Change Your Image
nick_mcdougall
Reviews
The Da Vinci Code (2006)
Disappointing to say the least
I'll say right off, I haven't read the book. i tried, but found Dan Browns style of "Langdon drove past a monument, heres a 20 page history on it" very difficult to get into.
As such i went into this movie not sure what to expect. I had liked previous films done by Ron Howard, but i have hated everything written by Akiva Goldsman. the cast looked great, but the story didn't interest me. All the same i did end up seeing it the day it came out, because all the controversy and huge amount of advertising for this film had certainly been effective in building hype.
Unfortunately its hype that really isn't deserved. There ends up being very little to get excited over in this movie, and maybe it plays well on page, where millions of readers got hooked to this modern day holy grail quest, but translate to screen it does not.
The main problem with this film is the characters. there aren't any. instead the film makers have given us merely a bunch of people able to recite exposition. The convoluted plot demands so much explanation, the religious mythology and art history so complicated and difficult to explain to an audience, that there's really no time left for dialog about anything else. We know Langdon is meant to be the hero, but i cant for the life of me figure out why. He doesn't really do anything heroic. he doesn't really give us any insight into his character, apart from the fact he happens to be claustrophobic, which never has any relevancy towards anything.
The murder from which the whole story begins seems utterly ludicrous. An old man who is part of a secret society gets shot in the stomach, and then with his final moments to live, goes all around the giant museum that is the Louvre, painting over famous art works, hiding keys, and eventually stripping off, painting a circle with his own blood and laying in the middle of it in order to recreate another famous art work. Did it not cross his mind, while he had all this ample time to... oh i don't know... call an ambulance? or even better, ring Langdon directly and just tell him the frigging mystery? it just seems ridiculous for Pete's sake.
In spite of this insipid plot, the cast are all pretty good. Hanks does an OK job with a non existent character. Audrey Tautou is so beautiful you will ignore the fact that she doesn't get to do anything except every now and then say "what does this mean" and "what's going on?" thus allowing the other characters to go on a giant ramble to explain the historical relevancy of just about every tiny religious detail in order for the plot to make a lick of sense. Ian McKellan is just as fantastic as everyone says, as is to be expected, and manages to have fun with each and every syllable of his clunky dialog. Jean Reno and Alfred Molina really don't get anything to do, which is unfortunate for two such excellent actors.
When all is said and done, there's not much going on with this film, a pulp novel adaptation that takes itself far too seriously. I found myself drifting off towards the end, because they seem to want to end the movie at at least three separate points. i wont spoil the twist but you'll understand if you see it. a disappointing effort I'm sad to say.
Mission: Impossible III (2006)
M:I:III works to reinvigorate a series that got tired after one movie.
I'll say right now i'm not a fan of M:I:II. i saw it out of patriotism, but couldn't have been more disappointed, considering the first movie is an incredibly tense and well thought out thriller. this third installment however, is a strong step back in the right direction, and probably outshines even the first film. After seeing this, i cant wait to see what will happen in the future for this series.
One hugely important element here is the supporting cast, who are all brilliant without exception. Michelle Monaghan as the fiancé makes you completely understand why Ethan Hunt would want to turn his back on his secret service days. Hoffman is unflappably calculating, evil and awesome, the kind of bad guy who doesn't evil monologue, doesn't reveal a thing, and is watching you every second to uncover your weakness. Billy Crudup works perfectly as the agent who seems out of his depth and yet seems completely trustworthy. Jonathan Rhys Myers seems perfectly at ease transforming from one disguise and accent to another, and gives what would have been a throw away part so much more character. Maggie Q is beautiful, and like Myers, gives her character much more than what seems to be written for her. Laurence Fishburn speaks each and every line of dialogue with a degree of cool reserved for his acting style alone. Simon Pegg, i cant watch this man without laughing, he manages to make anything seem funny. If they do in fact make any future instalments for the MI series I really hope they keep some of these characters going on. Ving Rhames has staked himself recurring ground and it would be great to see a few more familiar faces.
Secondly is the direction, Abrams makes his big screen directorial debut count in every way possible. he manages to balance his exploration of both the significance of the characters and the significance of explosive action set pieces in a way that satisfies exactly what i was hoping to see from this film.
The script seems to have taken the strongest elements of the first two movies and mixed them together, so we get to see the intelligence of the first movie through the spy thriller genre, as well as the fast paced, highly stylised antics of the second movie through the action genre. the result is one of excellent cinematic entertainment. rush out and see it. SEE IT NOW I SAY!!!
Sons & Daughters (2006)
A brilliant show that wont last
When this show first started it had the rather lofty legacy left by Arrested Development to live up to, due to various comparisons made by TV critics. This proved fairly unfortunate considering the die hard fan base that surrounds Arrested Development, but at the same time it is not altogether unexpected.
Certainly the two shows bare many similarities. Both are about comical situations that arise from immediate and extended family relationships, and both have a large ensemble cast. Character roles are also very similar between the two shows, Don the struggling actor uncle is much like Tobius the struggling actor uncle, Carrie the sarcastic teen far more mature than her two parents is much like Maeby Funke, Henry the awkward teenager resembles George Michael, and in the center Cameron is relied upon to hold his family together much the same as Micheal Bluth did.
However, that being said co creators Fred Goss and Nick Holly still manage to create a show where every character feels original, realistic and sympathetic. The absurdity of the situation never outshines the emotions of the people within that situation, the humour of an episode never eclipses importance of the relationships between the members of the Walker and Fenton family.
The partially improvised scripting helps this show break away from the normal verbal patterns witnessed in other sit coms, where its generally just examples of feed line, punch line, pause for laughter, feed line, punch line pause for laughter, repeat ad nausea. instead their dialog flows more naturally, overlapping, stuttering and fumbling. Somehow it's truthful, relatable and still very funny.
As the first season nears its end it saddens me to think these characters probably wont be returning to TV screens, due to fairly poor ratings. 11 episodes is barely a blip on the radar for most shows, and its not nearly sufficient in the case of these characters who have so many more stories to tell and so much more history to reveal. If there's any justice in the world we will be seeing much more of Sons & Daughters, but unfortunately we live in a world where American Idol is the most watched show on TV, so justice clearly went out the window.
Swimfan (2002)
Terrible
I was unfortunate enough to watch this movie one day on cable TV, and have since been forcefully advocating my hatred of it to anyone that will listen. John Polsen whom i had so much respect for, considering he directed the Trop Fest film festival into becoming the hulking success it is today, and also directing Siam Sunset which i greatly enjoyed, has permanently stained his career in my perspective, with this his first leap into Hollywood. The main character, Ben a devoted swimmer, is unwaveringly unlikable. His sleazy demeanor make it impossible to find him remotely empathetic, and so when he does happen to have a high school affair with the mentally unbalanced new girl, and she continues to seek vengeance upon him once he spurns her, i found myself wishing her the very best. Not that i found it possible to relate to her on any level either, because in the script she is presented as such a shallow stick figure of a character. each twist this film takes seems hackneyed, each line of dialog feels forced. I'm sorry to say this, i really am, but it's simply rubbish in my opinion
Why We Ponder (2003)
A cinematic work beyond comparison
Winner of the coveted best film award at the Quick Flick short film festival, as well as also snatching up best junior director for Nathan Hunt and best junior script for Trilby Beresford, (but not best cinematography, blast) this film details the story of a young boy forced to come to terms with his own family's internal trauma, caused by the death of his older brother.
Mr Hunt and the crew at Calm Water Pictures have created a masterful and moving depiction of an emotional journey to forgiveness. ten stars from this thoroughly impressed viewer, though i do think they should try and spell the name of the cinematographer right. that guy is going places...