joseayarza Reviews

Ocean's Twelve (2004)

One of the worst ever

[1/10 · 18 January 2005]

This movie made me get dizzy. Characters talked so fast, things happened so fast. Being Mexican, I had to read the Spanish subtitles at a record speed, while I also tried to see what was going on, with all the camera angles and stuff. The movie was long, boring, full of nonsensical plot twists. It's like the filmmakers were trying to tell us: "Oh, look, look, how clever we are". I've never like movies that rely too much in plot twists. I eventually don't care about what happens anymore. Plot twists are good when they make sense, they are not predictable and when there's not many of them. Well, I didn't think the twists were predictable, but nonsensical and too many they were. With so many things going on, the great cast doesn't really have a chance to really shine. The cameos... well, I did like Bruce Willis' cameo, but the other one... it was completely unnecessary. It's a real shame because I really LOVED Ocean's Eleven, not a masterpiece, but a greatly entertaining movie. In this sequel, the cast isn't really going for the golden egg or the safe box... They are going for the audience's money.

50 First Dates (2004)

Good but could've been better. The ending...

[7 April 2004]

The trailer for the movie made me think it would be a very romantic movie, since the guy has to win her love back everyday, you know, something that many couples don't use to do. Anyways, this is basically a comedy, and succeeds as that most of the time, but it's not ambitious enough to make us think a little. It entertains, but nothing more. Another complaint is the ending. Too forced and implausible, plus it kind of contradicted some things that had been said during the movie (can she remember her dreams????), and it just left us with many questions. It seemed that they just wanted to end the movie right away, and solved things the way they could. I give it a 6.5/10. Sorry because the premise was excellent, but the execution needed to be better.

Anger Management (2003)

No words can express my disappointment

[21 January 2004]

I like comedies. I'm usually someone that can pretty much laugh at anything, even if it's stupid. I'm not ashamed of saying this. What is wrong with being happy and liking some escapism? I've liked other Adam Sandler movies like "Waterboy" and "Mr. Deeds", which were pretty much universally panned. When I heard about this movie, I thought wow!, Adam Sandler and Jack Nicholson in a movie about anger management? This is just gotta be good!

The result? I only watched this movie for 30 minutes. One of the worst plots ever, it just didn't make any sense. But above all, I don't think it's funny to see poor Adam Sandler suffer and suffer and suffer and the whole world turned against him, and having a maniac invade his house. For God's sake, how do they want us to laugh at this poor guy? It's just so damn sick. Let me tell you that I changed the channel to see "Daddy's Day Care", and I had a pretty good time and I'm not ashamed of that. I give this movie a total zero.

Hulk (2003)

Boring and disappointing

[17 January 2004]

I couldn't catch this one in the movie theater, and I was very anxious to see this one. I thought it would be the best superhero movie so far. But it wasn't. It's not a complete disaster... the camera angles, simulating a comic book, were pretty interesting, and the battle between Hulk and the mutant dogs is breathtaking. The rest is quite boring. The movie just spends a lot of time setting up the story, and the payoff is not good enough. The action scenes are pretty anti climatic and devoid of all tension or suspense, with the exception of the dogs scene. One mayor disappointment comes when Hulk must fight his own father. This should have been the most exciting of the battles; remember, leave the best for last. The fight between Hulk and his father is incredibly short and is ended in an abrupt, completely anti climatic way. I can't believe they could end the movie the way they did. It sucked, sucked, sucked. I preferred X2, thanks.

The Brothers McMullen (1995)

Dull

[5/10 · 5 January 2003]

That's it. That's the word that describes it all. "The Brothers McMullen" certainly is not the worst movie I have ever seen, but it's perhaps the dullest one. I don't know, I just have the feeling that the movie just kept focusing on the same and the same and the same, and grew tiresome. It needed some plot twists or new characters at the middle to give it a bit of fresh air, because honestly, the situations it presented were like trivial for me. Much as I wanted, I just didn't care about the characters or situations. However the movie has some high points. For example, the acting is pretty acceptable, especially if we considered that some (if not all) of the cast members were debuting in this film. The direction and camera work were nothing special, but not a disaster, like in other B-movies. Also, one of the good things about "The Brothers McMullen" is that it avoids cliches.

However, this movie was just too light for me. It needed more intensity. Sometimes it seemed like not even the characters cared about the situations presented. "She's the one", Burns' next film, was panned because it wasn't as realistic as this one. That's true, without a doubt, but at least that other film was more entertaining than this one, even if, admittedly, was completely formulaic and contrived. Rating 5/10.

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002)

Very disappointed

[5/10 · 21 December 2002]

After having loved the first movie, I just couldn't wait to see what was going to happen with those characters that "Fellowship" made me care so much about. And what do I get? A dull plot, unnecessary scenes, excess of characters, lame battles, talking trees... God, I could stay here all night complaining about EVERYTHING that was wrong with this movie. Not even the final battle scene could hold my interest; in fact, it was during that scene that I was endlessly checking my watch, wondering how close was the ending. If I hadn't gone with a friend (who by the way did like the film) I think I might have walked out on this one. I've walked out on a movie in a theater only once (although plenty of times I've pressed "stop" in a VCR) when I saw "How the grinch stole christmas", and this was just about to be the second one. Yes, it was THAT bad.

Changing Lanes (2002)

Excellent movie, if you take away the last 10 minutes

[19 December 2002]

What were they thinking????? God, the ending sucked bigtime. It could have been one of the best films of the year, but thanks to the typical, feel good ending, it's not. The movie is a realistic character study, where one can easily feel identified with the people there, and all the situations felt like they could have happened in real life, but then comes the ending, in which suddenly everyone decides that they should do the right thing. No, not just doing the right thing (that would be believable). The Ben Affleck character actually decides he wants to be a hero. It made me sick. Why do filmmakers think we always need a happy ending? Sometimes it's necessary. In this case it was not. The movie was a perfect 10/10, but the ending was SO bad that I'm only giving a 7.

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (2002)

Ecologists might like this film (spoilers)

[1 December 2002]

Yes, this movie is all recycled. I mean, the movie starts once again with Harry Potter suffering with his excentric uncle and aunt, then goes to Hogwartz (or however it's spelled) where there are strange things happening, so our 3 heroes break as much school rules as they can to investigate. Both of the plots involve something very secret, and end (SPOILERS) with a climatic battle against Voldemort. Now, this is not to say that the film is not entertaining. It is, but if the third movie turns out to be the same, I won't be thrilled, trust me. I haven't read the books, and I probably won't, but I hope the third installment is more original. MUCH more original.

Say Anything (1989)

Didn't get my interest

[17 September 2002]

This movie is too light. I mean, REALLY light. Which isn't a surprise, by the way, because we're talking about a movie by Cameron Crowe, the maker of movies like Jerry Maguire or Almost Famous, well made films, but I don't know, his movies do nothing on me. They're too trivial. To give you an idea of the main problem of this film, let me tell you I didn't watch it to the end, but not because it was too boring, I was watching it on TV, and on a commercial, I started checking other channels; my original plan was to return to the original channel and watch the rest, but I found something more interesting and completely forgot about the movie. Get it? This movie is too harmless, too mediocre, and by the way, I can't believe a movie of this nature can get so many good reviews and be included in several lists of classics (like Ebert's, for example). I mean, come on, it's pretty dull.

Thir13en Ghosts (2001)

Hilarious!!!

[7/10 · 10 September 2002]

"Thirteen Ghosts" is a hilarious movie. It's so bad it's good. I mean, it's terrible, and I wasn't scared for a second, but god did it make me laugh. I had never seen such a display of unintentional comedy before. This is a camp classic comparable with Ed Wood movies. Wooden acting, excess of gore, absurd plot makes for an unforgettable film. Right from the start you get a good laugh. That scene in which cars "eat" people is histerical. If you see this movie, prepare yourself to MST3K it, otherwise you won't enjoy it.

There's Something About Mary (1998)

There's nothing about Mary

[26 August 2002]

It's strange. I usually like movies with bathroom and sex humor, like Dumb and Dumber, Me, Myself and Irene, Scary Movie, Not Another Teen Movie or Road Trip. But on those ocasions on which I happen to watch this movie on TV, I usually change the channel some 30 or 40 minutes into it. Perhaps it's just that the characters are too annoying, and the story too contrived, but the fact is, I think this could be one of the worst movies of all time. I'm not kidding. I've tried to watch it entirely because everyone says it's so good, but I never make it. I think I'll never understand the overwhelming success of this film.

The Crime of Padre Amaro (2002)

Wow

[17 August 2002]

How can I start? I just came back from seeing this movie and I'm stunned. It's difficult to accept it, but this movie portrays Mexican society in a way so realistic that it scares. It's a little excessive, but just a little. Its characters are complex and interesting. Those priests seem mean at the beginning but then you start knowing them and you realize that, after all, they also have feelings, and in a way they regret their actions. Here in Mexico, a very big campaign has been made to try to keep this film to enter theaters. I can see why: the film shows priests that sleep with women and accept money from drug dealers. When a priest becomes involved with a guerilla, the bishop quickly orders him to go elsewhere. He disobeys the orders, and he's of course, kicked out of his church. In this film, the church does not care about people, only about money. It's horrifying. If you add the fact that this film has some of the best actors in Mexico, you can realize how powerful it is.

Seinfeld (1989–1998)

It's horrible

[7 August 2002]

I've seen this show several times and I think it's not funny at all. The characters are annoying and the writing --- one failed joke after another. I don't understand all the praise to a show that besides, looks SO cheap, so sad, has 4 characters, it's depressing. Of course, I've laughed sometimes, but overall, it's tedious.

Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones (2002)

Episode One was MUCH better.

[3/10 · 2 August 2002]

Oh, Star Wars is not back. The magic of the original trilogy is just gone. Those characters you really cared about, those inventive action sequences, will never be back, it seems. Episode One was silly and had wooden characters and bad acting, but at least it was entertaining. Episode Two is silly, has wooden characters and bad acting, and IT'S BORING. The last 20 minutes or so are impressive, yes, but they don't save the entire film. When this movie isn't focused on the dull love story, it shows the uninteresting adventures of Obi-Wan or tortures us with political mumbo-jumbo. All the "plot" is trivial: Someone tries to kill Padme, and who has to take care of her? Of course, Anakin. Yawn. Obi-Wan discovers that someone ordered a clone army so that the Republic could have a defense. Zzzzzzz. He discovers the mean plans of the separatists. More Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Yoda many times appears and the order of the words in sentences he changes, as usual. Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Padme and Anakin start to fall in love. Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

It is simply appalling.

I'll give it a 4/10 just because the special effects were awesome. Previous ratings: Original trilogy (the three films):10/10. Episode One: 6.5/10

Mighty Morphin Power Rangers (1995)

If you're a fan of the TV show, this one is for you

[27 July 2002]

Is this movie good or bad? Well, everyone will have a different opinion. I went to watch this film with my brother. I used to love the show, and my brother always hated it. As you might probably guess, I highly enjoyed the film and my brother, of course, hated it.

NOTE: Mr. Ebert did quite a good job in mentioning every single flaw of the film, including the negative message of being a faceless conformist. (??????????????????????) Don't make me laugh, Mr. Ebert. That's appliable to may superheroes which also hide their identities. Besides, THIS MOVIE SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY. If this movie has a message, you should have also looked at the good ones: friendship, love, loyalty, etc. I usually like Roger Ebert's reviews, but sometimes I wonder if he wasn't high when watching films.

Pulp Fiction (1994)

Overall a great film, but...

[10/10 · 27 July 2002]

OK, I loved this film. LOVED IT. But it's not perfect. The main problem with the movie is that the best scene is at the beginning: the histerical what? conversation. This scene comes very early in the movie, so you would expect that the rest should equal or top that perfect scene. And while the movie is always interesting and has some other moments of great humor, it never reaches the greatness of that scene. Compared to that incredible scene, the rest of the film is a disappointment. That wouldn't be a problem if the scene had been left to the end, but since it's at the beginning....

Putting that aside, this movie is so original. The characters speak a lot. In many movies, the characters only speak the necessary to advance the plot, and the action is given more importance. However, in Pulp Fiction, characters are given the chance to talk, as we talk in everyday life. As a result, the characters seem incredibly real and we care a lot about them. The non-linear structure is another plus. It's a very intelligent way to grab the audience and not letting go. At times the movie gets a little boring but you never lose interest because you always want to know whether the movie will move forward or backwards. Movies that play with time always work. Well, most of the time, at least.

What about the acting? My personal favorite was Samuel L. Jackson. But everybody did a good job including Quentin Tarantino as the guy who helps the guys hide the body but is afraid that his wife might arrive and discover the whole deal. Uma Thurman was also great at portraying that strange woman who apparently likes to play with people's feelings, knowing that they're afraid of her, because of her husband. John Travolta was my least favorite. He was too inexpressive for me, although, perhaps he did that intentionally because the character required it.

Overall: 9/10.

Mary Poppins (1964)

I can't say enough bad thing about this "film"

[27 July 2002]

Just a while ago I watched "Mary Poppins" on TV and it left me cold. I had never seen such an excruciating piece of trash. I mean, it doesn't have anything. No good performances, no funny jokes, no real situations, no developed characters, no message (tries hard to have one, but fails miserably), no talent, no nothing!!!!! I'm glad that this days, the musical genre is nearly dead (although a few musicals have worked on me) For me, this movie gets a 0/10. But unfortunately, the IMDB requires me to give it a minimum rating of 1, so that will be my vote.

The Cell (2000)

Zzzzzzzzzzz

[20 July 2002]

Wake me up when it's over. This movie was extraordinarily boring. Pure trash disguised with great visuals. There is no plot or character development. It's painfully confusing. I really don't know what else I could say about this movie, just avoid it.

Bottom line: Mr. Ebert, are you kidding me? I was expecting a star or one star and a half, but 4 F***ING STARS? Were you drunk when you wrote the review or did you watch the wrong movie?

Memento (2000)

I simply did not understand this movie

[6/10 · 12 July 2002]

OK, so the movie ended and I began to try to put the pieces together and solve the puzzle... but no, I just couldn't. Who where those people, how did Leonard meet them, how are they involved in the murder? I didn't understand that. Perhaps I would need to watch it again, but I don't know if I could bear it.

Patch Adams (1998)

It works.

[11 July 2002]

Having hated manipulative movies starring Robin Williams like "Dead Poets Society", "What dreams may come", or "Bicentennial Man", I wonder why I sort of liked this movie. Robin Williams does not improve in this movie: in fact, I could say he's at his absolute worst here. Well, in the melodramatic part of the film, because this film is also a comedy.

Robin Williams is great at comedy. Mrs. Doubtfire and the Birdcage are examples of this. That's why the comedy in this movie works so well. But the drama also works. Why? Because behind all that sappiness, all those cliches, and all the manipulation, the cause that Patch Adams was fighting for was truly touching. Sometimes, patients who are about to die need more than medicine, which sometimes only increases the pain. His idea of a more human medicine was respectable -- and that's why the movie works. Robin Williams was, after all, the perfect choice for the role, I mean, who else could have played it better? Unfortunately, as usual, there are moments where his sappiness is unbearable.

The scene where Patch faces the Medical Board and the kids arrive is abysmal, it's manipulation at worst. But overall, the movie has a good message and has better script that "Dreams" or "Bicentennial"

Armageddon (1998)

A miserable experience

[9 July 2002]

God, this movie was horrible. I was only 14 when I watched it and I used to like any action movie, even if it was only brainless action, I really didn't care. So I went to the movie theater with my family to watch "Armageddon" expecting another "Deep Impact", but a faster one.

The problems with the movie start right from the beginning. A little note to the writers: People who shoot other people on a leg (or anywhere) use to go to jail, you know? Right from the start you can see you're about to watch something incredibly stupid, like the NASA people sending ordinary drillers to space. Ha ha ha!

But I really did not care for that, I was just expecting the action. Wgen the action finally came, I really felt like walking out. The movie is so fast and the scenes are so short that most of the time I didn't know what the hell was happening. Besides, those characters were not likable. Bruce Willis was a psychotic person who shoots his daughter's boyfriend at the beginning, do you think you'll like the character? Of course not. Plus, I hate Ben Affleck, I've always hated him, so basically, I was rooting for the asteroid (I'm not kidding, I really was).

I can't imagine anyone enjoying this horrible movie -- not even as mindless action does it work.

Boston Public (2000–2006)

An insult to my intelligence

[4 July 2002]

Although I enjoyed the first episodes of the series, this TV show has grown more and more stupid and boring. First of all, the problem that many people have pointed out: It's unrealistic. Harry Senate has fired a gun in class, kissed a student, formed a suicide club and even allowed a fight in class. The principal knew about ALL this situations, but Mr. Senate hasn't been fired. Oh!, but Kevin Riley had to be fired, and well, the reason was pretty stupid.

But the problems with this sitcom don't stop there. The teachers aren't likable. Steven's character is annoying beyond belief. Harry Senate is pretty boring, he's portrayed as some sort of a "superhero" trying to save all his students from their problems. Ha ha ha ha! And the new teachers are pretty ridiculous, especially that lawyer that dresses as though she was a prostitute.

Besides, the writer, David E. Kelley, tries to get a very intelligent dialogue from EVERY situation. His scripts are laughable, he tries to impress us with existencialist mumbo-jumbo but no, Mr. Kelley, we are not idiots, perhaps at the beginning I did fall for it but not anymore. David E. Kelley, a lawyer, doesn't know much about teachers, and bases this TV show on cliches. At least, that's what I think. Most of the situations aren't very original.

Then, the acting. Chi McBride, the lead actor, is terrible, so you could imagine how bad is the rest. Combining this to the poor quality of the scripts, results are painful.

Mr. Kelley, you should stick with lawyers. "The Practice" is a very well done TV show, this one is disgusting and insulting. Your attempts at making movies have resulted in "masterpieces" like "Lake Placid" or "Mistery Alaska" (I've being sarcastic here). It's clear that your writing talent is extremely limited.

Bridget Jones's Diary (2001)

Horrible

[5/10 · 26 June 2002]

This movie is extremely overrated. It's not funny at all and Bridget Jones was so annoying!!!!! She really got into my nerves. I wanted to enter into the movie and kick her ass. Anyways, this movie was a cliche from beginning to end and I hated it. I use to love romantic comedies but it seems that the genre is going downhill. This isn't as bad as "someone like you" but close enough. 4/10.

The Godfather (1972)

List of things which are more entertaining than watching "The Godfather"

[3/10 · 22 June 2002]

1.- Pouring alcohol into an injury. 2.- Counting the number of books available in a big library. 3.- Reading all those books. 4.- Watching the Weather Channel for 5 hours. 5.- Looking for a needle in a haystack. 6.- Counting the hays in the haystack. 7.- Sharpening 10,000 pencils in a row. 8.- Seeing a tortoise walk a distance of about let´s say, a million miles.

You get the idea, don´t you? This movie was so sloooooooooow, and the story just draaaaaaaaaaaags on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on. It was a torture, and at the end, I wondered: WHAT WAS THE POINT OF THIS MESS OF A MOVIE? It seemed like it was also going to tell us the story of Michael's sons, grandsons, great grandsons, great great grandsons, and well.... it just seemed endless. ENDLESS. I wondered why IMDb users praise it so much if every single person that I know despises this movie. It's beyond dull. At the end, somehow Michael got rid of ALL of his enemies, in 2 minutes? Just that simple? He should have made that before, and he would have kept me from suffering this dreck. After watching this, I never want to watch one of those called "classics" (like Citizen Kane, Casablanca, Schindler´s list, Gone with the Wind, etc.) because it seems to ba a rule that a movie can´t be artistic and entertaining. Few movies combine those things. Those are the true classics. One example? Pulp Fiction. That movie is perfect in every possible way.

I'll rate this movie a 3. I don't give it a one just because Marlon Brando was great. By the way, Al Pacino sucked in this movie. He couldn't have been more inexpressive.

A.I. Artificial Intelligence (2001)

Loved it

[10/10 · 21 June 2002]

Why is this movie considered as one of the cinematic disappointments of 2001? The answer is just beyond me. I know this movie isn´t very realistic, but it´s so emotional that, trust me, I was just about to cry. It´s perfect in every possible way. Acting, Character development, and especially, Script! I loved that script! Oh, and it has very good special effects too. Haley Joel Osment, you´re great. I´m sure when you grow up you´ll be such a GOOD actor. 10/10