Change Your Image
story
Reviews
Scarface (1983)
Overrated
This movie can't hide behind the "dated" excuse, since it's an '80s adaptation of a '30s success.
The tone, the pacing, the acting (Pacino's Tony Montana is a cartoon), the editing, all point to one thing: A director who couldn't put a good film in the can if he accidentally took one of Scorsese's home from the printer.
The script is one of Oliver Stone's best efforts, and the theme was over-the-top topical. Given real production values and someone willing to spend time cutting it together properly it could have been a great movie. But Brian de Palma is like Tony Montana, ignoring his lack of talent or judgment and completing the job on balls alone, and everyone in his vicinity dies out of negligence, association, or misapprehension.
The Matrix Revolutions (2003)
Not even very good chop-socky
This was the "wall of sound" episode of The Matrix, and had no real ending.
Certainly none that made more sense than "see you next time we need a hundred million bucks."....
Kid Notorious (2003)
You gotta get it to get it.
If you want to get every joke, you have to have read Evans' book or seen his autobiodocupic or, like the show's hilarious take on Kim Jong Il, have heard the Books-on-Tape version.
The man (former actor [he *played* Irving Thalberg!], movie producer [ever hear of Chinatown? Marathon Man? Popeye?], studio president, inspiration for Dustin Hoffman's character in Wag the Dog, and husband or lover of just about every movie star and model since the mid '60s, Robert Evans) has had more deaths and resurrections than a 16-part slasher series. This show parodies Evans mercilessly and equally mercilessly satirizes the corruption of the post-studio-system Hollywood way of doing business, along with plenty of famous people who have had it coming for a long time.
If you come into it cold, I suppose you'll just be left wondering "What the f--- was *that*?" But the Osbournes was a hit, so there's no reason to write The Kid off again. And even if you do, he'll just come back bigger and richer.
So is it the funniest show on television if you have the clues? You bet your ass it is.
The Legend of Bagger Vance (2000)
Oh christ.
Robert Redford couldn't direct warm water into a sink of soapy dishes. This cast, this story, this script should have sung. The failure of harmony and melody rest entirely with the skill of the man at the con. Unless Redford's direction was a metaphor for Junuh's lost golf swing, this movie sucked and it was all his fault.
Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones (2002)
Only just barely better than Ep. I
Still suffers from Lucas' inability to write, and difficulty in directing actors. Reminiscent of Empire in that it's less of a complete story than a connection between the one before and the one after, and in the division of the plot with protagonists separating. Beyond that, it fails to evoke the wonder and inner beauty of the galaxy, settling for heartless, brainless action and a matte-painting, picture-postcard substitute for beauty.
The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)
Lacked a central plot.
Pardon my lack of prejudice as I've not read the books. Where's the story? This reminds me of The Empire Strikes Back. It ends with no resolution. It's beautiful, sure, but for all the chapters, it has no compelling, self-contained plot of its own. The fellowship? Seemed to be formed late and suspended in convenience for some future arc. Bilbo's independence? Perhaps, but it too was forged in the fires of setup. Aragorn and Boromir? Rather subjugated. Many things begun, none of great power completed. I want to see the payoff for Arwen's pledge; that'll be something; there is one, right? It's beautiful, sure, but some scenes rather overdid the ethereality that didn't need it, though those that needed it did it very well. On anticipation that the trilogy will play in three wonderous acts, I've given it an 8, but I'd like to have seen this part have a quality that stands it on its own.
Dinosaur (2000)
On a scale of 10, it's a 12
Some of the complaints here are nitpicky things that kept me from rating Dinosaur a 14, but most are missing the point.
This is a Disney movie. Disney plots are straightforward, to reach the very very young as well as the rest of us jaded postadolescents. Disney movies have talking animals in them. And Disney characters use contemporary language. Sometimes, they're downright hip. Remember The Jungle Book? Louis Prima in the part of the orangutan, King Louie, singing, "I'm the king of the swingers, ohhhh, the jungle V.I.P." It don't get hipper than that. And Robin Williams' Genie in Aladdin... I mean, if this is your gripe, then you just don't get Disney movies.
Despite what you read about the animation getting old after the first sequence, it never lets down. Disney's Tarzan was complex, but Dinosaur is insanely complex. Plot points depend on shots that demonstrate heretofore impossible techniques. And novel animation touches appear right up to the end. (Anyone who complains about Earl sticking his face in the lens just didn't get that, either).
This is absolutely a must-see--and must-see-again--film.
Double Jeopardy (1999)
They threw out the formula...then they forgot the recipe...
This thing is half-baked and full of holes.
From the failed central conceit (that Louisiana couldn't convict her of a crime she wants to commit after Washington convicted her of the same crime which she didn't commit) to the poorly-cast children, Double Jeopardy stands as a symbol of getting a second helping of something you didn't order in the first place.
Ashley Judd is predictable. Tommy Lee Jones is wasted after his first scene. The direction is random. The cinematography involves inexplicable camera movements and jarring focussing changes (which, given the widescreen format, result in funhouse-mirror geometric distortion effects). The screenplay, while occasionally hitting plot points, prefers to cut across them. Every move is telegraphed, save the inexplicably convenient coincidences. And just how much money did that old bat bury beneath her tomatoes?