joe-886 Reviews

The Last Legion (2007)

It was like a two hour episode of Hercules The TV Show from the 1990s.

[19 July 2007]

The Last Legion was Terrible, with a capital "t". I can not believe they spent over 20 million plus on this film. It was really bad.

It was like a two hour episode of Hercules The TV Show from the 1990s.

The cinematography was bright and crisp like a comedy when it should have dark and grainy like the Gladiator or even King Arthur, which while not the best move was certainly better than this film.

There were some decent actors in the film, but most of them were cast in the wrong roles, and thus their performances suffered. Colin Firth was wonderful in Love Actually, but was completely unbelievable as a legendary Roman Centurion. Kevin McKidd, best known for his role on the HBO TV Series Rome, might have delivered a decent performance, but I was far to distracted by his awful wardrobe and makeup to notice. I would have much rather seen him in the role of Aurelius – but then that would have raised unwelcome comparisons to his television series. The best actor, or at least the one with the most awards, Sir Ben Kingsley completely phoned in his performance.

The wardrobe and special effects department looked straight out of a low budget TV Show. No amount of acting could make the heroes heroic, or the villains terrifying through their ridiculous costumes.

The fight scenes were straight out of the 1950s and demonstrated the worst theater techniques known to man. They also demonstrated just how bad both the editing and special effects were, because you could clearly see that no damage was done in one shot, then six scenes later a character would have a wound from where he was struck, despite not having one before that.

Needless to say, I was not impressed with this film. I am a big fan of many of the actors in this film, and very much wanted to like it. I guess I will just have to blame the director, who by the way did work on the Television shows Hercules and Xena: Warrior Princess…which certainly explains a lot.

Rescue Dawn (2006)

Don't Politicize This Film!

[10/10 · 13 March 2007]

I am amazed at how many people are so consumed with Anti-War fever that they can't appreciate a true story about a man who overcomes something that most people couldn't. If it does not reinforce their preconceptions then they consider it propaganda. Yet these same people hale anything, no matter how absurdly ridiculous that reinforces their beliefs. They completely miss the point. Their own prejudices keep them from recognizing and appreciating a work of art when they see it. Many of today's filmmakers seeking to make both fictional films and documentaries about the war in Iraq, as well as wars from the past, are running into a brick wall. Both Hollywood and the Independent Film Industry are refusing to show films that do not take a distinctive anti-war slant. Filmmakers that show an objective view of warfare, neither taking a position for or against the war, are finding it next to impossible to get their films shown. Likewise, if the film is even remotely related to a war and does not blatantly condemn it then it does not get shown. Just ask Nick Bicanic & Jason Bourque how hard it was for them to get their excellent documentary about the modern day use of Private Security Companies seen. As them how many studios offered to purchase the rights to film if they would only change the tone to one of condemnation rather than examination. I get the sense, from the back story about the lack of financing Herzog was able to get for this project that he ran into the same problem. Frankly I am appalled. The industry, both mainstream and independent, are pushing their own agendas over all else. The art form is suffering greatly for it. I congratulate filmmakers like Bicanic and Herzog for refusing to take no for answer. As for this film, it honors a man who risked his life not only for his country but for his fellow POWs. You can hate war and still respect the men and women who were called upon to fight it. You can hate war and still call a POW who escapes capture despite impossible odds a hero. You can hate the war in Iraq and appreciate the sacrifices the men and women who are fighting it are making on your behalf. Don't let your own personal bias lead you to make a mistake you'll regret for the rest of your life. Protest the war all you like, just do it in a way that does not belittle the airmen, soldiers, sailors and marines who are fighting it. Whether you agree with their decision or not, they deserve your understanding and your respect. Just as Dieter Dengler, the POW on whom this film is based, deserves your respect. Don't belittle his sacrifice by politicizing this film. Whether you agree with his decision to become fighter pilot or not, his accomplishments.

Collateral (2004)

Gun Play Hit and Miss!

[3 January 2007]

One of my biggest pet peeves in films is the gun play. With firearms training schools like Front Sight training actors for free, there is no excuse to get it wrong. Tom Cruise's performance in this regard is near perfect. Every motion is exactly as it should be. Smooth is fast, and he does it by the numbers. Perfect. Mark Ruffalo's performance, however, is pitiful. He is supposed to be a detective. Meaning he's spent years on the force and knows what not to do, if not what to do. Yet he walks around with his firearm in one hand, held sideways like a gangster. I don't care if he grew up on the streets; the academy would have broken him of this stupid habit. This is a cardinal sin amongst firearms professionals. The technical adviser did not earn his paycheck that day!

Miami Vice (2006)

Both Eyes Open with Iron Sights - Not gonna happen!

[3 January 2007]

There is a pretty big screw-up in one of the better scenes in this film. When Gina gives her "That's not what happens" speech and shoots the White Supremacist in the head, she takes the shot with both eyes open. Current dogma for iron sights is to shoot with the supporting eye closed. Now if she had a magnified scope or red dot sight that would be different. Those devices are designed for both eye open shooting. But her academy would have trained her to close one eye using that weapon in its current configuration. The film takes a lot of care to make sure the gun play (meaning the actual handling of the firearms is accurate) so this screw up is a little disappointing for those of us who know better. Also, the firearms seem to be handed out haphazardly and with no regard for their characters backgrounds or the weapon's practicality. Cops carry expensive Euro trash firearms; the leader of the white supremacists carries an outdated HKG3 while his men carry state of the art firearms, and so on. It's like they just lined up and grabbed what was available. Frankly, I expected better attention to detail.

Shadow Company (2006)

An Excellent Film That Saves the Genre

[10/10 · 31 October 2006]

After Fahrenheit 9/11 and "When the Levees Broke: A Requiem in Four Acts" I feared the political documentary genre was forever lost in liberal bias. Shadow Company restores this genre to its rightful place of respectability.

Far too often documentary film makers shape their films to fit their predetermined conclusions and present only the footage that backs up their premise. Shadow Company takes a fair and balanced approach that few filmmakers, or news outlets for that matter, have the courage and integrity to take.

Shadow Company is an extremely insightful, educational, and entertaining look at a remarkable and very controversial event in contemporary politics and modern warfare. Anyone hoping to have a well informed conversation about the war in Iraq needs to see this film. Conservatives and liberals alike will call it one of their favorite films of the year.