Reviews

Spy Game is a solid entry into the spy genre (which has been lacking as of late). Both Redford and Pitt turn in above-average performances to characters that probably should have had a little harder edge to them (particularly Redford).

The story, despite flashbacks, is always interesting thanks to some well-plotted writing. The only let-down is the ease that Redford makes the ending happen. There weren't any obstacles in his way. Basically, the only dilemma he had was the choice to give up the 280k he'd been saving.

The film is helped by sharp directing and cinematography. Kudos to the editor, too.

Overall, a film that you can watch more than once -- and that's saying something these days...

3.5/4 stars (***1/2 out of ****)

Denzel did what few actors can do. Take a thoroughly corrupt, unlikable character, give it dimension and use it to help deliver a very good film. He deserved the Oscar, no one can deny that.

The seminal scene for me was near the end when Denzel, outnumbered and outgunned, still holds his facade together with the brothers in the hood like he's still the one in control - very believable.

Though, credit has to be given to the overlooked part of the equation, Ethan Hawke who anchors the film by allowing us to identify with someone - and that's really the icing on what might otherwise be an average bad cop story.

Kudos to the writer for writing an straight-forward, character driven story (though somewhat slow at times) and to Antoine Fuqua who really delivers as a director this time (as opposed to the Replacement Killers which he fell flat action and character wise).

Worth repeated viewings if you have the stomach for corruption or if you want to experience Denzel's darker side.

3/4 stars (***/****)

It's almost become a given that as action stars age, their movies become exponentially worse, and dumber. Dolph has not been immune to this trend as evidenced by some of his most recent outings.

Which is why I was so pleasantly surprised by his latest (and last? if rumors are to be believed) film. HIDDEN AGENDA is by far Dolph's most intelligent, and probably best, movie to date. It is what MISSION IMPOSSIBLE I&II and ERASER aspired to, but failed to deliver.

The script is well-plotted and the writing crisp (I noticed it's the same writer, Les Welden, who wrote Van Damme's best recent-memory film, REPLICANT) with some nice one-liners delivered with tongue and cheek savoir-faire by Dolph. But it is the directing which stands out. Marc Grenier, whose other films I have not yet seen, delivered a terrific looking film on what was clearly a limited budget. He also got a nice performance out of Dolph who is usually constrained to one-sentence grunts and kicks. The action and suspense were plentiful as were the twists and turns.

Overall, a must-see for any Dolph fan, or any movie goer who likes intelligent, suspenseful films. It's a shame films like this one get relegated to direct-to-video status when so many other horrible movies find the big screen just because stars are in them. My $8 would've certainly been better spent on this than half the films I've seen this year.

****1/2 out of 5 stars.

I usually dig these kind of stories. It's been about 15 years since I read the book so I went into the film needing and expecting some refreshing and fleshing out of the characters (which I assumed would happen based on the reviews).

Boy, was I disappointed - very, very disappointed. I may be the minority here, but I refuse to buy into the big marketing hype just because the studio has so much invested on the line here (can anyone say half-a-billion and not swallow?).

The film was way too long, the explanations too complex to keep track of (unless you'd recently read the books), the characters shallow and uninvolving and the action overly done and unrealistic. For example, the Ring Wraiths, truly fearsome creatures of the dead in the book, are easily disposed of by a human with his sword and torch. Or, how about a band of nine, including a dwarf, defeating a throng of thousands of Orcs who have recently decimated an entire city of fighting dwarfs? And Gandalf didn't even have to use his magic, relying on his sword and staff!

Subplot and character-wise, things were never fleshed out. While certainly picturesque, Arwen and Aragorn's bridge interlude explained nothing about why she was willing to give up her immortality for him save to say that they somehow knew each other before (hey, I know the book may go into more detail, but for viewers in the audience it was like -- what?).

And the geography made no sense. Though Frodor and gang had traveled for months through valleys, rivers, fields, over mountain tops, under mines, the new and improved Orcs seemed to catch up with them no problem.

I know it's fantasy, and movies, and things like that can usually slide by but...sheesh. It's 3 hours worth of letting things slide by waiting for a decent story. In fact, half-way through, the five people I was with unanimously wanted to leave -- I made them stay, hoping it would climax into something more. You can imagine their reaction to the ending.

When is Hollywood going to realize that cool (and they were ultra-cool) Special F/X don't make a movie. What's more amazing is how the studio marketing machine is able to ram this overbloated production down our (and the critics') throats -- and the sheeple buy into it! I'm sorry, but this film worked better than Tylenol PM -- and lasts just as long. ZZZZ... 1/5 Stars.

I don't know who paid off the critics in Hollywood to give this film the rave reviews it got; but, it sure fooled a lot of us movie-goers, though apparently not enough since the film failed to make even $80 million despite a $100+ million budget and a huge marketing campaign to boot(let's not forget that Spielberg films routinely make $100 million or more). Thankfully, that says a lot about word-of-mouth. It's a shame, too, because Spielberg is a very gifted director, but the truth is that he missed the boat on this one.

The story, which has been compared to 'Bicentennial Man' is really more akin to 'Pinocchio', except it's not nearly as well told. Spielberg (or maybe Kubrick) failed to see the point of a toy-wants-to-be-boy story. First of all, in 'Pinocchio', our sympathy lies with the parent, Gephetto, who cannot have a child and is presented with the opportunity through the puppet, a misguided toy who may never fulfill that need. In AI, that element is totally absent; the parents are not only capable of conceiving, they already have a spoiled child of their own (I know he's in a coma at first).

The biggest point missed in the toy-to-boy story was that of human choice-making. In 'Pinocchio', the puppet must make some very real choices (concerning greed, selfishness, etc) on his way to gaining his humanity, and we feel sorry for him because of the consequences of those choices (which ultimately affect his father). In AI, however, the robot never makes any choices; he is just an isolated victim of circumstances with no "conscious" (even so much as a cricket) just rolling along with the plot... and rolling... and rolling... for an hour too long.

Sure, the film looks good and feels big, but, like its hero, is nothing more than an expensive artificial creation that we, as audience members, can hardly get attached to - much less really ever come to like. 1.5/5 Stars.

Okay, so it's not the cutting edge, biting comedic satire we all know the very talented Reese Whitherspoon is capable of. Nevertheless, it is still a rather enjoyable, if not overly fluffy, comedy. Sure you have to sort of suspend your disbelief (I think that's the term) to make this story work, but who cares? Once you get past the "yeah, right, that could happen that a fashion major got into Harvard" problem, the film actually moves along providing some genuine belly laughs and ridiculous situations. Cynics and critics aside, like a creamy pastry, it looks great, and half hour after it's done you've moved onto other things. But isn't that what guilty pleasures are all about? 3.5/5 Stars.

I missed this movie in the theaters and recently rented it on video. I'm glad I did. What could have been an engaging thriller turns out to be a rather dull movie with few thrills bogged down by an overly complicated plan on the part of the bad guy. Without giving it away, he has murdered Leelee's parents and somehow thinks that he can get to her inheritance. My question is, how? By demanding a little money to build an add-on "wing" on their glass house from the Bank who is controlling the trust? Get real. First of all, he's a guardian with no access to the millions in trust. All that's ever available is $20-30k at a time for tuition, etc; that's chump change hardly worth murder for someone who lives in what has to be a $20 million home in malibu and owes hundreds of thousands to loan sharks! All in all, a very poor plan by what turns out to be a very stupid bad guy. Then, to add to the absurdity of his plan, he winds up trying to kill her! How's that going to get him out of the financial straits he's put himself into? The film makers should have looked more closely at the (il)logic (though it seemed pretty glaring to me). Characters are pretty standard cookie cutter fare: sneering bad guy, wide-eyed girl in distress, brat kid brother. 2/5 Stars.

These days, I never know what to expect from a Van Damme film. Is it going to be the old high-kicking style, the awful Dennis Rodman-era stuff, or completely different ("he's an actor!") stuff like his most recent and very good film "The Replicator."

I had the same reservations about "The Order". What to expect? Well, the answer is somewhere in the middle. For Van Damme it's a return to his fighting roots with plenty of martial arts and action with less emphasis on acting (which is a good thing).

The plot is a bit lofty, but moves very quickly with some genuinely good fight sequences. The characters, while not Oscar material, are interesting in their own way and include a very sexy leading lady (in tight tube tops!), the guy from "X-files" as a villain, and Charlton Heston who plays a spunky old professor and gets killed far too quickly.

While there may be a few too many things going on (ie. a secret sect, a bomb, a buried treasure, a kidnapping, a heist, an expensive egg, etc.), overall, this film provides good comedy-action entertainment and is not a bad way to spend two hours. Just leave your thinking cap at the door, buy an extra-large tub of popcorn, and enjoy. 4/5 Stars.