slcchina Reviews

Highlander: The Source (2007 TV Movie)

There can be only one - and this isn't it!

[3/10 · 20 September 2007]

Highlander fans - there simply are very few ways to enjoy this. Aside from totally ignoring the mythology of both the films and the series, the fight scenes were either poorly choreographed, poorly shot, or both. There are no flashbacks in a film that desperately needed some sort of underlying sub-plot and/or simple explanation of the main plot. The dialogue is cheesy, not one of the characters approaches anything like three-dimensionality (other than the recurring trio from the series - and that's only by virtue of fans' past experience with them), and there is no real motivation given for any of them aside from lame "having visions" plot.

Like the last Highlander film that attempted a futuristic setting, this one misses everything that made the first film and the series great. And unlike Highlander 2, the vision of the future here is never really explained and doesn't make a great deal of sense.

They should have stuck with the monkey and the airplane. (See the trivia section.) I can't even really say that if you aren't a Highlander fan it might be enjoyable - because even then it didn't make a lot of sense. I saw it, so I can't un-see it, but if you haven't spare yourself the train wreck.

Below (2002)

A good scare despite its flaws

[7/10 · 2 August 2007]

I don't ask for much out of a horror/ghost movie. Mostly I want it to draw me in, occasionally spook me out of my seat, and not have too many moments where I find myself going "Oh come on, that would never happen." (Like I did with the over-beloved "Saw," for example.) "Below" had its flaws, numerous enough to keep this from being a great film, but for what it was it was pretty good.

The underlying cause of the spook story will be pretty obvious early on to just about anyone, but getting to the final resolution involves enough starts and scares to be worthwhile. Some cliché moments, and it helps to keep in mind this is really just a "B" movie, but in that sense it's a lot better than "Ghost Ship" to which it seems to be compared to here at IMDb quite a bit.

The film succeeds in making the most of its atmosphere and setting, combining the real-life scares of being on a submarine with the supernatural hocus-pocus. In fact, where "Below" succeeds (and in my opinion "Ghost Ship" failed) is in keeping the hocus-pocus stuff to a minimum and instead building the tension within the crew.

Overall I think it's worth renting, as long as you remember what you're in for and don't set your expectations too high.

Saw (2004)

A Let Down

[6/10 · 24 May 2007]

I have to say after all the hype, after all the hoopla - when I finally saw this film I was terribly disappointed. It was supposed to be this smart, scary film, and instead it went for shock value and plot twists that made absolutely no sense at all. As a shock film, it works, but on any other level it just doesn't.

Let's start with all the elaborate traps (which if you haven't seen the film you can see them in the trailer). These things are a forensic expert's dream - there's no way not to leave trace evidence behind somewhere. The police act with predictable stupidity for these kinds of films: the two detectives close in on a known serial killer - who they already know has a proclivity for booby traps - WITHOUT backup? A doctor who apparently doesn't know the first thing about actual first aid and can't tell... well, no spoilers here.

I think if the movie had just been two guys locked together in a room, and left at that, this would have been so much better. But by the time the third victim is trundled out it becomes clear it's all about the body count. The puppet's creepy, but it's the only original thing here. The pacing is good in places, and in others ruined by predictable plot clichés and unnecessary exposition that only further underscores the incredulity of the overly-complicated premise.

So why six stars and not lower? Because for the kind of viewer who likes this thing, there was nothing wrong with it. And if it hadn't been for all the hype, I probably wouldn't be so harsh on it, either. But for everyone who hailed this as the second coming - and all the films that followed in it's wake, it's just not worth it.

The Dresden Files (2007–2008)

Haven't read but now I want to

[8/10 · 26 February 2007]

Okay, let's start by establishing that I have not read the books. I plan to, now that I've seen the show. However, I think it's important that the show should stand in it's own right, and to me it does. I think there is plenty of room to grow, too.

There's a good blend of mystery, semi-noir detective, and good old fashioned magic. There's enough glimpses at stories behind the stories to make it interesting, but it's doled out sparingly enough to keep it from overwhelming the central plot of each episode.

And while recent episodes have featured the tried and true monster stock, the opening episode gave enough evidence of original things to come, too.

My only complaint so far is that there isn't quite enough development of each story (a little less commercial time, perhaps?) and with the exception of Terrence Mann, it's obvious the leads need time to grow into their characters. But I think the potential is there, and I'm hoping Scifi gives it a chance. If it were network it would be dead already, I'm sure, but the networks would have canned "Battlestar Galactica" too.

(And on the subject of books: "Spencer For Hire" while a great show, bore little resemblance to the books. Other than dead-on casting for Spence and Hawk, everything else was what they term "loosely based." But it was a great show, and a great introduction to the characters for those who hadn't read the books yet. That series made me a Spencer fan, as I'm guessing this show will make me a Dresden fan.)

Alexander (2004)

Coulda Shoulda Wasn't

[6/10 · 21 July 2006]

There is so much cinematic potential in the story of Alexander the Great - and almost none of it made it to the screen. Mythic/historical gems like the Gordian Knot, the siege of Tyre, and it's all left by the wayside in favor of over-emphasizing Alexander's bisexual nature. After about the fourth or fifth reference to this, I felt like saying "enough, we get it already." Despite how much was made of the cavalry charge, that scene, along with many others, really felt as if Oliver Stone wasn't so much directing a new movie but borrowing heavily from others (Braveheart comes to mind rather readily, but there are similarities to many other films), and there were many other battles to choose from, much more pivotal and important, that would have also greatly added the character depth that was ultimately missing from this film. (I can't fault the actors for that, either, as blame rests solely on the people who made the decisions about what scenes went into the finished film.) For as ambitious as this film was supposed to be, it was quite a let down and again, that's as much from what was left out of the film as what was in it. As a gay/alternative lifestyle pride film, it works, and Colin Farrel's acting is grounded enough, but anyone looking for a solid historical epic should rent something else.

Mann & Machine (1992)

Canceled too early

[7 February 2006]

I remember watching this back in the early 1990's when, aside from the Star Trek franchise, there was very little in good sci-fi on TV. This show had some good potential that, unfortunately, never got explored. The vision of the future was well done (one of the better semi-dystopian interpretations on TV since Max Headroom), and the ongoing chemistry between the two leads was pretty good. Never intended to be "the bionic woman" that one reviewer labeled it, Yancy Butler does well as the new-model robot/android, with the right touch of unintentional sexuality in a character just learning the nuances of actual human interactions (esp. between the sexes). Plus, they didn't bring on all of her artificial abilities all at once, instead developing them - and the relationship between the two leads - as they went along. (The scene where she takes out her eyes, and her partner's reaction, comes to mind as an example.) Would it have survived if they'd given it the full season to blossom? In the TV environment of the day, probably not, but it probably would have fared better today on the cable landscape.