kimberly_ann Reviews

The X Files: I Want to Believe (2008)

Not as bad as people are making it out to be

[8/10 · 25 July 2008]

Honestly, I thought this was a good film. I'll even go so far as to say a great film. I really think that Chris Carter, David Duchovny, and Gillian Anderson delivered what they had promised to. All along, throughout the post-production and press campaign we've been told that this is a creepy story with Mulder and Scully's relationship at its core. Well, that's what it is ... plain and simple. I really think that all the negativity and people's harsh reviews are from false and hyped up expectations of what this movie is supposed to be. If anything, you should just try to walk into the theatre with an open mind.

But I almost think some people who reviewed this film, saw a different film than I did ...

1. I read a review in which the person said Gillian Anderson's acting was awful. That is false. It is quite the contrary. Gillian Anderson is probably one of the strongest aspects of this movie. Every time she's in a scene, you're captivated.

2. I had read that Mulder and Scully don't show up in the film until 45 minutes into it. False. Scully appears in the 3rd scene - so what? no more than 7 minutes? - and Mulder directly follows.

3. Someone complained about an irrelevant and torturously long scene where Mulder fills up his gas tank. This doesn't happen. He goes to a gas station, gets out of his car, and goes into a store.

4. Lastly, it was rumored that the actors where flubbing up their lines all the time. Okay, even if they did, that wouldn't end up in the final film. Obviously they do multiple takes for a reason. The lines are solid.

This movie is not boring. The surprises are there. It may not be scary in a 'horror film' sort of way where things are jumping out at you every 2 seconds, but it is scary. The acting is amazing. Gillian Anderson on her own is a joy to watch, but when you put her in a scene with David it's either going to break your heart or melt it. The supporting cast won't let you down, and neither will the storyline. It's not paranormal in the sense of freaks and monsters, but religion and God. It's very much in the fashion of "All Things"; seeing the signs and following them. Finally, it is just excellently put together. Whoever edited this film did a phenomenal job! The inter-cutting and juxtaposition was out of this world.

GIVE IT A CHANCE, FOLKS.

The Rapture (1991)

It had all the potential, but ultimately a disappointing

[2/10 · 23 March 2008]

This movie started out normal, but spiraled increasingly out of control. First of all, if Mimi Rogers' character is into foursomes with strangers I don't think she's going to be so quick as to strike up a conversation with some Jehovah's Witnesses ... and then immediately want to "find God" and "be clean". I understand it's an indie film so there's no budget and they have to condense the movie, but it's just not believable. Plus, all of a sudden Sharon starts talking about "the child" and "the pearl" ... where did those even come from? and why are they never even explained? And for someone who is just recently converted, she sure does have ALL the answers. Even at the end of the movie, when her daughter is asking her all the questions about loving God and heaven and how long she has to stay in Hell .. I don't think she should know. Finally, the last half hour .. I swear the director was on acid. One minute we're in the real word and then it's just this big dream/fantasy sequence and, personally, I know there's a message but I was far too distracted by cheesy visions of reapers and sickles and the horsemen of the apocalypse.

I know this movie COULD HAVE had a great message, but the way it went about portraying it was erratic and annoying.

p.s. The one redeeming quality was that I got to see David Duchovny's naked a**.

The House of Mirth (2000)

Absolutely Riveting

[9/10 · 29 January 2008]

I'm not sure how this movie could get a bad review. Of course, there are those people who find its pace too slow. However, one must realize that this is a period drama; it's not meant to be an action-packed suspense thriller. Everything is subtle, but it is so beautifully prepared, thought out, and executed by all.

1. Were it for nothing else, the technical aspects of this film would have kept me watching until the very end. The music was perfectly placed to rise and fall with the internal emotions of the characters - especially Lily and Lawrence - and to express the turmoil of the social downfall of Lily. On top of that, you have phenomenal costumes and set with the most lavish colors. Lastly, and possibly what I found most fascinating about the film, was the lighting. it always seemed just bright enough or just dark enough to reflect the romance or dreariness. In addition, there is just not denying that the way the light fell upon Gillian Anderson in every, single scene is something I have never seen before.

2. The all-star cast! Gillian Anderson. Eric Stolz. Laura Linney. Anthony LaPaglia. Dan Akroyd. Do I have to go on? I can almost guarantee that you'll find yourself, at one point or another, yelling at the screen. These characters are so manipulative and deceitful and malicious. And Lily is so naive and just won't accept love when it's given!! I think the best thing about the cast and performances in this film is that watching the film and listening to it are 2 completely opposite experiences. The actors convey one thing with their faces and another with their voices; it's pure talent. I was amazed.

3. If nothing else, this film should watched purely for Gillian Anderson. This project was so different than her 'X Files' persona - and such a success, at that. The way she uses her eyes to express 5 different emotions in a matter of seconds blew me away. Her acting and utter vulnerability was awe-inspiring.

Against All Odds (1984)

Underrated

[7/10 · 15 April 2006]

OK, so i admit that the music is a bit cheesy and the story gets a bit choppy and hard to follow from time to time, but for the most part i think that "against all odds" is very well done and worth while movie that i would enjoy having on DVD and watching whenever. i am a little bias because i LOOOOOVE Rachel Ward, but i still have some arguments to make against some people who think this movie is a second rate remake. i was watching the special edition DVD and on one of the deleted scenes the director clearly said that he Didn't want to remake "out of the past", they merely took the story line and ran with it. so, a lot of people are disappointed that Rachel Ward isn't this evil bitch with a hidden agenda and actually loves Jeff Bridges and doesn't know what's going on with her psychotic boyfriend! well, against all odds isn't a remake and the director has clearly decided to go more for a ROMANCE movie with a lingering crime story line rather than a CRIME movie with a lingering romance. it's that simple. out of the past was one of the hard hitting film noirs of the 40's that was all about deceit and crime and murder and betrayal and against all odds is simply NOT that. Rachel Ward is SUPPOSED to be in love and weepy and oblivious! against all odds takes the story of a man hired by his old friend to find his runaway girlfriend who eventually fall in love with one another from out of the past BUT THATS IT .. after that it's no holds barred and the movies are completely different. I LOVED THIS MOVIE AND WOULD HIGHLY RECOMMEND IT. the love scenes are unbelievably romantic and sensuous and Rachel ward is a definite far cry from her last project ... the thorn birds, but she does so well in leading James woods and Jeff bridges. she definitely deserved the top credit because she's the actress who drives the other two actors in the movie and it shows!!!