part of what made their relationship work. In fact, Henry's flaws and Claire's flaws are what made their relationship work.

Next, Never put Stephen Tobolowsky in a film that is supposed to be serious. I did not at all picture him or believe him as Henry's doctor. I can see why certain reviews on IMDb found it frustrating that there was no reason given for Henry's time travel. They completely skipped that part of the novel that talked about the additional chromazone that Henry possessed. In fact, it was a scientist that worked on Claire to figure out how she could keep from miscarrying...

I could go on and on...I cannot recommend this film to anyone. Even if you didn't read the novel, it's still not a very good film. The novel was original and sidestepped the time travelling clichés. It was also a very dark novel. This film sucked all of that out and left us with NOTHING as the author intended.

Zack and Miri Make a Porno (2008)

Kevin Smith: The George Lucas of Comedy

[24 May 2009]

My partner and I rented this thinking it was going to be funny.

Well, the dialog was bad. It was like a film school student trying to write a Judd Apatow script. Seriously, most of the dialog brings the movie to a crashing halt because they just ramble on in such an artificial way.

The whole situation of them losing their power and water because they haven't paid their bills is so artificial. Neither one of them even react to the situation the way normal people would. Follow that up with the obvious set-up as to how they are going to fund the film (their friend just happened to be saving up for a widescreen TV..and wow, just like that, he hands them a LITERAL WAD OF CASH.)

We have Traci Lords in a film about making a Porno...har har har! Can we get any more obvious?

Then the movie switches into Romantic Comedy mode...thats right. We get the overly used, "OMG, we slept with each other, so what does that mean? " plot stolen directly from "When Harry Met Sally." The problem is, THERE IS NO CHEMISTRY HERE! They tried the "Best Friend" conversation at the beginning of the film, that falls flat and sounds like they're reciting from a bad script, so their sexual attraction just isn't believable.

Finally, let me skip to the nail in this films coffin: the "This porno needs an ending" speech from his friend that pushes him into giving her one last chance...and their final scene ends with the romantic music and happy ending flair..I was waiting for the Slow Clap from the film, "Lucas." :)

Kevin Smith, I now crown you as the George Lucas of comedy. Whatever it was you once had, you've lost.

Mad Men (2007–2015)

A 60's Melodrama-Style TV Series

[21 September 2008]

All these reviews about how "unrealistic" this show is miss the point all together. This is a show done in the style of a 60's melodrama.

The exaggerated style, the random slap in the face in the super market, the bizarre relationship between Mrs. Draper and the little boy, a woman who doesn't know she's pregnant suddenly giving birth, a man with a hidden past...these are elements that are very much in line with movies such as Peyton Place, Susan Slade, The Best of Everything and A Summer Place...

I think this is one of the BEST shows on TV right now. Unpredictable, provocative, surreal, and occasionally funny. Not every episode hits the mark, but even a "bad" episode of Mad Men is better than a lot of shows on TV today. Just the unspoken communication that the actors manage to convey to each other is incredible and speaks highly of Mad Men's highly talent actors.

Vantage Point (2008)

This years best comedy...

[24 February 2008]

At least it felt like it considering how many times the audience laughed. The biggest laughs seem to come each time the screen goes black and the beginning time starts ticking again.

The biggest problem was not the actors. It was the script. The horrible dialog began with the Sigourney Weaver and ended with Dennis Quad at the end.

The car chases and running were only bearable to laugh at all the funny faces Dennis Quaid makes as the camera zooms into his face to get is reaction to almost hitting something.

The premise of the movie is entirely blown when the last "replay" basically tells you everything that happened. The replays aren't clues....as it's suggested in the trailer, they are merely cliffhangers to set up the last scene that shows you how all the previous replays ended. The only thing the last part did was fill in the cliffhangers that the other replays left you with. Whats going to happen with the little girl? What did Dennis Quaid see?

Why didn't they just show us at those moments and spare us the replays? If you want a better movie that used this gimmick to much better effect, try "12:14" and stay away from this stinker.

The Golden Compass (2007)

Chris Weitz should be Intercised from the rest of the series

[8 December 2007]

Now a review from someone who just finished the book a second time last Friday...

First of all, the actors were not convincing. Not one time did I feel like any of the characters really knew what they were talking about. They were throwing the term "Dust," "Intercision" and the phrase, "It's just a little cut!" around without any meaning. Almost like someone told Chris Weitz, "Hey look, this term Dust...that sounds cool! Make sure you use that as much as possible!" I was waiting for the band Kansas to kick into the soundtrack at any moment.

The meanings in the novel are slowly revealed during the course of the book were part of the discovery and suspense. Lyra had no idea what they meant until later in the book. They explain them during the first 15 minutes of the film, and they suddenly become arbitrary and over-used. No mystery, no sense of menace that the novel had...

Also, the dialog was overly expository. People saying things along the lines of, "I must tell you this because something related to it comes up later in the story, so even though its out of character for me, the audience must know what's going on." Case in point, when Mrs. Coulter explains about how the King of the bears wants to be human to Lyra at the beginning of the movie for no apparent reason at all. Everything else was so glaringly obvious that it wasn't for Lyra's benefit, but for the benefit of the audience. It's lazy writing. Rather than maybe flesh out that part of the story where Lyra learns about it on her own, some character just decides to randomly blurt it out. Even worse, none of this dialog really tells the audience anything because it's too fast and doesn't say enough.

Then there is this whole, "If your Daemon gets strangled, you're getting strangled" thing. When a Daemon gets hurt in the book, the hurt the person has is a very emotional one. It's like your heart literally being broken...an overwhelming sadness as if you're most dearest friend is literally being torn apart from you permanently...a sense of loss. So if someone is slapping your daemon around, you're not going to feel a slap in the face. Mrs. Coulter is seen belting her own Daemon across the face, and using their logic, makes no sense as we should at least see her flinch as if she slapped herself in the face.

Related to the above issue is the fact that none of the character's relationships that they have with their Daemon is ever realized.

Then this dialog came up: "Don't worry Billy, we'll get your Daemon back." At that point, I knew the screenwriter just didn't understand this novel. The whole point is people taking the souls from children is a permanent, horrible thing. There is no getting your daemon re-attached. In the novel, it's a heart wrenching, emotional sucking, worst-thing-that-could-possibly-happen to you experience. In the movie, they're just like..oh well, it happens. We'll fix it. How ignorant can a screenwriter be?

The kid who really lost his Daemon in the book was Tony Markios in a very sad part of the book where he's holding onto a dead fish because it's all he has left while asking, "Have you seen ratter?" in a very zombie-like state. He eventually dies because of it. A very haunting part of the book that has absolutely no weight in the movie. The haunted city where the boy was found in the novel was replaced by this little shed out in the middle of nowhere. A person without their Daemon is also very repulsive to the people in this world. A lot of them kinda kept their distance from Tony at first, almost like they were disgusted until someone yells at them to help the kid.

They also took out the scenes that showed how they tricked the children into coming with them. Without that, there really was no feeling that children were being taken. It was just "said" in an off-the-cuff sort of way. No scene with the children outsmarting their dimwit captors with Lyra's help either. In other words, The Gobblers is just another cool term that Chris felt he should use that seems to have no meaning in the movie....glossing over the whole Oblation Board while he was at it.

The story itself was rushed. We meet Lyra and 10 minutes later she's already been with Mrs. Coulter and is on the boat with the Gyptians. They yanked out a lot of necessary character and story building aspects that really needed to be in there. Showing the Gyptians as just this sort of rag-tag group when there were meetings and planning in the book that showed just how well organized they were...and how much they loved their children. Grumman's head...the whole, "You can't trick a bear" conversation. Too much of the soul of the story was left out.

I know the argument that they cant put EVERYTHING from the novel into the movie, but you can at least try to keep the spirit of the novel in the movie and not change the novel's meaning. If you cant explain why a character is the way he is, then at least let the actor keep that as a motivation and let it be conveyed in the acting. A 5 minute conversation with Iroek and Lyra to help build their relationship isn't asking too much.

The Golden Compass is a dumbed-down picture-book version of the novel with simple characterizations of the people in the novel. Its a bunch of characters going through actions who don't seem to have any motivation or reason for what they are doing and the only reason why they are doing what they are doing is because a script tells them to.

The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (2005)

What movie are all these people watching?

[30 April 2005]

I've read this series at least a half-a-dozen times.

Mos Def was HORRIBLE. I certainly don't remember the part where Ford Prefect gets a labotomy and mumbles throughout the book. In fact, Ford had no presence in this movie whatsoever! In the book he's witty, charming, mischievous. In the movie, he's a zombie. The scene where he's scarfing down beer at the beginning isn't even explained! It makes no sense without explaining that he's trying to minimize the effects of hitchhiking.

Zooey feels like she's reciting her lines.

Arthur is just some guy in this story who makes funny faces once in awhile.

Slartibartfast obviously had the same acting coach as Mos Def since they were basically the same character (mumbling, weird pauses..).

Kudos to Sam Rockwell as I kinda liked his Zaphod, but even that character fell apart at the end.

The ending. Whoah boy! Talk about dumbing the movie down for mass consumption and completely screwing up the events in the books. So I guess there's not going to be a prehistoric earth in the second movie because SURPRISE Earth was completely restored and everyone lived happily ever after.

Blech.

I keep hearing "True to the spirit of Douglas Adams!" Maybe the guide, the heart of gold and the parts that didn't have actors in it.

Try the BBC version. Sure, it didn't have the special effects budget, but it retained the story and the "spirit of Douglas Adams" much better.

The Polar Express (2004)

Cynics should learn from this movie

[24 November 2004]

Many of us look fondly back on the holiday evenings when the CBS Special Presentation logo would spin and then reveal such puppetoon classics as Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer or Santa Claus is Coming to Town.

Yet, all the bad reviews for The Polar Express state how poor the animation is. How the eyes don't look quite right. That the North Pole looks like a fascist regime. Yet, we can't remember how the Munchkins or the Oompa Loompas acted around their guardians. Did the eyes in our puppetoon favorites look real? Did any of our favorite Christmas specials ever have tons of characterization?

The Polar Express is a sterling movie. The 1940's/Victorian feel gives it what I call "creepy warmth." The Hobo on top of the train. The industrial city that is the North Pole with the 30's/40's scratchy Christmas music playing through the loudspeakers. All this gives the movie an unsettling atmosphere that is comforting, yet at the same time, makes you shiver. This is the atmosphere of Charles Dickens and Norman Rockwell.

I was amazed at how much I was touched by the messages in The Polar Express.

These messages were obviously lost on the cynics panning it.

As I sat there watching the picture book coming to life, I put it in the perspective of the holiday specials I enjoyed as a kid. Within that boundary, it fits perfectly.

I give this *** 1/2 out of 4 stars.

The Stepford Wives (2004)

Revenge of the Test Audiences

[13 July 2004]

Judging from the movie as a whole (the remote controls, growing and shrinking breasts, etc.) It's obvious that the wives were supposed to be robots. I have this gut feeling the test audiences wanted a happy ending. How could you possibly bring back the wives if they were dead and replaced?

So they had to re-shoot and add additional scenes that suggested brain implants instead! This way it could be reversible.

This makes sense considering they had so many reshoots to do. It also makes sense as to why some scenes contradict the whole brain-implant idea.

It's also apparent there were scenes that ended up on the cutting room floor. Some scenes seemed to come prematurely such as the discussion between Joanna and her husband about Joanna not liking Stepford when they hadn't even lived there one day. The trailer also has a few scenes in it that did not wind up in the film.

I'm not sure how much was Frank Oz (who also had to reshoot the ending to Little Shop of Horrors) and how much was Paramount. But it sure does feel like Frank just gave up. This film reminded me of the "Love Conquers All" version of Brazil. Something that was not of the directors original vision.

Either way, this slap-dashed affair of a movie with stars who seem disinterested in being in it and an editing job that feels as if a lot ended up on the cutting room floor should have been put on the shelf for good. Or at least until it was made the way it they were intending for it to be made.

Perhaps we'll see a directors cut some day.

The Ring (2002)

The Ending is Easy to Explain..

[20 October 2002]

*Spoilers..Major Spoilers Ahead...*

Wow, it's funny to see people coming up with these weird explanations of why Rachel was saved and the others weren't...

It's really simple, actually....

Samara wants everyone to know what happened to her. She wants to spread the message.

So when you watch the tape, you are required to make a copy of it and pass it along to someone else, else you will die. (Although I'm not sure what happens if you give it to someone without a TV Set..)

Thus, that is where the name of the movie, "The Ring" comes from.

Sort of a chain-letter from hell.

Great movie by the way...really spooky stuff. Hopefully we will also get a sequel and the prequel remade too.

It's interesting to see a lot of "Ringu elements" in games like Silent Hill and Fatal Frame. Each containing creepy little kids who seem to have more power than they should have.

I also loved how the American version still retained the Japanese quality of the original film..even the little girl with her hair in front of her face looked a bit Japanese.

Dan

Requiem for a Dream (2000)

Hallucinatory and Unforgettable

[16 June 2002]

My partner and I had watched this knowing it was going to be depressing. However, I didn't realize just how much of a "trip" that the director was going to put us through as well as the characters who were taking the drugs.

This is a film I loved because it stuck with me for days afterwards. The people who don't find any sympathy for the characters don't really understand what this film is about. Each of these characters had dreams, just like us. They really thought they had the way to achieve those dreams. Sadly, they had no one in their lives to tell them otherwise except those who were being hypocritical.

The heart-wrenching conversation where the son learns that his mother is on uppers and tries to convince her to quit is so sad. The junkie learning that his mother is on the same road and powerless to do anything about it.

I think the parts that really stuck in my mind are when the director seems to be accurately letting you feel what a drug trip feels like. Like when the mother suddenly sees her entire livingroom as a TV Show and the entire cast, crew and audience starts laughing at her. It was a hallucination that felt real..the kind you might have if you had a high fever.

In the end, I felt mom was a victim of the media..this idea that we all must be slim as a pretzel stick to be beautiful.

Just like the son and his friends fell victim of how you need to have money to be successful.

But when it all comes down to it, all these characters really needed was the love they had for each other. It's a movie of people who run at each other with open arms and constantly miss with disasterous results.

As much as I liked this film, it's definitely on my "watch once, never again" list with such films as Happiness and In the Bedroom.

Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones (2002)

The audience laughed -- And they weren't supposed to

[4 June 2002]

"I hate sand, it's gritty and coarse. But I like it here...Everything is soft and smooth."

--and the entire audience burst out laughing.

Just an example of some of the awful dialogue you'll find in Episode II. It's too bad that George Lucas has forgotten how to write a decent script, decent dialogue and direct a decent film.

All he gives us are some very annoying characters..even Yoda has become annoying. Young Bobafet must have had one direction from Lucas.. "Look Bad!" because that's all he ever does..produce a really stupid looking sneer and fake maniacal laughter from time to time (and now I'm really disappointed that I know who Bobfet really is....another annoying child actor that Lucas dug up somewhere..).

Perhaps "Howard the Duck" and "Radioland Murders" should have given us a hint of how much he's fallen as a filmmaker.

What people forget is that he didn't direct the last two episodes..and he should have given the directing helm to someone else during the first two episodes.

The biggest problem with the last two Star Wars pictures is the lack of a Han Solo-type character who would roll his eyes for us during those cheesy Jedi-speak moments. So now we are forced to take everything seriously and it just makes it overly campy. You can tell that Lucas is trying to interject humor into his screenplay for Ep II, but it just seems overly forced and cliche'. ("I hate it when he does that!" harr harr harr!!!)

Sorry, but now I dont even CARE about Episode III. If it's as bad as the first two episodes, then the first Trilogy is just part of a completely different story as far as I'm concerned, and I'll leave it at that and continue to enjoy Episodes IV - VI as if I'd never seen the first three.

Happiness (1998)

If it disturbed you, then it did what it was set out to do..

[30 March 2002]

What people who put down this movie because of it's disturbing nature do not understand is that this is exactly what kind of response that the director would love to hear.

This is one of those movies I really loved, yet would never want to own in a million years. Yet, I've rented it multiple times and have watched it with people because it's one of those films that, to me, is only worth watching again just to see the reactions of those who you are watching it with.

I've always described this movie as a Family Drama gone to hell. It feels as if you are watching something like Eight is Enough, or Family, or perhaps one of those wretched Lifetime Women's Movie you see on cable (it even stars Cynthia Stevenson who has been in quite a few Lifetime productions)..yet, somehow, it's much more honest than we really want to believe.

We are seeing people as they truly see themselves before reality comes crashing in on then. Even then, some of them just go on like before because they want to believe they are happier than everyone else.

It's funny because Todd Solondz creates a Family Drama atmosphere with chirpy music and swelling love-theme music (as when Dr. Maplewood sees Billy's friend and falls completely entranced) during events that either we just see as plain wrong, or they hit so much close to the truth for some people, it causes discomfort and makes them want to turn the TV off or critique it because they don't know what else to do with it.

Someone called this "Liberal Hipster" crap. Ironically, Pedophilia is more relevant than ever now with the recent events in the news..but the men who are commiting this act are associated with conservative organizations. So again, maybe this is hitting a little too close to the truth than many people would like to admit.

One way or another, this movie will either make you laugh, make you shout at the screen "This is just wrong!," make you cry or maybe all at the same time. Fortunately, with "Happiness", all those reactions are warranted and exactly what this movie is trying to elicit.

Ice Age (2002)

Good Animation, Same Tired ol' Story

[16 March 2002]

**Possible Spoilers** (even though you've seen this ending before in other movies...)

First of all, for me, the voice talents (if that's what you want to call it) of Ray Romano are enough to kick my rating down a star. His normal voice and "annoying voice" and "angry voice" are really not that different. His monotone drove me crazy through the entire movie. PLEASE don't let him become a staple in the voice-over animation industry!

Second of all, how many times are we going to see the "Benedict Arnold Makes Good" plotline? Or the "Suprise I'm not Dead" ending? (my partner mentioned the fact that the Tiger really didn't get hurt enough to even be lying there on the brink of death to begin with...)

The only thing that really saved this movie at all was the Squirrel which seemed to be destined for a series of short features soon.

Other than that, we have good 3D animation wasted on a movie we've seen thousands of times before.

In the Bedroom (2001)

Misunderstood Movie

[7 February 2002]

*This contains spoilers*

First of all, this is a film that should require a designated driver. By the end of it, it will feel as if you've been put through the wringer emotionally. I felt as if I was driving home from a funeral.

The movie is very well done. It gives you a very realistic view of grief between two parents who have lost their son. Not only did they lose their son, the man who murdered him may also get away on a simple manslaughter charge.

So not only are we dealing with the grief, but the feeling of revenge these people have for what seems to be one of the creepiest "Jerks" alive.

Unfortunately we have that feeling too, and the movie gives us that revenge. Except it shows you that the result still leaves you with nothing but even more grief. Knowing what you have done with another human being. Someone who you learn may have been more "human" than you thought.

The person who said he didn't show any remorse or guilt for what he did must have walked out of theater. Anyone could see the doctor kept telling him to be quiet to keep his monster from appearing too human. The picture on the wall of him and his ex-wife showed even more humanity as at one point, she loved and laughed with him. Why do you think he had to shoot him when he did, rather than waiting as they had planned? He had to kill him before he learned too much about him.

The look on the doctors face at the end let us know he would replay the scenario over and over again for the rest of his life.

Another excellent "downward spiral" film to be put up next to other movies like Ordinary People.

Mulholland Drive (2001)

A "Peripheral Film"

[10 January 2002]

I just got back from seeing this movie.

The one unique quality of this film is that if you try to dissect it too much, the meaning will get farther and farther away.

It's a film to sort of just remember out of the corner of your brain where snippets of reason and meaning can sort of be seen.

There is a story here, but it's told in "Dream Time" where events aren't always in the order you are watching them in and some of them may not even exist out of someone's imagination and memories..

But the major thing I interpret is that the first half is the "Glamorized" version of Hollywood. Where old people smile in the back of limos and everyone talks to each other on a first-name basis. This is the hollywood that a lot of naive people dream about.

The second part is about the REAL hollywood....where lovers can change and then change back in a single kiss. Where hearts get stomped and the creative have to make compromises to people in big hats. And the people who go there dreaming about the idealized version of Hollywood find themselves tormented by their dreams never coming true with the fantasy still lingering, (and according to this film, escaping out of little boxes) and chasing them down until they go crazy and kill themselves.

Vertigo (1958)

A movie about obsession, but not just about Scottie's..

[22 February 2001]

A lot of people seem to miss the obsession that Midge had for Scottie. She follows him around and spies on him. She also leaves a note under his door that says "Where are you?!"

She paints herself as Carlotta, half-hoping he would see her the same way. Then she beats herself up in a tizzy-fit after he gets upset at the "joke" and leaves...

Then the final realization that she will never get him back at the mental hospital. But the she was a smart girl and gave up.

Scottie on the other hand didn't, and look what happened to him.

Vertigo is a great movie. The kind you can just lay on the floor during a lazy afternoon and view --each time seeing something you didn't notice before.

Trick (1999)

Trick? Definitely

[14 April 2000]

After reading all the great reviews and the positive word-of-mouth praise for this film, I'm extremely disappointed.

First of all, the characters aren't characters. They are cardboard cutouts with no depth and you never truly understand who they are. Especially the go-go dancer! His acting was awful, not to mention he had about as much charisma as Dolph Lundgren. He was great to look at, but you never get to know him other than a few VERY small details (or one large one as the camera was desperately wanting you to learn).

The movie is padded with dance and singing scenes. If you took those out, you'd have about 60 minutes worth of movie left.

The "romance" between the two leads is just pushed out there without any motivation. Why do these two people like each other so much? The only clue is the go-go dancers interest in the songwriter's talent. But that's about it. We never learn about the go-go dancer other than what his body looks like and that he lives with his mother. Other than that, he is just "there" staring around letting Campbell's character lead him around like a dog on a leash.

Also, within 30 minutes, Campbell's character learns what a sleazoid his new friend is by a Drag Queen. Then he gets all upset and runs off. PLEASE! He has hardly had a conversation with the guy and he's getting upset that he's not the only one he's ever done?! This guy picked him up for SEX for heavens sake! That was the ultimate turn-off for me.

Maybe that scene would have worked better if this story had gone on for a series of days and these two got to know each other better....but in this very, VERY rushed ("it's over already?") film, this makes their relationship so unrealistic that I just couldn't feel anything for these two characters.

There are much better films to see than this one. Go rent Parting Glances, Jeffery or Prescilla Queen of the Desert if you want gay characters and romance. All trick does is show us that gay people are way too accepting when it comes to gay cinema.