Change Your Image
terence_laoshi-1
Reviews
Catchfire (1990)
Thought-provoking ... what were they thinking?
This movie really left me thinking ... but not about the plot, the direction, the characters, an underlying message, or a clever script. Far from it. I was left wondering what in Sam Hill went wrong behind the scenes. Clearly, something was badly amiss from the beginning.
I'm amazed at the positive comments for the movie and for Jodie Foster's performance. From the get-go it was clear that Foster had phoned this one in. One earlier comment even made a favorable mention of her facial expressions. I must have been watching a different movie since Ms Foster (usually a personal favorite) seemed to be totally disinterested.
In one of his first scenes with Foster, Fred Ward looks as though he, also, is distracted by her lack of energy and he struggles to deliver his own lines with any enthusiasm. By the time he's called upon to take part in a supposedly desperate search for runaway Foster, Ward also seems to have become embarrassingly half-hearted about the project.
In my opinion, Dennis Hopper has always been a uni-dimensional performer, so I wasn't expecting much from him ... and he delivered.
Yes, this one left me thinking long after it ended. The fact that Joe Pesci and Charlie Sheen refused to have their names attached to the project suggests that this was a real stinker for everyone involved. But to then learn that the Director preferred to hide behind a pseudonym speaks volumes.
But why listen to me? I always think Foster looks ridiculous in a dress, yet she's sensational in lacy underwear.
Alex Rider: Operation Stormbreaker (2006)
Superb performances in front, behind and apres camera.
I've rarely been moved to comment on a movie, however this one is special with mildly parodic performances and super-dry wit that only the British can do. This movie doesn't take itself too seriously however many people may not 'get it'. I expect the overall rating to suffer as a consequence.
We're treated to wonderful performances from the entire cast. Bill Nighy peddles his unique shtik superbly while cameos from Fry, Coltrane and Carr are all too brief for mine. Ewan McGregor and Mickey Rourke deliver, as always. Does anyone have more big-screen charisma than Rourke? Alicia Silverstone fits perfectly into this British genre and Alex Pettyfer demonstrates huge talent.
But the biggest surprise is the stunningly balletic execution of direction, photography and editing. Every scene is a visual experience created with clever dolly-work and choreographed with smooth depth-of-field changes (sorry, I don't know the technical terms). Especially sharp are the chase scenes whether by car, motorbike or push bike. The overhead shots when the bikes are speeding around the jagged coastline are amazing. I was sure I fell off the edge and died, right there.
And the fight scenes! These guys do 'chaos' better than I've ever seen ... all delivered with a not-so-subtle 'nod and a wink' to the audience.
The Sci-fi-like plot isn't to my taste, but there's no need to get heavily involved. Just enjoy the performances in front, behind and après camera.
Conspiracy (2008)
I enjoyed it ... there, I said it!
I quite enjoyed the film. There, I've said it. But having said that, let me say this ... it's no classic and Val Kilmer needn't dust off his dinner jacket for award ceremonies.
I'm prepared to add a little balance to the scathing comments that precede me and to say: this is not as bad as many people are saying.
Kilmer's performance is precisely what he would have been aiming for, and that was a reasonable choice. The supporting actors were sufficient, unless you're looking for an academy nominee (and you won't get any guarantees of that, anyway). The plot is predictable, but this is Hollywood after all and most movie-goers aren't looking for 90 minutes of cerebral exercise.
Almost all of the comments have cited the obvious shortcomings. It appears to be a relatively low-budget production and, if that is the case, it's a pretty reasonable effort, in my opinion. I can overlook the shallow performances of many of the supporting cast and the disorganized and disoriented extras.
Some comments are quite unfair, in my opinion, and only show that key plot points have been missed. This is quite a few years after Iraq 1. I suspect that some of the viewers think it's Iraq 2. Kilmer's weight and age, for example, are not a simple error of judgment by the Director and casting agent; rather, it's a simple error in the viewing of the movie.
I'm surprised that few people have noticed the very obvious Halliburton message. This is my major gripe. I have no interest in defending the indefensible, but the message delivery is quite infantile. It reached it's zenith with the overly-long speech by the main female character. She outlines how Halliburton ... sorry, Hallicorp or Halco or whatever it's called ... profits from supplying the weaponry to blow up foreign countries, then wins the contracts to build them again, ultimately never spending their ill-gotten gain in America (which is a curious extension of a moral point) ... and on and on it went. It was one of the most tedious and embarrassing 'worthy' speeches I've heard in a movie (and I support the basic concerns in the message). It was a parody of itself and I watched it three times to see if there was a glimmer of embarrassment in the actor's eyes. How do they do it? Method, I guess.
Aspects of the plot are quite a stretch. I can't see Dastardly Dick Cheney retiring to a dusty little town in the middle of nowhere to build an old-west replica as a base from which to live out his power-crazed fantasies. He already has a much better and more comfortable location for that.
Tell Your Children (1936)
An amusing retrospective on the "War on Drugs"
Classic 1936 exploitation film. Originally titled "Tell Your Children", its cast is mostly unknown actors of the time. The plot involves high school students who are lured by drug pushers, a hit and run accident, manslaughter, suicide and rape.
Financed by a church group, it was targeted at parents, attempting to teach them about the dangers of marijuana.
After languishing for decades, it was rediscovered and out of copyright. Modern audiences, especially on university campuses, embrace it as a comedy that provides an interesting perspective on the "War on Drugs".
This is well worth viewing as an amusing retrospective on life as it was perceived through cinema.
Bee Movie (2007)
Bee realistic and you'll Bee entertained!
This is enjoyable light entertainment without pretense. It has nice characterizations, plenty of humor and typical Seinfeldian insight for those that remain alert. It never takes itself too seriously and - it could be safely assumed - never seeks to have anyone else take it too seriously. It appears that some of the negative comments miss this critical point.
Bee Movie has broad appeal for movie-goers with realistic expectations. Accept it for what it is and you won't be disappointed.
A survey of this household indicates that diverse audiences including University Professors, Chinese Scientists, Peasant farmers and cute little girls will all enjoy The Bee Movie.
Flawless (2007)
Flawed ... yes; but still worth seeing
I agree with all the positive comments for this movie, however I found Demi Moore's performance to be very disappointing. I understand the understated nature of the direction, but she just doesn't pull it off. You need far more natural charisma to make that work.
And the troweled-on make-up ("please don't touch the acrylic facings") for the elderly 'Demi' was simply a tragedy. It was so hideous as to be just plain silly - only matched in skill and professionalism by Demi's failure to act as a much older character.
At first, I was stunned by this caricature of an old lady in an apparently serious movie, then totally floored when she opened her mouth. Clearly it is the voice, manner and presentation (and teeth) of a young femme who is 40 or so years younger. Absurd. I can only wonder at the decision making that was going on during filming and editing.
In spite of these astonishing shortcomings, I'd still recommend the movie to serious punters.
Slipstream (2007)
An idiosyncratic portrayal of a mind under stress
If you're looking for something that's not too taxing and with a familiar Hollywood formula, it might be best to avoid this one.
I freely admit that themes, allegories and so forth elude me in film literature and office politics, alike. While I basically understood this by the end, Hopkins' commentary was very helpful.
Through the first viewing, I was fascinated and enjoyed it immensely. On second viewing with commentary, I was impressed with the manner in which this 'relatively unknown' writer and director attacked this very challenging subject matter.
Hopkins' attempt to define the essence and inner workings of the mind in the circumstances in which the lead character finds himself is a remarkable piece of work. In my opinion, it is reasonable to compare this work with Fellini's 8 1/2.