Change Your Image
ciski77
Reviews
Boogeyman (2005)
Boogeyman aka How to waste 90 minutes of your life - SPOILERS
Why do I do this to myself? I'm a big fan of the genre and I tend to enjoy even less accomplished movies but this just sucked major ghost hole.
So...apparently here they thought that replacing a decent screenplay with a few BOO scares, 6000 cuts x second, LOUD sound effects and fog machines would do the trick. Guess what? It doesn't. Nope. Sorry. The opening is the token scary scene that shows us a kid whose father is one night sucked into a closet by...something - we don't exactly know what or if the man survived and if you're expecting the movie to explain that at the end, oh...you're wrong. Cut to 15 years later and Barry Watson (the dude from '7th Heaven' who can't act his way outta his bed and has this perennial constipated look on his face), that same kid now grown up, is obviously still scared by closets but people basically think he's nuts or just plain make fun of him. Whatever. He's got a rich girlfriend and he's basically trying to move on despite the fact that his mother (Lucy 'Xena' Lawless with the worst old woman make-up you could imagine - like, rippled cellophane glued to her face or something) is in a mental asylum for reasons you won't be explained later and appears to him from time to time to scare him s**tless, always for reasons you won't be explained later, until she dies.
So, following a train of thought that makes no sense whatsoever, his therapist tells him to go spend a night in that old house where his father vanished so that you know, the movie has an excuse to move forward to the supposedly scary stuff. So he does and it's obviously this creepy mansion and here the director desperately tries to scare you by running the camera up and down the stairs, from and to Watson's face and showing half closed doors, because! no matter where this dude goes, there's always an old looking closet half open that he feels compelled to look into - that's because the screenplay doesn't really feature any substantial events. So, picture 30 minutes of shrieks and Barry Watson's cow eyes and his girlfriend pops up from nowhere and they run off to a motel where the boogeyman (that is never shown until the last 5 minutes where he looks like a CGI version of LaToya Jackson) somehow sucks her down the drain of the tub. I also forgot to mention that Watson's character is visited by this kid called Franny who's a victim of the scary, scary monster and for reasons that won't be explained later, looks like she's alive and can talk to him. And he also has a friend played by Emily Deschanel (who looks like she's smelling a fart for the entire duration of the movie) so you know, he's got someone to save at the end because everyone else is kidnapped by the boogeyman and for reasons that won't be explained later, is never heard of again. So, a few more shrieks and bigger and bigger plot holes that involve being able to go from the mansion to the motel through a closet and such, and here we get to the big final fight sequence that lasts exactly 2 minutes with the boogeyman being destroyed when Watson smashes a statuette that looks like him that for reasons that won't be explained later, was somewhat related to the said boogeyman or something. End credits.
How hard must it be to sit down and write a movie that makes sense? I mean, technically coming up with a sensed chain of events should be easier than coming up with a story that has no rhyme or season whatsoever. I mean, that's what I was taught in elementary school. But, shame on me in the first place for bringing this on myself.
Sud pralad (2004)
Just plain awesome - may contain spoilers
How hard is it to write up a commentary of a movie that speaks to your senses? Actually, 'Tropical Malady' wasn't even a movie as much as it was an experience for my ears, eyes and my mind.
The movie is split in two halves that both tell the same story - a love story between a soldier and a countryman - one filtered through reality, one through mythology: the city where every action follows a rational and logical thread, and the jungle where there's no rule other than learning to coexist with nature and all events and emotions are primary and raw. In the second part, the country boy becomes the incarnation of a shape-shifting shaman and follows the soldier in the shape of an extraordinary tiger, as to mirror his forceful appeal and the soldier's wild desire: what was a polite, romantic and almost naive love story becomes a supernatural tale where all schemes and disguises are erased and all that's left is pure instinct.
There are so many memorable moments (the theater sequence, the descent into the temple) but everything that happens in the second half speaks to you on a totally different level. Words are replaced by jungle noises, sounds become messengers of peace or impending danger - the soldier (Banlop Lomnoi, who's beyond awesome) has to choose whether to give in to desire or tame it, kill the tiger or let it kill him. The visual impact of this part is astonishing - the tiger appearing for the first time, the branches shaken by the wind, a tree lit up by fireflies: the beauty of the imagery is almost epic.
Seriously, the movie deserves to be watched because putting this into words is almost like betraying its spirit. Awesome, awesome experience all throughout.
Almost Famous (2000)
"Almost Famous", almost good
"Almost Famous" is a feel-good, coming-of-age kind of movie that you're going to love, and forget about quickly. It has an autobiographical basis which Cameron Crowe drew from his childhood / adolescence, when he used to be a huge rock fan and write for the "Rolling Stone" magazine. The story is about William, a 15 year old kid who leaves with the members of the rock band Stillwater to write an article about them while their tour: this trip will introduce him to a whole new world and - obviously - will change his life. There's nothing more, nothing less: "Almost Famous" is quite funny, it has a brilliant screenplay that works just fine, and everyone who was 20 and a rock 'n' roll maniac in the 70s will find it really entertaining. That's all. Patrick Fugit doesn't look like he's in total control of his character, but the rest of the cast is very good, especially Kate Hudson who looks really natural and appealing. I laughed a bit, I yawned a bit, and I don't think I'm going to see it again. 7/10
Requiem for a Dream (2000)
A work of sheer genius
This movie is an amazing, compelling experience.
Darren Aronofsky has a unique visual talent that enables you to live what the characters are living on the screen, so that "Requiem for a Dream" becomes a roller-coaster ride of colors, feelings, images and sensations. This said, let me add that it is not for everybody. Drug addiction has never been depicted in such a cruel, raw and yet sincere way: as we see Sara, Harry, Marion and Tyrone slowly embrace self-destruction we cannot help but identify with them, and this is what really hurts inside. They're ordinary people like you and me who try to make their dreams come true and ultimately be happy; they're naive and helpless, they take the wrong paths and end up destroying themselves and everything that surrounds them. That's what the movie's about: our dreams, hopes, desires, and how badly we strive after them, often losing our balance and ignoring what really matters.
The performances are magnificent, and Ellen Burstyn is so brave and true that by the end of the movie it's impossible to look Sara in the eyes without being hit right in the face by her pain and agony.
10/10. There should be more movies like this one.