Change Your Image
sempergumby
Reviews
The Music Man (2003)
Better and Worse than the original
I had not watched the original for decades and thought this version was terrific! Possibly I had lowered expectations considering this was a made for TV musical, but we had to buy the DVD because my family loved it so much. The costumes and cinematography were better than the original and the cast worked very well together (and the original was very good). There were scenes where Broderick was better than Preston and vice versa. Same goes for the leading ladies, though there is something endearing and enticing about Chenoweth and her unique voice that fit the part very well.
If you love musicals you can watch this over and over the same as Sound of Music or Oklahoma and the kids love to sing and dance to it.
The choreography was excellent as were the sets, you really travel to River City, Iowa a century ago.
Caution: if you recently watched the original or were in love with it you might not appreciate this interpretation as much as I did.
Back to Gaya (2004)
Beautiful CG, BUT worse than a Saturday Morning Cartoon Story
The Computer Graphic in this movie were sometimes sooo good that I kept trying to figure out how such quality effects were used in a movie with such terribly poor pacing, story, and plot. The quality of the scenes was often on par with Shrek or even Monsters Inc. I would watch a scene thinking this could be a professional studio doing this film (that I never heard of in mainstream media), then I would see the characters do a scene that would no longer pass as adequate in a Saturday Morning Special.
Maybe it was the difficulty of working with CGI characters. Its possible that because the film was made in German and then English audio was dubbed that caused the audio track to be off throughout the film. I never realized how spoiled we've become with films like Toy Story, Shrek, Nemo, Antz, and so on. This film had several sweeping scenes that I thought could have been right out of any of those films, but then cut to action that could not have been in a storyboard for one of those films.
Beautiful scenes, but lacks the wittiness and pacing that would allow an adult to enjoy this movie.
Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith (2005)
Execution so perfect it overcomes some unbelievable storyline.
In a number of areas this is by far the best of the six films. Action: 10 out of 10. Non-stop, story moving, jaw dropping action. Special effects: 11 out of 10. The light-saber fights are perfectly executed, epic, stand up and clap awesome. The sets/scenes are gorgeous works of art with elegant, well thought out detail. These details that add to the realism are found throughout the movie. The character generations are a step above previous films. Yoda gets a 10, I think Yoda is as well done as Gollum in LOTR if not better. Variety: 10 out of 10. Numerous types of weapons, ships, life forms, robots, and even heroes and villains raise this film to a new level. General Vicious (spelling?): is as impressive and convincing as Darth Vader, except maybe his death after Obi discovers that all you have to do to kill him is shoot under the protective flap covering his vital organs (a serious design flaw for a killing machine).
Acting: 8 out of 10. The acting is much better than Ep2. Ewan and Natalie are almost perfect, though Hayden (Vader) doesn't come near convincing me that he is Darth Vader or ever could be. Its not his fault, its an error in casting. In his defense, and he needs it, Hayden does a much better job with a more difficult role in Ep3 than in Ep2.
SPOILER (if you've had your head in the ground). Haden is supposed to convince you that he is willing to kill a bunch of innocent young-lings (Jedi children) to have a chance of saving his wife if the evil Darth Sideous isn't lying about the one thing Anakin wants most (I guess Anakin never saw Little Mermaid). In addition this potential knowledge is enough motivation to kill all the Jedi and his master/mentor/brother ObiWan. I don't think I could kill my innocent brother to have a chance that I'd be able to prolong my wife's life for an undefined period of time. Lucas should have focused on the power or emphasized the good IL boy system keeping Anakin from progressing or found a better motivation for a Jedi to turn on his fellows. While these concepts were toyed with, Lucas decides the strongest motivation for murder is potentially saving the life of your spouse and Anakin is willing to turn the Galaxy over to Palpatine to save his wife from a foreseen death.
Conclusion: 9 out of 10. I so wanted to give the film a 10 and it deserves a 10 in so many ways, but since the central story of the film is unbelievable (in the Star Wars world) I can't rate this film over a 9. For someone to become Vader, and I've know my share of Vaders (having served in the Navy) they have to have a mean streak, not a passive-aggressive spirit. Anakin is nice until things go too far, thats not the Darth Vader I knew.
The Incredibles (2004)
Incredible - Did someone already say that?
Just saw this movie and I'm still on a high so my comments might be over the top.
This is the type of action packed film with perfectly placed humor and even a few touching scenes. Fathers and mothers might shed a tear, especially if you get into films and experience what the characters experience.
In other words, I laughed, I cried, I will watch this movie again and it is a definite buyer when the DVD is released.
The effects are vary impressive, I wish all superhero movies were done half as well. The timing, the action, the plot were executed with great vigor and you can feel the emotion the performers convey both digitally and vocally.
The storyline really moved the plot forward, almost every scene moves the plot forward. The film effectively comments on family issues, teenage issues and even work issues. I'm impressed at how accurately it expressed the challenges family members face.
Fahrenheit 9/11 (2004)
Misdirection Misdirector
Of course Mike gets a few good jokes in, but completely ignores half of the relevant facts. Because this film is all about the content I wish he had be more fair like he was in BFC. At least there he somewhat fairly represented the idea that other countries have guns and low fire-arm related deaths, why is America different.
In Fahrenheit, Mike ignores most of the facts that support going to war, the success had in Iraq, how terrible Saddam really was. Instead he takes things said out of context, ignores the messages the Bush administration was putting out there and most importantly he does not address the difficult situation President Bush was in at the time, which a "documentary" should do.
Consider we had just had 9-11 and the American people wanted action. Many felt that the government/Bush administration was not "aggressive" enough. Compound this with intelligence from every source saying Saddam definitely HAD WMDs at one time and no significant evidence existed that they were gone. Additionally consider that Saddam was extremely unlikely to get rid of the WMDs himself. What was Bush supposed to do? Take the risk that Saddam had WMDs and let it go, continue with sanctions. Let inspectors spend another year?
The fact is that we may not know for years if WMDs were destroyed in the first Gulf War, if they were smuggled into a neighboring country, or if they are still hidden underground in a mass grave of soldiers that hid them there. Yet Mike is confident that he is right.
How many narcissists does it take to change a light bulb? One, he holds the bulb while the world revolves around him.
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004)
Best of the Three
I was very impressed at how comfortable this film felt. It was like I was viewing my own imagination. The sets were superb, the special effects blended into the story, the score supported the scene without distracting from it, the performances were excellent. Everything seemed true to the story.
And now for the criticism: NOT ENOUGH. We NEED an extended version, too much of the book was lost, I know the flow of the movie was terrific, but we lost so many little cute, fun, interesting scenes. The Directing was so well done, I would personally pay double for an extended version. If anyone connected with the movie reads this, please pass on the lesson of Lord of the Rings. Do a real extended version, with like a half hour of scenes through out the film, not a few extra 5 minute scenes.
The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003)
Immerse in an Epic Tale
Peter Jackson delivers again; while not perfect, Jackson transports us for a few hours to the wonderful world of Tolkien. The special effects, acting, and directing allow fans and movie aficionados to lose themselves in Middle-Earth. I love movies that I can immerse myself in and ROTK is definitely one of those films.
Jackson is very skilled at capturing the theme of the books and ROTK does not disappoint. ROTK is not true to the books and like TTT there are a number of unnecessary added scenes as well as scenes that would have explained things to those who hadn't read the books. Despite its imperfections ROTK surpasses the expectations fans had for painting such an elaborate tapestry the reflects Tolkien's beautiful but terrible world.
Definitely another 10, the strengths of this film soo far outweigh the weaknesses that 10 is the only rating I can give it.
The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002)
Another 10, not perfect, but in the top 1% of all-time.
This film was certainly a 10 when evaluated as a separate work. (and by 10 I mean that it was in the top 10% of all movies, probably in the top 1%) For those expecting devotion to Tolkien, don't. However, the diversions from the storyline were interesting and well done.
SMEAGOL was terrific! He was funny, pitiful and somewhat scary. He truly ran the gamut. If he is not nominated for an oscar the Academy will lose credibility. **SPOILER** The scene where he talks to himself is one of the best on film.
The performances of the other cast members were very well done. Believability in a fantasy film is often difficult to pull off as other films of the genre have demonstrated. This is why I think the actors in this film are so talented. Without exception I sat there watching and I believed they were who thy portrayed.
For Tolkien fans the film captured the mood and message of his trilogy, if not the encompasing world of Middle-Earth. Certainly I would have enjoyed seeing more of the Ents, Gollum and the emotional struggles Sam and Frodo went thorough with Farimir. I can understand these scenes may not be as entertaining on film.
Well, thanks again Peter J. I appreciate your attention to detail and the seeming effortlessness you displayed in delivering one of the greatest literary works of the last century. Very smooth.
The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002)
Another 10, not perfect, but in the top 1% of all-time.
This film was certainly a 10 when evaluated as a separate work. (and by 10 I mean that it was in the top 10% of all movies, probably in the top 1%) For those expecting devotion to Tolkien, don't. However, the diversions from the storyline were interesting and well done.
SMEAGOL was terrific! He was funny, pitiful and somewhat scary. He truly ran the gamut. If he is not nominated for an oscar the Academy will lose credibility. **SPOILER** The scene where he talks to himself is one of the best on film.
The performances of the other cast members were very well done. Believability in a fantasy film is often difficult to pull off as other films of the genre have demonstrated. This is why I think the actors in this film are so talented. Without exception I sat there watching and I believed they were who thy portrayed.
For Tolkien fans the film captured the mood and message of his trilogy, if not the encompasing world of Middle-Earth. Certainly I would have enjoyed seeing more of the Ents, Gollum and the emotional struggles Sam and Frodo went thorough with Farimir. I can understand these scenes may not be as entertaining on film.
Well, thanks again Peter J. I appreciate your attention to detail and the seeming effortlessness you displayed in delivering one of the greatest literary works of the last century. Very smooth.
Sweet November (2001)
Biggest Waste of Time
Unlike many other movies made by the stars of this film, this was a complete waste of time. The idea for the movie may have had some redeeming value before it was completely decimated in execution.
This is another disappointing film where you keep thinking it has to get better, and yet it never does.
Sorry, to those who are fans, this is not even a good chick flick.
If you want a good chick flick, go see Emma or better yet Princess Bride.
The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)
INTENSE!! One ring, One word INTENSE!! (Spoiler if you haven't read the book)
One word rings after seeing this masterpiece, INTENSE!
As one of the original online promoters of bringing LOTR to the Screen, I can only say BRAVO, On Core! Back in 1991 a newsgroup discussed with fear and trepidation the challenge associated with taking Tolkien's almost sacred text and translating it to a medium which has commonly reduced wonderful novels to mediocre movies. However, Peter Jackson has far surpassed almost all of our original expectations.
This movie is literally an experience. Gripping and relentless it transports you to middle-earth's most documented age. Sauron and his nine black riders are realistically done and convey the fear Tolkien described so well. The tension between the races is portrayed without being overdone. The orcs and goblins are a bit scary for children, hence the PG-13 rating.
SPOILER ---Those who compare the Troll in LOTR with the "Troll in the dungeon" from H. Potter are misleading. The LOTR troll is a powerful, vicious beast, taking arrows to the head, sword wounds, a spear, etc ... Potter's troll is knocked unconscious by one tap on the head with his own club.
While I rate this movie a 10 overall, it is not perfect; mostly because we must wait a year to see the second installment. Unlike another highly anticipated film, Star Wars Episode I, I find it difficult to formulate any changes I would make to the film. The acting, action, drama, score, villain, and heroes are close to perfect and elevate Lord of the Rings, the movie, to and epic in the company of Gone with the Wind, Laurence of Arabia, Star Wars and Jurassic Park.
The score wonderfully adds to the film, even if it is very reminiscent of Episode I (Star Wars) in places. The acting is very convincing and in numerous instances very powerful. Sir Ian's wonderful portrayal of Gandalf as a happy and powerful, yet not perfect wizard, fit with how I pictured him. Elijah Wood convinced me he is a noble, yet humble hobbit. I was also impressed by the hobbits size in comparison to the humans (one of the worries of the original news group).
Numerous critics have attacked Jackson's ability to show the positive scenes, I disagree. The sequences with Arwen-Aragorn, Rivendell, and every hobbit scene are all well done.
Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones (2002)
Lucas redeems himself with Episode II-Excellent
Disclaimer: This review is by a Star Wars Fan! For a short time today, I was again a young boy, enjoying and remembering the thrill of the first three movies.
Episode II will redeem George Lucas in the eyes of his fans. The "Attack of the Clones" is a terrific display of CGI at its best. Substance and style are rarely found in a blockbuster, but Episode II has them cold. The acting was believable, except a few instances where Anakin was a tad forced. However, the confluence of technology in a moving storyline made for an memorable experience. Episode II will be remembered as one of the best of the Saga, if not THE best.
The criticisms from Episode I were not present, apparently Lucas learned from "Lord of the Rings" to give his fans more time looking at the breathtaking scenery and incredible effects. In Episode I you would barely recognize that you were looking a Coruscant and blink the next scene was upon you. Jar-Jar Binks is not even annoying in Episode II (even if my daughter did love him in Episode I). And the stilted acting of childhood Anakin is replaced by the better, but not perfect acting of young Anakin.
The humor and surprises are reminiscent of the first three films lending a similar feeling. Amadala occasionally reminds one of Princess Leia, and Obi-Wan starts to show characteristics of the Ben-Kenobi we came to love. R2 and C3P0 are also back to their familiar banter, ironic because this all takes place before any of the later films.
The experience of seeing Episode II with an audience of fans on opening day made the film that much more enjoyable. Cheers and clapping in appropriate places served to emphasize the positive aspects of this film in my mind. We even had a Chewebacca in our midst, who roared once when the magic words "Lucas Films" appeared on the screen, followed by great bouts of laughter.
[]
The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)
INTENSE!! One ring, One word INTENSE!! (Spoiler if you haven't read the book)
One word rings after seeing this masterpiece, INTENSE!
As one of the original online promoters of bringing LOTR to the Screen, I can only say BRAVO, On Core! Back in 1991 a newsgroup discussed with fear and trepidation the challenge associated with taking Tolkien's almost sacred text and translating it to a medium which has commonly reduced wonderful novels to mediocre movies. However, Peter Jackson has far surpassed almost all of our original expectations.
This movie is literally an experience. Gripping and relentless it transports you to middle-earth's most documented age. Sauron and his nine black riders are realistically done and convey the fear Tolkien described so well. The tension between the races is portrayed without being overdone. The orcs and goblins are a bit scary for children, hence the PG-13 rating.
SPOILER ---Those who compare the Troll in LOTR with the "Troll in the dungeon" from H. Potter are misleading. The LOTR troll is a powerful, vicious beast, taking arrows to the head, sword wounds, a spear, etc ... Potter's troll is knocked unconscious by one tap on the head with his own club.
While I rate this movie a 10 overall, it is not perfect; mostly because we must wait a year to see the second installment. Unlike another highly anticipated film, Star Wars Episode I, I find it difficult to formulate any changes I would make to the film. The acting, action, drama, score, villain, and heroes are close to perfect and elevate Lord of the Rings, the movie, to and epic in the company of Gone with the Wind, Laurence of Arabia, Star Wars and Jurassic Park.
The score wonderfully adds to the film, even if it is very reminiscent of Episode I (Star Wars) in places. The acting is very convincing and in numerous instances very powerful. Sir Ian's wonderful portrayal of Gandalf as a happy and powerful, yet not perfect wizard, fit with how I pictured him. Elijah Wood convinced me he is a noble, yet humble hobbit. I was also impressed by the hobbits size in comparison to the humans (one of the worries of the original news group).
Numerous critics have attacked Jackson's ability to show the positive scenes, I disagree. The sequences with Arwen-Aragorn, Rivendell, and every hobbit scene are all well done.
The Man Who Knew Too Little (1997)
HILARIOUS, If you're in the mood.
Bill Murray has a lot of fun with this movie and the timing works. Instead of vulgar, shocking and inappropriate scenes to garner forced laughs(well there is one of those too), Murray uses time tested methods combined with an innovative new twist. If you are in the mood for a good comedy--not in a critical mood--"The Man Who Knew Too Little" really delivers the laughs. Throughout the movie there are successful bits and surprisingly the type of comedic scenes prevalent in the 70's and 80's still work today.
This film proves that movies can still be howlingly funny without the new 'shock comedy' that is becoming so prevalent (new SNL alumnus films--Superstar and Jim Carry talking out his butt).
For conservative folks this may not be a family movie (SPOILER--hotel room scene with old woman spanking her husband with a whip). For ages 13 and up and parents though this is a very funny film!
Star Wars (1977)
The Most Respected Action/Sci-Fiction Movie of All Time
Star Wars brought respect to the action and science fiction movie genre. It was monumentally innovative, while providing an excellent example of a movie succinctly telling the story. The only thing lacking in the story is there are not enough dull moments and humorless comments compared to todays films.
This is by far the best movie ever produced with such a small budget and the sequels did not improve dramatically with increased budgets (although the special effects did improve). The cast was excellent, believable and sympathetic. Even Vader was a very likeable villain. The treatment of Darth Vader set the standard for powerful, unapproachable, and awe/fear inspiring villains. Luke played the confused teenager well while conveying a real sense of naivete. At the same time you could see his confidence and latent abilities grow throughout the movie. Harrison Ford provided humor and the loose cannon to keep things interesting. (Gueedo discovered that loose cannon early in the film).
The droids R2-D2 and C3PO were terrific. The were Bert and Ernie, Laurel and Hardy, the odd couple, grumpy old droids. If you just crawled out from under your rock, or recently landed on this planet go see it. It is a classic and will be remembered decades, maybe even centuries from now.
The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)
INTENSE!! One ring, One word INTENSE!! (Spoiler if you haven't read the book)
One word rings after seeing this masterpiece, INTENSE!
As one of the original online promoters of bringing LOTR to the Screen, I can only say BRAVO, On Core! Back in 1991 a newsgroup discussed with fear and trepidation the challenge associated with taking Tolkien's almost sacred text and translating it to a medium which has commonly reduced wonderful novels to mediocre movies. However, Peter Jackson has far surpassed almost all of our original expectations.
This movie is literally an experience. Gripping and relentless it transports you to middle-earth's most documented age. Sauron and his nine black riders are realistically done and convey the fear Tolkien described so well. The tension between the races is portrayed without being overdone. The orcs and goblins are a bit scary for children, hence the PG-13 rating.
SPOILER ---Those who compare the Troll in LOTR with the "Troll in the dungeon" from H. Potter are misleading. The LOTR troll is a powerful, vicious beast, taking arrows to the head, sword wounds, a spear, etc ... Potter's troll is knocked unconscious by one tap on the head with his own club.
While I rate this movie a 10 overall, it is not perfect; mostly because we must wait a year to see the second installment. Unlike another highly anticipated film, Star Wars Episode I, I find it difficult to formulate any changes I would make to the film. The acting, action, drama, score, villain, and heroes are close to perfect and elevate Lord of the Rings, the movie, to and epic in the company of Gone with the Wind, Laurence of Arabia, Star Wars and Jurassic Park.
The score wonderfully adds to the film, even if it is very reminiscent of Episode I (Star Wars) in places. The acting is very convincing and in numerous instances very powerful. Sir Ian's wonderful portrayal of Gandalf as a happy and powerful, yet not perfect wizard, fit with how I pictured him. Elijah Wood convinced me he is a noble, yet humble hobbit. I was also impressed by the hobbits size in comparison to the humans (one of the worries of the original news group).
Numerous critics have attacked Jackson's ability to show the positive scenes, I disagree. The sequences with Arwen-Aragorn, Rivendell, and every hobbit scene are all well done.
The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)
INTENSE!! One ring, One word INTENSE!! (Spoiler if you haven't read the book)
One word rings after seeing this masterpiece, INTENSE!
As one of the original online promoters of bringing LOTR to the Screen, I can only say BRAVO, On Core! Back in 1991 a newsgroup discussed with fear and trepidation the challenge associated with taking Tolkien's almost sacred text and translating it to a medium which has commonly reduced wonderful novels to mediocre movies. However, Peter Jackson has far surpassed almost all of our original expectations.
This movie is literally an experience. Gripping and relentless it transports you to middle-earth's most documented age. Sauron and his nine black riders are realistically done and convey the fear Tolkien described so well. The tension between the races is portrayed without being overdone. The orcs and goblins are a bit scary for children, hence the PG-13 rating.
SPOILER ---Those who compare the Troll in LOTR with the "Troll in the dungeon" from H. Potter are misleading. The LOTR troll is a powerful, vicious beast, taking arrows to the head, sword wounds, a spear, etc ... Potter's troll is knocked unconscious by one tap on the head with his own club.
While I rate this movie a 10 overall, it is not perfect; mostly because we must wait a year to see the second installment. Unlike another highly anticipated film, Star Wars Episode I, I find it difficult to formulate any changes I would make to the film. The acting, action, drama, score, villain, and heroes are close to perfect and elevate Lord of the Rings, the movie, to and epic in the company of Gone with the Wind, Laurence of Arabia, Star Wars and Jurassic Park.
The score wonderfully adds to the film, even if it is very reminiscent of Episode I (Star Wars) in places. The acting is very convincing and in numerous instances very powerful. Sir Ian's wonderful portrayal of Gandalf as a happy and powerful, yet not perfect wizard, fit with how I pictured him. Elijah Wood convinced me he is a noble, yet humble hobbit. I was also impressed by the hobbits size in comparison to the humans (one of the worries of the original news group).
Numerous critics have attacked Jackson's ability to show the positive scenes, I disagree. The sequences with Arwen-Aragorn, Rivendell, and every hobbit scene are all well done.