tonylo Reviews

Road to Perdition (2002)

A beautiful period piece, but it requires patience.

[7/10 · 20 July 2002]

This movie is one of the most beautifully photographed movies I have seen. But the question remains; is this enough to make a movie a success?

Every set and scene has been meticulously prepared, almost distractingly so. You find yourself looking at the sets instead of enjoying the movie.

The role of Michael Sullivan must have been a difficult one to play. The lack of emotion shown by the character, but yet the requirement that the love of family be made evident, makes the character elusive. Tom Hanks does a worthy job.

The other actors are superb. Paul Newman and Jude Law especially shine, but their roles are more "surface" characters.

Road to Perdition will not rank with the great movies. It is much too slow-moving and long. The pace of the movie is 25% slower than it should have been.

The script betrays the source of the story. They may have called it a graphic novel; I call it a comic book. Their are no few speeches of more than two sentences; probably because of the limitations of the comic book speech balloon.

I cannot recommend this movie to anyone who wants a movie with pace. To enjoy the Road to Perdition you must be patient.

Mulholland Drive (2001)

To me the only great movies break new ground.

[10/10 · 28 May 2002]

This film handles a formulaic Hollywood story; small town girl goes to Hollywood and either succeeds or fails. However, in this case she does both. The way Lynch approaches this story in his inimitable Twin Peaks style, complete with the haunting Badalamenti score, makes this movie a revolutionary one.

This last two years we have seen movies like Memento, Vanilla Sky, Traffic, Moulin Rouge, and Mulholland Drive. These are movies that take chances, show new slants on old stories, but more than anything else, these movies assume the audience is intelligent.

Nothing is given away, some things are hidden, and others have clues to the truth.

Not since the sixties with the wave of Trussaut, Fellini, Resnais, and even Polanski have we seen better thinking man's movies.

I would say this about Mulholland Drive; If you liked Swordfish, you will HATE Mulholland Drive. And you are the poorer for it.

Memento (2000)

Sometimes a movie is so complicated you have to see it twice.

[9/10 · 8 September 2001]

Sometimes a move is so complicated it has to be seen twice; once forward and once backward. Memento is such a movie.

We already saw it in reverse; now lets run the scenes forward. The advantage of renting a DVD is that you can explore the inside. Not that the movie was too hard to understand; it's just that the writer/director, Nolan, left so much out.

The special features tell you that that memory-man did indeed cause his wife's death and that he had escaped from an asylum to seek the "killers" of his wife. All this is alluded to in the movie but since most of it comes from the Pantoliano character, you don't know what to believe.

The characters played by Pantoliano and Carrie-Ann Moss are especially hard to pin down. When do they lie or tell the truth?

In fact then the audience is intentionally left in the dark the same way memory man is confused. That is the beauty of the movie. Is it necessary to know all during the playing of the story? The answer is no. Because, the not knowing keeps the interest and the concentration level maximized throughout the playing of the tale. It is only afterward that you want to talk it out with a friend or read about it from the DVD.

The Minus Man (1999)

The movies that are different are often the best.

[7/10 · 20 August 2001]

Originality is important in such a redundant art as moviemaking. For this reason any movie that is original should be given a plus. Such a movie is "The Minus Man".

Thematically, the movie is about a serial killer, a well worn genre. But this serial killer kills peacefully and without a pattern. A miserable barfly, a disgusted businessman, and a high school football hero fit no database. The poison used puts them to sleep and they never awaken. These are new.

But what makes the movie really different is the fact that many facts are left up to us, the audience, to decide. Where is the landlord's daughter, who killed the landlady, where did these imaginary cops come from, what happens at the end? These are all questions that go unanswered, but are answerable by us. There are other questions. Does he want to be caught, will he soon be caught, why the hair and the clothes, why did he start this, how does he live with it? These are not so easily answered and pose more thought.

The portrayals are good to excellent, but what makes this movie worth seeing are the questions. Thus the trailer uses this approach to sell the movie.

I'd like to thank all those connected with this movie for their risk taking and for their originality.

Pollock (2000)

He must have been a nice guy once in awhile

[7/10 · 18 August 2001]

The problem with portraying a real person is that the writer tends to overplay his flaws. As a result, the character Jackson Pollock, became a one dimension son of b---h. We wanted him to die and the only bad thing is that he took an innocent victim with him.

Ed Harris was probably miserable the entire time the movie was in production because his character was. The story of Jackson Pollock was just like his paintings, without depth.

Traffic (2000)

The best movie of 2000

[9/10 · 16 January 2001]

As I was watching this film, I suddenly realized that this was a movie style I've never seen before. The four plot lines outlining four of the areas of drug traffic and the dealing with it, in four different locations, using different filming techniques were new to me.

The director, Soderbergh, has done good work in the past but this is his "Citizen Kane". The performances were uniformly good but this is Benicio Del Toro's movie. He owns it and controls it. Not since I saw De Niro in "Mean Streets" has a performance by a relatively unknown actor blown me away.

In addition to all this, the film gives a message to all of us who think that drug use is under control. The message is so strong that several politicians participated in the cocktail party scene, telling new drug czar Wakefield (Douglas), their opinions on the status of the drug war.

You come away from this movie excited because after all these years, there are still new ways to tell a story. This film will win the Oscar for best movie. Of that there is no doubt. Del Toro will win for best supporting and the young actress, Erika Christensen, who plays Douglas' daughter, has a great future as well.

Thank you Mr. Soderbergh.

Proof of Life (2000)

Very good movie, especially when Meg Ryan isn't in it.

[8/10 · 10 December 2000]

Why do directors try to make an actress do more than they can? Meg Ryan is great in comedies and love stories. She is not a serious actress. Her last attempt was Courage Under Fire and she was terrible in that. Her vapid, mouth open expression is the only serious one she has. She almost ruined a very good movie in Proof of Life.

On the other hand Russell Crowe, David Caruso, and especially David Morse played their parts perfectly. The script was a good one, and the scenes of Ecuador were exquisite.

A word about the other female in the movie. Pamela Reed showed you what a good serious actress can do in a movie like this. Ryan should give her a percent of her paycheck.

About the marketing of the movie, the real life affair that Ryan and Crowe are having should not have been the main thrust of the marketing campaign. The movie is not about their relationship. It is about many other things that are happening in the world today, but not about a lust story.

Had the producers chosen another, better actress, Michelle Pfeiffer comes to mind, the movie would have been more realistic.

Unbreakable (2000)

Much too long to get around to nothing

[4/10 · 25 November 2000]

This movie was a disappointment because it had so many possibilities that did not turn out. The hero, David Dunn was poorly developed. He appeared bored with life both before and after his epiphany. The parallels between him and his counterpart, Elijah, were never drawn. His backstory was poorly told. And finally, his son was just a two dimension.

Many reviewers compared this to the director's fabulous Sixth Sense, but there really is no comparison. This movie was edited to death and not where it should have been.

The bulk of the movie dealt with his dreary present and not enough with his past or future.

The ending was terrible. Any movie that fills out the ending with titles explaining what happened to the characters after the action finished is poorly done.

The movie should have ended at the breakfast table after much more action on the part of the 'new' David Dunn.

All in all this movie took too long to deliver too little.

The Cell (2000)

Not just for Jennifer Lopez fans

[8/10 · 19 August 2000]

The two plot movie is difficult to bring off. How do you keep the audience interested in both, and how do you bring them together? Both were accomplished in this movie.

The locating of the hiding place and the suspense involved in finding it in time, and the trips into the minds of the killer and the boy by psychological team were at various times kept separate and finally combined all in breakneck speed.

The dream sequences or invasions into the subconscious were both visually and intellectually stimulating. The fact the Lopez' character had to be submissive while visiting but in control while hosting gave greater plausibility to the entire concept.

The actors were perfectly cast. Lopez showed sensitivity in her role. The various doctors and agents were believable in their roles. But the star of the movie was Vincent D'Onofrio. He continues to amaze in his ability to do many different kinds of roles in an exceptional manner.

The director kept things simple in the real world and contrasted them in the torture tank and the dreams so that the emotional roller coaster kept going to the end.

This movie should be seen for the effects and for D'Onofrio's performance, not just for the Jennifer Lopez fans.

Bull (2000–2001)

If you know a little about the market this is the show for you.

[16 August 2000]

Bull stands for a lot of things in our world. One of the uses applies to Wall Street. A Bull market is an aggressive up market, one we have recently experienced.

In this show, Bull stands for more than that. I believe it stands for the way many people carry themselves in the business world, as in full of....

The pace and the dialog are so fast and at so high a level of business-speak that those only half-listening or not familiar with the market might have some trouble keeping up and/or understanding all that is going on; especially the references to insider knowledge and trading.

For those who keep up they will be rewarded with a well written, intelligent, and entertaining show. The cast is very good, especially Donald Moffat and Stanley Tucci. The younger part of the ensemble will get better as they "get" their characters filled out.

I am looking forward to the upcoming episodes and strongly recommend it.

Live Flesh (1997)

A well constructed and interesting story

[8/10 · 2 April 2000]

Almodovar has done it again. He writes for all of us. The political statement about the changes in Spain over the 26 years of the movie, the full circle of birth, and the triumph of innocence over evil, were beautifully displayed in this movie.

The European filmakers have always done it better and now with the growth of the independents, maybe the Americans are catching on that in this director's medium called film, the actors are really secondary or even tertiary to the script and the director. Hooray for Almodovar!

Ronin (1998)

Very disappointing

[4/10 · 27 February 1999]

Hideous beginning. Nobody talks that way.

Two car chases and a people chase in the arena say there is no plot and we need filler.

Awful ending. Why the skater? Was that necessary?

Frankenheimer should retire.

De Niro should be ashamed. The best actor in the world made this movie better, but he should have turned it down.

Suicide Kings (1997)

A very good black comedy

[2 December 1998]

This was a very well written movie that used the abilities of Christopher Walken, Dennis Leary, and a group of young male actors, to fashion a mystery, plot twist, black comedy that is really different in today's action FX world.

It doesn't surprise me that it made no dent at the movie houses. People don't pay $7 to see movies like this anymore.

Thank God for videotape.