lizzyfang2002 Reviews

Timeline (2003)

Not a bad story, no sense in it either

[1 September 2004]

I have always been intrigued by time travel movies, and then every time they suck people in and turn out to be exactly what we expect: a problem, time travel through a "wormhole" or "rip" in time, more problems trying to get back, and then a somewhat happy ending in the present. Being from the "Back to the Future" generation and loving books such as "A Wrinkle in Time," I have come to expect more than the typical skeleton plot diagram. Be it as it may, this movie differs from others in that it presents a time travel to one particularly chaotic day of warfare rather, and being accepted by the people of that time period or introducing modern day objects is not the main point of interest. A word of warning: if you are a movie-watcher who likes movies to make common sense (And I'm not saying that this movie is deep to understand either.) please rearrange your viewing timeline.

Overall, this movie does not leave you feeling as if you completely wasted your time. There is some hang-in-there action; however, way too much time, obviously something rather crucial in this movie, and much precious dialogue is wasted on petty arguments between characters that start off seeming validative until they drag to a point where you just want everyone to shut up and slap someone across the face. The result is a movie in which the pace proceeds in a red light/green light manner; it's rush hour time with lots of bad traffic. The characters in this movie are believable enough to pass, but there are too many characters whose only roles are to be killed without us finding out or feeling very much for them. Of course, many things happen to work out too perfectly if you are the type of watcher who likes non-idealistic movies. If you are go-with-the-flow, you can sit through this movie without much complaint.

***SPOILERS AHEAD***

I like critiquing movies, so obviously, here are the things that make absolutely no sense whatsoever in the movie. I'm sure I have not caught all of them.

1) The entire time travel/electron moving machine, which is the size of a large ballroom, can be rebuilt within 4.5 hours after a grenade shatters everything. I'm sure these scientists keep giant wall mirrors in back storage. 2) Mareck finds his own tomb with Lady Claire in the beginning, but at that same time, history books say Lady Claire died at the battle for Castlegard. How can her tomb with Mareck and her death earlier exist at the same point in time? 3) The head scientist (Robert Doniger) in charge of the time machine's operation seemed very apathetic in the beginning for the well-being of the archaeologists, but all of the sudden, at the end when the machine is at 81%, he is "concerned" for their health. 4) The actual recipe for Greek fire has been a mystery to this day. How would the Professor know how to make it from scratch with materials from France while the English are practically under siege when no one in the present world can even make a formula that emulates it? Greek fire is also supposed to create a sound of a huge explosion. Whatever happened to it later was also unaddressed in the movie.

I'm sure there are tons that I have not covered here, but you get the gist; it would take a book to go into all of them in detail. While not too bad, it definitely could have used revision.. 5/10.

But I'm a Cheerleader (1999)

Fluffy, Funny, etc. *SPOILER ALERT*

[4/10 · 26 August 2004]

Addressing issues of homosexuality is hardly the first thought that crosses one's mind when reading the title of this movie. While controversial, this movie speaks of a topic quite openly that was more or less taboo in 1999, at least to someone with a conservative background. Due to the rarity of the subject matter, this movie already peaks a certain interest in the open-minded movie-goer. The movie treats the topic of homosexuality lightly, with a comedic air. The audience can feel this aura from the overwhelming light and dancy colors that parade the screen. You will be amazed at how many everyday items can be found in bright pink and blue, from the house itself down to the last dishtowel. The background music also feels like it comes from a 50s TV sitcom, a prancy xylophone concert, which becomes irritating after playing non-stop for several minutes. All of these slight annoyances, however, really end up making you laugh at the entire situation to begin with.

This movie is easy to follow, with little unaddressed, except for how Megan's parents appeared to have disowned her in two seconds when they were so open and understanding at the beginning of the movie, having watched videos about this "disorder" and leafed through many pamphlets from a man in a "Straight is Great" T-shirt. How they came to disown her so quickly was quite a mystery. It seems to be thrown out as a sudden battle Megan must fight, something to antagonize her just enough to romanticize her plight.

Plot events are predictable. The girl that treats Megan with the most disdain in the beginning ends up becoming her girlfriend, a typical example of opposites attract. What is even more predictable is that any person who watches this movie knows that this True Directions boot camp is not going to do anything close to its objective except make attendees even more homosexual than they probably were in the beginning, especially Megan. The movie fluffs homosexuality to such a point that all these characters have almost no common sense or depth beyond their sexuality whatsoever. The brave, "true-to-themselves" bunch all run off at the end, happily ever after in a random, never-before-seen, pick-up truck that miraculously becomes decorated with hearts like a marriage getaway car. Megan's cheer at the end is cute, borderline cheesy, a must for a main character of a movie in which "cheerleader" appears in the title. Don't we all wish we could live in such a doll house world?

Men who are looking for lesbian action in this movie will be disappointed. Overall, this movie serves its purpose to make light of a matter and make people laugh all at once. Being that it was funny and an interesting topic, versus having a plot line that began to melt into a growing puddle as the movie progressed, with shallow characters swimming about, I'd say this film deserves a 4/10.

Vanity Fair (2004)

Nice job overall with several flaws

[6/10 · 25 August 2004]

I saw this movie last night at a screening in Boston, and I have to say there are both positives and negatives to this film. Surprisingly, the movie does follow the general outline of the classic novel, obviously with certain sections omitted, Hollywood-style. The characters are all given a strong background for a nice foundation at the beginning, and the pace of the film moves along comfortably during the beginning as well. Because of our preset notion of Reese Witherspoon from previous movies (ahem, Legally Blond) it is at first difficult to see her play this role. However, after the first few minutes I found it easy watching her as Becky Sharp. The characters generally follow closely to the traits that I had imagined from the novel. And even if you haven't read the novel, they are very believable.

SPOILER ALERT

I feel that the director did a generally good job of conveying the overall message and story of the original novel. Becky is seen in her impoverished childhood, bent towards making a better life for herself by climbing the Everest of social society in the 1800s. Her wit and power of being able to manipulate others turns haywire after making the mistake of allowing a rich man to pay her husband's gambling debts. It characteristically follows the 1800s-novel scheme by bringing her back to where she started, with a slightly uplifting end in a place (India) foreshadowed where Becky did not expect to see herself.

Some complain of being confused at the end. The pace of the movie jumps pretty quickly at the end, but I did not find it hard to follow myself. It is merely the consequence of trying to concentrate the rest of the novel within half-an-hour, quite understandable considering the actual novel length. Several major issues that seem important are not addressed as thoroughly as I would have liked (We find out that Rawdon Crawley dies of a fever during a conversation later on. He was a pretty important character to brush off like that.) The only other thing is the scream Becky Sharp makes when her husband leaves her. Reese seems to be forcing it out: it's really almost unnatural.

Overall, I still feel that this movie does not tread far from the general tone, mood, and moral that was meant for Vanity Fair. Pretty well done, considering the depth and length of the novel, a 6 out of 10.