5 ReviewsOrdered By: Date
Eden Log (2007)
Oscar material!
18 April 2010
Watch this movie. I am laughing as I type this, as it has been a VERY long time since I have seen a film so awful. Seriously, it's awesome how bad it was!

Mystery Science Theater unfortunately couldn't even use it though, since there are not enough "actual scenes" to comment on. And please ignore all the "People with low IQ's will hate this movie" comments. Realistically, it's more like people with IQ's ranging from 100 - 110, will somehow find a way to appreciate this film, in an attempt to appear more intelligent.

I don't need a big-budget film to be entertained! And ironically, the low budget had nothing to do with this film sucking. Well, unless they spent the money allotted for a script on candy for the crew.

But I don't think so. I think this is perfection, and exactly what they intended. I mean, the premise is good, right? But it's like a choose-your-own-adventure book, where after the opening page, there's only one choice, and it's the one where you die.

Anyhow, I just HAD to write something about this movie, as I am still in shock, and still laughing too. I think this movie should win all the Oscars, in every category. It is 100% perfectly bad. And THAT is a film-making achievement!
6 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Young Yakuza (2007)
18 April 2010
When I think of a documentary, two types come to mind. First would be the objective type. Or rather, one that provides information directly to the audience, in an entertaining and educational manner.

A good example of this would be the well received "Super Size Me", which many agree is quite informative and entertaining. It presents the audience with a concept, and then proceeds to tell a story that communicates a message clearly and concisely. In other words, with a documentary like "Super Size Me", even for those who may have not liked it, there probably weren't many saying to themselves "I'm not sure I understand...?" The second type is the genre that "Young Yakuza" falls in for me - the subjective type. Rather than presenting an idea directly to the audience, this type almost strictly relies on footage. Often without any narration or film crew interaction, characters are simply followed with a camera, and a story is told. In the end, leaving any conclusions or messages in the film up to the audience.

More often than not, subjective-type documentaries tend to suck. Although they may show the viewer a topic in a first-person light, they fail to actually be entertaining. And in the end, the term "meh..." comes to mind. And that's why I liked Young Yakuza so much - because it communicates as much information as a film like "Super Size Me", in an entertaining way, without even telling you anything directly.In fact the film is so well shot, that at times, you forget you're watching a documentary at all.

There is no film crew interaction or narration in the film. Not only that, but don't be fooled by the "a young, aimless man joins the Yakuza" plot synopsis above. The director did an amazing job at setting up this film, and it simply could have been called "Yakuza".

Exposing the audience to a view of modern Japanese culture, as well as a glimpse into the mysterious underworld of the Yakuza, this film is so much more than just a bunch of experts being interviewed about a criminal collective. In a way, you almost gain a respect for the infamous organization, as you follow one particular clan's trials & tribulations to survive in a modern Japanese society.

In closing, I'll just say that you can think of this film like this: We've all seen the Godfather, Casino, etc. And although the mafia does still exist, they certainly haven't done any specials on A&E lately... If you've ever wondered - "What is it actually like?" From an Eastern perspective, that's what this film is about.

Imagine that one of the "mob bosses" (for lack of a better term, lol) of today, allowed a film crew to follow them around and get a glimpse into the everyday workings of the organization. Well, that's what you will see here. It may not be as flashy as Hollywood depicts, but it's real. And thanks to the excellent production & direction of this film, extremely entertaining. Highly recommended!
9 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
An unbiased review for everyone!
21 November 2009
Inglourious Basterds. Note that the five star rating is NOT because the film is mediocre, by any means. It simply falls in the dead middle of the spectrum. You'll either love it, or hate it, plain & simple.

Myself? Well first off, I had no clue what to expect from this film. Having not seen so much as a preview, prior to viewing it, my only knowledge on-hand was that it was QT's new flick, it had a good rating on IMDb, and that the gist of the story revolved around a "secret" US outfit sent in to terrorize/kill/maim Nazis, in order to spread fear among the German ranks.

After watching it, I left with the same impression as I went in with: It is QT's new film about a group of Nazi killers during WW2. I was thoroughly entertained, and that is pretty much that =] Was it groundbreaking cinema? No, lol, not in the least. Was it a Tarantino flick? 100%

After browsing the scores of positive reviews on this, I think that no matter who you are (and this is mostly directed at those who disliked the film), you have to admit one thing: Tarantino has his finger on the pulse of Generation Y. And that, in itself, is gold.


  • Christoph Walz's performance is excellent

  • The myriad of spoken languages/subtitles in the film is wonderful, refreshing, and a joy to listen to

  • The set & costume design is fantastic (if you care about stuff like that)

  • It's entertaining, with some great moments of suspense!

  • Mike Myers is tolerable (wow!)


  • Brad Pitt is a good actor in many films. In my opinion though, he was terribly miscast here. A younger Clint Eastwood type, without a fake accent would've much better suited the role...

  • The American "machismo" in the film may have not been overbearing per say, but its presence was just enough to make me roll my eyes a few times. Essentially, any time the Basterds were on screen...

  • The Basterds were, for the most part, idiots. I don't think this is a con exactly, depending on how you look at it. I think it's just saddening that they are, in fact, our the "heroes". A bunch of violence-crazed, hillbilly yanks. Yay. Go team. And we wonder why other countries don't take us seriously?

On a final note, I'll just say that any cons, including others that I didn't bother to list, can be easily dismissed with one fact: It's a Tarantino film. I definitely recommend checking it out and deciding for yourself. If not for originality alone - I have to give it a thumbs up =]
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A collection of deleted scenes that barely manages to convey the synopsis you would read on the back of the DVD box set.
19 October 2009
Never seen Battlestar Galactica before? Well, if you start here, you probably won't pursue it any further. And for fans of the series, like myself, I'm not even sure this is aimed at us? As another reviewer accurately pointed out - this is truly "scraping the bottom".

TP's brief synopsis is the retelling of the Cylon attack on Caprica, and the immediate panic & events that ensue, as the human race frantically tries to salvage what it can and split to avoid complete annihilation. However, the first few seasons of the 2004 incarnation convey that simple sentence brilliantly, whereas this grab-bag makes it look like a show you're better off skipping.

Personally, I didn't watch "Caprica", the studio's previous effort at post-capitalizing off the franchise. Namely since, although it may have been good, the prelude just didn't really interest me. But good or not, it was certainly better than this prison chow.

In my opinion, the BG reincarnation has been very much of a Matrix-like experience. The first several seasons rocked. Edward James Olmos was the frakking commander of the gods-damn Battlestar Galactica warship that barely slipped away from the Cylon nuclear-mega-attack, and him, along w/his ace fighter pilots Starbuck & Apollo were going to save the frakking human-race and find some place called earth! Sign me the frak up! Then, much like "The Animatrix", the film "Razor" shows up, and tells a side-story with it all. Secret government missions, a psychotic admiral, torture, some awesome revelations, and just an all around excellent stand-alone story.

And then... the later seasons. Um, well, like Matrix: Reloaded, they weren't exactly "bad", and of course plenty of fans out there were still totally on board...

And then the conclusion. Like good old "Revolutions", it was a struggle for me folks. It was as though all the stuff I cared about was over, and the focus was on - well, I'm not sure, getting to the end?

Which brings us full-circle to The Plan. Although this is based entirely on opinion (hell, it is a review), this is my take: One day I went to the studio and said, "Hi, you know - I really thought that the first several seasons of Battlestar Galactic were so freaking awesome, but after that, I just felt that the series plummeted into oblivion. Is there anything you can do with the beginning seasons to make the feel more consistent throughout?"

They told me they had a plan.
78 out of 141 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
If you like Hallmark cards, you'll love this!
13 March 2009
Ah.. "the place promised in our early days... " - a phrase soaked in soft memories of naive, but blissful adolescence. Too bad the plot reads like that lame anniversary card you Dad gave your Mom last year. The animation is, of course, stellar - but the story? Well - let's see... what is a story anyway? What do clouds mean? Oh wait - if you're like me - who f***ing cares.

After reading the "helpful" review on this, I gave this film a shot and watched it. I mean hey, I loved Spirited Away. It's not as though anime has to be along the lines of Fist Of The North Star for me to enjoy it. But oh my god, what a piece of s***! It's like one of those films where you keep thinking the plot is starting to get good, but it's not. In fact, the plot is "tricking you" into thinking it's going to get good, and then when you're interested again, it's like - "hehehe... got you sucker...", and then continues to unfold as lamely as you subconsciously assumed it would after the first 15 minutes.

Nonetheless, out of respect for the talent it takes to make a finely animated film such as this - I have to give it far more than 1 star. But still, those 4 stars are for quality of workmanship alone, and NOT for an enjoyable film. But you don't have to take MY word for it... Go ahead, watch it. But I promise you, unless the question - "What do clouds mean?" appeals to you, then you will feel cheated out of the time you wasted watching this . Besides, you can always just go to the drugstore and read anniversary cards for free.
14 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this