Change Your Image
chambersjad
The Dresden Files
Carnivale
Firefly
Early X-Files
Spaced
Favorite movies
Dr. Strangelove
Hot Fuzz
Boondock Saints
A Clockwork Orange
Hudson Hawk
The Quiet Man
LOTR Trilogy
Brainscan
Strange Days
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
The Ballad of Buster Scruggs (2018)
I wish its limited release had brought it to theaters in MY town.
This is a great movie. Easily the best movie I saw in 2018. Without any doubt the best western released in this decade, and probably since 2000. It is actually my new favorite Cohen Bros movie. The haters seem to think it started good and then got worse and worse. Actually it started brilliant, but kind of lightly sardonically dark and then got more ponderous and serious and continually more and more darkly humorous. And MORE interesting, unless all you wanted was a stereotypical "yee haw, cowboy movie." For any TRUE fan of dark comedy, this might end up being your favorite western of all time. A great (but for the most part understated) cast, fantastic score, flawless and beautiful cinematography, I can't think of a single flaw. Some have criticized its pacing, but any fan of the genre realizes that anthology films are just paced differently than other films. Some pieces do drag on a little, but the payoff is always worth the wait. In other words, they EARN every second of run time. A new Western classic and proof that the Cohens still "have it."
Watch Dogs (2014)
Overall, Fun and Very Good
I enjoyed Watch Dogs. It wasn't without its issues, but overall I had lots of fun. I'll start with the bad. I didn't find it to be a compelling story. The characters don't develop or go anywhere. There isn't much in the way of payoff at the end, and there is a moral choice at the end that doesn't change the ending much either way. And the "moral choice" comes out of nowhere as no choices anywhere prior to the very end (even after the boss fight) has any influence on the ending. It's like someone set out to write William Gibson and wound up with Lifetime Movie of the Week. Still, not a big loss. This is a video game, I'm not expecting Hemingway. And there's so much to do and so little story, that the main quest is only about a quarter of the game anyway.
Glitches. I've run into several mission restarting glitches on the PC port. And there is a report of a game ending glitch that ruins whole savegames (I'm lucky I missed that one.) Ubi needs to realize that playtesting can prevent problems like this and this is bush league developer stuff.
And I'm not finding much re-playability. I got many hours of enjoyment out of Watch Dogs, but now that I'm done with the story and most of the cheevos... there isn't much else. The multiplayer isn't meaty enough to carry much replayability. But then again I'm not much into online multiplayer, if someone is their opinion might be different.
But the good far outweighs the bad. Plenty of great gameplay outside the main story. Lots of content and contracts and games. I've heard complaints about the driving... but I prefer it to Rockstar's Euphoria engine driving (GTA.) I really think a lot of the bellyaching is coming from folks who aren't very GOOD at the driving.
Mechanically, the engine is good, the stealth works, the driving is good, the game engine does everything asked. And the controls are smooth and easy to master. Again any problems with the controls has more to do with personal ham-fistedness than actual difficulty. And I'm not a guy that cares about graphics. I'll never take away points for bad graphics. Gameplay and story matter much more. But if a game has particularly good graphics, or displays something particularly well... I may add a point. And I have done so with Watch Dogs. The graphics aren't the greatest (looking like the E3 display settings are still on disc, but were nerfed for PC to drag it back down to console level) but they are plenty good enough. And the Chicago of Watch Dogs... feels more alive than any other sandbox city ever has. Partially due to the "profiling" mechanic, but it's just better than the average cityscape with a handful of non-reacting npcs sprinkled on it.
Man of Steel (2013)
This Movie Would Not Allow Me to Like It
It did so many things right. Good acting/casting, decently well written story (I'm not one of the "grimdark" complainers, that didn't bother me,) and it had a big plus in Shannon who was excellent as a very well-written Zod. The fight sequences were suitably huge and bombastic... all in all, this movie didn't make very many mistakes. But... the one mistake it DID make was so pervasive that I could not leave the theater NOT hating Man of Steel. EVERY SINGLE SECOND of this movie is shot in shaky-cam, pretentious, "realistic-o-vision." Editing the movie to look like it was filmed on an iPhone is OK for maybe ONE or TWO action scenes. Maybe a long shot or 2 as well. It is unnecessary and unforgivable in a scene where 2 people are standing still and speaking to one another, and even worse if it is every single frame of the movie. Add to that the bizarre use of intentionally blurring foreground and background to give the impression it was filmed by 1970's camera technology as opposed to the state of the art digital cameras we KNOW they used. It is a baffling (and ugly and stupid) choice of visual aesthetic, and was SO overused it never stopped being annoying. So, 2 out of 10. If petit-mal camera doesn't bother you... I'd say at least a 7.
X: First Class (2011)
Glad I gave it a chance.
I just watched this movie, quite a while after it's release. A friend who I thought was fairly intelligent told me not to bother. He said it was the worst X-Men film yet. I didn't bother, I didn't watch it. But recently my curiosity got the best of me. This was a really solid prequel-reboot of a series that was on a serious 2 movie skid. I'm glad to see all of the positive reviews. And the naysayers ALL seem to have problems with this movie's "continuity" with the rest of the franchise and the comic books in general. It's the same problem that my friend had with it. About halfway thru this fantastic movie it occurred to me... "that argument doesn't have a freakin leg to stand on." Hey comic book fanboy... yes, they take liberties with the established characters. You know who else does that with Marvel characters? Every freaking writer working for Marvel comics, that's who. House of M, Age of Apocalypse, The End, Ultimates; these titles sound familiar? Oh right, reboots and alternate versions, most made decades before any of the X-Men movies, and there are about a dozen others just like them. I think re-booting X-Men is the most authentic tribute to the comics made so far in the franchise. If that's the best criticism the naysayers can come up with... this movie didn't have much wrong with it. Now I'm off to punch a friend in the kidneys, not too hard, for making me miss this in theaters.
Kaubôi bibappu: Cowboy Bebop (1998)
Cowboy Bebop is Important...
Even for folks who aren't into the whole Anime scene. Storytelling is at an all-time low in most television these days. Unimaginative "plot twists" and dusty dry trite "same-ol same-ol" story lines are seriously losing out to "no thought required" reality television. And something like Cowboy Bebop is the answer to that problem. The basic plot and premise are fairly cliché and overdone. That being said, the real genius is... they tell it so well that most wouldn't notice it. But far and away the best reasons are the DARING ending to the series. Plus so many animes drag on and on and on... for a hundred plus episodes 90% of which are filler setting up the other 10%. CB tells its story and wraps it up. A perfect length, leaves you wanting more and does not overstay its welcome. And what makes it transcend its root genre and place itself up there with avant garde TV art... the music. Well chosen and performed for each episode. Each song seemed almost written for the episode it appears in. It sets the mood for each ep perfectly, and does not get in the way of any of the other elements.
Shoot 'Em Up (2007)
Someone Shot the Story
Yeah, two stars... harsh. I guess I should qualify that. The rating I gave this movie reflects totally on the complete lack of anything near a good story and characters. I always judge most movies based upon the writing, and not as much the execution. In a very few instances a good/bad actor or director can affect a rating from me. But not in this case. Giamatti and Owen have been in good movies, but aren't good enough to save this one. And the director is... well terrible. Ugh, Monster Man (shudder.) If you at all enjoyed Star Wars, never... and I mean never ever, watch Monster Man. Seriously just stay away from this director. But... it is worth saying that this movie has some SWEET gunfights. Visually, Wicked, Kills. Lots of them, over and over. Standard shoostings, own kills, railing kills, oddly large splosions, and comedic relief death. My eyes and schadenfreude were feasting while my brain was trying to dribble out of my nose.
Split Second (1992)
Smooth, goes down easy.
Well, 8 stars comes with an "*" attached. It was exactly the right movie to watch the first time I saw it. I was looking for a somewhat witty, kind of suspenseful, action thriller. And that's exactly what "Split Second" is. Since then I've seen it a couple more times. And it was deliberate. I was in the mood for that type of movie, and so I watched it again. It's not "10-star" brilliant. It does a few things right, does not take too many chances, and gives some witty lines to some OK actors. In the end it's success is that it had nothing in it that annoyed me or put me to sleep. It may not have been great or superb, but it was never bad for one second. I thought about giving it a 6 or so for that, but the extra for the 8star rating came from the fact that this movie is just so fun. So if you're looking for a somewhat clever, suspenseful, action packed movie, you are in for exactly what you want
The Box (2009)
I Continue To Be Surprised By Kelly
Wow, Richard Kelly once again delivers. Why Shyamalan does so much better than Kelly is the true Hollywood mystery. Not a great cast, but they do their job. The story is the perfect contrast to its own promotion. It's billed as a little story about a curious button and a macabre choice. The previews made it look so simplistic I was disappointed in Kelly for seemingly "dumbing down" his latest movie. Wow, am I glad I watched it anyway. It may not be "Darco," but its right up there with "Southland Tales." And yeah, I see all the negativity in the reviews. But if I wasn't expecting vintage Kelly, I'm guessing that neither were the nay-sayers. I got a pleasant surprise, and they seemed to get confused. Is it really so important to have everything spelled out and explained these days? With "Lost" having done so well on TV, why are movies held to some kind of different standard? Can't anyone just enjoy the ride anymore? Kelly is adapting a story by Richard Matheson here. A story that Matheson already adapted for "Twilight Zone." And that's the feel that really came through here, and was enhanced by the idea to make it a 70's period piece. I've always thought that story and writing make or break a movie. Everything else (casting, acting, effects, etc...) will only nudge a review toward 1 more or less star. And Richard Kelly has proved this with every movie he's ever directed. If you too think that the "journey" is just as important as the destination, this movie is for you. If you don't get that... no biggie, just give this one a pass
Blue Seed (1994)
A Very Fun Show
A very good anime. Older look, cell-shaded animation style gives it a sort of "classic" look. It does start a little slow, but that's because the first half dozen or so episodes are written out to help introduce each character. It really picks up after those. The music and soundtrack is kind of hit or miss, but its there when it needs to be. But what I liked most about this series. It was well planned. It told the whole story, then ended. So many anime series go on dragging out every fight far too long and have 100+ episodes and surprisingly little content. This is a nice self contained story that lifts elements from Japanese folk tales and really hits the spot.
Psycho (1998)
Why not?
Well OK, no it's not the original. Is that really a fair comparison though? The original is one of the best movies ever made. A hater review of this says we "can't not" compare this to the original. I understand what they mean (even though it's said in a profoundly stupid manner) and firmly disagree. We should judge every movie based upon its own merits. Do we ask every other movie to be this good? No, of course we don't. So there's no point in making that comparison here. So what is '98's Psycho then? It's a very thorough tribute to the original by a director and cast who clearly respect the original as much as I do. That and its precision to detail gets it 6 stars right there. The 7th star goes entirely to the performance of Vince Vaughn. He plays the same character in every other movie I've ever seen him in... Vince Vaughn. But after seeing this, I'll give him credit from now on. He really is an actor, not just a comedian who does the same character in every movie he's ever in.
Memento (2000)
Brilliant, now make me care a little please.
Man am I going to lose some "artistic" cred here. The formula is very well done, and totally apt to the condition portrayed by our main character. It is a very interesting story and well told by Nolan and the entire cast. Yes I'm aware of all of that, and based upon all of those things "Memento" was brilliant. That being said, I didn't enjoy watching this movie. After being interested for about the first 5 minutes, I lapsed into waiting for the story to progress. It never did. I don't see how anyone could pull off this type of "pacing" any better than Momento, the problem is I don't see how the pacing of this story can be good either. It's not the fault of anyone involved, I just couldn't stand constantly receiving the same information over and over. I already know this, I don't care that the main character does not. It could not have been put together any better than it was, but it just kept frustrating me over and over. Every single second of the movie is spent re-hashing information about the movie that the movie has already established. And I don't think that's even possible. The entire film I was thinking "movie, show me something we don't already know." And it never did.
11:14 (2003)
A fun watch, and a solid effort.
Initially I gave this only 6-stars. Then I noticed that someone who 1-stared it mentioned that Hillary Swank's braces looked goofy. Really. That's important somehow? I bumped it to a 7 just based on that. I mean if someone dogging this movie had to reach that far to find something they didn't like, (even something as shallow as "like totally look at those braces, make me gag, like really ya know") there must not have been much wrong with the film. I mean stuff wrong with it that actually matters. It uses its time mechanic well, it has a good cast, and characters that you like to hate (love to hate would have made it 1 star better.) I had fun watching this movie and that's all that really matters.
Equilibrium (2002)
Shocked at all the Reviewer Love
It's sometimes hard to take expectations out of mix when deciding if you liked a movie or not. All the love built this up to be "the best movie that I failed to see in theaters." I should never think that way, movies never live up to that kind of expectation. Or in the case of Equilibrium, any expectations at all.
Like others have said, this movie takes plot points from several other movies and novels. Normally I would say that does not matter, all that matters is if this movie was entertaining or not. Let's face it, most of the good ideas and stories are already out there. Taking a concept and building on it is a good thing. I always rail against all of the haterz out there screaming "ripoff, way to be original ROFLOL" (and all of the other lame junk pre-teenagers write on boards and user reviews.) Movies that take story elements here and there and present them in innovative ways can be really entertaining. But this one is not. It takes the story from several other (mostly good) sources and jumbles it together into a unfocused mishmash that fails to entertain or establish its own identity.
The only thing separating this movie from its influences is it's credits. They tried to spice it up with a big cast, but I have always believed that success or failure lies with the writing. Take a movie like Southland Tales, worst cast I thought I would ever see all in one movie, and it got a ten out of ten from me. I was amazed how good a movie it was, packed with such blowful actors. Equilibrium filled it's sets with respectable talent... and tripped on it's ho-hum script.
I see all of the "like Matrix but better" reviews here. No, if you have not, go see the Matrix. Then get Blade Runner, 1984, Logan's Run, Fahrenheit 451, and watch them. Then read some Phillip K. Dick, Clarke's Light of Other Days, and Harrison Bergeron. That all will take a month or so, but at the end you will have watched a half dozen better movies and read a half dozen better books. (oh, and listen to Mercury Theater's War of the Worlds adaptation) And in all of that you will already have Equilibrium... no need to see it after that.
Southland Tales (2006)
Richard Kelly Delivers Again
How does he do it? I can't give out a #1 reason why I put this on my NF queue. Loved Darco, so it had the Kelly thing going for it. But by description it sounded just OK. Then I looked at the cast list. I was just blown away by the cast. I couldn't come up with an ensemble cast list that spelled "bomb, bigtime" better than this movie. I'm not even sure I can explain why I liked this movie so much. This movie reminds me of Branston Pickle, it's not good, but you will never in your life experience anything else like it. I was glued to my couch, there is an odd sequence of a still just after the credits. I sat staring at the screen until it faded and my DVD player got back to the menu. I must have liked this movie. I'm just still not sure exactly why.
The thing I don't understand about all the hate is why? Why is it so freaking important that you all have to "get" a movie before you like it? What is so important about the ending of a story that makes people forget that the ending is 5% of the story and the journey is much more important? How someone can watch something thought-provoking, funny, and meaningful for 85 minutes; and then pour on the hate when the story does not tie up every little thread in the last 5 minutes, is totally beyond me. Richard Kelly is physically incapable of compromising his edgy and fantastic storytelling to "dumb it down" for commercial success. Trust me, he tried with "The Box" and still failed. So he gets railroaded into the category "never made a movie that turned a profit" while hacks like Michael Bay "babasplosion" and M. Night Shalylalamaualon crank out "movies for dummies" and strike pure uneducated gold. I'm glad he remains uncompromising in his attempt to make the moviescape less stupid. I'll watch Richard Kelly movies because they are better than the rest of the slop out there these days. His filmmaking skills are firmly over the boundary of the line between "in it to make money," and "cinematic work of art." And I hope they stay that way.
Strange Days (1995)
Ding
This is one of my favorite movies. I'm coming back to write this review after its director Kathryn Bigelow has received best director for the best picture Oscars for "The Hurt Locker." And she should have, I agree with the academy that it was clearly the best movie that year. But I enjoyed "Strange Days" even more. Finnes and Bassett are two fantastic actors who do not disappoint in this movie. Wincott is a great bad guy for any film. And although I would not cast Sizemore in any project, even he rose above and turned in a great performance, I was stunned. Lewis... well her part wasn't particularly important, and she did well enough. She probably was the best actress available who would have consented to the nudity, so there is no real problem there either. And she does have that skanky and overt sensuality that went perfectly with her character and voice in the music sequences. And she does at least rock, even if just a little. The story is fast paced and well written, with plenty of twists and turns. It has its comedy moments, which serve to punctuate the drama very well. I can't think of a thing wrong with this movie. Except for the creepy mime.
Hard Target (1993)
A Total Guilty Pleasure
This movie is a guilty pleasure that I really should not be ashamed to love. John Woo and Lance Henriksen really drive this picture. JCVD, well hes a lot worse in other movies. He seemed to kind of fit in here. Yancy Butler's performance was solid, and she's pretty good in the eye candy category. Not the usual character we see with her, more of a girlie and less of a tough girl, and she plays it OK. And Wilford Brimley, its like a balding, grandfatherly, cherry on top. And the action really delivers; splosions, kung-fu, gun and knife kills, and even a railing kill or 2. And the writing and story is really above average. I will qualify that, really above average for an action movie. Don't be scared off by the prominent placement of Jean-Claude on the cover, this is actually a very fun movie. A lot of these reviews ridicule the mullet he sports in this flick. OK, they should. And that's what I should be ashamed of. I rocked the permed, curly, tennessee mudflap back in the day. And I looked just as goofy, guilty.
Twisted (2004)
It's bad, but I had fun. (contains spoilers)
The weird thing is I agree with most of the hatarz about this one. The twist is telegraphed, writing is so-so, and the actors do a good job with not much. But I had a lot of fun watching this movie. The over the top stupidity of this main character of a freaky, drunken, wantonly promiscuous uhh... (lady of the evening, member of the oldest profession, I should keep it simple) whore was continually hilarious. Woe is me, I might be a killer like my father. I keep drinking until I black out and people are dead when I wake up. Anybody with half a brain would stop drinking. Why is this happening? Really? I also loved Garcia as the Obvious Red Herring. Im creepy for no reason other than to take suspicion away from the real villain. Andy makes this writers crutch into something so over the top its funny.
The Fourth Kind (2009)
Could have been good
I hate the "reality" horror genre. There has never been a good "reality" horror movie. And it is too bad, I was all geared up to like this movie. It would have gathered 6 or 7 stars if it had just dropped the pretense of being based upon "documented events." Everyone knows that's bunk, everyone has already seen that the supposed tormented psychiatrist was credited and is a Canadian actress. The pretense distracted from the horror, without adding to any type of atmosphere of dread. It undermined itself when it could have been a good movie. If reality horror is up your alley however, this will be right in your wheelhouse. It's no different than the rest of that junk.