Change Your Image
cionex
Reviews
Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith (2005)
Kurosawa spins in his grave
Myths put to rest by this "film":
1. Natalie Portman can act. 2. Low Expectations aren't enough to make people think a turd's a ciabatta. 3. George Lucas isn't distracted by family, wealth, and business. 4. The worst dialogue in history was written by Jack Chick. 5. The "Top 250" on IMDb can't be excessively influenced by buffoons. 6. A lack of Jar Jar Binks automatically improves a film. 7. Suspension of disbelief is entirely the responsibility of the audience. 8. English actors help avoid the problem of stilted, hamhanded performances. 9. Actors can easily work in front of a blue screen and make it seem real.
King Arthur (2004)
Certainly every bit as good as "Dude, Where's My Car?"
Oh, it doth suck mightily. It's got all the pluck of a typical Antoine Fuqua film, combined with the shifting British/Southern U.S. accents being perpetrated by the "actors". The only thing this dungheap of a film is missing is William Shatner and the obligatory aging renegade saying "I'm too old for this sh!t" at the beginning of a contrived action sequence.
On a scale of 1 (throttling the theatre manager by the throat for a refund) to 10 (actually hoping for a sequel and considering sneaking back in for a second viewing), this film rates a 2, because I'm trying to be more calm, and have been warned by the local police about our nation's seriousness about its battery statutes.
Still, a truly awful film. It's better than being given the Abner Louima treatment by a metro police force, but it took me a minute to be certain.
The Cat in the Hat (2003)
Soulless, Unfunny
A miserable film. Dr. Seuss is probably spinning in his grave. Self-indulgent tripe from Mike Myers, combined with a screenplay that lacks any semblance of either humor or focus. The film's not even noteworthy enough to be offensive. If you like Mike Myers intensely, you may be able to sit through the film. Otherwise, save your $10 a buy a copy of the book.
Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle (2003)
A miserable, amateurishly directed waste of time.
It boggles the mind that the horrific first movie warranted a sequel, and it's even more frightening that it's possible to make a worse film. It's an unbelievably moronic and tedious mix of pointless, sloppily-shot action scenes, and acting so bad it makes you wonder how Estella Warren didn't find her way in somehow. Three actresses who are famous for being famous (and aren't really that attractive) shouldn't really appear together in a movie.
This is two hours of your life you won't get back. Run and hide. Pauly Shore's been in better movies than this.
The Big Chill (1983)
The Whitest Movie Ever Made
If you're looking for something with narrow appeal, you've found it. 50ish frat boys and sorority girls can use this as a vehicle to misremember and overestimate the importance of their youthful antics and superficial relationships. With a cast consisting entirely of soulless automatons exuding dime-store angst and sorrow, you can look forward to a combination of the vacuousness of a typical chick flick, combined with a yearning desire for critical respect.
A complete waste of time. Two hours of your life that you'll never get back. When this film is remade towards the end of this decade, look for Sandra Bullock, Hugh Grant, and Matthew McConaughey to be the cloying, overaged brats on the screen, rather than Jeff Goldblum, a random Tilly, and the always unctious Glenn Close. The role of Kevin Costner, who was filmed but mercifully ended up on the cutting room floor, will be played by a gradefully aging Frankie Muniz.
Run away.
Catch Me If You Can (2002)
Light, inoffensive, ultimately forgettable entertainment
Really more of a place for set and costume designers to show off than much of a story. Enlightening in terms of the amount of information available to people today in finance, and DiCaprio and Hanks have a reasonable screen chemistry. The Jennifer Garner cameo's pretty weak, pointless, and forced, and by and large, this is a film you'll be seeing 8 million times on cable eight months from now.
Nothing particularly noteworthy about the movie, and you'll forget the vast majority of it before you leave the theatre, and the rest a few hours later.
Hysterical Blindness (2002)
Not just a chick flick -- a BAD chick flick.
The period music and costumes are amusing, but the dialogue is about as well-conceived as a typical A-team episode. The make up people do succeed at making Uma Thurman look like a nasty skank, which is pretty impressive.
Unless you're Dr. Phil, or grew up in the NY/NJ environment this piece of trash was set in, you'll be snoring early and often. What a waste of Gena Rowlands, who used to rock, and Juliette Lewis, who's capable of better.
Signs (2002)
Ham-handed and forgettable
After reading a few of the other comments here about _Signs_ being an intelligent film, I have to wonder if I was in the right theatre. It was somewhat entertaining, but about as subtle as Allen Iverson's jewelry. You get pummeled about the head and shoulders repeatedly with some of the most obvious foreshadowing ever to hit the screen, and the whole movie is pretty manipulative.
If you love Wal-Mart, double-wides, and sport a mullet, this film may strike you as intelligent. Otherwise, go in with reasonable expectations, and don't pay full price. The acting was good, but the script and direction were extremely disappointing -- kind of like M. Night Shyamalan wants to sell Beanie Babies or Angel Figurines on QVC or something.
The Sum of All Fears (2002)
The Sum of all Film-Goers' Fears
An unbelievably trite, watered down, insipid film. If you saw "The Player", you may recall how focus groups and testing twisted a filmmaker's vision into a mindless piece of pap, primarily through a hilarious ending change.
If only this film were ONLY that cynical. There's enough factual errors to fill a warehouse, but that's part of the movies, so no real big deal there. The really horrific swill comes from dialogue so mind-bendingly stupid and poorly delivered that it makes one long for "Joe Dirt: The Director's Cut." Yes, Ben Affleck's an affable lightweight, but the no-talent actress playing his love interest is reminiscent of Pauly Shore doing Shakespeare, or the kid who played the lead in "Star Wars: Episode I".
If you've read the book, don't see the film. If you haven't read the book, read the book, then follow the instructions in the previous sentence. This movie assumes you have no brains, no interest in a coherent storyline, no ability to discern interesting visual effects from a few SUVs with lighter fluid on them, and no ability to resist incessant marketing. It's horrible. Read between the lines on the other, more positive reviews -- this is a lightweight film that "isn't too bad" if you "lower your expectations."
You shouldn't HAVE to lower your expectations. The Sum of All Fears is flat out awful, and worse yet, a complete waste of your time.
Swing Kids (1993)
Bafflingly stupid, self-absorbed, and pathetic.
Words can't describe how horrendous this film is. There is absolutely nothing in this film worth anyone's time or money, except perhaps some of the music. The acting's flat, with a bunch of talentless pretty boys trying to instill drama into script more lifeless than a slab of formica.
Swing Heil, indeed. This film is hideously awful.
Jurassic Park III (2001)
It's too late for me....save yourself.
This would probably be a good film to see....provided you've already seen every other film in existence, and thoroughly explored the bellybuttons of yourself and those around you. God, this movie was unbelievably insipid, with some of the worst (or is it nonexistent) writing ever captured on film. There is no saving grace to this film; even the animatronics are kind of lame, and it's just a complete waste of time and money.
Run. Fast. It's beyond horrible.