Change Your Image
calgarian3432
Reviews
Fantastic Four (2005)
Fantastic Four perfect at being what it advertises
I strongly recommend this film. The entire movie, from start to finish looks great. There are no glitches on the way. Nothing is too boring.
This is better than X-Men. X-Men drones on with annoying personalities. Plus, who wants to look at a guy with side-burns, really.
Jessica Alba looks fantastic as always. She's worth the price of admission.
The special effects seamlessly blend the humans with the CGI. There's none of the "blue-screen-look" you see in other movies. I'm sure they used it, but the special effects look natural.
Unlike a lot of super-hero movies, these actors actually look respectable in their outfits. They give semi-believable excuse for requiring the outfits. Of course, much of the movie is unbelievable. But, that's the point. If you make a movie a about invisibility, stretching, and flames, you do'not want to be believable. You want it be unbelievable and incredible. That's a good thing.
The Pacifier (2005)
Clunky faker to avoid
This was an amazingly bad film. It was stunning how bad. I was willing to accept a typical formula, that this film promised. You have a "tough" army guy, who's softened up by kids. You know how things will unfold. But, this film went overboard, to the point the the acting was beyond cartoonish.
It seemed like every shot in the movie, was just a "gag" shot done for a TV ads, movie trailers, and talk show appearances by the star. There's no explanation for why people behave certain ways. The first half of the movie, the actors to even approach being human.
Clearly, there was no single person, who edited this film. It felt like it was shot by multiple people, and patched together. A few parts near the end seemed slightly funny and slightly human. But, that was it.
Alien Fury: Countdown to Invasion (2000)
Absurd plots twisting
This is the most pathetic "thriller" ever. The plot goes one way, then changes 180 degrees. It flips back dozen ties. The rate of plot twists actually increases to the point of utter silliness.
Now sci-fi can get away with no good plot, *if* the effects are worthy. Nothing like is here. It's a pretty cheap film. Chyna is a horrible actress. They tried to use her fame from wrestling, but it doesn't work. There's a reason her film career has flopped.
Another big failing of this movie is one has no concern for any of the characters. The acting is so fake and forced, I couldn't care less. Again, a great sci-fi can get away with this, if there are effects. None were here. I couldn't care less if there were aliens, or if aliens took over the world, or what happened.
Sin City (2005)
great comic-book movie
This is a really good example of how to do a "green screen" movie. The "real" people are made to look "drawn", and the drawn images, are made to look "real". So the actors and background blend perfectly. An example of failed attempt at this is the movie "World of the Future", which looked terrible, since the actors in that movie just didn't look like they belonged in the background.
There's some extreme violence, but it's stylized, so it doesn't leave you disturbed like a horror film would.
The plots are pretty simply and easy to follow. The movie isn't really about plots, but it's about style. And there's lots of that. It's also about beautiful women, and Jessica Alba is the star there. It has nudity and sex, but that's nor reason to see it. If you just want sex/nudity, then there are a lot more appropriate sources.
Now some people won't like this film. If you dislike comics, or black&white, you'll dislike this movie. Forget completely about reality if you go to this movie.
So, overall I'm pretty happy with the film, and recommend it.
p.s. It's a comic-book people. "Graphic Novel" is term concocted by adult men who refuse to admit they like comic books. The movie is a comic book, and that's a good thing. Watch it.
Phil the Alien (2004)
pretty so-so film, uniqueness is it's sole plus
This is a typical Canadian indy film. It's cheap. Real cheap. It has some humor, which is the only redeeming feature.
Appearance: Most movies try to look good. This film doesn't even try. The actors almost all look terrible. They don't even try to look good. They must be wearing "ugly" make-up. The setting (Canadian wilderness) had beautiful potential, but they chose to not have a single appealing "nature shot". Here's a free tip for all low-budget Canadian films: There's one really stunningly beautiful thing that you can put in your film, which costs nothing, it's called the Canadian Outdoors. Movies that don't want to look good, do not belong on film; they belong on VHS.
Action: boraramma. Not much happens. Not much suspense. Now I can accept low-action when a film when it tries to avoid violence to be "family safe". But, this film has the odd distinction of having a few scenes of ultra-violence with virtually no action. Remember how A-Team had continuous action for the whole show, but nobody got a scratch on them. This is the *exact* opposite.
Sex: This film has just enough implied sex to be gross (like an underage boy sees a hooker and falls in love, yuk). There are some other tasteless sexual references. Yet, there is of course absolutely nothing "sexy" about this film.
Continuity: Now it's accepted that a film like this (aliens) can never be fully logical. But, without spoiling anything, it tosses a plot twist or two that just doesn't get set-up properly. Don't watch this for the story.
Special Effects: If you don't have a budget, don't do effects. The talking beaver was pathetic. The puppet/thing they had was so bad, that a real beaver, with no lip-syncing, would have done a better job. Now some people might excuse the film, by saying that's the "style" they were going for. But that doesn't fit with the rest of the film. I was really surprised to see the full list of credits at the end of the film. They put a lot into this film, but the beaver was junk.
Humor: some good jokes. That's all this film has.
I paid only six bucks to see this film. It's worth that, no more, no less.
The Merchant of Venice (2004)
Cheap production of so-so play, but not all bad
The one good thing about this film, is that unlike other similar ones, it is easy to follow the words, without having studied the play. It is perfectly clear what is being said, and what words mean. No need to take old English class. This isn't just for students.
The first thing that truly disappointed me was the darkness throughout. One could hardly see much detail in the costumes or the set. This is a common strategy for low-budget films, which allows the makers to spend less on details. I expected a grand spectacle.
Also, the movie uses the cheap ploy of excessive cleavage, and women walking around with the breasts hanging out for no reason.
The Phantom of the Opera (2004)
Sounds great, looks good, and written badly
After watching the film, I found it was as good, and as bad as expected. The music is great, but at the same time you won't hear anything great that wasn't given away in ads and trailers. I think with musicals, giving away the best music outside the film, is kind of like giving away the plot. Basically, the only significant singing you didn't already hear (before going) is them singing pure two-way dialog. Of course a musical should be filled with music, but please don't think you can take any two-way conversation, and turn it into a duet. The "Sound of Music" is an example of how a musical *should* work in singing and dancing. Only emotional and significant character dialog should be put to music (in addition to "true" songs).
As we know from the small size of the mask, the phantom is hardly seriously disfigured (I'm not revealing anything here that's not given away in the movie billboards). He wears it like Batman's mask; a kind-of fashion statement. The key characters are hardly developed. I won't give away the Phantom's back story. But, I will tell you it's pretty lame. Remember this film is not the same as the 1943 film, which was not a musical, and did have a clear motivation for the Phantom.
One thing that really let me down, was how small the opera was. I was expecting a huge opera building, with lots of space, lots of crevasses. After all, a guy is hiding out here for many years, without detection. Turns out it's a pretty small place. OK, maybe it is as big as the "real" thing. But, I don't want reality. I want fantasy. I want bigger than life. By nature, the "Phantom's Opera House" aught to be truly grand. It should be the kind of place where you'ld be afraid to be in at night. The kind of place you could get lost in.
Now, I know my review sounds like I'm dumping on the movie. But, keep in mind I can't convey the great music, and good look, which you know about, before going to the movie. If what you've seen and heard is worth seeing for 2hours, then go see it. But please, do not see this video-cassette on a little TV. Catch it only in a theater, or on an entertainment system with great sound/video quality. That's all the film has.
Wild Things (1998)
This movie is a twist failure
This movie simply doesn't work. You will not predict the ending, and I won't say what it is. But, that's not plus. Anybody can make plot twists unexpected, if they don't make any sense, and have no basis. This movie simply arbitrarily switches tracks without laying any good groundwork. A movie can not be made exclusively by great looking women. If you want the movie just to see the women, than rent the DVD, and skip to the good parts, with muted sound. Otherwise, don't bother.
The plot twists (without giving them away) amount to throwing out a stereotyped character, and having them be the opposite of what they appear. Big surprise. Neve Cambell is a truly great actress, and I hope one day she gets a film that does more than cash-in on her looks.
Darkness (2002)
Pointless
Darkness is a movie that simply goes nowhere. Lots of things happen all over the movie, with no connecting explanation. Without giving the ending away, I'll say that there pretty much is no ending. They could have randomly ended half an hour before or later.
Once this movie is over, you get the impression you just watched random clips taken out of the complete movie. Many plot threads are opened, but never closed. A widely reported reason for this, is that the movie tried to avoid doing or deleted scenes showing any violence. But, in removing any violence, they failed to substitute with anything. Movies to a purpose, an endpoint, a reason for being.
Aside from a bullet holed-plot, another problem is unbelievable characters. There's basically only a couple characters with any humanity in them. Only the star character has any appeal, and only because of the actress (Anna Paquin). Characters simply present no reason whatsoever for doing what they do. They just do it.
skip it
The Village (2004)
Great original movie
This a really great movie, and it is *not* a typical thriller or horror movie. The ending is not what many expected. This is a movie designed to make you think when it's over. If you want a mindless blood and guts horror, then please don't see this. But, if you want a suspenseful surprising movie, then this is it.
Be careful before viewing the movie. Read and listen to as little as possible. It's really easy to give away the ending. The surprise is whole value.
It's impossible for somebody to tell you why you should see (or not see) this movie, without giving away the movie.
Josie and the Pussycats (2001)
This is a great light movie
I enjoined this movie. Rachael Cook was the best. It's a completely harmless film. There are no surprises or plot twists. But, that's fine It's very "self-aware" of how silly it is. I thought this is a perfect example of how to make a cartoon into a live-action movie. The characters in the movie are cartoon-like in how they act, but not how they look, which is as it's supposed to be. The reverse approach other movies have are actors in spandex trying to be "realistic". No spandex in this film.
All three girls look perfect throughout. They all look sexy (while keeping their clothes on). If you want an *escape* rent this movie. If you like to critique the artistic merit of a movie, then please don't watch.
I wasn't a follower of the original cartoon, and it's not really geared to same age range.