The explosion at the beginning is very nice. Hugh Jackman has definite onscreen charisma. I thought the writing was mostly pathetic and/or horrendously pretentious.
Reviews
15 Reviews
Glengarry Glen Ross
(1992)
Small yet engrossing
20 July 2001
This is an excellent 'film'. I place that in quotes because, since the picture was based of David Mamet's play, it is less of a 'film' than it is a play put on the big screen. Where this picture excels is in its dialogue (the film is essentially, entirely dialogue) and its performances. Al Pacino is charismatic and exciting. Jack Lemmon is utterly wonderful, believably downbeat yet electrified and invigerated during his sales pitches. Basically, every one of this picture's main characters is excellent. The angry Ed Harris has a lot of power, Kevin Spacey is superb as the slimey, despised "child" boss with brains if not experience and Alan Alda is low-key and as skillful as ever. The story is very small in terms of where it takes the viewer (quite literally the street, the office, a bar, a some doorsteps) but the broadness of the characters and the skill on show more than make the picture enjoyable.
Its not action packed in the traditional sense, but watching such a fine cast work their magic is more than enough reason to watch it.
8/10
Its not action packed in the traditional sense, but watching such a fine cast work their magic is more than enough reason to watch it.
8/10
Drunken Master II
(1994)
One of the Best I've seen...
13 April 2001
Wow. This has to be one of the most impressive films I've ever seen! So the plot is the usual swill, but the fight scenes are most probably the best I've ever seen. And yes, I've seen The Matrix, Iron Monkey and Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon.
Watch this film if you like Martial Arts. You will not be disappointed.
Watch this film if you like Martial Arts. You will not be disappointed.
Unbreakable
(2000)
Often excellent, mostly good...
1 January 2001
Warning: Spoilers
MAYBE SPOILERS! ABOUT THE SIXTH SENSE THOUGH NOT THIS FILM!!
OK, lets set the scene, just so you know I enjoy the Sixth Sense as a film, when I first saw it the twist blew me away. However, once I thought about it, I decided it didn't really work, here's a guy that's been living out his life for some unknown amount of time (although I think its fair to assume its probably a few months or so) without anyone saying a word to him, without human touch and generally walking about finding locked doors and silence in his path. I don't think the end worked because surely he would have sensed something was wrong and wouldn't have been the calm character he actually was. So now you know my taste in Syamalan...
But anyway, this review is about Unbreakable, which, in short I did like, but I found to be very flawed. The beginning bored me to death, but then came Samuel L. and all was well :) He was great as ever in this movie, filling each scene he was in with his uncanny ability to hold the screen on his (brittle) shoulders. But while this film did have its superb moments (when Willis stands in the train station in his raincoat was a stand out moment for me) mostly it seemed to be too much of good ideas wasted. But, as I said, I enjoyed the film despite its lack of depth and unfortunately lethargic pace.
But I would recommend seeing it, the twist at the end of this outing is a pretty good one, even if I did guess it before the end...but at least this time it made sense :)
I gave the film 7/10 in IMDB, because it had a nice sense of humour and a good sense of reality, even if some of its handling of the superhero methodology was a little too comic book for the real life setting.
OK, lets set the scene, just so you know I enjoy the Sixth Sense as a film, when I first saw it the twist blew me away. However, once I thought about it, I decided it didn't really work, here's a guy that's been living out his life for some unknown amount of time (although I think its fair to assume its probably a few months or so) without anyone saying a word to him, without human touch and generally walking about finding locked doors and silence in his path. I don't think the end worked because surely he would have sensed something was wrong and wouldn't have been the calm character he actually was. So now you know my taste in Syamalan...
But anyway, this review is about Unbreakable, which, in short I did like, but I found to be very flawed. The beginning bored me to death, but then came Samuel L. and all was well :) He was great as ever in this movie, filling each scene he was in with his uncanny ability to hold the screen on his (brittle) shoulders. But while this film did have its superb moments (when Willis stands in the train station in his raincoat was a stand out moment for me) mostly it seemed to be too much of good ideas wasted. But, as I said, I enjoyed the film despite its lack of depth and unfortunately lethargic pace.
But I would recommend seeing it, the twist at the end of this outing is a pretty good one, even if I did guess it before the end...but at least this time it made sense :)
I gave the film 7/10 in IMDB, because it had a nice sense of humour and a good sense of reality, even if some of its handling of the superhero methodology was a little too comic book for the real life setting.
The 6th Day
(2000)
On the Sixth Day, God created Arnie, MISTAKE!
17 December 2000
OK, so this is not a good film, it has a great many problems, most of them Arnie, but thats not what I want to warn you about here today.
This film contains, without a doubt in my mind, the most terrifying, the most horrific abonination ever to grace the silver screen. A creature so evil, so mesmerisingly demonic, and with such manky eyes, the Sim-Pal!
This cute little doll that grows real hair and gives kids hours of fun, before it takes up the largest knife it can find and guts the family screaming the likes of "I wanna play" in true Chucky style...it doesn't actually do that in the film, but it has that kind of face...
Don't see this film for the plot (what plot), don't see this film for the acting (come on, its Arnie) see it to feel terror like never before, see it to push your mind the the brink of madness, see it for the Sim-Pal...
This film contains, without a doubt in my mind, the most terrifying, the most horrific abonination ever to grace the silver screen. A creature so evil, so mesmerisingly demonic, and with such manky eyes, the Sim-Pal!
This cute little doll that grows real hair and gives kids hours of fun, before it takes up the largest knife it can find and guts the family screaming the likes of "I wanna play" in true Chucky style...it doesn't actually do that in the film, but it has that kind of face...
Don't see this film for the plot (what plot), don't see this film for the acting (come on, its Arnie) see it to feel terror like never before, see it to push your mind the the brink of madness, see it for the Sim-Pal...
Being John Malkovich
(1999)
Stupendously Wonderful
21 September 2000
This is my favourite film of all time (and before you ask, yes, I've seen the classics, Citizen Kane, Seven Samurai, Toy Story 2). This is one of those ludicrously rare movies where it is so completely well written, the monsterously barmy and complex plot is completely understandable and easy to follow at all times (well, I thought it was :).
The acting is wonderful throughout, the plot is tremendously original and works so well within its own twisted little world, working along its own twisted logic. This is a deeply interesting film, a deeply funny film and a deeply entertaining film. Deeply.
I love it, and I am extremely proud to say that I, for the first time in my life, own my favourite film of all time :)
The acting is wonderful throughout, the plot is tremendously original and works so well within its own twisted little world, working along its own twisted logic. This is a deeply interesting film, a deeply funny film and a deeply entertaining film. Deeply.
I love it, and I am extremely proud to say that I, for the first time in my life, own my favourite film of all time :)
Snatch
(2000)
Utterly great stuff...
7 September 2000
I liked Lock Stock a lot, but this is even better, more characters, more gags, a nicer, darker plot and the superbly impressive Brad Pitt.
Awesome film, superbly directed and wittily written. Excrutiatingly funny at times, always very entertaining. Excellent entertainment.
Go see, 9 out of 10
Awesome film, superbly directed and wittily written. Excrutiatingly funny at times, always very entertaining. Excellent entertainment.
Go see, 9 out of 10
X-Men
(2000)
Very enjoyable piece of rubbish...
20 August 2000
Hello, OK so I saw it last night and here's a quick run down on what I thought of it.
I'm gonna address many of the points people have made in the many reviews I've read for this film one by one as to whether I agree or disagree with them. OK, here goes:
Q Is the film enjoyable? A Yes, I found it very enjoyable, why? Cos it was nicely directed, had a few funny jokes in it, it had the superbly hot Famke Janssen (or is it 2 Ns, one S) wearing nice night tops, Halle Berry's wonderful breasts (yup, subtlety there) and even little Anna Paquin has grown up to be a rather attractive large breasted young thing. Top-notch birdage all round. Oh and of course Mystique has a fantastic body, shame it was blue and scaly.
Q Does it screw up all the X-Men timeline stuff? A Oh yes, all the storylines the film is based on have been screwed to b****ry. Examples include the fact that Cyclops and Iceman were supposed to be the same age and should have joined the academy at the same time, however Cyclops is a mid twenties member of the team whilst Iceman is an adolescent school boy in the classroom. But hey, I didn't actually care much cos I've forgotten almost the entire plot from the comics and it was only Alex that reminded me of most of it.
Q Are the FX nice? A Oh yes, lovely stuff. Nice CGI, nice Wolverine claws, yeah, t'was good.
Q Is the plot of the film too lightweight and does it think its being all serious and great when its actually not? A Yup, the plot stank. Overall premise was fine (after all that's the whole point of the X-Men) but it had a lot of holes in it. And it all seemed a bit TOO much like the first film of three. For example, The Matrix knew it was gonna be a trilogy but it answered pretty much most of what it asked. However this film has dream sequences, underdeveloped characters and whatnot and its handled in blatantly obvious "we're gonna build on this in the next one" manner. OK, so that fine but it was there for everything. Nothing was explained!
Q How well is Wolverine used? A I thought he was pretty well used. He was nice and aggressive and didn't really do all that much really but what he did was nice, like the first time you see his claws and he pins this large bloke against a wall with two of them and slowly extends the middle one towards his neck whilst slicing the bartender's rifle in half with the other hand. Wolverine has the best lines from the film (the best of which I would love to spoil for you but I'll let you hear it for yourself when we go see it :) ) on both the macho front and the humour front. Oh and there is a beautiful piece of direction when he's swinging round a prong on the Statue of Liberty by his claws and the camera follows his claws round all four sides, spinning slowly until its completely cut off. OK so I can't explain it but you'll like it when you see it Leigh :)
Q Is Ray Park a gay stank ass? A NO! For the first time in cinema history we hear Ray Parks real voice! YAY! It's just a normal London accent actually, but it suited Toad well enough. Oh and I did like his character cos his fight scene was very nicely done and he even did a Darth Maul joke by grabbing a metal bar that was holding a lift open, spinning it in the exact same way he did with the light sabre and doing the arm to the side stance, lifted directly from Episode 1. Oh but instead of a snarl he does this really cheeky grin and it was really nicely done. Could have been a really crap joke but he pulled it off well. He doesn't get to do much martial arts but being able to jump really, really high he does some lovely Blade-esque landings. :)
But anyway, this as turned out to be a far too long review so I'll sum up now. X-Men is a very lightweight movie, the plot sucks and the timeline it's based on goes completely out of the window. But it is a very nicely directed film, the acting is mostly very good (and yes, Ian McKellen and Patrick Stuart do add the required gravitas to their roles, any scene with both of them in really did sparkle) and there were a few very funny little jokes in it (like Wolverine using the middle claw to flip off Cyclops). So in all, I thoroughly enjoyed it (Adam and Alex thought it sucked by the way) and will, hopefully, be seeing it again and yes, it shall be DVD'd.
Score: 7.5/10 (so I'll give it a 7 on imdb)
Oh yeah and it has this one really superb death scene in it where a bloke literally melts away to nothing, it was sweeeeet.
I'm gonna address many of the points people have made in the many reviews I've read for this film one by one as to whether I agree or disagree with them. OK, here goes:
Q Is the film enjoyable? A Yes, I found it very enjoyable, why? Cos it was nicely directed, had a few funny jokes in it, it had the superbly hot Famke Janssen (or is it 2 Ns, one S) wearing nice night tops, Halle Berry's wonderful breasts (yup, subtlety there) and even little Anna Paquin has grown up to be a rather attractive large breasted young thing. Top-notch birdage all round. Oh and of course Mystique has a fantastic body, shame it was blue and scaly.
Q Does it screw up all the X-Men timeline stuff? A Oh yes, all the storylines the film is based on have been screwed to b****ry. Examples include the fact that Cyclops and Iceman were supposed to be the same age and should have joined the academy at the same time, however Cyclops is a mid twenties member of the team whilst Iceman is an adolescent school boy in the classroom. But hey, I didn't actually care much cos I've forgotten almost the entire plot from the comics and it was only Alex that reminded me of most of it.
Q Are the FX nice? A Oh yes, lovely stuff. Nice CGI, nice Wolverine claws, yeah, t'was good.
Q Is the plot of the film too lightweight and does it think its being all serious and great when its actually not? A Yup, the plot stank. Overall premise was fine (after all that's the whole point of the X-Men) but it had a lot of holes in it. And it all seemed a bit TOO much like the first film of three. For example, The Matrix knew it was gonna be a trilogy but it answered pretty much most of what it asked. However this film has dream sequences, underdeveloped characters and whatnot and its handled in blatantly obvious "we're gonna build on this in the next one" manner. OK, so that fine but it was there for everything. Nothing was explained!
Q How well is Wolverine used? A I thought he was pretty well used. He was nice and aggressive and didn't really do all that much really but what he did was nice, like the first time you see his claws and he pins this large bloke against a wall with two of them and slowly extends the middle one towards his neck whilst slicing the bartender's rifle in half with the other hand. Wolverine has the best lines from the film (the best of which I would love to spoil for you but I'll let you hear it for yourself when we go see it :) ) on both the macho front and the humour front. Oh and there is a beautiful piece of direction when he's swinging round a prong on the Statue of Liberty by his claws and the camera follows his claws round all four sides, spinning slowly until its completely cut off. OK so I can't explain it but you'll like it when you see it Leigh :)
Q Is Ray Park a gay stank ass? A NO! For the first time in cinema history we hear Ray Parks real voice! YAY! It's just a normal London accent actually, but it suited Toad well enough. Oh and I did like his character cos his fight scene was very nicely done and he even did a Darth Maul joke by grabbing a metal bar that was holding a lift open, spinning it in the exact same way he did with the light sabre and doing the arm to the side stance, lifted directly from Episode 1. Oh but instead of a snarl he does this really cheeky grin and it was really nicely done. Could have been a really crap joke but he pulled it off well. He doesn't get to do much martial arts but being able to jump really, really high he does some lovely Blade-esque landings. :)
But anyway, this as turned out to be a far too long review so I'll sum up now. X-Men is a very lightweight movie, the plot sucks and the timeline it's based on goes completely out of the window. But it is a very nicely directed film, the acting is mostly very good (and yes, Ian McKellen and Patrick Stuart do add the required gravitas to their roles, any scene with both of them in really did sparkle) and there were a few very funny little jokes in it (like Wolverine using the middle claw to flip off Cyclops). So in all, I thoroughly enjoyed it (Adam and Alex thought it sucked by the way) and will, hopefully, be seeing it again and yes, it shall be DVD'd.
Score: 7.5/10 (so I'll give it a 7 on imdb)
Oh yeah and it has this one really superb death scene in it where a bloke literally melts away to nothing, it was sweeeeet.
Citizen Kane
(1941)
Finally got to see it...
28 July 2000
This is rightly regard as one of, if not the, best film ever made. After wanting to see Citizen Kane for a few years now, I finally did but one day ago.
What makes this film so good is that it is thoroughly enjoyable. Why, you may well ask and how can a film that is essentially so actionless and talky be so enjoyable? Well, let me tell you:
Welles gives one of the all time great performances in film as Charlie Kane, as he plays him right from the age of 25 up to his death many decades later. Welles, a man in his mid twenties at the time is believable and compelling to watch as his character progresses through the years, swinging from likeable rogue to controlling old man to the pitiful, unsatisfied man he was before his death.
The cinematography is truly astonishing. This film may look like so many others now but that's only because it invented the techniques, still used in cinema today. From the ground breaking miniature photography to the expert editing, this film is a beautiful sight to behold.
Finally, the wonderful structuring of the plot shines through as the film remains easy to watch as well as mentally stimulating throughout. The end is a true piece of perfect cinema history as we, the viewer, discover what rosebud was all along and how it plagued Kane's life so powerfully through the events of the movie.
In all, see this film and form you're own opinion about it because this is one of the most important movies there is, and you really should have seen it.
What makes this film so good is that it is thoroughly enjoyable. Why, you may well ask and how can a film that is essentially so actionless and talky be so enjoyable? Well, let me tell you:
Welles gives one of the all time great performances in film as Charlie Kane, as he plays him right from the age of 25 up to his death many decades later. Welles, a man in his mid twenties at the time is believable and compelling to watch as his character progresses through the years, swinging from likeable rogue to controlling old man to the pitiful, unsatisfied man he was before his death.
The cinematography is truly astonishing. This film may look like so many others now but that's only because it invented the techniques, still used in cinema today. From the ground breaking miniature photography to the expert editing, this film is a beautiful sight to behold.
Finally, the wonderful structuring of the plot shines through as the film remains easy to watch as well as mentally stimulating throughout. The end is a true piece of perfect cinema history as we, the viewer, discover what rosebud was all along and how it plagued Kane's life so powerfully through the events of the movie.
In all, see this film and form you're own opinion about it because this is one of the most important movies there is, and you really should have seen it.
Stuart Little
(1999)
I want a Stuart Little...
27 July 2000
OK, bit of an odd one this, Stuart little isn't particularly funny (it IS funny, just not enough to be a straight comedy), it isn't particularly exciting and it isn't really subtle enough to be as adult oriented in the same way as Toy Story 2 or A Bugs Life. BUT, there is something extremely, hugely likeable about it.
Its refreshingly old fashioned in that it is a really nice, happy, pure family film. I went to see it with two of my friends, all of us around the ages of 20 and 21 and we all thoroughly enjoyed it.
It has a few cracking one-liners and a few nice action set pieces but it scores by just being a really watchable, likeable, lovable film. A real one to take your entire family to...
But still, no TS2 . . . . . . . . . . 7/10
Its refreshingly old fashioned in that it is a really nice, happy, pure family film. I went to see it with two of my friends, all of us around the ages of 20 and 21 and we all thoroughly enjoyed it.
It has a few cracking one-liners and a few nice action set pieces but it scores by just being a really watchable, likeable, lovable film. A real one to take your entire family to...
But still, no TS2 . . . . . . . . . . 7/10
Mission: Impossible II
(2000)
Oh my good GOD!
9 July 2000
OK, first things first, this film is not a comedy...so why did I laugh more during its viewing than I ever have before in the cinema? Let me tell you: The major point of sheer humour was the ever shifting accent of the main bad guy's henchmen (who's name sadly eludes me). It seemed to drift somewhere in between Irish, South African, German and Australian (perhaps he's a really frequent flyer). The acting in the film is sooo bad! From The female leads drunken stumblings (signifying the advanced stages of a super virus no less) to Tom Cruises' senseless mugging and the most hilariously over emphasised pronunciation of the word "Loo" from my favourite hench-goon. The plot is possible the worst I have ever seen (and I am including every film I've watched through MST in this) and involves more 'characters not actually being who they look like but in fact wearing masks' than should ever have been allowed. This film probably took about 15 minutes to write! So, why oh why did John Woo ever decide to direct it? In a film with about 20 minutes of decent action in its 2 hours running time, why on earth did he think he could make it worth watching? Woo is a superb director of action movies but a lot of the slow-mo in the more sedate scenes just seemed unnecessary and down-right pretentious. The final quarter of an hour was superb however. The 'battle on bikes' was great and the final fist fight was entertaining if not really that impressive in terms of Martial Arts. But then again, as soon as the pre-credits action ceases, the film falls into a pit of irredeemable boredom where the 'plot' is 'explained'. My god, its so bad they even seemed to be apologising for its lameness by saying lines like "Couldn't be simpler" after explaining away some massive development in a few astute syllables. Frankly, this film was always going to be bad, but I was expecting a a piece of entertainment saved by its wonderfully entertaining action (a la Broken Arrow) but instead we have a wonderfully placid, souless piece of garbage based on classic Hitchcock with a smattering of entertainment towards the end. Even the trademark Woo double gun action looked toned down in comparison with the ridiculously great, tile splitting, plaster showering lobby scene from the Matrix! Now that the world has the Wachowski's, Woo has lost his originality and unique talents. We now know that there IS someone else out there who can do it just as well as he. In all, if you're a fan of MST, go see this film for its unintentionally hilarious appeal, but if you're after an all out action fest you're going to be deeply, deeply disappointed.
Final Destination
(2000)
Silly, funny, insane, superb!
21 May 2000
Yup, this film was completely ludicrous but I had one of the best cinema experiences of my life watching it! So much fun, so very jumpy!
Great acting, wonderful action sequences, nicely directed, well written and a great cameo from Tony Todd...
See it for the 'bus scene' alone :)
Great acting, wonderful action sequences, nicely directed, well written and a great cameo from Tony Todd...
See it for the 'bus scene' alone :)
American Beauty
(1999)
Wonderful in the extreme...
30 April 2000
Just saw this movie on its last showing at my local Multiplex...
All I can say it that I couldn't have enjoyed it more! It was powerful, important, bleak and extremely funny!
Wonderful end too... worth every ounce of hype!
All I can say it that I couldn't have enjoyed it more! It was powerful, important, bleak and extremely funny!
Wonderful end too... worth every ounce of hype!
Three Kings
(1999)
It has action in it but its in no way an 'action film'
5 March 2000
I saw Three Kings last night (I'm not slow, just English), so its still pretty fresh in my mind. I actually went to the cinema to see The Green Mile but it was Saturday evening and it was unsurprisingly sold out. So, myself and my two friends deliberated over what film to see, should it be Toy Story 2 for a fourth time, or American Beauty for a second but I'd just read a very positive review in the newspaper of Three Kings and it sounded good. So, we got our tickets for the nearly full showing of TK and went out for food to kill time until the later showing started. When it began, the opening scene showed us pretty much all of the main characters and began with some very nasty yet funny jokes about whether or not the troops were
'shooting people' anymore. This opening scene was indeed very funny, but it was also very effective in showing us the less than eager yet utterly desensitised troops in the Gulf War of 1991. The war, it transpired had just ended and US President Bush had told the peoples of the affected countries to rise up against Saddam but hadn't actually offered anything in the way of support. This is the basic structure of the plot throughout the rest of the film but it is most certainly a lot more complex than that. The trailer (oh dear, how incorrectly was this film marketed) showed TK to be a brash, action movie filled with loveable rogues and guns. Sure, it is an action movie in part, it does have a lot of guns and yes, the characters (Clooney in particular) are loveable rogues but this is one of those films that makes you laugh, a lot, but also makes you sit there, open mouthed unable to fully take in the horror in front of your eyes. Anyway, this is a film about four American troops who find a secret map (in a man's a**e, no less) that leads them to stolen Kuwaiti Bullion. And so, the men go AWOL in the hope that this little endeavour will be a quick afternoon job, go in, flash the weapons, get the gold and go. However, although it does sort of work out this way, before the men leave they realise the predicament the townsfolk of these war stricken villages are in. These are ordinary people, told to 'rise up' but they have no weapons, no water and Saddam's soldiers are on their tails from word go. So, in true Magnificent Seven style, the outnumbered good guys take on the bad guys. Simple, unoriginal.? Hell no! The goodies don't take to the idea well, the whole thing is just a big mistake after one of Saddam's Republic army kills an innocent woman in front of her husband and daughter. What follows is a superbly stylish and deeply effective gun fight where the camera never breaks from slow motion and follows each bullet as it leaves its respective bullet and embeds itself in the body of a soldier. Main characters get shot, the cease fire is broken and the law breaking escalates. The rest of the film is spent pondering the plights of the Americans and their understandably less-than-grateful protectees. The film has its fair share of nicely played action set pieces, but where it really excels is in its powerful messages and beautifully acted 'quiet bits'. It gives us characters we can enjoy and like and then makes us watch them suffer. George Clooney is excellent as the worldly, knowledgeable Archie Gates on the edge of retirement. Mark Wahlberg gives us a nice, pretty boy patriot, Troy Barlow, who doesn't really like what he's doing, but does it for the benefits it could bring. Ice Cube, Chief Elgin is suitably stylish to look at, and plays his born again Christian role with quiet power. My favourite character was Spike Jonze as Conrad Vig. You know him? The funny little man from the Fat Boy Slim 'Praise You' video? Well, he can't dance but he can direct (Being John Malkovich) and he can act too! He plays a weedy little yokel with 'no real day job' (watch the film and realise why people who have will chuckle when they read that) who wants to be Wahlberg's character more than anything. The main players are supported nicely by Jamie (Randy from Scream) Kenedy and a foolish yet not entirely heartless reporter, who's name shamefully escapes me. Overall, this is a film that made me think, a lot, that night about how vile war is. But its not entirely an anti-war movie. The message I think it said was that the only way out of war is more war, until its over. A sort of Just War type thing.As a piece of entertainment, it'll make you laugh (never before has an exploding cow been so great to watch!), make you think about things in a new way (the bullet sequence is a real 'stick in the mind' piece of cinema) and it'll make you think you spent the money on the ticket wisely. And isn't that the real point of the movies? Well if not, getting messages across as well as this movie does must be.
'shooting people' anymore. This opening scene was indeed very funny, but it was also very effective in showing us the less than eager yet utterly desensitised troops in the Gulf War of 1991. The war, it transpired had just ended and US President Bush had told the peoples of the affected countries to rise up against Saddam but hadn't actually offered anything in the way of support. This is the basic structure of the plot throughout the rest of the film but it is most certainly a lot more complex than that. The trailer (oh dear, how incorrectly was this film marketed) showed TK to be a brash, action movie filled with loveable rogues and guns. Sure, it is an action movie in part, it does have a lot of guns and yes, the characters (Clooney in particular) are loveable rogues but this is one of those films that makes you laugh, a lot, but also makes you sit there, open mouthed unable to fully take in the horror in front of your eyes. Anyway, this is a film about four American troops who find a secret map (in a man's a**e, no less) that leads them to stolen Kuwaiti Bullion. And so, the men go AWOL in the hope that this little endeavour will be a quick afternoon job, go in, flash the weapons, get the gold and go. However, although it does sort of work out this way, before the men leave they realise the predicament the townsfolk of these war stricken villages are in. These are ordinary people, told to 'rise up' but they have no weapons, no water and Saddam's soldiers are on their tails from word go. So, in true Magnificent Seven style, the outnumbered good guys take on the bad guys. Simple, unoriginal.? Hell no! The goodies don't take to the idea well, the whole thing is just a big mistake after one of Saddam's Republic army kills an innocent woman in front of her husband and daughter. What follows is a superbly stylish and deeply effective gun fight where the camera never breaks from slow motion and follows each bullet as it leaves its respective bullet and embeds itself in the body of a soldier. Main characters get shot, the cease fire is broken and the law breaking escalates. The rest of the film is spent pondering the plights of the Americans and their understandably less-than-grateful protectees. The film has its fair share of nicely played action set pieces, but where it really excels is in its powerful messages and beautifully acted 'quiet bits'. It gives us characters we can enjoy and like and then makes us watch them suffer. George Clooney is excellent as the worldly, knowledgeable Archie Gates on the edge of retirement. Mark Wahlberg gives us a nice, pretty boy patriot, Troy Barlow, who doesn't really like what he's doing, but does it for the benefits it could bring. Ice Cube, Chief Elgin is suitably stylish to look at, and plays his born again Christian role with quiet power. My favourite character was Spike Jonze as Conrad Vig. You know him? The funny little man from the Fat Boy Slim 'Praise You' video? Well, he can't dance but he can direct (Being John Malkovich) and he can act too! He plays a weedy little yokel with 'no real day job' (watch the film and realise why people who have will chuckle when they read that) who wants to be Wahlberg's character more than anything. The main players are supported nicely by Jamie (Randy from Scream) Kenedy and a foolish yet not entirely heartless reporter, who's name shamefully escapes me. Overall, this is a film that made me think, a lot, that night about how vile war is. But its not entirely an anti-war movie. The message I think it said was that the only way out of war is more war, until its over. A sort of Just War type thing.As a piece of entertainment, it'll make you laugh (never before has an exploding cow been so great to watch!), make you think about things in a new way (the bullet sequence is a real 'stick in the mind' piece of cinema) and it'll make you think you spent the money on the ticket wisely. And isn't that the real point of the movies? Well if not, getting messages across as well as this movie does must be.
Sleepy Hollow
(1999)
Dark, Comic, Evil, Tense, Tim Burton...
4 January 2000
I just saw Sleepy Hollow in an advanced Preview show in the UK. I went with a couple of mates, all of whom had seen some Tim Burton before but only I was a big fan. I simply love Tim Burton's surreal style of directing and of all the films I've seen of his (Pee Wee's Big Adventure, Beetlejuice, Edward Scissor Hands, Ed Wood, Mars Attacks!, etc.) I thought only Mars Attacks! Was less than superb. ESH for example has a superbly innocent atmosphere to it but it extremely dark at times. So now, with the release of a new Tim Burton film (of a story I remember fondly from the old Disney Cartoon of the 50's) I was rather excited to see it! And so, I sat in the darkened cinema at my local Multiplex and was amazed. From the dark and mysterious opening to the more humour-spiked yet no less horrific end this is one of my favourite films ever! I'm a big horror film fan and was so looking forward to seeing what take Tim Burton would have a true horror film. My god, he did well. The look of the piece is both extremely dark and evil (the Horseman kills men, women and children with equal relish) but it retains scenes of beautiful, dreamlike states once again making good use of Mr. Burton's own thoughts and visions. It's a very funny film too. Depp is great as an Englishman (only slipping into American twang in one syllable early on in the movie) who will battle the horseman and inspect headless, beetle filled corpses with gusto but then leap onto a chair, screaming when he sees a spider! Christina Ricci was also very good. Usually, her parts are beautiful yet rather evil characters that look innocent and pure until you look into her eyes
not this time though. She just looks, well, sweet! She's softly spoken, and very caring and that's it, no daggers in the pupils, no sly frowns to the camera. Christopher Walken made the small role he had in the headless horseman (he played him on the few occasions he actually had a head) his own with his usual evil visage and a load of screaming! Plus nastily shaved down teeth. The real masterstroke of this film though, or at least its main bad guy is the use of Ray Park. For those of you who saw Episode One and enjoyed the lightsabre battle at the end, Ray Park was Darth Maul! He brings a very modern look to the fighting, most scenes are fought with a sword in one hand and an axe in the other! Its like a medieval John Woo! But almost every time that he gets hold of a weapon he does some kind of stylish one-handed flip to the sound of wonderfully over-the-top swish sounds! The deaths, most of which decapitations of course, are all seen onscreen in their full, gory glory. Not a single piece of blood escapes the cameras here! The film really does have a lot of blood in it but it's a kind of comic book redder than red blood, which adds to the whole films not quite real feel. The cinematography is once again, from Burton, superb. The vile smog0filled 18th century New York and the Scarecrow at the beginning. My god, the scarecrow, its so evil! Onscreen for a second but its image lasts
But anyway, in short, this is a fantastic film. Burton has never done anything this visually eye-popping before (take a bow Industrial Light & Magic). The plot is both intriguing and whimsical, the acting excellent, it has a cameo from Hammer Horror master Christopher Lee and it boasts one of the most evil, most frightening, most superbly realized supernatural baddies I've ever seen
and I've seen plenty! Go see this film if you like horror or you just want some fast-paced fun
9 out of 10
Tell Your Friends