Change Your Image
b-severson
Reviews
Event Horizon (1997)
Conceptually very scary film...
I saw this movie in theater when I was 12 and since then it has remained in my top three scariest films. I don't think my parents realized how frightening it was going to be when they took me to see it. The film, which takes place in 2047 (when humans have already established colonies on the moon and have started commercial mining on Mars), moves quickly and gets scary fast. Sam Neill plays a scientific engineer (Dr. Weir) assigned to guide a search-and-rescue vessel to Neptune where a ship (the Event Horizon) has suddenly resurfaced seven years after disappearing. Laurence Fishburne stars as the crew's captain (Cpt. Miller) and mediator after news of the lost vessel found creates panic. The Event Horizon (which was a research vessel destined for our nearest star) was actually part of an exploratory project designed by Weir. In the film, he creates a gateway (black hole) that allows for faster-than-light travel. However, unforeseen accidents occur and the Event Horizon ends up at a place far, far away from its intended destination. A truly terrifying film that expands on Stephen Hawkings' ideas about black holes for the WORSE...
La pianiste (2001)
Hardcore Haneke *SPOILER*
When director Michael Haneke and Isabelle Huppert collaborate, what results is an exceptionally graphic piece of art. Little did I know when I casually rented this film that it would be as emotionally jarring as it was. To be perfectly honest, I thought the film was going to be about some passionate love affair between the two characters visible on the cover. I imagined that the plot would be predictable and romantic. Never in my life did I expect to see such violence, such unconventional, unexplainable behavior. Bravo Ms. Huppert! Her startling performance as sexually repressed piano teacher Erica Kohut is quite unnerving and memorable. I haven't seen too many films that deliver the kind of shock and devastation that I received from The Piano Teacher, not even Haneke's other horrifying experience, Funny Games (1997). My initial thought about this film was that it had virtually no soundtrack, except for the obvious piano pieces played by Huppert and Benoit Magimel. The absence of sound gives the film a kind of harsh quality, especially in the end. The ending leaves a sour feeling in my stomach every time, like when something important is left unresolved. However, Haneke's art direction is quite excellent, and gives his actors the necessary credibility to convince the audience of their seriousness. A very brutal, graphic depiction of how social boundaries are violated by sexual imparities.
L.I.E. (2001)
Excellent directorial debut
This is gonna sound weird, but for some reason when I first saw this film, I thought Brian Cox was Marlon Brando. I kept thinking, "Gee, he looks good considering the weight he's put on in recent years." It wasn't until the end credits that I realized my horrendously bad error in judgment. Man, what was I thinking? Besides that bit of confusion on my part, I was terribly impressed by the bravura performances I witnessed in this bold, daring film by first time director Michael Cuesta. Brian Cox was INCREDIBLE as lonely pedophile Big John Harrigan, and Paul Dano was equally impressive as Howie Blitzer, an impressionable 15-year-old who catches the eye of Big John. After Howie's mother dies in a fatal car accident on the Long Island Expressway (L.I.E), Howie finds solace in his friend Gary (Billy Kay), a deceitful troublemaker who convinces Howie to steal guns from the neighbor's basement. When Howie is finally caught by the owner, John "Big John" Harrigan, he agrees to return the guns. But a miscommunication between he and Gary leaves some guns missing, and Big John decides to put Howie to work in other ways.
Despite the film's NC-17 rating, L.I.E. is one of the better films intended for mature audiences. A truly profound and disturbing piece of work, this film examines how sexual maturity can develop under traumatic experiences, such as the death of a parent, and how subsequent damage confuses the vulnerable mind. This film is also an examination of sexual discovery and confrontation. It is a film about recognizing who we are, what we want, and how moral, ethical, and social boundaries are trespassed in the process of obtaining our needs. A must-see film for serious movie viewers.
Gangs of New York (2002)
...zzzz...zzzz
I saw this film in theater while my parents went to see The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers. I initially agreed to see Gangs of New York because of Daniel Day-Lewis, who happens to be one of my favorite actors. In addition, Martin Scorsese had directed it, so I trusted it would be good. Not so. The first few sequences were undoubtedly attention-grabbing, but after the first half hour, things became incredibly boring. About a quarter of the way into the film, I dozed off and didn't wake up until the last quarter of the film. The seats in the theater were particularly comfortable that day, and I couldn't resist the temptation to sleep. Anyway, Amsterdam Vallon wasn't doing much to keep me awake. I've never been a big fan of Leonardo DiCaprio, and I was an even smaller fan after seeing him in this film. What the hell was up with his accent? I was never sure what nationality he was supposed to be, going completely by his accent. Was he Scottish? Maybe southern, or a combination of the two? His attempt at creating an Irish accent was painfully unimpressive. I've heard genuine Irish-speaking people, and let me tell you: Leo cannot do accents. Who was his dialogue coach anyway? That person should be fired. I understand that petty details such as accents shouldn't have all the weight, so I will give some praise to this overblown, overpublicized film: it did give the audience a graphic gore fest complete with severed limbs and other various modes of human execution. Daniel Day-Lewis was about the only tolerable actor, and Cameron Diaz was plain obnoxious, as always. I should have gone to see The Two Towers...
Starship Troopers (1997)
100 percent entertainment *SPOILER*
Paul Verhoeven knows what audiences like: pure concentrated entertainment. Nothing new. Nothing different. Just pure entertainment given in high doses. Most of the world likes mainstream fare anyway...hell I do a lot of the time. I stay away from some kinds of mainstream crap, you know the glitz 'n glamor films that Tinsletown often produces. But Starship Troopers is quite good, considering that it's directed by the same man who directed Showgirls and Basic Instinct. I think I like Paul Verhoeven better when he's not trying to seduce his audience with open legs or anything (at least as far as male viewers are concerned). I like Starship Troopers because it's easy to digest and appealing to watch. The gore is plentiful and there are even some naked bodies in parts of the movie. I noticed that Paul Verhoeven has a fascination with unisex showers/dressing rooms in his films. In Robocop, there is a scene in which men and women police officers are getting dressed in the same room. In Starship Troopers, there is that ridiculous scene in which Rico and a bunch of other mobile infantry, men and women, are hosing down in the same shower stall. I found the scene particularly hilarious when one of the female soldiers expresses her desire to have "babies" as she's standing butt naked in the midst of her male comrades. What a joke! The only thing I despise about this film is the completely unnecessary sex scene between Rico and Florence. Why in the world would they want to have sex in a place like that? And only 20 minutes to do the deed? That scene was so blatantly added for the sake of having a sex scene, and we all know that. Besides that one blemish, and the nauseating smile Ibanez (Denise Richards) is constantly showing, I think Starship Troopers is a good movie.
Ripe (1996)
under-appreciated film *SPOILER*
C'mon people! Give the director a break. This film ain't so bad. In fact, I think it is one of the better coming-of-age films I've seen. Despite some areas of imperfection, are the technicalities that important? Who cares if some pieces of the plot are questionable...the performances are heartfelt and strong. I was especially impressed with Daisy Eagan's performance as Rosie, the bitter and rejected twin of Violet, played by Monica Keena. After their parents die in an accident, Rosie and Violet head to Kentucky, where they plan to start over. On the way, they hitch a ride to an army base where they meet Pete (Gordon Currie), a loner who is living on the base. He eventually decides to let them live with him temporarily while they work on the base to earn money for their trip. Throughout the film, Rosie and Violet become progressively more detached from one another, physically and emotionally. Violet, the prettier and more sexually aggressive of the two, develops a crush on Pete, while her sister discovers a fascination with guns after meeting Ken (Ron Brice), an army official working on the base. When Rosie discovers that Violet has lost her virginity to Pete, she becomes dangerously jealous. She sees Pete as a threat to the bond that she and Violet share as sisters and devises a plan to get rid of him. The ending will shock and amaze you. It is by far one of the most devastating conclusions although it is genuinely real. This film is an excellent examination of how bonds between siblings are corrupted by the natural and inevitable events that shape sexual maturity.
Crash (1996)
Artistic Porn
What can I expect? David Cronenberg doesn't surprise me here. He just eludes my interest. I can't believe a piece of garbage like 'Crash' can even call itself art. Maybe porn, but not art. Actually, it is kind of stylish in its own way. I think car crashes and sex make for an interesting combination, don't you think? Imagine, having an orgasm at the same time colliding into another vehicle doing 60mph. Man, that's gotta be indescribable! Even though I haven't read the book, I think the film blows (no pun intended). James Spader and Holly Hunter give minimal performances, and Elias Koteas is just plain weird. The only actor who was remotely tolerable was Deborah Unger (that scene where she and Elias Koteas are in the backseat when Spader goes through the carwash must have been hard). The abundance of nudity in the film, in addition to the graphic language and sexuality, only oversaturates the film and obscures the deeper appeal. This film is too perverted, even for me.
Nothing But Trouble (1991)
What's up with you people?
I was shocked to discover that this movie ended up on AFI's 100 worst movies list. Compared to dark comedies like The Cable Guy and Death to Smoochy, I think this film is quite good. The plot is original for once and the performances are highly entertaining. Dan Aykroyd is frickin hilarious as the J.P. and John Candy gives an equally amusing performance as Constable Dennis/Eldona. Chevy Chase and Demi Moore also give noteworthy performances, although their characters are less memorable. From the reviews I've read about this film, the general consensus appears to be negative. I'm a little confused. What exactly is so unsatisfying about the film? The script isn't that bad, and Dan Aykroyd does a decent job directing. There's even a cameo appearance by Tupac Shukar. What could possibly make this movie the WORST dark comedy of all comedies? The film isn't overly humorous, and actually contains some eerie moments. The scene in which the judge removes his nose always frightened me as a kid and so the audiences' emotions are not continually lopsided, being the majority of the film is funny. If it were up to me, I'd remove Nothing But Trouble from AFI's worst movies list and replace it with something more deserving.
The Devonsville Terror (1983)
bad acting, primitive special effects, amusing nonetheless
Typically I dislike films about witches (with the exception of Dario Argento's horror classic Suspiria), but The Devonsville Terror is quite amusing. The script is disastrous, the performances are over-acted, and the special effects are anything but special. The plot is devoid of any significant twists or surprises. The audience anticipates the impending events faster than do the characters, and the conclusion is accomplished suddenly and sloppily. However, I can't deny that this film makes me curiously happy when I watch it. Something about the lighting and overall appearance of the film. The soundtrack is also quite good, and gives the film an eerie quality. I particularly like the scene where Walter Gibbs' face melts (the special effects are primitive but cleverly done using wax melting in time-lapse). That scene always gives me the creeps. The storyline, despite its uncreative, allows the characters to really show their true colors. Walter Gibbs' character specifically is quite gross, and almost matches with his looks. A film worth trying, and for those who are skeptical, Donald Pleasence of John Carpenter's Halloween also stars.