Change Your Image
Lestat-28
Reviews
Alexandra (1983)
Porn Remake of "Letter to Three Wives".
But, without the greatness of the latter. Limp directiion (can you please give me more than ONLY two angles during the sex scenes!), bland acting (is this really just paycheck-sex?), and a script without the great, long dialogue scenes full of subtext and character (does porn really rate THAT low on most talented writers lists?) All-in-all, not only a waste of time, but an uninteresting, dull waste as well. Andrew Johnson.
Funny Games (1997)
Haneke's Statement....
MIchael Haneke has made an interesting film here. Like
seemingly all artists (or any genre or type) Haneke wants to point
out something wrong with this world. But, and this speaks directly
to my problem with either him, his ideas, and/or his film, he finds
no hope and his writings, if this movie be witness to both his
feelings and those writings, don't give any hints as to what would
change things. To me, if one be critic, one must also become form
a suggested solution. I have nothing to say about the quality of this
title, as I think everyone should decide on their own about that. My
only hope is that the pessimism that I feel pervades this movie
and, again, if this be witness, Haneke's thoughts does NOT
become epidemic.
To say that not only have criminals become polite next-door- neighbors, but also that human decency can lead only to death
and human horror is to suggest that that death or that this
hopelessness is, to me, the only way to exist. Let no one near you.
Keep the world at bay.
Rather, I think it's better to say that, with some caution and the
ability to reason and keep one's head about us, we can
accomplish so much.
Andrew Johnson
House of 1000 Corpses (2003)
Zombie's Full-Length Music Video.
Of course, the main problem is that Rob Zombie hasn't really
come up with music enough to help compensate for the lack of
story or character development seemingly innate in this picture.
I'm sure, having seen some of his music videos, that Zombie is
quite well equipped to direct, even to visually awe.
But, that clearly, if this film be the witness, doesn't mean he's a
storyteller. I think Zombie has a clear idea of how to use the
various editing tools as his disposal. He obviously has quite a
wicked imagination, though one wonders if it's more a by-product
of his prior B-movie viewing experiences or something more
inherent and instinctual within him. And, even more clearly, he
likes experimentations (the continual use of B-movie stock fotage
bears this out). But, experimentation is only intellectual game- playing until talent and skill make it innovation.
Overall, I think the movie could've used the very thing so many
films today seem to need: a veteran or even merely a good
WRITTEN storyteller, i.e. a good or, helll, even a decent script. The
opening was, in some ways, a good tone setter. But, the rest didn't
measure up, outside of the idea that these people are so out-there
that ANYTHING could happen.
Like many a Film School student or even a recently-graduated
one, I feel Rob Zombie may have been too in love with the idea of
directing an "old school" gore flick. I believe this love ultimately
forced him into a situation without the clarity of vision as to what
made those flicks work.
Andrew Johnson
My Big Fat Greek Wedding (2002)
TV Show Built for the Multiplex....
I think it's a sign of the overall design of this movie's screenplay
that a TV series is being adapted from it, because the movie is
SOOO built for that eventuality you have to wonder why Mrs.
Vardalos and Mr Zwick didn't just go to NBC with the $5 million snf
create one.The direction, to be quite frank, is mostly from that
arena, with a starling lack of close ups and mostly two-camera
work, just like in TV. Watch any episode of Cosby Show and ask
yourself whether that show is more about, characters or cameras.
If you answered the former, you're correct. More importantly,
though, TV sit-coms, which is most certainly the genre My Big Fat
Greek Wedding belongs to, seem about catching the lead-up and
punch-line, which is how this movie is shoot and how the camera
work flows. For me, a visual lover and camera devotee, this always
strikes me as a little lazy of a style when it comes to film-making.
Zwick isn't shooting a TV pilot, but rather an hour and a half film.
About the characters, I find myself agreeing with another friend -
who reviews for a local newspaper - when he says that all the
characters come off largely as stereotypes. As usual with me, I'm
trying to find some justication for this, as I know that two veterans -
I believe Vardalos has been doing comedy for quite some time
and assume the one-woman show for a great deal of time as well
- probably wouldn't do something without some reason. Now, is it
to try and show the clash of cultures? If so, why is the "Greek" side
shown with so much seemingly more variety of characters than
the WASP side? And, if it's not about "culture clash" and the
characters still not meant to be more than skin-deep, then why,
again, isn't this either a made-for-TV movie or considered as a
piece of lazy writing as any other cliche-ridden screenplay with
plate-deep characters?
The movie seems to be in need of either fewer characters or a
larger palete with which to work from. Perhaps the TV series will
supply some answers.
Andrew.
Flooding (2000)
Flat Direction Dulls out....
a potentially tight, interesting movie from a fairly simple premise.
The movie begins to two loooongggg, very uninteresting dialogue sequences wherein the director uses NOTHING but medium one shots connected via the shot-reverse shot method. Had Portugal studied film actually, he would know how quickly this technique tires the mind.
In fact, I was looking forward to seeing some kind of slow builder, a movie whose brief critical description matches the latter part of my initial sentence. Portugal clearly knows simple compositional principles and editing techniques, but is seemingly unaware of how to make a movie MOVE!
Mother Night (1996)
Subjective Storytelling
I've just finished listening to the director's commentary for this film, and I think the one big thing I got from it that I agree with is that this film, like Mann's The Insider, is completely subjective. It's from Howard's POV. So, any review or attempt at contemplating a set of comments about it, as Ebert did, is really about Nolte's character actually. If you feel, as he did, that the film "does not work", then you're saying, I think, that Howard does not work. And, to be frank, you might be right. Howard's reasoning and personality really wouldn't stand up to professional mental treatments and analysis.
But, hey, that's the nature of people.
Andrew.
Serendipity (2001)
A very divisive romance....
...And I say this because of the movie's heavy reliance not only on contrivance, but also upon its photogenic stars. Sad to say, but this film will either be loved or hated, so of like most Christian books.
I loved it, not because I'm an incurable romantic to begin with, but rather because somewhere in my heart, there lies the seeds for that romanticism, needing only the water of cinema to make them flower.