Change Your Image
bkitchin-2
Reviews
Away (A)wake (2005)
A disappointment
Reading the article in the Memphis paper (see Reviews section of IMDb), explains a lot. One point in the article is that the movie had 12 characters not 4 in the original cut. During test screenings they realized it was too busy. I suspect editing the film shot into a 4 character version simply did not improve the situation but increased its choppiness. Also the original 12 character layout probably contributed to the incoherence and lack of focused in the script. Trying to do too much is often a formula for failure. The article says there was a two month acting workshop. If more time had been spent on doing a good script they might have made a better film. The acting was mixed. Some of the actors did better than one might expect from untrained actors but others were not very good.
I too noticed the excessive video effects which while sometimes neat were often distracting.
In comparison to Blue Citrus Hearts which overcame its shortcomings by great, nuanced acting and a good focus, this was a great disappointment.
Yeladim Tovim (2005)
Powerful drama that hits hard
This movie is definitely *not* for everyone. As another comment says, it is both raw and brutal. Unlike too many movies that portray prostitution, this one is not wearing tinted glasses. But it is not all negative either. There are moments of tenderness and friendship. I'm glad that someone recommended this to me as it is not something that would have attracted me by its description. However, I rather like strong drama and this is definitely that. I thought the acting was quite good. I'm not familiar with these actors but they ought to go pretty far. The characters are portrayed as real people with individual personalities and quirks rather than stereotypes. You find yourself rooting for some of the main characters even as you recognize that there is not a lot of hope for them. However, you realize that not a lot of hope is not the same as no hope. Highly recommended if you like drama and are not repulsed by the, at times, rather brutal portrayal.
Serenity (2005)
Very good but not the end all and be all of all movies for all time
I have been astounded by the hyperbole expressed on this board for this movie. A movie could not possibly be that good and it isn't. I really enjoyed it. I'm glad I went. As one person put it, there was more character development than special effects. That is very good.
But the degree of hype given here is excessive. When you use so many superlatives together you take away from the effect that such strong words are meant to convey. What will you have left to say when something as good or better comes out. I doubt that ten years from now this movie will still rate so high.
Don't get me wrong, it is a good movie and I recommend it. If I had read the comments before going to the movie, I would have been terribly disappointed. My expectations would have been set too high and it would have fallen flat.
One caution for those, like me, did not see the TV series. Be prepared for some time getting the picture of what is happening. There is not a lot of up front explanation to put you in the know. Basically that is a good thing since that can be pretty boring even for those who need to hear it much less for those who already know it. Be ready to be a little confused until the picture begins to fit together. In this I think Whedon did a good job of providing the background without taking time out of the story to do this.
Expect a good movie and you will probably not be disappointed and you might even be pleasantly surprised
La marche de l'empereur (2005)
A really great film and a tribute to those who did the on location work
A lot of good things have been said about this movie along with some negative things. Overall I was very pleased with it. As always there are things that might have been done better but if they had been done the other way people would still have complained.
I had great admiration for those who went on location. Even with all of the modern survival equipment that must have been a grueling time. The slightest mistake could mean death. I've worked with people who have gone to the far north and they tell me how quickly one could freeze to death by a simple mistake.
What struck me most was listening to comments as I left the theater. Various people were commenting on how Anartica was at the *north* pole. As I hope most people here know, it is at the south pole. Also the breeding grounds were not at the pole itself but were within the antarctic circle (peroid without any sun at all). Another, more understandable error I saw in published reviews was a reference to the aurora borealis. Those are the northern lights. The commenter correctly called them the southern lights which are also known as the aurora australis. BUt I really had trouble biting my tongue as I overheard one woman teaching the young children with her that the penguins lived at the North Pole.
ON the positive side, I learned a lot from just watching. In the past I've mostly seen penguins in still pictures or briefly at a zoo. BUt watching them in motion and doing things, I was struck by how truly birdlike they are. We have parakeets and the was a lot of resemblance in the way they move their head and do other things between the little parakeet and the giant emperor penguin.
Fantastic Four (2005)
It was a good, fun movie, not great but about what I wanted
I'm amazed at all the bashing this movie is receiving. Some people say that movie company posted some ringer comments. That may be true, but from what I read, it looks to me like the competition has posted some ringers of their own to bash it.
Reading a lot of the comments, I get the feeling people are expecting too much from this movie. Batman Begins is a different order of movie. I expected serious and dark there. Here I was looking for and found light and fun. I enjoyed both movies. Obviously Batman Begins was the better movie but it was not light fare either.
A little less of Johnny Storm might have improved this a bit. But in general Chris Evans did a very nice job of portraying this character. He was annoying but he was meant to be. I enjoyed the way he enjoyed his talent.
Michael Chiklis did a great job as the Thing. The one that gave me the most trouble is Julian McMahon as Dr. Doom. IT didn't come across well.
In summary, my wife and I went out to see a light, fun movie and got exactly what we were looking for. If that is what you want, I recommend it. If you are looking for the next Best Film or Best Action film, stay home because there is nothing for you in the theaters now and, I suspect, there never will be.
Bewitched (2005)
Pretty poor with some relief from Kidman
When we saw the previews before the movie was released, my daughter observed that it might be a good movie unless Will Ferrell ruined it. She hit it on the head.
Ferrell's part and his realization of it was simply too stupid to be funny and was frankly boring.
The movie was rescued from complete banality by Nicole Kidman and Shirley MacLaine. I don't know if it was better writing or better execution by the actresses but they provided the only really funny parts of the movie. I suspect their acting had a lot to do with it since they shared the same writers with Ferrell.
To borrow from the movie, I would give Kidman a 99 but I wouldn't give Ferrell even a 32.
The movie provide some chuckles when I needed some comic relief. But I wouldn't rank it higher than a two. Wait for the DVD / Tape.
Ein Leben lang kurze Hosen tragen (2002)
A very disturbing but riveting film
There is no question that this film is very disturbing and is not for many people. The director avoids the graphic, shock techniques of many other films. He doesn't rub our noses in the horror. This makes the actual dramatic effect of the tale he retells all the stronger. It is a horror that hits the mind rather than the stomach (at least for me). A lot of horror films have a near comedic element to them. This drama has none of that. It was quite stark.
The facts are apparently true. The horrifying realization I came away with is that I could find no explanation for why he did what he did. But he did it. An original researcher into the confessions on which this is based suggested that the boy / young man may have been effectively messing with the heads of his captures and, eventually, us.
It is clear that no answers, simple or complex, are provided. We are left to wonder where it all came from and whether it could have been avoided. As I said very disturbing.
The directing and editing were quite excellent. While the movie had some color it was mostly black and white. This suited the mood of what was being presented. The acting of the younger character was quite good. Someone commented on having a problem with the 'confessions' of the older character. I thought they were well done and gave a flavor of what those who heard the confession probably heard. The confessions were not smoothed out for movie purposes. The cutting back and forth between the older and the younger character was very effective. A well done disturbing film.
Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith (2005)
It is a space opera isn't it?
It really makes me sick. So many of the writers here are treating this movie as if it were a candidate for best dramatic movie of the millennium and then flunking it when it fails. I really get sick reading people (on this movie or many others) who apply their very narrow artsy standards to a film that was not created for their narrow world of drama.
Come on guys, it is a space opera. The original Star Wars was a space opera. For its genre, it is really great. The original Star Wars was corny and I loved it then and I love it now. This one is more somber due naturally to predetermined ending.
Are their flaws, sure. There is not a movie made that does not contain flaws and can't be ripped mercilessly to shreds (and that includes your favorite movie whatever that is).
One of the thing I enjoyed about it was the way it tied the circle together resolving things from a New Hope and other episodes.
I also enjoyed the performance of Ian McDiarmid very much. But the performance of the other actors was quite respectable. I hadn't enjoy Natalie Portman in the previous episodes very much but in this one she shines.
If you don't like it, fine but I for one am not interested in your overly critical review of what is not meant as high art (for which I am grateful).
Blue Citrus Hearts (2003)
Intense film, not for all
Whew, it took my breath away.
First on the quality of production. It lacked something but for the most part did not interfere with what was presented. My main problem was the sound. Being somewhat hard of hearing, the poor sound quality did interfere some of the time. Seeing it on DVD, I had to back up a number of times which is not the best idea as it interrupts the flow which in this film is very important.
Being straight, there is a lot of what the two main characters were feeling that I could not easily identify with. However, there were things that were amazingly clear. I felt that the film showed raw emotions better than most any other film I've ever seen. I could hear their agony. It was not done with a lot of words, dialog was minimal. It was done with facial expressions, body language and I don't know what.
I do know about not being a part of the scene and not being accepted. Being thought odd. I think this is why the emotions struck me so strongly. I could feel the emotions flowing out of the screen. Some one remarked on the lack of professional status of the actors. I think they did a superb job better than many well rated screen actors.
This is clearly not a film for everyone. The whole format is not going to be liked by many who prefer the traditional presentation. Some will be turned off by the subject matter. Some will be threatened because they do not allow such emotional levels touch them because they are afraid of it. That last is a bit judgmental. WIthout being judgmental I can safely say that if you are not prepared to watch a movie with poor quality video and muddled sound (I've heard worse) that communicates more with emotion than dialog (and I don't mean emotions like shouting and cursing, it is much more subtle and much stronger than that), if that is not for you neither is this movie.
AKA (2002)
Very interesting movie
I enjoyed this movie for the interaction between the characters. THere were many characters and a large number of them were drawn without much development. However, the character of Dean, Benjamin, and Alexander were well done. We could see what Dean was struggling with and how he attempted to cope with it and where it went. Unlike the less well-drawn characters, more of Dean is revealed when he interacts with Alexander and Benjamin.
Unlike some others, I enjoyed the split screen. I thought that the different images worked together to create the tension and dynamics of many scenes. Having looked at the movie both this way and as it was shown on TV, I think the TV version lost a lot of the power of the scenes. However, it made the story seem less linear. My main regret was not having scene it on the big screen. The three screens become rather small on a TV.
I would recommend this movie but it is not for everyone.
Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves (1991)
Wasn't worth the time
I was very disappointed in this version. It was a rewritten Robin Hood. If you want to rewrite it write your own story. There are plenty of drama / adventure successes that do not claim to be the telling of a legendary story. I felt that it was too full of late 20th-centuryisms. Rather than try to recreate the atmosphere of 12th century England the writers expressed too many attitudes that belong only to the recent era. Btw, I'm not speaking of Marian's relatively liberated attitudes or the presence of a black character. But the entire flavor of the movie screamed late 20th century. This is why I'm not a fan of 30's and 40's historical dramas because they too made this mistake. But recently movies have tried for a more historical authenticity. This was not one of them.
Casino Royale (1967)
Zany movie that is a lot of fun
The mistake that many make with this movie is to expect continuity and a story line. There is a tissue thin web that ties the whole thing together. However, in the midst of it I lost track of what that is.
To me it is an enjoyable series of scenes each of which is comic and many of which spoof some movie or another. Most people see it as a James Bond spoof. Beyond that it is a spoof of many types of movies and stereotypes. It makes fun of James Bond, it makes fun of itself, it makes fun of much of Hollywood and it even makes fun of previous performances by the very actors in this movie.
Whatever you do, enjoy each scene for itself. Do not try to connect it to the previous scene or the next scene. If you do, you will get terribly confused. Taking each scene on its own is the best recipe for enjoying the movie. Some scenes will strike you as funny and others may not. It helps if you know old Hollywood through the Hollywood of the 60's. A lot of references are likely to get right past you if you are only a movie watcher of that last few decades.
Disturbing Behavior (1998)
Better editing would have improved this not too bad film
Taking the overall story there were elements that were too unrealistic. However, I enjoyed much of the acting. Especially by the three main characters. If you see the deleted scenes on the DVD you'll see some of the best acting in the movie. Some have put down Marsden's acting. But watch the deleted scene where he describes what happened with his brother.
The editing made many holes in the story. Someone commented that directors should learn to reign in their editors. If you listen to the director's commentary you *know* he really wanted the original (and far superior) ending. He said that directors sometimes do not have control. I assume that he is referring to the powers of the studio that want to make the movie into a cookie cutter image of the standard fare.
Even with the deleted scenes restored, the presentation of the means of transformation from regular kid to blue ribbon kid was quite thin and hard to believe. I agree with another's comment that the psychiatric hospital was really bad. It looks like a 19th century bedlam. I might be wrong but I believe they don't let patients get this way anymore.
I've seen DVD's that provide more than one version of a film by doing something with the linking of scenes together. It is too bad they didn't make this one so that we could see the original cut.
I try not to take these kind of flics too seriously. I enjoy many more films that way. I give the movie 7* out of 10.
The Office (2001)
To me the comedy is sick rather than great
I was sorely disappointed by this series. I found it as bad and as disagreeable as the Three Stooges. Someone else told a critic to go back to the Three Stooges. Well this is as bad and I'd rather watch some *good* British TV of which there is a lot out there rather than this pathological junk. I'm often a fan of British TV because it usually is so much better than the insipid junk we get in the US. But this is junk. Popular junk but popular doesn't make it good.
I prefer comedy which lightens my day not which reminds me of the worst that I might encounter. If I had this in my office I don't need to be reminded of it and if I don't (and these days I don't), I don't care to watch such sick people hurting each other.
Overall, a show to avoid. There is much better fare out there.
Bully (2001)
The story is more real than some believe
(SOME SPOILERS AHEAD). After reading the book on which this movie was based to satisfy my curiosity about some of the details, I did a web search on the real characters. Someone said the sentencing was pure Hollywood. In the Fla State Supreme court website, I found a recording (video/audio) of lawyers arguing to set aside Marty Puccio's death sentence. They succeeded. Puccio's lawyer in arguing to have the sentence changed to life (his speech to the court was about 30 minutes), summarized what happened in the murder. I found it earily just like the book and nearly like the movie. Not only did the sentencing turn out to be rather an odd mixture (which was how they convinced the court to commute the death sentence) but the details of who did what in the murder was right in line with the book and movie. What Puccio's lawyer didn't say, the state's lawyer did. Both lawyers painted a picture of some of these teens that was creepy and like the book and movie. Much of what they said was from the transcript in the original trials.
I have purposely left aside the issue of how Clark presented the subject. But I wanted to make it plain that the story seems to be in accord to the evidence presented in court. There are some who are disputing that portrayal (the one in court, book, and movie) in real life. But it appears that the story in the book and movie is consistent with what came out in court as agreed upon by lawyers for both sides during the appeal.
What conclusions you draw from this movie or book is up to you. But you would be ill-advised to think that it was made up. It was apparently too real.
Shapeshifter (1999)
Fun if you don't expect too much
I watched this movie on a night when I wanted something light in the sci-fi realm. It fit the bill. I thoroughly enjoyed it inconsistencies and weakness included. I found the use and place of music intriguing but I can't say more without going too far.