elcopy Reviews

Unfriended (2014)

It has become better with time, for unintended reasons

[7/10 · 16 September 2021]

I didn't watch this film during its time of release, and I can understand how insufferable must be to watch in a theater a movie that happens almost entirely in a computer screen. I watched it in a computer screen, which seems like the proper way to watch it, it also makes the horror-movie silliness more forgivable.

However, what saves this movie almost a decade later is not its concept, but a crucial decision in its execution: Unlike most films that use simulated operating systems and software, this film happens within the very real Mac OS X Yosemite, using real software and real social networks.

It's quite a treat to watch the actors use Skype, which was popular at the time, Facebook before it became a white-supremacist recruiting tool, and YouTube before it became unwatchable with excessive use of commercials. Because of this, this movie has become a time capsule that is hitting a nostalgic bone, less than 10 years after its release, and I am sure, it will be more pronounced in the years and decades to come.

This is why this movie has become better with time, unintentionally.

The Mummy (1999)

Entertainment at its zenith

[10/10 · 13 May 2021]

I am watching this movie for the first time since I watched it in a theater 22 years ago, and I am nor sure if it's nostalgia, but it has aged incredibly well. Humor, action and thrills are put together in perfect harmony. The pace, the production value, editing, even the comedic and stunt timing of the actors is flawless. The actors all look great, and they are at the peak of their careers.

It's classic Hollywood in every frame, perhaps it's the reason why it looked old fashioned, even when it came out at the end of the 90s. Now it's timeless. Everyone who worked in this film should be proud.

Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014)

Ingenious, thrilling, action packed

[10/10 · 3 June 2019]

An old-school espionage thriller hiding in a superhero movie. The casting of Three Days of the Condor star Robert Redford, is no coincidence. Imagine a superhero from the era when everything was black and white, good was good, evil was evil. Alas, he is now living in a time when things are not as clear, and he becomes more paranoid as the list of people he can trust starts to shrink.

It took me several years for me to review this movie to see if it was going to age as well as I thought, and it has aged even better. The elevator scene that had me at the edge of my seat in a movie theater in 2014, is now iconic. I expect this movie to be referenced in the future the same way we now reference classics like Die Hard.

Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014)

Ingenious, thrilling, action packed

[10/10 · 3 June 2019]

An old-school espionage thriller hiding in a superhero movie. The casting of Three Days of the Condor star Robert Redford, is no coincidence. It took me several years for me to review this movie to see if it was going to age as well as I thought, and it has aged even better. The first movie established a hero of the past, idealistic, where the lines of good vs evil were clearly defined. This movie sets the hero in a present where those lines blur, and the more you find out, the less you can trust the motives of the people surrounding you. Captain America is indeed, living in a time where the forces his generation fought in Europe and the Pacific are now controlling the highest levels of power, openly and in secret.

The elevator scene that had me at the edge of my seat in a movie theater in 2014, is now iconic. I expect this movie to be referenced in the future the same way we now reference classics like Die Hard.

Mad Max: Fury Road (2015)

This movie is punk rock

[10/10 · 14 April 2019]

This is not a movie, it's energy, it's fury and fire in audio/visual form. Action that hammers like drums, paced with machine-crafted rhythm, a script that flows like lyrics, verse chorus verse, the same three chords, but that's all you need, it's virtual Joey Ramone, it's beautiful, it rocks. This movie stage dives out of the screen. This movie rocks.

Mad Max: Fury Road (2015)

This movie is punk rock

[10/10 · 14 April 2019]

There are some things that are impossible to translate for one medium to another. Let's put for example those unfilmable novels, and how difficult was to bring it to screen, like Tom Tikwer's Perfume. So is punk rock music. To this date, the closest translation was Walter Hill's The Warriors. That ended in 2015 when this masterpiece was released.

Alita: Battle Angel (2019)

This movie has a heart made with forgotten technology

[10/10 · 19 February 2019]

Twenty years ago, I came to this very site to post about how a film got me so in awe, I didn't know what to make of it. That film was The Matrix. No I have come out of the theater with the same feeling of exhilaration. This film has a lot to share with Rodriguez first work in comic book world, Sin City: They are both very loyal to the source material, and they both went for broke, overloading the viewer with several storylines that took a few books to develop in the source material. This was the movie's only mistake, as it didn't give any of the characters room to breathe. The actors, however, pulled their weight. Rosa Salazar's breakthrough performance is the highlight, but Oscar winners Christoph Waltz, Marheshala Ali, and even Jenniffer Connelly were great, the later even with the little material they gave her. The comparison to The Matrix comes with the fantastic world building that would take repeated views to sink in, the fantastic, almost groundbreaking visual effects, and the breathtaking action sequences. This movie is a happy ending in a decade where CGI-ridden escapism was losing its luster.

The Wolf of Wall Street (2013)

I consider it the best film of the 21st Century to date.

[10/10 · 6 January 2014]

A thousand years from now, when historians study the fall of the American empire, they will watch this tale of sex, drugs, money, power, corruption, greed... and will laugh their asses off. The movie is about indulging excess, and it's an indulging excess itself. I mean, a three-hour comedy? Are you kidding me? Who else can pull this off? This is a master, Martin Scorsese, at the top of his form. DiCaprio's impeccable comedic timing in this film cements him as one of the greatest actors of this generation (to me, comedy is far, far harder to do than drama. It's harder to make people laugh than you think). And don't get me wrong, this is a film of horrible people doing horrible things, and most people will be offended how this movie turns horrible things into laughs. That doesn't take away that it's a masterpiece.

The Tree of Life (2011)

Boring. Tedious. Practically unwatchable. One of the best films of the year!

[1/10 · 15 March 2012]

I'm a film-goer who enjoys art house movies, foreign films, campy B-movies and the occasional Hollywood CGI explosions festival. I only ask of movies one thing: to have at least some entertainment value. You can tell your story as long as you can keep me interested and don't insult my intelligence.

This highly-praised movie has absolutely zero entertainment value, or the entertainment value equal to watching paint dry. The story -if there's one- is unfocused and disjointed. The beautiful cinematography doesn't hide that most parts doesn't seem to belong in the same film. In resume, is a film you endure through it.

Now, the genius of the film, which has so many critics and idiots masturbating to it, is that all the disjointed imaginary put together opens the film to interpretation. Such as an abstract painting can be interpreted by the public as they see fit, or give it a deeper meaning once they learn about the author's intension. This is how Duchamp was able to turn an urinal into a work of art.

The problem is, I don't go to see films to interpret them. I take them at face value (even the best abstract paintings allow themselves to be taken as face value if you wish). If they're entertaining, I am able to read between the lines through smart subtext placed by the director or the actors. This film is not smart. It's lazy and self-indulgent.

So let me flip the finger and extend a cordial eff you, to you who consider this film a masterpiece. You are idiots.

Sugar (I) (2008)

The "Friday Night Lights" of baseball

[9/10 · 18 April 2009]

"Sugar" is simply one of the best sports movies ever and it does so avoiding every sports movies cliché ever made. The story of the main character is simply a composite of the story of the majority of people who go to play the game professionally. Not only that, but also reflects the story of the immigrant who comes to America pursuing a dream.

Spoken mostly in Spanish, the movie almost qualifies as a foreign language film. The filmmakers do an excellent job capturing the contrast in atmosphere of the Dominican Republic -a poor country, rich in happiness- to the heartland of America, and back to the Bronx -a Dominican stronghold outside of the island, also stricken by poverty.

As in "Friday Night Lights" you can feel the constant stress these young players endure to make it big. It's every bit as tense and if you like baseball, and are interested a little bit about these foreign superstars now playing the game, this movie is going to be a treat.

One of the best films of 2009.

Out of Africa (1985)

Zzzz

[1/10 · 25 February 2008]

One of the worst movies that won the Best Picture Oscar. It's however, perfect bait for movie snobs: beautiful photography, art direction, dramatic acting, etc. Time proved another Oscar nominee, Spielberg's "The Color Purple" was more deserving of the award. 1985's best movie however is not questionable: One of the best American comedies in history, "Back to the Future", which was seen as just another sci-fi summer blockbuster at the time but decades later is vindicated and considered a classic. Oscar has many films like "Out of Africa", beautiful and competent, but ultimately fail to connect with a non-snobbish audience. Some of the Oscar winners I've seen that deserve to be with this movie are "The English Patient", "Ordinary People" and "Shakespeare in Love". No one is going to dispute classics like "Fargo", "The Empire Strikes Back" and "Saving Private Ryan" are not more beloved by audiences. When it comes to quality, trust the people and not the Academy.

There Will Be Blood (2007)

Markets more than what it delivers

[7/10 · 5 January 2008]

Miramax proves they don't need the Weinsteins to market over-hyped, critic's darlings. We're talking about the studio that stole best picture Oscars in 1996 from Fargo and 1998 from Saving Private Ryan, and got nominations from movies that were okay but not great like Chocolat. I even think there were far better movies in 1999 than the Oscar winner, American Beauty, but you be the judge of that. This movie, if marketed normally, would've tanked in the box office. Here's how they do it: Show it to a handful of critics by year's end, who'll start the buzz and put it in top-ten lists. Premiere it in one or two art houses in New York and L.A., who are obviously going to be sold out because people wanting to see what all the fuzz is about. The thing goes in crecendo, the movie wins some nominations, premiere it in more theaters. Wins some Oscars, do a wide release. By then, the film is bad-word-of-mouth proof. As in "Gangs of New York" Daniel Day Lewis' performance overpowers the film and turns it into a one-man show. Only his scenes with Paul Dano have some balance and are in fact the film's most entertaining exchanges. Not a bad film at all, just a bit overrated.

Grindhouse (2007)

Great concept, dragged down by QT

[6/10 · 9 December 2007]

In Grindhouse Tarrantino and Rodriguez pair up to make some of the crazy camp that they served with From Dusk 'Til Dawn. Rodriguez's Planet Terror is an instant classic: gory, ridiculous and plenty of great moments. Tarrantino's Death Proof is simply boring, self-indulgent and drags down the whole Grindhouse with it. Any of the fake trailers pack a million times more entertainment than Death Proof (inexplicably, critics decided Death Proof was the best part). Rodriguez is finally capturing the lost opportunities he had in Once Upon a Time in Mexico and Sin City and looks like he's finally using the best of his talent. Tarrantino on the other hand, does a poorly-written dialog rehash of his other films interrupted briefly by some action sequences and the result is plain horrible. Too bad this happened, because the concept is great, the trailers are amazing (I'd love to see Machete if it ever gets done) and if the whole thing would've succeeded, we could be seeing a Grindhouse 2 directed by Rob Zombie and Eli Roth. Unfortunately Tarrantino's flop ruined it and Grindhouse bombed.

Death Proof (2007)

Tarrantino has become a parody of himself

[1/10 · 9 December 2007]

While Rodriguez managed to capture the ridiculous campy nature of 70s and 80s B movies, Tarrantino showed how rusty he's become, and he's starting to look like a one-trick pony. The good moments in Death Proof are too few and far between and it's ruined by filler dialog overkill. This movie, more than any before, shows Tarrantino's biggest directing flaw: All characters sound the same. Instead of dialog the whole thing sounds like a big, self-indulgent Tarrantino monologue interpreted by several people. Maybe 15 years ago his characters calling each other "bitch" and "nigga" constantly was breakthrough, now, it looks recycled and overdone.

Critics who praised this film over Planet Terror clearly didn't get it. B movies are not about acting, or quality, or even a coherent plot, the only sin of a B movie is being boring, and Death Proof is boring and practically unwatchable. Now I understand why producers wouldn't let Tarrantino direct Casino Royale.

Perfume: The Story of a Murderer (2006)

Tykwer captures the essence

[9/10 · 16 September 2007]

Tom Tykwer has to be the most talented, bravest director of our time. I say the bravest because he did a movie practically impossible to do (Stanley Kubrik believed doing this movie was impossible). You read the book and you can only understand a little how hard it is to bring a story like Perfume to film. Not only the book is hard to translate, but also the subject. This movie is about a serial killer, and everyone knows how hard it is to get into the mind of a serial killer, if that's even possible. This movie does the best it can to get us inside the mind and motives of a predator, better than any other film ever made. Filmmakers thinking of doing a movie that could make you understand characters like Manson, Dahmer, BTK, Gacy, Bundy, even guys like Hitler, will have to study this movie. Tykwer, not only takes the challenge, but succeeds. The medium is completely different, but he manages to deliver the same sensation. The same horror, passion, and awe condensed in the time of a feature-length film. The plot is lineal and easy to pick up, something American Audiences would appreciate. Too bad they'll stay away because of the subject matter, but for those who dare, they'll find a hidden jewel of a film.

National Treasure (2004)

When a ripoff turns out better than the original

[6/10 · 27 August 2007]

When a ripoff turns out better than the original

There's no doubt that National Treasure is a ripoff of the Da Vinci Code, set in the United States instead of Europe. The strange thing is, the ripoff turned out a better movie. It has all the action, adventure, joy and fun Da Vinci Code failed to deliver.

It's still far from being the best movie ever, but it's absolutely entertaining. Nicolas Cage beats Tom Hanks to a pulp.

I think they would have made Da Vinci Code a SEQUEL to this movie. If you're a fan of Dan Brown's book, you'll enjoy this movie. Skip the awful Ron Howard adaptation and watch this instead.

Hostel (2005)

Perfect Horror Movie

[9/10 · 20 August 2007]

There are scary movies and there are horror movies. Hostel is the later. What do I mean by horror? A movie that makes you flinch, that's uncomfortable to watch and stays with you long after you see it. The movie starts like the garden-variety scary movie in the vein of "Scream" and 80s slasher flicks, but by the last half it becomes pure unadulterated horror. The director did a pretty good job taking us from the cheesiness to the terrible cruelty you experience later to its unrealistic, but satisfying Hollywood ending. Many people will say the Hollywood clichés will ruin what could have been a classic, but I think when the subject is so disturbing you need a little movie magic to lighten up things. When the movie ended, the most horrible thing I think I experienced was not watching helpless, trapped people being tortured like if they were in the deepest stage of hell, it was thinking these things are happening somewhere in the world right now. Not in Slovakia, where this movie does what Borat did for Kazakhstan, but in places like China, Iran and Cuba (where Americans are likely doing it too). There are some parallels between sex and violence in the movie, but it's easy to forget if you only want to watch it as face value. There are too many clever things done for those who want to read between the lines. One last praise, I think it was pretty clever not to subtitle any foreign language. It adds to the experience, which in the end is to make you uncomfortable in all levels possible.

Carlito's Way (1993)

Overlooked jewel

[8/10 · 15 June 2007]

De Palma and Pacino pair up once more in a movie about another Latin outlaw, yet this is as close to Scarface as it's going to get. This movie is completely different, which is going to disappoint Scarface fans. Pacino's Carlito Brigante is not Antonio Montana by a mile. If you're going to watch a great performance is going to come from Sean Penn and his bad perm. Trust me, it's one of the greatest performances in movie history. De Palma has many hits and misses in his career, this movie cleared some bad taste out of the stinker that was "The Bonfire of the Vanities" and it's perhaps his best film after Scarface and the Untouchables.

300 (2006)

Many writers wish their books were adapted likewise

[10/10 · 18 March 2007]

First, 300 is based on a comic book by Frank Miller (Robocop 2), inspired in the battle of Thermopylae. So don't even bother seeing it, if comic book violence, action over character, style over substance, fantasy over realism is your thing. Second, this movie captures the very essence of the comic book, frame by frame and word by word. Sounds familiar? Maybe because Robert Rodriguez already did it in 2005's Sin City, based on a comic book by, guess who? Frank Miller. Other comic book artist in the vein of Miller have seen their work butchered on the screen. Example is Allan Moore, whose comic books have spawned a bunch of mediocre movies (V for Vendetta, From Hell, The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen). But Frank comic books are perfect for the screen. The stylish frames are the perfect storyboard. The characters over the top, the wardrobe iconic and visually arresting. Of course, Spartans didn't go to war wearing tongs and red capes, but the symbolism of it, godlike bodies almost nude, tells you about the characters more than any words. The same with the mangled, ugly bad guys, visually altered to give maximum impact. His words are simplistic, but piercing, and like the medium, macho as hell ("Spartan, come back with your shield, or on it."), that's why you can do a script by simply copy/paste-ing exactly what you read in the comic book. It's the perfect blueprint for an action movie. Snyder knew all this and took every artistic license possible to do this movie like a comic book. He used tricks done by Rodriguez before, only that Rodriguez relying on star power distracted me from the stories in Sin City, also Sin City's pace was not enough to savour each story: Sin City tells 3 stories from 3 books as long as 300 in the same space of time. A lot of people will look at this movie looking for other entertainment tricks used more in regular films. This is looking back. The great thing about 300 is that freshens up the tired sword-and-sandal genre. It's a very welcome update and one of the best films of the decade.

Letters from Iwo Jima (2006)

Enemy Mine

[3/10 · 13 January 2007]

Make no mistake: This movie stars Japanese actors and it's spoken in Japanese, but it's still an American movie. A Clint Eastwood movie. You can see that in the pace, the way the characters are laid out and the story itself. Unlike war movies made by Americans, with American's point of view, there's an emotional detachment palpable in this movie. It's hard to understand, and I know soldier's both sides have similar values. It's just the values of the soldiers on this movie seemed to me... American. The straightforward thinking, the subtle cockiness, the lack of comfort with silence of these soldiers is something I've never seen in any Japanese film. Again, the pace it's pure Eastwood. The brutality we're used to see in war films since -this film's producer -Spielberg's "Saving Private Ryan" is absent. It's less action, more character. Very Eastwood. But in the end, this is how I imagine a war movie, where the Americans are directed by a foreigner.

In the Time of the Butterflies (2001 TV Movie)

In the Time of the Salma

[3/10 · 12 December 2006]

Many good books have been written about the brutal regime of Trujillo in the Dominican Republic. Check Edwidge Danticat's "The Farming of Bones" and Mario Vargas Llosa's brutal "Feast of the Goat" (also turned into a horrible movie). "In the time of the Butterflies" is one of the most successful commercially which is perhaps the reason Salma Hayek saw it as a star vehicle that preceded Frida.

With a budget no higher than a telenovela, the movie focuses on Salma and tries to become a manipulative story of a strong Latina, but ends up becoming a "Like Water for Chocolate" wannabe with no real direction. And as history goes, I don't think a movie with a mostly Mexican cast, speaking English and playing Dominicans is taking history too seriously.

Apocalypto (2006)

The most violent movie I've seen

[8/10 · 10 December 2006]

I would have rated this movie higher if the violence in the movie wasn't so gratuitous. Seriously, folks. This movie has more gore, mutilations and torture than most horror flicks. If you thought Savning Private Ryan was too intense, get ready to see something more extreme. Too bad because sometimes it distracts you from the plot and the action, which is quite good.

Mel is very talented enhancing the drama of every scene. Something I remember well from Braveheart. The story itself is very simple, but it works quite well. Despite the mindless violence, is still one of the best movies of 2006.

X-Men: The Last Stand (2006)

Singer's Mistake

[7/10 · 29 May 2006]

If -like me- you liked the first two X-Men movies, and lowered your expectations for this one because of Bryan Singer's departure, you're correct.

Simply put, the director's switch was a bad move for both camps. I don't think Singer will add anything to Superman we haven't seen before and Brett Ratner can't keep up with the expectations set on the former two X-Men Movies.

Didn't help the plot tried to grab more than it could chew on. Too many story lines and too little time to develop them all. Main characters die and lose their power without adding drama or urgency. Other characters are introduced without a backstory. The one that has some backstory (Angel) is almost a cameo. With this movie, one of my fears from the comic book came true: There were so many mutants at one point I lost track of them. But, Jackman and McKellen carry the movie as they did in the other two. Fortunately.

Add also the poor decision of giving up more story development for bombast. This movie mainly goes for apocalyptic, and totally unrealistic fighting scenes between the good guys and the bad guys, as if trying to show off the big budget the movie had for special effects.

Yet still, it manages to entertain, so it's not a lost case. The problem is, with Ratner the focus is on entertainment, when Singer focus is on delivering a message first. And that's the main difference between this X-Men movie and the other two.

The Da Vinci Code (2006)

Ron Howard is not worthy of the Grail

[1/10 · 26 May 2006]

When I read the mega-bestseller, I visualized the movie version as a scavenger hunt in the vein of the Indiana Jones movies and its clones ("Romancing the Stone" and the like). Unfortunately, it turned out to be an uninspired, blah adaptation made by Ron Howard - perhaps the most overrated director in movie history.

The whole movie seems to run on rails. The actors look like in a trance. Character development is a joke. The action sequences are snooze worthy. The slight hint of humor in the novel is completely gone.

On the plus side, the script follows the story almost step by step. Book fans will appreciate this but it won't be enough to wake them up from this bore.

My recommendation: Skip this movie and watch one of the many "Da Vinci Uncoded" documentaries out there. They will give you more insight on the book's theories than this movie.

If you want to see what could have been this movie, but with the fun added, watch the mildly entertaining "National Treasure".

Three's Company (1976–1984)

Inferior to the British original

[27 February 2006]

As every American remake, this series is far below the British original "Man Abour the House". I happen to watch the original first and I saw better acting, raunchier humor and better casting (also seen 30 years later in the American version of British hit sitcom "The Office").

Strangely, the American remake became far more popular than the original.

This sitcom is now a classic. It retained some of the humor and raunchy jokes. Just to a bare minimum but enough to make it one of the most popular sitcoms ever. Still, I advice you to catch "Man About the House" and decide if I'm right or wrong.