Change Your Image
WheelerClown
Reviews
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (2007)
A flawed yet still superb performance.
My chief complaint about this film was that certain key (comical) scenes that I anticipated for months were disappointingly not there. Am I the only one who was looking forward to seeing the DA give Malfoy, Crabbe, and Goyle what for when they attacked Harry on the Hogwarts train at year end? Or the swamp created in the Great Hall by the Weasley twins? Granted the movie was meant to be dark and somber, but a little humor never hurts, especially when it is so delightfully described in JK Rowling's prose.
That said, the overall movie was a resounding success. The acting on all parts was superb. I haven't seen a better casting of a Hogwarts "villain" than Imelda Staunton as Dolores Umbridge since Kenneth Brannaugh's delightful portrayal of Gilderoy Lockhart. Staunton had the best (worst?) traits of the character down cold. Her oozing patronizing speech as she spoke down to the students. Her vile cold-hardiness as she "tortured" Harry in detention. I could go on and on. As for other "villains", Helena Bonham-Carter as the malevolent and somewhat mad Bellatrix Lestrange was also riveting, if somewhat underused. David Bradley really shone as Argus Filch in this movie, more so than any of the preceding ones. The Dursleys were as always dreadfully good, but very underused. I did not get a good sense of Uncle Vernon's delightful villainy this time around. Tom Bradley as Draco Malfoy was also woefully underused, but I am sure this will be remedied in Half-Blood Prince. And Kreacher couldn't have been done better, although I was disappointed to see his part in the villainy that resulted in Black's death was woefully absent in the picture.
The two newest female "good guys" were also superb, although in one case woefully underused. The casting of Evanna Lynch and Natalia Tena as Luna Lovegood and Nymphadora Tonks, was brilliant. Tonks' character was not seen nearly enough, but in both cases when the characters were seen, Evanna and Natalia stole the show.
Of course the old regulars did their usual superb jobs (well for the most part anyway). Dan, Emma, and Rupert really shine in this movie, showing how much the characters of Harry, Hermoine, and Ron have grown through the years because of their trials and just because kids just have a way of growing up. I especially like the transformation of Hermoine from "follow the rules to the letter" bookworm to actually enjoying being a rebel. I have always enjoyed Maggie Smith's portrayal of McGonagal and she did not disappoint me in this movie. Robbie Coltrane as Hagrid was not used enough, but this was true to the book. (Grawp was fantastically done by the way, although not quite the way I pictured him). I can't get used to Professor Flitwick's amazing youthful transformation that took place in an earlier film, but Warwick Davis still does a fine job. Snape as always is delightful (Alan Rickman is one of my all time favorite actors), and the way he reacts to Harry seeing the memory of him being taunted and teased by James Potter was superb. Speaking of that scene, however, the aftermath (Harry coming to grips with the fact that his father wasn't perfect and maybe Snape had a reason to be the way he is) was just glossed over. A wonderful opportunity for character development lost.
I have never been a fan of Michael Gambon's Dumbledore. Richard Harris was so much better, and I couldn't help but wonder how he would have interpreted the Dumbledore scenes in this movie. Gambon did okay, more so than in the last film, but he just doesn't have the magic that Harris did.
The plot, except for the disappointment I expressed at the beginning of this review was actually handled quite well and the story was moving. I can't complain at all there. Like others have mentioned, some more detail in the Hall of Prophecy scene would have been an improvement, as could have Fred and George Weasley's last stand. And not having the centaurs speak about why they hate wizards made what they did to Umbridge a bit confusing. Still all in all, a great movie that I recommend to all Potter-fanatics.
X-Men: The Last Stand (2006)
Doubt there'll be an X-Men IV
This was at least as entertaining as X-Men I and II, maybe more so. The action was good. Acting wasn't too bad. Halle Berry's depiction of an angry Storm wasn't great, but then, her acting rarely is. Angel was window dressing; hardly part of the story at all. If Beast was director of Mutant Affairs, where was he in X-II at least, if not X-I? I have to say here I was pleasantly surprised by Kelsy Gramer. He is NOT one of my favorite actors, but he did a decent job of playing Hank McCoy, the Beast.
And where was Nightcrawler? You'd think that there would at least have been a storyline explaining where he was, and I think, based on a conversation he had with with Mystique in the last movie, I expected to see him in line to get the "cure." If it was a question of special fx costs, they should have shelved Angel and stuck with Nightcrawler.
I hated the way they made Jean Grey's Phoenix persona look like something out of the exorcist and never really explained what made her so murderous, or why it took her so long to re-surface. And it was a bit lame to blame Phoenx on a hidden part of her personality all along that Xavier was trying to get under control, considering that was never even hinted at in the previous films.
Still, there are just as many good points. the storyline of Rogue seriously wanting the cure so she could actually be embraced and kissed by her boyfriend was riveting, although I expected her to come to a different conclusion at the end. I was thrilled to see Kitty Pryde get a major role in the movie. She's always been my favorite X-Man (or should I say X-Woman?) with Rogue a close second. I was disappointed that they didn't establish the relationship between Xavier and
As for the end (and here are major spoilers, so if you don't want to know the end, read no further), it's pretty obvious to me that, except for the possibility of a prequel or another reincarnation (several, in fact), there's not likely to be an X-Men IV. Two of your major villains (including THE major villain) are no longer mutants. The same for a major X-Man (woman). And with the deaths of Xavier and Cyclops (told you this would be a spoiler), what can they possibly do for a real sequel? I liked the story and the major ending better than the last X-Man movie (except I hated who decided to take the cure). Magneto's rejection of a major supporter and ally the moment she involuntarily got "the cure." was magnificent. I did want Rogue to show up at the last moment and siphon off Phoenix's powers so she could be Jean Grey again. And why did Wolverine do what he did to her when he could have just shot her with the cure when he got close enough to use his claws? Sometimes, movie lines just defy logic, even if you can buy into the fantasy settings.
X-IIII pretty much ended the movie franchise in my opinion. An X-Man movie just wouldn't be an X-Man movie without Xavier. But I guess we'll have to see. Money does strange things in Hollywood.
Bottom line...X-Men III is definitely worth watching.
I'll Be There (2003)
Not a great film, but an excellent one
I found this movie to up upbeat and even a bit heartwarming. The plot was perhaps a little contrived, but I'm a sucker for happy endings and movies about families that, eventually at least, work it out.
Perhaps I have a better DVD than one of the other reviewers, because I found nothing wrong with the sound quality of the film. The acting wasn't up to Academy Award standards, was was quite good, and there were some very funny parts, although some of the "British" comments went over my American head. Charlotte Church's voice is always a pleasure to hear and while the songs in this movie weren't of the type she really excels in, she still has "the voice of an angel" and her singing alone would have made the film worthwhile. The other principal actors were quite good as well, and it was fun seeing Anthony Head play a low key villain after seeing him for so many years as Buffy's adviser and protector.
Star Trek: Deep Space Nine (1993)
The very best
Although I never got into Voyager, and the Enterprise only in the last season, I am a big Star Trek fan. And Deep Space Nine was the very best of all the series. The characters were more human and didn't always get along, they faced the challenges of overcoming old (in their world) technology, and most of the stories were refreshingly new. It also had some of the most memorable characters in the Star Trek universe, marvelously played by some excellent actors. Quark, Grand Negus, Kira, Odo, Garak, just to mention a few. Avery Brooks' (Capt. Sisko) acting )and appearance) improved as the show went on. That too was a wonderfully woven 3 dimensional character right from the first episode when he had to overcome his hatred of Capt. Picard who, as the Borg Locutus, had led the battle that killed his wife. I couldn't stand Rom at first, but his character grew on me.
I felt betrayed when Jadzia Dax was killed (my favorite character). Even more so when I learned that this was necessary because Terry Brooks had allowed herself to be lured away to play (can you believe it?) Ted Danson's girlfriend on another show. But I found Ezri Dax, because of her insecurities and youth, to be an even more interesting character and would have been happy to see her on it from the first.
One question I always had (because it would have created an ending plot twist that I would have enjoyed) is this. If Odo could be turned into a solid by his people (as was done in an earlier episode) why couldn't Kira be turned into a changleling at the end to experience the great link with him as he had experienced her world with him? That would have been a great finale to a wonderful series that, in my opinion, ended much too soon. My rating: 5.5 stars out of 5.
Million Dollar Baby (2004)
Good start LOUSY ending
This is a definite spoiler so if you don't want that, don't read any further.
Let's skip to the end for my pet peeve. I have a physical challenge and I am so sick and tired of the movie industry painting us one of two ways. Either the character is placed on a pedestal so high I could never get my wheelchair on it. Or, as in the case of Million Dollar Baby, as a #$#** coward that would rather die than face a difficult challenge. Guess what Hollywood? We're just the same as everyone else. Meaning, yeah there are a few out there like that, but most of us are regular people who enjoy being alive whatever our limitations and who usually find a way to do what we want and need to do.
This is what rang false in this movie and ruined it for me. If Maggie (Hillary Swank was such a fighter, she wouldn't have given up in the end. It wouldn't have been in her. Need I cite examples? (Christopher Reeve). The movie would have been so much better if rather than talking Frankie (Clint Eastwood) into euthanasia (another name for murder/suicide), it had shown Maggie as struggling but ready to take on the next challenge and fight the next fight. The ending alone knocked this movie down several points in my vote.
Okay, off my soapbox. Up to that point it was a fairly good movie and I liked the acting. Other than what I've already mentioned (and a minor point I'll mention in a minute), Hillary Swank did another quality acting job, as she usually does. Clint Eastwood was Clint Eastwood, just as John Wayne's characters were always John Wayne. If you like the one basic character he always seems to portray (and I do usually) you'll like him here. My complaints are all in the writing department, not acting. Did anyone else get tired of Hillary calling Clint "boss" throughout the movie in that southernish accent. She sounded like a prison inmate when she did that. But as I said, a minor complaint.
Bottom line, enjoy most of the movie, skip the stereotypical demeaning ending.
Æon Flux (2005)
Wow! ! ! !
This is one great sci-fi movie! I didn't realize until I read another comment that it was based on a TV series. Which is probably why I liked it so much...didn't have to compare it to anything.
Charlize Theron as usual was great and made the show. Most of the other main actors as well. And the cloning thing caught me completely by surprise.
I could only voice two fairly minor complaints about this movie. Sophie Okonedo's portrayal of Aeon's friend was not great acting. (But I liked the hands for feet special effect.) And they kind of left the fate of the rebel leader (in fact just about everything about her) in the air. I expected her to be a villainess in the end and was disappointed that she wasn't anything at that point.
Still, all in all this movie is a definite 10
Xena: Warrior Princess (1995)
Started Great, Ended Not So Great
I was hooked on Xena from the beginning. Lucy Lawless' vocal and diction abilities are amazing. Wasn't too fond of Gabrielle (Renee O'Connor) in the beginning...she started out as such a wimp. But after they made her an Amazon Princess and figured out that they could have her kick you know what but not kill anyone, Gabby became my favorite character (next to Callisto, Aries and Caesar, the three greatest TV villains, anyway.) Joxter was annoying but I got used to him and the way he died saving Gabrielle was perfect.
Unfortunately, towards the end the writers ran out of Greek mythology imagination and suddenly Xena was a former Norse Valkyrie and former student of a Chinese sorceress. And that is when the series started to go downhill. The last episode should never have taken place in China, it was a show based on Greek mythology for heaven's sake. Still, it was a great series while the Greek setting and stories lasted. Overall I give it 9.5
Birds of Prey (2002)
Every bit as good as Smallville (and I like them both)
Another reviewer put down Birds of Prey as not being faithful to source material (DC Comics) while Smallville is. Come on...show me anywhere in the Superboy/Superman comics where Smallville is practically destroyed by a meteor shower bringing Kal-El (aka Clark Kent) to earth. Or a story in the comic books about humans getting super powers )and always going evil with them) from Kryptonite (called green meteorite rock in the first season or two).
My point is, it's not necessarily following source material that makes or breaks either show. Smallville (which survived the cut) is about teenager Clark coming to terms with his superpowers and trying to be a normal teenager. And it works.
Likewise Birds Of Prey was mainly about Huntress (aka Helena) who was also struggling with growing up and trying to deal with a loving mother violently taken from her at an early age and a father she never knew and resents but whose shoes she is now called on to fill. I thought the show was great and was very disappointed that it wasn't given at least the chance of a few seasons to make a go and gain a loyal following, as Smallville has. I liked Birds of Prey from the start. I didn't like Smallville from the start, but it grew on me. Why? Because I forgot about how it butchers the Superboy myth and just enjoyed it for what's there. Birds of Prey, with it's excellent cast (particulary Ashley Scott who created a superbly three dimensional character in Huntress). My only complaint was never getting to see "HarlyQuinn" in costume. And the episode where they had to make Oracle walk to defeat an old foe. You don't have to be able-bodied to be a hero(ine).
It's probably too late, but come on WB. Bring back what was one of your better shows. (Much better than some of the ridiculously stupid comedies that lasted three seasons or more).
States of Grace (2005)
An incredibly moving Dutcher film
I expected to see a repeat of God's Army one which, while very good, was full of impossibilities (like a missionary serving for more than two years just because he's dying) and sometimes irreverent humor. I saw instead a moving and quite realistic film. (I know because I was in a stake many years ago where a similar situation happened, resulting excommunication, disfellowship, and years of only sister missionaries in that area after the scandal). But it was handled tastefully, reverently, and powerfully. This is definitely a movie I intend to own as soon as it comes out in DVD.
The transformation of the "I can't wait to go home" missionary into an "I wish I had more time" missionary was realistic and moving. (And shocking when I first saw a body covered with gang related tattoos). So, in a depressing makes you want to cry way, was the transformation of the gungho missionary into a man losing practically everything that was of value to him because of a tragic mistake which he could have easily avoided but didn't. And the transformation of the street preacher into a strong man of God (albeit never a Mormon but who used both Bible and Book of Mormon into his later preaching.
If it was possible though, I would rate this movie 9.45 instead of 10 because of things I that I think should have turned out differently but (probably because of Dutcher's vision of reality) didn't. And don't we go to a movie like this to say "to heck with reality, I want to come out of this movie happy and uplifted?" The young boy should not, in my opinion, have been murdered while his older brother was being confirmed. Realistically, his grandmother would have dragged him to church that time anyway. And even if it had to happen to further the plot (which it did), it shouldn't have happened there. Or the kid could have been seriously beaten up but not killed. I think that would have sent his older brother on just as much of a rage.
When the soon to be fallen missionary disappeared, I wanted it to be because he was trying (whether he succeeded or not) to tell the tortured actress's parents what jerks they were being and to show the love and forgiveness that any daughter, especially one as sorry as she was, deserves. I know there are parents like that out there, and it pains me. NO parent should ever quite loving a child just because they've erred (no matter how great the error, like starring in a porn movie, which would just about kill me if my daughter did, but I'd still love her and never give up on her. ) I desperately wanted to see some reconciliation there, no matter how small. Likewise, in the case of the missionary, no child deserves to be disowned for choosing a path the parent doesn't approve of. (As the fallen elder's dad did by saying he'd rather his son come home in a casket than come home dishonored. )
And I wanted to see the fallen missionary's mom, who was at one point standing so close to the hurting actress who realized what she had done to the woman's son, to put an arm around her and say "If God can forgive you, and He will, how can I do anything less? And you and my son need to forgive yourselves as well." After all, wasn't the whole theme of the movie that God loves and forgives his children, no matter what?
Those small weaknesses aside, this was undoubtedly one of the best (if not the best) movies of 2005 and even though it's unlikely, should be nominated for a couple of academy and/or people's choice awards. My advice to all is to take a handkerchief with you, but go and see it. Don't expect a preachy Mormon movie. Expect a powerful experience that will have you leaving the theater deeply moved and wanting to improve your own life and show more love to those around you that may be hurting in ways you may not know. And find yourself hurting less in the process.
Dreamer: Inspired by a True Story (2005)
A Great Family Film
I always suspected it, but this movie made it true. Dakota Fanning CAN act and can be more than just cutesy. The chemistry of all the actors/actresses was great, the story (though predictable) was excellent. And Oded Fehr, who is one of my favorite of all villains (the evil Zankou on CHARMED being an excellent example) showed that he is equally good playing a good guy. His role while short was great. What can I say about Kurt Russell? He is Kurt Russell, the man who even pulled off being Elvis Presley years ago (something I thought at the time was impossible). And he was great here too, although I suspect after reading about his family life with Goldie Hawn and her children that he was just being himself in this one. The one surprise of the movie of Elisabeth Shue. Not having really seen her since ADVENTURES IN BABYSITTING, I'd never of recognized her without seeing her in the cast. Again she was great in the film.
If you love family films that give the appearance of going to be a tear jerker but actually end on a happy and inspiring note, this movie is for you.
The Work and the Glory II: American Zion (2005)
Not enough of the story here
I personally found this movie disappointing. In trying to cover too much (2 books, I believe), It glossed over too much that made the books riveting and would have done so with the movie. Where is the conversation between Ben and Nathan Steed that led to Ben allowing his wife to be baptized? Where was the finishing and dedication of the Kirtland Temple; which I believe took place before the worst of the Missouri problems? Where was Liberty Jail? And the relationship between Joshua and Jessica, good and bad, was butchered and unsatisfying. And the ending was so abrupt, it made no sense whatsoever.
Still there are pluses for the movie. The acting, as usual was excellent. The antagonistic relationship between the Missourians and Mormons, while a bit choppy, was realistic and riveting. And while I had complaints about what was missing, I still would have enjoyed the movie had it not been for that abrupt ending. (see the film to see what I mean; I won't spoil that for anyone.) This movie won't satisfy the fans of the book series, but it won't leave them demanding their money back either.
The Legend of Zorro (2005)
Entertaining, but a pale imitation
The legend of Zorrow does have it's moments of entertainment and humor. And it's not a bad movie to watch. But it pales in comparison to the original, more so than a lot of sequels. (And we all know sequels rarely outshine the first movies.) The story is lamer, and the fiery chemistry that existed between Antonio Banderas and Catherine Zeta-Jones in the original is sadly lacking here as is the elegance that Banderas portrayed as a don in the first movie (disappointing since in the original he was only pretending to be a don, whereas in this movie he really is one). There is a little humor between Zorro and Toronado (his horse), But it occasionally gets downright outlandish (like when Elana (Zeta-Jones) drops a pipe from an upper window and Zorro later finds the horse smoking it...yeah, right) And the main villains demise is a little too reminiscent of that of the villain in the first movie.
All that said, the movie is okay in its own right (if you don't compare it to the original). The action scenes, while more Jackie Chan-ish than in the original are entertaining. (Although the first one involving Zorro's young son is a trifle unbelievable). And while the original chemistry between the leads is missing, the many arguments they have are somewhat entertaining. I wouldn't recommend this movie as Academy Award material, but neither would I say stay away from it. Don't compare it too much to the original and you'll probably enjoy it.
Doom (2005)
Doom it's not (but it could have been much worse)
If you want to see a Night of the Living Dead Clone, this movie is for you. If you came to see a movie resembling the video game Doom, skip all but the first half of the last 30 minutes of the film. If you came to see the Rock play a stereotypical egomaniac military leader with no ability to put morality above orders (in short to see him play an almost totally UNLIKEABLE character), again this movie is for you.
Harry Potter being the exception, movies based on other mediums (in the case a popular video game) rarely if ever even remotely resemble that which they are supposed to be based on. That said, there are a few good Doom images in the film, although the storyline does not resemble the game at all. I was pleasantly surprised to see several images in the first part of the film that I, as a Doom enthusiast, recognized. Rising platforms, elevators, the circular stairways going down, etc. And like I said the first fifteen minutes of the films last half hour or so definitely fit, the scene being seen from the same prospective as the game, namely with the viewer looking over a massive gun as if the person behind the gun. The final "monster" (of the non-human variety) resembled a creature found in the game as well. Other than that, this was not a movie based on Doom but, as I said, on the old zombie eating people who then turn into zombies themselves scenario. And the only acting job worth remembering is that of Karl Urban, playing John Grimm. I loved Urbn as one of the best villains in the old Xena series (as Julius Caesar), and he was great here as a tortured soldier of mayhem with a tortured past, an estranged sister, and a conscience. When he becomes super soldier is when the movie really gets good. Unfortunately, that happens too late in what is otherwise a slasher/alien/zombie film. This is not to say I didn't enjoy it as a movie on its own merits rather than as a Doom remake...I did, mostly. There was way too much gore and vomiting for my tastes, but the gore wasn't much worse than that in the actual game. But as a low budget action monster flick, it ain't bad. Go to it to see good sets. Go to it to see a fine acting performance turned in by Karl Urban. Don't go to it to see a fine acting performance by anyone else (including the Rock) because you'll be disappointed. And come to see a movie based on its own merits rather than on how closely it resembles what it claims to be based on. If you don't, again you'll be disappointed. If you do, you'll see a fairly entertaining gore film.
Corpse Bride (2005)
Not The Nightmare before Christmas, but not bad either
This show is not up to the standard of Tim Burton's Nightmare before Christmas in terms of storyline, songs, or visual effects. That notwithstanding, it is a very entertaining movie with several very funny lines and situations. The voice talent is wonderful, the character development (especially the Corpse Bride herself) is excellent.
If I have any complaints at all it would be animation and an unsatisfying ending. Victor has a pallor throughout that makes him appear as dead as the corpse bride. The overweight characters in the film look quite good but the skinny ones (Victor and the Pastor come to mind) look like stick figures. And unlike Nightmare, the characters walk in an obvious marionette on strings manner. As for the end, it is too unsatisfying. What the dead do to the villain after he dies is totally off-screen. And it would have been a much better story if it had ended in a happily ever after "live" wedding. And what finally happens to the corpse bride makes no sense at all given the concept of the world of the dead already created in the film.
These shortcomings notwithstanding, I recommend that anyone who enjoys a Tim Burton film should definitely see this one. Not an excellent film, but a very good one.
Dogville (2003)
I appear to be in the minority because I hated it.
Perhaps if the DVD box had warned me that I would be viewing a "teleplay" instead of an actual movie, I might have approached it differently. As it was, the bad cuts (for example, Kidman is lying down one second and suddenly sitting up the next) were very disruptive to me getting anything out of the movie, as was the lack of scenery and props. But most of all the movie was much too dark for my tastes. While the adult citizens of Dogville may have deserved their final fate, the children did not (with the possible exception of the one bratty boy who wanted a spanking). That part of the ending at least was not something one would have expected Nicole Kidman's character to do, even given what the adults had done to her.
All of that said, I will admit that Nicole Kidman acting shone as brightly as ever, as did Lauren Bacall's and a few of the others. But I couldn't help wondering what in the world would have made them be a part of such a movie. Maybe Bacall's opportunities to act are fading with her advancing age. But Kidman owes it to herself and her public to hold out for roles and movies of a much higher standard than Dogville.
Scrooge (1951)
Best Version ever made! Alistair Sims and Michael Hordearn are great
Best version ever made. Michael Hordearn and Alistair Sims give the best and most three dimensional portrayals of Marley's ghost and Ebenezer Scrooge ever performed on film or television. Hordearn clearly portrays the tragic sadness and horror of Marley, a spirit doomed to suffer forever because he didn't have someone looking after him like he helped Scroge. And Sims gives the most believable transformation of sinner to penitent of any of the countless Scrooges. The other characters in the movie are well done too. Kathleen Harrison's Mrs. Dawber is a particular delight. But my favorite scene in the movie is when Scrooge's niece-in-law accepts his heartfelt apology completely and without reservation, showing that his life has indeed changed.
There are countless versions of the movie (not counting the comic clones), but if you want to pick one that far surpasses all the rest and probably always will, this is it.