26 ReviewsOrdered By: Date
Funny Games (1997)
2 August 2005
As soon as the credits rolled at the end of Funny Games, I felt as if the Michael Haneke played a joke. It was like "Gotcha!". This is a case when a director has a good idea in mind but completely sabotages it. If this was in the hands of another director, it could have been great. This is how much potential the film had.

The film started off very well. A family is playing a game where they play classical music and the father starts to guess the composer. Suddenly, dark heavy metal music plays off screen as we watch there unexpecting faces go along with the music. The metal song would later be used well and then not so well at the end.

The film has some considerable merits. There is great acting all around. The director definitely knows how to build tense moments. Some parts were pretty well written.

The biggest problem I had with the film was the self reference scenes. I knew before that those type of scenes would be in this but somehow thought the director would pull them off well but he does not. It is painfully obvious in the "rewind" scene. I like the whole idea of the "Show. Don't tell" type of film-making. Self reference complete shatters that purpose. If I wanted someone to spell it out to me, I would read a book. The movie has a real lack of logic (How is there only one phone in the whole house of a very rich family?) The movie is tedious to sit through. It feels like a chore watching. There is a ten minute one take scene which showed some amazing acting but honestly could have been about four or five minutes. The psychos are clichés of the suave, sophisticated, and charming killers in other superior films. The end is probably the most disappointing. It ends on probably one of the worst clichés you can think of.
7 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Ratcatcher (1999)
Very Good Movie with unforgettable images
29 July 2005
This is more of a 7.5/10 Lynn Ramsay made a promising debut with this feature. It is the typical first feature. They make an above average movie where they can later improve on their techniques to create a "great" film.

I have minor faults with this film. The score at the beginning is too sentimental for such an unsentimental film but later improves itself greatly with the music. I thought the first scene of the accidental death was not documented enough and it leaves you pretty confused. Some of the characters' problems go in and out of the movie and I just wished there was more insight. A few of Ramsay's techniques got a little tiresome.

Ahhhhhhhh. Great Imagery. I am such a sucker for good cinematography. There are three beautifully poetic scenes in the film you will not forget(the pasture, the trip to the moon, and the wonderfully ambiguous end that reminded me of My Own Private Idaho)The film gets good performances all around. The protagonist James is interesting but very mysterious because Ramsay keeps most of her characters at a distance. The protagonist's father is also a standout. It never let me get bored and was interesting. There are some very well done scenes involving the protagonist's father. In the latter part of the film, the score is used very effectively.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A Complete and Utter Failure
28 July 2005
The words uneven and messy can not do this film justice. This has to be by far Herzog's worst film to date. I really went looking for this film and I now regret every minute I wasted trying to find it. Before I go to my real analysis, I have to say I am a pretty big Herzog fan but this film is a humongous disappointment.

I have to say it started out on the right foot in begins with obscure footage of tornadoes and then moves on to a man in the Outback playing his digderidoo while the camera scans over an almost alien landscape. A very Herzogian way to begin the film. The biggest complaint is the acting. This is by far some of the worst acting I have ever, ever seen in a feature film. It is truly terrible. Even the leads were bad. Bruce Spence should probably never work in film again. The dialog is awful and completely insipid. It tries to be thought provoking but falls flat on its' face. The plot really makes absolutely no sense and they never try to explain it. The film tries to be powerful but winds being the classic "oppressed minority versus white majority" story that I could have watched on cable. Although I really cannot say anything bad about the cinematography, I was disappointed in the lack of apparitions that usually appear in Herzog's films. It is not very exciting. There is absolutely no insight to the characters. At the end, the film tries to bring back some of Stroszek's magic but winds looking like a desperate attempt to usher something in worthwhile so the audience will not felt they have been cheated by watching this debacle. The ending with more tornado footage serves as a very regurgitated message of the film. The classical music is also used very out of place.
5 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Liked half, Did not like half
26 July 2005
I was awaiting to see this movie for a long time but I have to say I was pretty disappointed. I did not hate it. I did not love it except for the end. Some people say Altman is an acquired taste. After seeing this and the average Short Cuts, I fear I know what side of the tracks I'm on.

There was definitely stuff to like. Warren Beatty and Julie Christie were both very good as the title characters especially Julie Christie. It was well written. Although a low body count, the movie did something very revolutionary at the time by making the deaths very poignant and meaningful instead of being a mindless kill fest of a Western. By far the best feature is the ending, it is well thought out, emotionally builds tension, and undeniably brilliant. It definitely goes off on the right note. Also a very good soundtrack by Leonard Cohen.

A lot of the techniques Altman used were very annoying. There was basically no lighting. I can honestly say that about 30 percent of this movie I could not see what was going on. Altman is known for and especially in M*A*S*H for putting dialog over other dialog and then for some odd reason going to the unimportant person's dialog. I know he is trying to be realistic but it is distracting ,completly arbitrary and a waste of time. It has a bunch of pointless scenes. Although some very good cinematography on some outside scenes, most of the inside scenes give off an unnatural yellowish orange color that is honestly not very good on the eyes. My biggest complaint is the title characters relationship. The book is called McCabe and they should have named the movie the same. Julie Christie was very under used. I wanted more of her. I thought their relationship was underdeveloped. There were parts in her character I wanted to go into with more depth i.e. her opium addiction but not to a veil. After the breathtaking ending, you see an image of her and you wish there was more of her. Maybe it did not go off on the right foot.
12 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Herzog's most powerful imagery yet
22 July 2005
Werner Herzog's sophomore effort is probably his most bizarre to date. The whole cast is compromised of dwarfs who take over an institution and wreak havoc. This treat for Herzog fans is very entertaining.

The film does have its problems though. The first half hour is hard to sit through but this is the type of film that gets better as it goes on. Also, I was expecting more of an ending. The ending, although funny, seems that it just does not fit and ended too abruptly.

As I said in my title, I think this has Herozg's most powerful images. With the dwarfs wreaking havoc and celebrating with smiles on their while African tribe music is playing, the scenes are very bizarrely beautiful. The movie is very entertaining and very funny. Hombre has probably the best laugh I have ever heard in my life. He definitely brings real evil to the film. The cinematography is great (yeah, what else is new in a Herzog film?). The message of the film is also very profound.

Although this is definitely not Herzog's best, it is one hell of a trip!
15 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Oh Herzog, you genius, you!
16 July 2005
Werner Herzog has to be one of the most amazing directors who has ever lived. His films have the most indiscernible depth I have ever seen on the medium. He crafts some of the best films and Heart of Glass is no exception at all.

Besides from a plodding pace, the movie is virtually perfect. The hypnotism of the whole cast I thought was kind of gimmicky in the beginning overcomes and becomes a grand metaphor for their sleepwalk without realization into an almost apocalyptic ending. Also, the hypnotism gives the film a very surreal feel that I have not ever witnessed. It also gives a great character study of a descent into madness with the character Master Huttzensomething. The beginning and end images are undeniably beautiful. The movie is also filled with the usual Herzogian brilliance on how he carries out his scenes. I loved the ending. It was just so ambiguous. I am still trying to figure it out though. It is still undeniably poetic and moving.
3 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Overnight (2003)
Good Movie
15 July 2005
There is nothing more enjoyable than watching a very mean and terrible person getting what he deserves. It helps me get up in the morning that complete jerks like Troy Duffy get what they deserve. He is an egotistical under talented sexist intolerant moronic alcoholic piece of trash that I have no sympathy for. He clearly did it to himself. Although I have to say this film was not well put together and carried on on some subjects too long it was very entertaining. It is amazing to see how much Troy Duffy thinks of himself. He is a jerk to his whole family especially his brother. I really cannot believe he is trying to get back into the industry with Boondock Saints 2. Poof!
32 out of 46 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Gummo (1997)
Mr. Herzog What Are You Thinking?
14 July 2005
Gummo is definitely an interesting film to watch. I watched it really because I wanted to know what side of the Gummo fence I was on. I can honestly say I absolutely loved about 15% of the movie but absolutely hated the rest. Some people think it is vile exploitive trash while others think it is a modern masterpiece. Even though I am on the negative side, I really do not agree with what the anti- Gummo people think.

I really did not think it was exploitive at all. I definitely agree with the director in saying that it is not exploitive if these people know what they are doing and willingly agree to do it. Kind of like pornography and the women who perform in it. I have to say there are about five scenes(out of the dozens of scenes) that I thought were great. One in particular being the final Roy Orbison scene. It is truly a brilliant piece of cinema.

I can go on and on about what is wrong with this film. The script is terrible any attempts at dark comedy flop pathetically. The dialog is extremely wooden and does not seem real. The film casts non actors (which worked well in films like Stroszek and George Washington) but in this backfires. The actors here are painfully bad even the leads. The annoying narrative style which consists of the two main leads killing cats and then going to people's houses and we get our little back story about the homeowners. Scenes go way way way too long. Basically, the whole movie does. You will be amazed on how many pointless scenes there are. I do not know why everybody is so amazed on how the director combined the super 8 and polaroids into the film. To me, it just felt like something to take up time and was ultimately pointless. Even though I hate using this word, but I believe this is the only way to explain the scenes: self indulgent and pretentious. The scenes I am saying are the ones where you get one of the characters giving their little commentaries on their lives.

The thing that upset me the most was the directing style. Although before I said I did not think it was exploitive, there were a lot of things that upset me about it. By casting the people he did, it felt to me like he was saying, " look at me, these are how real people and these people are so low in life." Some parts it felt like he was rubbing salt into a wound. You see people cutting themselves, whipping cats to death, and worshiping Satan while heavy metal music is playing. It really hit me when the final beautiful scene and you heard the music. You will have to see it to believe it. It was just so insincere.

Watch it out of curiosity.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A Disappointment
11 July 2005
I really cannot say much about this film since there was so little to talk about. I just thought it was unbelievably bland. It was just so boring. It is such a shame since there were some very clever ideas but they just did it in the most boring way possible. Many of the plot points were also very unbelievable. I was looking for something more profound. Not even the cinematography that popped out in Blue had much of an effect on me. All in all, this movie and its' characters were just uninteresting. Never the less, I am still going to finish up the three colors trilogy. I think I might have been expecting too much from it but it is then still just average.
8 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Easy Rider (1969)
A Flawed Masterpiece
11 July 2005
To me, a flawed masterpiece is a film that is not perfect but by the end achieves something so great it overcomes its' flaws. The two films I can honestly say that about are Lars Von Trier's Dancer In The Dark and Easy Rider. Easy Rider perfectly defines it.

The flaws: Well, the first half although entertaining it pointless. They basically just ride around and pick up hippies and go to a commune. Peter Fonda although he looks the part but for some reason something seemed missing from his character. Also, in the beginning there is a pretty annoying editing technique which they luckily soon abandon.

The film really gets astounding in the second half. The whole film is shot very well by DP Laszlo Kovacs and the music might be one of the best soundtracks ever in film. I might even buy it. The film is filled with genuinely poetic ideas. Jack Nicholson gives a star making performance and Dennis Hopper is once again and forever THE MAN. This film is filled with many biblical metaphors which never came off as pretentious but very powerful. The film is filled with very strong visuals. No wonder Dennis Hopper once wanted to work with Alejandro Jodorwsky. The ending is might be the best part of the movie. It is almost the ultimate "what the f*ck?' moment in history, but for such a chaotic film it fits perfectly. The ending is also powerful. It represented to me the end of a generation.

Well okay. This movie I know will definitely not please everybody but for those who are open minded and into visually driven films, this film will certainly live up to its' title as one of the most influential films in American history.
81 out of 107 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Safe (1995)
Remarkable. A Provocative Gem
10 July 2005
It is easy for people to criticize Safe. The movie gives no real answers about the protagonists condition. The movie is very slow. Some even say the movie lacks a climax. Truthfully, it does have a climax but I even have to admit it is very subtle. These are some of the reasons I love the film so much. The movie almost invites you in too give your opinion and really get into it.

The movie is flawless. As many people have said and I will say it, Julianne Moore gives a truly great performance possibly one of the best and underrated of the decade. The dialog was great and very life like. The movie has some great cinematography especially in the later half of the film. The movie is way ahead of its' time. It definitely corresponds to the millennium than to Generation X when it was made. The movie will give you a whole new view on things you have never stopped to ponder.

2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
I truly do not know why so many people like this
10 July 2005
Let me start off by saying that I did not see the whole movie. I missed a part of the middle but the rest I watched completely. I should also say that I'm a pretty big Tarantino fan. This movie was awful in every regard. I can see people calling it a cult film for the so bad it is good reason, but calling it classic and original is miles away from the truth.

You name it this film did it terribly. It was terribly directed by newcomer Troy Duffy. Every seen almost came off as comic unintentionally and inserting the religious message made this film even more bad(not that I have anything against religion). This movie is an abomination to religion. The Pope would be vomiting. This might have been one of the worst editing jobs I have ever seen. It is so annoying. I can imagine the director going " ooh I want to be cool like Tarantino and make it time twisting." Give me a break. The acting had nothing to offer. I found the two leads to be not very good and miscast. The scene that tries to be poetic( trust me, you will know) had a very good idea go to complete waste. The action scenes were some of the worst I have ever seen in my life. It is too painful too describe. The film arrives at one of the dumbest conclusions ever. Please, let the sequel get caned.

Never see this movie.
16 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Fitzcarraldo (1982)
I know I am in the minority when I say this but...
2 July 2005
Fitzcarraldo is very over rated. I have enjoyed many movies that people have thought were very tedious to watch. Some of them are 2001, Stranger than Paradise, Down by Law, and Night on Earth. I know I will sound very ignorant to people when I say this, but I will say it as bluntly as I can. Fitzcarraldo was excruciatingly boring. From start to finish.

I must admit there are some fascinating scenes. When everyone is working together to build the pulley system is interesting. The scenes where Klaus Kinski plays the Caruso on the phonograph on the boat do break up the boredom, and the ending was definitely not bad. Judging by the ending the film in not easy to dismiss.Unfortunately the damage had already been done.

Besides from being mind numbingly dull, I was not very fond of the script. Any attempts at humor crash and burn. The dialog feels wooden and phony. The score with the guitar was very out of place for this film. And once you get to the climax(which was pretty predictable) which might have been exciting if you had not lost interest in this movie nearly an hour ago.

I know some people will find this a masterpiece but I believe I saw an emperor without any clothes. I still want to check out Herzog's work. Maybe it's just me.
12 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A Grand Film
2 July 2005
This movie is more like an 8.5.

I had previously watched this film before when I was younger and I did not like it. I was probably to young to grasp the full power of the film and what it represented. I know for the first time saw it for it really was.

I can go on and on about the film's many outstanding qualities. Juliet Binoche gives an Oscar caliber performance as the grieving Julie Vignon who has lost both her daugther and husband in a car accident. She performs on so many different dimensions it is hard to describe. Ahh, the music! It was beautiful. From the street performer and his flute to the orchestras going on in Juliet's head to the operatic ending. I don't think music has affected me this deeply in any movie before. The cinematography is also great. Ranking as one of the top five best shot films in my opinion.

Only problem: parts in the middle of this movie are painfully painfully boring. Too bad.

Definitely recommended. I am now off too watch White and Red.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1 July 2005
Werner Herzog continues to amaze me. He has been able to make great commentaries on the human character through bizarre and uncommon circumstances which makes his work even more effective.

This is the perfect movie. As I stated in my summary, this movie is beautiful. Landscapes, people, dreams. I do not think I have seen beauty so greatly captured on film. All the acting was great. Bruno S. embodies the character of Kasper Hauser. The rest of the supporting cast is also great. The movie is slow at times but ultimately overcomes its flaws in the end where the movie really shines. Werner Heerzog also adds humor to the film to lighten it up. Most importantly, the movie is full of Werner Herzog's awkward overly long shots that I just love.

A must-see!
5 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Maybe I'm not a zombie person
29 June 2005
Maybe I might have liked if I had seen the previous Dead movies, but this was my first. I did not like it. It is not horrible but I would not call it good.

There are some good things to look at. The movie definitely gives a few good jumps. The beginning scenes of the zombies becoming smarter are fascinating. And Dennis Hopper. What more can I say? He is just the man.

I cannot ignore the films flaws. The dialog in the movie is predictable and awful, but I was reminded by my friend that you really should not dwell on it. The acting was not good. Asia Argento could not cover up her Italian accent and she really was not good anyway. Leguizamo, who is stuck in an acting hole, bogged down the film also. The scenes where the zombies become more intelligent were interesting in the beginning but midway through they become very tiresome. The major flaw I thought in the film was the social commentary. I was probably expecting too much. And yes, I did understand. I was looking for something more profound but I thought it just ineffective.

This just might not have been my type of film. I know some people will definitely like it (calling it a "masterpiece" in the papers is beyond me). Maybe just wait for video.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
The Tenant (1976)
28 June 2005
Warning: Spoilers
This was the first Roman Polanski I have ever seen. Although I can't say I really liked it but I really cannot say I did not like it.

Polanski is great at creating suspense, mystery, and intrigue and this is evident in The Tenant. The cinematography was great which added to the suspense of the movie. It was well told and I really liked it's pacing. It never let you become bored. The movie had MANY good ideas but that is what I think is it's major flaw.

Like this movie and I Heart Huckabees, they both suffered from having too many ideas and they could not put them correctly on paper. Polanski fascinates the audience with Egyptology, alienation, pathological liars, cross dressing and many more ideas but I just wish he went more in depth. I wanted to know what the hell was going on! The other problems were acting. Roman Polanski I did not think was terrible but sub par. The lady that played Stella was at times horrible(the first hospital visit). The ending was also a bit predictable and unfulfilling.

This is definitely worth at least one watch but I wouldn't be surprised if it divided audiences. I probably would have liked it more if I knew what was happening, but as for now, my first viewing, my rating stands as a 6/10.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
I was ready to put my foot through the television screen
21 June 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I am reviewing the Reconstruction I cannot tell you how bad I thought this film was. Words really cannot explain. This was as "deeply poetic" as an LA cop show.

Before I go on to massacring this film, I have to say this film had potential and had good ideas in mind, but boy was this terribly directed. First off, as many have said, this film tries way way way too hard to be meaningful and poetic. It falls flat on its face looking very cheap and cliché. The movie is directed like it is an episode of C.H.I.Ps. There is so much winking at the camera and being tongue in cheek. The so called humor also is unbelievably stupid. The acting was very bad and it was terribly casted(Lee Marvin was at least bearable). None of the characters were interesting and the storyline was so disconnected since the movie just appears like a bunch of separate vignettes. Back to the directing, it is shot like a 60s film(I have nothing against 60s movies) and it just does not fit the script, which is wretched, and this movie could have worked better as a 30 second Go Army ad on the TV. The ending of this movie relates to my titling of the summary. When Lee Marvin liberates the concentration camp, he comes across a dying young boy and carries him on his shouldered. We slowly see the boy keeling over as her dies on Lee Marvin's shoulders as he walks on. This could have been a GREAT and touching scene, but then of course we get cut off by Robert Carradine's annoying narration and the rest of the scene gets cut to the crappy storyline. The other parts of the liberation are done so poorly that let's just say the victims of this terrible war would be rolling over in their graves. If I am to go on, I will probably kick my foot through the computer screen. Oh yeah, the movie is tedious and boring.

I will never get that two and a half hours back.
9 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Stroszek (1977)
Brilliant Masterpiece
20 June 2005
Warning: Spoilers
When I first started watching this film I was trying to keep an open mind. My previous viewing of a Herzog film was less than fulfilling( it was Fitzcarraldo). The first time i saw Stroszek I was really not sure what to think of it. I guess I can say I was a bit bewildered. The second time I really saw it for what it was. A deeply moving tragic comedy with everything done to a tee.

There is just an infinite amount of aspects of this film that are admirable. The acting by Bruno S. was great considering he basically is the character he played and Eva Mattes and Scheitz also gave positive performances. The music of the film gave it a very surreal feel. This movie is a meditation on life unlike Fitzcarraldo which was flat out boring in my opinion. The movie hits a lot on the emotional level. The movie works greatly on a social commentary on everyday life. The ending might have been possibly the best end I have ever seen I constantly re watch it. The ending has some of the most ambiguous and metaphorical meanings ever captured on the medium, and the auction scene might be one of the most heartbreaking scenes ever.

This is an extraordinary film in every aspect. Highly Highly recommended. I am know going to watch most of Herzog's filmography.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Blade Runner (1982)
The Most Overrated Film I Have Ever Seen in My Life
14 June 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I saw the Director's Cut of Blade Runner How the heck is this movie on the top 250? It is flawed beyond imagination. The only positive thing I have to say about this movie is that visually it is entertaining.

Where to start? It uses many old ideas movies have used but does not bring anything new to them ("I am a robot but I feel real"). The acting was laughable. Even though this movie is not too long, it is very boring. You would think they are taking their time to explain something but no. This movie hardly went into any real depth. The first chase scene was not done well at all (I almost laughed). Gosh, the climax! The part of the movie you really wanted it to pick up speed but they dragged it out to the old cat and mouse routine. This kind of goes hand in hand with it being badly written. The movies attempts at being poetic is truly pathetic. It turned out so corny The final twist that Ridley Scott added to the Director's Cut when you first saw it was somewhat interesting, but then you would realize this twist is so illogical the only way to actually explain it is to have a sequel. Also, the twist is like one of those last minute things that M. Night Shamalan would put in his movie.

Not recommended at all
8 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Bad Education (2004)
The Best I Have Seen from Almodovar!
13 June 2005
This certainly has to be one of the top five films of 2004. People say this is typical Almodovar, but this film I thought was much more than the dull All About My Mother and the good but overpraised Talk To Her. I dare say this is a masterpiece.

There is so much to admire about this movie. Gael Garcia Bernal's performances are all great. The script is very fun and it has snappy dialog. The humor breaks up this very dark story. The plot you definitely have to think about which makes it all that better. Almodovar's photography is as always spectacular. I won't even go into the direction. I'll say Hitchcock would be proud.

Even masterpieces have one mistake, but this flaw hardly took away from the genius of this film. I thought the ending was a little premature. I wanted to see just a little more.

All in all, this a great thriller that I would recommend in a heart beat.

P.S. The only reason this film is getting bad reviews because there is gay sex. Don't worry! It is just another barrier to be broken down!
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Wim Wenders does not Dissappoint
9 June 2005
This movie might even possibly be an 8.5.

When I heard Wim Wenders did a thriller. I thought people were joking. I don't think Wim Wenders was a bad filmmaker (Paris, Texas is one of my favorite films). It just did not seem like his type of movie. Prepare to be surprised.

Flaws: The only real flaws about this film are that it wanders about in the beginning and towards the end. I am not actually talking about the end end. I kind of mean the falling action. Also, the score, in which the beginning was tolerable, sometimes was irritating. I think it is just me. Alert: If you have a short attention span, do not see this! Just like Paris, Texas, this movie is told with absolute brilliance and carefully takes its time. Just like the drawn out climax in Paris, Texas, the climax in this is brilliantly done. The cinematography from Robby Muller (he has done great work for Jarmusch films) is absolute genius. The actually ending is well done and definitely a surprise. Dennis Hopper and Bruno Ganz are amazing. I cannot stress that enough. It was Oscar worthy, but who cares, the Oscars get nothing right. Each scene is well thought out. Also, like Paris, Texas, it involves a family and it has a message. Wenders is never preachy.

Must see in my opinion.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Engrossing, A very underrated film
3 June 2005
After only writing a few reviews, I promised myself I would not give a film a perfect score too easily, but I cannnot resist. George Washington is truly astonishing and touching piece of cinema. Some people have called one of the best films of the new decade. This is definitely not too far from the truth. As the summary had said it is told very deceptively but we do not know the director has up his sleeve both plot wise and emotionally.

One of the best things about this film is its realism. David Gordon Green captured the essence of how kids today speak. Often we find in the usual "tween" movies that the young kids speak perfect English, always have good posture, speak with a clear voice, and have a wide vocabulary. I sound like one of my teachers. In the real world, this is not how kids actually talk and Mr. Green should be commended for bringing this to the masses.

As many people know, this film has great cinematography and the location is an area rarely seen in movies today. It even rivals Malick's. The opening scenes in particular have great cinematography. They are a hook to the viewers that enchants them to keep watching. The sub-satisfactory location is turned into a beautiful not quite urban or rural town of mystery and intrigue.

Yes, I will say it. This film is very moving. I know I will sound like a sap but it is moving in the true sense of the word. It is never overly sentimental or sappy. It feels so genuine. Few films recently have been so affecting on this level. The film has a very provocative take on redemption I like how the director used amateurs to add even more realism to the movie. The acting was pretty good, too. Stay clear if this movie if you do not have a good attention span (most reviewers are complaining about this). It is drawn out but oh so rewarding. Highly recommended.
16 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Layer Cake (2004)
29 May 2005
This was an okay movie. It was not bad. It was not that good. Just okay. This film has garnered much derision for being too much like Guy Ritchie films. I do not believe this is the case, it is missing the harder edges that Ritchie's films have, but I do think Guy Ritchie films are superior.

Anyone can recognize the film's flaws. Terrible score, although a few times it was used well. There are many clichés(showering in slow motion after a hit). The first half is very choppy and I occasionally lost interest.

There are upsides to this movie. Many moments I found myself laughing out loud at the dialog. It was well written and acted. The film kind of rallies in the second half. It definitely gets more interesting towards the end.

The ending, the ending. I really did not know how to think of it. It bewildered me in a strange way, but I think overall it left me with a bad taste in my mouth. All in all, wait until it comes out on DVD before you take a look.
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Trainspotting (1996)
Definitely deserves it spot on top 250
29 May 2005
I loved this movie. Just everything about it is perfect. Almost too perfect. I thought this movie was a great ode to the films it homaged. Stanley Kubrick would have been proud of the scenes reminiscent of A Clockwork Orange.

I thought all of the performances were great. Ewan McGregor did a very good job as Renton(my friend and I both agree he is a very underrated actor). But I must say the standout performance is Robert Carlyle who plays Begbie, a cold fiery fight picker.

I was so in love with the bright color scheme this film used. Especially the club scenes. The cinematography was great. The Worst Toilet in Scotland scene was so well done. The cinematography made me so claustrophobic, sick, and bewildered all at the same time. A very surreal scene. Also, GREAT MUSIC!

There are scenes in this film that are very scary. Trust me you will no which ones. I know a lot of people will disagree with me when I say this but I thought this was better than the very good Requiem for a Dream.

I know I probably should not put this in my review but I feel so strongly about this I have to. I'm sorry to say this, but if you thought this movie was pro-drugs; you are an idiot, plain and simple. If you cannot see this movie is anti-drugs, you are a very ignorant and narrow-minded person. Sorry, needed to get that off my chest.

The only fault I find with this film is a very awkward one. I usually complain that a movie is too long, but I think Trainspotting could have benefited from being longer than it's 94 minute running time. Oh well. Whatever. This movie is truly a treasure and I am puzzled why I didn't watch it sooner. Highly recommended!
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
An error has occured. Please try again.