Reviews

30 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
Married to the bitter end
16 November 2012
Warning: Spoilers
A nice and partly funny movie, marriage and children, divorce and nasty settlement, a story who opens the way for marriage crisis of dimensions. Kathleen Turner and Michael Douglas has played against each other before - like in "Romancing the stone" and the sequel "Jewel of the Nile", and it's hardly a coniciderence they came together for the third time, the couple made very chemistry on the big screen, everything seemed to fit them both.

The most funny thing related to this movie, is that Danny De Vito - here with a great performance, also is the man in the director's chair, also had good parts in those movie I mention, and as far as I know, is a good friend of Douglas privately.

Is it something we can learn from this plot? I chosen to let the question stand wide open, but it's not unimaginable that such bitterness and desperation in our real life have I read, and seen countless example of several divorces - but of course, here we got presented a drama like a black comedy, for that sake of the entertainment.

Maybe most of the movie's situations stroke better those who already had been through their divorces or two, and I'm not sure I will recommend this movie to anybody, it could end up with bad estrangement for the theme - a partly entertaining story of a marriage on the wrong track, but a pretty good movie to watch.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Contract (2006)
5/10
What happen with this movie?
15 November 2012
Warning: Spoilers
In the beginning of this movie it seemed to be an entertaining piece of work, exciting with strong characters involved, but after they had establish themselves in the wilderness, the quality of the story went into a foggy condition. The plot revealed itself as very simple, and the big point wasn't unmasked before the close end.

The actors wasn't at their best in the movie, but I thought young Jamie Anderson as John Cusack's troubled son could give me a surprise here, but when I came to the story, it was battle between the hunters and the hunted, the political issue almost disappeared.

Young Anderson's performance said it all when it came down to the experienced actors like Morgan Freeman, Cusack and Alice Krige, but I put most of the blame on the writers - I thought they lost their sight along the way, too obvious and too convenient.

But "The contract" is not really a bad movie, but I'd expected more from a good idea, director Beresford had all the skills to make a very good thriller, maybe his time is out? The writers had no experience, Katz died after finishing the movie, and Darrouzet had only his screen writing, this was his first movie there was some highlights to watch, but circumstanced like financial problems, gave Beresford no choice - without delivering a good enough script, he had to finish the production anyway.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Man on Fire (2004)
7/10
Fire and blood
25 October 2012
Warning: Spoilers
This movie is a hardcore violent action movie, and it has some good points. The product delivered in the very center, a shining study of the character that Denzel Washington portrays. the disillusioned ex-CIA agent Creasy who experiences his personally nightmare, and becomes reborn as a killing machine. The character is lost in the bottle, but shows a faint spark of life behind empty, dark eyes - and then end up something like a angel of death, for justice. and all for the nine year old schoolgirl Pita, a daughter of rich and wealthy parents, Creasy has been assigned to as her bodyguard.

Director Tony Scott has earlier shown his talent for the film craft with the genre, and he didn't leave anything out this time either. Scott hit the mark on every single violent, bloody and explosive scene for all it was worth. Because the movie isn't exactly beautiful, Scott's characters are very close to describing racism when it comes to Mexico, and in some scenes, that were almost too much to swallow. As mentioned it's not a beautiful movie to watch, but entertaining? Definitively, Yes!I really did like it - there is no message in the bottle as far I could see, and it deserve my good points. A great action movie with two excellent actors - Washington and Dakota Fanning, and a pretty good plot.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Love on high level
25 October 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Something positive has happened to the grand master William Shakespeare, something exceptional, particularly in this unconventional fiction story. Shakespeare has been taken down from his high horse and placed among ordinary human being, and the result? He became hip among younger viewers like you and me.

The movie is a free interpretation about what young Shakespeare's life could have been like under the writing of history's most famous love story - and tragedy "Romeo and Juliet". The plot is fresh and stylish, and very alive, and this movie is voluptuous, and very entertaining.

The production has a top quality British cast - with a few American actors. Particularly excellent was Judi Dench as Queen Elisabeth, the experience of the film was intoxication to my eye, and it received thirteen Academy Awards. But of some reason Joseph Fiennes didn't get anything, I thought he dominated in the movie beside Judi Dench - as the late medieval version of "Prince". Gwyneth Paltrow got her Oscar, but personally I found her too weak in her role as the female lead - life is strange.

in any case, the movie was a great adventure on the big screen, a most unusual production that really grabbed my heart. Love stories easily too sentimental - or too pompous. this one is just great to watch.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Pretty good drama in the courtroom
23 October 2012
Warning: Spoilers
The movie starts with the voice of prosecutor Rusty Sabich (Harrison Ford) with a statement of the American legal system and his own position on it.. The story begins excellently with a nice presentation of Sabich both private and professionally, but the plot eventually gets him into a dangerous situation. The main sequences happen in the courtroom, the judge has to decide if the accused is guilty - or not. The movie lose some of its level of tension when the trail begins, every detail is gone through in too long, heavy and demanding scenes for me as a viewer. But I also have to mention that it presents dashes of good excitement. Here Raul Julia is the big star in this courtroom drama, he is very capable in this role. Overall, the pace is indeed too slow, but several camera angles got into my mind - and of course, very good acting from the people behind the main characters. Beside Raul Julia, Brian Dennehy and Bonnie Bedelia made great performances - just like the movie's center star Harrison Ford. I found this movie very good, but it's not perfect, there is something missing. And I became quite surprised when the murderer was exposed, even if I had some suspicions.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Strange political effects
17 September 2012
Warning: Spoilers
This movie is a raw satire about intolerance. It' s not really about political right or left wing views, but about people who fail to understand what freedom of speech really is. The main characters don' t think about their own limits - just the other people' s. This group of elite students conceived their own mission, a mission to get rid of everybody who they think have the wrong opinions about the society. As mention in the movie - i you travel back in time and met the young artist Adolf Hitler, knowing what he would do as a grown man, would you kill him to save millions of lives? I probably would, but to change history - what consequences would that make for the future? That' s the question I asked myself... This is the debut for director Stacy Title, the theme is controversial, and the product has a visual style that appeal to me. The actors are very good, Title and her staff have apparently picked the right cast, and everybody did an outstanding job - even the guest stars. Stacy Title haven' t done anything memorable later in her professional career - which makes me wonder why, for with this production, she hit the nail on the head.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Disappointment de luxe
17 September 2012
Warning: Spoilers
I think this franchise has to end now, this is the question I asked myself after seeing this sequel from the original the year before. I guess this production was continued purely for the sake of the money, and the product didn't even camouflage it. Because this movie had nothing new and original to show for at all, it went in the same track as the first movie with pretty young teens hunted by a psychotic killer - something like "Friday 13th", "Halloween" - and even "Nightmare on Elm Street". The first movie in every series is always the best - so much more entertaining. And of course, all of them got an X numbers of sequels, most of them progressively bad ones - don' t do the same mistake, leave the money alone - because this sequel fell to the ground with a big bang. A movie with no new ideas, everything' s very predictable, and for me it became unbelievable boring. Well, there' s nothing too negative to say about the actors - Jennifer Love Hewitt did alright, here is also Brandy, more known as an RnB singer at that time, so there is some talent among this young actors. But as a horror movie it sucks, it' s like a long yawn, really. A bad movie with no excitement.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Trendy horror
17 September 2012
Warning: Spoilers
There's no doubt that writer Kevin Williamson has a talent for this genre. Although he he describes cruel murders much better then he describes characters, that can' t be contested. Williamson is not able to to unravel the story as well as he has done before - and after this movie. It started out well, but was taken down to earth too quickly, director Jim Gillespie it not too known to me, so I can' t really on his abilities. This seems to be the perfect movie for young people who love horror movies. It looks like this particular resipe has became a trend in the last years, just like in the 70s and the 80s. Pretty young people in a horror scenario of dimensions, a mad killer on the loose with his bloody hook. The movie is realtive creepy, and has several hard hitting surprise along the way. There may be too many stereotypes though, and the young cries vigor related to an extreme evil murderer wasn' t especially credible - nor original. But the plot and effects still kept it interesting and tense - so I couldn't expect more from a movie in this genre. Good horror, but the characters were disappointing.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Strange - but good
11 September 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Having a public influence is not always a good thing, so does the self centered radio DJ Jack experience when his on-air caller kills seven people, triggered by Jack's flippant comments. This was director Terry Gilliam's first movie made from someone else's script. Parry is played by Robin Williams, is still a classic character of Gilliam from his time with Monty Python - a figure combined with both fantasy and reality.

In Gilliam's first movie "Monty Python and the holy grail", the knights searched for the legendary cup. For Parry the grail was a symbolic item for the meaning of his own life, and in "The Fisher King" the destroyed Jack also had a grail to look for. Both Jack and Parry were victims in the same tragedy, and together they try to find a way back to society, their normal lives.

There is no real performance by the actors here, it may have been difficult to give life to these characters. But Robin Williams gave maximum to his weird role, and Jeff Bridges also did very well - but I fell for one particular scene with Michael Jeter which gave me a big laugh. However, the actor that gave this movie the classic comedy, was Mercedes Ruehl. Her scenes were very funny to watch - but in a dramatic way.

Gilliam's craft is very good, but his product lack courage and originality. The movie is also too long, and I thought it could be cut down at least 20 minutes. The plot took too many directions, but the product was highly praised, received four Academy Award nominations - and won an Oscar for Mercedes Ruehl. All in all it's a very good movie, I think it deserved an 8 star vote from me.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
A novel became great on the big screen
11 September 2012
Warning: Spoilers
I read the novel of Jeffrey Deaver about a year before this movie was released on the theatres, and I was really looking forward to see the film adaption. It was not a disappointment, it may seem like the movie followed the standard formula, but that's no drawback, it was something different about it anyway. I loved the movie immediately, and based on a novel, it did very well at the theatre too. Denzel Washington has for a long time been one of my favourite actors (Glory 1989), and his chemistry with Angelina Jolie came out very good. That developed in a positive way through the entire story, absolutely something good.

I found it very strange with all the negative response to this movie from professional critics, I thought it had good nerve and great excitement, and I was satisfied with its pace. I liked the concept, it had mixed elements of good drama and thriller - even scenes with a touch of horror, I really fell for this movie.

Of course there is some changes from the book - most noticeably that Rhymes' nurse was a man, Amelias last name was Sachs, Rhyme was an irish-American white male, and there was a sexual moment between Rhyme and Amelia, but this these details had no importance for the story, or for me as a viewer.

For me this movie provided great entertainment and excitement, it had several highlights that got all my attention, it had me on the edge of my seat - I had two thrilling hours!
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
No funny Candy
11 September 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Where are the comic element in this crime comedy? Usually the massive John Candy is very amusing, but in this movie he reel off a bunch of worn out one-liners which I didn't find funny at all. And the visual slapsticks had no dash of comedy, they're pretty amateurishly done. Admittedly there were some situations that produced some short laughs, but most of the movie was pretty dull. The one-liners and gags where lined up about to stomp each other to death, and the main story nearly disappeared.

So I guess the screenwriters bet all their money on just being amusing, but it didn't word out - the plot became the secondary part of this production. The movie is probably for huge fans of John Candy only, but no matter how hard I tried, I couldn't find it funny or entertaining. Candy just became annoying with his bad jokes, and even worse was his horrible disguises. - he became an idiotic copy of Fletch. This movie was a bore, and a waste of money!
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Mrs. Brown (1997)
7/10
British is best
8 August 2012
Warning: Spoilers
The worst year of Queen Elisabeth II as head of the state was probably not worse than the attention the British royal court got when Queen Victoria got engaged with her groom John Brown 150 years earlier. Unfortunately, it was a completely different time, a another world, and this relationship almost broke down the British monarchy.

This movie is very well played. Judi Dench is magnificent as Queen Victoria, an awesome personality with a heartbreaking soul - and this performance earned her an Oscar nomination. Billy Connolly isn't less impressive; a Scottish groom in kilt, brimming with confidence - a free speaking man. Queen Victoria and him are two totally different people, but they fit together very well. The movie is characterized by great acting all over, as well as a good British sense for bygone times; the delicious nature surroundings and a good eye for details. This made the movie a great experience, but I see something about it that took it down a notch: the plot is too quiet in periods, and the script didn't allow room for any reflections. But in any case I did like it.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Bug (2006)
7/10
Crawling movie
8 August 2012
Warning: Spoilers
This has become a very bizarre movie, a paranoid drama, a psychological thriller with elements of black comedy and horror. It is a bug creeping study of the immersing anxiety; crawling and biting, unpleasant horror which nearly made me check my own flat for unwanted bugs with a magnifying glass.

The movie won the The International Federation of Film Critics Award at the Cannes Film Festival, although people I've talked to have not heard about this production. However, the movie became very intense and quite disturbing - but also fascinating, and I really liked it, it has a great plot. As far as I know there is divided opinions about the movie. Some say they think it's bad and others think it's just superb, but I just say the movie is good. I came by it on television at random, my daughter had recommended it, and now I have to see it again some time.

Actor Ashley Judd is just fantastic in this movie. Her interpretation of her character's growing paranoia is material for an Oscar, but didn't get as much as a nomination. Also Michael Shannon is very good in his role, the environment suits the movie very well - enclosed and claustrophobic; the perfect atmosphere for this type of production. Great script - good movie!
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Women on top
8 August 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Stephen King has been my favourite author since the 70s. Many of his novels have hit the big screen and I have over a dozen of his books in my bookshelf. Dolores Claiborne was also made into a movie and when I saw it recently I was thrilled and wanted it for my DVD collection.

I guess most of the audience was unsure if the protagonist Dolores Claiborne were guilty or not for quite a while, and so was her daughter Selena in the story. So there is the excitement on two levels, one can say. The strongest aspect of this movie is the female actors, especially Kathy Bates as the main character. She is very credible as the wounded, bitter - but strong Dolores, and this peculiar love/hate relationship between the snobby Vera and hard working Dolores is a great interplay between Bates and Judy Parfitt. One other great performance is Jennifer Jason Leigh as Selena - the nervous, stifled and pill eating daughter of Dolores.

The screen version of this superb book has become an absolutely great movie. Kathy Bates is at her best. She has earlier said that King's novels made her a superstar and she proves it here; she shines! And with the presentation of the beautiful environments of Maine, which is almost a standard in King's novels, I was really pleased with the outcome.

Something to put my finger on? Unfortunately, yes. Leigh's character became too indistinct at times, it's difficult to figure out if that was the purpose. Also the make up on the women is not very good; at times it looks artificial. but okay, But all in all, this is a very good movie based on a great book!
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Fight Club (1999)
7/10
Strange and surreal movie
4 August 2012
Warning: Spoilers
The pretty and smooth Brad Pitt along with the sweet and bashful Edward Norton as the couple of a blood dripping undercover fight club, rolling in the gutter with broken teeth, swelling eyes, and bloody faces in a secret underground game.

Could the filmmakers and writers make me believe such a story, or make me care? Well, director David Fincher did. I went to the theatre and saw this movie with an open mind, confident with the notion that this would be a pure fighting action movie. However, I was dragged into a story blacker than night. It embraces widely, it puts its grip around consumerism - the Ikea generation where brands and advertising defines our identity as hollow and poor. We are left quivering with strength, but empty of something meaningful; that's the message of this story.

Here we are trapped in a world of shopping culture, but is it about an identity crisis, some kind of revolution, or straight up terror? I couldn't really tell. The movie is quite surreal, a struggle between two people who become something totally different.

Very good performances from the three main actors. The movie has a dark and visual power, and turned out to be quite disturbing, but it was very fascinating - and very good!
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Hellraiser (1987)
7/10
Gory and creepy
4 August 2012
Warning: Spoilers
The first thing that struck me was that the actors' performances was nothing to brag about, but I guess that wasn't the filmmaker's intention. Here the plot is in the centre, and this movie wouldn't be much without the magnificent special effects. The effects, the creatures and the make up, isn't only great, but they create the whole movie which now has the status as a cult movie. And they have made over half a dozen of them over the years.

Accordingly, a classic horror movie with a pretty sick plot and a even more sick production design. This movie is very bloody and disgusting, and it all looks terrific with the superb effects, without any CGI involved. This is a type of movie that is suitable for Halloween, a movie you would want to see together with friends - not alone in the dark.

Hellraiser is a bit strange and abstract, mostly because the female main character seduce the victims with sex. There is generally a strong sexual atmosphere in the story. That is perhaps not the most traditional theme for a horror movie, but surprisingly it works.

A frightening movie - happy Halloween!
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Hang 'Em High (1968)
Not great - but pretty good
2 August 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Clint Eastwood is back in the USA and Hollywood after his journey in Italy and Spain where he made his famous trilogy with director Sergio Leone. It made him a superstar and I guess the Americans are happy with that. But when director Ted Post tries to make a similar American version of the spaghetti western of the likes of Leone, he totally failed. Post did not have the skills and fantasy of the Italian master, and this lack of quality from Post is obvious.

It's possible Post bet all his money on Eastwood alone in this production, but so much went wrong; the backdrop, the actors behind Eastwood, and the tedious use of camera. So to compare this film with the work of Sergio Leone is impossible. The impact of the supporting actors is rather thin, although actor Pat Hingle is solid as the hard judge. None of the female cast managed to impress me. This is an okay western, but far from top notch from my personal point of view.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Fever Pitch (1997)
7/10
Love for football vs the woman
2 August 2012
Warning: Spoilers
If you are looking to see a romantic comedy I would recommend this British film. It's funny, it's serious, and of course romantic, without being sentimental. The movie felt like a big smile, but the question is; can the love for football and the club Arsenal be combined with the love for a woman? Paul is obsessed with football and 'The Gunners', but Sarah has no idea what this game is all about.

The writer Nick Hornby wrote this novel in the 80s, and he is also the man behind the script. He also has a little cameo as a coach for a boy's football team. The story takes place in 1989, and this proved to be an enjoyable and fun movie. I could see myself in my younger days watching the Norwegian team Rosenborg and British Manchester United play, and relating to this movie's depiction of enthusiasm, empathy, anxiety, and even grief, on behalf of the team.

Fever Pitch rises above all those anonymous romantic comedies. There is something here that I've never seen before; the environment, the dialogues, and the actors; it has all made this story into something different. As Paul says; "There's always a reason to love what you love". That's passion. For the main character, Arsenal was the social channel to his family and friends, the team meant life and affiliation.

Everything is told with intelligence and good humour. The actors gives us capturing performances, especially Colin Firth, he is sparkling with his growing dilemma - football or Sarah, or maybe both? This movie puts across the necessity to be thrilled by football - and of course by fellow humans. This movie for certain a feel good movie!
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
The grand old lady on screen
2 August 2012
Personally I'm not especially keen on this type of movie; movies packed with music numbers. But after all, it is the grand old lady Tina Turner we are talking about; she deserves more than something average. I really did like her songs in the 80s when she got rid of her abusive husband Ike. Her voice was strong and with a great personality.

The relationship between Ike and Tina was almost made for a movie; there is drama, violence, and music. The title really says it all. Angela Bassett and Laurence Fishburne are stunning as the main characters. Bassett got the nearly impossible job to portrait one of the most remarkable female artists in music history especially when it comes to the body language of Tina. However, Angela Bassett did it very well. Also in scenes with playback I could hardly notice it was an actor imitating a great rock star.

Overall a very good movie, but like I said; too many music scenes that I felt interrupted the story. But most of the songs are well known - and good!
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Cute puppies, bad movie
30 July 2012
Warning: Spoilers
I will recommend all conscious adults to stay away from this movie, but of course, that could be a problem if you take your kids to see it. But please, keep the very youngest away, the end could be a bit too rough for their eyes and minds.

Well, this movie has the same recipe as the "original" from 1996, almost everything follows the same track. It's pretty much the details in the story that more or less could come up with a few more surprises. Therefore it is predictable to the point of painful boredom, I knew everything that was about to happen in the next frames, that's not a good feeling when I am watching a movie.

These extreme characters Cruella, Jean Pierre and butler Alonzo are overplaying, it's far over the top. They seemed to get as close to the original characters as possible from the animated movie from 1961, but didn't succeed. Even with yet more dog added, it didn't help, but anyway - it was the dogs who made some colourful entertainment in this disaster of a movie. It was quiet annoying to watch..
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
City Hall (1996)
7/10
Good movie - but a bit disappointing
28 July 2012
Warning: Spoilers
On the DVD cover of this movie, the Norwegian distributor had tagged as a "political thriller". It's about the intrigues and murders around the mayor of New York (played by Al Pacino), but is it a thriller? For me the first commandment for a thriller is excitement and good pace, and this movie lacks that. It is also a bit predictable. but I will describe it more like a political drama more than a thriller.

I'm surely not an American, so I will not fully understand the political system in the US. What I pick up from newspapers and TV is almost all about corruption and fraud. Yes, this is a movie and not reality - but there's a touch of real life in every movie, there is a rotten apple in every basket, even in little Norway.

my favorite actor Al Pacino gave a very good performance, although it's too quiet behind him. An extra point to John Cusack and Danny Aiello as well. On the other hand I got the feeling that I've seen the story before, the lone ranger and his girl fighting to expose the big political conspiracy, so I would like to see more originality in the plot. The advantage for betting on a well known horse such as Pacino is that they can't get too wrong - Pacino saved the movie, I'll blame the writers for the rest. There is a lot of skilled actors involved here, it's too bad they weren't able to show what they really can do; they to little to work with. But all in all this is not a bad movie, but I did feel a little disappointment - maybe I expected too much. But Al was good as always.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Evolution (2001)
7/10
Funny and fast evolution
27 July 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Evolution was heavily marketed weeks before it was released world wide, but it seemed like the audience wasn't especially keen to see it. The movie barely made the budget at the box office, it didn't prove to be a popular movie. I found that a little odd, because personally I thought it was funny and entertaining, and at times exiting. It attracted me from the beginning - the genre, the good visual effects, and most of the actors.. therefore I found this an amusing story, after all it is a comedy and I didn't take too seriously, but it made a good couch time. Okay, you can pick out some verbal and visual clichès - David Duchoyny is hardly a magnificent comedian, and Orlando Jones had a tendensy to overplay his role. But two actor did well - Julianne Moore and Dan Aykroyd, both good as always. However, it's the visual effects that take the prize; CGI made it with great skill, and unquestionably with much work and time behind. My judgement - a nice, funny movie!
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Laughing at war
27 July 2012
Warning: Spoilers
This movie is probably one of the most bizarre comedies of the time, but also one of the best in its genre. A kind of anti war movie; a satiric look at the cold war in the 50s and 60s between east and west. This movie is filled with tremendous actor performances, Peter Sellers stars in three of them - and does it best as the mysterious Dr. Strangelove. Sterling Hayden is excellent as the general who steps over the edge of insanity, and George C Scott is very funny in his role, even though he's not particularly known as a comedic actor. The great thing about this movie is the actors and their dialogues, and the plot is a stroke of genius from director Stanley Kubrick. And just look at the names of some characters - Bat Guano, TJ King Kong and Jack D Ripper, that alone gave me a big laugh. This is surely a great movie, although one thing was a disappointment, the special effects was very poor, even for its time - but overall, I enjoyed it.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Volcano (1997)
6/10
A movie for beers and pizza
24 July 2012
Usually when I want to see a movie, I don't read too much about in beforehand, just the main plot. I want the story to unfold me - hopefully with positive response, or if necessary; with total disappointment or mediocrity. Overall I try to ignore the professional critics - some may praise the same movie as someone else is beating it down the gutter. Those critiques have no meaning for me, it's me as a viewer that counts.

Back to this movie, "Volcano" has some exiting scenes, but unfortunately the clichés are lined up, and concerning small and big heroes, it is quite unbelievable how many clichés they can make room for in one tiny story. for good and bad, it's not much of a story either; even skilled actors couldn't impress, but I give one little point for Anne Heche in this case. The special effects were mostly well done, but some of them were directly pathetic to watch. In any case, after the end credits, I felt this movie was okay, but far from great.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Fairytale on the screen
24 July 2012
this was the first big movie from Walt Disney and his team, and it was received with great cheers from everyone - the audience as well as the critics. The movie even got a special price from the Academy Awards: One normal sized Oscar, and seven small ones! They didn't have a category for Animated Movies at that time, but its popularity was demanding much attention - and got it! It's a feel good movie that I remember well from my own childhood, but now in my old days I have some critiques. It's a good adventure, but it evolves as more like a musical, a type of genre that I normally greatly dislike. A few songs could have been skipped, and the choreography in the dancing scenes are too "nice". However, this fairytale from the brothers Grimm that I read as a child, was very exiting, and done good on the big screen. It has great animation with good colours and a marvelous depth in the frames. And the dwarfs are fantastic characters; all seven from Grumpy to Dopey.

Yes, this movie was ground-breaking when it hit the silver screen, and I think all animated features from Disney is very good - well,up to the end of the 70s. But this one is great entertainment for any family member!
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

Recently Viewed