duff-579-22069 Reviews

Robin Hood (2010)

Where is Monty Python when you need him to save the day (movie) ?

[2/10 · 16 May 2010]

Terry Gillium and Monthy Python could have made a better and more interesting movie of Robin Hood, with half the budget and twice the fun. John Cleese surely could write more historically (and hysterically) accurate and poetic lines.

Russell Crowe seems to fat, too old, and too uninteresting to present a romantic or convincing Robin Hook to the screen. He tries to pull it off like an athletic shot-putter in what should be a ballet. Robin Hood should not be played like a gladiator. Gee, Sly Stallone could do same ( just as bad a job) as Crowe did for 10% of Russell's pay!The producers should have signed someone 20 years younger.

I like Cate Blanchett, but she was wrong for the part of Marian.

The only actor that almost pulled this downing movie's head above water was William Hurt. He needed more lines and a more developed part. Hurt looked like he wanted to save the movie, but the director wouldn't let him.

Even the cinematography and editing was half-ass for a production this big.

Defendor (2009)

Defendor YES

[10/10 · 25 March 2010]

The only reason I can think of why a person would give this movie a bad review is that it wasn't the movie they expected. I liked it from the first minute to the last, and I didn't know what to expect. I can't think of a single flaw in this very low budget film, so in comparison to some of the disappointing big popular movies out there that have expensive visible flaws, I give Defendor a big YES. Woody did a very good job on this film. I can see by his performance that he enjoyed making it and I enjoyed watching him.

I was disappointed in Woody Harrelson's previous acting in the "2012" monstrous mess where he painfully overacted and seemed to be telling the audience that it was all a bad joke. Defendor made up for that.

Woody proved that you don't have to have expensive green-screen special effects to make a good movie. It can be done with acting talent. Thank you Woody!

Relax your mind, see the movie, let yourself enjoy it.

Dead Man (1995)

Dead Man

[10/10 · 10 November 2009]

I find it disturbing that this film, Dead Man, was made for only 9 million dollars and amazingly only grossed 1 million. How could this great film lose money? Must not have been distributed well. The movie got so slammed by professional critics like Ebert, who gave it one and a half stars. I can't find anything Siskel said about it. I suspect the Hollywood establishment poisoned the well. If Warner Brothers had made Dead Man it would have been nominated for Academy Awards.

Dead Man is a great epic equal or better than Dances with Wolves. Dances with Wolves cost 26 million & grossed $184 million in US ( 424 million world wide.) The 1980 epic western turkey called Heaven's Gate had a budget of $44 million ( in 1980 dollars) and grossed $3,400,000, destroying the TransAmerica company, a major player at the time.

On my shelf Dead Man is a classic, and will go next to "Little Big Man" (1970).

The Limits of Control (2009)

Limits of Control is an Art movie, not Entertainment.

[7/10 · 10 November 2009]

Limits of Control seems to me to be designed for the attitude of European Art-Film lovers. Not American multiplex mall rats.

If you like Fellini and Picasso you'll find something in this movie.

If you prefer James Cameron and combat computer games you'll hate this movie.

If you're an American Republican you'll hate this movie. If you're a Psychedelic Socialist you'll love this movie.

What I like about Jim Jarmusch's film is that his surrealism is just the right dose of strangeness to keep me interested when it seems there is little or no action. Unlike David Lynch, who to me, seems to want to make his audience ill and disturbed. Lynch is LSD laced with Strychnine. Jarmusch is magic mushrooms and periodic hits of DMT.

I suspect people who gave Limits of Control a bad review didn't see the whole movie.