I can enjoy a low budget sci-fi with annoying acting, but not this one. Could work as an episode in black mirror or something. But not as a almost two hour movie. They really padded out most of the scenes to the extreme. Expect your self saying "get on with it" a lot.
Reviews
16 Reviews
What is Final Fantasy?
6 September 2001
It's a game series. A never ending (ironically) game series. Plot outline -> An outsider fulfills his/hers destiny somehow. And on their way experiences love, loss, new fiends and a new sense of purpose. All games are like this because you should feel like you are playing life. Now they have made a movie out of it. . . Hmmmm. I think if I could decide where and what the characters did, it would be fun.... Hey I can,,, when Final Fantasy X comes to the PS2.... . . . . This movie is probably best for us FF gamers. I don't think any non gamers liked it(with exception of the never tiring sci-fi fans).
It didn't look any good.
24 January 2001
Hmmm. I've seen a lot of Asian movies, a lot of Hong Kong martial arts from the 70's 80's and the 90's. I generally like drama but also love martial arts films, as well as Japanese Anime. I know about Chinese myths, so I don't mind the over dramatization with long flights thru the air. BUT, it didn't look any good. It looked stumbling, not graceful. It was to slow. Actually the one time it looked good was the first time we only see a shadow darting through the roof. Some of the fight scenes looked Ok, but not the best I've seen(Tai-chi, Shoulin Monks, Judo Saga...).
When it comes to the drama of this movie, it stumbles to much. A mediocre love story. Not a very good plot. And the film change it's rhythm on numerous occasions. Something which make it seem uninspired.
The filming, colors, costumes and settings are as almost always in Asian film, superb... But most Asian films(who are obtainable in the west) have this quality.
People who will love this film are the people who have never seen an Asian film before, who likes action and do not mind subtitles.
If you have seen good Asian films before, you'll only think it's ok. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .I think... ;)
When it comes to the drama of this movie, it stumbles to much. A mediocre love story. Not a very good plot. And the film change it's rhythm on numerous occasions. Something which make it seem uninspired.
The filming, colors, costumes and settings are as almost always in Asian film, superb... But most Asian films(who are obtainable in the west) have this quality.
People who will love this film are the people who have never seen an Asian film before, who likes action and do not mind subtitles.
If you have seen good Asian films before, you'll only think it's ok. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .I think... ;)
Dune
(2000)
Trying to hard
21 January 2001
I consider the Dune saga to one of the best books I've ever read. When I first saw the 1984 version, I loved it(I was 14 years old). Then I started reading the books 6 years later. After the first book I hated the 1984 version. THEN after finishing the whole series, I saw it again learned to accept it, but not love it.
It's been some time now since I read any DUNE, but if I remember right the 2000 version keeps to the book more than the 84v. Some details have been left out, but is only noticeable if you have read the book. I understand what the 2k version is trying to tell, but I don't know if they have done a good job. I get the feeling they are trying to hard.
There has almost never ever been a movie that's better than the book. When you decide to make a movie out of a book you must ALWAYS get a writer(sometimes preferably the author as in 2001)to write a new story adapted for film. This writer must have in mind that he is now in a completely different medium. Things that are important when you write books are not as important when you write a script. Naturally visual things are more important. Dialogue too. What we lose in film are smells, feelings, thoughts(though in the 84 version we actually hear their thoughts. Something I personally liked) and in this story something very important. I sort of footnote before every setting. These are things the writer must think about. They have been trying to hard to keep to the book, rather than to write a script. It shows. The 84 version has tried to little to keep to the book, and added some very very stupid things(rain at the end????? What the F*** are they thinking).
All in all the 2K version is not entertaining enough. Poor effort. I'll stick to the book.
It's been some time now since I read any DUNE, but if I remember right the 2000 version keeps to the book more than the 84v. Some details have been left out, but is only noticeable if you have read the book. I understand what the 2k version is trying to tell, but I don't know if they have done a good job. I get the feeling they are trying to hard.
There has almost never ever been a movie that's better than the book. When you decide to make a movie out of a book you must ALWAYS get a writer(sometimes preferably the author as in 2001)to write a new story adapted for film. This writer must have in mind that he is now in a completely different medium. Things that are important when you write books are not as important when you write a script. Naturally visual things are more important. Dialogue too. What we lose in film are smells, feelings, thoughts(though in the 84 version we actually hear their thoughts. Something I personally liked) and in this story something very important. I sort of footnote before every setting. These are things the writer must think about. They have been trying to hard to keep to the book, rather than to write a script. It shows. The 84 version has tried to little to keep to the book, and added some very very stupid things(rain at the end????? What the F*** are they thinking).
All in all the 2K version is not entertaining enough. Poor effort. I'll stick to the book.
Bunch of Five
(1998)
C**p!!!
16 February 2000
Utter c**p!!!
How completely unrealistic. I'm not saying that there is no gangs in Oslo, but they don't talk or act like that. The sound scape of the streets in Oslo sound like downtown Manhattan(Believe me, Oslo is a town in nevada compared to Manhattan).
How completely unrealistic. I'm not saying that there is no gangs in Oslo, but they don't talk or act like that. The sound scape of the streets in Oslo sound like downtown Manhattan(Believe me, Oslo is a town in nevada compared to Manhattan).
American Pie
(1999)
SEX!!!
11 December 1999
And with a headline like that more people will read this comment, and sex is what make this movie popular. I can see their point, but it was just too boring. Sexual debut is something which is always funny to talk about, I was therefore disappointed that this movie did such a poor effort. Some funny elements, but too few. To the movies defence , I think one must know about American high school graduation. Being from Norway I can't understand the big fuss about prom night . All in all dull. Virgins will have no fun with this movie. And if you while watching felt that you learned something, have another father-to-son talk.
Central Station
(1998)
Touching!
13 November 1999
A beautiful film which shows us the harsh life in Rio de Janeiro if you are unlucky, and a teacher teach how to love.
A young boy loose his mother in an accident. A retired teacher who writes letters for people, feel sorry for the boy and start helping him finding his lost father. Grow to love both the boy and Dora(The teacher).
Bring tissues!
A young boy loose his mother in an accident. A retired teacher who writes letters for people, feel sorry for the boy and start helping him finding his lost father. Grow to love both the boy and Dora(The teacher).
Bring tissues!
The Blair Witch Project
(1999)
MMmmmmmmmyyyyyeeeeessssNnnnoooooWweeeeeeellll...
26 October 1999
To begin with I kind of liked it(Except for the end). Then I digested it for a while and found out it not as good as it seams. Why? Well I'm only human, and as human I easily get influenced by commercials. I think this movie sell on marketing and not on quality. It has been done before and the whole thing was a bit shallow. Never-the-less it's better than the other crap... So I voted 6.
Æon Flux
(1991–1995)
Intelligent!
19 October 1999
Rating:<8>
Finally a cartoon which challenges the brain. As appose to Japanese Anime(also known as Manga) where everything is sex and violence, is Aeon Flux more like a good sci-fi novel. Nevertheless, the plot outline probably looks like an Anime.
The drawings looks more like American X-Men than Manga and are quite good.
All in all, a great series.
Finally a cartoon which challenges the brain. As appose to Japanese Anime(also known as Manga) where everything is sex and violence, is Aeon Flux more like a good sci-fi novel. Nevertheless, the plot outline probably looks like an Anime.
The drawings looks more like American X-Men than Manga and are quite good.
All in all, a great series.
Species II
(1998)
The sequel!
26 June 1999
In scream 2 the "horror movie geek" has a formula which this movie follows to the point. More blood, more gore, higher screams, more sex and more killers. I have seen only but a few good sequels in my time, unfortunately this is not one of them.
A BAD MOVIE!
(But if you like Natasha H. there are more nude scenes with here in this movie, but I hope that is not enough to make this a good film.)
A BAD MOVIE!
(But if you like Natasha H. there are more nude scenes with here in this movie, but I hope that is not enough to make this a good film.)
Dune
(1984)
From great, to pure crap, to OK.
11 June 1999
The first time I saw this movie, I thought of it as the best movie I had ever seen(the peak of my sci-fi era).
Then I read the first two books (Dune is based on the first of the six book series by Frank Herbert) and saw DUNE once again (I was really hyped because the books were the best sci-fi novels I have ever read, and still are). For the first time I understood everything. And realized the makers understood nothing (I don't want to lay it all on Lynch, we all know what the people with the money sometimes can do. "See Terry Gilliam Brazil."). I then hated the movie.
Now I have read all six books. I feel I know every inch of Arrakis. The final verdict for DUNE now is that it's OK. I see their attempt to tell the whole story through the first book. I think if they would have stuck to the book, there never would have been made a film.
But it makes it hard to keep up with the film and I believe you have to be a sci-fi fan to like it.
Then I read the first two books (Dune is based on the first of the six book series by Frank Herbert) and saw DUNE once again (I was really hyped because the books were the best sci-fi novels I have ever read, and still are). For the first time I understood everything. And realized the makers understood nothing (I don't want to lay it all on Lynch, we all know what the people with the money sometimes can do. "See Terry Gilliam Brazil."). I then hated the movie.
Now I have read all six books. I feel I know every inch of Arrakis. The final verdict for DUNE now is that it's OK. I see their attempt to tell the whole story through the first book. I think if they would have stuck to the book, there never would have been made a film.
But it makes it hard to keep up with the film and I believe you have to be a sci-fi fan to like it.
The Celebration
(1998)
A great story!
4 June 1999
First I want to say that this movie has got a shocking(I knew nothing about it in advance) and great story. The actors and actresses are believable and good.
HOWEVER! I may be wrong and have got no clue about modern art, but the DOGME style with poor quality digitally compressed video, a lot of fast cuts and moves as well as MTV "cool" shots. This looks to me as trying to be hip with an "MTV Rap Zone" kind a production(tilted shots, quick moves, fast cuts). Not because of a low budget, but to appear hip. I don't like this style. The DOGME team has not yet earned the respect to alter the movie art. I do not appose new thinking, but personally feel the DOGME style is a failure.
Never the less the movie survives because of the story and the actors.
HOWEVER! I may be wrong and have got no clue about modern art, but the DOGME style with poor quality digitally compressed video, a lot of fast cuts and moves as well as MTV "cool" shots. This looks to me as trying to be hip with an "MTV Rap Zone" kind a production(tilted shots, quick moves, fast cuts). Not because of a low budget, but to appear hip. I don't like this style. The DOGME team has not yet earned the respect to alter the movie art. I do not appose new thinking, but personally feel the DOGME style is a failure.
Never the less the movie survives because of the story and the actors.
Twin Peaks
(1990–1991)
The undefeated, undisputed champion of the world!
4 June 1999
The Deity of TV-series! The Lord of horizontal and vertical lines! The Shogun of soaps! The Pharaoh of love stories! The Emperor of horror! The Master of mystique! The President of characters! The King of eye candy! And so on, and so on, and so on, and so on, and so on....
The screams pierce my bones!
8 April 1999
Tell Your Friends