proficy Reviews

They Came Back (2004)

One of the worst movies I've ever seen

[1/10 · 4 September 2005]

I like "art house" movies. I like zombie movies. I like French cinema. In theory, I would like this movie. Sadly, this was one of the worst 2 hours I've ever spent.

The movie kept asking questions, (maybe most importantly) like "Why did the dead return?" Not a single question was answered!!!! I sat through the first hour and a half on the assumption that I'd get some resolution. But NOTHING.

The (little bit of) plot was excruciatingly slow, the cinematography was average, and the dialog was non-existent.

I can safely say that this movie has nothing going for it. Don't bother.

At Dawn They Sleep (2000)

An Unfortunate Attempt

[2/10 · 3 July 2005]

What a mess. It had potential, but lost it somewhere near the beginning.

I'll start with the good points, there were some. There were a few well done visual effects (I really liked the demon and the cocoons) and the acting was alright, especially for an independent film like this.

Unfortunately, that's where the good points end.

The editing was so bad that I spent half of the movie wondering if I missed some very important part that would let me follow the story. I rewound and realized that I didn't miss anything.

There were a few very pretentious dialogue scenes that seemed to be put in for no other reason than to show how "cool" the movie writers are. Although they were the best scripted scenes, they had nothing to do with the plot. Maybe if they had been cut there would have been time for some scenes that explain what is actually going on.

The ending...could someone explain? I have *no* idea what that was about.

I think that the filmmakers have definite potential, but they need to pay more attention to continuity, and less on naked women and heavy metal.

The Interpreter (2005)

Sub-par Thriller

[4/10 · 27 May 2005]

Woe-is-me. Did they really think that the UN setting would be enough to make this movie even mildly interesting? Come on-- anyone can see the UN on tour. Having it in a movie isn't that thrilling. You still need to provide us things like ...and original plot, good dialogue, suspense. But alas, Hwood thinks we'll be satisfied with a new setting only. For 10$ plus snacks, I expect more.

Movie sales are down and it's no surprise why. It seems "they" have run completely out of ideas.

If you absolutely love the UN, this might be mildly interesting to watch. But I doubt it.

House of Wax (2005)

No Horror, Just Cheap Gore

[1/10 · 12 May 2005]

I love horror movies, but this movie was a complete waste of time. So much so, that after an hour and half, I just walked out.

There are no thrills, only cheap gross out gore. The story was weak and so unoriginal that I didn't care to find out what happened.

**Possible Spoiler** The only characters you care about (Hilton's character is not one of these) are the first to go, and the plot for the rest of the film is so predictable that you think "why bother". ***End Spoiler***

If you like movies that make you use your imagination, don't bother seeing this one. Huge waste of money, I can see this kind of gore on the news. The preview for Land of the Dead looked great tho!

Definitely a 1 star film.

The Amityville Horror (2005)

Scary Stuff!

[8/10 · 17 April 2005]

Sometimes I think that people who review or rate horror movies must not be horror fans. I watch horror movies-- a lot of horror movies. I wasn't expecting much from this one, but was pleasantly surprised! For the first time in a long time, I was scared by a movie! There were a few "cheep" thrills. But there was also a really good tension created that kept you on your toes through the whole thing. And the characters were likable, so you were actually rooting for them.

As we were leaving the theatre, everything I heard from the other members of the audience was positive. A lot of people said it was the scariest movie they had ever seen.

There were a few cinematic flaws-- a little discontinuity, some wardrobe problems, but generally, this was a very good movie.

8/10 for me.

Million Dollar Baby (2004)

One big joke...

[3/10 · 20 February 2005]

Is this one big joke I'm not in on? I can understand how people might like LOTR (although I thought the series was...boring), but Million Dollar Baby was just horrible. I don't think Eastwood could have jammed more over-used clichés in if he tried. Morgan Freeman played the same character he does in every movie these days (I actually laughed out loud when I heard he was nominated for an Oscar). The writing was awful, the acting was bad...so why did everyone like it??? Some brilliant "foreign films" have come out, but the award shows group them into one category...so we are left with pathetic attempts at cinema like this to celebrate.

The Forsaken (2001)

Good movie, Great film

[7/10 · 18 December 2004]

Another vampire movie? This one has a fun take on the genre. There's your classic Hunter, your unwilling Hero, and your Damsel in Distress. The movie gets away with all its clichés by never taking itself too seriously and working well within the limits that a "vampire" movie imposes-- that is, although there is a fresh take on things, the vampire scenario is still as believable as a vampire scenario is going to be... if you follow.

There were a lot of extras I really enjoyed too. I liked the way the director used music to introduce (and then "go with") the different characters. I also liked the light, comic-book feel of the movie. I found it really easy to know who to root for/against. There were quite a few scenes that had a frame-like style to them; they were quite artistic. The colours, guns (!), and cars also made this a very stylistic film.

I haven't read any other reviews for the movie yet. I'd actually never heard about it 'til tonight when I picked it up at movie sale. I'm glad I bought it and can foresee it becoming a movie night favorite.

7/10

The Calcium Kid (2004)

Even if you don't like boxing, you'll love this movie

[9/10 · 6 December 2004]

So far, this is my vote for the Feel Good Movie of the Year. It the whimsical story about an amateur (record: 0-0-0) boxer, played by Orlando Bloom, going up against the World Champion, played by Micheal Pena.

The movie is shot in a pseudo-documentary style, so you really get to know the characters personally. There are quite a few laugh out loud parts, and the story goes along pretty well. The filmmakers used some standard movie "cliches" and stock characters, but they used them quite effectively.

Orlando's character, The Calcium Kid, is very endearing. You just want to hug him and pinch his cheeks through the whole movie! xoxo The cast meshed really well.

Even if you don't like boxing, you'll love this movie. Boxing is just the subtheme for a cute British comedy with a few real feel good moments.

**** for me!

Lost Souls (2000)

Lost Time (mine, that is)

[4/10 · 5 December 2004]

This movie had so much promise! What a great idea! The cast was pretty good! Great cinematography...

But what a failure. If you're studying film, this may be a great film to dissect. The editing was confusing: the storyline...I'm not sure if there was one, actually: one of the worst endings in motion picture history.

SPOILER: I mean, come on. You wait the whole movie for some resolution to this guy's Satan thing, and then...that's it???? What a letdown. And what's with his girlfriend being involved. I should have also warned that this was a rant. lol

Anyhow. This movie was very weak when it had the potential to be very good.

I guess that is the worst thing about it. Not living up to its potential. **

My Little Eye (2002)

Clever and Unique Movie

[7/10 · 5 December 2004]

This is a great "b-horror" movie. It reminded me a lot of a film that Hitchcock or Bradbury would make. It isn't like the other teen horror films that being released (by the dozen) these days.

The movie case caught my eye (5 people offered 1,000,000$ to stay in a house for 6 months and be video taped -- none can leave -- bad things happen). There are a few "holes" in the story (e.g. do they get 1,000,000$ each?), but you can get over these and still understand everything. :) They're just annoying every once in a while. Twists in the story keep you on track all the way through.

The plot drives the movie more than its action which I enjoyed, but my husband found frustrating to watch. Some lulls plot/action might take away from the overall flow of the film, but overall, a really fun and satisfying watch! ****

Envy (2004)

This Humour Not For Everyone

[8/10 · 20 November 2004]

I wondered why this movie got such bad review-- since it stars so many good actors and has so many talented people involved in its creation. I'm a huge fan of Larry David (Seinfeld, Curb Your Enthusiasm) and I think that this movie has a lot of his flavour, and I thought it was hilarious. Although only produced by David, the acting and combination of talents were really interesting, and the nonsensical plot seemed only to be a base for the humour, as it might be in an episode of Seinfeld or CYE.

This type of comedy probably isn't for everyone. Some people were probably expecting Jack Black in his usual jackass role. Instead, he's actually funny in this movie without having to make a fool of himself. But I know that's not what many people came to see...

8/10. Smart, funny, excellent acting, wrting and improve (on Walken's part).

Two Brothers (2004)

Not Life of Pi

[6/10 · 8 August 2004]

How could anyone say this is a kid friendly movie??? I am going to have nightmares for months!!!

It seems to me like the movie makers shot a bunch of cute tiger scenes and then through together a film with 1) no plot/a whole lot of stories going on that don't go anywhere and that you don't really understand, 2) no diffinitive moral ending, 3) a bunch of stock character-- including a nauseatingly cute boy, 4) a main character who is passive and never stands out as good or evil. ZZZZ... When not bawling, I was sleeping in this snoozefest.

On top of this, they personified the animals: in a movie which seemed to be trying convince us it was "real", this is not only unbelievable and emotion blackmail, but very unsafe for children. Anyone who has read Yann Martel's fantastic book, The Life of Pi, will know what I mean. Animals are *animals* and do not behave like humans. In a fantastic world, such as that created by the jungle book, this is easier to accept as fiction.

All in all, the movie had some cute parts, some nice scenery, wonderful job by the tigers (whom I hope where treated well).

6/10 for me. Don't rush to see it. Don't bring young kids.

The Bourne Supremacy (2004)

Does not Rein Supreme

[5/10 · 5 August 2004]

The theaters must be losing money on this film, having to clean up after the motion sickness. Seriously, what's with the camera action? A little is OK, but 20 minutes is nauseating.

Some of the movie was good. The acting was excellent, some of the directing was right on, Europe and India were beautiful. Karl Urban and Matt Damon are both "very nice looking young men" (ahemhotahem) and play well off each other. Good call in casting.

The bad included a very confusing, yet predictable plot (if you can imagine that), gratuitous fight scenes and car chases, and, a real let down for me, a weak story as to the cause of J. Bourne's amnesia.

5/10 Hope the 3rd is better.

A Cinderella Story (2004)

Positive, But Boring

[5/10 · 2 August 2004]

I am a big fan of H.D. for making positive girl values cool again, designing clothes that look good but also look like clothes for CHILDREN (and not drag queens, strippers, college kids...there's a time and a place.) She also makes good movie choices.

In this movie she plays a strong female character named Sam, aka Cinderella.

She works hard,has goals, and sticks up for herself while still being a girl. (She doesn't totally take on the "tomboy" role that the movie wants her to take-- which is great! You don't have to be like a man to be any of those things and Hillary is a good model of that.)

The movie is cute, funny, and pretty positive. Unfortunately, it also gets really boring and sort of silly at times. Of course, I'm not in the target age range for the flic, so who am I to say?

5/10 It's not one I'd watch over and over again.

The Butterfly Effect (2004)

Surprisingly Good

[7/10 · 2 August 2004]

Since we'd all heard negative reviews about the movie, no one would watch it with me tonight. I have to say they missed out.

I was leery of Ashton K. playing anything but a dumb*ss, but he did a pretty good job (I suspect this is because a shallow, but charismatic character was needed in order to focus more on the events in the movie.)

The directing is pretty good- you get to know characters in a very short period of time and can follow them through a very quick moving story.

It is NOT a real thriller; it is NOT a horror movie...another example, i think, of false marketing. It IS very similar to Run Lola Run, and sort of like Donnie Darko. If you liked those, you'll probably enjoy this one.

7/10 entertaining, somewhat original

The Village (2004)

Not What Ye Think

[4/10 · 1 August 2004]

Weak. Weak weak weak. There are so many holes in this story, useless scenes, unfilled plot lines. Also, it has been marketed as a movie that it is not, and the director has not given his audience any of what they came to see. But, the thing is, you don't realize any of this until the end when it comes together that you've been gypped.

When the movie ends, if you're left asking yourself "What about...?" or "Does that mean...?" Then, the answer is yes-- yes, nothing happened; yes, it was *that* dumb; yes, you *are* right.

I'm trying to write this without spoilers. Bear with me.

The movie is at times very entertaining. There are even a couple very well done scenes. Some of the acting is good, some is awful. The thing is, it never comes together and makes a fluent, gripping movie with characters you care about...or a plot that is believable.

4/10 Disappointing.

Catwoman (2004)

Steer clear of black cats

[1/10 · 26 July 2004]

**Possible Spoilers…Don't worry, the movie can't get any worse**

Just when you thought Hollywood dialogue couldn't get worse than Gigli, there came Catwoman. My favorite lines: 'With freedom comes power.' (What???) 'Lassie would have brought me a key.' (hahaha. That was sooo clever.)

So, if you could get over the eye rolling, stomach gagging, cheesy, embarrassing dialogue, and make it to the story…well, you were left with the story. It was a good idea, but somehow no one involved in the movie managed to pull any of it off. Weak characters, bad costumes, terrible plot line and editing so choppy that I kept having seizures.

Oh oh oh, and the most beautiful irony ever-Halle Berry fighting the 'bad guy cosmetic company' when, wait a second, isn't she a Revlon spokes model??? Uh, yeah. Someone could have thought of that when they were doing the casting. But I guess they needed her bum for the 25 butt shots.

But maybe I'm being a bit unfair. I mean, I did see it at the drive in… and my view was corrupted by all the cars that kept leaving. And about an hour and half into it, mine was one of those cars too.

½ out of 5 … because the cats were pretty cute.

(It made the earlier movie, A Cinderella Story, look like an Oscar Winner...there were no cats in that one. Sorry.)

House of Sand and Fog (2003)

They should hand out Prozac at the door

[6/10 · 14 January 2004]

I watched this movie knowing very little about it. I had heard that it was based on an acclaimed book, and that it starred Jennifer Connelly and Ben Kingsley.

Well, I would very much like to have read the book, because, aside from Mr. Kingsley's stellar performance, this movie did not achieve what I'm guessing the author would have achieved in such an acclaimed novel.

(POSSIBLE SPOILERS) I found Connelly and her "boyfriend"'s characters to amoral and generally unlikable to cheer for, so I never found myself "switching alligiences." In my opinion, though Connelly did lose her house somewhat unfairly, she took a rather passive approach to getting it back (legally) and so I completely sided with the other family.

The story dragged on and became repetitive at times, there was some bad acting (especially that of Ron Eldard,) and although I've enjoyed many "depressing movies" (eg Dancer in the Dark) this was one I would not bring myself to watch again nor recommend.

I'd give it a 6/10, redeemed by some great performances and some genuinely good directing (at times.)