alex-306 Reviews

Fahrenheit 9/11 (2004)

Excellent, important, and moving film

[10/10 · 4 July 2004]

I saw Fahrenheit 9/11 at Phipps Mall in the affluent Buckhead neighborhood of Atlanta, GA, and I will say for the record:

1. Fahrenheit 9/11 attracted the most racially integrated audience I've ever seen at an Atlanta movie theater, as well as the most age-diverse audience.

2. The audience was completely in tune with what Michael Moore was trying to do. When he wanted you to be mad, people were mad. When he wanted you to be upset, people were upset, and when he wanted you laugh, people laughed. And boy, did they laugh.

3. The audience cheered (loudly) upon the film's conclusion.

Truly a satisfying moment, to feel part of a community of people, if only for two hours, who recognized that the emperor indeed has no clothes.

Is Michael Moore manipulative? Of course- he's an editorial documentarian. Does he sometimes assume too much from too little information? Of course- he's a human being. That's what human beings do. Now, you may say, yes, it may be human nature to infer too much from too little information, but as a responsible artist, Michael Moore should get his ducks firmly in a row before trying to manipulate his audience. That being said, we have libel in slander laws in this country. If Michael Moore is so far off base, where are the lawsuits and defamation of character charges? Why won't Bush or his camp respond to any of the specific allegations of Fahrenheit 9/11? Why is that, in fact, they state an unwillingness even to see the film, and yet feel qualified to have a valid opinion of it? Now who's inferring too much from too little?

What is absolutely undeniable is that a) war is horrible, b) the United States of America went to war with Iraq for spurious reasons, c) we have been conspicuously unsuccessful in capturing Osama bin Laden, in part because bin Laden has no relationship whatsoever with Iraq, d) there have been many people who have benefited financially from the war, and those people have a long and in many cases sordid relationship with the Bush family, and e) Bush has used the 9/11 attacks as a way to advance an agenda that is completely unrelated to the attacks themselves, and to infringe on our civil rights. Any attempt to dissect Michael Moore's arguments fall flat when these basic facts are irrefutable.

Fahrenheit 9/11 is ultimately a highly entertaining and justifiably scathing review of the Presidency of George W. Bush, embarrassment to himself, our great nation, and, for that matter, to the entire human race. Please help vote this buffoon out of office before he can discredit our country further.

Salò, or the 120 Days of Sodom (1975)

Vile film/superfluous cautionary tale

[13 June 2004]

I fancy myself as having an iron stomach, but had a very difficult time keeping my eyes open and not vomiting while watching this film. Can I acknowledge that, within the morass of the physical barbarism and sexual perversion, lies a cautionary tale? Absolutely. Certainly, Pasolini has taken aristocratic frivolity and authoritarian entitlement to their most horrific extreme. However, I could read A Tale of Two Cities and gotten that without having to watch the consumption of fecal matter. In short, I would argue that Salo' is effective but superfluous.

Of course, many people watch this film out of morbid curiosity due to its reputation of being, as Criterion puts it, "perhaps the most disturbing and disgusting film ever made." If you haven't seen Salo', I will say that I'll give Criterion the "disgusting" part of their claim. That said, I was more disturbed Todd Solondz's Happiness, which, though graphic, does not show on film some of the darkest behavior committed by its principals. A comparison between Happiness and Salo' reveals that what is understood but left to the imagination is often-times more disturbing than what is explicitly stated or shown. The same point might be made of Schindler's list vs. Life is Beautiful.

In summary, if you want to see the most disgusting film ever made, fork over the twenty bucks to buy a bootleg DVD on eBay and knock yourself out. Just don't expect to uncover some profound truth that might otherwise be attained through less unpleasant experiences.

5/10

The Matrix Reloaded (2003)

Terrible

[3/10 · 17 May 2003]

Let me preface this by saying that I was a fan of the first Matrix movie. The special effects blew my mind, and the philosophical content of the story was compelling. All told, there had never been an action film quite like it, and I was more than willing to endure the headache of seeing a blockbuster movie the day it came out.

Wow, was I ever disappointed.

For anyone who said this was an exciting movie: were you watching the same film I was??? Rarely has anything less exciting been imprinted onto celuloid. After about 90 minutes, I was checking my watch every five.

Firstly, the plot is incredibly half baked, and the philisophical content of Reloaded was lame. The first Matrix film was an allegory for contemporary existence, in which we struggle for individual identity and real freedom, as opposed to the mere illusion of the same. With Reloaded, they flip-flop and, instead of addressing the control our social orders have on us, there's a thoroughly uninteresting discussion of predeterminism. The "ending" (if you can call it that) flip-flops a second time, but not in any way that gives you much hope for the third installment.

Secondly, the effects in this movie were NOT that special. The CGI was heavy-handed, all of those slow-mo, speed up effects were enormously overused, and everything has the feeling of "look what we can do." It's as if the directors got together and said, "Okay let's make a movie in which most of the scenes tell the story, and then we'll just throw some perfunctory scenes in for the special effects geeks out there." Arguably, the Lord of the Rings series blows out of the water anything in Reloaded. We're talking superior by an order of magnitude.

In sum, Matrix Reloaded was a mind-boggling waste of my time and money. Why not stay home, actually spend time with your children, make love to your romantic counterpart, walk your dog, listen to your favorite album, or watch the NBA playoffs instead?

3/10

Bully (2001)

Interesting

[30 March 2003]

Larry Clark seems hell-bent on filming some of the extreme ugliness of contemporary existence. Why? I don't know. With both Bully and Kids, I find that he's sending some mixed messages.

Firstly, let's talk about sex. Is sex bad or good in Larry Clark's eyes? Well, given his nearly pornographic sexual voyeurism, he can't think it's too bad. That said, his obsession with young, naked bodies is tempered by a "sex is bad, mkay?" theme that pervades his work. Young people go out, do drugs, have sex with each other indiscriminately, and commit acts of extreme violence. If you're portraying an unattractive lifestyle, and that lifestyle includes a great deal of budding sexuality, are you saying that there's something wrong with young sexuality? You're certainly implying it, and it's hypocritical to do so when you're obviously drooling over Bijou Philips's goodies, Larry!

Secondly, let's talk about drugs. Is doing drugs bad or good in Larry's book? Well, it's certainly a part of the same lifestyle that is the subject of his bleak films. However, like sex, drug use does not have to lead to degeneracy and violence. The message is unclear once again because Larry Clark acknowledges that hey, drugs are fun.

So is Larry Clark a subversively perversive or a subversively prudish? It's tough to say, but he damn sure is subversive.

In the end, you're left with some mesmerizing images designed to titilate and horrify, sometimes simultaneously. Given Larry Clark's background, you can understand why he appreciates the power of an image. But what is he saying? Are these modern/postmodern tales he spins moral, or is that not the point? Are they just honest, or just melodramatic tripe?

The answer to all of the questions I ask is, "yes," and it is within these contradictions that you, the viewer, comfortably resides. Larry Clark makes movies worth watching. Whether they're worth understanding is debatable.

7.5/10

Legally Blonde (2001)

Better than it has any right to be

[15 March 2003]

A man I knew growing up would often describe a film as being, `Better than it had any right to be.' I found the expression clever at the time, but had forgotten it…until I saw Legally Blonde for the first time. If ever a film could be characterized as better than it had any right to be, it's this one (or perhaps Bring it On for similar reasons). I must reluctantly add my name to the list of reviewers who found this movie rather more clever and charming than we care to admit in public.

Of course, let's not get carried away. Legally Blond is not Citizen Cane. It is a trite, silly film, and certainly not responsible for any great cinematic innovation. However, it's blessed with a very funny script and an extraordinary comedic performance by Reese Witherspoon. Reese's timing and delivery are impeccable, and she pulls off making vulnerable and endearing an ostensibly superficial protagonist who has been handed the world on a silver platter. The fact that she's also remarkably easy on the eyes is not a good reason to see a film, but it's definitely a bonus.

For all you skeptics out there, I challenge you to give this film a chance the next time it comes on HBO. If you don't find yourself cracking a smile in spite of yourself, feel free to write me a nasty-gram.

My fearless prediction: Legally Blond 2 will be heinous. Pleasant surprises do not merit sequels in the almost certainly vain hope that lightening will strike twice.

6.5/10

The Sweetest Thing (2002)

Come on, people!

[8 March 2003]

***Spoilers***

Okay, this movie wasn't very good overall, but the ire it appears have incited in some people is unwarranted. I mean, any movie in which Cameron Diaz gets "glory holed" can't be that bad. I'm sorry, but that's funny, will always be funny, and if you don't find that funny, then you need to rediscover your inner child, lighten up, and stop writing pretentious reviews on imdb.com.

5/10

And the Band Played On (1993 TV Movie)

Surprisingly good HBO film

[8/10 · 4 March 2003]

HBO's original programming has generally been of superior quality for quite some time, and 1993's adaptation of And the Band Played On is no exception. This is a haunting story of how one of the most baffling diseases in modern times turned into an epidemic. As I was born in 1978, I do not remember the time when people were dying mysteriously of opportunistic infection with no consensus from the scientific community as to what the root cause of these deaths were. To see this era recreated was tremendously powerful for me. I can't imagine imagine anything more horrifying than people dying with no understanding as to why.

And the Band Played On focuses more on the doctors who were responsible for early research on AIDS more than they are on the AIDS victims themselves. This in some respects makes the film less powerful than it might have been, but it also provides some profound insight into why it took so long for the virus and test therefor to be discovered.

Of course, the film and the book from which it was extrapolated could be criticized as an over-simplified exercise in finger-pointing directed towards everybody from sexually promiscuous gay men to Ronald Reagan to callous blood banks to glory-hungry medical researchers. And to extent, such a criticism is valid. However, And the Band Played On is best interpreted as a cautionary tale. Although HIV in the developed world is not so much the killer it used to be, the damage has been done, and continues to be done, both here and especially in Sub-Saharan Africa. The lesson of HIV will be told in its human face, and that should our species be faced with similar circumstances as we were in the early 1980s, that our action will be more decisive earlier. This adaptation serves as a powerful medium to convey this message, and it is something everyone should watch.

8/10

Saving Private Ryan (1998)

It's okay

[6/10 · 8 February 2003]

Best war movie ever made? Please. Go watch Full Metal Jacket, Platoon, Ran, Apocalypse Now, Das Boot, or any other film made by a director with a true understanding of artistry in film-making. Spielberg's sycophants make me sick.

Saving Private Ryan is best when Spielberg sticks to what he is actually good at, to wit, action. I whole-heartedly admit that the two big battle scenes are breathtaking. However, two scenes do not a movie make. Everything else was duller than dull. No profound insight. Nothing but cookie cutter characters, cheesy dialogue, and mindless flag waving. If this film was the only source of knowledge about Americans that someone had, s/he would come away with the conclusion that Americans sure are a bunch of cornballs. But we can shoot people pretty adeptly, can't we?

Spielberg, go back to making ET and Raiders of the Lost Ark and save the heavy stuff for real directors. That is all.

6/10 (the two battle scenes warrant a 6)

The Pianist (2002)

Best Film of 2002...

[10/10 · 4 January 2003]

...in fact, one of the best films I've seen in quite some time. Although not unique in theme, The Pianist is very much unique in presentation, perspective, and pacing. Polanski is technically brilliant here, and his portrayal of humanity within a context of universal suffering and personal torment is poignant without being cheesy or sappy. This is a movie I will own the second it becomes available on DVD, but I would highly recommend seeing it in the theater. There's a certain grandness to it that demands to be seen at least once on the big screen.

Not entertaining, but a profoundly life-affirming and moving film.

Die Another Day (2002)

Boo!

[15 December 2002]

I had low expectations of this film prior to seeing it, and boy, were they justified. This movie really stunk up the joint. Now, Bond is supposed to be formulaic, riddled with horrible one liners, ludicrous plot lines, idiotic Cold War-era political content, etc., but something about the over-the-top stupidity of Die Another Day left me, well...bored. There was really nothing to recommend this installment. By the third act, I just wanted to get out of the theater, so even the pacing of the film didn't work.

The makers of the Bond films try to give its audience what it wants: frenetic action sequences, loud explosions, compelling visual effects, hot chicks, and one badass protagonist. DAD has all of the above, but absolutely no soul or originality. You could have taken every other Bond film, spliced arbitrarily scenes from the same to make one new film, and you'd have Die Another Day. Don't get me wrong: I still love car chases, special effects, hot chicks, and the rest. Furthermore, when they release yet another Bond movie, I'll probably see it in the theater. Hopefully, I'll be able to stay awake next time.

The opening credit sequence with the Madonna theme song was pretty cool.

Airplane! (1980)

Classic

[22 July 2002]

It really doesn't get much funnier than Airplane!, which is easily one of the very best comedies ever made. There is no sight gag, no pun, no moment of slapstick, no silly joke, that the ZAZ team shied away from when making this film. As a result, so many funny moments are packed into Airplane! that it lends itself to multiple viewings in a way that most comedies of this sort do not. Overall, it seems silly to write a long review of this, but I just wanted to add my recommendation for the two people out there who haven't seen this yet.

Life Is Beautiful (1997)

Now, this is a great, great film.

[10/10 · 25 May 2002]

Perhaps some spoilers contained herein:

Steven Spielberg should take notes. See, if you're going to make a film about the Holocaust, do so with some originality. I don't care to watch self-indulgent, exploitive, voyeurism, Oskar Schindler and the Temple of Doom, Oskar Schindler, the Extra-Terrestrial, the Holocaust in all its made-for-Hollywood, tear-jerking glory. Just make a sweet, little comedy that captures more drama, more real, human feeling, and more uplifting goodness amid horror than Spielberg in all his overblown ineptness ever could.

Okay, I'm going to leave Spielberg alone now. It's just that, in retrospect, I realize I didn't bash Schindler's List enough when I reviewed it on this site.

Charlie Chaplin understood the power of comedy to make a social or existential point. I was surprised to learn that Roberto Benigni does as well. Assume that your audience is aware of the collective human embarrassment that was the Holocaust...and don't show it. Just put us in that historical context and mock it with the story of a man who, even in the gravest of circumstances, acknowledges the beauty of existence, of the woman he loves, and of the son he brought into this God-forsaken planet. Life is Beautiful is not an ironic title- it is, absolutely, the fundamental transient human truth that permeates every second of celluloid it took to make the movie. The film culminates with the reunion of mother and son, the son yelling joyously, "abbiamo vinto (we won)!", referring to the game he believes he has won, the game his father spent every second of his internment convincing his son they were playing. His mother, with tears in her eyes, gives her tearful agreement, "Si, abbiamo vinto." I am a pretty hard person who's become more so as a result of two and a half decades of socialized masculinization, but I burst into tears every time I watch that scene. What it means to have won is for you to feel, not for Benigni to say.

In fact, Benigni does not explicitly say much. Life is Beautiful begins with a narrator whose identity is later revealed stating, "Quest'e' una storia simplice (this is a simple story)." And on the surface, it is a simple story as Benigni tells it. The understated profundity of its message, however, is not simple. It is a rejoicing, and it an act of defiance. Life is beautiful, in spite of what we collectively do to ruin it. This is film is to be seen again and again.

The Shawshank Redemption (1994)

Forget the IMDB Top 250 ranking- this is still a great movie.

[10/10 · 25 May 2002]

Is The Shawshank Redemption the second best movie of all time? No, it isn't. However, I contributed to its ranking by giving it a 10/10 vote. Yes, IMDB's Top 250 list is flawed in the sense that some of the greatest films ever made inspire some of the most violently negative reactions in a sizable contingent of the collective movie-viewing public (thereby rendering them ineligible for the highest overall voting average). The Shawshank Redemption, however, clearly did not evoke many negative reactions- should the film be faulted for that?

Absolutely not, I say. This is a grand movie that strikes one fundamentally real and basic existential chord, namely the abstraction of faith and hope within the context of the tremendous pain and frustration humanity inflicts upon itself. Faith does not have to be of a religious nature, and The Shawshank Redemption doesn't go there (this is why I love it, but abhor The Green Mile). Rather, the faith of Shawshank is a stubborn, earthly, human faith, that despite the arbitrary injustice of existence, the individual can persevere and affirm within himself or herself that yes, life is worth living. For my money, that is solid return on two hours of my time.

I am a cynic and a misanthrope, supremely so on both counts. That said, I acknowledge that I have no choice but to accept the context of my existence for what it is, and I can either "get busy living or get busy dying." Apparently, most people agree on some level.

Happiness (1998)

Pretty "good" (or something)

[27 December 2000]

Happiness is quite possibly the most disturbing film I have ever seen, and I am not someone who is easily disturbed. Of course, that is not in and of itself a particularly compelling reason to spend two hours and fifteen minutes watching a movie. Why, then, could I not change the channel when I caught it on HBO?

The short answer to the preceding question is that Happiness is mesmerizing. The profundity of the perversion involved and "patheticness" of every single character evoke a greater emotional reaction in the viewer than any formulaic Hollywood yawnfest ever could. Beyond that, I feel somewhat uncomfortable discussing the film's merits. Most of Happiness's central themes go unarticulated in the film itself, and it seems somewhat trite to try articulating them here.

I should add that I was somewhat surprised by how positive a reaction Happiness has received amongst IMDB reviewers. Certainly, this movie is not for everyone. Sexual deviance, bleakness, and frustration are all too pervasive in our culture. However, this does not make for entertaining viewing, and those who tend to prefer escapist cinema to the more realistic (or something) fare would do well to avoid Happiness. That said, the film has a great deal to offer the more adventurous viewer, and is definitely worth checking out when in the right sort of mood (though I must say I'm not quite certain as to what that mood is).

7/10

Universal Soldier: The Return (1999)

Good Lord, this movie was awful!

[1/10 · 24 December 2000]

Universal Soldier: The Return is not the worst movie ever made. No, that honor would have to go to a film that attempted to make some sort of statement or accomplish some artistic feat but failed in a pathetic or offensive manner. However, perhaps no movie I have ever seen has tried for so little and succeeded so completely as did Universal Soldier: The Return.

This film is a sci-fi/action travesty that has virtually nothing to recommend it. The acting is as bad as any movie I've ever seen. The plot is terrible and predictable. The special effects are pathetic. In short, anyone even remotely connected to this film should be ashamed of themselves. US: The Return makes previous Van Damme fare seem like groundbreaking cinematic masterpieces. Some movies are so bad, they're good. Believe me when I tell you that this is not one of them. I'm really not sure what else to say here. I doubt many people were considering seeing this movie if they hadn't already, but just in case: don't.

Brazil (1985)

Dug it

[9/10 · 29 July 2000]

Ah, Brazil. I first saw this film in the theater when I was 7 years old, and subsequently rediscovered it when I was 19 or 20. Interestingly, I thoroughly enjoyed it at both ages.

Brazil is quite striking visually. The dream sequences are bizarre, and the film is shot in such a way that you never really see what this imagined world actually looks like in its entirety. Rather, we see life through the eyes of an increasingly alienated man in a social system that cuts people off from the world around them.

The plot has been well document by other users. Yes, it borrows liberally from 1984, but with Terry Gilliam's sense of the sublimely ridiculous that is distinct from Orwell's dystopic vision. Thus, Brazil does not reinvent the wheel, as it were, but it does provide sufficient creative twists to dispose of any charges of unoriginality.

Overall, this is a jewel of a movie filled with many small and large pleasures. I own it and have watched it numerous times, and every time I appreciate it just a little more. I gave it a 9 out of 10.

American History X (1998)

Not as intelligent as it thinks it is, but still wonderful

[9/10 · 6 June 2000]

American History X is nothing if not great filmmaking. The film is powerfully and hauntingly shot in both color and black and white. Additionally, the film gets some great performances from its actors, most notably Ed Norton Jr. "Wow" is all I can say about Mr. Norton's turn as a sharp but misguided teen. Honestly, I think it is one of the top 5 performances of the 90s.

The content is a mixed bag. I thought this film would be idiotic, but in fact, it does succeed in addressing a number of issues (from immigration to affirmative action) in such a way as to illustrate how a reasonably intelligent adolescent could be lured into the Neo-Nazi movement. Still, there's almost an implication that anyone who doesn't support affirmative action or who does support tougher immigration laws is one step away from being a through and through bigot. There are indeed shades of gray that exist between black and white. American History X fails to find these shades, and instead rests comfortably in extremes.

Oh yeah, the violence is pretty graphic. If you're a pansy about that sort of thing, you may not be able to stomach it. I think it's done responsibly and to great effect.

In short, see this film. Take it with a grain of salt, but see it. This is one film that is guaranteed to make you feel something. I gave it a 9/10.

Stealing Beauty (1996)

Liv Tyler is hot!!!!

[7/10 · 5 June 2000]

I'm not a huge Bertolucci fan, but I checked this out anyway because it was the first movie he had filmed in his native Italy in quite some time. Overall, this film is not great thematically or in terms of plot development. But lord, is Liv Tyler a lovely young woman!

In fact, the primary feature this film has going for it is its visual appeal. There's plenty of beautiful people to ogle, and of course the Tuscan countryside is worth the price of admission by itself. I'm an "Italy-phile," so I'm inclined to look with favor upon anything that reminds me of that wonderful country. Overall, Stealing Beauty is better than average, and at least it makes an attempt, however feeble, to discuss intelligently sex and sexuality.

Gladiator (2000)

Worth seeing in the theater

[8/10 · 1 June 2000]

I expected Gladiator to be mediocre thematically, perhaps a cross between The Matrix and Spartacus. As it turned out, I was pleasantly surprised. Although I cannot give this film an overwhelmingly positive endorsement, it certainly is worth checking out in a theater. Its greatest strength is, of course, the visual effects. Ancient Rome is recreated so beautifully that my jaw literally dropped during some of the scenes. Additionally, there are some great battle scenes, including a large, "Braveheart-esque" affair and smaller, gladitorial encounters. Overall, it's the kind of brutality you can really sink your teeth into (ie, it's stunning visually and lighthearted enough that you don't really feel bad about being entertained by it).

The plot is a bit silly, and the film drags at points. Without the awe-inspiring eye candy, this movie would be merely decent. As is, this is a fine film that foreshadows the kind of film making we can expect with the astronomical increase in special effects quality.

Full Metal Jacket (1987)

Probably my all-time favorite movie

[10/10 · 1 June 2000]

Kubrick obviously didn't like women, or at least didn't understand them. That quibble aside, he was, without question, a remarkable director and filmmaker. Thus, when you apply his considerable talent to a very male-dominated story (marines in Vietnam), you get one of the greatest movies ever made.

Simply put, this is a masterpiece. You laugh at the over-the-top ravings of a drill seargent as he pushes a group of young men through boot camp. But this film is like a sore ribcage; it makes you pay for laughing. Overall, Full Metal Jacket is an eclectic mix of darkly humorous and dark, period. The soundtrack is creepy, and the visual aesthetic is creepy. The existential content of the film creepy. It's a movie I will think about until the day I die. Because films are so diverse in style and content, I find myself unable to state definitively that one movie is THE greatest movie ever made. However, Full Metal Jacket is probably my favorite movie. If you have not yet seen it, you most certainly should.

Gustav Hasford's The Short Timers (on which Full Metal Jacket was loosely based), is worth reading as well.

Schindler's List (1993)

Overrated!

[6/10 · 19 September 1999]

It's not that Schindler's List is a bad movie; in parts, it's quite powerful. What has always annoyed me about this film, however, was the way it was so unreservedly embraced by critics and unsophisticated moviegoers. Seriously, am I the only one who was unimpressed by the main ethical point of the movie? Really, what does this film have to say beyond, "the Holocaust was a bad thing?" I'm sorry if I don't consider this to be groundbreaking, cutting-edge historical analysis. Furthermore, am I the only one who was offended that Spielberg made a fundamentally "feel good" movie about the holocaust? Was I the only one that was offended by the fact the film ends by dedicating itself to the six million Jews who died in the Holocaust (and about the five million non-Jews who also died you say nothing)? Did anyone else notice how the main characters in Schindler's List were not actually Jewish, thereby following in the grand Hollywood tradition of turning the story of oppressed people into the story of a sympathetic member of the oppressing group (a la Cry Freedom, Mississippi Burning, Beyond Rangoon, and so on)? What really offended me, however, was an issue that, in all fairness, was peripheral to the film itself. I was infuriated by the way Hollywood patted itself on the back for making a movie it hadn't wanted to make, a movie it should have made decades before. Schindler's List was made about forty years too late, and at its core is the same innocuous Hollywood nonsense that has pervaded the world of cinema for far too long. The memory of the members of my family who were murdered during this tragedy deserved better.

Hard Boiled (1992)

I would have given this movie a "20" if I could

[10/10 · 10 September 1999]

Having done two very negative reviews on IMDB, I thought it appropriate to write a laudatory review of the greatest pure action film ever made. This is John Woo at his finest; a hard-boiled cop (the always entertaining Chow Yun-Fat) with a heart of gold chases a ring of gun runners all over Hong Kong, with much mayhem and bloodshed. Boasting a body count that few films can rival, Hard Boiled is fun for the whole family. The Eastern ethos that pervades the movie is interesting as well. Unless you take yourself way too seriously, you will enjoy this masterpiece of the action genre.

Mississippi Burning (1988)

Disgraceful

[12 August 1999]

Hollywood has produced some idiotic films about racism, and Mississippi Burning is just about the worst of them. This movie is a disgraceful revision of the 1960s South that glorifies the FBI (yeah, right) as the saviors of Black people (who apparently had nothing to do with their own salvation). Additionally, Mississippi Burning follows in the shameful Hollywood tradition of turning the story of racism into the story of white people. Avoid this movie at all costs!

Indecent Proposal (1993)

The single worst movie I have ever seen

[1/10 · 4 August 1999]

There is a group of five movies, all within one or two degrees of separation from one another, that I consider the five worst movies ever made. They are: Fatal Attraction, Disclosure, Showgirls, Basic Instinct, and the single greatest cinematic atrocity of all time, Indecent Proposal. Redford and Woody should be ashamed of themselves for appearing in this vapid, misogynist piece of excrement. On the other hand, Demi Moore, probably my least favorite actress of all time, is appropriately cast as the female lead. I don't think even the most gifted living writer would be capable of putting into words just how passionately I hate this movie. Long, boring, idiotic, and based on a non-issue (should a woman take a million dollars to sleep with Robert Redford?), Indecent Proposal represents everything I hate about Hollywood. And to top it off, all of the five movies listed above use racy content and an "R" rating to lure unsuspecting viewers into watching films that take an essentially puritan, prudish attitude towards sex and sexuality. Watch at your own risk. God, I hate this movie!