Reviews

5 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
1/10
Just cheap, ugly, and in your face
6 September 2004
Should I completely overlook the extremely poor, practically amateurish realization of this project . . . as the filmmaker apparently chose to . . . I am still left with a greater and more troubling barrier: simultaneously weak and undisciplined direction.

Whatever subtlety or finesse of dramatic tension might have existed in the script, it didn't survive the transition to screen once this team hit the location with mini-dv cams and inspiration from Cassavetes in tow.

Perhaps it is my nature to view the glass as half empty, but the impact this film could have had is betrayed by a very poor respect for cinematic structure and timing. It plays more like a documentary . . . the audience remains strictly in the third person, voyeurs at best . . . opposed to properly executed narrative cinema which actually works to draw the audience into the room, into the story.

The disregard for the craft here so degrades the cinema's ability to transport the audience that the voyeuristic result is almost pornographic. No allegory or underlying themes to entice the audience's imaginations. Just cheap, ugly, and in your face.

On top of everything else must be the most absolutely wretched soundtrack . . . dreadful, droning music that does nothing to enhance the emotional arc of the story.
9 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Once Upon a Mess of a Movie
22 September 2003
A great cast playing interesting characters in a fantastic setting

with the potential to re-define a genre . . . and nothing.

Somewhere along the line I got the impression that movies were

intended to engage, transport, entertain and inspire. I couldn't quit

thinking about my valuable time and the eight bucks I wasted on

this mess.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Sad ... Not the story, the filmmaking.
11 May 2003
One of the worst films I have ever seen. Trite, inconsistent, overdone characters spouting an endless spray of lip flap, ultimately betraying an idea which might have had impact in more capable hands.

I don't even know why I'm writing this, it doesn't even merit criticism. I want my 90 minutes and 9 bucks back.
8 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Hannibal (2001)
8/10
Stands on it's own
21 February 2001
I found the film very entertaining--by no means perfect, but probably just about as good a movie that could have been made from that particular novel.

If Scott and the screenwriters had taken themselves too seriously, or merely tried to duplicate the approach of the prior film, the movie would have been a total disaster.

The primary problems appear to be the result of weaknesses in the novel.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
G.I. Jane (1997)
6/10
Good until final act
16 December 1999
The film was actually very good--until the final act. The "tacked" on battle was gratuitous and did little to serve the story. I'd read that Ridley originally shot Moore's character dying in action, which would have reinforced the idea that she was a political pawn
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed