Change Your Image
abner_en
Reviews
The Boondock Saints (1999)
Not perfect, but one of my favorites
This film is one of the few I can watch over and over again, sometimes twice in a day if I have time. Part of that, of course, is owed to the extremely attractive actors portraying the MacManus brothers, but if that were the sum of the movie's parts, I would only watch the movie once a month, if that.
The storyline is not 100% original, and I will admit that Duffy did seem to just point the camera in the general direction of the actors and hope that they did things right. For the most part he got lucky. Norman Reedus, Sean Patrick Flanery, Billy Connolly, and most especially Willem Dafoe are such talented actors that they are able to interpret their characters and carry their scenes, even if most of the supporting actors aren't quite up to par.
Reedus and Flanery are endearing as Murphy and Conner; their scenes together - and they're only once apart - are at once hilarious and adorable. Connolly is granted minimal screen time, with only a few lines, but he manages to pull even that off. The shining star, of course, is Willem Dafoe as Paul Smecker, the conflicted FBI agent hot on the trail of the twins, unsure of whether he should help them out or bring them in. The fragmented scenes in which Smecker describes the crimes are interesting, a little like watching Sherlock Holmes in action.
The bad points: 1) David Della Rocco as Rocco (how original), package boy for the Yakavetta branch of the Mafia. Rocco has the MacManus brothers' quick tempers without their intelligence or their style. Smecker describes him as "kind of an idiot," and I have to say that I agree. Della Rocco seems to just take the script and run with it without giving any kind of thought to his character. 2) Doc the bartender (Gerard Parkes) seems to have Turrett's as he randomly shouts curse words, and he disappears fifteen minutes into the movie, never to be seen or heard from again. The storyline about his bar being closed down completely fizzles out. 3) Again, the hit-and-miss directing. Duffy got lucky. Very, very lucky. Actors with just a little less talent would have made mincemeat of this movie. 4) The interviews during the credits. The movie does a commendable job of setting up an ethical dilemma. There was no need to belabor it; that ploy served the double purpose of infantilizing the audience and making the movie take itself too seriously. Yes, Duffy, we heard you. The horse is dead.
Still, one of my favorite movies. I offer it 8 stars.
The Core (2003)
Remember why we GO to movies?
Movies are supposed to be fun. Entertainment. And on that score, I think The Core answers. If you want everything to be scientific and plausible, you'd be better off watching a documentary, but The Core is no less fantastic than the novels of Jules Verne (20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, Journey to the Centre of the Earth). Instead, I think expectations have changed.
Yes, The Core requires a massive amount of suspension of disbelief. And personally, I'm willing to suspend it. Would the Earth's core stop spinning? Unlikely. Would we be able to restart it if we did? Improbable. Do I care? Not one bit.
The Core is a movie I never tire of, and I think it is one of the better natural disaster movies. The performances are solid and the dialog interesting. If your problem is the performance of the script, I can't say anything more, but if you're quibbling about the "scientific errors", and I'm sure there are many, I have this to say to you: Relax. Have fun. You'll live longer.
Great Performances: Jesus Christ Superstar (2000)
Wow!
I had heard of Jesus Christ Superstar before from, of all people, an eight-year-old who was an avid fan, but the very title was enough to throw me off. Then, my sister's high school made the very gutsy decision to use it as their spring all-school musical. Her enthusiasm for it caught my interest. I listened to the London Concept soundtrack and loved it, then watched both this movie and the 1973 version. There is absolutely no comparison. As Jesus, Ted Neely (sp?) always seemed to be sleepy or something, except for his breaking up the marketplace in the temple. But Glenn Carter - wow. Not only can he express the torment of a man who knows that he was only born to die ("To conquer death, you only have to die"...who can forget that??), that his very best friends will deny and betray him, and that he might never get recognition for what he is about to do; he can also display such radiant joy that it is impossible not to smile with him. In the "Hosanna" scene, that gorgeous smile of his just shines with heavenly light - until the Israelites suggest that he die for them. His voice is lovely, but the true shining light in this production is Jerome Pradon's Judas Iscariot.
Usually portrayed as a villain, Pradon's Judas is disillusioned, irritated with Jesus for not doing something about his followers' misguided ideas, and torn between civic duty and love for his best friend. Some have described his voice as not up to snuff, but Judas is arguably one of the most complex characters in the history of theater. Consumed by confusion, anger, helplessness, and guilt, whose voice could NOT crack? The Last Supper and the Betrayal always leave me in tears: Judas' last desperate attempt to understand Jesus, his agonized betrayal of him and Jesus' subsequent forgiveness, followed by his realization that he has been tricked into murdering his best friend by a silent God, and his final grasp at control over his own life by hanging himself.
More pluses: Renee Castle's Mary Magdalene is heart-wrenching as she comes to grips with the fact that she loves a man who will never love her back - moreover, that she doesn't want him to. Simon Zealotes, as a gun-toting militant, represents the many people who thought that Jesus had come to Earth to fight a war against the Romans. Pilate is magnificent, if a little over-acted - a man who does not know what to make of Jesus, who seems so small and helpless, but possesses an inner strength and power that frightens Pilate, who was, everyone must remember, an unwilling accomplice in Jesus' death. Rik Mayall's Herod is hilarious, but something in his facial expression sends chills up one's spine - he may be loopy, but he's nobody to mess with. Finally, although I know Annas is not a comedic character, his voice kills me every time. The perfect weasel-y villain next to Caiaphas' almost too deep bass!
Some common complaints by Christians: First, that Jesus is portrayed as too human. I beg everyone to remember that Jesus was human, and that the night of his arrest he prayed so earnestly for God to save his life that he began to sweat blood. Second, that everything is not portrayed as it is in the Bible. If this worries you, please remember that the Gospel was written by other disciples, and even by people who never knew Jesus personally. The point of the play is to see events through Judas' eyes. As we can never know Judas' feelings and thoughts, this is only someone's attempt to understand how the events of the Gospel may have appeared to him. Third, that the Resurrection portrayed in the Bible is not part of the film. Again, remember that this is Judas' story. Judas did not know that Jesus would rise again. All he knew was that Jesus would die, and that is what the movie portrays.
Now for my few complaints. The actor who plays Caiaphas tries so hard to sing contrabass that often he misses notes and rhythms. Jesus' destruction of the marketplace was not as good as it could have been, what with all the TVs everywhere: the one element in which I prefer the 1973 version. Judas' suicide is rather too long drawn out, and almost loses its importance. But these are minor problems. All in all, I would give this movie two huge thumbs up!