Se7en(dir. David Fincher)
REVIEW PENDING...
**1/2 out of ****
Showing posts with label 1995. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1995. Show all posts
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Monday, January 14, 2008
Oh 1995...
1995
1. Heat(dir. Michael Mann)
2. Lessons of Darkness(dir. Werner Herzog)
3. Clueless(dir. Amy Heckerling)
4. Dead Man(dir. Jim Jarmusch)
5. The Addiction(dir. Abel Ferrera)
Amateur(dir. Hal Hartley)
Fallen Angels(dir. Wong Kar-Wai)
Dead Man Walking(dir. Tim Robbins)
Need to see: Casino, The Bridges of Madison County, Toy Story(rewatch), Se7en, Waterworld, Cyclo, Underground, The Glass Shield, La Haine, Kids, Operation Dumbo Drop, The Quick and the Dead, Safe, Clockers, Exotica, and more...
1. Heat(dir. Michael Mann)
2. Lessons of Darkness(dir. Werner Herzog)
3. Clueless(dir. Amy Heckerling)
4. Dead Man(dir. Jim Jarmusch)
5. The Addiction(dir. Abel Ferrera)
Amateur(dir. Hal Hartley)
Fallen Angels(dir. Wong Kar-Wai)
Dead Man Walking(dir. Tim Robbins)
Need to see: Casino, The Bridges of Madison County, Toy Story(rewatch), Se7en, Waterworld, Cyclo, Underground, The Glass Shield, La Haine, Kids, Operation Dumbo Drop, The Quick and the Dead, Safe, Clockers, Exotica, and more...
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Oh Vienna...
Before Sunrise(dir. Richard Linklater)
The only reason why I watched this movie was because I want to see Before Sunset and I hate not seeing a movie that preceded whatever movie I want to see beforehand. The biggest problem I had was that they hit it off too well and too quickly. If the film was perhaps more whimsical and hopelessly romantic, I would be able to believe it, but since the film is fairly realistic in terms of their conversations and the things that they do, it's hard to believe it especially given that they're fairly analytic about their relationship. While their conversations are definitely believable, it's hard to really say they're all that interesting. Philosophical banter can be amusing like in Linklater's Dazed & Confused and A Scanner Darkly, but here, it's kind of mundane and uninteresting. The couple don't feel their conversations are ultimately trivial even though in a way, they pretty much are. If these characters have understood that their conversations are trivial much like the characters in a Whit Stillman film do, it would have been more fun and enjoyable. I ragged on this film enough. I thought it was good, but you could clearly see how they could have improved it. I think a lot of it's problems could have been assuaged if it was more romantic. I hope Before Sunset is. I recommend.
*** out of ****
The only reason why I watched this movie was because I want to see Before Sunset and I hate not seeing a movie that preceded whatever movie I want to see beforehand. The biggest problem I had was that they hit it off too well and too quickly. If the film was perhaps more whimsical and hopelessly romantic, I would be able to believe it, but since the film is fairly realistic in terms of their conversations and the things that they do, it's hard to believe it especially given that they're fairly analytic about their relationship. While their conversations are definitely believable, it's hard to really say they're all that interesting. Philosophical banter can be amusing like in Linklater's Dazed & Confused and A Scanner Darkly, but here, it's kind of mundane and uninteresting. The couple don't feel their conversations are ultimately trivial even though in a way, they pretty much are. If these characters have understood that their conversations are trivial much like the characters in a Whit Stillman film do, it would have been more fun and enjoyable. I ragged on this film enough. I thought it was good, but you could clearly see how they could have improved it. I think a lot of it's problems could have been assuaged if it was more romantic. I hope Before Sunset is. I recommend.
*** out of ****
Monday, October 29, 2007
Oh Vampires and Cowboys...
The Addiction(dir. Abel Ferrara)
It's hard to resist a film that compares vampiric blood lust to heroine addiction and to sin. We're human so obviously we sin, but what do we do about it? Like the responses Kathleen's victims give when she threatens to harm them if they don't say some variation of "go away," we're usually passive and evasive. We try to brush it off. The film suggests that forgetting about your sins is about as bad as letting an addiction go uncheck even when the addiction involves other people's blood. The film is basically Ms .45 minus the .45 and feminist undertones. In their place are vampire fangs and Catholic and existential undertones. The similarities in story and structure between the two are uncanny especially since they're both written by the same guy. This film, however, ends on a much better note than that film and doesn't contain any extremely annoying neighbors for the protagonist and the audience to be pestered by. Unlike Ms .45, this film has a somewhat pretentious vibe given all it's philosophical banter, but that might mainly be because I didn't understand most of it. It also felt like it wasn't going anywhere until it's redemptive conclusion that made all the ennui one might experience worthwhile. I highly recommend.
***1/2 out of ****
The Tin Star(dir. Anthony Mann)
An average western with Henry Fonda and Anthony Perkins. While I'm not that big of a fan of Mann's westerns(the ones I have seen) outside of The Man From Laramie, they at least had a sense of immediacy to them to make them entertaining. This just slowly inches it's way to a predictable happy ending. There are some scenes that you could picture being memorable if Mann added an extra oomph to them, but he doesn't and they end up being fairly generic. The appeal of the film(for me at least) comes mainly from the two leads. The relationship between their characters is quite clichéd, resembling something along the lines of "The Sheriff Kid," and they both end up giving clichéd performances because of it. Overall, it's bland and uninteresting.
** out of ****
It's hard to resist a film that compares vampiric blood lust to heroine addiction and to sin. We're human so obviously we sin, but what do we do about it? Like the responses Kathleen's victims give when she threatens to harm them if they don't say some variation of "go away," we're usually passive and evasive. We try to brush it off. The film suggests that forgetting about your sins is about as bad as letting an addiction go uncheck even when the addiction involves other people's blood. The film is basically Ms .45 minus the .45 and feminist undertones. In their place are vampire fangs and Catholic and existential undertones. The similarities in story and structure between the two are uncanny especially since they're both written by the same guy. This film, however, ends on a much better note than that film and doesn't contain any extremely annoying neighbors for the protagonist and the audience to be pestered by. Unlike Ms .45, this film has a somewhat pretentious vibe given all it's philosophical banter, but that might mainly be because I didn't understand most of it. It also felt like it wasn't going anywhere until it's redemptive conclusion that made all the ennui one might experience worthwhile. I highly recommend.
***1/2 out of ****
The Tin Star(dir. Anthony Mann)
An average western with Henry Fonda and Anthony Perkins. While I'm not that big of a fan of Mann's westerns(the ones I have seen) outside of The Man From Laramie, they at least had a sense of immediacy to them to make them entertaining. This just slowly inches it's way to a predictable happy ending. There are some scenes that you could picture being memorable if Mann added an extra oomph to them, but he doesn't and they end up being fairly generic. The appeal of the film(for me at least) comes mainly from the two leads. The relationship between their characters is quite clichéd, resembling something along the lines of "The Sheriff Kid," and they both end up giving clichéd performances because of it. Overall, it's bland and uninteresting.
** out of ****
Saturday, October 27, 2007
Oh Tommy & Elina & Bruno...
Mission: Impossible III(dir. J.J. Abrams)
It's an effective yet impersonal action thriller. The high tech gadgetry in the film has more personality than the characters. Some of the action set pieces were entertaining like the ones set in Vatican City and Shanghai at night, but they're simply no match to the set pieces in an action movie like Live Free or Die Hard. As a spy movie, it's quite cumbersome and dull especially when compared to a film like Casino Royale, which is infinitely more engaging due to it's non-paper-thin characters. That film also allows it's audience to view the action without the overly shaky camera work and cut cut cut nonsense that plagues this film. You could easily make the mistake of thinking that Michael Bay directed this. It's still decent in it's soulless machine-like nature.
**1/2 out of ****
Amateur(dir. Hal Hartley)
When Hal puts emphasis on story instead of characters, his films suffer. This is definitely one of those cases. It expects the audience to have interest in this film about an amnesiac by having them ponder who is he? At least, that's what it seems to suggest with how the narrative plays out. Since this mystery isn't very mysterious, it's hard to really get involved with it. It definitely has it's moments, but much like The Unbelievable Truth, it doesn't really register emotionally or intellectually. I still recommend checking it out, though.
*** out of ****
Twentynine Palms(dir. Bruno Dumont)
It's one of those movies that you're glad you watched but probably won't ever want to watch again. That's not to say it's bad despite what most people will say. It just becomes excruciating before it's climatic and terrifying conclusion. While it starts off fine, there's just so much one can take of basically watching a couple burn time in the middle of the Southern California desert doing nothing much. Most scenes start off relatively sweet and turn hideously sour much like the film itself. It's hard to really describe the film preceding the last 20 minutes as sweet, but compared to those last 20 minutes, sweet doesn't seem that horrible of a description. Those last 20 minutes, which could be dubbed the "pay off" even though that makes me sound like some sadistic freak, are some of the most horrifying last 20 minutes I've ever seen. It makes the "build-up" seem worth it in some sick and deranged way. This is definitely a film that's hard to embrace due to it's unlikeable characters and extremely slow pacing, but it's still a film worth watching if you have the patience and stomach for it. I highly recommend.
***1/2 out of ****
It's an effective yet impersonal action thriller. The high tech gadgetry in the film has more personality than the characters. Some of the action set pieces were entertaining like the ones set in Vatican City and Shanghai at night, but they're simply no match to the set pieces in an action movie like Live Free or Die Hard. As a spy movie, it's quite cumbersome and dull especially when compared to a film like Casino Royale, which is infinitely more engaging due to it's non-paper-thin characters. That film also allows it's audience to view the action without the overly shaky camera work and cut cut cut nonsense that plagues this film. You could easily make the mistake of thinking that Michael Bay directed this. It's still decent in it's soulless machine-like nature.
**1/2 out of ****
Amateur(dir. Hal Hartley)
When Hal puts emphasis on story instead of characters, his films suffer. This is definitely one of those cases. It expects the audience to have interest in this film about an amnesiac by having them ponder who is he? At least, that's what it seems to suggest with how the narrative plays out. Since this mystery isn't very mysterious, it's hard to really get involved with it. It definitely has it's moments, but much like The Unbelievable Truth, it doesn't really register emotionally or intellectually. I still recommend checking it out, though.
*** out of ****
Twentynine Palms(dir. Bruno Dumont)
It's one of those movies that you're glad you watched but probably won't ever want to watch again. That's not to say it's bad despite what most people will say. It just becomes excruciating before it's climatic and terrifying conclusion. While it starts off fine, there's just so much one can take of basically watching a couple burn time in the middle of the Southern California desert doing nothing much. Most scenes start off relatively sweet and turn hideously sour much like the film itself. It's hard to really describe the film preceding the last 20 minutes as sweet, but compared to those last 20 minutes, sweet doesn't seem that horrible of a description. Those last 20 minutes, which could be dubbed the "pay off" even though that makes me sound like some sadistic freak, are some of the most horrifying last 20 minutes I've ever seen. It makes the "build-up" seem worth it in some sick and deranged way. This is definitely a film that's hard to embrace due to it's unlikeable characters and extremely slow pacing, but it's still a film worth watching if you have the patience and stomach for it. I highly recommend.
***1/2 out of ****
Sunday, March 18, 2007
Oh Val...
Heat(dir. Michael Mann)
I have to say this is his best movie and maybe the best movie ever. I loved it.
**** out of ****
The Big Sleep(dir. Howard Hawks)
Definately an improvement over Red River. I'll admit that I was restless in the beginning. It started to pick up during it's last 40 minutes or so. Best moments in the film were between Bacall and Bogart. I liked it a lot.
**** out of ****
I have to say this is his best movie and maybe the best movie ever. I loved it.
**** out of ****
The Big Sleep(dir. Howard Hawks)
Definately an improvement over Red River. I'll admit that I was restless in the beginning. It started to pick up during it's last 40 minutes or so. Best moments in the film were between Bacall and Bogart. I liked it a lot.
**** out of ****
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)