This movie had so muh going for it. Great production value, the animation was excellent, and the action, while more-than-a-little over the top, was extremely fluid. But what happened? I just don't know. I think a developed backstory would have helped. Without that, the protagonist guy is little more than a fungible super-powered action star. It's true, it felt way too much like Akira. I've seen countless anime feature films, but for some reason I felt my perspective was too Western to appreciate the way the director tells the story. It's a tough call. Bottom line, I would have preferred rented it than buying it. It's not a "bad" film, and yes it's worth seeing just for it's stylised action-sequences and art, but this isn't the kind of movie you can watch over and again like other anime.
Reviews
9 Reviews
Hellsing
(2001–2002)
great action AND story. Something to sink your teeth into.
24 August 2003
I had mixed expectations before seeing this series. First, I really like stylised action anime and I really like vampire-hunter genre. I was also excited by the reviews I've read at IMDb and how fans of other vampire movies recommended Hellsing to me. But I also read the the makers of "Hellsing" also created "Ninja Resurrection" which turned out to be one of the worst, most appauling animes I've seen.
Well, after watching the English dub of the series I have a lot of positive things to say. The dubbing was excellent, and the casting for Allegra was especially noteworthy. The animation was very good as was pacing of the series and the characterisation. My absolute favourite element of the series was how it showed the relationship with the Hellising Organisation with the Crown of England. Watching the politics unfold was a real treat, and it was so realistically done. There were a lot of unanswered questions, but I didn't have a problem with that as their mystery both added to the series' mystique and left the door open for a possible second season.
Although I would have preferred the final fight seen go the more vampiric route, rather than a demonic powers route, I do not cite this as an objective criticism of the movie. I guess certain "hell" themes make me a tad uncomfortable, but that is just a personal reservation of mine.
In the final analysis, I recommend this series. The direction was so solid and the story was so interesting that watching the 13 episodes back to back felt more like watching a really good epic movie. See it!
Well, after watching the English dub of the series I have a lot of positive things to say. The dubbing was excellent, and the casting for Allegra was especially noteworthy. The animation was very good as was pacing of the series and the characterisation. My absolute favourite element of the series was how it showed the relationship with the Hellising Organisation with the Crown of England. Watching the politics unfold was a real treat, and it was so realistically done. There were a lot of unanswered questions, but I didn't have a problem with that as their mystery both added to the series' mystique and left the door open for a possible second season.
Although I would have preferred the final fight seen go the more vampiric route, rather than a demonic powers route, I do not cite this as an objective criticism of the movie. I guess certain "hell" themes make me a tad uncomfortable, but that is just a personal reservation of mine.
In the final analysis, I recommend this series. The direction was so solid and the story was so interesting that watching the 13 episodes back to back felt more like watching a really good epic movie. See it!
no wonder it's doing so well at the box office
29 July 2003
First of all, I really wasn't expecting to be impressed with this movie, even though I am a Johnny Depp fan. Most movies this summer have have been pretty bad, most notably, Bad Boys II. Jack Sparrow was always two steps ahead of everyone, and I really liked the way that the story tellers didn't reveal was his wily plans were until they came into fruition. The casting was dynamite, as was the cinematography, writing, humor, and set decoration. If I were to raise some of the films weaknesses, I'd say that 1) It was probably too long and had at least one too many endings, 2) some of the violence was a little too graphic,in particular, the slicing of throats and when the British navy troops were run through the sternum with swords. I might also have editted out the crying child when the pirates plundered. It was a little too realistic. The denoument was a little drawn out, but i like the way that even though the damsel's finance was written as unlikable, they didn't cliche him and make him into the scorned rejected villain. But all in all, I definitely recommend this movie. Maybe the sequel will be a little more family-friendly, but still, I endorse this film as sequel-worthy.
Saturday Matinee the LXG way.
11 July 2003
Well, I just came out of the theater after having viewed LXG. First off, I do not think it was a bad movie. While i would not recommend it as a must see movie, I certainly didn't find it to be a waste of my time. Sure, some plot points could have been developed more/better, but hey, I didn't walk in expecting Shakespeare. Though I haven't read the graphic novel on which the film is based, I have read that both the graphic novel and the movie take place in a reality alternate from both out history and our literary canons; which means that even though Stoker never wrote Mina as turning into a vampire, it's okay for LXG to take the license to do so. And so on and so forth.
Yes, it would have been nice to see Connery make his character a little more swashbuckling. But maybe that was the writing. I almost loathe watching anything with Peta Wilson, but i found here surprisingly interesting in this movie. In fact, other than Tom Sawyer's character seeming a bit incomprehensible, I think the other Leaguers were pretty interesting. But what was the deal with the bad guy, "M"? I thought his M.O. was even more pointless and less fleshed-out out than any of the flattest Bond villains I've had the displeasure of seeing. It was just a badly written character.
Just a word or two about the Mr. Hyde F/X, the CGI wizards of the Hulk could take a clue. Sure, both characters were CGI rendered, but Mr. Hyde's size carried a credible degree of mass and weight, whereas the Hulk often moved as if mass-less, making him seem too two dimensional.
All in all, I give the movie a respectable 6/10.
Yes, it would have been nice to see Connery make his character a little more swashbuckling. But maybe that was the writing. I almost loathe watching anything with Peta Wilson, but i found here surprisingly interesting in this movie. In fact, other than Tom Sawyer's character seeming a bit incomprehensible, I think the other Leaguers were pretty interesting. But what was the deal with the bad guy, "M"? I thought his M.O. was even more pointless and less fleshed-out out than any of the flattest Bond villains I've had the displeasure of seeing. It was just a badly written character.
Just a word or two about the Mr. Hyde F/X, the CGI wizards of the Hulk could take a clue. Sure, both characters were CGI rendered, but Mr. Hyde's size carried a credible degree of mass and weight, whereas the Hulk often moved as if mass-less, making him seem too two dimensional.
All in all, I give the movie a respectable 6/10.
X2
(2003)
worth the price of admission, BUT...
9 May 2003
How was X2? Ehh...fairly decent. definitely worth the price of admission, but the movie is not without serious flaws.
X2 was thankfully not as boring or lethargic as X-Men, but it still needed a shot of adrenaline. Even though there was a boatload of characters, i felt that not enough stuff actually happened in the movie. I felt there needed to be at least two more one-on-one fight scenes and also a good group-vs-group maylay. Nightcrawler's intro and the Wolverine/Deathstrike fight were great, but I felt they were bigger teaser to upcoming bigger events that just never happened. The X-Men were repesented as a minority sect fleeing their persecutors. I think that perspective makes for great story-telling, but i think for an action movie, Singer spent too much time having the X-Men on the defensive. I've read reviews about Marden's portrayal of Cyclops. Yes, the role was reduced, but I think his brief presense and emotional breakdown of losing Jean were very well done.
Lastly, I wasn't crazy about the ending. X-men versus lots of water. That was about as satisfying as the alternate ending of Blade 1 featured on the DVD. In the alternate ending of Blade 1, he's up against this 5 story blood tornado. But the makers reshot the ending because the scenario of protagonist versus liquid just doesn't produce a big enough pay-off to movie-goers. People go to see a big-budget action movie to see the ultimate conflict resolved in a big action sequence. Sorry, guys, spewing water just doesn't cut it. The resolution has to be with the antagonist that faced the protagonist with overwhelming odds throughout the movie, not with a soulness, faceless force of nature that appears in the last reel.
There are a lot of other little things that needed tightening up, but enough people have written about them, so I don't feel i need to. Granted, while there was a lot of room for improvement and the movie was too long to sit through (w/o jetting the the bathroom), i still walked away happy that I saw it. I think non-comic books fans would be uber-bored, but I must confess, I will definitely pay to see X3 when it rolls around in a year or two. Hopefully, the movie makers will have learned from the mistakes in X-Men & X2
X2 was thankfully not as boring or lethargic as X-Men, but it still needed a shot of adrenaline. Even though there was a boatload of characters, i felt that not enough stuff actually happened in the movie. I felt there needed to be at least two more one-on-one fight scenes and also a good group-vs-group maylay. Nightcrawler's intro and the Wolverine/Deathstrike fight were great, but I felt they were bigger teaser to upcoming bigger events that just never happened. The X-Men were repesented as a minority sect fleeing their persecutors. I think that perspective makes for great story-telling, but i think for an action movie, Singer spent too much time having the X-Men on the defensive. I've read reviews about Marden's portrayal of Cyclops. Yes, the role was reduced, but I think his brief presense and emotional breakdown of losing Jean were very well done.
Lastly, I wasn't crazy about the ending. X-men versus lots of water. That was about as satisfying as the alternate ending of Blade 1 featured on the DVD. In the alternate ending of Blade 1, he's up against this 5 story blood tornado. But the makers reshot the ending because the scenario of protagonist versus liquid just doesn't produce a big enough pay-off to movie-goers. People go to see a big-budget action movie to see the ultimate conflict resolved in a big action sequence. Sorry, guys, spewing water just doesn't cut it. The resolution has to be with the antagonist that faced the protagonist with overwhelming odds throughout the movie, not with a soulness, faceless force of nature that appears in the last reel.
There are a lot of other little things that needed tightening up, but enough people have written about them, so I don't feel i need to. Granted, while there was a lot of room for improvement and the movie was too long to sit through (w/o jetting the the bathroom), i still walked away happy that I saw it. I think non-comic books fans would be uber-bored, but I must confess, I will definitely pay to see X3 when it rolls around in a year or two. Hopefully, the movie makers will have learned from the mistakes in X-Men & X2
Thick as Thieves
(1999)
an altogether well-made film
9 May 2003
So I'm visiting my brother's house bored to tears and channel-surfing like crazy. All of the sudden, i catch Thick as Thieves coming on. I had never heard of it and the intro was pretty quirky, so i gave it a shot. This movie is one of those best-keep-secrets that most people don't notice. It's not a comdey per se, and not really an action or a Tarantino-esque movie, it kind stands in its own class. The situations the characters get in and out of are humorous-- not "LMAO" funny, just amusingly funny wry. The pacing, casting, the characters, the acting and direction are all top notch and very well fleshed out. So far, anyone i've personally recommended Thick as Thieves to has enjoyed. Hopefully you will, too.
I don't get it.
18 January 2003
Why the heck is everybody jocking this movie? Unless you're a diehard LOTR fan , I really don't see what all the big hoopla is for. Granted, the visuals in LOTR: TFOTR was unlike anything anyone had seen before and it was worth double the price of admission just for that, but honestly, I just couldn't get interested in the story. I do have to say that Christopher Lee's presence was awe-inspiring and the sets were breath-taking. I felt that ,visually, I was taken to levels I had never even imagined.
But I felt that this installment didn't offer anything new. It seemed to only draw out TFOTR's worst flaw--endless exposition. This installment looked to me like a 3-hour montage. I didn't find anything particularly memorable, except the excellent CGI of the creepy-crawly dude (sorry, I didn't quite catch the name). It wasn't that there was bad acting--it was more like there was no acting, or rather, no opportunity to act. It seemed like everyone was either just doing a lot of staring "out somewhere" because the odds were so insurmountable, or that they were scuffling about in groups of twos or threes headed "just over the other side of that tall hill or mountain".
Kudos to the LOTR movies for staying faithful to the books, but as a non-fan, (yes, I know, I am probably blaspheming) it all seemed rather tedious and silly. I thought it was bad enough that TFOTR ended with the Fellowship being chased by a crap-load of Orks (sp?) who are easier to kill than the buffalo in a particularly memorable episode of the Simpsons. I mean, jeez! Is this the world's most inefficient army or what?!?! These Orks are easier to kill than the "middle-eastern" armies in an early Schwartzeneggar or Stallone movie. There is just no element of danger. Everything seems just to gosh-darned easy. TTT ends with a good-guy army of 300 (and eventually some elves) taking on 10,000 Orks. You just know that the Fellowship will pretty easily overcome ridiculously impossible odds. Sadly, I could suspend my disbelief and therefore, I could not enjoy this movie.
This movie gets the 3rd Bass gas-face!
But I felt that this installment didn't offer anything new. It seemed to only draw out TFOTR's worst flaw--endless exposition. This installment looked to me like a 3-hour montage. I didn't find anything particularly memorable, except the excellent CGI of the creepy-crawly dude (sorry, I didn't quite catch the name). It wasn't that there was bad acting--it was more like there was no acting, or rather, no opportunity to act. It seemed like everyone was either just doing a lot of staring "out somewhere" because the odds were so insurmountable, or that they were scuffling about in groups of twos or threes headed "just over the other side of that tall hill or mountain".
Kudos to the LOTR movies for staying faithful to the books, but as a non-fan, (yes, I know, I am probably blaspheming) it all seemed rather tedious and silly. I thought it was bad enough that TFOTR ended with the Fellowship being chased by a crap-load of Orks (sp?) who are easier to kill than the buffalo in a particularly memorable episode of the Simpsons. I mean, jeez! Is this the world's most inefficient army or what?!?! These Orks are easier to kill than the "middle-eastern" armies in an early Schwartzeneggar or Stallone movie. There is just no element of danger. Everything seems just to gosh-darned easy. TTT ends with a good-guy army of 300 (and eventually some elves) taking on 10,000 Orks. You just know that the Fellowship will pretty easily overcome ridiculously impossible odds. Sadly, I could suspend my disbelief and therefore, I could not enjoy this movie.
This movie gets the 3rd Bass gas-face!
Equilibrium
(2002)
Better than "The Matrix"?? yes. Yes!! YES!!!!!!!
10 December 2002
The Matrix made me say "Whoa!". Equilibrium made me say "WOW!!".
Yes it's true. Equilibrium clearly borrows heavily from other movie effects and plot-points. I won't waste space here telling you all the movies and t.v. episodes it lifts from, most viewers will be able to figure that out themselves. But sitting in my seat being absolutely blown away by all the action and story and all the actors' strong screen presence just made me not mind at all. What a great "Guy movie".
I suppose the big question is "Why isn't this movie in wide-release?". It's production level was top-notch. It's better than 99% of the fodder studio execs market to us. Go figure.
Anyhoo, I absolutely cannot wait for the DVD. SEE THIS MOVIE!!!!!
Yes it's true. Equilibrium clearly borrows heavily from other movie effects and plot-points. I won't waste space here telling you all the movies and t.v. episodes it lifts from, most viewers will be able to figure that out themselves. But sitting in my seat being absolutely blown away by all the action and story and all the actors' strong screen presence just made me not mind at all. What a great "Guy movie".
I suppose the big question is "Why isn't this movie in wide-release?". It's production level was top-notch. It's better than 99% of the fodder studio execs market to us. Go figure.
Anyhoo, I absolutely cannot wait for the DVD. SEE THIS MOVIE!!!!!
The Ring
(2002)
great premise, but it REALLY needs a sequel
25 November 2002
Okay. So you've seen this movie. Is is a great scary movie or are there so many unanswered questions that it was just too unsatisifying. The answer to both questions is "Yes".
This movie was a great date flick. I'm pretty sure that most people understood that the little girl was some "force of death", like the grim reaper. Everyone was at the edge of their seats trying to unravel the mystery of the connection of why the killer's modus operandi was confined to killing only those who saw the tape.
There were some other technical questions that went unanswered. Maybe on an artistic level, it is better leaving everything up in the air and allowing the audience to theorize their own explanations. But still, the questions beckon for answers. The only problem is that in the sequel-happy mindset that is Holloywood, most of us know that most sequels somehow cheapen the novelty and artistic integrity of the original.
This movie was a great date flick. I'm pretty sure that most people understood that the little girl was some "force of death", like the grim reaper. Everyone was at the edge of their seats trying to unravel the mystery of the connection of why the killer's modus operandi was confined to killing only those who saw the tape.
There were some other technical questions that went unanswered. Maybe on an artistic level, it is better leaving everything up in the air and allowing the audience to theorize their own explanations. But still, the questions beckon for answers. The only problem is that in the sequel-happy mindset that is Holloywood, most of us know that most sequels somehow cheapen the novelty and artistic integrity of the original.
Tell Your Friends