Reviews

15 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
Get exactly what you expect.
14 November 2005
This is one of those films that you can't ignore the obvious manipulation. Each scene is telegraphed a mile a way, with no real attempt to mark new ground. No, this film is exactly what it is intended to be; holiday good cheer and nothing more. In that respect, the film is successful and in the end, a harmless holiday movie that tries to help us forget all the real world darkness going on.

Tim Allen seems to be carving out a career with these Christmas movies. Though his performance is not even close to his Santa character, he still manages to put in a performance that has some memorable moments (the scene after his fat injection is a hoot). Jamie Lee is over the top and at times can be a little too much, but still, she fits right in with the rest of the decorations that are wrapped around this Christmas tree of a movie. I give it a 6 because let's be honest, it is totally predictable and corny. But as I mentioned, it is a welcome to all the negative things going on right now.
64 out of 95 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Not the 70's version........and that is a good thing
14 November 2005
I grew up with the 70's version of this famous book. I loved and still love watching the movie to this day. Though I own it on DVD, any time it is on TV, I stop and watch it.

When I learned Burton was teaming with Depp to make a new one, I knew that it would be a "new" version. I was not disappointed.

I have seen many make references to Depp's characterization of Wonka as being a spin on Michael Jackson. I say that comparison is grossly inaccurate. I felt Depp presented a Wonka who was a lonely, tortured soul, out of touch with the real world. Perhaps it is this that many are drawn to in their connection of Depp's Wonka being a send up of Jackson, but I disagree whole heartedly and say Depp gave us the Wonka that was intended in the book. This man is not going to be the fatherly type. He is going to be eccentric and goofy as well as creepy and dark. All of these are on display in Depp's performance.

Excellent work. I still love the 70's version and it remains a classic story from my youth. But this version has staked it's own unique place.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Good.....but could have been much better
14 November 2005
From an overall message standpoint, this film gets a 10 out of 10. I really enjoyed the the two actors who play the brothers (Jonah Bobo and Josh Hutchenson). I think in the end, the film is hurt by being too much like Jumanji (the other Chris Van Allsburg). I have never read either book, so they may be very similar, but still, no attempt to separate this film from Jumanji was made.

Dax Shepard is surprisingly good as the astronaut, playing basically a straight role. Tim Robbins makes what essentially is a cameo as the dad. It would have been interesting to perhaps utilize his talent and had him more involved in the film, but again, not knowing the source material, don't know how that would have worked out.

The special effects and adventure which made Jumanji fun falls totally flat here. Were it not for the great performances of the kids playing the brothers, this film would have earned a far less rating than 6 from me.

A good film overall, but one that definitely is a DVD rental, if you really enjoyed it, a DVD purchase. But I would save your cinema money for other films this season.
4 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Village (2004)
7/10
Movie suffers from inaccurate marketing......
24 October 2005
As with M.Night's other movies, I enjoyed this latest outing, especially the performances of the leads. I think the movie suffered in overall response due to a poorly conceived marketing plan.

The movie was sold as a horror film and fans of that genre went into this with that mindset in place. When the film actually turned out to be a look at how we try and protect those we love from the horrors of the "real world", fans were upset and rightly so. As anyone that has enjoyed M.Night's movies, all is not what it would seem. I think the marketing pushed too hard the horror aspect which created an expectation that was not going to be met.

I think if you go into this movie expecting another commentary on spiritual and moral themes, you are going to like this. If you are going into this for the scare factor, you are going to be left empty.
37 out of 48 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Flightplan (2005)
6/10
Pure fluff
12 October 2005
Jodie Foster seems hell bent on us forgetting those Oscars she won and accept her as an action star. Panic Room, and now Flight Plan, puts Jodie in similar circumstances (fighting off bad guys after money). Don't get me wrong, all in all, this is enjoyable. But it is kind of like a plain hot dog. It satisfies your taste buds, but only for a little while. Soon you are hungry for more. That is what I found myself asking for in this one. There are so many plot holes in this film, you are left at the end frustrated by the lack of exploration or explanation of story arcs that are started yet never finished.

I guess in the end, this movie is decent and it did entertain me enough to not be totally disappointed. But like eating that plain hot dog, I am left knowing there was so much more that could have been added to it, but I started consuming it so had to finish. It satisfied me for a little bit, but not long after, I wanted more.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Corpse Bride (2005)
7/10
Not bad.....but not great
12 October 2005
I have to admit, I came out of Corpse Bride a bit disappointed. It wasn't because the film was bad. It is because it didn't equal or surpass Nightmare Before Christmas.

The film effectively evokes the Burton sense of style and story telling. But something is not quite right. The songs are one thing. Elfman, a great composer and long-time collaborator, seems to just kind of sleep walk through this one. Nothing really catchy in the way of songs, which was a big part of Nightmare. The other thing, the story just kind of left the whole sub-plot of the bride and the duke. There really was no real acknowledgment of their past.

All in all, will be added to my collection, but can't help but feel this was a bit rushed.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
A must for any football fans out there
23 September 2005
A pro football players decent into total self-destruction is played out between moments of comedy, grit and sorrow. Probably my favorite Burt Reynolds movie, it catches him back when he was still acting and not smirking for the camera. Football is a sport that can bring out the best and sometimes worst in people. That is showcased brilliantly in this film.

This film is over 30 years old, yet its themes of betrayal, enlightenment, grit and determination are still echoed on football fields every September through December. I have a feeling it will play for another 30 years and not loose a step.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Good, but too much by the numbers......
23 September 2005
For football and Sandler fans, this will be a good tide over in between your fix of watching real games. As a film, this is strictly a by the numbers recycle of the older, better, 1974 film. Most of the same story elements are here, as well as dialog lifted straight from the original script. We get some updated dialog to make it entertaining (mainly Rock's quips), but I wish they had tried something a little different with it rather than taken the lazy way out.

In the end though, a good rental for the football fans out there. Possibly a purchase for Sandler fans, though this is by far not his best film. None the less, harmless fun not to be taken seriously.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
A surprise
23 September 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I went into this movie half-expecting another Linda Blair turn. Come to find out, this actually was not the spook fest that I thought it was going to be. Yes, there are moments that are telegraphed a mile away (the one and only professional witness that can back up the priest's claims meets an expected end before being able to testify), but still, the movie is more a lesson in faith than it is another story about the devil and the Catholic Church doing battle.

It is nice to have expectations of a movie going in and then it turn out to be something totally different. The film doesn't make any new strides in the genre, but it does come from a different angle and has enough chills, suspense and of all things, heart, to make it a nice surprise.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Sahara (2005)
5/10
Pale modern version of Indiana Jones
20 September 2005
This movie had a lot of potential, but in the end, it just wasn't enough to make me want to see it again. Everything about it seems out of place. The soundtrack music, meant to invoker a certain nostalgia I think, is way out of place in most scenes (the only time it is used effectively is during the land sailing scene). The comedy at times is way too forced. The henchmen have to be the dumbest in screen history. You can forgive a little bit of this given that the movie is trying to take a page from the Indiana Jones trilogy, but they just make the henchmen way too stupid and unobservant.

All in all, I can see why this film did not do the business at the theater that was expected of it. A shame, a good cast, just not a lot there for them to work with.
24 out of 45 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Art of subtle acting.....
18 September 2005
I resisted watching this movie for the longest time. I really wasn't interested in it quite frankly. But over time, finally just gave in the other night when it showed up on TMC. I was totally blown away. Bill Murray has turned into one hell of an actor. The movie is an example of subtle film making at its best. There is really nothing exciting to keep you into the movie. What keeps you into the movie is the performances of Murray and Johansson. Watching these two Americans in Japan, neither doing what they want to be doing but powerless it would seem to change that. Both are not totally happy in their current relationships. These two factors bring them together, an unlikely pair, but given their circumstances, the relationship makes perfect sense.

I am glad that I finally gave in and gave this movie a chance. After seeing some dismal movies lately, was nice to watch something that lived up to the hype I had heard.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Transporter 2 (2005)
7/10
Nothing complicated here.........
18 September 2005
Just an all around fun romp at the movies. No new or complicated story here. We just get more of Frank kicking some serious tail. Implausible action sequences are forgiven with the wink of an eye from the director and actors. Some of the fastest action you will see that doesn't rely on wire-fu or CGI. Rather, we get a lot of the same from Frank and that is exactly what should be expected. I think in the modern era of the high concept action movies, they have forgotten how to just show the audience a good time. This movie and it's predecessor take us back to a time when action wasn't bogged down by complicated stories, rather the star's charisma and action were all that one needed to enjoy their time in the theater.

These movies have no lofty aspirations other than to give you one hell of a ride for an hour and a half. This outing delivers in spades.
70 out of 88 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Oldboy (2003)
5/10
A mess
27 August 2005
OK, perhaps there is truth in the saying "lost in translation" because I absolutely do not understand why this movie has garnered the praise it has. It is a mess, an absolute mess from beginning to end. The only positive thing I can say about it is the wickedly twisted revenge plot. There is no cohesive story line, no attempt to give the viewer any kind of clue about what is going on. You are kept in the dark the whole time, which I assume is the point. But by the time the final credits roll, you want to borrow one of the hammers used in the movie and beat yourself over the head with it to stop the pain that the film inflicts on your senses from trying to make any kind of sense of it.

I have since gone back and watched this film again without the dubbed soundtrack and though I still feel it is way over hyped, I do not feel it is as bad as my initial review of it above. I have given it another star from my original 4 that I gave it. Still, the movie
132 out of 286 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
The Crow: Wicked Prayer delivers
5 June 2005
Warning: Spoilers
THE CROW: WICKED PRAYER marks a return to a stylized form of film making. Each scene, especially early on, is like a framed poetic piece of art work. That word "poetic" was used by quite a few folks when describing various scenes. The film/story is set in the desert Southwest. Everything has dust/sand on it. There is a natural haze that seemingly lifts once night fall comes. Gone is the urban decay of previous stories. This dusty/dirty atmosphere helps to establish the film as a modern western tale.

The local community is odds over the mine in their town being closed to allow for a casino to be built. This conflict pits the Native American community against the rest of the community. This conflict, in part, lends to some of the reasons why the Four Horseman gang featured in the film are seeking revenge. The gang believes THEY are righting wrongs. The one thing that the town can agree on is nobody likes Jimmy Cuervo (Eddie Furlong).

The gang is not entirely evil, which is evidenced through some very well done moments in the story where the gang isn't so sure of themselves. This humanizes these characters that have in previous Crow films been nothing more than cartoon characters lined up for the slaughter. Jimmy could easily have fallen into this gang. Were it not for the love of Lily, he may well have. It is this tip toeing of the line between who is good and evil that makes the story fascinating.

Action is straight on, not a lot of martial arts. Wires are used from time to time, but other than that, the action is raw and emotional. There are no car chases, no exaggerated fighting styles. This is bare knuckle action and it fits the setting and story perfectly. I really liked that the action was not over the top.

The opening sequence, with its tip of the 10 gallon hat to THE GOOD, THE BAD & THE UGLY intro of the gang is great and sets the tone perfectly. Jimmy and Lily's intros are great. It was a nice to actually see both lovers alive at the beginning, where we can see them relate to each other rather than relying on flashbacks to establish their relationship. This adds strength to our empathy/sympathy for Jimmy later on. Jimmy's resurrection is done perfectly, a lot of emotion.

The music is absolutely fantastic. Jamie Christopherson's score is THE best, in my opinion, to date. It uses guitars, harmonicas, brass, all the elements that you would expect from a western setting.This is the first Crow film without the benefit of a rock soundtrack. In my opinion having a score-only soundtrack works perfectly given the desert setting.

Eddie Furlong's performance is spot on. He has the crux of responsibility in this film and he handles it beautifully. His character is very different from previous Crow films. He is torn when he comes back. He doesn't want to be there, he wants to be with Lily. Eddie does a great job conveying this pain. Eventually he accepts that this is the only way to be with Lily again. Emmanuelle is a dream, you can feel her love for Jimmy and the strength she has.

The villains overall are a much improved element over previous sequels. The beauty of this film is for the first time, we see the villains as humans. They have back stories that we are given glimpses into through their introductions and flashback sequences.

The director, Lance Mungia, has a great style to watch. The camera angles and shots are beautiful. The editing is near flawless with some very nice transition scenes that go from real-time to flashback back to real-time with beautiful results. I would have to say that for the first time in the sequels, we have a very technically sound film here. There was great care and work put into this film during post-production and it shows.

The ending is one of the best since the first film from an emotional level. It is beautifully shot and executed; you will be moved by it. Again, the word "poetic" comes up time and again when I look for a way to describe the look and feel of this film.

My only complaint with the film is the first half of the 3rd act. This is when Luc has channeled Satan and he and Lola are married to further consummate the union. David Boreanaz, in my opinion, is too far over the top. The dialogue David has during this part of the film is sprinkled with a tongue-n-cheek tone, but his delivery works against the intent, in my opinion. He obviously tries to take a page from Jack Nicholson's slant on the Joker from the first BATMAN film, but goes two pages instead.

Hopper's dialogue is cringe worthy in the 3rd act. I had hoped perhaps the delivery of the lines would improve them from the last script I had read. But as feared, the gangsta' lingo sounds out of place and I wish it would have been changed. Thankfully the second half of the 3rd act gets things back on the right track and gives us a very satisfying and emotional ending.

Overall, loved the film and can't wait for the DVD.
32 out of 69 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Theatrical release is nothing more than promo for video release
6 March 2005
The only reason this movie gets a 1 from me is that you have to give it something.

The movie, no matter what the fans of this mess want to say, is nothing more than straight to video fair that was thrown to paying audiences to basically promote it for the video release. It is an insult to any one that wastes their time and money on this train wreck of a movie.

How bad is it? The movie in a matter of 3 short weeks has totally fallen out of the top 20 and is down to one showing in the basement room of most theaters. The only reason this movie has made over 10 million is due to the inflated ticket prices of today.

The movie is scheduled for a May 17th release. That is right, only 3 months from its theatrical release it will appear on video shelves. Further evidence that New Line is trying to save what money they can. With the budget for this movie close to 90 million and another 20 million promotion, it is this years Gigli. a failure on all levels. All I have to say is good thing New Line made tons of money off the LOtR movies. Unfortunately this crap has taken a large chunk of money out of the LOtR cash kitty New Line had saved up.

Shame on New Line for ripping people off of hard earned money and time.
6 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed