chongchuanmun Reviews

Death Note: The Last Name (2006)

An Unfortunate Incident of Slight Disappointment

[7/10 · 26 January 2007]

If you have read my previous review on the first installment of Death Note, you should know how much I like the movie. The Last Name, however, pales in comparison to the first, although it is still a good movie in itself.

The weak points:

Story - Sad to say, the first 90 minutes of the film was just plain boring.You do not get to see a lot of intellectual outsmarting anywhere. The story was prolonged in such a way that you lose all interest towards the end, even though it has one hell of an ending. In addition to that, the new ending made these 90 minutes seem useless, so much so that when analyzed, the movie could actually do better without them.

Acting - Tatsuya Fujiwara still can't do a wicked grin even if his name is to be written into the Death Note.He just doesn't have what it takes to be Kira.Although his ending was brilliantly portrayed, he is just couldn't give you that wicked, cruel, evil, and yet superbly intelligent feel. He just looks cute (to some). And the biggest disappointment came in the form of Ken'ichi Matsuyama as L. After his brilliant acting in the first film, he actually broke from character in this second installment. He spoke too fast, and his actions were a little over the edge. Either he got too confident that he over-acted, or they just made him speak faster to compensate for the length of the movie. His eyes movements and the blank stares are still excellent though. And luckily he didn't mess up the ending.

Directing - Although the director was the same, it somehow felt different, almost lame. There were quite a few odd moments in the movie that just didn't seem right. The scenes with the mask, the comments about women, and the ending. Simply put, the directing just didn't have as much gusto as the first.

Songs - Something is definitely wrong here. Both the opening and closing songs did not match the movie at all. Someone should be hanged for this.

Impact - The entire movie did not have the desired "intellectual orgasm" impact due to two factors. The beginning 90 minutes or so which made the movie so boring that it couldn't be saved in the end, even with that brilliant ending. The second factor is probably the main reason why the movie turned out to be a disappointment. Death Note. Rather, Death Notes. Towards the end, there were just too many Death Notes lying around and it made it impossibly difficult to keep track, killing off the "intellectual orgasm". To those who does not follow the manga or anime, they wouldn't know that Ryuuk actually has 2 Death Notes, one for himself, one for Kira. Misa is holding on to Jealous' Death Note, and Rem has another. Finally, there's L's fake Death Note. That's 5 Death Notes in 15 minutes. It's an overkill. Oh, the Sakura TV scene in the beginning was also poorly made. Ramming the car into a stage instead of the front door is just a clear sign of lowering the cost of the movie. Bad move.

Additional comment - throughout the entire movie, I couldn't shake off that nagging feeling that L is not being smart enough for his own good. The whole movie feels like Kira is just stringing L along, and you practically cannot see the intellectual prowess of L. Yes, the ending did save L's reputation, but it didn't save the movie. Pity.

The strong points:

Sound - the background music was excellent to complement the intensity of the visuals. However, these scenes were far and few in between and that made this winning factor lost in all the boredom and confusions.

Ending - I didn't see it coming. Someone told me that there would be a 3rd installment, so I was expecting the same ending as the manga and was about to walk away disappointed. Well, I still did, but at least the movie made it worth the time and money I spent on it. After the ending in the manga, the authors actually created, no, compounded, it with another ending. Fans of the manga would know that this ending actually came from the second chapter of the story, where Kira was pit against Mello and Nia. Perhaps this is also the mistake that killed the movie, as it introduced the multiple Death Notes that caused the confusion. Yet, the brilliant thing is, the authors added another new twist that wasn't in the manga. L's sacrifice. This is brilliant in script-writing. Due to the fact that the original and final ending are still the same, and it did not and will not anger the fans. Instead, the authors created an alternate ending to complement the original and final endings, something that wasn't in the manga, but could have happened anyway. It really shows how brilliant they are in writing their story, being able to manipulate the story in such a way. My hats are off.

Extra comment - one thing that I didn't understand was, the "friendship" between Light and L, which was very prominent and important to the manga, did not make it into the movie. Instead, we have an ending where L found his father figure in Light's father. For those who didn't know, L is an orphan. This makes a lot of viewers sympathize for L, especially after he sacrificed his own life to defeat Light/Kira. This makes for a very touching ending, and the anti-climax is the best that I have seen in recent years. Perhaps this is another way for the authors to write an alternate story based on the original.

I like the movie, but I'll go back to the manga, and the anime any day. This is just an alternative watch on a lazy day when I don't mind looking at Fujiwara's weak acting.

Casino Royale (2006)

Bond In The Making

[6/10 · 19 November 2006]

Well, here it is, guys. The sixth James Bond. Presenting, Daniel Craig! Well, depending on how you see him, he may be a good or a bad Bond. Why? Let's review the movie objectively.

Casino Royale is a story about Bond who just got promoted to Double 0 status, and this is his first assignment. He is a rookie, has no gadgets, no experience, utterly reckless, gets beaten, fooled, lied to, captured, and tortured more times than you will ever watch this movie. With that said, Daniel Craig makes a very good rookie Bond. Clueless most of the time, without charm, and does not express any of the James Bond traits. If you are a hardcore James Bond fan who must hear the words 'Vodka Martini; shaken, not stirred' in a Bond movie, then you will not like this. Still, the movie in itself is not bad.

Directing: with Martin Campbell as the director, there is not a single flaw in the movie. However, even Martin could not give Daniel what he gave to Pierce. Also, I hope he did not have anything to do with the utterly silly opening sequence.

Story: this is perhaps the downfall of the movie. It has no story, per se. The plots are flatter than a flat tire and the theme is simply unidentifiable. I don't know. I just can't appreciate the gist of what they are trying to tell.

Music: I hated the Bond music ever since David Arnold took over in Tomorrow Never Dies, and this movie by far his worst work. You don't even get to hear the Bond theme till the end of the movie! Bring back Eric Serra please.

Q: This is perhaps the first movie that doesn't have Q. Why? Oh right, Bond has no gadgets.

Vodka, women, and Aston Martin: the synopsis of the movie promised us the revelation of these three Bond trademarks, but although I could guess, they were never really explicitly explained.

The villain: Goodness! This guy has got to be the worst Bond villain of all. What happened to the ultimate evil that threatens the entire world? He makes Dr. Evil looks evil. Well, he did say that shedding tears of blood was a medical condition, and has nothing to do with being sinister.

Timeline: I got confused here. Judi Dench was first introduced as M in Goldeneye, and Bond was not happy with her being his superior. He thinks she is an accountant and does not match up to her predecessors. In this movie, Bond was promoted by her. Someone help me out here please.

Rip-off: What's with the Yamakasi rip-off in the opening sequence? Great action directing though.

Bond: whether you like Daniel Craig as Bond or not, that man can sure run!

Sound: well, the music was bad, and the sound effects didn't fare much better either. Surround sound was scarcely heard, and most of the time, you just don't feel like there's any sound effects!

The Bond pose: I was wondering why, when the movie started, there was no Bond walking out in black and white, focused by the barrel of a gun, and then turned and shoot into the camera. Well, here we have the origin of that shot, although I seriously doubt that was the actual origin of the idea.

Sony, Sony, SONY: if you noticed, this is the first Bond film (in recent years anyway) that does not belong to MGM and United Artist. Columbia Pictures got into the Bond franchise and what do you get? Sony stuff, all the way. Practically every model of the Sony Ericsson phones were displayed prominently in the movie. The unmistakable Sony VAIO laptop, and the very shinny Sony Cybershot digital camera. Now that's a way to promote your products. Seriously, it worked. I nearly bought a K800i after the movie!

At last, I have to admit that I only started watching Bond movies since License To Kill, and I am not that big of a Bond fan. Still, I like him. If you asked me, Timothy Dalton remains the worst Bond ever, and Pierce in Goldeneye is staying at the top. I felt cheated by Casino Royale, but I guess that's what happened when you gamble.

Death Note (2006)

An Almost Perfect Adaptation

[9/10 · 11 November 2006]

I am a fan of the manga (and anime) and as always with movie adaptations, I have my reservations about the integrity of the adaptation. I understand there are mixed reactions about this movie, so as with my usual reviews, I will be objective and review the strengths and weaknesses of this movie. Before I begin, let me stress that this movie is not about power corruption. This movie is about convictions of what is right and wrong (hence the controversial debate of moral values), and the battle of intelligence between two of the smartest characters (in the manga world, at least).

Story: To say it stayed true to the manga, it did not. To say it strayed a lot from the manga, it did not. Suffice to say that the authors created a parallel story that made the movie stands on its own, but also gave manga readers a good enough adaptation to satisfy their obsession, but did not arouse any anger. The opening sequence was definitely a good idea (except for the part where Light used the Death Note in public, which in the manga would have been a fatal error). Also, the subplot that showed us Light's conviction was simply brilliant. And I have to say that the creation of the new ending sequence was excellent (even though I figured it out halfway through the movie).

Unlike The Fellowship of the Ring that gave the movie an incomplete ending that leaves audience unsatisfied, the authors created a new plot that not only breathes new life to the entire premise, but also made a great ending to the movie, yet at the same time, left a major cliffhanger on the audience. Can't wait for the sequel! Directing: A very good adaptation to the manga in every way, except for two items. First: L uses a Mac Powerbook to communicate with the police. Even the manga authors/artists knew about Macs' trademark sphere speakers. Yet, the director (or art director) chose to use a cheap non-branded speaker. Second: final scene flaw. If everything was planned by Light from the start, why did he fell so ecstatic in learning Naomi's name? He should feign ignorance! Also, what's with the pen? Acting: Ken'ichi Matsuyama is brilliant as L. He captured every single habit of L perfectly, from his blank stares to his odd behaviors. However, I think the make-up artists put too much powder on his face. He almost looked scary at first glance. Having seen Tatsuya Fujiwara in Battle Royale II: Requiem, I was convinced that he wouldn't pass as Yagami Light (although he was good in Battle Royale). And I was right. Light is an insanely calm but ultimately ruthless person who will stop at nothing to achieve his goal (you can tell by looking at his eyes), even more so in this movie than in the manga because of the ending. Yet, he is that great actor who could fool anybody, even L.

However, Tatsuya couldn't project any ruthless aura, at all. In many scenes, he almost looked too forceful to be Light. Maybe it's because he has a little too much weight on him. Maybe it's the hair. But mostly, it's his eyes. It just couldn't give you that Look of Evil. Oh, and he couldn't grin wickedly either.

Ryuuk: Well, I was disappointed. With CGI technologies that created the Final Fantasy movies, Ryuuk looked utterly unrealistic and totally un-intimidating. Sure, they got all the details, actions and facial expressions, and the voice-over is incredible, but he just didn't fit in the picture. Somehow, he couldn't blend into the movie. He should have been real, but only visible to Light, which was what made the character so incredible in the manga.

Art Direction: Art direction was sparse but gave just the perfect feel for the movie, though I didn't know L was such a big eater.

If this movie is so great, why did I give it a 9 and not a 10? The production crew made one fatal flaw in the movie.

In such a story where intelligence and logic is centered, explanation is overwhelmingly important. One of the, if not the most crucial factor that made the manga so powerful, is explanation, or rather, how the story was explained.

What happened, why it happened, and most importantly, how it happened. I doze at such long-winded explanations, normally, but when reading the manga, it is the explanations that gave me goosebumps. It's like reading into the minds of the characters. Thus is the flaw of the movie. By way of explanation, it leaves viewers who did not read the manga lost and unable to appreciate the intricacies of how the events were planned, carried out, and discovered.

Although the ending scene was perfectly explained (probably because it was written especially for the movie), the rest of the movie were not, hence the mixed reviews. Take the FBI Agent scene for example. The anime did a better job than the movie. What a let-down. The director (probably in his obsession to stay true to the manga) has forgotten the existence of Ryuuk. He is the best premise a director can have in communicating to the audience the crucial explanations of the movie, as Ryuuk can act like the audience, asking the most important questions to Light. Alas, the two's interactions were minimal and that was the downfall of the movie.

All in all, I enjoyed the movie immensely. I was shouting (almost), getting goosebumps, and having intellectual orgasms from the complexity and intricacies of the story. Of course, I am very familiar with the manga. However, for those who are not, I believe they will not enjoy the movie as much, which is a very sad fact. This is not some dumb brainless Hollywood gore fest. Anyone who has half a brain of intelligence would watch this movie, and should know how to appreciate it.

Feast (2005)

Can anyone say Decadence?

[3/10 · 3 November 2006]

The only slasher movie that I like, is Urban Legend. It has a solid story with a good plot. With that said, this movie has Ben Affleck, Matt Damon, and Wes Craven in the Executive Producers credit line. So how does the movie fare? Directing: None.

Acting: None.

Story: Absolutely non-existent.

Plot: None.

Art Direction: Pretty good, and the lighting is not at all bad.

Sound: Dolby Digital in the DVD sounds fantastic, especially for monster movements and background effects.

Gore: Abundant.

Violence: You bet! Sexual Elements: For those who feels bestiality is not high enough, here's monster sex for you!

Conclusion: This movie is the epitome of human mental decadence. As with all such movies, the gorier it is, the more disgusting it is, the more violent it is, the better it fares in the cinema. If these movies are rated R, if parents won't let kids watch them, and they themselves don't watch them, why do they still making these movies, and continue making money? Do we need to wonder why war rages on even at this age and time?

There are, however, two scenes in the movie that cracks me up real hard. Absolutely funny, totally inappropriate, incredibly mindless, but I laughed anyway. How else can you react to such garbage like this movie? Incidentally, this movie isn't half as bad as Invincible, which has Mel Gibson and Jet Li as its Producers. By the way, does anyone know when is the Second Big Flood coming?

Laa-thaa-phii (2006)

A Time Filler At Best

[3/10 · 3 November 2006]

The movie itself is a failure, big time. Scare elements left me yawning (literally). The story has no real ending, and makes little sense. However, I do like the premise where the movie is based on, and the directing made the movie looks very much like a reality show. I find myself asking the same questions as I would while watching a reality show. The sound is nothing to shout about, but the sight is quite awesome. Set design was incredibly detailed and realistic. Lighting was especially good. However, costume design and make-up leaves a lot to be desired. Acting was incredibly lame. A good watch to waste your time, but I have better things to do and scarier movies to watch. Try Shutter if you can get your hands on it. One of the best Thai scary movie ever. In fact, with Shutter and Dorm, I'll say that Thai movies are beginning to play better than most Hollywood cash cows, but then Ghost Game came along and destroyed my conviction.

Silk (2006)

A commendable effort.

[8/10 · 21 October 2006]

This is not the best movie that I have ever seen, but it comes very close. In fact, I haven't had the experience of being at the edge of my seat for a long time now, but for this movie, I was constantly at the edge of my seat. And that's saying something.

The idea is effectively new, and interestingly captivating. The story itself is cohesive and very sophisticated, something that recent movies lack. The writer uses science to explain supernatural phenomenons like ghosts (no, it is not the Matrix assimilating a program that is doing what it is not supposed to do). And it's no simple science we are talking about here. Although I could understand the story, my friend who is a college IT lecturer couldn't. On top of that, the writer can even anticipates what the audience will ask. Every time I came up with a question, one of the characters on-screen asks that very same question. As can be expected from the writer who wrote Double Vision (although I didn't really understand that movie as a whole - but it was a good story nevertheless). Characters developments were immensely heart-wrenching, although it was only focused on two characters. There was a scene where I actually closed my eyes and turned away from the screen, and I was crying.

The editing and plot were superbly done. For a movie that could have bored the audience easily, this movie interlaced long explanation sequences with actions and scare scenes. This is the main reason why I was at the edge of my seat. I kept waiting for the answers but at the same time being caught in the action on-screen. Brilliant! The acting was the next commendable area of the movie. Chang Chen gave a very solid performance as both a cop and a son in distraught. Karena Lam also gave a memorable performance here as a woman who is willing to sacrifice for love. Yosuke Eguchi's performance reminds me of Tadanobu Asano's performance in Ichi The Killer. Although less masochistic, Hashimoto's character gave you the sense of someone who has a strong hold on his own believes, and he is willing to go further than most people to get what he wants. Yosuke Eguchi was brilliant as Hashimoto, being able to bring out that pain and stubbornness within the character. The casting director should get an award for this alone.

Art direction was very good. The building of the set was not only believable, but also gave out the correct atmosphere to compliment every aspect of the movie. There are no overkills like those you see in Pulse. The backgrounds were nicely done, and house decorations are kept to a realistic level. No unnecessary marks on the walls, no abundance of abandoned furniture, and definitely no worms squirming on leftover food or unwashed dishes. An abandoned apartment looks like an abandoned apartment. Just look closely on the beginning sequence and you will see what I mean.

Camera works were good and innovative, but more importantly, there were effective. The lighting was perfectly done. I got goosebumps just from the atmosphere alone.

With those said, let's look at the negative side of the movie. Directing was not very strong here. No fatal mistakes were made by Su Chao-Bin, but there were nothing much to impress either. My only major complain is the scare scenes. They were by far the worst ideas I have ever seen. It was still good in the beginning, but towards the end, they were downright funny and unimaginative. Those who came up with the ideas, and those who approved them, should be shot in the kneecap. This movie can be really scary if only the scenes were done right. What an unfortunately and unnecessary weakness.

The music was insignificant. I can't recall really, if there were any background music to accompany the movie. They just don't register. It didn't help the movie, but at least it didn't ruin it. Also, I don't really like the multi-lingual dialogs. More often than not, I find myself switching between listening to the dialogs and reading the subtitles, which in this movie where many explanations were essentials (and often very long), it can be easy to get lost. Why? Because the characters often switch languages right in the middle of a conversation! Also, I don't care much about the politics portrayed in the movie.

It could work just as well with only one country being involved in the case. How many Japanese can speak perfect Mandarin, and vice versa? Overall, the movie was good, very good, but it could have been great. Maybe if I directed the movie...

Re-cycle (2006)

The idea was good, the movie is bad.

[2/10 · 30 September 2006]

This movie is the epitome of paradox. Whether or not it is a scary movie does not even bother me. I am so fed-up by it I am not even going to spend much effort in writing this review. So here are the people who deserves to be Re- Cycled.

First: editor. The entire movie is a series of snapshots fading in and out of the screen. There is no continuous or coherent scene. Most of the time, you get flashes of a shadow or a hand. The shots are angled, out of focus, and pointless. If the movie was trying to be abstract, it failed miserably. I can't see a darn thing! I am refraining myself from using words that are not permitted here.

Second: the directors. To tell the truth, other than The Eye (the first movie), the rest of their works are mediocre, even borderline lousy. This movie pushes it over that borderline. One of the signs of weak direction is the inability to know when a scene should stop, and it is so evident here.

Third: sound director. Did they run out of budget? Give me a break.

Fourth: actor. I never like Lee's acting but I thought she was decent in The Eye. In this movie, I got sick looking at her, and most of the time, it is her that you see. She is the focus of every single shot, and she was able to show only one expression. Fear/anger/confusion; I can't decide which it was. Oh, and the dialog. Were they on a dictation contest? Does anyone in the cast and crew knows the meaning to the word 'acting'? At least at one point I feel for the little girl, but the best thing is, it wasn't the point where I was supposed to feel for her.

Fifth: writer. I can appreciate and even respect the idea presented in the movie. Yes, abandoning things are bad and we should recycle. So what's the point of the movie? Exactly, there is none. It teaches you neither to abandon, nor to recycle. Well, they do tell you the horrid of aborting a child, but I think the moral value is lost when you can't even make it to that point of the movie without losing your patience, and your mind. Oh and I think everyone who has watched at least one movie would have figured it out by then. I think they wanted to make the movie only because they thought the idea was nifty, but never really did any actual work on writing or reading the script. The movie spent the first 30 minute developing something that only affects 5 minutes at the end of the movie, and that was the gist of the one and a half hour movie. Please! And people dropping from the sky? Come on, help me out here.

Sixth: writer. Yes, he/she/they deserves to be buried twice. The entire story is a paradox. 'Why is everything here so horrible?' Lee said, squatting on a rock with a sweet child amidst a beautiful river with a small waterfall and lush greenery's. 'This is the place that I belong', Ting-Yu (the child) said when her mother was holding her in her arms, crying, wishing they could live together happily ever after. Need an explanation? The place is for abandoned things, and she has a mother that wants her, so she is not abandoned anymore and hence she no longer belongs there.'Anything you threw away can be found here' the child said, and then everything got sucked away by the wonder known as Re-Cycled. So what's the point again? They are thrown away, gather in this place, only to be thrown away again? Someone stop me please.

The lowest rating a movie can get here is 1. I gave this movie 2. The extra point was for the visual effect. The environment was nicely built, especially the toy graveyard. I think they made the movie BECAUSE of that. I would have given another point for creativity, but I took it back because the movie looked like a cross between The Langourliers and Silent Hill.

Why do I sound so angry you ask? Simple. I spent my money, my time, and my effort to watch a movie. I watch any movie with an open mind, and I try to justify the movie for what it is. I have enjoyed many movies, but when I watch a movie such as this, I get angry. I strongly suggest that they do not make another movie again. Excuse me while I go watch Dorm again.

Dorm (2006)

The Best Movie I Have Seen In Years

[10/10 · 27 September 2006]

I am a Chinese, living in Malaysia. Why do I start my review with that? Simple. I am not a racist, and I believe that a movie transcends race, religion, and culture. It is a work that brings together the elements of human nature and human ingenuity, both the best and the worst, into film, to weave a story that has a meaning and a reason, that gives us clues to how to live a better life. This is what a movie means to me.

With that said, I must state here that the recent movies that I have seen these few years were, to say the least, disappointing. Dorm, is better than them. Period.

The best movie I have seen still remains to be Donnie Darko, but Dorm comes very close. Very close. You can put it up there with Stand By Me and The Sixth Sense. The movie touched me in so many levels that after the movie, I started talking to myself about life and beyond. I know what you are thinking by now. I bet you are thinking that this reviewer is crazy. Maybe I am. But do read on.

The first thing that I want to state is that, this is not a horror movie. It doesn't scare you. It doesn't make you jump. It doesn't make your hair stand on ends. No, this is not that kind of movies. As some reviewers already stated, this is a coming of age movie, one where the character learns about himself and grows. This is a supernatural movie about ghosts and friendships, about sacrifice and childhood, about a father's sin and a son's journey into becoming a man, a better man.

I gave this movie ten points, so the first two points go to the story. This is a tried and tested method. A linear and chronological story that has no branches, no what-ifs, and no shocking endings. Hence, no screw-ups. The story was coherent, and the plots were all properly placed (albeit a bit flat), and the characters well-developed. The climax was justified, and the story was properly wrapped up before closing. This movie doesn't give you nonsense like a kid transferring to a new school and then bumps into a ghost for no good reasons. No, the father had an affair with the maid, the son saw it, and was shipped to a boarding school to keep the secret safe. The son suffers for the father's sin. As we later found out, this was not the case. The father in fact did it for the good of his son, but being a child, it wasn't easy for him to come to terms with the fact that the father was doing what was best for him. Dealing with domestic issues in a supernatural thriller is uncommon, but effective here as the father later deals with his adultery with his son. I used to be a school teacher myself, and the scene that grips me most was the headmistress seeing one of her own child drown at the bottom of the pool. I believe one could go crazy from a tragic accident like that. The Boy Who Cries Wolf was illustrated perfectly here in the movie, so kids, take heed. The best thing that I like the most, is that in this movie, the ghost is not a vicious, nasty, ugly, blood-thirsty, flesh-hungry, brain-dead, decomposing slab of meat that goes around haunting people for no good reasons. Why did Sadako do it? Why don't we ask how she did it with a tape? In this movie, the ghost is a little boy who had an unfortunate accident, who lives on to suffer the consequences of his own actions. Although his character was not very well developed, and you can practically tell he is the ghost 30-minutes into the movie, you won't actually mind at all. You will sympathize for him. You will feel for him. You will love him as if he is your son. And it was this friendship, a kid making his first friend in a new school (who happens to be a ghost), is what struck me the most. We remember all too well that first day in that new school, and that first person who came to talk to you who eventually became your best friend. Their friendship goes to such a level that a mere child was willing to risk his life to save the soul of not one, but two persons. One of the dead and one of the living. The story did not do the smart thing (like the ghost took over the boy's body as with we have seen in The Skeleton Key) or leaving the story wide open for a sequel. No, the boy saved the ghost, but therein lies the dilemma. Not only did he has to put his own life on the line, he also had to let the ghost leave. And then he told the headmistress the truth, and thanked her. The story didn't do the smart thing, but the right thing. And why did the ghost haunt the kid? Who asks the new kid to go to the toilet in the dead of the night? He was asking for it!

Unfortunately, my lamenting has caused me to run out of words, so I'll be brief on the rest. The directing was good, except for the oversight on Ton's hair length. The music was superb, especially the ending song. The special effect was good, and the cinematography is brilliant on the use of colors and lighting. Lastly, the acting. One word: superb. Charlie is even better than Haley, hands down. The scene where he had his first meal with tears in his eyes, my heart bleed.

I wish IMDb would give me more words, cause there are so much more I want to talk about this movie!

Slither (2006)

What could I say? The Best B-Grade Movie Ever?

[5/10 · 24 August 2006]

In the spirit of cheesy B-Grade movies, this movie owns the throne. Take Body Snatcher, mix it with a zombie movie (any zombie movies), and then sprinkle a little bit of love on it (a good one, like Titanic or Gone With The Wind), and viola, you get Slither. Gory, funny, and highly entertaining when you are up at 3 in the morning having a cup of insomnia and a plate of migraine. Perfect fun for the loner couch potato who doesn't have a life.

Sounds confusing? Yes. I do agree. The movie in itself is funny and entertaining, if you have time to kill and nothing else better to do. It provides you with enough gore to stop you from finishing your bag of chips. Blood, flesh, slugs everywhere. A must watch for those who like it disgusting.

Story wise, it doesn't have much. It's an old and repetitive formula, but oddly original. 'A conscious disease' they call it. Something new in the movies today. The idea itself is terrifying. The execution, not so much. However, I do have to commend the director for taking the bold in actually developing the storyline (whatever storyline it has) within that short 80+ minutes. It does gives the character more depths, and much more believable. His efforts actually shows. Due to this, you won't feel cheated or insulted after watching the movie. You felt like there was actually a solid story behind it (even though this may just be an illusion).

I would also like to applaud the art director for his wonderful job in the set design. The sheriff's office looks especially realistic. For a moment there, I actually wondered if they were shooting the movie in a set, or in real life buildings in a real life town. The stickers on the glass door, the mess on the officer's tables, all of them very nicely done.

The only disgusting about the movie, aside from the gore, were the acting. Not one of the actors in the movie can act. Not one of them could portray the characters, or even give you an illusion that they were real. But perhaps if you look at it in another point of view: from real life, you may feel that they are good actors, because that's how real people would react to the situation. You see a head blown off and a slug coming out of it (and you're out of ammo), you turn around and run! Still the only nauseating feeling I got from the movies did not come from the gore, but from the acting. Lying there watching with wide eyes when the only grenade that could save humanity exploded in the water just cracked me up, and then I puke. In my humble opinion, if you put a slug into the every actors' brain (and the casting director's), they would actually do a much better job than this.

I also strongly urge Air Supply to sue this movie. I appreciate the humor of using a sentimental song in a gory scene, but from now on, every time I hear that song, I will only remember pieces of flesh on the floor, an ugly infected man tearing the flesh out of another dead human, slugs, and a big fat hideous blob with tentacles. Thank you Mr. Composer for ruining one of my favorite love songs. Not only did he/she skipped the job of composing an eerie music for this sequence, he/she also insulted the sanctity of music. He/she crossed the line in matching music with picture. Someone should shoot him/her in the head.

The director/writer did make a mistake towards the end of the movie. To cause a gas explosion, you need a spark. A gun produces sparks. Brilliant idea! Here's another: the spark is produced when the bullet is hit by the hammer and when it scratches the gun barrel. When a bullet penetrates the flesh, no sparks are produced. I suggest that in his next movie, maybe the director would like to consult with the caveman who discovered fire.

Finally, why do the slugs always have to go for the mouth (when the first one didn't)? There are so many other holes in the body, and some of them are more interesting than others to be invaded! I am sure the girl in the bathtub wouldn't object (though she would scream) if the slug were only a little more intelligent. If you think I am being vulgar here, think back to Dreamcatcher, The Hills Have Eyes, and Species.

All in all, that's 90 minutes of my life that I won't be getting back, but I can't really say it was a waste. And the ending song? Someone shoot me, please!

Ultraviolet (2006)

This is cheating!

[1/10 · 26 June 2006]

My first impression of this movie before I watched it was "It's something like Equilibrium". At that time, I didn't even know Kurt Wimmer directed Equilibrium. With Milla Jovovich and a Sony Pictures release on its side, I never did expect a big screen movie to be this bad. I feel cheated for buying the DVD, I feel violated by the awful directing, and I feel totally insulted by the computer graphics.

Unlike Equilibrium that has a solid (albeit paradoxical) story and a good directing, Ultraviolet looked like a home-made movie by some high-school students on an obsolete PC. It's a futuristic movie; hence the application of computer graphics to generate a futuristic world is extremely important. Yet, they didn't spend any efforts on it. There was no art direction at all. They just design a few futuristic looking building, generate it using computer graphics, and put it there. An artist's paintbrush could produce a better picture. There were absolutely no details. Polygons were just put there. I don't think they even render it! Helicopters and motorcycles look fake when they move, out of proportions when the camera angle changes, and at high speed, the frame rates actually drops to a very visible lag. They didn't even care enough to make sure the bullets don't overlap with the target.

The sound effects were so artificial and non-consistent it made me switch off my home theater and watch it solely on the TV's speakers. Gunshots without sound, surround sound where there were not supposed to be, and a total inconsistency of volume leveling throughout the entire film made the DVD a waste of money.

Then come the directing. Scenes were done without focus, without objective, and without care. It's not refined and it lacks motivation. Every scene is like a general shot that shows everything. It doesn't capture the objective of the scene, where the focus on a certain angle will tell the viewers what is the intention of the scene, what and where the director wants you to see, and how you should be feeling. This is directing at its worst.

Being an action movie laden with martial art fighting sequences, I would expect a level of commitment to the action choreography. The idea of the "Gun-Kata" in Equilibrium was very good, very believable. When they reuse it here based on Violet's super-hearing, it's just plain silly. The entire scene was a joke. Yes, my father actually laughed at the scene. When it came to fighting, the scenes were even more absurd. One whoosh and ten guys surrounding Violet goes down to the floor dead. Punches were thrown without aims, and when they do connect, there is no impact. A blade going into the body has no feel to it. Thugs go down with one twist of the arm, and there were hundreds of thugs for Violet to pound on. The piles of bodies on the floor after a fight sequence are absolutely amusing. You would ask at the end of every fight scene where did those bodies come from. There are absolutely no attentions to details in this film!

Talking about details, the design of security measures against the HGV is just brainless. You have multiple designs, from a full body suit to a single nose piece. Front-line soldiers wear full body suits. Supervisors wear a transparent face plate that does not cover the entire face, and the scientists wear goggles and mouth-pieces, leaving the nose exposed. When Daxus go outside, he wears only a nose-piece, nothing else. Yet, he has sterile napkins ready to wipe any cups he wishes to use. Did anybody even ask if the coffee was safe?! If you don't think all those are good enough to complain, how about this: he puts his gun in a sterile, vacuum package.

Milla Jovovich is a good actress, and this is definitely not one of her best work. Neither is Nick Chinlund. There are just no depths to their characters.

The script was not doing any better either. The dialogs in this movie were one of the worst I have ever heard. Violet said "... a weapon used to kill me and everybody like me" twice in the movie. It's a little redundant I think, since I am sure by that time we should already know what the story is all about. Then she said: "I am a titan, a monolith." That was the last straw for me.

I have never seen a movie as bad as this since Ticker and Unspeakable. My friend bought the DVD together with me. He didn't even finish watching the movie. So for those who are considering this movie, I advise you to save your money, time, and brain cells. I lost half my sanity watching this movie.