Reviews written by registered user
SajeevaS

Page 1 of 8:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [Next]
80 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

0 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
A Swashbuckle adventure that sinks as good as the Flying Dutchman, 25 May 2007
3/10

With the second installment leaving viewers disappointed, many would expect Verbinski to finish off the trilogy with a solid patch up, that would complete the series with stellar recognition. Unfortunately At Worlds end tends to be more incoherent than the sequel, and even more pedantic, that it concludes to be a waste of talent.

Johnny Depp was sublimely memorable as Jack Sparrow in "The Curse of the Black Pearl", however with this installment he has turned a once named icon to a schizophrenic idiot, whose aimless adventure exacerbates the dull plot line to one similar to a Farelly Brothers script. Offcourse there needs to be humor, however since the adventure itself is disoriented, the humor surfaces as purely lame and unfunny. Keira Knightley has much better movies in her resume, that she does not need Elizabeth Swann as a driving force for her career, as God only knows that she may end up capitalizing on this mundane and overdone character over some of the other major projects, that could turn her into a highly acclaimed actress. Finally there's Orlando Bloom who may provide eye candy to many teenage girls but his acting skills needs such an uplifting as much as Gore Verbinski's directing.The only positive aspect was seeing the once villainous Captain Barbosa returning to his conniving and shrewd role BUT Geoffrey Rush wasn't powerful enough to patch up the loop holes in the movie.

At the end all what remains is sheer confusion, plenty of yawns and watch staring. At worlds end is a disappointment and 2 hrs:48 mins of a persons life, one cant take back.

7 out of 16 people found the following review useful:
A light hearted dramedy with its heavy moments..., 13 May 2007
9/10

The buzz 'Georgia Rule' garnered from its production was enough to make any individual to drop in to the cinema to find out the outcome of Lindsay Lohan's lack of proffesionalism. However with Garry Marshall directing, one can be assured that his sugar coatings do wonders for films and this is no exception.

The performances were phenomenal- over here we have 3 mainstream actresses. Jane Fonda who looks stunning for her age, plays Grandma Georgia, a rule maker who burdens any visitor in her house with her 'Georgia rules.' For comic relied Jane Fonda nails the part of Georgia, and we see an icon in the film industry mellowing herself down to cooler roles - heck she ain't trying to win an Oscar now..?!!? Then there's Felicity Huffman, who proved she can still kick ass on the big screen as much as she could on TV. As Lilly, Huffman's portrayal of a slumping alcoholic, was touching and was a departure from her usual roles. Finally the spotlight of the movie - Lindsay Lohan who unequivocally gave the best performance. This is definitely her most mature role, and she will shock audiences as no one has seen her this grown up. Transcending and unforgettable, Lohan definitely takes the cake as Rachel.

The trailer was misleading, and what I expected was Lindsay to be playing another character too much like her ownself - however this movie surfaced the morals of family and trust. Yet another stunner by Marshall.

2 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
Brilliant Third Installment -lets hope this is it though..!, 3 May 2007
8/10

Every Spiderman movie brings with it the extravagant hype, and this was no exception. The dark satire that was to be expected, probably caused a lot of concern to fans, who would have wondered where the franchise was heading.

This definitely shone is terms of maturity. Mary Jane Watson's character has been transposed from girl to woman, and Kirsten Dunst provides the movie with a solid performance, shedding the 'girl next door' image. Unfortunately this cannot be said for Tobey Maguire. Spiderman's character has to remain uniform through-out the franchise, but when Maguire becomes Peter Parker, the same kid is conspicuous form the first installment. This has the writers to blame, cause there were a few scenes, that dealt with Peter's evil transposition which could have been scripted differently. James Franco shines with his charm and his on-screen presence, making his character quite lovable. The same could be said for Bryce Dallas Howard, who shocked me with her portrayal of Gwen Stacey. We see in this instance an actress (whose only mainstream role has been a blind girl in 'The Signs') starting to explore diversity at arguably a commencement point in her career.

A brilliant third installment, however lets hope it stops here..! this offered much more than the second installment, and gives a good end to the franchise.

Dreamgirls (2006)
30 out of 48 people found the following review useful:
Dream-Musical to revive the Genre!!, 1 February 2007
10/10

The pumped up beats, the glamorous outfits, and that Motown sound - YEAH! Something which the film industry's been waiting for since Chicago won a Best Picture Nod at the Oscars in 2002.

The casting is pitch-perfect. Jennifer Hudson is astounding, which keeps you wondering about her departure from American Idol due to insufficient voting??!! That voice, and those emotions pave the way for Oscar glory. Beyonce Knowles, though many critics have credited her as the weakest link in the movie, is far from being weak. Her radiant-glamour and her 20lbs less voluptuous figure, shine whilst "the Dreams" are on stage. She is far from being the weakest link. As Deena Jones, Beyonce has the voice, experience, looks and talent. Eddie Murphy actually acts, and "NO!" -he does not over-act, play multiple characters, or provides unneeded humor- there is a vein of emotions displayed vividly in his character -James "Thunder" Early - from his love between his wife and back-up singer, drug addiction, and winding career. Its too bad, it took Murphy this long to realise his capability and potential in a significant contribution to the film industry. Jamie Foxx - is easily the weakest link. His performance is insipid and it seems like he has been pasted in the scenes to give them attitude and ego-ism. Though its a very Jamie Foxx character, and is pretty much Curtis Taylor Jr. Jamie Foxx's on-screen presence and performance was not good enough. Anika Noni-Rose did not receive the acclaim she deserved. Sure she is the least known in the cast, but her portrayal of Lorell was spot-on, and was as powerful as Eddie Murphy and Jennifer Hudson's performances. Her voice was amazing, and I hope this movie rockets her career.

The music especially the additional songs, gave this movie the final touches. Amazingly directed by Bill Condon, this is one movie, that lived up to its hype. Loved every bit of it.

Happy Feet (2006)
7 out of 12 people found the following review useful:
By far the worst animated movie i've seen.., 18 January 2007
1/10

There was hype alright - and way too much of it. I really didn't get the reason as to why this was made in the first place. It was a pure spectacle of bad dialogue and story telling, and the worthless use of A-grade actors. Nicole Kidman sounded like a Paris Hilton wannabe, and the rest of them babble out words to save themselves from boring the audience. The first 40 mins of the film just made me give up, cause there was no longer any reason to watch it. The only incentive to watch this movie is just admiring the cute and cuddly penguins...Besides that, I seriously Don't GET why this movie topped the box office for 3 Damn Weeks!!!

...does not get the facts straight one bit..!, 5 September 2006
3/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The concept of this movie is applauding - the impact of internet pornography on children in the vein of corruption and destruction of planned ambitions. However the approach to this, is something way less than reality or in fact its misleading.

Firstly,what I did not like about this is that it gives an opinion that this destroys every kids life i.e. anyone who is exposed to such material, and the fact of watching porn is something taboo. There is no indication of him using a webcam and indulging in disturbing sexual activities for pay, which happens to be the critical issue affecting tweens, and one that should have been given paramount recognition in this movie. Hence Justin Peterson solely watches pornographic material, and manages to do so in the movie,without any indication of self stimulation. His relationship gets ruined and he experiences perverse thoughts and visions...DUH - he's a teenager.

The whole message, was misleading. They could have done so much with this, and shown what 'really' happens with internet corruption, with more emphasis on chat rooms and the riveting impact of the web cam..! all of this was dealt with subtly or not discussed at all, hence the title 'Cyber Seduction', really has no place in this motion picture.

0 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Great....but lacks Oscar potential....!, 4 November 2005
8/10

Cameron Diaz's character Maggie happens to be the main focus of this movie. Maggie is a party girl, dates rich men, very fashion conscious, and quite quirky, a role pitch perfect for lovely Miss Diaz.However one thing that this movie lacks is Oscar potential.

This in my opinion is Cameron's 4th powerful performance. She showed she is more than just quirky in Being John Malkovich, Vanilla Sky, and Gangs of New York - especially the latter one, which she was very astounding. This movie on the other hand, lacks a certain ingredient to make it gain Oscar recognition. Toni Collete and Shirley MacLaine, gave good performances too, however even in this instance, none of these are powerful enough to gain Oscar recognition. Truthfully, an Oscar performance was the one she gave us in "The Sixth Sense" - compare the 2, though they are of different genres, she was remarkable in the Sixth Sense. Well remarkable wouldn't be a word i would use to describe her performance in this - i would just say "really good".

Its a pity for Cameron, she needs a complete breakthrough, cause she is an A-list actress, with potential - she just needs the right role, and no way was "In her shoes" the breakthrough role. Though it was a very good movie, the Oscar buzz surrounding the performances do not make it very well worthwhile. Sorry Miss Diaz....Maybe next time...!

Have fun...thats it - expect nothing more!, 3 October 2005
7/10

Seeing "The Love bug", and knowing it to be a classic, you would expect this movie to stand out way more than the other Herbie movies - why? well cause its 2005, and people always seem to be hitching for that nostalgic feeling in movies, and secondly when they place Lindsay Lohan as the protagonist, why wouldn't it stand out? cause lets face it she is quite the most targeted teen star for all magazines, and she is a good actress too! However this movie didn't exactly stand out - instead whilst watching it, you realize that the main focus of this movie was bringing Herbie back, and hence the producers have completely neglected the storyline. This movie suffered from the "weak-plot syndrome" - and the only reason why many scenes managed to stand out was because it had some amazing classical vintage rock classics.

The integration of the classical Herbie tunes into this movie just showed the desperation on creating the nostalgic feeling. It caused a sense of anachronism i.e. this is set in 2005, so whats with the 60's music?? I guess its just a pure fun type movie. Nothing else - and perhaps i'll get myself a copy of the soundtrack - cause that was the only thing about this movie that truly ROCKED!!!

2 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
I think I know whose gonna win the Razzie for Worst actor next year!!, 22 August 2005
2/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The opening credits of the Walt Disney logo is accompanied with a Navy-mixed version of the 'When you wish upon a star' tune. When the first scene opens and in its entire action sequence is revealed, you wonder if Disney actually signed in to this. Vin Diesel started out great, but once the plot of the movie began and the movie actually commenced, its then you realise that Diesel made the biggest mistake in his career - not only did he take on a role that he could not progress well at, he also turned himself into a Jessica Simpson-esquire male nanny!! The moment of glory occurred we got to see Diesel performing the "Peter Panda" dance - not just once - the same dance routine was also used for a second time to figure out the ending. The reason why i remained watching this crap, was because of Lauren Graham. I am a HUGE fan of Gilmore Girls, and this was a rare occasion when Graham played the leading female. Well, you could credit this movie with the word 'cute' - but plain cute does not keep people on their seats.

0 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Enough with the degrading!!!!, 18 August 2005
10/10

I guess the problem with this movie was that people went to see it, with the pure intention of reliving the fondness of the TV show - however obviously this is 2005 and DUH - things have changed, and so had the settings, and the characters of the movie. Having the same old TV show, reproduced into a movie would have been so boring. This had new additions - as for the Duke boys, i bet the TV show didn't have them as female perverts, but they would have if the board of media censorship permitted them. I loved this movie!!!. THought it was quite the flick, and Jessica Simpson was quite surprising. They should have fed her more lines - and made her character more important. Seriously this is not that bad!!!! The directing is good too!


Page 1 of 8:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [Next]