Change Your Image
carnegis
Reviews
X-Men: The Last Stand (2006)
Not even close to the first 2
First off, I'm not a comic book fan nor do I know very much about the X-Men other than the movies and I am a fan of movies. That being said, I thought the first two movies were excellent and that X2 is one of the best movies of the decade. I had high expectations coming in though I was somewhat concerned knowing that Bryan Singer wasn't involved since director's play such a big part.
The best sequels enable you to watch the movie without having to have seen the originals. This movie was not like that at all, if you didn't see either original you would have been somewhat lost. Keep in mind that I have no problems with the movie not following the comic story lines, I see the movie as an entity unto itself.
Good - acting, action, visual fx - The Rouge storyline - "The Cure" storyline
Bad - continuity (going instantly from day to night at the bridge, huge mistake. - plausibility (why didn't they just take a boat, what was the motivation for a bridge besides a cool looking effect) - character depth lacking. Why care about Jean, she hardly spoke. Why care about the bald kid, there was no emotion. Why care about Rouge, etc. What is the motivation for these new guys? - Killing a major character early on, why even care about his death if he isn't developed
The first 2 movies were great, this one is an okay final chapter. Bring back Bryan Singer if you're making more, it makes a huge difference.
Fugitives Run (2005)
Ugh
Worst movie ever. Crap. I was forced to watch this movie because of my job, longest 80 minutes of my life. The credits were nearly 8 minutes long, inter-cut with unfunny outtakes and bloopers. Torture.
Michael Moriarty's character had no conceivable motivation for any action, his only feature was to burp and fart at inappropriate times. He has come a long way down since Law and Order.
Gordon Tootoosis' character was cliché and predictable.
It makes me wonder if any of the actors read the script before they came on board, why any established veteran could agree to star in this a mystery.
Watch this movie if you want to see how NOT to put together an enjoyable flick.
White Chicks (2004)
Allot better than I expected
I saw this at the drive in, it was a double feature with Spiderman 2, which was excellent. I debated wether to stay for it or not and decided to check it out.
I had extremely low expectations for this movie and was surprised, it was allot better than I thought it would be. Occasionally I like to take in a dumb movie, but there is funny dumb and there is lame dumb, I'm happy to report that this was funny dumb. Not as funny dumb as say Dumb and Dumber or Stuck on You, but still not as insulting as I thought it'd be.
There were a few jokes where you groaned, but in the most part this was an enjoyable movie.
Scott
The Book of Mormon Movie, Volume 1: The Journey (2003)
Good points and bad points
A note, I am an active Latter-day Saint.
First the bad...
I doubt Jews in Jeresalem in 600 BC looked like Anglo-saxons. Please find people that at least look Jewish to play the parts of Jews.
The make-up; a white woman with brown make-up to make her look Aboriginal or Jewish still looks like a white woman with make-up.
This movie was low-budget, and it looked like it. Everything seemed artificial; costumes, sets, minatures, it felt cheap. It didn't seem aged are blended in.
Lehi preaching, it seems the only thing he says is "The City will be destroyed, don't you understand" over and over. Couldn't think of any other dialogue?
Where were the master or establishing shots? There were very few, they would have helped the movie feel more complete.
The language seems inconsitant, sometimes it's modern, sometimes it's King James English. Pick one and stick to it.
This movie came off as low-rent, this is especially noted when Nephi is struggling to get free from his binds and the audience is laughing, rather than sympathising. This is becasue some parts of the movie are cheesy and that results in the audience not taking it seriously.
Cheesy parts #1... the brothers getting shocked, should have just left that out. Makes it seems like Nephi has magic powers, comes off weak.
Cheesy parts #2... Lehi's fake beard, it changes once from long straight and grey to short curly white.
Cheesy Parts #3... The aging of the characters wasn't belivable.
Cheesy Parts #4... the voice of God depicted with a deep voice and allot of reverb, cliché. Find a new way to do this. How about a soft whisper?
Cheesy Parts #5... Lemuals re-action to the angel, supposed to be a serious moment but is laughable because of his reaction.
Cheesy Parts $5... The Lamanites at the end dancing around a fire with war paint. Comes off over the top.
Now the good...
The acting was good 95% of the time, Laman was the best acted in this film.
Laban being murdered, I really like how this was done (other than the clichéd treatment of the voice of God) and it had good emotion.
Nephi's vision of being shown was is to come, again good emotion, and good editing.
Montage while Nephi is bound, well done.
We get a good sense of the conflict between Nephi and Laman.
I thought that the added dialogue (stuff not from scriptures) was good and blended scenes well. I enjoyed the added homour and seeing Nephi and his brothers bond after having conflicts.
The Joseph Smith stuff I thought was well done, except Moroni's visit, just seemed out of place the way it was done.
Final word. Before the next one, take the time to secure more money and make it the way it should be, a grand epic. Pretty good job for a first time director and allot of first time actors. I wouldn't see this one again but I would see the next installment.
Orgazmo (1997)
Funny, but inaccurate
I love South Park and I knew I'd love this movie, but I thought I'd clear up a couple of things, being an active Latter-day Saint, aka Mormon.
- it doesn't cost anything to get married in the temple - missionaries can't call home to their girlfriends whenever they want - mormons don't pray to statuettes of Jesus - missionaries aren't supposed to leave their companions
Stupid funny movie, just what I knew it would be.
Scott
The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003)
When is this over?
Is what I kept asking myself when watching this movie, it could have easily been 30 minutes shorter.
Loved the first one, but didn't really care for the second two.
In Part 3, we have many of the same scenarios repeated from earlier in the film or in the other films; good guys defending their city, outnumbered by the Orcs; looks like they're about to die, but then another group of good guys come to save them, yaay!
How many times will we see Frodo having doubts or being tempted by the ring, and Sam comes to the rescue? How many times will we see someone dying and their friend there to comfort them? How many times will we see the same close up shot of Frodo with that same look on his face? Was there a point to Liv Tyler being in any of the movies? Her character did nothing. Sauron and his role was barely mentioned in this movie, therefor his defeat (the big eye falling over; lame) was very unsatisfying.
This is another example of a big budget, over-hyped movie being filled with amazing graphics (and they are amazing) but little depth to the storyline. I felt no emotion while watching this movie, it did nothing to draw me in.
Cold Comfort (1989)
Good flick
First of all, this film is set in Alberta near Medicine Hat, not Manitoba or Alaska.
I first saw this film in 1990, before "Misery", before "Due South", and I thought it was great. The suspense builds in a natural way as you see Steven get deeper and deeper into trouble and come to realize the kind of person Floyd is.
Great drama, excellent acting. The scene where Steven freaks out on Floyd is some of the most believable anger I've ever seen in a flick.