Reviews written by registered user

Send an IMDb private message to this author or view their message board profile.

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

6 out of 12 people found the following review useful:
In what universe is this a good movie??, 10 May 2015

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Honestly, I have no idea why other people, and everybody really, has been giving this movie such high ratings and rave reviews. To me, the entire film is poorly thought out, contrived drivel.

It starts with the beginning of the story, where Cooper (Matthew McConaughey) more or less by accident tries to break and enter into government property by applying a bolt cutter to the gate of the secret government complex where the mission is being planned, and is subsequently enlisted as the mission head pilot, of all things. I don't care if we're told that he used to be an Air Force pilot and apparently a notable one at that with old acquaintances in high places; that was a big letdown in storytelling, erm, right out the gate for me. Just too lazy for a film of its (attempted) magnitude.

With all the good reviews in mind, I thought I was at least going to be wowed by the rest of the film's plot and the imagery. Well, with the cheap availability (in film studio terms) of pretty much even the grandest CGI effects these days, there was nothing about the imagery that "Elysium", "Oblivion" and particularly "Gravity" haven't already done in recent times, and better, and the whole plot not only disappointed with half-hearted but self-indulgently attempted forays into philosophy and some semi-spooky abnormal phenomena, but also by its ignorance of some quite basic natural laws. While the idea of time dilation within the gravitational field of a black hole was actually somewhat well explained, you just scratch you head at 500-foot monster waves on the water planet which suddenly rush across a vast expanse of otherwise knee-deep water that looks about as agitated as a reflecting pool (think Tsunamis back here on Earth). Also, there is no such thing as a more gentle black hole which won't spaghettify you as you approach it and therefore kill you dead. The list of errors goes on far beyond this.

And finally, the last 20 minutes or so sucked worse than the black hole whose (imagined) innermost we get to see. It felt like a bad rehash on acid of the scene in the first "Matrix" sequel where Neo meets the Architect. A culmination of all the things that make the plot of this movie so dreadfully banal.

Again, like I said, I just can't understand why people would think that this is a good or even an outstanding movie. Yes, I know that this is a film which would like to get you to think more deeply about the issues it raises, and pick up on its whole philosophical angle. And I generally really like movies like that. But sorry, there are many films which have done a much better job at this, without falling flat on their face in the process.

Long story short, after close to three hours, I felt about as robbed of my time as Cooper when he watched the video transmissions of his ageing kids from back on Earth.

14 out of 31 people found the following review useful:
Disappointingly unfunny., 17 March 2012

Having long been known as a somewhat peculiar character, even among all the other peculiar characters on British telly, Fielding and his entourage of writers and producers spared no cost in treating us to yet another permutation of his off-the-wall and sometimes outright bizarre sense of humour.

That is, if you can call it humour. "Luxury Comedy" never delivers what it promises. It may be luxurious in terms of visuals, and perhaps even the concomitant production values (although looks may be deceiving, in this age of fool-the-eye cgi effects). But the show drops the ball where it really matters, and fails dismally in terms of actual funny-ness. It's almost as if all the creative potential that was expended on bringing this programme to life went into the (admittedly lavish) artwork, and nobody thought to hire writers to come up with things that the odd person who isn't a die-hard Noel Fielding fan might honour with even so much as a chuckle.

If you've seen Noel Fielding as a guest on any comedy panel show, you know that he is actually a pretty funny guy, capable of ingeniously hilarious one-liners and ludicrously bizarre takes on just about any subject. It's a shame that almost none of this comedic potential has surfaced on "Luxury Comedy", and it makes the experience of watching it even more disappointing. Apparently Channel 4 have already commissioned a second season - here's hoping that it will finally live up to its own name.

3 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
A forgotten gem, lots of potential for a remake, 29 October 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Like some other reviewers here, I first watched this movie when I was young, in, say, about 1987. It fascinated and intrigued me and I found the whole premise to be very unique. There have been meager attempts at knock-offs since, but none of them have come quite close to this one. And then, a while ago, the film was back on television, and once again, I was spellbound.

Meet Peter Proud, a young college teacher who is haunted by visions in his dreams about, as it turns out, a previous life. One by one, he follows leads as to who and where he was then. Finally, he finds out that he lived in a picturesque New England town some 30 years ago. He travels there and manages to track down his "wife" from back then and his "daughter". At first, they have no clue who he is and what he came ("back") for, but his wife, an alcoholic who is still guilt-ridden about secretly murdering him back then, soon gets a pretty good idea when she realizes that Peter's mannerisms and his behavior are a spitting image of her dead husband's. As time goes by, he slips into a romantic relationship with his "daughter", and his visions slowly subside - except for the one in which he is killed by his wife during a night swim in a lake. Irony has it that while Peter goes for a swim in that same lake to get rid of his last and most terrifying vision, his "wife" follows him, cursing him for coming back - and kills him again.

While the movie displays some genuine 70s cheese (and I don't just mean the music) and some mildly wooden acting, it still has that fascinating premise which in my mind still makes it stand out as one of those almost forgotten "twilight-zoneish" B-movie gems of that era. There has been talk about a remake, and I would love to see an updated version. If whoever will produce that movie plays it smart, they will have plenty to work with.

1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
delightfully crappy, 23 September 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Now here's a real gem of a second-rate B-movie slasher flick. Very "80s" by the way. Here's the story: Some kid's parents get whacked by an out of control, armed and dangerous Santa - while he is watching. Deeply traumatized, he is sent off to a Catholic orphanage where he becomes even more instilled with guilt and fear. Years later, his boss makes him wear a Santa outfit for Christmas. All hell breaks loose, and the kid goes on a gory killing spree around town. He chops off heads, impales a girl on a deer head's antlers in her living room (now there's a really creative way to kill somebody!), strangles a guy with a power cord.... I lost count somewhere along the way, but he sure kills a decent amount of people. All to get shot in the back at the end while trying to swing his axe at the orphanage's mother superior. Poor boy.

Let's see... cheesy special effects, wooden acting, pretentious storyline that tries to scream "I have a deeper meaning" but eventually falls flat on its face... not much there for you, unless you have a thing for good ol' 80s B-movie horror. Movies like this are a dime a dozen, but still, if you grab yourself a couple of beers, they're not so bad after all. I'll give it a five out of ten, but only if Santa is not coming after me with an axe this Christmas.

3 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
Yet another unimaginative chick flick..., 26 August 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

What was I thinking when I agreed to watch this movie with my girlfriend? She had read about it in some women's magazine and from then on she was dying to see it.

go figure....

So here's this movie about (black) female empowerment, a perfect world where men are either complete insensitive jerks or just this big hunk of a guy who with all his gratuitously displayed muscle can't even walk straight. No wait, there's more, did I mention the sissified, braided-hair, pro-female-agenda metrosexual who drinks his coffee from a china cup with his pinky spread apart?

To get one thing straight, I am neither misogynistic nor do I have issues with female empowerment, but this movie about a woman trying to get by in a supposedly still male-dominated world is almost insulting to any self-respecting man.

That said, let's move on to the few upsides of this movie. Mena Suvari and Alicia Silverstone, two of the hottest babes under the sun, together in one movie, and Mena Suvari's character getting a boob job... now there's something to enjoy for a guy. It's a shame Alicia Silverstone never really became that big a name. She definitely still has potential and has come a long, long way since the days of being the "Aerosmith chick" or the "Clueless" valley girl. Please please, movie executives, find it in your heart to give her more challenging roles! Mena Suvari is stunning as ever. She, too, has evolved far beyond the goody-goody girl of "American Pie" and "Sugar and Spice" and just looks fabulous. I think we'll be seeing a lot of her in the future.

Maybe it's because I'm a guy and "just don't get it" - but I can't see this movie rating anywhere above three points, despite very entertaining performances by Silverstone and Suvari. My apologies to the girl nation out there... or maybe not.

P.S.: When we were done watching the movie and after my gf sat through the rant I was giving her about how this movie distorts the image of the modern male, she just quipped "...but that's how men really are!" -- You'd better hope the verdict is still out on that.

0 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Absurd., 24 August 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

When I rented this DVD, I thought a movie that has Mila Kunis in it can never be bad, and that just seeing her would make up even for the cheesiest, most far-fetched plot. Boy was I wrong. This movie is complete nonsense and so extremely predictable and unexciting, it's painful to watch.

On the upside, it's not really Mila's fault. She's cute as always and doesn't disappoint - after all, she goes to great lengths to stick it out against an absurd script like this and do what she does best- playing the intense, demanding, border-lined, obnoxious next-door-girl type. Think of her as Jackie Burkhart from the 70's show on cocaine. Something is definitely wrong inside this girl's mind. She goes on a killing spree around the campus when she finds out that there are more promising contenders than her for the position of teacher's assistant at her college. That's the story in a nutshell.

The movie attempts some sort of twist at the end, like the classic "Bet you didn't see that one coming" -- but again, too predictable and too cliché. If it weren't for Mila Kunis (and man is she hot), I'd give it a 2.0, but it has my vote for 5 points.

The Ring (2002)
1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
didn't sleep too well for days after I watched it, 15 June 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Thank God I now sleep tight again. This doesn't really happen to me much after scary movies, but boy did it happen with this one. As far as the scariness factor goes, this movie has it all. Creepy story about a dead girl's ghost seeking revenge, very disturbing special effects that make you want to crawl and hide under your blanket, split-second shock effects that will bring you close to cardiac arrest... and an overall mood that is very dark and eerie.

Never mind the plot holes that some reviewers here have pointed out, this film has already become a modern classic for its unique attempt to leave the beaten path and try something not substantially new, but innovative enough.

At least I'll never look the same again at white noise on a TV screen late at night.. who knows what's gonna come crawling out?'ll know what I mean once you've watched it. But be warned - the worst setting in which to enjoy this movie is home alone at night after a couple of beers. And I should know...

8 out of 9 people found the following review useful:
It's been a long time..., 4 June 2006

...since a film has actually moved me quite like this. I had read about half of Dalton Trumbo's original novel before seeing the film. The book is sort of difficult to read, but the movie is one big revelation. It may be because Dalton Trumbo wrote the screenplay for it and directed his own original brainchild that this film is so incredibly dense and gripping.

Much has been said about the plot and storyline, so I won't get on that here. The bottom line is, this movie is as original and authentic today as in 1971 when it was made (Vietnam war era, no less!), or even as in 1939 (at the eve of WW II!), the year the novel first appeared on bookshelves. A timeless classic if there ever was one, and a glowing testimony to the eternal insanity of war. Oftentimes subtle and subversive, its dialogs fully expose the madness of the whole concept of it. But it doesn't stop there, the film also examines the conflict between religion and war and the absurdity that ensues from justifying bloodshed through creed.

I could go on forever trying to explain here why this movie is such a masterpiece to me, but maybe it's enough to tell whoever will read this to go buy the DVD. Like I said, it's a timeless anti-war classic that's worth every cent.

The Island (2005)
A movie about cloning that is a clone itself... sort of..., 25 March 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Some of the reviewers have come up with the crazy notion that this movie has elements of and references to other movies in it... and boy does it have them!

Let's start with a few basics - the main protagonist realizing that his world is just an illusion and that humans in his world are actually grown, not born (including a shot of humans in "embryo pods") - The Matrix I

Him and some pretty girl escaping from their confined underground world and glaring into the bright sunlight of the real world - Logan's Run

Escapees in bright white overalls running through the desert, chased by (black!!) helicopters - Capricorn One

Futuristic-looking motorized vehicles that are actually fully badged current production models, only with PVC-augmented fenders (and one concept car that, even if briefly this time around, steals the show) - I, Robot

One heck of an urban highway chase with demolition scenes agogo: The Matrix II

The idea of the "real" human and his clone meeting face to face - The 6th Day

And let's not forget THE clone of all clones of scenes in this movie - towards the end, when Lincoln is about to be captured, he is lying on the floor, gradually pushes himself back up, and says "My name is Lincoln!!" ... Keanu Reeves, eat your heart out!

There are probably more "references" or, simply put, knock-offs, but these are the most obvious. Now don't get me wrong, this is still a nice movie as far as action flicks and summer blockbusters go - lots of action, shooting, explosions and mayhem, but if you've watched the movies mentioned above, you can't help feeling a bit strange when you see the corresponding scenes in this one.

Also notable: the barrage of product placements. Sure, a movie like this costs a lot of money to make, but those various well-known brand logos could have been presented a bit more subtly.

I'll give it the 6 points it deserves, and please do rent/buy this movie if these elements I just mentioned are your type of thing - because for what it's worth, it delivers well in these departments... but that's where it ends.


2 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
A Neo-Noir masterpiece all the way!, 6 March 2006

Personally, I never made David Cronenberg for somebody who could direct a character-driven, gripping edge-of-your-seat thriller - and least of all a Film Noir epic.

But that's exactly what has been created here - a modern-day suspense thriller that has nearly all the bells and whistles of classic film noir, molded into a contemporary crime drama.

Meet Tom Stall - a respectable, caring family man who owns a diner in some quiet little town in rural Indiana. On the surface, he is just the average John Doe who has never done a bad thing in his life. One day, some gunslinging villains shake up the peace and quiet of his diner; Tom just snaps and kills both of them on the spot in a dramatic self-defense stunt that briefly earns him national television fame. Just days later, a bunch of mobsters from Philadelphia show up, telling him that someone back in Philly wants to settle an old score. Tom's facade begins to crumble as it becomes more and more obvious that he has quite a past - and that he was once an East Coast mob henchman under the name of Joey Cusack...

The storyline bears a striking resemblance to the classic Noir movie "Out of the Past" and may therefore be seen as a mere knock-off by some. But then again, what's wrong with adding a new angle to a once-great story premise? Aside from dramatic high-contrast lighting and a dark, grim and existentialist overall feel and touch, the movie employs classic Noir clichés like a main protagonist haunted by his past who is drawn into a maelstrom of cataclysmic events. The too-good-to-be-true facade of a serene, carefree rural life in Heartland America is shattered in what has often been called the "negation of the American Dream" - another trademark feature of classic Noir movies.

"A History of Violence" was deservedly nominated for two Academy Awards - Film Noir hasn't looked this good in color for a long time.

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