Change Your Image
imdb-543
Reviews
Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest (2006)
Disappointing: Loads of Wonderful Action & Nonsense but Drowned in an Unpalatable Plot
Had no real expectations for this film - if you can believe me. I'm not that sort of movie-goer. I just want to have an experience when I go to the cinema. Fun, exciting, or dramatic, thrilling, or thoughtful, inspiring, etc.
It starts off well. We get our heroes from the last flick set up very quickly and believably, and given new problems to resolve. This will be the last time this happens.
Throughout the rest of the picture, amidst some super-cool action pieces, we are treated to miserable attempts to up the ante. This is done with boring, unspirited acting for the most part, though Ms Knightly did have one terrific scene. Still, perhaps this muddle was due to the darker concept of this film.
But add to that the re-introduction of minor characters from the first film - and in such a thoughtless manor - just because they provided comic relief before, and the idea that the semi-eternal creatures need to take naps, or that anyone would really have been able to pull the net with the barrels while the whole ship is under attack in that frantic manner... I mean, what a hash! Parents will also have difficulty explaining to their children why certain pirates are mercurially helpful one moment then bloodthirsty (is that hyphenated?) the next. But then what would any child be doing in a theatre watching pirates...? ;) Mr Depp is still in good form. Mr Bloom came down a notch. Ms Knightly really wasn't given much to do (but that's OK, it's just the brakes) but fared well.
Nevertheless, it was a bore.
Really felt like this should have been condensed or perhaps fused with the 3rd movie for better pacing and a resolution. This was no EMPIRE STRIKES BACK.
I will believe, however, that the Powers That Be won't screw up the next film.
Superman Returns (2006)
More Drama that Action-Adventure, But Pretty Damn Good
Saw this a few hours ago and was much moved. There were moments that were worth cheering for, a couple of big surprises, a few action bits, some beautifully placed nostalgia, and a bit of mediocrity thrown in to create a charming but uneven adventure.
I am not a Superman purest, though I grew up on the Christopher Reeve movies, of which I only love the first. I am now 39 years old, and if it's true that one is only as old as one feels then I'm 72, but I still get a thrill from a great Superhero flick.
SR is pretty darn good. This time, however, it is very much a drama, focusing on its story lines around the Clark/Superman-Lois & son-Richard White dynamic, with regular characters (Jimmy, Perry, and even Lex) added to pad the 2.5 hour flick. They're obligatory rather than relevant, which is saying something considering Lex is about to destroy the US in search of his primary goal in life: real estate.
Lex's plan is pretty stupid considering he's such a genius. Superman cannot take a punch in a weakened state, but somehow he will attempt to do the impossible (I won't say whether he is completely successful). I suppose as a wrestler I know one can dig down deep, even at the point of collapse, and draw from reserves of strength, so I may be able to rationalise a superhero's ability to do likewise, especially since the repercussion is so devastating.
It was not important to me that this troupe of actors resemble any of the actors from the first series of films, but Mr Routh actually sounds a bit like the late Mr Reeve. Ms Bosworth is a different sort of Lois, though, but her introductory escapade made me an instant fan. She may not be kicking any ass yet, but she can definitely take a beating. Dang, what a broad! Then, soon after, we see her struggling with old and new feelings, giving both this actress and this Lois much more depth than anticipated.
There's so much nostalgia in this film, gentle tips of the hat to the Donner masterpiece, right from the beginning, I know I'll see this film again, and definitely buy the DVD when it comes out. But I don't think I'll see it more than once more at the cinema (and then only in IMAX) because it wasn't a super high octane adventure that needs to be appreciated only on the big screen. It looks lovely, though.
I place it one or two notches below the original, and that's pretty darn good.
The Phantom of the Opera (2004)
A 'not-so-phantom' menace
I have been waiting a good long time to trash this film. I refused to pay $10 to see it in the cinema; I had already been aggrieved to pay for tickets to see the stage play in L.A. years ago. I am a huge lover of musical theatre, but Sir Andrew has all but twice made me want to chew off my right leg to prevent myself from going mad. I have friends and acquaintances who love this musical, who beg me to see it again with new eyes, to open myself up to the beauty and spectacle of the piece, to let myself feel the love and passion of the principle characters, to embrace what a truly fantastic work PHANTOM is.
Well, I have. I paid my $1, watched the DVD while I was in an already good mood, and was immediately enchanted by the opening sequence.
Then it all went pear-shaped, filthy muck, turning my delicious popcorn into ashes as it passed my lips. My friends were and are WRONG!! This musical is all spectacle without being spectacular. I daresay, if you like this PHANTOM then you probably went orgasmic over PHANTOM MENACE. It is possible you may be genetically predisposed to loving things with the word 'phantom' in it. I have to admit, it is a pretty cool word. I'm thinking of naming my firstborn 'Phantom'. Well, I was before the two aforementioned debacles were executed. (Oh, and if only they had been.... It's bad enough Sir Andrew thought this stuff up and turned an over-rated literary treasure into an over-rated Broadway phenom, but to do it in public... so unhygienic.) I liked two of the songs/lyrics. I liked 4 of the tunes/orchestration. The clothes were swell, I guess. The opening sequence, as I mentioned, was done rather charmingly. The rest left me with a gorgeous appetite for disdain. With a side order of disdain. With a disdain shake made with real ice cream. Go rent Sondheim's PASSION or SWEENEY TODD, LA BOHEME, some Gilbert & Sullivan, or even GREASE 2 for crying out loud! Something where the music isn't all either bluster or reduced to staccato when neither of these serve as characterisation nor adds tension to a scene (an amplified trick Sir Andrew used back in his Jesus Christ SUPERSTAR days).
PHANTOM, for me, has always suffered from unsympathetic characters. (This is a glaring fault, especially since Mary Harron was able to provide me with such in a film like American PSYCHO.) I've always wondered if this antipathy could be remedied by placing a bit of the Phantom's back story somewhere closer to the beginning of the film. Indeed, when the story of his origins is narrated by Miranda Richardson, I had my first and all-too-brief mote of feeling since this tale began - other than annoyance, that is. It's a good scene, but by this time the Phantom has already murdered people, so I doubt anyone with a moral compass is going to feel sympathy for him. What, just because he has a good singing voice and forms an attachment to a beautiful girl we're meant to forget that he's no different than Burke and Hare, Gacy or Cole, his brother murderers? Oh dear, but he's disfigured, so perhaps it's no more than should be expected of him. What claptrap.
In one scene, the Phantom is all but overthrown, captured, but Christine pleads for mercy. Fine. Her new beau lets the blighter go free. But in the very next scene, the dullard mounts an even more elaborate plan to try to get the Phantom in the exact same position from which he had just released him a moment ago, this time using Christine as bait. This leads to great danger... that's not so great.
I have much more venom to spew - this amount of hate could take weeks to harvest - but I feel like lifting my spirits with a bit of D-I-Y root-canal work. But as I exit, mumbling to myself and walking into walls - the effect all Sir Andrew's musicals have on me (save SONG AND DANCE and SUNSET BOULEVARD) - I must posit: How could Christine go off with what's-his-name over the much better-looking (scars, psychoses and all) Phantom? And while one can understand a certain lack of springiest in the choreography of a live performance, why the hell didn't Mr Schumacher use another cut or some fancy editing to make the larger ensemble scenes less unruly? Ah, who knows... maybe the prequels will be better.
(from my review at DVDStation)
Cinderella (1997)
Multi-racial casting breaks stereotypes for kids
While different from the Rodgers & Hammerstein TV version with which I grew up, this whimsical Whitney Houston produced rendering of the classic tale provides a healthy alternative to white royalty, overcoming stereotype for many a young girl. Bernadette Peters, Jason Alexander and Whoppi Goldberg are hilarious, using slapstick and tarty words to add goofiness to an often told serious fairy tale. Brandy is fine and certainly helps to break the mold of whimpering, helpless Cinderellas, providing a stronger (though not so self-determined as Barrymore's performance)characterization. Young girls will love it and parents will appreciate its overall harmlessness, since, every once in a while, just about every girl wants a princess tale.
Septem8er Tapes (2004)
Drivel
Amateurish in the extreme. Camera work especially overwrought - documentary camera operators needn't spin around ALL THE TIME.
The script is truly inane, and the acting is even worse. On top of that, the story is disjointed and meandering - with some gaping holes in logic. At one point the lead wishes to get thrown in jail in order to rub shoulders with suspected Al-Quada operatives, and thus get an interview with Osama. I found the story entirely unbelievable as a result of so many flaws. The "filmmaker"/lead role really portrays a rash, idiot frat boy. The only item of interest really, is that the filmmakers did in fact film on location. It's truly a shame they wasted their opportunity to make something interesting.
Who financed this crap?