suffer-smart-magnet Reviews

The Ninth Gate (1999)

Lots Of Potential (But The Ending Misses The Mark)

[6/10 · 21 January 2006]

What starts out as a promising thriller from veteran director/writer Roman Polanski ("Rosemary's Baby", 1968), ends up getting tangled in a spider's web of technical miffs, poor editing, and weak score.

Starting off strong, we learn about Dean Corso (Johnny Depp), an unscrupulous book dealer who is willing to deceive in order to get a deal on a rare copy of "Don Quixote". One of his regular customers, Boris Balkan (Frank Langella), calls on him to verify the authenticity of his rare book "The Nine Gates" by comparing it to the only other two copies in existence. But Balkan is too insistent and suspiciously generous in his offers, already promising to double the money before Corso even starts. But Corso (apparently not being as smart as us viewers) doesn't really question this. Additionally, Balkan offhandedly entrusts the $1,000,000 book to Corso without hesitation or contract, despite its enormous value.

As Corso tracks down the other two books (he gets on an airplane - Balkan has already told him of their European locations) and people around him start to die, he learns that the book (derived from a book by Lucifer) somehow holds the key to opening a portal called the ninth gate.

Corso, examining the differences in the nine illustrations between his and Victor Fargas' copy, finds some of the illustrations signed by LCF (for 'Lucifer'), and some by AT. Here the plot takes a major 'wrong turn', as the viewers can clearly see what Corso doesn't: that the nine LCF illustrations, distributed among the three copies of the book, must be brought together to solve the riddle and unleash the book's powers.

As we wait for Corso to catch on to this mind-numbingly obvious fact, he continues on his quest, which instead of gaining intrigue, becomes plodding and familiar. The same goes for 'The Girl' (Emmanuelle Seigner), who mysteriously appears and disappears, occasionally gliding through the air, but we never learn much more about her (except she has a thick accent, never answers questions, and likes to have sex near burning buildings).

Aside from Depp, who finally succumbs to sleep-walking through his part, most of the acting is B-rate. Seigner blurts our her lines at times, much to the dismay of viewers wanting something more substantial. Langella, for the most part, does well until the climax of the film.

Effects, even minor ones, could be troublesome. A wire to tip over a podium during a fight scene was glaring. The CG in the opening titles was poorly done, though mostly forgivable. Driving and flying scenes were obviously rear projections, if only they hadn't been so thoroughly abused.

Then there are things that defy explanation. Corso, in hot pursuit of Balkan, stops in the middle of a stream (where he supposedly got stuck). A car, trying to hit Corso, manages to miss by swerving in the opposite direction. In an attempt to surreptitiously follow an unsuspecting target, Corso and The Girl choose a loud, high-revving red Dodge Viper. And the film must get at least a mention for having one of the most distracting mustaches (Pedro Ceniza) ever to be projected on a silver screen.

The weak score from Wojciech Kilar was often more fitting for a comedy than a thriller. As Corso walks down an alley on his way to a book dealer, we hear a kind of 'adventure' music, similar to what you'd hear in a comedy during the setup of a physical joke (I was half-expecting to see Depp pushing a circus elephant into the back of a convertible). Occasional mismatches between the action and the musical peaks don't help. During the same alley walk scene, the 'adventure' music starts in the previous scene, before we even get to see Corso walking, and it is jarring when the visuals finally catch up.

At 133 minutes, this film was nearly an hour too long, plodding its way through details that should have been thought better of. Why do we care if scaffolding suddenly comes tumbling down on Corso? It wasn't scary or mysterious, just out of place.

I so much wanted this movie to take me to new and exciting places, and fulfill the promise of the opening minutes. But that was not to be. It is clear that a moderately bigger budget, a few better actors/actresses, and some retakes, could have put a completely new face on what ended up being, for the most part, substandard fare. In fact, just re-scoring the movie, along with some minor editing, would move the film up a few notches.

I gave this film a 6 out of 10 as an indication of 'what could have been' and for Depp's characterization of Corso.

Total Recall 2070 (1999)

Totally Unrecallable

[24 September 2005]

Based on glowing 'must see' IMDb user comments (and in turn wanting to like it), I watched about half of the first season before giving up on this problematic series.

The biggest problem stems from the distant, restrained writing which leaves us with the shell of a typical cop show that's been relocated to a corporate-controlled future. Flat characters and low production values seal the series' fate, removing whatever potential might have otherwise remained.

As others have noted, comparisons to Blade Runner (1982), Total Recall (1990), and Star Trek: The Next Generation (at least as far as the Data-Farve android connection goes) are hard to avoid (and I am a fan of all three). The series has far more in common with the android-laden themes Blade Runner offers than with the Schwarzenegger movie with which it shares little more than a title and a few images. Thanks to user comments, I avoided comparing this series directly with the 'Recall' movie (as should you).

Poor writing remained the series stumbling block. Contention between man and machine (or android) gets touched on, but never gets fleshed out or fully explored. Det. David Hume and his wife Olivia both start the series out having deep-seated feelings against trusting androids, yet Hume's android partner Farve gets accepted by both with only a whimper, after which the issue gets shelved. In particular, Hume occasionally brings up trust issues with Farve, but moments later is willing to act as if he trusts him with his life. We briefly see Olivia deal with her android-related issues, but this seems to be largely forgotten in favor of relegating her to the typical 'cop's wife' role. Their relationship, including why they love each other and questions involving their history, is never expanded upon. The result is that Olivia's presence distracts from the plot, as opposed to revealing something about their respective characters. In another character switch, Assessor agent James Calley at first seems to support Hume (allowing him to keep an illegal weapon), only to later set up Hume to clean up his dirty work (when he kills 'The Technician'). Questions of whether androids are sentient beings are mentioned occasionally, but are never the focus, only serving as a plot smokescreen. Farve is taunted as being 'only a machine', but this question is forgotten before the next scene.

Lesser irritations surface throughout the series. Why is Det. Hume allowed to openly keep an illegal weapon? Why does he actively desire to keep such a weapon? With such prevalent communications, why don't the CPB officers contact Captain Ehrenthal when questions arise (the 'unauthorized surgery' scene from 'Brain Fever' comes to mind)? We hear about 'calling for backup', but rarely see more that Hume/Farve on screen. Farve seemed resilient to some weapons, but he avoids getting in the line of fire (as opposed to Data, who had a willingness to sacrifice himself so that humans might live). Sometimes we go wildly afield of any semblance of plot. Witness the superfluous sex scenes complete with nudity that established nothing other than a cheap grab for attention.

Scene footage reuse was fairly high. Several times I recognized an elevator CG shot, as well as the outside shot of CPB headquarters where the same two people enter the building. A reverse angle of a street scene previously shown would have slipped by had it not been for a rather recognizable extra in a dark tank top.

Scene retakes to avoid errors were not taken advantage of. Someone scanning a corpse accidentally catches the victim's collar. Elsewhere, a person's shadow moves in the background of an otherwise empty room. Other errors added to the sloppy feeling. In one scene, Farve's gun lights up but no CG shot comes out, an error that could have easily been edited out given that the previous several shots worked. Similarly, a spoiled voice-over for a reverse shot of Rawlings sounded jarringly different. These are errors that shouldn't have made it near the final edit.

Acting was mostly reasonable. The one big question in my mind came from casting Rawlings as Capt. Ehrenthal. His 'soft-spoken' approach just didn't seem to fit his character. His diminutive height was another issue, especially when standing next to Pruner. Based on other production shortcuts that were taken, the sporadic dips in acting quality could be attributed to not allowing for necessary retakes to enable the actors to hit their marks. Karl Pruner's interpretation of Farve captured almost completely Brent Spiner's Data of 12 years previous. In a continuation of the Farve-Data comparison, the series quickly focused on Farve trying to find his 'maker', just like Data did in 'Next Generation'.

I wanted to like this series - honest. I was hoping for one of those little-known gems that catches you off guard. Unfortunately, no amount of polish will bring any real shine to this series. The writers just didn't tackle any big issues, not to mention the low production values. This isn't to say that the series is completely without merit - it just doesn't warrant going to any great lengths to see. If you want to see a Sci-Fi series done (nearly) right, try Battlestar Galactica (2003).

French and Saunders (1987–2017)

Not Absolutely Fabulous

[12 September 2005]

Having loved several 80's British comedy TV shows that made it to the U.S.A. (including Young Ones and Black Adder Goes Forth), I decided to give the F&S: Material World DVD a try. The DVD is a collection of short skits from the series, which includes many parodies. Jennifer Saunders (with some help from Dawn French) later made her mark with the show Absolutely Fabulous, a show I didn't care for.

Unfortunately, I didn't recognize some of the parodies, rendering them ineffective. A music video by 'The Raspberries' (Cranberries) was strange, not initially recognizing the group or the significance of the song, with the laugh track painfully reminding me of the jokes I was missing.

In general, the comedy is a mixed bag of over-the-top skits. In the Batman parody, the evil villains (the 'Krankies') used jokes as a weapon to someone else's uproarious laughter ("What do you call a man with a car on top of his head - Jack!" ). In more inspired moments, Batman (Saunders) forgets the voice he used to open the Batmobile, and so tries a Dalek voice (Dr. Who), and eventually fails. Later, when a woman offers to be Batman's love interest, Batman confesses he doesn't know what to do, not even being able to 'get the car started'.

One comic tool F&S use is to portray actresses in a production, sometimes slipping out of character to complain when something goes wrong. In the opening sequence of the Loveheart (Braveheart) skit, Saunders is credited for Liam Neeson, and French is credited for Mel Gibson. Other comic targets include attempting accents, Ireland and Scotland, special effects gone wrong, and playing male characters (using overtly masculine or feminine personifications).

One sketch was Lord Of The Rings, where F&S made extensive fun of the special effects (such as making hobbits appear small). While it was one of the funniest sketches on the DVD, there was a lingering awkwardness in that they were making fun of movie effects that were superb - not exactly cannon fodder for parody.

Thick British accents (especially when comically exaggerated or muted) complicated viewing by making some dialog difficult to understand. Unfortunately, there were often no subtitles to come to the rescue.

Highlights included parodies of Batman, Madonna, Lord Of The Rings, and Baywatch, all of which were worth seeing despite some comic unevenness. Others that didn't work as well included "The Gulf" and "Tripping", both of which were dated. Cute references to other British shows can be found (including 'The Prisoner' in the Batman skit).

Watch it someday if you can, but don't expect any mind-blowing revelations. Just make sure to have the remote handy to skip over dull moments.

The Wizard of Speed and Time (1988)

Not Up To The Hype

[4/10 · 21 August 2005]

"The Wizard Of Speed And Time" is a low-budget movie loosely based on the trivial adventures of a special effects person (Jitlov) who is making a short movie. I sought out this movie after reading many glowing reviews on IMDb. Despite wanting to like it, I found the hype to be unfounded.

Dated music and visuals along with cheesy humor screams out "80's movie". Inexpensive early synthesizers in simplistic arrangements were used for a large part of the music. For visuals, somewhat crude stop-motion photography is the order of the day. Never do you finish a scene without having to digest the awkward and unnatural effects. Even keeping in mind that this is a low budget movie, we never cross over into cherishing the effects for what they are, and instead lose whatever redeeming value they could have otherwise had.

As a fan of Airplane!, I enjoy 'low-brow' humor. Unfortunately, "Wizard" is not nearly in the same league. Puns sometimes replaced any real attempt at adding any substantial humor. Scenes showing Jitlov's dealings with various unions (complete with double-talk representatives) left me cold, despite their humorous target. The various flat-lined police scenes (often involving mock-chase scenes) produced groans instead of laughs. In other parts, clever visuals took the place of real humor. Often, a small effect (for instance, glasses that glowed at the right moment) inspired a smile. Unfortunately, cute effects can't bridge over the large gaps in humor this movie has, and "Wizard" never goes beyond a level that only pre-teen audiences can enjoy.

"Wizard" contains Jitlov's running commentary on Hollywood unions. Jitlov reduces the movie industry to a two-dimensional caricature of evil and incompetence. In one case, a movie producer ambushes Jitlov's efforts at every turn in order to win a bet. "Wizard" is also laced with running themes about Hollywood union lock-down. For example, studio executives use creative accounting to allow the non-union Jitlov to make his short while remaining out of union sight. "This potentially political statement lacks the bite it needed to come across as anything but fluff. Instead, it becomes lost 'in the mix'.

Script limitations left the actors out in the cold. Philip Michael Thomas ("Miami Vice") played a bit-part policeman that had no significant role in the plot other than to chase some conveniently placed bad guys. His character ends up slapped on top of a script held together by loosely-based vignettes. Stephen Stucker (who nearly stole the show in "Airplane!") had even less screen time. His last screen appearance, Stucker's comic talents unfortunately are never allowed to surface. In the end, Jitlov spends too much time in front of the screen with his only 'adequit' acting skills.

Some have made much of the movie showing behind-the-scenes glimpses of how special effects are done. Nobody is going to walk away from "Wizard" a special effects expert. While "Wizard" held a few moments of interest (notably, the 'running on the wall' effect), most everything fell into simple 'common sense'.

In conclusion, this isn't the 'diamond in the rough' that some have suggested. I wanted to like "Wizard", but the many flaws quickly grew tedious. If you do come across it, take a look. Just don't get your hopes too high.

MacGyver (1985–1992)

Stupid

[18 May 2005]

I watched this when I was younger. I wanted to like it, and I did like the idea behind MacGyver. Despite the show's unwarranted reputation for realism, I mostly laughed at the impossible things he did. One that has stuck in my mind was the magnesium bicycle cutting torch. Glancing over a pile of junk, MacGyver finds an old magnesium bike. This brings up a myriad of issues. For one, magnesium frame bikes are super rare. The bike they showed looked just like your average 10 speed bike. Magnesium is prone to failure from cracking. Magnesium also has oxidation (rust) problems. Magnesium is also expensive: it is an expensive material, and it is costly to fabricate. This would make it unsuitable for the 'average' user's bike, especially considering the availability of alternatives which don't suffer from these problems (such as aluminum). If it existed in real life, this specialty item would likely be for racing.

OK, so now MacGyver has the extremely improbable magnesium bike. He takes it apart, and fills part of one of the bike's tubing with metal filings from the rest of the bike. He gets it lit (I don't remember how), and uses it as a cutting torch to cut through plate steel. Except, of course, that this could never work. Yes, the magnesium would burn, but it never would take the directed shape needed to cut through steel (unlike a cutting torch). Also, the filings would burn very fast (or even explode) while the tubing would burn very slowly (if at all). On screen, it looks just like a cutting torch, with a well-behaved flame.

Episode after episode were filled with similar improbabilities and impossibilities. In the end, I laughed at it because it ended up being stupid.

Metrosexuality (1999–2001)

Outside Tradition

[2 December 2004]

Modern culture asks us to accept many infringements into our lives, including our identities. Being in love might be simple, but what to do with it can be complicated by concepts of monogamy and monosexuality. Metrosexuality attempts to explore the vast differences in people's identities and relationship boundaries while not getting caught up in either ham-fisted soap opera antics or soft-core homoeroticism. Comparisons between Metro and Queer As Folk will be unavoidable for most, but they fundamentally differ. QaF is homocentric, while Metro finds room for a gray-scale that better represents the range of people's identities, and better captures the variety and confusion in relationships.

Gay, straight, bisexual, monosexual, polysexual, monogamy, polygamy, feminism, and masculinity are some of the topics explored in an everyday setting. Each character has their own traits, and through their interactions gives us insight into who we are.

The actors/actresses performances sometimes dip into being a tad wooden, though generally are acceptable. The low budget they must have had sometimes distracts. The fast pacing (which I enjoyed) will make some dizzy, with quick cuts between settings and characters setting the feel. The intentionally shaky (and sometimes TOO shaky) camera technique adds a certain anxiety, though occasionally intrudes. The characters are developed through their interactions, so we never get to explore the inner thoughts of any single character outside of group settings. At any rate, they certainly are a sexy bunch.

Overall, I enjoyed Metro (especially after my letdown on over-the-top QaF). The series foretells the coming of a revolution where polarized labels (gay, straight, bi) are a thing of the past, and people celebrate themselves for who they are, wherever they may fall in the spectrum of life, not simply how well they can be pinned down into a stereotype. Unfortunately, it only lasted one season on UK television and never made it to the US. I saw this on DVD, which includes the pilot "Heterosexuality".

Highlander (1986)

Weak, Cultified Cannon Fodder

[2 November 2003]

Cult films have often carried generous followings despite major problems. Unfortunately for Highlander, the list of faults is so weighty that any cult appeal it might have sustained was lost in the first thirty minutes of screen time.

Attempting to follow the story line resulted in confusion, disorientation, and frustration. Many storyline questions were posed with little resolution. How do the immortals know that they'll die if they get their heads cut off? How do the immortals know that someday they'll have to compete against each other for some mysterious prize? Dispensing with any rational answers, Ramirez spouts on why the sun comes up - "Nobody knows."

Characters often have confusing motives. In a scene where Nash demonstrates his immortality to Brenda, he stabs himself in the chest. Next, they kiss because they are suddenly in love. (???) From Brenda's point of view, all Nash shows is that he is crazy enough to (non-lethally) stab himself in the chest. Any sane person would put lots of distance between themselves and Nash, but not in this movie. Self-inflicted injuries are apparently hot and romantic.

Editing left much to be desired by including many transition errors. Some of the many jumpy cuts includes a scene where we see a sword flying through the air, then abruptly cut to showing the sword stuck motionless in the ground. At least they could have shown it wavering. The effect was a jarring transition that stung of a sophmoric effort to bypass the effort required in tending to details.

Continuity was also a problem for the filmmakers. In one example, an older woman, who becomes an unwilling passenger in a recklessly driven car, first appears going down the street sitting in the passenger seat. Then we cut to find her hanging onto the hood as the car takes a turn. There's no excuse for such sloppy continuity.

Actors visibly struggled to control the unnecessarily large and heavy swords throughout the movie (one sword appeared to be nearly 6 feet long). Lightweight swords would have been a more realistic choice. The faster weaponry would have provided for quicker conclusions to fight-scenes, and a mercifully shorter film.

Poor dialog stunned me into unintentional laughter several times. Lifeless acting left many potentially involving scenes flat. Enough said.

Somewhere, under all that mess, lives the basics of a story line that, given a more suitable treatment, could have been made into a decent movie. Unfortunately, there are many other sword-laden cult movies that did much better at avoiding the many errors that weighed Highlander down. Watch those instead - you'll be glad you did.

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (2001)

Three Sneers and The Harry Potter Drinking Game

[22 September 2003]

Most everybody has seen or heard about this film by now, so I will only add a few comments to the pile. As an adult viewer, there are four obstacles to enjoying this movie: pace, believability, believability part 2, and the Harry Potter Drinking Game.

The pace of the movie was fairly slow. For a movie this long (152 min.), that's typically because they didn't edit it down to a manageable length. (The other excuse, that the story demanded it, doesn't apply here.) We watch as Harry is conveniently abandoned by Hagrid at the train station with a ticket for platform 9-3/4. This signals the start of another little puzzle that Harry must solve in order for him to go on. Of course Harry, the bright lad he is, figures it out. Unfortunately, this sequence doesn't add to the story, and neither do many others.

There are too many unbelievable/convenient elements in the story. Hermione just happens to know the spell to fix Harry's glasses. Ron just happens to do well at chess in time to win the Wizard's Chess Puzzle. Harry just happens to have special abilities he inherited from his mother which are only revealed when he battles Professor Quirrell. Harry just happens to accidentally make the winning play during his first Quidditch game. This goes on throughout the movie, turning most minds into cabbage jelly.

The adults, as portrayed by the movie, are completely out of touch with the school and its students. Despite the faculty of Hogwarts having great experience with all kinds of tricks that budding wizards like to play, nobody says anything about Harry's very public cursed broom episode during the Quidditch game. As in many other episodes in the film, the adults either look down upon or ignore the students. Of note, this theme has been given wide treatment in many other teenage angst films, but without the benefit of being so unreal and heavy-handed.

Every time Harry is introduced to someone new, that person has to act surprised, intrigued, and in awe (it's in their contract). Harry's 'name recognition' scene was played approximately one thousand times too many. I quote from my still-burning memory cells: "Potter? Harry Potter? _THE_ Harry Potter?". By the middle of the film, I was cringing at the sight of any new character within shouting distance of Harry. Perhaps someone will revisit the Bob Newhart Show drinking game with the Harry Potter movies.

Overly long, contrivances galore, and the Harry Potter Drinking Game were the only major faults I could stand to learn about. Other than that, watch till ya' drop.

Auto Focus (2002)

Waiting For The Next Bob Crane Film...

[18 September 2003]

Auto Focus' purpose in life will be fulfilled should some young, budding filmmaker realize the potential hidden behind this mundane work.

Whatever made Crane an interesting and captivating person didn't make it into this weak and timid portrayal of his life. Bad casting and a worse script removed any chance of developing an interesting story.

I have enjoyed some of Greg Kinnear's work in the past, but his take on Crane left me wanting someone more substantial. When Kinnear tries to act easy-going, he just ends up being goofy. Kinnear just wasn't a good fit for the part.

The script, afraid to delve too deeply into controversial subjects, leaves the viewer with a mere surface view of Crane's psyche. We never see the inner drive that allowed Crane to pursue his interests in the face of family and Hollywood's conservatism. All that is left is little more than an embellished documentary.

There are several major inaccuracies in the movie. For one, the movie shows Crane living the ideal family life and then turning to porn. However, porn was an interest of his long before he got married. Those interested in more can visit Crane's web site (run by his son).

Some of you will watch the movie based on an interest in Crane's private life (like I did). However, I suggest you wait for the next big movie about Crane, and pass on this lame duck.

As for the title "Auto Focus": despite Crane's interest in cameras and photography, auto-focus cameras weren't available until several years after his death.

Bringing Down the House (2003)

Offensive Undertones Bring Me Down

[16 September 2003]

BDTH is among Steve Martin's worst (though I haven't seen Novocaine, which rated poorly). While acting was an issue, the poor script takes the biggest fall, especially when dealing with racial issues.

Making no bold moves, the script stays right on track through the very last scene, slathering cliche on top of cliche. Charlene (Queen Latifah), freshly escaped from prison where she was doing time for a crime she didn't commit, worms her way into 'tighty whitey' Peter's (Martin) home. After various run-ins (including Peter having his upscale house turned into an all-black neighbor-offending house party), Peter helps Charlene clear her name while she helps him reorganize the priorities of his life.

All the wrong anti-black racist undertones were here to be seen. Charlene is a convict. She resorts to violence when pushed. Her values are compromised (she lets Peter's young son read a 'personals' magazine called "Jugz"). She is willing to let her conviction defeat her self-image.

Through the movie, Howie (Eugene Levy) courts Charlene all the while spouting 'ghetto-talk' resulting in another misfire. Neighbor Mrs. Kline (Betty White) calls black people 'negros', and arms herself with a golf club when she hears 'negro talk' going on outside. This isn't funny, just offensive.

What should have been a fluffy comedy with Martin's trademark antics instead turns into a dreary, boring 105 minute wait for the oh-so-tightly-wrapped-up ending that made my head hurt. If you want to see Martin, watch "L.A. Story" again. When I saw the DVD I wrongly thought a Martin/Levy collaboration would be a blast. I won't be watching this again.

Girls Will Be Girls (2003)

Over-The-Top Comedy + Soap Opera = Mish Mash

[10 September 2003]

"Girls Will Be Girls" features three women sharing a house along with their minefield-laden personal lives. While the production was good, the script left something to be desired.

There were many good things one could say about this movie. The music was well done. The cinematography held up. The acting ranged from passable to very good. The setting, while not original, was interesting.

Unfortunately, the comedy and drama were another thing.

The comedy was often tedious. Well-worn jokes hit the screen at a surprising rate. What helped break things up was that the movie didn't take itself seriously. Fortunately, the writer(s) kept trying, and a few good laughs made it in. Most of the comedy was derogatory in nature. Characters aimed put-downs, slams, and jabs at each other with reckless abandon. It was almost like watching a miniature war.

About halfway through the movie, we start to learn more and more about each character's background story as the drama gets cranked up. By the end of the movie, we have switched from 'heavy-handed comedy with a little bit of faux drama mixed in' to 'heavy-handed drama with a little bit of comedy thrown in'. This is soap opera territory.

This shift in the focus of the movie was awkward. In the beginning, characters were throwing mean-spirited comments around left and right. You don't care about the characters because they are one-dimensional. And that's good, because if you did care, those verbal jabs would change from humorous to hurtful.

Later, the movie shifts and the characters start having reasons for why they do things. A lot of the background stories are schlock, but the characters are hurting, crying, and reacting. To the characters, the drama is all too real. In the end we come to the awkward realization that we care about the characters - despite how much they seem to enjoy hating each other.

The comedy in GWBG knows few limits. We see a naked man, a naked woman, vomit, rape, and more - all for self-serving comedic effect.

One of the in-jokes is that the three main female characters are played by actors. In the beginning, we're not sure if the characters are supposed to be female, or Male-To-Female transgendered people, or just men dressing as women. Some confusion ensues when characters start dating until we finally figure it out (they're women).

I would have given the movie slightly higher marks had they left it as a meaningless comedy. Unfortunately, the few laughs to be had die down as the drama is cranked up. I might watch GWBG again if I were drunk enough.

28 Days Later (2002)

Combines Horror, Action, and Suspense

[23 July 2003]

28 Days Later is not your average horror film. Borrowing from movies such as "Omega Man", 28 Days Later effectively combines horror, some action, and suspense.

The plot revolves around Jim (Cillian Murphy), who wakes up in a London hospital to find that the city is deserted. Teaming up with Selena (Naomie Harris), Jim learns that an extremely contagious virus has turned most of the people into mindless machines of uncontrolled rage. Later, Frank (Brendan Gleeson) and Hannah (Megan Burns) join the group. The group heads to Manchester to investigate a radio broadcast from Major Henry West (Christopher Eccleston).

Avoiding typical Hollywood formulaic scare tactics, Director Danny Boyle maintains a balance, striving to weave some character development and suspense into the mix. Jim is first bewildered and passive, but as his situation continues to change, he eventually responds by taking action. Selena, coldly focused on survival, later blossoms as she regains touch with her humanity.

One step that you have to take to enjoy the film is to accept that a virus can infect and transform a person in a mere 30 seconds. Also, Jim ends up a little too blood-thirsty during his 'save Selena' crusade. Reducing Jim's savageness during these scenes would have made for a more believable fit to his character. Several others of note include: a taxi that drives over a pile of cars; Jim doesn't use any of the readily available cars for the first third of the movie; Frank lifts the side of the taxi to change a tire; and we get to see Jim naked several times (while Murphy has a nice body to show, it doesn't add much to the plot).

The acting is fairly flat. Cillian Murphy never hits any big highs or lows with his personal trauma (like dealing with his parent's death). Naomie Harris ends up being a little more personable on screen, taking some of the spotlight away from Murphy.

Technically, the effects were low budget. During some of the 'vacant London' scenes, I thought I noticed reflections of traffic in windows. Some of the grainy film effects were weak, and some camera work was a bit too shaky. But despite minor glitches, the film works fairly well.

At times dismal and depressing, and not treading any new ground, 28 Days Later manages to bring together decent plot, actors, cinematography, and directing. I would watch this movie again.

Freddy Got Fingered (2001)

Intellectually Insulting and Pointless

[9 July 2003]

Cruising around the Reelviews movie review site, I ran across James Berardinelli's review of this movie. Berardinelli gave the movie zero out of four stars, along with a review so scathing that I couldn't believe a movie could be so bad. Taking up the challenge to give the movie a chance, I rented the DVD.

I was wrong.

I laughed three times, two of which were at the movie (as opposed to the 'joke'). The most entertaining scene is at the beginning where we watch Tom Green skateboard through a mall, doing a few tricks. From there, it quickly goes downhill and flat-lines, plumbing the depths of banality.

'Freddy' consists of a loose collection of trite, tedious scenes. And when the all-too-few plot/humor ideas run out, they just show Tom Green screaming as a substitute. Unfortunately, Green isn't funny by any stretch of the imagination. Generous use of the fast-forward feature helped ease my suffering.

A few choice examples of bad, pointless 'Tom' scenes include: Taking a shower in scuba gear; Masturbating a horse; Having a kid get hit in the face (again).

These scenes have no connection with either characters or plot - that would have required a level of sophistication completely foreign to the movie's creators.

There were some interesting actors/actresses/cameos in the movie. Unfortunately, there was no opportunity for them to contribute. Rip Torn, Anthony Michael Hall, Julie Hagerty, and Drew Barrymore have apparently hit the bottoms of their careers. Did they actually read the script before they signed on?

Of note, Shaquille O'Neal makes a funny 30 second cameo providing some much-needed relief.

In the end, I can't recommend this movie to anyone and I won't be watching it again. 'Freddy' consistently assailed the viewer's intelligence. This movie is easily bested by the likes of 'The Pest' (which also garnered zero out of four stars on Reelviews). As for Tom Green, I hope Hollywood has learned their lesson. I've learned mine.

The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert (1994)

Fabulous!

[9 July 2003]

'Priscilla' is a road trip movie where two drag queens and a transsexual (MTF) journey through the outback on their way to their next perfoarmance venue.

'Priscilla' compares favorably to "To Wong Foo, Thanks for Everything! Julie Newmar". Both movies share plot elements. But where 'Wong Foo' falls flat with formulaic plot, shallow characters, and rigid acting, 'Priscilla' delivers.

Bernadette (Terrance Stamp) is the eldest, and has the most character of the group (being a transsexual, having her lover die, etc.). Hunky and shallow Felicia (Guy Pearce) provides plenty of eye-candy, filling out dresses with muscle to spare. Pearce's flamboyant characterization of Felicia was on target and the level of detail is amazing to watch.

Mitzi (Hugo Weaving) provides the group's direction by setting up the trip. Unfortunately, Weaving is a bit flat at times, leaving the audience to guess at some of his reactions. When Felicia jests at the possibility that Mitzi has a son, Weaving's reaction should have revealed the truth behind the remark.

The plot was well developed but a bit shallow. While the characters had background stories and personalities, there was no real motivations or conflicts for the characters to grow by.

I liked that 'Priscilla' didn't pull any punches. When someone asks what sort of performers they are, Felicia explains that they dress up in womens clothing and lip sync to music. A few plot points were missed on the first viewing and could have been made clearer.

While obviously a budget film, the technical aspects of the film fared well. Some of the scenery was captured nicely, along with a variety of costumes. A minor point was getting over the Australian accent and lingo.

I enjoyed 'Priscilla' and would watch it again. I recommend it over 'Wong Foo'.

One Hour Photo (2002)

Life of the Lonely - *Minor Spoilers*

[23 April 2003]

OHP looks into the life of Sy (Robin Williams), a 1-hour photo specialist. Over several years time, Sy becomes obsessed with his regular customers, the Yorkins. Sy learns more about them by talking to them and by covertly examining their developed photos. Sy yearns for the Yorkins' life (as portrayed through the smiling faces on their photos) so much that he starts making more and more effort to be a part of it. When Sy learns of Mr. Yorkins adultery, he begins to spiral further out of touch with reality.

ACTING: Robin Williams makes one of his most notable performances in portraying Sy as asexual, perpetually reserved, and quirky. Gary Cole (Bill Owens) is good as the impersonal micro-manager who ends up firing Sy, without even knowing what Sy's job is. Eriq La Salle (Detective James Van Der Zee), like his 'E.R.' television series performance (as Dr. Peter Benton), comes across with strong presence, making a good detective.

PLOT: The beginning of OHP has a slow building in tension where you aren't sure where things are going, and sometimes you feel a bit bored. As the plot unfolds, things ramp up in a very natural progression, and we never feel that the tension has been artificially pumped up. We feel for Sy in his attempts to have people in his life, even though he contrived some of them. Even though some plot points were predictable, you never felt that things were staged just to keep them unpredictable. Two plot points failed (in a minor way). When Sy is fired, he is allowed to work out the rest of the week. Unfortunately, that doesn't happen anymore, not even with long-term employees like Sy. In another minor misfire, Sy's ending reveals his abuse as a child as his motivation for his involvement with the Yorkins. It would have worked much better to put clues along the way so we could see Sy's character develop rather than springing it on us in the end.

CINEMATOGRAPHY: Excellent use of color (and lack thereof) give most of the movie the stark, lonely feel that mirrors how Sy feels. At the end of a workday, Sy walks alone through an empty parking lot lit by yellow-orange sodium lights that become almost green for the camera.

MUSIC: The music added well to the theme and pace of the movie.

CONCLUSION: OHP is an unconventional thriller which tries with good success to open the mind of someone who is out of touch with reality. I liked the movie and would watch it again.

A.I. Artificial Intelligence (2001)

Humanity Explored: Thought-Provoking Vs. Entertaining - *Spoilers*

[22 March 2003]

STORY - OVERVIEW: In a world where advanced robots are a common convenience, David (Haley Joel Osment) is created to be the first robot boy to have the ability to love. Through David, A.I. explores the human identity, their self-proclaimed superiority over other beings, as well as the responsibility of humans to other beings.

HUMAN IDENTITY: Humans treat robots as mindless machines. When Dr. Hobby (William Hurt) proposes to build David, he off-handedly compares his creating David to God's creating Adam, claiming it will be like when 'God created Adam to love him'. Hobby displays the arrogance of humanity through a willingness to irresponsibly manipulate 'lesser beings'.

As an unlicensed runaway, David is captured and taken to the Flesh Fair to be destroyed to the amusement of its spectators. When David takes his fateful place on stage, he pleads that he is 'just a boy'. Having never seen this before, the crowd goes silent. Then the crowd sides with David, saving him from death. David's plea touches the crowd, forcing them to change their idea of what it means to be considered human.

ARE ROBOTS SELF AWARE?: Self-awareness defines humanity, but it is also a device that enables humans to see themselves as superior to other creatures. At the Flesh Fair, we start to realize that robots are self-aware. One robot asks another robot to shut off his 'pain circuits' so that his death will be painless. Later, Gigolo Joe (Jude Law), when captured by the police and facing death, tells David, "I am. I was!? This parallels Descartes? "I think, therefore I am," and demonstrates Joe's self-awareness.

RESPONSIBILITY TO OTHERS: Love is a dynamic, interconnectedness of two beings, not just a static, one-sided emotion. The responsibility of love, likewise, falls on both sides. In David's case, love is not a freely made choice. Instead, David's fate is to be irreversibly imprinted with someone whom he must love.

Monica imprints David, but has to reject him because he doesn't fit in. Later, David decides that if he could become a real, live boy, it would enable Monica to love him. In an effort to realize his dream, David pleads to a statue for it to turn him into a real boy, a plea that spans 2000 years. David cannot simply decide that this desire for Monica's love is not worth his pain. David's single-minded goal of love was irreversibly programmed into him and he is at the mercy of his unchangeable feelings.

DAVID'S PURPOSE: The ending reveals David's ultimate purpose: he delivers information about what humans were like with the advanced race, helping to fulfill their goal of learning more about what humankind were like. By design, David fails to realize his contribution, being concerned only with Monica's love.

FAULTS: When an advanced race of beings appears near the end, I first thought they were aliens from another planet. Through the DVD extras, I learned the 'aliens' are instead extremely advanced descendants of robots like David and Joe. To not make this story point clear was a major flub, as there is nothing to be gained by keeping the audience in the dark.

When Monica is reconstructed from her DNA, it is explained that she can only be reconstructed exactly one time. Unfortunately, the explanation is too abstract for us to understand what's going on. The ending had several different interpretations, but only because it was unintentionally vague. See the IMDB.com A.I. message boards for some of the various interpretations.

CINEMATOGRAPHY/EFFECT: I wish I had seen A.I. in the theater, as there were many scenes that didn't translate well to DVD. Panoramic cities and wide landscapes that were beautiful on DVD surely would have been spectacular and haunting on the big screen.

LIGHTING: Much of the lighting was excellent, and followed the feeling of the story well. The first third of the story was clean and sterile. The second third was dark, harsh, and moody. The last third was emotive with lots of contrast. Sometimes the lighting effects came off as a bit gimmicky. Near the end, when David and Monica are in her bedroom, there is a glint of sunlight that transforms the scene from looking at Monica to looking at David. While the effect is inspirational, it also feels played up. Overall, the lighting added to the story in a simple yet expressive way.

CONCLUSIONS: The issues dealt with in A.I. are so broad in their scope that the story must necessarily fail to achieve any large measure of focus, even considering its near 2-1/2 hour running time. The nicest part of the story is that it is told so that the audience gets to draw their own conclusions, as opposed to the popular practice of spoon-feeding answers at the end. With A.I., the viewer can draw different conclusions throughout the movie as we see how things progress.

A.I. ended up being more thought provoking than entertaining. I enjoyed this tradeoff, and will watch this movie again.

Minority Report (2002)

One Thousand Cuts, But Not Dead Yet... (Spoilers)

[18 March 2003]

If I have many complaints about Minority Report, it is because in many ways the movie came close to being very good. Unfortunately, it ended up falling short too many times for it to earn a place among first-rate movies.

Story: To the movie's benefit, there are many strong story points. Three precognitives (precogs) predict murders so that murder can be prevented. Anderton (Tom Cruise) leads a team faced with the challenge of preventing the murder once the prediction has been made. The idea that the precognitives sometimes disagree on their predictions leads to many questions about Anderton's choice and free will when he is faced with a prediction of him committing murder. Is Anderton's future locked, unable to be changed, or is there room for choice? And what about the possibility for error on the part of the precognitives?

Minority Report also contains many errors. Notice how Anderton's retina ID somehow remains on the Dept. of Precrime's authorized list long after he becomes a fugitive. This allows people to get in several times undetected. In one instance, Evanna (Jessica Capshaw) is allowed to walk into the Department Of Containment with a gun by using Anderton's retina ID, and this is after Anderton's previous unauthorized visit to Precrime. Even if the police had at first forgotten to close this loophole, Anderton's all-too-public appearance inside Precrime's 'temple' would certainly have changed that before Evanna visit. Another problem is when Agatha guides Anderton around a mall using her precognitive skills. With pinpoint precision, she predicts how they can hide behind balloons and give a bum money so as to escape their pursuers. While murder is easy for the precogs to predict, it is explained that the precogs can't predict things like rape because of the lesser nature of the act. We are stuck with the paradox of Agatha not being able to see rape, but being able to predict the positions of balloons and bums on a whim.

In another part, Lamar Burgess (Max von Sydow) kills Anne Lively (Jessica Harper). Knowing the possibility the precogs will see him, Burgess waits until after he meets with Lively to put on his disguise. This makes for a dramatic visual of Burgess's preparing to murder Lively, but it doesn't make any sense. Burgess's whole intent here is to not be recognized. A Precrime technician would have been looking at the live feed and would have recognized Burgess, pinning him with murder. It makes more sense that Burgess would have put on his disguise before he showed up so as to eliminate any possibility for a slip-up.

The story also wanders. Anderton's eye replacement takes too much screen time with no real benefit. We learn that Anderton once arrested his black market eye surgeon, but the surgeon doesn't hold a grudge against Anderton. After the surgery the surgeon disappears from the story, rendering the involved scenes that build up his character into useless fodder. Such asides don't justify the lengthy 2 hr. 25 min. running time.

Action: The way the action was shot revealed important details only after the action happened, if at all. An example of this happens at the end, when Burgess holds Anderton at gunpoint on a balcony. A close-up showing just their heads and some anxious dialog leads up to a dramatic climax. A gunshot rings out and Burgess falls. Only afterwards are we allowed to see that Burgess had somehow inconspicuously reversed the angle of his gun in order to commit suicide. This ends up being a cheap substitute for real creativity. It would have been simpler and more effective to see Burgess decide to give up and turn the gun on himself.

Other things happened too conveniently. Anderton ends up in a car factory and zooms off of the end of the assembly line in a new model (apparently, they come complete with a full tank of gas). Or how about his escape from Precrime that involves the all-too-convenient use of a lever that opens the drain for the tank he is standing in: 'WHOOOSH!'. Conveniently, the drain is big enough for a person to fit through, and Anderton makes his escape. Unfortunately, it works so well, I expected to see a cameo by the Tidy Bowl Man, only to get flushed away with Anderton. Maybe in the future they could just place a big red button labeled 'Escape' on a nearby wall for Anderton to press at the appointed time.

Character Shifts: Characters, having established certain values within themselves, later shifted in order to fit within plot requirements. In establishing his character, Burgess comes off as old, tired, and world-weary. He seems on the brink of retirement, and while he feels outdated and unneeded, he's not fighting it. "What can an old man do..." says Burgess about his inevitable displacement from power. Later, Burgess becomes divisive and control-driven. Burgess is revealed as the mastermind behind setting up Anderton for murder, a plot designed to keep him in a position of power at Anderton's expense. Another character, Witwer, portrays himself as competing for Anderton's position. After Anderton becomes a fugitive, Witwer goes so far as to take over Anderton's office to the objection of Anderton's former coworkers. Later, Witwer spearheads the fight to clear Anderton's name, proclaiming Anderton's innocence. Witwer takes it upon himself to reveal to Anderton's boss (Burgess) how Anderton might be innocent. Unfortunately, we are left to fill in the gap as to why Witwer suddenly changes his view.

Acting: What is it about Tom Cruise that doesn't seem to fit into most any movie he's been in? To the detriment of his characters, a distasteful attitude seems to surround his acting. That said, Anderton is one of Cruise's best performances to date. His performance feels thin at times. During more dramatic moments, Cruise can't find the line between being completely detached and over-dramatic, often shifting around. This doesn't make the movie unwatchable by any means, though it is noticeable. Another distraction is how Cruise's character remains in the spotlight just a little too long for comfort. He's the only one who can use a data glove (Jad, Anderton's coworker, uses the same computer display, but without the benefit of fancy gloves). Somehow, in a divisive move, Cruise's only male competition (Witwer, who is a go-getter and around the same age/looks as Anderton) gets killed about 2/3 through.

Overdramatic Visuals: Mostly, the effects/visuals were good to excellent. I liked the personalized, full-motion advertisements that address people by their first name after recognizing their retina ID. However, there are many effects/visuals that under mild scrutiny don't pass a 'reality check'. When Anderton visits the Department Of Containment to view a prisoner, all of the prisoners are put on display, as opposed to just the one Anderton needs to see. Apparently, computers are smart enough to deal with 3D imaging and retinal ID's, but can't differentiate between prisoners. This is all for the benefit of showing off a great visual, without having a reason to show it to us. In another scene on the highway, Anderton jumps to safety off of a car moving straight down. Last time I checked, jumping off of a vehicle traveling at greater than 30 MPH heading directly downwards and landing on concrete results in death. Anderton shrugs this off by learning a new yoga position.

Conclusion: After viewing a movie with so many flaws, I was surprised to see many reviews giving this movie top marks. This is not a 4 out of 4 stars must-see movie by any stretch. Despite Minority Report's many weaknesses, from Cruise's acting to the overdramatic visual effects, I generally liked this film and would watch it again. I would, however, search for a slightly better option first.

Life Is Beautiful (1997)

Life is Mostly Simplistic - (Minor Spoilers)

[16 March 2003]

Life Is Beautiful - Review

LIB is about Guido (Roberto Benigni) and how he deals with life. Set in Italy during World War II, the story follows Guido in two stages of his life. First, Guido meets then courts Dora (Nicoletta Braschi). In the second part, Guido along with Dora, now as his wife, and son Giosue (Giorgio Cantarini) become prisoners of war and sent to a concentration camp.

Guido takes whatever life serves him and turns it around to make it funny. In one scene, he takes a horse that has been marked by vandals with derogatory remarks and changes the writing into artwork, masking the original words. He then uses the horse to help woo Dora. When Guido and his son Giosue end up together in a concentration camp, Guido turns the situation around by pretending the camp is part of a game he entered his son into. The many rules Guido invents include explanations about German soldiers, military uniforms, and camp personnel speaking only in German. There is a points system to rate the 'contestants' (fellow POWs), and the 'prize' is a tank. The youth buys off on the increasingly ridiculous lies that Guido is forced to tell to try and keep the truth that they are POWs from his son.

The first part of the movie is comical but leaves viewers uninvolved. It does well to set up Guido as a joker with a kind heart, but ends up running a bit too long to accomplish only that.

The second part of the movie brings us some important problems with Guido and Giosue's situation. Giosue is your average incredibly inquisitive child. He sees what's going on around him, as well as hearing rumors on death. The camp smells terrible and has a limited selection of food. Even at five years old, it's difficult to believe that Giosue would continue to follow his father's words about 'the game' in the face of the overwhelming and unavoidable reality of life in a concentration camp. Somehow, Guido's horror-stricken campmates find the energy to give the game a little push (or at least to not spoil it), which borders on the unbelievable. Somehow, Giosue is able to fit in with the German children without talking, and is able to reap some of the benefits of being on the side of the prison-keepers as opposed to the prisoners.

In the end, we never learn of the consequences of Guido's lies. One hopes that Guido's deceit doesn't affect Giosue adversely, but dishonesty of such a magnitude (especially with children) rarely comes without repercussions. People generally have a feeling about when they are being deceived, and this causes changes in how they deal with and trust in people. While it might seem innocuous to fabricate such a tale to shield the youth from the reality of a concentration camp, it would be shortsighted to ignore the aftermath that will follow Giosue around for the rest of his life.

In conclusion, I enjoyed the movie and would watch it again. The plot was a bit simplistic and the comedy only lightly entertaining, so I wouldn't expect much value from seeing it again.

Delicatessen (1991)

Horror both strange and beautiful.

[20 February 2003]

Delicatessen captures the essence of (good!) art-house flicks through its exploration of human character matched with unique visual style.

Sometime in the future (after some unspecified disaster has occurred) people struggle to survive using arcane technology and changed morals.

The mail is delivered by bicycle, television is in black and white, and food is scarce. So scarce, that responding to a job wanted ad could be your demise, and a healthy meal for others. Against this backdrop, the two main characters (Louison and Julie) struggle to find love and happiness. The other tenants of their apartment building add to the story, each with their own personality traits.

I watched Delicatessen on VHS subtitled in English. I would definitely watch this again. Similar to Brazil in its artistic scope, but without the nonlinearities.

Ghost in the Shell (1995)

serious anime for the mind

[7 January 2003]

GITS is one of the better anime's to make it into English. The art is well done and the story compelling. There is a nice blend of action along with intellectual pursuits.

Set in the future, GITS shows mankind's growth in technology, and how it leads the main characters through a politically and technologically entangled criminal investivation. As they progress, they start questioning more about what makes humanity special. The big question is, how do humans define themselves as conscious beings?

Whether on purpose or not, the English voice actors were a bit flat at times, not displaying as much emotion as I would have liked.

I watched this on DVD and would watch it again.

Kung Pow: Enter the Fist (2002)

Airplane! hits Japanese martial arts films

[7 January 2003]

Its not often that you see a comedy that treads previous waters while making for worthwhile entertainment, but KP fits the bill. The basic premise of the movie is to make fun of early martial arts movies.

In case you haven't heard, KP is a film where they took an old martial arts film, rearranged the scenes, digitally added new characters, and dubbed the whole thing over. And, no, you don't have to have seen the original for things to make sense (I didn't). Yes, this is a comedy. If the idea that 'recycling' old movies is repulsive, you haven't guessed the half of it.

The first 15 minutes gets off to a slow start, setting up the origin of the main character, The Choosen One (played by Steve Odekirk). After that, you are assailed by the worst low-intelligence jokes you'll ever have fun laughing to. The movie is ridiculous, and in doing so, makes fun of the martial arts genre. If I didn't laugh much the first time I watched it, it was only from the shock that something so bad could be so funny.

The in-joke of this movie is that everything has been messed with, but the characters aren't in on it (well, you could argue that Steve is...). If you are good at lip-reading, you will get a few extra laughs from what the characters are actually saying before they were dubbed.

My only complaint (aside from the slow beginning) is the budget-limited special effects. Some were a bit cheap looking. Then again, nobody's going to see this movie for the effects...

Now don't get me wrong - this is no award winner. But it is fun. And silly. And stupid. But most of all, fun. I watched it on DVD, and will gladly watch it again.

The Broken Hearts Club: A Romantic Comedy (2000)

The Sweet and Sour of Gay Life

[7 January 2003]

BHC is exactly what it is billed as: a romantic comedy. We watch as a group of friends struggle with being young, being old, being gay, who they are, and where they are going.

None of the characters are shining examples of humanity, rather each has their vices and personality traits. And each has to deal with their situation in the world. The story has very down-to-earth feel, with quite a bit of the story concentrating on relationships. In the end, some things are resolved, but its not so locked down that you feel like things were handed down on a silver platter.

BHC has a surprisingly well rounded cast, including good acting from the likes of Dean Cain (whose 'Lois and Clark' acting failed to impress). Limited nudity and tasteful bedroom scenes add to the direction of the movie.

I watched it on DVD and would definitely see it again.

Cowboy Bebop (1998–1999)

A Story Worth Watching

[7 January 2003]

CB is a happy blend of story, action, and characters.

Set in the future, CB takes its name from the spaceship, around which the story loosely revolves. The main characters, Spike and Jet, try to make their living while not getting killed, traveling around looking for bounties.

Technically, the animation is very good, though a friend pointed out that sometimes the frame rate is low, or they use a still in a shot. These didn't bother me because they were used tastefully, and were balanced by action shots that carried a lot of energy.

The voice acting for the english version is great, and adds to character depth. They seem to understand who the characters are and how they would react.

The story line is interesting. With each episode being around 25 minutes, the time is filled with a balanced blend of action, character development, and plot. The story within an episode develops rapidly, while the whole series moves more slowly, with the exception of the last few episodes (where they were trying to wrap things up).

If you've never tried any anime, this would be my first choice. I watched it on DVD, and would definitely watch it again.

Life as a House (2001)

Change from within people's lives... (minor spoilers)

[1 October 2002]

Change seems to some in two extremes: overwhelming and imperceptible. LAAH is about change in both varieties. George (Kevin Kline), the main character, experiences several hard-hitting changes to his life within a matter of days. The biggest change is that he doesn't have long to live. After a 4 day stay in the hospital contemplating this news, he takes charge of his life and sets about fixing some of the things that are broken in his life.

(minor spoilers)

The story shines best because it doesn't dwell on George's illness. We don't see any doctors or hospitals until the very end. Instead, we see George pushing his life, trying to better himself and the people his life touches. In re-establishing a relationship with his son and ex-wife, George discovers happiness in his life that had previously been only an unrealized potential. In parallel, the house he builds mirrors the emotional ties he mends. And we find ourselves captured by the positive energy that George is able to give to those around him.

Missing is George's transition from simply meandering through life to taking charge of his life: we see the results, but never gain insight into his character. We see George find out about his illness, and later see him full of purpose. The gap in between would have helped establish his motivation.

Also missing is Sam's transition from rebelling from George to accepting him. This should have been a much bigger obstacle for the characters to tackle. Sam had stopped listening to his parents, having lost respect for them. He has installed a lock on the door to his room and refuses to answer their knock. He separates and distances himself from others. His prominent piercings and blue hair stand out against his more conservative classmates, who accuse him of being a 'freak'. Curiously, after ignoring other people, he listens to George after a brief 3 minute lecture, which initiates a change in his behavior. Unfortunately, this is out of character for Sam without some motivating factor.

Kevin Kline does a decent job playing George. There are a several scenes where he appears to be too strong and in control for a person as sick as George, but this is minor. In one scene he is taking morphine for pain and is out of it so much that his speech is slurred. He raises his head off his pillow for a moment, but when he sets it down he displays a control that shouldn't be there.

Hayden Christensen is well suited as Sam. I am convinced that if I were to meet him in person, I would dislike him for being that 'young with attitude' person he seems to be so good at playing (and I won't even mention Star Wars...). Hayden's character stumbles through a life which doesn't hold much purpose for him. Unfortunately, I haven't seen Hayden act any other way, so I can't tell if this is a skill or by accident. Perhaps they could have just flashed some more of his young, tight body on screen to make up for it. Another near-miss is Sam's uneven angst. He tells his family he wishes they would all go away and leave him alone. In other scenes, he talks about love, even though he has yet to find his first love in life.

Several small sub-plots should have lived only long enough to make it to the cutting room floor, including the one involving Josh and Helene. Suffice it to say that they didn't add anything to the heart of the story, leaving the impression that they were simply tacked on to amuse bored viewers who couldn't handle the main plot.

This movie doesn't fit the typical style of movie I tend to watch. This isn't because I am insensitive to emotional dramas, but rather that I am sensitized to images of death, having watched my brother die over a period of years.

In closing, there were a lot of difficult, emotional things that the movie got right, and a lot of small things that were uneven and wrong. Overall, I enjoyed this movie and would watch it again.

The Adventures of Rocky & Bullwinkle (2000)

Doesn't Live Up To 'Boris and Natasha' (1992)

[1 October 2002]

I picked this movie up hoping it would continue in the spirit of the underrated 'Boris and Natasha' (1992).

Unfortunately, they made a kids movie instead, mixing (with moderate success) animation and live acting. A lot of the humor came straight from Rocky and Bullwinkle reruns, and was laced with tedium.

There were a lot of name-brand actors in this film, but it didn't keep the plot from flat-lining (it was supposed to be witty and sarcastic).

If you show this to your kids, make sure you're not in the same room. Or, just watch some of the original cartoons instead. I watched this on DVD, and will not be watching it again.