Change Your Image
myuyuta
Reviews
The Boondock Saints (1999)
the ultimate "Style over substance" movie but still...
Not that there's anything wrong with that... Lots of stuff in the screenplay did not quite make sense. You really have to suspend your disbelief in order to appreciate "The Boondock Saints". I disagree that the film glorifies violence and vigilance. It shows both sides of the coin, as I believe another viewer said. Furthermore, during the end credits, the people who thought the Saints were as bad as the criminals were just as many as the Saints' "followers". I really like the idea of the film. As silly, gory, and violence-driven as this flick is, it makes you think: about what kind of person you are, about whether or not you would do the same things if you got a chance, whether you approve of this type of "justice", etc. The cinematography was spectacular and I loved the dialogue.
On to the acting now... As always, Willem Dafoe is excellent. He really shines compared to the pedestrian acting by just about everyone else. Dafoe's whole gay-bashing thing was really amusing. And I enjoy Billy Connolly everywhere I see him. Ron Jeremy... He can't act but at least I was glad he kept his clothes on this time.
As a whole, I loved "The Boondock Saints" but I probably would have hated it if I couldn't stand violence. With a more coherent script, it would have been a 10. I give it a 9, realizing I may have been a bit too generous.
Ben-Hur (1959)
Lord of the Rings' granddaddy
There are many parallels between Ben-Hur and Lord of the Rings (let's take "Return of the King", for the sake of the argument). The obvious one is that they're both ridiculously long. I mean, wouldn't you rather watch 30 less minutes of Charlton Heston's over-the-top theatrics? Even then Ben-Hur would top 3 hours and be considered an overly long epic.
Another thing is that both flicks won 11 Oscars and I'm pretty sure neither deserved that many. I mean, Heston won an Academy Award for THAT? And LOTR's clean sweep obviously happened because the first two were not taken seriously enough by the Academy. I didn't see how "Return of the King" was better (or worse, for that matter) than the first two. Perhaps there's a rule that every movie over 3 hours has to win Best Picture and a bucketload of other Oscars- see also Titanic, Schindler's List, Dances With Wolves, Gandhi... I'm sure there are many many more. OK, that's enough ranting for now. Apart from the always unintentionally funny Heston, the performances are good. I especially liked Stephen Boyd as Messala. The chariot race sequence was fantastic and the ending would appeal to every Christian on the face of the Earth. As an Atheist, I just found it chuckle-worthy. In a nutshell, if you have nothing to do for a whole day and don't mind Charlton Heston, you see this. It's pretty good although a little overpraised.
In the Company of Men (1997)
don't you people get it?
I don't know what's wrong with most reviewers. First of all, stuff like this happens in real life. Not often, but it happens. I know a real life Chad. Just to clarify, I don't condone such behavior but it exists. The main reason the movie was controversial is that the main character was an major a--hole and comes out on top at the end. That's very un-Hollywood and, apparently, a lot of people were disturbed by this. However, I loved the ending. It was not what one would expect. Also, I don't know if you realize how many Howards there are among us- not really an a--hole but someone who wants to be like the "alpha male" and goes along... I believe Howard deserved what he got. And Christine, although she was nice and vulnerable, didn't mind dating both guys. So nobody is really good. Overall, I would recommend ITCOM to mature people who are not obsessed with political correctness. Its only flaw was that it was very obviously low-budget...
The Straight Story (1999)
heartwarming
Well, it definitely is unlike anything else directed by Lynch. No supernatural stuff, no violence, no profanity. Nevertheless, it is a beautiful flick. It's a little slow but perhaps that was intentional because it's the story of an old man's 6-week(that's my best guess for its duration) journey. The characters are everyday people and thus, they are believable. The performances are good and the final scene was incredibly touching. Everyone who has a sibling can relate to it. Lyle and Alvin don't even have to say anything. For a moment they are back in the old days and all the fighting is forgotten.
Platoon (1986)
THE war movie
In general, I'm not a fan of war movies. But "Platoon" is literally a war movie. Other 'war movies' seem to concentrate a lot on the soldiers' life before the war, their families, etc. In "Platoon", the only civillian characters are the Vietnamese. The film is powerful and gripping. It is also quite gory, which is a turn-off to some people. But, after all, there is a lot of gore in war, right? Tom Berenger's portrayal of Sgt. Barnes was magnificent. Willem Dafoe and John C. McGinley weren't half-bad either.
In response to those two guys who criticized it(hockeyguy and Mike Fleming), I think you don't know what you're talking about. First of all, I don't believe soldiers would use politically correct terms to identify the enemy("We wasted three Asian people" would sound strange). Hence, the frequent use of 'dinks' and 'gooks'.
We Were Soldiers- accurate? The US was promoting peace in Nam, right? Please. If you've heard about the My Lai Incident(it was mentioned in the film when soldiers talked about Charlie Company), you'll know that Oliver Stone could have gone even further in his depiction of raping and pillaging. I've read that some soldiers refused to participate in such acts but they didn't want to 'spoil the fun' for the others. So the only unrealistic thing in this case was that Charlie Sheen's character saved the little girl from getting gang-raped. As far as the 'awful actors' part, I guess it's just a matter of taste. Anyway, unless you faint when you see blood, "Platoon" is a must-see. 9.5/10
Hurlyburly (1998)
good performances in an awful film
Really, really bad, boring plot. What saves Hurlyburly (actually, doesn't exactly save it) is the acting. As always, great Sean Penn and great Chazz Palminteri. Kevin Spacey is his usual cynical self (we've gotten used to seeing him shine in crappy pictures) but that's about it for this one. Anna Paquin disappoints and Robin Wright-Penn is the designated blonde who doesn't bring anything to the table. 1 for the plot, 7 for the acting > 4.
Intruso (1993)
kinda twisted; I'd recommend it to anyone who likes Spanish movies
MINOR SPOILERS AHEAD
This is the story of a strange friendship- two men fighting for a woman who wants to love them both. Old friends end up resenting and killing each other. It is intense and dark but also witty. If you are feeling depressed when you see it, you appreciate it even more (believe me, I know). And last but not least, Victoria Abril is as tempting as ever. Overall, not a masterpiece but pretty enjoyable. 8/10
Book of Shadows: Blair Witch 2 (2000)
very underrated and very creepy
For some reason, people had high expectations about the sequel of one of the worst movies ever made. Actually, 'Book of Shadows' isn't half-bad and is very underrated. It has some scary moments (unlike 'BWP') and as a whole is very creepy. Like 'BWP' it is very amateurish, which is something I don't like, but at least the sequel has a plot.
The Blair Witch Project (1999)
How much can a movie suck???
I went to see 'The Blair Witch Project' at an 11:30pm showing with the hope that it would scare the hell out of my girlfriend and my friends. Not only was 'BWP' very unprofessional (some people say that was one of its advantages, but I really don't think so), but it wasn't scary at all. Two of my friends fell asleep watching it (really). For 80 minutes I thought that the scary part was coming up and then it ended. Hugely disappointing.
Four Rooms (1995)
all's well that ends well
I loved 'Four Rooms'. I like movies that tell several stories with more than one director. I would have given it a 10 if it wasn't for the first room. Luckily, the other three stories were wonderful. Tarantino trusts his friends a lot(see 'Destiny Turns On the Radio' and the first story here), and with the notable exception of Robert Rodriguez, they suck. Tim Roth, Antonio Banderas and Bruce Willis were great, especially Banderas in the macho dad role. The third story was 'pee in my pants' funny with all the mayhem that the kids and the corpse in the bad caused. If you're a fan of Tarantino and can sit through 15-20 minutes of crap at the beginning, you'll love it.
Taxi Driver (1976)
the perfect flick for anyone who has any kind of angst in their heart
Just excellent. Look at the characters: the disturbed Travis, the little whore Iris, the slimy pimp, the squeaky clean Betsy, Travis' clients- the scum of the city, and the politicians who represent the glorified scum, and last but not least Martin Scorsese whose character was in the movie only for about a minute but that was more than enough to freak Travis out even more. And the final sequence when Travis 'cleans up' was just unbelievable. If you have any kind of angst in your heart, this is one film that you just can't miss.