Change Your Image
larson.72
Reviews
No Country for Old Men (2007)
Meandering and somewhat derivative, but still interesting
The first half of 'No Country for Old Men' comes off something like 'The Terminator goes to West Texas'. All the elements are there: an unstoppable, determined, and soulless killing machine set against a hopelessly outmatched protagonist who is simply trying to stay alive another day. Derivativeness aside, this part of the movie is still quite gripping, though, which is more than I can say for the second half of the film. As things dragged on, I couldn't help feeling a little bored as Tommy Lee Jones' pseudo-philosophical and somewhat redundant sheriff increasingly wandered in and out of the story. Near the end of the movie, the story seems completely lost. The abrupt ending especially feels like the filmmakers ran out of gas and tried to pass it off as authenticness and artistry. It's too bad, because this movie could have easily been a 9 or a 10 based on the first hour or so.
Equilibrium (2002)
Derivative and illogical
I borrowed this movie from the local library with fairly high expectations, considering it was 7.7 here on IMDb. Unfortunately those expectations were let down.
The first problem I had with this movie was the absurd premise: In the future, it is illegal to feel, because feeling causes war (apparently), so people take a special drug which suppresses feeling. One small problem: it doesn't make any sense. Obviously the characters feel. There's situations throughout the movie where supposedly 'unfeeling' characters grin, express surprise, anger, etc. Not to mention the fact that, if people were truly without feeling, then they presumably would not care whether or not someone else died in order to achieve some mundane goal. So right off the bat, the movie makes no sense. Perhaps it would have made more sense if, instead of eliminating ALL feeling, the goal of the government was simply to eliminate STRONG feelings. That I could have bought into...but unfortunately the movie makes it clear that ANY feeling is a 'sense crime'.
The second problem I had with this movie was how blatantly derivative it is. From the opening gun battle, it's pretty obvious that the filmmakers are trying to emulate The Matrix, from the way the 'clerics' are dressed, to the scripted gun and sword battles, to the ragtag underground of rebels, to the overall theme of the movie of one man trying to overthrow a repressive authoritarian regime. It's really somewhat nauseating how much this movie wants so desperately to be The Matrix.
If you want to watch a good sci-fi film about a future where emotion is repressed, rent THX-1138. If you want to watch the Matrix, then rent the Matrix. If you want to watch an illogical, second-rate, derivative movie inspired by those movies, then by all means go out and rent this movie...
Snakes on a Plane (2006)
Utterly stupid
Apart from the internet buzz this movie had over the ridiculous premise and name, it doesn't have much going for it. If this is the best Hollywood has to offer then we are in sad shape indeed creatively. I have a hard time believing that, among the thousands upon thousands (maybe millions) of books sitting on the shelves of the Library of Congress there wasn't something more interesting to make a movie about then poisonous snakes being let loose on an airliner. This movie was not "so bad it's good"...rather it was just "so bad". The entire premise is just so ridiculously stupid and unbelievable that there really isn't anything more to say beyond that - in fact, debating the finer points of the movie would be an insult to your and my intelligence...
Dirty Love (2005)
Ridiculously over-panned
This movie is ridiculously over-panned and over criticized. The reason, judging by the reviews I've read on here is quite simple: people don't like Jenny McCarthy or Carmen Electra. It really boils down to that. It wouldn't matter if they delivered Oscar winning performances in an epic movie directed by a resurrected Stanley Kubrick - people would still pan it because it's Jenny and Carmen, and they are, and always will be, the hosts of the 90s MTV's show Singled Out. I suppose there's nothing that can be done about those sort of preconceptions, unconscious as they may even be. That's too bad, though, because this movie is actually considerably better than a lot of comedies I've seen lately. Certainly it's no worse than most movies that Hollywood passes off to us these days as comedies. There are some very funny and even edgy moments in this movie - the whole supermarket scene comes to mind. I dare say that someone who watched this film not knowing who Jenny McCarthy and Carmen Electra were would undoubtedly have a better opinion of it than most of the people who have posted such scathing reviews of it on here...
Paradise Now (2005)
Thought provoking
It's hard, I think, for most people to begin to understand why it is that someone would kill themselves and others for seemingly no reason. We live our lives and go to work everyday, and it just doesn't register why someone would do something so seemingly violent and random. It's easy just to dismiss terrorism as the product of brainwashed crazies, but ultimately everyone has some kind of thought process behind their actions - whether it's logical or not.
That's not to say that this movie is a terrorism apologist film, though. On the contrary; if anything it's message is that terrorism is morally wrong and counterproductive. Yet at the same time, I think it illustrates that when you have very little to live for, you also have very little to lose by acting out violently. Nowhere is this expressed more clearly than near end of the movie: One minute we are inside the militarized crumbling ghetto that is the West Bank; in the next scene, we are in a car with the bombers gliding through the shimmering Western metropolis of Tel Aviv. Like another poster said, it's hard not to see the symbolism in that that the bombers have already reached their paradise of sorts, and are, for all intents and purposes, already dead...
United 93 (2006)
Words can't express
There's nothing romantic or patriotic or uplifting about this movie. It's just tragic. Tragic because the people in the movie fought so hard, and yet it was all in vain.
They didn't fight for their country, they didn't fight for America or you or me or the Capitol building - they fought for one thing and one thing only: to save themselves. This movie hammers that point home with frightening clarity and reality. I would suggest that you don't see it unless you are really prepared to see what happens to people when they are faced with the ultimate choice of killing or dying.
The worst part is, you can't just tell yourself that it's "just a movie" after the final sequence rolls and the screen goes black...
Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines (2003)
Subpar Terminator 2 Rehash
The thing that struck me most about Terminator 3 was how liberally it borrows from T2. Once again, we're trying to stave off judgment day. Once again, a shape-shifting robot who is sent back in time to kill John Connor, and another Arnold is sent back in time to protect him. There's another vehicle scene, the initial confrontation between the terminators, etc. The problem is, the plot just isn't all that interesting because we've already seen it all done and done better in T2, with better actors too. It's too bad Edward Furlong was dropped from this project because I have a feeling it would have been much better with him onboard reprising his role as John Connor. Having Linda Hamilton and maybe even Robert Patrick would've been nice too. As it was, though, Claire Danes and Nick Stahl just didn't really cut it, in terms of likability or chemistry. Kristianna Loken was not a convincing villain as the T-X either. In a nutshell, I think T3 was a so-so rehash that attempted to one-up it's predecessor and fell flat. You might as well just watch T2 again instead...
Serenity (2005)
Don't believe the hype
I can't begin to fathom how this movie has an 8.6 out of 10 as of this writing.
Firstly, the plot of Serenity is tenuous at best. Most of the cast basically just serves as screen fodder for the first half of the movie, plodding along to different and seemingly random locales delivering poorly acted and sometimes incomprehensible dialog (subtitles maybe?), while the main story slowly takes shape in the background. After about an hour you'll find yourself saying: where is this going? Thankfully, it does eventually go somewhere, and the movie does improve somewhat in the second half, but even when the plot does pick up, the movie still can't overcome the other main hurdle: very bad acting and questionable dialog. Not once did I find any of the characters convincing enough to suspend my disbelief that I was watching a low-rent sci-fi movie. In a nutshell, the movie basically just comes off exactly as it is (or should have been): a made-for-TV movie that inexplicably made it's way to your local movie theater.
As I left the theater after seeing this movie, I couldn't help but think of some of the stalwarts of the science fiction movie genre - Star Wars, Alien, Terminator, 2001, Blade Runner, and how utterly superior those movies are to this film, in terms of plot, acting, pacing, and dialog. There's just no comparison. I also couldn't help but think of all the brilliant science fiction novels that are waiting to be adapted into movies that would probably be superior to this one even in the hands of an average director.
In conclusion, don't believe the hype of fanboys - this movie is average at best. After seeing it, I think there's a reason the TV series it was based on was cancelled after 11 episodes...
Starship Troopers (1997)
Subtle satire
* Minor spoilers * A lot of people didn't 'get' Starship Troopers when it first came out 8 years ago. I, for one, dismissed it as a silly gore-fest when I saw it in the theaters, but now, watching it again, I see that it's much more than that: it's a very subtle satire. Maybe it's the effect of the times we live in now, but it seems so obvious to me now, I can't imagine how I missed it to begin with. Starship Troopers is, and always was, a jab at jingoistic flag-waving militarism, and more of a rebuttal than an adaptation of the original Heinlein work on which it's based.
In the future word that Verhoven creates, people aren't citizens until they've served in the military, and perfect-looking soldiers are sent into hopeless battles to fight an enemy whom they don't even understand. Throughout the movie, we follow three different youths as they take divergent, but similar paths in service of the earth military fighting in the War against the Bugs. And at the end of the movie, when the space marines finally capture the 'brain bug', Neil Patrick Harris' character exclaims that "it's scared" to whooping shouts of joy from the assembled marines. It's this scene which best illustrates the dichotomy between the magnitude of their struggle and the meaninglessness of it all that gives the movie it's very subtle sense of irony amidst the over-the-top presentation. And it's this subtle jab which drives home the message of the movie that was missed by most of us the first time around - that, at the end, nothing has really changed, and the earthlings have basically become the same as the bugs whom they've fought so hard against.
Der Untergang (2004)
One of the most important movies ever made?
Through the decades since the end of World War 2, we've come to regard Hitler and the Third Reich as somewhat of a confusing question mark in history: how could this have happened? This movie, perhaps more than any other, tries to answer that question by presenting a unique view of the last days of the Third Reich. It explores the question of why people can be led so easily into hell and the madness of self-destruction by one man, and one idea. The bunker simply serves as a convenient setting to examine this question: after all, it's only at the end, with death imminent, with time for self-reflection, that we can get a really convincing picture of the motives and thinking of those who were involved. "Why?": I think that's the central question of this movie. No more, no less. And because of that I think it's one of the most important movies that have been made in a long time, maybe ever.
Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi (1983)
Underrated
* Spoilers * 'Empire' may be the best of the three movies in the original Star Wars trilogy artistically, but ROTJ, in my mind, is and always was unsurpassed by the other two movies in terms of action and sheer scale. There's just so much happening in this movie as Lucas tries to wrap up the trilogy; there's the rescue of Han and ensuing capture and escape from Tatooine, then the resumption and conclusion of Luke's training, the planning for the assault on the second Death Star, the landing of the infiltration party on Endor, and finally the interleaved 3-way finale between the battle on the surface of Endor, the battle in space, and the final confrontation between Luke, Vader, and the Emperor. I think one of the main reasons this film is so overlooked in the trilogy is simply because of the Ewoks, which is a shame. That, in my mind, is something that can be overlooked. Yes, they are corny in some scenes, but the rest of the movie more than makes up for it. And the ending is a very satisfying conclusion to the trilogy - more so than most other sci-fi trilogies these days seem to be able to manage (i.e. Terminator, the Matrix). Who can forget that scene, with Darth Vader dying in Luke's arms..."you were right about me Luke...you were right..." It's just brilliant, and at the same time, a sad ending to a great epic story of finding one's purpose, not giving up, redemption, and the ultimate triumph of humanity and love over evil. Too bad Lucas hasn't been able to recreate the magic in the new trilogy, though (mainly because the characters suck, in my opinion). ROTJ gets a 9/10 in my book.
Spider-Man 2 (2004)
Overrated.
* Minor Spoilers *
I don't even know where to begin with this movie except to say that it is grossly overrated.
It makes no attempt to even create suspension of disbelief. Miniature man-made suns float in midair and are labeled 'nuclear fusion power'. Doc Ock's physics-defying mechanical arms are kept in check by a magical green chip that predictably gets destroyed and makes him turn evil. Peter Parker falls 10 stories onto concrete and gets up and brushes himself off like he's Wiley Coyote. Mary Jane writes off Peter Parker's friendship simply because he missed her play.
The plot is trite and predictable. Peter Parker loses his powers and questions his role as Spiderman. Mary Jane questions her feelings for Peter Parker and vice versa. Doc Ock tries to kill Spiderman and Mary Jane.
I couldn't help but think, after the end credits began rolling, how much this movie reminded me of the latter Batman movies, which were resoundingly criticized as terrible, yet somehow this movie is praised as fantastic. It makes no sense. 'The best comic book movie of all time' it is not.
Is anyone here really going to tell me with a straight face that Alfred Molina as Doc Ock was a better villain than Jack Nicholson as The Joker in 1989's Batman? Or that either of the Spider Man movies even come close to the same level of suspension of disbelief or convincing atmosphere as that movie? I don't think so.
I Heart Huckabees (2004)
Some funny parts, mostly dull
I'm not really sure what to say about this movie. The premise seemed to hold hope - two 'existential detectives' spying on the main character and trying to gain insight into the meaning of his life, but the movie just falls flat miserably. There are some funny scenes, for sure, but overall there's just too much lack of direction and dullness for the movie to stand as a whole. I think the main reason for this is because the movie really has nothing to say, other than a whole lot of pseudo-philosophical tripe about 'infinity' and 'nothingness'. Having nothing to say might work for a movie like Napoleon Dynamite, but not for a comedy about existential detectives. Really the only reason this movie is even watchable is because of Mark Wahlberg. He is without a doubt the most interesting and comical character in the movie. Without him this movie would completely fall flat. 5/10.
Saved! (2004)
Funny and indicting satire
Having been raised in a fundamentalist, evangelical Christian household, and watching my sister get pregnant at age 16, I have to say that this movie is a very edgy and entertaining satire which hits home. The core question of this movie is: what happens when religious dogma meets the real world? The outcome, as it is in real life, is people having to make hard decisions about what they really believe. Yet somehow the filmmakers take this idea, which could have easily made for a depressing drama about being shunned from those who you thought cared about you, and construct it into a comedy. That alone deserves commendation.
As far as performances go, there are some real surprises in this film. Jena Malone is good, for sure, but so is Mandy Moore in her surprisingly convincing role as the annoying and hypocritical goody-two-shoes Hillary Faye. Macauly Culkin also delivers a good performance of the movie as the wheelchair-bound outcast who is stuck in the culture around him, but ultimately is able to break through the superficiality of it and transcend it.
Being a former fundamentalist myself, I think it would do most fundamentalist Christians good to watch this film and take some notes on how others perceive their actions - and also to lighten up and realize that there's more to life than what happens at church, and that no one likes a person who can't take a little being-made-fun-of!...:)
2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)
Most Ambitious Movie Ever
Many people are turned off by this movie because they don't understand it. In my view, the meaning of the movie is perhaps much simpler than some people think. What the movie is, in my view, is a philosphical exploration of the ramifications of consciousness and our inability to grasp why we are here in the universe. If we were created by some force external to us, and we don't know why we are here, what happens when we then go on to emulate our creator(s) and create our own life? How do we provide answers to our creation when we don't even have the answers ourselves? And how do our creator(s) provide answers to us when we finally return to them with our own shortcomings?
The Matrix Revolutions (2003)
Someone dropped the ball
* spoilers ahead *
My first thought was "why did I just sit through 6 hours of cinema for this ending?" I really don't understand how they could screw this one up...all they had to do was have Neo JUST DESTROY THE DAMN MATRIX. This movie has one of the worst and most unsatisfying endings since Contact, if that's possible...
Masked and Anonymous (2003)
Tedious drudgery
I saw this movie at a special sneak preview hosted by Larry Charles himself.
It is basically a self-indulgent Bob-Dylan-worship wet-dream put to film. It is tedious, pretentious, pseudo-intellectual drudgery, and the only reason I didn't walk out was because the director was sitting about 10 rows behind me. It was almost awe-inspiring in it's awfulness - kind of like a trainwreck.
Eraserhead (1977)
Nightmarish
Ever have one of those dark, bizarre nightmares that aren't necessarily terrifying, but are deeply disturbing, uncomfortable while they are going on, and don't seem to make a lot of sense once you wake up? This movie is basically that, put to film.
Spun (2002)
derivative
This movie is basically a Requiem for a Dream / Trainspotting derivative, except lacking the overreaching moral message of Requiem and the dark comedy of Trainspotting. Mickey Rourke is really the only saving grace. For him alone, the movie is worth watching. His performance as the drug-manufacturing unpredictable redneck is so convincing, I almost have to wonder if he actually rented out a hotel room and started making crystal meth in preparation for the role. :)
Traffic (2000)
Eye-opening
It's not surprising that so many people would feel the need to bash this movie. A lot of what Soderbergh is trying to say in Traffic is not something society is willing to accept right now - namely, that if drugs were legal in this country, there would be no drug war, and the only people that would be dying would be the irresponsible junkies - not the police officers and innocents who lose their lives because someone else can't control their own appetite for pleasure.
One of the most eye-opening movies I've seen in recent times.
Igby Goes Down (2002)
Unentertaining
I am usually a fan of 'dramedy' indie films, but I did not like this movie at all. The only likeable and intriguing character in this film is Bill Pullman's mentally disturbed father, who, for some inexplicable reason, has the most powerful and important scene in the movie, and is yet relegated to the periphery for the rest of the film. Bad move, because the rest of the characters in this film you will find impossible to emphasize with, and about 45 minutes into the movie you'll probably actually be wishing death upon Igby himself. To be honest, this movie mostly fails at being funny and at being dramatic because of the grating characters. Do yourself a favor and watch 'The Royal Tennenbaums' or 'Trainspotting' if you want to see a good movie in this genre.
Better Luck Tomorrow (2002)
Intriguing but flawed
This movie has a really good premise, but I don't think it's 'fully cooked', so to speak. The character development seems pretty shallow, and as someone pointed out earlier, a lot of it is told to us instead of shown to us. I couldn't help but think at the end of the movie that the main character, Ben, didn't really seem to be much different than at the beginning, despite everything that had happened. Because of this, suspension of disbelief seems to gets worse and worse as the movie progresses, culminating in out-and-out head-scratching at the climax. The fact that most of the actors look like they're in their mid-20s doesn't help either. :) But to it's credit, the premise of the movie is very ambitious, original, and intriguing, and for that reason alone I give it a thumbs up.
Solaris (2002)
Not for everyone
This movie isn't for everyone.
In other words, it isn't for those people who are too dim-witted or scared to watch a movie that actually makes them think about existential issues like man's place in the universe, the nature of consciousness, and what it means to be a human. Movies like this can't possibly have a concise answer that can wrap everything up neatly at the end. If they did, then philosophers and metaphysicists would've figured out all of the aforementioned issues long ago, and movies like this wouldn't need to be made in the first place.
The same people who really dislike this movie probably also think that '2001: A Space Odyssey' and 'Blade Runner' are the worst 2 science fiction movies of all time and that 'Independence Day' is the pinnacle of the genre...
The Ring (2002)
Interesting concept, ultimately flawed
This movie has a very intriguing concept behind it, but it's ultimately flawed pretty badly. The main problem is that most of the characters and situations are forced to the point where they simply can't seem realistic or natural at all.
For one, take the kid in this movie. Not only is his character completely unbelievable in the way he acts and talks just like an adult and expresses zero emotion, but he really wasn't even a neccessary part of the movie. He's not the exception either: Hardly anybody in this movie is really a believable character. First there's the mother who seems rather callous towards her son and is always never-too-flustered that she is going to die in a matter of days after watching the videotape. Then there's Richard who seems to react to strangers in a completely random and unexplainable fashion. And then there's Anna and Samara who seem like they're pulled straight out of a German fairy tale or something. In fact...the only character that seems somewhat realistic is Noah.
The ending of the movie leaves a lot to be desired too. Yes there's a plot twist, but it comes off as more of a cop-out than any attempt to seriously explain anything or bring closure. It creates more plot holes than it fixes actually.
Blue Crush (2002)
Actually not too bad
A lot of people seem to like trashing this movie because of a supposedly weak plot. Well let me be the first to say that the plot is a whole lot better than a lot of movies that have come out recently directed at the so-called MTV generation.
With that said, Blue Crush is a surprisingly enjoyable movie. I thought it would be horrible when I saw the movie posters and previews, but it far exceeded my expectations. I think the reason I enjoyed it so much is because the characters and environments actually seem believable. It's not just a movie about surfing - it's about how these 3 friends live in virtual poverty trying to support their other lives as part of this surfing subculture. At the same time, the main character is trying to keep her little sister in school (since their mother abandoned them), and battle her own fears which center around a near-death experience she had while surfing in a major competition that keep her from moving on with her life. This sort of subject matter isn't exactly the stuff that teen movies are usually made from. For that reason it is on a slightly higher level.