trimmtrabb620 Reviews

Snake Eyes (1998)

Strictly for De Palma-maniacs

[4/10 · 16 October 2008]

...Like me.

I really like De Palma movies. It's sad sometimes how much I do. I think he as a person is as dull as ditch-water but I believe technically his movies are fascinating and that he has a masterful way of pulling an audience into a story and orchestrating their expectations. Body Double ranks among my personal favorites. Dressed to Kill, Sisters, and Blow Out are all terrific films. Obviously, if you disagree, that's fine.

As others have noted, the movie starts out great but then quickly tanks. Nicholas Cage is a little too old to play this character and there are moments where he's uncomfortable to watch. It's not natural; it's showing off. There are head-turns and dialogue deliveries that see him channeling 1997 Jim Carrey. He never really seems comfortable in this character's shoes. Sinise does just fine. Gugino is great to look at and Stan Shaw is quite memorable as a boxer at a crossroads with himself.

The movie reveals it's cards way too quickly, which shifts the emphasis of the story onto a foundation of absolutely nothing. There is no reason to keep watching once the cat is let out of the bag except that you're holding out hope for something, anything.

The ending is one of the worst endings I have ever seen. I do not understand how a tidal wave hitting the casino could look worse than the half-baked ant-climax they replaced it with. For a director so uncompromising as to answer the ripoff accusations with his most Hitchcockian movie at the time (Body Double), I'm surprised he didn't stay true to his vision. Maybe after the screen tests did so poorly, De Palma realized he had no vision and that he was treading water with a poor script.

I give it a 4 because it's wonderfully shot, opens with great promise, has a musical score too good for the material, and at times carries great energy. Too bad it sucks.

Flashpoint (1984)

Strictly for Treat Williams fans

[3/10 · 5 March 2008]

It starts out promising enough, coming across as a low-rent 'Simple Plan' with a budget Bill Pullman (Treat Williams, saving some scenes with that 'Prince of the City' bluster) and Kris Kristofferson (taking his shirt off more than thrice) coming across a jeep from 1963 carrying a bolt-action rifle, a skeleton (which really didn't get enough shots), and a lot of cash-money to drop like it's hott. Kris wants to keep the dollar-dollar bills y'all without question but Treat wants to investigate where it came from and get some semblance of a plot underway.

From there, I'm not quite sure what goes sour. The film switches gears to a drug bust and then tries unsuccessfully to return to the original plot. If there was a connection between the drug bust and the original plot, beyond introducing Kurtwood Smith into the film, I missed it. Miguel Ferrer is underused and Smith is saddled with a lame TV movie villain role. He was much better in 'Robocop'. In fact, they both were. Much better.

There's a scene of showstoppingly stupid dialogue between Smith and Kristofferson where you can tell the writers are trying to make a point about crime but just aren't articulate enough to get it across. There's about 45 minutes where it feels like nothing happened. The climax is predictable and although the ending has some intelligence to it, you're just too worn down by then to appreciate it. The theme song at the end (of course it's very 80's, about 'love on the run', and called 'Flashpoint') is hilarious. Not recommended.

The Fountain (2006)

two stars out of four

[5/10 · 12 February 2008]

Pi was great. Requiem was really good and I'll never know if it's better than that because it would take a lot to make me sit down and watch it again. And I have a feeling it's the kind of movie you only need to see once anyways. The Fountain was an ambitious attempt at a modern-day 2001, but without the cohesiveness and style to hold it all together.

A lot of the visuals in The Fountain come off as silly and distract from the overall enjoyment of the film. The flow and pacing of the film was confused in that it felt more like a three hour movie when really it was closer to 90 minutes. This is most likely because it felt like a series of ideas, some decent and some haphazard, strung together over rich visuals. The acting is average at best, which is saying a lot since neither Jackman or Weisz have much room to explore their characters.

For a more cohesive style and visuals that are much closer to breathtaking (which Aronofsky thrived for here but generally failed), then I'd recommend 'Sunshine', another modern day film that works along similar lines as 2001 but succeeds more as an action film than as a Zen parable. Aronofsky is talented and has achieved some stunning work, but I'm not going to like this movie on that fact alone. He doesn't demonstrate his qualities as a filmmaker with this movie so much as reveal his weaknesses. I was underwhelmed.

Fist of the North Star (1986)

One of the worst films ever.

[17 June 2004]

My friends and I watched this movie as a joke because it was so bad so I'm amazed that so many people praise it. Of course, people who like it seem to obsess over how "TOTALLY AWESOME" the violence is... "hey, whoa! not for the squeamish! Isn't that SO cool it's not for the squeamish? Wow! Violence is SO COOL!" What the heck?? Get over it! If you're not bored by the violence after five minutes then you have issues. The violence just becomes tedious and repetitive after that with heads exploding over and over and over...

People seem to be missing the fact that the dialogue is some of the worst dialogue ever written, ("no, i disagree, it is YOU who is going to die...in fact, there is no doubt about it.")and that the plot is nonexistent for about an hour in, and then it just goes from subplot to subplot in an attempt to drag the movie on for an hour longer than it should go. I felt like I should've been given a glossary explaining everything before viewing the film like they did with 'Dune'. The movie consistently gave me the feeling that I had just missed three or four crucial scenes. Oh, and it gave me that feeling with every two minutes. The ending is hilariously unmotivated in every way and I still have no clue what the creators were going for.

And as for people comparing it to 'Evil Dead' and 'Brain Dead' and all those gory horror films, they're missing out on how although those films were violent like this, they also displayed a keen sense of humor and an offbeat personality that carried you through the film. It wasn't just the violence, but it was the playfulness of it and the fun one experienced through it. The filmmakers were in on the joke. The violence in this seems to be directed purely at 13-year-olds who think the torture scene in 'Reservoir Dogs' is "SO COOL 'CAUSE IT'S SO BLOODY" and STILL play Mortal Kombat for the finishing moves and fatalities. I guess if you're one of those people, what I've said won't matter because you'll still be clapping and woo'ing as heads continue to blow up after two hours and you won't realize that as a movie, it totally fails in every way that actually matters.

Overall, one of the worst movies I've ever seen.

PS: Even as a bad movie, it's hardly worth watching because it goes on too long and doesn't have a solid storyline. In other words, one of the 'worst' worst movies you can find.

The Year of the Yahoo! (1971)

The Worst Kind of HG Lewis film

[16 March 2003]

There are good HG Lewis films such as 'Blood Feast' and 'The Wizard of Gore' where the bad production value, cinematography, special effects, and acting (aside from Ray Sager, whose charisma brings substance to all of his roles) surmounted in a hilarious and enjoyable film. 'Year of the Yahoo!' is the worst kind of HG Lewis film in that it is extremely tedious, badly shot, (not ha-ha badly shot like 'Blood Feast', but just plain bad) and in the end not worth investing your time in. Much like 'Just for the Hell of It', every scene is dragged out so that the film can reach feature length and so we're left with scenes begging to be cut in half.

But like even the most mediocre HG Lewis film, there are the moments that elevate the content above 'poor', such as every scene with Ray Sager. He bites into the role of a sleazy television producer but does it with zeal and personality. But even for Ray Sager, you'd be better off checking out the entertaining 'Blast-Off Girls' or the wonderful 'Wizard of Gore', where his over-the-top yet likable acting style is in full throttle, resulting in one of the most interesting cinematic characters of all time.

Blast (2000)

Honest comment from a user who DIDN'T work on the film

[2/10 · 30 August 2002]

This film seemed more interested in getting teenagers to like it than in getting a story told. The music in the film is an obvious attempt at drawing in a younger audience...how else would you explain such "hip music" playing at such inappropriate times in the film? Often, the music is extremely distracting.

Not to say that there's much to distract us from...you get unrealistic teenage stereotypes that we're supposed to relate with on some level, dialogue written by a forty year old desperately trying to channel a 16 year old, and a painfully predictable storyline that wants to show us that people can change... dramatically... with no reason, thought, or logic involved whatsoever.

In the end, the film comes right out and says, "this was about reality". I'm not sure what that line meant...and i'm not sure that a hip soundtrack will help me through any of the incoherent babble littered throughout this film.

The Straight Story (1999)

An absolutely gorgeous film

[10/10 · 17 February 2002]

I have always been a fan of David Lynch and with this film Lynch proved to critics that he has the talent, style, and artistic integrity to make films outside of the surreal aura that he's become known for in the past decade. As much as the film is G-rated, it's pure Lynch in style, pacing, and tone. The film moves at a masterfully hypnotic pace and is filled with scenes of genuine emotion and power.

The cinematography is terrific, as is to be expected from a Lynch film, and the transitional montage sequences are breathtaking. It's also very refreshing to see a film where the characters are all friendly, kindhearted folk and not unmotivated characters that are clearly labeled as being either "good" or "evil".

Richard Farnsworth turns in a beautiful performance as do the rest of the cast, most notably Sissy Spacek in an endearing performance as his daugher, and Harry Dean Stanton in a small but infinitely crucial role.

With this film, David Lynch proved to critics that he could make a powerful moving motion picture just like he did in the 80's with 'Blue Velvet' and 'The Elephant Man'. Critics seemed to lose faith in the past decade after he produced such surreal films as 'Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me' and 'Lost Highway' but with this film he showed that there was method to FWWM and LH, and it looks as if critics finally caught on with his recent film 'Mulholland Drive', considering the high praise it's received and the Oscar nomination for Lynch.

'Straight Story' is to me one of the most moving motion pictures I've ever seen. It's a loving story about family, friendship, and the kindness of strangers. I would highly recommend it.

Planet of the Apes (2001)

Tim Burton's worst film to date

[1/10 · 6 November 2001]

What ever happened to one of the most innovative and brilliant storytellers of our time? Well, he made the kind of typical summer action fodder that could've been directed by anybody available out of film school...and in fact, they probably would've done a better job. They would've at least have put half of a thought into the dreadful script.

Mark Wahlberg plays an astronaut who traveled through some sort of wormhole and landed in a planet ruled by apes. (gasp!) Except this time around, the apes squirm through groan-worthy dialogue, nonsensical plotting, and showy special effects that constantly reinforce in my mind that this money could've been put to about 10 independent films that would have been considered 'masterpiece' next to this tripe.

As much as I enjoy the superb acting talent that is Tim Roth, his performance as evil ape leader Thade is nothing more than an intense composition of slouching and heavy breathing. Luckily for him, the makeup allows he as an actor to maintain some dignity and most of the crap-dialogue is hidden behind his groans and sniffles.

And alas, the always dependable Hollywood tradition of taking the male and female leads and hooking them up at the end without any relationship development or cause. And the "haha, we're so clever, aren't we?" way that Hollywood intermingles references from the original POTA into this one. Sigh...

Instead of seeing this, spend the night in and call up some friends and rent 'Ed Wood', 'Edward Scissorhands', 'Batman', or even to a lesser extent 'Sleepy Hollow', and reminisce about the days when Tim Burton was a man of vision and originality...not shame and ridicule.