mgchainsaw Reviews

Death Sentence (2007)

Surprisingly awful, unless you have the right attitude

[3/10 · 3 June 2009]

Well, you can look at this movie one of two ways. Either go in looking for a thought provoking thriller and be disappointed, or have a few brews, have some friends over and laugh your behinds off at the hackneyed plot line/characters and the amazing "suspension of disbelief" the plot demands. At first, I figured Kevin Bacon is in it, so there might be something to look for in this movie - IMHO, he usually involves himself in some very good movies with some very interesting ideas (Murder in the First, The Woodsman, etc.) Fairly soon, you realize this was just one of those "need to make some $$" movies, and it's actually hilarious how see through the plot line is and the amazing levels of disbelief that is required to move from one scene to the next. John Goodman is great in this, too, (once you've thrown reality out the door). I still have to give this a really poor rating, though, since it's incumbent on the viewer to recognize the farce in front of him/her - but it's a great straight man to make fun of.

Spider-Man 3 (2007)

It delivers, but...

[8/10 · 28 July 2007]

First of all, I want to say that I gave the movie an 8 and I do recommend it, but the comments here may be more about what's wrong with the movie than what's right. In the end, however, it had all the excitement and thrills that you paid for, and actually does have a message and in the end delivers that message in a satisfactory way. That's why I really recommend it, and feel I got my $10 worth.

Now, let's nitpick. I can't help but feel that the main 3 actors in the movie (MaGuire, Dunst, and Franco) pretty much mailed in their parts this time. And it really is a shame. The main theme through the movie of everyone battling the good and the evil within should have given these folks the incentive or the "meat" to really give a better effort. I really did like MaGuire in the first movie, but he's just not suited to sustain this part through these sequels. His heart isn't really in it any more. Never liked Kirsten Dunst, and she really just portrays MJ as a b*tch more than anything else. Franco played Harry too corny when he was "good Harry" and too - I don't know the word I'm looking for here, wimpy? stupid? overmatched? - as "bad Harry". I couldn't help but start thinking about who WOULD have been good in these roles, and for fun sake I would say - Ryan Reynolds as Spidey. Rose Byrne as MJ. I don't know, maybe even Tom Welling as Harry. Don't feel like writing a book, so I'm not going to go into the whys about this.

Anyway, there were certainly spots in this movie that seemed forced, they tried to get a lot of plot in a very short time, and some of the supposed to be funny scenes were just plain dumb (the "bad Peter" scenes where he's dancing were just embarrassing).

All this said, through the good work of the director, special effects, Thomas Haden Church as the Sandman and surprisingly, Topher Grace as Venom, the overall message of forgiveness and "there but for the grace of God go I" manages to come through in the end with full emotional impact, and for that I am thankful. The story and message were quite a task to fit into an action movie, and they did, in the end, pull it off. Still, it bothers me that the main actors in the movie cashed their huge checks and did not feel the onus to put forth commensurate effort. To Tobey and Kirsten (maybe Franco, I'm not really convinced that he just isn't any better, though): Yes, we all know sci-fi/action movies are beneath you, but you accepted the role, and I feel that the work of everyone else in the production deserved a better effort. There, I said it.

Wicker Park (2004)

Payoff was worth the wait

[8/10 · 11 December 2006]

OK, this could maybe be described as a "chick flick" and I'm actually surprised that I made it through to the end on this one, but I'm glad I sat through the whole thing. It was an odd movie. It really tested your "suspension of disbelief" and used some odd camera shots, especially in the beginning for no other reason I could surmise but to prove that the director was going to be taking some risks in the movie.

I had no idea what this movie was supposed to be when I watched it, and that's a good thing. It could've been a murder mystery, could've been a romance, could've been some kind of psycho-drama - I just didn't know. Suffice to say that it actually had elements of all of these and more, and the acting was actually quite good. Josh Hartnett really tried to give an emotional performance without over acting and it really did work. I was very impressed by Rose Byrne, and the rest held their own. We were certainly expected to allow for a great deal in the way of "coincidence", so just do so (I mean we give Shakespeare a lot of latitude when it comes to that sort of thing, so why can't we in a modern movie?) and I think if you are willing, you will be happy with the ending and the movie overall. It's far from perfect, but I actually enjoyed the movie a great deal.

House of Wax (2005)

Not terrible, and may be worth your time for one scene.

[4/10 · 23 June 2006]

Well, this is a horror movie, and probably a slightly better than average film of that genre - not my particular cup of tea. I would say that the movie has more of a story line than expected, and doesn't rely on gore and shock to make it interesting, not that there isn't a good supply of gore and shock.

Elisha Cuthbert is pretty good in the movie, and the movie *tries* to be more than just a slasher. It has a story, and some of the murders are quite chilling. I have to say that it killed a lazy afternoon for me, so I don't have all bad to say.

I'm really only writing this to save some time for those of you who are just interested in seeing Paris Hilton in a movie. *MAJOR spoiler* Fast forward to about 3/4 into the movie and you get to see her killed in a pretty gruesome way. Probably makes it worth your time.

The Woodsman (2004)

It makes you think and discuss, and that's a good thing

[8/10 · 23 June 2006]

This is definitely a movie that deserves to be seen. Not because it's a great movie - it isn't, but it is a very good movie, and it portrays it's characters without glorifying or vilifying them. At least it tries to.

This movie tackles a highly sensitive subject, and is not an enjoyable movie to watch. It definitely makes you uncomfortable, and I admit that I have trouble getting into a movie in which I can't find something to identify with. I wish I had seen the tagline ("what's the worst thing you ever did?") before seeing this movie. It would be interesting to watch the movie if I could pretend that the crime he had committed wasn't SO detestable that I could find a way to embrace him. Kevin Bacon truly gives a fantastically layered performance, and is fascinating to watch. He manages to show so much emotion, especially in scenes where he doesn't even have dialog.

The strength in this movie is in it's performances and the lack of a defined viewpoint. It *tries* to just put a story out there and let the viewer take in the situations and decide for himself the ramifications of trying to rehabilitate such a man.

*spoilers* There are problems with this movie, but the great thing about the problems with it is that it evokes discussion. How can he be allowed to live across the street from a grade school (the lame reason: "he's the only landlord who'll take my money)? How does he wind up with a girlfriend? Is a boss (David Alan Grier's character) REALLY going to be upset with other employees for divulging this secret? And the part that had the potential of ruining the movie is the aspect of having the other child molester that the Kevin Bacon character is keeping tabs on. I guess they had to find someone WORSE, and are we truly supposed to see the Bacon character as a hero for beating up the other molester (when he had plenty of opportunity to PREVENT another molestation).

Again, the movie deserves to be seen, but it's got it's problems, and it's not an easy one to watch.

Two Family House (2000)

Nice Sunday afternoon movie.

[7/10 · 13 February 2006]

Well, football is over, so I caught this on an early Sunday evening watching HBO. Never heard of it, and I honestly don't know how I started watching it - just flipping around I guess and I heard an Irish accent, so I watched for a bit. Turned out to be a very good movie, not a great movie, but interesting nonetheless. Michael Rispoli wins you over with his Italian nice-guy performance, and Kelly MacDonald is wonderful (for some reason reminded me of Donna Reed in It's a Wonderful life). Really, this was just a slice of life picture with some characters that were interesting and compelling. I know this isn't a really great review I'm writing here - I guess I just want to say that if you come upon the movie, give it a chance. It's not going to change your life, but you'll probably talk about with anyone you see who happened to see it to, and that's always a good thing.

Cinderella Man (2005)

Personally, I don't see why all the hype

[7/10 · 14 June 2005]

When I see a movie, I guess I am always secretly hoping for my expectations to be exceeded, so some movies are in a little bit of trouble to begin with by it's own campaign telling you a movie is "best of the year", "the perfect movie", and whatnot. With the reviews and the notes, I was expecting a really wonderful movie. And, truth be told, it was a very good movie, but I guess I was expecting something a little EXTRA special. I had an idea what the movie would be like, and I guess I was figuring there would be something in this movie that I wouldn't see coming, or done so extraordinarily well, that this would make this movie special. Everything was done very well, nothing extraordinary. The story was EXACTLY what I expected. I know that this is a true story, so they can't really invent something, but I was maybe hoping for an angle on the story that I wasn't expecting.

I'm not going to go into details about the movie. Everyone did a fine job. I think the movie makers did exactly what they wanted to do, and they did it well. I guess my only complaint is that this was pretty much the movie in my head BEFORE I actually saw it, and while some of the fight scenes were exhilarating, I see no need to see the movie again, and I don't see myself seeing a friend and beginning a conversation about this movie.

This may be a semi-spoiler, but you probably know the Braddock story if you are interested in seeing the movie. If you haven't seen "Rocky", you could just as easily watch that and you will have seen all the underdog boxer movie you need in your lifetime. Or you could see this one, and pass on "Rocky". If you want to see a really good SPECIAL boxing movie, go ahead and see Million Dollar Baby.

The Dangerous Lives of Altar Boys (2002)

Delinquents coming of age.

[6/10 · 11 January 2005]

I'm not going to write a whole lot about this movie. I liked it OK. There was really nothing in the movie that I hadn't seen before in better movies, but it's still a pretty good movie. Kieran Culkin and Emile Hirsch gave winning performances, and Jena Malone was wonderful. I guess my main problem with the movie is that it didn't really have a point. Maybe I'm getting old, but just because you are 14 and are in an oppressive environment doesn't give you the right to do absolutely anything you want. I would've been OK with the movie if we could've seen more of the good side of the kids and less of the bad. I know, I'm getting old... All that said, I was glad that I watched the movie - it did make me think, and I did become involved with the characters. I guess that's more than what you usually get.

Identity (2003)

I thought it was excellent, and unique

[9/10 · 7 June 2004]

In the past few years, there have been several movies that would be identified in the genre of horror that have been so much more than creepy music and gore. Honestly, they have been frightening, but even moreso they have been clever and thought-provoking. "The Sixth Sense", "The Ring", "The Others" have all managed to raise the goosebumps without using gratuitous gore and also have been able to bring a fully completed thought to a movie. Bless them, and bless this movie, also. This movie does have more gore than the aforementioned, but it's not gratuitous and probably manages to use these to it's advanatage - there are some jolts in this one. Most of all, this is a thriller, and the fun of the movie is to try and figure out WHAT is going on.

No spoilers, here, and the less you know about the movie before viewing, the more fun. You do have to pay attention in this one...

Pay It Forward (2000)

Pretty good, tried to do too much

[7/10 · 3 August 2003]

Unfortunately, the end of the movie was shameful, and just leaves a pretty good movie with a bad taste in your mouth. There were some emotional moments in the film, but the ending was pretty much ludicrous, and indicts the films integrity.

That said, you really don't want to miss any movie with Haley Joel Osment in it, and he's great again. The whole cast is pretty good, and there are many wonderful scenes. Too many really, and the movie lacks direction. There are too many good things here to not recommend the whole, but I really wish these scenes were in better hands, so the whole production would be crisper, and someone came up with a different ending. Anything. The comment someone here made comparing it to porn was spot on.

Hulk (2003)

Good movie, tried to do too much

[7/10 · 17 July 2003]

This was a well crafted movie, and for the most part I enjoyed it. It just couldn't seem to decide if it was going to be a drama or a Godzilla rip off. I wish they stuck to the drama, and I wish the creature wasn't SO cartoonish. I understand what he was trying to do - which is to be true to the comic and the cartoon, but the story was so compelling before the Hulk was unbelievably (and I mean that in the true sense) bounding across the country that I wish the story would've stayed in the earth's atmosphere. I got into the story and I was willing to suspend disbelief while the characters were developing, but

it was almost as if the directory was slapping us and saying, "come on, -IT'S A MOOOVIIIIEE, you idiot. Watch, I'll make the damn thing be carried into space and live. That should get you out of this 'this could really happen' mode."

Anyway, I still liked the movie. The characters were great, and the Hulk WAS fun to watch once you changed your mood. It was two movies, really. I just would have liked to see the ending to the first one.

John Q (2002)

Good performances, poor movie

[4/10 · 11 February 2003]

I'm not going to write a lot here, you'll get the idea by

reading all the other reviews. I gave it a 4. Seen it all before, there were a couple of really good, thought provoking scenes in it, though (SPOILER: John Q about to kill himself to give

his son his heart - which would have been a killer ending, making this movie worthwhile!). My basic problem with it is that the

main character was just too perfect. Perfect dad, perfect husband, perfect friend, but somehow just can't get a good job. All the

other criticisms listed here also pertain. I'm sure some will

really like this film, but I can't in good faith say that I liked it...

Simon Birch (1998)

Somewhat disappointing.

[6/10 · 5 September 2002]

OK, I read the book, but I came into the movie knowing that there were many changes, and was merely "suggested" by "A Prayer For Owen Meany", not based on it. Frankly, I just couldn't understand why the boys were such good friends. The scenes of them running through the woods and playing in the water just didn't quite create the powerful friendship in my mind that was necessary. It had the smaltzy, sentimental moments, and I'm a sucker for those, so I did like the movie, but I was really hoping for more...

St. Elsewhere (1982–1988)

The best

[10 May 2002]

The two part episode that spanned St. Eligius' history from 1935-1985 was the best show ever on TV. The great thing about the show is that you never know if things will wind up good or bad, and the show likes to use your own memory of previous shows rather than beat you over the head with them.

Spider-Man (2002)

I thought it was great

[10/10 · 8 May 2002]

All right, I'm a Spider-Man fan. Have been since I was little. Too lazy to read the Comics, I did see all the cartoons and do remember running around the house screaming "I'm Spider-Man" and pretending to

fire webs by pressing the button on my hand and jumping around the house much to my mother's chagrin. What I was hoping for most was that this movie would bring back that joy and inflated sense of self-esteem, and it did all that. I was truly jazzed watching the guy swing around the city (and it did look amazingly believable).

The story was pretty much as expected with a few changes here and there. I can roll with that. I do wish that the Goblin wasn't wearing a mask the whole time, but it didn't really do any harm. The movie was just pure escapism, and it was just what I was hoping for. I do wish that some of the scenes in the movie weren't quite as frightening cuz I wish I could bring my 7 year old boy, but I fear nightmare repercussions. If he was 9 I would be happy with the movie the way it is, though. Call me selfish.

So, if you're more than 9, go see the movie. I'd be really surprised if you don't like it, unless you really put an effort toward not liking it.

Oh, one more thing. I thought Tobey MacGuire was great, and the guy who played Jamison. Kirsten Dunst was pretty good (although I don't really see all the hubbub about her).

Hearts in Atlantis (2001)

Wanted to like it, just couldn't

[4/10 · 1 May 2002]

I usually like movies made from Stephen King books. I loved Shawshank Redemption, Green Mile, Stand By Me, and was hoping this would be another. It wasn't. I had heard not so great things about the movie, but I still had my hopes.

First of all, I couldn't imagine anyone liking this movie if they hadn't read the book. It just wouldn't make any sense. I don't think I would understand why Bobby cares so much about Ted based on the movie. <small spoiler> Plus, Jeez, what kind of a guy would bring the boy to a pool hall at night and just leave him alone (in the book, this was done during the day, when the place was almost deserted)?

I have to agree with the lack of character development, my guess is that the director and script writer were counting on its audience reading the book beforehand. Having read the book, the movie just seemed like an excuse to put together a bunch of powerful scenes together without going through the effort to give them any background. The scenes are all probably pretty good, but I can't get past the idea that they don't make a whole lot of sense based on what we are given of the characters.

I honestly think that if they had the voice of the adult Bobby explaining some things, briefly, between scenes it would have done a world of good. A simple: "I became really close to Ted over the summer." Would have done a whole lot more than the simple scenes of him reading the paper to him, which I suppose were supposed to convey this.

Anyway, the material was there to make a good movie. The performances were fine, I guess. Hard to tell, when you can't really figure on any characters particular motivation. As it stands, the movie is pretty bad.

The Time Machine (2002)

I had fun, and it DID make you think

[10 April 2002]

OK. No matter what the critics say, they liked it, too. Heck, it's their business to find fault, and yes, this movie did leave a fair ration of fault to find, if that was your inclination. The movie was fun, imaginative and visually gratifying. Yes, there were some inaccuracies and even some logic problems with the given premise, but to me that just gives rise to more discussion and actually asks more of the audience than if it painstakingly made a point to make no error.

It should be noted that this could easily make the action/adventure section as well as the science fiction. It had a lot of Indiana Jones in it. Basically, go into the movie for a good time, and you will have it. Go into it hoping to find fault, well, you will have that too. You'll enjoy it either way, just in very different ways.

PARENTS: If you have small children, especially those prone to nightmares, this is not the movie for them. The future Morlocks are very scary, and there are many surprise shocks and scares, dizzying heights, and chase scenes that actually remind one of a nightmare. I wouldn't bring anyone under 10. Yes, there are kids younger who would be fine, but I wouldn't risk it until you've seen it first...

The Sixth Sense (1999)

Truly wonderful film

[10/10 · 17 December 2001]

I'm not going to write a lot. I have seen the movie several times, and am amazed by the boy's performance each time. It's a wonderfully woven story. I've yet to meet someone who didn't enjoy it.

The Nephew (1998)

Worth a look

[7/10 · 17 December 2001]

OK, I enjoyed the movie. A good part of what I liked about the movie was simply learning a little about the daily life of people in Ireland. Take that away, and I'm not sure that the somewhat flawed script and story would hold up. The story holds your attention in that you get to know the characters and you want to know what happened 20 years ago. The revelation is fairly predictable, and not overly satisfying.

I give it a 7, and that's probably a little generous...

High Fidelity (2000)

John Cusack prototype movie

[9/10 · 12 December 2001]

Which is a good thing. I really like John Cusack and have trouble coming up with a movie that he's been in that I haven't enjoyed. This movie is pretty much just what I expected. Funny, a little quirky, with heart and insight if you care to look for it. Doesn't break any new ground with this one, though, and can't compete with Better Off Dead...

Frequency (2000)

I was surprised how great this movie is

[10/10 · 13 November 2001]

OK. I give this a great rating partly because it really hits a lot of areas that I, personally, enjoy. The emotional focus is on the father-son relationship, and the idea of being able to contact your deceased parent. That alone would make me at least interested in

the movie. It also deals with "the space/time continuum" idea not all too far removed from "Back to the Future", but certainly not in

a comedy sense. These types of movies are a guilty pleasure. It

also manages to weave in a semi-interesting murder mystery. The fact that there is the backdrop of the 1969 World Series is just an added treat for a baseball junkie, such as myself. It's sort of a "Field of Dreams" meets "Back to the Future" with a side of murder mystery. All in all, I really enjoyed it. I have watched it again, now that it's

on video, and it holds up to multiple viewings. It will probably be one of those movies that I watch periodically to make me feel better.

Anyway, I'm not going to give any plot lines or rave about the performances (they were all fine). The true value of the movie came from the story and the direction. Just watch the movie, I doubt you'll be disappointed.

The Others (2001)

Family discovers they are not alone in their old Victorian mansion.

[6/10 · 3 October 2001]

I liked this movie. It wasn't great, and falls far short of the Sixth Sense, to which it is often compared, but it was still a good movie. The scene is England, 1945, and revolves around a woman (Kidman) who has lost her husband to the war and is isolated in this mansion with her two children afflicted with a condition which makes them vulnerable to light. The children must spend their lives in candlelight.

The movie has a few surprises, and there will be no spoilers here. I will just comment that the movie moves rather slowly for the first two-thirds or so, but does pick up at the end and did provide me with some jumps. You are rewarded in the end for allowing the movie some character and plot development.

The acting is excellent, and I was impressed by the two children's performances. Kidman was fine, as was whoever played the old lady servant (OK, I'm too lazy to look it up now). The movie was more spooky than scary for the most part. The scary parts are due more to timing and development than gratuitous violence (there is none of that here).

My warning is that the movie is not for those with short attention spans, or for those who need a shock every two minutes to keep their attention. This movie unfolds like a good book, introducing the characters and slowly giving you the stories behind the people and withholding most of the action until the end when you better understand who the events are happening to. I gave it a 6/10, which, to me, says it is better than average.

A.I. Artificial Intelligence (2001)

Tried to do too much. Some very cool stuff, though.

[6/10 · 18 July 2001]

I can't say that I liked this film. I can't say that I disliked it. I am glad I saw it. I probably won't see it again. The film certainly akes you think, and there are some very cool images and special effects on display. For the most part, I cannot say that I enjoyed the film. It tried to be too many things, and you can get a glimpse how each one of those things could've been a great movie/story, but there simply wasn't enough time to do a good job on any of them. It could've been a nice fairy tale. It could've been a good action/sci-fi thriller. It could've been a wonderful social commentary. It was all of these without the complimentary adjective.

The good thing is that it is a movie that you will discuss afterward, but the watching of the movie was not a glorious, magical experience that you might be looking for. Haley Joel Osment was good in the movie. Possibly his greatest acheivement is keeping you always conscious that he isn't real, but this is what makes it harder to root for him, and which, for me, anyway, makes it harder to "lose myself" in the movie. You watch and analyze this movie, you don't participate. It's hard to enjoy a movie where you don't really care about (or even know whether you are supposed to care about) it's characters.

One more thing. The movie is not meant for very young viewers. Sure, it will be compared to the Wizard Of Oz, but it is much darker. I would not bring my 6 year old to the movie. 8 and up, maybe, but that would have to be a very mature, well adjusted 8.

American Beauty (1999)

Don't see what all the hubbub is about

[6/10 · 5 February 2001]

This was an OK movie. There were some moments when I truly laughed

and there were moments when I was very interested in the characters. For the most part, it was just a movie with plotlines that I have

seen before, with nothing particularly new to offer. Sure, it was very well acted, and well directed and gave the stories a wonderful spitshine, but it's still a pair of shoes that I've worn several

times before. Boy, that was a pretty horrible metaphor - sorry about that.

Anyway, why this is such a hailed film is beyond me. I think the movie was going for surprises, but for the most part I saw them coming. Don't get me wrong. I enjoyed the movie, and would recommend it to friends, but I would set there expectations that this is no "Citizen Kane". I guess my review is slightly tempered because I didn't see it at the movies, but rented it expecting to see something exceptional and merely got "pretty good"...

Better Off Dead (1985)

This is one of my favorite films that I watch over and over.

[10/10 · 30 January 2001]

This is just a funny film. The premise is that Lane Myer (John Cusack) is suicidal now that his girlfriend Beth has decided to leave him for the class ski-jock. The story line is basically an excuse to go from gag to gag, and the gags will make you laugh 80% of the time. If a gag leaves you flat, don't worry, another will come along shortly and will probably make you at least smile, and sometimes belly laugh. Depending upon your sense of humor, there are quite a few scenes in the movie that would be defined as your favorite. For whatever reason, I enjoyed the breif scene with the less than attentive mailman the most, but there are at least 10 more scenes that are close. I confess that I have to look pretty hard to find a John Cusack movie that I don't like ("Con Air" comes to mind), but this, along with "Gross Pointe Blank" are my favorites, with this getting the slight edge. I can't really give it higher than an 8 because the movie is far from perfect, but I have enjoyed the movie more than movies that I may given a higher rating. Catch it on the comedy channel when it comes around (I don't think very much, if anything has been cut out). You will probably recognize half of the cast from somewhere. Curtis Armstrong is awesome in this movie: "Lane...I've been going to this high school for 5 and a half years. I'm no dummy."