Reviews

21 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Rollerball (1975)
10/10
"The game must show the FUTILITY OF INDIVIDUAL EFFORT...in the end you must lose"
19 May 2008
Warning: Spoilers
Those words, spoken by John Houseman to Jonathan, are the heart of the movie, and its explanation: Why Jonathan must not be allowed to continue to play since he always wins.

His individual effort and bravery must not remind the docile citizens that they too can win against the control of the corporation, if they fight hard enough. Jonathan was willing to give up everything, for the right to do his best-he was giving up his life thinking he would die in the last game, and gave up the woman he loved for years, when he understood that to have her he had to obey and stop playing. The movie made that clear, when he erased her video in front of her, after watching it one last time. His face had an expression as if he was telling her ...."You're not on my side like I thought, I was in love with my image of you"....
8 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Dangerous Liaisons (2003– )
5/10
If you knew younger Deneuve, don't see this
16 January 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I've watched films with Deneuve since her youth. Seeing this one last night gave me a peculiar, PHYSICALLY uncomfortable sensation, because of what plastic surgery has done to her face. She now has enhanced lips that have lost their elasticity,the top lip is thicker than her normal one was, and a strange, pained expression is permanently onto the whole face, which is strangely immovable.

My discomfort was because my eyes "expected" her face and mouth to make the familiar movements as her natural ones did pre-surgery. They did not, and this was taking my focus away from the movie.

Rupert Everett was not believable in his role of the beautiful rake. This role demands the likes of a young Warren Beatty, or a young Alain Delon, or Olivier Martinez, or Clive Owen, irresistibly handsome and also irresistibly sympathetic and attractive (all the more lethal). Rupert was very unlikeable with no charm, a harsh expression on his face most of the time, and what was supposed to he at his most seductive, was totally soulless. Anyone who saw the very young Warren Beatty seducing Vivien Leigh in"The Roman spring of Mrs. Stone" will know what I mean.
8 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Poor treatment of a potentially fascinating subject
27 December 2006
I'm writing this without having read any other comment, just after finally watching the movie, which I had excitedly anticipated.

I found it to be just a regular thriller, and not a very good one at that.

The script, in my opinion, was the main reason the movie was so "busy", with so many unconvincing events happening.

The photography and shots were pretty great, but that is just about it.

The albino 'killer-angel" was played way over the top. Tom Hanks remained an unknown throughout the film, with the same expression on his face for the whole duration. Audrey Tautou and Tm hanks had zero connection, and zedro chemistry, which seemed absurd, given what they went through and why. that alone trivialized the whole film.

There was time allocated for secondary scenes in the movie, disproportionately to their importance-ex. the self-flagellation of the albino monk.

The concept of "Deus ex machina" is way over-used, and the whole thing gave me the impression that it was a summary of a very long book, not knowing what to keep and what to abandon in the script.

It was a conseptually mediocre movie,which disappointed me, to say the least.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Evil (2003)
10/10
Wonderful, excellent , gripping, tragic !
20 October 2006
Warning: Spoilers
This was a big surprise to me because the DVD cover said "Fight club in a school", and I associated it with the well-known Fight club with Brad Pitt (that was excellent too,but very different).

From the one side I hate movies that are so good they make me want to hit the sadistic step-father, to shake the complacent, frightened mother and make her defend her son by getting rid of that horrid husband-it's frustrating to want to do these things from your sofa! From the other side, I would not trade a movie like this for "war of the Worlds" for anything! It involves the viewer-the unfairness of it, the cruelty of it, and above all, the truth of it is devastating.

All the actors were wonderful, and Andreas Wilson was absolutely superb-something in his manner reminded me very much of James Dean and Alain Delon. I hope we'll see many more movies from the talented team that made "Evil".

For those reviewers who were a little upset thinking we would not see this movie in America-be happy for us-it's here!!
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Annapolis (2006)
1/10
Greatest possible waste of a fantastic subject
10 August 2006
Warning: Spoilers
This is easily the most infuriating movie I have ever seen. I have been married to a Marine graduate of Annapolis, so I know what the makers of this piece of meringue pie did not do with what could have been a wonderful, interesting subject; the Plebe year.

I would be very surprised if this movie was not done for recruiting purposes, aimed at brainless teenagers who can deduce from this movie that they can become Naval or Marine Officers by winning boxing matches, hitting superiors, remaining overweight, being tardy, and flirting with "friendly" female superiors.

As about the fat midshipman who attempted suicide by jumping off a third-story window, and only beaking a few bones, and being able to lecture his colleague from his hospital bed without a-n-y effort.....what can I say? It is rare to see more sloppiness, and laziness in treating the subject-matter than this.

All-in-all, a total waste of time and good money in making this regrettable piece of....

Simplistic, naive, false, ignorant, ridiculous, are epithets that fit this movie. See it if you truly want to waste time, and if you don't mind feeling angry at the makers who pulled off this nasty job.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
This movie is a gem!!!
25 July 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I'll try not to repeat all of what the other reviewers have written already. Kevin Bacon is unbelievable in this role, he wears his part as a slick, sexy, supremely confident and laid-back DJ so well. He makes it impossible to imagine any other actor in this role.

Every scene he appears in is to be savored. His voice is ideally suited for the broadcasts he makes. Seeing his easy charm and friendly manner is no wonder the young, innocent Kartchie idolized him. Visually, the movie is beautiful, rich, with a great soundtrack, excellent screenplay, in short, 100% enjoyment.

Very nicely photographed, with very good sound direction.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Apocalypse (2002 TV Movie)
9/10
This was a first; a very good one
27 April 2006
I will only write about one thing, since others have covered the excellent Richard Harris' performance: This was the first time we got a small idea of Revelation, thanks to good computerized special effects. I say a small idea, because the actual book of Revelation in the Bible contains what must be the ultimate in fantastically spectacular scenes-and a multitude of them at that. It is strange that no big production has ever attempted it. From all the existing films with titles referring to Apocalypse or Revelation, this is the best one by far. The others are no different than low budget-low interest movies, which don't even begin to reach the magnitude and magnificence of the book of Revelation.
30 out of 37 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Joshua (I) (2002)
10/10
Beautiful movie
27 April 2006
Warning: Spoilers
This was a beautiful movie-period. Apart from all the wonderful comments other people have written about it, it pointed out subtly that we CAN react to people who attack us in a positive, non-defensive way, while telling the truth at the same time.

I thought this was very useful for us today, because we are bombarded by the media with all the things we 'must' do to keep ourselves safe, be it safe economically, politically, physically, educationally,emotionally, etc.

This bombardment of course is not just for our own good-it is meant to sell us all kinds of things and services to 'keep us safe'. It sets us up to always be on the lookout, on the defensive, as if the world is strictly a dangerous place. It is dangerous often, but if all we do is protect ourselves from it, we miss all the chances for happiness this world also offers. This movie clearly shows what a Christian is supposed to be like-a sure, confident person, unafraid to love and help others.

There is only one thing that spoiled the enjoyment for me-the very loud music. This loudness is common in many modern films, and forces people who watch movies at home to change volume all the time, as if music is not anymore an integral 'component' of the movie, but mainly meant to sell itself. Needless to say I don't buy any film music whose volume is too high because it connects with that annoyance....
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
The very best movie about Jesus- and I have seen them all!
25 March 2006
I just finished watching The Visual Bible's "Matthew", and it will be a while until I feel "normal" again. For almost 4 hours I was back in time, among his followers, totally transported by this movie, as close to the real thing as I could never imagine was possible. I can't describe properly how very real it felt.

This movie, although very rich and lush visually, contains none of the marks of a Hollywood "production". For the first time, we get to hear all of Jesus' words and parables in everyday English, as Matthew wrote them in detail, which are delivered by Bruce Marchiano in the most lively, realistic way imaginable. His "Jesus" is as close to the real one as we can get-full of life, loving, affectionate, smiling, dynamic, persuasive, so human and so full of love, so approachable and realistic. His skin and that of the disciples is tanned from their days of walking and teaching in the sun, and if there is any make up, I can't even tell.

I have collected all the movies made about Jesus, including Pasolini's-none vibrates throughout as strongly with Jesus's realistic presence and words as this movie. I have really no words to describe it adequately.

I just feel like I'd like to thank all the people involved in this work, for they have created something wonderful for the world. Matthew's portrayal in his old age is absolutely masterful and enchanting. In a hugely artistic, entertaining way, Bruce Marchiano's unbelievable performance as Jesus makes every thought and word of Jesus in that Gospel readily understood-thank you for this incredible work! I saw at Marchiano's website that he is making "The Gospel According to John" -again word for word-entirely by his own ministry when they manage to get 250000 people to donate $100 each-how I wait for it!
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Thou shall not act!
12 March 2006
This is a very disappointing portrayal of the life of Jesus. It is devoid of feeling and acting. Strange, tableau-like scenes, with actors holding a steady gaze as they look at Jesus on the cross, or Lazarus rising. The ponderous delivery of Jesus' lines made me long to hear how he spoke in real life. The triumphant music with the chorus in the background was overwhelming, and the gray/black scenery and costumes, with Jesus and the apostles all in white was too unnatural and high-tech. The extremely long shots were very annoying, because we could not see anything, and the sound seemed to be coming too loudly and from the wrong direction. It was as if someone decided to spend a lot of money making a movie about Jesus, but ensuring that the movie or Jesus aroused no emotion in the viewer, by taking any reality out of the movie. Too bad that with the richest possible story ever, this movie is all they did. It seems the director may have wanted to emphasize a particular "style" of telling the story, and sacrificed all feeling to style. In contrast, I enjoyed "Jesus of Nazareth" very, very much, as well as the wonderfully 'live' "Jesus" with Jeremy Sisto in the title role.

But the one that really "did it" for me is the word-for-word life of Christ from the Gospel of Matthew, in "The Visual Bible - Matthew": The movie that had the smallest production budget, yet brought Jesus to life like no other so far.
10 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Savior (1998)
9/10
An ode to evil
28 February 2006
Excellent movie, very well acted, conceived, photographed. No cheap sentimentality here. It grabs you and hits you hard, leaves you serious and depressed. No sides taken really-all the deeds and people it shows are murderers and victims. This is a movie for thought, not entertainment! Even though it's impossible for a movie to come close to the real horrors that took place in that land, as in so many other lands, it makes one think about the enormous scale of man's inhumanity to man throughout history. If I ever had any doubts that the world is ruled by Evil, thinking about the wars, blood, lives, lies, and horror going on for centuries reminds me that it is so.
7 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Josephine Baker Story (1991 TV Movie)
10/10
She did it HER way
26 February 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I remember many years ago reading Josephine Baker's biography, and looking hungrily at the photographs, trying to learn a little more about the woman who had used every ounce of energy and talent she had to serve her purposes-and how noble those purposes were. She could have lived a very comfortable life resting on her laurels, without taking the chances and responsibilities she took, but she did not. This movie does her justice, and it is truly a feast for the eyes and ears, as well as food for thought. Lynn Whitfield's performance is amazing, moving, exciting. It brings Glamor of mythic proportions into the living rooms of people, most of whom would never see something comparable today. It also brings twinges of embarrassment to me as an American, seeing the shameful racist treatment Josephine received in her own country, which she bore in a regally proud way. I had one thought as I was watching her in all her splendor and fame waiting for food that was not to be served to her at the Stork Club: How many of the racists who treated her so awfully were foolish or liars enough to call themselves Christians?
9 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
At last... I was almost there....
1 February 2006
I'm not sure I'll be able to complete this comment-I just saw the movie and I feel exhausted. Yes, it was real. Yes, it was reverent. Yes, it was as brutal as the truth of the Passion was. It had been hidden from us all those years with the sanitized versions of the Life and Crucifixion of the Christ we were used to getting. This time, no piercing blue eyes, no visible pancake makeup with the token couple of drops of blood: This time Mel Gibson did not spare either special interests or sensibilities. He really told us what it was like: Who, What, Where. There is no doubt that Jesus was really badly beat up, on the orders of Pilate: Pilate wanted to save his life, that's why he ordered him flogged-to hopefully touch the hearts of the crowds when Jesus was brought out again, and Pilate asked "I find no crime in this man-what do you want me to do with him?". So Jesus must have gotten beat within an inch of his life. Yet in the prior movies we were shown a few drops of blood from the thorns, His clean back as He was carrying the cross, and Him being silent while nails were hammered into his hands. Thank you Mel Gibson, for your talent, your courage, and the truth you gave the whole world with this masterpiece.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
The only movie about Jesus that I liked
1 February 2006
This was truly a movie about Jesus, with a rendition that was gentle and compassionate, yet spirited and sharp when he had to be. I could tell that He was a man with a huge mission.

It was great that the script stayed close to the Bible-with such a well-known story, it's annoying when they take extensive artistic liberties with the script, like in "King of kings".

The apostles were made so real for us in this movie, as well as all the people and places, beautifully done!

I wish I had the writing skills to express how rich, alive and realistic the movie is-how the camera touches faces in the crowds, their woven clothes, the dirt roads, until we forget that we watch something that took place 2000 years ago. It is amazing how well it portrays the apostles' feelings, especially Peter's-his surprise, ambivalence, fierce feelings of love and sorrow.All in all, GREAT movie, the one to see or have about Jesus Chist. And it did not have too much of portentous, loud music either, for which I was grateful.

I just wish the script had not presented something absent from the Bible-the association of Judas with the Zealots. It makes the motives of the filmmakers kind of suspect in doing that.....as if they want to give a bit of nobility to his wretched betrayal.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
King of Kings (1961)
1/10
Jesus was just a supporting role in this spectacle
1 February 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Awful. There was more time, more emphasis on everything and everybody else but Jesus. Inaccurate, misleading, and hell bent on lots of extras and costumes, just like its ridiculous introduction stated. A battle and massacre right outside the Temple while Jesus was speaking inside???? Where did they make this up from? Caiafas hanging out with Herod and Pontious Pilate??? Judas a....simple patriot? That was a neat attempt to absolve a Jew for surrendering Jesus to his death, making Judas appear as "....Gee...I had no idea it would go so far, I thought they'd just fine Him...". Ridiculous. The whole of the priests at the Temple waring identical white robes? How realistic was that? Mary Magdalene wearing what looked like a white cotton, long-sleeved sweater??? No guards outside Jesus' tomb? No angels to tell the "what do you seek the living among the dead?". The narration was a bad idea, ensuring that the viewer never got involved in the film. The scenes with Jesus were few and short, since all the time was taken with marching roman soldiers and such other "spectaculars". As for Jeffrey Hunter...too bad he accepted the role. Looked like an athletic college football player, with stiff and pompous deliverance. too bad. With the greatest story and material, they could only make a film like this. Lacking in vision, screenplay, sensitivity, and suffering from a total absence of what was really important.
11 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Locusts (1997)
9/10
True drama...
30 December 2005
...in the type and class of 'Cat on a hot tin roof' and 'Summer and smoke'. Jeremy Davies should have won an award for his very talented performance of a difficult role-he's this generation's Anthony Perkins. Vince Vaughn's performance was excellent and moving too, and a meaty role for him-a Marlon Brando-type role, to be sure! Dark, depressed, tragic movie,with an air of inevitability hanging over it, beautifully photographed, with a lovely sound track with several golden oldies. The soundtrack really set a tone and time for the movie, and was at the right volume, unlike so many current artless movies where blasting music or car engines obliterate the dialog.

Too bad that the delay of Clay in running after Flyboy at the end of the movie, as Flyboy ran from his mother's bedroom, was not believable-it was obvious that Clay would have ran after his very distraught young friend right away.
6 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Another excellent Mickey Rourke performance
25 December 2005
I won't bore any readers by repeating the plot line, since several others already have.

I bought the DVD after renting this movie, so I can enjoy Mickey Rourke's performance many times. It is wonderful, very different from what he has played before, and his Irish accent is just right-quite a pleasure to hear it.

I enjoyed the movie altogether, but Rourke's performance made it stand out totally-without it it would have been just another action/suspense movie. However, the blind girl's acting was unnatural and contrived a bit.
12 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Swimming Pool (2003)
10/10
How I understood the movie
17 October 2005
Warning: Spoilers
The Sara Morton character is sick and tired of writing her stock-in-trade serial books, and wishes for inspiration for something NEW. She says so to her publisher, who wants to keep her writing them, and offers her a stay at his French villa for a rest and change of scenery.

Sara goes to the villa. We then see several scenes of just how much she enjoys the solitude, the sun, the quiet, the food. She breathes in deeply that fresh air, so different from the London cloudy skies, nameless crowds in the subways etc. that she came from. *** The sensuality of the landscape, the climate, even the pool, put her in a frame of mind different from the bored, fatigued frame of mind she had in London.*** (This is the key to the movie).

And, so, inspiration to write something a bit different does come: She starts writing another book, combining bits and pieces of given facts and given characters: The daughter that her publisher mentioned, appears in her manuscript as "Julie". All her attributes and behavior come from Sara's inspiration-"Julie" never actually comes to the villa. The rest is just how the book develops-and since she is an experienced writer of murder mysteries, a murder is written in too. She finishes the book, gets it published by a new publisher, takes it to her old publisher as an "I'll show you!", and this is where we see that she has never really met the daughter: A young girl with braces walks in, not recognizing Sara. That is the real-life daughter.

One scene that is quite telling of where reality stops and her inspiration starts is that of Franck-the local waiter, cleaning leaves from the pool with the net, wearing a tiny bathing suit, before he stands over the sunbathing, sleeping "Julie". The camera goes slowly over his body and his obvious arousal, in close-up-not the way he could be seen from where Sara was standing, looking out at the pool. That is BEFORE he is shown arriving at the villa with "Julie".

Well, the waiter is initially shown briefly serving Sara a drink in the village, and that's all he does. He doesn't work at the villa cleaning the pool-that is old Marcel's job. There is no other explanation about Franck suddenly being at the villa cleaning the pool, other than "that's how Sara wove the local waiter into her book".
57 out of 68 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
I really enjoyed this movie!
24 August 2005
I liked the fact that the actors portrayed real people and looked like real people. I enjoyed very much seeing Lorraine Devon sing "I surrender"-the only thing that would have topped her incredible performance would have been if J.D. Souther (David)had sung. This was the first time I saw J.D. as an actor, and I loved him-he's so understated yet intense and "present", just like he is in his music video "Go ahead and rain". The story line and the message (no need to be looking at the destination-enjoy the journey there) were very intelligently woven. This movie proved that "chick flick" does not mean "silly'.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
My take
5 November 2004
The film uses symbolism to describe multiple things, i.e the social climate, as well as the Bateman character inside and out. He's externally appearing as hip and successful. Internally, he knows he's just a little schmuck among other little schmucks, who all "promote" themselves to Vice Presidents of one of many firms on Wall Street. Those in the brokerage business know that titles as "President" or "Vice President" on business cards are just written to impress clients. A one-man business office, can have a card that reads 'President" even if he lives at the poverty level. Bateman is aware of his precarious, inferior, real status, and tries to shore up his inner fear of failure by external props and obsessions, such as dress, grooming, ability to make reservations at expensive places, etc. He can only "defeat" those weaker than him and all his victories happen in his fantasy, as a defense mechanism against his strong sense of inadequacy. Anytime he gets put-down or made to feel small in any way, he becomes (inside) a raging, fearful, trembling little guy, and -to compensate-indulges in orgies of "power fantasies of murder and omnipotence" which he expesses by sketching them out in his calendar,kept at his desk drawer. I believe that the pages of his calendar his secretary finds, are the clue to what's really going on with Bateman. The camera closes-up on the pages, almost empty, with one or two appointments penciled-in per day, sometimes none(meaning very few clients, which means very little money), further showing one grisly drawing, which becomes more and more such drawings as the days and months go on. I believe that his increasing anxiety and anger over the measly business he was generating is exressed in those drawings. His self-defense is fantasizing of himself as all powerful, above all others, and he draws it-he fantasizes all the time, and he snaps under the tension: He can't stop the ever-more violent fantasies, until he comes to believe them, feels the fear of being caught for his imaginary deeds, and tries to get help by confessing. Another clue is that his lawyer had seen the supposedly dead Paul Allen, which really tell us that the murder and the detective was only in Bateman's mind. It is as if the movie plays in two tracks at the same time, Bateman's head, and the true reality. It is heavily based on psychology and the pathological compensating mechanisms one can have for severe feelings of inadequacy and inferiority. Perhaps the movie wants to show us in the face of Bateman the broader view of today's success figures, who appear as beautiful, composed, and powerful as Bateman appeared, while inside they're aware of their limitations, which make them rage and worry.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
A gem!
11 July 2004
This movie was the first chance to see Marlon Brando in a truly comical role, not the "He Man"-unbelievably good! His accent, his body movements, the Japanese he spoke, hard to believe this was the same man who did the Waterfront.I really think he deserved an award for this role. These were a couple of the most enjoyable hours I've ever spent. Having lived in Okinawa, and familiar with the practical, down-to-earth people there, I enjoyed the movie that makes so much fun and caricatures narrow-mindedness and pompousness while exalting creativity, adaptation, and "what really matters". The movie does make fun of the narrow-mindedness of some Americans, and shows the Okinawans with respect and tenderness, as assertive, business-minded, resilient, and proud. A real quality movie, and I'm so glad I taped it from Turner Classic movies.10 out of 10.
27 out of 32 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed