The_Mob_Has_Spoken Reviews

From One Second to the Next (2013)

Here's my theory.

[10/10 · 5 November 2015]

This is an excellent short form documentary. Werner Herzog is a bit of a character and you never know what his movies are all different* so I always try to catch his stuff. But what I really want to know is why he made this one. My theory is that Herzog got caught in California text messaging while driving a couple times and the judge made him do a movie about it instead of community service. If anybody knows, please PM me.

9/10

*Herzog makes documentaries, feature films, and even acts in other people's movies.

Synecdoche, New York (2008)

One of the best movies ever made, although very hallucinatory and sad. Will likely induce nightmares, epiphanies, and suicidal thoughts.

[10/10 · 7 April 2009]

That's about it. The movie follows a moment or two every few years in the life of Philip Seymour Hoffman's somewhat tortured playwright. All of the performances in the film were great. The writing here was circular but brilliant. I've said it before and I'll say it again: Charlie Kaufman must do a ton of LSD (in fact I read here that the film was like a bad LSD trip, which I completely agree with). This is an actor's movie, a playwright's movie, but also an easily accessible film for the masses. Warning: this movie is funny and hallucinatory, but also very, very sad. Although there are no suicides in the film, it is definitely not for the potentially suicidal. Seriously. I'd never say that about anything else I've ever seen. Watching this movie is like that Stephen King short story from the 1980s about long-distance space travel wherein a person stays awake (they are supposed to be unconscious and sees EVERYTHING and perceives/experiences eternity, which drives him irrevocably insane: you will never see the world the same way or be the same person again.

Golgo 13 (2008–2009)

Very good; almost as good as the manga.

[9/10 · 3 January 2009]

"Golgo 13," while being my favorite comic book character (although he is not likable; after all, he's an assassin), has not for the most part received very good, faithful screen adaptations. For the uninitiated, Golgo 13 is the alias of Duke Togo (also, probably an alias, but people seem to know his name routinely), the world's deadliest assassin and foremost sharpshooter. Now, TokyoTV has made a very faithful, beautifully rendered, decently animated animated series based on the long-running manga. I would recommend this for fans of manga/anime, comic books, and assassin/action movies and even mysteries. The episodes are self-contained and even non-linear, much like the comics. Catch this sweet show on the video-hosting sites, someone is in the process of translating them all into English, Spanish, and French.

Forgetting Sarah Marshall (2008)

Forgettable. (with a "sorta" spoiler)

[6/10 · 29 April 2008]

Still, some good moments and better acting than this movie deserved, because there isn't a whole lot here. The movie seems incompetently edited and poorly written, with entire plot threads and characters forgotten (sorry, Segel; but your acting was good). Mila Kunis is gorgeous and a decent actress. Kristen Bell is cute and always turns in good performances as unlikeable (or "seriously flawed"; take your pick) characters. Lots of Apatow regulars in cameos. Some funny jokes, but not funny enough, and the drama was undramatic: it might not be such a good idea to immediately 'fess up to an abortive BJ with the ex to your new girlfriend, retard.

Doomsday (I) (2008)

So who told this movie's producers that the Special Olympics gave out film awards?

[6/10 · 16 March 2008]

This movie plays like a what-not-to-do list for filmmakers: DO NOT plagiarize EVERY SINGLE SCENE from superior films (I mean this literally; I can't wait for the lawsuits to start flying); DO NOT make "Waterworld" look innovative and brilliant by way of comparison; DO NOT cast Malcolm McDowell if you want the audience to take your movie seriously; etc.

And yet, I must admit that I had fun watching this complete turd. Sure it's schadenfreude, but for some viewers, it might be enough. I gave it 4 out of 10 stars for this aforementioned "how bad can it be?/ you won't believe how awful it is" phenomenon.

Lucky Number Slevin (2006)

This movie is okay, but it's a far cry from a masterpiece.

[5/10 · 11 November 2006]

I had read good things about this movie, and so I was prepared to like it a whole lot. But, alas, it was not to be. This is one of those movies that has a complicated plot. The plot is so complicated, in fact, that it contradicts itself on quite a few occasions. The people giving this movie a 10/10 (at last count, 25.2% of IMDb voters who rated this movie gave it a 10) are morons with bad taste who need to watch more movies, plus they are liars because even a mongoloid could tell you that this movie wasn't anything close to a masterpiece. But dumb people will love this movie and confuse its idiotic and convoluted plot for brilliance. On the other hand, I liked the cast. However, Oscar winners alone do not a good movie make. They did the best they could with the material at hand, which is admirable, I suppose (although they were also being paid millions of dollars for it).

Æon Flux (2005)

So-so: nothing genius, nothing horrible

[7/10 · 5 December 2005]

I would like to start off by saying that I am a huge fan of the MTV cartoon show of the early/mid-1990s, and that I always will be. This movie is not nearly as bad as one might guess, considering the facts that (1)it was produced by Hollywood hack's hack Gale Anne Hurd; (2)it is an adaptation of a cartoon, which studios notoriously ruin in film versions; (3) it was not screened for critics, which almost always means a movie sucks, but definitely means that a studio has almost no faith in it. For further evidence, consider when it was released, prime movie season, and what it was going up against, a year's worth of fantasy franchise entries (including Harry Potter and the Narnia movie) and the usual late-year Oscar contenders. The movie has its points. The acting is good enough. The set designs are phenomenal, worth the price of admission alone for architecture aficionados. The story was not quite as bad as what I am accustomed to, considering it deals with human clones (which must be in the played-out sci-fi hack's field guide). The character of Aeon is not as strange as in the cartoon, and the movie suffers for it. It is simply not very interesting without the Aeon Flux we all know and love, by which I mean the character, not the identically-named character played by Theron. Why didn't they make this into a cartoon movie? Also, a lot of morons are probably comparing this to The Matrix, which is unwarranted. This movie most recalls Logan's Run and Barbarella in terms of story and set design and Aeon's character, respectively. In fact, I'd list Barbarella as an inspiration for the cartoon character. Also, The Matrix is obviously the superior movie, albeit no less derivative. I thought this movie was also a little boring. The original was great (by which I mean fun to watch) because it didn't need coherent story or consistent characterization to be entertaining and engaging. This movie missed that critical point.

The Interpreter (2005)

A sturdy, workmanlike, somewhat innovative motion picture (no spoilers, so read on without fear)

[7/10 · 16 November 2005]

I enjoyed this movie mostly for two reasons, as it was fun to watch due to Sydney Pollack's solid direction (he hasn't yet made an unwatchably bad movie that I've seen, as his movies are consistently solid and watchable) and timely in that the plot credibly mirrors actual contemporary political events in Africa and the UN. Good acting from the entire excellent cast (starring Penn, Kidman, Keener, and Pollack himself, plus some familiar-looking black character actors), good cinematography, but ultimately no masterpiece. See it in widescreen for the pretty pictures. Lots of DVD extras, including director commentary, but by far the best extra consists of grouchy old Pollack discussing ad nauseum why he hates pan-and-scan for about five minutes (why did they even make this feature? To be sure, it is a minor laugh-riot).

Father of the Pride (2004–2005)

Actually, an okay show. Catch it while you can.

[12 October 2004]

I expected to hate this show, but can say it is better than most TV. Still, a book beats the hell out of it. Any book. If I ever have nothing better to do, I will watch it, which is rare. It is funny (low-brow pedestrian humor, but definitely not the "sick" show another poster makes it out to be) and well-voiced. So it's a cartoon show aimed at people who can count to 100, so what! Ignore comments like TheMightyN's, the show is not meant to take the place of anyone's beloved Friends or Frasier, exactly. Catch it while you can, as they'll probably cancel it pretty quickly. Don't hold your breath, N: I doubt they'll ever give "Sherk" his own show. Did you mean Shrek?

Firestarter (1984)

One of Stephen King's best; one of cinema's worst

[27 August 2001]

I read this book in high school years ago and it struck a chord in me. I had read a few King books before this. It seemed perfectly balanced and proved itself to be a very satisfying read. Stephen King books aren't usually as well-worked as this book, which would make a perfect movie, thought I. In terms of theme, character, and content, this stands almost alone among the mostly schlock and drek that are King adaptations. Notable exceptions are the Dead Zone(book and movie) and his short stories. Someone earlier remarked about the movie's faithfulness to the book. While I agree it was a faithful adaptation, I must disagree that it was any good at all. Bad casting(even I must say that two of my all-time faves, Sheen and Scott, are woefully miscast), bad cinematography, bad editing, bad special effects; overall, a poor movie with none of the horror, wonder, and humor which made the book good. Even as a movie it is of negligible merit. It is such a good story, so this pains me: * and a 1/2 out of ****.