Gong5 Reviews

Not Going Out (2006– )

Brilliant Comedy

[31 December 2011]

I m so glad this series continues on the bbc! It's so often that you discover a series and then you find out it's been canceled. TV is a strange medium that not always rewards the better efforts.

This series is great, it's such a refreshing mix of absurdist, anarchic, warm hearted and fun comedy. Nowadays script writers who lack in talent aim in mean-ness or crass humour, and this is amply evident. Not here!

Also the writing keeps getting more refined and the actors work very well against each other as the show progresses.

There's tons of talent in the writers and actors of course. Great work everyone. Not to be missed this show.

Back to the Future (1985)

What a concept.

[14 October 2010]

MJ Fox is rather grating after your 100th of so film you 've seen in your life, and I don't like this over actor (god bless his soul with the fight he is on) nor the other overactor Llloyd.

But Lea Thompson is something else here, she's so charming, and natural, and expressive...she's something.

This film's success was that it fused too great forces together teen love and lust with the concept of that happening between a boy and a younger version of their mom in the past. Now what's forceful here is not how many guys have fancied their moms, we are talking here symbolically, and in that level there's a taboo (for good reasons) and taboos can be very titillating and exciting (even if you don't subscribe to the literal meaning of the taboo - in your fantasizing subconscious of symbols and apparitions the taboo is still there (not literally with ones mom of course) contrasting such complex internal phenomena as motherhood, care, love, lust).

So in essence this fantasy notion of time travel gives the writers here (in a very unlikely for a Hollywood teen flick profound way) a very inconspicuous way to explore, or to tease rather, the very real forces of taboo, oedipal complexes (though I dislike the term) , our feelings of attachment, lust, love and we also have no worse than too teenagers we can project them on. While that doesn't go anywhere really, nor should it (or could it) necessarily, it keeps a very sensual and exciting aura that spills over the dumb and formulaic scenes that make up the rest of the plot.

MJ Foxes to me is a loss to the film, his constant spastic antics might add something to the comedy, but they detract a lot from his scenes with the girl. Plus his face which is so man boyish (that of young looking older man more so than that of an older looking kid) detracts too. He also plays too much like a caricature, the girl playing his mom is so into her role, and he... well, he isn't convincing at all. Anyway I ll shut up about MJH now because a lot of people love him here. It's just doesn't do it for me, now, it did when I was a kid and watched it.

So, all in all some really good acting by Lea, a delicious conceit for a script (not so the time travel of course, but the "incestuous" bit, but too formulaic a script otherwise, and not funny where it should have been (well if you are over 20-25 or something and with some good sense of humor).

It's a classic so ratings don't really matter (and as an aside I think films are not like sacks of potatoes that you can compare by rating/weighing, even potatoes are not so unimportant that solely on weighing they can't tell us nothing about their colours, bitterness, sweetness, taste...), so I'll give it a 7.

Hairspray (2007)

Dumb and formulaic, but very enjoyable (the fat girls is great)

[2 September 2010]

I preferred john waters version of course, the original with the transvestite divine and the crass show hostess Ricky lake, but john Travolta was really good as a transvestite here too.

As per usual Hollywood affairs are for the moron masses, so this loses the appeal of the Waters film but still the fat girl is a great actress, and it rips enough off the original to make it enjoyable.

I have to fill out these lines because somehow IMDb doesn't allow for less than ten lines of review, what's with that, I thought brevity was a virtue? It sure seems to so with all the garbage but gets posted here.

There I did it.

Butterfly (1981)

Incest

[2 September 2010]

I give this a graceful 8/10 because I 've watched so many crap films in my life that got 10/10 from all the morons at IMDb. This is a film that deals with incest in a crass way. But how does the rest of society deal with incest when at the very least about 1/70 girls are abused by members of their family in private? Not well at all, actually worse than in a crass way. So how do we expect a film about incest as a western to be? As freud said, it's the ultimate taboo. Pea is wonderful here, Orson is drinking his .. off and it shows, all in all a great movie not to be missed, but it will be, because it's not even out on DVD.

The Siege (1998)

Formulaic and boring beyond belief.

[29 January 2010]

Only the wonderful Anette Benning is worth it. The script is slow,boring and formulaic, and so cliché ridden. Strictly for (some) teenagers and morons, lots of them around.

Only Hollywood can mass produce such stinkers. Another day another dollar for some fat exec cat in Hollywood. Seeing this after 9/11 it isn't even eerie? what is more shocking this unreal junk or the terrorist attack? These propagandising films straight out of the offices and the wallets of that organisation and the Israeli lobby of course, and then there's the real deal.

"They are gonna hit the march?", one character says, "Can you imagine a better target?" Well it seems actual terrorists had a better imagination, which says a lot about the screenwriters.

To be honest there is a point to be made in that the Americans train their terrorists abroad and then unleash them upon themselves, takes a lot to be world bully, and someone's had to do it. But this simple point doesn't have to make for such bad films.

And of course this is whitewashed and watered down because the bad US general is arrested for the torture and murder of an arab suspect, not that much luck for any court marshal in Guantanamo...

Washington gives the umpteenth performance of that one character he plays all the time, or about 95% of the time to be precise.

Mr. Monk has a role as a side kick too, he's a good actor, but after monk he's too typecast to make him palatable.

Like I said Ms. Benning is a wonderful actress, too bad she didn't wear a bullet proof vest.

The Innocents (1961)

What a bore...

[6 January 2010]

The kids are excellent and so is the cinematography, Kerr is OK too.

But boy is the script a naive bore, no wonder this hack Capote co-wrote the script, his journalistic writing never had a bone of originality.

And it's all good and well to talk about traumatic experiences, and freudian repression and all sorts of fancy metaphors that people tend to read into films, but the fact of the matter is that the story just isn't there. Nothing happens at all trust me. There's no big revelation, an innuendo here another there, and that's that.

Prissy governess stays in the house with two young kids, she has a few visions of a man and a woman, the head maid tells her the vision is of a man who used to work at the stable or something and who died on the stairs some time ago and the woman in the vision, his lover, committed suicide over this. And then the governess has a few more visions and some confrontations with the kids, before she sends the girl and the maids away, to stay with the little boy, he forces him to say the name of the devil that haunts him, or so she thinks, and the boy dies...big frigging deal.

I like dark and atmospheric type movies of that age, l' anne derrière a Marrienbande is a favourite, but this is one is a miss for sure. So what if people like to speculate about the suggestive plot, in and of itself it's as boring as it could be. It's boring to have kids prance around acting all sinister, the apparitions are boring, and there are no twists. So what if the children were abused, or possessed or whatever, who cares? All these are interesting themes but when they are actually treated not hinted upon in a dead slow pseudo horror flick...

You really can't trust peoples' taste in movies judging by the high rating this has, they are easily impressed by the most vacant stuff (high brow for film buffs, low brow for the rest, but vapid nevertheless) and they miss the subtleties and intelligence of (most of) the truly great pieces of filmaking. But that's just how it is I guess.

Jade (1995)

Unintentionally good, in a sad, quasi repulsive, quasi idiotic way

[20 December 2009]

This is a Basic Instict rehash plain and simple, actually it's a pre draft of basic instict. The directing is a mess, I can't believe this guy shot the french connection. But now he's old and where he tries to be different here, he is instead just plainly bad...Tight close ups for no reasons, boring set scenes, saturated photography...the cast is decent but with such a trite script...the dialog is worse than trivial.

Its only saving grace is an unintended one, and maybe with that meditation in mind this can actually become a good film: Because the grotesqueness, blandness and stupidity in the realisation and script of this film reflects the world of powerless unsexual morons acting all powerful and sexual. Obviously this is unintended as this tries to be edgy, erotic and smart. It tries to be a murder mystery, a who done it on coke a la BI, but it ends up being a who gives a ..., I 've never been so emotionally detached at the end of any mystery.

But in this way it poetically conveys within it's form the artificiality of power and sex, the dead end that is pleasure without sentiments and sensibility.

A bland, derivative, tasteless film about power, sex and wealth, that fails so miserably that its failure becomes a medium of expression and gives the film an unintended second narrative level. It's also starkly realist, because what can be more real than a failed Hollywood flop on sex, money and power. You don't see people doing realistic actions, but you see people acting, directing badly, writing scripts badly. The epitome of decadence.

It could even be quite a good sobering experience, even weirdly lyrical if one watches it with that in mind.

Must Love Dogs (2005)

What a lovely romantic film.

[4 December 2009]

I 'm a guy and I m not into rom coms but I thoroughly enjoyed this one. Turns out IMDb users have rated it with 5.9. I 've decided that neither public opinion nor the critics are a good way to gauge a film, both are incredibly misguided, they don't have the appropriate intelligence, emotiveness, taste or flair. (!! HECK EVEN THE INBUILT IMDb DICTIONARY DOESN'T EVEN RECOGNISE THE WORD EMOTIVENESS AND THEY MARK IT IN THE PREVIEW AS A MISTAKE...they suggest that it be replaced with abortiveness, how about that for poetic irony) This might a bit on the harsh side but honesty has that tendency. Only a a friend whose taste you trust can really recommend a film.

Anyway, I digressed enough. This is a sensitive, very well plotted and very funny film. I wasn't expecting this and I very positively surprised. First of all all the actors here give fantastic, even John Cussack who I thought had only been doing phone ins lately.

Diane Lane, well what can you say about Ms. Lane, she's such a treat, such a dependable actress. Here she lets off her guard and delivers a very difficult performance (that of a woman growing older, being neurotic, being needy) in such a splendid way. She's so appealing here being so vulnerable. I thought no one could hold a candle to Diane Keaton in these types of roles but Lane here is a more mature Annie Hall for the 2000s. Actually the film is very Woody Allen-y in a lot of ways.

The sublime Stockard Channing gives a fine performance too (what a fantastic comedienne, she could make watching paint dry entertaining, one of the truly great actors on the screen these days.), and so does Elizabeth Perkins, and the old master Christopher Plummer. But all the other characters are so well acted too. Absolutely fantastic casting here.

Kudos for the direction here and of course the writing, there are some minor lines that gave me belly laughs. Most of them subtle and understated of course like much of this film. It seems unless you paint with these awful broad dramatic or comedic strokes people don't get it. And why would they. And what lovely dogs too!!

A real unexpected treat this film, a fun, sensitive, silly and honest romantic comedy.

Princesses (2005)

I wish people with less money and connections could make films...

[30 November 2009]

...Because almost all the ones that do have money and connections are shallow and gutless and that's why you have to dig and dig and dig to find a good film.

Another reviewer got a 0/11 out of the eleven gracious contributors to this film fro saying this is boring. He was right in saying that the acting is indeed very good, the main actress does seem to overact a bit, but the domenican girl is a joy to watch, and the minor characters are very well acted too.

So, big love to the actors here, great job.

Big boos to the directors and screenwriters. What a shallow sophomoric story, no twists, no turns, and that could be acceptable if at least there was some semblance of a cinema verity, a gritty reality portrayed. But there's none of this.

The film doesn't build up, doesn't explore characters, doesn't even have one single story to tell. Forget imagination or plot. I am not a blockbuster Hollywood viewer but give me something more than some shallow musings on "someone exists because you remember them" and about princesses being too sensitive. Any way you cut it, under any sympathetic light you might want to view the film it fails miserably and that's because of the flat, dirt poor story and characterisation.

It's more than obvious that the director and writer are clueless when it comes to prostitution and that's why this is reduced to boring stereotypes.

Unfortunately very few real prostitutes rise from the gutter to tell their story. Let me rephrase that because I 've read some wonderful insightful books about prostitution from prostitutes. Very few real prostitutes actually get that big chunk of money to make a film. I tell you whatever little contact I had with working girls as a man, some of those short rushed discussions were far more honest and heartbreaking than any of this boring trite.

Let's be frank prostitution exists because men are horny and men have power, and prostitutes do what they do because some of them are lazy and want an easy way out, and most of them have been abused and are tortured souls, they are also poor girls and some are stupid girls. It's not a happy subject matter because it reflects on the atrocious nature of people, mostly men. It might not even be an interesting matter. But if you are going to tackle it, there's stuff there for sure, if you are to make a movie of it there's so much there to avoid banality and clichés. The sheer number of which here are mind blowing.

But of course that's happens when people with money make films about issues they have neither the sensitivity nor the intellect to handle, and that they've not lived through for sure. So we get clichés: hiv, the bad pimp, the junkie, the college kid, the immigrant, uuuggghhh...

And what's with 15 manu chao songs in a single film? Straight from an "anti globalisation" march.

Miller's Crossing (1990)

Uggg..

[25 September 2009]

Very thinly plotted and just above average acted. Some mix ups and double crossings from some of the mafiosi crossing paths, but we don't really care about any of them really, no background on them, just some vague talk on game fixing. The minor character of Casper is a joy to watch and there are some brilliant understated comedic lines from him, but the others are all paper thinly written and forgettable. I don't like Gabriel Byrne, he's not much of an actor, but he's half decent here, just barely. Marcia Gay Harden is atrocious though. They are making this fuss about this plain broad, the guys who own every working girl in town. Give me a break. It's very easy to tell she got the part from the window, good connections though I ll grant her that.

What else. Ah, again it proves that most film viewers are morons if they proclaim this thinly written and forgettable story as a masterpiece. Fairwell my lovely is a great film, and so is the other raymond carver film they shot, the big sleep, but this is just trite. Of course its not the disgrace with Stuart Cox characters that the Cohen's write these days (malcovich in burn after reading) but it ain't good either. Of course as per usual some brilliant Cohen wit every thirty minutes or so, and the usual great cinematography but that's about it.

I am giving it four stars while it should be five or six just because I had high hopes for it and didn't meet the expectations at all.

A very disappointing film all in all. It really bugs me how a film like this gets such high grades, a film so vacant and soul less as this, a gangster farce, and vapid in its own genre really. Who cares about a half wit small time gangster who never as much as emotes to anything in the film, at least give us some clever twists here, everything is so boringly predictable.

Well, the Cohen's being the jewry they are got all the funds they could to keep making more films after this and luckily we did get a masterpiece in Lebowski. But it seems lately their films are worse than millers' crossing, very stupid crap they make nowadays, just utter farce garbage...shame really cause they are some of the people that are really doing cinema in the states. Let's hope they get some of that talent back, because I am sure they too know it that burn after reading and the other one with clooney and zeta jones are phone ins.

Inglourious Basterds (2009)

Trash

[18 September 2009]

Some people have outgrown prepubescence and find this a very disturbing sign to were the world is heading with morons making films such as this one and influencing western youth. That's somewhat hopeful.

Even seen from a purely aesthetic standpoint and not a moral one putting Jewish people under hiding in the south of France to the sounds of a spaggeti western and cutting into the fake southern accent of Brad Pit can only be the work of a true cretin.

This tired provocation and disrespect to human suffering is as insidious as it is boring. And that's the most tragic thing of all to me.

Just cause some video store freak once got lucky throwing in a few old clichés doesn't mean we have to perpetually suffer as a global culture to this garbage. And what is worse he's created a whole new generation who savour artifacts that are worse than dirt, and favour and proliferate them.

I am barely holding back from wishing this guy a fate similar to the many splatter scenes he's subjected the world into. That would make some sense, if some idiot chooses to replicate scene after scene after scene of sadistic graphic brutality enabling and recreating it in the world it would make sense that he suffer through it, wouldn't it. But that would be going along his mentality, the twisted, stupid vindictive one. So I would reason that more awareness of this trash is the imperative, so more people can avoid their insidious ways, and will thus be better off. But I don't foresee much hope there. Anyway.

As for the holocaust read Primo Levi, watch Shindler's List, and the lovable Mel Brooks take on it, and try educating yourself on the reality of this unnamable horror that was the persecution of the Jewish people by the German people. And let's bear in mind that this hasn't been of course the sole genocide, but there are other ones in history that are comparable and even more brutal. Some are occurring right now in the genocide of the Kurdish people by the Turkish people, and of the Chinese people on their minorities. Others like the genocide of the Indian people by the American people occurred further down in history. And also becoming aware to the fact that the Jewish state has committed atrocities of immeasurable magnitude to the Palestinian people, atrocities that should never have been committed by a people that suffered so much in their own persecution by others.

And vote this garbage down to send this moron back to shelving videos.

Very Bad Things (1998)

One of the worst films ever made, bad, sad, and stupid...

[17 April 2009]

...and the good reviews are a testament of friends and family of the director's commenting and/or the generally shallow level of people's tastes. This is abysmally bad, it's probably the single most unfunny film I have watched. This is not a black comedy, it's not a comedy, it's not even black, it's a sickly stupid green hue. It's mean in a shallow childish way but with none of the charm of kids. Every single character is cartoonish and the bad premise is executed as awfully as can be, very ugly, very very nasty staff. The ending is surely the most repulsive thing I have ever watched, truly, cruelly awful and offensive. This film is offensive, it's offensive, to love, friendship, cleverness but it's even offensive to shallowness and brainlessness too, it goes beyond that. There's no motivation to the characters, no suspense, just death and mayhem, very unfunny death and mayhem. A really sad, bad, and stupid film. I hope the director meets the fate he depicts in his film and saves us thus from such horrors.

p.s. I am still trying to fathom the idiocy I just watched, not a single funny line nada...nothing...

Final Analysis (1992)

What's NOT to like in this film? Beautifully done suspense neo noir.

[4 February 2009]

I am overcompensating here, this should really be a 9/10 but I am so annoyed by the lack of taste shown by the ratings at IMDb that I feel the 1 extra credit is fair enough. I have actually lost all hope of people choosing wisely and making good suggestions on films...Hollywood has made a science out of aiming for the lowest common denominator anyway and making trillions.

It would be great if we could comment comment on an existing review at imd, such as the one by some "licensed clinical psychologist" which has been been chosen as spotlight review. Now this fella in all his psychotherapeutic wisdom acts like a 5 year old and takes this film literally and passes judgment on Gere's character's psychiatric practices. Is he nuts? It's a damn film for Christ's sake, and a neo noir!!! Of course the shrink will cross the "boundaries" with his patients and act unprofessionally and "needily", he's supposed to be setting up a drama. Let alone that these things ALSO happen in real life. Drama's are not set up by shrinks who act according to AMA rules and psychiatric ethics. To pass judgment on the film on such grounds is like saying that Dumbo is not supposed to fly because elephants don't. PLEASE, IMDb, take this review off the front page,it's insulting.

OK. on with the review: THIS IS A GREAT NEO NOIR FILM, ACTUALLY IT'S PROBABLY THE BEST NEO NOIR AND ONE OF THE BEST CRIME/SUSPENSE/LOVE DRAMA FILMS I VE WATCHED.

Why? The plot is intelligent, it has plenty of twists, and surprisingly very few holes in it (that ANY neo noir or crime thriller for that matter even David Mammet is going to have). Even the more clever viewers are going to miss some of the twists and they won't see them coming. But anyway most here complained that it went to fast for them...may I suggest they use a staple of the modern DVD/blue ray/VCR the pause button and reflect in the interim pause...The script is also highly emotionally charged. Of course that's happening within the confines of its genre, it's not a film heavy on realism but provided you abide by the codes of the noir, there's plenty of pain here, shame, longing, distrust, antagonism, hate, love, friendship not only involving the main characters but every single minor character too. It's also very NUANCED which I suspect is why the film warrants the "this film sucks" comment gracing the boards.

All characters are very conflicted, very human, you can't pin them down to a simpleton archetype, the good doc, the manipulative patient, say, because they all have their blind spots and conflicts. I am sure a lot of people will hate this -why's the script writer messing about-, he or she should be acting in this a to b to c predictable way. Yet this is what makes the film so great, far better than the Hitchkokian bore it alludes to.

THE CAST IS ALSO GREAT, EVERYONE. They all nail down their roles to the tee. And then you have the main trio, Richard Gere and Kim Basinger in their prime, and Uma Thurman in one of her budding roles. What else does one want from the lead roles in film? First of all they are all stunning. Now that might not mean much to most in, and it doesn't mean anything to me either most of the time, but these three are not just good looking, they are gifted. They all have a once in thirty years in film charm to them. Seriously folks has their been a more charming lead than the good Buddhist Richard Gere, after Brando, and maybe coming close to him Mickey Roorke and Johny Depp. Who? Mat f. Damon? Gere has such a tender yet tough face, I won't do him justice describing his charisma here in a small review. Anyone who's got eyes can see. And so is Kim, I re-watched the film recently and after all the Scarlett Johansens and Kate Hudsons we 've seen recently you can tell that Hollywood has dropped the ball big time... look at the nineties they had Kim, and Madeleine Stowe, and Jessica Lange and, and, and...this are dirt poor times wrt to actresses' talent.

Kimmie is just fantastic here, the tone of her voice, the understated performance, she oozes charm with a mere glance. He chemistry with Mr. Gere is like hand and glove too. And she's a way, way underrated actress. This girl is up there with the top stars of the 40s, 50s, and 60s, she's a Marilyn. She plays a very complex character here and there's not a single scene where she's not mesmerizing...An all too brief nod -for no other reason than brevity for this review- to Uma and the rest of the cast, I ll just say that the scenes with Uma on the couch have such a suspenseful and seductive mood, the way she phrases her dream and looks at the shrink, Uma another natural talent.

I also really liked the directing here but the 1000 word limit calls. I loved the motifs: the lighthouse, the promise of love, the chance that love and truth above all can undo the damage, the remorseless nature of damage being done and perpetuated. Those who've watched the film will know what I mean, and I am not giving anything away to those who haven't. Last but not least I find George Fenton's score excellent, a really intricate part of the whole film. Maybe it could have been a bit more risky and less classic, but I think this austerity and measured portions of predictability and inventiveness only add to this very classy and elegant film which to me is a lost gem.

The Sweetest Thing (2002)

Truelly atrocious

[3 February 2009]

I don't know how the actresses agreed to play this part, this is such a tasteless waste of perfectly good film. Most people will find it repulsive. There little humour in it and so many parts that are just disgusting beyond relief. Gross out laughs of the lowest common denominator, the directors and writes must have set this up out of a trailer park...no forget that, I got nothing against trailer park people, they met in public lavatories....

A mockery to men and women. Triple a,awful,awful, awful.

There's a reason why this one has a 4.7 one of the lowest of low ratings for a mainstream comedy.

Avoid, and thank me latter.

Even Money (I) (2006)

7.5 Actually.

[17 January 2009]

I 've made up my mind to try to be succinct in my reviews, brief, to the point. This will be more helpful to me and to the readers here. Art should speak for itself, reviews are not diatribes.

It's a testament to the continued ignorance and emotionally shallowness of the majority (even at IMDb that is an IQ/eq click over the median) that decent films get sub par ratings, and atrocious ones get good ones. That said it's always heartening to see that an informed minority (who's voted 30/45 on another reviewer's positive review) has got the sense and the sensibility (to paraphrase one of the loveliest wordplays ever) to appreciate good films within their differing opinions of taste, background, world view, frame of mind.

This is one of those films that is actually quite good, yet you 'd never know that from the rating or some reviews here. First of all we have an excellent cast of seasoned actors giving fine, tempered performances, not overdone, not understated, just fine tuned performances all around. So the drama or the twists aren't spectacular, so what? There's plenty of humanity here and emotion to keep one's interest. A special vote to Kim Basinger who isn't getting the recognition she deserves, she's adorable here and she's grown to be a splendid actress, despite the ensemble cast the real star here is her. All in all a very sweet film.

En face (2000)

Lack of intelligence by the viewers is not a scriptwriters fault.

[13 January 2009]

Love conquers all, or does it? And at what price? At what price to love itself? Will love triumph, or will it be defeated. Can it be defeated triumphantly? What are these other guys who reviewed this blathering on about? Especially the guy that rated this a two, Jesus Christ, garbage after garbage comes out and this film gets his two? It gets my ten, this is a heartfelt, wonderful, lustful film. Everyone involved excel themselves in their performances. They play a couple very much in love with each other...Clotilde is a breath of fresh air. There's so much tension and suspense too.

There are no holes whatsoever in the ending, which makes for one of the most heart wrenching, poignant and splendid twist finale's in, let me say this cinematographic history. What an aching finale, so, so beautiful. Of course if the viewers' are baffled because of their low IQs that's not something the screenwriter can do anything about. We can't have all film being common idiocy Hollywood type films. I tell you guys and gals if you got some brains and a heart you will just love this ending.

By all means,any chance you get, watch this gem that never was. A fabulous, fabulous movie, you 'll remember me in the end and thank me for suggesting it, forget the morons, trust me. FIND IT, WATCH IT!