Reviews

66 ReviewsOrdered By: Date
The Way (I) (2010)
9/10
Powerful Way
24 March 2013
As I listened to the audio version of the book Along the way, by Martin and Emilio, I found out about this other collaborative projects of theirs, the movie The Way. This is such a quiet, soft paced movie, that it might have been easy to overlook it if one was expecting something different. But it leaves you with something that is hard to point out. The fairness, realism and softness while almost brutally honest ensures that this film will stay with you.

Many films before The Way ensure, with aggressive plots, exaggerated characters and often unrealistic story lines, that you are left with a specific message. The Way does the opposite, with simple outline, deep characters and almost non-event story. And while you will be left with a message it is almost certain it will be a deeply personal one, varying greatly between viewers.

I give it 9 stars, not because it is groundbreaking, but for the simple fact that it moved me and it was made with more heart than I have seen in a long time.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Borgríki (2011)
7/10
Enjoyable attempt at Tarantine style cinema in Iceland
27 December 2012
City State or Borgariki, is a twisted tail of criminals foreign and domestic and their dealings with somewhat questionable police force. Set in the capital of Iceland, Reykjavik, it mirrors some aspects of what has been supposedly happening during the last decade as foreign criminals take on the their somewhat softer counterparts in Iceland.

Each scene of this movie plays wonderfully on its own, with all the actors doing some of their best work (at least in this type of a movie) and filming and sound/music really well done. It was wonderfully surprising to see Jonathan Pryce pop up couple of times and the almost amateur actor Zlatko Krickic was superb.

The downfall of the film is its cutting. It could be possible that the story was somewhat at fault, but mostly it felt as each scene was not related to the next. There were even some totally unnecessary time jumping, which looked to be done as an afterthought.

City state would have been a better movie with faster pace, tighter story and cutting. Having said that, this film goes on my list of Icelandic films I recommend to foreigners.
7 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
10/10
Like a perfect dinner
25 December 2012
Had rewarding day with my dad as we went to see The Hobbit together. We were not the only father and son team at the 11am morning show on Boxing day!

The Hobbit was truly wonderful, and I proclaim all negative reviews null and void! It was like a good dinner, where you have multiple courses, served over a long period of time, making you think you must be full while still wanting more as the hours passed.

The 3D and frame rate did nothing but enhance the movie, creating a truly unique movie experience. There was nothing about this movie that I would have changed, beside hoping for even longer version on DVD later. If I were to really try hard to find something wrong (while not wanting to change it), it might have been to many money shots referring to the LOTR.

One of the greatest thing about this movie is that it keeps the adventures spirit that you felt in LOTR, while still maintaining its uniqueness. I feel blessed having seen this movie - and for having shared it with my dad!
4 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Evolution (2001)
6/10
Making fun of X-files?
28 August 2002
I had waited for a long time for this one. Not so much expecting some master piece, but I'm a big fan of David. He was great in Kalifornia, and never failed in X-Files. When it was released on DVD I bought it, even before seeing the film. I loved the first viewing, but when I watched it again couple of days later I wasn't so impressed – to the point of being bored. There are few jokes in the film, and none where you do anything more but smile (with maybe the exception of scenes with the two fat blokes). The good and relaxed spirit between the actors saved a lot though. I think the film should have been longer, with less monsters and more humor. Evolution tries to hard to be serious, while at the same time including scenes with pure idiotic humor. Each method might work well on its own, but mixed like this in one film didn't work. This is sadly only an average comedy, which could have been so much more. 6/10
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Get Over It (2001)
6/10
Finally, a teen-flick I enjoyed
28 August 2002
I rent these teen-flicks even though I know most of the time I will be greatly disappointed with feeling of having wasted 90min. But once in a while (which is most likely the reason why I keep renting them), I come upon one that I enjoy. `Get over it' surprised me; by being on several occasions funny, by having couple of good music numbers, and for the appearance of Martin Short. The film flows smoothly (when compared to other teen-flicks), and the actors are at ease. There is a nice realistic touch to the characters, except for Martin Short which as usual was a bit overboard. Enjoyable little film. 6/10
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Space Cowboys (2000)
7/10
Missed the mark to some degree
28 August 2002
The first time I watched this film, I was a little bit disappointed. Maybe I expected more action or more humor – don't know. But neither seemed have been Clint Eastwood's goal, rather more to portray a `realistic' film of four old timers getting a second change at space travels, after having lost the opportunity as young men. The greatest downfall is that the film never really takes off. Like the first part is to explain the second half, while the second half executes what was explained in the first half (not sure that makes sense!). There are not many things that surprise you or even excite you; even the baddies are Russians, which I thought was just not done any more. CGI in space was well done though I wasn't sure of the realism behind what they were doing there. Of course the four old friends are brilliant, and always enjoyable to see them on the big screen. That saves the film from being boring, and I'm sure that as these four great actors this film will age well, and it wouldn't surprise me that in years to come it will be remembered, despite its many obvious flaws. 7/10
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Eye See You (2002)
6/10
Sly almost acting
28 August 2002
Here we have Sly as the FBI agent, Malloy, chasing a cop-killer with killing of 9 officers under his belt and intense interest in Malloy. After almost drinking himself to death, he finally agrees to seek help in a secluded institution specially for stressed out officers. Soon Malloy start suspecting that not everything is on order at the institution, as unusually many deaths seem to occur within its walls. I had read so many bad things about this film, that I didn't expect much. But I was reasonable happy with it. D-Tox has a breath of fresh air about it, with an unusual story, and interesting blend of action, thriller and human misery. Interesting that rather good group of actors came together there – with evenly distributed screen time. The filming is interesting, and the institution itself very thrilling. Sly was also in unusual role her, but it seems that he is picking roles more and more of ordinary guys, allowing himself to display more of his acting ability often sadly questioned due to his pick of roles rather then anything else.

But the film had its flaws. It seemed to be made for low budget, and suffer for it. Conversations were short and no real emotional interaction between characters, leaving all these good actors without an opportunity to shine. What saves it, is that it keeps you interested, and is about the best role I've seen Sly in for a long time (including the much praised Get Carter, which I hated). 6/10
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
7/10
Disappointing to some degree
27 August 2002
I had looked forward to see this film, mostly due to the story, but also because the three lead actors are all fantastic. And the film starts out brilliantly, capturing your spirit and dissolving the world around you as you are sucked into the story line. At which stage the film lost that I'm not sure, but it did loose it. I've read many of the other comments, and it seems that many feel that the focus on the idea `Pay it Forward' was too little, giving too much time to the interaction of the main characters. This is true to some extent, though I think the film producer where trying to twin into the story line a wonderful love story. That failed, as the misery of the characters live story was just to much, with not enough substance being given to their actual characters (i.e. they were only what had or was happening to them, while having no real identity – if that makes any sense!). Some users criticize the ending, which I think was one of the better parts of the film. Good film, but easily forgettable, which I think is its greatest downfall! 7/10
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
3/10
David Lynch might get away with it… but this film doesn't
27 August 2002
When I rent films such as Mulholland Drive I expect to be confused, and realize that I have to enjoy the film from an artistic point of view, rather then story line. This rather unknown Writer/Director, Stephen Carpenter, which most known job to date are writing credits for the comedy Blue Streak, has taken on too big of a task her. Soul Survivors is not badly acted, nor in the cinematography that bad. And with some added scenes, maybe the story line wasn't that bad. But the end result is a disaster. The film is only confusing and never pulls of being interestingly confusing. Scenes are mixed, with the audience never having any clue as to what is real and what isn't. Even the ending leaves you hanging, wondering what on earth the film was about. When we compare it to films such as Mulholland Drive which is also very confusing, we have suspense, great dialog and unbelievable cinematography. Soul Survivors doesn't have that, it is like a horror teen flick set mixed with bad David Lynch story line. Maybe some of you out there can make some sense of the story, and if so, you might enjoy this film. Like I said, it wasn't really the actors that did badly; it was the flow of the story – or even a lack of A story. 3/10
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
7/10
Full of tension but changed style half way through
27 August 2002
I finally found a German film, with English subtitles at the DVD rental store. Having seen Til Schweiger in Driven recently I was excited to see him in an authentic German production. And the film starts out well as we see the 6 radical friends going from being anarchists to most of them living pretty normal live, even to the point of betraying their original believes. In some ways I think people that lived through this might have a depth of understanding which I'm lacking having been brought up in very protective environment in Iceland. Therefore for an outsider, I felt that the film should have spent a little bit more time on defining what they were objecting to, what drove them, if you like. And the film had a strange balance of reality and humor, which did work, though unusual. When the film neared to its closure I felt it lost height a bit, becoming a little bit too Americanized. Unusual and well worth seeing. 7/10
4 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Bring It On (2000)
5/10
Nothing that you can't easily forget!
27 August 2002
There was nothing remarkable about this film, which surprised me. I had expected a greater and larger then life dance/cheerleading, but instead we had rather un-interesting gymnastics going on! Maybe you just have to be American to appreciate this. I've never seen cheerleading with my own two eyes and don't really understand the culture behind it. I enjoyed parts of the film, especially Eliza Dushku (Faith in Buffy/Angel), as she has just a wonderful and beautiful screen presence. It wouldn't surprise me if she will become a leading actress in the future. Kirsten Dunst is usually good, but I didn't really like her in this part, just seemed too hollow. They say that one will understand the effort and professionalism that goes into cheerleading by watching this film, and the stereotype of them being thick as brick should be proven wrong. Well, I'm sorry, but I was confirmed in that believe rather than anything else, as all of them, excluding Eliza's character, didn't seem to utilize their brain power to any great length, nor have any ambition or moral -> that is, not until the captain changed their mind. But the film wasn't bad, the dialog was pretty good, and most of the actors did a good job. You will most likely enjoy it, and then before the week is over, forget it. 5/10
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
The Siege (1998)
7/10
Seeing into the future
27 August 2002
It was scary watching this film, now, after the September 11th attack. The casuality of the subject, the Hollywood fantasy characters, the story line – it all stings you a bit now. This film would never been made today, where the Army is portrait almost evil, due to enforcing Martial laws on New York in attempt to find the terrorists. Watching the film when it came out, I'm sure that I like many, felt that this was not right, that civil rights were greater and that the army was out of line. Seeing it now, I can't help thinking about the reality of USA attacking another country in order to find the terrorists. There is a question one might ask himself – do we see anything wrong with that? And further more, was Bruce Willis character really evil in his attempt to rid New York of terrorists. Anyway, I throw these up as questions or thoughts, as it is interesting (though extremely sad) to see a film like the Siege becoming so close to reality. The film itself is full of flaws, and manages at no point to be exciting. It doesn't offer any action, and the interaction between Denzel and Annette was strained, and changed from scene to scene. The film did (and does) raise interesting questions, but somehow having the world picture changed for us, has also changed the answers to those questions. 7/10
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
9/10
Always enjoyable, can watch it again and again
27 August 2002
Kevin Costner had unbelievable amount of good films from 1987-1992, with this one and Dances with Wolves being at the forefront. The mixture of comedy, action and drama is just in the right proportion, and lines like `I'll cut your heart out with a spoon' being something everyone remembers from this film. I'm sure that one could find a lot to criticize, but there is not need. This film became an instant classic, is thoroughly entertaining, hilarious, with visual confetti and great action scenes. 9/10
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
6/10
Well, I just have to disagree
23 August 2002
It is funny to think about how you sometimes disagree with the norm, and will I only stay proud on those occasions. I just wrote about `The Messenger: The Story of Joan of Arc', which I loved, but most people hated. And the next evening I watched this film, with 4 Oscars to pride itself of. I had also heard so many people praise it, falling over Russell Crowe and his performance here. Maybe I was just in the wrong mindset or something, but the filmed bored me to tears. I never really felt, while watching the movie, that John Nash was a genius, nor did I like his character (which I think was important while watching him struggle through his schizophrenia). The character building of his wife was horrible, as it leaves you wondering what on earth she saw in the man. This film is one more example of `either you get it, or you don't'. I completely missed it! 6/10
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
4/10
Where didn't the film fail?
23 August 2002
Sadly we sometimes witness big-budget films turn out to be a mess from beginning to end. I don't mind so much brain dead, big-budget, Hollywood factory films, as long as they are entertaining, or action packed or funny. I've learned to enjoy those sorts of films, not expecting some ‘Schindler's list' every time I go to the movies. However, with all the wonderful material, the fountain of possibilities and the broad spectrum of the story The Time Machine, nothing becomes of the film. Yes, I thought the CGI was well done, and captured the time travel pretty well, but that's it. Everything else is horrible. We have major turning points in the film which last for seconds, while minor scenes are dragged out. The motives behind everyone's actions are un-realistic. Characters don't catch our sympathy at any point, and when anything is becoming interesting we cut to something else – leaving what ever was left behind hanging without any further development. Two of the biggest failure I feel was to leave the story so simple. The director should give more credit to his audience and fill the film with complicated and challenging material. Just think about it, Star Trek raises more interesting questions about time travels in 45min episodes, than this film does. The other irritating factor was the horrible look of Guy Pearce. He looked like he had been on speed (amphetamine) for several weeks, or that he was anorexic. This look served him well in Momento, but here he just looks constantly sick. In general the film should have been more challenging, longer, and with another lead actor! 4/10
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
6/10
More funny then scary, but that was OK
23 August 2002
Now I'm a scary-cat, and hate horror movies. It takes very little to make me cover my eyes, or find a reason to leave the room, when viewing scary movies. So if a film doesn't scare me, it won't scare anyone! But, should you watch this movie for the plot and the story, you won't be disappointed. The characters are well build, and the story line in itself is interesting. Some twists and turns are also included, and very gory though not scary ghosts are added as bonus. Many of the others user comments mention how great the house was, and that is true. However, I felt that you never knew where anyone was, and therefore you never really knew if they were in danger or how far away from safety they were. Every corridor was the same, creating a visual boredom during the middle of the film. What let the film down more then lack of suspense was the ending. It is just too simple, too easy, especially when looking at the years of planning that went into creating the house and these 13 ghosts. 6/10
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
The Others (2001)
5/10
Very interesting, but only once you finished watching it
23 August 2002
I don't have much to say about this film. It had a very claustrophobic feel to it, lacking overview at times, and very few characters. Not that it made it a bad film or anything. The actors all did pretty good job, though I had a dislike of Nicole Kidman's character. What I suspect was the downfall of the film, from my point of view anyway, was that you never really get what the story is about. That is, until at the end, and let me tell you, if you know how it ends, the film is ruined for you (I think). Overall, has the feeling of someone having a great idea (i.e. the ending), and then not managing well enough to write an interesting story! 5/10
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
9/10
Sometime it is great to be surprised…
23 August 2002
I wanted to see this one at the movies, but after hearing it was no good from what I considered good sources, I decided against it. Having seen it at the DVD-rental store many times, often almost grabbing it, but deciding against it remembering how horrible it was supposed to be. Finally one day, finding nothing else, I rented it. And I loved it! It is great, finding jewels unexpectedly like this, as when one watches as many films as I do, the only great films you see are the newest ones. After watching it, I went to the user comment area here on IMDb and tried to find out why people have given it such low rating. Further more, this was an Oscar performance from Milla Jovovich, but apparently the film wasn't even nominated (based on what I can see here on IMDb). This film is in the category, `either you get it, or you don't', or `either you love it or hate it'. I didn't know anything about Joan of Arc, and maybe that is why I liked it, watching it as a film rather then historical documentary. The film leaves me with a comfortable feeling. Before I watched it, I was afraid that we would see some saint of a woman, and how un-human and holy she was in what she did. Instead we see a young woman, plagued with the notion of purpose, extreme determination, while never fully understanding why or what is happening. Joan of Arc is much more of a hero to me after seeing this film, because the film is about her as a woman, rather then some supernatural being. 9/10
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Notting Hill (1999)
8/10
Wonderful Fantasy…though at times a bit too sentimental
23 August 2002
What characterizes this film is good vibration and easiness in storytelling. Surprisingly fast paced for romantic comedy, with concentration on being humorous, while allowing the lead characters to build up the romance through pure chemistry. Though it is not a downside, we have both Hugh Grant and Julie Roberts in well known parts, not displaying anything new. What makes this film special are the extras, mostly British diamonds, similarly cast to add flavor to the story as in `Four Weddings and a Funeral'. I especially enjoyed Rhys Ifans in the part of Spike, leaving me in stitches every time he was on screen. If it wouldn't have been for the out of character, over sentimentally, over dramatized line from Julie Roberts close to the end of the movie, I would have considered this film worth 9/10. However, that line was just too much. 8/10
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Epoch (2001 TV Movie)
5/10
Good elements, but lacked some funk
19 August 2002
There was not much I expected from Epoch, thinking that surely we would have one of these B-movies with pausing dialog and s****y script. So in some ways I was surprised, as the result was much better then I expected. What saved this film was pretty good idea and not too bad script. The main actors did well, keeping their conversation fast paced and witty. There were some parts that irritated me though, mostly to do with the government, which seemed to be filled with idiots. It had a weird balance between comedy and action, which I don't think really worked here, and even though some wit is good, they should have kept it more realistic. I especially enjoyed Brian Thompson, which we have seen in so many TV shows (Star Trek, X-File). He managed to actually act here, which he is not allowed to do often, and I think he is underrated as an actor. But the performance of Ryan O'Neal just irritated me along with a few of the others; with such bad over-acting that it was painful to watch. However, this film lacks action and the storyline went steadily down hill from beginning to end. The idea could have been used to make a pretty good action movie, with a little bit better worked out storyline, and much better casting. 5/10
7 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
The Score (2001)
7/10
Great acting, shitty script
19 August 2002
I was looking forward to seeing the Score, so much in fact that when it wasn't available at the rental shop in English (Living in Germany has its limitations!), I went out and bought it. That was a mistake. I never buy films unless I've seen them before, as I purchase them to see again and again. Here is another reason for me to keep to that rule, as I doubt that I will watch The Score often. The acting is fantastic, even from Marlon Brando, which I'm nowhere as much in awe of like so many seem to be. And the building up of the rubbery is good, characters are well established, and some mystery is even generated. But then it just dies out. I was completely at loss, thinking that the film was building up for exciting end, or major plot twist, but no. It just faded out, with several loose ends and leaves the audience surely disappointed. However, it is worth seeing if not only for the performance of Edward Norton. 7/10
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
5/10
Jim Carrey getting tired…
19 August 2002
I had resisted for a long time seeing this film for two reasons. Jim Carrey playing Jim Carrey was getting a bit tired in my books, and further more I hadn't heard one good thing about this film. But searching one night for a DVD to rent I decided to check it out anyway – mostly due to lack of anything better. Well, I didn't regret renting it, which must be a good thing. There were some laughable scenes, and Jim didn't too badly in playing two personalities. The way his kids were portrait I liked especially, as it was such a comic criticism about in which way those sort of characters are generally represented. But the film was weak. It had a strange mixture of seriousness and comedy which didn't work. The storyline was so thin that at times it seemed they were dragging out the scenes. And most surprisingly, even though the material surely generated great opportunities for laughable scenarios, it was reduced to some falling-on-your-face scenes. I enjoyed the beginning and the end, but became bored during the middle. 5/10
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
7/10
Enjoyed it, even though I dislike KISS
19 August 2002
Detroit Rock City was surprisingly enjoyable film. The storyline was solid, as we follow the 4 teenagers trying to get to a KISS concert, while everyone of them has their own version of coming into adulthood, confronted by their biggest fears and dreams. Not enjoying KISS didn't ruin the film for me, though I surely would have enjoyed it more without that music blasting throughout the film. Edward Furlong also proved to me, that he is an actor worth watching, and hopefully we will see much more of him in the future. The only downside for me was when their stupidity took over, especially during the driving to the concert, and couple of rather unrealistic scenes which I felt were unnecessary. The story had such a good base and comedy in itself that it didn't need to resort to some silly scenes to be funny. 7/10
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
8/10
Based on it being a true story, a beautiful film
19 August 2002
This film is such an epic, filmed to perfection, with every frame, every scene a work of art. Now this would surely make it a fantastic film, but it doesn't. The story being the true story of Frank's McCourt childhood, clearly limited the film makers, as we have such a heart breaking tale that it is close to difficult to watch at times. In some ways I think concentrating a bit more on Franks dreams and ambition would have delivered a little bit more hope, creating a better finale. Because that is really what both the story and the film are about; A boy growing up in an environment of no hope, while still managing to cling to his dreams and goals for a better life. It is difficult to judge a film, when you can see how much work, how much professionalism and superb acting has gone into it. You feel like you are unworthy to criticize such a wonderfully done film. The bottom line though, that even though it will leave you thinking for a long time, and will affect you, there was something lacking. Difficult to put ones finger on it, or to actually find the flaw, but it is there, for better people then myself to point out. 8/10
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
8/10
A little diamond
19 August 2002
Watching this film the second time, was just as enjoyable as the first time around. The balance between comedy and seriousness is well done, as the stupidity never takes over. Matthew Perry has often irritated me in Friends as he is so over the top, but here he has been kept within better boundaries. Neve Campbell is also in a role that seem to fit her perfectly, playing a sweet, while little wild woman. Dylon McDermott and Oliver Platt are also great in their parts. What made the film work was how believable Matthew Perry is as gay, something he suffers from in Friends as well. So the whole plot works out, with the chemistry between Matthew and Neve working out beautifully. This is well balanced romantic comedy which I recommend. 8/10
17 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
loading
An error has occured. Please try again.