Reviews

9 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Reign of Fire (2002)
1/10
Total Failure
13 November 2002
"Reign of Fire" is a less than worthless unfinished piece of crap, not even remotely worth seeing. The story is as thin as they come - penned by an eight-year-old perhaps - with little point or message. As a fantasy, it has the depth and quality of a junior high school droop out's first attempt at crafting a D&D scenario - so don't even give me that "loosen up, it's just for fun" crap. "Fun" would be something 1/10th as good as "The Princess Bride," this was 1/10th as good as a below average "A-Team" episode without Mr.T. While drizzled hear and there with some low-grade bits of meaningless action, most of the movie consists of people talking to each other in front of poorly lit sets. What action there is mostly consists of quick flashes of cheap digital violence, in which meaningless characters disappear from the story in no particular order. The viewer is repeatedly asked to excuse the most idiotic plot points imaginable, with little if any payoff for doing so. Numerous unfinished details dangle helplessly from the story's unfinished edges, included I suppose only because the effects just looked "too cool, dude" to toss the scenes completely. It is clear that the creators of this mess had better intentions than what they ended up with, but there is no debating the fact that much of what we see on screen (and wait through, bored in our seats) is bare-bones filler intended only to fill out the minimal length of a feature. "Reign of Fire" is totally disappointing, stay away.
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Where is the rest of this film?
24 April 2000
I'm sure I must have missed something. Maybe it's "only" for people who read the book or something. The scenes I saw were mostly pretty cool, and the whole thing felt really weird in a quasi Cronenberg/Lynch kind of way, but a lot of important transitions were obviously missing. The ending is total balony. Did they just get tired of making it or did they run out of money? Unlike the ticket price one pays to see the film, this movie is not complete. This film fails to follow through on every level and releasing it in this state was a huge mistake. Totally disappointing...
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
U-571 (2000)
3/10
Bad Bad Bad!
24 April 2000
Aside from the somewhat tolerable acting, there is almost nothing good to say about this movie. Other than that, everything else that is at all interesting in this film is pretty much a direct quote from either Das Boot or The Hunt For Red October - except much less convincing in the context of this totally ridiculous plot. Basically, you get a grab bag of tight close up shots of sweaty faces and damp machinery intercut with the occasional crappy digital effect of something exploding. The action scenes consist of the jumbled jump cuts and random camera moves that have come to dominate modern action films. The special effects are so cheesy that most of the audience I saw this film with was laughing when the Nazi ship gets blown up. While the main premise is kind of cool, the rampant and shameless historical IMPOSSIBILITIES that make up the plot points of this movie are totally repellant. This film is bad, bad, bad, bad history!!! It seems to me that this is a perfect example of how a foolish studio can push around a weak writer/director team to totally and utterly ruin a script that had, at it's heart, a good idea. People who have a fetish for Nazi uniforms might get a slight kick, but aside from that there is absolutely ZERO romantic content in this film. My expectations going into this movie were low, but this stinker breaks up so fast that I couldn't even find anything to hang on to. Stay away.
4 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Titus (1999)
9/10
Excellent non-verbal cues add to the reinvention of an almost lost classic...
22 February 2000
Julie Taymor's TITUS does a most excellent job of communicating Shakespeare's work through all sorts of fantastic non-verbal means that add a great deal of depth to the experience. Her use of absurdity, anachronism, outlandish sets and costumes, and most of all an absolutlely fantastic cast is exciting to see on screen and really helps move the story along, allowing the viewer to really enjoy Shakespeare's verbage without having to simultaneously deduce every plot point. With only a minor amount of dialog rearrangement she has given new life to what seems to have been an almost lost work. I find it encouraging that such an artifact from our language's past can be recast in a format that is so accessible and exciting. This film should be compared favorably with other recent film adaptations of WS's plays such as Greenaway's "Prospero's Books," Luhrmann's "Romeo + Juliet," and Branagh's "Hamlet" in which tremendous licence was taken by the film makers to revisualize these plays as living works worthy of reinterpretation. Other amazing inter-textual connections, such as this film's relationship to other "sword and sandal" epics, it's reflection of history, or the compelling and disturbing race and gender issues this film grapples with, makes this film even more satisfying. It's a shame that CNN's Paul Tatara felt the need to bash the living daylights out of it, making it just that much more difficult for a film that will already reach a tragically small audience.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Gummo (1997)
10/10
Pure unadulterated genius served with unreserved love.
22 February 2000
GUMMO is the tightest, most consistent, and honest portrayal of youth's quest for love in a society that has forsaken them ever made. Forget the comedy, forget the outstanding photography, forget the heart stopping art direction. This movie is about the little people forgotten between the cracks who seek acceptance amid overwhelming obstacles of hatred, crime, poverty, disease, and twists of fate that leave them alone and groping for comfort. Almost every character is screaming out for love in one way or another, however dysfunctional their lives may be. All of these issues are real - even if exaggerated in the film - and there are thousands of kids out there who in their own beautiful way are trying to live their lives despite the cruelty of a world that will just crap on them. The next time you watch this film, look for the tenderness between the mayhem...
50 out of 73 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
A chilling deconstruction of the human form on film.
19 January 1999
Shot by Mr. B in a busy metropoliton morgue. The recently deceased are prepared for embalming by technicians we barely see. Hands wearing rubber gloves open torsos with scalpels. Heads are opened and brains are removed. Real people are pulled apart and thrown away. Who were they? Who are we? Grainy 16mm color stock. Available light. Moderately long lenses. No sound. No music. Silence.
10 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
A brilliant doc on a tragic and absurd case in which no one comes out looking very good...
19 January 1999
This documentary provides a chilling post mortem on the tragic case of two Reno, Nevada teens who decided to shoot themselves in the head with a shotgun rather than go on living, and the ensuing civil court case staged to place the blame on the heavy metal combo Judas Priest. It is a heartbreaking case, but a fascinating film. It is a great look back at mid-1980's american culture, and should be compared to the fictional "Gummo." The question explored by both the court case and the film is whether or not the boys shot themselves because of the music or because of the heartless, spineless and absolutely mindless "society" they were forced to grow up in. The film includes fantastic interview footage with both the surviving boy, the members of Judas Priest, and assorted family members and other characters who revolve around the case. I got the feeling that the film maker did a great job of trying to be as objective as possible - and no one comes out looking all that good...
21 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Zardoz (1974)
9/10
Dystopian sci-fi classic.
19 January 1999
An important link in the early 70's dystopian Sci-Fi sub genre, not to be missed by fans of "A Clockwork Orange," "Soylent Green," and "Logan's Run." Between "2001: A Space Oddessy" and "Star Wars" films such as this explored the darker side of what science fiction had to offer, often pitting lone hero's against unsurmountable social orders that consume them completely as each successive discovery is made. Usually, these discoveries pertain to the way things "really" work - which never seems to be big nightmare for everyone.
8 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Sal Mineo drawing a bead on Dennis Hopper while Natalie Wood and James Dean are playing house in a vacant Hollywood Hills mansion....
19 January 1999
Sal Mineo drawing a bead on Dennis Hopper while Natilie Wood and James Dean are playing house in a vacant Hollywood Hills mansion... A chilling freeze frame in film history, and an intersection of extreme beauty and pending tragedy. James Dean, car crash; Sal Mineo, stabbed to death; Natalie Wood, drowned; Dennis Hopper - alive, but what a row to hoe! Wow.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed