The sequel to the thriller Saw has two basic storylines in its structure. One of them is very good with some awesome twists very much carrying on the tradition of the first film. The second storyline is nothing more than a basic slasher complete with a host of characters who will inevitably be killed in a variety of different fashions before really getting to know them making their deaths, while gruesome, mean nothing emotionally.
The primary storyline involves the pathos-injected serial killer, Jigsaw (or John, as he prefers to be called), building an intricate and complex game around and between a cop and his son, who are, of course, estranged due to a parental divorce. This is the primary plot device which propels the film forward in both elements and gives us some buy-in to the story. john makes his simple request and assures the cop that if he complies, he will see his son. Since he is also told everyone in the house where his son is will die within the same time frame of a deadly nerve agent, this creates an understandable amount of agitation for the cop. This conflict is played out in pretty much one location while they can watch the eight people in the house on a series of monitors. This plot climaxes beautifully, has no less than three excellent twists within that climax and really makes the film worth watching.
The second plot of the eight strangers in a house is ok, and serves the primary purpose to give the main plot something to argue over. However, these eight strangers are idiots. They don't listen. They don't cooperate. They are told some specific things, and don't seem to even care. They are told about an antidote in the room they start in, but they don't even try for it since that would involve conversation and character building. Instead, they set themselves to wander aimlessly through this house, insisting (no matter what stands in their way) that they will find a way out. They get themselves into the traps Jigsaw has made, and more often than not, die trying to decipher them...not that the deciphering is that difficult. For the first trap, they somehow know that the antidote is in syringes, but they have yet to see what the antidote looks like yet. How do they know it's not injestible? They woudln't. On another occasion, they actually get an antidote, but no one uses it. Why not? If fact, no one even mentions it even though the syringe clearly had something in it. Deleted scene? Overall, this part of the film just stinks because it is so plain in comparison to the main plot. It takes away from the enjoyment of the main plot due primarily to the amount of eye-rolling that goes on for me.
So the verdict is that this is a good and watchable film as long as you don't expect too much from our house guests, who act very much like they belong on Big Brother complete with their infantile antics. Go for the main plot. It is intelligent and clever and the twists are (as with the first film) definitely worth the wait
Showing posts with label S Titles. Show all posts
Showing posts with label S Titles. Show all posts
Sunday, February 1, 2009
Skeleton Key -- 2005 -- PG-13
Dissenters aside, I thought this movie worked pretty well for what it was. Most of it occurred in one house with some pretty decent character development, though the main character could have been rounded out a little better. We got a feel for her outlook, but not much of her past life or future desires.
I thought the basic plot was pretty good and the twists were well thought out and tied together, along with a very sinister revelation near the end. That really helped this film a lot, but it still suffered from underdeveloped characters. While I will grant that there was a reason they appeared the way they were, it still would have helped if there was more substance to them.
Some of the sequences did not make a lot of sense. Why continue to go up to the attic just to explore the forbidden room? Especially after what it was doing earlier? Why defy the homeowners so much? Why, when threatened as she was, with the knowledge she had, did she stand directly in the path of danger? Why not run to her room where she had already protected herself? She seemed to willingly welcome the fate she ended with. In quite a few instances, the plot moved the characters instead of the other way around as it should be. This movie also has the distinction of being the only film I know of where a vehicle is unable to break through a lock on a fence. Kinda weird.
Everything else was well-explained, clever for the most part, and tied up neatly complete with a bizarre question mark of an ending for a minor character. So overall, not bad, it just lacked in a lot of other areas. I think a little more thought into the screenplay would have helped a lot.
I thought the basic plot was pretty good and the twists were well thought out and tied together, along with a very sinister revelation near the end. That really helped this film a lot, but it still suffered from underdeveloped characters. While I will grant that there was a reason they appeared the way they were, it still would have helped if there was more substance to them.
Some of the sequences did not make a lot of sense. Why continue to go up to the attic just to explore the forbidden room? Especially after what it was doing earlier? Why defy the homeowners so much? Why, when threatened as she was, with the knowledge she had, did she stand directly in the path of danger? Why not run to her room where she had already protected herself? She seemed to willingly welcome the fate she ended with. In quite a few instances, the plot moved the characters instead of the other way around as it should be. This movie also has the distinction of being the only film I know of where a vehicle is unable to break through a lock on a fence. Kinda weird.
Everything else was well-explained, clever for the most part, and tied up neatly complete with a bizarre question mark of an ending for a minor character. So overall, not bad, it just lacked in a lot of other areas. I think a little more thought into the screenplay would have helped a lot.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Sahara -- 2005 -- PG-13
This movie was billed as "James Bond meets Indiana Jones." Having all of the movies from both of these franchises in my collection, I have an idea of what that might entail, and while this fits the movie plotwise, it also lacked in other areas where these franchises succeeded.
Number one, and I noticed this very early, the movie tried to do TOO much. We don't have a plot and subplot. We have two plots that intersect. While this is normally good writing, a third plot managed to creep in and override one of the plots for the majority of the film. This made for a very tedious film to watch.
The main plot presented right from the beginning was the search for an iron ship from the Civil War which disappeared, the Texas. This was what our hero, Dirk, was looking for during the film. Most of the references to this plot and the following of it was done by accident. Some happenstance got him to stumble on clues to lead him there.
Another plot was some sort of disease that was plaguing whatever the country was we started in and they determined came from Mali, where of course, our hero looking for his boat was also going. This plot took a more center stage presence than the ship.
The third plot which crept in had to do with a revolution among the Toureg (sp?) faction of the Mail people against their leader who only took power because he killed the previous leader. So mix this revolution with an incident regarding a plague that could go international, coupled with some kind of search for a National Treasure worthy boat, and voila, you have a movie with a whole lotta plot.
Number two, this movie lacked something that James Bond and Indiana Jones have. Character weaknesses. James Bond drinks, smokes, gambles, and can't pass up a beautiful woman. These vices get him into a lot of trouble and damage his mission quite often. Indiana Jones is a brilliant archaelologist, but he cannot handle snakes. He freaks out over them.
The hero of Sahara has no weaknesses or vices besides the hunt for this boat. He knows everything, can get out of any situation, and is in every way, superhuman. He would do things that make little sense when they occur, but somehow work out to his benefit. While his sidekick seems a little bumbling like an idiot, he is anything but, and plays a solid role only slightly less superhuman than the main character.
In Bond and Jones, there is always a bit of character development from one of the supporting characters, if not from themselves. In Bond, it is usually the girl that grows. Jones has a mix in its three films. Sahara has none from anyone. No one ends the films any different than they began (unless they died). Sure the hero got the girl, but she appeared to fancy him from the get-go. There was no real change there. We just saw an episode of a very expensive serial episode.
It had some fun action sequences, and the plot(s) was clever, but without the character growth, it kinda laid a little flat for me.
Number one, and I noticed this very early, the movie tried to do TOO much. We don't have a plot and subplot. We have two plots that intersect. While this is normally good writing, a third plot managed to creep in and override one of the plots for the majority of the film. This made for a very tedious film to watch.
The main plot presented right from the beginning was the search for an iron ship from the Civil War which disappeared, the Texas. This was what our hero, Dirk, was looking for during the film. Most of the references to this plot and the following of it was done by accident. Some happenstance got him to stumble on clues to lead him there.
Another plot was some sort of disease that was plaguing whatever the country was we started in and they determined came from Mali, where of course, our hero looking for his boat was also going. This plot took a more center stage presence than the ship.
The third plot which crept in had to do with a revolution among the Toureg (sp?) faction of the Mail people against their leader who only took power because he killed the previous leader. So mix this revolution with an incident regarding a plague that could go international, coupled with some kind of search for a National Treasure worthy boat, and voila, you have a movie with a whole lotta plot.
Number two, this movie lacked something that James Bond and Indiana Jones have. Character weaknesses. James Bond drinks, smokes, gambles, and can't pass up a beautiful woman. These vices get him into a lot of trouble and damage his mission quite often. Indiana Jones is a brilliant archaelologist, but he cannot handle snakes. He freaks out over them.
The hero of Sahara has no weaknesses or vices besides the hunt for this boat. He knows everything, can get out of any situation, and is in every way, superhuman. He would do things that make little sense when they occur, but somehow work out to his benefit. While his sidekick seems a little bumbling like an idiot, he is anything but, and plays a solid role only slightly less superhuman than the main character.
In Bond and Jones, there is always a bit of character development from one of the supporting characters, if not from themselves. In Bond, it is usually the girl that grows. Jones has a mix in its three films. Sahara has none from anyone. No one ends the films any different than they began (unless they died). Sure the hero got the girl, but she appeared to fancy him from the get-go. There was no real change there. We just saw an episode of a very expensive serial episode.
It had some fun action sequences, and the plot(s) was clever, but without the character growth, it kinda laid a little flat for me.
Star Wars III: Revenge of the Sith -- 2005 - PG-13
Well, I did the geek thing one night and I went to Wal~Mart at midnight to get my very own copy of Episode III with the bonus disc...and then I watched it today.
Visually, it's spectacular. All the stuff on screen just overloads the senses. It's got one of the coolest space battles I've ever seen, and certainly two of the coolest lightsaber fights. Plotwise, of course, it's meant to fill in the gap between Episodes 2 and 4, and it does this seamlessly. All the stuff built up in 1 & 2 finally gets played out in 3. Unlike the original trilogy, the pre-trilogy plot covers all three movies to play itself out. This has made some people go nuts on 1 & 2 since the plots were incomplete, but I really like the way it all came together.
Dramatically, this movie pulls out the stops. It's mostly watching what you know is going to happen all play out. All the characters' individual struggles come to a head as Anakin crosses over to the dark side, betrays everyone he knows even though he doesn't see it, and then culminates in the final scenes which serve to admirably setup the trilogy to come.
Some weaknesses...Anakin/Padme love dialogue: yuck. Dear Lord, George, get an editor on this tripe. I know they're in love and it's very cute and all, but but the dialogue is just terrible in these scenes. In the scene where Anakin does finally pledge his allegiance to Palpatine (this isn't a spoiler for all but those 5 people who never saw Star Wars), I think he finally does it too quickly. He's been leaning towards the dark side building to this scene, but the decision seems to come too easily for him.
Minor things in a film that works great to complete the current Star Wars saga. If you haven't seen it yet, you're really missing out. This is not only the best of the prequels, but a top installment of the series.
As a side note, after watching this, I immediately put on Star Wars IV, and the kind of impact of knowing all that backstory going into the classic really makes you see EVERYTHING in a whole different light. I don't know how much George let Alec Guiness in on the backstory to his character, but hm, did he flash a bit of recognition at seeing R2 and Threepio? Does Owen recognize R2 and Threepio before he buys him and immediately demands their memories wiped? How does Obi-wan really feel handing Anakin's lightsaber to Luke? Is Obi-wan thinking "The time has come"? If only Leia knew she was talking to her daddy at the beginning...wild stuff.
Visually, it's spectacular. All the stuff on screen just overloads the senses. It's got one of the coolest space battles I've ever seen, and certainly two of the coolest lightsaber fights. Plotwise, of course, it's meant to fill in the gap between Episodes 2 and 4, and it does this seamlessly. All the stuff built up in 1 & 2 finally gets played out in 3. Unlike the original trilogy, the pre-trilogy plot covers all three movies to play itself out. This has made some people go nuts on 1 & 2 since the plots were incomplete, but I really like the way it all came together.
Dramatically, this movie pulls out the stops. It's mostly watching what you know is going to happen all play out. All the characters' individual struggles come to a head as Anakin crosses over to the dark side, betrays everyone he knows even though he doesn't see it, and then culminates in the final scenes which serve to admirably setup the trilogy to come.
Some weaknesses...Anakin/Padme love dialogue: yuck. Dear Lord, George, get an editor on this tripe. I know they're in love and it's very cute and all, but but the dialogue is just terrible in these scenes. In the scene where Anakin does finally pledge his allegiance to Palpatine (this isn't a spoiler for all but those 5 people who never saw Star Wars), I think he finally does it too quickly. He's been leaning towards the dark side building to this scene, but the decision seems to come too easily for him.
Minor things in a film that works great to complete the current Star Wars saga. If you haven't seen it yet, you're really missing out. This is not only the best of the prequels, but a top installment of the series.
As a side note, after watching this, I immediately put on Star Wars IV, and the kind of impact of knowing all that backstory going into the classic really makes you see EVERYTHING in a whole different light. I don't know how much George let Alec Guiness in on the backstory to his character, but hm, did he flash a bit of recognition at seeing R2 and Threepio? Does Owen recognize R2 and Threepio before he buys him and immediately demands their memories wiped? How does Obi-wan really feel handing Anakin's lightsaber to Luke? Is Obi-wan thinking "The time has come"? If only Leia knew she was talking to her daddy at the beginning...wild stuff.
Sin City -- 2005 -- R
So back with a bang on the movie watching, I see Sin City. This thing was taken almost directly from the underground comic books of the same name by Frank Miller. I had read once that this was to the point of that there was no script or stroyboarding done; they just used the comic books.
The film follows a series of short stories that weave themselves together, but do not tell an interlocking, coherent tale. The majority of the film is in a comic book-ish black and white with smatterings of color for accents. It's done beautifully.
Now, it is ultra-viloent, but the violence remains for the most part in that comic book black and white, which means the blood is white, and a lot of the really potentially disgusting shots occur in silhouette. The guns are loud when they go off, and a lot of the action and such is exaggerated, but I feel like it adds to the style, rather than detracts from it.
Pacing, this thing moves like nobody's business. Since it tells several tales over a two hour period, it never gets boring nor do you get stuck in that second act lull that kills so many potentially good films.
Just the way this film was shot makes it worth watching, and overall, I definitely think it's worth at least a single viewing if not more beyond.
The film follows a series of short stories that weave themselves together, but do not tell an interlocking, coherent tale. The majority of the film is in a comic book-ish black and white with smatterings of color for accents. It's done beautifully.
Now, it is ultra-viloent, but the violence remains for the most part in that comic book black and white, which means the blood is white, and a lot of the really potentially disgusting shots occur in silhouette. The guns are loud when they go off, and a lot of the action and such is exaggerated, but I feel like it adds to the style, rather than detracts from it.
Pacing, this thing moves like nobody's business. Since it tells several tales over a two hour period, it never gets boring nor do you get stuck in that second act lull that kills so many potentially good films.
Just the way this film was shot makes it worth watching, and overall, I definitely think it's worth at least a single viewing if not more beyond.
Star Wars: The Clone Wars: Volume 2 -- 2005
This is the video release of the second wave of shorts made by the cartoon network to bridge the gap between Episodes 2 & 3 of the movie series.
Now we're getting down to business picking up where we left off in volume 1. The stories are a bit longer and more involved, but it is to the benefit of the viewer that we're finally getting down to business in setting up where we begin the story in Episode 3.
The dialogue in this series is far better than that in the prequel trilogy probably because Lucas didn't write it. Instead, we concentrate on the visuals carrying the story forward, which is how it should be and the dialogue only picks up the pieces. Lots of Jedi moments where their true potential is shown such as Yoda causing ships to crash together in the air, and Mace Windu cheating death as he falls from his wounded ship and manages to commandeer a droid ship, using it like a high tech skateboard.
Anakin does get his scar in this volume as well as facing a trial which brings out more of the oncoming dark side within him. It was a very powerful moment in my opinion, appropriately in stark contrast to his normal self throughout most of the stories.
Overall, I felt this was an enjoyable series that took us from the beginning of the Clone Wars through a series of events that leaves us with the kidnapping of Chancellor Palpatine by Grievous and sets us up for Episode 3.
Now we're getting down to business picking up where we left off in volume 1. The stories are a bit longer and more involved, but it is to the benefit of the viewer that we're finally getting down to business in setting up where we begin the story in Episode 3.
The dialogue in this series is far better than that in the prequel trilogy probably because Lucas didn't write it. Instead, we concentrate on the visuals carrying the story forward, which is how it should be and the dialogue only picks up the pieces. Lots of Jedi moments where their true potential is shown such as Yoda causing ships to crash together in the air, and Mace Windu cheating death as he falls from his wounded ship and manages to commandeer a droid ship, using it like a high tech skateboard.
Anakin does get his scar in this volume as well as facing a trial which brings out more of the oncoming dark side within him. It was a very powerful moment in my opinion, appropriately in stark contrast to his normal self throughout most of the stories.
Overall, I felt this was an enjoyable series that took us from the beginning of the Clone Wars through a series of events that leaves us with the kidnapping of Chancellor Palpatine by Grievous and sets us up for Episode 3.
Skeleton Key -- 2005 -- PG-13
Dissenters aside, I thought this movie worked pretty well for what it was. Most of it occurred in one house with some pretty decent character development, though the main character could have been rounded out a little better. We got a feel for her outlook, but not much of her past life or future desires.
I thought the basic plot was pretty good and the twists were well thought out and tied together, along with a very sinister revelation near the end. That really helped this film a lot, but it still suffered from underdeveloped characters. While I will grant that there was a reason they appeared the way they were, it still would have helped if there was more substance to them.
Some of the sequences did not make a lot of sense. Why continue to go up to the attic just to explore the forbidden room? Especially after what it was doing earlier? Why defy the homeowners so much? Why, when threatened as she was, with the knowledge she had, did she stand directly in the path of danger? Why not run to her room where she had already protected herself? She seemed to willingly welcome the fate she ended with. In quite a few instances, the plot moved the characters instead of the other way around as it should be. This movie also has the distinction of being the only film I know of where a vehicle is unable to break through a lock on a fence. Kinda weird.
Everything else was well-explained, clever for the most part, and tied up neatly complete with a bizarre question mark of an ending for a minor character. So overall, not bad, it just lacked in a lot of other areas. I think a little more thought into the screenplay would have helped a lot.
I thought the basic plot was pretty good and the twists were well thought out and tied together, along with a very sinister revelation near the end. That really helped this film a lot, but it still suffered from underdeveloped characters. While I will grant that there was a reason they appeared the way they were, it still would have helped if there was more substance to them.
Some of the sequences did not make a lot of sense. Why continue to go up to the attic just to explore the forbidden room? Especially after what it was doing earlier? Why defy the homeowners so much? Why, when threatened as she was, with the knowledge she had, did she stand directly in the path of danger? Why not run to her room where she had already protected herself? She seemed to willingly welcome the fate she ended with. In quite a few instances, the plot moved the characters instead of the other way around as it should be. This movie also has the distinction of being the only film I know of where a vehicle is unable to break through a lock on a fence. Kinda weird.
Everything else was well-explained, clever for the most part, and tied up neatly complete with a bizarre question mark of an ending for a minor character. So overall, not bad, it just lacked in a lot of other areas. I think a little more thought into the screenplay would have helped a lot.
The Son of Frankenstein -- 1939 -- NR
Somehow the second sequel to Frankenstein (if you ignore the strange continuity errors between it and the preceeding one) was better than the first two movies. The plot was improved and the characters were more rounded. For some reason, Frankenstein manor became Frankenstein castle in "Bride" and it is some surrealistic castle in "Son." Also Dr. Frankenstein's lab, isolated in the first two movies, is on the family property and intact in "Son," even though it was destroyed in "Bride."
When handled as its own film, it works admirably. Boris Karloff returns as the monster again and is joined by Basil Rathbone as Frankenstein's son, and Bela Lugosi (famous for Dracula) as a vagrant who controls the monster. The plot is clever and even has a bit of a twist with Lugosi's character. I liked this one far better than its predecessors.
When handled as its own film, it works admirably. Boris Karloff returns as the monster again and is joined by Basil Rathbone as Frankenstein's son, and Bela Lugosi (famous for Dracula) as a vagrant who controls the monster. The plot is clever and even has a bit of a twist with Lugosi's character. I liked this one far better than its predecessors.
Friday, January 16, 2009
Sunset Blvd -- 1950 -- NR
This one came out of 1950 and showed a dark underbelly of Hollywood in forgotten stars. It was made into a musical by Andrew Lloyd Webber which was nothing more than an attempt to sing the film. I found it clever and very film noir, although it took a little while for the Betty Schaefer subplot to come into play. We were halfway through the movie before her character, introduced briefly in a producer's office as she unknowingly insulted our main character, finally came in with any kind of force. Once she got rounded out and this bit of conflict was put into motion, the film ended really well.
Really, the backstory of the film's actors was as interesting as the film itself. Gloria Swanson played Norma Desmond, a has-been silent film star. Gloria Swanson was a silent film star who was a has-been by the time this film was made. The film talked about a return for Norma Desmond, and this was a sort of return for Gloria Swanson, although her career never continued for more than a couple movies beyond that. Erich von Stroheim played Max von Mayerling, a has-been movie director who directed all of Norma's early pictures. Erich von Stroheim was a has-been director who directed Queen Kelly, a silent film starring Gloria Swanson when she was a silent film diva. She called her lover, JFK's father, during the production to complain that the idiot they hired as a director was screwing up the movie. Ms. Swanson once noted that she could have been Norma Desmond for real if her life had turned badly. Seems the casting was spot-on.
Really, the backstory of the film's actors was as interesting as the film itself. Gloria Swanson played Norma Desmond, a has-been silent film star. Gloria Swanson was a silent film star who was a has-been by the time this film was made. The film talked about a return for Norma Desmond, and this was a sort of return for Gloria Swanson, although her career never continued for more than a couple movies beyond that. Erich von Stroheim played Max von Mayerling, a has-been movie director who directed all of Norma's early pictures. Erich von Stroheim was a has-been director who directed Queen Kelly, a silent film starring Gloria Swanson when she was a silent film diva. She called her lover, JFK's father, during the production to complain that the idiot they hired as a director was screwing up the movie. Ms. Swanson once noted that she could have been Norma Desmond for real if her life had turned badly. Seems the casting was spot-on.
The Stepford Wives -- 1975 -- PG
This is the 1975 cult classic that was recently remade. This was a weird movie and definitely deserves its cult status, since it isn't for everyone. We spend a lot of time getting to know the town and the characters, but little by little weird stuff starts happening. Soon the heroine's friends start changing and she gets really suspcious of what is going on.
I can't say I liked how it ended, but I will say this is a good movie. I really felt for the main character and her plight and concerns. I was definitely interested in following the story as it unfolded, and genuinely curious of the weirdness going on.
I can't say I liked how it ended, but I will say this is a good movie. I really felt for the main character and her plight and concerns. I was definitely interested in following the story as it unfolded, and genuinely curious of the weirdness going on.
Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street -- 1982 -- NR
The 1982 video recording of the 1979 musical with music and lyrics by Stephen Sondheim at the height of his career. Sondheim has not turned out a show like this before or since. It was simply awesome. I have loved this story and cast recording every since I got it several years ago, and seeing it played out on stage was a real treat.
hile the basic story is familiar to everyone (Sweeney Todd kills people giving them "close shaves" and Mrs. Lovett, his downstairs neighbor, uses the flesh for her meat pies with great success), this takes the horror and makes it into a melodrama where Sweeney Todd becomes a sympathetic character wrongly accused and sent to prison so the evil Judge can get ahold of his wife. When Sweeney returns having escaped prison, his wife is dead and his daughter, who was one when he was sent away, is now a ward of the judge, and the judge is planning to marry her. Sweeney wants his revenge and is willing to do whatever it takes to get it.
It a wonderful revision of the gritty horror story of Todd and Lovett, and Sondheim's score makes it truly a cut above the rest.
hile the basic story is familiar to everyone (Sweeney Todd kills people giving them "close shaves" and Mrs. Lovett, his downstairs neighbor, uses the flesh for her meat pies with great success), this takes the horror and makes it into a melodrama where Sweeney Todd becomes a sympathetic character wrongly accused and sent to prison so the evil Judge can get ahold of his wife. When Sweeney returns having escaped prison, his wife is dead and his daughter, who was one when he was sent away, is now a ward of the judge, and the judge is planning to marry her. Sweeney wants his revenge and is willing to do whatever it takes to get it.
It a wonderful revision of the gritty horror story of Todd and Lovett, and Sondheim's score makes it truly a cut above the rest.
Shanghai Knights -- 2003 -- PG-13
This is the sequel for Shanghai Noon, and I didn't go into it having watched the first film. I didn't even remember which one came first, to be honest, so I decided to see how this would play out.
I figured out pretty quickly that this was the sequel. It felt like a sequel. The characters were quickly introduced, and then breifly reminisced before plunging into the storyline, which as conceived, wasn't too bad. Actually, this film's problems are in its presentation.
The fight scenes are WAAAAAAAAAAAY too long. I got really bored watching the endless array of punch, kick, dodge, bounce, fall down. There were a lot of completely unnecessary scenes that destroyed the film's pacing. It got to going pretty good, and then something happened that was probably a throwback to the first one for the sake of doing it. The scenes in no way contributed to this film's storyline and should never have been filmed, much less kept in the final film. I could probably cut 30 minutes out of this film ad lose no story while making it interesting. After 30 minutes, I was looking at the timer wondering how long it has been, which for me, is not a good sign.
Beyond this rather major flaw, the plot itself wasn't bad. A little contrived, but it could work. Had the film been cut and edited properly, it would have been rather good, but until the super cutdown version comes out, it's kinda boring.
I figured out pretty quickly that this was the sequel. It felt like a sequel. The characters were quickly introduced, and then breifly reminisced before plunging into the storyline, which as conceived, wasn't too bad. Actually, this film's problems are in its presentation.
The fight scenes are WAAAAAAAAAAAY too long. I got really bored watching the endless array of punch, kick, dodge, bounce, fall down. There were a lot of completely unnecessary scenes that destroyed the film's pacing. It got to going pretty good, and then something happened that was probably a throwback to the first one for the sake of doing it. The scenes in no way contributed to this film's storyline and should never have been filmed, much less kept in the final film. I could probably cut 30 minutes out of this film ad lose no story while making it interesting. After 30 minutes, I was looking at the timer wondering how long it has been, which for me, is not a good sign.
Beyond this rather major flaw, the plot itself wasn't bad. A little contrived, but it could work. Had the film been cut and edited properly, it would have been rather good, but until the super cutdown version comes out, it's kinda boring.
The Stepford Wives -- 2004 -- PG-13
This is a remake of the 1975 movie which I've also reviewed on here. This version of the story took a far more comedic angle to the cult tale, and it was very, very funny. However, in doing this, the story lost some of its suspense flavor that made the original good. It was paced very well, but with too much revealed too quickly, and a slew of inconsistencies that could only stem from rewrites after scenes had been shot, the film as a whole fell very flat.
While a remake has advantages over a sequel, it suffers from one big problem a sequel doesn't: there was already a movie about this, and the audience of that movie might expect some measure of the original story. Well, the story was there, but it was stripped to a bare minimum. In the original, the wives are robots. In this version, I don't know. They are introduced as robotic, but at the end they aren't really. I will admit to liking the ending on this one more than the original, but with less characterization of the lead characters, and less of the big conflict between the husband and wife that thrust the original forward, this ends up being a good effort that dosn't quite measure up. For comedy, it's an A++, but for the other stuff that makes a good movie, it lacks a little bit.
While a remake has advantages over a sequel, it suffers from one big problem a sequel doesn't: there was already a movie about this, and the audience of that movie might expect some measure of the original story. Well, the story was there, but it was stripped to a bare minimum. In the original, the wives are robots. In this version, I don't know. They are introduced as robotic, but at the end they aren't really. I will admit to liking the ending on this one more than the original, but with less characterization of the lead characters, and less of the big conflict between the husband and wife that thrust the original forward, this ends up being a good effort that dosn't quite measure up. For comedy, it's an A++, but for the other stuff that makes a good movie, it lacks a little bit.
Spartan -- 2004 -- R
Val Kilmer plays a spy of all departments who sets out as a part of an operation to rescue a girl of some importance who has been kidnapped. While there is not a load of character developmet in this story, it is one of those that doesn't need much, and the plot takes precedence over pretty much everything eles that goes on. From the very first frame, we are on the case in trying to figure out what is going on. It unfolds very naturally with just enough characterization to make us care.
The methodology to unlock the secrets is gradual as you move through its plot, and also very believable in how everyone works together and forms a single unit of many people parts. In an initial watching, I found no major issues that stood out although the twist was not too surprising, since that bit of plot is a little overused.
It's not as high adventure as a Bond film, but it does hook you as a thriller, and if you have any interest in spy thrillers, you're bound to enjoy this one.
The methodology to unlock the secrets is gradual as you move through its plot, and also very believable in how everyone works together and forms a single unit of many people parts. In an initial watching, I found no major issues that stood out although the twist was not too surprising, since that bit of plot is a little overused.
It's not as high adventure as a Bond film, but it does hook you as a thriller, and if you have any interest in spy thrillers, you're bound to enjoy this one.
Saw -- 2004 -- R
One of the best psychological thrillers since Se7en.
Two men find themslves chained to pipes in a decrepit old bathroom. With them are micro-cassettes describing their situation, and what they need to do to get out of it: one of them has to kill the other. The doctor in the room has until 6pm to kill the photographer with the gun in the hand of the dead man in the center of the room, or his wife and child will die. Throughout, items are discovered giving them more information, and not all of it less than disturbing.
This is a wonderful psychological thriller that begs the question "What would you do to live?" It is brilliantly executed with clever characters, whacked out almost no-win situations, and some twists that are very intelligently thought out. While the film contains a fair number of disturbing images (it got a 10 for violence/gore for a reason), it is a very intelligent film to watch if you can handle it. It is one of those where the blood an such are needed for the plot and not just thrown for the sake of having it.
This is the first psychological horror in a long time that is actually worth watching. I'll have to catch the sequel as soon as I can.
Two men find themslves chained to pipes in a decrepit old bathroom. With them are micro-cassettes describing their situation, and what they need to do to get out of it: one of them has to kill the other. The doctor in the room has until 6pm to kill the photographer with the gun in the hand of the dead man in the center of the room, or his wife and child will die. Throughout, items are discovered giving them more information, and not all of it less than disturbing.
This is a wonderful psychological thriller that begs the question "What would you do to live?" It is brilliantly executed with clever characters, whacked out almost no-win situations, and some twists that are very intelligently thought out. While the film contains a fair number of disturbing images (it got a 10 for violence/gore for a reason), it is a very intelligent film to watch if you can handle it. It is one of those where the blood an such are needed for the plot and not just thrown for the sake of having it.
This is the first psychological horror in a long time that is actually worth watching. I'll have to catch the sequel as soon as I can.
Secret Window -- 2004 -- PG-13
It was a pretty good movie with a solid zinger of an ending. The only weak point I found was that a solution was revealed very early on in the film. The character all but refused to act on this solution until the end. Some might say that the reveal at the end might have affected this, and one scene might have gone on to end a different way, but during the film, I think this was ignored too easily.
But beyond this, the suspense and intrigue of the thriller is worth the one weak spot . It kept me glued when I wasn't yelling at him to go get the stupid magazine.
But beyond this, the suspense and intrigue of the thriller is worth the one weak spot . It kept me glued when I wasn't yelling at him to go get the stupid magazine.
2008 Edit: I think this was one of my first reviews ever. It was written on a message board that is now defunct before I moved it to MySpace. Perhaps I'll review it again someday, though you can see it might not be worth the effort.
Sabrina -- 1995 -- PG
Watched this remake of the 1954 film of the same name the other day, and it remains as amusing and well-crafted as it was then.
The clever little plot follows a girl names Sabrina who is the daughter of the chauffeur and lives with her father over the garage. She has a crush on the younger of the Larrabee brothers, David, her entire young life, but during an excursion to Paris David gets engaged to the daughter of a big time business owner with which the older brother, Linus, is making a business deal. When David takes a liking to Sabrina all grown up, Linus takes it upon himself to engage Sabrina until David falls for his fiancee again.
I really don't have anything detrimental to say about this movie, if anyone cares to believe that. The major character were well-rounded and given pasts to relate to. The plot was left free of holes as everything ties up rather nicely and it has some decent, yet predictable, twists. It does have that air of nuisance in that the characters are given cushy lifestyles so that they can do whatever they want throughout the film, however that's more of a pet peeve than a complaint on the film.
This is a standard fare chick flick that delivers a better than average film.
The clever little plot follows a girl names Sabrina who is the daughter of the chauffeur and lives with her father over the garage. She has a crush on the younger of the Larrabee brothers, David, her entire young life, but during an excursion to Paris David gets engaged to the daughter of a big time business owner with which the older brother, Linus, is making a business deal. When David takes a liking to Sabrina all grown up, Linus takes it upon himself to engage Sabrina until David falls for his fiancee again.
I really don't have anything detrimental to say about this movie, if anyone cares to believe that. The major character were well-rounded and given pasts to relate to. The plot was left free of holes as everything ties up rather nicely and it has some decent, yet predictable, twists. It does have that air of nuisance in that the characters are given cushy lifestyles so that they can do whatever they want throughout the film, however that's more of a pet peeve than a complaint on the film.
This is a standard fare chick flick that delivers a better than average film.
Spawn -- 1997 -- PG-13
From the opening teaser, I was afraid I was getting into a fanboy movie that I'd only get if I had read the comics. My fears were abated, however, when the plot unfolded and I was easily able to follow it.
The characters were okay and about average for an action movie. The plot was pretty decently filled out and I knew what was going on and mostly why. One of my complaints here was that the main character was extremely dim as to what was going on. I have never read Spawn, nor did I know anything about him before I watched this film, yet I knew what was going on. Our hero had a gun obsession when on multiple occasions, he clearly did not need them.
Several times during the film, a solution (read: fight move) was obvious, but the characters deliberately took the more difficult route presumable to prolong the action. Spawn had abilities that were impressive after he learned how to use them, and yet in the final battle, he chose to thump on a critter with his fists instead of the more obvious solution of those rather nasty chains.
An action movie with all the weaknesses of an action movie: thin characters, overuse of guns, and deliberately prolonged sequences, but in the end, it was an enjoyable experience...if not a guilty pleasure. The film did have more than one very impressive and colorful explosion, some good drama between Spawn and those he left behind, and an everyman that was easy to relate to which helped to raise us above the stadard flick and make it a good watch.
The characters were okay and about average for an action movie. The plot was pretty decently filled out and I knew what was going on and mostly why. One of my complaints here was that the main character was extremely dim as to what was going on. I have never read Spawn, nor did I know anything about him before I watched this film, yet I knew what was going on. Our hero had a gun obsession when on multiple occasions, he clearly did not need them.
Several times during the film, a solution (read: fight move) was obvious, but the characters deliberately took the more difficult route presumable to prolong the action. Spawn had abilities that were impressive after he learned how to use them, and yet in the final battle, he chose to thump on a critter with his fists instead of the more obvious solution of those rather nasty chains.
An action movie with all the weaknesses of an action movie: thin characters, overuse of guns, and deliberately prolonged sequences, but in the end, it was an enjoyable experience...if not a guilty pleasure. The film did have more than one very impressive and colorful explosion, some good drama between Spawn and those he left behind, and an everyman that was easy to relate to which helped to raise us above the stadard flick and make it a good watch.
Scary Movie 4 -- 2006 -- PG-13
I watched the Unrated version on video that probably included more profanity, I'm guessing.
This one was a vast improvement over the last two pieces of crap put out in this franchise. Scary Movie 2 was shameful and Scary Movie 3 only moderately improved on it, since it was not possible to get worse (knock on wood). The "fourth and final installment of the trilogy" was much, much funnier and though it depended on the spoofing of other films for its humor, it did a far better job than it has ever done before. I have seen nearly all of the films it spoofed, so very little was lost on me.
One of the weaknesses of 3 was that it tried to do too much, and when I saw a dual War of the Worlds/Grudge thing going on, I was immediately concerned that this one might repeat the mistakes of its predecessor. My fears were abated, however, when the WOTW battle began, the Grudge plot was transitioned into something more. It was also amusing to me that Bill Pullman, who was in the Grudge, played a warped version of his role from that film.
While definitely a stronger entry this time with more laughs, the storyline still suffers from its reliance on spoof material and sight gags. A lot of things happen just for the sake of there being a joke in there somewhere, which hurts it when the joke doesn't come off as funny.
That being said, the overall story was actually pretty good. It had some ok development among the characters with our War of the Worlds characters actually experiencing growth during the course of the film. Our lead, Cindy, doesn't really grow that much at all, though.
So in the end, we have a far better offering than the previous ones have been. I'm not sure how much better it could have been considering the dependance on previously existing films.
The Shawshank Redemption -- 1994 -- R
I finally got around to seriously watching this one, and found out I saw part of it at some point in another life or something. This is an amazing film to behold. Tons of solid emotional moments. Great character development even on the minorest of characters.
We meet Andy: a man who was accused of murdering his wife and her lover and thereby sentenced to two consecutive life sentences in Shawshank Prison. There, he meets Red, who is continually turned down for parole at various points in the film. These two build a strong relationship throughout the film, and various other minor characters who serve to exemplify prison life and afterlife are explored. These characters are supremely introduced, briefly (but as completely as needed) developed, and then their purpose fulfilled.
This film ranks number 2 of imdb's top 250 and for good reason. It is an exceptional film and anyone who claims to be a fan of movies needs to view it at least once.
As an update now in 2008, the film has progressed to number 1 on IMDB, and what's more interesting is that this is one of very, very few movies that lists only one genre on its IMDB page. I guess simplicity does pay off.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
