Hound222 Reviews

Cloverfield (2008)

Poor. So Poor.

[3/10 · 22 January 2008]

I'm going to try to keep spoilers at a minimum here, but having wasted $12 this weekend to see Cloverfield (thank you Manhattan), I feel it's my duty to try and save others from the same fate.

There's a reason why the early parts of the year are traditionally known as a dumping ground for studios. Because it is. A good deal of the stuff released at this time is done so because it's the furthest possible time between this year's Oscars and next year's...allowing studios plenty of time to distance themselves from bad films before the noms come out. Cloverfield is no exception to this trend. Borrowing liberally from films such as The Blair Witch Project, the recent Godzilla remake, and every horror movie you've seen where the main characters act completely illogically and are knocked off one by one, Cloverfield fails to meaningfully deliver on its goal of taking the big monster film down to the level of the individual "ordinary" people caught up in the wake of an attack.

It fails mostly because it fails to make us care at all about the central figures and their ludicrous quest to save a girl who is most likely already dead. I'll set aside the glaring logical inaccuracies (cell phones blacked out one moment, then working the next, cell phones working underground, extreme compression of basic New York geography...there's more but...), but I can't ignore the fact that for this little experiment to work, we have to care about these people who are running around doing really stupid things. Ostensibly, the first twenty minutes of the movie sets this up, within the thin framework of a party for the male lead. But all we really learn from it is that pretty much all the guys are kind of jerks, so no help there.

There's even an exact recreation of some 9/11 footage just to flavor the pot, which I found kind of offensive, and other New Yorkers might have too. I'd probably have been even more offended if the movie was any good. But it's terrible, so, there you go. Look, I wanted to like this movie. It was great promo. When I saw the trailer the first time I was really excited, as many of you probably were too. But i urge you to save your money on this one. Rent it if you must, the jerky camera-work and sub par story will be exactly the same on the small screen as the big screen.

Equilibrium (2002)

Judge for yourself

[8/10 · 24 January 2003]

The biggest lesson I've learned from seeing this film is to judge films for myself, and not to listen to the critics. If you look at the critics' reviews for this film, they're terrible! The NY Times said it could "only be stupider if it was longer." But look at the viewer reviews. 8.0 from IMDB users at the time of this comment, and four stars from moviefone.com viewers. I almost didn't see it because of the critical reviews, but my fellow moviegoers won me over. And I couldn't be more pleased. This film is an intelligent synthesis of the ideas of autocracy and population control presented in such books as 1984, Brave

New World, and Farenheit 451. It presents a dark view of the future, but grants enough light and hope in the story to carry an audience's attention. Admittedly, the romantic side story with Emily Watson is overwrought and practically

unnecessary, but what movie doesn't have one or two flaws? Plus, the main selling point of this film is the action sequences. Christian Bale carries off the "gun-kata" synthesis of martial arts and gunplay with believability and a surprising grace for someone who, to my knowledge, really hasn't been a part of the action/martial arts genre at all to this point. And the direction definitely polishes any weakness that Bale (or Diggs for that matter), may show. It is a beautifully done, artistic action film, with fight scenes to rival the matrix. And it's all done without the "flying" (though wirework is undoubtedly used), so it's much more palatable in my mind than the fight scenes in the Matrix or

Crouching Tiger. See this movie. Don't believe those snobby critics and their smear campaign. Join us, the people, and fight the good fight!

Shrek (2001)

What's the worst that could happen?

[10/10 · 5 June 2001]

There is no good reason not to see this movie. When checking out the vote history on IMDB, I was astonished to see that anyone at all had rated this movie a "1". Whether it's your type of movie or not, this movie could never be considered "awful" under any rational rubric.

This movie skillfully captures that which has been sorely lacking from the last offerings that Disney has given us: it is a movie which revels in its own cleverness, yet never at anytime ceases to poke fun at itself. The vocal acting is stupendous, regardless of whether or not you enjoy Myer's feigned scottish accent, and the character modeling is realistic and evocative. Most impressive is the way that actual features of Lithgow, Diaz, Myers, and Murphy are molded into those of their respective characters.

The writing is almost brilliant. It oscillates from low-brow to high-brow without effort, and earns hearty laughter either way. When characters in the movie do things that are annoying, something funny and violent usually happens to them to make them stop, granting all of us a great deal of gratification. If only the producers of Star Wars:Episode One had had a similar attitude towards Jar Jar...

This movie is without comparison in the field of animated films. Many Japanese animes have produced stories and action which is as evocative as Shrek's, but their ways and means are far different. Shrek is a movie that never insults your intelligence (too much), never takes itself seriously, and insists on being an enjoyable film with depth of both drama and humor. Go see it: it's something you can feel good about in the morning.

Finding Forrester (2000)

A Film which greatly underachieves...

[7/10 · 12 April 2001]

Clearly Gus Van Sant is not the same director without the sharp writing of Damon and Affleck. Finding Forrester is a film with great potential, a fine cast, and some of the worst pacing I have ever seen in a movie. The script is long, far far too long, and is made even longer by the half-hearted attempts to work Anna Paquin and Michael Pitt's pointless characters into the plot. Busta turns a surprisingly dramatic performance as Jamal's content older brother, and Connery, Abraham, and Brown all demonstrate their polished acting skills, albeit hampered at times by an unwieldly script. All in all though, this movie is definitely worth sitting through once. The themes about triumph over adversity and the struggles of inner city students, while not particularly original, are compelling. And Van Sant never disappoints in the realm of the technical with his well-thought-out and well shot film. You won't walk away with your heart exactly aching for the plight of a lonely author and his African student-friend, but it does produce a certain fuzzy feeling.

Eyes Wide Shut (1999)

Brilliant Requiem For A Brilliant Man

[9/10 · 13 April 2000]

Although there was a lot of negative public commentary surrounding this movie, and a few bad reviews, those who didn't like it most likely were not intelligent to understand the message or follow the story. The acting is amazing, and carries what is not an otherwise notable story. The artistic direction alone is breathtaking and makes this movie worth seeing. Kubrick's use of light and darkness has always been unparalleled, and he out does himself in this movie. His reputation as a perfectionist is clearly well deserved. A must see for any lovers of the art of film.

Shooting Fish (1997)

Excellent!! Sweet, funny and intelligent...

[9/10 · 2 February 2000]

This movie is simply great. While it perhaps lacks a larger social message, other than the simple "do good with what you have", it is a smart, funny movie which definitely has its moments, both cinematic and dramatic. The rags to riches story of two orphan con men: one, a genius Brit, the other, the American spin doctor. Together they engage in "shooting fish", or fleecing rich people of their extra cash, in order to buy themselves the lavish house they've each coveted because of their simple upbringing. The story is fun and engaging, the characters seem very very real, and the different cons they pull off together are extremely funny. I won't give away any of the story, except to say that the has a nice, unexpected twist. An excellent date movie, or even to take in with a couple of close friends. You may not laugh out loud the whole time like you did at "There's Something About Mary" or other slapstick comedies, but you'll definitely be smiling the whole time, and by the time the credits role you'll simply be in a much better mood than you were when you started.

A Fistful of Dollars (1964)

Good, but give credit where credit is due...

[14 November 1999]

This is an excellent Western. It has some of the most definitive fight scenes of the genre, most revolving around the "show down" type. But let's not forget to give credit where credit is due. This film is ripped almost entirely from Akira Kurosawa's film "Yojimbo" (or "Yojinbo"), the story of a masterless samurai who brings peace to a town torn apart by gangsters by pitting them against one another. The characters, plot, and even some of the dialogue are taken directly from that Japanese masterpiece. Good film, but I highly recommend you see the original as well.