Change Your Image
B-A
Reviews
Mission: Impossible II (2000)
Mission Impossible 2 - If only it was as good as it sounds, or at least as good as the first.
The main problem in MI2 is the plot, to be precise the lack of it. The first MI movie was good because it was a thriller which just happened to enjoy the services of state-of-the-art stunts and special effects. Yet the plot remained the most important thing to it's writers and producers.
In MI2 they tried it the other way around. First the Stunts and special effects then the plot, if you can even call it a 'plot'. The result is a movie overfilled with stunts and effects, but without a decent story to justify them. It is almost as if the actors and dialogs exist just to provide an excuse to show cool gadgets and science fiction espionage technology.
I'm not saying you couldn't enjoy yourself in this movie. Some Parts of me obviously did. But you can also enjoy yourself in any other action movie. You just expect more from MI2 than a standard action movie. As in any action movie, there are holes in the story and some of the stunts, especially in the final fighting scene, were unrealistic (as one of my friends bothered to mention every second or so of the movie).
The only actress worth mentioning is Thandie Newton, and that's only because she looks damn fine.
Pitch Black (2000)
Shameless rip offs don't make a movie.
Hungry, bored, plain stupid? Make your own Pitch Black!
Ingredients: 1 blanket, 1 flashlight, 1 pair of swimming goggles, 1 disgusting plastic cockroach that shines in the dark, 1 large popcorn and a coke.
The making process: Get under blanket, pretend that you're five and you're hiding from aliens.
Turn on the flashlight and put on the goggles. Spend 1 hour and 58 minutes of boring quality time with yourself.
Eat the popcorn and take a zip from the coke.
After precisely 1 hour and 59 minutes turn off the flashlight.
Wave the cockroach in the air and make scary noises. Take the goggles off, finish the coke and go home you sick pervert!
Now, if you didn't understand any of the above it means that you belong to the large group of people which have a life and were fortunate enough to miss this abomination called: Pitch Black.
Two major rights were violated during the making of this movie: first the basic human rights of the viewers who had to put up with two hours of this c**p, and various Copy Rights.
Pitch Black is an obvious rip off from two major science fiction sources, Isaac Asimov and the 'Alien' series. The idea of a destruction which comes on a planet in cycles of a few years, every time an eclipse takes place, is a shameless rip off from Isaac Asimov's famous book 'Nightfall'.
The stranded spaceship, the crew who finds a deserted colony on the planet, the presence of dangerous people on the crew and the endless wondering whether they are trust worthy or not - all this bear a close resemblance to the 'Alien' series.
In spite of all the great stolen ideas in it, Pitch Black is still a bad movie. There is no backbone to the story. They just crash on the planet and immediately they begin their rescue. Not much dialogs either, you could probably watch the movie silenced and still understand a great deal.
The main theme of confusing between light and darkness and between good and and evil is emphasized in the sudden change of roles between the 'law enforcing' man and the dangerous murderer. Yet instead of adding depth to the movie it lacks reliability and something called 'acting', and ends up adding nothing more than the element of surprise to the movie.
Of course one could claim that since this is a horror movie that is exactly what its makers wanted to achieve. But it's very clear when you watch the movie that Pitch Black was intended to be a cross between Science Fiction and a horror/thriller. And for some unexplained reasons it turned out to be a plain horror movie, and a horror movie it is indeed.
Oh, you think this is harsh go see the movie.
Dogma (1999)
A 'landmark' in its own way.
While there is no doubt that Dogma is a good movie, it's also a good example for how a 'brilliant' idea can turn out 'less than brilliant' with the help of some main stream pleasing, box-office producing, big studio managers.
Dogma excels in brilliant insights which manage to tear apart the ridiculous and somewhat immature ideas of the institutionalized religion concept. Hilarious interpretations for God's gender and his alleged death give Dogma that rare smell of innovation that so many big studio movies these days lack.
Sadly though, Dogma suffers from the worse case of multiple personality you'll ever see in a movie. The movie is characterized in radical mood swings and atmosphere changes. One moment it's a smart and hilarious movie and the next moment it turns to something so sticky and religious that no 'Sunday's school' would have been ashamed of. While watching, and enjoying if I may say, Dogma, you always have that disturbing feeling that a religious consultant of some sort was present on the movie's set at all time, working overtime trying to balance every 'sacrilegious' scene with a matching 'God fearing' scene.
One of the highlights of Dogma is its ability to present fundamental theological concepts, as God and 'Faith', from a unique perspective, so different from the 'Religious' perspective and paradoxically at the same time loyal to the meaning of the 'original text'.
Humanizing God and his servants would have been considered sacrilegious in most major religions, even though in the Bible it is clearly said that man was made in "..the image of God.." (Genesis 1,27). The original verse in Hebrew is even more clear and leaves no doubt that the makers of Dogma understood The book of Genesis and the 'miracle of creation' better than most religious Dogmas in the past Millennium or so.
Dogma goes out against every modern religious approach which makes the belief more important than the believer. This important saying in Dogma along side with its mockery for the Calvinist ideas (religious mortification and orthodoxy) which are becoming popular again in America, lead to the conclusion that among the makers of Dogma were no doubt some 'normal' religious/non-atheist people whose goal was to deliver the following message through the movie: "Lighten up people, not even God takes himself that seriously".
Dogma's strongest side is its cast. From the rightfully known Ben Afleck and Matt Damon to the hilarious Metatron and stoned 'prophets', Dogma forms a praiseworthy cast. This cast manage to salvage even the most 'religious' scenes from total disaster and give them some meaning, through excellent acting.
A note also must be said about Alanis Morissette's part as God. The role of the all mighty himself combined with literally no line to be said makes Alanis's part the best part possible for a non-actor person, and she performs it well. As one viewer put it in reply for another viewer's amazement of the lack of words in Allanis's part: She's God! what else can you ask for?!
Overall Dogma is a smart and funny comedy worth watching despite all its obvious flaws. It's safe to say that Dogma is an important movie and even a 'landmark' in its own way.