Reviews

I have to say, most people who have seen this film have seen the original two (great) movies, and are big fans of Aliens. But this movie is just too different for many of the ALIEN fans, especially after seeing the second one - it's as simple as not expecting a sequel to Aliens when you watch Alien3 - expect a different kind of Alien picture, and that's what I like so much about this sequel. So many sequels are rehashes of the original, are good movies in their own right, but with many of the same things as the movie that preceeded it, but Fincher has crafted a movie that is so different from Aliens, many people do not like this sequel. I don't think we need another Aliens movie, it's like Alien was more of a suspense horror movie, Aliens had more aliens and was more of an Action/Adventure, and now there's Alien3, more of a drama with suspense like the first. In conclusion, sometimes originality can take away in making a sequel (no wonder they make most sequels like the prequels!), which is why I think it shouldn't have been called Alien 3.

As for the film itself, Ellen Ripley lands on a prison colony planet, and a xenomorph on her ship kills everyone but her, and the alien starts killing people and whatnot. There is great acting, and a fantastic end.

In conclusion, expect Fincher, and not another ALIENS, and you could enjoy it very much.

9 out of 10

(P.S. The worst in the series is Alien Resurrection, but that one isn't so bad - but it's more like Aliens).

Whether you follow movies or not, you've probably heard of Steven Soderbergh's 'Traffic' (based upon the british TV series, Traffik). I've heard countless critics rave about how great and original it is, but nothing here really went the extra mile to make a classic (which is what most critics are giving it, if you consider a perfect to 4 and a half out of five a classic).

Sure, there are many different, interesting plots interwined, from a senator's daughter being a heroin addict, corruption in the mexican police force, and more. And the screenplay was fantastic, Gaghan well deserved that oscar.

But, despite great performances by all the cast members (although, unfortunately, a great opportunity was missed - none of the plots are interwined) and a superb script, the downfall of Traffic is that it's based on a TV miniseries, limiting what the director, producer and writer could have done with Traffic, and making it seem longer than it had to be (about 20 minutes too long...).

Also, the plot about the senator's drug-addicted daughter is just mediocre...watch 'Requiem for a Dream' (which rightfully deserved the best picture nomination more than Traffic) and you'll know what I mean.

Despite this, Traffic is still a recommendable and very good movie, but if it didn't have it's miniseries roots, it could have been a lot more (think the X-Files movie).

7.8 out of 10.

How to make a bad action/adventure flick:

Step one:

Take out all of the ingredients that made Die Hard and Speed good movies (character development, plot twists, etc).

Step two:

Hire a list of completely untalented, unknown actors and then tell them to overact in typical Shatner conviction (only not as amusing and intelligible).

Step three:

Throw in typical terrorist plot (in this case, 12 terrorists take over a HUGE ocean liner (don't know how they could take over a place with around 250-1000 people) who want money in the vault when they could just rob a bank

Step four:

Throw in a couple annoyingly stupid characters

Step five:

Take out things like choreography, bullet dodging, or anything that would make someone watch an action movies

Step six:

Make sure to include totally one-dimensional characters

And the result in one hella bad, boring movie. It sure wouldn't be hard to make a good action movie, even include a little joke or something, but the filmmakers took all of the ways to make a good movie and did the opposite. There is absolutely no way I can recommend this mediocre piece of shazbot (sorry).

If you see it in a store, warn people of it's presence and tell them not to be fooled by Ice-T's presence in the flick (even Mean Guns is better than this tripe).

1 out of 10.

At it's heart, Cast Away is simply a survival picture telling the tale of a man's isolation and lonliness for over four years on a desolate island, lacking any large amount of food, or even wildlife, in the tropics. So lonely, in fact, Chuck Nolan (Hanks) spends some time speaking to a volley ball for half of the movie, and even crying for it's loss. This could have been a hilarious situation, something for a Saturday Night Live parody of the 'Survivor' TV series, but Hanks is so convincing and human in his performance, he doesn't hold anything back. You can't help be sad for the poor volleyball's (named "Wilson") fate, when really you, the audience are sad for Hanks losing his sanity while adrift in a wood raft (the director, Robert Zemeckis, sure has a good way of manipulating the audience). There are also many special effects in Cast Away that one wouldn't notice, just take for granted as part of the filmming - there are many SFX scenes in Cast Away, but none of them are used for 'eye candy', like many, MANY other films today. You just can't help but root for Hanks throughout the entire movie, so he can get off that stinking island. Also, the bulk of the film, when Nolan is on the island after the plane crash (which is easily the best scene of last year, 2000), will totally immerse you into his isolation, thanks in part to no cutting back to what's going on back where his girlfriend is waiting for him - so many movies have been ruined in part to this, (The Perfect Storm a great example). Instead, the characters tell him what happened later on. And somehow, there is little to no dialogue in the 'survival' bulk of this movie but it never gets boring. NEVER. Zemeckis should have taken a hint while making What Lies Beneath in between Cast Away.

Not that Cast Away is perfect.

The film loses steam when Nolan returns home, but there are still some great scenes ahead, but once again, I am not bought on Helen Hunt in the role of Nolan's motivation for going on and trying to get off the island (there is a short scene involving him hanging himself). Just like in Pay it Forward, she's not too convincing and is best suited for Richard Gere chick flicks like Dr. T and The Women.

And no - the trailer didn't reveal much about the film. You see - Cast Away isn't about plot - it's about damn good acting.

9 out of 10.

Coming Home is the story of a woman and her father, who seems to be losing his memory. Throughout the story we see her taking care of her father's worsening conditions, and we hear about his past in the war - he lost a son in vietnam.

Then, she needs to go back to the city to accept her promotion, leaves her father, then comes back home because he needs her. The end.

If you aren't sleepy already, maybe this film is for you. My mother was watching it on TV the other day, and even she did'nt like it, even though it was sort of like a chick flick. Unfortunately, I can't remember any of the actor's names as I was very eager to leave the living room after watching this garbage. And then there's the 'subtle' sound of the harp playing in the background whenever there is a new scene, for no reason.

This movie tries so little, I'm surprised it even got past the script stage. If you want to watch a real tragic character study, I suggest something like Wonder Boys. Unless a movie about an old man and her daughter trying to figure out what to do with him piques your interest of course. None of the characters are believable either.

2 out of 10

Franchise Pictures must be stopped. They already made Driven, Get Carter, and this one, which are all horrible movies in their own respect. Obviously this movie was done as a quich cash-in on the book, but BE didn't do very well at the box office, and neither will it on video because even people who haven't seen it know it's a bad movie; nothing in the script ever got revised, and no one ever said something like this during shooting a scene: "Ummm, I don't think it makes much sense to have the humans mine for gold, which is somehow in bars, even though they have no equipment. Even the cinematography is just horrible: Most of the movie is at about a 47 degree angle! And to make matters worse, most of the scenes are in only two colors, like the chase scene ripped from Blade Runner, only it's all in one shade of green and black, at a 47 degree angle! Also, the aliens, the 'Psychlos' look like tall potbellied humans with messed up hair. There are also many illogical scenes in BE that just can't be ignored - even the acting is bad (one of the lines in BE when a character gets mad at another: "You arrogant greener!" What the heck does that mean!?) and John Travolta overacts more than Captain Kirk in Star Trek. Hell, the humans are portrayed so stupid in this movie, you'll want the Psychlos to win, even though they have a bad sense of fashion. Also, they have conquered galaxies (as said by the pointless opening words) but they need gold. Why? Don't know. And somehow the humans know how to make a nuclear missile out of nothing which literally destroys the Psychlos planet into a million pieces somehow.

Unfortunately, unlike other bad sci-fi movies, which are so bad they are good (Like 'The day time ended') this one is just bad, and not laughable.

Oh, and one last thing: Travolta has talked about making a sequel, even though the first is a universally bad one and made no money at the box office. Now, I'm waiting for him to redeem himself after this. Maybe a sequel to Pulp Fiction or something.

1 out of 10

Meet Sam Lowry. He has a simple desk job at Information Retrieval in a world bound by forms, receipts and the like for just about everything - even a receipt for the arrest of a perp. 'Brazil' thrusts you into his unique, 1940's meets futuristic world of terrorists against the government's form system and mistaken identity.

Through an accident, one Mr. Buttle gets arrested instead of Harry Tuttle (Robery De Niro in a bit part), a renegade engineer, considered a terrorist. We learn that every night Lowry dreams he has wings and flies to the girl of his dreams (literally) and then he meets her, who is mistakenly thought to be with the 'terrorists'. Adventure, hilarity and more ensue into a very entertaining, and somewhat modern look at bureaucracy (but this film is anything BUT boring).

There's everything from Lowry's mother's plastic surgery, and the upside-down shoe he wears on her head, to many other silly little things in the movie to keep it from being too serious.

In fact, every aspect of 'Brazil' is perfect in every aspect, you just have to be the right person to be able to appreciate such a film that is definitely not the norm. How Terry Gilliam gets this stuff from, I will never know, but I want more of it!

So if you happen upon this title at your local video store (or better yet, the 3-disc DVD edition), rent it, and keep an open mind. You'll enjoy your stay in Brazil.

Note: This movie has nothing to do with the word 'Brazil', except for the title of an infectious song in it).

10 out of 10.

Very highly recommended.

I came into Tomb Raider after having read very harsh reviews, many giving the film two or less stars, and obviously, they have missed the point of Tomb Raider.

Basically a fun adaption of the video game, and Angelina Jolie is not only hot in the role but convincing as Lara Croft. There isn't much plot, some of it is too unbelievable, but what Simon West and the writer(s) meant to do was make an entertaining, 'fun' action/adventure film (even though most of the jokes fall flat) that would make the viewer stay glued to his/her seat, and in that aspect Tomb Raider succeeds and is easily the best 'popcorn movie' of the summer so far (A.I. doesn't count as a 'popcorn flick').

Leave your brain at the door, grab an extra-large popcorn and expect along the lines of Con Air and not Raiders of the Lost Ark, and you will not be disappointed.

8/10

One final note - all of the many action scenes are amazingly choreographed by Jolie - no fakeness here, and are the best I've seen since The Matrix.

When I watched the latest Snipes action pic, I was expecting something along the lines of a good Snipes action movie, like Demolition Man or Blade, but not as good, but it's even worse.

Not only is the plot unbelievably unbelievable, it rehashes all of that 'techno-subterfuge' into one giant mess of a movie. There are many glaring problems, some insignificant, with The Art of War. For example, for one scene, Snipes literally jumps off a 50-foot building and survives it, rolls and continues running. He's a freaking spy not Spider-Man! Another scene has Snipes literally shot to death, blood and everything, and walks away. I'm talking 20+ bullets here!

The plot? Doesn't really matter, but here goes: A CIA agent is framed for a murder he didn't commit, has to run away from thugs and good guys who think he is bad before it's too late because of an international conspiracy and blah blah blah. Other films have used this tired vehicle for a movie and it worked because it was a 'fun' movie. This is not a fun movie, no hilarity whatsoever.

Also, it blatantly rips off the matrix, in a bad way, and all of the action scenes are HORRIBLE. One has Snipes up against the guy who framed him (of course, he was his friend) and they are shooting each other 4 feet away and neither lands a single shot. It's got bad choreograhpy also and good choreography is very important for an action film.

Bottom line: Not even hardcore action movie fans will find it worthwhile

Rating: 2 out of 10

I like my epic movies. Some stand out of the crowd more than others, and some are very overrated, like this one. The plot is very predictable, and leaves you waiting until what you expect will happen next.

The plot is your simple, you-killed-my-wife-so-now-I'm-going-to-kill-you-all-of-you-evil-minions revenge plot fueled by many soldiers willing to aid the protagonist because the evil dude is well...evil. The score is good, but darn it sounds like the one from Titanic! Celine Dion would be spinning in her grave if she was dead.

Then what saves the movie? Mel Gibson's Wallace character is totally riveting, likable and believable, with lots of - gasp - depth.

On a whole, though, Braveheart is too long for it's own good, (sort of like 2000's Traffic). Patriot was better. It was shorter. This is almost four hours long. Go see Lawrence of Arabia instead. It's the only movie which remains very...'intelligent' throughout it's whole length.

Surprisingly, Get Carter has great, totally convincing acting (even from Stallone), an open-ended plot, and a couple really great scenes. But of the 102 minutes, for about 60-75 minutes...nothing happens.

Most of the film has you waiting for the next scene to happen, but Kay's directing is so...barren, that a big chunk of Get Carter just has Stallone walking around a city to find out what happened to his deceased brother, so he can get revenge, but the plot has no twists (which would have been easy to implement to the plot), not nearly enough action scenes, so basically, Get Carter doesn't know what ot wants to be, either an adrenaline-induced tale of revenge, or drama about a bad-turned-good gangster who only wants to redeem himself of his nasty career and do something good.

In short: the acting is superb, some scenes are totally convincing, the plot is open-ended...but the cons far outweigh the pros, turning a potential blockbuster into crud. Even die-hard Stallone and Caine fans will be sorely disappointed, especially by the blink-and-you've-missed-it ending.

Someone must tell the director of this picture that horror and camp features and idiotic death scenes do not belong in a serious horror movie. There are only three good scares, and while they are excellently done, three just doesn't cut it. It also had a good plot idea, what a shame.

Just to show you how unbelievable the characters are, here is an example: At the end of the film, the two surviving characters have faced trauma-inducing events, seen people bludgeoned, electro-shocked, etc, etc, and at the end of the film, the two actors are laughing because they got everyone else's money they were supposed to get for surviving the night (that being a million dollars of course - could this be the start of a new reality show? Haunted house survivor?). And the scene that preceeded it, left me laughing (literally) at how humorously bad the SFX and the scene itself was.

I suggest you pick up The Haunting (a really underrated film) which is actually decent. I wasn't expecting a bad movie when I sat down to watch it, but I had witnessed a really bad horror movie - you know, like they all are nowadays.

3 out of 10.

'Nuff said.

You know Darren Aronofsky is a great director when you see his name above the title in large letters, and it's only his second picture (the first being the excellent Pi).

Requiem follows the tale of four people's journey into spiraling into addiction, whether it be food, cocaine, weight-loss pills, etc, etc. The message hear is clear: Addiction can come in any form, any shape or size. But the movie NEVER becomes preachy, and does not hesitate to show graphic images (if you are looking for lots and lots of nudity, you will sorely be disappointed) of the drug's effect, using what Aronofsky appropriately, 'Hip-Hop Montage', which is basically quick images and sounds thrown at the viewer, along with many fast-forward parts, during the drug scenes. All of this style really shouldn't work with the subject matter, and turn it into nothing but an MTV film (cough, The Cell, cough, Hallow Man, cough, cough) and is probably the first serious drama that used so many special effects shots (keep your eye out for the revolutionary 'Snorrie Cam', which is a camera attatched to a person's body part, like the head) but...the whole thing is successful.

Plot

Ellen Burstyn plays an overweight mother who just gets a call to be on a game show. Excited, she tries on her 'red dress', which doesn't fit, and ends up resorting to weight-reduction pills (which are really speed) and the red dress is her source of the addiction, she wants to get in the dress, but the pills have horrible consequences.

Then, there are three drug dealers (Jared Leto, Marlon Wayans, Jennifer Connelly) hoping to make it big on a sale. Their own paths change, for the very worst.

The plot's simple, the charcters are four-dimensional. In fact, all four actors probably give their best performances ever, and Burstyn actually deserved that oscar more than Julia Roberts - her character is the most human, and, like the whole cast, totally believable. Marlon, fresh off of Scary Movie, also shows that he is indeed a great actor.

The Bad?

The whole thing is very dark. Too dark for some. If you are a little squemish, or faint of heart, please avoid this film. You may think, "Hey, it's just a movie", but some people have been actually pretty disturbed by its dark nature (It was released to only a few theateres because Artisan knew the NC-17 would give it the flush. It should have been called "Requiem for a Nightmare".

Overall, if you find it at a store, pick it up (the DVD is especially great) and watch it with a high school student or by yourself or whatever (this is definitely not a date movie), just watch it. Better than Gladiator in my book.

The trailers would lead to believe that Hollow Man, Verhoeven's latest, was about a man turned invisible and wrecked havoc and tried to kill the scientists who did this horrible thing to him. Actually, that's the last ten minutes. And therin lies the problem.

Not only is the potential to make a creepy flick about a madman slowly chasing down prey ruined, all of the deaths in the film happen within only about a second/minute within each other! There is no suspense in what is most of the movie, the characters are under-played to perfection, and Kevin Bacon's charcter is as hollow as the name suggests. Are there any redeeming qualities? Well...more thought was put into the special effects that well-developed charcters or a well-paced plot. But at least the SFX are nice, but they are only the tasty icing to the big, sour-tasting cake. I wasn't expecting Citizen Kane here, but this is hopefully the last in the series of mindless SFX films lacking plot. SFX buffs will dig it, but if you like a film with an OK plot, but turned great by convincing and well-developed characters, you should just watch a James Cameron film (minus Titanic).

It also tries to be one of those 'fun' movies like the Mummy at the same time. I'm not even going to go there. Bottom line is, the title tells it all. Very hollow, not enough cream filling, if you know what I mean.

Memento is the first truly original film since 1999's Fight Club. It's the kind of 'mind-trippn'' (I call it) movie that really makes you think during it's whole running time. In brief, it follows the story of a man (Guy Pearce) who only wants to avenge his wife's murder and rape. The catch? He has short term memory loss, which means he cannot make any new memories of anything after 15 minutes, so he lives in fifteen minute segments, the only thing he has got is a polaroid camera, notes and tattoos of things to follow, in order to find the killer. The film poses many questions, and, trust me, if I tell you any more about it, the movie won't be as great as a first-time viewing.

There really isn't much else to say - except that the film is filmed very differently than your average picture.

Once again, all I have to say that this is one helluva film. Better than Pearl Harbor even.

Just go. now. to the theater.

11/10