Reviews written by registered user
|14 reviews in total|
Not having a big budget was not the main problem in the production of
this movie. It's the lack of talent and ideas that make it so extremely
bad. The acting is so over the top that it becomes annoying after 30
seconds. The camera moves like a madman, thinking this is the way to
make your movie look cool. The colors and lighting only add to the
cheapness. The main problem is the story, which isn't one. It just
drags along, one stupid fight after another. Not anyone in the theater
was laughing even once.
And only for trying to make a rape scene funny, this movie deserves to be called worthless.
I'm fond of Jim Carrey, especially when he's NOT doing comedy. But what
I saw him doing in this awful movie, can hardly be called 'acting'. But
I don't blame him. This movie has no decent story to begin with. The
script is an incoherent mess, a would-be psychological mystery that can
only be entertaining for 14-year-olds and with the kind of formulaic
twists that makes me fall asleep. Without spoiling anything: the book
that sets everything in motion, is written by 'Topsy Kretts'. How
clever is that? It takes the characters about half a movie to discover
that that is not a real name! How stupid do the people who made this
thing, think we are? Add the complete lack of style of Joel Schumacher
and you get a movie that is bad in every way it can be. Mr. Schumacher
plays with shadow and light, with colors and obscure locations, but he
still is the king of kitsch and not the David Fincher he thinks he is.
The man is simply one of the worst directors ever, who coincidental
made some good movies, but mostly awful ones.
The Number 23 is a terrible, terrible movie and I never want to watch it again.
There's a lot to like about this excellent British drama. The story about the relationships between the members of a family, may seem a bit too simple, and the lack of big surprises may disappoint some people, but anyone who takes a closer look, will discover a rich, subtle, heartwarming family drama that offers very authentic, original characters and more emotions and reality than any soap opera will ever do. Stephen Poliakoff's direction is impeccable, the casting is truly perfect (even for the smallest roles), the actors never less than wonderful. The beautiful music supports the dramatic events in a way that 'Perfect Strangers' will be in your head for several days. An absolute masterpiece.
It's been like 1,5 year ago that I've seen the movie, but I frequently think
back about it. And when I read the previous comment, I realized what
specific detail made me like this movie so much: the emptiness! The
previous person on this board didn't like the fact that there were no cars
or extra to be seen, and he supposed that Miss Chayko did it on purpose to
give a sphere of loneliness. That's a possibility, but even when the reason
is simply that there was no money for extras, I don't care: it gave the
movie its unique atmosphere.
And I also agree that Miss Chayko will, one day, certainly make a great movie!
I had no idea what to expect of this movie, but after a few minutes already, I knew this was a hidden treasure! This beautifully photographed movie has a very strong script, a perfect balance between irony and drama, and it sometimes reminded me of 'Happiness' and 'American Beauty', two great movies that got much more attention than 'Lawn Dogs', although they were made later than this film! And then, the actors! Mischa Barton is incredible! I can't remember having seen any child (certainly not the horrible Haley Joel Osment) acting so great lately. This girl is a supertalent and I'm sure that within a few years, she's going to be a star! I highly recommend 'Lawn Dogs' to everybody who has seen enough of the typical Hollywood-drama's!
I must say I didn't expect much about this movie, but it turned out not to be bad at all. Most striking of course, was Aidan Quinn's performance. I would never expect to see this fine actor as an action hero. The great thing about it is that he really builds up his character (Annibal). I mean, it was not like Mel Gibson or Bruce Willis would do it, he was sensitive and modest. For example, he's really upset when he kills someone. I also noticed that some clichés were avoided. When Annibal gets his training, you would easily expect him to be a rebel and act like any average American would do in such a situation, ask what the f*** is going on and refusing to cooperate. But Annibal is a professional marine officer, he doesn't give up and he tries not to lose his courage, in which he succeeds pretty well, except for a brief break-down on Christmas Eve, which I think was very realistic. I'm glad that Aidan Quinn got this opportunity to show another side of him (in fact two, because he plays the villain as well), even although the film wasn't that successful.
I had my finger on the fast-forward button while watching this, as I expected this to be a boring and mediocre political thriller and I'm not that very interested in politics. But what a surprise! It turned out to be a smart and very intelligent movie, with a realistic and intriguing story! Although lots of actions happen, on a very high tempo, the story always remains clear and comprehensible. John Hurt was extremely strong, the photography was nice and the camera-work effective. I also liked the music very much, it certainly contributed tot the tension in the film. I think it's great the way George Sluizer made this movie with possibly not that much money.
This was a very strong and touching movie: an intelligent and realistic script, good camera-work and, not in the least, terrific actors. It were especially the three young actors who convinced me with their performances! This picture certainly gives us something to think about! I now know much more about the Jehova-religion (but I can't say this movie made me understand it). Congratulations to the film-makers for their nice job on a risky theme!
I don't understand why this movies gets this much of enthusiastic reactions
by the IMBD-members. I didn't like it that much.
First of all, the story was not interesting. In fact, a good plot was
missing. 'Hannibal' lacks surprises, psychological depth and real people
and emotions. Liotta and Goldman's characters were nothing but caricatures,
and Hannibal Lecter has lost much of his creepy manners. Ridley Scott made
some great movies, but I don't think he got any little bit involved in
making this, emotionally I mean. So I wonder where the 'soul' of this movie
is. Everyone involved in the making of 'Hannibal' probably assumed this was
going to be a great movie, so they forgot to make the efforts for it.
And then the actors. Hopkins is never bad, but if you compare his performance to those in 'Titus', 'Remains of the Day' and especially 'Silence of the Lambs', this isn't a great performance. And although I like Julianne Moore a lot (Boogie Nights! End of the Affair! Big Lebowski!), this role was so badly written that it would only reach the audience if it was played by Jodie Foster again! Of course there were some good moments too (the pigs, Liotta's head during dinner, the scenes in Italy), but there wasn't a single moment that the movie touched me in any way, and isn't that what cinema is all about?
I never bothered to see this movie, because it was not that famous. I was only willing to watch it because I'm a Joan Allen fan and she's in it, but I still kept thinking that nothing could be better than 'Silence of The Lambs'. I was wrong. Although 'Silence...' is one of the best psychological thrillers ever, 'Manhunter' just excels in every way (except that it hasn't Jodie Foster). I never, never saw a movie so intense, so constantly exciting... Brilliant photography, the most thrilling music ever and great performances. There were plenty of moments that made me feel really uncomfortable, just like the main characters. This is a real masterpiece and it makes a mediocre movie like 'Hannibal' even worse. Ridley Scott, watch this and quit the job!
|Page 1 of 2:|| |