Change Your Image
rowman2222
Reviews
El orfanato (2007)
Excellent for the genera, Truly the best Ghost Story of 2007
This is the best Horror film of the year. I use the term Horror to encompass a broad range of films including supernatural to gore. The reality is that this film is a ghost story. Possibly the best ghost story I have ever seen. I feel this way because the lead characters makes real choices. They are very well developed people and you can understand their motivations, their desires, their fears, and their purpose; and this is rare in any genera nd almost unheard of in horror; in my opinion.
The depth of development for the character of Laura is phenomenal. Her emotions can truly be felt by the viewer and her obsessions, which to the casual observer might seem mad, are understood in a way that only great film makers and actors, can achieve. The viewer is made to want what she wants. You do not become a casual observer to her plight as much as you become a willing participant. And it breaks you apart, not with terror, but sadness;unavoidable anguish and hurt.
The cinematography is excellent. The scope of the shots, the color saturation, the picturesque landscape of the villa, really gives the eyes a feast. There are no weak performances from any cast member, everyone is exactly whom you believe them to be.
My only problems with the film have to do with the lack of decent back story. There is no explanation of how Laura was brought up, very little explanation of why she has had this desire to reopen the Orphanage, and very little to say of why she and her husband decided to adopt. I would like to have seen more explanation for the events that led then back to the orphanage. That and the creepy social worker woman who seems almost creepy for creepys sake. And she was creepy.
Enjoy the film.
Sunshine (2007)
This was good. Best SF film in at least six years.
I think brevity is best to do this movie justice. First, the movie is good. It is worth the exorbitant price of a ticket. Second, it is Danny Boyle's best work. Not necessarily his opus, I think that is yet to come. But having seen the majority of what was released in the US, I think I speak with a certain degree of authority when I say, I like it.
Now, there are still some points that need to be forgotten if you are anal like me and need to get through this film with as little pain as possible. The first point is that you need to forget that should such a mission as was the subject of this film be necessary, it could be accomplished by remote; no crew needed. Second, you need to forget that computers are best used to double check the work of humans for errors. And lastly, any animal, even humans, will require 1/3 the oxygen of a normal member of their species if they stop talking, stop moving around, and restrict their diet to absolutely bare necessity.
Get over those points and you are in for a great ride. I was stumped several times as to the route they were taking. Normally I have the movie figured out by the end of the first act, (This is not to boost my ego but is a jab at the poor storytelling of most movies). This one did a good job of keeping me in the dark while simultaneously keeping me entertained. The cinematography was good. I say good, because it was obvious that the majority of the shots were edited in the computer. But not to discount that, they were still amazing.
The bottom line is that despite my issues with the film, the tension was good, it made sense (mostly), the science was correct (mostly) and the characters were real. No deus ex machina. Enjoy.
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (2007)
Good acting and special effects, poor directing, writing, and editing
JK Rowling has created a world so rich with texture and vivid descriptions that we can live everything from the smell of the kitchen stench at the Leaky Cauldron, to the feel of the sheets at Hogwarts. Unfortunately, she brings one other element into her book that bastardizes the entire work; her reliance on worn out literary devices. The order of the Phoenix is rife with them. First, we see friends that turn on Harry for terribly poor reasons just for the sake of creating tension. Last time in was Ron, this time it is Seamus, and various other people throughout the series who sort of just go along with whatever the stronger willed characters tell them to do. Even Dumbledore has been seen to accuse Harry of wrongdoing when there was little or no proof and his past record is of absolutely candidness. (Goblet of Fire)
The next device is her reliance on contrived and impossible situations to further the story. Of course, suspension of disbelief is necessary for a movie about wizards, but you shouldn't have to abandon common sense. The Tri-Wizard tournament in the last film, was a game that restricts its participants to the whims and fancy of a magic goblet whose motivations are never explained and thrusts them into a tournament whose peculiar games are inexplicably drawn over the course of a school year when the actual competition itself lasts only a couple of hours. In Phoenix, it is Deloris Umbridge who is able to take over Hogwarts putting the entire school in the stranglehold of her moral code and at no time suffers any backlash from parents, other professors, or the rest of the wizard community. The only support offered for this ludicrous situation is that she has the minister of magic in her pocket. Never mind that ministers are elected positions and have to answer to more than just one woman. This is a woman whom everyone is against but no one has the nerve to stand up to. Even Dumbldore simply chooses to vanish like a coward when faced with the prospect of being excused from his position. Has Dumbledore ever shown such cowardice before in his life? I doubt it.
The biggest device however, and the most often abused by Rowling, is her reliance on the Cassandra complex: a person who knows the truth of the past or the future but is disbelieved by everyone including friends and family. This is present in every film in some degree and grows with intensity as the series goes along. In the Order of the Phoenix, Harry spends nearly the entire film being accused by everyone at Hogwarts of making up stories about the Dark Lord's return. Umbridge even goes so far as to scar Harry for "Making up Lies." Again, where are the parents and other teachers when this is going on? In the last film, Mad-Eye Moody was scolded for using transfiguration as a punishment on a student, and here we have a professor using mutilation with impunity? But back to Cassandra. While Harry does manage to recruit a small band of friends to that he trains in defensive magic, the majority of people think he is making things up. That is, until the very end of the film when the Minister witnesses Voldemort for himself and the headline in the Daily Prophet reads "Harry Potter Vindicated." This headline indicates that it was not just those at Hogwarts but probably the majority of the wizard world that thought he was a Liar. Why? He has no history of lying. Indeed, he has the opposite. He has been vindicated time and time again in each film and yet people continue to think he is making things up. This may make drama in an otherwise undramatic year at Hogwarts, but it defies common sense.
Now unfortunately, the film itself only amplifies these issues. Even more perplexing is that Harry himself is not immune from this propensity to disbelieve other wizards. Although Harry is by now, quite familiar with the loneliness and frustration of being disbelieved, when his budding girlfriend Cho is indicated to have turned him in to Umbridge, instead of asking her what happened, or giving her the benefit of the doubt, he gives her the cold shoulder and does not speak to her again for the rest of the film. Even when it was revealed that Umbridge used a spell on Cho to get her to tell of the location of their secret club, Harry still does not go to her to apologize. Obviously his own experiences have thought him nothing of empathy or understanding, not even equipping him with the ability to admit when he is wrong, something others have done including Ron and Seamus who ultimately realized they were being poor friends for disbelieving Harry. Apart from this, the movie fails in ways the others have not. Namely, it is the shortest Potter film to date and I got the distinct feeling that what was cut out, was more crucial than the editors thought. There were so many loose ends that I left the theater thinking I had missed entire sections. Who ordered the Dementor attack on Harry? How was Voldedmort able to break into Aszkerban? What were the circumstances surrounding the death of Neville's parents? Why has the minister suddenly become a complete nincompoop? Why has Draco (one of the most interesting characters in the first two films) been completely written out of the script? What happened to Quiddich, was it canceled along with everything else at Hogwarts? Why isn't Harry, or anyone else for that matter, doing anything to try to clear Sirius' name? What happened to the romantic tension that was brewing between Hermione and Ron in the last film?
Taken by itself, this would have been a satisfactory movie. But it isn't by itself. It has a book to try and match and four previous films to honor.
The New Kids (1985)
Rent this to get up the nerve to beat down the guy who took your woman.
This movie makes you want vengeance. I cannot think of another film that makes you want to suddenly appear on the corner of this "every town" with a sawed-off shotgun, a dagger and a pack of Pall Malls. James Spader was great. I am not convinced of his relationship with the other "red necks" in his gang because he is the only one who obviously bathed regularly, but he was very convincing. This movie was also the first time I ever learned of a breed called a Staffordshire Terrier (He doesn't deal cards or retrieve the newspaper but he does make you want to agree with breed specific bans). So Without giving away the story, I will make comments such as, Lori Laughlin is fabulous as ever, beware of anyone who keeps pig's blood in their fridge, and "you don't key another guy's car, you just don't do it." (Pulp Fiction) That is unless you are trying to bait them into retrieving a rather large arsenal. Of course, all of this testosterone is tempered with the fact that there are several cliché's employed, terrible acting by everyone but the principles, obvious setups that have only one conclusion, and the inevitable, yet tragic, ending for the Staffordshire Terrier. Rest in pieces.
Overkill (1996)
this movie has to have at least one funny moment
I can't say I know what it is but I can offer this. My friends and I were vacationing in Puerto Vallarta when one day we were approached by a woman on the beach. She was a casting director for a film they were shooting nearby and needed extras to be "Swat Cops." It paid 50 bucks and would make a great Spring Break story. So we showed up on the set and were told it was going to be a very exciting movie as it was starring Chuck Norris's brother, Aaron. So we get dressed in the wardrobe and show up on the set when the Director yelled at the casting director telling her that he didn't want any extras that were bigger and better looking than the Star. We didn't get paid but we got free food out of the deal and a lot of funny pictures behind the set. And we hung out the next day with Pamela Dickerson who said she was the female lead. Her name does appear in the credits but having never seen the film, who knows what part she had.
28 Weeks Later (2007)
I can't be scared because I can't get past how preposterous it was.
I really enjoyed the first film. The characters were real, they made understandable decisions in stressful situations. It was a fresh take on a very cliché genera; zombie films.
The second film, unfortunately, has none of that. Unrealistic characters making the same irrational, unintelligent choices that people in terrible slasher films make. Maybe taken on its own it would not have been that bad, but it has a much stronger film to live up to so it amplifies all of the weaknesses.
I am sorry if I am giving some things away so stop reading now if you have not seen the film and want to "try" and be surprised. I say try because there was nothing, absolutely nothing, unpredictable about this film.
The thing I found most absurd was that after only four months of failing to find an infected person, they already want to try to repopulate the island. Preposterous!!!! The greatest plague in the history of world and they are going back all cavalier? No. It would take years, maybe even decades before any re-population attempt would be made, and even then it would be a military only operation composed of troops and scientists. There would have to be global wide panels of experts and diplomats involved as the entire world would stand to be infected if something went wrong. Anthrax can live in moist soil for years so why not the rage virus? Maybe if the title was 28 months later, or more realistic, 28 years later.
And then again, who would want to come back? There would have to be fantastic incentives to get people to move back. Such as no taxes for life, free property, hereditary titles, etc. But the filmmakers make no effort to explain why the people who moved back were motivated to do so.
Then there is Robert Carlisle's character who is ultimately the person responsible for the re-emergence of the virus. He accomplished this because he has a magnetic pass key that gives him unfettered access to the entire complex, even top secret areas. He walks into a quarantine room of an individual, who turns out to be his wife, that is a carrier of the rage virus but is asymptomatic. He supposedly is some sort of civilian contractor or maintenance worker in the facility, but that wouldn't give him unrestricted access, he isn't even military. Come on!!! Then when the virus finally breaks back out (Too far into the movie to allow for much action in a 90 minute flick) the emergency protocols are so amateurish to be laughable. It is obvious right away that they have never given any or the re-patriots emergency drills because as they are being shuffled into quarantine chambers, they are all confused as to what is happening. You have to go through emergency drills your first day on a cruise ship and they are telling us that after repopulating Brittan after the most deadly plague of mankind, they are not even going to do some drills???? So when this inevitably fails (the zombies break into the quarantine zones, of course) in the ensuing panic, the soldiers cannot tell who is infected and who isn't. After not too much time, the general gives the order to shoot everyone just to be sure. Again, I was sitting in my seat fuming, all they would have had to broadcast on the PA was "Put up your right hand if you are not infected." Presumably zombies don't follow directions. But no, the soldiers start shooting everyone. I wonder if a Nuremburg defense would work in this instance? And of all the other soldiers shooting civilians, only one has moral qualms. Pathetic.
From here, the movie devolves into the typical horror film. The surviving characters of the initial carnage band together and are slowly picked off by circumstance and the results of terrible decision making (Should I go into the Tube where it is dark and has no lights, or should I stay above ground where I can see where I am going?) Oh, and while in the tube, they navigate with a lone night vision scope on an assault rifle that the character doesn't point at the way ahead, but instead at the surviving characters heads, did she forget that the scope is attached to a gun? Who points a gun at peoples heads they are not intending to shoot. BTW this is the same character who earlier in the film corrected the word usage of a person and then made the same mistake herself. (What kind of writer didn't pick that up???) Oh, and Robert Carlisle just happens to appear in nearly every scene even though he is only supposed to be a zombie. It got really irritating to keep seeing him pop up all the time. Was someone directing his location????? Again, no explanation of why this particular zombie was so adept at finding the few survivors.
Skatetown USA (1979)
Reminds me of what it was like to be 7 years old in June
Alright, Star Wars was the movie for every other 7-year old at the time, as it was for me. But seeing this film after more than twenty years instantly invaded my senses. I smelled the popcorn, felt the heat of summer, and the heard handful of change my friends and I would use to get into the double features playing at a theater that has long since been bulldozed for a mega Gap store. It has all of the elements of a perfect summer movie. Action, romance, Maureen McCormick in tight shorts, Billy Barty in a characteristic though cliché tuxedo, and music. Plus, it gave us Patrick Swayze in his first screen role.
Now the plot is as formulaic as they come. Basically a dumbed down Romeo and Juliet on roller skates with bad disco on the Jersey Pier. Greg Bradford, who did nothing before or after this movie, is a young and studley out of towner whose sister, Maureen McCormick, takes him to the local skate, disco, super-rally-roller-rink where he acts like an a pathetically nieve boy next door type; but with blonde hair and biceps. No surprises when he falls instantly in love with the pettiest, most aloof girl in the joint. This ballerina on rubber wheels just happens to be the kid sister of Ace Johnson. Aka Patrick Swayze. ACE, isn't that a great name for the leader of a tough talking, fast moving, skate gang.? So, no surprises, Ace isn't thrilled with his kid sister and the new guy. There's a lot of empty threats from the Ace and members of the tough talking skater boys and notable appearances by Scott Baio who, as a friend of Maureen McCormick, tries to defuse the situation.
Of course he can't keep things from degrading, which they do, first into a "skate off" which might as well have been filmed on ice for how choreographed as feminine it was. And then it degrades further into a skate death match. Now this is where the movie is really trying hard to be as formula as possible without looking like they are trying to be formula. Now in a regular testosterone-machismo film, this is where the two can't back down let alone think teenagers would match up in a car race towards a cliff before they ditch at the last second and send their muscle cars over a cliff making us all cry. There are no cliffs in Jersey and this is a roller skate movie. The testosterone is tainted with estrogen, the pants are too tight, the skates are laced even tighter, and they race each other down a pier towards the Atlantic ocean on rocket powered skates. I kid you not.
I don't want to give away anything else, but I will say that the most challenging thing about this film is obtaining a copy. They never produced in on VHS. It hasn't been shown in years and years in a theater. Never shown on TV to my knowledge. And no plans for a DVD release that I have heard of. I just happen to have a bootleg copy that I had to sell my soul for. Cheers