Change Your Image
bigtron
Reviews
The Da Vinci Code (2006)
Better than expected after having read the book
I have reservations on how they are going to squeeze all that information into a movie without making Tom Hanks sound like a walking encyclopedia (many of the information presented in the book are through memory flashbacks of Robert Langdon). The beginning of the movie is very shaky and confusing to those that have not read the book. The introduction of Opus Dei, The Priory of Sion, The Louve, Robert's char and especially Sophie's char are all under done. Sophie's char was really underdeveloped and as a result i think they left out the romantic portion between her and Robert (if not it would look like it is forced). Her history and flashbacks are too vague which is sad because i felt that it was one of the more important aspect of the book.
But the movie really picks up when they got to Teabing's mansion. From there onwards, it was a good blend of adventure, mystery and a bit of a "history" lesson. The music also really contribute to the excitement. The movie really does the book justice from that point onwards.
Tom Hanks does a credible Robert Langdon and Audrey is quite good, but the show is stolen by Ian McKellen. The key of the book (and this movie) is to make people think the "history" is real, and Sir Ian McKellen delivers.
I am a bit disappointed by the ending (not the part when Robert found the grail, that was good!!!) but the part where they traveled to that place (forgot the name) following the last clue. It was changed from the book and they made it worst. Also a bit disappointed about the romance being left out.
All and all, a relatively well done adaption of a very difficult act to follow, considering that they really have nothing to show for on =the movie format except a great conspiracy story (unlike LOTR with the scenery, CGI monsters, action etc)
Stay Alive (2006)
fun movie with great graphics and scary scenes
Overall the movie is well done, the ghost are scary without having to show a lot and the acting are generally OK. What really gets me is the script. How they always manage to make the characters so stupid is beyond me. It one thing watching a char die because of the circumstance but watching a char die because of his/her own stupidity is another. It just makes the audience feel cheated and resentful to the characters. Its a shame that horror flick cannot be more intelligent. 'The Ring' was great and it looks like a great beginning for the new age of scary, intelligent movies but this movie push the genre back a few notches.
Basically there should be 2 types of scary movie, 1) intelligent ones and 2) stupid but with lot of T&A. This movie is stupid without the T&A (replaced by really nicely rendered video game scenes). guess that is not enough to please the audience.
BloodRayne (2005)
Compared to other female action hero movies, its not that bad
The movie isn't as bad as most people make it to be. Maybe because this movie was released before AeonFlux and UltraViolet, they it got hammered in the reviews. However when placed in comparison with there other 'bigger' movies, Bloodrayne does not seems that bad.
First the cinematography is quite decent. Better than most movies. The action scenes are OK, nothing spectacular but better than most with plenty or blood and gore. The music is terrible. They have the same music for every scene, however different the mood is. If they had removed the music, the movie is 10x more enjoyable (which is why i think those watching in the cinemas will definitely hate it more than those watching at home, whom have the option of lowering down the volume) The acting are terrible, though i feel its not their fault. Feels like the director only had 1 take to save time and money and probably gave the actors the freedom to act as they wish (who would take directions from Uwe Boll). This probably explains why different actors act out in different styles (Billy Zane as though he is in a comedy, Kristanna Loken as though she is in a drama, Michael Madson as though he is in an drunken orgy and Michelle Rodriguez as though she is still in 'Lost'). Kristanna looks the part (so gorgeous and sexy that you are willing to be bitten by her) but she need help with her delivery of her lines. Give her some time and good help, she probably will turn out to be a decent actress.
The story have a few plot holes (but who really cares about the story). If Uwe Boll was not the director this movie probably would have received a better review. Better than AeonFlux (a MAJOR disappointment) but not as fun as Ultraviolet. Kristanna is sexier than both actress (it helps that she has quite an explicit sex scene although its a bit sad that she showed the most emotions in that scene).
5/10 in comparison with other heroine movies out there.
House of 9 (2005)
Not a bad movie but not great as well.
The whole movie feels like a well produced made-for-TV show. Usually these types of movies either have a lot of shocking images Saw, Saw II) or a good story/execution (the cube) but this movie has neither. It really feels like a movie length episode of the Twilight Zone.
It could do with a bit more sexy scenes (especially for Kelly Brook) or gore and slightly less stereotype (angry black man having issue with asshole white male, lush rich (or ex-rich in this case) girl, Sexy and innocent girl follows old wise guy, junkie 1st to freak out....) In the end it just make me want to go back and watch The Cube or Saw just to appreciate how good they really are.
Memoirs of a Geisha (2005)
visually stunning movie
With all the negative reviews about the movie, i was very surprise on how much i enjoyed this movie. Its did not felt like a "blockbuster" formula movie where the story is sacrificed/altered to make way for a 2 hour commercial ala any movie ever made by Michael Bay (except Armageddon which somehow works!!). not to say the movie wasn't visually stunning. Its just the perfect blend to scenery, costumes and of course beautiful actresses. All except 1 scene where Zhang Ziyi's char threw away the chairman's handkerchief on top of a cliff, which seems a bit forced, just to have a shot of the beautiful cliff scene.
As be the three actresses, Zhang ziyi keeps on surprising me with her acting and how much she has progress since "Hidden Dragon Crouching Tiger" (her movies lately have seen her taken on difficult roles and aced them perfectly. lets just forget she was ever in Rush Hour 2. That almost derailed her career as an serious actress. Only her language difficulties is holding her back. I have no difficulties understanding her or any other actresses. The only gripe i have is that they all talk with different accents and different levels of expertise. Michelle Yeoh was very polished to Gong Li broken English. And the kids all have American accents trying hard to fake an Asian accent. It a minor gripe and does not really bother me at all (except it seems to bother a lot of reviewers). Gong Li's char was suppose to be more sad but they made her out to be too evil and unsympathetic. Her true love was made out to be just a sexual fling and her sacrifice was made out to be nothing more than a inconvenience in the end, the scene where she was walking away after having lost everything she worked for, I did not even felt a bit sorry for her char.
The movie flows very nicely (like a soap opera but squeezed into 2+ hours)I am glad they did not skip on the beginning and rush in the major stars (zhang ziyi and michelle yeoh) immediately. The girl who played the younger version was quite good which sets up the whole tempo for the movie (its just a bit weird that her English was better than zhang ziyi). Some complained that the movie is too westernized, geisha are not so open and daring. i am glad i am not so well verse in the Japanese geisha culture so i do not nik pick on those points. however they seems to be acting as though they are westernized (which then gives the problem of having to 'westernized' even more after the American arrived. The western stereotypes are just cringing and may put off some people. that is the only weak part of the movie.
in the end a well done movie that did not get more audience because of the backlash of the 3 actresses background. i mean if mel Gibson can be a Scottish i don't see why these 3 fine actresses cannot be Japanese. i also felt that the broken English put off a lot of main audience (who wants to see a Japanese setting movie with actresses speaking in perfect American accents, with that hint of fake Japanese accent) In the end you get to feel how the character feels, her lost, her pain, her sacrifice and ultimately her joy. Definitely made me like zhang ziyi even more (after her sensational performance is 2046). definitely a must see and at the very least a DVD must buy.
Rumor Has It... (2005)
not a comedy as expected
when i watched the trailer, its made the movie out to be a comedy with a very promising and original setup. I though it more of an sophisticated version of wedding crashers & 40 YO virgin but with the same humour and fun. It had a decent cast and Jennifer aniston (a decent comedic actress). unfortunately the trailer is where all the fun ends. This movie seems to be a Jennifer aniston vehicle to transform her to a romantic actress but fails miserably. it looks like the guy cutting the preview saw the lack of chemistry between Costner and aniston and decided to trick the audience to think that it was a comedy instead of a romantic movie. Kevin Costner (whom i like and is great in a similar yet superior movie 'The upside of Anger') is much too old for Aniston and they don't have any chemistry. Jennifer is much too girlish to pair with Costner (whom had a few great parings with actress, mostly strong, older chars) This makes me afraid of what "the breakup" is gong to be like. Although it has Vince Vaughn and the trailer looks very funny, i worry that is may just be another 'romantic movie' for Jennifer Ansiton.
Fun with Dick and Jane (2005)
What happened to Jim Carrey!!!!
Jim Carrey used to play roles that make use of his extremely gifted talent but in this movie it looks like he probably was forced to make the movie cause he owned the director some money and is just going through the process. Coming off the "Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events" as Count Olaf, in which he carried the whole movie, we get Dick Harper which looks like its played by his untalented twin brother (like Eddie Murphy's char in bowfinger). If not for the most beautiful actress comedic actress, tea leoni, the movies simply falls flat. Also the crime spree did not even begin until after 1/2 way through the movie and that only lasted for a while, which is unfortunate cause that was the only funny parts of the movie (even then Tea Leoni carried the scenes). They simply spent too much time in showing the downfall of Dick Harper.
If not for my love-struck-one-way-relationship with Tea Leoni (U LUCKY BASTARD David)since her Naked Truth TV series, i would have stopped watching the movie long before the end.
The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe (2005)
Nice to see a childhood story brought to the big screen
I read the book almost 15 years ago (for English class) and have forgotten most of the details. However upon watching the movie, i suddenly remember small details which brings back some fond memories of the story.
The movie however is simply an above average movie. The acting are good but not great. Tilda Swinton is quite good in a surprisingly limited screen. There simply aren't enough screen time to built char (especially with 4 main chars!!). Why Edmund would betray his siblings is a bit lost if based solely on the movie. Him being bewitched with Turkish delights also is not in the movie, the movie simply shows it as just another 'perk' if Edmund was to bring his brother and sister to the white witch. The CGI is good but not great, maybe because it was too clean to make the PG rating. Its makes the battle looks cartoonish which is a shame.
If they had made a longer movie and spent more time developing chars AND put in some blood and gore into the battle, the movie would be much better (ofcourse that would make is less of a kids movie and probably make less money for the studio) Nevertheless the movie is quite enjoyable and worthy to bring a wonderful childhood story book to life.
King Kong (2005)
in all, a decent movie
There are a few things that everyone should do before watching this movie
1. forget the 'Peter Jackson' hype and stop trying to anticipate a LOTR type of epic story and interesting characters. King Kong is a simple story , with cliché characters made for the movies (they even said it in the beginning of the movie. A romantic movie with a 'safari' back scene)
2. don't watch it for the CGI graphics. If you want a good 'CGI' movie, watch Jurassic park. That movie is all CGI, no story.
Those 2 points aside, King Kong is quite a fun movies. I like the fact that they do not rush through the character setup to get to King Kong. Carl Denham (Jack Black's character) at the beginning was likable, a genius filmmaker with a vision, that was getting screwed over by those rich/greedy investors. His transformation to the 'bad guy' was nicely done. The first time he gave the "i will donate the proceed to his wife and kids" speech makes him out to be a guy who truly is remorseful about the results of his actions. The second time he said it, everybody knows that it was all an act, he will do anything and screw anyone to get what he wants. Naomi Watts is truly beautiful and manage to give a strong performance to a role where she is suppose to be the 'damsel-in-distress'. She manages to show her frailty and strength, all which seems to capture King Kong's interest in her. This unfortunately leaves the 'hero' (Adrien Brody) looking like a bit a a wuss. How Ann Darrow could ever fall in love with him is a mystery (excpet maybe they were stuck in a ship for too long and he was probably the only one that is 'acceptable' to her). King Kong is probably one of the best character in the movie. His scenes with Naomi watts is truly loving and heartbreaking at the same time (they have more "romantic" chemistry than watts and Brody but that would simply be too weird). His death scene is more heart wrenching than watching Leo slip into the ocean at Titanic. The jealous rage when KK saw Driscoll, the fact that the giant monkey shows his 'love' for Darrow, after going through all the rituals of ignoring her yet willing to go through hell, in this case 3 T-Rex, to save her, while Driscoll seems to be timid and 'not worthy' of the beautiful and brave Ann Darrow. This makes the audience rather see the Kong and Darrow together than Driscoll and Darrow, however odd and inappropriate that may be)
That being said, Peter Jackson seems to have borrowed the "what-not-to-do-in-a-movie" manual from George Lucas. The cheesy chase scenes, the even cheesier last second escape from certain death (2-3 in total in a movie is OK but almost every character doing it 4-5 times is just stupid). The simply "B-grade movie stuff" scene where Jimmy shoots the insects from Driscoll's body WITH a submachine gun AND with his eyes closed most of that time AND with him losing control of the gun. A hand gun maybe but not a submachine gun.
What other ppl never mentioned is the char of Bruce Baxter (played by Kyle Chandler). His char is funny when it calls for it and dramatic when required. His character seems more like a hero if not for the way they made his cowardly escape at the end.
Basically the movie is about the ape and Naomi Watts char. They have better chemistry than a lot of other paring in other movies, which only goes to show how good Naomi watts is, acting with such emotions to a blue screen. The rest of the movie, the CGI, the 'comedy', the action are simply average or even B-grade stuff. This movie reminds me of Ang Lee's 'The Hulk', a beautiful actress and a CGI beast. Ang Lee mentioned that he tried to show the emotions through Hulk's facial expressions BUT unfortunately the poor CGI plus the lack of chemistry with the human char (jennifer Connelly) doomed the movie. Ang Lee probably wish he had the team behind the magic of King Kong and Naomi watts with him.
Bad Company (2002)
Good enough for a TV movie
Bad Company has a very simple plot. A large, professional organization for whatever reason, hires a "smart but a loser" character/group, only have a few days to teach years of training to undertake a dangerous mission to save the world and make it a safer place (and no, I am not describing the movie, Armageddon). The simple plot is usually just a vehicle to deliver spectacular action, comedy, expensive computer generated scenes and maybe T&A, which this move has none of. Beside a few funny moments (which can be counted on one hand, even if you have lost a few fingers in the lawn mover accident) The movie is completely lacking of any excitement (which maybe even worse is this movie is seen after 'The Sum of All Fears').
Chris Rock has become less and less funny and Anthony Hopkins probably owns someone a big favor and is paying it back with acting in this movie. This movie is very disappointing considering it is directed by Joel Schumacher and produced by Jerry Bruckheimer (master of thin-plot movies with extra cliches but involving plenty of good action, comedy and fun). Hopefully he could do a better job with his protégé, Michael Bay, in Bad Boy 2.
Wait for the video or better still, wait for it to be on TV. Only then maybe you could enjoy the movie. I give it a sympathy score of 5/10 for the director, producer and Anthony Hopkins. Those three usually are involved in much better movies (even for JB).
The Sum of All Fears (2002)
One of the more exciting movie of recent times
Spoiler Alert In the tradition of Clancy movies, this movie manages to keep a very exciting pace up until the end. Ben Affleck is credible as the young Ryan (although his character has nothing more to do than look and act out of his place, in the move that is). Liev Schreiber's role as John Clack is refreshing and fun while Morgan Freeman has been reduced to the token, wise old black man, acting as a mentor to a younger inexperience character (see High Crimes) and of course he has to die to pave the way for Ryan. Other reviews have said that the two governments acted in a stupid way but people presume too much of their government. (there are enough real-life bungling of international affairs or matters relating to the well-being of the country, for people to presume that they can handle a real end-of-the-country nuclear treat). Plus the russian president just got elected and according to Ryan is only pretending to be a hard liner and therefore it is reasonable to presume that he was being 'push around' by his generals into his actions (plus he has been betrayed by his own army in the Checnia attack) while the American president just survived a nuclear bomb and thousands of his citizens has just been murdered with the potential for millions more. It should not be surprising that they are not acting with a cool head.
I am not sure but did they stole the music from Crimson Tide (which is by the way the most exciting war music of recent times) The movie also have some well placed humor(when the president is being led off, the scene looks like better than anything Candid Camera can come up with, where people do not know what to do, run and possibly save their own lives or risk looking like a fool). I am surprise that some of the well-paid football players do not decided to save their own skins.
As for complaints of changing from muslim extremist to neo-nazis, they should know that even in real life, Osama has not been found, thus ending the movie with the muslim extremist in hiding and the us special forces looking in caves is not a very satisfying ending. Finding a bunch of old wealthy white guys presents no problems at all.
This move goes to show that all action scenes are not necessary to make a successful and very enjoyable movie. 8/10 for the movie but 10/10 for enjoyment and excitement.
Enough (2002)
Once again Hollywood has to stuff things up
The first half of the movie is quite good, showing the abuse and JLo's reactions (or lack of it) which I thinks what happens in real life. Her unwillingness to report to the police at first to protect her husband then later to protect herself and her kid. However Hollywood suddenly made the husband the Saddam Hussien of all husbands, with all his low life connections and no redeeming quality.I find it hard that someone that rich and smart cannot find a way to legally trap JLo or at least have a better plan (maybe it is asking too much for a better movie script). (maybe it is a deliberate feminist joke that in the movie, Noah Wyle's character said that Slim is just a waitress and she is stupid while all the time it is Mitch who made all the stupid moves and Slim at the end making the right ones). Also Slim runs away from the 'rich, strong and confident' bad guy to the 'poor, weak and quiet' good guy, Joe, like some bad teen movie.
I wish JLo would get better scripts (like Ashley Judd's Double Jeopardy, which was so much more believable. I guess Hollywood is scared of showing a women fight back with a gun, just being PC with all the gun violence) especially when she has already been in a few good movies to start a career. Its suppose to go the other way, bad movies first, get famous and get the good scripts. Overall a good potential movie, getting screwed by typical Hollywood treatment.