Reviews

5 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Hannibal (2001)
5/10
What's the fuss???
19 February 2001
I don't understand the hoopla surrounding this movie. What story it had was paperthin AT BEST. Of course Anthony Hopkins was good, he should be if you look at the totality of his work he is considered a GREAT actor for a reason. Anything less from him WOULD BE news. There were several blown opportunities at real scares and the climax that everyone oohs and ahhs over struck me as kinda silly and another missed opportunity to be a real screamer. I suppose it had to be toned down for the movie's budget sake, so as not to get an NC-17. It's not a terrible movie, however it's nothing spectacular. George Romero...those of you that know movies think about him and ask yourself, compared to George Romero, Ridley Scott is not even doing anything in the horror or gore arena that is startilingly new. In fact, the only thing new was Hollywoods willingness to spend big, fat dollars on the genre. Only because it was a proven vehicle and not without hedging their bets with MASSIVE advertising. You wanna see Anthony Hopkins in a truly awesome performance, in a truly twisted movie with depravity and horror about as well as infinitly more shock value than this.....try TITUS directed by Julie Taymor. Beautiful to look at at times, shocking to look at other times and overwhelming as a film. Anthony Hopkins Lecther would actually make a great husband for Jessica Lange's character from Titus.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Contender (2000)
3/10
Liberal tripe from Dreamworks, what a suprise
20 December 2000
Warning: Spoilers
I am befuddled that more people haven't been critical of this shallow, flaccid swipe at conservatism. Let's break down the liberal smear campaign that this movie is. SPOILERS CONTAINED BELOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

SPOILERS BELOW!!!!!!!SPOILERS BELOW!!!!!!!!SPOILERS BELOW!!!!!!!!!!!! 1.) The democrats are all cast as handsome, dashing men with full bushy heads of hair who have a sharp sense of right and wrong and defend those beliefs as pillars of righteousness leading right up to the lame-brained scolding of congress at the end of the movie. 2.) The Republicans are portrayed by a lumpy, bald-headed bespectacled frump with the effeminate name of "shelly" who don't care about right or wrong, only advancing partisanship at any cost. So wrongheaded are the Repulicans that even their spouses sell them out. 3.)Obviously this is a feeble Hollywood finger waging at what the writer feels was an unfair attack on Bill Clinton and it is devoid of any sense of reality. But, that's what Hollywood is about I suppose. 4.)In the most pathetic skewer of wrongheaded politics, the Democrat with a good working realtionship with "shelly" is exposed as a fraud.

This movie is a poor attempt at a liberal fairy-tale in which pricipal takes a stand and ultimately wins. The movie purports to advance an agenda that taking a stand is what's important even when being right in the beginning would have made the whole issue moot. This movie is an insult to the intelligence of ANY moviegoer who has even the vaugest notion of what the political landscape of this country is all about. A much, much better film (liberal as well!) is the documentary The War Room about Bill Clinton's presidental campaign. Throw this in the trash where it belongs and see the War Room for how politics is REALLY played.
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Ride with the Devil (I) (1999)
8/10
Astonishing but not QUITE spectacular....VERY CLOSE THOUGH
19 December 2000
Warning: Spoilers
I wanted to see this film when it came out in my area and it was gone literally in one week. That is quite a shame. When critics in this country call films like "The Patriot" quality entertainment it makes me realilze that critics aren't necessarily that bright. Ang Lee has proven to be a master of producing films that are not only beautiful and complex (The Ice Storm, WOW!) but also subtle and thought provoking. He respects the people who see his films as being of above average intelligence and is never pandering (unlike above mentioned film). This film deserved to have critics rally around it in an effort to really get some people to see it, certainly this movie deserved a better fate.

In this era of cinematic sensory overload where everything needs to have a quick, simple and brutally violent resolution it is refreshing to see a film that constructs true emotion, true realization and honest development. Yes, this movie is violent, very violent in some places however that serves as witness to the horrors of war that Jake experiences and eventually rejects rather than embraces. He realizes that war does not have anything to do with honor and dignity and that true honor and dignity mean accepting your place in the world and being a good person as he ultimatly realizes himself to be as evidenced by the final, profound climax.

I'M NOT SURE, BUT THIS MAY BE CONSTRUED AS A SPOILER........ Some may find the ending anti-climatic because there isn't zillions of dollars in pyro-technics abounding and blood splatters and cannonfire, but rest assured, if you have a brain cell in your head you will find the ending rich and satisfying.
7 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Slow moving, insightful and very well written
29 November 2000
This movie is certainly NOT for everyone. And I would whole heartedly agree with people who feel mislead by the cover of the videotape because it doesn't create any idea of what the movie is. What the movie is, is a very finely crafted film much like "My Dinner With Andre" but much more somber. The layers of these characters peel off as they become more and more comfortable with each other and it creates for an almost voyeristic feel that lends the movie an immediate impact credibility. This movie is reflective of how many, many people interact and present themselves as something they are not and how fragile people can really be. We see and work with people every day who could be lost souls, lonely hearts, broken egos etc.....and this movie simply reminds us that not everyone is what they seem and that the world is full of lost, lonely people. Obviously not a subject that lends itself to the average movie-goer but if you like outstanding writing and want to see what can be done with TRULY indepenent movies, this is the movie for you. I HIGHLY recommend it to literate movie fans.
18 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A movie that will stay with you a long, long time
28 November 2000
This movie ranks as possibly one of the most emotionally devastating films ever created. If you are simply looking for pure entertainment you will hate this movie because it is deep, beautiful, disturbing and complex. I saw it in the theater when it first came out and was literally weak when it ended. I have since closely examined this film many times as I think it is exquisitely crafted and genuine in it's execution. There are scenes of such powerful emotional intensity that you actually feel intrusive watching them unfold. The only fault, if that can be said, is that this film is unrelenting in it's starkly honest portrayal of the darkest corners of the human heart and the bitterness with which some people endure life. If there wasn't truth about the human condition movies like this wouldn't be as powerful as they are.

I also applaud Atom Egoyan for not using Russell Banks ending from the book. Though I enjoyed the book as well and the movie is generally VERY faithful, I felt the ending of the book much to conciliatory and applaud Egoyan's courage for not taking the easy route.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed