sikobabel Reviews

The Butterfly Effect (2004)

Like swiss cheese - tasty but full of holes.

[6/10 · 7 July 2004]

I should state up front that this review is for the director's cut.

To put it bluntly, this movie suffers from having a smart heart and a stupid brain. Any movie like this requires the viewer to suspend disbelief. In doing so the storytellers have the option to establish replacement rules to govern the universe they've created. This movie sets up well, giving the main character (Evan) blackouts which it will fill in later. However, once Evan ventures into his past to 'fill in' the empty spaces, the movie begins to contradict itself. This would be excusable if it was a lighter, more amusing movie. But this is far from light material. It is extremely morbid. The audience is bombarded with this darkness, which attempts to engage us, to give us something deeper. Unfortunately, it doesn't take much digging before you get frustrated.

For me, there are two particularly frustrating aspects to this film:

First, the tagline of this movie is "change one thing, change everything". As such, I expected that when Evan goes back to change something, everything from that point forward will be different. In other words, if Evan has ten blackouts, and goes back to visit the fifth one, then all the following blackouts would either vanish or be completely different. Instead, the blackouts are always the same. Evan jumps around to whatever blackout is convenient. However, this betrays the movie's central concept. This could have been fixed with a more careful storyline, where the blackouts were visited in reverse order.

The second frustrating aspect is the gross simplifications in Evan's revised histories. When Evan goes back and changes over a decade of history, the effects of his change are summed up far too easily and conveniently, almost as if the other people are all in on some cruel joke being played on Evan. I understand that this is done to keep the pace moving, but again the central theme of "change one thing, change everything". But even after multiple changes, a lot of the world stays pretty much the same.

Comparisons to Donnie Darko are inevitable. Donnie Darko was a superior film in this regard because it did not make the mistake of laying down ground rules and then breaking them. Instead, it hides the rules from the audience and leaves them up for discussion. As a result, you have a much more interesting conversation piece. The Butterfly Effect essentially outsmarts itself by trying too hard.

For some, my comments may seem like cynical over-thinking. This movie has a lot of polish on it to make it look good, and if you want to keep your brain turned off, you may enjoy it considerably. Some people may not like Ashton Kutcher and discredit the movie based on that, but honestly I thought his performance was far more convincing than the script itself.

Like I said before, this movie does have a smart heart. It tries very very hard to bring something interesting to the table. The setup and ending are good, but the path between is too dark for its own good and ultimately a mess of contradictions. 6 out of 10.

American Splendor (2003)

Two things: Wow, and Thank You

[9/10 · 15 February 2004]

I've been relatively disappointed as of late with quite a few movies I've seen that have received considerable accolades. It's not that there haven't been good movies coming down the pipeline. It's just that it seems like the public and critics are so hungry for something new and different that certain movies that are marginally innovative are getting a bit blown out of proportion.

Suffice it to say that when I picked up American Splendor, I expected another entry in the line of good-but-not-great films that I have been catching up with on DVD.

What I got, finally, was what I was looking for. Personally, I've been thinking that maybe the problem was just me. That I wanted something in a movie that no one else is looking for. Something that nobody else is thinking of.

Frankly, seeing this film fills me with a hearty mix of joy and jealousy. Joy, for the most enthralling and refreshing film I've seen since Fight Club. Jealousy, for the fact that they have accomplished with this film everything that I would want to do with a film if I had the brains and funds to give it a shot.

I can't give this film a 10, but if I could, I would give it a 9.9. It is not the greatest film ever made. In some ways, it's at the opposite end of the spectrum from "great" films. This film starts out somewhat disappointing. Almost as if it is lost, and doesn't even know what it wants to be. But then I got it. This is a film about a man who doesn't even know what he wants to be. In some ways, it's like the gimmick of Memento. That film gives you no memory by telling the story in reverse. This film gives you the lack of direction of Harvey Pekar by never allowing itself to become any particular genre of film. You can never put a label on it. It is an anomaly in and of itself. And as much as I loved this film, I wouldn't recommend it to many people. Much like the comic itself, this film does not cry for attention. This film only wants you to know that there are people out there who get it. They understand what it's like to have ideas without the talent to express them. They understand that level of frustration.

I didn't know who Harvey Pekar was before I saw this film, but I will never forget him now. In some ways, he's just a lucky loser, and in his own way, he's a genius. This is a biographical movie unlike any other. And to everyone involved, I want to say Thank You.

Chicago (2002)

Nice try, but it's no Moulin Rouge...

[6/10 · 27 August 2003]

I wasn't quite sure what to expect from this film. What I got was surprisingly predictable. It is a good looking film, with very good editing and has some outstanding singing & dancing. But as entertainment, it falls a little flat. The energy of this film is a polar opposite of Moulin Rouge. In this film, the energy has to come completely from the actors and performers, as stage settings can only do so much. In Moulin Rouge, every pixel on the screen is alive and the actors have to double-time things just to keep up. In Chicago, things are much more linear, as if the director found it impossible to sustain more than two simultaneous subplots. It is simpler plot with characters that are much more shallow.

I know that this is a stage adaptation, and the attempts to stay true to those roots are quite admirable. But admirable attempts alone do not make for great entertainment. The songs are simply too long for the big screen, because unlike a stage presentation, you can only see what the director wants you to see. On a stage, you can focus on any aspect you like. It doesn't translate well if you don't thicken the visuals up.

I give this a 6 out of 10. It might get lower but a few of the singing and dancing numbers possibly could qualify as classic scenes (especially the puppet and tap-dancing numbers). They also managed to put Richard Gere in a role that didn't make him annoying. However, I hardly think that this was worthy of the "Best Picture" Oscar.

Equilibrium (2002)

I'd buy it gladly.

[8/10 · 1 August 2003]

I don't get it. I really just don't get it. How does a movie this well-made slip under the public radar? It certainly isn't a perfect film, but it is definitely well made. I don't know what the budget was, but the results look like $100 million.

Besides being good looking, it has good acting. Christian Bale carries a film that requires him to run the full spectrum of human emotions. The remaining actors also dive into their roles with reckless abandon. No complaints at all in that department.

The story is a bit refreshing. It's not completely original, but it makes an admirable effort to avoid being too cliche. It's a new spin on the old "mankind sacrifices art for peace" kind of film. In this film, it's not big bad machines or scary 'big brother' that make up the oppression. It's a drug. In the world created for this film, sobriety is a crime. The world is on dope that kills their ability to appreciate art in any way. The sober people are like stoners, high on their own feelings. It's a great way of demonstrating that being extreme in drug policy in either direction is a bad thing. Banning drugs is as bad as banning sobriety. A great message.

The real star of this film though is the gun-fights. I've never seen anything quite like this film before. Seeing how this was done only confirms that the Wachowski brothers really did drop the ball with the second Matrix movie. Equilibrium introduces a fighting style called 'Gun-kata'. It's gun-fighting that makes the gun an extension of the fighter. Instead of ducking and shooting, it makes use of calculated positioning and quickly disposes multiple opponents. It's a complete thrill to watch.

Like I said though, it isn't a perfect film. Some of the twists in the plot felt a bit cheap. The events in the third act have similar plot problems to the end of Vanilla Sky. Good plot twists tease the viewer, giving them at least a chance to see them coming. Bad plot twists are like shooting someone in the back, and this film is guilty of a little of that.

With a better third act, this film would easily surpass the original Matrix movie. As is, I call it a draw. Go see this film immediately. I just rented it, but I'm buying it as soon as I can.

Finding Nemo (2003)

Pixar rebounds and scores.

[9/10 · 3 June 2003]

As a movie studio, Pixar has a nearly perfect track record. In my opinion, they slipped a little with Monsters Inc. While the movie was certainly fun and technically the graphics were brilliant, the story was weakly assembled and felt rushed. It almost felt like a movie put together by a studio that took its excellent reputation for granted. I was nervous about seeing Finding Nemo, only because I feared that this studio had run out of real magic, and would continue to coast along on brilliant graphics alone.

I have to believe that Dreamworks' recent success with Shrek was a wake-up call to Pixar. Shrek widened the market of animated films, proving that a well-mixed dose of tongue-in-cheek adult humor was long overdue. Pixar's routine was getting stale, and Monsters Inc. was the result.

Finding Nemo brings back the magic. It succeeds in every way that Monsters Inc. failed, and surpasses all their previous efforts in technical brilliance. Taken as a whole, it surpasses every Pixar movie except for Toy Story 2, which remains the most emotionally charged of all their movies.

True to form, Pixar gives us a simple story with complex emotions running throughout. No time is wasted on the setup here - we have a father (Marlin) who loses everything but one son (Nemo). Marlin becomes understandably overprotective, but the excesses of this lead to frustration in Nemo. Nemo rebels in a scene that plays out so well that you completely forget you are watching fish. The tension is unbelievably real.

From there we are taken on a journey that introduces us to a wide variety of characters and fantastic adventures. To go into detail would spoil the wonder of it all.

Possibly the most amazing feat of this movie is that I actually enjoyed Ellen DeGeneres in a major role. I didn't think that was possible, as I normally find her brand of humor annoying. Perhaps this comedian has finally found her niche in voice acting, or just her perfect role. Either way, her part demanded a surprising amount of range for a comic relief sidekick, and she delivers.

Congratulations Pixar, you've still got it.

9 out of 10.

25th Hour (2002)

A skillful examination of hate.

[9/10 · 22 May 2003]

This is only the third film of Spike Lee's that I've seen from start to end, and the level of excellence displayed here makes me hungry to see his earlier (and from what I hear superior) set of work. Mr. Lee's greatest talent that I've seen so far is his ability to affect an audience so well when building upon the framework of an essentially simple story.

I am a big fan of Edward Norton's work, and he delivers a performance here to rival the well-deserved accolades he received from American History X. Supporting cast members deliver where needed as well.

If this movie is missing anything, it's that the premise has too subtle of an introduction. I knew what the basic story was before going into the film, and I was quite glad to know what was happening beforehand, because I would probably have been a bit lost without that. Like I said before, the story is really simple, but the details are revealed in bits and pieces through the film that would make it hard to follow if you went in completely oblivious to the story. Our main character is a drug dealer who gets busted and has 24 hours of freedom left to spend sorting out his life on the outside before he will disappear into a notoriously hellish prison for seven years.

What makes this movie so effective is its refusal to pull any of its emotional punch. The opening credits establish the time and place for the story by showing images of New York City that mark an unmistakable period in time. No on-screen dates required. I've heard that some found it gratuitous. I found it to be a perfect collection of shots to establish the setting. It is hard to not be moved by it, whether it is sadness, awe, or disgust that you feel.

The director takes this a step further from there, exposing the most taboo of thoughts lurking in the heads of the characters in the movie. There is a lot of hate in this film. Spike brings all the hate full circle, however. He brings it back to the source. The hate that these characters feel, it all begins inside them. They hate themselves, some things they've done, and often things that they didn't do. They mask it by projecting it onto any easy target around them. But it never works, because these people can only lie to themselves for so long.

Unfortunately, these introspective discoveries don't get to make the rounds to all the characters, which might make this feel like a more complete film. However, it would have also dragged things out, and that would be a shame to do to this surprisingly well-paced film. Rarely do dramatic films flow so well. This is due in large part to the decision to blend all dialog with the cinematography rather than giving each their own voice. The best example of this shot would be the conversation in the apartment that overlooks Ground Zero. Brilliant.

Along with the skillful examination applied to hate, a sense of deep love lies lurking beneath the surface. While some of the harshest words I've ever heard spew from these people, deep down you can feel that the darkest emotions on display here could not exist without a love that made them care so much in the first place. This is real inner conflict, not the generic crap that TV soaps will spoon feed you. I found it all mesmerizing.

In the end, this movie feels like a love letter to America itself. This is a land that can eat you alive or supply you with your greatest desires, and gives you the freedom to choose your path accordingly, but the can always punish you for the bad choices you make. We are given a land of choice, but our ability to choose is also an ability to take ourselves down. The message is that so long as we confront our choices and consequences, there is always a glimmer of hope, and a shot at redemption.

The director, cast, and crew bring it all together here, and the results are harmonious.

9 out of 10, just shy of greatness.

The Matrix Reloaded (2003)

The thrill is gone, but hope lingers.

[7/10 · 19 May 2003]

Some movies collapse under the weight of their own hype, such as the Star Wars prequels. In a summer full of sequels, the Matrix was clearly the favorite for the summer of 2003. This movie can not live up to that hype. In fact, it could not live up to half the hype it has received.

I saw some mixed reviews before going to see the movie and consequently I lowered my expectations a bit before going in. I knew that I would have to turn off my brain for this movie and just enjoy the ride, but the result here was just ridiculous.

To really delve into the flaws of the movie would spoil the few decent plot twists that are sparsely distributed in this bloated film. So, I can only scratch the surface here. Honestly, the plot of this movie, if it was put together in a denser manner, would far exceed the plot of X2. But this is a less enjoyable movie than X2. I have to imagine that in the editing room, this labor of love was too close to the directors' hearts to cut down some scenes. But this movie really needs some harsh love to make it a better film.

I've heard plenty of complaints from friends and other reviewers about the scenes in the Zion being overdone. These complaints are warranted, and I agree. I can't believe I am saying this, but the fight scenes are also too long, and quite overdone.

The prime example is a scene that we catch a glimpse of in the trailer: Neo takes on a swarm of agents single-handedly. The actual scene, when played out, feels as if it were a half hour long, and is almost boring by the end. This scene had potential, it should have been the next coming of Bruce Lee in Enter the Dragon fighting off a swarm of guards. But this scene is about as much fun as watching someone play a video game with the cheat codes turned on. You never get a sense that Neo is going to lose. You know from the first movie that Neo has powers beyond kung fu, to manipulate the Matrix itself, but here he's just flipping around punching and kicking agents all over, and never really inflicting any substantial damage. It feels like the fight choreographer wanted to show Neo kicking agents from every possible angle, and expects us to wait while each of these angles is demonstrated. About halfway through this fight, there are so many agents on screen that they make a very obvious switch over to a computer generated fight scene. You can easily see the switch because Keanu's overly-stiff kung fu style suddenly is overly-graceful and flowing. Sure, it looks cool, but it's obviously not Neo. It's someone playing a video game, and the audience doesn't get to play, just watch. By the end, you're thankful that it's over, instead of begging for more.

Unfortunately, about half the drama in-between the fight scenes is even more dull and useless to the plot. Worst of all, there is one key character from the first movie that is gone in this installment, dismissed in trite retrospect, and his replacement is a quite unwelcome bit of comic relief. I don't want to spoil who is missing, but trust me, you'll know, and you'll miss him.

So, is it really that bad? Am I being unfair? Maybe. Some of the action scenes are pretty darn good. And like I said before, there are some decent plot elements here that could elevate this movie if they weren't so diluted. And, if I had to pick the best thing about this movie, it was the possibilities created for the next film. There is the possibility that Neo and his crew will face dangers other than agents and sentinels, but those possibilities are really only hinted at in this movie. If they are making promises for the next film, however, I will be there. But some advice for the Wachowski brothers if they happen across this little blurb of mine: I know that you are capable of better filmmaking than this, and better thinking than this. Don't be shy with the knife when it comes to editing time. Go and watch the first Indiana Jones movie. There is a scene where a man with a huge sword squares off with Indy. Indy whips out his gun and just shoots him. It was the smart move. Neo could benefit from a little of the same common sense.

I give it a 7 out of 10, on the strength of the unexplored possibilities that we may see in the final film. If those are untapped, this trilogy is best left to the first film alone.

The Salton Sea (2002)

Offbeat and wholly enjoyable.

[8/10 · 16 May 2003]

Dark humor is a growing trend in films since the explosion of Pulp Fiction. Some films get it right, like Fight Club. Some films fall flat, like Rules of Attraction. This film, The Salton Sea, gets it right. Whenever you're laughing and simultaneously thinking, "I should NOT be laughing at this", you know you're watching good dark humor.

There are a few great moments like this, but added to that are some well crafted scenes, good acting, and a plot that is better than nearly every other drug-themed film I can think of. Films like Trainspotting and Requiem for a Dream are excellent examinations of drug use and addiction, but in terms of real plot, things really are on the thin side. This film gives you the visual goodness that comes with exploring a drug culture, but takes the plot above this, leaving it in the background.

The less you know about this movie before you see it, the better. But I will tell you this much: do not expect your typical "my life sucks so I destroy myself with drugs so pity me" kind of film. Early on in the movie, the main character says "I know what you're thinking, but don't give up on me yet." This is a good bit of advice, because you just might end up rooting for this guy by the end of the film.

If you look for flaws, they are there, but well painted over with great visuals, great humor, and an marvelous shift from lazy introduction to mounting intensity. Occasionally the main character lets himself meander off the path a bit too far with pointless poetic ramblings, but it's only mildly annoying. There are a few scenes that don't hold up under scrutiny, but the problems don't get in the way of a great plot.

I give it an 8 out of 10. Good stuff.

X2 (2003)

Great scenes + great characters = decent movie?

[8/10 · 14 May 2003]

I was quite enthusiastic about seeing X2, and for the most part I left quite satisfied with the results. I'm not quite ready to say that this film exceeds the first movie.

What we have here is a set of undeniably cool characters and fantastic scenes, but they are sewn together in predictable and almost cliche patterns. Adding to the hurt is the fact that I watch movie trailers closely, and any big surprises this movie intended to deliver were drastically softened by the scenes shown there. That may be unfair, but big blockbuster movies like this that plan on inundating people with marketing material should be more careful with what they reveal. When you see 10-15 commercials plus 2-3 trailers for a movie, you are going to pick up on a lot of things unless you take better care to hide them. Shame on the production team for that.

Character portrayals are quite good individually, but interactions are a little off. Magneto and Mystique pull off the best chemistry in the movie amongst the characters from the first movie. The scenes with Stryker where he interacts with Wolverine, Magneto, or Professor X are surprisingly good, pulling off a sense of real history that characters from the first movie got for free. Other areas suffer. Iceman's dealings with his family fell flat for me. That should have been a pivotal scene, but it played out like a clip from 90210. Luckily that scene doesn't last long.

The bad chemistry moments aren't really that bad, and they're quite hard to notice with all the action going on. You rarely get a chance to breath before someone flexes their mutant powers for some reason. Unfortunately, these displays of power often feel disjointed, like a bad fight scene. Punch, block, punch, block. It feels like the script was divided up into one section for each mutant to show off his or her powers. This gives the film overall an awkward flow. The sheer coolness of most of these scenes tends to outweigh this awkwardness. I'm going to rate this film an 8 out of 10 because I really did enjoy myself while watching it. However I think that if I wait another week to review this film, it will drop to a 7. The reason is because any thought after-the-fact on this film only further exposes its weaknesses, and that really isn't fair to a film that delivers some devastatingly good popcorn fun.

My advice would be to see this film without high expectations, and don't let the occasional brilliant scene get your hopes up for a smart film. Set your brain on autopilot and bask in the great action. In the end, the plot really doesn't fly, but pretty much everything else does, and marvelously. The opening scene alone should go down in history as one of the best fight scenes ever.

The Ring (2002)

Scary? Yes. Deep? Maybe...

[8/10 · 12 May 2003]

I should say up front that I am related (not closely) to the director of this movie. However, trust when I say that any bias I have would cause me to feel more negative than positive about a film if it was not up to par. I was, frankly, quite disappointed with The Mexican, and was hoping Mr. Verbinsky would have chosen better material this time around. In my opinion, this source material gave him the ability to demonstrate some real talent.

First, the good. The look of this film is very Fincher-esque. The grays, the blues, the blacks, they are all used heavily. In less capable hands, this would only convey sadness and depression. Here, the dreariness conveys something beyond a simple, sad world. This world is haunted. Every shadow, every corner, every closed door seems to be hiding something. The atmosphere it generates is perfect for this story, and doubles its effectiveness. The soundtrack (or lack thereof) complements this. There are no cheesy moments of thumping melodramatic compositions getting in the way of things. It's understated and haunting, often going for creepy white noise instead of overwraught symphonies.

Beyond the good looks, there is substance. This leading lady is no pushover. She is determined and driven, never helpless. The remaining cast plays out well, too. All of the cast members seem to have exaggerated features, which gives them almost the feel of a comic book, and adds to the surreal feeling of this world we're looking at. These are not the usual horror movie flakes waiting to add to the bodycount. These are accessible characters with real flaws but are smart enough to make you believe they have a chance of thinking, not fighting, their way out of the situation the find themselves in. I found this quite refreshing.

The scares come early and often. This is not a slasher movie, since a large part of the mystery here is wondering what the heck happened to the people who get killed off. You get bits and pieces, just enough to tease you each step along the way.

The plot is effective, some things are very subtle and will likely not be picked up by everyone. In discussions with others, I found that people were looking for plot holes in the wrong places. The video, how it was made, that's all there and reasonably explained if you pick up on it. This subtlety is nice for someone like me who enjoys figuring things out and picking up on seemingly innocent clues. Sadly though, there are some key plot elements that do not hold up under the same scrutiny, and that holds the film back from true greatness.

My score: 8 out of 10. Good scares, great acting, beautiful to look at. Lets you dig deep for answers, but you'll find bigger holes along the way. If you can forgive that, or at least suspend your disbelief, you'll have a good time.