scirceo Reviews

Road House (2024)

Gyllenhaal is terribly miscast

[3/10 · 23 March 2024]

There is a lot I didn't like about ROAD HOUSE 2024.

For starters, this 2024 version tries to catch the feel of the original, but Jake Gyllenhaal is too good an actor for the role. He works very well in places, but given the overall b-movieness the director and producers seem to be going for, Gyllenhaal was miscast.

Given Gyllenhaal's presence, I had expected a serious treatment of the story, not a poor rehash. In fact, the editing is so bad in places that I wonder whether it is a purposeful nod to the original. So, okay, I get it, but, then, again, why cast Jake Gyllenhaal?

Conor McGregor was also a poor choice, but in the opposite way. McGregor is over-the-top camp, very b-movie, but not believably so, not even to himself. He is cartoony. I hate him, but not in the right way. I never once believed that there any way in any universe that this guy would beat Dalton.

Outside that, the rest of the cast was well-selected, particularly Billy Magnussen as the hapless (son of the never seen) crime boss. He truly captures the essence of the film's feel, and creates a villain worth watching. His haircut and wardrobe are perfectly schlocky, counterbalancing his brilliant performance, and thus finding the b-movie vibe.

I laughed out loud a few times, because the gang members are pretty funny in places, as is appropriate in this kind of film. I was particularly engaged by the overly friendly and nonchalant treatment the talented Arturo Castro put on his character.

Overall, ROAD HOUSE 2024 is a must-watch for fans of the original, and it's not without its charm. However, the fact that this film tries so hard to emulate the original, rather than stand on its own legs, leaves me wondering how good it could have been. Otoh, did anyone really like the original Road House after the first viewing? Hmmm....

Unhinged (II) (2017)

Terrible script. Terrible story. Terrible acting. Simply terrible.

[1/10 · 13 April 2022]

There is nothing redeeming about this film. It seemed as if the script and story were being improvised, and I truly believe that they ran out of budget before they finished shooting, so they simply chopped what they had together. Do not waste your time.

The Goods: Live Hard, Sell Hard (2009)

Perhaps targeted at an over-40 audience?

[9/10 · 17 August 2009]

I gotta say, I was surprised (as I'm sure The Goods' many detractors will be) by how much I laughed during this movie. The jokes were silly and often in the background. And funny.

I am really not sure what made me laugh so hard. I think it boiled down to the fact that The Goods is a good ol' raunchy comedy, but with a twist: It seems to be aimed at adults who have lived life a bit, not the Superbad crowd. (FWIW, I do not see the humor in Superbad. I tried. Twice. Couldn't get all the way through it. But was glad I had tried, because it allowed me to laugh out loud at one of the jokes in The Goods.) I am curious if there are older people (over the age of 40, let's say) out there who also dig the film.

As for Pivens' performance, I thought it was weak in the dramatic parts, but this is a comedy, so no harm no foul, and I understand that the dramatic story is there because producers feel it's necessary.

All the players were hilarious. I thought maybe the psycho WW2 vet was a bit over the top, but he did play that part well.

This is normally not my kind of movie -- cheap, raunchy humor is not my bag. I went on a whim and was pleasantly surprised.

Hostel: Part II (2007)

Enjoyable, better than the first one

[7/10 · 8 June 2007]

I guess I have a high tolerance for gore, so I won't comment on the gore content.

I will say, though, that this is a much better film than Hostel. I enjoyed the enhanced story about the infrastructure of the factory and the fact that we are introduced more intimately to a couple of the customers.

The story is familiar, if you saw the first movie (or even if you didn't), and plot twists are guessable, but I liked the fact that they were in there, anyway.

The acting across the board is good to very good.

All in all, a fun, enjoyable way to spend a couple of hours.

Babel (I) (2006)

One of the best films of the past several years

[10/10 · 27 December 2006]

I enjoyed Crash, but Babel goes far beyond where Crash went. The stories in Babel were far more compelling. I cared about all the characters and couldn't wait for the next piece of each of their stories. The exploration of other aspects of human interaction besides racism plus the fact that we are being shown that people are really the same the world over is what puts Babel a cut above.

A Mexican nanny trying to choose between her devotion to duty and one of the most important days in her family history. How many times have we been put into a situation where we try to do the right thing, but it turns out wrong? If we'd only had more time to make that decision....

Two Moroccan brothers who accidentally seriously injure someone. Didn't we all do some dumb stuff when we were kids? How lucky were we that things didn't go terribly wrong?

An American couple away from home. The wife is injured in what seems to be a terrorist attack. How would we feel? What would we do?

A deaf Japanese teenager, with other life issues, trying to find her place in society. What a compelling story. What if we couldn't hear? How would our lives in high school have been different?

This is one of the best films I've seen in the past several years. It's great storytelling with a very human point of view. I felt the pain of all the characters as they tried their best to deal with difficult circumstances. Babel is a must see for everyone who would like a better understanding of human nature and themselves.

Lord of War (2005)

Not what I was expecting but I truly enjoyed it

[8/10 · 16 September 2005]

The trailers I'd seen indicated more of an action flick, but what LOW turned out to be is a rather talky life story of a gun runner.

First, though, let me tell you that the backdrop for the opening credits is really nice, taking us from the manufacture of a bullet to the spot where it kills a person. Very well done.

Performances by all the primaries were good, with Jared Leto being the standout as Nick Cage's younger brother. He should get an Oscar nod for the performance. Cage put in a standard turn as one of our better American actors.

All in all, well worth seeing. It is one of those films that is made twice as good by the ending, which is not shocking, but a bit of a twist.

I give it 8 out of 10.

Envy (2004)

They don't get much worse than this

[2/10 · 29 March 2005]

I love Ben Stiller and Jack Black -- they're hilarious ... usually. But this script is so bad, not even they can save it. From the terrible story to the unbelievable characters this movie is a pure waste of time. Even Christopher Walken appears to be sleepwalking through the film.

Most of the problem is that the story didn't know where it was going. Is it a buddy flick? Is it a screwball comedy? Is it a romantic comedy? It makes feeble attempts at all these. Perhaps if it had chosen just one direction, the writers could have generated a script worth shooting.

Barry Levinson directed. Huh? This film could be the biggest waste of talent in the past five years. I give it a 2, because I did actually laugh once toward the beginning of the film.

Be Cool (2005)

Definitely not Get Shorty, but entertaining nonetheless

[8/10 · 13 March 2005]

Great story? NO. Great script? NO. Enjoyable movie? YES.

Don't go to this movie expecting a script that is the equivalent of Get Shorty -- that's a high bar to reach for, and I'm not sure Be Cool even really tried. But if you're looking for a few good laughs, some Travolta coolness, a bit of Rock weirdness, a none-too-subtle dose of Vince Vaughn humor, and a funny take on the gangsta rap crowd, finely delivered by Cedric the Entertainer and the hilarious Andre 3000, you should enjoy this film.

I admittedly had low expectations, so the only thing that really disappointed me about the movie was the singer, Linda Moon, as played by Christina Milian. She's just too American Idol-ly for my taste, with no real character to her voice, so no real reason for anyone to get too excited about her as a performer.

The Rock was definitely a pleasant surprise as a gay country singer/actor currently working as a bodyguard. He was funny because he played his character perfectly -- just a bit overthetop.

Uma kind of walked through her performance, I thought, without any real heart, but she was still Uma, and that's good enough for me. After her high-energy turns in the Kill Bill movies, she deserves a break.

See the movie for a good time, but don't expect Get Shorty 2 -- the original movie was on a whole other level.

Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle (2004)

Loved Dude Where's My Car ... this one, not so much

[3/10 · 28 February 2005]

I was looking forward to seeing this movie, and it started out funny enough, but lost me during the strange night of events. Just not funny. I thought that perhaps I'm just too old for this kind of humor, but I think Dude Where's My Car is one of the funniest movies in recent memory, so that's not it. I thought maybe the fact that the script includes a lot of drug references detracted from the humor for me, but I really enjoy Cheech and Chong.

The main actors were charismatic and likable enough. The directing didn't get in the way. So I have to attribute my dislike of the film to the script -- poorly written, at least for me. Fred Willard was wasted in a throwaway role, but Anthony Anderson was a standout as a burger employee going over the edge, as was Sandy Jobin-Bevins as a racist cop, and Neal Patrick Harris as himself in a great against-type role.

Seems the movie appeals to many people who frequent IMDb, but I have to tell you that I really can't recommend it, and consider it almost a total waste of what was fortunately only about 80 minutes.

Sucker Free City (2004 TV Movie)

Wow! I was very pleasantly surprised!

[8/10 · 13 February 2005]

A 2.0 overall (which is what it was when I looked at it on IMDb), does not do this film justice. My ranking is an 8.

When I read this was a pilot for a series, I was not expecting much, but I'd heard good things about it, and, since I sometimes feel that I'm one of the last Spike Lee fans standing, I thought I'd give it a look.

What I saw was terrific characters in intelligent settings, a well-written script, well-acted for the most part (hey, these are kids). I really cared about the characters and want to know more ... but I guess the series was not picked up. Wonder why? Spike Lee has done a great job of giving us his version of the gritty reality of San Franciso ganglife.

I'm no expert on this subject by any means, but I did find the stories quite engaging. And the characters are all likable, in a weird way, from the sober, intelligent K-Luv, to the displaced, entrepreneurial Nick, to the confused but commanding Peter, all ambitious and ruthless. We must imagine how we would react to our surroundings if we were in their shoes. It's easy to sit on a highhorse and judge these guys, but would we really be any different?

The camera-work was phenomenal, with an earthy, videotape feel at times, and a cinematic one at others -- always appropriate. If you have an HD television, Showtime is showing it thus, and it looks remarkable.

Catch it if you can.

The Corporation (2003)

Nothing new or shocking here

[2/10 · 13 October 2004]

I guess we can thank Michael Moore for reviving the documentary, but it's unfortunate that I was sucked into paying to see this film.

Did you realize that a corporation's primary goal is to, above all else, make money? Did you know that corporations do cost-benefit analyses for everything, and make decisions solely based on the results of those analyses?

Is there a problem with that? I own a small company, and, yes, we are in business to make money. If we weren't making money, we would shut down the business.

The agenda of the film is to inform, and possibly shock, viewers about the deeds of "evil" corporations. It didn't win me over. There's nothing new or shocking here. Save your money, or, rather, use it to go see the interesting and revelatory "Going Upriver: The Long War of John Kerry".

Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow (2004)

Bad script but a nice look and feel

[2/10 · 19 September 2004]

Well, I went into this movie with no real expectations. Good thing. The script was totally predictable, the characters were boring, and the electricity between Law and Paltrow couldn't run my garage door opener. I will say this: The look of the movie was striking, but once you get beyond that, like, say, after the first five minutes, something interesting has to happen. Nothing did.

I heard people comparing this to an Indiana Jones movie, but it is a far cry from that. The action in Sky Captain is just about nonexistent, and the character of Sky Captain doesn't display the humor or skill that Indy does.

Don't bother with this one. 2/10.

Big Fish (2003)

Boring - I was greatly disappointed

[2/10 · 17 January 2004]

I respect Tim Burton's film wizardry: Batman, Edward Scissorhands, Ed Wood, Beetlejuice, and even Planet of the Apes and Peewee's Big Adventure, are wonderful films on many levels. Unfortunately, Big Fish is not.

Story is the driver of most films. Some would say story drives all films, but I disagree -- it's possible to make a great film without much of a story -- witness Jarmusch's Dead Man, Kurosawa's Dreams. Without a story, a film needs one of two other things: interesting characters (as in Dead Man) or beautiful photography (as in Dreams).

Big Fish, however, has no story, or I should say none of any interest, and no interesting characters -- at least none that are explored in any depth. The one character who changes by film's end is the son, and, wow, he realizes that if his dad wants to tell stories, that's who he is, and that's okay. (Not a spoiler -- you know this is coming after the first scene.)

The photography is fine, and there are colorful sets, as well as some colorful, but flat, characters -- these aspects of the film allow me to give it a 2 out of 10.

I'm a Tim Burton fan, but this is not a good film. 'Nuff said.

Drowning Mona (2000)

A funny movie

[8/10 · 3 January 2004]

This is a hilarious black comedy with terrific acting, an interesting script, and some laugh-out-loud moments. Even my wife was laughing, and we rarely find the same things funny. It's incomprehensible to me that others would review this movie badly. If you are a fan of the absurd, you'll enjoy this movie. I give it 8.5 out of 10.

The Matrix Revolutions (2003)

Don't bother

[2/10 · 5 November 2003]

I rewatched the first two movies before seeing this one. While I had walked out of Matrix 2 thinking it was better than Matrix 1, I have to admit I was wrong, upon watching the movies closer together. However, I really enjoyed 2 at the time I saw it, so I was looking forward to Matrix 3. Bad idea. Not enough hand-to-hand combat, too much of a wild story that just got wilder as we went along.

In retrospect, Matrix 1 was a nice little film (if that can be true of a big-budget movie) with some cool effects. Matrix 2 got away from the look and feel of that nice little film and Matrix 3 really leaves it behind.

Save your money and don't even bother with this one.

--Steve

Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (2003)

Great fun!

[10/10 · 19 October 2003]

This movie is: (1) great fun; (2) great art; (3) distinctly Tarantino. It's not necessary to have a working knowledge of 70s kung fu movies to enjoy Kill Bill, but it helps. Tarintino's hand is obvious, but only in the best possible way: well-written dialog, interesting camera angles, artistic production additions, well-played scenes.

I saw this movie on Friday, Saturday, and may go again today. Is this his best film? I can't say that. Tarantino's films are all great in their own way, and I don't really think they compete against each other. I'll say this: Tarantino fans will not be disappointed but casual moviegoers who don't understand Tarintino's art probably will be.

10 out of 10.

--Steve

Homicidal (1961)

Not bad for a Psycho clone, but ...

[7 June 2003]

... the dubbing was terrible. Don't blame it on the era, either. Both Dr. No and Goldfinger contain lots of dubbing (yes, Goldfinger himself was dubbed), but the effect is very well done. The dubbing in this movie ruins it, because it gives the ending away. A good idea, though, and well done, story- and acting-wise. Excellent performances throughout. Well, wait a minute. Helga is a mute -- can she not write?

X2 (2003)

Sorry, but I thought this movie was quite boring ...

[3/10 · 13 May 2003]

I looked forward to X2 with great anticipation. All the things I'd heard about it were positive. Unfortunately, I was greatly disappointed.

X2 lacks the charm of the first movie. In that one, we got to know the characters a bit. X2 adds a couple characters (Wagner and Stryker) who are not very interesting, nor are they very well-developed.

I know, I know, this is a comic book. Okay, fine, but so was X-Men, and I really enjoyed that movie. This one was just boring to me -- not a lot of suspense, no plot twists, predictable action. Had I been alone, I would have walked out.

Do yourself a favor and rent X-Men or the first Batman, or go see A Mighty Wind, but don't waste your time and money on this movie.

I most enjoyed the way Magneto escapes from his prison. Nicely done.

--Steve

The Hours (2002)

The best of the nominated films ...

[11 March 2003]

I saw The Hours and it's a knockout. A great film on so many

fronts.

The Story - magically intertwining life with fiction, a period piece in

modern times, nice wrapup at the end.

The Acting - Ed Harris, superb; Nicole Kidman, wonderful, as

always, and, for the first time, I see what everyone's talking about

when they say she's beautiful; Julianne Moore, nice job; Meryl

Streep, generally overrated, but well-acted here.

The Music - Philip Glass's score stands out as an integral part of

the film, filling in the gaps when needed; wouldn't be the same

movie without that score; rather like Bernhard Hermann's score for

Psycho; it's a player.

All in all, a wonderful film. Still, I wish Adaptation had been

nominated for best picture, as it was the best film I saw of last

year.

Gangs of New York (2002)

A huge disappointment

[2/10 · 10 March 2003]

As a big fan and great respecter of Martin Scorsese, counting Taxi

Driver, Mean Streets, The King of Comedy, and The Last

Temptation of Christ among my alltime favorite films (sorry,

Raging Bull), I looked forward to Gangs of New York with huge

anticipation. I have to say I was let down.

The story was a typical tale of revenge and love, wrapped around

the political happenings during the early years of New York City.

Sounds interesting. Unfortunately, it wasn't.

The problem for me, primarily, was one of character development.

There was no change in any of the characters throughout the

movie. William Cutting (Daniel Day-Lewis) represented the old

guard, Amsterdam Vallon (Leonardo DiCaprio) represented the

new, and Boss Tweed (Jim Broadbent) was the political figure

who was really in command of the situation.

None of these characters grew at all during the movie. Cutting was

a believer in rule by violence right up to the end. Vallon was bent

on revenging his father's death, his only true motivation throughout

the film. Boss Tweed was a typical politician, playing both sides,

depending on which looked like the right horse at the time.

As for the acting, Broadbent did a great job as Boss Tweed, and

the smaller supporting roles were quite well done. Daniel

Day-Lewis was outstanding as Cutting, but his weird accent was

distracting right from the beginning. You may try to make an

argument that it was true to the time (which I doubt can be proven),

but to my ear it was quite false. DiCaprio suffered the same accent

problem, but, even worse, his screentime with Cameron Diaz was

much less than sizzling.

Another problem: I couldn't buy Diaz and DiCaprio together at all. I

guess maybe Diaz seems too old to play the role. While they are

not that far apart agewise in reality, in the movie they were both

supposed to be around 21 or so, and Diaz just couldn't pull it off. I

may be imagining that, but I can say this for sure: Diaz and

DiCaprio had no chemistry at all.

In essence, Gangs of New York is quite a boring film. The story is

interesting, that this is really the story of the formation of New York

City, but as cinema, it falls very short of the greatness attributed to

it. I can give it only 3 stars out of 10. Sorry, Mr. Scorsese.

Vulgar (2000)

Kevin Smith fans ... don't bother ...

[1/10 · 21 February 2003]

This a terrible movie with a terrible story. It's low budget, so, of course, I forgive the acting and production flaws. But there's no excuse for a bad story. A down-on-his-luck clown who is determined to make it as a clown, decides to become a stripper clown and market himself as a joke for bachelor parties. His first gig goes really bad. A turn of events makes him rich and famous, but that bad gig comes back to haunt him. I rented this movie because of the Kevin Smith connection, since I'm a huge Smith fan. Don't make the same mistake I did.

Falling Down (1993)

When bad things happen to frustrated people....

[9/10 · 21 February 2003]

I can't believe Michael Douglas wasn't nominated for an Oscar for this great performance as a man on the edge who finally goes over the edge. Robert Duvall is also superb as a cop on what was supposed to be his last day who feels compelled to bring Douglas's character in. An interesting character study and great performances make this movie well worth watching, at least for Michael Douglas fans.

This Is Spinal Tap (1984)

Possibly the funniest movie ever made

[10/10 · 19 February 2003]

A great film! I remember the first time I saw it. I was at a party in 1985 and someone rented it. There was discussion after the film as to whether the band was real or not. It seemed obvious to me at the time that it was a mockumentary, but there was a musician in the crowd who'd seen Nigel Tufnel on the cover of Guitar Player magazine. Almost 20 years later, the movie still stands as a masterpiece. Guest's later Waiting for Guffman and Best in Show, and I'm sure the upcoming A Mighty Wind, are also very well done, but the music in Spinal Tap is what sets it apart. The DVD is nice, but I was disappointed by the commentary by the guys in character. I'd rather have had something more substantial. If you haven't seen the movie, see it now!

Apocalypse Now (1979)

Redux is a totally different film.

[10/10 · 27 September 2001]

As a huge fan of Apocalypse Now in its original state, I was excited to hear that it was being re-released in theaters with additional footage. I hurried to my local theater, watched the film with great anticipation, and I was disappointed. While it was nice to see this great film on the big screen once again, the additional footage really speaks worlds for the editing process. Redux is a totally different film from the original. I admit, I was hoping the new footage would give us more of a look inside Kurtz's compound. There was some of that, but most of it was burned up with a visit to a French villa and time with the Playmates. And, strikingly, Willard becomes far too human. As it was originally released, Apocalypse Now is one of the greatest films of all time, a stunning commentary on man's need to dominate and control man, a psychological study of Kurtz and Willard, and a bit of anti-war sentiment tossed in as an aside. Redux, however, dilutes the primary messages of the original and becomes more of a "horrors of war" film, focusing on the war's impact on people of all types. Fans of Apocalypse Now who've never seen it on the big screen should see Redux just for the experience. As I was watching the film, though, I have to say that I was amazed by the artistry that knew that the deleted scenes should, indeed, have been deleted.