Reviews

Normally when someone tells me a movie is a "feel good film" or is "heartwarming" I make sure not to see it. Most of these films are cliché with boring characters and sappy dialogue. This one is different.

Even though I prefer Tarantino films over romantic comedies, I can't deny that this left me smiling like no film has ever done. Others have pointed out that there are parts that are unrealistic. This is true, but is not a fault--the film has magic and magic deserves a creative license.

Furthermore, while the film isn't actually laugh-out-loud funny, it will make you laugh on the inside, not to mention make you feel good about life. And when a movie can so masterfully make an audience feel good about who they are and find beauty in the mundane--it's one you don't want to miss.

Finally it's been made. Actually it was made several years ago, but thank God it was. For those who expect more from "news" stations, who believe that all of them, whether they be MSNBC or CNN or yes, Fox News, can and should do so much more to offer viewers unbiased news coverage and balanced commentary, this film is sure to incite some anger. The film makes one main point: it's not that Fox isn't good at being nonpartisan; it simply doesn't want to try. If it did its ratings would plummet and the film explains just why.

The documentary is about as low budget as they come. No great special effects or artistic twists, but it succeeds at expressing its point in a concise manner and by using plenty of information from former Fox employees and excerpts of newscasts.

If you believe Fox News is the only true fair and balanced news network, you'll probably turn the film off after a matter of minutes. That's what happened when I showed the film to my very conservative father. But otherwise, you'll probably find the film to be both bold and informative, one that confirms what many have long expected to be true.

After reading numerous reviews of the movie by veterans, I feel obliged to share my opinion, the opinion of someone who knows very little about war like 95% of moviegoers. First let me say, yes, the film requires considerable suspension of disbelief and I don't blame any war veteran from not being able to do this--I don't know that I would be able to either. The director could have done more research and she should have. But this film is not a documentary. And no, it is not objective. I respect the film for its phenomenal acting, cinematography, and yes, direction. Despite its long and often disjointed scenes, I felt considerable suspense for most of the film. I was successfully drawn in. I could see how it would be easy to find the film intolerable if I were a veteran. I could also see how it would be easy to find hundreds or thousands of films about FBI agents intolerable because surely the films would miss so many details describing what this honorable profession is like. The film was made for people like me, people who, despite watching numerous four-star war movies, are truly oblivious to the nature of war. I've never been shot at. I've never held a gun. But I believe that doesn't prevent me from recognizing talent and beauty, and so I do highly recommend the film to anyone who won't hold its awards against it.

This is a movie to talk about, a movie I'll recommend to friends even though I can't say I much enjoyed watching it. In fact, if you looked in my living room window, you probably would have guessed I was watching sports, screaming at the television every time the director and overall plot let me down.

To summarize the plot, the story is about a high school senior who conducts an investigation on the disappearance of an ex-girlfriend, and who in doing so encounters drug dealers, thugs, and pretty women--all characters who are supposed to be 17 years old but look closer to 30. Think Grease.

The movie has a lot going for it. There are plenty of twists, a great screenplay, mesmerizing shots, and if you can look past the major problem that these are stylish middle-upper class teenagers in roles made for adult thugs, you might just find some suspense.

I wanted to see some crumb of youth in this movie, even something human. Instead, certain characters, especially Pin, were over the top and cliché. After having watched Blue Velvet this week, I can say that David Lynch was much more successful in combining absurdity and suspense. But then again, he's David Lynch. But like a David Lynch movie, there's nothing watered down here and the action is relentless.

If thrillers are your thing, see it, but don't tell anyone I told you do it.

There's the suspense of a Hitchock film with the shock of a, well, David Lynch film.

Incredible acting, especially by Dennis Hopper, along with with great cinematography and an intriguing and approachable protagonist, make this film unforgettable. The movie will make you sweat.

Some parts of it seem out of place, but you can always chalk them up to red herrings. The sex that may have been too explicit and gratuitous in 1986 now seems pretty moderate although the sadism could be cause for discomfort. The repeated line of "Don't look at me" fits in perfectly. And the climax won't let you down.

It's hard to critique a movie that doesn't take itself very seriously. On one hand, it's absurd and squanders an attempt at suspense with its silliness, but on the other hand it's got a fantastic screenplay with some unforgettable one-liners.

A cult classic with plenty of dark humor that couldn't help but remind me of Heathers, and some cheesiness that reminds you it's from the '80s. Clichés are intentional and part of the fun, and the soundtrack fits right at home. It begs to laugh with you and will get your attention like a class clown.

A great party movie, it's fun with lots of creativity and a hint of intelligence.