Change Your Image
dmc197807
Reviews
Me and You and Everyone We Know (2005)
Strange, and Strangely Unpleasant
From the guy who sets his hand on fire, to the girl (Miranda July) who is fascinated by/stalks the pyromaniac, to the very unpleasant things the writer/director has children say and do (and adults say and do to children)--this movie is really poor. I watched it because Roger Ebert gave it a glowing review, but poor old Roger has seen too many movies and, apparently, is desperate not to have to watch only Independence Day style movies. But really, unless you're really into certain body parts and functions that not mentioned in polite company, or into strange women who have a strange attraction for an obvious loser, save your time and sanity.
The Prestige (2006)
Not worth the trouble
This is a very good example of Hollywood spending a lot of money on stars and directors to try to make a great, deep movie, and failing. The "art style" editing, cutting scenes back and forth in time, trying to make the story, cut up, seem deeper than it is.
Why is he in Denver, where is Tesla, why is Scarlet Johannsen even in this movie, who cares about the surprise ending (and who believes it?)?? These are all good questions that we scarcely care about. Just looking at my watch waiting for it to end.
The actors are good, but you actually need an interesting story to tell. A similar period (Sherlock Holmes' London) is done much better with the Downey/Law flic just out. For this one, don't see it in a theater, don't pay to rent it, maybe watch it if someone lends you a copy or you are huge Hugh Jackman fan, otherwise, save your energy.
The Man Who Fell to Earth (1976)
The worst sort of art house semi porn
All of Roeg's promise from Walkabout goes out the window in this movie. There is (with one exception) nothing redeeming about it. Lousy cutting, terrible writing, ridiculous acting, loose ends, nonsense. The use of strange camera angles, cutting back and forth to some people who obviously won a lifetime supply of aluminum foil and decided to use it for clothes in a desert and who have some sort of Sesame Street tram, useless and meretricious bush and limp pecker shots--and these are the highlights of this silly movie. The acting would not survive a high school stage.
The only thing redeeming is about 20% of David Bowie's performance, where he really seems born to play an alien. I recently saw What's New, Pussycat and thought there could be nothing worse. Now Peter Sellers can rest in his grave, The Man Who Fell is absolute trash. It makes me want to revisit Walkabout and look to see the origins of all this gratuitous nudity and obvious bad taste.
Summertime (1955)
The photography alone is worth the time
Okay, the bad things first: Kate orates and emotes throughout most of this movie and, until she dresses up in an evening gown, looks about 65 years old (she was only 48 when she made this movie). The premise is believable, but it's hard to care too much about a middle-aged Akron secretary who comes to Venice for one reason that she doesn't want to admit to herself, and that she would never do in Akron: she wants a little "adventure" (yep, she wants to get pawed over by a hot Italian far far from home). The kid, Mauro, is annoying, there's an obligatory fall into a canal or two (hardy har har).
But the good is that David Lean managed to really photograph Venice the way it is, and it is incredible. What's more, although the Italian boyfriend seems a little shady (he lies, he admits that he wants sex --(wow this is 1955!), and he calls Kate on all her fraudulent statements--Renato is actually very convincing and in his own way pretty sympathetic. So, if you've never been to Venice, watch this movie, it's as close as cinema will take you. If you've been there, watch this movie, it's like a free trip back. Incidentally you can compare this movie on many levels to The Roman Spring of Mrs. Stone and this one is far superior, imho.
What's New Pussycat (1965)
Only for the Masochistic
I like to rank movies on a basis of whether I'd pay to see them in a theater, pay to rent them from a video store, borrow them from a library collection, or simply watch them on free cable. What's New Pussycat qualifies for none of the above. It is a poorly edited, poorly conceived "romp" filled with overacting, lame jokes (fortunately Woody Allen got better) and stupidity. It's like one of those SNL skits that should have never been aired. Trying to watch this movie last night was like having a root canal, without the anesthetic. Many films age poorly (MASH, or Easy Rider) but it's hard to imagine that this "romp" was even viewable back in the day. Just take one look at Peter Sellers' wig in the opening scene and the camera work and that's all you need to know about what's coming up. It's a dog's breakfast.