abknor Reviews

Orgazmo (1997)

Good, clean, family fun

[6/10 · 23 January 2005]

This is good, clean, family fun. Orgazmo and his trusty side-kick clean up Los Angeles for Jesus. Although the movie is strong on morals (it shows you countless ways to love your fellow man), it never gets high handed. Even a slightly cynical non-believer could enjoy the jokes, and, heck, the heavily cynical non-believer will probably enjoy the sterling performance of Michael Dean Jacobs as Orgazmo's evil opponent, Maxxx Orbisson.

Makers Trey Parker and Matt Stone also put in convincing acting performances, showing the world that yes, script writers can act. (Are you a director? I've got this great idea for a movie!) 6/10

Pietje Bell (2002)

OK movie

[6/10 · 25 December 2004]

Pietje Bell left me with the same impression as Harry Potter and the Philosopher's stone, which is: nice images, good adventure, so-so acting of the leads and sometimes irksome dialogue.

The Rotterdam of the 1920s was convincingly portrayed. There was a cartoonesque feel to the decor, which made it easier to focus on the story. The nose of aunt Cato was hard to believe in though, and drew attention to the fact that I was watching a film. Also the newspaper manager acted too 'modern' for my taste.

I did have a bit of a hard time believing the sister wanting to date the gruesome Joseph. Which, in a sense, is a compliment for the two actors, because they managed to convincingly portray good and bad.

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (2001)

OK Movie

[6/10 · 25 December 2004]

I happened to watch Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, as this film is called, on the same evening as Pietje Bell, another children's movie, and came way with approximately the same opinion on both films: nice images, good adventure, so-so acting by the leads, and sometimes grating dialogue.

The beginning, I felt, moved a bit slowly and eratically. It took Harry ages to go to the wizards' school, and the premonitions about his magical qualities could have been smeared less thickly. At times even Harry's actor seemed to look on in disbelief at Harry's powers, having quickly run out of facial expressions of disbelieve to display.

Bluebird (2004)

drama with strong lead

[6/10 · 10 April 2004]

The last two Dutch films I saw had lead characters that did not make you root for them ('Drijfzand' and 'De Ordening'). That is OK if the movie has other things going for it; sometimes a hero would just be in the way. Unfortunately, those two Dutch flicks had no such other things going for them either.

Blue Bird is different, partly because its makers cheated.

The lead character is Merel, a girl of 12 who has started attending secondary school. For some reason or another (who knows why these things really start?) she gets off on the wrong foot with the rowdy crowd of her class, and from then on she is being bullied and beaten up by that group.

Merel has some average qualities, for example in that the she is slightly nerdy. But most of the time she is being the ideal person: she can sing, she is a swimming champ, she is a very caring and devoted sister to her charming and handicapped little brother and she is one of the best students in her class. This makes it very easy to care for her: you want her to overcome the bullies, and grow in the process.

And this is where the makers cheated: her being so perfect also makes it difficult to imagine her the target of bullies. Bullies usually pick on the weaker kids. Although Merel does defend herself, she seems to have no friends for most of the movie, except in people that are not in her school.

Director Mijke de Jong uses another trick to make us feel for Merel. The camera is often distant, hidden behind backs or staying away from the action, so that it feels that not even the registering eye will step in to help this poor girl.

Elske Rotteveel as Merel believably portrays the lead character in both sad and happy times, and holds her own in both speaking and silent moments. She outperforms her grown-up colleagues in many scenes, making her Merel stand out even more.

All in all this is an engaging TV film.

Berlin Is in Germany (2001)

powerful drama

[6/10 · 2 April 2004]

This is a powerful drama about a guy who tries to get to grips with getting out of jail and being released back into society. Nice for people who like this sort of film (usually shown early in the evening on the women's channel, this one must have acquired some sort of filmhouse stigma on the way), but not my cup of tea.

There were some interesting ideas in this one, such as the lady from the rehabilitation who kept using social worker talk as if reality had completely passed her by, but too few and far between to lift this film to the next level.

Still, quite entertaining, with enough humor to never make it completely boring. I switched from the last half hour of Hannibal to this, and did not regret that choice.

One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (1975)

pretty standard stuff

[5/10 · 1 April 2004]

A few interesting ideas as a starting point, and from there on predictability all the way. I believe the technical term for this sort of movie is 'crowd pleaser', and it's easy to see why it won so many Oscars. There's redemption, there's hardships to overcome, there's comradery. The predictability and dumbing down is rising to levels that makes the food inside me almost rise too.

Case in point: the Chief. Will Sampson played deaf and dumb convincingly, until Murphy found out that he wasn't deaf and dumb at all. From that point on the Chief had metamorphosed into somebody who could hear, and the movie viewers were implicitly invited to pretend like the nursing staff hadn't noticed. Every time something was said, you could see the Chief react. But only for the viewers' sakes, of course. Wouldn't want them to not understand what had happened. Bad case of disbelief kicking in.

Still, and entertaining movie, just not a very good one.

De ordening (2003 TV Movie)

bland

[4/10 · 27 March 2004]

Cinematography-by-numbers, trademark Dutch gratuitous nudity, actors who refuse to enunciate all combine to cover up what's essentially a boring story. Some interesting view point, some intelligent references and the appearance of the secretive cousin never manage to sustain my interest for long.

The signature piano tune playing through-out the movie also did little to keep me glued to the screen: director Kuijpers (Van God Los) should perhaps learn that not every movie can be Once Upon A Time In The West, and when the on-screen developments do not thrill, music added to imply a continuous threat can only grate.

Ready to Rumble (2000)

Fun little meaningless comedy

[5/10 · 22 February 2004]

This fun little meaningless comedy lets Arquette and Caan act out their teenage fantasies. It doesn't live up to the high standards set by other goofball comedies such as Police Academy III, and Police Academy IV, and I cannot recommend this movie as the dreary Monday night video rental, because it's too slow paced. However, if you can get it on VHS as a gift with, say, three family packs of toilet paper I would say: go for it, tiger! The kids will love it!

Finding Forrester (2000)

Karate Kid, but with books

[4/10 · 22 February 2004]

This is like The Karate Kid, but with books; a kid feels estranged from his new neighbourhood, seeks out a lonely old guy, who initiates him in the noble art of ... well, this time it's writing.

The comparison becomes eerily close in a very silly scene that was already rather contrived in Finding Forrester's better and ancestor, the one where the skill is instilled by going through the motions. In The Karate Kid, the kid had to paint the wall to learn effective karate movements; in Finding Forrester, the teacher lets his pupil punch the keys of a typewriter.

I suggest you watch The Karate Kid instead.

Together (2000)

Moodysson delivers

[8/10 · 30 December 2003]

Director Moodysson's previous (and first) feature, Fucking was a good movie, but it was sometimes stingy with detail. With most films, you can drop in in the middle, and after five minutes you will be fully up to speed. I keep feeling that such would not be possible with Moodysson's films, and I think that is a bad thing.

However, his second offering, Tillsammans, is at least much more coherent than the first. An example of the problem, though; in the middle of the film, a couple leaves, because they disagree with the changed politics of the commune. Who were these people? Did we see them in the film before? If we did, why did they not show their faces more often? At that point, I suddenly realize I am watching a movie, and a director should avoid such realizations at all cost.

Most of the time, though, this is a good movie. As in Fucking, Moodysson's biggest strength is making his protagonists seem real. With Tillsammans, he reached a rare level: I knew these people. Perhaps not literally, but parts of their characters are present in people I have met throughout my life. At times, I could almost 'hear' what the characters were thinking. Spooky and gratifying at the same time. I don't know how he does it, and over time as other directors acquire his technique we may get used to it, but for now he has the upper hand. (For instance, "Hill Street Blues" felt like a breath of pungent air of realism to me when it first aired, but seems very much dated now that re-runs are shown.)

I can safely say that if you could only watch 100 movies in your entire life, this should probably be one of them.

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002)

competent, but not compelling

[7/10 · 30 December 2003]

This series seems competently made, but it lacks the drive that Tolkien displayed. Even if I look past the fact that a lot of the visuals seem to be based on the works of doodler Allan Lee, I cannot get past the vision of good and bad, which seems to be the same as in any other Hollywood movie, and so far removed from the conservative, cold-romantic view of the original author.

There's history. There's written history. Then there were a bunch of irreverent hobbits, who figured they could write the history from a hobbit's eye perspective. That (red) book got translated by an English professor.

I remember the doubts from Tolkien fans when they heard Peter Jackson was going to film LotR. At first, I shared those doubts, but then I realised that he was only following tradition. Of course, he would be making a romanticized, Hollywoodized version of the story. He would be making a fiction based on a true story, and he would be doing that true story injustice in the process. Taking that as a given, would the end result still be an enjoyable movie, all by itself? And I think that largely it is; but I don't see it as more than a competent re-telling of the subject matter. I liked Tolkien's more factual translation better. The LotR trilogy is hastily told, at times it feels like I am looking at abstracts of the book.

Private Benjamin (1980)

otherwise funny movie fails

[5/10 · 30 December 2003]

Private Benjamin, the movie, has two sides to it. On the one hand, it is a 'serious' drama about a young woman who has had men dominate her all here life, and is trying to break free from that pattern. And on the other hand, it is a goofball army comedy, with a feel-good ending.

It is not, however, an army goofball dramedy about a young woman trying to break from her role pattern. That would have actually worked.

So in this movie, the happy end appears about two-thirds into the movie, when the last goofball bit has ended and the rest of the serious movie has to be played out.

Don't get me wrong, it's a competent movie, and if they had released the two parts separately, you would probably have had two good movies, but as it is now, the film is too piecemeal to be enjoyed for the whole run. I usually switch off after the boot camp scenes.

White Men Can't Jump (1992)

entertaining

[7/10 · 7 September 2003]

This movie is well-made: it tells a good story, and maintains high production values. The playing-off of different cultures does not really work, but then again that was not central to the story. The hustler being hustled theme could have done with some more Roald Dahl-like wit, but all in all this is an amusing comedy (it does not reach out enough to be considered a dramedy) and a worthy rental for those boring winter evenings.

Dit was het nieuws (1996– )

not as good as

[3 August 2003]

This is a spin-off of Have I Got News For You, and not nearly as funny as the British original when hosted by Angus Deaton. You cannot fault the Brits their level of sportsmanship, though: by having the show now hosted by that horrible prat who does that horrible car show, they certainly have given the Dutch program a chance to catch up. Thank you BBC! (Although I would have preferred being able to watch one good news comedy show over two mediocre ones.)

Snatch (2000)

confusing mix

[5/10 · 3 August 2003]

There are movies such as The Quick and the Dead and basically anything that Tarantino has done that portray rock hard scum as real heroes, in which the viewer's sense of justice and morality is pacified in the end by killing off the 'heroes'. Then there are the movies that try to appeal to the wannabe intellectuals by using intricate plot and editing devices, such as Lola Rennt. Snatch is a mixture of both and should therefore appeal to both the people who view the first category of film as a director's easy way out, and to those who find the latter boring.

And it would have worked too, had the story not been too simplistic and the telling too confusing. It took me a while to figure out who was who and by then the movie was almost over. Maybe I'll like it better after a second viewing, but from what I saw, a second viewing is not in the cards. Still a pretty good rental, though, just don't expect a top movie.

De gulle minnaar (1990)

overall good, but promised so much more

[6/10 · 3 August 2003]

This movie has a great plot, a good script, mediocre cinematography and bad acting. Depending on which you find important, you might find it good for its kind or flat-out horrible.

Had Hollywood production values been adhered to completely, De Gulle Minnaar (lit. The Generous Lover) might actually have made a good romantic comedy of errors.

Peter is a single houseman who brings his son to school every morning and meets a lot of lonely women that way, whom he consequently sleeps with. Then he meets the beautiful Mascha and falls head over heels in love with her. Even his son seems to like her, so the story is about to end before it even started. Except ... there are still quite a few housewives who are not yet willing to give up their daily morning special, i.e. Peter.

Peter tries to ignore their beckonings, but that is pretty hard to do, especially if one of his lovers threatens to kill herself. A great set-up, but it gets even better in the second half of the film. Peter might have gotten away with his philandering, but Mascha is a famous cook show presenter and as such she is under the scrutiny of the national gossip press. A paparazzo finds out she is dating Peter and starts to stalk him. Soon his uncovering of Peter's love life is all over the papers, and Mascha breaks up with Peter.

The second half of the movie shows two people on the rebound, who just have been advertised all over the national media as good love makers, and who try to turn down advances, but at the same time are not completely averse to all the suiters.

A film like this needs not one, but two leads who can carry the movie. Otherwise you get a second What Dreams May Come, in which the actors cannot convey the least believable chemistry between the lovers. Peter Faber plays the rôle of Peter Heg on the auto-pilot, but he pulls it off, somehow. Mariska van Kolck was believably cast as the pretty, happy-go-lucky yuppie who had landed a dream job of presenting a cooking show; and Masha does not even know how to cook! Unfortunately for Van Kolck, at times there is some real acting involved, and that's where the toe-clinching, nail-biting begins. She cannot act! She is a line-sayer. You could have put a robot in her place, and it would of produced the dialogue with at least the same amount of emotion.

The unfortunate end-result is that the brain automatically starts to wander everytime Masha is on-screen, and the film starts to be only about Peter. When that happens, Peter becomes that n-th male protagonist of a Dutch film, in which the sex is more important than the story. From a love sitcom, the film turns into a documentary about a pervert.

There actually are some good actors in this movie, but only in very small parts.

Although I would generally rate the script to be good, the writing is clunky at times, ruining some of the jokes. The cinematography is effective, but crude at times. Clearly it feels like the only ones in this production who understood comedy were Peter Faber (a stand-up comedian once) and the writers, Marjan Berk and Rob Houwer.

I would love to see this remade, right this time. Perhaps by film makers from France, where they understand both how to make a comedy and how not to make a film appear flat and unintelligent; or from Britain, where they are masters of the double entendre.

Coupling (2000–2004)

apples and oranges

[17 July 2003]

First, this show is nothing like Friends. Comparing Coupling to Friends is comparing apples and oranges. They've both got three male and three female leads, and that's about the only similarity. To those who think that that's enough to call the two shows variations on the same theme I would like to say: congratulations, you can count to six. You are slightly smarter than a rabbit.

Friends is about friendship. You could develop an allergy to hugging by just watching one episode. Coupling is about sexual attractiveness; how we exploit it and how we deal with getting stung by it. The jokes may be cheap at times, but the telling is never crude; nakedness is suggested, rather than shown.

Coupling could have been, say, five gay guys and a straight one. The jokes would have worked as well (different jokes, of course), but then the series probably would have been compared to Kids in the Hall. Sigh. I guess I should just be glad that Coupling does not (yet) play in New York, because then we would be in a comparitivational quagmire.

Also, the Jeff character is not all that brilliant. Sure, he's the crackpot, the clown. They had them in circuses, you know? Where Seinfeld's Kramer is off the map, Jeff is just normal abnormal. The true funniness of this show--and it is funny, let me assure you of that!--stems from the sharp observations, and these are made by all the cast, including but not limited to Jeff.

I liked Rob Belcher's review. He wrote: "this show will speak to anyone who's ever dated, been in a relationship, or just noticed that men and women are different creatures." But if you really want to get a taste of the show, don't rely on these reviews, but visit the official web site, which has clips and quotes (including the 'breasts with brains' and 'sock gap' bits). Judge for yourself.

If you want to see similar British humour, I recommend "Game On!"

(P.S. I like Friends too, but for totally different reasons, which is just as well, as it is a totally different show.)

Tonino (2002)

well told joke

[7/10 · 19 June 2003]

Tonino is a clumsy Italian waiter working in the Netherlands who wants to be a photographer. He gets a shot at this when his boss, mr. Suède, wants to hire him to bring him the photographic evidence that his wife is cheating on him. The client will find out, however, that art cannot be forced.

Basically, this is one long joke (literally), and it could have been told in five minutes just as easily as in ten. But it is a good joke, and well told. The dialogue is this short's weak point--it grates seriously at times. Ton Kas as mr. Suède makes up for that though. The way he does not dare tell Tonino what his problem is, walks across the room so as to not face the young waiter, then yells at him 'she is hard to satisfy' [sexually], is very funny.

Speed (1994)

boring

[3/10 · 19 June 2003]

I fell asleep watching this, and not because I was sleepy either. Perhaps I misunderstood and this was really a film about repetitiveness. Reeves and Bullock were perfectly cast: a bad plot badly executed deserves actors who cannot act. Do yourself a favour and watch the Father Ted parody.