ecogirlveghead Reviews

The Starving Games (2013)

An Amusing Spoof for the Most Part

[7/10 · 25 December 2013]

I watched this spoof of The Hunger Games with no expectations or preconceived ideas of what it should be like. And I enjoyed it! Not every joke hits the mark but for the most part its kinda funny, kinda silly, and mostly harmless.

Maiara Walsh does a good job imitating Jennifer Lawrence and has nice comic timing of her own. Diedrich Bader, who I never could stand watching on the Drew Carey Show due to his general lameness, plays an amusing President Snowball, a parody of The Hunger Games' President Snow. He doesn't bother trying to imitate Donald Sutherland and as a result comes off kinda funny.

There's a slow, odd, and unfunny sex scene with LOTR characters thrown in that really didn't fit and I fast forwarded through most of it.

These kind of parodies require one quick gag after another in order to keep us watching and for this most part this one succeeds. Worth watching if you have a Saturday afternoon to kill.

Tamara (2005)

Not as Predictable as Most Teen Horror

[6/10 · 2 November 2013]

While the plot and action in this movie weren't uniquely fresh (shy teen girl with a weird crappy home life gets bullied at school) I appreciate that this movie isn't as formulaic as most teen horror. I tend to fast forward through most movies these days as I know what's coming next both in the action and dialogue. I didn't FF through any of this movie. We know that Tamara has come back to get revenge but she does it in unexpected ways.

There was just enough gore to fit the genre but not so much that it became the kind of kitsch that makes me ponder how many buckets of fake blood went to waste. The acting is well done and some of the dialogue surprised me with its wit. "Its wet," says Tamara as she's seducing her teacher who reacts with plausible discomfort. You'll have to watch it yourself to see what she really meant.

I truly love the scene were Mrs. Natolly (the teacher's wife) gets attacked because it is NOT a scene where a helpless female does stupid things that result in her quick and gory death. Mrs. Natolly uses her brain.

Although it was predicable who would survive until the end, the final way that Tamara is dealt with wasn't obvious or clichéd.

This movie doesn't resort to overdoing the fake blood or gratuitous sex but it still has sexy moments and enough creepiness and suspense to make it real horror; plus, the engaging plot and solid acting made extra gore unnecessary. A film worth watching on a rainy weekend afternoon. Maybe they should make more horror in Manitoba.

Lost in Austen (2008)

Surprising twists to a classic

[8/10 · 30 July 2013]

I didn't make the mistake of reading reviews before watching this so I went in with no expectations. Before going any further I have to admit to having watched the 90's version of P & P and read the novel dozens of times. A true Austen freak, I am.

Like other reviewers, at first I was offended by the crudeness and lack of tact displayed by the Amanda character when she entered the world of the novel. How dare any true Austen fan behave in a way that displays such ignorance of Lizzie's world? She should have fit right in. But then I realized the choice to NOT make Amanda a perfect Eliza Bennet clone made for a much more dynamic story and more amusing moments between the characters. Instead of giving her the perfect accent, the perfect deportment, and the perfect manners right from the start, it took her some time to fit in. Her clumsy manner and bluntness caused her to make some mistakes that would seem impossible for a true Austen fan but enabled unexpected twists and turns in the story. And its these twists and the what ifs that I loved. I loved that the wrong people fell in love. I love that everything she thought was supposed to happen didn't happen. If I wanted to watch a P & P imitation, I would just watch the real thing again. I found the movie Becoming Jane, which attempted to follow a truer Jane Austen style, to be a sappy and insipid imitation that was truly forgettable and predictable. No one else can do Jane Austen and Lost in Austen doesn't try to. Instead, its fun and impertinent in a way that I think Jane herself would appreciate.

Lorna Doone (2000 TV Movie)

Hits and Misses

[5/10 · 19 August 2012]

Great costumes, wonderful scenery, great art direction. Unfortunately, this movie suffers from uneven acting and a lack of attention to period detail. The actor playing Carver is creepy, but he is lacking charisma and screen presence - he's kind of a sad little bully and there's no way Lorna would be unwillingly attracted to him (as she was in the book). The actress playing Lorna is sweet, lovely, and appealing but she too, doesn't draw me in.

I agree with other reviewers about the variety of accents - I wish they had spent more time getting the accents of the time and place correct and consistent.

Also, its really, really silly and takes away from the believability of the whole thing that one of the 17th century female villagers is wearing glasses. Some of the dialogue is way too obviously modern too: "All work and no play makes Johnny a dull boy." "I'm not marrying some ignorant farmer," says his sister. "Not if he sees you first." Sounds like a conversation at the local high school. The sad,dramatic music is played way too much and too loudly and distracts from the scenes - overpowering music is a pet-peeve of mine. Honestly, while the movie was playing, I spent more time reading reviews here - it simply wasn't that compelling.

Its almost like this movie was made for teenagers (who like romance). This is too bad because even teenagers like period detail and can understand quality movie making. They appear to have made some parts of this movie too quickly and had to skim over some elements - or some of the people working on it had experience and others were still very green. Somehow this one just misses the mark.

Timer (2009)

Emma Caulfield is charming

[11 September 2011]

Its time for producers of Hollywood blockbusters to stand up and take notice! Emma Caulfield makes this movie. Her comic timing is perfect. She is light and bright and shows just the right amount of depth for this part.

She has soooo much more talent and comic ability than big names like Jennifer Aniston and Julia Roberts. They've become so big they've forgotten how to be the character in the movie. These ladies show up and put in uninspired performances - I hestitate to even call them performances. Their movies have become "Julia Roberts stands in front of the camera saying some lines". In Eat, Pray, Love, Julia Roberts was humdrum and boring and ordinary. Resting on her laurels. And honestly, Jennifer Aniston never had Emma Caulfield's comic talent or depth.

Emma Caulfield pulled me into her character - she was totally believable - this is the kind of acting I watch movies for. She actually made an effort and the result is fresh, fun, heartening, entertaining! I want to see more of her.

Now, Voyager (1942)

A Woman Comes Into Her Own

[4 September 2011]

What does it mean to know your mother doesn't love you? What does the child become? Is it possible to believe you are deserving of any love if you weren't deserving of the love of your mother? When the child becomes adult and goes out into the world, how does she survive?

Answer: she doesn't. She hates herself. Treats herself as undeserving. Lets herself get pushed around. Doesn't believe that anyone could ever love her. She hides from the world. Suffers a nervous breakdown.

Charlotte Vale (Bette Davis) is born of a selfish, cruel, and heartless mother. Gladys Cooper as the mother is so realistically vicious, I felt my own psyche deflate with her verbal abuse. In her eyes, the daughter is not a human being – she is a servant, a slave, not permitted to have her own feelings or thoughts, and beholden to the mother for bringing her into the world despite the fact that she was unwanted. A compassionate psychologist (Claude Rains) comes into Charlotte's life and she learns that she is indeed human, deserving, and can think for herself. She begins to come alive. She becomes physically transformed. A man (Paul Henreid) admires her beauty and desires to know her. They fall in love. Because of that love, she becomes whole, confident, and treats herself in a self-respecting way. She stands up to the mother and discovers that she is no longer scared (of living). Their love also buoys the man's confidence so he can pursue his own dream career.

Despite circumstances which keep them from marrying or expressing their love publicly, they find a way to build and keep their love. She sees in his daughter the unloved child that she once was (unloved by a selfish and jealous mother). More than anyone else and because she knows the precise ache of this girl's pain, Charlotte is able to give this emotionally starved child what she needs: love, acceptance, attention. In helping his daughter, she can become his partner. His daughter becomes THEIR daughter. She creates her own version of a family that might not be satisfying to someone else or even socially acceptable but it makes HER happy. She is now woman who chooses for herself.

This is a soft and feminine performance by Bette Davis. Unlike many of her other performances where she charges like a bull through the dialogue and body language, she steps more lightly and gently through this role as a vulnerable woman coming into herself. I like her as this full-fledged human being with depth (rather than a conniver, a powerhouse, a manipulator, a queen). In this performance, Bette Davis exhales, and its nice to watch.

Eat Pray Love (2010)

Boring Travelogue of a Shallow and Unhappy Woman

[21 August 2011]

I am a yoga instructor and the reason I rented this movie was because one of my yoga students came to me gushing about how this movie was so good and related to a woman's journey of transformation partially involving yoga. Hmmmmmm......not so much...on any count. Not good, no transformation, no yoga (except one scene where Julia's character rolls out a yoga mat, but doesn't actually use it).

I agree with so many of the IMDb reviewers. "Sit, Stare, Yawn" one of them claimed. Yes, it is a very long and uneventful movie. "Vapid" another one called it. Yes, the main character, Liz, is unhappy and complains a lot, but we're never really shown why. She divorces her husband because ?? She yells at him because he keeps changing careers, but its never explained how that negatively affected her. Then she starts a relationship with a younger man and another character tells her, "Honey, you're in so much trouble." Again, its never explained what the trouble is. Lots of info left out about this character - it goes into no depth about her at all. She apparently is living a dream life, but is inexplicably miserable, complains a lot, and runs across the globe hurting men who are decent, kind, and treat her well. She has an uneventful trip, doesn't seem to learn much, or transform, or even find happiness. Is it meant to be a commentary of the creeping malcontent in North American society? Or is that just an unintentional side-effect?

Lots of inexplicable camera moments....Liz goes to Italy and the camera focuses on her plate of whoa, don't be shocked here, SPAGHETTI. Then we see Liz staring at the plate of spaghetti. Then we see the plate. Then a looonnnngggg time is spent on Liz eating spaghetti. One of the IMDb reviewers described this movie as boring as watching someone's home slideshow of their European vacation. I actually find this more tedious - what traveller would bother going to Italy and take multiple photos of a plate of SPAGHETTI? There are also ridiculous gaps in the plot (some already mentioned by other reviewers) like Julia goes to a party at a bar in Bali. Javier Bardem's character tells her that the music they are playing is from a mixed tape he made for them. Then while that music is playing a female character points to a man at the other end of the bar playing the bongos with a live band (!)

As a female who lives an independent life of my own, I found the references to the limits placed on womens' lives insultingly stupid and dated. This is not 1952! As she trots the globe and goes anywhere she wants and does anything she pleases without any interference, conflict, or hassles, Liz complains how women are expected to want to be married and have kids, as if those are our only options these days.

I gave the movie two stars for Javier Bardem - who I've never seen before and now want to see more of. Otherwise, its just another big waste of Hollywood talent and money.

Red Doors (2005)

Lovely and light movie

[17 July 2011]

The story of a Chinese-American family experiencing transition. The father retires, the three daughters make changes in their lives, and the entire family begins to discover their true selves and what truly matters - family and love.

Some of the descriptions call this family bizarrely dysfunctional - but really there is nothing outlandish or extremely unusual going on. Just people finding their way.

The dinner scenes made me wish I was there - so much yummy food prepared lovingly by a caring mother. People from large families that eat together in a traditional way might take it for granted. But those of us whose families never sat and ate together, long for that kind of togetherness (and home-cooked food).

Equilibrium (2002)

predictable

[12 July 2011]

Christian Bale has screen presence even when he is being "emotionless". That said, the rest of the movie made me yawn. I skipped 45 minutes in the middle and still knew exactly what was going on. Totally predictable - from the plot "twists" to the hero's reactions to the ending. There was no depth to it and its certainly not an entertaining thriller. This movie didn't keep me on the edge of my seat, or intrigue me, or make me think. Nothing fresh or new here. Its all been done before. Wish I had skipped the whole thing.

Its been compared to the Matrix. The only thing I liked better about this one is that they didn't use ropes for the stunts - it was all done the traditional way - stuntmen using their skills - I have an appreciation for that.

The Tudors (2007–2010)

Sad waste of talent and $$ on soft-porn

[3/10 · 3 March 2011]

Political discussion, soft-porn, quasi-political discussion, soft-porn, Henry throws a tantrum, soft-porn, Henry rides a horse, soft-porn, repeat. If this turns your crank then this is the series for you!

There is no actual ROMANCE, merely gratuitous sex thrown in to entertain teenagers. No imagination - just grabbing and slamming. At least I presume the intended audience is teenagers because anyone over the age of 22 will be bored by the sex scenes and will find the historical "drama" laughable. Many other reviewers have already noted the complete disregard for historical accuracy. I would also like to reiterate the inappropriate choice of JRM as Henry VIII. He struts around like a posturing hip-hop boy with apples hanging from between his buttocks. (What is with that walk?!) He isn't given much to work with however, as Henry is depicted as an immature big baby given to temper tantrums if he loses a fight - he won't sign a treaty because the King of France beat him in a wrestling match - boohoo. I really was rooting for Buckingham to win the joust and knock Henry on his behind.

Such a waste of the other great actors too. This is less than a soap-opera - there is no fun, no intrigue, no romance, no story line, and really no drama. Its just a lot of money wasted on pretty sets and costumes meant to entertain and titillate teenagers. How about spending some of this money on entertainment for grown-ups? And/or teenagers who have brains? They do exist. I love to see historically accurate period dramas. Television needs to grow up and stop pandering to the lowest common denominator.