Reviews

11 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
Weird, but very entertaining
26 January 2006
This is the most personal of Gondry's movies so far. You feel like his screenplay gives you a glimpse into how his creative mind works. It is also probably the strangest as well, but it's a different "strange" than the Charlie Kaufman scripts. You keep jumping back and forth between dreams and awaking life, with only tiny hints of which one you are currently looking at. (It's not like Waking Life at all, fortunately.)

Charlotte Gainsbourg and Gael García Bernal succeed admirably in bring their momentarily changing relationship alive. The animation crew deserves extra credit, their low-key sequences are really stylish and a fascinating departure for the CGI fare you see in abundance in all the other movies.

I hope The Science of Sleep will get a wide release, so everyone can enjoy Gondry's fascinating creativity.
16 out of 43 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Beautiful pictures and music, predictable story
25 January 2006
I loved the Czech scenery and architecture (both buildings and rooms). These backgrounds combined with Glass' music and Norton's mysterious character do an astounding job of setting the mood. Giamatti does a great job and really brings the inspector character alive. Jessica looks fantastic (her part doesn't need or get too much of an acting performance).

However... the story was amazingly predictable -- at least to me. Based on audience conversations I overheard afterwards, some others were more successful at leaving their brains at the door than I was.

With all that said, I enjoyed the movie and would recommend it for all the things in the first paragraph.
8 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
What animation shorts are invented for
22 January 2006
This flick has just the perfect blend of experimental ideas, an interesting story and meticulous animation work. The creators opted to use a 3D-flattened-to-silhouette animation technique, which is quite unique and hard to describe. Suffice to say that it works well to emphasize the mood of the story. Oh, and it also looks absolutely stunning...

Jasper Morello is a navigator on an airship, who gets a chance to help save his wife, as well as humanity from a plague, by venturing to unknown territory. His Verne-like trip takes him to strange lands and strange creatures...

I don't want to give too much away, so I'll just say that you should go check it out (or at least the trailer at www.jaspermorello.com).
16 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Human Nature (2001)
10/10
My favorite Kaufman movie
24 May 2005
As much as I love his other movies (except for Confessions..., I didn't find too much original material in that one), I think Human Nature is the one I love re-watching most. Beside the very original (hey, this is Kaufman we are talking about!) main story line there are some incredibly funny side branches and the movie full of quotable one-liners.

Tim Robbins and Patricia Arquette do a great job, as I learned to expect from them.

The movie might have drawn some critical fire because it is very weird. The IMDb ratings show the same thing... But if you like weird (or one of the stars), rent it, and I promise you won't be disappointed.
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Primer (2004)
8/10
A fun little puzzle
14 April 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Most reviewers scathed Primer for being hard to understand. I personally don't mind a good puzzle every now and then. And I certainly got that -- even Donnie Darko and Memento didn't need as much concentration as this movie. In fact I doubt that many people will figure out what's going on right away (especially during the last 15 minutes) -- as all good puzzles this is something you take home with you and spend another few hours connecting the pieces. And if you end up throwing in the towel, the official site has a message board where you can obtain clues...

I appreciated how non-linear the narrative was (duh, what did I expect from time travel?) and how the explanations were realistically hidden in the dialog instead of being spoon-fed to the audience the blockbuster way.

The low cost shows in both the acting jobs and the sound/video quality, but anyone who really cares about these is not going to fish among the indie fare anyway. You go to indie movies to see indie ideas, not to be blown away by special effects (and when it happens after-all -- like in the case of MirrorMask, it's just all the more fun).

This little production shot right up there to the pantheon of my indie favorites. My only regret is that I wasn't there to see it during Sundance 2004.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The funniest of Sundance
30 January 2005
When it comes to musicals, movies like Chicago and Moulin Rouge come to mind. Most people loved one or the other (or both) of those, so Reefer Madness has to work hard to live up to expectations. While it is not as visually extravagant as Moulin Rouge, this movie is just as funny, and while the dances are smaller key than Chicago, they are perfectly choreographed and blend together well. All actors do their own singing and dancing, and they do quite well.

The film is about the negative effects of Marijuana on society, in the form of a fable. An all-out, way over the top, in no way politically correct fable. You start suspecting that the writers are not going to hold anything back as soon as Jesus appears in a single silk loincloth, surrounded by showgirls. Very few aspects of the christo-republican lifestyle are not subjected to some good old fashioned irony and black comedy, but democratic values take a bit of beating too.

Reefer Madness is based on the stage play of the same title, which was fine-tuned during its 8 year run. The effects of the long tweak-time are obvious, the movie is crammed full of jokes -- from small asides to full-on audience rollers -- and there are virtually no duds. The on-screen adaptation lives up to the material, at no point does this flick feel at all like a stage play.

The long practice shows on the performances as well, Kristen Bell and Christian Campbell -- both carrying on their roles from the stage play -- do a great job both as naive 1940's schoolchildren and as uninhabited addicts. A notable change from the play is the addition of Alan Cumming who is putting in a great and unrestrained performance as always.

I saw the movie at a Sundance screening at midnight. Not only was the theater totally sold out, but all of the audience members were wide awake and cheering, clapping, laughing and utterly enjoying themselves for the entire duration.

In case you get a chance to go to a theater-screening, do it, it deserves the big screen. Otherwise don't forget to program your DVR to record the Showtime premiere!

In case it is not obvious from the above, this movie is the definition of A+ fun and entertainment.
53 out of 65 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Ryan (2004)
10/10
It will wow you
30 January 2005
I bought a ticket for the Sundance animated short program thinking that I will see the usual rehashed animated fare. Boy, was I wrong. But as good and creative as the other shorts were, Ryan stood way out.

It is something truly original, not just because it is a computer animated documentary, but also because of the truly inventive use of the capabilities of CGI animation. The movie tells Ryan Larkin's life story in a concise but very touching way. I promise it will be the perfect roller-coaster ride, it will make you happy and sad, and it will make you think. And it will also make you stare at the gorgeous imagery.

I doubt you can find a better way to spend 14 minutes of your life.
24 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
The oddest Harley film yet
29 January 2005
Being a huge fan of the films that Hartley did in the 90's, I couldn't wait to see this movie at Sundance. In fact it was one of the two movies I absolutely had to see (the other one was Mirrormask).

I can't say that I got what I expected. The movie proclaims itself to be a "Science fiction film by Hal Harley". It is neither science fiction (unless you count Kurt Vonnegut as science fiction), nor a typical Harley film. The special effects that you expect in a science fiction are nowhere to be found. In fact, big chunks of the movie aren't even in technicolor.

The whole movie is shot with very long exposure times and frame rates reaching down to 5-10 fps, leading to a totally dreamlike look.

But enough about technicalities... 'As I said the movie was a surprise but a very pleasant one. Harley uses his favorite themes of alienation (this time with actual aliens) and random, but very deep personal connections. He paints a weird but very familiar world of people treating sex as a means to getting what they want -- but with a quite interesting twist. Other current subjects, like civil liberties (ie: the lack thereof) and teenage crime are also treated to a round of deep black, dripping irony.

All in all I would recommend the movie, but not as a mindless Friday-night excursion. I give it an A.
24 out of 33 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Mirrormask (2005)
9/10
Labyrinth for the 21st century
29 January 2005
The audience that showed up for the Sundance premiere of this gem was quite diverse. Some came for Neil Gaiman, some for Dave McKean and the rest for the Jim Henson legacy. Based on my informal polls conducted in waiting list lines around Salt Lake City, everyone got what they wanted.

The visuals -- as you would expect from a move involving Henson's company -- are simply stunning. Most of the movie is blue-screen, which is quite unbelievable for a movie made for a mere $4 million. The human actors blend into the gorgeous painting-like backgrounds (google McKean's art and you will understand that this is quite a feat), and do an outstanding job of interacting with the digital characters.

Only 17 people -- all freshly graduated students -- worked on the animation, but the result looks like 170 professionals did. It should be noted however that Dave McKean spent 18 months in post-production, pretty much 24/7.

The weakest part of the movie is the story. Dave and Neil came up with the outline over 3 days, and worked out the details as they filmed. The end result is a run-of-the-mill Alice in Wonderland rip-off, with some elements from Labyrinth and other familiar children's tales.

I have to give extra credit to Stephanie Leonidas, who does a great job bringing Helena, a girl who ends up lost in the world of her Dali-meets-Picasso-meets-McKean drawings, to life.

I hope this movie will get picked up for theater distribution, because it deserves to be seen on the big-screen. In any case, McKean fans will be happy to hear that a Mirrormask picture book is in the works that will contain the 1700 drawings produced for the movie...

If you get a chance, go see this movie. It should be fun for children of all ages. If it comes to theaters, I will go see it again, and will give it an A again :)
92 out of 138 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Oh My God (2004)
10/10
Detestably fun
24 January 2005
Warning: Spoilers
This is one of those films that people either find disgusting (viscerally as well as morally), or just absolutely hilarious -- or, in my case, both. The closest popular scene is the one in pulp fiction with the brain chunks -- except Oh My God is much more morally reprehensible :) The plot summary on the main page is perfect, and about the maximum you can give away of the movie.

If you hate everything else about this short, I promise you will love the title sequence and credits...

I appreciated the challenge of figuring out whether to despise or to embrace this little movie, so I give it an A.
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Spelling Bee (2004)
10/10
Spelling with a flare
24 January 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I got a chance to see this gem at the '05 Sundance. It was my first festival, so I didn't really know what to expect from the shorts programs. The movies -- including this one -- exceeded all of my expectations.

I don't really want to give away anything, suffice to say, it the kind of short that makes you roll on the ground laughing, not the kind that makes you question humanity or your will to live...

The director is someone to look out for, he is a genuinely funny guy based on the post-movie Q&A. He seems to be shooting for the big movies, so you might actually get a chance to see some of his work in the future. An interesting piece of trivia: he managed to get Charlie Sheen (and Drew Mikuska) for the part thanks to their collaboration on scary movie 3 (where he was directing second unit).

In case you were wondering, I give this Spelling Bee an A+.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed