Reviews written by registered user

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

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
A very poor sequel, 3 October 2004

I was extremely disappointed in this movie. My review for the original gave 9 out of 10. This sequel would not even get 5.

The plot is the problem. What happened to the matrix? It was all but forgotten in the sequel and very well could have been any other action movie. What made the original movie unique was pretty much ignored in the sequel. There was a standard chase sequence which went on way, way too long and had no place in a matrix movie, as far as I'm concerned. And why did they feel the need to throw a romance into it? Not every action movie needs to have a romantic relationship just because there are two single available people in it.

I can't complain about the acting - they did the best they could with poor material.

The special effects were a little too much for my taste. It fell into the trap other sequels, like "The Mummy Returns", have fallen into before - because the first movie is a success, they open up the purse strings and end up putting in a bunch of unnecessary special effects just because they can afford to.

I disliked this movie so much, I haven't even bothered to see the third one. I suppose I will sooner or later just to see how the whole things ends, but I'm in no hurry to.

DVD comment, 3 October 2004

I shelled out the dough for the DVD versions of the original trilogy and wanted to comment on them. I'll stick to A New Hope, since that's the movie I'm reviewing. Overall, I love it. Looks great, and they really did a good job on making use of the 5.1 audio - spaceships flying from behind your head to the front, from side to side, etc; atmospheric sounds from all directions.

Since, everyone mentions it, I'll also comment on the added scenes. They don't really bother me, it's just that they fall under the rule "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." I don't feel the additional scenes add anything important to the film. Did we really need to see the panoramic view of Tatooine? I was able to suspend my disbelief when I originally saw the film without that shot and believed Luke lived on a planet other than earth. Was the scene with Jabba necessary? Didn't add anything we didn't already know or learn in the later films. The extra creature shots for atmosphere. Okay, so they're nice, but, again, don't really add to the believability or the plot. Why put them in? To repeat, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it.". I know Lucas said that the way it is, is the way he envisioned it, but seeing as it was such a big hit, obviously lots of people were perfectly happy with it the way it was, which is why he should have just left it as is. Again, for the amount of time those extras last on screen, it doesn't really bother me. I just feel they were completely unnecessary and didn't add anything worthwhile to the story.

If you're thinking of buying them, I say go for it even if you don't like the extra scenes (if you've seen them before on the VHS versions or on TV). The quality of the DVD transfer is awesome and you won't be disappointed with that aspect of the films.

The Matrix (1999)
0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Very original, 4 September 2004

What if the world around us was, in fact, a hologram? The Matrix is based on that idea and, because of that, is one of the most original movies I've ever seen. While the story isn't perfect, it's interesting and fast paced enough to keep you glued to your seat. It's one of those movies where you can't miss one minute or you'll be confused about what's happening next.

The action sequences were particularly good. After finding out the truth, Neil (Keanu Reeves) is able to perform amazing feats once he realized the 'rules' aren't rules at all and can be bent to a point in the holographic world.

I'm not a big fan of Keanu Reeves, but I thought he did a good job as did Laurence Fishburn and the rest of the cast. Hugo Weaving was great as agent Smith, who plays a computer controlled holographic projection who hunts down renegade humans who've stumbled onto the secret.

Definitely worth watching even if you generally don't enjoy action films. I'd give it about 9 out of 10 mostly because of originality.

201 out of 248 people found the following review useful:
Surprisingly Good, 4 September 2004

Although I had expectations ( from watching the trailers ) that this might be a good movie, I was still surprised that it's as good as it is. The story is actually more complex than I had expected, involving cursed pirates and their quest to rid themselves of the curse. I won't say more than that so as not to spoil it if you haven't seen it.

There aren't as many action scenes as I had thought there would be in a pirate movie, but the ones that are in the movie were very fun and enjoyable. After seeing it, I think it had the right balance of action and drama. There are also, of course, a lot of funny bits interspersed between the action and drama. Some really good special effects also add to the enjoyment of this movie.

I wasn't much of a fan of Johnny Depp until I saw this movie. I think he deserved to win the Academy Award for best actor. It's largely because of his performance, IMO, that the movie was so good. Most of the supporting cast did well, mind you, just that Johnny Depp stood high above the rest. I did find Orlando Bloom's performance a bit wooden, but other than that the acting was good.

Basically, it's a really fun movie and I'd give it about 8 out of 10

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
A different kind of movie, 4 September 2004

Tarentino is very good at breaking the rules and doing his own thing with movies. It's been tried many times, but, for some reason, Tarentino can pull it off time after time. I'm sure you haven't seen a movie quite like this one before.

It's actually a bunch of stories put together in one movie, but, yet, they're all connected. It's not that any of the stories are completely original, it's just the way the movie is put together. It's non linear, for one thing. You see the end of the story at the beginning of the movie and the rest of the scenes are out of place as well, but somehow it all works. In the hands of someone other than Tarentino, I'm sure it would have been a huge mess.

The thing that's best about Tarentino is the dialog. He has the best knack out of all writers to create believable everyday dialog that's still interesting. As a person who's dabbled in writing, it is difficult to create good, authentic dialog, without boring the reader. If you've ever listened to two people talk in a restaurant or something, you'll know what I mean - dull as a felt tip marker. Tarentino can create authentic sounding dialog without making it boring. This movie is worth watching just for that.

The acting was very well done and most of the characters were original and non-stereotyped. Travolta was particularly good and showed he was capable of doing drama as well as comedies and musicals.

If you want to see something different, this is one you don't want to miss. It well deserves to be in the top 100 on the IMDb list.

Bad Santa (2003)
1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
The movie rating is in the title: BAD, 3 September 2004

I only laughed out loud once, a few times I chuckled, the rest of the time I just shook my head. One of the dumbest, waste of time movies I've ever seen. I'm no prude but when pretty much every other word is a swear it's too much. Why oh why are we being influxed with so many of these kinds of movies with juvenile humour? I can laugh at a lot of things but after the first 2 or 3 references to bodily functions it isn't funny anymore but you just know you're going to hear the same basic joke 10 more times before the movie is over and it wasn't even really that funny the first time. And I think i've seen the kid-who-pees-on-the-department-store-santa scene enough times, thank you very much. But these kinds of movies are cheap to make and bring in lots of teenage dollars so I guess they're going to be around long after I am. But if I've saved you from spending your 5 or 10 dollars then this review was worth the effort.

3 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
Very Good, 3 September 2004

I avoided seeing this movie for quite a long time as I generally don't like straight dramas, but was surprised when I finally did see it at how much I enjoyed it. The movie is about a civil war soldier, John Dunbar (Kevin Costner), sent to an outpost in the western frontier. There he encounters an Indian tribe camped a short distance from his outpost. He gradually becomes acquainted with the members of the tribe and, in time, becomes friends with the tribe. What makes this movie so good is being able to see and feel sympathetic to how the indians' land was more or less taken from them by the white man. It was done very cleverly by showing how John Dunbar went from the attitude most people have ( the indians were savages ) to understanding their culture and coming to appreciate it and understanding they were only protecting their way of life and territory. Most of the really good movies, like this one, will have you come away with an altered point of view or, at least, make you look at something in a way you haven't before.

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Average Action Movie, 3 September 2004

This movie was okay, but I wasn't overly impressed with it. If not for the over use of the hand held camera, which had me feeling seasick, I may have enjoyed it more. While such technique can add a sense of urgency to a film, when it used throughout 99% of the movie, it just becomes totally annoying. It distracts from what is happening in the scene. The car chases were particularly hard to watch and follow what was happening. They did use some interesting, original angles in some of the action sequences, but, again, with that shaky camera it didn't have the impact it could have had. I hope if there is another movie in the series, they will make much use of that old movie making rule: Use a tripod most of the time.

One of the best movies of all time, 3 September 2004

I don't like to rate movies based on hype or box office receipts, so I'll stick to the movie itself. In case you live under a rock, the movie is about a young man, Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamil), who becomes involved in a quest to become a Jedi knight and rescue Princess Lea who has been kidnapped by Darth Vader. Obi Wan Kenobi (Alec Guiness) becomes his mentor and they employ Han Solo (Harrison Ford) and his sidekick, Chewbaca (Peter Meyhew) to take them to Alderon. Along for the ride are two androids, C3PO and R2D2, to add comic relief. When they discover that Alderon has been destroyed, they find their way to the Death Star - an Imperial weapon capable of wiping out a whole planet in one blast - and, after rescuing Princess Lea, join in the battle to destroy the Death Star.

The movie is very well done, with amazing special effects that still stand up quite well even today. There are very good spaceship battles reminicent of world war I dog fights, as well as sword fighting using light sabers ( the traditional weapon of the Jedi Knights ). The idea for the movie is quite original, combining sci-fi with tales of camelot and world war I fighter combat. The plot is engaging, if somewhat predictable and the acting is top notch considering most of the cast were unknowns at the time.

It's one of those movies that doesn't show its age and continues to gain young fans who's PARENTS weren't even born when it was originally released.

I'm glad to hear it will finally be available on DVD soon and I'll definitely be adding it to my collection.

Shrek (2001)
1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Very good, 16 May 2004

I have to say I was completely awed by the amazing 3D animation in this movie. Built on that is a solid story about an ogre named Shrek (Mike Meyers) who is sent on a quest by Lord Farquaad (John Lithgow) to rescue Princess Fiona ( Cameron Diaz ) from a fire breathing dragon so that Lord Farquaad can marry her and become king. Along for the ride is Donkey (Eddie Murphy). The voice acting is very well done (John Lithgow is my favorite) and the music and sound effects created a nice story book atmosphere. Cameo appearances by many classic fairy tale charcters also adds some laughs to the movie. This will, no doubt, become an animation classic in years to come.

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