Change Your Image
Brunswick84
Reviews
War of the Worlds (2005)
Spielberg and Cruise should never work together again
Spielberg has done some great films throughout his career, but this is not one of them. He has not done anything but consistently disappointed me. These are my main criticisms about War of the Worlds.
First, the whole movie is from Tom Cruise's point of view. I think that's wrong. The whole world is being destroyed and we only follow an uninteresting character in Tom Cruise. Big mistake.
Second, the cinematography. I know people love Janusz Kaminski's photography but I could not stand the dirty look of the film. I wanted him to clean his lens. It does nothing to the story.
Third, one of the worst endings in film. I won't go in to more details.
Fourth, this film is supposed to evoke horrors of 9/11. A crowd of New Yorkers running through the streets and ash is falling and people are screaming. And the daughter is asking if it's a terrorist. Obviously the film is trying to evoke those feelings and I find it offensive.
This movie only made me angry for watching it. I did give it 5 stars for some parts, but what a let down.
The Big Sleep (1946)
Bogarts best! One of the best films of the 1940s (or all time)
Forget Casablanca, Maltese Falcon or African Queen. The Big Sleep is Bogart's best performance. He's a cool, tough private eye, yet he's vulnerable. He can get hurt in a fight, but he always comes back for more. This makes Bogart's Phillip Marlowe a more interesting character. Lauren Bacall is also excellent in this film. The chemistry between the two leads is great. Most likely because there was chemistry between the two actors off set. The main criticism this movie receives is the confusing plot. Yes, it is confusing, but that's beside the point. The point of this film is the sharp dialogue, chemistry, and Marlowe outsmarting his way out of each situation. Sit back and enjoy this movie. Please note, this film was re-edited prior to release in 1946. The original unedited version was re-released in the mid 1990s. This is one of the few times the studio was right to interfere with the post production because the 1946 version of this film is superior. Please watch this film. It's one of the all time greats.
Laura (1944)
One of the best films of the 1940s. The definitive film noir.
I love this film. It's one of the best films of the 1940s and one of the best film noirs ever made. The acting is first rate and Gene Tierney is absolutely gorgeous. The plot is a basic whodunit with a police detective trying to find out to killed the young socialite Laura. He finds himself falling in love with the deceased, but that's all I'll say about the plot. Despite knowing the ending, this film stands up to repeat viewings because of the sharp dialogue. The highlight of the film is the theme by David Raskin. Even though the theme is repeated throughout, I never get tired of it. Gene Tierney is fabulous but really the standout acting belongs to the supporting cast including Clifton Webb, a young Vincent Price, and Judith Anderson. The acting, dialogue and mystery will keep you entertained throughout. A must see film!
Jeanne Dielman, 23 quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles (1975)
Oppressive running time ruins what may be great about this film.
What do this film, Titanic, Doctor Zhivago, Giant, and Godfather Part II all have in common? The answer is they all have close to the same running time. Three hours and 20 minutes. The latter four films are all stories of large scope that need long running times to tell their story. Jeanne Dielman is a movie about a woman that experiences a mundane life of being a widowed house wife with a teenage son. I understand that the point of the excessive running time is to illustrate how long and lonely this character's life is. However, we get the point within a few minutes. Why this film takes over three hours to tell its story is mind boggling.
I watched this film only because it was the highest voted film on the recent Sight & Sound Poll. I am at a loss as to why so many people like this movie. This is not a case of not agreeing, I can't understand how anybody can sit and watch this film and love it. This is a story that could be told within 30 minutes, but not three hours.
This is a film that should be in discussion in film classes on how NOT to edit a film. I'm sure there may be a good film here, but the oppressive running time takes away from any greatness that's there. A very miserable watching experience.