Change Your Image
mseifer
Reviews
Femme Fatale (2002)
What could have been...
It's like the movie was on the tip of the director's tongue. It would've/could've/should've been a spectacular experience. The concept was amazing, the score was brilliant (In spite of the blatant rip-off of Bolero), the cast provided potential, and the setting was gorgeous. Despite these promising components, the entire feature comes off as a mangled, obscure, and frustrating.
I would have made it a silent film.
Drastic you say? Nope. Watch the movie again if you can stand it. There's so little dialogue to begin with that the story, moderately modified, could easily be told without a single spoken word. The dialogue was atrocious anyway and many a scene was ruined by powerful music clashing with spoken words and environmental sounds.
Use the original composition, don't bastardize it.
Subtlety will get you everywhere as long as people notice the subtleties.
The allusions we're given that the dream sequence is in fact, a dream, are hardly noticable. The clocks all set to the same time (3:33), overflowing water, Deja Vue posters, actors doubling characters (the ambassador, the security force), etc. are far too subtle. I have yet to read a review where anybody noticed them all (goodness knows I barely noticed any their relevance] until it was all "revealed" to me in the extras on the DVD). The folks who made the movie claim that this enhances "rewatchability." The problem is, if people don't know that they missed anything they probably won't watch the movie again to find things they missed.
If a model can't act, don't cast her.
Rebecca is an absolute goddess but she couldn't act her way out of a wet paper bag. Why do you think she doesn't speak in X-Men?
Cut the Hollywood crap.
Cliches abound. Coincidence lurks around every corner. Prurient interests are indulged. It's great that everything "works out" but it pains me when things are tied up in such a neat package. Everyone has a happy or potentially happy ending, good beats evil, everyone falls in love, happily ever after BLAH BLAH BLAH. Just write some original dialogue (or have none!), don't give me cutesy everyones-lives-are-tied-together-make-the-right-decisions-your-actions-hav e-sweeping-consequences bullshit. Finally, no movie (sans porn) absolutely positively needs naked people. As much as I enjoy it people never need to take their clothes off in a movie. I have yet to see a film where the plot hinges on whether or not someone's private parts are seen.
I gave the film 4/10 for what was there, it would have had 10/10 if it had been complete.
La leggenda del pianista sull'oceano (1998)
Wonderful concept, horrible execution.
Imagine, if you will, a world. A world where movies have thought provoking premises, eye-popping cinematography, beautiful sets and costumes, and absolutely beautiful music. Now, take all these positives and combine them with contrived dialogue, blind editing, cliches, and a plot that meanders on a journey to nowhere. This is the world of The Legend of 1900.
I'm a big fan of feel good movies, Disney has made more than one feature film that has "pulled at my heart-strings," yet I found it almost impossible to care about this movie. Character development never took place, in fact, I'm not sure acting ever took place. The movie was filled with unrealistic, "magic" moments that might have made more sense in a children's fantasy movie. But this can hardly be considered a children's movie considering the number of times the f-word is used and the feature is too painfully grounded in reality to be considered fantasy.
To call the dialogue tin-eared is almost a compliment and though the director is Italian it's not as if he would be unable to hire someone who did have a clue.
Speaking of directing, why direct a movie that should be an intimate character study with such an epic style? The grandeur of the camera angles/movement is impressive until you finally realize that it's there to entertain you through part of the flat plot.
As plots go, we never really accomplish anything. By the end of the movie, I almost felt that I knew less about 1900 than I did at the beginning. And Vince's character, eyes darting about to the point of distraction, gives a horrible performance with a whimp of a character. Other than serving as 1900's lap-dog and trite narrator he serves no practical purpose whatsoever.
The thing that bothers me most, though, is the number of people singing this movie's praises. Endless reviews calling it "magic" and "unforgettable." It gives me cause to step back and re-examine my long-held views that people aren't generally idiots.
I don't mean to destroy this movie, I simply find myself disappointed. I had hoped for so much more. I would love to see this movie redone by a director who knows English and with a script that follows the same plot without the painfull specifics that drive this feature into the dirt. This movie gets a 3/10. 1 for cinematography, 1 for music, and 1 for a concept that had enough potential to make me pick up this movie on a whim.