Reviews

12 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Blue Streak (1999)
1/10
If I ever meet Martin Lawrence ...
19 September 1999
From watching trailers and commercials for Blue Streak, it's quickly evident that the Martin Lawrence starring vehicle is not a movie out to try to garner Oscar nominations or critics awards. But it may receive one notable accolade despite itself: the title of worst movie of the year.

For two hours the audience is treated to highly contrived scenes where Logan is constantly in the wrong place at the wrong time and, disregarding all ramifications of his actions, dispenses his own brand of vigilante justice. He chases robbers across the Mexican border despite the fact they are out of his jurisdiction; he searches trucks without a warrant; he beats suspects into confessing crimes.

For his actions Logan should have been fired hundreds of time over. But since this is a movie, and because Lawrence is the star, he instead earns the respect of the entire dim-witted police force, including Carlson (Luke Wilson), his rookie partner who acts like he just transferred from Mayberry.

Despite Logan's incredibly suspicious behavior (he's caught about half a dozen times scouring the air vents for starters), his colleagues fail to put two and two together. When they do ask questions, Logan is able to fend them off with ludicrous stories that only the most brain dead of human beings would believe. He is treated as a savior of a department which has been on the hot seat of late due to its perceived incompetence. Since these detectives are unable to uncover Logan's true identity considering his paper-thin alibis, it's safe to say the criticism was justified.

There's no disguising Blue Streak, however, for what it is: a poorly written, acted and directed debacle only brought to the big screen due to Columbia Pictures' evident desire for the almighty dollar.

At the root of the problem is the pathetic effort put forward by scribes John Blumenthal and Michael Berry. The pair, whose only other writing credits are for the 1990 film Short Time starring Dabney Coleman, seem to have written only a vague outline of staged formulatic scenes and left the cast and crew to figure out the rest. Director Les Mayfield, previously responsible for the dismal failures Flubber and Encino Man, makes it 0-for-three. Not one scene evolves with any kind of purpose other than to accent Lawrence's comic stylings.

Lawrence really can't be blamed for anything other than signing on to what he should have been able to tell was destined to be a bad film. Throughout the film he gives his best efforts to generate laughs, even dressing as a pizza delivery guy that bears a striking resemblance to Ol' Dirty Bastard. Unfortunately he lacks the charisma and comic timing to carry a film as he is asked to do. It's seriously doubtful whether, placed in more capable hands, the picture could have been a success. But with Lawrence trying vainly to salvage the film all by himself, Blue Streak proves to be a failure in every way imaginable.
12 out of 33 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Worst piece of moviemaking ever
8 August 1999
Strangely enough I don't feel it's a great stretch to call this movie not worth the film it was put on. This film could have been used for an Oscar winner, a thoughtfully done picture, or even a Bruce Willis action movie. But instead it was used to record Master P's desire to employ all the awful rappers of New Orleans while keeping his unexplainable popularity as the poor man's Puff Daddy through the roof. I can't even begin to tell you the problems I had with I Got The Hook Up other than to say I don't count it as an actual movie. Movies have actors, plots, scripts. This awful production had none of these. I've seen some bad movies in my time, but by and large many of them were at least fun to laugh at. This wasn't; in fact this made me genuinely angry. I wasted an hour and a half of my life on this monstrosity that I will never get back. If I ever meet Master P, he'd better watch out.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Goodbye Lover (1998)
5/10
Why oh why was this movie made ...
8 August 1999
Film noir can be some of the best cinema to make it to the big screen. A depth of characters, a complex and winding plot, dark humor that makes you laugh involuntarily, a shocking ending that leaves you exhilarated can add up to a thoroughly enjoyable experience. But when these things go horribly astray, oh what a disasterous result we can have. Goodbye Lover is one of the latter, mixing bad acting, comical plot lines, and one of the worst casts ever assembled (why are Don Johnson and Dermot Mulroney allowed in Hollywood?) to create a horrible moviegoing experience the likes of which have only been matched by movies involving Roland and Emmerich. What the studio was thinking when it combined the cast of phillistines it did I will never know. What I can tell you is this movie will go down as one of the more laughably bad experiences of my life (right up there with Showgirls, I Know What You Did Last Summer and, unbelievably, its inferior sequel).
5 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
American Pie (1999)
7/10
Good movie, but see the trailer
6 July 1999
By no means was this a fantastic film, yet it was pretty funny at the same time. However, if you're strapped for cash and trying to pick and choose movies to see this summer, you can save yourself admission and just download the trailer. There for your eternal viewing pleasure are the funniest moments of the film. Also from this you can essentially figure out the entire movie, one of the more predictable in history, before you even set foot in the theater. All in all, however, a fun movie. 7 out of 10.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Better than I thought
3 March 1999
I'll admit I was expecting a big steaming pile of crap when I went into this movie. But I was relatively presently surprised. The comedic parts, mainly in the first half, was very funny. Unfortunately though there were some dramatic parts that received laughter as well. There were a few individual scenes that were incredibly improbable, and a few other that just plain didn't work. But all in all this was a good movie.

And major kudos to Sarah Michelle Gellar. After IKWYDLS and Buffy, I was convinced the girl had no acting talent whatsoever. But she actually played the part of the uberbitch very very well. Ryan Phillippe lived up to my expectations (i.e. crappy), and Reese Witherspoon was actually good.

It gets a 7 out of 10 from me. Not great, but definitely better than some of the teen flicks I've seen recently.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Dark City (1998)
10/10
Shocker for me
27 February 1999
I hate sci-fi (and I don't use the word hate often), but I was incredibly surprised at Dark City. If nothing else one must admit that Alex Proyas has created a world and a group of villains that lacks nothing in originality. There was nothing at all recycled about this story; the utter imagination involved is enough for commendation. Saving Private Ryan is the only better movie I've seen all year; that's some company.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Affliction (1997)
9/10
About as dark as they come
27 February 1999
My criteria for how good a movie is is not the conventional formula of "Did I like it?, but "Do I respect it?". I don't think it's possible to like Affliction in this regard, but I can tell you I sure as hell respected it.

One scene in particular made the film for me: the bloody attempt at dentistry Nick Nolte performs upon himself. There was more power in his painfilled eyes, bleeding mouth, and watering eyes than in almost any scene that I've ever seen on film. I'll be rooting for to win on Oscar night, and this is coming from a HUGE Ed Norton fan.

I will admit, however, that the voice-over narration by Willem Dafoe was downright bad. I love Dafoe; his character in Platoon is one of the most tragic I've ever experienced. But his character seemed to unnecessarily be included in the film as an observer of the downfall of his brother and nothing more. Such an observer was not needed, and his role did not lend anything more to the film.

Nevertheless, a triumph on almost every level. Here's hoping this sort of character-driven story becomes more of the norm in the movie industry in the future.
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Things I was thinking when I saw this film ...
11 November 1998
1) For all the pop culture references these characters make, haven't they seen Scream?

2) At this rate Jennifer Love Hewitt will go through the entirety of the next sequel topless.

3) Not that I'm complaining ...

4) Yes, you heard me right, the NEXT sequel.

5) Tip to all the horror moviegoers: pick out the non-stereotypical characters. THESE are the ones that will live throughout the movie.

6) Why in the world did Long John Silver kill ... oh, I don't know ... the first ten or so people he offed?

7) The supposed huge plot twist was about as obvious as the fact that this movie is a poor, poor attempt to duplicate Scream.

8) How the HELL did Jennifer Love Hewitt and Brandy get into the supposed great college they are enrolled in? That is, when they're not skipping out to go to exotic tropical island locales.

9) Does everyone ever believe a character in a horror movie who warns them of danger?

10) How many times did Hewitt walk alone through an apartment/hotel room looking for someone she couldn't possibly have stopped if she had found them?

11) Did Mekhi Peiffer have one line where he didn't sound like he was thinking with his groin?

12) This movie will go toe to toe with Meet Joe Black for the top spot at the box office this weekend.

13) People who like this kind of movie make me seriously reconsider universal suffrage.

14) As many times as I correctly predicted what would happen half an hour before it did, I was looking for myself to be listed as director.

15) Then I remembered a three year old could have predicted the plot.

16) I'm damn glad I didn't pay to see this load of crap...

17) ... cause it is officially the single worst movie I've ever seen.

18) I spent more time writing this review than the screenwriter did writing the story.

19) I'll give it a 2 out of 10 ...

20) ... I'm being generous (if only Hewitt would shut the hell up and just get naked).
11 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Pi (1998)
8/10
If only for a bigger budget ...
10 August 1998
This movie had a very good concept, good writing (although a little unclear at times), good direction and good acting. The only thing that held back the overall success of the film in my estimation was the financial constraints the makers must have felt when making this film. By that I don't mean they needed more money for special effects and the like; the simplicity of the film was one of its strong points, allowing the viewers to concentrate on the subject matter at hand instead of silly sub-plots. But lack of finances for things most of the movie-going public take for granted, such as state-of-the-art camera equipment, hampered the film in my estimation. This is not to say low budget films can't work; In the Company of Men and Clerks were huge successes despite having budgets less than what some big studios spend on buffet spreads for their stars. But neither of those films needed more advanced technology for chase scenes or rapid action. Both were essentially pieces where the camera was set up in a corner and events in an almost documentary style. Pi lost much of its power and drama in scenes where it was difficult to comprehend the action because of poor cinematography. It's really a shame considering these faults could most likely could have been ironed out for less than what one chase scene in a lame summer action movie costs. What a Catch-22; you have to get big studio attention to make money, but you have to be able to make money before you get money from big studios.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A tale of two films
10 August 1998
I was a little disappointed when I left this film, but not because of the overall result. I was disappointed because of the wonderful way in which the story was laid out and unfolded itself in the beginning, then seemed to fall away during its 2nd act. The reverse theme of bad kids turning good was fascinating, and the paranoid performance by Nick Stahl was worth watching and intrigued me. But then, as soon as Stahl was converted, the film started to fall apart. For one Stahl was the only character I found to be truly worth watching. Marsden and Holmes were just two pretty faces noticeably void of much talent; I never believed the two as a couple, and I never found any reason to invest myself in hoping for their well-being other the fact they were the lesser of two evils. But most noticeably, I grew disinterested because of the change in aim by the makers. The first half of the film, which by itself I would have given an 8 or 9 out of 10, was more of a grown-up horror movie, where the situation and plot rather than actions dictated the fear of the audience. But after Stahl disappears to the dark side, the film changed into a teen slasher film almost, where blood, violence and screaming is used in a vain attempt to induce fright. This 2nd half was worth a 4 or 5 out of 10. The length did not bother me as much as others (I've seen plenty of effective movies that were under 90 minutes). What bothered me more was the lack of development in some key plot points. I think the entire conspiracy plot behind the conversion of the teens needed to be fleshed out much more, characters needed to be drawn more distinctly, and so on. So I balance out the two halves and come up with a 6 out of 10. Worth renting, but could have been something special.
61 out of 68 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Just plain bad
2 August 1998
This movie was bad on so many levels. First, the comment that the character development was good could not possibly be farther from the truth. The reason for this, of course, is the desire to put as much of Chris Rock's stand-up routine, Riggs' and Murtough's infantile antics, Pesci's "comic relief", and a whole lot of things blowing up into the film. Rock is not an actor, and his character was completely unnecessary and as one-dimensional as they come. He served no real purpose in the film except to get a few cheap laughs from his supposed homosexual attraction to Murtough. This plotline, along with the entire scene in the dentist's office, have been done hundreds of times in sitcoms, and with much better and funnier results. It was also amazing how Jet Li, playing the role of cyborg robot killer, was actually the most human character in the entire movie. He actually showed some genuine emotion, although nothing more than furious rage. The script (if in fact there was one) was also severely lacking. Plot details were thrown in like an afterthought in between explosions. The action scenes were extremely elaborate, but at the same time boring since they, in almost every instance, had nothing to do with anything that had transpired previously. If this movie is what you're looking for, save yourself some money by watching the Chris Rock Show and a Fox special. This was an awful movie in a summer of awful movies, and I have lost respect for everyone who appeared in this fiasco for their association. Here's hoping that Chris Rock and Danny Glover's film careers are over, and Gibson, Russo, and Pesci distance themselves from this tanking franchise.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Godzilla (I) (1998)
3/10
Two and half hours of my life gone
2 August 1998
So many things wrong with this movie it's difficult to know where to start. First off, and the most glaring problem, was Maria Pitillo. In a movie populated by talentless actors, one-dimensional stereotypes, and cliche after corny cliche, Pitillo managed to suck what little life accidentally found its way into the movie with her airhead blitherings. Next, onto the real star, the lizard. It was one of the least frightening things I've ever seen, and nothing more than a stripped down version of the T-Rex in Jurassic Park. The only device in the movie that appeared to take more than ten minutes to come up with, Godzilla the creature was one big yawn. Nothing in this movie was original in the least. I saw scenes straight out of Jaws, Jurassic Park, previous Godzilla movies, King Kong, and many others.
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed