luridlarry Reviews

Final Destination 2 (2003)

Best laugh I've had in a loooong time...

[1/10 · 4 September 2003]

In a movie that goes out of its way to explain Death's reasoning through characters who have rootless epiphanies as the plot necessitates, I find it amazing that nobody questions the convoluted methods Death utilizes in order to go about what, for him, is routine business. Death can, it seems, create these imaginitive and complicated Rube Goldberg chain reactions that result in a demise out of left field, but cannot simply give someone a heart attack, or enlist a goon to shoot them in the face. I must admit, after only catching twenty minutes of the film, I was postulating some very imaginitive manners in which I might slay the filmmakers for the obscene amount of money they no doubt made creating something that would fetch a "c" in a Junior High film and video class.

The movies message seems to be: People shouldn't die. The writers, if they believe in what they wrote, must actually operate under the asinine notion that the world would be a better place if nobody died.

But, I must admit, that rarely have I laughed harder than the scene following the dentists office fiasco. That was gold.

The Hard Word (2002)

"Different" and "good" are not synonymous

[4/10 · 18 July 2003]

This film, though it succeeds in digressing from the standard "Heist Movie" formula (worn down to an imperceptible nub of its once original splendor), makes no effort to be what one would term "good". It seems that Scott Roberts got so caught up in his efforts to avoid convention, that he forgot to give the plot any direction, or make the movie remotely entertaining. There were times when it was clear that he was going out of his way to disappoint expectations, but without results that were worth the effort. More than once a character was introduced that played an important part of the story, that would then disappear completely without apology. If this were to in some way improve the story or the point, I would understand; but instead it came off as a juvenile device. "Look at how unexpected that was. Did you see, nobody ever does that." Well, nobody (at least not anyone that produces a film for public consumption) has put a gerbil in a blender and filmed it, but I'm not gonna expect people to be impressed if I'm the first.

While I am tired of the same movie coming out over and over again under different titles, with different superstars playing the same role, I do think that there are conventions in writing that are necessary for all but the few geniuses who know how to break the rules (and usually, they follow others). Certain conventions (creating characters about whom we care and fleshing them out; creating a discernable and engaging plot; moving naturally from event to event) can be utilized in original screenplays. I know. I've seen it done.

There is nothing more wrong with convention than there is with originatily. It is only quality that matters. And it is there that this movie fell shorter than legless munchkin.

The Matrix Reloaded (2003)

I like a frontal lobotomy as much as the next guy, but...

[1/10 · 18 July 2003]

Walking out of the theater after viewing this putrescent stain on the mayfly life of filmmaking brilliance displayed by Wachowski Brothers (soon to be "siblings"), I was certain that I'd seen one of the ten worst movies ever made. There was no doubt in my mind that it would require a blow to the head with a wrecking ball for even the most insipid simian to claim this film had any value.

I suppose I should feel good that my arrogance and superior nature are not without reason.

The entire film, written around three tediously long action scenes, had all the originality and intrigue of those "Ad-lib" books I played with in third grade (you know, the ones where you fill in nouns, verbs and adjectives to make your own version of the story; frought with hilarity and expletives). The famous "pole scene" about which all the sheep were crying "baa-ram-yoo" with such fervor afterwards was so prolonged and repetitious that I could have safely used the restroom and come back to find that I'd missed nothing but an opportuinity to lose minutes I will never again be able to use for more worthwhile things.

While I expected, going into a sequel to an eye-candy action flick (and, before you cry "Philistine!" and start collecting the torches and pitchforks, I did love the first movie), bad writing, I thought perhaps the directing, or at the very least the editing, would make up for it. However, with absolutely nothing either innovative or even vaguely artistic in a single scene, I was left wondering if perhaps I'd wandered into a dress rehearsal for the film.

The effects were obscenely expensive without being at any time impressive. I saw some of the most expensive cheese to which I've ever been exposed on the screen during that movie. It looked like Ed Wood got his hands on $100 million dollars.

There is no point in analyzing the acting in this film. If you did not shudder at the idea that these people make more than most do in a lifetime for being unrealistically talentless, there is no getting through.

My favorite oversized wool sock that they yanked over the collective audience head was the end. Just to make sure that those who walked away liking the movie felt that they'd understood something "intu-lek-shul" they forced the word "ergo" from the lips of an erudite looking old white man more than once. There are people out there who think they know something because they liked a movie with one SAT word buried in it.

One final thought: When the hell did MTV's "The Grind" make its sweaty way onto the silver screen? What the hell was that house party all about?

Saving Private Ryan (1998)

Great starts don't always finish first

[5/10 · 18 July 2003]

While the first twenty minutes (or, for you pedantic moviegoers out there who are going to jump on me for being six minutes off in my assessment, the length of the first scene) of this movie is a brilliant "chaotic and harrowing battle scene", there is nothing else in the movie that even comes close its poignance. The rest of the movie follows in the footsteps of every other trite Spielberg drama. I think that people are too afraid of besmirching the face of any movie that deals with WWII to be honest about films such as this. The subject matter does not make the art. It American audiences are unable to make such a distinction.