Reviews

29 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
9/10
The best Next Generation movie!
14 December 2002
I have got to say, this is the best Star Trek movie I have seen in years! It is without question the best Next Gen. movie and in the entire history of Trek movies is second only to Wrath of Khan, though this movie does compare favorably to it. Even more, the story parallels Wrath of Khan in certain ways, to good effect. The enemy Picard faces in Shinzon is every bit as personal as Khan was to Kirk, though for a much different reason. The space battle in this movie is just flat out AWESOME! Indeed, the whole story is excellent and enjoyable. The acting is well done(I'm sure these guys can play their roles in their sleep by now!). The effects are wonderful (the idiot critic who says they are bad doesn't realize Romulans are supposed to look that way!).

All I can say is if this is indeed the last of the Next Generation movies, they go out on top!



9/10
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Rollerball (2002)
3/10
Not a good movie, but I didn't mind watching it
27 November 2002
This was an odd movie. I knew going in that this movie was a mess by all accounts, and by the time it was over I could agree with all of the criticism. Yet I found that I did not mind watching it and was mildly entertained. the only reason I could come up with was that I liked watching the game contained in the movie. Everything else was crap.

I can't say I would recommend this on any count, as watching Ticker is the only thing that keeps me from calling Rollerball the worst movie of 2002. But if you like the extreme sports action take on roller derby shown here, you may just want to part with the rental fee. Otherwise, skip it!

3/10
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Derailed (2002)
Title is apt description of Van Damme's career
15 November 2002
While not the worst movie Van Damme has ever made, it is nothing more than a mediocre entry into the straight-to-video schlock-fest JC finds himself stuck in.

This is not so much a review of the movie, you can see from most of the other posts that this is an Under Seige 2 rip-off, with a little Outbreak thrown in for laughs. This is more a statement of the dreadful path this man's career has taken. This man was so close to becoming a major action star when he had a major brain fade and did Street Fighter. Every movie of his since has tanked at the box office, even the really good ones. After Universal Soldier 2 rolled around to stink up the box office, all his stuff has gone straight-to-video, good or bad. It is a sad testament. Maybe he should team up with a rap artist and make a movie. Hell, it worked for Seagal's career!

Rent it if you are a fan of JCVD, otherwise skip it.
10 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Signs (2002)
8/10
They don't make movies like this very often, and they should!
5 August 2002
Shymalan hits it out of the park again with Signs. Shymalan is the only director I think who could've pulled this movie off in the way that he did.

You probably know the bsics about this story by now, I will try to not elaborate too much on the story as I do not want to possibly spoil anything for you. The way the story plays is like a small corner of a larger story. What's going on on Graham Hess' farm is part of a global phenomenon, yet we only get the bigger picture through bits and pieces of news reports. In one way, it's like if Independence Day was told entirely through the eyes of Russell Case and his family.

Shymalan takes the philosophy of "less is more" and applies it liberally, and to very good effect. He seems to have a good ability to know just how much to show us to let our imaginations fill in the rest. With anyone else, this movie would have been in our face with horror and special effects galore. The way Shymalan does it employs none of this, yet delivers a more profound effect. In many ways, he is the antithesis to the man he is compared to, Steven Spielberg.

The acting in this movie is nothing short of fantastic. Particular kudos go to the children played by Rory Culkin and Abigail Breslin. They handled their roles with the polish of seasoned professionals.

Of course, there is the famous Shymalan "suprise ending". I will not spoil the suprise, it's not the shock "The Sixth Sense" was, rather it plays directly to Graham Hess' loss of faith. It brings many seemingly unrelated elements together and brings an entirely new meaning to "the Lord works in mysterious ways".

If you're in for a well acted, well paced, and well thought out story that makes you laugh, cry, and jump in your seat. Follow the Signs and see this movie!

I gave it an 8/10.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
An exercise in subtle acting and direction.
17 July 2002
This is a movie different than many you see nowadays. This is the type of story that is character driven and the director realizes this. He simply places the camera in front of the actors and lets them act.

And act they do.

The amazing thing about the performances in this movie is how much of the story is told with their facial expressions and their body languages, as well as their voices. The final scene of the movie is a perfect example(don't worry, no spoiler): Halle Berry's Leticia does not speak a single word in the final scene, yet you can see exactly what is going through her mind simply through her subtle facial expressions.

A warning: while I do consider this a good movie, it is most definitely NOT a happy movie. Many bad things happen, some quite unexpextedly. Oh, and for those of you who went ga-ga over Halle showing her "berries" in Swordfish, that was nothing compared to what you get in this flick!

If you like good acting and a story well-told in it's simplicity, give this one a look see. 7/10.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Impostor (2001)
5/10
A good short movie streched WAY too thin by feature length
17 July 2002
This movie makes me think, "It's too bad...". It's too bad they didn't make the anthology movie this was to be a part of. It's too bad that this movie impressed Dimension so much that they decided to make it feature length. It's too bad they couldn't better develop the added storyline. It's all too bad, because it made something good into something else.

What it ends up being is a story similar to Minority Report without being quite as interesting. I will not say this movie steals from MR because 1) this movie was made long before MR and 2) both stories are based on the same writer. Nothing wrong with the actors (you can't go too far wrong with the likes of Sinese and Stowe), it's just that you can tell that another story line was grafted onto this one to stretch it out, and it's not that interesting to boot.

Good thing they put the original short on the DVD so you could see how good the movie originally was. 5/10 (mainly for the short).
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Waking Life (2001)
4/10
What to Watch When You Are Stoned
15 July 2002
Not that I advocate drug use, but this is the only way I can see this movie being entertaining fare. Otherwise it is an overlong meandering of various philosophical theories spouted by different people encountered by the central character (played by Wiley Wiggins). Perhaps this is interesting to someone who likes to study various philosophical ideas, but as entertainment it does not work, and I certainly find it ludicrous that people's lives improved because of this movie. A philosophy is only as good as one can apply to their life. Can anyone out there really say, "Wow, after seeing 'Waking Life' my relationship with my wife improved!". Or, " Something I saw in 'Waking Life' helped me to communicate better with people."

I will say that the animation work is impressive in this film. It certainly gave the film the "dream state" quality the director was looking for. And, again, would be especially be appreciated by those under the influence of mind altering chemicals.

Richard Linklater has certainly done better work than this. 4/10.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Ben Affleck saves the world
2 June 2002
I found this to be an enjoyable flick. It is slow getting started, but once it gets up to speed, it really gets moving. This is not a sock-em-up action film, but rather a political chess game-style thriller. And thrill it does. As you go deeper into the film, you watch breathlessly, wondering just how close these people will come to blowing up the world before the one man with the truth (Affleck's Jack Ryan)can overcome obstacles in his way deliver the truth to the people who REALLY need to hear it.

Morgan Freeman is easily the top choice for best performance as Mr Cabot, the CIA Director. It's when he finally gets teamed up with Affleck's Ryan that the picture gets moving. As for Ben Affleck, he plays Jack Ryan as if he were Ben Affleck. To put it another way: If someone were to make a movie called "The Ben Affleck Story", Ben Affleck would be the ideal actor to play the lead. Whether or not you think he did a good job playing Ryan depends greatly on whether or not you like Ben Affleck.

The president and the balance of his cabinet are played by some of the biggest character actors in Hollywood. James Cromwell, Ron Rifkin, Bruce McGill, and the guy who played the game show host in "Magnolia"; they all put on fine performances. Liev Schreiber offers up quite the cool cat as John Clark (I believe they are preparing a movie for Rainbow Six so they can spin Clark off into his own series).

As to the re-vamping of the story to make Ryan a much younger man, I thought it worked well. The problem with keeping Ford as the lead is the man is in his 60s now, and the only way to have kept him believable throughout the book series would have been to make them all consecutively, and that wasn't going to happen.

Also, I think that some of the criticisms levelled at this movie are unfounded. Even withstanding the 9/11 terror attacks, this movie presents a realistic scenario.

At any rate, if you enjoy taut political thrillers, go see this movie.

I gave it 7/10
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Better than Episode 1
17 May 2002
Warning: Spoilers
My review of Attack of the Clones

My general view of the movie: Somewhat slow, but picks up the pace to finish strong. You will need to see this movie more than once, if for nothing else than to see all the stuff you couldn't take in the first time around. It is not a perfect movie, it does have it's flaws. Yet it is an improvement on Episode 1 and a worthy addition to the franchise.

Specific thoughts: **Some Spoilers Ahead** Ewan McGregor IS Obi-Wan Kenobi! Perhaps it is just the beard and the longer hair, but I could honestly believe someone miraculously de-aged Alec Guiness, he was THAT good. Hayden Christenson shines best when he gets in touch with that nasty dark side. Natalie Portman makes it obvious where Priness Leia gets her good looks from. She also wears an outfit at the end that comes close to Leia's Metal Bikini in Jedi for sex appeal. Samuel L Jackson is fine as Mace Windu, but the role really does not play to his strengths: Yelling and Jive-Talking. Nice to see R2-D2 and C3PO back at it. C3PO has some of the funniest scenes in this movie, particularly when his head is removed and mistakenly attached to a droid warrior. And Yoda.......oh, boy! Muppet no more! He's now a full on CGI character that finally shows just how much of a bad-ass Jedi he really is!

One thing I noticed the most were things that rely on the viewer's foreknowledge of what is to come to have an effect. Obi-Wan's line to Anakin, "I swear you are going to be the death of me!" would be just a throwaway by itself, but given we already know Obi-Wan's fate in episode IV, that line elicts a response from the audience. As does another line from C3PO, "R2 says he has received a message from an Obi-Wan Kenobi....", which parallels a line from Episode IV.

Like I said, the movie has it's flaws. The dialogue does seem stilted at tiimes (personal beef: Having someone with an American accent say "Milady" to me sounds EXTREMELY fake! Just say "My Lady" and it sounds SO MUCH better!), but I really do not see the beef people have with Lucas' directing style. To me, it works just fine for this movie.

As to this installment's place amongst the episode pantheon, it is close but does not quite equal any of the first three movies, but it is a solid improvement over Episode I. At any rate, it is definitely worth a look see whiole it is still in the theater. I know I will go again.

I gave this movie an 8/10.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Very good for what it is.
11 May 2002
If you want to spend 90 minutes with your brain shut off, watching near non-stop action, then this is your movie!

This movie suceeds because it never pretends to be anything other than what it is: A summer popcorn flick heavy on the action and comedy, lite on plot line and story(and costume for a certain sorceress!).

This movie also suceeds in it's intentions to make The Rock into a bankable action hero. While he'll never win any Oscars for his acting ability, he is certainly more than adequate for this type of movie, and the sheer fact that you can understand what he is saying gives him far more range than the likes of Arnie or Van Damme will ever have.

One other point: watching Kelly Hu as the Sorceress left me with one very important question: At what point would any less clothing on a person be considered naked? I know times have changed when I remember how racy I thought the costumes were in Flash Gordon (mind you, I was ten when I first saw it), but they were postiviely chaste in comparison to Kelly's ancient version of pasties and a g-string!

To sum up: If you want a movie which provokes deep thought, go rent Memento. If you want to see The Rock beat the living snot out of some nasty people, go see this movie.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Spider-Man (2002)
9/10
A comic book comes to life!
6 May 2002
This has to be the best adaptation of of a comic book super hero I've seen since Superman. While mucho kudos go all around for acting and storytelling, Raimi gets an extra helping in my book for this: The movie actually LOOKS like a comic book brought to life! Definifitely a worthwhile way to spend a couple hours and $10, and Episode II looks like it has a little stiff competition to face!
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Training Day (2001)
8/10
A riveting piece of filmmaking
24 April 2002
I have never seen A Beautiful Mind. I'm sure Crowe did a fantastic job acting it. But Washington definitely deserves the Oscar he won for this role. Why? He took on a role that I had never see him try before and gave such a multilayered performance that I was riveted to the screen throughout the entire movie. You never knew exactly what was Alonzo Harris' true motivation in his actions towards Jake Hoyt(Ethan Hawke)until the final act, and it takes superb acting to pull that off with the sincerity and believability that Denzel did. Ethan Hawke does a good turn here also as the rookie cop Hoyt who struggles throughout the movie with the apparent "realities" of narcotics investigation offered up to him by Alonzo. Just how much "dirt" is Hoyt willing to take on without becoming untrue to his ideals?

I never judge a movie by how "original" the story is. "Being John Malkovich" was hailed as an "original" story, yet I found it only mildly interesting. If Training Day has been "done" before, I can't recall seeing it. I judge movies by how well they tell the story that they are telling. This one is told quite well. The characters were interesting, the plot moves along quite smoothly, the visuals really portray the gritty, harsh reality of the LA ghetto.

All in all, I found this to be a very worthwhile experience and would recommend it to anyone.

I gave it an 8/10.

P.S.:I wonder if the writers of FX's The Shield watched Training Day before writing the character of Det. Vic Mackey?
0 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Order (2001)
5/10
He needs to stop writing his own movies
4 April 2002
Just when I think Van Damme is on a comeback after watching Replicant, I run into The Order. Not that this movie is bad necessarily, as a matter of fact I did find it mildly entertaining, but it is a shallow story where JCVD plays what seems to be a stylized self-image. The minute I saw him driving a sports car and hitting on a pretty lady, I knew this movie was in trouble.

I give this movie decent marks for some good action sequences, otherwise this movie is somewhat forgetable. Maybe they should've had more Charlton Heston in this picture. It certainly couldn't have hurt!

While this is not the worst movie Van Damme has done, it does nothing at all to revive his career to big screen status. Some advice to JCVD: let the directors direct and the writers write. You just say what they write and kick the kicks, and you'll be fine!
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Blade II (2002)
7/10
As entertaining as the original.
28 March 2002
If you liked the first Blade, I Imagine you would like the second as well. Like the original, this movie is a great action ride and is at it's best when kicking vampire (or reaper) ass. It looks like they've kicked up the CGI effects a bit (this is probably one of the few movies that actually benefits from the Matrix "Bullet Time" effect). The plot isn't the most intricate and some people here REALLY need a few acting lessons, but all in all it was definitely worht my money, and I will definitely line up for Blade 3!
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Yards (2000)
5/10
I really, really wanted to like this film........
11 February 2002
.....but it just does not captivate.

Nothing wrong with the cast here, they are all excellent stars, and they do good work here. But the story is........well, boring. Good acting + uninteresting story = a boring movie.

Perhaps also the problem I have with this movie is the ambiguity behind who is good and who is bad. Personally, I like my movies to delineate good and evil a little more sharply than this one does.

And as a side note: What do Charlize Theron and Robin Tunney have in common? Almost every movie they do they have at least one scene where they show off their knockers (exceptions: Theron in The Astronaut's Wife and Tunney in The Vertical Limit). With Tunney I dont mind so much, they are some of her better assets, but Theron is a superb enough actress that she doesn't need to do that(plus, while they are nice, her boobs are no great shakes). The reason I mention this is once again Theron's top comes off in this movie! It's getting to be a trademark, kinda like Van Damme and his butt!

Rent it if there is nothing else to see. Otherwise, use the two hours of your life more productively.

5/10
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
They did it right!
18 January 2002
Kudos all around! From acting, to directing,to special effects; everything about this movie is fantastic! This movie was done in a way to sate the appetites of Tolkien's many fans, yet thoroughly entertain the uninitiated as well. The screenplay obviously left out many things from the book, but it was done with such adroitness that none of the essential storytelling was lost.

The only thing I did not like about this movie is that I have to wait until next Christmas to see the next one!
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Ticker (2001)
2/10
All the right ingredients, but poorly made by the cook
17 January 2002
I remember when I first heard about this movie; Seagal, Hopper, and Sizemore in a movie together; it sounded like a fantastic movie! I mean with good actors like that, how could you possibly screw up such a movie?

Albert Pyun knows the way.

The way this film is put together, it feels like a reject from film school shot and edited this piece. Hmmm, how many times does Seagal walk down the same hall? Or drive up in his pickup truck? Why are half of his lines spoken when he's off camera? What's up with the sound editing when Sizemore is interrogating Pressly? Pyun even managed to screw up the action sequences. Seagal doesn't throw a punch until near the end of this movie, and when he does get some action, the camera is so close in on him, you don't really see the moves.

Save yourself the rental fee. If you want to see a decent Seagal action flick, your money is better spent on Exit Wounds.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
An Interesting Whodunit
4 September 2001
This premise for this movie has intrigued me ever since I read about it on upcomingmovies.com. I like Samuel L. Jackson as an actor, especially when a part is played to what I consider his two strengths. Jackson is at his best when he plays a) a slick/jive talking character, or b) someone who yells a lot. His character in this movie, the paranoid-psychotic-homeless-genius-musician Romulus Ledbetter(man, what a name!)does plenty of the latter! But when his insanity driven tirades subside, he becomes merely good at the role.

Many things are interesting about this film. First there is the struggle Jackson endures to stave off his madness while he seeks to find who killed a homeless man left outside of his cave. Also interesting is the depiction of Rom's madness as seen through his eyes; both as a representation of the inner workings of his mind, and as physical manifestations in the real world. The second was so convincing that I spent part of movie wondering whether or not Romulus actually knew something as opposed to just being crazy (his madness involves a "Conspiracy Theory" theme with a man named Stiverson( I believe that is phonetic, I have seen it spelled differently elsewhere) controlling the populace from inside the top of the Chrysler builing by shooting out "y-rays" and later "z-rays" that control people's minds).

One more thing to look for is a wonderful performance by Anthony Michael Hall as the bankruptcy lawyer who befriends our hero. It's nice to see Mr. Hall has emerged from his post teen star lull as an accomplished actor.

At any rate, it's worth a look-see at the rental store.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
A very funny movie!**A Small Spoiler Inside**
27 August 2001
Warning: Spoilers
Kevin Smith wraps up his View Askew series with this hilarious romp, with our heroes travelling across country to Hollywood to stop a movie being made about the comic book heroes they were the inspiration for. Although it helps to have seen the previous View Askew movies, there are still enough jokes for this movie to be funny in it's own right. You've gotta keep your eyes open, or you'll miss the myriad of cameos in this movie!

The only thing I found disappointing about this movie was that being a partial sequel to Chasing Amy, I was hoping we would find out more about what happened to Holden and Alyssa (if anything), but since both characters were nothing but cameos (Albeit Affleck's earns the adjective "glorified"), we know nothing more than the fact that they never got back together (which I perosnally find a shame).

Two more things: Shannon Elizabeth is HOT! And I'd like to see Jason Mewes do some other roles to see how good of an actor he really is.

If you want a whole slew of seemingly dumb, yet well thought out jokes, here's where you spend your movie dollars. I gave it an 8.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Rush Hour 2 (2001)
9/10
Better than the Original!
8 August 2001
I was so afraid that this movie would be a poor rehash of the first movie. Instead, I got to see a movie that took the action and the comedy to another level!

I knew going in that some of the jokes in the first movie would be played in reverse. Fortunately, they are well placed and not overdone.

And as good as this movie is, the outtakes are to die for!("Jackie Chan, is ALWAYS ok!")

A worthwhile movie at twice the price, you must go and see this!
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
On Golden Pond (2001 TV Movie)
7/10
Nice take on the story, but doesn't compare to the movie
30 April 2001
This made for a nice little program to watch on sunday night, but it just can't quite match up to to the powerful performances put in by the cast in the movie. Plummer and Andrews put in good performances, but the rest of the cast does not seem comfortable doing live television. I don't know if they'll ever put this out again, but watch it only if the movie isn't on!
3 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Red Planet (2000)
5/10
M2M is better
23 April 2001
This movie is a prime example of how a movie needs more than just special effects to be entertaining. It needs acting, and it needs a good story.

Red Planet has a decent dollop of the former, yet falls way short of the latter. It's a shame to see good actors stuck in a bad story, but they manage to keep this one mildly interesting. Plus we get to see Carrie Anne-Moss as naked as we're ever going to see her! Other than that, Mission to Mars has this movie beat in terms of storytelling.

5/10
0 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Stripes (1981)
10/10
The movie that made Bill Murray a STAR
28 March 2001
Hilarious story about a couple of burnouts (Murray, Ramis) who join the Army in search of a new life, and turn it on it's ear in the process.

Bill Murray is at his wisecracking, smartass best. Ramis plays a wonderful foil. Wonderful performances are turned in by John Larroquette as the bumbling Captain Stillman, John Candy as "Ox"(who has his best scenes in the mud wrestling pit), and Warren Oates as the hardass Sargeant Hulka. Also watch for a young Sean Young as Ramis' love interest.

If you're a fan of Bill Murray and naked women, this movie is worth a look see!
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Simpatico (1999)
Great actors in a mediocre movie
20 March 2001
You'd think that a movie with the acting power of Nick Nolte, Jeff Bridges, and Sharon Stone would be one to watch. Well.......it is and it isn't.

First off, I'd never in my life thought I'd see Nolte and Bridges in the same movie. Talk about an odd pairing!

With that out of the way, they both put in good performances, as does Stone. The star of this movie though is Albert Finney. His performance is the best of all the parts in this movie.

Unfortunately the plot, involving a racing scam many years ago which resurfaces, is only mildly interesting at best. It seems almost a shame to have such good performances wasted on such a story. Still, it's worth a watch if nothing else is on.
13 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
A very funny movie!
29 December 2000
This is a very funny movie! The only thing going against it is it went up against some heavyweights like What Women Want or Cast Away and that may obscure it from the minds of many moviegoers.

Everyone turns in a solid performance. From Sandra Bullock as the tomboy turned beauty queen, to Ben Bratt as the lead FBI agent, to Michael Caine who nails the part of the Beauty consultant, Candace Bergen and William Shatner ( I love the way he says "Texas"!) as the pagaent hosts, they all do a wonderful job.

If you get a chance to see another movie this year, check it out!
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

Recently Viewed