real_hiflyer Reviews

What Dreams May Come (1998)

A fantastic love story - timeless

[10/10 · 10 March 2009]

This movie deserves a much higher rating. Robin Williams is as talented with drama as he is with comedy. Unfortuneatly his dramatic works seems to be a series of good movies which slipped through the cracks. I've found him excellent in all.

You don't have to agree with the concepts of life and death, and Heaven and Hell, to enjoy this movie. One concept has been taken here and presented beautifully. Special effects were fantastic for their time, and having just watched it again, still stand up well now. That's because the story is the vehicle here, CGI just one of the tools used. This is a love story through and through, and at a time when I needed it, reminded me of what true love is really supposed to be about.

To all who called this a classic, I agree absolutely. After so many years it still resonates with me as much as it did when I first saw it. Robin Williams is so underrated. And Ms. Sciorra shines in this movie too. I give it a ten with no equivocation whatsoever.

Eden Lake (2008)

It's a lovely day in the neighbourhood ...

[1/10 · 28 February 2009]

CONTAINS SPOILERS

As does the movie. This is a beautiful movie transcending genres and reaching out to the best in all ages. It helps teach the futility of resistance. How fighting back is just tiring, how running just rips your clothes and can ruin your mascara. And just how naughty kids can be some days. Tut,tut,tut! And now for the moral lessons. A) If you're out for the day with a group of kids and you're a kid, be sure to bring your knife. B) If something isn't nailed down, steal it. C) If you have a choice between doing good or evil, do evil. It's just so much more fun. d) Any chance you have to hurt another person is okay, providing the group of you can rely on winning. You're not emotionally developing properly unless you torture and kill. E) If you're hesitant as to whether you should let yourself be persuaded to join in the depravity, don't waste time, just dive right in.

Seriously, a lot of talent was wasted on this film. It's course is just perverted into a message of violence and utter hopelessness. Kids get another lesson in administering violence without consequence. The best of the kids are killed off. The single dark skinned child in the movie is burned alive with a tire around his neck and his head in flames. Was that just thrown in so the KKK could reminisce on this side of the pond? Was there anything in this movie designed not to appeal to the worst in all of our natures from child to adult?

How soon before we're hunting down children instead of protecting them? Where are the morals in this piece of filth? What single redeeming quality did it at last show in its ending?

Kids will watch this movie, and cheer the group on. Adults will be just a bit more inclined to drive on by when seeing a child in trouble, instead of trying to help. Maybe Texas can use it to lower the death penalty even further.

If you have to make a movie like this why make it so uniform in its bleak, depressing outcome. The hunted die. The weak die. The greatest sadist wins out and we leave him admiring his new sunglasses while his Dad and their neighbours murder a woman in the downstairs toilet.

This story has no redeeming quality. It's influence is negative, and it's still more BS if claims continue that this type of crap does not have negative implications on what kids watching it - and there will be many kids watching - think about the culture of violence our world is cultivating without equal.

If the makers of this film had a conscience, they should have watched what they'd given birth to and then destroyed it. To think that they're making money and garnering fame which encourages them to make more of the same, makes me sick.

If it doesn't make you sick, you should think again. In a world of violence where even our so-called civilised democratic countries are engaged in murdering people half a world away, this is what we have to offer?

If you wonder where God is in all this, consider this. He's done what we've asked of Him. He's hiding. For the atheists reading this and dismissing the whole comment because of the mention of any deity, for the last time listen. Murder through the modern ages and today is not based on religion - it is based on the perversion of religion, both Christian and Muslim, the twisting and bastardaization of what was intended into a perverted justification for men to engage in their other most basic inclinations, their overwhelming greed and their unending thirst for power. Bin Laden, Blair, Bush. They all spell religion MURDER.

Peace takes work, necessitates love and understanding. War takes lives, and needs nothing more than bombs or bullets.

What does this have to do with Eden Lake? Eden, the first Biblical reference to a place. And the message of Eden Lake? Continue building a framework of violence from the ground up. Why should kids be left out of the picture? We'll be needing them soon enough.

Nice job, guys. Continue the good work.

Statistics (2006)

An introspective and involving look at society and our role in it.

[10/10 · 4 January 2009]

How this movie has a 4.2 rating I'll never understand. For writer director editor Frank Robak it is without doubt a labor of love. Kent Harper, co-producer and principal actor does a marvelous job as he evokes a universal emotion in us all, and touches on some facet of each viewer's life in his frustration in not being able to comprehend why things are as they are, why people visit violence upon each other, why life itself seems cruelest in giving us those things we love most and then taking them away. It's not your typical movie. It's more an examination of the state of our world and the ways in which we interact with each other, whether purposely, negatively, or simply in passing. And the affect these interactions have. Definitely one to watch again, a great surprise, and a lesson to me to go with your gut and read these viewer's offerings here, so as to not put more onus on it's 4.2 rating which would cause so many, including me, to normally just pass it by.

The Fall (I) (2006)

I saw it blind expecting a thriller, and was thrilled anyway

[10/10 · 25 October 2008]

Everything's been pretty much covered here, compliments reigning down upon every facet of the production. I just wanted to add this is the last type of movie I could imagine sitting down to and I found myself totally enthralled. The chemistry between Lee Pace and Catinca was magic, and though you see the word roller-coaster used too often nowadays, I have to say that it touched every emotion I can think of, from tears to laughter.

It is an exceptional piece of work which caters to every generation and one of those family films you can go to without worry.

If Hollywood and all the other huge cinema chains throughout the world were to advertise it as it deserves, this film could and should be re-released and become the major distribution success it so absolutely needs to be. If you don't see this, you're missing out on something very special. This one's timeless and a keeper.

Albert Fish: In Sin He Found Salvation (2007)

Spoiled all on its own, and may contain Spoilers

[1/10 · 22 October 2008]

I could have accepted a lot of the 'artistic license' used in this film if it were claiming to be a movie based on fact, rather than presenting itself as a documentary. A previous comment does a good job of pointing out the errors in the added period footage.

It was a good introduction into a serial murderer I'd never heard of. It was also a disgusting overly dramatized exercise in attempting to concentrate more on the gross out factor than reporting the facts. Not content to describe once how good certain parts of a child's body were when roasted and eaten, it describes the heinous deeds in fact and again in a first person voice-over narrated by an actor playing Albert Fish.

For shock affect it delved into ramming the details of his crimes down the throat of the viewer, again and again. At the expense of his victims and their families the film wallows in filth and was offensive in the extreme because of it. Either we're too stupid to digest the horror of his acts, or sales were forefront and above any other consideration the film makers claim.

It's not a documentary. A documentary informs us of real events without trying to sicken people with fictitious scenes added catering to the director's opinion of what took place. That's fiction. It's not a movie, in a movie you can accept that 'based on' gives the director license to add whatever he thinks will sell. It is a sick perverted film on a sick perverted killer but that not being enough, it approaches the same type of sick twisted deeds on film, that Fish did in person. In this, the film makers succeed in showing their perverted intention on wringing out every last drop of human suffering in their own race for sales.

Joe Coleman, obviously delighted to lay claim to notoriety by surrounding himself with the artifacts of the infamous and psychotic members of our society, sits smugly as he tells us he's thrilled to have the original letter sent to one victim's family, describing what Fish did to their child. How he was 'meant' to have it. Most serial murderers take trophies and this particular derelict of humanity, Coleman, does the same here, living with the material surrounding the worst part of themselves humanity has to offer. If any proof was needed for what I'm saying here, it's in the repeated interviews with this piece of crap. His sole participation in this film should have been only in examining this letter. Instead we're treated to repeated interview segments with no other reason than to try and help sell this presentation of crap.

These flaws ruin what could have been a remarkable recounting of Fish's deeds. The makers of this prostituted themselves for sales and in doing so, reflect a watered down mirror of the same sort of sickness Fish succumbed to. It's a perverted reporting of a perverted person and because of this they have more in common with this man than they may want to realize.

Answered by Fire (2006 TV Movie)

A film which attests to the sacrifice offered to gain and maintain a true vision of democracy

[10/10 · 1 August 2008]

I am ashamed to admit I had no knowledge of these events prior to watching this film. I say ashamed because the Timorans and the minuscule UN force (?)are a perfect example of how many horrific events took place in a people's fight for sovereign's and the return of their own country. It portrays a legitimate and heroic effort to utilize the supreme efforts of a population willing to lay down their lives in their quest for autonomy and a democratic country.

To think the Australian government intentionally deserted these people to a carnage they knew was coming and sent in a token force of UN personnel who were predestined to failure, just to make it look good, is unforgivable.

This after Timor's assistance against the Japanese during the 2nd world war. It best reminds me of the saying, 'with friends like these who needs enemies.'

To compare it to the US version of democracy best shows how the West has fallen. Here you don't stand a chance of becoming president unless you have millions to start with, tell people where ever you go what they want to hear as opposed to what you'll actually do when elected, and sell your soul to the highest big business interests.

To see people crying out for freedom while risking life and limb, makes a joke of our political process and the indifferent response by our people to politicians lining their own pockets.

I bow down in respect to all of those forgotten and ignored by our so called TV news programs. God's speed, and for goodness sake don't pattern what type of society you aspire to by using ours as an example.

I can't even start to explain how the Austalian government knew what was coming and actively participated in it by doing nothing !!

The Hollowmen (2008)

Off to a good start

[19 July 2008]

Although reminiscent of Frontline, and The Games, this series, after two episodes seems to be missing a main ingredient the other two series offered. Likable characters. It's well written, topical, and seems to be off to a good start.

Obviously after two episodes it's too early to reach a conclusion. Unfortuneatly our North American TV usually cans a series if it's not a hit overnight. That's why we see so much Deck on the network channels, and the migration of viewers to the more independent channels, like HBO, the Comedy Channel etc. If anybody's ever seen the classic Yes Minister British series they can see a perfect example of this type of format. It's amazingly well written, bitingly funny, and as watchable now as it was when first aired.

For Australia The Games will remain a classic and could play every four years ad infinitum, for as long as we have the Olympics. Frontline was great too, leaving the viewer wishing there'd been more to come.

If this series remembers it's important to have somebody to root for, and manages to balance its cleverness with the personal touch, it could be a great addition as well.

Goya's Ghosts (2006)

A classic failure, with no more substance than the ghosts in it's title

[3/10 · 16 July 2008]

This isn't exactly a complicated story. It's not a mystery, or a plot you have to spend time re watching because you missed an intrinsic part of the dialog. Claiming a movie has to be seen multiple times for you 'to get it' may apply to a very few films, however this isn't one of them. Those type of movies have substance and are so involving it's easy to miss an important portion of dialog, or a subtle nuance to plot details you may have overlooked. With Goya's Ghosts this doesn't apply. The main flaw in this movie is an absence of detail. It jumps from one character to the next, never giving enough substance to any one set of scenes to allow the involvement of those watching. Because of that you don't connect with any of the characters. You don't get to the point where you care. Either the main actor is gone just as the movie seems it's going to redeem itself, or their actions are despicable and you're not inclined to anyway. Goya's refusal to go very far to help Ines is a good example. His refusal to commit himself further mirrors the overall tone of his part. The only characters you may momentarily feel for are Ines, when she's being questioned and then tortured. After her rape by Lorenzo any focus on her character is pretty much gone. Following that the only other in depth involvement comes from the best scenes in the movie centered around Lorenzo's invitation to supper with Ines' family, and her fathers all out attempt to force Lorenzo into signing a bogus confession and getting his daughter back. Then just as things start to be developing again, they're gone from the movie. I've read a lot of the comments here about how the movie didn't know what it wanted to be, etc. I found that basically it succeeded in not being much of anything. From Lorenzo's return and the coincidental viewing of Ines' daughter by Goya, everything seemed nothing more than contrived. Without much of a storyline, no effort to really examine the turbulent times they lived in took place. The essence of who Goya was didn't materialize, other than his actions, or lack thereof, proving him to be more self-centered than anything else. As for his art, the movie seemed intent on examining a few of the paintings he did but again frittered away another opportunity in examining the reactions to this work rather than the work itself. To sum things up best, the movie had no cohesion, it grossly lacked the substance to delve into the historical environment it covered, and upon ending, left you feeling like what you'd just seen was a series of aborted attempts to engage the viewer by switching from one thing to the next without adequately engaging the viewer in any of them. You can't watch something like this several times expecting it to improve with added examination. There's just not enough to it to waste the time. It's not a case of your missing out on something, it would just be more proof that the ingredients needed to make this movie good, just aren't there. As for best film ever made? It's not even the best film I've watched today.

Varian's War: The Forgotten Hero (2001 TV Movie)

What it takes for good to flourish, is for good people to act bravely.

[10/10 · 30 June 2008]

Just watched this on DVD. Having read all the comments, in and of itself, I am glad to have heard the story. I did write down the names of the books authored by these people, so I'll be interested to read these eventually, and judge a little for myself the worth of the contributions, assume-ably completed after the rescue. William Hurt was as good as ever, Julia Ormond as beautiful as I've ever seen her. Matt Craven is a familiar face I've seen in many movies and here gave a solid nuanced performance as well. It's a shame his talent has yet to give him the recognition he deserves.

The comment about the Julia Ormond character doing an injustice to the real person, I can't comment on. I'll jot down the info on her book and see for myself. I have to take the movie for what it was and plead ignorance to inconsistencies I'm not aware of.

It was a good movie. Heartbreaking and one I hadn't heard of either. I understand they couldn't rescue everybody. I understand that Varian was limited to trying to save those who could best bare witness and who's prior fame was to have offered a more concrete and believable platform from which to convince America of the gravity of Europe's destruction, and the need for them to intervene. That was the ideal of his mission, and really the only reason he had funds enough to save those he could. There was no resolution here though, nothing to show if any of this group contributed to affecting this. Perhaps the books written will shed more light on this period, I don't know yet.

I do know this. That their first and foremost mission upon arrival in America should have been to immediately convince the world of what Hitler was doing and to help get the others out. Did this happen? Did they work night and day toward this effort or return to their art and intellectualism and let their fellow countrymen be damned. Because if they didn't do this, then I don't give a damn what they wrote or painted or composed or sculpted after the war. In the world they lived in right then all of these took a distant second place to their responsibility to humanity.

The most forever haunting heart-breaking and utterly depressing scenes in this movie were those when men women and children begged for their lives and were turned away. Varian played God here. If those that were rescued did not commit their all from the safety of America they damned these people twice over. If Varian and his organization back home did not see they were forced to do so then I'm afraid my admiration for what he achieved is diminished greatly. No man has the right to determine a stranger's worth. Those damned and turned away were of no less consequence than those saved.If those rescued did not do all they could, this turns into a tarnished elitist farce. I'll place this as a new topic heading in the forum and perhaps some of you reading this can tell me.

August Rush (2007)

Chill out, relax, and enjoy the story. Exactly the pill this doctor ordered.

[8/10 · 16 March 2008]

What we are really doing here is adding "comments", as the box is titled. We're not qualified critics. We all love to think of ourselves as arm-chair critics and consider the critique we leave as Gospel. Well it ain't.

When I sit down to a movie, it's not with a note book. We watch movies and read books, and listen to music to entertain ourselves. We pick the genre or style of what we experience on the premise that we like those forms, and there's a good chance of a couple of hours escape from the norm, from our own set of reality and our problems. That's a whole lot of weight to put on any form of entertainment. And all the wrong criteria for a bonified critic to work from. When we hate or love a movie we're expressing an emotion, not a critique. We're really 'commenting' on the fact that considering our mood, whatever distractions there were while watching, how far and how much help did this piece we're watching offer us in escaping our own set of problems, for a while, which let's face it exist in a world gone mad.

So I watched this on my computer. My pets were fed and settled down for the night. They were either cuddled in, or asleep in their favorite places. No-one rang. (Hey - I heard someone say 'No wonder!)I watched this movie, and let it take me away. I was looking for a story, and I found one. And since all fiction is based on the premise of how far you're willing to let yourself suspend reality in order to enjoy it, my mood, or emotional criteria, I brought to watching this film was just right for there and then.

So I'll comment that I loved it. The story, the people, the music, the ending, the whole fairy tale. It gave me something I needed and filled the void I'd slotted it into with a light-hearted tale of music magic and happy endings.

Next time maybe I'll be criticizing this or that. But I'll try to remember what reading all these comments has reminded me of this time. That a lot of it is responding to things I disagree with that other commender's have written. This time, I'll leave it.

Thanks to all involved in this picture. I truly enjoyed it and you all did a wonderful job.

The Quiet American (2002)

The Quiet American - an excellent and extraordinarily movie on every level.

[10/10 · 4 March 2008]

I've been watching quite a few movies lately. I was disappointed in There Will Be Blood, more so with 3:10 to Yuma, and so on. Then I watch a movie I'd never heard of called The Quiet American. Since then I find myself returning to this movie. Comparing the merits of others in comparison. When my friends ask me if I can recommend something to them. When I think of the movies I've seen over the years. I return to this movie.

Set in the period when transition was bringing American forces into Vietnam as the French withdrew, it was something I knew little about up until then. I always enjoy when a film educates and this one got me interested in researching the actual events in more detail on the net.

But none of this is it. What this movie does is present a moving story of the lives of those affected during this time. It gave us Vietnamese, British, and American characters who were all too human, and allowed us to identify with each of their predicaments. And Michael Caine, both narrating and starring in this movie, in my opinion did some of the best work I've ever seen him do. With strong support from the rest of the cast, beautiful photography which showed us both the beauty of Vietnam, and the ruin that war causes.

So I could go in depth with everything I liked about this movie. Could go on for quite a while. But my best advice is simply to watch it. To be drawn into a story and have it resonate with you for a long period after, is, after all is said and done, one of the highest compliments one can offer.

Thanks to Mr. Caine and everyone else involved.If the highest purpose of movie making it to tell a story, and do it well, this succeeds and then some.

There Will Be Blood (2007)

Don't believe the hype. Everything you've heard is as exaggerated as the title is misleading.

[7/10 · 27 February 2008]

After watching this movie, I thought Mr. Lewis did a pretty good job, and the story was fairly interesting if nothing new. That's why I am once again flabbergasted at the reaction of the critics, press, and now the awards. This is as classic and timeless as was the Western, 3:10 to Yuma. Please don't miss the sarcasm. 3:10 to Yuma was a second rate western and an insult to the original. Both the story and the performances were rote and unconvincing. There Will Be Blood was a better effort. But my God people, Rendition, Atonement, The Quiet American ... THESE are movies !!!

I'm afraid it's yet another Oscar year based on some criteria I haven't been let in on. No doubt Daniel Day Lewis did a good job, but great? There was hardly enough to his character to base that opinion on. The film depicted how the oil industry began and told us that yes, the same type of mentality which drew people to the'oil-rush', are basically the same as they are now. Manipulative, controlling, and capitalistic to the point at which it's their God given duty to give little or nothing while taking all if you can, cause goshdarnit, that's the daggum American way. If that sounds harsh, do a count of the Native Americans and Mexicans in this movie. They'd been 'dealt with' thoroughly enough at this point to find it best to lurk in the background of this movie. Kind of ironic, isn't it, what with the 'immigrant problem' now. You know, when a lot of the people wanting in are those the land was stolen from in the first place.

Lewis played a cold, emotionless bastard, he portrayed that without equal. But that's all he did. His character was so one dimensional that it's over two and a half hours of playing the same note perfectly, while ignoring the exploration of all those other keys. There's nothing historical to be proud of here, no nugget of information previously unknown. It was simply a character study of a controlling man who's psychosis eventually pushes him past the point of no return. With a conscience as baron as the landscape, and the sole driving force to gain more, there was no opportunity provided for an actor no matter how talented to exhibit the range of emotions a supposedly Oscar worthy performance provides the evidence for.

Mr Lewis is an amazing actor who's done work of that caliber before and no doubt will do so again. There Will Be Blood, a title which still has me puzzled, just wasn't it. All of this enthusiastic praise for this project does little other than further remove the public's credibility as far as the awards are concerned, or leaves them feeling stupid for being too thick to see something that was never there in the first place.

Wire in the Blood: The Colour of Amber (2007) Season 5, Episode 1

You can't hack almost 30 min from a mystery without ruining it entirely!

[9/10 · 21 February 2008]

Now in it's sixth season, Wire In The Blood is an extremely good British drama series starring Robson Green as a psychologist helping police profile serial killers. That said I was really looking forward to Season five. For the first time I was completely disappointed with every episode. I thought the series had simply run out of steam, the usual quality severely eroded. I resigned myself to an uninspiring sixth season. Low and behold I discovered an extended version on the internet, and discovered that about 23 minutes had been hacked out of the story-line. In every episode of season 5. Some types of movie to TV films can be edited for time to conform to the time slots allotted. But this was made for TV originally. There is no room for editing out scenes. Every scene is intrinsic to this typically highly charged and riveting series. So I am writing this for two reasons. One to let fans know the series hasn't imploded, and two, in the hopes that someone from the production company reads this and realizes they're cutting their own throats by permitting the butchery up to 46 minutes out of a two part episode and providing a solidly second rate product. I've since re-watched the unedited versions of some of season five, but even though they were better, it's hardly the same knowing whodunnit from the onset. Episode one of the sixth season has already aired - again butchered, and I refuse to watch it until I can get hold of what's being called the 'extended version', which is really the episode as it was meant to be viewed with nothing 'extended' about it. With any other show I'd have just stopped watching altogether. However Robson Green is an excellent charismatic actor portraying a complex character with his own set of problems to deal with, and the series 1 through 4 were so good I hate to see this travesty lead the series into cancellation. The nine out of ten vote reflects how good these are when you watch them the way they were initially intended.

Run Fatboy Run (2007)

A n enjoyable comedy to simply sit back, relax, and enjoy.

[7/10 · 21 February 2008]

Why are people asking where was Hugh Grant? I mean is he the only comedic British actor they can think of? Suggesting he replace the Simon Pegg Character would be gross miscasting of the first order. Okay, this movie isn't rocket science. And sure it's predictable, how many story lines can you think of right off the bat that haven't been done to death already? Once you've accepted this as a given instead of a complaint - chill out, relax, sit back and enjoy.

If I could be a fly on the wall while they were filming this movie, I'm sure there was more than one trade-off as to whether which type of humor, British or American, would crossover best. As a fan of British comedy series - Spaced being one of the best of many - I realize there is a large section of the American market that just don't get it. There's no comparing American Pie, a crass, gross, brain dead offering appealing to the basest of gross and sordid humor, to this. That type of American humor is like a punch in the face which is dummed down for the audience type it's designed for. And it sells.

So okay, this wasn't a masterpiece. Neither was it a dud. It was a humorous middle of the road movie good for what it was meant for. An hour or two of light entertainment unfolding in it's own manner, in this case a pretty funny and well-paced timeout with laughs built in. I enjoyed it, and part of that enjoyment was in not faulting it for being something different than exactly what it claimed to be. Now Hot Fuzz was a hilarious tongue in cheek comedy of a different order altogether. I really can see why Americans would sit down at that movie and say huh?

Slipstream (2007)

A movie version of Alzheimer's disease

[1/10 · 19 February 2008]

A confused mess from start to finish. Like they used to say about the Beatles'songs, there was a secret message if you played the LP backward. If one had the patience to watch this films scenes from finish to start, you'd come away with the same degree of disappointment.

Apart from all of this psychedelic hodge podge of flashbacks and false starts, the clearest characters were the movie backers, out for revenge if the movie didn't get sorted. There was nothing to like about these two either. Overacting, shouting and threats were delivered in comic book fashion. I think one dimensional was an overstatement.

Okay, so maybe the artsy types are rolling their eyes reveling in the fact that unlike them, we plebeians just didn't get it. Well I'm afraid there was nothing to get. And the two cardinal sins of any bad movie carried from start to finish. A non-existent and pathetic story line if you want to call it that, and by far the worst, not a single character you cared about in the least.

The Unknown Trilogy (2007)

Comment deleted in my account for a submission I never made !!

[3/10 · 18 February 2008]

This comment was deleted by IMDb based on an abuse report filed by another user)

The comment below appears as a deletion when I visit my commentary info.

The comment below was falsely attributed to me. It shows as deleted due to a customer complaint when I check my comments history. I never made this comment in the first place. Did not even comment on the movie.

________________________________________________________________

Fake Reviews!!! Warning!!, 31 January 2008 Author: barbapapa-2 from Canada

Having read this, I'm sure it is hardly a one off problem. Can the IMDb staff add to their database a small program to weed out the instances of this happening. I like IMDb, use it daily for the reviews and want to feel - along with all honest contributors, we're getting a fair shake.

Otherwise, we waste money, waste time, and IMDb will waste its reputation. I am positive utilizing a search and compare facet to the database would not be hard, having worked with databases in the past.

Control (2007)

It's just a ...' 3 dressed up as a 9' ... basically a real waste of time.

[3/10 · 13 February 2008]

I have loved Samantha Morton since 'Leaving Liverpool', a great British mini series. She's upped the rating of whatever project she's worked ever since then. I enjoyed her rather small role in this,and unfortunately, it provided the film's only redeeming value.

Now as for the rest. Curtis's movements on stage while singing were embarrassingly ... what? Stupid, retarded, laughable? The music was awful, and though occasionally some of his writing came across anyway, it was that of an averagely intelligent juvenile, what you'd expect from a high school kid. Maybe with a future in which he honed his craft, his light could have shone. He removed the chance of us ever knowing.

He couldn't sing and the band's repetitive distorted insistent beat was perhaps the only reason an audience - necessarily stoned out of their minds at the time - might find it good. I'm not out of hand condemning this type of music, the Joy Division was just plain bad, but like punk-rock, death metal, and rap etc, it appeals to rebellious kids looking for something - ANYTHING - to cling to, and the more so-called truth in the lyrics consisted of distortions, filth, violence, and the degradation of women, then authority figures, then just plain hate.

Some rap I like. Some does bring across the writer's experience and opens a window into a world and attitude we might not otherwise be privy to. But is the sheer deluge of outright crap you have to wade through a good enough reason for trying to find the diamonds in the rough?

These forms of music seem to elevate the bad and mediocre efforts into a spotlight they could and should have never made it to. Ian Curtis comes across as being kind, but steeped in his own self indulgent importance, very little talent, and fans, as they seem to do consistently, elevate his contribution because of his committing suicide. He wasn't around long enough to fade into obscurity.

If I've offended any readers, then maybe it's time you took a reality pill and wise up to the fact that most of it encourages violence, degradation of the human psyche, and intimately damages our self-esteem for ourselves, and the devaluing of the lives of others. These things do nothing to improve the plight of the poor and lower class. They teach hate and ' tell it like it is'. Don't you think people already know 'how it is', and at the risk of affecting the bottom line of the mega-bucks record company incomes, it's time to help instead of hurt?

The movie was long and boring. The portrayals one dimensional. And the talent non-existent. What else do you need to know?

Alexandra's Project (2003)

Some of the best acting I've seen in years

[10/10 · 22 January 2008]

First I have to say that the acting was nothing short of superb. But Steve takes it another notch higher when you realize he spends almost the whole movie reacting. His facial expressions while mostly spending the whole movie as a captive audience of one, portray as much, if not more, than had he been given the non stop dialog his wife was privy too. He is amazing and whether liking the movie or hating it this cannot be taken away.

As for Alexandra's revenge, I think it would have taken a lot more than a Prozac to cure. She unleashes years of repressed anger and lashes out with enough venom to poison Steve, the kids, and herself many times over. Of course neither party was faultless, but while Steve's faults reflect a sadly typical man's point of view; they're not vindictive. Nipped in the bud early on and some counseling and/or trying to educate Steve in what he's doing wrong is reasonable. But here she stores up all that anger, she prostitutes herself and blames the shame for that completely on her husband as well.

When a marriage self destructs who hasn't witnessed the worst in people brought to the forefront. But Alexandra is sick, a mental equivalent as dangerous as her faked cancer. The children are pawns in her revenge.

As for the last scene when he pathetically attempts masturbation to a movie scene that cuts him to the core? It speaks to his total pathetic devastation. Here is a man in the depths of depression, alternately engaging and failing in an act which will most likely drive his esteem lower, and at other times watching the children - family - he's been robbed of. Repeated replay of his children wishing him happy birthday pile-driving him further into utter repair.

His faults were those of omission. Hers were evil through and through. How much hate would you have to harbour to do that to a person? (Remember when he was trying to call her about the security bills for the re-keyed deadbolts etc. Salt in the wound when she apparently was providing payment to her neighbor for services rendered.)

And lastly, if at some point his neighbor had been sliced diced and served up in some sushi bar, I wouldn't have minded a bit!

The Insurgents (2006)

The sum of the parts provides a wakeup call greater than the whole

[8/10 · 19 January 2008]

Rightwingisevil brings up a number of interesting points.

"i don't know why and how this boring, going-nowhere deadbeat screenplay could have made"

I have no trouble believing that he hasn't a clue.

"just got several guys lip serviced with lot of big words from 'our founding fathers"

"...our founding fathers and a lot of big words..." in one swoop dismissing the authors of the constitution as being in the same bag as ... Voltaire's's political philosophy about tyranny and revolution', the blah, blah, blah ..."

So is it the big words that give him a problem, a huge amount of ignorance where the dismantling of the personal privacy and freedom these documents afforded are concerned? Is it that since the actual hijacking of the American presidential process resulted in an illegal invasion of Iraq, under a president who stole the leadership and then allowed Dick Cheyney to be the only non president in American history to declare war on another country; and still continues to undermine your rights by any means possible?

"... never ended with a bang..."

Is this his main criteria as to whether a movie is good or not? Big things go boom! YAY!

This guy didn't offer a comment on the movie. Along with that mentioned above ... ", giving out lot of speeches ...the so-called female insurgent made love to each of the guys listed above (did she do it with the writer? well, i'm not quite sure, because i used lot of fast forward to speed up the slow motion movie). Add an eloquent descriptive process "...in this movie that worth people (?) to write a review. it's a pure junk, pointless and meaningless, and i really don't know what i did saw (?) in this movie..."

"...never ended with a bang..." By the way, do you know what a spoiler warning is?"

If nothing else, listen to this movie. Read the blah blah for yourselves. The government in recent years has given militias more material to work with than they could have wished for in a life time. The topics this movie brings forth need taught, examined, and discussed. Otherwise what you risk doing is making this film almost a documentaries starting point for those who feel disenfranchised and igniting the potential of those who'd form other home-grown terrorist cells.

Add to that the stupidity of how the FBI deals with the threat. Waiting until a truck of explosives is rolling through the city with a live detonator on board. I know I'd feel a lot easier if they'd been arrested before leaving their base. I mean it's not like American authorities think they need evidence before arresting people any more. And how long before the activists speaking out and protesters walking the streets are lumped in with the 'terrorist' label tacked onto their offenses?

Sounds paranoid and ridiculous doesn't it? An innocent Canadian citizen was just recently returned to his home after being kidnapped by the US government, ignored by the Canadian government, and being shipped off to Syria for a year and more's torture. When he contacted the Harper government he received a form letter reply thanking him for his interest.

As much as you hate this movie, listen to what it is saying. Then find out about the points it makes that resonate with you. Because the only thing you can be sure of, is you sure as Hell are going to be hearing them again.

The Good Shepherd (2006)

The wolf in sheep's clothing ...

[8/10 · 3 January 2008]

A lot of reviewers here are drawing comparisons between The Godfather and this film. What's not pointed out often, if at all, is the closest comparison the lead characters have in common is they are both psychopathic. They both feel themselves to be above the law and both have no compunction about breaking the laws we little people try to live by, right up to and including murder. The film was well done, but I kept hoping at some stage someone would point out the movie's title was one of sheer sarcasm. However we reap what we sow. And what evil deeds justified in shadows then, we're seeing the fruits of now. The worst is that those in government committing these crimes no longer even see good reason to hide them. It left the same sensation as Lord of War did with the arms trade. The sensation of having to live in a world whose leaders have stared into the abyss for so long they now mirror its reflection.

Atonement (2007)

A love story with more than the ravages of war to contend with.

[8/10 · 25 December 2007]

This was a very good movie, but for reasons not normally listed here. To me I focused on the moral aspect, and the devastation which can be caused by its aftermath. I believe the girl suffered regret from when the realization struck home as the police drove the accused away. But instead of going the full distance to put things right, she worked at a job her 'society' posing would have let her bypass, and perhaps tried to make things right with herself more so than with the others.

So the moral of the story? We all know that as we grow older a heartbeat can be enough time to take us from here to where death will take us. If we've done wrong, and it has and is hurting others, then the time to put things right is now. And the reason no better than it is simply the right thing to do. Forgiveness may be forthcoming, but it's got to be by-product of the process, not the reason.

I enjoyed the movie, but I like mostly how it reminded me of what the wages of sin carries, and how that weight is sometimes careless upon whom it chooses to bear its burden.

i think the young couple suffered greatly

Shattered (2007)

Betrayal can cause a darkness in the soul that radiates outward ...

[9/10 · 21 December 2007]

You know I'm getting very tired of reading that comments are added by involved parties and family and friends. For the instances when it May have happened these people here are making the practice sound like an epidemic. For those who say they've lost interest in the first five minutes, I suspect they have the attention span of a gnat and should go back to straining their brains on the intricate plots revolving on the videos on MTV.

If they claim to know what's going on in the first five minutes then they're grasping at a lucky guess. So fast forward to the end, see if you're right, then go watch something intellectual, like a Simpson's show.

This was a good movie. It was better than well put together and what these idiots are calling twists, and saying that's all they really liked about the movie, still don't realize that they were the resolution to the mystery. You know, the thing that makes the rest of it make sense. Duh! If that's done well then pierces from the movie finally come to the fore front and see the light of day.

Apart from the story this movie portrayed the lengths to which emotional pain can scar and twist even your own perspectives, even when you're the injured party. Particularly when you are. I'd ruin the show for someone, but pay attention to the husband's character throughout, see how this was a last chance that was being offered not just a revenge.

Excellent performances, not a dull moment,and tension right up to the final frame. I call that a great movie. It should have gone to the cinemas, but that just goes to show that the powers that be also agree with the fact you're too stupid to get it, or are also too stupid themselves. No wonder it's the independents who are producing what's best in what's released these days. They have to tell a good story instead of thinking that unless millions of dollars are thrown at the production it ain't no good. (For the few, ain't no good is a double negative which really means it was good but without this note the phrases three word plot might have been lost on.) It's also grammatically incorrect, but one thing at a time.

Did you not find this not useful?

A Mighty Heart (2007)

A portrait of courage, in a time when it's most needed.

[10/10 · 15 December 2007]

Leave the misconceptions at the door,and just go in and watch the movie. Yeh, I agree that Jolie's been in a lot of crap movies and if she wasn't so damn beautiful, wouldn't be nearly as famous, or as infamous the actress she is now. I mean not only did she manage to keep her clothes on, but an effort was made to downplay her usual appearance, necessarily removing a distraction that made it easier to portray her character. The last time she did these two things she got an award for best supporting actress, I think, in Girl Interrupted. Why? I have no idea, Winona Ryder did a great job in that film and carried the whole movie and got nothing. I've given up on the awards shows, they all seem so calculatingly political and biased now. The facts here are really very simple. She did a great job portraying a woman who must contain her devastation as she tries to deal with a continual deluge of false leads and lies. in order to have any chance of affecting the return of her husband, at all. She does her best for him in a horrible situation which none of us could ever imagine the despair of having to live through. Well, I believed her. I forgot about all else but the story and I think our knowing the outcome drew us closer to her because she also knows full well what her chances of success are. 'There, but for the grace of God, go I'comes to mind. Just in that God forbid anything similar happening to us, and honestly reflecting on whether we'd have the same strength and ultimately generous spirit as she did. I'd be lying to say I could. Hopefully I'll never find out. She and her husband worked to bring the truth out of George Bush's creation of his mid-east Disney World, and like Hotel California, you don't always know when you check in any time you want, that sometimes you're the steely beast, and no, you may never leave.

When she found out finally what happened and she stepped into that other room by herself, the anguish in that heart-breaking scream echoing through the place brought tears to my eyes, and a knot in my throat, even thinking about it now. It also reminded me of Missing, and in any collection, I think it can hold its own side by side with that amazing movie, as well. It's important to remember that both stories occur in country's in which the US interfered in a big way and participated in the background,foreground, or both, in instigating and participating to one degree or another, in causing the deaths of many, many people.

Angelina did a marvelous job. There wasn't a false note in the performances of the entire cast And please, no anti-American slurs on these comments. Telling the truth is a pro American concept. And if truth had been told,the tragedy shown here, would never have happened in the first place.

The Book of Revelation (2006)

The title was the best part of the movie

[2/10 · 7 December 2007]

I have to agree with what many of the other reviewers concluded. A subject which could have been thought-provoking and shed light on a reversed double-standard, failed miserably.

Rape being a crime of violence and forced abusive control, the scenes here were for the most part pathetic. It would have been a better idea to cover short glimpses of what was happening and let the audience imagine the deed. And the victim's laugh with the cops, when he aborted his police complaint, seemed as genuine as that of the cops. No awkwardness, no hesitance to merely join in. I don't know if this was bad acting and or bad directing but someone missed the point entirely. As for his half-a**ed supposed search for his attackers, pathetic. They should have skipped most of the sex scenes - another monumental failure in themselves, and had him meet Colin Friels when he first went to the police. The story could have then been drawn forth with good dialog and the occasional flashback - and saved by the superior acting and presence Colin Friels - the only reason I watched this movie - brings to any project he does.

The only concrete revelation of this movie, is, it was crap.

Hacking Democracy (2006)

Democracy tainted by lies, profit and the abuse of power.

[10/10 · 24 November 2007]

Lets take a look over the U.S. power structure over the last few decades. The Kennedy's, their money inherited through illegal liquor smuggling during the prohibition, along with all the bribes and violence those type of activities invite. Kennedy , who involved the US in the Vietnam conflict after first sending CIA and army personnel on an 'advisory status' (you can read the letters on the official freedom of information act which brought this correspondence to light.) Nixon impeached for wiping tapes and orchestrating a fictitious break-in to hide the truth. He was really the last leader brought to task for criminal activity and was pardoned by Ford before spending a single night in jail. Reagan, who used his actor's fame and presence, to wriggle his way out of the fact he was providing arms to South American murder squads and terrorists known to be murdering men women and children. A flagrant and illegal abuse of power he was never even tried for. Then the first Bush, selling arms - including poisonous gas to Iraq in it's war against both Iran and mass extermination of their own people. Then Clinton, who so blatantly twisted lies about his notorious affair, it was embarrassing enough to listen, let alone watch on TV. And then there's the second Bush. The one who grounded all flights in the USA except those whisking the Bin Laden family back to Saudi Arabia immediately after 9/11. To look at this realistically, 'Hacking Democracy' was a phenomenally brave and convincing documentary showing how America was cheated out of its democratic process and informing us of how Bush turned America into a country soon to be more fascist than democratic. Let's face it. America is run by business. Oil power and profit are now our democratic purpose. Let me state this reality. I have mentioned nothing here that you cannot verify for yourself with a little research. If you accept that Bush should have and never would have been elected in a fair process, then his interference with personal freedoms, riches attained through contracts given to Cheyney and all of his other cohorts, and last BUT definitely not least, an illegal invasion of Iraq are all crimes - the last a crime whether legally elected or not. Why is nobody calling him out on these issues? Why aren't the same people who went after Clinton for a lesser offense, chasing him down with the tenacity deserved? People scream anti-American! at you if you so much as mention a difficult question, and then claim we're somehow assaulting and insulting our troops abroad. It is way past the time those in command explain themselves honestly,without rhetoric, and that we refuse to be fobbed off yet again. If any other administration in any other country had pulled the same stunts we have, the US would be on them like a ton of bricks. Hacking Democracy should be a must see in every classroom in America. If proved we have a president who should be immediately impeached, we'd end up having to pay reparations to Iraq and Bush could be brought before a war tribunal and charged with crimes against humanity for the hundreds of thousands of deaths he's caused to say nothing of those maimed for life in this abhorrent mess he's caused in Iraq.