Reviews written by registered user

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

5 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

Vexille (2007)
9 out of 13 people found the following review useful:
Impressive all around, 18 June 2008

Okay, so if you've read all of the other reviews then you know that the animation of this film is AWESOME! It's an excellent step forward for hybrid animation. Also, though not all of the reviewers agree, my opinion of the action in this film was that it was sweet and sick (in the most radical fashion.) For the animation and action alone, this film is totally worth the price of a rental. Which brings us to the plot of the film; while some reviewers thought the plot was empty or lacked merit, I am of the opinion that those reviewers probably didn't pay attention to all of the dialog. The plot was well developed, more believable than several of the big-budget live-action Hollywood films (such as The Happening, which totally sucked,) and played along the social issue of fear of technological invasiveness quite nicely, though it was a rather formulaic script. The dialog was a little weak, and there wasn't much for serious character development, but the nonverbal scripting played quite well. After all, this was an animated action flick, and quite frankly it was one of the better offerings from the anime genre in recent years. To recap, this is worth the cost of the rental if only for the visual imagery. However, if you have a well developed sensibility for the suspension of disbelief, then you will also likely enjoy the story as a whole. I know that I certainly did.

Otis (2008)
17 out of 24 people found the following review useful:
Worth seeing, if only for the imaginative brutality of the parents..., 14 June 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Forget the character of Otis. Yeah, he's demented, calculating, and creepy in his own right...But the parents of the girl that Otis abducts...those people are insane in the best way celluloid could depict. This movie is certainly worth the price of the rental. But don't watch it thinking it's going to be a horror flick. It's got more going for it as a comedy than anything else. Anyone who is selling this as a horror flick is probably working for the advertising firm promoting the film, and they just don't know how to promote it as anything else. This film is hilarious, and is certainly a great show for a keg party, teen movie night, or just another Tuesday evening with nothing better to do.

6 out of 12 people found the following review useful:
Really, Mr. Shyamalan? Really?, 14 June 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Before I get into the body of this comment, let me just state that I am a serious fan of M. Night's movies, so much so that I feel perfectly comfortable with, and not at all disrespectful about addressing him by his first initial and middle name. No, I don't know him personally. And no, I am not a cyber-stalker. I don't make it my business to know about his personal life; I simply like the man's movies.

Unbreakable is probably my favorite, mostly because of his uniquely suspenseful and darkly dramatic approach to telling a superhero story. I also loved The Village, simply for the humanistic story of intellectuals who were willing to raise their kids in an Amish-style village completely cut off from the modern world, and doing so through the use of fear of the supernatural. I thought Lady in the Water was one of the most fantastic fantasy tales of the new millennium. And above all, I love M. Night's method of drawing us into the personal stories of his characters, allowing us to identify with them emotionally, and maintaining our interest through the use of compelling direction and storytelling.

That being said, I did find myself relatively entertained and preoccupied with phenomenally human performances from Mark Wahlberg, Zooey Deschanel, and John Leguizamo. Even little Ashlyn Sanchez gave a fine performance in the role she was given. The direction by M. Night was spot on, as usual, drawing us into the heart of the film. However, once we reached the heart of the film, M. Night's story became a sales pitch.

You see, even Mr. Shyamalan knew, in the telling of this story, that the event catalyst that drives the film would have to be explained...and that was where it all fell apart. Because the explanation that he offered us was so wholly unbelievable and contrived, he had to keep driving at that explanation to sell us on it. From the middle of the film right up to the end, we are fed some random guy's speculation, which snowballed into a science teacher's unsubstantiated hypothesis, and finally fleshed out in a professional botanist's biased theory as to why the happening occurred.

While M. Night tried to do for plants and trees what Hitchcock did so well for birds, the truth is that he pushed the explanation too hard. I felt like I was at a used car dealership, and I just spent a thousand dollars on a car that doesn't run. (After the cost of the ticket, a soda, and a box of Hot Tamales, it sure felt like a thousand dollars.) The direction and the performances were solid, but the story, though researched and scientific, was so unbearable unbelievable that it turned this devout follower into a skeptic.

Pathfinder (2007)
4 out of 9 people found the following review useful:
Sure, I've seen worse films..., 20 August 2007

Okay, so just skim through a few of the comments others have posted, and what do you come up with? Horrible direction, shoddy editing, poor cinematography, pathetic dialog, hack-job screen writing, lame acting...

Okay, stop right there. In defense of the actors (who obviously need to get new booking agents) allow me to say this...the director and screenwriter gave the actors unimaginative, clichéd caricatures rather than emotive, depth-filled characters. The actors had nothing to work with, so their work looks weak at best.

In defense of the screenwriter...well, given the inane dialog, I really have no defense for the screenwriter - except to say that this was probably picked up as a side project for just enough cash to buy a pound of weed and a fat bag of shrooms.

Truthfully, the director and producers are to blame for the asinine waste of celluloid that was Pathfinder. They should be kicked out of the Hair Club of Hollywood, banned from film-making, and whipped in an torturously unpleasant, non-fetish custom for months on end. Then they should have to give us our money back, and pay restitution for emotional and intellectual damages, for we are sadder and dumber for seeing this film.

Torque (2004)
8 out of 14 people found the following review useful:
There is some value to this film after all!!!, 20 August 2007

Upon seeing this film, the only way that I could believe that someone paid to produce this mockery of cinema was as part of a nefarious plot to create a new torture device for enemies of the English-speaking world; or as some diabolical psychological experiment reminiscent of the Auschwitz atrocities; or perhaps as a reminder to would-be filmmakers that the laws of physics cannot be excluded while trying to achieve a suspension of disbelief.

However, as it turns out, some people actually liked this movie. Now, normally I would be respectful of the tastes of others, given that I am a fan of free will and the right to choose one's own passions. However, I am firmly convinced that the people who liked this film are either production studio plants, or insanely moronic individuals who shouldn't be allowed access to the internet, or folks using mass quantities of psychotropic substances.

Consequentially, given the problem of America's waning educational system and plummeting test scores, I am convinced that this film should be used as a gene-pool filter. Given the number of positive reviews and high votes, I believe that people who like this movie should be singled out for castration or hysterectomy, and this in turn should allow for a major increase in intelligence throughout America.