SSCMSMIT Reviews

Gattaca (1997)

Very re-watchable

[19 February 2005]

The first time i saw this i enjoyed it, but did not appreciate the depth of it until a 2nd or 3rd viewing. Essentially the film is about the dying spirit of humanity, in a world in which people are defined by a statistic. Ethan Hawkes character (Vincent) is a man amongst automatons, one of the last of a dying breed in a relentlessly scientific dystopia. Cleverly, those such as Vincent who are born without the aid of genetic modifications are called 'godchilds'; for it is essentially a belief in something more than genetics which precedes their existence. The film skillfully balances a number of themes such as faith, friendship and a emotionally resonant picture of a possible future. As a viewer you share in Vincents dream in the same way Jude Laws character does and yearn for his escape to the uncertainty of space in which nothing is predetermined.

The acting is of a high standard amongst the entire cast but it is Jude Law who excels in his portrayal of the tragic Eugene, he perfectly balances the superiority complex of his character while remaining likable and a subject of pity. The musical score perfectly captures the ambiance of the of the environment while soulfully embracing Vincents hopes and the heart of his humanity. The sets and cinematography are excellent. The writing and original concept are what is truly worth watching the film for.

I recommend most highly especially to the patient intelligent viewer. 9/10!

The Cable Guy (1996)

Misunderstood!

[27 September 2004]

I think the problem for a viewer of this film is they have a clear preconception of what to expect and think they are getting less than what they paid for. This was undoubtedly what hindered my appreciation of the film the first time i watched it a few years ago and i think why some critics and the IMDb mark it poorly. The only mistake of the film is it tries to please Carey fans with classic Carey comedy (which he does so well in 'Ace Ventura' and 'The Mask')and challenge the viewers intellectually as well. As a viewer this is a difficult duality to comprehend and enjoy, however on 2nd and 3rd viewings the inherent quality's present themselves. Careys character (i say character because he has a multitude of names in the film) although surreal is the product of a technology that effects us all: the television.

---------SPOILER---------------------

In a sense he is the darkest product of that technology a man without a singular identity but that engendered by years raised by the television. Careys character has no understanding of social interaction in the real world and so fails to connect with reality. Instead he acts inappropriately within every context and is subsequently rejected by Steven (Played by Matthew Brodrick who brilliantly captures the normality of the average joe, in a sense he is the pure opposite of Carey, almost grounded in reality superfluously): "i just don't have enough room in my life for a new friend". The film ends poetically with Carey's epiphany that he must destroy his creator. Symbolically Careys conflict with television represents every child's relationship with its parent culminating in the child's rebellion. Great film 8/10

Once Upon a Time in America (1984)

Highly overated

[17 May 2004]

Ok i admit i'm not the most objective in that i think a superfluous amount of gangster/crime movies have been made. However i can recognise the inherent qualities of godfather 1+2, scarface and goodfellers, qualities that are in no way present in this film. The biggest problem is the lack of a coherent plot and as far as i can tell the ending is pretty meaningless. The time jump toward the end (Where James Woods and Deniro's characters are old with the worst make up ever to illustrate this fact)led me to a conclusion that is out of touch with the direction the movie was originally going. A twist in a movie is fine but it must make some semblance of sense within the parameters set my the intro and middle of a movie.

I was not drawn in by the characters or the plot which inevitably leaves a viewer bored. AVOID THIS FILM AND SPEND THREE HOURS TRAINSPOTTING OR SOMETHING! - 3/10

Kill Bill: Vol. 2 (2004)

Can't believe this is in top 250

[13 May 2004]

OK first of all let it be known that i loved Kill Bill 1 because it didn't have any pretensions about what it was, a cool, witty samurai movie which draws upon the best of genre films only does better which leaves the viewers with a feast of gore and chick fights which stand up against 'crouching tiger'. Unfortunately the 2nd volume does not rely on action and cool laconic Dialogue which is OK i grant you. Clearly Tarantino wanted to spend the entire film with characters exchanging pointless below average lines (not Tarantino quality of 'Resevoir dogs' and 'Pulp Fiction) because he had faith in the cinematic appeal of Bill which im sorry wasn't there. Their is one semi decent action scene in the entire film between daryhl Hannah and Uma Thurman's the bride and the rest is dependent on the on character relationships which are .. well ..LAME! I don't mind a slow paced film but if it lacks the dialogue and emotion that makes them enjoyable they are the worst type of film to have to sit through. Sorry to disappoint my friends - Kill Bill 1's an 8/10 possible DVD purchase, Kill Bill 2's a 5/10 at the most and i suggest you suppress your curiosity until it comes out on TV or something.

Whose Life Is It Anyway? (1981)

Inciteful challenge to the power given to doctors by the state - 8/10

[7 October 2003]

This film may well deal with a taboo area of medicine which of course is patients control over their own death. The film deals with a very morbid subject area without descending into difficult viewing.Richard Dreyfuss's delivers a continum of comedy while not betraying the feeling of hopelessness felt by his character. Other than great dialogue and acting the film leaves the viewer questioning common sense notions of the rightieusness (probably spelt wrong sorry) of medical professionals as well as acknowledging the reality that the institution of medicine is a new religion that dictates its own values on the less powerful subjects in its claws (claws is too much isn't it). Great film!!!

Aliens (1986)

Complete change in genre ensures the originality of this sequel

[8 May 2003]

Why Alien is always revered to such an extent i find hard to comprehend when Aliens is clearly a more enjoyable film. James Cameron's conceptualisation of the alien creatures is far more interesting for the screen. All the creeping about and setting of the scene in the first installment leaves a viewer quite simply bored. Aliens completely switches genre from sci-fi thriller to sci-fi action movie. Riply (Sigourney Weaver) is given new strength and is perhaps the strongest heroine to hit the screens if not Sarah Connor in Terminator 2 (another of Camerons creations). The effects in this film are still enjoyable to watch today and the aliens themselves are a much bigger feature in this film, hence the name Aliens! Bill Paxton Provides the comical element in the film representing the average person put in a situation as psychologically crippling as one could imagine being trapped on a planet crawling with homocidal aliens might be. This film delivers great actions scenes with plenty of human and alien carnage to satisfy an audiences blood lust, while the balanced structure of the film does not neglect the characters giving more than Ripley an interesting arc. A failure in many action films is when a character is of such little interest to the viewer that you do not care what happens to them (see 'Black Hawk Dawn'). Aliens avoids this trap and is definitely a film that can be enjoyed more than once. 9/10.

A Clockwork Orange (1971)

Id love to speak like Macdowell does in this!

[8 May 2003]

The neo shakespearean language created in this film provides a continium of comedy for the protagonist Malcolm Macdowell. It also prevents the language from becoming dated as the dialogue is not synonymous with any modern subcultures exchange in discourse. The element of comedy comes from the juxtaposition of the language with the "ultra violence" performed by Alex De Large (Macdowell) and his gang. Soft words and poetic deliveries soften the displays of violence in the film (but perhaps make them darker) and also allow the audience to understand the pleasure in which the Alex takes in the violence as his antics go hand in hand with songs, laughing and poetry. (Possible Spoiler) The film is dark throughout as Alex's character has no arc, suggesting that all change in men is socially conditioned rather than a product of moral awakening. This is classic with Kubrick who changes the ending of the book to deliver a darker conclusion to that of the book much as he did with Stephan Kings 'The Shining'. If you like this film i suggest watching 'American Psycho' which also provides a satirical character who equals Macdowells nihilism and entertains in a similar way.