drews Reviews

Heavy Metal 2000 (2000)

What a waste.

[29 January 2001]

I just finished seeing HM 2000 and there isn't much to say about it. The animation is good, besides putting away most of Simon Bisley´s original concepts, but there is no story, the dialogues are childish, many of the scene simply make no sense, the eroticism is far from the first film ... this list can go on forever, but I don't think it's necessary. I have to confess I'm a big fan of Kevin Eastman's work, but this one... why didn't he adapt the original Melting Pot story? Too bad, Kevin!

Titan A.E. (2000)

A failure? Why?

[3 July 2000]

I was very afraid to watch this one. The news about its box office failure scared me badly. If recent successful Sci-Fi flicks (like "Mission Mars") were terrible, what should I expect from one that failed badly? But I forced myself to go. First because I always like Don Bluth's movies. Second because since "Akira" I was dying to see another animated Si-Fi movie (and "Akira" was THAT GOOD). Then, there's "TITAN A.E." on the screen, and me in the audience, and I have to say it wasn't what I expected. I didn't get disapointed at all. On the contrary, I thought the film was amazing: good characters, good acting, good script (ok, it has flaws but nobody´s perfect), and the visual... do I really have to say anything? Once out of the theater I started wondering what went wrong with "TITAN A. E."? It is really good. So, why aren't people going to see it? Maybe the problem is Disney's "Dinosaur", also visually impressive but shallow as a water puddle, when it comes to script. "TITAN A. E." might not be a great movie, it certainly is not a turning point in animation history, but it is great fun for all family (my eight Y.O. is playing Cale since we left the theater, just one week after "Dinosaur"; I assure you that that means something).

Dinosaur (2000)

Recycled ideas

[24 June 2000]

For 82 minutes living dinosaurs dominate your mind. OK, they speak, and that does not fit the tone of realism present on the images. But, it is a Disney film, that's how it works. I was prepared for that. What I wasn't prepared for was the recycling of ideas. Some people compared "Dinosaur" to Bluth's "A Land Before Time". For me "Dinosaur" is nothing but a new version of Bluth's movie: during a shortage of food and water, herds of dinosaurs cross the land in search of a valley where food and water are abundant. Similar, isn't it? How about the predator falling to death? Or the dinosaurs getting out of a cave directly in the valley? Needless to point the lost child being raised in a strange environment by a different species story has been told before also (recently in a Disney movie called "Tarzan"). After that, "original Screenplay" on the credits almost made me laugh.

Hush (1998)

What a waste of time.

[8 January 2000]

I've just finished watching this movie and the only thing I can think is "I should have done anything else in those 90 something minutes." What was that? I can't even say the plot wasn't OK because there was no plot at all. And how about the preview, full of shots that are not on the film, and give the wrong impression about it. How come Jessica Lange got involved in something like that? Was she in debt with someone?

The 13th Warrior (1999)

What's wrong with this film?

[15 November 1999]

Many people advised me not to see this film, but I didn't pay attention to them. At the end I thought "what's wrong with this film?" It is well done, the locations are fantastic, the photography is wonderful, the battle scenes are unbelievable... I read Michael Crichton's book a few years ago and I think it's his best. I was really afraid they would change the story a lot as they usually do with Michael Crichton's stories (If you read Jurassic Park or Congo or Rising Sun you'll know what I mean). The story was reduced to fit the usual film length, but almost everything is there. To put in fewer words, I really liked this film, and I wasn't able to see why so many people didn't.

8MM (1999)

What is not on the screen.

[15 May 1999]

A lot of fuss has been made about the explicitness of some scenes on 8mm. Well, there are really some explicit scenes, but the major shocking elements are the ones that you don't see: almost all violent action happens away from the eyes of the audience, on films seen by the characters. All the audience sees is the reaction of that other audience, what opens space for inference, and what we infer about it is much worse than any explicit violence we see in movies everyday. A film for those with the guts to let imagination go free!

The Matrix (1999)

Are you sure of what is real?

[15 May 1999]

Brilliant! A film that deals with the nature of reality, that questions what is real, not what we feel that is real but the very concept of real, brings this discussion to another level. Every time you're getting involved with the story, the Brothers remind you that it is just a film by putting onscreen a rereading of a scene you've seen before in another film. The amount of intertextuality found on "The Matrix" is little from unbelievable. Is even difficult to follow all the citations. John Ford, John Woo, Bruce Lee, Dirty Harry, Superman... can you really identify them all? If you know nothing about films, you'll love it. If you know a lot, prepare yourself for a unique experience!

Total Recall (1990)

Who is who and what is happening?

[9/10 · 15 May 1999]

A guy that doesn't know who he really is: a recurrent theme in Philip K. Dick's work (see Flow my Tears the Policeman Said or Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep). Quaid (or Hauser or whoever he is) loses his identity during the film. Is he living the memory implant he paid for, or is there a real conspiracy going on? Is he a construction worker or a secret agent? That is for the audience to decide, and, in the end, it really doesn't matter.

The film is confusing and difficult to follow, and that is exactly what makes it wonderful, different from the pre-chewed plots we're forced to swallow everyday. Beware! A good amount of thinking is demanded to follow this one.

Twilight (1998)

Senior tough guys

[1 May 1999]

Have you ever imagined what would happen to Sam Spade and Philip Marlowe lived to be seventy? A genuine hard-boiled detective film forty years later. The myth behind Newman's accident is hilarious. A must see!

Event Horizon (1997)

Outer Space Hellraiser

[1 May 1999]

A device that, when set in the right configuration, opens a doorway to hell and releases terrible supernatural entities... sounds familiar,doesn't it? When I first saw this I really disliked it, exactly because its lack of originality (some make up effects look exactly like Clive Barker's film), but then i saw it again, and realized it is much batter than any of Hellraiser's sequels. Change the title to Hellraiser 5, and have fun watching it!

Hamlet (1996)

Hamlet is a movie

[10/10 · 1 May 1999]

Branagh is one of the few who understands the difference between a film and a play. Hamlet is probably the most faithful adaptation of Shakespeare to a film and yet is a very dynamic film, almost an action thriller. The scene of Hamlet's meeting with his father's ghost won't leave your mind.

12 Monkeys (1995)

Raising and erasing the audience's hopes

[10/10 · 1 May 1999]

I've seen this film many times and what impresses me more is the hope that most people have that Cole will really save the day and prevent the virus to be spread. I'm saying I'm impressed because in any moment of the film the idea of changing history is brought up! Cole is sent to the past only to try to retrieve a simpler form of the virus, before it mutates. The idea of cycle is all the time on the screen, but the audience still hopes for it. Casting Bruce Willis for the role of James Cole was really a fantastic strategy move: without him, the American hero made flesh, everything would be different!