Reviews written by registered user
viewtifuljoe1010

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

5 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

9 out of 15 people found the following review useful:
Not a bad concept, 15 September 2006
7/10

I just finished watching this after I just finished hearing about it. I'll say it's not great, but its definitely worth the time to watch.

You have a very dramatic story of a murdering bigot's grandson (who's a lawyer) trying to save his grandfather (Gene Hackman) from his execution in 28 days. Just from their you know the plot is going to thicken.

When I saw this movie had Gene Hackman and Faye Dunaway I said "great I love those actors". It's also got Chris O'Donnell, OK not a bad actor (but does he remind anyone else of Matthew Perry?), and it's even got Bo Jackson.

I was surprised by a few things. One was that, Bo Jackson, despite not having many lines, was quite good at acting. Another less pleasant was that, as much as I love her, Faye Dunaway did not do an overly impressive performance. Watch her in "Bonnie and Clyde" and then compare her to THIS role... you're not even on the same chart. Playing a rich Southern Bell is maybe more difficult for her, but she did have a few good scene's playing a drunk. One thing that didn't surprise me was Gene Hackman. Mr. Hackman is undoubtedly a great actor, is this movie he made no exception. He definitely needs to give thanks to his make up crew, but he certainly delivered the punches. The emotions he showed seemed so powerful, like he's really ready to join in a lynching. But he's also prepared, not ready, but prepared to forgive.

Really i think that the only problem with this movies was the scenes without Gene Hackman. The rest of the scenes made everything seem more like a "Made for TV movie". The chemistry between Adam Hall (Chris O'Donnell) and Nora Stark (Lela Rochon) was played off of more when they WEREN'T together. With better acting this could have been a much better film. But still it was not bad.

Kudos to John Grisham for the novel, It's a good idea, it wasn't played out as well as it could have... But still, it's still worth while watching.

No Man's Land (2001/I)
0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
A new age "Hell in the Pacific", 23 May 2006
9/10

I had not known what to expect when I picked up "No Man's Land". To be honest, I wasn't expecting very much, but I must say that now I am left in awe.

Forget about big shoot out scenes, or massive explosions. This had something greater then effects could give you, a situation looked at from two waring sides, as well as the United Nations, and the media.

It's a simple but unforgettable story. A Bosnian and a Herzegovinan, (during the ethnic cleansing conflict in 1993) soldier are stuck in a trench between the two front lines and no one is willing to go in to help them out.

I found this film to be something that seems more like a Godard picture. A hint of French neo-realist in a heavily dramatic tense scene filled with philosophical hints and themes through the story.

"No Man's Land" Is the perfect showing for anyone, its a dramatic story, its a social commentary on any and all sides of war, its a story of hatred to friendship and everything in between. When given the opportunity, I strongly suggest you watch this film. You will most certainly not be disappointed.

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
A premature Shogun or Last Samurai at best, 8 November 2005
7/10

When I heard this movie had both cult classic Sonny Chiba, and the infamous Toshiro Mifune, how could I resist! Not to mention James Earl Jones for a little extra flavour.

Yes despite having Darth Vader, The Street Fighter, and Sanjuro (Yojimbo), the main character was instead one of the less popular names, Frank Converse, as the Captain who must retrieve the stolen "Bushido Blade". Retrive the sword stolen from non-other then a band of Samurai who are against the modernization of Japan. The treaty that both the American and Japanese must sign is held in the balance of this sword. The Japanese refuse to sign the treaty until the president of the US receives the "Bushido Blade".

Although much of the history is incorrect, it does still show the kind of comparison of the eastern and western culture you'd expect from this kind of film. Its not a bad film, if you liked the Last Samurai or Shogun, then this one would be one to check out, just do yourself a favor and don't compare it to the ladder two.

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Taxi Driver and Fargo in a blender, 8 August 2005
8/10

This is an excellent film to show what the "true colours" of people in North American society. The story is about Samuel J. Bicke, a office supplies salesman who just can't understand why he has to lie to people in order make ends meat. He can't seem to catch a break, he owes money all around and he is Desperately trying to patch up his marriage with his separated wife who is looking for some one else. He's constantly frustrated with his boss and thinks of him as the biggest liar and evil person around but later realizes that he is nothing compared to the biggest liar of all, Richard Nixon.

Niels Mueller did a good job directing the film, some people may not like that most of the film was shot free hand thus making he picture fairly shaky throughout the film. All in all an excellent film definitely worth checking out

1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Very well done, 14 July 2005
9/10

I am not a huge fan of the Godfather trilogy (but I do enjoy them), but I must admit that this is quite a good film. I wanted to see why everyone always beats this movie down. There is absolutely no reason to do so! (Save for Sofia's acting...) I can understand why people wouldn't like this movie though, in this film, you are cheering for a completely different Micheal. In parts I and II you are cheering for the guy who's breaking his way to the top, in III he's at the top, and has seen the errors of his ways, so he wants to make things better. It's because he wants to make things better that people don't like this film.

If you liked parts I and II you probably won't enjoy this as much. BUT if you simply enjoy good film, then this is a very excellent view that I would definitely recommend.