Reviews written by registered user
|8 reviews in total|
Pure movie magic that has never been eclipsed before or since. The
feelings one can derive from this film have no benchmark for
comparison. Additionally, each and every scene is essentially flawless
with regard to the movie's purity and "vibe".
Please note, when George says, "Well, how old are ya?" his lips are not moving!
You won't believe the neat experience I had with bringing the woman who played Zuzu to introduce the film at a Christmas screening in historic Greenbelt, MD a few years back. If you're a fan, do yourself a favor and read about it at http://zuzu.net/essays/wonderful_theatre.html.
Top 10 Reasons this movie stinks 10) Keanu Reeves has doesn't work as a romantic lead 9) ZERO chemistry between Bullock and Reeves 8) The script would have received a D- in a screen writing 101 course. Characters say exactly what they think. No creativity/cleverness. 7) The direction is so over the top it distracts the story (every shot a "money shot"? pulease.) 6) No one ever questions the premise. He/she is in the future/past? right. okay. How about upping your meds, pal? 5) The guy who plays Reeves' brother is God-awful. Brotherly dialogue is also atrocious (see #8) 4) The script stinks to high heaven. 3) The lighting and colors are so overly-dramatic in just about every shot, distracting from the story - if there is one - even more. 2) The premise is full of holes that aren't even worth getting into. 1) Did I mention the bad script??? Oh, and I love IMDb's "If you like this movie, you'll like 'The Legend of Bagger Vance'" (re: For those that like everything even really, REALLY bad movies, perhaps you'll like this stinker too.) Okay, I'll stop rolling my eyes now...I just can't believe everybody else liked it. Maybe it was different in the theaters???
Okay, if you saw the trailer you may have thought, "Ha, ha. Another
silly contrivance under the auspices of 'high concept'". Well, that may
be true (it is high concept), but the actual movie is the most
delightful surprise to all you romantic-comedy connoisseurs out there;
it's HILARIOUS, the situations are fresh and unexpected and the writing
is fantastic (for a high concept comedy; let's be honest about what
we're dealing with here).
I saw this film tonight at a preview in Washington, DC and the audience laughed throughout. All I can say is that this film is going to make A LOT OF MONEY (probably $175M or so domestically is my prediction, it should do even better when word of mouth gets out) and it deserves to. Hats off to the writer and director whose names I'm about to look up here...go see it!
Watching the trailer for this movie, I thought, "Geez, why doesn't
Jamie Foxx just DRIVE AWAY if he doesn't want to get involved w/ Tom?
How STUPID!", but then I got to see a preview screening of the film
and, wow, did it change my mind in a hurry.
The above problem is explained very thoroughly and the movie is just a SUPERIOR suspense thriller with fantastic performances by both leads, a what's-going-to-happen-next rush for the whole length of it, wonderful, tight camera shots and superior dialog that challenges its audience intellectually AND morally.
One thing: I happened to be able to predict the ending, but it didn't detract too much and actually tied things together in a nice way.
If you liked "Changing Lanes" - which is what this movie reminded me of most and which also had a HORRIBLE trailer - you will like "Collateral". If you DIDN'T like "Changing Lanes", you will like "Collateral"! (Naw, just kidding on that last part, but it is pretty darn good and a real crowd-pleaser.)
Having been a huge fan of his breakthrough hit "Next Stop Wonderland", I
high hopes for Brad Anderson's latest work, which I was fortunate enough
have seen at the Sundance Film Festival last week. However, I was not
for the pleasant surprise that this exceptional psychological thriller
From the first frame I was on the edge of my seat, my brain working overtime to try and figure out what was happening and where things were going, all the while enjoying the crazy ride I was on and the unbelievable performance of Christian Bale who I understand lost 65 pounds to play the role of our sad protagonist Trevor Reznik.
Anderson's storytelling chops have never been so finely tuned as in "Machinist". He never lets go of the audience and paces things so well you don't care how long it takes to get to your destination YOU HAVE TO KNOW WHERE THIS THING IS GOING! And the climax delivers without the slightest sense of disappointment and/or abruptness that even many of the great master's films did in the last act.
I haven't stopped thinking about this film since the curtain came up and it's probably because I've never been so spellbound (pun intended) perhaps since "Memento". Though "The Machinist" may not be as ORIGINAL a concept as that other film, in every other way it matches and/or surpasses it and, unlike "Memento" it has no gaping holes in its logic.
Go see this movie and see if you're as blown away as we all were at the World Premiere in Park City.
Well, I liked so much about this movie...I was captivated, I was compelled, I thought the acting was tremendous, I was into it hook, line and sinker, and I think the filmmaker should be commended for an amazing job on a shoestring budget. I think most audiences will adore this film. Best of luck to "The Gatekeeper".
As a student of filmmaker Wolf Zoettl in 1999, I learned so much from this film, mostly that a great idea can turn into a great film without much money and/or even time! This film was shot in a day (in the middle of nowhere) during which there was a tremendous thunderstorm which drenched the main character. You'd think that was a bad thing but all it did was bring the miraculous RAINBOW which makes its cameo at the end of the film...simple, funny and beautifully shot on 35mm film (an expensive medium unless you shoot just a little of it!), this piece exemplifies the concept of movies as sheer entertainment. Find it online and watch it NOW!
When I rented this movie, I had no idae what to expect. Charlie Chaplin in a talkie?! I had just seen (heard?) how poor Buster Keaton's awful voice destroyed his presence as the classic stone-faced pantomine. Might Mr. Chaplin's performance in a speaking role be as sadly disappointing???
The answer in a resounding word was, "NO!" If anything, Chaplin's voice and accompanying ability to express himself with words enhanced his screen presence by providing a new dimension with which to appreciate his seemingly limitless talent.
I'm not sure just how to explain this other than the fact that I watched most of the film with a big grin glued to my face. I marvelled at the subtleties of Chaplin's performance which distinguish him not only as a silent movie actor, but as an actor of ANY era! In today's world of over-the-top silliness and questionable acting passing as good comedy, his performance is a clear indication that intelligent comedy is not an oxymoron and that the "King" of it is the same person as the king of slapstick.
If you're the kind of person who appreciates the subtlety in Woody Allen's humor, you will find yourself marvelling at "A King in New York" and you will see (and hear!) a part of Charlie Chaplin you may not ever have known existed.