Set in the late 1940s, The Hi-Lo Country is a strange mix of drama, romance, western, buddy movie and something that can be best described as an Americana version of Latin America's magical realism: there's even a witch telling the future, and her prophecy fulfills! The movie does not offer much in terms of action: it rather sets out to be a "slice-of-life" piece, taking a look both at the events and the changes occurring in all the lead characters. I can understand this kind of approach can be disliked by some viewers; still, I found this movie interesting and somewhat underrated (picked it one evening on the cable). If you like a movie that emphasizes the mood instead of the actual action and with a strong cast ensemble (watch for Northern Exposure's Darren Burrows!), this is for you. 7 out of 10.
Reviews
20 Reviews
The Bourne Identity
(2002)
Good
23 June 2011
While this movie purports to be an adaptation of Robert Ludlum's classic action novel, it actually borrows some of the main plot points, and nothing more. Which actually is a quite good decision: this new, 2000s-updated version of a story, in which a man, found floating unconsciously in the Mediterranean Sea and suffering from a total amnesia, slowly starts picking up pieces of his forgotten past as a undercover agent, actually works. "The Bourne Identity" is a decent action flick, with lots of high-speed chases and hand-to-hand combat scenes; Matt Damon is very believable and natural as the title character, and Franka Potente as his love interest shows why she could be regarded as the modern cinema's overlooked gem. Chris Cooper also shines as the bad guy, although he is unlucky to share many scenes with the late Brian Cox, and Cox always had the ability to steal the scene whenever he appears on screen, and this movie is no exception. A good action flick. 8/10
The Keep
(1983)
Promises so much, but delivers so little
23 June 2011
In a 1942 Romania, a German unit occupying the old keep on a mountain pass is decimated, as two soldiers accidentally release an old demon kept within its walls. This movie had all the ingredients: decent director, Tangerine Dream's atmospheric score, great cinematography by the late Alex Thomson, some decent actors (Glenn, Prochnow, Byrne, McKellen), and to top it all, the great source - a very good horror book by F. Paul Wilson - but ultimately, it failed. The actors are good (especially Prochnow), and both the cinematography and music are great; unfortunately, the script itself is too shallow and actually loses most of the original book's atmosphere and tension. In a word, "The Keep" could have been a decent, 7-8-point horror movie, but ultimately it fails. A nice filler for a rainy afternoon, if you don't expect too much. 5/10
Karol - The Pope, the Man
(2006 TV Movie)
What was this supposed to be, a 1910s western movie?
31 March 2010
A real shame. Such important and complex figure as John Paul II deserves a good movie about him; unfortunately, this one did not come anywhere near that.
Piotr Adamczyk gives his best efforts, but even the master violinist wouldn't give too impressive performance when given very poorly written concerto. Essentially, the movie jumps from one episode to another, being a collection of small pieces rather than a cohesive unity; in effect, this leaves the viewer increasingly bored as the movie progresses, as there is nothing really interesting here.
But what hurts the movie the most is the ultimate polarization of characters. The Pope is always good, smiling, charismatic, wise, - put in any positive adjective and it will definitely fit in. The baddies are always cold and cynical. Such polarization gives the viewer the impression of watching an old 1910s silent western: with the Sheriff always cleanly shaven and wearing stainless white coat and the bad guys always bearded and wearing black. Of course, all the controversies concerning the Pope are absent: he is perfect human being, and so, becomes a cardboard cut-out rather than a live character, far from the complex, rich personality the Pope in reality was. In fact, the same can be said about virtually every character, with one notable exception.
The ironic twist of the movie is that the only character that sticks to the viewer's mind is the infamous Mehmet Ali Agca: somehow, he is the only character in the movie that seems to be human, of flesh and bones. And the scene where he assembles his handgun and prepares for his mission is the high point of the entire movie: suddenly, some life is breathed into a lifeless parade of clichés and cardboard cut-outs. Sad. 2/10.
Piotr Adamczyk gives his best efforts, but even the master violinist wouldn't give too impressive performance when given very poorly written concerto. Essentially, the movie jumps from one episode to another, being a collection of small pieces rather than a cohesive unity; in effect, this leaves the viewer increasingly bored as the movie progresses, as there is nothing really interesting here.
But what hurts the movie the most is the ultimate polarization of characters. The Pope is always good, smiling, charismatic, wise, - put in any positive adjective and it will definitely fit in. The baddies are always cold and cynical. Such polarization gives the viewer the impression of watching an old 1910s silent western: with the Sheriff always cleanly shaven and wearing stainless white coat and the bad guys always bearded and wearing black. Of course, all the controversies concerning the Pope are absent: he is perfect human being, and so, becomes a cardboard cut-out rather than a live character, far from the complex, rich personality the Pope in reality was. In fact, the same can be said about virtually every character, with one notable exception.
The ironic twist of the movie is that the only character that sticks to the viewer's mind is the infamous Mehmet Ali Agca: somehow, he is the only character in the movie that seems to be human, of flesh and bones. And the scene where he assembles his handgun and prepares for his mission is the high point of the entire movie: suddenly, some life is breathed into a lifeless parade of clichés and cardboard cut-outs. Sad. 2/10.
Das Boot
(1981)
The classic
7 February 2010
One of the best war movies ever made, Das Boot tells the story of a group of submariners aboard the German U-boot in late 1941.
The realism of the images is striking: one can almost smell the putrid scent of those small, confined spaces. The movie strongly resembles "Black Hawk Down": the soldiers do not talk about politics, they do not care if they are doing the right thing or the wrong one. They are the professionals, they have to follow their orders. And they do.
Had the pleasure to watch the full 208-minute long version, which is probably the definitive one: the 5-hour miniseries, for me, was too long and lost some of the dramaturgy in process.
The realism of the images is striking: one can almost smell the putrid scent of those small, confined spaces. The movie strongly resembles "Black Hawk Down": the soldiers do not talk about politics, they do not care if they are doing the right thing or the wrong one. They are the professionals, they have to follow their orders. And they do.
Had the pleasure to watch the full 208-minute long version, which is probably the definitive one: the 5-hour miniseries, for me, was too long and lost some of the dramaturgy in process.
Massacre in Rome
(1973)
Good, could be better, but really good movie
7 February 2010
One of the first movies of George Pan Cosmatos, "Massacre In Rome" is a chilling story of German reprisal for the death of 32 German soldiers in a IED explosion in Rome in 1944. It is decided that for each dead German, 10 Italians must be executed.
Cosmatos was an excellent craftsman, and it shows here. The movie is cold and distanced: both protagonists, disillusioned German officer (Burton) and Italian priest (Mastroianni) are faced with the inescapable fate: Burton must follow his orders and carry on with the execution, while Mastroianni's attempt to make the Pope stop the Germans fails, because the Pope is not willing to get involved.
"Massacre In Rome" has one excellent scene: the briefing where Burton explains to his officers how the executions will be carried out. A really chilling sequence, thanks to Burton's maestry. The somewhat cheesy action sequences somewhat lower the vote. It would easily be a 8.
Cosmatos was an excellent craftsman, and it shows here. The movie is cold and distanced: both protagonists, disillusioned German officer (Burton) and Italian priest (Mastroianni) are faced with the inescapable fate: Burton must follow his orders and carry on with the execution, while Mastroianni's attempt to make the Pope stop the Germans fails, because the Pope is not willing to get involved.
"Massacre In Rome" has one excellent scene: the briefing where Burton explains to his officers how the executions will be carried out. A really chilling sequence, thanks to Burton's maestry. The somewhat cheesy action sequences somewhat lower the vote. It would easily be a 8.
The Long Kiss Goodnight
(1996)
Not a bad movie, just nothing new and special
7 February 2010
In her final attempt to make a blockbuster lead, Geena Davis stars as an ordinary housewife with a kid, suffering from amnesia, who finds out she was once a top secret governmental killer and now some old friends have found her. This is not a bad movie at all; just nothing special happens here.
It has a fine amount of shootings, blood, dead bodies, one-liners, big explosions, cool bad guys etc. - just nothing substantial and nothing new and as a result nothing that could really attract the viewer. A good craftsmanship, but nothing that stays longer in your memory. A perfect example why Harlin and Davis never actually reached stardom, or anything close.
It has a fine amount of shootings, blood, dead bodies, one-liners, big explosions, cool bad guys etc. - just nothing substantial and nothing new and as a result nothing that could really attract the viewer. A good craftsmanship, but nothing that stays longer in your memory. A perfect example why Harlin and Davis never actually reached stardom, or anything close.
Bad Girls
(1994)
Nothing special
10 August 2009
When the prostitute Cody Zamora (Madeleine Stowe) shoots a military man in self defense and is about to be hanged, she is rescued by her three companions (Masterson, Barrymore, MacDowell). They want to leave for Oregon, but are pursued by Pinkerton agents and their paths cross with Kid Jarrett, the local thug, and his mob.
The movie itself is pretty fine; the problem is that it appeared too late. After such landmarks as "Unforgiven", or even "Dances With Wolves" - not to mention the classic antiwesterns of the 1960s and 1970s - a western which is nothing more but a pure entertainment appears somewhat empty and unfocused. Also, it is somewhat underwritten: the good chicks are individualised, clean and smart, the bad guys are a mass of dirty, drunken, constanly sinisterly laughing, idiotically-behaving, stereotypical villains. In the 90s? please! The movie could have worked as a tribute to classic old westerns, but what worked fine in the case of "Silverado" is here neglected - sadly, because this would significantly improve the picture. All in all, not a bad movie - just nothing new and original. 5/10
The movie itself is pretty fine; the problem is that it appeared too late. After such landmarks as "Unforgiven", or even "Dances With Wolves" - not to mention the classic antiwesterns of the 1960s and 1970s - a western which is nothing more but a pure entertainment appears somewhat empty and unfocused. Also, it is somewhat underwritten: the good chicks are individualised, clean and smart, the bad guys are a mass of dirty, drunken, constanly sinisterly laughing, idiotically-behaving, stereotypical villains. In the 90s? please! The movie could have worked as a tribute to classic old westerns, but what worked fine in the case of "Silverado" is here neglected - sadly, because this would significantly improve the picture. All in all, not a bad movie - just nothing new and original. 5/10
Tamara
(2005)
Could be much better
10 August 2009
Warning: Spoilers
An unattractive schoolgirl, Tamara (Jenna Dewan) becomes subject of bullying because of two things: she reveals that members of the school sports team use performance-enhancing drugs, and because the other students find out that she's in love with a young, married teacher, Mr Natoli (Matthew Marsden - the guy who broke his wrist in "Black Hawk Down"), even trying to practice witchcraft to seduce him. A prank on her turns bad and the girl is incidentally killed. Out of fear, the students bury her in the woods; to their surprise, Tamara appears in the school the next day, seemingly completely changed. Soon, she starts her bloody revenge on all the pranksters.
(This section contains some spoilers.) A sad example of a picture that could be much better. The witchcraft is never explained at all; where did Tamara get her magical book? They are not sold out on every corner. What kind of witchcraft it is? We are left to guess. And how is she able to alter people's minds and behavior, as shown in the latter part of the movie (even forcing two of her bullies to have a gay sex)?
(This section also contains spoilers. You were warned.) The main fault is, in my opinion, the way the character of Tamara was written; we feel sorry for her in the first part of the movie, and when she starts her revenge, we even want all the bullies who were responsible for her demise to die a violent death. But later, her character turns out to be so wicked after her resurrection that we quickly start to loathe that b*tch. (Most of all because she becomes hell-bent on Natoli, wanting to get him no matter the cost, even going as far as to command two of her bullies to kill his wife.) This imbalance, in my opinion, somewhat ruined the movie; it would be much better if Tamara was more focused character.
I've seen some worse horror movies; this simply has nothing memorable (the only exceptions: the scene mentioned above and Jenna Dewan in black underwear. Unfortunately, no nudity occurred in this movie.) 5/10.
(This section contains some spoilers.) A sad example of a picture that could be much better. The witchcraft is never explained at all; where did Tamara get her magical book? They are not sold out on every corner. What kind of witchcraft it is? We are left to guess. And how is she able to alter people's minds and behavior, as shown in the latter part of the movie (even forcing two of her bullies to have a gay sex)?
(This section also contains spoilers. You were warned.) The main fault is, in my opinion, the way the character of Tamara was written; we feel sorry for her in the first part of the movie, and when she starts her revenge, we even want all the bullies who were responsible for her demise to die a violent death. But later, her character turns out to be so wicked after her resurrection that we quickly start to loathe that b*tch. (Most of all because she becomes hell-bent on Natoli, wanting to get him no matter the cost, even going as far as to command two of her bullies to kill his wife.) This imbalance, in my opinion, somewhat ruined the movie; it would be much better if Tamara was more focused character.
I've seen some worse horror movies; this simply has nothing memorable (the only exceptions: the scene mentioned above and Jenna Dewan in black underwear. Unfortunately, no nudity occurred in this movie.) 5/10.
Ashanti
(1979)
Not that bad
10 August 2009
Beverly Johnson and Michael Caine as an interracial marriage of doctors try to help some African kids when the woman is abducted by a ruthless slave hunter (Peter Ustinov). Seeing that the local officials are not too willing to do anything about it, Caine decides to take the justice into his own hands and starts chasing Ustinov across the vast deserts of Maghreb.
Despite all the warnings, not that bad movie. The pace is somewhat slow, and the acting somewhat absent (though both Malik and Ustinov try to do their best), but generally, an acceptable filler on a rainy afternoon. The high points are the shots of North African desert and the Omar Shariff's short appearance.
Beverly Johnson is pretty chick, but she's seen only periodically (still she has one scene of full frontal nudity, although very brief). And the grimy subject definitely deserved a better treatment. All in all, not a definitely bad movie; just nothing really memorable, exceptional and shining here. 5/10.
Despite all the warnings, not that bad movie. The pace is somewhat slow, and the acting somewhat absent (though both Malik and Ustinov try to do their best), but generally, an acceptable filler on a rainy afternoon. The high points are the shots of North African desert and the Omar Shariff's short appearance.
Beverly Johnson is pretty chick, but she's seen only periodically (still she has one scene of full frontal nudity, although very brief). And the grimy subject definitely deserved a better treatment. All in all, not a definitely bad movie; just nothing really memorable, exceptional and shining here. 5/10.
Own Goals and Gaffs
(1992 Video)
Fine For Fans
9 May 2004
Own Goals And Gaffs is a compilation of various football mistakes: bizarre own goals, missed passes, missed shots, that sort of things, both historical - European Cup 1972 (Wolverhampton vs Ado[Holland]), Premier League in th 50s and 60s, and modern - World Cup 1990 (Scotland vs Brazil), Premier League in the 90s. There is also a set dedicated exclusively to Paul Gascoigne. And Mr Danny Baker who compiled and narrates this is fine, his comments are ironical but good. For someone who is into football soccer] it is 84 minutes of enjoyment: my good, how stupid they are sometimes! Funny. If you enjoy football don't miss it. 8/10
Trainspotting
(1996)
Piotr St. says: Fecal Poetry.
8 February 2003
Warning: Spoilers
Trainspotting may be one of the most shocking movies ever, describing drug addiction from deep within. The film presents world seen thru the syringe, cold, terrifying, depressing.
Ewan McGregor is great as Mark Renton, drug addict trying to change his life. Thumbs up also for Jonny Lee Miller, and Robert Carlyle as mad, psychotic Francis Begbie.
(spoilers) The shortest description of Trainspotting: fecal poetry. This refers to the scene in which Renton loses his opiumic suppositories and desperately dives in a water closet (a REAL DIRTY one), and suddenly he appears into some imagined, vision sea, diving deep and finding his suppositories. Disgusting, but also intriguing. 9/10.
Ewan McGregor is great as Mark Renton, drug addict trying to change his life. Thumbs up also for Jonny Lee Miller, and Robert Carlyle as mad, psychotic Francis Begbie.
(spoilers) The shortest description of Trainspotting: fecal poetry. This refers to the scene in which Renton loses his opiumic suppositories and desperately dives in a water closet (a REAL DIRTY one), and suddenly he appears into some imagined, vision sea, diving deep and finding his suppositories. Disgusting, but also intriguing. 9/10.
Alien 3
(1992)
Piotr St. says: Pink Floyd - "Animals"
8 February 2003
On March 24, 1973, Pink Floyd blew the roof off the dump with their greatest album to date, "The Dark Side Of The Moon", one of the most inspiring, powerful and classic albums of the whole rock history. On September 15, 1975, they did something no one expected: they came with an album, being almost exact continuation of Dark Side..., but with a few changes in style (long, constructed compositions as opposed to short songs from TDSOTM) "Wish You Were Here", also considered as classical. However, nothing happens twice, and their successor, "Animals", presented to the audience on January 23, 1977, was a good, solid album, but didn't stand comparison to its precedessors.
OK, but what about Alien?
It's almost the same story. In 1979, "Alien" blasted everybody right into Space: incredibly challenging meteor, still standing incredibly fresh even now. In 1986, a continuation appeared, James Cameron's "Aliens". Once again, this was not a direct continuation (it couldn't be! NOW we all knew how Alien exactly look like, so the suspense of the first one was gone; now there were the only unknown thing - when, where and how aliens attack; and we had dozens of monsters instead of one and a bunch of marines instead of simply workers), but was also good as f**k.
But you can't have three masterpieces in a row, and Alien 3 simply couldn't outclass its precedessors, or even be equal to them. This might be caused by rather large changes the producers made to the original film (and mediocre level of "Animals" might be considered as a result of Roger Waters' autocratic domination on the Floyds). However, it stands pretty well, with its grimy, claustrophobic atmosphere and industrial settings. I have to admit I like this one, despite its faults (major bullshit: persons of YY chromosomes! An explanation: These are two types of human chromosomes, X and Y. Women have an XX combination, while men have XY. However, X chromosome is the only one that carries all features; Y doesn't carry anything, so the person having an YY couldn't exist because ovarium would ALWAYS give an X chromosome; and if even, by some very rare and strange mutation, such combination would appear, it would die immediately after conception).
7/10 (The Floyd-Alien similarities end here; the next Floydian slip, "The Wall", was a masterpiece; the next movie doesn't.)
OK, but what about Alien?
It's almost the same story. In 1979, "Alien" blasted everybody right into Space: incredibly challenging meteor, still standing incredibly fresh even now. In 1986, a continuation appeared, James Cameron's "Aliens". Once again, this was not a direct continuation (it couldn't be! NOW we all knew how Alien exactly look like, so the suspense of the first one was gone; now there were the only unknown thing - when, where and how aliens attack; and we had dozens of monsters instead of one and a bunch of marines instead of simply workers), but was also good as f**k.
But you can't have three masterpieces in a row, and Alien 3 simply couldn't outclass its precedessors, or even be equal to them. This might be caused by rather large changes the producers made to the original film (and mediocre level of "Animals" might be considered as a result of Roger Waters' autocratic domination on the Floyds). However, it stands pretty well, with its grimy, claustrophobic atmosphere and industrial settings. I have to admit I like this one, despite its faults (major bullshit: persons of YY chromosomes! An explanation: These are two types of human chromosomes, X and Y. Women have an XX combination, while men have XY. However, X chromosome is the only one that carries all features; Y doesn't carry anything, so the person having an YY couldn't exist because ovarium would ALWAYS give an X chromosome; and if even, by some very rare and strange mutation, such combination would appear, it would die immediately after conception).
7/10 (The Floyd-Alien similarities end here; the next Floydian slip, "The Wall", was a masterpiece; the next movie doesn't.)
The Abyss
(1989)
Piotr St. says: A real good one despite some faults.
8 February 2003
Warning: Spoilers
I've seen this film first about 12 years ago, when I was 12, and I found it then really fantastic. I saw it again a few days ago and I have to admit I still like this one.
(spoilers here) The Abyss sometimes lacks tension, and is divided into three sub-plots: a family movie with soon-to-be-divorced husband and wife reuniting again, a cold-war (?) movie with a S.E.A.L. commander strongly believing that the Reds have sunken US submarine and should be nuked for that, and a science fiction thriller about an alien race living deep in the ocean and their encounter with the human race. However, these three "sub-movies" are put together well, and the final effect is really good, despite the saccharine ending.
This flick costed about 70,000,000$ and never was a blockbuster, but now has a group of diehard fans. A cult movie for 70,000,000$? That's a punt! 8/10.
(spoilers here) The Abyss sometimes lacks tension, and is divided into three sub-plots: a family movie with soon-to-be-divorced husband and wife reuniting again, a cold-war (?) movie with a S.E.A.L. commander strongly believing that the Reds have sunken US submarine and should be nuked for that, and a science fiction thriller about an alien race living deep in the ocean and their encounter with the human race. However, these three "sub-movies" are put together well, and the final effect is really good, despite the saccharine ending.
This flick costed about 70,000,000$ and never was a blockbuster, but now has a group of diehard fans. A cult movie for 70,000,000$? That's a punt! 8/10.
Runaway Train
(I) (1985)
Piotr St. says: Prepare for a ride!
8 February 2003
Warning: Spoilers
Runaway Train is for me one of the best action movies ever made. Basically (spoilers here) the story is about two men who escape from a maximum security prison in Alaska and try to escape on a train. The driver has a stroke and dies, and the train runs without any control.
The director is Russian, and the script is based on an old story by Akira Kurosawa. Therefore, the movie is located on the junction of three different cultures. Fast action and suspense is American; the observations on human behavior put in an extreme conditions are common in Japanese movies; and the confrontation between man and cruel, outrageous nature and fatum controlling human life has its roots deep in Russian culture, Tchaikovsky and Dostoyevsky.
Jon Voight is simply incredible. A cruel, obsessed con whose only human aspect left is constant fight for independence still remains one of his greatest performances. Renken is almost the same, with an obsession of power and control. Eric Roberts also does well here.
Very highly recommended. 10/10.
The director is Russian, and the script is based on an old story by Akira Kurosawa. Therefore, the movie is located on the junction of three different cultures. Fast action and suspense is American; the observations on human behavior put in an extreme conditions are common in Japanese movies; and the confrontation between man and cruel, outrageous nature and fatum controlling human life has its roots deep in Russian culture, Tchaikovsky and Dostoyevsky.
Jon Voight is simply incredible. A cruel, obsessed con whose only human aspect left is constant fight for independence still remains one of his greatest performances. Renken is almost the same, with an obsession of power and control. Eric Roberts also does well here.
Very highly recommended. 10/10.
Alien
(1979)
Piotr St. says: A Classic.
8 February 2003
An incredible one. Fully stood the test of time. You can visit this 1979 meteor anytime and it is still fresh, scary and challenging. The beginning of (so far) a quadralogy (one sequel great, one fine, one mediocre). A Must! 10/10
2001: A Space Odyssey
(1968)
Piotr St. says: Unique experience
8 February 2003
Warning: Spoilers
I've rewieved 3 movies so far and I gave all of them 1/10. But don't worry. This movie does not deserve it.
(Some spoilers possible, depending on what do you understand as 'a spoiler') 2001: A Space Odyssey is an special and unique movie. Unlike almost all others, this one tends to use as little words as possible, the story is told mostly by the pictures and the music - and so, this may be the ONLY complete movie in history, telling EVERYTHING by images, not by words. The book gave a strong explanation of everything: the film simply presents you the pictures (I love one of it: an ape throws a bone in the air, and it, slowly floating down, suddenly turns into a spaceship floating in space - 4 millions of years of evolution and history of mankind, all turn into ONE SINGLE CUT!!!! Incredible.), and leaves all explanation up to you.
Definitely 10/10.
(Some spoilers possible, depending on what do you understand as 'a spoiler') 2001: A Space Odyssey is an special and unique movie. Unlike almost all others, this one tends to use as little words as possible, the story is told mostly by the pictures and the music - and so, this may be the ONLY complete movie in history, telling EVERYTHING by images, not by words. The book gave a strong explanation of everything: the film simply presents you the pictures (I love one of it: an ape throws a bone in the air, and it, slowly floating down, suddenly turns into a spaceship floating in space - 4 millions of years of evolution and history of mankind, all turn into ONE SINGLE CUT!!!! Incredible.), and leaves all explanation up to you.
Definitely 10/10.
Piotr St. says: AVOID THIS S*** AT ALL COST!!!!!!!!!
23 November 2002
Why oh why this piece of crap hasn't yet reached bottom 100? It deserves that! It's simply unwatchable.
I can understand that some people love Big Brother or other s*** like this. But -- If Mr. Gruza really enjoyed Big Brother, he might tape it from the TV, or get the people together, shot them with a camcorder and watch the result on a VCR with friends to have fun. But instead, he put this on a screen and wanted people to pay around $3.50 for this!
There is no plot. There are just some incredibly stupid people messing around, talking, drinking, but no one knows what they want to do, and why. If you want to watch some stupid people to have fun, try to watch Big Brother (if you won't fall asleep... it's oh so boring). If your wife has just left you, drink some beer and watch this .... film (?). It can kill you faster than barbiturates do.
Piece of crap. 1/10 and even this is too much for this 'film'.
I can understand that some people love Big Brother or other s*** like this. But -- If Mr. Gruza really enjoyed Big Brother, he might tape it from the TV, or get the people together, shot them with a camcorder and watch the result on a VCR with friends to have fun. But instead, he put this on a screen and wanted people to pay around $3.50 for this!
There is no plot. There are just some incredibly stupid people messing around, talking, drinking, but no one knows what they want to do, and why. If you want to watch some stupid people to have fun, try to watch Big Brother (if you won't fall asleep... it's oh so boring). If your wife has just left you, drink some beer and watch this .... film (?). It can kill you faster than barbiturates do.
Piece of crap. 1/10 and even this is too much for this 'film'.
The Avengers
(1998)
Piotr St. says: Huh huh huh! This sucks!
14 August 2002
Warning: Spoilers
For everyone who has ever seen at least one of episodes of the original "Avengers:, one thing is clear: It's very stupid, silly and laughable series... ...when taken seriously. At one moment, I got a 'moment of clarity' and I got one thing: In fact, this one is an intelligent and brilliant PARODY of spy-movies and TV series of the '60s (like 007s and The Saint). All the cliches and standards of those movies are here brought to an absurd: (some spoilers possible here) little cats manipulated electronically to attack and kill humans like big tigers? machines making cars and people matchbox-sized in one millisecond? people ripped to pieces by a 'winged avenger' with great metal claws - and not bleeding? Pathetic - when taken SERIOUSLY. If not - it's real FUN!
Why I'm writing this?
Because mr. Chechik didn't get any of that. This film is made so seriously it's incredible pathetic: (some more spoilers possible) Big Ben hit by a lightning explodes like it's made up of gasoline? Teddy bears sequence - God, it's simply stupid.
This film is boring, incoherent (this one may be caused by large cuts in finished movie) and, generally, barely watchable.
If you've never seen any episode of Avengers, you may even enjoy this. If not... do yourself a favor and don't even come CLOSE to this ***t.
This sucks! 1/10.
Why I'm writing this?
Because mr. Chechik didn't get any of that. This film is made so seriously it's incredible pathetic: (some more spoilers possible) Big Ben hit by a lightning explodes like it's made up of gasoline? Teddy bears sequence - God, it's simply stupid.
This film is boring, incoherent (this one may be caused by large cuts in finished movie) and, generally, barely watchable.
If you've never seen any episode of Avengers, you may even enjoy this. If not... do yourself a favor and don't even come CLOSE to this ***t.
This sucks! 1/10.
Spider-Man
(2002)
Piotr St. says: CRAP! CRAP! CRAP!!!
8 August 2002
Omigosh!!!! How can ANYONE give this film more than 3 (except from TY and WD fans) remains a mystery for me.
First of all this one is FOR LITTLE CHILDREN ONLY. I know that comic books adaptations are not meant to be, say, A Clockwork Orange, but do yourself a favor and go watch Batman (1989) - it's a great pleasure. Thanks to great director and of course Mr. Nicholson. And it still stands well: its dark mood, photography, and dark poetry have transcended well into 2002. In comparison this one is simply pathetic. Only special effects, and wery weak, naive screenplay. Why do you Americans take us all as fvols?!
Spider-Man is a deadly boring movie: I watched this at a cinema and everybody was loudly laughing anytime when "...with great power comes great responsibility blah blah blah..." came from the screen. Many people left before the film has ended, saying "LAME!", or "Crap". There is nothing new, we have seen many films of superheroes and this one is simply re-make of all cliches you can imagine.
I can't understand why this one earned so many money: I think it was because there were no good releases at the same time. If released together with Attack Of The Clones, this would hit the bottom faster than Titanic did.
Not worth any minute of your life.
1/10 - just because there is no 0.
First of all this one is FOR LITTLE CHILDREN ONLY. I know that comic books adaptations are not meant to be, say, A Clockwork Orange, but do yourself a favor and go watch Batman (1989) - it's a great pleasure. Thanks to great director and of course Mr. Nicholson. And it still stands well: its dark mood, photography, and dark poetry have transcended well into 2002. In comparison this one is simply pathetic. Only special effects, and wery weak, naive screenplay. Why do you Americans take us all as fvols?!
Spider-Man is a deadly boring movie: I watched this at a cinema and everybody was loudly laughing anytime when "...with great power comes great responsibility blah blah blah..." came from the screen. Many people left before the film has ended, saying "LAME!", or "Crap". There is nothing new, we have seen many films of superheroes and this one is simply re-make of all cliches you can imagine.
I can't understand why this one earned so many money: I think it was because there were no good releases at the same time. If released together with Attack Of The Clones, this would hit the bottom faster than Titanic did.
Not worth any minute of your life.
1/10 - just because there is no 0.
Tell Your Friends