vladymirror Reviews

The Notebook (2004)

behind every love there is a story (forget the great)

[6/10 · 20 January 2006]

The reason I saw The Notebook was because I really liked Rachel McAdams in Wedding Crashers. She is a doll, isn't she? Rachel was so good in Wedding Crashers so I wanted to see her in another movie.

To tell you the truth I'm not quite sure about this one. The Notebook is definitely not a great movie – that's for sure. I haven't read the book but I got the feeling that the director was picking from different passages of the book in order to give us maximum information in a very limited time. I am referring to the second act with all the many short stories – the war, house, new boyfriend and girlfriend, and so on and so on. The acting was also not that good. Rachel in a way was OK but Ryan Gosling acted too boyish for this role. There wasn't a good chemistry between the 2 leads. The whole cast with the exception of the old Noah wasn't convincing. Not to mention the ending was so very contrived.

However this is a love story and as such some fantasies are allowed. From a bird's view this is a film about the time old question: should one follow the heart or should one follow the head? Which body organ is more reliable when making decisions? Choosing between what's good for the soul or what's good for the body. Passion or reason. Ideal versus money. Tough question I know. But what I know is that the movie also won't give you a convincing answer. I guess there isn't one.

There are other good love stories out there that are much better than The notebook. One that comes to mind from the new ones is The Constant Gardener. The Notebook is a romantic melodrama that has its moments I guess. If it so happens that you might even cry, take a look at yourself in the mirror, take your time and think what's wrong with…you.

6 stars out of 10

Good Night, and Good Luck. (2005)

too much smoke

[6/10 · 20 January 2006]

Hallo everybody. It's been quite a while since my last review. It's good to be back.

I am going to be brief with this one. I heard a lot about GN&GL and how is one of this year's Oscar contenders so I decided to give it a go. Well, I'd say I'm not fascinated. It is well directed, well paced with a camera work in the spirit of ER and West Wing, and with some incredible cast – a superb performance by David Strathairn, but still didn't quite do it.

For people like me who are not familiar with the subject at hand this movie didn't make much sense. It looked like a documentary on the 50's America. Well that's OK but it means nothing to me. It was too historical, too political and too smoked. Can somebody tell me what was with all this chain smoking? There was even a full length KENT commercial shown. Unbelievable. Didn't get the idea. I didn't also understand whether the movie made a stand on the importance of journalism and TV particular in educating the ignorant and helping the weak, or a more general one – the freedom of ideas and beliefs as a whole. I don't know – do I make any sense?

I wouldn't recommend this movie to people not familiar with this period of the American history. As to whether the premise of this movie is still relevant, I would say – probably. But I think many people will agree with me that with the rise of the Internet the ways we get access to information have changed for the better. 6 stars out of 10

Brazil (1985)

didn't like it

[2 July 2004]

It has been a while since a wrote my last review so it's nice to be back. Unfortunately this won't be a good one for the occasion is uninspiring - the movie called "Brazil."

When a saw it that it was on the IMDb 250 list I decided to give it a go, further more the great De Niro was listed number two on the credits. Well, to say the least, I didn't like that movie at all. A couple of times I had to resort to the remote control to fast-forward the extremely boring and confusingly pointless scenes.

I haven't read George Orwell's classic novel (never been much of a reader) and I am not going to but a sincerely hope that it is more interesting then its adaptation. Generally I enjoy watching "dark" movies from the likes of "Donnie Darko" and "Dark city" not to mention that I am a big fan of Terry Gilliam's all times classics: "Monty Python and the Holy Grail", "12 Monkeys" and "Fear and Loathing in LV";however "Brazil was too difficult to follow and at times completely dull.

I wouldn't recommend this movie. I don't know why is in the IMDb list.6 stars out of 10

The Perfect Storm (2000)

just perfect

[18 November 2003]

Every now and then a movie like this comes along combining that what Hollywood is most famous for: the home of the best special effects in the world (pluralism not allowed) with a very real and simple human story: there no good and bad guys, no one-liners and witty dialogues, there are no real heroes to safe the day. What we see is just a bunch of people doing what they have to do-no extracurricular activities. And again all this told through the lens of the Hollywood.

As I think again, that kind of movies donft come along very often. I would single out: "Cast Away", "The Pianist", and a bit ambiguous about "Saving Private Ryan." That's all I can think of.

Let me get back to "The Perfect Storm." The special effects were breath taking-one of the best I've ever seen. Cinematographically was superb-light, shadow, color can't get any better. The cast, well I don't know but there is something I like about the teaming of Clooney and Wahlberg; I liked them very much in "Three Kings" and I liked them very much in this one. Clooney was better in "Three Kings", nevertheless, convincing enough in "The Perfect Storm." My kudos go to Mark-it is not that he is a great actor, it's just the roles that he picks are just the right ones for him.

The only thing I could complain about this movie is that I couldn't see it on the big screen. 10 stars out of 10.

S.W.A.T. (2003)

S.W.A.P.

[17 November 2003]

I had my doubts regarding this one and the only reason I watched is was because I didnft have to pay for it. What's the conclusion: the remote control is indispensable when watching this film; check the batteries and keep it ready in your hand with your thumb touching the fast forward button. I suggest you warm it up (the thumb) cause you gonna use it.

SWAT has one of the most deceptive trailers I have ever seen. The plot is virtually non-existent. OK with movies like this we don't need a plot, but even the action was missing. At least "Bad Boys 2" was action packed. Of course most of the scenes were meaningless, but still they were keeping up awake. Here the action was just the last 15 minutes or so.

Should I comment on the cast? No. they were all there for the money. Especially Samuel L. Jackson. You could see it in his eyes: gget the money and hope people forget me being in this movie.h

Well, it's not one of those movies that will make you SCREAM: "I want my money and 2 hours of my life back." Probably will make you complain mainly about your money. 5 stars out of 10.

P.S. I am a big fan of Roger Ebert because he is a great writer and most of the time his and mine view coincide. However, this is not the case with this movie. Reading his review a thought I must have seen a different movie. Thinking about it after all, it gives me pleasure knowing that nobody is perfect and even the great ones make mistakes.

The Matrix Revolutions (2003)

we can all rest now

[14 November 2003]

The only reason I've started writing reviews in the first place was that I wanted to see how good I was in writing essays and since I really like movies the selection of IMDb as my tribune of choice came quite naturally. This, to my modest opinion, is the best site on movie reviews. And now I am here in from of my computer trying to write something about the final sequel of a trilogy that caused probably the biggest excitement in the movie world since the Star Wars trilogy. I don't remember experiencing something as ... indescribable as the moment in the first Matrix when Neo took the red pill. The following 10 minutes or so were moviemaking at its greatest (the closest emotional experience that I can remember were the last 10-15 minutes of the movie "Vanilla Sky"-in a different way though).

Then came the second Matrix, which was quite a disappointment to me. When I think back again I realize that the first Matrix raised the bar to the highest possible level, which didn't allow for such a short period to come up with a sequel that would live up to the origin. And again, the mistake with the second one was entirely mine-I shouldn't have watched the movie more than once.

And now comes the great finale. As I (we all I believe) have set about watching this one with much, much lower expectations, not really caring much about Neo, Trinity, Morpheus and the rest of the gang, just simply waiting for the grand finale, I have to say I was completely contented, maybe not on 100% but nevertheless, satisfied enough.

If the first Matrix was an absolute 10, the second was below 7, the third one is closer to 8.

The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen (2003)

choose a different league

[24 October 2003]

The only thing I'm gonna say about this movie is: "Thanks God I didn't have to pay to see it." It was enough that it wasted 2 hours of my life. I guess the only good thing about "LXG" are the reviews-starting from Roger Ebert and going on with some of the peers on IMDb. Unfortunately, the only way to appreciate them is by watching the movie however, the pleasure you get from reading those reviews doesn't justify the 2-hour insult to your intelligence. My advice is: choose something less extraordinary-saves both money and time.

I am really tempted to continue this review by bringing the sarcastic side of me but I'll refrain. Enough have been said about the extraordinary: submarine, car, Venice's channels, gentlewoman, bombs, dialogues and one liners, and so on and so on. Actually, everything about this movie is X. OK, I promised I won't get sarcastic.

To be honest I've seen much, much worse. I cannot say I was really p**sed after seeing the film. No, it wasn't like that. It's just that feeling of time wasted. 5 stars out of 10.

Nurse Betty (2000)

wonderful nurse Renee

[20 October 2003]

How important is the mindset you are in when watching a certain film? Without any doubt-extremely important. To continue in the same direction, it is also very important the way you set about watching the particular film-with low or even very low expectations or the opposite-with high or very high expectations. I think all of those propositions affect very much the final outcome. I am blathering about all this because this was pretty much the case (my case) with "Nurse Betty." I had very low expectations when I went to rent this movie (I thought it would be one of those cheesy comedies) but it turned out to be such a beautiful one.

This is a movie about two dream chasers: Renee Zellweger and Morgan Freeman. I actually won't bother telling the plot, what's important is not to think that this is a kind of "road" movie about a mad woman pursued by two killers. It is not. It is much more deeper; and what makes it much more deeper is Renee Zellweger with her best to date performance. She was beautiful. She played not one but three different characters. Morgan Freeman with his final 5 minutes Betty and Greg Kinnear with his 5 minutes of directing Betty were the perfect supplement.

Go and see this movie, you won't regret it. It gives you that nice feeling that good things happen to good people. Recommended.

Changing Lanes (2002)

Ben Affleck's best

[17 October 2003]

Have you experienced choosing a movie you know nothing about it and it's only the sixth sense that makes you rent it and at the end you end up seeing a really great film. It's not that you have read some reviews or your friends recommended it. You know unexpected, down from the sky, and not the least because of the hunch that you had. It is really a very good feeling. This was the case with "Changing Lines."

I totally disagree with defining this movie as thriller or movie about revenge. I don't know for sure in what genre this one falls to; the closest I can think of is drama. It is a very serious and complex movie. It is a movie looking at the different aspects of the human nature and most of all, our natural propensity to make mistakes; and the older we get the bigger the mistakes we make.

What make this film memorable are the extremely deep dialogues: my favorites are the ones between husband and wife (Ben Affleck and Amanda Peet) and between sun-in-law and father-in-law (Ben Affleck and Sydney Pollack). Profound.

Both leading stars Ben Affleck and Samuel L. Jackson played very well, however, to me Ben's character was better explored (written) and more convincing. That is the first movie that I like him act.

I would recommend this movie to all serious moviegoers. 8 stars out of 10.

How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days (2003)

watch it with your girl (boy) friend

[16 October 2003]

I set about watching this movie with tons of reservations-I expected the worst. I mean starting from the title itself in combination with Matthew McConaughey it didn't look like the best choice for the evening. And what can I tell you: it wasn't as bad as I thought it would be.

The plot at first glance seems completely contrived, bout on a second thought it looks plausible: a girl how has to make a guy break up with her in 10 days and a guy who has to make a girl fall in love with him in 10 days. And here they meet. Possible don't you think? And the rest was a lot of both Kate Hudson and Matthew McConaughey in overacting mood. Too sleazy.

Anyway, as I said I expected so much worse. With the exception of the end, which looked like the creators of the movie wanted to just finish the film as fast as possible, the rest was acceptable. 6.5 stars out of 10.

P.S. It would be double the fun if you watch it with your girlfriend (boyfriend).

Rat Race (2001)

overrated

[14 October 2003]

I have delayed the viewing of this movie for so long since I had my doubts, but finally I decided to give it a try and I regret it. I like Zuckerfs no-brainers from "Airplane!," "Naked Gun" and the likes, but this one was too directionless and shallow.

The premise of "Rat Race" is the "Cannonball" series concept. A few randomly selected people have to race from point A-Las Vegas to point B-a town in New Mexico. The one who gets there first receives 2 million dollars. If I have to single out my favorite character among this bunch I would be really at a loss for an answer: all of them were equally uninteresting and dull.

I wouldn't recommend this movie to my friends. With the exception of the few funny moments the rest is just to boring. On few occasions I had to resort to the fast-forward button on my remote control. 6 stats out of 10.

eXistenZ (1999)

decent Sci-Fi flick

[14 October 2003]

I have to say, I ended up seeing this movie by chance. The DVD was suddenly giving to me by a friend of mine and the only thing I knew was that it was about some kind of a computer game. I wasn't even sire that I wanted to see it since I had never heard of it prior to that, but after going through some of the reviews a decided to give it a try.

I don't think that there is a way to explain in a few sentences what "eXistenZ" is about and even if I could I don't think that will do the reader of this review any justice for the story of this movie is open to different interpretations. When does the game end or does it end at all is somewhat unclear.

What I like to point out here is the magnificent play by Jude Law; I would go even as far as saying that he played too good for the purpose of this movie. Looking in retrospective-from the final twist backward-we could conclude that he acted into his own act, a role into his role. I don't know whether I make myself clear, but he was more of an actor in this movie than the character he was supposed to play. Whatever.

The movie took off very strong up to the moment the Law's character paused the game. From that moment on the film lost its inertia and tension. Overall, I would say I liked the movie. Recommended. Between 7 and 7.5 stars out of 10.

City by the Sea (2002)

De Niro is back

[10 October 2003]

Keeping in mind the completely unsatisfactory performance from De Niro for the past decade (with the exceptions of "Analyze This" and "Casino") I set about watching this movie with very law expectations. What can I say now after seeing the movie? Well, the guy is back, finally the great De Niro is back.

This movie is about a New York homicide detective (De Niro) whose father was executed for kidnapping and killing a baby and his latest case-a murder investigation where the main suspect is his only son (James Franco) who he hasn't seen for years.

The main merit of the movie comes from the incredibly solid performance from the entire cast: special credits to James Franco as De Niro's befitting co-star, and of course Frances McDormand and William Forsythe with their solid supporting roles. However, this movie is all about De Niro-very solid performance with Oscar winning last 10 minutes. As I mentioned: the guy is back.

This movie is a must see for all De Niro's fans; it is not as good as his all time best performances ("Goodfellas" or "Once Upon a Time in America"or "Midnight Run" etc.) but is 10 times better than the crap he was involved in recently. There is no way "City by the Sea" is on par with "15 Minutes" or that "The Score" is better film. 7.5 stars out of 10.

Showtime (2002)

better than "Bad Company"

[6 October 2003]

I saw part of this movie on flight screening and I didn't like it. Then I thought it must have been because of the flight frenzy (I don't like to flight) so I've decided to give it a second chance. How often do you see such kind of pairing: De Niro and Murphy.

Well, I have one thing to say: disappointing. There were virtually no funny moments. Such a waste for the talents of both actors and especially De Niro. He seemed being on autopilot after "15 Minutes" and with no desire to act whatsoever. Such a waste. Murphy was better than I expected-nevertheless, unfunny.

You won't hate the movie for the leading roles are entrusted in the hands of two of the Hollywood's greatest. Overall, there is nothing wrong with the movie except but one thing: it's just not funny, not at all. If you have to choose between "Showtime" and "Bad Company" take the former one. 5.5 stars out of 10.

Bad Company (2002)

it could hardly get worse

[28 September 2003]

The only reason I watch this movie was because I had a free coupon that I had to use the same day so I had no time for a thorough look so I got the first title that came across. Let me tell you-it was a bad choice.

The intentions of the creators of this movie were all about moneymaking. I know that the purpose of moviemaking for the moviemakers is mainly to make money, but in case of this one that was the only purpose. I would guess this movie was partly financed by the Prague City Hall for it looked like a big promotional clip of the city. That's on the part of the creators, but the same applies for the actors.

Anthony Hopkins looked like he thought he had signed up for a different movie or that the money he was offered must have been too much to resist. Seeing him running through the streets of New York was humiliating even for me. Chris Rock in his attempt to be Eddie Murphy also had his contribution to the overall travesty. The movie would stop its flow, everybody would freeze for a moment, so Rock could deliver his pathetic one-liners in his stand-up comedian mode after which everybody kind of awakens and carries on with the script. And not to forget the villains, one word: hilarious.

If you remove the word "company" from the title you'll get an idea about the quality of this flick. 5 stars out of 10.

The Kid (1921)

the greatest

[26 September 2003]

Is there a way to name the greatest filmmaker of all time? Probably not, to different people it's gonna be different person, so I can speak only for myself. Let me try to describe my favorite contestant for this award:

This man is the true embodiment of the "American Dream": Having grown up in poverty and misery and virtually without parents (without a father and with insane mother), moving to America with basically nothing but his ability to speak English (in the era of the silent movies), this man manages to establish his own film company (United Artists) and becomes one of the creators of Hollywood. He produces, directs, writes, plays the leading role and composes the music for his movies. He is the creator of the most famous movie image on the earth-the Little Tramp. As you all probably know I am talking about sir Charles Spencer Chaplin.

There are attempts, sometimes I read, to make Buster Keaton candidate for the Chaplin's throne. Well, I won't comment on that for I am not familiar with Keaton's work; I grew up with Chaplin so you could say I am being biased, however I would mention only one fact here: the only time the two meet on the screen is in a Chaplin's movie "Limelight." I think this says a lot.

Why did I choose the movie "The Kid" as a podium for my tribute to the great Charlie? I have to say I like all of his movies, mistake, I love all of his movies, but this one is the true purl in his work to me. I don't think of any other movie, not only Chaplin's, that made me cry, I mean really cry, and laugh, I mean really laugh, like "The Kid." The closest I can think of now is another Chaplin's masterpiece "City Lights" but unlike the later one in the former one that is only him, the tramp, and the kid; and everything is silent. Think about it: the movie making at its purest.

I don't know whether I could make my point with this review-probably not. There are not enough words to describe the respect and gratitude I feel towards Chaplin. To me he is simply the greatest filmmaker of all time.

Clerks (1994)

makes you wanna be a clerk ... for a day

[25 September 2003]

I wanted to see "Dogma" before I decide, which movie I gonna comment on. Both movies were fine, but I liked "Clerks" better.

As the title suggests this movie is about a day in the life of two, convenience and video store, clerks. For the money it was made $27 000, this movie was a very original, creative and interesting one. The witted dialogues between the two friends (clerks) are in the center of the movie, however my favorite moment is the Dante's girlfriend confession about her previous obsession for fellatio. Despite of the somewhat wooden performance by some of the cast, the overall feeling of warmth and humanity from the screen stayed intact.

This movie comes to say that we can find something interesting in everybody's lives. That's why those "Candid Camera," "Real TV" or "Cops" shows are popular. A mean, the clerks' life obviously could be interesting. Life is an interesting thing; it is just that we have to find that thing.

P.S. The black and white thing was something I couldn't understand the meaning of; I think in color this movie would've looked so much more ... colorful.

The Animatrix (2003)

worth the time

[22 September 2003]

There is not a secret that "The Animatrix" was made to cash in on all the Matrix geeks and me being one of them made me see it. I have to say I wasn't disappointed, not at all.

This animation is a basket of 9 unrelated (with one exception) stories having as a common ground the concept of the Matrix. 9 different stories, 9 different animators with 9 different signatures. Interesting.

"Final Flight of the Osiris" was no more no less just an eye candy. With its cutting-edge computer animation was the perfect introduction; story wise-nothing special. The two "The Second Renaissance" parts explaining the cause of the war between mankind and the machines were pathetic. "Kid's Story" gave the answer where did the boy who was chasing Neo in the second Matrix come from; both in terms of animation and story was good. "Program" was also not bad animated with some good story. "World Record" and "Beyond" were exploring some of the glitches in the system about which the Oracle was talking. "A Detective Story" and "Matriculated" were my favorite.

Needless to say that this is a must see for all the Matrix fans. It is not that is gonna make you run off after seeing it and buy the DVD it's just a good time passer. 7 stars out of 10.

Edtv (1999)

Ed TV > Japanese TV

[22 September 2003]

I had different intentions when I want to rent this movie. I new that "Ed TV" had tried to cash in on the popularity of concept of "The Truman Show" and that would suck completely and I was not wrong. It was a boring, highly contrived, and unfunny film. However, I didn't regret watching it for as I mentioned I had different intentions which were more study and research-like rather than entertainment-like. Let me clarify:

For the last 2 years I have been living in Japan. There are many strange and bizarre things about this unusual country in terms of culture, social interactions, and traditions some of which I guess some of you out there are aware of. However, here I would like to talk about a different kind of peculiarity of the Japanese everyday life-Japanese TV (JTV). The weirdness of the JTV transcends any historical, cultural, linguistic or whatever differences-it is just plain bizarre. OK let me try to explain in a few words: JTV strikingly resembles "Ed TV." Actually, the opposite.

The Japanese broadcast TV consists of around 10 channels. A group of around 50 people (out of 125 million Japanese) called TV stars, could be seen every single day seven days a week on those 10 channels, as sometimes one person could be seen on three different channels at the same time. All of them are multitalented: they sing, dance, and act (both in comedy and drama); in one show we can see some of them as hosts and on another channel the same people are guests. Some of them, the chosen ones, have 3-4 shows each (as hosts). The others are being sent to foreign countries to try their food, ski or sea resorts, others are taken to some tribes in Africa, South America or in Asia to live with the indigenous people for a week or so and then cry as they leave. And all this is being diligently filmed.

The same 50 people everyday. Filmed while playing golf, eating, surfing, eating, traveling, eating, working for example as farmers of constriction workers, eating, shopping, eating, fishing, eating, studying (foreign language or eating etiquette for example), eating bathing, eating, etc. and again eating. Yes that's right - eating comprises about 50% of the Japanese TV content. Amazing. You have to see it to believe it.

Which one do I like better JTV or "Ed TV." I would say "Ed TV." 5 stars out of 10.

Mulholland Drive (2001)

the ultimate drive

[13 September 2003]

"Mulholland Drive" man, one of the greatest movie experiences of my life. Perfect from the beginning till the very end. I can now completely forgive David Lynch for "Lost Highway;" he's redeemed himself.

I don't think that there is a way to explain in one sentence what this movie is about, but let me try. The closest to "MD" movie is "Jacob's Ladder" and to lesser degree "Vanilla Sky." What those movies have in common is that all of them depict a dream and like in real dream nothing can be explained, the sequences do not complete each other, the dream just wanders over what it finds fascinating, leaving the unpromising stories and characters behind. It's all about imagination. But if I have to talk about something real that would be about the two women in this movie. Astonishing. Both of them, but I would like to comment on Laura Harring's performance. She was the ultimate outcast in the first part and the classical "femme fatal" in the second half. I am speechless. And of course nothing would've been complete without Lynch's perfect cinematography.

This movie is definitely in my top 10 list. And again, it isn't about understanding it is about entertainment. This movie entertained me a lot. I love it. 10 stars out of 10.

Full Metal Jacket (1987)

shouldn't be in the top 250 list

[12 September 2003]

The first time I watched "Full Metal Jacket" to be honest, I couldn't finish it that how boring I thought it was. When I saw it on the IMDb's list of top 250 movies occupying the 97 place I thought I must've missed something so I decided to give it another try. Well, it was still painful to watch - boring. I guess I couldn't understand Kubrick's genius. With the exception of "2001: A Space Odyssey" (actually the part in the space only) I couldn't enjoy none of his other movies. His last movie was relatively OK just because Tom Cruise is my favorite actor. Anyway, let's get back to the "FMJ."

There are two main acts in this movie: the first one took place in an American military training camp and the second one in Vietnam. The first part was extremely boring and annoying lacking any message or idea – meaningless. The suffering of the fat guy and the weird way he turned suicidal were so unconvincing and pointless. Half of the movie was devoted to this guy and his fat a**. The second half of the movie was at least more dynamic, but equally pointless. The two scenes with the Vietnamese prostitutes were so incoherent and unnecessary. No, there is no need to continue this review.

This movie is way overrated; hell, I think that it shouldn't be even in the IMDb's list. I wouldn't recommend it. "Rambo II" was easier to watch. 5 stars out of 10.

Bowling for Columbine (2002)

very entertaining

[10 September 2003]

The reason why everybody likes movies and especially Hollywood movies is that the main purpose of making a movie has to do with selling dreams. Our lives are so monotonous, routine, and uneasy, that everybody wants to escape from that reality and movies seem to be the best and easiest way to do so. However, unlike most of the American movies "Bowling for Columbine" does not sell a dream, it sells you a reality the American one.

This movie, actually documentary, tries to find the answer to the question: Why in America there are more homicide cases than in any other country in the world? It looked like Michael Moore couldn't find the answer to that question. And I don't know about him, but I have my answer, which I would like to share with you:

First of all, there is no way you could compare 30 million Canada with 300 million USA. Demographical structure, population density, economy, and I would say even the climate are completely different. The same applies to the comparison with Germany and especially Japan where 99 % of the population are Japanese.

Secondly, of course the historical factor matters and here again the inappropriate comparison with England, Germany, France and Japan. You cannot compare a few isolated incidents (OK even more than a few) with the everyday killing that was going on thought out the American history.

The mass media in this country. It is one thing to go and see one Schwarzenegger movie at the movie theater, another is to watch violence and shooting everyday on the TV in your home. No other country has such TV programs.

Marilyn Manson also provided part of the answer to that question. By the way, this guy is good.

And finally, I think that there is no other nation in the world that has made money a cult. In the USA like in no other nation everything is money; and we all know that where there is money there is blood.

Well anyway, I will stop being a philosopher for now. Going back to the movie a would say that it is definitely a worth seeing one. Very entertaining. Recommended-9 stars out of 10.

Gangs of New York (2002)

boring

[7 September 2003]

Scorcese movies have always been an occasion worth celebrating. From the first "Taxi Driver" till the ultimate best "Goodfellas" all of his movies were at the very least super entertaining. However, to my modest opinion this is not the case with this one.

The first thing that comes to my mind is the length of the movie-super long. Actually, is not that it was long rather that it was filled up with nothing. "Magnolia" was much longer, but it didn't feel long at all cause it was interesting. The acting, with the exception of Daniel Day-Lewis' one, was weak. Even Diaz who I really appreciate as an actress was very unconvincing. But I don't think this was her fault, it was more of a bad screenplay. With the exception of the opening and closing fights, the rest was even painful to watch. It would've been so much better had it been an hour short.

I wouldn't recommend this movie to my friends. I think that there are thousand better ways of spending 166 min of one's life than watching this film. 6 stars out of 10.

Amélie (2001)

fabulous

[6 September 2003]

Why is that everybody likes this movie? Let us think about it:

The first thing that comes to my mind is the set-Paris-one of the most beautiful cities in the world. The buildings, the streets, the palaces, and everything. It wouldnft have had the same effect if it were shot in any of the cities in the USA. Paris symbolizes love. However, for those of us who have been there we know that that kind of Paris: clean, orderly, safe, simply does not exist. (it reminded me in a way of the small town that Jim Carrey lived in "The Truman's Show.")

The second thing I guess has to do with the cast, to be more precise, the selection of the citizens of Paris. All of them were native French (with the exception of one picture of a black guy). Again for those of us who have had the pleasure to visit the city we know that you get a completely different picture of the city.

The third reason has to do with the language. Even though I am not fond of the French language a totally agree with the Merovingian from the second Matrix that in French even when cursing it feels like wiping your a** with silk. Imagine this movie in German or Japanese.

And the forth and most important reason is Audrey Tautou. I haven't seen such a big and beautiful eyes in a long time (Ifve been living in Japan for quite sometime now). It wasn't like she threw a great performance it was more like she was born for that role. I hope that she will manage to escape from the "halo" of this role and avoid the destiny of such actors like Mark Hamill and Carrie Fisher from "Star Wars" and Tom Hulce from "Amadeus."

I am surprised that there are not many French movies out there nowadays and I don't know why. I hope to see more of them in the future.

Requiem for a Dream (2000)

not better than "Trainspotting"

[6 September 2003]

It wasn't till a saw it on IMDb 250 list that I found out about "Requiem for a Dream." I was even surprised that for such a moviegoer like me this title had somehow slipped from my sight; we are talking about #45 on the top 250 list. Needless to say I had to see it.

My first impression is that is overrated. There is no way this movie is better than "Trainspotting." No way; which doesn't mean that is not a good movie. In fact is one of the most disturbing movies I've seen. The sound editing was breathtaking. The truth is that I felt sick at the end, that's how disturbing it was. Which again doesn't mean that it was a great movie. With the exception of the sound and camera editing, it felt like documentary.

One of the major flaws of the movie with the exception of Ellen Burstyn was that it wasn't given a clear explanation as to why the people in the movie got hooked on drugs in the first place. It would've been so much better. Again with the exception of the Burstyn's character it wasn't clear what our people dreamt about.

Nevertheless, it was an experience and a memorable one, which is what movies are all about. The dialogue between Burstyn and Leto (mother and son) was astounding. I was entertained though not in the conventional sense. It moved me. Recommended.