rantinghuman Reviews

Kick-Ass (2010)

an appalling movie you don't need to see

[1/10 · 24 July 2010]

We watched the better part of Hollywood's latest pile of filth called "Kick-Ass", before its mindless, gratuitous violence drove me from the theater before it ended. As we went up the aisle to leave, I stole a glance at the dark faces in the theater and wondered if any of them chuckled in a similar manner when they saw videotaped beheadings of abductees in Iraq, where men screamed for prolonged periods of time because it took that long to saw through the bones in their necks. For many of all ages, this has actually become entertainment. Would it take something tragic like this to happen to someone in their own lives before they snap out of their misdirected notions of entertainment? People have become so insulated from reality that they've lost the concept of what torture and killing actually are.

I never for a moment understood the appeal of slasher movies and I quit watching commercial TV because it is so permeated with jaded rot, but we all know about today's crime shows that depict the most gruesome killings imaginable, and a wildly popular show that actually glorifies serial killing. Hollywood even made a slasher musical that passes itself off as "serious" and "artful". But even a repulsive film like "Sweeney Todd" had some originality and cinematic virtue, endless scenes of slit throats and splattered blood notwithstanding. But "Kick-Ass" had none of this. "Kick-Ass" was just adolescent pap that laughs at torture. Nicholas Cage was nothing but a poor portrayal in a used Batman suit. Even more repulsive was corporate Hollywood's device of using a cute, trash-talking hero girl to draw in younger audiences (like my daughter, which is why we went). What it did instead was inspire my daughter to pledge to sell her Playstation 2 and its equally mindless depictions of violence. Not wanting to let a good thing pass by, I handed her instead a pick-axe and safety glasses, and she made the sparks fly off that piece-of-crap "toy". She made me proud.

It is perplexing how otherwise intelligent and kind people that I know, love and somewhat respect, can be so easily misdirected into believing that moronic filth like "Kick-Ass" is entertainment.

Whale Rider (2002)

The quintessence of human heroism

[10/10 · 29 May 2005]

One of the best films ever: the power of myth, the tenacity of culture, a prophesy fulfilled, the quintessence of human heroism, and the satisfaction of a child's need for her family's love. The unswayable force of one girl's destiny. This film has it all, and is powerfully delivered by a child actor with virtually no acting experience. She is a realistic hero, and the milestones of her heroism can be delightfully measured. If you have a daughter, you must share this film with her. These sorts of films do not come along often.

If this film interests you, you might want to see Broken English. Also set in New Zealand, it also contains Maori culture.

Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith (2005)

Hook, Line and STinker

[6/10 · 27 May 2005]

It was George Lucas' last chance to go out with a bang, but it was a lackluster performance. Oh yeah, the sets and special effects were over the top, but they couldn't save the film. I need to see it again as usual to get a clearer perception, but it just seemed like a lot of anachronistic direction and interminable hand-wringing over what the dark side has planned next. Spoilers follow, so don't read on if you don't want:

The motive behind Anakin's turning to the dark side was plausible. Chancellor Palpatine, a.k.a. Darth Sidious, promises him the ability to restore life, a power exclusive to the dark side he says. Since Anakin has been having dreams of Padmè's dying in childbirth the same way he dreamed of his own mother's death, he is desperate to save her. But it is so undeveloped, like the whole film is. And the moment he turns to the dark side was completely implausible! It was trite and contrived-- sort of "o.k., I'll be evil now." The acting by the whole cast was rather bad, with the possible exception of Ian McDiarmid as Chancellor Palpatine, but Star Wars has had problems with acting. Ewan McGregor is disappointing as Obi-Wan, a role once made great by Sir Alec Guiness. His dialog has been reduced to mostly trite wisecracks endemic of action films. Anakin continues his single-faceted whiny "it's not fair!" demeanor, but that's not completely his fault. George Lucas should have integrated that demeanor better in with his anger, the way he did when avenging his mother's death. But Anakin is instead fickle, without any realistic progression toward evil. Lucas should have given him more substance, to say nothing of Padmè, who is supposed to be a powerful senator and heroine, but has been reduced to a "stay here, wait and worry" woman throughout the film. Still, Natalie Portman bursts into tears quite realistically.

Where did the swashbuckling spirit of the first film, episode IV go? Where's the overwhelming dread of an imminent empire? Where's the pageantry of episode I, and the great mythos, like the "a child shall lead them" of young Anakin? I'd settle for a plot, but instead it just delivers quick one-line contrivances in order to tie it together, mostly via a lot of hand-wringing dialogue, and a lot of space-hopping, getting into and out of various space craft. And then there's the petty snipping from the Jedi council, something that has been going on since Episode I. These guys are supposed to enlightened, or at the very least not petty.

At the end, Yoda says in reference to hiding the infants Luke and Leia: that they should go where they won't be found, that Luke should go to Anakin's home planet Tatooine, to be with his family. So much for 900 years of wisdom. Clearly this was an installment that wasn't worked out in advance.

And no one should have given a Sabra to Christopher Lee, who plays Count Dooku. The guy has two left feet. (oh yeah, there's a LOT of sword fighting, and everyone in the film almost without exception gets one or both forearms lopped off)

Then in the last scenes of the film, things improve. When Obi-Wan verbally confronts Anakin after he turns evil, the moment was actually o.k.: after their fight inside the fiery bowels of a volcanic planet, Obi-Wan conveys his anguish over seeing his comrade fall from grace, and turns away for the last time. Somewhat good. Then Anakin, one arm lopped off, declares his hatred for his former master as he becomes disfigured in the red hot sands of the lava field-- also somewhat good. And when he's repaired and we see the assemblage of the Darth Vader guise that we all know and love, and he takes his first filtered breath-- that was good. But then they go all hokey again, stealing a scene from Frankenstein, with the tilting operating table, and Vader even breaks his shackles a' la Frankenstein.

As much as I hate to admit it, this film just wasn't made for a 43-yr-old who, as a 15-yr-old, fell for the epic, hook, line and sinker. I should have gotten the hint when they first introduced Jar-Jar.

Life as a House (2001)

Surprised this didn't get more recognition

[23 September 2004]

"Life as a House" is not an easy film to watch. Its story is piercingly poignant, sometimes depraved, and unbearably sad. If you insist on flashy amusements and naive happy endings in your films, this is not for you. If you are "real" though, about the dynamics of our troubled lives, then it is for you. And if you are sensitive, then this is a film you can only watch about once a year.

It is well written, directed, and acted, especially by Kevin Kline and Kristin Scott Thomas. Hayden Christensen gives us the same believable anger, sullenness and pathos as his Anakin Skywalker character did in Episode II; maybe better. He makes a good troubled teen. And Jena Malone is good with the script she is dealt.

I'd recommend this film to anyone.

Good Boy (2003)

The pain! The pain!

[21 April 2004]

I have an 8-year old, so I see a lot of films for kids, many of which I like. And in general, I like Molly Shannon and Kevin Nealon. There also were a fair number of respectable names doing voices, like Vanessa Redgrave and Carl Reiner. Matthew Broderick annoys me (except for "Ferris") but that's just me. A universal truth, however, is that this was the worst film I've ever seen: the worst acting, the worst writing, the clumsiest transitions and the most nonsensical developments. Even the make-up was bad. It was almost as if they were trying to make you squirm with dissonance. My GOSH it was awful! It was all I could do to keep from howling in pain in front of my daughter. ....My 8-year old daughter gave it the "thumbs up", though.

Adaptation. (2002)

I loved it ...at first.

[29 June 2003]

What a gas! ...at first. It's reminiscent of _Being John Malkovich_ created by the same people. But instead of some fantastical story, it's based on real issues ...at first. The film shows that you can write about any subject and make it brilliant. Cage plays a brooding screen writer Charlie Kaufman who is stricken with neurosis and self-loathing, and in a panic over trying to adapt a book called _The Orchid Thief_. But Kaufman is also a real person, and is in fact the screen writer for this movie. Kaufman has written himself into the film as the main character! Cage also plays his own twin brother who is his antithesis and infinite source of aggravation. So I'm thinking "brilliant film", right? (Spoilers follow:) And just then, just like in _American Beauty_ , this perfectly brilliant film leans on the old tired crutch of gratuitous violence, drugs, homicide and man-eating alligators for crying out loud, and I'm hoping that it's not happening; that it's all in the imagination of our main character, who had begun listening to his twin brother's (who is also a screenwriter) simpler, more mainstream tastes. But no, people actually fly through windshields in the story, and get eaten by alligators, and Meryl Streep, for crying out loud, goes homicidal. Regardless of what happened, I'm sticking with my original suspicions; that Charlie is just selling out to his brother's less-sophisticated ideas. I'm thinking the creators of this film are, by selling out to tired devices, are having a little joke on us, just like the rest of Hollywood routinely does. "The true conflict is not between the characters in a novel, but between author and reader. In the long run, however, it is only the author's private satisfaction that counts." --Nabokov

The Scarlet Pimpernel (1982 TV Movie)

Errol Flynn meets Monty Python

[5 January 2002]

This is a fun film. Rather than a straight period piece drama, it mixes drama with satire, action and a little Pythonesque character. Anthony Andrews as the lead character compels one to seek out other films of his. Jane Seymor is her usual beautiful but mediocre self. If you're tired of the same old over-the-top special effects, head-spinning action scene editing, or dreary Masterpiece Theatre period pieces, this is a nice alternative.

Joe Versus the Volcano (1990)

A film rich with metaphor if you can suspend your disbelief

[2 November 2001]

This is a favorite movie in the light-fare category. Being far-fetched, it may not have enjoyed such good reviews, but some stories are just supposed to be far-fetched. Beyond that, the movie is rich with charm and metaphor of life. Tom Hanks is his lovable self and this may be the funniest work Meg Ryan has done.