Reviews

6 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Come Undone (2000)
1/10
aimlessly wanders
31 March 2002
After reading several good reviews as well as hearing nice things about it by word of mouth I decided to rent Come Undone. I must say I was rather disappointed. The story was hard to follow because the film is set as a series of flashbacks between the present and recent past that are very poorly executed. The characters, despite the actors best efforts are flat and uninteresting. The sex is and nudity are more explicit than they need to be. I've never seen a film where they seemed so unnecessary to the plot. The ending is very anti-climatic and leaves many unanswered questions to a story line that wasn't explained well to begin with. In my opinion, a waste of time.
2 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Panic Room (2002)
6/10
attractively shot, if not a bit empty
30 March 2002
My friends and I made sure to see Panic Room at one of the first showtimes on the day it opened, lest someone spoil it for us. Having been a huge fan of both Jodie Foster and David Finchers works perhaps I set my sights a bit high.

I must say though that as far as camera work the film is revolutionary. Fincher always does great stuff (the title sequence of Fight Club for example). It was amazing to me how they pulled off some of the shots. This made the house actually seem like it was one of the characters in the film.

The acting performances were all very strong. Jodie Foster had wonderful believable chemistry with the young girl who played her daughter. The other three characters also played well against them. Dwight Yoakam was particularly menacing, and Jared Leto's character added some much needed lighter moments to the story.

It was entertaining and certainly provided a decent 2 hour distraction. I didn't find it as "edge of your seat thrillerish" as it has been billed in reviews. Walking out I was glad I'd seen it but for some reason found the story to be a bit empty and flat, salvaged by the good acting and interesting cinematography and editing. Worth the time but not something I'll watch again.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Teenage Caveman (2002 TV Movie)
1/10
Just wrong...
17 December 2001
Wow! This was bad and I mean bad. In every aspect this is just a horrible film. The plot is weak. The acting is beyond terrible, even by the somewhat established actors like Andrew Keegan and Tara Subkoff. It's a Larry Clark film for one and although he occasionally makes a semi-decent film like Bully or Another Day in Paradise, his stuff is usually one step above porn. Because this was made for cable TV and aimed at a "teen audience" the nudity, profanity, situations, and overall content are especially shocking and uncalled for. It was one of those movies that was so horrible and unbelievable that you just couldn't stop watching. I kept waiting for someone to come out and say it was all a joke. Unfortunately it's not.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Mr. Stitch (1995 TV Movie)
9/10
Odd but beautiful B sci-fi
6 December 2001
I happened across this while browsing through the older sci-fi releases in a video store and decided to check it out because it featured Rutger Hauer and Wil Wheaton, two actors I enjoy. The first half of the movie is excellent with it's simple backgrounds and is driven by excellent dialogue and great acting (except by Nia Peeples who I found to be a bit flat and uninteresting). During the latter part though the story began to lose my interest and it became more obvious that this was a low budget movie. The story which is basically a modern updating of Frankenstein was a good idea in theory and I think that they got a lot of it right but they really needed to take it in a different direction with the ending. Still, for what it is it's worth watching at least once if only for Rutger, Wil, or some of the great dialogue.
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
B movie crap! Poor Rutger...
5 December 2001
Ugh! What an awful film. I was up in the middle of the night (a time when most things on stink anyway) channel surfing and landed on this. I thought I would check it out because the little cable synopsis sounded kind of cool and Rutger Hauer is great. Well, not in this movie. The horrible script managed to kill or at least stifle a great actors performance. The story which centers around a hacker ring or something like that (it was hard to keep track because the story was so askew and boring to boot) it ridiculous and tired. It's been done similarly a hundred times...and usually with much better results. The worst thing about this film would have to be Andrew McCarthy. I just could not believe that was him in that silly goth looking get up. His character was so flat and comical as a bad guy (and it was unintentional by the looks of it). His lines were horrible. Now I'm no fan of Andrew McCarthy by any means but if I may say so this movie was a new low even for him. Ok, so it is a B film and it was straight to video so maybe I'm expecting a little much. Or maybe not, Rutger has been in plenty of other B movies like Mr. Stitch and they still proved to be entertaining. It can be done...good B movies are out there.
5 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Good acting with the same old hustler story
14 September 2001
The acting of Jordan Brower, Daryl Hannah, and several others saved this otherwise so-so movie. The story has been done so many times before. Not necessarily better, but none the less it's been done. It'd be nice if the studios and writers could come up with another gay teen story-line to overdo to death, this one is getting boring.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed