andersonenvy Reviews

Kidnap (I) (2017)

Thrill Ride

[7/10 · 5 January 2018]

I love simple movies that take place in one day or one setting, and this film does that, while keeping you on the edge of your seat the entire time. No need for subplots and romance, just a fun time.

Sure, the mother makes some dumb choices, but that's part of the fun. Ever seen a horror film? The fun part is screaming at the TV "No! Don't leave the shotgun on the table!"

My main gripe is a few very weird editing/stylistic choices that seem out of place. Also, the bit with the bad lady on the phone talking about the ransom ruined the cryptic bad guys, who would have been far more interesting without knowing their motives. And, the last bad guy at the end was just wonky and unnecessary - I didn't buy it.

But overall, this was the most fun movie I've seen in awhile. Great work to the cast and crew!

John Carter (2012)

How did this get made?

[2/10 · 7 August 2013]

This has to be one of the silliest films I've ever seen. Words can't really describe: It really seems like the entire story and screenplay were written by a child... It reminds me of when I was a kid and would play with my action figures, and they'd be fighting monsters, but then they could fly, but then they'd save the princess, and then they'd teleport to other planets and stuff. And yet, even despite the sheer randomness of the plot, it ends up being completely predictable. I mean, from the very beginning we know Carter isn't really in the tomb, but come on you really just use the 'Rome and Juliet' cop-out? He literally just says "Toxin. Derived from the Puffer-Fish. Simulates death." That's how silly this movie is. I'm really not sure how this film was even green-lit, but it's no surprise that it set a few records for biggest movie flop of all time (the budget for this movie was $250,000,000 and it only earned $75,000). I just don't understand how this movie even exists.

The Greatest Movie Ever Made (2001)

Better than Citizen Kane?

[10/10 · 16 February 2010]

Of all of the films of the past century, many have been dubbed "The Greatest"... Citizen Kane, Gone With The Wind, and Psycho have all vied for this coveted title. However, all three of these films, as well as every other movie ever made in history, pales in comparison to The Greatest Movie Ever Made, which is not only an instant classic, but also a genuine hope for the future of film and all high art in general. One can only assume that all future discussions of art, truth, and soul will use this film as a frame of reference to what perfection can be. The Greatest Movie Ever Made is a cinematic masterpiece that not only encapsulates the essence of renowned art and outstanding film, but encapsulates life itself. 10/10 (and I never give tens!)

Suture (1993)

What a Bad Idea...

[2/10 · 10 May 2007]

This film is like when you're sitting around drunk with your friends and some guy says something clever, and then you're like "Oh dude that would make a cool movie!" Then you wake up the next day and think "Wow, I was really wasted last night, what was I thinking"?

*SPOILER*

So, some scrawny old balding guy decides to kill his brother who is this big black guy. He slips his magical, indestructible drivers license into the black guy's wallet, and proceeds to blow him up. The dental records won't survive, but the ID card certainly will!

The black guy survives, but has amnesia. But somehow everyone mistakes the black guy for the white guy... Apparently, being in an explosion gives you black skin, African facial features, a full head of hair, and a different voice and personality.

Despite how insanely ridiculous this movie idea is, somehow the film continues to be completely predictable throughout. It's boring to boot.

If anyone can give me one good reason this film exists, please do.

But I will say the cinematography was pretty good/interesting.

From Justin to Kelly (2003)

Wow

[1/10 · 17 May 2006]

This one is up there with Xanadu in WORST MOVIES EVER MADE... Where do I begin? The horrible music? The bursts into song out of nowhere? The unfunny characters? The atrocious acting? The insanely predictable lines and situations? The ridiculous clothing? The ugly/gay lead character? The blonde girl who can't sing? I could go on... but what's the point?

But it IS a great movie to make fun of with your friends (if that is your thing)... I don't think I stopped laughing for the entire first 15 minutes or so.

I have fortunately never seen an episode of American Idol, and this solidifies the fact that I never will. This movie is as retarded as it gets.

I do not hand out 1 Star ratings often, but this deserves even less. I can't believe I wasted my time typing and reviewing this garbage.

King Kong (2005)

Peter Jackson fails yet again

[2/10 · 29 March 2006]

Here comes the King of the stupid remakes. Wow. Let's begin with the one good thing about this film - the cinematography and special effects departments. The visuals in this movie are stunning, and, let's face it, are the reason you went to see it. Jackson does a great job with lighting on the characters, making the actors appear just a bit CGI themselves, to match the imperfect CGI of the animals. Not to mention the wonderful looking 30's NYC. The only part that looked fake at all is when Kong gets out of his chains in the theater.

So why could a movie such as this only get 2 stars from me? Simple. It was written by a 2 year old. OK, I can admit this movie would be great for kids, but for intelligent adults, it has some of the most ridiculous lines and characters ever filmed. We all know the story of King Kong, so the movie itself is, of course, completely predictable. But when you can predict each character's cheesy line right before they say it, something is wrong.

Let's start from the beginning. The movie opens up and we are rushed through a sad scene with Naomi Watts and some random old guy who is going to Chicago. We don't know who he is or why he is leaving, and (in true Peter Jackon style) we never will. The old guy later shows up at the theater, but we are still confused as to exactly what role he is playing.

Naomi Watts can't find a job as an actress, and begins to starve, resorting to stealing food and even considering becoming a hooker. Jack Black to the rescue with the movie role of a lifetime for her. Starving Watts (for some unexplained reason) turns him down. What?!!! Of course, he talks her into it.

Now on the way to the island, we are run through about 30 minutes more of ludicrous acting and scenarios that have nothing to do with the story. A boring side-story with the token black mentor sailor teaching the young, inexperienced sailor, stuff like that. Skip ahead to the island. The islanders were sort of cool, but why not capture Watts right away? We have to wait another 20 mins for her capture aboard the ship. Boring.

Now in to the rescue comes the men. Unlike the great adventure stories like Jurassic Park, in this one, they never use their smarts to get out of a hairy situation. They are constantly saved by dumb luck. Somehow surviving a brontosaurus stampede, then a swarm of bugs. Why not use the light to scare away the big bugs? It would be a really cool scene! No, we'll just have some guy magically show up with a tommy gun and kill thousands of them in about 2 seconds. I'd go on, but you know what I mean.

Now, capture Kong and bring him to NYC. How will they get him aboard the ship? No explanation. They just do. Here is the moment I have been waiting for. King Kong loose in the city. Ehhh. Not much happens aside from the car chase. I've been waiting 2.5 hours for this scene and it's a bit short. Naomi Watts appears out of nowhere in my favorite stupid "saved by dumb luck" scene. The predictable, "sad" ending, had me laughing.

In all of this what do we walk away from? Did Jack Black learn his lesson? He was a jerk throughout the whole movie. Character development? What's that? No. He just says "It's beauty and the beast" and walks away. What??!?!!!

Jackson needs to stop concentrating on special effects, and use some of those millions for a decent screenplay. Heck, if he paid me $100, I'd write him something twice as good, and (as you can tell from this review) I am no writer. I give this movie a huge Boo.

Good Night, and Good Luck. (2005)

*Booooorrrrrriiiiiinnnnnnggggg*

[4/10 · 21 March 2006]

Since I am only 24 years old, and don't care much about history, I can honestly say I knew nothing about McCarthy-ism before watching this film. That said, I can now say (after watching it) that I still don't have a clue. As for the fact-checkers, I could care less if it's accurate or not. This may well be the most boring movie I have seen since "The Accidental Tourist" in 88. The characters go nowhere. The plot dies before it begins. The rhetoric is so authentically mundane, it's hard to sit through. Well made, but might be more interesting for a student of journalism. I can't forgive a movie that plays off as a documentary. If it's a doc, call it thus, so I can then avoid it at all costs. (I.E. Blackhawk Down)...."Life and Times" movies are notorious for being bad, and this one is no exception. I have to give Clooney credit once again for his great directing, though. His abilities as a director far outweigh his as an actor, and, even though I didn't personally like this one, I see a lot of potential in the future for him. I'd say he out-did Ang Lee for this years best. The casting was outstanding as well. 4 stars out of 10.

The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938)

Incredibly Lame

[5/10 · 12 February 2006]

In all my days I have never seen a more goofy attempt at an actual film. Robin's men are certainly merry as they boast a big, "HA! HA! HA!" after literally anything they ever do. The fight scenes are mediocre at best, but more cheesy than anything. If this film was going for super- cheesy, it succeeded, but who wants to sit through that other than to simply make fun of the atrocious lines and situations?

The tag line for the film states that it is a movie that you can see with your kids and secretly like yourself. I dare you to find me a kid who would actually enjoy seeing this garbage.

I give it 5 stars because it was made in '38, and the cinematography is excellent. Thus far, I am not too impressed by any of the Robin Hood movies.

On the Waterfront (1954)

Great film - atrocious music

[6/10 · 11 February 2006]

Brando's acting in this classic film about working the 'Docks during the depression is quite admirable. The other, well casted, actors also do a great job for the most part. The story is excellent, probably one of the best mob movie plots I've seen. The direction and production are very good for the early 50's.

The soundtrack to this film, however, is pretty bad. Loud horns and violins drop in during scenes when nothing is happening at all. It annoyingly happens throughout the entirety of the film, making OTWF a little difficult to sit through at times.

Besides the score, the film has very few flaws (the scene as Brando breaks in the woman's door for the kiss is laughable) and could be enjoyed by any movie fan with a little patience. It's not too bad.

The Bridge on the River Kwai (1957)

Good story, but not for people with short attention spans.

[6/10 · 8 February 2006]

WIth a great plot and well done performances for its era, TBOTRK is a fantastic view of one of the lesser known sides to WW2, the POWs on the Asian front. It's an exciting and often nail- biting look at life for British POWs building a bridge for the Japanse, and the true meaning of the term "fog of war". However, at over 160 min this film is not for people who want a quick fix. The horrific editing of this great film demands a lot of patience from the viewer. For instance, we are forced to watch a 10 minute cut of commandos placing mines on the bridge, a scene which could have easily been cut down to under 1 minute. The movie basically follows this pattern throughout, as long, drawn out scenes are constantly in the way of storyline. This film could have been cut down to under 90 mins and still had the same effect. Poor editing, but a great film if you have the patience.

Red Eye (2005)

I don't think so....

[3/10 · 2 February 2006]

In this latest Wes Craven atrocity, we are completely duped yet again. The deceiving previews lead us to believe we are about to see a great new thriller about a psychopath who coincidentally sits next to a woman on a plane who he decides to terrorize.

The film plods along in classic Craven normality, building suspense until...wait for the big let down...there it is! The psyhco killer is actually just a mobster who needs her to make a dull phone call because she happens to be a hotel manager that can help him. What??!?! Obviously, this horrible plot only goes downhill from here. The bad guy has been following her every move for 8 weeks, these guys are obviously well versed and ready to make a huge hit on a substantial target. Unfotunately the best "plan" they could concoct was to move the target into another hotel room and....shoot him with a rocket from a fishing boat?!?!!!! How could they possibly expect to get away with this? Utterly ridiculous. They'd have a better chance shooting him from the shore in his original room. Then, at least, they could possibly get away.

I won't go into any more of the moronic moves by the bad guys, lets move onto the girl. As soon as she stabs the bad guy in the neck and grabs his phone, she could've alerted the police and saved the day. Instead...she decides to run from the cops and take on everything herself. Predictably ending up alone inside the house with the killer, instead of in the safety of a police station with the killer behind bars. Uggghhh....

I will say that I have seen worse acting in a Craven film, but not by much. Also, the suspense was pretty high during the scenes aboard the plane, but considering it was all for nothing plot-wise, I can not praise any of those scenes too highly.

Usually with a thriller/horror I would say, "Rent it, then trash it". This movie is most definitely not even worth the price of the rental.