timefreezer7 Reviews

Urban Legend (1998)

If you liked the Scream and Last Summer movies make sure you don't miss this atmospheric thriller

[8/10 · 15 December 2003]

A local college is being terrorized by brutal murders. The mysterious killer targets a certain group of friends who initially do not realize, or even ignore, the upcoming danger and fall prey to his clutches. They leave their rooms unlocked or go alone in the forest at night. The killer's main victim seems to be Natalie (Alicia Witt) a very typical gal, at least on the surface. The killer stalks her and harasses her continuously and Natalie not only tries to convince everyone about the danger in vain, but has to deal with melanic issues from her past. People soon start dropping like flies and Natalie and her friends are helpless before they all meet their fate. Many years before the incidents the college was rumored to have been plagued by an insane professor who flipped and invaded the students' dormitory killing many fraternity members at one single night. One of the few survivors is proven to be a sociopath weird janitor who is not willing to share his traumatic memories in order to help solving the mystery of this new killing spree. The murderer is much more than a freaked loser copycat who simply wants to rekindle the horror on the 25th anniversary of the alleged massacre, but has an obscure agenda.

Maybe all these plot elements sound stereotyped and nothing special. The premise of a horror movie localized in a college is as old as it gets and has been done to death (no pun intended). Nevertheless there is a special originality in this film. The killer's modus operandi follows a unique pattern of an urban legend methodology. You probably all know what an urban legend is. Folklore stories which are always laying on the verge of reality and myth. Usually they are scary crimes and everyone seems to know or have heard or have read a similar crime although no one seems to have actually enlisted specific names. Stories like these are usually typical frightening tales. One example is the poisoned candy children are frequently treated on Halloween by insane people. Another example is the seemingly normal father who mysteriously brutally slaughtered his entire family over one night, preferably by axe, and disappeared never to be heard of again. The screenwriter plays cleverly with all the cliches and the fears of the dark. The urban legends provide fertile ground for some genuinely original and shocking death scenes.

Urban Legend, despite an intriguing premise, cannot hide its origin. It is a typical 90's horror film mixed with a whodunit subplot, recognizable TV faces and plenty of gore. The film succeeds in being a memorable and above average effort but if you are set to watch it you are bound to find all the stupid overused themes a teeny bopper provides (without nudity though: that is the determinant between 80's and 90's). There are plot holes the size of a volcano crater. For example the police officers are so dim witted that they regard a clearly obvious strangulation which would probably have left distinct bruises on the victim's neck as a suicide. Moreover why, oh why don't they send officers during the climactic tragic events after all those murders. I can accept the fact that the phone lines were dead but couldn't someone just go and ask for help? When they do arrive it is far too late. The cast was also over-crowded and it was obvious that the protagonists were nothing more than screen fillers. It is too bad since their acting skills, which seemed promising, were withheld. For example Jared Leto and Michael Rosenbaum are Paul and Parker respectively. Although the film starts off interestingly with equal screen time, Natalie soon wins the absolute focus and their roles are so small that they end up being extras. Things are even worse for Brenda (Rebecca Gayheart) and Sasha (Tara Reid) who also had shrunken roles and are wandering pretty faces waiting in line to be sliced and diced. Although the suspects are many, the final revelation of the killer is weak, the motives even weaker and of course we have the inevitable cat-lived nature of the killer-who-refuses-to-die escorted by the predictable cliffhanger epilogue with the "TO BE SEQUELED" sign.

An extra detrimental element is the presence of Alicia Witt in an especially important role. Her acting is not awful but it is definitely misguided and fails. Witt is way too calm to convince as a realistic character. After a certain point it is clear that her psychopath stalker has not only killed her friends, but is after her, and she doesn't even show a trace of panic. She DOES try of course to warn the bonehead authorities and she does a little research on the urban legends. The bad thing is that even in the gruesome finale she doesn't seem to fear the maniac even a little bit and even worse she is not the willing-to-fight heroine that Sidney Prescott in Scream was. Now I don't want to be misunderstood, I wasn't looking for Jamie Lee Curtis's overblown vocal pipes but she could have more human reactions, especially after the deaths of her friends. It's as though Natalie had read the victim list and knew that she had a contractual commitment to survive until the end. The only one of the main characters with some substance is Joshua Jackson as Damon. This guy is a derivative from other horror films and strikes as a cardboard cutout: a prankster who teases his friends and is slightly horny. At least Damon has a certain and sensible persona and Jackson is adequate. The funniest aspect of the film is that the cameos are far more successful and memorable than the leads!! Danielle Harris in a short role is the quite trendy Gothic young diva who is the incarnation of the Lust sin, the aged John Neville is the strict and by the rules Dean of the University and Brad Dourif gives an excellent performance in a role which I won't reveal. The best of them is Robert Englund as the clever and a bit creepy Professor who teaches folklore and introduces his students to the urban legends. Professor Wexler seems to be the chief suspect for this horrific situation and although there are sporadic hints throughout the film which point to other directions, Englund virtually dominates the screen even with his absence!!! Of course I won't omit Loretta Devine as Reese the guardian of the University who is very funny and adds the necessary comic relief. Who could have thought? A woman and indeed a black one as the cop/protector. It is another attempt to break a few cliches. Well done casting directors.

Apart from some good performances Urban Legend has many other assets. The opening sequence alone was enough to keep me hooked on as I realized I would watch a great film. The rainy frames and the professional shooting with the distant take angles is enough to pose the threatening tone and warn us about what is to follow. The introductory scene is a stand alone masterpiece. The killer here doesn't have a costume but hides under a winter jacket with a cowl and this gives a realistic touch and a difficulty in pinpointing the culprit since many people have the same type of jacket. The best part of Urban Legend is the setting and the cinematography. The university buildings are bulky and old enough to support a medieval atmosphere which excites our imagination. Further, these baroque aged buildings give a much more scary climate and ensure that no matter how much they run, the protagonists will never get away since the corridors are so long that probably no one is going to hear them scream. But the greatest virtue is the photography which was dreary and gave a sense of a documentary style. The best example to describe the stigma the director tried to pull off are the library scenes. The leads are in a situation reminiscent of the Name of the Rose (lacking the religious undertones of course!!!) and are trapped in an infernal game they cannot escape. The whole point of view of the movie is clearly cinematic and the imaging techniques are much supportive. As I aforementioned the death scenes are fascinating and catapult the adrenaline to heights. Although the character development is bare you feel sorry for the victims (well, OK, for most of them). One surprise follows another as the body count increases.

It comes as a great disappointment therefore that after a chilling 90 minutes period, the last 30 minutes go downhill. The action is very weak, the suspense retreats and we are left with overacting, inept and predictable "plot twists," inadequate explanations and a rather disappointing climax . I mean how could anyone not wonder why the maniac wouldn't just kill Natalie and get over with this revenging mission instead of doing this wild carnage. So be warned: the last half hour is extremely disappointing. Thus, if you are a horror fan who wants an entertaining thriller Urban Legend is a good shot. Despite some letdowns Urban Legend is yet another landmark in 90's horror genre.

URBAN LEGEND - 8 / 10

The Witches (1990)

On a par with the rest of Dahl's movies (Willy Wonka , Matilda , James and the Giant Peach)

[9/10 · 12 December 2003]

Yet another book by the famous storyteller Roald Dahl has been transferred to the silver screen. To be honest I have not read the book but I can assure you that the film consists of all the sinister irony, the creepiness and an amusing touch of morbidity which dominates all the fairy tales this fellow has printed on paper. The Witches is a rather forgotten little gem with a biting script, an engaging direction and entertaining performances from the entire cast. Roald Dahl (and consequently the writer and the director) made his own version of witchcraft. He used scary images and frightening themes not to insult the occult fans but simply to poke fun at some cliched lore and legends. As a result the film suffered from a severe identity crisis and failed to reach a target audience: a bit too dark for kids and the adults easily misjudged it as a run-of-the-mill childish corny movie. No wonder the film is to date an unknown fantasy flick. However for the lucky viewers it is a fondly remembered satire with a cult status.

Luke (Jasen Fisher) is a little boy whose parents take him on vacation to visit his grandmother Helga (Mai Zetterling). Helga has Norwegian origin and knows many things about witches, evil creatures which manage to lure small children only to kill them later. Apparently Helga has encountered a witch in her childhood. Luke seems to enjoy his grandmother's stories. When Luke's parents are killed in a car accident Helga takes the orphaned child under her custody and does her best to fill the void. When Luke is attacked by a strange woman who most probably was a witch, Helga realizes that her grandson has suffered enough already and needs a break. The two of them take a getaway trip to a luxurious British hotel by the seashore. During their residence in the hotel, a convention is being conducted by a group of women calling themselves "The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children." Their leader is Miss Ernst (Anjelica Huston), an aristocratic lady whose gothic and sharp characteristics seem to vaguely ring some bells in Helga's memory. Luke accidentally attends the convention only to find out it is actually a coven of the hideous witches his granny has described to the last detail. The witches hide their ugly real faces under masks. Miss Ernst is of course the notorious Grand High Witch, the most repelling, terrifying, powerful and infernal of them all. The Grand High Witch is fed up with her underlings and decides that enough time has been wasted: therefore she forms a master plan according to which they will eliminate easily all the children in the country. It is now up to Luke and Helga to save the United Kingdom from this massacre.

The imagery used by the director is effective and plays a crucial part for the atmosphere of the movie. Congratulations to the SFX and make up crew for their awesome depiction of the bare skulled sorcerers. Yeah, yeah it is quite scary for kids but whatever. Dahl never cared for stereotypes and neither should we. The whole concept is a multileveled parody: firstly the childish phobias of mean witches are depicted pleasantly. Secondly, the underlying metaphor the film tries to pull off at how cruel these social workers and charity people can be, instead of preventing the cruelty, is funny. There are also many other humorous scenes (obviously wanting to counter balance the scary ones) like when Bruno, an overweight spoiled rich bulimic boy who was transformed into a mouse by the witches, says compliantly to his freaked parents "Don't take it so hard mom! You did after all want me to lose weight, didn't you?" Speaking of the mouse, I would also like to make a reference to the professional puppeteering and dubbing SFX by Jim Henson which are very successful. Generally the effects for this movie are well crafted and not at all dated. The director also did a good job in setting the creepy scenes or the action sequences (like the finale).

The casting was also inspired. I liked seeing Fisher in the central role, not necessarily because he gives a standout performance but because we finally get a real character and not a piece of cardboard. Luke doesn't apply to any of the stereotypes we see in cinema generally. He is not the cute and painfully sappy sweet little boy, or the nerdy goof and he is definitely NOT the do-it-all superhero who destroys everything in his wind-blowing path (a la Dennis the Menace or Home Alone). Mai Zetterling (who is also the narrator) gives a warm performance as the wise grandmother and also the most dramatic one of the entire film. She provides therefore the human element of tragedy in the movie. Anjelica Huston arguably steals the show in a challenging role. She is exceptional being threatening and spooky (not necessarily in her real grotesque appearance but with her ice cold stare). The kid who plays Bruno adds much comic relief in an obviously preachy role about the sin of gluttony. Oh, there is also a cameo by a then obscure Rowan Atkinson who is sadly underused. For you obsessed Atkinson fans out there you may check him out in a verbal (albeit brief) character.

Enough said, I think. The Witches is a strange film which has a perfect (but misunderstood) balance between a dark fairy tale and a snicky adult satire. It is well worth watching for fantasy fans anywhere. I don't know if it is the best (or faithful) ADAPTATION of Dahl's novel, but I believe sincerely that it is the best MOVIE BASED on a Roald Dahl novel. Recommended? You betsa!!!!

THE WITCHES 8.5 / 10

Heathers (1988)

Biting

[9/10 · 11 December 2003]

Starring: Winona Ryder , Christian Slater , Kim Walker , Jennifer Rhodes and Shannen Doherty

A gem from the late 80's, Heathers is a brilliantly written indie film which not only managed to launch the careers of its stars, but will be forever remembered as a strong social satire and one of the finest examples of film-making and how many things you may accomplish with a witty and genuinely daring screenplay. Although the basic set is a high school, this movie appeals to all ages because the main theme is that cliques exist in every aspect of human life: business, sports, art, science etc,etc.

Veronica Sawyer (Winona Ryder) is the rookie in her "school's most powerful clique." Her 3 "friends" are all called Heather. They are snobbish and dislikeable. Heather Chandler (Kim Walker) is the leader and runs the school. Veronica is the newest member and she has doubts about her new lifestyle and the attitude she has to adopt. She has traces of guilt for abandoning her old best friend Betty Finn (Renee Estevez), a nerdy , geeky, sweet girl with glasses who (surprise!!) is still a virgin! Meanwhile a new student called Jason Dean (Christian Slater) comes to town. J.D. has changed about 5 schools in 3 different states because he can't fit in anywhere and as he says..."the only difference in these schools was the combination in my locker". J.D. and Veronica soon hit the sheets. J.D. is a rebel and convinces Veronica to acknowledge her hate for her "friends." After a fight with Heather Chandler, Veronica and J.D. set a prank for her but Heather accidentally ends up dead. The couple manages to cover it up as a suicide and gets away. But this is only the beginning for a chain of unusual and surrealistic events which lead to an explosive finale!!

Slater and Ryder give arguably the best performances of their careers and this helps. Ryder has a sweet face which is perfect. She is convincing as the disorientated teenager who is searching for her identity and although she has aristocratic looks she finds it hard to fit in with the snobbish manners her friends impose. Slater was also perfect playing his psychotic character with the proper innocence to make him look normal enough. The social subjects the film deals with are tremendous. First of all everyone of us has faced cliques in our schools and not necessarily snobbish rich girls. There are always teams of people who form a mafia-like group, are annoying to the bone, do nothing more than serve and protect their own interests and are on a constant conflict to pull the others down. They are so irritating and antipathetic that all of us have fantasies and dreams of them dying (sometimes preferably by our very own bare hands, namely STRANGLING them). Of course these people don't even remotely like each other but keep coiled up for their common interest. Shannen Doherty (playing an other member of the trio) at Heather's funeral thinks "Dear God, I had prayed for Heather to die many times, and although I know it was wrong, I kept doing it. And now that finally Heather is dead I know that...you understood...Pray Jesus! Alleluia!!! " This is a prime example of how rotten these cliques are. After Heather is buried Heather Duke (Doherty) pursues her chief status and becomes even bitchier!!

Veronica is an average girl which confronts the psychological dilemmas all of us have. What is the cost of being acceptable in your social environment? What does it take to be popular? Is it worth it when you end up not liking yourself and have to stick with friends you dislike? Actually the allegory is even deeper. Many times we don't show our real face to our friends and have to adopt another attitude. We never want to show our compassionate and sensitive side so our friends don't find us weak. We sometimes don't want to confide our unhappiness in order not to expose our vulnerable traits .This bold satire dares to depict with real power and not pretentious provocation what happens when a teenager's life and behavior is treated with silly Freudian terms and is put under the microscope instead of giving him / her what is really necessary; self-esteem and self acceptance.

The movie is filled with tragic yet simultaneously hilarious scenes (like the funerals) or lines. One example is after Heather's "suicide." The teachers council in her school tries to psychoanalyze her and the most interesting element they find in her suicide note (forged by Veronica) is the word "myriads." She failed to write it in a recent dictation test therefore this led her to self-destruction! In one class the teacher asks from her fellow mates to express their feelings over this sad departure. One guy easily says "I used to date Heather very briefly once. She left me because she said I was boring. But now...I know it wasn't my fault ...She just wasn't happy from her life." How convenient! Not only can a fact can be interpreted with various silly ways from various silly persons, but the tragic demise of a young individual made another one esteem himself more and overcome his rejection!! There are many other examples but I don't want to give away more spoilers.

I will have to warn you that the last 15 minutes are quite lame and disappointing. The plot breaks new limits of over-the-top campiness and we end up with an unnecessary duel scene. It doesn't matter. Heathers is a masterpiece that can be viewed over and over. If you like you may fast forward the last 15 minutes and go to the final ironic line of Veronica to Heather Duke. STRONGLY RECOMMENDED!

Heathers 9 /10

Beetlejuice (1988)

After 10 or so times I watched it , still engaging - every fantasy fan should see it

[9/10 · 10 December 2003]

Directed by Tim Burton

Written by Michael McDowell and Warren Skaaren

Starring: Alec Baldwin, Geena Davis, Winona Ryder and Michael Keaton

A brilliant, fascinating and imaginative black comedy by Tim Burton, who proved unambiguously his great talents and went on to direct Batman . Beetlejuice is a satire dealing with the supernatural and is a modern fairy tale. Simultaneously it has a good share of hilarious moments and creepy scenes (like the snake scene).

Although the basic plot may be regarded as quite original and funny, I am somehow compelled to point out that the basic concept seems to be loosely influenced by Oscar Wilde's "The Canterville Ghost," a rather dark fairy tale for kids (in precisely the same tradition of Roald Dahl's creepy books like "The Witches," "Matilda," "James and the Giant Peach" etc.) . It contains the hopeless attempts of an undead British lord who haunts his castle for centuries and callously scares off or even murders in gruesome ways all the subsequent habitants of the castle (including his very own descendants) only to fail to boot out a wacky American family of Republicans , who have bought the castle and have taken over his residence. Failed efforts to show them his presence include post-midnight roaming in the hallways hauling a rusty creaking metal chain and breaking the tea set in the living room. Sounds familiar?

The film starts out as your typical romantic sitcom with your happy couple Adam (Alec Baldwin) and Barbara Maitland (Geena Davis) being the ideal young husband and wife, full of love for each other and dreams. They live in a big house on an idyllic grassland near a cute little American hometown. The first plot twist comes 3 minutes later when Adam and Barbara are killed in a peculiar ironic sequence (which seems to have be taken by a Wile E. Coyote cartoon). Their spirits return in the house without remembering what happened. After a short period of research they realize that they are now ghosts and they have to endure a transitional state during which they are stuck in the house for good. As if there weren't enough problems already, a typical American yuppie called Charles Deitz (Jeffrey Jones) buys the house and sees the perfect chance to have a calm relaxing period from his anxious life in N.Y. Along with him comes his neurotic second wife Delia (Catherine O' Hara) who regards her stone monstrosities of statues as skilled art and will do anything to promote them, and his daughter from the first marriage Lydia (an alarmingly pale Winona Ryder in one of her first acting steps). Lydia is a miniature of a Black Widow, dressed in black and self acknowledges her existence as "strange and unusual." She hates her step-mother as much as Delia hates her. The two ghosts want to get rid of the intruders: after several unsuccessful "hauntings" they have no other option but to contact a weird "Bio-Exorcist" called Beetlejuice (Michael Keaton) to help them. This propagates a series of uncontrollable situations which culminate into a hilarious climax.

Beetlejuice is truly one of the most visually stunning and imaginative movies ever seen. Where to begin....well the cinematography is very good. The scenes in the afterlife world which depicts it as a surrealistic public service full of bureaucratic hints and tricks, is wonderful and gives us a strong satirical aspect of our world ( HELL! - even in the afterlife you need priority numbers !!!) along with beautiful-for-the-eye scenes. The director of photography made an excellent job with his colorful lighting. The sets, costumes and make up are exceptional. Who can forget the scorched "Cigar Man" who "is trying to quit?" Who can forget the room with the pit of "exorcised souls" with the Escherish designs? Who can forget the ending sequence which is simultaneously creepy (an occult exorcism with paganistic spells taking place on a stormy night) and funny with Beetlejuice gatecrashing the session, evoking chaos.

The SFX team really outdid themselves. For a 1988 movie we have some of the most original SFX to appear in screen for years. Further than the afterlife sequence we have hilarious scenes in Beetlejuice's miniature graveyard or the notorious whorehouse sequence or the climactic metamorphosis of the Beetlejuice to a neon lighted sparkling fun-fair hammer which sends the guests to the ceiling (the entire movie seems to be a roller-coaster with a "terror train," dark and kind of scary but great fun). Not to mention Delia's sculptures which come to life. There are other examples but I think I gave away too many spoilers. The music score by Danny Elfman gives the right two-natured feeling of a horror carnival the film has. There are some great existential moments which have a dreary moody feeling like when Lydia discovers the miniature city in the attic fully illuminated by white lights. The performances from all the actors are great. Winona Ryder shines here (no pun intended) in a very unusual role. The same goes for Michael Keaton as the fast talking deranged voluptuous Bio-Exorcist called Beetlejuice. The word "perfect" can't do this man justice. See the movie and judge for yourselves.

Although Beetlejuice drops in literally half way through the film (time-keep for yourselves if you don't believe me) he is the definition of a scene stealer and he even occupies the film title!! However I would like to underline that the best scenes in the film are the opening ones when the Maitlands try to figure out what is going on and struggle to adjust in the new status quo. Beetlejuice is a semi-dark masterpiece and a classic movie which can be viewed over and over many times. If you are a fan of dark satirical flicks like Gremlins then this is definitely a must-see for you.

BEETLEJUICE 9.5 / 10

A Nightmare on Elm Street: The Dream Child (1989)

In one word : mediocre

[6/10 · 9 December 2003]

The fifth chapter in the popular horror saga is one of the weakest entries of the series, but not a bad little movie at all. The producers fortunately decided to return the series to its dark roots after the rollercoaster ride of the video gamish Part IV. Although the effort was nice, neither the script nor the direction managed to accomplish fully successful results. The result was quite mediocre but at least this film had a plot (in contrast to The Dream Master) and made an attempt of portraying a nightmarish world with dark gothic scenery.

We knew it would happen: after the financial success of Part IV the sequel was inevitable. Picking up where we left off, one year after the events of the Dream Master, Alice (Lisa Wilcox) starts having bad dreams once again. Her life will soon change drastically when first she learns that her boyfriend has rendered her pregnant and she then witnesses, in a peculiar day-dream/vision, the horrific rebirth/resurrection of the notorious boogeyman called Freddy Krueger. It seems that Freddy simply can't be put to rest. However, I am compelled to acknowledge the fact that the explanation given by the scriptwriters is logical, decent and passable instead of having a dog urinating fire on Krueger's bones. So after Krueger is resurrected he begins his reign of terror once again by intimidating Alice and invading the dreams of her friends dispatching them one by one.

There are some interesting plot elements in this one but I don't want to give away spoilers. I will say however that the storyline continues the revelations given in Part III about Krueger's past. The gothic dream sequences where Alice infiltrated the mental asylum are some of the best ones in the entire film. Speaking of Alice, Lisa Wilcox is a much better actress here, portraying Alice perfectly as a dynamic and powerful heroine who struggles to save herself and her unborn child, while in the last film she seemed out of place. The cinematography is good, some of the SFX are great (the comic book sequence comes to mind) the supporting actors give solid performances. The death scenes are quite cool, do not disappoint and will please both the Elm Street and the gore fans in general. The characters are likeable enough to root for them. My personal favorite was Mark, the comic book freak.

Unfortunately the liabilities are quite as many . First, the script can't do anything to hide the fate of the supporting cast. From the first moment you see Alice's friends you can watch the stamped label on their foreheads writing "CANNON FODDER" with huge neon lights. Secondly some of the scenes lack the tension they should have due to Stephen Hopkins' lame direction (like the rebirth scene). The visions Alice has of her 8 year old son Jacob is a quite cliched and stupid idea which doesn't seem to lead anywhere . On the contrary, the visions of Amanda Krueger was a strong plot device which helped the film. One of the worst aspects of the film, which is especially damaging, is Robert Englund as Krueger. Not only has he little screen time but he gives his worst performance in the entire series. Englund is quite bored and tired here, sleepwalking through his role. Rumors have it that he had signed a two movies contract in Part IV and it shows!! Finally the ending sequence which can't deliver what the writers envisioned. Not only does it seem suspiciously "inspired" by Labyrinth (1986) with the Escher-esque scenery, but it lacks the power it should have. The ending leaves you wanting more of Freddy and a more satisfying resolution. Fortunately Part VI, which followed, accomplished all these tasks perfectly.

Worth noting is the fact that the script was written in an era where the media had made a great fuss about abortions, so the social allegories the film tries to pull are vociferous . Unfortunately these subjects are quite dated by now so the film once again loses points in impact. Overall, Part V is a mixed bag. It may disappoint many of you while others may be thrilled. I believe that although it is not worth all of the money you will give to rent it and you may not lose much if you miss it, on the other hand you can take a look at a couple of satisfactory scenes not to mention you may find out if Alice will eventually survive from the clutches of her dream stalker. A mediocre entry but at least an entertaining, cute try from the producers.

Nightmare on Elm Street V : The Dream Child - 6 / 10

Spider-Man (2002)

Well done - can't wait for the sequel

[8/10 · 21 November 2003]

Directed by Sam Raimi

Written by David Koepp

Starring: Tobey Maguire , Willem Dafoe , Kirsten Dunst and James Franco

After years of anticipation and a never ending court battle concerning the legal rights , a big budget cinematic adaptation of the well known comics superhero has finally made it to the movie theaters . First of all I should say I was never much of a Spider-man fan , I have never read comics but is there any person on earth who doesn't know the red clad hero who jumps from building to building ? I doubt so . My only knowledge of Spider-man was some cartoon show where he makes a dynamic trio with Iceman and Fire-Star . I am not aware of anyone of Spidey's enemies and I was not familiar with his origin and motives . Nevertheless I am keen on comics generally and I always like seeing comics characters materialize on celluloid . So I got really excited when I heard that the project FINALLY got green-lighted and that Sam Raimi eventually took it upon him to shoot the Spider-man motion picture . I will have to admit that most of the comments are 100% right . Spider-man (2002) may not be a GREAT film but it sure is a good one (and it beats the hell out of the overrated and disappointing 2000's X-Men) .

I don't think the plot is significant . The movie remains as faithfully to its comics origins as it could be and it satisfies both the hardcore well-knowing fans and the uninitiated like I am . Peter Parker (Tobey Maguire) is a nerdy 17 year old student , not much accepted by his social environment and constantly being picked by his bullies classmates . He has a secret crush on the beautiful girl next door Mary Jane `M.J.' Watson (Kirsten Dunst) but she hardly knows he exists . When he is bitten by a mutated super spider he is bestowed with special powers like climbing on windows with his bare (albeit sticky) hands , ejecting spider nets from his arms , incredible acrobatic agility and enhanced danger-approaching instinct. While he tries to adjust to his newly obtained powers he finds himself caught in a war that a fiendish super criminal called the Green Goblin has declared against him . The Green Goblin is a maniac who wreaks havoc and kills innocent people using military equipment and weaponry . He believes that Spider-Man is the only real threat and wants to bring him down . The Green Goblin is actually the alter-ego of Norman Osborn (Willem Dafoe) a very wealthy businessman / scientist who has started developing a split personality and the deranged Green Goblin becomes more and more dominant driving him to madness . Norman's son is Harry (James Franco) who coincidentally is Peter's best friend and classmate . So Spider-Man will try to stop the Green Goblin before he kills more civilians and simultaneously will try to get Mary Jane's attention .

That's it folks . The film spends much more time on the love story between Peter and Mary Jane and less on action . I always like character development and human relationships unfolded in superhero films but a little more action wouldn't heart either . Basically we see Spider-Man beat up some random thugs on alley streets and that's it . The balloon sequence in the middle of the film is nice but awfully reminiscent of Batman (1989) . I wish there were more epic battles between Spider-man and Green Goblin with more explosions . Some other things I didn't like either were :

1) Even worse CGI SFX than the robot soldiers in the Phantom Menace !!! I never thought it could happen but here it is . The shots of Spider-Man in the beginning of the film jumping from the top of a building to another is a lame cartoon that will not convince even a 3 year old viewer . I cannot describe how laughable and fake this Spider-man cartoon is : you will have to see for yourselves .

2) The acting is average from all the actors . None of them manages to deliver fully the dramatic depth of the characters as scripted by the writer. The worst performance belongs to Willem Dafoe . His mirror communication scene was nicely scripted but Dafoe is extremely bad and unconvincing . What exactly happened here ? I liked him in Body of Evidence and Speed II but his talents seem to have been erased in this film . I will have to admit that some of the Green Goblin's lines gave me the creeps but can anyone assure me that it was really him under the suit (or his voice for that matter) ? Maguire's and Dunst's acting is better but still mediocre . Speaking of the duo , one other flaw is that they don't have enough chemistry together (like Christopher Reeve and Margot Kidder) . If they made a more fitting pair the screen time spent in their romance would be more worthily used . And if James Franco has the most impact screen presence is because his character requires for him to sit back and look calm and cool (and it is obvious that's the reason why they cast him) . The secondary characters like Peter's uncle and aunt act OK but that newspaper editor was too annoying to like him.

3) The Green Goblin is never developed and is not much of a formidable foe . Maybe it was intentional to give him little screen time in order not to pull another scene-stealer (a la Joker) and give all the focus on Spider-Man . Unfortunately a great action film always needs a powerful evil character to be the opposition AND the driving force for the hero's existence .

Aside from these flaws the movie has all the features of a good blockbuster . The red suit of Spider-Man is faithful and really convinces us that the character has come to life ! There are some good scenes like the one where Peter finally beats up one the bullies in school . My favorite scene in the movie is a great surprise and that's why I cannot give it away. All I can say if you haven't watched the film , is the sequence where the Green Goblin sings `The itsy , bitsy spider.' . I also digged the final duel between Spider-Man and Green Goblin . Without being too violent it is an exciting fight , larger-than-life and worth our money . I just wish the rest of the movie reached the same adrenaline levels . Despite a lackluster performance , Tobey Maguire was perfectly cast as Peter Parker . He suits the geeky looks the character has and convinces as a 17 year old with continually growing power (physical and personal) . The film has an obvious open end as a set up for the sequel . Much like some recent blockbusters like the Matrix or X-Men the first film is clearly an introductory chapter wanting to lure the audience to a whole franchise . You wait for more action in the next film , more exploitation of the potential of the story and you have a curiosity to find out where the relationships between the protagonists will lead . Spider-Man however manages to rise above the aforementioned films . Why ? Because it is a GOOD introduction . Where X-Men made the mistake of under using 10 characters without any success , Spider-Man has ONE main character . This is what I like most about Raimi's film . We follow Peter Parker from the very beginning . We have a taste of his life before the drastic change occurs and then we have the transformation in front of our eyes full play ! There is not a single superhero film that bothered to show us the beginning of the character . Obviously they thought it would be dull for the already initiated comic book fans but they were wrong . Yes there are other films with scenes were the motives were explained like Batman and some opening establishing scenes like the first Superman . But Raimi's Spider-Man is unique : we SEE Peter Parker training with his super powers , trying to control them and we even get to see him pick his costume . Now I will keep my reservations because I have yet to see the recent batch of Marvel comic-book adaptations like Daredevil or Hulk but for now Spider-Man is the best introducing film you will find . The metaphor about the responsibility of a teenager turned into a mature adult is also explored . The realistic approach is successful here . First of all the first thing Peter does with his powers is to try earning money . Only later he decides to use them for the city 's good and safety . Secondly despite some nitpicking from fans it is quite logical that Spider-man's web-shooting is an organic power . Peter is just 17 and as much as he is supposed to be a science genius he wouldn't have the money or the technology to invent some synthetic web shooters . The Green Goblin outfit sure looks like a Power Ranger suit but it is also realistic as it is a piece of military equipment and not a Halloween costume . New York City is depicted as a shiny town and establishes a truly existing environment for the story to take place .

Spider-Man (2002) for all its weaknesses is a good film with some of the best narrative I have seen . The voice-overs by Maguire help us identify with him even more . The film is better than some other comic book flicks like Phantom or Spawn (not entirely their fault since these characters are less appealing and therefore less known) Dick Tracy , The Mask or the Shadow (good idea but mediocre script / execution) or over hyped blockbusters like the X-Men . It will not be a classic like Superman II or Batman but it is one of the best of the bunch of the `comic-book' genre . I rank it up there with the 3 Batman sequels , Judge Dredd and the original Superman .

SPIDER-MAN (2002) 8 / 10

Knight Moves (1992)

Hidden treasure (everyone mildly interested in mystery/action films should see it !)

[9/10 · 20 November 2003]

During a big chess tournament a chain of brutal murders occurs. The victims are thoroughly young attractive females who are not related anyway . The murder is always executed in a ritual way and the killer leaves a message on the wall of the room (written of course with blood) . The police are puzzled since this clever psychopath is obviously not a freak worshiper of satanism or any other cult . Instead he seems to be a sadistic calculating killer who not only has an unspecified goal but is so hideous that he likes to show himself off and drag the police officers to a cat and mouse game , challenging them to find him . The chief suspect for the gory killings is Peter Sanderson (Christopher Lambert) a player in the tournament. Despite his young age , Sanderson is one of the most skillful and acclaimed professional chess players . Right after the first bloodbath , Sanderson starts receiving harassing phone calls from the killer who not only threatens his life but teases Sanderson to find his identity . Two detectives (played by Tom Skerritt and Daniel Baldwin) and 1 criminal psychologist (Diane Lane) co-operate with Sanderson in order to link the dots and trace the killer . It is quite possible that the insane butcher is an envious antagonist of Sanderson in chess from the past . But who can it be ? Sanderson has played numerous chess games and has faced many famous players . Surely a great amount has obviously injured egos because Sanderson won them but which one of them snapped ? . Unfortunately the threatening phone calls do not narrow the suspicions about his innocence . The police seem to believe that the deaths come as the result of the actions of Sanderson and a partner . What is the truth ?

This is one of the most atmospheric detective thrillers of the 90 ‘s . Despite a no-name director and a no-name writer `Knight Moves' proves that professional filmmaking can be achieved with the talented work of the proper technicians (direction of photography , scenery setting etc) and a well written intelligent script . The plot seems to be a combination of Seven (1995) and The Game (1997) . Seven is reminiscent not only script-wise but the dark , rainy and dreary atmosphere is inherent in the directorial look . Well how do you know ! Knight Moves is actually a predecessor to these movies ! ( I believe David Fincher owes a great thank you to this film ) Just because it doesn‘t have major star power doesn‘t mean it should be left unnoticed . Few people know the existence of this wonderful thriller and in my opinion it is not fair for this little gem to be forgotten or overlooked . It is probably Christopher Lambert ‘s best movie and a setup for many other crime mysteries which followed in the decade . So if you like whodunits I can assure you that this is one of the best samples.

The cinematography is dark and moody and it helps giving an ominous air to the screen . The sets are perfect for the claustrophobic threatening tone even in scenes with large halls like where the tournament is being conducted . The music and sound effects are also successful and contribute quite nicely to the creepiness of the movie (like the thunders during the storm). Aside from the great direction the basis of the film is a great screenplay with enough plot twists to keep the viewer hooked to the premise . All these surprises build up the tension , leading to a heart pumping final 20 minutes period and deliver a superb climax which you will remember for a long long time . There is a negative point though : Knight Moves belongs to a strange category of films which should be viewed only once and then left with fond memories . This means that your second viewing may come as a great disappointment since you already know what will come . Another minor flaw is that the killer ‘s motive is clear from the very first scene . It is however difficult finding the adult now psychopath and the shrewdness of the director is that he manipulates us to forget the initial scene and concentrate on the twists and the red herrings that the screenwriter has staged for us . It is a truly fascinating modernization of the Hitchcockian tradition as we enter a tunnel only to be `allowed' later to find the light that was always there.

The acting is for the most part passable . Lambert plays solidly and gives a legitimate hero as an everyday guy who gets caught in a paranoid game . He is not the gorgeous poster model or the beefed up tough man . Tom Skerritt plays one of the most wooden and mundane police officers I have ever seen in a film . He is always neutral and cool tempered without catchy gags or profanity . This may render his presence almost invisible , but I believe the realistic approach is achieved here , since most officers are quite indifferent and inert in reality . All they are willing to do is arrive at the scene AFTER the crime and take fingerprints . On the contrary Daniel Baldwin (the most obscure of the clan) is the younger and more aggressive detective and his performance is a pleasant surprise . He believes that Sanderson is actually himself the accomplice who wants to fool them out . He exhales so much anger against Lambert ‘ s character that at many points the two of them nearly duke it out with their fists . It is quite original for a movie of this kind since the detectives usually form a harmonic alliance with the lead (a la Copycat) . Baldwin ‘s and Lambert ‘s stormy chemistry chips in the building of more tension and nerve . Diane Lane is the psychologist who halfway forms a predictable affair with Sanderson . She and Lambert were married at the time and it is funny to see their chemistry transferred on the celluloid . Further than the obligatory love interest Lane performs another difficult task . She manages to survive an underwritten role and she gives the best performance of the entire cast . For once again she proves herself a dynamic personality who captures the audience ‘s attention. At short periods she temporarily becomes the lead herself ! Another exhibit for her pivotal screen presence is `Judge Dredd' . Very few times indeed has Hollywood given us active female roles who are not decorative co – stars . The actor who plays the killer appears shortly (a la Kevin Spacey in Seven or William McNamara in Copycat) but is also quite good. The phone calls he makes with a special voice changer , make him sound like a distorted pervert and will certainly send chills down your spinal column . This is the most scary aspect of the film which pulls up the agony even more . The paranoid is a very sinister person and his chilling voice enhances the demonic threat which suspends above the heads of the leads and every other person who attends the tournament .

It is worth purchasing this exceptional mystery game . It is not simply a popcorn light movie just for the amusement of it . On the contrary `Knight Moves' is a professionally constructed mind trap which has terrifically escalating suspense and an explosive finale . Rent it , see it preferably after midnight and don ‘t forget to dim the lights . The final part of the movie will certainly leave you breathless . A small independent masterpiece `Knight Moves' deserves far more recognition than it has got . If you like crime puzzles this is one of the best you can find.

KNIGHT MOVES 8.5 / 10

Halloween H20: 20 Years Later (1998)

The best finale - if you loved the first two films don't miss it

[8/10 · 18 November 2003]

In 1978 a psychotic 21 year old escaped from the mental asylum where he was institutionalized for the murder of his sister and returned to his home town to do his unusual trick or treating on October 31st, namely All Hallows Eve. Hidden under a scary Captain Kirk mask and armed with a "big sharp kitchen knife" he brutally slaughtered many people. It is rumored that about 16 people lost their lives in one single night. The sole survivor of this horrendous massacre was a 17 year old girl who allegedly had a special link with the monstrous killer. After a battle with his doctor, the maniac was nowhere to be found and the girl was found terrorized and paralyzed with fear. She tried everything to get over this shocking night where she witnessed many of her friends being gutted like fish: group therapies, psychologists, meditation. Nothing worked. A few years later the newspapers wrote that she was killed in a car accident. It was over : the only person who escaped the "Halloween Murders" was dead as well.

If all this sounds strangely familiar, you are absolutely right! I bet there is not a movie fan around the world who hasn't at least heard of the tale of the infamous Michael Myers who killed people on Halloween and his unfortunate sister Laurie Strode (played by Jamie Lee Curtis). Laurie could never forget her encounter with the masked Shape and suffered a lot until the car accident which reportedly killed her. Laurie Strode was no more ....... or so we thought. Laurie actually feared that the deranged Myers was alive and still after her so she entered a Witness Protection System to stage her death. She changed her name...her identity...her past...and her haircut!!! Laurie now lives far away from Haddonfield, in a boarding school in California. She is a divorced headmistress and she teaches Literature to the students under the name Keri Tate. She rarely talks to her ex-husband and has developed a drinking problem. She suffers from recurring nightmares about that fatal night and frequently takes pills to ease her pain. Every Halloween she is especially jumpy since she lives in the sheer terror that her insane brother will come back. She has a 17 year old son called John (Josh Hartnett) whom she is overprotective with. It is now 1998: 20 years after the carnage, October 31st is approaching and John is now a grown boy who wants some good healthy teenage activities. They quarrel because Keri doesn't want him out of the house on Halloween. "I am just asking you for ONE lousy night!" But John decides that enough is enough, "NO mom! If you want to stay handcuffed to your dead brother, that's fine! You are not dragging me into this!" Unfortunately for Keri her fears are not at all ridiculous. The demented Myers is indeed alive and eventually manages to track her down, even if it took him 20 whole years. On Halloween night he invades the boarding school. The majority of the students are away on a field trip so Michael sees the perfect chance to terrorize the deserted campus and finish what he started back in Haddonfield. Unfortunately Keri doesn't have much of help. Dr Loomis (played by the veteran Donald Pleasance) has passed away. Her fellow teacher, Will (Adam Arkin), who is also her boyfriend, and the security guard Ronny (L.L. Cool J.) are not prepared for this kind of menace and end up helpless victims. Laurie needs to protect herself as well as her precious son. This means that she will have to confront the killer/brother for one last time.

It is almost impossible to feel for Curtis' heroine and get engaged to the premise if you haven't watched John Carpenter's indie masterpiece Halloween (1978) and the equally atmospheric follow-up Halloween II (1981). I will have to warn the hardcore fans (although you probably are aware of it by now) that the filmmakers and the writers opted to decline from the batch of Halloween 3 - 6 and create an alternative universe where Laurie doesn't have a daughter and Michael has vanished completely for 20 years without anyone hearing from him. There are no hints of druids or thorn curses either. The script returns to the basic roots of the Laurie Strode plotline. Dr Loomis allegedly survived at the end of Halloween II and spent his life trying to find his fugitive patient. A few years ago he died from natural causes. Veteran Donald Pleasance was dead in real life so they had to write out the character. Many fans were displeased with his absence but nothing could be done. Fortunately Jamie Lee Curtis fills in the void perfectly providing a tremendous amount of energy on the screen. Steve Miner was a perfect choice for the helm as he staged some truly chilling scenes. The film opens with a devilishly clever introductory sequence which is so shrewd and wicked that I wouldn't even dare giving it away. Then we have the most haunting opening credits I have ever seen in a film (again you will have to be familiar with Halloween II).

Many have accused the movie for being a Scream derivative. Yes, it is obvious that Kevin Williamson had a small contribution and left his footprint on the project but his treatment was just the pre-credits scene (again altered) and the whereabouts of Keri/Laurie. The screenplay went through major changes and Robert Zappia was one of the many of the recruited writers. The script could have been written by John Carpenter and Debra Hill themselves since it does not rely on gore. Unfortunately nothing was as scary as the beginning. Fortunately instead of being wasted in slashing (regressing to a Friday the 13th clone) the movie has an extremely low body count and very little blood. Most of the deaths are off-screen! The film spends most of the time psychoanalyzing Laurie Strode and treating her like a real person. Her horrifying experience in 1978 didn't just conclude with the end credits of part II and the "Mr. Sandman" song. She spent her life hiding until one day she realized that she would have to get over it and stand up. There are many false scares and Miner does an exceptional job: from the first frame to the dream sequence the director shows his professionalism. The film was very successful not only concentrating on drama instead of violence but on finally revealing the essence of horror as depicted in all scary movies. When you see Myers stabbing someone it is not so scary. The truly terrifying part is the deserted takes in the beginning with the air of threat whiffing on the screen. The IDEA of danger is much more frightening than the danger itself. Laurie sees the crossing line when she realizes that her brother is not the boogeyman but a psycho killer that CAN be destroyed. She has to stop running but protect her son and her life as well . Although a bit rushed this is the most logical transition for her character after 2 movies and 20 years of hiding in dark corridors waiting pathetically to get it from the knife. There is a frequent complaint that the film is way too short with little action. Moustapha Akkad & Co. decided not to make another horror movie but a tribute to Halloween. Gosh, how successful it was! The film is full of lines and scenes which refer to the original. Watch carefully and you will see the homage (people hiding in the closet etc).

Jamie Lee Curtis actually doesn't try to give a strong performance since her character is powerful enough to work on its own. The best acting is accomplished by a young Josh Hartnett who is convincing as a normal young man who wants to live his life and tries to keep his mother's reason intact as he believes her phobias are groundless. The rest of the young cast is unfortunately underdeveloped and you end up not caring for them. Adam Arkin has little screen time but plays very well and L.L. Cool J. tries to entertain us in the inevitable funny role. This is a one woman show though and Curtis is the host. Oh, there is also a pointless cameo from Janet Leigh (Curtis's real life mother) as Keri's secretary who serves as an indifferent Psycho tribute.

The finale was the most perfect that could be conceived and suited the franchise. The producers had the boldness to end the story once and for all and wrap smartly the series. It was a great disappointment therefore that they had to make Halloween Resurrection (2002) and ruin the good effort. Even now I believe that any true fan will stick to this memorial final chapter and joy over the closure of the series. H20 despite its quirky title is a Halloween small classic which gives you some chills and will most probably satisfy you. Congratulations to anyone involved to this decent try. A good moment in 90's modern horror films.

HALLOWEEN H20 : Twenty Years Later 8 / 10

Alien: Resurrection (1997)

Very good 4th part in the alien series-every sci-fi fan should see it !!!

[8/10 · 14 November 2003]

****The first two paragraphs are an extended plot description . If you have already seen the movie you may as well skip them****

**** For those who haven't seen the movie there may be some SLIGHT SPOILERS****

It has finally happened . After 200 years the unstoppable hostile beasts called aliens are resurrected . Lieutenant Ripley Ellen is long dead but the scientists found the secret to bring her back along with the alien queen embryo that she carried inside her . The greedy corporation Ripley worked for doesn't exist , but as long there is money and power hungry governments , somewhere , somehow , there will be someone who will fund an illegal program of bio-engineering in order to find the secret of the alien power . In this case the United Military Organization is behind this project although it is obvious that they are not even authorized by the Congress . They want to breed a new alien species to study them for purposes such as vaccines or alloys (but who are they kidding ? Inevitably the aliens will be exploited as a new super weapon) . The space base Auriga where the experiment is being conducted , is in orbit behind Pluto (naturally every illegal program takes place beyond the borders of the solar system) . The leader of Auriga is General Perez (Dan Hedaya) a rather mild mannered military officer who wants the project not to take a single risk . The scientists are led by Dr Wren (J.E. Freeman) and Dr Gediman (Brad Dourif) who are very enthusiastic about the potential of their task . They use frozen samples of Ripley 's blood in order to get the mixed human/alien D.N.A. and eventually clone Lt. Ripley (Sigourney Weaver) , resurrecting her and the alien fetus . The clone has not only the looks and physical shape of the deceased Ripley but unpredictably it has inherited all her memories and her psychological characteristics . There are also other side effects due to the genetic crossover and the clone shows some special features . The scientists isolate Ripley to study her later and focus on the Alien Queen which grows rapidly and incubates . In order to find some hosts for the face-huggers and the alien larvae , General Perez allies with a team of space smugglers led by Captain Elgyn (Michael Wincott) . They are black market merchandisers and in this case they supply Auriga with people they hijacked from other spaceships while they were on suspended animation . The unfortunate victims against their will are destined to be the first alien fodder . If you think the colonels are scumbags wait to hear where they get their financial sources : they cultivate vast quantities of cannabis ! This was an abandoned scene from the initial script and I thought it was best for you to know . Anyway , within a few days a bunch of aliens blossoms and everyone seems to be happy , but not for long .

Captain Elgyn lands on Auriga with his spaceship called `Betty' and they stay for a couple of days for refueling . Elgyn definitely is not aware of the classified project and just wants his fee . The rest of the Betty 's crew are Johner (Ron Perlman) a tough , foul mouthed and ugly sexist goon , Vriess (Dominique Pinon) a handicapped short man who is stuck in a wheel chair and is a mechanic with quite `long hands' , Hillard (Kim Flowers) an attractive woman who is Elgyn 's girlfriend and Christie (Gary Dourdan) a skilled and methodical shooter with rasta hair who is calm and seems to be the second in command . The recently added member is a short young girl named Call (Winona Ryder) who is a talented engineer and is the misfit of the group . Call has read the banned books written centuries ago by the convict Morse (another abandoned line) and is the only one who knows the legends about Ellen Ripley and the aliens . Ripley on the other hand is kind of a savage and autistic child in an uncomfortable environment . She hates the scientists for bringing her back to revive her worst nightmare . The inevitable occurs very soon as the aliens break loose and all hell with them too . The gory killings of the Auriga staff set everyone on alert . General Perez and the vessel 's central computer Father (he he) command the immediate evacuation of Auriga . Very soon all the remaining military members have left via the emergency exit vehicles , while the aliens have already formed a cocooned nest for their queen so she may reproduce more eggs . The space smugglers finally listen to Call 's warnings and head to the Betty . Unfortunately their spaceship is on the other side of Auriga . They form an uneasy alliance with Dr Wren and a soldier called Distephano (Raymond Cruz) who know the ship's design in order to get to the Betty fast and safely . They also take the cloned Ripley with them since her advanced knowledge on the species may be useful . The space shuttle is wrecked and under inner siege . Will their weapons help them survive ? See the movie and judge for yourselves .

Jean-Pierre Jeunet gives great imagery to the 4th and last chapter of this immortal sci-fi / horror series . Art direction and the magnificent photography deliver one of the most imaginative science fiction films of the decade despite the overused concept . The plot is rather predictable as we all have seen everything recycled in previous films (like the ending) . The visionary director provides us a beautiful film and the script gives us one of the most successful aspects of cloning in cinema generally . Jeunet and Joss Whedon who wrote the script gave their own approach on the series . The movie relies heavily on blood , gore and violence although it is sometimes depicted in a twisted , black humored , cartoonish manner . This the `funniest' in a dark way chapter of the saga and there are a few moments which tend to self-parody . It doesn't matter at all . The message of the script is the obvious catastrophic impact of the cloning experiments that are bound to happen in the next years . The aliens are now visible more than ever in the screen and they spend a lot of time gutting soldiers in the most vicious way (splatter fans will find their favorite element and glee) . We have seen the stereotypes `Man cannot tame nature' and `Greed is always punished' in numerous films but Alien Resurrection pulls it off with utter success . The sanguinary beasts dispatch the naive humans who foolishly thought they could control them , in the most revengeful way . Yes there are numerous films which have dealt with cloning but never this successfully . From the 7 mistakes preceding Ripley to the final `rebirth' the side effects are clear as crystal : messing with the genes can only generate trouble and atrocious monstrosities . The former scene is the most tragic one of the movie and will truly be the one Alien Resurrection will be remembered for . It sums up the poetic vision that Jeunet tried to give us and it is a chilling dramatic scene about what we might all experience in the (not so) distant future . Weaver 's character includes some surprises and twists and this really helps because a series needs evolution in order to survive . This is the most intriguing aspect of the Alien quartet . Each part was directed , written , photographed etc. by different people and each one gave his addition in the mythology like for example the biology of the creatures.

Alien Resurrection suffers from a great deal of problems which made the fans turn their back and despise it . Many of them thought that the film was way over the top and not terrorizing enough and lambasted Jeunet as improper for the job . As I already mentioned Alien Resurrection combines perfectly the dark shadows of a possible future with spoofing sequences and at the same moment grotesque images : the evacuation scene seems to be inspired by the respective one in Spaceballs ! Indeed some of the one - liners suck BADLY and almost turn the film to a typical Hollywood urban chauvinistic action flick `Who do I have to f*** to get off this spaceship ?' . Others are smashing and pull your leg nicely `Hey , Ripley , I heard you like , run into these things before' `Yeah !' `Wow man : so , what did you do ? ` ` I died !!' . The profanity here has hit the ceiling but I think that there is some background to it and let us not forget that the leads are criminals or rough military members . The greatest problem is the newly introduced characters . Ripley 's transformation and the ethical dilemmas she faces are nicely executed . Weaver gives a standout performance and she may be a bit more cynical but after the odyssey she has endured it is quite logical . After all , her new capabilities and enhanced power breath a touch of fresh air . It would be dull and repetitive if she was the same character . Winona Ryder is also very good as the mysterious Call . The two of them share good chemistry and accomplish the best acting of the film. J.E. Freeman is solid as Dr Wren too . Unfortunately the rest of the leads stink badly . I don 't care if it was intentional but Ron Perlman's character is thoroughly dislikeable and unbearable . Dominique Pinon is not especially amiable either . It also puzzles me why did they bother casting Dan Hedaya and Brad Dourif in virtually non existing roles . Just for the billing I guess . Both of them are literally wasted here and I am talking about less-than-cameo status . I have never heard of Michael Wincott and can 't see why he is so popular . His coarse voice makes him another repulsive character (probably he is the most chain-smoking person on earth) and he is also wasted . Characters worth caring for are Christie and Hillard . Kim Flowers is the only one who managed to insert humanity into her character , save Ms Ryder . Gary Dourdan has an underwritten role and too bad because he could have done much much more . Raymond Cruz is the extra / lead (thought it could never happen in a movie ?) playing the soldier who serves as the guider of the gang and I won 't omit Leland Orser as Purvis , one of the abducted by the smugglers hostages for the aliens harvesting . All the aforementioned characters had great potential but their screen time is little and are never fully developed .Too bad that the main characters are a**holes like Johner or Vriess whom you don 't give a damn for . The worst aspect of the movie is the ending . The baby alien is stupid but what comes as a great disappointment is his showdown with Ripley . OK the scene can be interpreted as hilarious or tragic at the same time but what happens is totally unrealistic (I am talking about laws of physics). The finale is totally rushed and feels a bad cop out . Rumors claim that it was reshot at the last minute (originally the movie ended on Earth) and it shows. Apparently they didn 't have the time to support it with some decent SFX . Another little nitpicking I would like to add is that the music score could have been better and at many parts it feels out of place .

Nevertheless I enjoy the film for many other reasons . The opening line is brilliant and it is quite obvious who Ripley refers to . Secondly , aside from Jeunet's inventive direction and the horrifying messages about cloning , the script finally answers a much debated subject . It is clear now that the aliens ARE intelligent creatures who know where to strike and can even outsmart humans . Another aborted line from the script stated that the aliens communicate with supersounds `just like bats' . The evacuation scene is also the most realistic one I have ever seen in a science fiction film , instead of waiting for the cast to be decimated and finally the 2 - 3 surviving leads go to the EEV , something they could have done right away . Here , when Father sets the distress mode , the soldiers INSTANTLY and without the slightest time waste abandon the vessel . The movie is actually plotless : the first hour is the introducing of the characters (although it is bare) and after the release of the aliens and the mass departure , the second hour is quite simply and frankly , the course of the leads to the Betty . No intermediate battle scenes just for dwindling of the cast . The SFX are for the most part believable , like the acidic blood , the alien agile moves or the super weapons that the smugglers have . Ripley's bilateral nature makes her and the movie far more interesting than a typical sequel . The acclaimed European director uses astonishing cinematography and brilliant sets to join forces with a genuinely American genre such as science fiction . The combination of Jeunet's psychedelic imagery and ordinary futuristic themes (a la Star Wars , Star Trek etc) is achieved quite balanced and we have an artistic approach to the series.

Alien Resurrection is certainly nowhere near as good as Aliens . It is quite good on its own merit and a decent 4th installment in the Alien universe . It is one of the best samples of sci-fi from the 90's and is bound to earn more recognition in the future . It was actually one of the most anticipated movies in history . Although some were disappointed , it is worth noting that everyone's favorite heroine lived again simply because an Alien film without Sigourney would have been a plain cash-in . The opening scenes with the cloning experiment is what everyone was eager for . This vertical glass tube with the reformed naked Ripley is already a distinct landmark . These sterilized labs with the subtle greenish lighting are uniquely conceived and the depiction is P-E-R-F-E-C-T . The entire film seems a nightmare transferred to the screen . Gross in some points with a wicked sense of irony and some parts that ignore common logic (like the cartoonish ricocheting of the bullets) . This is what Jeunet wanted and the execs did well hiring him . Alien Resurrection stands alone as a lyric vision of the fantastic intergalactic society that cinema tries to predict or warn us . It is not only for strict Alien fans but any casually interested movie fan should check this out . To put it in one word part 4 is one beautiful film . Witness the resurrection !

ALIEN RESURRECTION 8 / 10

The Long Kiss Goodnight (1996)

Very entertaining

[9/10 · 11 November 2003]

When I first saw the `Long Kiss Goodnight' I found it passable . Despite an intriguing premise and some good scenes , the movie was lowered down by an overdose of profanity and suffered from an unbelievably over the top ludicrous finale in which the leads are shot repeatedly without dying (Halloween 's Michael Myers would envy them) and a stream of improbable cartoonish action scenes that made Starship Troopers seem like a serious and realistic documentary !!! This film was way too campy to like it . It may have had a good start but the final 20 minutes just killed it . Oh well it was a fun ride I guess for its most part and it was nice seeing Geena Davis achieving a great performance . Repeated viewings improved my opinion about the movie . Not much , but sensibly . Although the finale is still unbearable the whole plot is much more comprehensible and a few of my questions were answered .

Let's start with a plot outline . The basic concept alone is very fascinating . Samantha Caine (Geena Davis) is a young teacher who lives in a quiet little town . She suffers from amnesia and the only thing she remembers is the last 8 years of her life . There are no tracks of any other family , husband , employment or any hint of her past for that matter . When she woke up in a hospital 8 years ago she was pregnant but of course the child 's father is unknown to this date . The detectives she hired over the years couldn 't find anything . Samantha seems to have settled down with her new adapted life . She is an active member of the PTA , she has friends, she is a good cook and bakes cookies , her 7 year old daughter Caitlin (Yvonne Zima) is a cute and obedient child and for the last couple of years Samantha is seeing a calm ordinary little guy called Hal (Tom Amandes) . Hal and she are getting along and it seems that wedding bells will ring soon enough . Until one day when Samantha shows some strange features of behaviour as if she has a split personality . Samantha has visions of a blond woman named Charlie who speaks to her in her dreams , summoning her to `join' her . You have already seen the props or probably know the story , so I don 't think that I will give away anything by saying that Charlene `Charlie' Baltimor is Samantha 's real name and she had an entirely different identity pre-amnesia . Charlie was a blond bitch , a rough tough mean killing machine . She was a trained professional assassin working for the government . After she had amnesia she was presumed dead and not even the powers that be knew she was alive . Unbeknownst to her , there are people who still want super agent Charlie (Samantha) dead . The first is an ugly bald convict called Jack and the other one is a young but ruthless criminal called Timothy (Craig Bierko) . Soon they track down Samantha and a killing expedition begins . Samantha's latest detective was Mitch Henessey (Samuel Jackson) a cheap loser who stages fake adultery incidents to make a living out of blackmails since his business has soared out . Much to his good luck however , he finds some clues about his amnesiac client which seem to point to a former fiancé Charlie once had . So Samantha and Mitch take a journey to find clues about Charlie 's past while a small army of bounty hunters is behind them . Meanwhile , Samantha 's alter ego emerges slowly but steadily .

There are a couple of twists which make the movie interesting . The idea behind the script is very good and I believe the handling made by the writers and the director was competent . The progressing personality change and the flashbacks are nice and give a few hints of a psychological thriller as well as some biting `funny' scenes like the `professional chef' vegetables chopping or the scene where Charlie dispatches her torturer . I believe however that 75 % of the success of not only Samantha's depiction but the whole movie as well , is accomplished by Geena Davis . She gives a splendid performance pushing both of her character 's aspects to the edge . As Samantha , Davis performs her best Shelley Long impersonation . The sweet , ideal muffin-baking housewife who is born to run a house and raise kids . Charlie is the agile , shrewd , chain-smoking , gun toting female Rambo . Davis is more than adequate as both characters . Samuel Jackson is very amusing as the detective who gets caught in a situation he can't handle , with powerful criminals popping out of nowhere wanting to kill them and at the same time watching a clean suburban housewife being transformed to a fatal blonde agent . He spouts way too many vulgarities but nonetheless some laughs are inevitable . Something else that saves the movie from being another forgettable shootemup are the cameos . First we have Brian Cox playing excellently an old agent who wants to help Samantha dig up her true identity . He is the reliable mentor and although he is old he still seems capable of getting the hang of weapons . Now , what can I say about David Morse as Luke , Charlie 's old fiancé ? Words fail to describe him . The man is just COOL !!! He appears shortly but his contribution to the movie is huge . The rest of the cast is passable like Samantha 's daughter , Charlie 's former boss or Hal who has a short role as the boyfriend . Craig Bierko as the main villain Timothy acts very well too . He is quite realistic as a hitman/terrorist who simply wants to complete the mission and behaves as an `ordinary' killer , with no psychotic laughs or morphasms . Despite his young looks he is quite threatening . Harlin also directed some unforgettable action scenes like the one you have all seen in the trailers : Davis firing on the icy surface of a lake while jumping off a window . There is also a memorable scene with a takeover of a Phone Station and others . I would also like to state that one viewing is not enough and you may lose some details . For example I didn't notice what was the fate of the deer at the beginning and I certainly didn't remember some hints on Mitch 's past .

The movie has some problems . There are some very corny one-liners and too much swearing at times . There are also some plot holes . People tend to be extremely cruel to the scriptwriters of Halloween H20 about where did Jamie Lee Curtis find the time to raise a 17 year old son , be a member of AA , attend psychiatrists AND be the headmistress of a private boarding school but how on earth did Samantha become a TEACHER (and raise her daughter) while she didn 't remember her past , seems to have escaped you . At least Laurie Strode did go to college . Secondly it is obvious that the conspiracy described in the script was huge . They would never EVER take the chances of being exposed therefore Mitch 's family would have been murdered at a glimpse (and Samantha's beloved ones as well) . But what really gives on my nerves is the unspeakable ending . Be warned that there are SPOILERS TO FOLLOW ******* After Davis blows up the building , Mitch not only is blown up in an impossibly cartoonish manner but he hits badly on a tree and eventually he lands on earth , UNTIED and without ANY injuries !!!!! That 's not the worst though . Later Davis drives the track full of explosives through a brick wall . Maybe , just maybe we can accept the fact that the explosives couldn 't be detonated until the countdown concluded but after this nasty accident Davis and the girl also don 't have the slightest injury . Lastly a shootout battle follows and Davis survives despite the bullets she gets and the bleeding . WHAT THE HELL ???? ******END SPOILERS . I still cannot digest the final 15 minutes (except of course for the nice showdown between Timothy and Samantha ) . If I had the power I would have reshot the whole denouement . I know that it cannot be done but at least an editor could have hacked the crappy stuff and left us with less bang-bang which would have at least make the survival of Charlie convincing. I am really not a nitpicker . I can always accept a campy scene . All of us regard Batman (1989) as a classic , although the Batwing being gunned down with just one shot by the Joker is laughable . Goldeneye (1995) with Pierce Brosnan is also a solid action film even if it contains a corny action scene in the prologue (you know what I mean) . But in here there are improbabilities which just PILE UP and almost ruin the whole thing.

The Long Kiss Goodnight is a good action film with an engaging premise , some funny gags , satisfactory (for the most part) direction and some brilliant performances. The last 15 minutes spoil the whole thing though so I cannot consider it a classic . If however you want a blockbuster for a fun Saturday evening then rent it . There is some healthy entertainment in this Renny Harlin action fest .

THE LONG KISS GOODNIGHT 8 / 10

Bedazzled (2000)

Entertaining comedy (and a decent remake)

[8/10 · 15 July 2003]

First of all I am a great fan of the original British version . This Hollywood modern remake is an enjoyable comedy with quite a few laughs . Without any reasonable doubt `Bedazzled' (2000) is inferior than the Dudley Moore film but this doesn't mean it should be left unnoticed. I am sure that most of the fans of the original will hate it and here's the reasons why . A) The remake has an entirely straightforward plot which focuses exclusively on the wishes the leading character makes . The 60's version included some great philosophical and existential insights , like when Moore moodily wondered `Why can't we choose our parents?' . It also contained some great satirical touches concerning the perennial battle between God and the Devil (like when Peter Cook recited the reasons which made him turn against God and ending up a fallen angel) . All these elements are absent here and the film suffers , but fortunately not severely . B) An abrupt ending . As aforementioned the plot rotates only around the wishes and as soon as the wishes end , so does the story . The 60's film had more story going on for it . There were specific reasons concerning the importance of Moore's soul for the Devil and why he was so special . We even got to see Heaven and hear God's voice !! The film lacks these things and just stops . Well I guess for the uninitiated the film will be more fun . As for me , I enjoyed the 2000 version despite these flaws . It is a professionally made comedy by the talented Harold Ramis and I believe it is slightly better than `Groundhog Day' (1993) where the script ran out of steam after the second half and the film just dragged on . Bedazzled (2000) is not boring for a single second and can be enjoyed immensely.

PLOT SYNOPSIS : The film opens with some scenes reminiscent of `The Mask' with Jim Carrey . Elliot Richards (Brendan Fraser) is a lonely guy who works in a big company . His colleagues deliberately ignore him or even avoid him in their social gatherings . Elliot is cute with a robust body and quite educated , but he belongs in the sad category of social misfits . As much as he tries , he can't make new friends . Every night he ends up in his small apartment , microwaves a `fast' dinner and watches TV until he falls to sleep . He is secretly in love with Alison (Frances O' Connor) a beautiful girl who works in the same company with him , but hardly knows he exists . After subsequent rejections Elliot is disappointed very much . Shortly thereafter he meets an ultra-gorgeous fascinating woman with a mysterious British accent who claims to be the Devil HERSELF (played by none other by Elizabeth Hurley) . The Devil offers Elliot a pact to make his life happier . She offers him a huge pile of paperwork , calling it a `contract' (which of course no one is going to bother to read) . The Devil tempts and eventually convinces Elliot to sign and sell his soul . The grant is 7 wishes where Elliot can literally have anything he wants . Of course as it always happens in movies with genies , things don't go exactly as planned . It is universally known that a deal with the Devil never pays off . Elliot 's wishes always turn sour and he has no other option but to return to the mundane reality . The Devil only wants his soul and always finds tricks to make the wishes go awry .



This is the story of the film and despite the weakness of the script , the movie has two things going on for it . Firstly the performance of Brendan Fraser shows his great acting skills and his enormous comical talents . Fraser pulls off one successful metamorphosis after another , to the point he is barely recognizable ! Aside that , Fraser succeeds in the dramatic aspects of the character . Despite his height and broad shoulders which make him appear like a goon , he achieves being a likeable `everyday' guy with nice behavior whom you root for (something he succeeded in `School Ties' as well) . Elizabeth Hurley is also great in her role . She is a drop-dead charming , irresistibly beautiful woman . She is HOT ! (he he he). Hurley is convincing as a modern siren , the incarnation of a dangerous temptation whom you should never trust . Simultaneously she is likeable enough herself : she really can't harm you if you have strong will . The second asset of the film are the wishes . Most of them are well executed and offer some great laughs . The make-up is PERFECT and Fraser changes persona with great agility . Not since the `Nutty Professor' with Eddie Murphy have I seen so exceptional work in the styling department . My favorite wish was the first one , where Elliot becomes a Latin millionaire . Of course the wishes wouldn't be complete without the great talent of Fraser who unambiguously is a gifted actor and changes voices and looks utterly convincingly , like when he speaks Spanish . Now there is the little worm of doubt which bugs me and tells me that the dialogue could have been voiced-over , but even in this case I will have to give my deepest congratulations to the director and the editors for some perfect work of dubbing .





It is a great flaw that after the wishes the film ends up with a patchy cop-out and with a clichéd way . I was expecting more plot or at least more characterization on Elliot . I also found pointless the cameo of God (or was it an angel?) in the middle of the film and it should be explored more . Well , I guess we shouldn't be expecting much . `Bedazzled' (2000) is not innovative and will not be a classic . It is however an entertaining film and I recommend it for a boring evening with the video . If you want a good comedy with a decent script , some great laughs , good performances , some remarkable SFX and a few satirical hints (the homework that the Devil gives to the students is the proof of `Fermat 's Last Theorem' , a very difficult mathematical problem which puzzled people for centuries and there are legends about mathematicians in the Middle Ages wanting to sell their souls to the Devil to solve it) then do not hesitate and see it . Although far from groundbreaking (this honor should go to the 60's film) `Bedazzled' (2000) is one of the best comedies from the 90 's.

BEDAZZLED (2000) 8 / 10

X-Men (2000)

Way too overhyped but OK film

[22 May 2003]

Directed by Brian Singer Written by David Hayter , Tom DeSanto and Bryan Singer

Starring Hugh Jackman , Patrick Stewart , Anna Paquin , Ian McKellen and Famke Janssen

Before I begin I should say that I am quite unrelated with the X-men universe . I have never read comics and the only character I knew apart from the celebrated worldwide Wolverine , was Cyclops . I can understand that the film by Brian Singer followed accurately the story and the origin of the characters so the fans liked the movie . Unfortunately the film hasn't got much to offer to the rest of the sci-fi and comics - transferred - to - celluloid aficionados . The 7.3 (!!!) rating is too much and I don't care about how much some X-men fans will protest , but comparing X-men to classics like Superman or Batman is an insult . I have already written in my Mortal Kombat Annihilation review (read it if you like) that it is strictly for well knowing fans of the video game and the rest are advised to keep away because most probably they will be lost . X-men 's fatal flaw is the same : too many characters in one short movie . But where at least MK:A had wonderful fight scenes and some decent SFX , X-Men fails miserably not only action-wise but the character development is also a letdown . Now , I would like to think that the deleted scenes which are included in the DVD will improve the unfinished elements but only time will tell . For now , the official cut is disappointing . Don't believe the hype : X-Men is an OK film but really nothing special . The critics for once again are proven to be wrong . There is actually nothing that differentiates the film from other ones . The comments about `adult' themes and `futuristic' imagery make me want to laugh . Batman (1989) had much more adult atmosphere and movies like `Dark City' or even `Demolition Man' deal much better with social and political issues than this latest cinematic adaptation of the famous characters . X-Men cannot hide its comics origins and it is not as dark as the official critics alleged . It DEFINITELY doesn't reach an intellectual level .

PLOT SYNOPSIS : The not so distant future . In the USA there is a great number of mutants . Although it is never explained how the mutations occurred , it is probably due to perturbations of D.N.A. The mutants have some amazing super-powers which have caused people to be afraid of them . The mutants cannot live ordinary lives and try to hide their secret because they now that a disclosure will ostracize them from society for good . As if this wasn't enough , a Senator called Robert Kelly (Bruce Davison) has started a campaign against mutants and wants to confine them so their super-powers will not be a threaten to society . Unbeknownst to his plans , there is a powerful mutant who is also a wise scientist , Professor Charles Xavier (Patrick Stewart) with enhanced telekinetic and telepathic abilities (ironically he is stuck in a wheelchair) . Professor Xavier (a.k.a. Professor X) has founded an occluded academy for mutant children . He teaches them how to use the powers they have and learn how to control them . He is an idealist and believes that some day the mutants will be incorporated as a healthy tissue of the society along `normal' humans . There is also another equally powerful mutant scientist Eric Lensherr (a.k.a. Magneto) with the ability to manipulate metal objects within a remarkable range and scale with exceptional timing and synchrony . Magneto (Ian McKellen) believes that a war is coming and he wants to exterminate humans before they get the chance to strike first . Professor X and Magneto were old friends but now their philosophies are bound to clash . Professor X's key assistants in the academy are Scott Summers (James Marsden) alias Cyclops whose eyes emit deadly energy blasts , Orore Munroe (Halle Berry) alias Storm with the ability to control thunders and air and Dr Jean Grey (Famke Janssen) a skilled scientist with limited telekinetic and telepathetic powers . The basic star of the film is actually Wolverine (a brilliant Hugh Jackman) a mysterious man with amnesia who has the power to heal himself rapidly from serious injuries. He meets with a mutant girl called Mari D' Ancanto (Anna Paquin) alias Rogue who has an energy-draining ability and her touch can be deadly . When the two of them are attacked by Magneto 's henchmen they are rescued by Cyclops and Storm and are taken in the Academy for security . Rogue is adjusted easily and makes new friends but Wolverine doesn't want to stay despite Professor X's warnings that Magneto is after him . Predictably more fights among the X-Men and Magneto 's gang will ensue .

This is the so-called `plot' of the movie . The first half hour before we enter the Academy is extremely weak and boring . If you are not familiar with X-Men you will not understand much . Towards the end there is a `master plan' by Magneto but it is a desperate and futile attempt to create a plot where there isn't there any . So what happens in between ? First of all Magneto is not evil and his henchmen are ugly and repelling freaks with lousy make-up . Mystique 's blue body is cheaply made and disgusting . The villains are not interesting . On the X-Men side things are not better . Storm (a woefully underdeveloped Halle Berry) and Cyclops hardly ever use their powers . Even worse they are decorative . The entire movie looks cheap. I don 't care how much money it cost but it looks cheap . Most of the SFX are nothing special and I was expecting better from a 2000 new-tech film . I have seen better SFX from older movies (Superman) or TV shows . Mystique 's shape-shifting , Cyclops 's red rays or even Magneto 's white light-emitting device are cheap and could be included in a 1970 's B-movie . What I liked was Storm 's abilities to fly and control the weather but as I already said she hardly uses them . Most of the fight scenes are also disappointing . As for character development forget it . Patrick Stewart was an ideal choice for the role but even he is not given much to do except from reciting his history to Wolverine . The interesting characters are Dr Jean Grey and Rogue. Famke Janssen and Anna Paquin try valiantly but suffer from a shallow script . There are also cameos from Pyro (a young man with pyrokinetic abilities) , the well known Iceman and Kitty Pride , a girl who can pass through walls with momentary dematerialization , who are all students at the Academy . I guess we will have to wait for the next film to see their characters stretched out . Professor X , Storm , Cyclops , Dr Jean Grey and Rogue have great potential and worth more screen time . This is another great problem of the film apart from the cheap SFX : the leads are never given origin or motives . They simply are there and act mechanistically . X-Men is clearly an introductory film and it leaves you wanting for more . As for the messages about racism and the obvious parallelism to Mac Carthy's politics ? Cute and welcomed but haven't we really seen it all over again in other films ? So this is not an innovation .

There is one thing I liked and of course this is Hugh Jackman as Wolverine . The man was born for to play this role . Wolverine is the lead of the movie . His claws is the most convincing SFX and he is the most developed character . In the future we will probably dig up more information about his past and how he obtained his powers . Hugh Jackman gives a great performance and survives the script 's flaws . On the acting side Famke Janssen , Anna Paquin and the ever reliable Patrick Stewart give solid appearances despite the one-dimensional roles . Has this film any other virtues ? Quite a few I am afraid . The academy 's scenery is quite psychedelic and who can forget the scene with Wolverine walking through the corridor with the mirrors . Some of the costumes are also nice . Jackman and Paquin share an interesting quasi-erotic chemistry . I also liked Bruce Davison as the Congressman and I believe he should be used more . And no matter how cheaply directed and unoriginal , the final showdown between X-Men and Magneto 's mutants succeeds in being memorable.

In conclusion X-Men is not a great movie . Brian Singer is definitely an overrated director (Usual Suspects was also OK but nothing great) but I have sincere hopes that the sequel will be better . If however you are sucker for comics - movies (like I am) see it . It is not Batman but it is not Howard the Duck either .

X - MEN 7 / 10

P.S In case you wonder about the corny line ` Do you know what happens to a toad when it is hit by a thunder ? ....... What happens to everything else' . This wasn't in the script . The rational explanation comes from the original version . The plausible answer is ` It croaks'.

Scream 3 (2000)

Decent epilogue to the trilogy

[8/10 · 21 April 2003]

I really cannot understand all these negative comments . Not only Scream 3 is quite good but it is the most decent finale that could ever be made for the Scream history . Why is it that you must always rush in to agree with the official critics and lambast the movies they want to bury ? What is so wrong with Battlefield Earth (IMDb rating 2.3) ? It is a decent enjoyable sci-fi movie . Yeah it is campy . So was the 5th Element (rating 7.0) . I like them both equally . What was so wrong about Batman and Robin despite the dumb one-liners ? Nothing not only the cast was wisely chosen but the action scenes were wonderfully chosen , sets , costume and make up were magnificent and save the Batgirl character , the origin of the others was kept intact . And don't even get me started about the butchering of the wonderful Speed II (rating 3.3 !!!!) . For God 's sake it is a big budget action rollercoaster with good SFX . OK OK , Dafoe and Patrick are more lackluster than their predecessors and the finale was over the top . Well so were all the action scenes in True Lies or even the Matrix !!!! Why must you always follow the dictates of the official critics . Why the praise should go to awful overrated films like Mission Impossible or Sixth Sense (rating 8.3 ?!?!?! COME OOOOON !) . Enough with the manifest . If you agree with me even partially then read this review . Scream 3 is an underrated film . It has some flaws but some of the critics were right . It is better than Scream 2 although not better than the original . This was to be anticipated . They had 3 years to plan it while Scream 2 was rushed into production shortly after the release of the original and was released less than one year later. The result was a carbon copy of Scream (albeit enjoyable one) . Did you know that in the original script of Williamson , the killer was Derek ? This time they had more time for process . I believe it was for the benefit of the film that the script was written by someone else , based on a format by Williamson . This gave the chance for our characters to evolve . Keep in mind that when I watched Scream 3 I already knew : 1) The identity of the killer 2) The motives of the killer 3) What happens in the opening sequence 4) The special trick the killer uses this time (I don 't want to give it away) 5) Jamie Kennedy 's post mortem appearance 6) The visions with Maureen Prescott 7) Who lives and who dies by the end . Still the movie surprised me , kept me hooked and satisfied me . That alone says enough .

OK PLOT SYNOPSIS TIME : It has been several years after the events of Scream 2 . Do not be fooled by the quote `I met Maureen Prescott 4 years ago' . If this was accurate then the time lapse between Scream 2 and 3 would be only 1 year . Sidney wouldn 't even have the time to graduate from college . `Stab 2' has already been released but the acceptance was mediocre. The basic cast was reluctant to return for yet another sequel but the producers went on to make a `Stab 3' , a semi-fictional movie based on the real living characters set in Woodsboro , in order to answer some questions about what eventually happened in the tragic bloodbath of 1996 . Meanwhile lets see what happened to the survivors . Sidney (Neve Campbell) has graduated from Windsor . She and her father live somewhere in the boonies . Sidney is convinced that she is still in jeopardy , so she has disappeared from the face of the earth . She works as `Laura' , a social advisor of a radio station , taking phone lines in her home and answers to people with various problems (abusing boyfriends etc) . She is tortured by visions of her deceased mother and believes the nightmare will never be over . There may be someone who still wants to kill her . Much like Laurie Strode in H20 her phobias will proven soon to be true . Gail Weathers (Courteney Cox) has changed the name of her show and still struggles to take the Pulitzer Prize. Cotton Weary (Liev Schreiber) has now his own talk show dealing again with social issues . His fame gave him success , celebrity , star power and he has a beautiful girlfriend Christine (Kelly Rutherford) . Dewey Riley (David Arquette) now works at the set of Stab 3 , as a technical advisor since he lived the experience himself . He has an affair with Jennifer Jolie (Parker Posey) , the actress who has played Gail Weathers in all 3 films . During the shooting of Stab 3 a new chain of murders occurs . The Ghostface killer strikes again and he kills the actors of Stab 3 , in precisely the same order their characters die in the script . Gail for once more arrives at the crime scene and teams up with Dewey in order to find the killer . The investigator of the case detectice Kinkaid , played by Patrick Dempsey is convinced that Sidney is the key to the solution and wants her to get out of her hide . The killer leaves pictures of Maureen after every killing and has obviously an unspecified link with the first carnage in Woodsboro . It is difficult however to find who will be the next to die , since the producers have come up with 3 different versions of the script in order to keep the plot from leaking to the Internet (something which happened in real life with Scream 2 and Scream 3 : another self referential irony by the writers). After the murders the producer John Milton (Lance Henricksen) has no other option but to cancel the filming , at least temporarily , while the police has sealed the set as a crime scene . The young and ambitious director Roman (Scott Foley) is losing his mind since this is the final strike in his newborn career . Predictably more murders will take place and the leads will try to save their lives as well as trying to shed some light in Maureen 's secret past .

Well the secondary characters serve no other purpose but to be killed . The only one which stands up from the crew is Parker Posey . Her disputes with Cox about who is the better Gail Weathers are hilarious and deliver some super bitchiness to the screen . Posey gives a great appearance. Unfortunately the rest are underdeveloped or even annoying (like the actress who plays `Sidney' in Stab 3) . This is a great minus . Fortunately , the writer Ehren Krueger makes up for some of the predictability of the script (especially in the final scenes) with some ironic lines 'Don't worry , we 're going to stick together' `Don't split up in this huge mansion' `Black characters never survive horror movies' . These people , as well as we the viewers , truly believe that these things happen only in horror films and we are not in danger . A classic example is the fax scene where a panicked character does the stupidest thing he could , due to his fear . Secondly there are a few plot holes : Most of the leads had cellular phones , why didn't they call the police ? Moreover , since the set is sealed and when a deranged killer is on the loose why do the actors of Stab 3 keep hanging around there , since they know they are in great jeopardy as the next targeted victims ? Did they want to `pick up their stuff' ? Sad excuse !!! I would also like to point out a factual error : the killer is shot REPEATEDLY and survives due to a bullet-proof vest he wears (don't consider this a spoiler : it will make you understand better what happened) . The truth is that this kind of collar can take just a few bullets but it is NOT A PANACEA and it is possible you will be injured and even with serious marks. Most probably if you take a bullet even with a vest you lose your conscience let alone six or seven bullets . I guess this is an ultra enforced and enhanced model hah ? It doesn't matter anyway . I can always accept a couple of plot holes . An important error by the writer is the déjà vu experience Sidney has in her `house' . I understand the point was a reliving of the fear but did we really have to endure a carbon copy of the original ? You should have at least shortened it Mr Craven . The visions with Maureen should be directed better with more haunting atmosphere.

These were the only faults I can give the film . All the other points are positive . Krueger did a wonderful job with our familiar characters . They have aged , but they have aged well and are not at all tired . Their chemistry is better than ever . I never liked Dewey but I rooted for him here . Arquette fortunately abandoned his `Doofus' mannerisms and retarded way of speaking . He is reliable and works as a serious protector . He and Cox give wonderful performances and their interaction is great . Campbell is now a grown woman and not a frightened student . She decides to come in terms with her fate and finally becomes an active character (again a similarity with H20 : no more pathetic screaming victims who run) . The screen time between the 3 leads is equal and this helps the movie not to be boring . All of them search for clues and keep the suspense. Parker Posey is also very good as Jennifer and Patrick Dempsey does fine in a non-geeky role . I am a great fan of Lance Henricksen and Liev Schreiber and they do not disappoint here as well . They shine in their small but effective roles . Kelly Rutherford is also welcomed here . Jamie Kennedy returns shortly as Randy and is cute but the best cameo is by Carrie Fischer in a surprise appearance . Despite the predictable victims the murder sequences are still effective and offer some surprises . The only problem is that Ghost-face is as not as scary as he was . Even Roger Jackson 's sinister telephone Voice isn't as menacing as it used to be . This was to be expected : after 2 movies Craven realized that the audience cannot be scared anymore . Therefore he did his best to make up . The psychological horror backsteps here but the interest is kept through the action scenes . This is the most action-packed of the Scream movies (and a horror movie generally speaking) . There are not only the routine chase scenes . The victims fight valiantly and there is a lot of bang-bang as well . From the opening sequence to the final hero-versus-villain showdown there are enough physical fights to keep you hooked . Craven is in top form and I don't give a damn about idiot libels .

I once said that Scream didn't need continuation chapters (read my comments on the first two movies if you 'd like) . I have changed my mind now . The revelations about Maureen and the re-attachment to the events of the first Scream make the movie worthwhile . The characters have matured and the film gives them and the story a perfect sense of closure . Ironically Arquette and Cox followed their characters' storylines ever since they met on the set of Scream . Life imitating art ? If you are a Scream completist do not hesitate for a second . Rent the final act and see the saga conclude (like the Star Wars trilogy) . Scream 3 is an enjoyable action / horror film which FINALLY does justice to its origins and will satisfy even the ones who were disappointed with the second part . I would also like to see some day a `Director 's Cut' with the rumoured 2 alternative endings. As it is , which is the final grade of the film ?

8 / 10

Liar Liar (1997)

Hilarious ! (and one of Carrey 's best)

[8/10 · 20 February 2003]

I am not a HUGE fan of Carrey . He did quite well in "the Mask" but I am really not a sucker for dum comedies with rubber-faced comedians (like Dumb and Dumber) . I also believed he was mediocre as the Riddler in Batman Forever and his stupid grimaces hurt quite a bit the "Truman Show" . This overacting was uncalled in Peter Weir 's film but what do we have here ? A solidly written comedy which really fits Carrey and gives him the chance to exploit his comedic talents but without being annoying . The result is (for the most part) amusing .

OK lets recap the plot . Fletcher Reede (Carrey) is a successful lawyer who lies not only in courthouse but to everyone he knows including his colleaques and boss who he simply uses as a ladder for his career , his secretary whom he doesn 't give a raise , even his 5 year old son Max . Fletcher is divorced and Max lives with his mother Audrey (Maura Tierney) . Audrey divorced him because he didn 't invest much of his time to her but the problem still remains the same for Max . Fletcher is an absorbed workaholic and never finds time for his son (not even quality time that is). He keeps going back on his promises about picking up Max from school , playing baseball with Max etc , etc (If you have seen Hook with Robin Williams you already get the idea) . Audrey is fed up with Fletcher and has decided to move to Boston . Apparently Max will see his dad as frequently as now so she doesn 't have hesitations . Laura wants to start a new life with her new boyfriend Jerry . Jerry is a very ordinary calm little guy and although they are not officially engaged , they seem to be moving on tying the knot . At Max 's 5th birthday , Fletcher once again breaks his word and doesn 't arrive at the party . Max is so disappointed that the wish he makes blowing the candles on his cake is " I wish that for 1 day my dad wouldn 't tell lies " . The wish actually works and Fletcher is unable to spout (or even write!) even the simplest lie for the unbearable time course of 24 whole hours !!! The side effects are evident from the first moment since he reluctantly tells the truth to every question (and as the movie progresses we learn about other side effects due to this weird curse) . This is nearly the beginning for Fletcher 's torture since the truths embarrass him in front of the courtroom , his colleaques , his mother , his secretary and the police officer who checks his unpaid parking tickets !!!

The premise was intriguing and Carrey is given free reign to spout the unpleasant truths in the most tragically funny way !! Carrey is superb in most of scenes like when he talks on the phone but he fails in others . One example is the scene with the pen which was badly staged . I would also like to complain about the scene where he beats his self up in the bathroom . It is totally unnecessary and at the worst case they should have at least shortened it . I especially liked the fact that the movie goes straight into action because the introductory scenes cover the first 10 or so minutes . Most of the consequences of Max 's wish are hilariously entertaining . The film is also short in order not to drag and be boring . Although it is inevitable that most of the viewers will simply focus on the gags and Carrey 's morphasms the writers pulled off some enjoyable messages . The satire on the profession of the lawyers is apparent . The usage and the benefit of lying in the "adult world" are also pointed out . As the plot unfolds we see Carrey actually redeeming his relationship with his fellow lawyers and his family even he was forced to outmouth bold and vulgar truths . For a family comedy Liar Liar actually contains a sensible amount of profanity although IMO it was used properly and rightfully " I am gonna take it up to my tail pipe " . If you have small children think twice before you let them see the film.

Acting wise the team has done extremely well . This is not simply Carrey 's one man show - if it was it would fail . All the supporting characters chip in with their performances . Justin Cooper as Max plays convincingly the 5 year old character . Laura Tierney as Audrey is solid too . The show seems to be stolen by Jason Bernard as the strict Judge . He acts very well and is the nemesis of Carrey since if Fletcher embarrasses himself in court , the Judge 's wrath will be hard on him . Anne Haney is also a sensible supporting cast member as Greta , Fletcher 's secretary . She basically copycats her own role in "Mrs Doudtfire" (she was the social worker) but nevertheless with splendid results . She has more screen time and her constrained behavior is a hilarious opponent over Carrey 's fast and furious attitude . The rest of the cast is passable . Cary Elwes is literally unrecogniseable as Jerry , Audrey 's wannabe new husband . He appears briefly but is quite convincing in a very unusual for his standards buffoonish character .

Liar , Liar is one of the most entertaining comedies of the 90 's . It is worth seeing even by non Carrey fans . For a fun evening with many laughs I recommend renting it.

LIAR , LIAR 8 / 10

Death Becomes Her (1992)

Classic in its own way

[16 July 2002]

This black comedy by the "wizard" creator of "Who framed Roger Rabbit" and the "Back to the future" films may not be a great movie but is certainly a very memorable and entertaining one . Although it doesn 't reach the brilliance of "She-devil" (1989) with Roseanne Barr it sure is a well crafted , professionally made film which undoubtly remains as a landmark of the careers of all the actors and the director .

Helen Sharp (Goldie Hawn) is a timid book author who is engaged to a famous plastic surgeon Ernest Menville (Bruce Willis) . Her "friend" Madeline Aston (Meryl Streep) is a famous actress . Helen and Madeline have obviously a bitter antagonism which stems from irreconcilable issues from the past . Their rivalry culminates when Madeline steals Ernest and the two of them tie the knot . Helen is left devastated and vows revenge . Many years later Helen comes back to their lives refreshed and sexy more than ever . Madeline is essentially a has-been washed up actress obsessed with beauty and youth . She meets a mysterious woman called Lisle Von Rhoman (Isabella Rossellini) . Lisle sells her a potion which can give her eternal youth and life . And so the chaos ensues .

This basic premise had a lot of potential but unfortunately the writers didn 't haldle it very well . As a result the plot falls flat in the second hour . (just look at how pointless and unnecessary this climactic action sequence with the dogs chasing Bruce Willis is . An uncalled for chase scene leading to a quite disappointing epilogue which could have stood on its own) . I would also like to point out that the much hyped SFX are actually quite fake . I was never convinced by the cheap digital addition of Helen 's hole in the stomach or by Madeline 's head turning 180 degrees backwards .

Fortunately the good points make up for the flaws . I will have to warn you however that in order to appreciate the film 's merits , one viewing is not enough since the first glance always focuses on the plot development which as I have aforementioned is quite thin . (the hardcore fans of Batman Returns will know what I mean) . A second viewing would be plausible to see how many social subjects this movie deals with :(even if it does it in a comical way which leaves them unnoticed) The feminine perennial insecurity about beauty and their obsession with retaining the youth with make up , face lifts , plastic surgery etc , etc : the side effects are evident ; just look at the last frame . Losing a loved one and abandonment , a person 's misery , and the continuing stream of bad luck . Goldie Hawn is truly heartbreaking when she asks Ernest "not to fail the Madeline Aston test" once again because she "won 't stand it if it happens once more" . Her sad look upon on her eyes when Madeline and Ernest get married is enough to choke you up . The psychological pauperization because of reoccurring bad memories coming from certain person(s) is a chilling aspect of human pain even if it is depicted amusingly in a small scene : when Helen says in the group therapy she 'd like to talk about ... Madeline Aston !!! The personal tragedy is shattering. But the main theme here seems to be nothing more than erotic rivalry , right ? WRONG ! The battle for Ernest 's heart is only the pretext . The 2 heroines had timeworn differences stemming from woman 's everlasting competition . It kind of surprises me that the script was written by two men because they succeeded in capturing and depicting the known aspect " When a woman tries to be beautiful , her purpose is not for male attention and lust but simply to make other women , namely her friends , to eat their hearts out " . The emotions of hate , jealousy , envy are portrayed excellently from the two heroines .

Of course the existential-philosophical issues the film gets down to are also vociferous . This may be considered a spoiler but all I can say that Bruce Willis 's lines when he refuses to drink the potion may sound a bit cliched but are perfect and pose the questions right . There are many great scenes which remain classic in the black comedy and are marvelous samples of great acting and direction . Examples include : Madeline and Ernest 's domestic quarrel at the top of the stairs (failed marriage / lack of self-esteem here as well) : "You 'll put up with everything I have to give you !" . Helen seducing Ernest in his house " Sexual ... sensual .... sexy ... sex ... sex , sex !" . Helen reciting her plan to kill Madeline (the two latter scenes are escorted with an eerie music which gives the right feeling). Helen and Madeline 's climactic shovel-fighting while exchanging various names and comments . To the credit of the director and the crew all these scenes along with the sequences in the hospital or in the pool or in Lisle 's mansion are lavishly shot . Kudos in the director of cinematography and the set designers for their flawless job giving us atmospheric and classic scenes .

On the acting side : Goldie Hawn is deliciously sexy in her red dress and hair , or in black leather . Bruce Willis pulled off a very successful metamorphosis from his typecasting days in action films . He gives a weak person trapped in his lack of will very well . Both of them are very good but the show seems to be stolen by Meryl Streep who is perfect as the hysterical obsessed with the mirror actress . Of course who can forget Isabella Rossellini as Lisle . She may appear in only two scenes but she is one of the most powerful , successful and memorable supporting roles in film history (like Brad Pitt in Thelma and Louise) . Her two scenes are pure magic with her mysterious , spellbinding lines and way of talking .

The whole package is completed with some of the most hilarious lines I have heard . I have seen the movie 10 times and I still find new things I hadn 't noticed . I will give you some brief examples

Madeline (observing her neck is "dislocated") : Hernest ! My ass !... I can see ... my ASS !

******************************************************************

Ernest : (in state of panic)Maybe the neighbors heard the gunshot !

Madeline : Neighbors ? What neighbors ? In twelve years in L.A. have you seen any neighbors ??!!!

*********************************************************************

Lisle: (right after Madeline has drunk the potion) Now , a warning.

Madeline: NOW a warning ???!!!!

The list goes on and on . Overall Death Becomes Her is a bit flawed but very good film which can be seen again and again . Not exactly a masterpiece but worth the money . I believe it has already gained its cult status and will be remembered as a diachronic movie .

DEATH BECOMES HER 8 / 10

Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace (1999)

Entertaining despite many many flaws

[8/10 · 27 June 2002]

*** THIS REVIEW MAY CONTAIN A FEW SPOILERS***

OK first things first : without any reasonal doubt the Phantom Menace doesn 't even hold a candle to the original trilogy . Lucas and co have decided to make the prequels simply to cash in the phenomenal success of Star Wars . Episode I is a very different story from its predecessors but it doesn 't mean it is a bad movie . I am a hardcore fan of Star Wars but before I watched it I had lowered my expectations enough to wait a mindless action film . I can understand why all the fans were disappointed since there were so many things wrong with this movie .

1) Unbelievably lame CG special effects . The robot soldiers were so fake that make one wonder when the Hollywood producers finally LEARN THEIR LESSON THAT MODERN DOESN 'T NECESSARILY MEAN BETTER AND CG DESIGNS ARE FOR THE MOST PART UNCONVINCING ??? Just look at how convincing the old fashioned antiquated SFX of the original trilogy with the imaginative costumes and suits are . What we have in the Phantom Menace is a terrible bunch of alien creatures annoying to the bone . The SFX crew are not the only ones to blame since the film had such a high budget that could include more talented designers . Just look at the canteen scene at the airport of Tattoine in Star Wars (1977) and the PM pales in comparison . From the Siamese two headed speaker of the pod race to the flying grumpy ugly master of Annakin and his mother , these creatures have none of the imaginative creation and charisma of the original 's . Jabba , in one of the few reoccuring roles , is one of the few exceptions and I would like to say that the only one I liked is (surprise , surprise ) Jar Jar Binks !!!!!! To all those thousands of Jar Jar haters out there I would like to say I found him entertaining and at the worst case passable and that HE IS NOT THE FILM ' S LOW POINT . Stop bashing him for God 's shake . He is not the disgrace to Episode I .

The director should focus less on those ugly and repelling creatures since they were unsuccessful . If he wanted to provide us eye candy or at least introduce us to his strange universe he should put his money on the scenery. This was also a lost bet which leads us to ....

2) Mediocre art direction . None of the scenes can top the brilliance of the compelling Death Star with its white lighted sterilized corridors in Star Wars , the frozen landscape of Hoth or the pink clouded sky city in Empire Strikes Back or even the forests on the Ewoks planet in Return of Jedi . I would like to admit however that the production designs were at least decent like Princess Amidala 's palace . The best though is undoubtly the sand-grounded planet Annakin lives which manages to bring us some of the much needed nostalgia of Tattoine .

3) The story is confusing : I never understood why all this mumble with the federation , the senate etc . Oh well who cares ? Not only the plot is insignificant but the main point is the research for the man who will bring the "Balance of the Force" (the movie's original subtitle) . The greatest weakness of the script was of course ****spoiler****** having a 10 year old boy navigating with incredible agility a flying combat spacecraft and infiltrating the enemy 's spaceship so easily ..... Whatever.....**********

4) Ewan Mc Gregor is wasted here . He practically is non - existing !! Little screen time and very few lines : he spends most of the movie nodding his head when his master tells him something in order to show he agrees with him !!! I guess this was intentional in order to wait for him to be developed in the next film .

5) Terrible and unnecessary make up for Natalie Portman . uuuugghhh .. disgusting !!! Can I presume it was also intentional to cover her up for safety reasons ?

And now the positive points

1) Much welcomed cameos from C3PO and R2D2 . More screen time for them

would also be plausible

2) The Ben Hur-esque pod race is enough to keep you at the edge of your seat.

3) Liam Neeson is EXCEPTIONAL as the (essentially) leading character and the best part is that he doesn 't even try !! Whoever cast him as the master Jedi made a wise choice . Neeson has such a calm yet powerful appearance , such a philosophic image and exhales so much confidence and reliability that he is perfect . He is the ideal portrayal of a Jedi knight . ******spoiler*****too bad he won 't be in the sequels******

4) I know I am once again the minority but actually Jake Lloyd is quite good. All this whining "he is a stupid kid with all his yuppies!! " is really inane . FOR CHRIST 'S SAKE what did you want ? A junior Darth Vader with a helmet and black suit ??? The script follows Annakin as a young charismatic slave who deals with his special uniqueness . He is confused because he has the choice of leaving with God-looking (in his childish eyes) Jedis to be trained but has to leave his mother behind . Lloyd gives a very nice performance (especially compared to other kid actors) . And just look at how ironic and creepy is the scene where Annakin meets Obi-One.

5) The final edition with the climax in three different points of battle is done nicely and is the best sequence of the entire film .

The highlight of course was the lightsaber duel between Darth Maul and the Jedis which also is one of the few connecting links with the initial trilogy. ( however , am I the only one who noticed that an unfair battle 2 vs one is extremely incompatible with the Jedi - code - of - honor ? )

Enough said I think . Episode I is a timid beginning and a setup for the next movies with the discovery of Annakin Skywalker and a few occasional gratuitous action scenes like the underwater chase sequence with the cetacean creature . Not a great movie but mindless fun .

STAR WARS 9.5 /10 THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK 8.5 / 10 RETURN OF THE JEDI 9 / 10

FINAL VERDICT : The Phantom Menace 8 / 10

Dark City (1998)

Impressive mix of a fantasy film and a psychological thriller

[8/10 · 18 May 2002]

Although the basic plot seems nothing more than a typical twilight zonish subject expanded to a 90 minutes time slot Alex Proyas succeeds in the narration of this strange story . His assistant technicians should take the credit for pulling off this never-boring-for-the-viewer movie with their decent art direction and dark cinematography .

I will begin by saying that CAUTION : this is NOT an action film . If you except the fact that our lead John Murdoch (Rufus Sewell) is constantly on the run to escape from his pursuers , there are no bombs , gunfire etc etc . If you want to see a typical sci fi adrenaline-packed blockbuster see the "Matrix" . AHHH! Here we come to the point . This atmospheric predecessor of the Matrix proved that you don 't need gratuitous action scenes with kung fu and corny acrobatic SFX to keep the audience 's attention ( however I would like to point out that it is unfair to say the Wachowski Bros ripped off Dark City because drafts of the script existed ever since 1996) . Anyway Dark City starts off as a psychological thriller . John Murdoch has a strange kind of amnesia . He can 't remember who he is , he is wanted for a murder he can 't recall committing , he has a wife who doesn 't recognize (played by Jennifer Connelly) and he has an unexplained desire to visit a place from his supposed childhood (Shell Beach) .

From the beginning though it becomes clear that we are watching a fantasy film with supernatural forces . I won 't say more however in order not to spoil the fun . The similarities between Matrix and Dark City are evident (3 leading characters , the pursuers/baddies , a massive hallucination) . But whereas Matrix was an IMPUDENT ripoff from Star Wars , Terminator and Nightmare on Elm Street mish-mashed with pseudo religious hints , Dark City can stand on its own thanks to the imaginative direction and mostly due to the mystery factor which keeps the viewer hooked until the end . (no need for "cool" rayban glasses or black capes) . Of course this doesn 't mean that the Proyas film isn 't inspired from other films . Dark City deals with the question "what makes us human" and is slightly reminiscent of Blade Runner . Personally I believe that Dark City answered the question much better than the 1982 film (no need for slow pace and foggy frames here as well!) . The prophecy about the ONE who is going to save man kind seems to be taken by Dune ( I am not saying Star Wars because we don 't have the plot device mentor-training-student ) . There are also some plot elements which I can 't give away but I will say that reminded me a little bit of "Close Encounters of the 3rd type" , "The Shadow" with Alec Baldwin and the villains seem to be cousins of Uncle Fester from the Addams Family .

The art direction seems to be an amalgam from Gotham City

(the most famous in-joke about Batman finally materializes : a city which never sees the daylight!!!) and 1920 's Detroit fashion : the cars , costumes and hats (the barber shop reminded me of the Untouchables) . The edition is nice with the flashbacks popping out here and there , the cinematography is beautiful (especially in all scenes near or on the river) but I believe the SFX needed a bit reworking . Anyway there are a couple of sequences you will never forget and the narration has the nice amount of mystery , action and suspense . Rufus Sewell performs a difficult task . Despite his plain looks and unattractive characteristics he gives a likeable character who struggles to save his life and memories in a messy environment. No real star power or bulged body or handsome face (Harrison Ford anyone ?). If the film was more mainstream we would have a Bruce Willis or Brad Pitt in the role . Unfortunately one of the liabilities is that Mr Sewell carries the film exclusively on his shoulders . William Hurt seems as a forced-in decorative role with no real purpose . I liked seeing Jennifer Connelly who was lost after the amazing Labyrinth back in 1986 , but unfortunately she isn 't given much to do . Both Connelly and Hurt are wasted and end up as nothing more than extended cameos . The actors behind the villains could have been interesting if we could tell them apart !!! The only supporting actor I found interesting was that strange cop and I hated seeing him vanish so quickly . Finally Kiefer Sutherland : his dyslexic character is obviously inspired by Mouse , the retarded blond adolescent who lived at the underground society in TV 's Beauty and the Beast with Linda Hammilton . Sutherland is sometimes irritating with the way he talks although he has the key role . (at least the plot twist was ingenious) .

Enough said I think . If you want to see an independent production , entertaining and simultaneously thought-provoking see Dark City . To its credit this is a short film obviously not wanting to have unnecessary interludes of action to fill in the screen time . It is the good way of telling an inventive fantasy story without being a boring flagging depiction of a one dimensional gimmick (cough , cough , Gattaca , cough , cough ) . Oh , and before I forget my hat off to Alex Proyas for delivering a much better film than the Crow .

8.5 / 10

Mortal Kombat: Annihilation (1997)

Brilliant follow up and worthy adaptation of the game (CONTAINS SLIGHT SPOILERS)

[10/10 · 17 May 2002]

Following the tradition of Aliens and Superman II , what we have here is a very decent and well made sequel which finally does justice to the basic premise which their predecessors failed to capture and execute . The only reason I can find for why all this negative publicity , is of course that the reviews were written by people who weren 't related anyway with the Mortal Kombat video game or were not true fans of it .

As a natural result they were confused due to the fast pace of the plot and the way-too-many-characters who were squashed in breathlessly . Therefore I will officially declare that although you have a point , MK II is addressed to the hardcore fans of the game who know the entire history and so will be my review . If you are a fan who hasn 't still watched Annihilation this is a must see . The rest of you should stop reading and stick to the first Mortal Kombat which is a more easy to follow and digestible film with less characters . For the "ordinary" audience the first installment is a decent enough kung fu movie I guess .

First things first : the original Mortal Kombat was a genuine letdown for the fans . It had underdevelopped characters , mediocre script , LOUSY SFX (especially the freezing power of Sub Zero) , predictable and rather badly directed fight scenes ( Johnny Cage Vs Goro anyone ?) and a quite disappointing climax with the obligatory cliffhanger epilogue as a setup for the sequel . The final result was lame beyond words . Something had to be done and fortunately the sequel came in quickly . Who cares if Christopher Lambert (Rayden) and Bridgette Wilson (Sonya) didn 't reprise their roles and were replaced ? Both of them , along with the wisecracking , pretentiously cool , dislikeable Johnny Cage were nothing more than decorative roles existing only due to the storyboard formula of the Mortal Kombat I game . The only likeable star you rooted for was Liu Kang and the narration 's heart beats with him . Thank God Robin Shou returns in the main role . A nice touch was also the return of Talisa Soto as Kitana as her sub - erotic interplay with Kang is interesting and keeps the attention (they share good chemistry) . The two of them are great (the acting is miles better this time) and the two substitutes for Rayden and Sonya are passable. I also digged the sceptic , puzzled and simultaneously funny and comedic aspect Lynn Williams managed to infuse to the character of Jax ( who was portrayed very faithfully and kicked a** with his bionic fists ) Every part of the sequel is improved : acting , much more convincing and well directed fight scenes and better plot . I really can 't understand why all this whining " why Johnny Cage is killed off so easily ? " . PLEASE do some research next time !!!!! This is exactly what happens in the story of the MK II game . The movie begins with the invasion of Shao Kahn 's troops from the Outworld . Then we are introduced to Kitana 's mother the Queen Sindel who is supposed to be Shao Kahn 's bride (just like the MK 3 story) and is probably the key to Earth 's salvation or destruction . From there on the story follows the 4 leads (Jax , Liu , Sonya and Rayden) struggling to save themselves from Kahn 's minions . Yes you guessed right there is plenty of action and the fight scenes are great . The plot is a mix from the stories of MK II & MK III .

I can still hear complaints " woo woo , too many characters too little development " . GIMME A BREAK ! This is an action film not a social drama . The ninja choreography and the SFX for the most part are great and are enough to keep you hooked on . Some examples are : the aforementioned freezing power of Sub Zero and the bionic punches of Jax , the net traps by Cyrax , the tele-transport of Ermac/Noob Saibot , the great CG Motaro who is frighteningly impressive and compelling , the banshee-esque supersonic screams by Sindel etc . Moreover I would like to point out that most of the characters of the video game are secondary and somehow naturally DESTINED to make a cameo and nothing more . The best example is probably Mileena : in the game she is a clad-in-pink evil duplicate of Kitana , fabricated by the evil sorcerer Shang Tsung . In the film she pops out in one scene and fights Sonya with her triple-edged knives (of course she loses) . What did you expect from the script ? A whole subplot with Kitana 's two sides and a psychological doubt game about who-is-who a la Uma Thurman in the Avengers ? I know that each one of you has a favorite character and hated to see him in blink appearances but you should stop whining and think logically . Cyrax and Smoke are nothing but robots programmed to annihilate Sub Zero after his betrayal . Nightwolf is a mystic Indian Shaman and shouldn 't be seen fighting physically rather than mentally so his brief appearance in a dream sequence as Liu 's mentor was wise . All these characters along with Scorpion or Baraka have cameos and that is the most fair . The focus should be on the leads and not on the henchmen - villains . My personal favorite was the groundbreaking Sheeva and I disliked seeing her written out quickly without any decent fights . The same goes for the weather-controlling Rain but I compromised since the good parts of the film are more than the bad ones .

I will agree that some of the most powerful characters are dispatched easily but the movie needed some realistic action and the leads are constantly on the run , pursued by the bounty hunters . I really digged the fact that the stories and the background was followed accurately and faithfully e.g. the hate relationship between Motaro and Sheeva , the origin and motives of Jade (I won 't say more) , the Kitana – Sindel weird relationship and the fact Rayden sacrifices his immortality to join the tournament (this takes place in the Ultimate MK 3) . I won 't say that the film doesn 't have some serious defects .

1) The greatest flaw was of course Shao Kahn . AGHHHH! As soon as he is unmasked his myth is shattered !! The actor did a LOUSY job - he wasn 't even remotely threatening or scary . Where is his commanding chilling voice ? Even worse he loses center stage since the main villain seems to be Shinnok from MK4 . In the film Shinnok is Kahn ‘s divine mighty father . Shao Kahn ends up as a weak , whining boy who doesn ‘t have his will to make decisions and constantly expects his father to find the solutions !!!. GRRRRRRRR......

2) The beyond ridiculous , ingenious plot twists at the end (what were they thinking ?????)

3) The ludicrous and corny Animality effects

If you can overlook these facts and concentrate on the merits you will have a nice dose of entertainment . The ending hopefully restores the script and gives the much needed resolution . I should give this a 9 but due to the awful depiction of Shao Kahn I am compelled to give a

8 / 10

This sequel is a very good adaptation of the game , at least for the ones who know the story . I hope that MK 3 : Domination will overcome all the script flaws and be even better . In the meantime Annihilation is the best of the bunch .

I Know What You Did Last Summer (1997)

Decent shlasher film

[8/10 · 2 March 2002]

Of course , this film is inferior than Scream but it does have its merits . I had heard so much trash about this thriller that I was very wary when I heard that TV would air it . Nevertheless I decided to give it a chance , expecting to see an easily forgettable campy teen horror film in the worst case . I was wrong : just like the case with "Last Action Hero" or "The Saint" (1997) people find it convenient to reject them in order to follow the dictates of the official critics but when it comes to awful films like "Mission Impossible" (1996) or "True Lies" which are critically acclaimed (obviously to promote them) everybody rushes to join the cult masses in order not to disclose the fact that he cannot see the emperor 's new clothes. I am not saying that Last Action Hero or the Saint are without defects but are very overlooked and underrated . I Know What you Did Last Summer is a very flawed movie but fortunately Williamson 's pen has done it again : he gives us some genuine chills .

First the minuses : this flick has the worst performances I have ever seen in years . The actors give the impression that got tired of studying the script and the director wrote the script on a blackboard , and the leads read their lines directly during the actual filming . The corny acting is sometimes laughable but hey this actually turns to be amusing ! There are a couple of scenes copied directly from Halloween . There are plot holes like how could the killer clean up everything just in a few seconds . Speaking of the killer , he could be much scarier and his suit should be redesigned in order to make him more dark and menacing . I suppose they wanted to make him look realistic and not give him a fancy outfit like Freddy , Jason , Father Death in "Scream" etc .. The biggest flaw is that the premise (based on a book) could have made a more psychologically orientated agony thriller about guilt and remorse (your crime will eventually return to avenge you ) . The writer preferred to make the film more action - packed perhaps after the libels that Scream was too much self - referential , comedic and with little gore . This movie was also rejected by critics who said that it underused the psychological atmosphere to degenerate to a teeny bopper with gore and blood . Well you cannot have it both ways you know !!!

On the plus side : the 4 leads were carefully chosen for the roles. Fresh young faces to make us like them . They sure did . Despite the plot 's flaws the film has a wonderful threatening atmosphere and manages to be memorable and to escape the aesthetics of a TV-like slasher or a common B-movie . The opening sequence is perhaps the best and will be included within the most classic ones of all thrillers . We first see a young man alone at a cliff late at night drinking . He is sad : it is obvious that something haunts him from the past . Then we see the graduation party of the 4 leads (two couples) . When they take a ride with a car , being semi-drunk they accidentally hit someone with the car . The accident scene and the subsequent sequence with the huge dilemma and the eventual disposal of the body are marvelous . One year later Julie (Jennifer Love Hewitt) receives a note saying "I know what you did last summer" . The demons from the past start tormenting her and the 4 friends are reunited in order to figure out what to do .

Surprisingly there is very little gore . We simply see the hook supposedly gutting the victims and the result is effective . In many points the direction compensates for the script 's faults , like in the climactic chases . Anne Heche gives a decent performance as Missy the slightly retarded , wild beast-like sister of the supposed victim . There are no self - referential lines (obviously not wanting to rip off Scream) except in one point (the Jodie - Angela undercover names). The script 's originality is wonderful in some scenes which invert some of the most eternal trivialities. The most characteristic example is the inversion of Psycho 's shower scene where Barry (Ryan Philippe) is alone in the gym , having a bath while the danger is threateningly near . At last , for once , the individual-in-peril is a guy ! The best scenes in the film are the ones with the flamboyant Sarah Michelle Gellar (Helen) but I cannot give them away . All I can say is that Helen is probably the most developed character and the most natural performance comes from Gellar . As for the scene in the car tires alley

it has been printed indelibly in my mind .

Freddy Prinze Jr as Ray is nothing more than the dark-haired handsome guy . He serves only as the love interest for Helen and a potential suspect (he is a fisherman and he has a hook) and he spends most of the movie quarreling with Barry .Enough said , I think . The cliffhanger finale is kind of lame but this film was not made to win Academy awards . It is purely campy fun with a few occasional psychedelic hints about crime and punishment ("Do you ever wonder if it was a suicide? " " If that 's the way you are able to sleep at nights .... " ) . Switch off your brains and have a nice dose of entertainment . Not as good as the astonishing Scream but undoubtly one of the landmarks of 90 's horror films . You simply must not expect much . A solid

8 / 10

The Matrix (1999)

Entertaining average film

[7/10 · 28 February 2002]

Just like the case with the vastly overrated Blade Runner : professional job from a couple of good technicians but nothing more . I will have to admit that the script had some potential but the quite amateurish direction by the Wachowski Brothers almost ruined the entire effort . Before I summarize the plot , I would like to point out that I am extremely upset with the comments "Philosophical" , "thought provoking" . ARE YOY FEELING OK ???? Do you seriously believe that the script is "complex" and the film "requires more than one viewing" !!!!!!?????? (just like the case with the overrated Usual Suspects which is as simple and obvious as a cockroach on a white carpet) . If that 's so then I will strongly discourage you from EVER watching "Twelve Monkeys" , "Dune" or "Sphere" because inevitably your brain cells will short circuit . It seems like the majority of sci-fi lovers have never read sci-fi short stories !!! The concept that we all live in a virtual illusional reality is not at all original . I can recite numerous examples but I will just stick to " Marianna " , a very short story by Fritz Lang where the heroine discovers that her mansion and her husband were holographic hallucinations and even herself was nothing but a wish coming true . The terrifying truth was that her real self (from were she was projected) was institutionalized in an asylum and was treated with an alternative personality/wish fulfillment program. Another short fantasy story claimed that very few people are indeed true and the rest were again the result of the subconscious materialization from the real ones' brains (their "soulmates" conveniently coming true from the wishes of their counterparts) . I can go on and on but I don 't have to . Even for the movie fans which haven 't read sci-fi novels , it is impossible that they haven 't watched similar films . The infiltration in an alternative reality , artificially constructed , is present in "Tron" (1982) with Jeff Bridges or in "Total Recall" (1990) where the question what is real and what is not , is inherent throughout the film . The reviewers who see correlation between Matrix and Plato 's philosophical theories make me want to laugh . On top of that there are the ridiculous "biblical symbolisms" the film-makers have insisted to include and publicize . I don 't think that by calling the ship "Nabouchodonosor" or by killing off the hero and resurrecting him there are christianic references . Then Ripley in Alien Resurrection should be titled a Christ figure or we can suppose that the "Janus" plan in "Judge Dredd" should be regarded as a metaphor for the Roman Empire and the ruthless games between the Caesar and the Senate !!!!! And the by the way , the pattern of the (chosen) One is omnipotent in almost every sci-fi , with the most notable case Luke Skywalker in Star Wars . The dystopic future with machines taking over humans is of course "borrowed" blatantly by the Terminator and the plot device "Dying inside the virtual reality truly will kill you " is apparently inspired from "Nightmare on elm street" .

Ripping - off so many movies and getting away with so called "profound originality" (!) is a great achievement by the Wachowski Bros and proves how brain washing the critics can be . Excuse me but I just want to get it off my chest . I can 't stand seeing Matrix with an average of 8.5 while brilliant movies like "Sphere" are stuck in 5.1 simply because the critics (for various reasons) decided to pan them .

On to the movie : we have a very large introduction (45 minutes maybe longer) before Neo (Keanu Reeves) gets to the "real world" with the guidance of "Morpheus" (Lawrence Fishburn) . If this introduction was shortened we would have a better movie . Anyway the middle part of the movie is undoubtly the best . After we learn the background of this strange society we are introduced to the submarine crew (Morpheus' friends) . I cannot spoil what happens next but I will say the moody atmosphere is highly successful . The climate is depressing , awe - inspiring and contains all the elements of a great existential drama .

But hey this is Hollywood and the final 40 minutes are frittered away : after the 3 leads (Reeves , Fishburn , Moss) are trapped in the illusional world they are trying to escape and the film degenerates to a poor shoot 'em up with irritating constant noisy gunfire and silly video-gameish action scenes to satisfy the Playstation 13 year old freaks who probably digged them and pitched the Matrix to the aforementioned 8.5 . The karate scenes are decent but other than that the SFX stink BAD BAD BAD . Not only the repeated gunfire is annoying but the much hyped slow motion special effects are unbelievably c**ppy and patchily edited ("Scary Movie" to its credit did these scenes justice!!!!!!) One scene in the roof of a scyscraper is the perfect example . We see the bad guy shooting Neo . Then we see Neo verging backwards in slow motion . Then we hear Neo squeak "Agh!!" and then we see the flight path of the bullet and we are supposed to presume that Neo was hit . Bottom case : we never actually SAW the bullet . Was the budget that low ?

I will lie if I say that I didn 't enjoy the Matrix . But it is very overrated . Sets and costumes are adequate and despite of the many flaws in the direction there are memorable scenes like the visit to the Oracle 's home or the climactic chase of Neo and the baddies . I can 't say more in order not to reveal plot secrets . On the acting side : the 3 leads give quite solid performances , nothing great but passable but I believe the supporting cast stole the show . My personal favorite from the crew members is Tank and I am sad he won 't be in the sequel . Speaking of the sequel I will once again refer to the faults of the film . Overlong introduction ,weak finale , lousy SFX BUT if they manage to jettison all these defects and they manage to reproduce the mystic , melancholic climate of the middle sequence then Matrix 2 will be a h**l of a sequel . Therefore I conclude with hope that in Matrix 2 they will wipe off the demerits and they will enhance the virtues to maximum . As it is Matrix is a fairly enjoyable could-have-done-much-more film . A controversial

8 / 10

Blade Runner (1982)

Good visuals don 't make a good movie

[7/10 · 28 February 2002]

The one line summary says it all . Ridley Scott with the aid of a brilliant crew (director of photography , SFX team and a decent music score) managed to shoot one of the most astonishingly impressive films ever but with a thin paper plot and an unnecessarily slow pace . It could as well be a short film. As it is it's just a 40 minutes story stretched to a 2 hours time slot .

First the positive points : Blade Runner gives an original and splendid mix of stylistic themes . It combines the film noir atmosphere of the 1940 's (the detective who "falls for the wrong woman" , the clouded alley streets etc) with futuristic sets (flying cars , colourful lights , advanced computer technology) and strangely it maintains the present day reality of a detective thriller of the 80 's or even the 90 's . The result is a wonderful surrealistic background , timeless and not at all dated . This diachronic atmosphere is a very successful depiction of the vision of many famous sci-fi writers , and I am not referring necessarily to Philip Dick . Sci - fi writers usually describe futuristic societies with an amalgam of elements from different historic periods and this is exactly the case with this film . I will have to shake hands with the SFX crew because the overhead take in the beginning of the movie where we get a panoramic view of the colourful-lighted scyscrapers is unbelievably good . Even now , 20 years later , when technology has evolved so much , I still haven 't seen such a convincing simulated image in a movie . For example Judge Dredd (1995) and Fifth Element (1997) tried to walk on the same path but with limited success . But the real kudos must go to the cinematographer because his work is in one word excellent . The cinematography is simply excellent and I doubt if it will be ever topped . It is the soul of the movie and the most representative sample of the spirit the film-makers tried to capture . Unfortunately due to a lame script they failed . Which leads us to the negative points : slight spoilers coming .

This film tries to be philosophical and mind intriguing but it simply doesn 't work . The silence and the slow pace add nothing to the film . No , the film doesn 't pose metaphysic questions about the essence of life and the borders between artificial intelligence and real existence , as the fans and the snobbish critics insist (keep in mind that back in the 1982 they panned it) . The only controversial scene is when Dechard(Harrison Ford) shoots down the dancer Zhora played by Joanna Cassidy. This is a violent bloody murder and one of them most depressing killing scenes in cinematic history . It is obvious that the "termination" of a replicant is still homicide of an intelligent entity . If the rest of the film managed to retain the same climate it would indeed be "philosophic" . Unfortunately we have a letdown to scattered scenes of erotic hypnotized innuendo between Dechard and Rachael and inane sleepy dialogue between Roy (Rutger Hauer) and Pris(the unrecognizable Daryl Hannah). All this leads to a disappointing anti-climactic finale . No , it is not at all poetic and if the idea was good *******spoiler**** Roy ultimately saving Decard******* the execution was horrible . I believe the main problem of the film was the acting . Although the casting was successful none of the actors gave a memorable performance . They all sleep-walked through their roles except from the a** kicking Cassidy . Now I reckon they were supposed to be deadpan to fit in the film noir climate but it didn 't take . Although Ford was likeable in his short haircut and had a weird chemistry with Sean Young they didn 't capture the viewer 's heart to the point they should . The ONLY character you root for is actually Sebastian (William Sanderson) who suffers from untimely anility at the age of 25 and hosts the replicants in his house. He is terrified of what is happening but can 't do anything to prevent it. I haven 't read the novel but I have downloaded the original screenplay and there are differences which would have made a slightly better film *********SPOILERS read at your own risk*****************

1) The truth test to certify if Rachael was a replicant was quite longer e.g. it contained the lines "What would you do if a wasp landed on your hand" "I would slap it and kill it"

2) There was another replicant called Mary who lived with Roy and Pris in Sebastian 's house . She was dispatced easily before Pris jumps -literally- on Dechard . She had about 5 lines throughout the whole film so she was easily omitted .

3) The scene in the bar where Decart meets the replicant was also longer. The replicant had cockroaches for pets and he urged Ford to kiss one of them ! Ultimately Deckard was the one who shot the replicant and not Rachael.

4) Roy didn 't only kill his creator scientist but also all his assistants and his family including his cute little 8 year old son . Sebastian actually was not murdered by him in that incident but unfortunately he inevitably bited the dust in the finale by the stray bullets from Dechart who gatecrashed Sebastian 's home .

5) The final duel between Roy - Dechart was actually a more successful shoot 'em up scene than those dreadfully sophomoric lines by Rutger Hauer who broke two fingers of Ford and suddenly he stopped for no apparent reason wanting pretentiously to show the supremacy of the replicants to the humble human kind . ****************************************************************** I cannot understand why everyone bashed the film 's happy ending and said it left unanswered questions . If you want to know the original script had the two leads go to a snowy forest . Dechart leaves and Rachael commits suicide with a gun since this was their common decision as the best solution !!!! The movie would end with a voice-over narration from Ford " I was glad because now they wouldn 't be able to set their hands upon her " (and harm her) . Would you prefer THAT ??? As i said impressive eye candy is not enough for a good film . BR is a landmark but just like the case with the horrible dull "Alien" (at least BR is watchable) a groundbreaking "classic" is not always a good movie . All in all a rather disappointing

7.5 / 10

Don 't expect much of a story and you will like it . Oh , I almost forgot *****spoiler****** Dechart IS a replicant . In the middle of the film in his house when he talks with Rachael , Rachael 's red-shine in the eyes is shown and then Dechard 's eyes come to screen and indisputably the same red shine is CLEARLY VISIBLE**************

12 Monkeys (1995)

Intriguing mental game

[9/10 · 20 February 2002]

***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** Nowadays it is hard to find original and thought-provoking scripts . Therefore I will give my deepest congratulations to the Peoples family for their tight and sophisticated play (I will have to note that I have downloaded the screenplay from the internet and Terry Gilliam has followed the script with religious devoutness , scene by scene and sentence to sentence : he omitted or changed 5 - 6 lines tops ) . I know that the idea was inspired by a French short film but this adaptation is very successful . It was a matter of execution both from the writers and the director . Many viewers have commented on the various issues the film deals with . They have labeled it as "sci fi" , "time travel" , "prophecy about the biological weapons and the nuclear destruction " etc , etc . I admit that all these subjects are resident in the film but the spinal column is nothing more than a poetic tale of paranoid doubt and vague , blurr memories . It is a search deep down in the abyss of a man 's brain . James Cole (Bruce Willis) is a convict from the future who is sent back in time in 1996 to collect information for a deadly virus which will extinguish 99 % of the human population . He meets a psychiatrist Kathryn Railly (Madeline Stowe) who wants to help him despite James is a violent and potentially dangerous man (just like a savage beast). He also meets Jeffrey Goines (Brad Pitt) , a slightly deranged young man whose father is a famous scientist who does research on viruses and is highly likely linked to the total destruction of man kind . This is the basic plot . The scenes in the mental asylum are quite surrealistic and give the stigma of the film . Twelve Monkeys is not your typical sci - fi with laser weapons , aliens , explosions , building collapses etc . Most of the movie is the roaming of James and Kathryn with the car which gives us a sense of a road movie . The fact that you don 't get bored with this non - adrenalin proves the success of the script and the great interest of the characters and the basic premise (despite the orders from the PTBT

and the repeated statements from Cole himself , his mission is essentially the salvation of the world although he doesn't admit it ) .

Twelve Monkeys is without doubt a confusing movie with a complex plot . There are questions which are answered by the end and questions that remain unsolved ,like it is never explained what is the husky old voice James hears throughout the film . One of the best lines which summarizes the madness of the whole film is " Maybe I am in the next cell . Maybe they (the 5 scientists)put me to spy on you . Or MAYBE I am only inside your mind " . As you realize the awkward and perplexed script is kind of hard to follow . Therefore the ultra-predictable finale (even a 3 year old can figure out the ending 50 minutes into the film) was an obligatory compromise of the writers in order to make the film digestible . James 's dreams are obviously foreseeing and knowing the prophecy you sit back and you are waiting for it to be fulfilled . That is not the end of the suspense though.*********SPOILER ALERT****t 2/3 into the movie a very interesting question rises : is this mission true or James is simply an insane person who lives in a fantastic illusional world ? This I believe is the greatest virtue of Twelve Monkeys and that is why I like it so much . The doubt factor is not inherent from the beginning of the film (like in "Almost Dead" with Shannen Doherty or "The Dead Can't Lie" with Tommy Lee Jones") but emerges after the middle and not at all in a gimmicky mode which would have left the viewer feeling cheated . The handling of James' questionable sanity from him and Kathryn and the schizophrenic situation of not knowing what is reality and myth is perfectly executed. I don 't know if it was inspired from Vertigo or other films of the maitre but if it was a rehash it was a good one . Fortunately just before the end the "historic truth" is restored with tangible evidence that all these really happened ********END SPOILER******** I will urge you to see the film twice . I did it , and it was a wonderful experience . There is too much information for the brain to retain with just one viewing . There are plot elements which play a crucial part for the comprehension of the events and the fight against the tricks of the mind . For example I hadn 't realized the vitally important vocal messages from the future (watch carefully) .

I will close the review with comments on the crew members . As you already observed I regard Twelve Monkeys as a script movie and not a director 's . Unfortunately the brilliantly talented Gilliam of "The Adventures of Baron Munchausen" or even the campy "Time Bandits" backsteps to a coldly professional subtle work . I believe he could have done more . The same goes for the music and the rather lame cinematography . Ok I admit that this nebulous photography works fine in the future scenes or in the foggy streets where the twelve monkeys headquarters are , but other than that it gets annoying . As for the cast Brad Pitt 's overrated performance is enjoyable (but not great) , Bruce Willis does a very good job as the mysterious convict and the most underrated performance is definitely Madeline Stowe 's . She is the only "logic" axis of the narration . Stowe gives a great appearance throughout the entire spectrum of her character 's aspects . The professional inquisitive psychiatrist , the frightened kidnap victim , the compassionate doctor who wants to help a "lost soul" who is suffering from hallucinations , the detective / resolver of this frighteningly paranoid situation and finally the protector of the haunted man . Stowe is subtle , grounded and effectively realistic in her performance .

All in all , if you want a different kind of entertainment check this out . However if you hate messy mystic films which look like a giant puzzle like "Dune" then you should clearly stay out . Gilliam 's film is a different original unusual experience .

A surrealistic masterpiece TWELVE MONKEYS 8.5 / 10

Return to Oz (1985)

Awesome and astonishing fantasy film

[10/10 · 18 February 2002]

Along with "Hook" (1991) this has got to be the best continuation / sequelesque adaptation of a classic fairy tale for kids . (although this one is slightly better than Hook because it has a more reliable plot and a tighter pace) . There are no words to describe how well constructed this movie is . Every part of it really shines . From the imaginative direction to the impressive sets and costumes and from the professionally constructed script and dialogue to the effectively subtle performances from all the actors (live and animatronic) .

I will have to tell you that I am fanatically against the screenplay changes film-makers usually conduct to a story / novel / myth / comic book / TV show when they turn it into a movie . They omit important plot elements , they mistreat important characters by underusing them , they often fail to shoot chilling scenes from the book (et al) due to lame direction and untalented SFX crew members hence not doing them justice (like the freezing super power of Sub-Zero in "Mortal Kombat") and generally they bastardize crucial thematic parts because of many changes in the atmosphere of the original . The "Return to Oz" script mixes elements from 2 books by L. Frank Baum and puts them in the blender with multiple variations and vital declinations from their roots . God forgive me but it is probably the best bastardization I have ever witnessed . If these words are coming out of my mouth then it is definitely a very successful film . I will brief you a little (slight spoilers coming) : characters from the first book which is the direct continuation of Dorothy 's adventures where Dorothy manages to find the ruby slippers and returns to see her friends , are Jack the pumpkinhead , the reindeer-headed flying sofa and Mombie the witch (and NOT an aristocratic princess) . Jack and the reindeer were precisely the same as in the movie , animated by the powder of life . (there was also a cute wooden pony which was probably omitted because it was a silent role) . Mombie however was a rather old grey haired wannabe witch who resembled remarkably Mim ! ( for the uninitiated Mim is Magica De Spell 's partner in the crusade of stealing the lucky dime of uncle Scrooge) . Ozma was indeed Mombie 's prisoner although she thought she was a boy in a young Jodie Foster way with dirty clothes under the name Chip ! The second book introduces us to Tic Toc who managed to drag Dorothy into the land of Oz once again . Tic Toc was indeed a golden metal robot but a bit shorter and quite thinner so he wasn 't as macho as in the film . He had more childish voice and manners , something like a juvenile version of C3PO from Star Wars . The greatest change was of course the Gnome King . Although his kingdom was under the ground of a desert he was not the ruler of stones but the king of Dwarfs (he was a nasty little Oumba Looba-like himself) . Nevertheless he had a powerful army and weapons and he tried to take over Oz. The Dwarves ' only weakness was the eggs . Oh , and Bileena was not Dorothy 's chicken but a native habitant chicken in Oz . The rescue mission was not for the Schiactro but for an unrelated prince (the Prince of Eb under the request of his beloved Princess) . Also the jewelry museum was true with the difference that the contestants had only one chance (not 3). The rest of the plot 's surprises such as the wheelers & the decapitated dancers were completely the brainchildren of Walter Murch and Gill Dennis.

All in all the combination of these thematic factors was wonderful . I believe that this slightly tense adaptation is a much more successful depiction of Frank Baum 's vision of the Land of Oz . Enchanting and beautiful for the eye but with hidden dangers lurking around . Who can forget the beginning sequence where Dorothy finds Oz literally wrecked ? Everybody has been transformed into a stone statue and the roads and buildings are torn apart . The direction is flawless in giving us this absolutely successful threatening but interestingly suspenseful scene . I really cannot realize why so many libels like "much dark" "too scary" etc. This has exactly the same level of violence with classic Disney cartoons where the evil step mother curses Snow White with diabolical spells in the middle of storm with frightening thunders or where Sleeping Beauty 's charming prince struggles to save her by fighting her wicked witch godmother who is transformed into a giant dragon who spits up disastrous and dreadful fireballs . A much more twisted and snicky kids film is " Willy Wonka " , especially the boat scene .

Anyway I don 't think Mombie 's heads or the giggling deranged wheelers can be frightening . They are graphic figures like the wicked witch of the West or the gremlins . As a matter of fact how hasn 't anyone found unsuitable and politically uncorrect the reoccurring quote of the Queen of hearts " Off with his / her / their head ! " in Alice in Wonderland (which keep in mind that was written by a priest) . Not only Return to Oz is the near perfect follow-up to a well known legend , but it is also one of the best fairy tale adaptations cinema industry has ever given us . Adequate SFX (like the petrified Emerald city or the flying sofa or the earthquake scene) , impressive sets (Mombie 's palace or the desert) and of course the unforgettable jewels museum (I have seen the film several times but this scene always thrills me) . As a stand alone fairy tale it is also great . Two scenes at the end standout as perfect examples *******Spoiler alert******** The celebration scene at the palace and the mirror-through communication between Dorothy and Ozma******** On top of that the glossy ruby slippers are still enchanting . What else can be said ? Mere cameos from the Tin man and the coward lion for the fans of the old cast combine with fine direction and script for a spectacular show . If only *****spoiler**** they didn 't spoil it with the doubts that it was all a dream ****** A classic masterpiece

RETURN TO OZ 9.5 / 10

The Avengers (1998)

A very successful film adaptation of the 60 's show

[9/10 · 14 February 2002]

When I first saw the Avengers I thought it was a messy movie , not necessarily bad , but hard to follow and with very little to recommend , like a few good lines such as " Isn 't there a Mrs Steed ? " " Yes there is.... my mother ! " . Unfortunately the confusing plot made the film an endless stream of scattered scenes and streched the time slot from the mere 85 minutes to an experience which lasted more than 2 hours in the mind of the viewer . Everybody bashed this film and I believe they had their reasons. Everybody praised the TV show as "brilliant" , "wonderful" and "tasteful". When the public network decided to broadcast reruns I sat down with high expectations to see this long lost TV series ....... What the h**l was THAT ????? Most of the episodes were load of c**p (the Time Machine for example), literally unbearable to watch !!!!!!!!! Very few episodes were interesting , witty and campy in a good way , like the 10 Little Niggers rip off or the episode where Mrs Peel was kidnapped by insane film makers who wanted to make her the star of their movie before killing her . Other episodes were so - so , "cute" storylines like "The Bird who knew too much " , the "Winged Avenger " , the "Invisible Man" or the episode with the Nanny Academy . But as I said the majority of the show is nothing but a waste of money and film. Did anyone actually LIKE THIS ??? And I watched the so called "best" colourful episodes with Mrs Peel !!! As for the Patrick MacNee - Diana Rigg so called "chemistry" ??? Non - existing ! Mac Nee was as stiff as an ice cube and Rigg although has a kittenish charm it failed to reach any acceptor because Mac Nee had the erotism of Hercules Poirot ! Believe me even if you drilled deep deep deep down the MacNee - Rigg relationship it is more possible to find oil deposits than even the least trace of a remotely mild "sub-erotic" chemistry ! Not even the most unconfessed one , like Linda Hammilton with her colleaque (I thing he was called Joe) in "Beauty and the Beast" or even Jodie Foster with Anthony Hopkins in "Silence of the Lambs" !! On top of that there are the infamous carate kicks of Mrs Peel , which (you have to trust me) are ATROCIOUSLY bad . I don 't think there are words in the English language to express how HORRIBLE and unconvincingly directed these "fight" scenes were . This classic series is just a P.O.S. No wonder I had never heard of the Avengers before the movie came out !!! (in contrast with other campy 60's shows like Lost in Space or Batman who retained their reputation throughout time) . The filmic Avengers were a masterpiece compared to their ancestor !!

Nevertheless I decided to rewatch the film believing that the second time would be more entertaining . Boy was I right !!!! Now that I knew the plot 's surprises this wonderful satire was highly enjoyable . Everything fits in to place , everything makes more sense , we manage to learn the predicament and the motives of all the characters . Not only the pace is fast moving , not only the plot unfolds with a very composed way , not only the hilarious dialogue delivers A-list British phlegm to the screen ( " Join me and we 'll rule the world " "You didn't say please !" )but we manage to watch some of the most original and inventive surrealistic sets a film has ever brought us. Many have praised the Escher-esque eternal stairs where Mrs Peel is trapped but I will stick to : the greenhouse with a pleiad of plants or the musical kist of whistles along with a jewlery collection in Sir August 's manor .

The film 's negative points are : Emma Peel is turned more into a victim instead of a more active part and Stead is authorised to kill her if he suspects that she is the leak . On top of that the subplot with Emma 's dark side ( I won 't say more ) should be shortened because it got annoying . The good points : further than the impressive sets and some good SFX (like the snow blizzard) the casting was very successful . Sure Ralph Fiennes was a bit young for the shoes of John Stead but he had all the qualifications for the role . A charming English gentleman , cool tempered and mild mannered , but not deadpan or emotionless , and with the hidden energy of an inert volcano . Uma Thurman was a PERFECT choise for Emma Peel as she had the deadly beauty required . And YES the two leads have the much needed chemistry that their predecessors failed to reach . Oh , their acting skills ? Just as moderate as they SHOULD be . Remember they are British agents and this is a British inspired satire , not your typical adrenaline pumped American blockbuster with explosions and car chases (yes there is a car chase but very different from the usual ones : the pursuers are giant mechanical bees !!) . As for Sean Connery ? Although the script didn 't do Sir August DeWinters full justice , Connery makes a pleasantly memorable and decent job as the bad guy . Remember again : this is NOT your ordinary summer roallercoaster and if Connery stole the show the movie would have failed . The action scenes are wonderfully directed , since Stead kicks a** with his umbrella and Mrs Peel does a fine job with her carate kicks and when she sword fights with Stead .

Overall the Avengers is a much welcome witty satire of the American spy films like James Bond and action / destruction blockbusters generally (like Armageddon) . It is charismatic and eccentric in a very positive way . If only the producers hadn't chop it by editing out so many scenes we would have even more entertainment like the plastic transport bubbles or the deliciously quirky sets in the weather controlling headquarters with black and white colours and weird cross linked architecture . I hope we will have a director 's cut some day . Sit back relax and enjoy the Avengers . It is a great cinematic experience and if you find it lame just give it a second shot (much like the surrealistic Batman Returns) . It has top British phlegm and I believe the main theme and point of the film is summarised in a very characteristic line (I can't say in which point in order not to spoil it ) " MANNERS , Mrs Peel !!" =) Wonderful sets , costumes , cinematography , the familiar music theme and an intelligent script give a good mix . One special benefit is that (despite the use of computers and electronic gizmos) you can't easily designate the time period of the events since the atmosphere mixes various stylistic elements and is reminiscent of a fairy tale .

Soon to become a cult classic the Avengers is vastly underrated but it will grow in the public 's heart as time goes by . A definite

8 / 10

Friday the 13th: The Series (1987–1990)

A small gem

[12 November 2001]

Gone but not forgotten . I remember watching this series as a kid . It was shown on Friday nights . However the channel chose to broadcast the supposedly most pivotal ones of all 3 seasons . Every week my friends and I would tune in and see the search for yet another cursed antique.

The premise was simple : 2 distant cousins inherited an antique shop by their late uncle Lewis Vendredi . Lewis had made a pact

with the devil as a result the merchandise was cursed and all the objects had magic powers which managed to corrupt their users and killed people in gruesome gory ways . The cousins have to retrieve the artifacts and stop the spread of Satan 's " unholy tide " .

The casting was very successful . The faces of the leads were memorable and likeable . John D. Le May portrayed the cute and sweet

Ryan Dallion , Louise Robey was his cousin Micki Foster (one of the most gorgeous redheads ever to appear on screen) . They were assisted

by the middle aged , grey haired , bearded , occult - know - it - all old friend of Lewis , Jack Marshak ( Chris Wiggins was a perfect choice for this father figure/wise philosopher role ) .

Although every episode had the same storyboard pattern ( a person discovers the object , uses it , the leads become suspicious , more murders take place , the leads are hot on the user 's tail etc ) you simply couldn 't resist to see the magic powers of each antique and the consequences on the user 's life . 10 years later I managed to spot reruns and watched almost all the episodes . The objects either killed and gave something in exchange (with very slight exceptions such as the cursed pipe with the lethal smoke or the sheriff 's badge which simply killed people) or were activated with the spread of the victim 's blood on its surface ( the make up suitcase , the car keys etc ) . The grant was usually money (e.g. the tattoo needles) , beauty (the golden compact mirror in "Face of Evil") , career success (the box gloves), lust and desire from persons of the opposite sex (the Cupid statue) or special powers like electrokinetic abilities (the electric chair) , temporal stasis (the time freezing pocket watch), time travel (the slides projector) , healing strength (the indian rattle) and even resurrection from the dead (the Coin of Ziocles) . The writers' message was clear : a deal with the Satan never pays . He will trick you into selling your soul but he will NEVER give you exactly what you want . Most of the objects had unpleasant side effects . The most characteristic example was the "Sweetest Sting" episode where the customers had to buy the blooded honey continuously to retain their youth.

After two successful years of antique hunting , John D. Le May opted to leave . He was replaced by another young man called Johnny Ventura (played by Steven Monarque) . To this day I can 't understand why Johnny was hated so much and regarded as the culprit for the untimely cancellation of the show . He was an ordinary person with his weaknesses and faults and a refreshing change . Although Ryan was sorely missed let's be honest : the real stars were the antiques , OK ?

Some episodes declined from the usual gimmick and focused on the 3 leads : the result was usually splendid . The first season finale " Bottle of Dreams " with the egyptian urn who caused horrifying memories of older objects to resurface , the second season premiere "Doorway to Hell" in which uncle Lewis wanted to resurrect and possessed the body of a small crook , and the infamous episode "Wedding in Black" with the hallucinating crystall sphere in which the leads are trapped and confront the Devil himself face to face . Some of the episodes were very poor to awful ( the 2 part "Quit of Hathor" , " Night Hunger " , "Better Off Dead" with the silver syringe ) and most of the episodes were so - so ( the pool stick , the garbage disposer ) . Others were small masterpieces . My personal favourites include : the radio which manifested fears scaring the victims to death , the mephisto ring which killed with electrocution , the indian rattle which suffocated people to death , the box gloves which produced a shadow killer , the "Faith Healer" with the healing glove , the photo camera which produced evil clones in "Double Exposure" , the Coin of Ziocles episodes and "Repetition" with a cursed cameo amulet habited by the spirit of a dead person ( the ONLY object without ANY benefit : a pure curse so powerful that knocked the 3 leads out of the episode almost totally !!!) But the best would have to be "Year of the Monkey" with the 3 magic monkey statues with so much plot and so many characters which exploited the potential of the premise to maximum . There was no real end to the series so I believe that a film remake is possible , probably in 10 or more years with a different cast . However there are episodes I have missed . The greatest loss for me of course was " THE PROPHECIES I & II " which are rumoured to be good and was the last appearance of Mr Le May . Therefore 10 years later , I still live in the same frustrating and sad ignorance . Eventually what happened to Ryan ??? I never knew (sniff!)