Shiva_Skunk Reviews

Shooter (I) (2007)

Decent action flick with some flaws

[7/10 · 24 September 2008]

Antoine Fuqua, the director behind the tight Training Day and not-so-tight Tears of the Sun, directs Jason Bourne.. um, Mark Wahlberg in a very Bournish agent action/thriller film. Sounds mildly interesting, but turns out to be a great improvement over Tears of the Sun, and nearly as good as Training Day.

Mark Wahlberg is Bob Lee Swagger, a sniper who got betrayed by his employers and was left in the battlefield with his best friend. Swagger survives but his friend dies. Embittered by this Swagger leaves the army and moves into a wilderness to live a solitary life. After three years Swagger is approached by Colonel Isaac Johnson (always fantastic Danny Clover) and offered a new mission, to prevent an assassination of the president. Swagger eventually accepts the mission and for this point on the ride begins with its twists, turns and some high adrenaline packed action.

This film deserves a credit for its abiding interesting script, I couldn't wait to see how this story would unfold, and its well paced and gruesome action scenes, there were numerous head shots as you could guess there would be in a sniper movie, and hand-to-hand combat scenes were realistic and brutal as well. Swaggers jiu-jitsu skills compete with his sniping skill.

But there were three major flaws which prevents Shooter getting a higher rating from me. One star away from every these fooleries: 1. Sarah Fenn (Kate Mara). Not a bad acting but her character was absolutely needless. And thanks to her scenes this film drags a bit in the halfway.

2. The ending was quite disappointing, but not going to say anymore about it, don't want to spoil it for anyone. Seems that some viewers actually think that's a great ending.

3. The whole America thing. Im not saying that this was anti-American or pro-American, and I don't really care if this was either one, I'm just SO bored with films commenting the state of America somehow. I live in Europe and I do not care! For Americans, think it like this, imagine if, for example, France would produce movies for universal distribution as much as Hollywood. And every second french movie would handle french government or politics somehow at least in some subplot. Would you grew tired of it? Without these flaws this movie would be perfect action movie in the same league with Die Hard, Hard Boiled, Ronin, and so on.

7/10

The Matrix Revolutions (2003)

Disappointment

[4/10 · 22 September 2008]

The Matrix Revolutions (2003), third and final installation of the Matrix series is considered the worst of the three by many viewers. Now after second viewing I can relate to both negative and positive reviews. It isn't very good movie, but it surely isn't as bad as it's told either.

The Matrix (1999) was and is a masterpiece. Not only as a technical achievement for revolutionary special effects but having one of the most original stories Wachowskis brothers created one of the seminal movies ever made. It was a really jaw dropping experience back in 99 and it's nearly that still today.

Matrix Reloaded (2003) included some fancy scenes but as a whole it was quite incoherent mess. The Zion scenes weren't nearly as interesting as scenes inside matrix. Story was very confusing and many things left unexplained. Still I was ready to forgive these things if Revolutions would turn out to be as good (or even nearly as good) as original Matrix. I had very high hopes for the last installation to sum up everything that was brought up in Reloaded.

After seeing Revolutions in premiere 2003 it felt huge disaster. If I had reviewed it back then, I would give it something more like 3/10. Nothing was explained nor nothing new brought up. Just the same old "machines are getting closer oh no", "we gotta protect Zion", "you know Neo what brought you here?" yadda yadda yadda. What was the purpose of that Merovingian guy? What is it with Agent Smith? Why is he doing what he is doing? What was all that Architects waffle about in Reloaded? And not only that but the rate of the dialog was lowered nearly at the bottom ("I don't have time for this s*it"), and the script was bloated with just completely pointless raffle, just look at this:

" Agent Smith: Why, Mr. Anderson? Why do you do it? Why get up? Why keep fighting? Do you believe you're fighting for something? For more than your survival? Can you tell me what it is? Do you even know? Is it freedom? Or truth? Perhaps peace? Yes? No? Could it be for love? Illusions, Mr. Anderson. Vagaries of perception. The temporary constructs of a feeble human intellect trying desperately to justify an existence that is without meaning or purpose. And all of them as artificial as the Matrix itself, although only a human mind could invent something as insipid as love. You must be able to see it, Mr. Anderson. You must know it by now. You can't win. It's pointless to keep fighting. Why, Mr. Anderson? Why? Why do you persist?

Neo: Because I choose to. "

AAAAARRRRGGHHH!!!!!!

Way too much time was spent in Zion, way too much talking and the ending was horrible. I could really come with a lot of stuff that was bad or lacked in Reloaded and Revolutions if I wanted, the cgi-fight between men and machines was really tensionless, character names were uninventive (the man who makes keys.. he's the Key Maker! The man with the train.. The Train Man!), Monica Bellucci was only for showing tits in Revolutions, and so on but lets leave it here..

I viewed it second time last night, and it felt somewhat improved. If one could view it as an indepent film, it isn't so bad. Just try to forget you ever saw The Matrix (1999) and this one will be a bit better. Action scenes are cool as ever, kind of apocalyptic feeling is present in most of the movie, and some individual scenes were in the league of the best scenes in a whole trilogy, like Neos confrontation with the Deus ex machina, highly classy scene, and the final fight with Agent Smith was closest thing anime has came to live action movie.

Still, it had awful and redundant dialog at times, it included one of the corniest dying scene ever filmed, and I still can't stand the ending tough.

In a nutshell: Main problem with Reloaded and Revolutions is that they spend too much time in "the real world". In Matrix (1999) time spent in matrix is somewhere 90% of the whole movie. It's the core and soul of the whole movie. In Reloaded matrixtime was maybe 40-50% and Revolutions below 30%. I don't care about the Zion, Niobe, Link, that boy who idolizes Neo and saves the day in Revolutions (already forgot his name), or anyone/anything that goes on outside the matrix.

Matrix Revolutions as indepent film 6/10

Matrix Revolutions as a Matrix film 3/10

Flying Padre (1951)

Interesting little document, but...

[5/10 · 6 March 2005]

A Story about a priest who flies with plane wherever he is needed could have been fresh and exciting in the fifties, but looking this today it certainly feels very dated and a bit clumsy, still interesting view in to the past nonetheless. The Reverend is portrayed as very sympathetic and kind man as he flies long distances for aid people and asks nothing for his help.

It's really hard to find any Kubrick's later trademarks here, in fact it's nearly impossible even recognize it's directed by him if you don't know it already nor catch his name in the opening credits. I really wouldn't recommend this except for its curiosity values.

Space Butchers (2005 Video)

Cheap and boring

[1/10 · 2 March 2005]

This is a Finnish homemade movie made by a bunch of teenagers in the spirit of good old Bad Taste (altought this piece of s**t will make Bad Taste look like Apocalypse Now). UFO is landed on earth bringing virus which turns people into zombies and two guys goes to hunt them down. In practice this means two teenagers wandering around the forest and shooting these "zombies" whenever they see them. Doesn't this sound good or what? There are few "actors" playing many parts each and most of the dialogue is just reusing one sentence: "What the f*ck?". It really isn't even unintentionally funny, just boring, even 68 minutes is really pushing it! Can't say that this would be even a turkey, more like a wannabe turkey. Best part in this is one music track stolen from Lucio Fulci's "The Beyond" which is used few times throughout this movie.

Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones (2002)

2/10

[4/10 · 28 February 2005]

First of all, I am NOT a Star Wars fan of any kind. I went to see this just waiting for something entertaining mindless junk like Pirates Of The Caribbean, not Kurosawa, Sergio Leone, or Krzysztof Kieslowski picture. And boy it really was a mindless junk but far far from entertaining.

The film is at its best in portraying Ewan McGregor as Obi-Wan Kenobi, only actor in the movie who successfully puts some kind of enthusiasm in his role (plus he has gained more believability as Obi-Wan with his beard). There are some other good actors too like Samuel L. Jackson and Christopher Lee, but they just sleepwalk over their roles, I didn't saw any kind of personality in their characters. Natalie Portman is clearly uncomfortable in her role (no wonder, dialog between her and Hayden is really, I mean REALLY awkward), and ridiculous Hayden Christensen just doesn't fit in his role, they both look and act like 16 year old kids.

So the screenplay was overall very poor and sloppily written. You really never find yourself caring about any of the characters. So did wonderful special effects and great story save the day? No way.. Somewhere in the middle of movie I nearly felt physically sick from watching this kind of terrible CGI-overuse and stupid lifeless CGI-characters. Some scenes look like they've made straight from some video game like Anakin and Padme jumping over machines in factory.

Attack of the Clones is slightly improvement over abysmal Phantom Menace, but it's still a soulless trash, appealing only to kids with low attention spans. IMDb rating 7.0 is insane, it's really not much better than Battlefield Earth. I doubt I'll watch this one again.

Spirited Away (2001)

Arousing story with stunning atmosphere

[9/10 · 21 May 2004]

I just watched this last night and I'm still pretty much in awe. This is a fairy tale for all ages, full of breathtaking visions and dreamlike characters. It's quite incomprehensible that someone has such imagination to build this wonderful tale.

This maybe isn't Hayao Miyazaki's finest work but then again, all his works (which I have seen this far) are masterpieces. Best thing with his movies is that you can never say what happens next. It may require several viewings to understand this whole thing completely but after first viewing I am ready to give this..

9/10

Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within (2001)

Animation is good, film is less than mediocre

[5/10 · 9 May 2004]

This movie had potential to be great. Such a shame they used all their time to make animation look good. Story is just mediocre at its best and dialog is just plain awful. That Steve Buscemi's character had one stupid on-liner after another stupid on-liner. And those clichés.. yeah, in Hollywood way in your party must be at least one female, hero, one sidekick and one black guy. C'mon! Is this really best you can do? What happened to the people who wrote those fantastic stories in Final Fantasy games?

This film is still watchable, but it's quite likely that most will watch it just once for the fine animation.

5/10