film101 Reviews

1917 (2019)

A technical feat that doesn't pack much of a punch

[7/10 · 16 January 2020]

1917 is filmed as if it's one long take as we follow two British soldiers on a time sensitive mission to save 1600 men from walking into a German trap. While the cinematography and direction are Oscar worthy, the film packs no emotional punch and fails to achieve any real sense of urgency during its 2 hour run time.

***SPOILER ALERT***

As the movie begins there's no context regarding the state of the war, who is winning - what's at stake (strategically) if these men die at this battle. The only emotional connection you have to the 1600 men who are destined to be slaughtered (by machine guns which came of age during WWI - the script doesn't bother to paint any sort of picture for the viewer) - is that of the faceless hundreds is the brother of one of the protagonists. That's it.

The two leads are fine actors but there's nothing about their characters that pops off the screen.. When the two run into danger, they're put in situations that make no logical sense. For instance, the two see a trip wire right in front of them - there's a bomb wired to go off - a rat triggers the wire HUGE EXPLOSION! Yet, of the two soldiers one isn't harmed at all (no burns, no shrapnel) and the other gets buried in debris but is left without a single burn or any shrapnel injury. Then this powerful explosion- that caused no injury to either soldier - makes the entire trench start to collapse as if it's built with dominos?

Sometimes the characters are in a huge rush, and other times they take their time waxing about cherry trees and sipping unspoiled milk?? at an abandoned farm. German soldiers have the same aim as stormtroopers, yet our hero manages to shoot a sniper 100 yards away by shooting blindly.

There's lots of dead bodies along the way, but Mendes isn't showing us any horrors that haven't already been seen in way too many war films. The one take style becomes distracting after about 10 minutes or so, bringing your attention more to the difficulty of the technical achievement behind the camera than the lifeless story unfolding in front of it.

The Matrix Reloaded (2003)

Disappointing

[7/10 · 18 May 2003]

(SPOILER REVIEW) Like Star Wars: The Phantom Menace, it seemed that The Matrix: Reloaded would be a can't miss, sure-fire, awesome sci-fi film. But just like Episode I, Reloaded just didn't have it. I loved the first Matrix film. It was a great sci-fi film and a great movie going experience. A visual feast, and something I had not seen before. A perfect modern day sci fi epic. A sequel seemed a natural. How could it go wrong?

The fact that the Matrix slo-mo trademark effect has been done to death obviously hurt the film, but there were so many other problems with it. First off, unlike the first one where each character aboard the Nebecanezer (sp?) was vulnerable in the world of the Matrix, now we have Neo; The One, who is unbeatable. There is no danger in each fight scene in which Neo appears. He can't be beat so who cares. There is no danger and nothing new that we are seeing in his fight sequences. The previous crew of the ship is missed too. There are no new interesting characters in this film.

The pacing of the film early on is extremely slow. They spend a lot of time setting up the politics and conflicts within Zion. Then they show us the inner workings of Zion, which just isn't that interesting. The slow pacing of the film finally picks up and towards the third act so much happens so fast that I thought I was watching a tease to the next film Revolutions. It was very strange. After the directors spend so much time showing us Zion, we find out that it gets wiped out by the invading Sentinels. All of this happens off screen! Why the heck did the directors spend so much time characterizing Zion and presenting it's impending doom and then let it all happen off screen?

There are some great action sequences during the film and some of the bloated pretentious narrative is somewhat engaging, but all in all this Matrix film is a disappointment. The excitement and anticipation of what we would see next in the trilogy, how would the directors blow us away this time, is gone. I stayed for at least 10 minutes to watch the longest credit crawl in the history of film only to feel jipped once again by a 30 second lame trailer for Revolutions. Will I go see Revolutions..yeah sure; but I'm not expecting much. (7/10)

Hannibal (2001)

Is this Clarice? Well, hello Clarice.

[7/10 · 2 July 2002]

(SOME SPOILERS)

I first saw Hannibal when it came out in the theaters. I had read

the book and was really looking forward to the film. I never

expected it to reach the same heights that Silence of The Lambs

did, but I was hoping for a good companion to that great film.

When I left the theater I was very disappointed. Last week I saw

the film for the second time on cable, and it's really not that bad. In

fact the first hour and a half are quite good. It's when Hannibal

comes to America that the film does a total nose dive.

The film is gorgeous to look at during it's first half in Italy, and

Hopkins does a good job of giving the audience that subtle feeling

of uneasiness that made his performance in SOTL so great. The

pacing feels right and the plot unfolds well, climaxed by a nasty

death scene of the inspector. Then when the film shifts gears and

Hannibal comes back to the states, the tone, and smartness of the

plot just goes away. It felt as if entire chunks of the plot were cut

out so the movie wouldn't play too long. After taking so much time

to build tension with Hannibal being discovered and stalked in

Italy, Ridley Scott builds no tension at all during the climactic pig

eating scene. It just sort of happens.

Two things that really brought the film down during the second half

are the characters of Mason Verger and Clarice Starling. The tone

of the Verger character never felt right. Am I supposed to fear this

guy or laugh at him? It never seemed clear. The make-up job on

him seemed a little off as well. To be honest, it was hard to look at

him and not think of Jim Carrey's Fireman character from In Living

Color. I don't think that is what the director had in mind. And

although Juliane Moore is a fine actress she just seems out of

place in this film. It's not her fault. No one could have replaced

Jodie Foster. The scene with Hopkins and Moore at the

amusement park fails miserably and seems all together pointless.

In the controversial final scene I had gotten to the point where I just

didn't care anymore. There is nothing less scary then seeing

Hopkins dressed like a butler making dinner, even if he is cooking

a man's brain. Perhaps it was an outtake from Remains of The

Day.

To sum up; very good first half, mediocre second half. And one

final note, GREAT SOUNDTRACK especially Vide Cor Meum (absolutely beautiful).

7 out of 10

Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones (2002)

The Good, The Bad and The Ugly

[6/10 · 17 May 2002]

As much as I would love to be able to say that Attack of The Clones is as good as the original three in the series, I sadly cannot. And even more dissapointing is the realization that the prequels will never reach the type of cinematic enjoyment that the first three did. It's just not going to happen. But don't get me wrong. Attack of The Clones is not a bad movie. It is much better then the Phantom Menace and gives us much more insight into how the Republic falls and the Empire takes over. THE GOOD: Every scene with Palpatine is awesome. Watching the character continue to manipulate the Jedi is fun to watch and you can tell that Ian McDiarmid is having fun playing the character. His early scene with Anakin gives us insight into the relationship the two have built since we last saw them in The Phantom Menace and when Palpatine talks about how he loves Democracy and loves the Republic it is develish evil we hear in his undertones. When Palpatine finally reveals himself as Darth Sidious in Episode III, it is going to be an awesome moment. Anakins slaughter of the Tusken Raiders camp is cool and his scene after where he tells Amidala what he did is easily the best acting scene in the Prequels. We finally see Darth Vader in Anakins eyes and it is very compelling. Also memorable: The chase through Coruscant, Kenobi vs. Jango Fett, The Battle Scene at Geonosis, parts of the C-3PO and R2-D2 antics during the big battle scene, watching Count Dooku escape on his scooter across the desert as he is being followed by Anakin and Obi Wan (am I mistaken or did the soundtrack have undertones of the Wicked Witch of the West theme from the Wizard of Oz as Dooku is on his broom err scooter.). The BAD: The two most difficult things for a director to convey are tone and subtlety. Lucas fails to convey both of these. Sadly this movie that should be full of energy and emotion is dead. Instead of experiencing the movie with the characters we are observers. This is mainly due to the weak dialogue and stale directing by Lucas. The Flanneled One is much more interested in computer effects then he is in character development. This is the biggest missing ingredient that seperates Episode I and II from the first three. Also, the editing choices in the film were questionable at times. There is little to no tension built through out the story. It never builds to anything emotional, it just moves on to the next scene, the next plot point. Some scenes should have been cut out all together. The UGLY: Anakins scene with Amidala by the fireplace is truly horrible. The writing is sophomoric and its really quite embarrassing for both actors. Lucas then follows this scene with what has to be the worst scene of the movie which is Anakin having a nightmare about his mother. This scene would have worked if Lucas would have shown us a glimpse of what his dream was about and it would have served to re-aquaint the audience with Shmi before we see her death scene. Sadly, no one mentioned this to Lucas and the scene plays horribly. I saw the movie twice on opening day and this scene got laughs both times. All in all the movie has a lot more good in it then bad. However I couldn't help feeling that as Palpatine and others watch the Clone Army board the Star Destroyers and The Imperial March is playing it should have been the emotional climax of the film instead of just another visual spectacle. 7.5 out of 10 but I'll round it up to 8 since it's Star Wars :-)

It (1990)

The Scariest TV Movie ever

[8/10 · 29 May 2001]

I remember seeing IT when it debuted on television. I was in high

school, and remember how scary it was, especially for a TV movie.

Tim Curry is simply awesome as Pennywise, and I can't believe he

didn't get an emmy nomination for his performance. I have since

seen the film at least a dozen times, and every time I figure I'll just

watch a couple of minutes of it, but again I get sucked into it and

end up watching all of it.

I would give the movie a 10 but the last 30 minutes is simple god

awful. But for the first 3 1/1 hours it is fabulous.

61* (2001 TV Movie)

Big Budget TV movie

[7/10 · 1 May 2001]

With some anticipation I watched the debut of 61* this weekend on HBO. Admittedly, the production value was quite high, especially for a cable movie. However, the plot felt like a television movie.

Maris hits a homerun, Maris gets criticized in the newspapers and the pressure gets to him. That sequence of events was played, and replayed in the film for the majority of it's running time which made the film painfully predictable and lifeless. Crystal definately knew what the feel of the ballpark should be, and visualized it very well, but where is the artistry in his direction? One example: Towards the end of the film, Maris is staying at the St. Moritz with his wife, it's the last homestand of the season for the Yankee's, and he is describing to his wife the minute difference in hitting a pop fly and hitting a homerun. To me, this was one of the most interesting passages of dialogue in the film. Wouldn't it had been nice to watch Maris at bat, as he describes in VO how it is simply a matter of inches between fouling a ball off, hitting a pop fly, and smashing a home run.

The ending of the film was the most frustrating part because there were so many holes left in the plot. For one, it is never really explained to the audience why it is such a cathartic experience for Maris's wife to watch Mark McGwire break the homerun record. Why does this make her cry? And there is no VO or text about how the Yankee's did in the postseason that year. Mantle was in the hospital, so it would have been up to Maris to lead them in the postseason. Did they make it to the World Series? Did they win? How did Maris do? Did he lead the team to victory? If you're going to spend part of the movie talking about how close the divisional race was between the Yankees and the Tigers you have to at least tell us how the Yankee's finished the season. This is never explained. It is also never said that Maris has yet to be elected to the Hall of Fame. (6 out of 10)

Battlefield Earth (2000)

Seeing is believing

[14 February 2001]

Like many others, I had to rent this movie just to see how bad it

actually is. First I'll start off with the good. I thought that movie

looked fine. I liked the use of green in the exterior shots and the

fact that the director decided to use dutch angles didn't bother me

at all. The special effects were fine. Nothing spectacular but they

didn't ruin the movie like so many have said they did.

Now for the bad:

Instead of putting together a laundry list of the numerous

production flaws in the film I will just touch on a few. First off the

direction of the movie is so incoherent that by 20 minutes into the

movie you have no idea what the hell is going on. More importantly

though, is that the whole man vs. alien theme is completely

unbelivable because the Psychlos prove themselves to be so

increbibly stupid, that there is no way anyone could believe for a

second that they would be capable of conquering any world, let

alone worlds. Combine that with the Psychlos dialogue that

consists of such "alien" words like "home office" and "corporation",

it certainly doesn't distinguish them as being very different or

superior to the "man animals". Are these really the words that L.

Ron Hubbard used in the novel? The screenplay is like a bad

creative writing paper from a 3rd grader.

The most dissapointing aspect of the film is I was hoping that it

would have that cult status of really awful movies that are fun to

watch like Tango and Cash and any of the Ed Wood films.

However, this movie is so incoherent and unwatchable that it even

fails on that level.

2 out of 10

Wild Wild West (1999)

The Godzilla of '99

[4/10 · 30 June 1999]

Well I just got back from a special screening of "Wild Wild West", and I cannot remember ever going to a screening in which the crowd actually booed at the end of the movie. After all, these screenings are free to attend but this movie is just that bad.

"Wild Wild West" is a perfect example of the big studio summer releases. Sharp direction, beautiful design, great special effects....it's got everything that a studio thinks it takes to make a good movie EXCEPT plot, humor, likeable characters, story arches, etc.......

The Mummy (1999)

Great Special Effects

[6/10 · 10 May 1999]

Wow this movie had great special effects! But other than that, I can't really say that it was that good. There were times when I enjoyed it, and there were times when I felt like walking out. Parts were funny, and other parts dragged...in the end I left feeling like it was a little below average for a summer movie.

The Shining (1980)

Kubrick the Master Filmmaker falls just short of a classic

[8/10 · 30 April 1999]

The Shining has some of the most memorable scenes of any film that I have ever watched on the silver screen. A superbly well crafted, and well written film that somehow falls short at the end.

Wagner's opening music, genius art direction and strong performances from Nicholson and Duvall help create the feeling of subtle uneasiness in the first act. I only wish that the kid had been a better actor. He has very little screen presence. Kubrick does a superb job in giving the Overlook menacing characteristics. It's size and vast rooms creates the feeling that it is an object far too overwhelming for the Torrance family to fight, thus making Nicholson's slow crawl to insanity that much more convincing. I found the film to be more frightening on a cerebral level than on an emotional one. This isn't a movie that makes you jump out of your seat in fright or cover your eyes. Duvall's performance is the emotion needed to make the fear real even though I had a certain feeling of detachment throughout the movie. Though the final image of Nicholson is memorable, the ending somehow seemed anti-climatic.