Reviews written by registered user

Page 1 of 3:[1] [2] [3] [Next]
21 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

A striking film with a brilliance you cannot take for granted, 26 June 2002

Spielberg once again proves why he is the amazing filmmaker he is. Minority Report's clever noir tale of a "pre-crime" officer's quest to discover how and why he is soon to commit a murder is as fresh and unique as any spun on the screen in the last several years. Just the idea of it is enough to captivate the viewer, but Spielberg's direction makes for a pay-off ten times greater than one could imagine. Everything that could work in this film does and works in a way the viewer didn't see coming. Summing up the merits of this film is impossible because they are merits incapable of being condensed. It is a movie entirely free of convention and tacky hollywood cliches. One really fun trip into the mind of the greatest mind in the movie business. Easily the best movie of the year and one of the finest ever made.

10 out of 10

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Starts good, gets better, ends in brilliance, 20 May 2002

The Coens have created another masterpiece. This is their finest work. The screenplay is full of ironic humour at every turn. Thornton is wonderful as Ed Crane, the man who works at a barber shop who doesn't really consider himself a barber. Out of boredom, he goes into blackmail so he can earn money to invest in a dry cleaning scheme. There, that's it! Amazing isn't it? Only the Coens could ever devise a film on this premise and make it work its wonder for 116 minutes of black-and-white glory. I liked the film after the last elegant line spun. After a few days of going over it in my mind, I loved it more and more. It's skeletal elegy of an everyman taps straight into your mind and holds you there long after the final shot.

Eerie and shocking, "The Man Who Wasn't There" gets a solid 8.5 out of 10.

The best yet of the new trilogy, 20 May 2002

The new trilogy cannot in any way be compared to the first. This one is synthetic, technically-driven, and far from the innocent simplicity of the first three entries.

When "The Phantom Menace" was released in 1999, a large percentage of the Star Wars devotees fell away, and such was to be expected. The feeling of the film was different--distant, esoteric at times. But this is an entirely new set of films and entirely new sets of objectives. Now that a second entry is in the books, perhaps the animosity toward Lucas and his new creation can go away at last.

"Attack of the Clones" is startling, mystifying, dazzling, provocative, and fun through-and-through. It employs the eye-candy graphics initiated with "The Phantom Menace" and takes them to a whole new atmosphere. Even though the film is 95% computerized, one can still feel a part of the picture, another spectator in the arena. The writing was refreshingly better than that of "The Phantom Menace." Full of quirky exchanges and chilling references of things to come, the script manages to keep the movement of the film fluid while not getting too bogged down in the politics of the story. A finely crafted dialogue and delivery onto a screen filled with enough going on to thrill even the biggest skeptic.

The last half-hour of the film puts the viewer on a conveyor belt, sets the speed to hyperdrive, and throws them straight into the door leading to Episode III. After seeing the film at 12:01 on the morning of 16 May, there was a great deal of material there to sink in. I am quite confidant that this film will appeal on many, many levels and take its place gracefully on the shelf next to "The Phantom Menace." And when all is said and done for this prequel series, movie lovers will have two wonderfully unique trilogies to sink their teeth into, for many years to come I hope.

"Attack of the Clones" gets a 7.5/10

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Beautiful in every sense of the word, 25 January 2002

Everything--the direction, the cinematography, the music, and of course, the acting--everything in the movie is beautiful. Russell Crowe is brilliant as he always is. He has done what I never expected him to do--match his performance as Jeff Wigand in Mann's "The Insider." He gives so much to his role as John Nash that I forgot it was him. His appearance becomes increasingly disturbing as the film moves along. Ron Howard's direction is flawless. He has finally proved to the world that he is an amazing director and no list of the best contemporary directors is complete unless it bears his name. The brightest gem in this film is Jennifer Connelly. Her performance is so real that you can't help but feel her pain in coping with her schizophrenic husband. Her performance as Alicia is worth every supporting actress accolade in the books. Ed Harris gives his best performance ever in a supporting role as Nash's antagonist. He appearance is so subtle it is absolutely terrifying. James Horner's musical score is grade A even compared to his previous work on Titanic and Glory. Beautifully cast, magnificently photographed, reverently directed, and hauntingly executed. This best film of the year 2001 is Ron Howard's magnum opus. A complete triumph that stands high above a rabble of mediocre works. Beautiful.


6 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
I'm glad I saw this one, 17 January 2002

People I knew told me this movie was I waste when it was in the theatres, so I took their advice and stayed away from it. This was a mistake. When it came out on video the following Spring, I watched it and loved it. Lucas keeps the spirit of Star Wars alive. Out of 10, this one gets a 9.

6 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
A great start, 17 January 2002

This movie is terrific and just as good as the first three. I loved all the characters, the worlds explored, the eye candy, and the mysterious storyline. It is just as I expected the Star Wars saga would begin, with strife slowly growing in the fabric of the great Republic. It doesn't run too long either. I can't say I'm a bona fide Star Wars fan; I just love great stories. Star Wars will be a story I will love experiencing again and again once all six episodes are together. This installment may have let some people down because it didn't answer all their questions, but I love its mystique and childlike spirit. It will be a great beginning for the dark chapters that are likely to come. I can't say enough about how fun this movie is. Placed historically alongside the first three movies, it cannot be near as great, but once it's one of six, the entire saga will shine as the greatest example of how great one's imagination can be. The Phantom Menace, Attack of the Clones, Episode III, A New Hope, The Empire Strikes Back, Return of the Jedi--how I will love them all. And how I wish I could personally thank Mr. Lucas for this incredible gift. I just can't wait for May 25, 2005, oh how great that day will be. It's great just to get away from this gawdawful mess of a world for a few hours and experience something not quite like anything else. I only wish more people could enjoy this movie, but that's their loss.

9.5 out of 10

4 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
Brief follow-up, 17 December 2001

And I know that I'm not the only fan of this film. Where did all the Star Wars fans go? I can't see you. Stand up and be counted. Over time, the entire six episodes of the series will transcend all present trends and its critics will be made to accept it. Gosh, I don't know anymore. This is why I so loath public opinion. I forgot to give it a rating last time around: As a critic: 6.5/10 As a fan: 10/10 <and this is the voice I will always listen to -And the typo in my previous statement of "the originals were to masterpieces of filmmaking, I meant to say were not masterpieces of filmmaking," but who cares what I think anyway? To the fans of this film, have a most happy future, and to all those idiotic nitpickers, stop trying to act so mature!

Titanic (1997)
2 out of 7 people found the following review useful:
Bloated wreck, 17 December 2001

I don't know quite how to describe this film. When it was in release everyone was calling it an instant classic, but now it seems everyone hates it. People, make up one opinion and stick with it. But I say this film is and always was terrible. The most horrid was of 194 minutes in my entire life. The story of the Titanic, first off, is not very interesting to watch for three odd hours. And the artificial love story does not help down this horse pill of a movie. The music is the only thing that I enjoyed, but even that wore out its welcome near the last hour of the film. Cameron should've sunk this film before it came out and robbed people of 1.8 billion hard-earned dollars. I'm sorry to myself for seeing this film because everyone else was, and I'm sorry to everyone else who saw this embracement for this reason. It is not the fan of film, just the fan of stupid dialogue and great big ships sinking with bad graphics and all. Now give the Phantom Menace a break, will ya, and say something about this shipwreck!

.5/10 (I can't bring myself to give a movie the same rating I gave to the 1998 version of Psycho, otherwise, I would be most inclined to slap a goose egg on this one.)

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
As a film, bad; but then again, so were the first three; that's what we all love about them, 16 December 2001

Hello people? Isn't this film just like the original three, or has it been that long since you've watched the original Trilogy? The reason I love Star Wars so much is that the films don't care about the standards of the time, they just aim to please, and for me I couldn't be anymore pleased with the entire series. What did you people expect? Star Wars was so built up over time that you just forgot that they are only movies, never to be taken seriously! I don't believe the world I live in anymore! Hypocrites! Don't act so mature and watch the movies not as critics but as fans, and you'll enjoy them maybe like you never have before. Phantom is just like originals, embrace it, the originals were to masterpieces of filmmaking, they were masterpieces of pop culture, and Phantom should've been part of it, if you idiots hadn't overanalyzed it to death. It's time like these I wished I was living in a less "educated" society.

3 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Two Decades in the Life, 16 August 2001

I can't say enough about how much John Lennon's death still hurts me when I think about it, and I wasn't even alive when that terrible date (8 Dec 1980) transpired. But through the duration of "Imagine: John Lennon," I felt at ease with his death. I felt that Lennon was sitting there next to me telling me that he's fine, and that he will never be dead as long as his music live forever in the minds of his fans. Lennon's life was captured brilliantly in this documentary. His brilliance, his unique spirit, and his controversial opinions about the crooked elements of the world are reverently presented. I thanks the makers of this film for omitting the name of the eternally damned soul who selfishly brought the end to the physical life of Lennon. Lennon lives on, but the scars left by his passing will remain. For those who do not know Lennon's life very well, this film is perfect for them. Together, you, me, and Lennon can imagine a world free of hatred in our lives and the lives of future generations. It is possible if we just give peace a chance. I love this movie and it's portrayal of the life of the most influential entertainer of the past couple centuries. What more can be said about such an amazing life?

Page 1 of 3:[1] [2] [3] [Next]