thehumble1 Reviews

Gummo (1997)

Much too much for one sitting

[9/10 · 5 April 2000]

Disturbing and important It is impossible to summarize the movie, but may be possible to characterize it. Although I haven't seen Kids, this film hits me as a dramatic look at the reality of our life. The visual poverty and distopia is profound, but the lifestyle which accompanies it is more impressive, pushing you to realize the ways people cope with their circumstances.

Don't watch it because you heard it was good and don't watch it if you aren't willing to look past the initial reaction, while still keeping it available. The film makes you react, but it also wants you to think. I didn't like watching it, but I am glad I have gone through the experience.

Fight Club (1999)

The smartest movie to happen in a decade

[10/10 · 7 November 1999]

It was an amazing mix of humor, fighting, terror, and confusion. A look at our society and ourselves that is seldom expressed today. This could start a revelation, but will not because it is made by capitalists. It will make you want to buy a DVD just to watch each frame as it appears in its artistic and graphic fullness.

I felt guilty for laughing, as nothing was funny, but it was some of the best humor I have seen in years, far surpassing the stupid tricks of Adam Sandler or similar "comedians" who think humor is about degrading themselves or another. In Fight Club, the humor is about degrading the YOU the one who is watching and laughing, it makes you hate the fact that the blood or the suicide or the death is funny.

The movie makes you feel guilty for paying $7.50 to watch it and $4.35 for the popcorn you hold. It plays on some of the ideas in American Beauty, to leave you feeling rebellious, but subdued.

And most of all, it makes you wonder, as you leave the theater, who is real.

Don't see it, watch it.

Playing by Heart (1998)

People need to watch movies with their mind as well as their time

[22 October 1999]

I was quite impressed with the entire presentation of the film. The characters were well developed, individual, and full of potential and humanity. The relationships were actual and realistic, a wonderful break from the Fantasy of Sleepless in Seattle (or You've Got Mail, pick the title you want). The presentation of people with problems and realistic responses to these problems and the people who are affected by these problems really makes this movie more than a past-time; it is a gift, showing us what we are and what we can become with some work and maybe a small paradigm shift.

Everyone did a wonderful job of presenting real people, Sean Connery found a role which allowed him to be his age but not loose that which he is loved for: sinful good looks and flawless composure. Gillian Anderson was so good that by the end I had almost stopped waiting for Molder to arrive. But for me Angelina Jolie was the centerpiece, as she showed the greatest degree of development and growth, epitomizing the struggle that each person was going through.

To me, the plot was a lot more complicated than just the feelings that develop from watching the movie, and the depth of perception is honestly presented in the comments of the other reviewers; most seem to have watched the movie with so much intensity that they got up 35 minutes into it to go and tell the popcorn boy to give them a new bag because they had specifically asked for NO butter. This movie is cognitive to the degree it is affective. It takes one relationship and divides it up into several stages (seen as the family members' relationships), and in doing so it allows us to see relational development in ways we normally can't, just as we repeatedly see the time of day change against the buildings.

It is funny, it is romantic, but it is true. And I am thankful for its gift of sight: into life, into death.

The Matrix (1999)

Zen, Christianity, and holes the size of Kansas

[6/10 · 10 April 1999]

I went into the movie with several preconceptions, but I was surprised. I was astonished both by the thought that was put into the plot, and the lack of thought that was put into the theory. The combination of the second coming of Christ and Zen Buddhism was nifty, but one would have to leave their logic in the car outside if they are going to follow the plot without gasping for coherence. I thought that Keanu did a fine job, acting the less like Bill S. Preston Esq. than ever, but it was a bit telling when the entire theater laughed at his attempt to look stylish while fighting; he isn't a martial artist.

The major holes in the plot may pass by some people, which may be a good thing, but I think that in a movie which tries to present a possible future, challenging the mind of the patron, it is sad when there are such problems in the actual presentation. There was a definite lack of continuity in thought that left me feeling insulted, as if the producers thought that I would not notice that nothing fit together. I think that if the movie was written and presented to a publisher, they would get rejected because of the lack of thoroughness.

But wow, there were a lot of scenes that just amazed me. I was captured.

It has a good story line with poor world design, a great presentation, and lots of eye candy.

I kind of hope that people could look past the problems, but I also would be saddened if people didn't see the big logical errors. It would mean that people don't think about and thus can't learn from movies. If they don't get the problems with the movie, they probably don't get the point of it either.