I did not like The Tree of Life, but watched it with an open mind and now I want to give it a serious review. I've enjoyed plenty of artsy films, like "Blue Velvet" and "Lost In Translation" and "Mulholland Drive," but this this movie is very different. There is very little dialog and seriously HALF of the movie is just imagery of the big bang, the creation of the universe and evolution of life on earth (yeah, there are dinosaurs in this movie). The other half of the film is really more a collection of "character studies" than a linear story. Sean Penn is hardly in the movie. Basically he goes up in an elevator in the beginning and comes down an elevator at the end. When we're not watching the history of the universe or Sean Penn in an elevator, we see Sean Penn's character as a young boy growing up in a somewhat dysfunctional family. The movie was very long and boring. There were a few times when it seemed to end and everyone in the theater said things like "finally, it's over" but then another scene would start and I could hear people in the audience complaining that it wouldn't end. To avoid being like film maker Terrence Malick, I made my point, so this is the end of the review.
Reviews
6 Reviews
Crazy as Hell
(2002)
Fun, but too simple!
16 August 2011
I'd never heard of "Crazy As Hell" before seeing it, but I watched it on a whim. It was entertaining enough to keep my attention, but I was kind of waiting for it to end. The film just lacked intensity, which was odd considering the subject matter. Sadly, it just kind of dragged and not a whole lot happened. It felt like a Twilight Zone episode that was stretched into a two hour film. And, like many old Twilight Zone episodes, it dealt with a very one-dimensional character with a painfully obvious character flaw (in this case: arrogance/ego). Our main character isn't all that likable and doesn't seem to have anything at stake, so why should I care what happens to him? There are a lot of not-so-subtle clues and symbols. Oddly, many of them seemed like plot flaws and turned out to be intentional later on. For example (without giving anything away) in first scene, Ty stops his car then back up and accidentally backs his car over a glass bottle right behind his tire - why didn't he run it over it when he first pulled up? I dismissed this as a movie mistake, but it actually made sense in retrospect. Like a lot of the movie, it was so simple and obvious that I actually DIDN'T notice it.
Hannibal Rising
(2007)
A boring and predictable film.
10 February 2007
I knew this movie was going to be lame, but my girlfriend wanted to see it, so I had to see it... This movie is oddly similar to Batman Begins. A young wealthy boy is traumatized by his family's murder, then grows up and learns how to fight and goes after the murderers and other bad guys.
Unlike Anthony Hopkins, Gaspard Ulliel was not able to make Hannibal Lecter a likable character. He was obnoxious and lacked the intelligence and depth that Hopkins gave to the character. It wasn't all Gaspard Ulliel's fault, the script he was given was bad to begin with.
This movie could have been really cool, but it was reduced to a basic revenge film with a "hunt-kill-hunt-kill" structure. Toward the end, there was a really cliché scene where Hannibal yells "NOOOOOOOOOO" like Luke Skywalker after Vader says "I am your father." Worst of all, the film was just boring. I do NOT need a lot of action, just something interesting! This movie was by far the worst of the series and I'd have walked out of the theater if I wasn't with my girlfriend.
Unlike Anthony Hopkins, Gaspard Ulliel was not able to make Hannibal Lecter a likable character. He was obnoxious and lacked the intelligence and depth that Hopkins gave to the character. It wasn't all Gaspard Ulliel's fault, the script he was given was bad to begin with.
This movie could have been really cool, but it was reduced to a basic revenge film with a "hunt-kill-hunt-kill" structure. Toward the end, there was a really cliché scene where Hannibal yells "NOOOOOOOOOO" like Luke Skywalker after Vader says "I am your father." Worst of all, the film was just boring. I do NOT need a lot of action, just something interesting! This movie was by far the worst of the series and I'd have walked out of the theater if I wasn't with my girlfriend.
Saw II
(2005)
I wanted to walk out on this one...
1 November 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I went to go see Saw II with my girlfriend last year. We had seen the first Saw together and both thought it was pretty good. I was amazed at the good reviews Saw II got. I have never walked out of the theater in the middle of a movie, but I really wanted to walk out on this one. The only reason I stayed was that my girlfriend wanted to stay. So I had to stay...
Saw II was so lame. First of all, the acting was SO BAD. Really flat boring characters. And nothing made sense. They had a flashlight in the scenes when they didn't need one but as soon as the lights went out they were just standing in the dark...what happened to the flashlight? And the gun behind the door which shoots you in the head when you turn the knob...this only worked because one guy was looking through the peep-hole while another guy turned the knob. Otherwise you could just open the door and a bullet would fly by you about a foot away. And the kid was in in "a safe place"...why didn't the cop say "what do you mean he's in 'a safe place'? isn't he in this booby trapped house?" totally predictable ending! And why didn't anyone think to look at the back of each other's heads to see if there was anything written there? It was the first thing i thought to do when jigsaw's message says "the numbers are in the back of your mind."
I'm going to see Saw III this weekend. Hopefully it will be a lot better than Saw II.
Saw II was so lame. First of all, the acting was SO BAD. Really flat boring characters. And nothing made sense. They had a flashlight in the scenes when they didn't need one but as soon as the lights went out they were just standing in the dark...what happened to the flashlight? And the gun behind the door which shoots you in the head when you turn the knob...this only worked because one guy was looking through the peep-hole while another guy turned the knob. Otherwise you could just open the door and a bullet would fly by you about a foot away. And the kid was in in "a safe place"...why didn't the cop say "what do you mean he's in 'a safe place'? isn't he in this booby trapped house?" totally predictable ending! And why didn't anyone think to look at the back of each other's heads to see if there was anything written there? It was the first thing i thought to do when jigsaw's message says "the numbers are in the back of your mind."
I'm going to see Saw III this weekend. Hopefully it will be a lot better than Saw II.
The Fly
(1986)
One of the very few GOOD remakes. Awesome movie.
29 December 2005
Sci-Fi horror at its best. I liked this movie a lot. I give bad reviews to most horror movies because I have high standards and I'm picky... But The Fly (1986) is a winner.
Unlike most remakes, which take good movies and make new horribly stupid versions, these guys took a lame 1950's movie and made a killer new version. That's what a remake should be! The plot and character development were impressive. This is NOT a dumb slasher film (although is has more than its share of gore).
The acting is good, story is good, the gore and effects are disgusting (in a good way). AND the end was good too. Check this movie out.
Unlike most remakes, which take good movies and make new horribly stupid versions, these guys took a lame 1950's movie and made a killer new version. That's what a remake should be! The plot and character development were impressive. This is NOT a dumb slasher film (although is has more than its share of gore).
The acting is good, story is good, the gore and effects are disgusting (in a good way). AND the end was good too. Check this movie out.
Wolf Creek
(2005)
Writers must have been smoking Wolf Crack
29 December 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I enjoyed Wolf Creek...because it was so BAD that it was funny. These are a few stupid things that bothered me about this film...(These are spoilers!) 1. How did the killer know which car the "smart" girl was going to get into? He's just waiting there for her...but she could have taken any car.
2. The "Smart" girl is being stalked by a psycho killer and she stops to look at videos of other people who were killed. No real person would care, they would just RUN.
3. Why is the guy crucified with headless nails? Kind of defeats the purpose of nailing a person to something, doesn't it? 4. Why don't the girls kill the bad guy when he is passed out on the floor? They are out of bullets, but they had other weapons in the room.
5. What happened with the aliens? The car stops, both watches stop at the same time...why? And how come the killer's car didn't get messed up by the same force? There are plenty more, but I don't recall right now. Anyway, this movie was horrible. It wants to Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Ed Gein but it doesn't pull it off.
2. The "Smart" girl is being stalked by a psycho killer and she stops to look at videos of other people who were killed. No real person would care, they would just RUN.
3. Why is the guy crucified with headless nails? Kind of defeats the purpose of nailing a person to something, doesn't it? 4. Why don't the girls kill the bad guy when he is passed out on the floor? They are out of bullets, but they had other weapons in the room.
5. What happened with the aliens? The car stops, both watches stop at the same time...why? And how come the killer's car didn't get messed up by the same force? There are plenty more, but I don't recall right now. Anyway, this movie was horrible. It wants to Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Ed Gein but it doesn't pull it off.
Tell Your Friends