Change Your Image
ListenBucko
Reviews
Alone in the Dark (2005)
These People Should Be Severely Punished for Their Crimes
The one significant achievement of this drek is that it DID consistently get worse at it went along, and progressively made less and less sense despite the fact that one can easily say what's about to happen next (that you won't care about). All you have to do is ask yourself "What would be the most stupid, cliché & pointless thing to happen now?" The results: Astounding accuracy.
There is simply no reason to have made this movie, and no excuse for having released it. It's bad enough to base a movie on a video game, but a bad ATARI game?? The "Contains Spoiler" button is entirely useless for this film, since there's no story to follow, and therefore, no ending to ruin. We knew when we started it (my spouse & myself) that it was a bad movie; we tuned it in on purpose, as we were mocking & trashing movies way before MST came along. If you enjoy doing that, this is one for you!
Story: Nonexistent. My guess is that they had the three writers it took to dumb it down so far each play the game. Once. Then write it down. There were VERY long expositional titles at the beginning, the reason for which I suspect is that the first scenes of the film were SO bad, they cut them all. Characters: Plastic, one-dimensional, cliché, and disposable. We're given nothing to care about, and no character to identify with. It was intended to be Christian Slater, of course, but Mr. Slater manages to conjure indifference to his characters in most movies he's made. He is also not to be forgiven for the Broadway "The Glass Menagerie" collusion, also in 2005 when this "film" was released. Mediocre to begin with, offending members of Actors Equity was not a smart career move. Tara Reid was just as dull, & no chemistry existed between her & Slater, nor anyone else. Reid, whom I've never found interesting, has hit 30, and her midriff-baring costumes and blonde hair have probably carried her as far as she's going to go. The rest of the cast, utterly forgettable & horribly directed; the only mystery is what Stephen Dorff was doing in this movie?
The dividing line between Uwe Boll's scenes and those of the 1st & 2nd unit directors is the widest that I have ever seen. The unit directors turned in wretched work, and it seems like the only instruction they gave the actors in those scenes was "Don't blink, it makes it more tense and exciting." Wrong!
The CG effects, which one would suppose were intended to be a selling point, were clearly and nearly entirely lifted from the game. Monsters pop up in video games unexpectedly and for no reason except to shoot yourself some points. No more logic than that in the movie.
This is cinematic garbage, and there is no saving grace anywhere in it. Well, there IS the fact that it eventually ends. While my spouse & I had a rollicking time trashing it, that's about all it's good for. Anyone looking for a good movie should avoid this one like the plague.
The Village (2004)
Style over substance yields disappointment
I saw the ending coming within the first five minutes of the film, which is unfortunate, but is the result of M. Night Shamalyan's heavy handed role as writer, director and producer. Having no one else to answer to, nor creative partners in the major shaping of the film. He had no one to point out that an astute movie viewer can very easily discern the "hints" given in various ways, and know nearly everything. The problem seems to be that Shamalyan is determined to duplicate the success of "The Sixth Sense;" clearly the backers of this film were hoping so, too. However, it's another "Signs" (also extremely predictable); a 'creepy' premise and the dressings of a suspense film, but with none of the satisfaction. In "The Sixth Sense," I didn't see the end coming. However, if I'd seen "The Village" and "Signs" first, I probably would. I don't like being "gimmicked" and expected to buy into something contrived. No, in spite of having collected a fine cast and crew, the movie fails because it doesn't tell a good story. Shamlayan seems to have aspirations towards "The Twilight Zone," "The Outer Limits" and other stylized movies and programs of their ilk. However, he's missed the point: they weren't good because they had an angle or a style, it was because they were GOOD. but it was the storytelling that did the job. Here, we have a flimsy construction of a story. However, even if you start getting caught up in what you suspect is happening, don't be surprised to find it losing steam on you. So we go down another level, and see if it's the people & the relationships that are the golden key. Nope. A fine cast, who worked well together, and some scenes did work nicely. But they worked nicely in spite of the movie; when people really clicked and connected each other, there sere sparks. But they couldn't carry the film, as it wasn't designed that way.
William Hurt seems very well cast, and plays his character with great honesty and compassion, but there are only a few moments in the whole film that bring the best out of him. What's Sigourney Weaver even DOING in this movie? The character showed some promise earlier on, but it fizzled out and the she became one of the crowd. Joaquin Phoenix did a creditable job with his character, but it seemed more natural to him, and as the actor, he wasn't having to try to fight through the material. If Adrien Brody hadn't been playing Noah, I doubt I've have been interested at all. Brody makes it work because it's HIM. The rest of the supporting cast is pretty effective. Bryce Dallas Howard shows a lot of potential, but this was over her head under the direction of Shamalyan. She was not believable as a blind person; however, she clearly has the talent to be able to do so, IF the director had given her the coaching needed. She was very committed, but I doubt that the director ever told exactly what he was after. I'm not sure HE'S sure. All of the character moments seemed to come from the actors' own efforts, and kudos to them. Shamalyan just doesn't seem to direct scenes well. No surprise, if he's sitting in his trailer at night thinking about the concept and how he can tweak it even more to force us into paying good money to see this movie. The music (featuring a wonderful violinist)is also manipulative. Yes, every suspense/horror film works better with a good score, but the passion of the music at the "critical scenes" far outweighed what we were getting from the screen. So they seemed loud and out of place.
A lot of the technical work is commendable. The music was good, but not used well. The cinematographer had many wonderful shots all throughout the film.... except that, in places, you could tell where Shamalyan MADE him take a self-consciously "gimmick" shot that didn't fit in with the rest of the camera technique. Scenic design was good, VERY good, and it provides important clues about what's going on. That's by intelligent design, but the lack of involvement in the characters lets the eye wander too much, and you are given more to know than you should at points. The costuming was effective in the same way, and leads you to some conclusions.
All over, it's not a BAD film; it's watchable, and you'll like most all of the characters. However, if you've seen "Signs," then you've pretty much seen this one and vice versa. My recommendation is to see "The Sixth Sense," skip these other two, and wait until Shmalyan comes out with some material with depth. Perhaps the people who were signing the checks this time, looking at their returns, may indeed themselves consider to tell Shamlyan that there'll be no more of this. He's a very talented director, but his writing isn't on the same level, and directing your own work might seem egotistical to some. He'd be much better off concentrating on direction, take on a co-writer, and working with a producer who'll twist his arm at the right times. Movie making is a COLLABORATIVE art, and it's high time that Shamalyan learns this for himself and learns how to trust other people to do theirs. I will not go see his next offering until some of my more trustworthy fans scope it out first.
A Home at the End of the World (2004)
Compelling performances make this a film worth seeing
While the script may not be a perfect adaptation of the novel (note that it was the author's first, and as such, may have been difficult to make into a cohesive whole. Also, the importance of good editing should not be overlooked).
In any case, the first part of the movie spends a bit too much time on exposition, or perhaps simply doesn't use the time well enough. We're fairly clubbed over the head with Bobby's near-worshipful identification with his older brother. The scenes with Sissy Spacek were far superior to the others, and brought out the best in the young actors playing the boys.
The film's most pleasing aspect was the wonderfully crafted relationships among the four adult characters, played by Farrell, Roberts, Wright Penn and Spacek. They were convincing, and drew the audience into the entire complex of the the interaction between the characters, even among those I've spoken to who identified more strongly with one of them. These scenes are crafted very well, and display the director's skill from live theatre. This part of the movie, I wanted to see more of. Yes, folks, Colin Farrell can indeed act; you'll find many different shadings in his performance, and a vulnerability you probably haven't seen before. Dallas Roberts, who was nominated for an Outer Drama Critics' Circle award for Best Actor for his outstanding performance in "Nocturne" in New York, and who recently finished a run of a two man play with none other than the renowned Sam Shepherd, does an extremely fine job. He maintains honesty and intensity, and isn't drawn into the easy trap of trying to play the whole weight of the drama at once. He keeps himself firmly in each moment. Robin Wright Penn turns in a delightful performance in a character whose range of outlook on life is wide and complex. Sissy Spacek is simply superb; aside from the tendency to like her in whatever she does, her character took only moments to become highly engaging. The scenic design and location choices were notably excellent.
This movie, which unfortunately has yet to receive wide distribution, is definitely worth seeing. Not only does it feature fine performances and direction in the latter part of the story, but it raises questions about what "family" really IS, and who gets to decide what that definition should be? That makes it a VERY timely film. Unless you've read the book, you probably can't tell what's going to happen at each stage, and you may find yourself with more questions than answers by the time the end credits roll. A piece of art that ASKS questions and doesn't claim to provide all the answers is to be valued and appreciated. It's also unusual for Hollywood to produce, given their corporately-driven tendency to release "neat and packaged" films. It allows far more room for the audience to make up their OWN minds, and thus displays more respect for them. In my opinion, it was this aspect of the script that enabled the producers to draw in three "name" stars, and give us a welcome introduction to the highly talented Dallas Roberts, whose performance takes no back seat to any of the others.
This film contains varied & perhaps unconventional relationships. For that reason, it has had a lot of screenings at Gay/Lesbian film festivals. Don't let that fool you into overlooking this film. Its appeal is in the humanity of the characters, not their sexual preferences.
I highly recommend the film. Be patient with the first portions; the older the characters get, the better the film gets.
Looking for Mr. Goodbar (1977)
Gratuitous and overly stylized
This is without a doubt Diane Keaton's worst role. The choice to play this role, at the time, seemed to be a deliberate move to break up her "nice & clean" image, so well remembered In "Annie Hall." Bad decision; not a reflection on her acting skills, but the character itself is disjointed and lacks any believable rationale for her actions. It's nearly impossible to find any character with whom to identify or care about what happens to them. The violence was excessive and seemed to only be so graphic to shock the audience and get the movie press it didn't otherwise merit. The cinematography was notable, in tandem with the lighting design. However, this movie is a relic of the late 70s, and there are good reasons why you will rarely, if ever, see it carried on even the cable channels that will air the graphic violence contained in it, particularly the ending. It fails both as the gripping drama and psychological exploration that it pretends to be, and takes itself far too seriously to land in the "slasher" category. Fortunately for Ms. Keaton, she made better career choices after this.
Scotland, PA (2001)
A delightful, quirky twist on the Shakespeare tragedy!
The trouble with watching the Sundance Channel is that you can get horribly depressed. So many of the films are dark, forbidding noir that the channel comes with free coupons for Pfizer products. However, I caught Scotland, PA, and I gotta tell ya, I LOVED this flick.
The director asked himself, "What would MacBeth be like if it was set in a fast-food restaurant?" No, really. On paper it sounds like an insane idea, and I tuned in mostly out of curiosity. I was quickly delighted by this turn of fancy, which turns one of the uglier Shakespeare plays into an offbeat comedy. James LeGros plays Joe "Mac" McBeth, a downtrodden assistant manager of a hamburger joint, who can't get ahead because of the owner's vapid sons. His long-suffering wife, played by the wonderful Maura Tierney (E.R.), presses him to plot to get ahead and then rob the owner, Mr. Duncan (get out your Cliff Notes, kids). They wind up killing him by knocking him face-first into the frier, and Mrs. McBeth winds up getting a significant burn on her hand. And so the intrigue begins. Malcolm, the lead idiot son of Duncan, practically gives the stand to the McBeths, and they are a rousing success, living high off the hog (or the cow, in this case) until Christopher Walken appears as Detective McDuff, a vegetarian cop investigating the death of Duncan. Walken does an hysterically funny parody of himself, as if he's the only character in the movie who's in Twin Peaks. The prophetic witches get a makeover that is both weird, funny and strangely appropriate. I won't tell you any more, but trust me, for once I'm being serious when I say that you should tune in Sundance for this movie, or ask your video rental store to get it. The direction, acting, locations and deadly earnest commitment to the lunacy make it an entertaining movie for anyone to watch. Those who know the play will be rolling on the floor. And as much as I like Tom Stoppard and love Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead, this movie is far more accessible. I hope we see more work like this from Billy Morrissette, the director.
Uchu kara no messeji (1978)
Rancid in nearly every respect... but the colors are pretty
What disturbs me is that someone thought this movie was a good idea. And when it was finished, they were convinced they'd made a good movie. The story makes no sense at all, and the characters seem to have little or no idea of what's going on. Still, I was fascinated by the consistency: bad acting, music, sets, special effects, design, dubbing, and the costumes, although very colorful, seem to have been pulled from every area in wardrobe, with a heavy emphasis on glitter pimp and 60's mod Kabuki. The whole business with the walnuts was no doubt meant to be fascinating and artistic... I think they were just plain nuts. They also spent a lot of money on sets, but even the pretty colors can't save this turkey. Perhaps the movie would be better on some sort of hallucinigen... but I wouldn't recommend wasting your time trying. The producers should be punished by being forced to watch it over and over. And what's Vic Morrow doing in this thing? I'd say the bad karma caught up to him on the set of The Twilight Zone movie; during filming he was decapitated by a helicopter crash. Harsh. Recommendation: Switch to ANYTHING else, and bury all copies in a toxic waste dump.