Change Your Image
OldRose
Reviews
Good Will Hunting (1997)
Don't forget the value of a great public library system !
It's hard to believe that in a single year so many outstanding and unforgettable films hit the box office, but 1997 was indeed such a year. In any other this film would have walked away with Oscars for ''Best Director'' and ''Best Picture'', but suffice it say I'm grateful that the team of B. Affleck & M. Damon won for their outstanding screenplay. Damon's ''Best Actor'' nod was also well deserved and the two partners worked in tandem to play up Damon while playing down an equally strong B. Affleck (the latter shows his outstanding potential in ''Armageddon''). Most difficult this must have been, for otherwise the characters of Robin Williams and Minnie Farmer, both of whom got Oscar nods and the former who finally took home a statue, would have been lost in the shuffle. This film and its story were pure talent from start to finish, totally original and a refreshing change. Underdog over spoiled yuppie -- that's my kind of film -- and one's got to be happy for Williams who finally bagged an Oscar. Top rating (5 stars of 5) !
Out of the Ashes (2003)
Gripping drama, stretching the limits of TV
"Out of the Ashes" is very nearly the best story brought to the screen, among the many I've seen. At issue here (which many may not realise) is the life-story of one Doctor Gisella Perl--a Hungarian Jew who, along with her entire family, was captured from the family's home-town of Sighet and sent by boxcar to Auschwitz--while the holocaust itself provides the backdrop for the story. Like "Sophie's Choice", this film involved the difficult 'choiceless choices' that were made by some of the survivors of the Second World War's most infamous extermination camp.
In order to truly appreciate the story and the portrayal, one must know something of Hungarians and of Hungary, as well as their role in World War II. Actress Christine Lahti turned in such a marvelous and unforgettable performance, I actually thought I was seeing a Hungarian actress playing the role (to begin with), and then a really fine performance it was, to boot! I found myself on the edge of my seat with a film that, being a product of cable television, didn't garner such advance expectations. And but for one very glaring and avoidable error, which happens early in the film (only one scene), the final product was really quite well done. Bravo to Showtime!
Lahti's performance was award-winning, to say the very least, whether or not she was ever properly recognised. Add: a wonderful supporting cast, recruited in the US, Canada, and Eastern Europe. The scenery is lovely (filmed mainly in Lithuania; the film-makers were able to find a beautiful town not destroyed during the war). For those who have not seen this film, please do! It's a remarkable autobiography (i.e. the book on which its based) and life story. I think the actual Dr. Perl would have been proud of, and pleased with Lahti's performance and portrayal of her. Rent the DVD rather than wait for Showtime to rerun it (even though I'm sure it will be run again and again). Rating: 4,5 stars on 5.
Juana la Loca (2001)
Revisionistic, but very well acted!
There is no question that director Vicente Aranda has taken considerable liberty with generally accepted history, but despite this and a few flaws within the context of certain scenes, what we have is an excellent story, and one very well recounted and acted.
It will come as absolutely no surprise for those who have seen this film to know that Pilar Lopez de Ayala (as Juana I) and Rosana Pastor (Elvira, Head of Queen´s Household) are nominated in the lead and supporting categories of the Spanish Goya Film Awards, and, despite having been ignored by the Golden Globes, this film should be in contention for Oscar Consideration as Spain´s representation for the "Best Foreign Film" of 2001. Frankly, the performances just mentioned were so stunning, especially Pilar Lopez de Ayala, that I would consider her among nominees for Best Actress at the Oscars, not only given the absolutely pathetic list the Golden Globes presented in the Drama category, but simply because Pilar Lopez de Ayala DESERVES IT, much as did Fernanda Montenegro in the Brazilian masterpiece "Central Do Brazil" just a few years back.
For the historians among the viewing public, my recommendation is to simply look the other way on the bit of revisionism on display, given that far greater crimes have been committed by Hollywood as regards same. The story is excellent, the costumes & design, art direction, cinematography, and above all film editing are simply tops -- and film editing has been a GREAT problem in US films in recent times. Go and see it and I DO MEAN the original version! Rating = 4 stars (of five).
Captain Corelli's Mandolin (2001)
Great supporting but awful lead casting...
Just exactly HOW director John Madden come to settle with Nicolas Cage and Penelope Cruz playing the roles of an Italian Officer and a Greek Villager in an honourable story: "Captain Correli´s Mandolin", just escapes me! Witness: a wobbly, inconsistent accent by Cage amid horrendous over-acting, with Cruz -- more adequately cast as a spoiled Latino opposite Johnny Depp in "Blow" -- in basically a repeat performance under the guise of a Greek nurse... ay, it was painful. But there were saving graces.
The story itself is thrilling-to-tragic, and Cage does have some (-- redeeming, this is !--) musical ability. Next, a superb performance by John Hurt (Cruz´s father, the village doctor) of Oscar Callibre, as well as by Irene Papas, each as village elders, as well as by Christian Bale (Papas´ son) among the village freedom fighters, go far towards counter-balancing awkward performances (especially at the beginning) by Cruz and Cage. Nicely, the last two seem to grow into their respective roles as the film progresses, but it´s teeth-gnashing early on. Finally, the scenery itself and the photography could garner a technical award, and such provides pleasant distractions when most needed.
John Hurt already has two Oscar nominations and this would be a third; I hope he gets it as his performance as the Doctor makes this film worth seeing. The true test of a supporting actor/actress is whether or not the film would be the same without the personage in question, and in this case, it would most certainly not be... not even close.
Entertainment value but for the aformentioned plus factors which do help raise the bar. See it if you haven´t. Rating = 3.5 stars (of five).
The Contender (2000)
Some great performances amid a lousy story...
I was left dumbfounded when a film featuring both Joan Allen and Jeff Bridges, multiple award nominees both, failed to reach the cinemas anywhere near me... that is, until I saw "The Contender" on video. Upon closer examination and amid the unmistakable markings of a Gary Oldman Production, there was little reason left as to why this film had limited circulation.
Gary Oldman, much like Kenneth Branagh, needs to learn to either work in the production of a film or act in it but NOT BOTH!!! Neither one can manage it and something always suffers when they try. In the case of "The Contender", the suffering party is the story itself: a sordid bit of pom-pom shaking amid dirty little political closets strewn everywhere. The film sacrifices both plot development and substance in order to mire the audience in manure all too fast -- only to find out later that misguided notions and rah-rah patriotics take over. It´s really pathetic and phony to the bone. That Jeff Bridges, playing the US President, and reminding more of his role as "The Great Lebowsky" even got an award nod for this is no less than ASTONISHING. But there is where we are left by the so-called voting public.
On the other hand, Gary Oldman himself, playing the role of a devious congressional leader is brilliant, but the "look" he adopted for himself in this film (being far too reminiscent of one Very Well Known Hollywood Director in actuality) was not only pompous but downright absurd and distractive. Joan Allen on the other hand provides an excellent performance in a soggy role; the audience is left wondering just exactly WHERE has this female politician come from (in every sense, both literally and figuratively), for most of the film until a rather surprising (and thrilling) climax, which frankly raised the film back into the realm of respectability. As to the rest, Sam Elliot does a decent job of an LBJ-esque character on the White House staff while Christian Slater is... well, Christian Slater: no different really than the role as the inquisitive reporter in the film version of Anne Rice´s "Interview with the Vampire" eight years ago.
Sadly for Joan Allen, a great performance was wasted as this role had no way of going anywhere but down hill. Still, she and Gary Oldman were both thrilling at times, especially in the one-on-one, seemingly good vs. evil clash that ensues. Gary Oldman is gaining a reputation for playing fiends which will probably go far in explaining why he is growing more interested in film production in direction: "type-set", is putting it mildly.
Entertainment value, wait for the video and let someone else rent it. Rating = 3 stars (of five).
Moulin Rouge! (2001)
McGregor's Best; Kidman's Breakthrough; together FANTASTIC!
For the first time in Calendar Year 2001, I walked out of a film and thought that maybe, just maybe, I had just seen 'Best Picture'...!
With an opener like that where do I begin? As noted with "A Knight's Tale", we have a revisionist approach to a musical in order to animate an audience where period music would not, and yet this in and of itself, while an ingenious idea, cannot guarantee success. Except that in both the mentioned films, it worked... and fabulously so!
Nicole Kidman went ignored after a hugely successful performance in "Eyes Wide Shut" a film that would prove quasi-prophetic in at least one sense although few would know at the time. It seemed in fact that neither performance with husband Tom Cruise (Far and Away, 1992) would earn either member of the now severing couple the praise they deserved. Kidman of course came out the bigger loser, having starred in the interim opposite many a big name and with very little notice.
This has now changed! Ewan McGregor, on the other hand, far newer but improving rapidly, just slides right into this role as if he were born for it. They both do, and it may be the springboard both needed: story, art direction, music, sets, costumes, make-up, direction, and yes acting, not to mention the singing (!!!) will have this film well up on the awards platter at serving time.
In addition to our two leads, outstanding supporting performances from John Leguizamo and Richard Roxburgh are thrilling, and this is one film where the entire cast could garner the Screen Actor's Guild award for Cast & Company as everyone involved in the unfolding of the story played a critical role, no matter how great or small. Add Best Soundtrack and possibly Best Song to the honours list and then you have it. A true masterpiece! To director Baz Luhrmann and fellow script co-writer Craig Pearce, "Chapeau"!
A five star film not to be missed and an early favourite for Best Picture, buy your tickets and see it now! Rating 5 stars (of five), simply flawless...!
A Knight's Tale (2001)
The Year of Revisionist Musicals
Ahead of going to see this film I didn't know if I'd see comedy, satire, serious drama, or a farce (!). I'm relieved to say that in the very best sense of the terms, this film contains all the elements and came off magnificently. Like the recent "Moulin Rouge" we have an old story with a modern musical adaptation. 'Revisionist' admittedly, but how many people could have borne either film with the true music of the respective ages...? I'd wager: not many.
'Story' is important, so is humour, and this film has both. Heath Ledger needed a strong springboard after "The Patriot" and a nearly unequaled performance therein. He got it... and much, much more. From start to finish the film is witty, humorous, clever, and then when the moments matter: dramatic, serious, sensitive and tender. All this in a film that will qualify for the Comedy & Musical Category of the Golden Globes as does "Moulin Rouge", and like the latter, I expect to see many an award nomination bestowed.
Rufus Sewell plays a convincing bad guy, but it's Paul Bettany who scores the 'Breakthrough Performance' and should garner nominations for same. Heath Ledger could well garner a nomination himself as he was nothing short of stunning and brilliant in the starring role. This required a lot more than a pretty smile and outstanding background music. As a Knight would, he carried the day... and Bravo to him! James Purefoy adds the crowning touch as the Jungian Shadow of our hero, someone who must play the same games for very different reasons.
A five star movie from the opening gunshot, the only flaw noted happens early and shan't be disclosed (go and see if you can find it). A must see in a year in which the Comedy & Musical are sorely needed (badly missed hitherto!) and have synchronistically arrived. Take your friends and plan to see it at least twice! Rating is 5 stars (of five) and I'm waiting for the award nomination envelopes to arrive!
Planet of the Apes (2001)
Trite dialogue, over-edited, lacking en todo !
Poor Mark Wahlberg: this honestly could have been a chance for him to extend upon steadily improving performances in the past few years, but the fault is not his. Equally, I imagine the screenwriters probably did an admirable job with their story. But any hope of a performance by Wahlberg, as anything more than a stereotyped dosage of testosterone, was trashed. It's really a pity. And to think that Tim Burton's name is attached to this film leaves me reeling... Having seen so many of his films and his genius revealed, I cannot help but believe this latest project suffered nuclear fall-out. Just think back: "Sleepy Hollow", "Nightmare Before Christmas", "Edward Scissorhands", and so many more: I could just keep writing... They were all fabulous.
The most to be said for the end-product is that it allows Wahlberg to be likeable. Tim Roth, on the other hand, comes off so badly that he reminds me of Gary Oldman (whose talent, by the way, is huge and underutilised...) with too much make-up and a bad hangover. Only Helena Bonham-Carter and the special effects (read: Tim Burton) make this film worth seeing. Bonham-Carter is not only likeable, but believable, convincing, and showing real talent despite the obvious handicap of the costume. She really does deserve high marks here, but I don't think the voting public will take the end-product of this film seriously. Again, what a shame... The Marketing Gurus and Editors really need to be strung-up for hacking to bits what could have been fabulous.
Entertainment value. Go see it for the special effects and noted items above. Recommend letters of condolence for Wahlberg and Burton; I am ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN this project could have been saved. Rating based on sentimentality = 3 stars (on 5).
The Princess Diaries (2001)
Absolutely Class...!
The long, long overdue return of Julie Andrews to major motion pictures could not have happened in a better setting or with a better producer. An Icon who helped make Walt Disney Pictures something more than a bastion for animated specials (not that these haven't been wonderful, consistently avant-garde, and unforgetable), we have the Lady back once more in the role of a mentor -- and she does this so well -- this time not for a proper British household, nor for a large family on the brink of the impact of a world war, but this time for a young girl who simply dares to dream. And daring to dream is something we ALL need to do.
Anne Hathaway is an outstanding find and I hope we see more of her; it took a lot to encapsulate essentially two personas for a newcomer. She was equally successful at both and the results are no less than noteworthy. The audience is kept entertained throughout the film, truly a feel-good adventure in a time when the world most needed one, and excellently supported by Hector Elizondo, Heather Matarazzo, Robert Schwartzman, and a surprise cameo by ... (go and see the film to find out !!!).
Not since "Victor Victoria" has Julie Andrews thrilled audiences like this, and said film garnered her third ocsar nomination along with a basket-full of others (6 more). That was 19 very long years ago.
Treat yourself to a fabulous performance by a Veteran and Living Legend, a thrilling newcomer, a wonderful story and chance to feel good. The film's only draw-back, although it was pulled into the humour effectively, was the "dialect" of the city in which the story takes place. But don't let this stop you. Rating is 4 stars (on 5). A must see -- don't wait for video or cable!
A.I. Artificial Intelligence (2001)
Stop the world, I'm getting off !!!
This is the third futuristic HORROR movie I've seen recently (cf. ANTI-TRUST, GATICA, the latter on video), and positively the most horrifying of all. It's quite clear the collective unconscious of the species foresees control, cataclysm and hatred, but this film was positively heartbreaking at points, and sheer nightmare elsewhere. Only towards the end of the film does it start to look a bit like Stephen Spielberg had anything to do with it. The story is of quality, just hopefully not anything to do with the future -- at all !!! "Darkening despair", "desolation", and "depravity" all come to mind.
Haley Joel Osment once again stuns us with his ability to interpret abstract and obscure roles (cf. PAY IT FORWARD, SIXTH SENSE), and Jude Law could also end-up on award rolls again -- a fantastic performance by him, rivaling the best of anything he's yet done. But were it not for the Bear (go and see the film to find out what I mean... but see my note below), this film would have been too much to handle and I would have walked out.
For the characters, the ending, and the Bear, rating is 4 stars (on 5). For this depiction of humanity viz. future, rating = minus 10. WARNING (my opinion only): DO NOT go and see this film if you are depressed, worried, or anxious... = Old Rose's disclaimer...
Blow (2001)
Johnny Depp shines to ever-brighter heights...!
I am beginning to think there is NOTHING this young actor cannot do and do magnificently. The variety and range of roles handled by Johnny Depp maintains him as my pick for "Most Under-Rated Actor in Hollywood". The performance at hand of drugster George Jung is credible, tangible, believable, and ultimately tragic and sad, as surely was the life of the real man, still living supposedly behind bars.
From youth barely out of his teens, to aging inmate with a paunch, Johnny Depp carries off the role magnificently and one is so left wishing that the real-life character could have confined himself to 'small-time' activities by late in this film, that it brings tears to ones eyes: a person of tremendous potential was wasted. Equally stunning is the look-alike for Columbian drug lord Pablo Escobar (Cliff Curtis) and an excellent supporting performance by Ray Liotta, not known for playing sentimental roles.
Many may have eschewed this film over a perceived similarity to FEAR AND LOATHING IN LAS VEGAS, but the two are separate and apart (and equally unique). The other work is a bit of a 'frenzy' for those not advance-prepared.
As with THE MAN WHO CRIED, BEFORE NIGHT FALLS, and CHOCOLATE, this is a must-see film for Johnny Depp fans, despite the fact that in two of the just-mentioned films his roles are less than leads. No matter. What this actor can do with a mere look, a gesture, a glance, an expression, others would need whole paragraphs to accomplish -- where not whole pages -- in order to rival. Simply impressive, superb, and without equal: Johnny Depp has no parallel in his generation.
The film's drawback is the remainder of the cast. It's weak. With exception of Jordi Molla (who coincidentally has acted with Javier Bardem of BEFORE NIGHT FALLS) as one of the two-timing partners, there is a serious weakness in casting. No matter. The players named carry the film. GO AND SEE IT. Rating 4 stars (on five).
Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within (2001)
The future genre of adult animated entertainment...
Neither the star-list of 'voices' for the characters in FINAL FANTASY nor the degree of animation and technological perfection motivated me to view this product. What brought me out to see the film was the question of whether or not a palpable story could be constructed, such that I would (at least momentarily) have lapses as to what kind of characters I was watching. The film succeeds: I forgot more than once that I was not looking at anything but 100% pure animation.
Nor is the film properly tagged by pundits as a 'replacement' for actual characters, despite the convenience of being able to blend characters and animation more effectively. What we may have, however, for the first time in 40 years, since the advent of THE FLINTSTONES is a form of adult entertainment (also suitable for those under age) in animated form. The evolution from 1960s cartoon has been long overdue and the garbage-grade material shown on certain networks dedicated to same has reminded me on many occasions of just how sorely we've been missing a true advancement in this area.
One fault, and it's a BIG one. Not everyone in our futuristic world is going to be young, physically perfect and beautiful. Only the Doctor is above cerca age 25. This is a bit absurd. What we needed was an intermixing of the real and the surreal with respect to the human-replacement element: not everyone is going to be shaped like Brad Pitt and Sharon Stone (just to pull two examples; no offence intended to either actor) in the future. Unless of course genetic engineering wins out and then the rest of us will, by then, hopefully find ourselves elsewhere.
Given such a frighteningly 'real' world created on-screen for the viewers of this film, living "elsewhere" does NOT appear to be a bad idea, of course until the dramatics build towards a clearly defined climax.
This cannot be graded as any other film; we didn't have acting per se, although we did have portrayals, and rather good ones. Overall the film constitutes high entertainment value and I'd award it 4 stars (on 5). Treat yourself to the next generation of adult animated entertainment!
Jurassic Park III (2001)
"Sometimes the worst things happen based on the best intentions...!"
The tag-line (above) serves as theme: I was appalled to the point of disgust over just how AWFUL this film's story line really was. And herewith we'd been promised, finally, something of a 'human element', a story, something on which to grab as regards the people in this film. And quite simply, we were robbed.
Instead, we find ourselves with even less of a feasible story line than in either I or II. We find some absolutely AWFUL miscasting in some of the key roles, and our heroes come down to the good professor once more (Sam Neill) without whom this series would have never survived, and only a brief appearance by his former working partner (Laura Dern), now moved on to other matters. Trevor Morgan and Alessandro Nivola provide some good supporting moments for Sam Neill, without which the film collapses entirely -- like just another flimsy protective barrier supposed to confine our dinosaurs in all three films.
Macy and Leoni could NOT have found themselves more out of place than a pair of vampires on a Spring Break outing to Miami Beach. Both were misfits throughout the film, and provided reverse entertainment in that the audience was kept betting on how soon they'd be squashed by a careless roaming Dino on a Sunday stroll...
Story line was non-existent. Plot development missing. Indeed, such could have been assembled over coffee and croissants by amateur university film students with far better results. The only thing missing was shaking cameras, as in the original BLAIR WITCH PROJECT (which was far more original). From opening premise to closing escape we are left wishing Hollywood could "wake-up and smell the coffee": not all films need a target market of ages 8-14, and that's about where this film falls.
Sacrificed is quality time viewing the marvellous animation effects of the creatures themselves, a primary reason for viewing these films given the gross departure from the Michael Crichton novel. Films I and II would manage 3 stars each (on five), but this third endeavour garners only 2 stars on pure generosity alone. Do NOT pay money to see this; cable will get it soon enough.
Pearl Harbor (2001)
Dramatic effects, almost deja-vu, but dialogue suffers...
The 2001 version of "Pearl Harbor" has much in common with another massive-budget film of recent years, "Titanic". Not that both involve ships, but both involve superior performances by supporting players while the headline stars fall far below their potential... In this film the recreation of the event itself is nothing short of phenomenal, to the point of momentary lapses and SHOCK... The visual effects defy imagination and, along with cinematography, possibly art direction, sound, and (certainly) the theme song, there are elements here I expect displayed at the next instalment of the Golden Globes, Oscars, BAFTAs, and others. Among the supporting crew, Academy Award Winner John Voight, Ewen Bremner, Mako, Alec Baldwin, and -- let us not forget, Cuba Gooding Jr., inspire, leading us to laughs, tears, stone cold somber moments, and everything in between. The first, John Voight, was so believable that he could garner an award nomination himself.
The hoped-for romantic 'enhancement' was not, in and of itself, misplaced, as many media reviews have stated. Rather, it was poorly done and here I would recommend a complete script chapter re-write. In other words, these things DID happen (during that era) and it could have been handled. It wasn't, and the film suffers for it. Our leading three characters are basically 'good' throughout (but not great), apart from various moments during said element. All three, at one point or another, stumble miserably through it, with Josh Hartnett doing the best job at 'damage control'. Ben Affleck, for his part, LOOKS just like someone from the era -- stunningly so -- and thus a major success. He manages the exchanges reasonably well, too, to include non-verbals, but for said element. (Hartnett is a little less convincing, but the difference is marginal.) Both men, at this point, however, lose the edge ENTIRELY on sounding like the 1940s, and the effects on the viewer are nothing short of a jarring back to the present = NOT GOOD. With better editing, Kate Beckinsale could have 'saved the day', so-to-speak, on the romance as this was a chance for her to 'manage' the unplanned balancing act (witness how well it was handled in "Castaway", for example), but alas... No.
I wish to emphasise that said element also had the potential to add to this film and unfortunately takes away instead, from an otherwise nearly-perfect production. What were the writers/ editors thinking...???
A few chewy remarks about money, vis-a-vis reasoning for making decisions with the use of aircraft and naval fleets are more indicative of yesterday's newspaper, and mean that even the directorial staff has forgotten the times. I recommend a dose of old WW2 movies to refresh their memories. This 'snafu' alone, however, would have had no more impact than a slight, indiscernable mistake made by a figure skater at the Olympics, e.g. the judges might have marked a 5.8 rather than 5.9. But along with the jarring effect of the failed element just cited, well...
My rating, however, rests with the sound, visual effects, music, song, cinematography and supporting cast, i.e. all of which and whom TAKE YOU THERE to the event itself and that is what I was looking for. This was also true with "Titanic" which could not have been carried without veteran Gloria Stuart retelling 'her' story along with all of James Cameron's creations... For these criteria alone, rating = 5 stars (of 5; but with 1.5 point markdown if I include everything else).
House on Haunted Hill (1999)
Started badly, went very badly, and finished atrociously
WHAT EVER POSSESSED someone of the talent level of Geoffrey Rush to take such an awful role? The same question was there for Liam Neeson in yet another terrible remake of another horror classic, "The Haunting". It is not often that I stop to comment on terrible films, but this one really rubbed me wrong, as did the Neeson remake. Both are of classics from about the same period: Vincent Price starred in the former "House on Haunted Hill" in 1958, while "The Haunting" came out in 1963. Both are considered to be almost without equal, and their remakes, both in 1999, I would qualify as nothing short of disastrous...! How is it that H-wood honestly believes that special effects with haunted buildings (not to be confused with good old fashioned, but sadly passé, Ghost Stories) can replace good honest suspense...? Somebody really needs to explain it to me as people walked out of both films either laughing or disgusted; count me among the latter. Rating ONE star (of five)-- and for kindness only! Don't go see it, don't waste money on the video, flip the channel when it comes on cable, and say no to your friends when invited to see either of these HORROR-ible insults to past classic works.
The Patriot (2000)
Major Oscar potential: Gibson's best & Isaacs a thriller!
Many, on both sides of the Atlantic, were howling about the so-called 'baddie' in this unequalled work depicting the Revolutionary War in stark reality carrying neither an overemphasis on gore nor on foul language, long before it ever hit the screens, but the truth of the matter is that it takes REAL GUTS to play the baddie: the one character everyone just loves to hate! And in "The Patriot", Gibson's character and up-and-coming star Jason Isaacs provide an unparalleled balance in which it seems one almost sees a flicker of his former self (not pleasingly, either) in the other. We have almost a pair of Jungian 'shadow' figures, and the film would have listed very badly on its proverbial side had there not been some such measure of balance. For Isaacs we're talking nothing less than an Oscar-calibre performance, while Gibson himself may finally see his name opposite an Oscar nomination in an acting category. The number of fine 'character' actors in this film is also impressive, and new stand-outs Heath Ledger and Lisa Brenner certainly deserve honourable mentions -- indeed, the latter may even find herself with a nomination as well. Certainly the best picture of the summer, if not for the year (it's already got my vote!), and other kudos would not be surprising at all in the directorial, screen-writing, cinematography, editing, and yes, "Best Picture" categories. A blockbuster film which also just happens to be GOOD (too!), "The Patriot" is a MUST-SEE! Don't wait, do it now! Rating: 5 stars (of five), and I'll gladly hand both Isaacs AND Gibson their statues.
Sleepy Hollow (1999)
Johnny Depp & Tim Burton, both, at their very BEST !
Thrilled from start to finish, I can certainly understand the rave reviews throughout much of Europe for the recently reinterpreted (and slightly renamed) "Sleepy Hollow: The legend of the headless horseman" by Tim Burton and now featuring three-time collaborator "par excellence" Johnny Depp who - as I have said before - is the most under-rated actor of his generation in Hollywood. Between this and the recent "Ninth Gate", I find myself at odds as to which is Depp's very best performance, but viewers will find he just keeps getting better and better with time. How he continually escapes notice at awards time continues to amaze and cause no small amount of chagrin. The film is top-notch, I don't care what language you see it in, JUST GO SEE IT. Rating 5 stars (of five !), and with greatest pleasure. (Honourable mention to British veterain Michael Gambon and a very well-matched Christina Ricci, too!)
Joan of Arc (1999)
Beyond all expectations...!
Milla Jovovich may have been the only woman who could have portrayed a 'Joan' believable enough for such a film and approach as that taken by Luc Besson, one which stops just short of suggesting some sort of 'shamanic visionary' as opposed to a character labelled everything from 'deranged schizophrenic' to 'lesbian', simply due to attire, while 'hearing voices' (all historical facts). The key ingredient: the eyes. Not since Faye Dunnaway's unforgetable portrayal in "The Eyes of Laura Mars" (1976), who coincidentally co-stars as an excellent Yolande d'Aragon herewith, has someone captivated an audience simply by a look or a glance. Spell-binding, riveting, and as true to the historical record as one can expect for this most noble of French heroines, while adding a plausible childhood, Besson, Jovovich, an excellent supporting cast and the film were all but ignored for the honours they so richly deserved. Rating five stars (of five) and a film I'll never forget!
Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace (1999)
Technological wonder; 'plotless wonder' !
After a long absence OldRose returns to her fans with a new review...!
Having been significantly older than the viewing populace at-large when the the first trilogy aired in 1977, -80, and -83, I can only marvel at what may have happened to George Lucas in fifteen years of hiatus. Whereas a target audience ranged quite widely back then, I'd say it doesn't now. Perfect for the 8-18 crowd this movie left most whom I know beyond those tender numbers wondering just what happened. And did we really need a character indicative of a monotheistic religious 'devil' who wears make-up like Freddy Krueger (or has everyone forgotten about him already?) Trouble is, we can all-too-easily guess Episodes 2 and 3 now, something that would not have happened with something of a plot worthy of such fan support. Rating (of 5 stars): 4 - on techno-aspects alone; plot = 2.
(NOTA BENE: did we really need unmistakeable 'ethnicitism' with some of the puppet characters, an ecological-destroyed 'main' planet ("100% city"), plus the aforementioned devil/Freddy Krueger - and other such trivialities that trilogy no.1 was entirely without...? Ah well, I'll just have to hang around long enough to see what gets thrown at us next in nos. 2 and 3!)
What Dreams May Come (1998)
Boldly takes you where none have dared before !
This is at least the third film of 1998 to deal with the subject of death, dying, angels, after-life and/or soul mates, and frankly all three (this plus "City of Angels", "Meet Joe Black") have been extremely well done, with each unique in its own way so as not to step on the toes of the others via overlap. Here we have the story of soul mates and the lengths they'll go to stay together. The scenery was fabulous and the concept quite orignal. Indeed, the notion of entering a dimension via artwork serves as metaphor for a far more powerful meaning that most probably missed. Take a box of tissues with you -- if not for yourself than for the others at the cinema. Williams is magnificent and should have been recognised for this role! (Rating 4.5 stars of 5.)
Meet Joe Black (1998)
Everyone should have an angel like that !
Haunting, relentless and unforgettable -- three terms that would certainly describe Death. Then, add Brad Pitt in a green suit with necktie askew and voila! After Hopkins' near seizure, there are a few moments early on during which one doesn't quite know where this film's going (e.g. how can Death be so dumb?!), but the comics do work and the story launches. Once it does, it grabs your attention for the remainder of the film; you don't want it to end but you know it has to -- Death didn't stop over for nothing, after all. Add West Indian accents to Mr Pitt's repertoire and a sensuousness that remains beyond compare (as a couple Pitt & Forlani have got definite repeat-appeal). Hopkins is great, as usual, and must never rest for the quantity of excellent films in which he's partaken over the past year. Would that we all go out on such a high note, with full understanding and our eyes wide-open. Superbly done -- go and see it! (Rating 4.5 stars of 5.)
Interview with the Vampire: The Vampire Chronicles (1994)
It'll take your breath away... Literally !
The transition from the first of the Vampire Chronicles was at least a partial success. Pitt is convincing as Louis and Dunst was an absolute surprise as Claudia! Lesser marks for Cruise as the famous Lestat, but the overall performance wasn't bad. Banderas is always good and was no disappointment here either, in the role of the mystical Armand. Rhea rounds out the cast of ''bad'' vampires vs. ''good'', amid beautiful and at times stunning scenery, costumes, and fantastic music. True to the novel (roughly speaking) minus a surprise ending. Great theme song from Guns & Roses, to boot! Nods from both Oscar and Golden Globe (especially for Dunst) were well deserved. Buy the video, and don't count on a sequel. (Rating 4 stars of 5.)
Seven Years in Tibet (1997)
Slow to begin, but don't worry -- it rolls !
An editor may have been sorely needed during the first hour of the film, but if you made it 40 minutes in chances are you stayed. The scenery was breathtaking as were the costumes and the seeming authenticity of the setting. Once again Pitt tackles a role involving a foreign accent (of sorts) and does an admirable job; appearance-wise it certainly wasn't difficult to impersonate an Austrian skiier, but the sequence of the changes that took place within the persona of Heinrich Harrer over the years as the story unfolds was well portrayed. Even the uninformed will now know something about Tibet and its plight as both a nation and a people. The ethically and morally bankrupt political apparatus that depicts the ruin and exile of what's created before the viewer is stark, moving, and unforgettable. (Rating 4 stars of 5.)
The Devil's Own (1997)
Not as bad as the critics would have you believe !
This film was panned and slammed by critics and pundits far and wide, and I distinctly remember a TV interview in which both key protagonists were left having to defend it (and ultimately themselves), amid rumours of an unfinished script and more. Assuming the benefit of the doubt, such hardships may have in fact added to (and certainly not taken away from) the overall result (!) -- which is what counts in the end. The likeable New York cop and father, Ford, is believable as one of the multidudinous descendents of Irish immigrants, while Pitt's portrayal of one fresh off the docks is quite admirable -- at least he doesn't shy away from a challenge, now does he? The worst thing about the film, however, is the title -- a monkey could have named it better. "Ah but, ya keep forgettin', it's an Irish story
" (Rating 3.5 stars of 5.)
The X Files (1998)
Watch out ! -- "Mister Cigarette" is back !
Mulder & Scully are back too, and so is the evil cabel behind the politicians, bankers and multi-nationals. When "Mister Cigarette" shows up you know its going to be bad -- and it is! To be truthful though, I was doubtful about H-wood's abilities to get this one to successfully jump to the "hyperspace" of big-time movie productions. One might have said, "can't they leave well enough alone"? Well I'm glad they didn't listen! I enjoyed it thoroughly and look forward to more episodes on the way. Kudo's to Duchovny & Anderson who were as good as ever. (Rating 3.5 stars of 5.)