OpinionatedBystander Reviews

Daredevil (2003)

Enjoyable, but lacking something...

[5/10 · 17 February 2003]

I must preface this review by stating that I've never read any Daredevil comics before. I can only assume that the movie followed the basic premises of the comic books, although some of the people I've since talked to have claimed that the storyline has been warped so that very little of what actually happened happens in the movie. Instead, I'm just going to try to address the technical aspects, and well, how fun the movie was to watch.

I thought the movie started on a very cheesy note, especially with the flashing, shiny DD logo in the beginning. Now seriously, was that necessary? It certainly makes a movie hard to legitimize when such painful weirdness floats up on the screen. Thankfully, however, the movie soon took a more somber tone, which persists throughout the rest of the story.

After the first fight scene, the pattern of the movie was set. Daredevil would kick everybody's ass he fought in a dazzling array of acrobatic skills...right. Personally, I thought the fight scenes were sub-par, and frankly, just plain weird. However, it's not as bad as some other movies in recent history, so we can let that slide.

The casting in this movie was interesting, to say the least. Ben Affleck seemed OK, although he still doesn't strike me as a very good superhero, in any sense of the word. Colin Farrell as Bullseye was either hit or miss, although for the most part his competent acting skills were wasted on such a poorly written character. (I can only wonder what Bullseye was like in the comic books). Jennifer Garner was sufficiently hot as the token female love interest. MCD was a good kingpin, although his role was much smaller than I thought it'd be.

On the whole, the movie was enjoyable to watch, although not up to, say, Spiderman's level of a comic book movie adaptation. It felt like exactly what it was: A high-budget movie with A-list actors performing a B-level script.

OB

How High (2001)

This is one of the worst movies I have ever seen

[1/10 · 2 February 2003]

I have no words to express my disgust at this mockery of a movie. Oh man, did this movie really suck, I mean REALLY suck, in a very very bad way. I suppose the premise was funny, that is, if you haven't ever watched Up in Smoke. Just think of it like an Up in Smoke crossed with a "hey look, I'm black...and you're not" movie (boy, I can't wait for Steve Martin's Bringing Down the House), and throw in a very generous dash of your stereotypical college movie (such as Van Wilder). Mix all parts, strain the worst parts from each, cut out any funny dialogue, then make sure the sections are poorly edited.

I am very glad that I didn't pay money to see this movie. If you're thinking about renting it - don't. Unless you're very VERY high. In which case you should rent Up in Smoke instead.

As side note, this movie doesn't end. It stops. Why does it just stop? I mean literally, the last few seconds of the movie are a frozen frame of nothing in particular, then the credits start rolling. There is no sense of conclusion, or even a final laugh. The editor should be fired.

Equilibrium (2002)

I cannot believe this movie was made

[1/10 · 1 January 2003]

Spoiler Alert After reading many other user's comments, I'm beginning to think that many of the "positive" reviews out there are nothing more than thinly disguised sarcastic cracks. While this movie wasn't a total disaster, it is unthinkable that anybody would willingly and without jest rank this movie as a 10.

Many people have already addressed the acting in this movie. It's sufficient, and in some cases, quite convincing. After all, since the characters in the movie are supposed to be devoid of emotion, saying the performances are "wooden" doesn't really do the actors any justice. Of course they're wooden. They're supposed to be, remember? A-

The special effects were so-so. There was nothing new brought to the table, but what the movie did provide was thoroughly entertaining. The editing on the action sequences was sub-par. Too many fast-cuts and blurred shots make it too obvious that the movie was straining to make mediocre scenes seem exciting and quick-paced, while hiding what was actually going on. Too many times during the movie, I found myself wondering, "what the heck just happened? Where did those people come from? And why are they already dead?" Compared to a movie like the Matrix, where the action scenes were well choreographed and brilliantly executed, the action scenes in this movie are chaotic and rough. B-

And now, we come to the actual script and storyline. And within the story lie the reasons why I cannot believe this movie was actually made. Although many have already said this: This movie's story was about as hackneyed and trite as humanly possible. It was as if a group of washed-up Hollywood writers had sat down and penned the story over a quick lunch. Yes, this story takes material from such classics as Fahrenheit 451 and a Brave New World, and so forth. That's not the problem. The problem is that every line of dialogue is so insipid that any scene that doesn't involve somebody getting shot is a pain to sit through. There are no twists in the movie, at least none that would have any effect on the audience. The storyline is so weak and illogical that even for an action movie it borders on the ridiculous. I'm not against ridiculous things happening in movies, for they are fantasy, but Equilibrium is ridiculous but yet tries to be serious and meaningful at the same time. It's difficult for any movie to make the audience think it has watched something worthwhile, no matter how well it was made. For a movie like Equilibrium, it's impossible. D

That said, the last 5 minutes of the movie are perhaps the worst 5 minutes of any movie, ever. Weak, utterly weak. Poorly edited and confusing. (If you've seen the movie - Where did that blood on his neck come from?) Where is the climax to the movie? So very, very weak.

OB