Reviews

5 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Click (2006)
4/10
Potentially interesting plot ruined by Sandler
18 October 2006
Before renting this movie I had heard from friends, as well as from reading reviews, that feelings about this film were mixed. So, I figured, what the heck, check it out for yourself. Well, I did. My wife and I were hesitant to rent it because we are older than the typical audience that enjoys Sandler's movies. But, since we found "Punch Drunk Love" somewhat entertaining, we took a chance on "Click".

We were turned off by the typical crude humor Sandler is known for delivering. However, we felt that the other main actors (Beckinsale and Walken) did a nice job. Walken, in particular, reminded us of the eccentric, wacky scientist played by Christopher Lloyd in "Back to the Future", which we really loved. Winkler and Kavner were just so-so - a bit over the top, especially for "old folks" scenes.

If the plot had been focused more on the serious rather than the comedic elements, the film would have come across as being less scattered. From our perspective, the serious messages were worth the time and cost of renting this movie. But Sandler is just not a good actor. It was hard to feel real empathy for him - not because the situations he was in weren't tragic, but because he uses very little facial or voice modulation to convince us he is in pain or rueful about mistaken actions he has made in his life. Now, if Robin Williams had taken this role when he was younger (e.g., when he did "Bicentennial Man"), the film would have been both funnier and sadder.

It was interesting to note that Sandler was one of the producers of this film. Too bad he couldn't rein in his ego and look for another lead actor instead of taking the role himself. The film would have been better had he done so.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Last Sign (2005)
2/10
Not worth your time
18 October 2006
A weak and incoherent premise. Made worse by poor acting - especially from the male "love interest", who delivered his lines with such a boring, monotonic voice, it's hard to believe he cared about being alive, let alone the troubled heroine. The "special effects" were non-existent. The kids in the family were much more upset than one could believe they should be given how long their father had been dead. Finally, Andie McDowell has never been a great actress. She should have stuck with modeling. In fairness to her, the script was so bad, I don't think even Merryl Streep could pull off a convincing portrayal of this half-psychotic grieving woman. And why Tim Roth would waste his time on this project is beyond me.

I got this as a free movie from Blockbuster because I rented another first-release one. Even being free, it wasn't worth the time it took to watch it. And that's saying something for me. I usually can watch even the most tepid, unpolished Independent movie yet find something worth while in it. Not this one.
6 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Esther Kahn (2000)
1/10
Garbage
3 June 2006
This movie was one of the worst I've ever seen. Pure drivel. How anyone could develop a connection with the heroine, or have empathy for her, is beyond me. I felt I was watching a case history of a schizoid individual with borderline personality disorder. Just terrible.

In its most generous light, this can be seen as an attempt at producing and "art" film - except I could not, for the life of me, find any art in it at all.

If this woman had lived in todays' world, she would have been whisked off to a mental institution and given a couple of days treatment with anti-psychotic medications. That, or simply allowed to roam the streets and become a bag woman. Why other characters in this movie found anything redeeming in her - and tried to aid her in her quest to become an actress - speaks more to their pathology than any convincing characteristics she had that made her worth that effort.
2 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Head for the Hills
1 May 2006
Poor Ray Bradbury. He must be turning over in his grave (or his ethereal spirit must be zooming around in a dither, totally at a loss to explain how or why this movie was made). The plot was horrible - totally unrealistic, even for a Sci-Fi film. Added to that, the "special effects" (if you can call them that) were tawdry and cheap. The premise of "waves" of evolutionary change every 24 hours makes absolutely no sense. I assume that the noise accompanying those waves must have been the inspiration for the film's title (which indicates how lost the writers and producers were in coming up with any meaningful label to identify this totally disjointed, silly celluloid canard). Or, perhaps, the producers realized how bad the film really was and, as a joke, used the title to prompt the theater audience to create "A Sound of Thunder" by stampeding en mass to the exits. Don't waste your money renting this DVD. Save it instead to buy some popcorn when you rent something truly worth seeing. This film does not fit that category.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Batman Begins (2005)
9/10
I REALLY loved this film!
9 July 2005
I REALLY loved this film! The plot was tightly written and the acting was, by and large, excellent. Bale, Caine, Freedman, Neeson and Oldman all turned in fine performances. Holmes was not as impressive,but this may simply have been due to the script she had to work from. Hauer's portrayal was somewhat stilted (but that seems to be his fate in most movie roles - type casting?). I thoroughly enjoyed the way the story evolved, and liked both the cinematography and the music. My only reason for rating it a 9 was because of the difficulty in making out most of the action sequences - particularly the fight scenes Bale was in, both before and after his transformation into Batman. I look forward to seeing this movie on my home system when the DVD is released. Maybe those action segments will be easier to view on the "small screen". But, all things considered, this film lived up to the many great reviews it received and was easily worth the price of admission. I eagerly await the sequel. One question looming in my mind is, who will play the role of Robin? Might it be the young boy who believed in Batman and whom Holmes protected (when he grows up a bit)?
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed