Reviews

Think of me as you will. My opinion is based on the film and it's message and not the Mr. Comes, just to make things clear. This film is supposed to show the traumaitzation of a man who was abused by a member of the Catholic Church when he was a young "boy". The problem with the whole story is, the stories that are being told are from men who claim to been abused at the ages from 12- 16. They say that they were unaware of what was happening to them and that they (the victim) would wake up and there was a man from the Church having their way with them. These story tellers say that at the time they weren't sure what was happening and that they let it occur. Right off the bat, I would say that those statements have no validity. In and around the age of thirteen, teenagers know about sex in way or another. You learn it from school, society, or family. To say you don't seems to be the way to cope with allowing your curiosity to happen. I remember I was in the fifth grade when we were given the crash course on sex, so at that age I was 10 or 11. Things that weren't taught (obviously) I learned from peers. So at that age I was aware of what sex was and would have some sort of idea of what may have been happening. What the story tellers also fail to mention is that they weren't coming forth about the abuse (if that's what they thought it was then) to anyone. Not parents of friends, or any one else in the Church. They allowed it to happen and happen multiple times. I mean, once they were 16 and the abuse was continuing, there was no excuse that they would still have no idea what was happening. They show a man referred to "John Doe" who remembers being drunk and naked and being in bed with a alleged sex offender and nothing else. He goes on how that experience disturbed him, but then he recalls experimenting with this man. How? First he said he didn't remember, but remembers everything else and was disturbed, but then allowed it to happen on another occasion. Why? This is only one small example, there are many other points that are trying to be made that get spun around based on the reactions and delays of the "victims" described in the film. Another example (a large one at that) is that even though one person in the film claims he is haunted by what happened everyday and that he is against the church (due to a lawsuit he's filed about 18 years later), the Church is still a big part of his life. He was married in a Catholic Church, sent his daughter to a Catholic school, and we see her receive her first Communion. And feeling all this bitterness and frustration with the church, he goes in and accepts Communion with his daughter. Once again, if this is all so traumatic and one claims to be abused or raped and lied too, why go back to this church? Why accept Communion, something sacred to this church? It's backwards. It's things like this that hurt the credibility of this film and it's story tellers. It rides the wake to a major controversy in America. It doesn't seem like a documentary, but like a movie of fiction. It tries to strike emotions with circumstances that seemed staged. The point and message of this film is lost with it's irony. I feel sorry for the story tellers not because of what they claim has happened, but because this film hurts what they have to say.

to the film makers, this is a bad film.

D- To all of you users here on IMDb, I stand by what I say. It's simple psychology since we are now being told a story decades down the road from what they claim happened. Over the years stories stretch and wear, till the very foundation has changed. I still find this movie to be dis-miss able. And personally to colorscheme, my review of a bad film was straight forward to the point using references from the film, therefore I am backing up my opinion so you can see for yourself. It's your review that has the wide array of emotions, not mine. I told you to think of me as you will, but truth be told and I'll say it again, this movie is awful and has a message lost in translation.

"Walk down the right back alley in Sin City, and you can find anything", and isn't that the truth. Sin City has everything a movie goer could want in a film. It has an amazing cast that portray their gritty characters with a distinctful hard edge and compassion, which is helped with a fantastic script. The movie is driven by the actors and their ability to make the audience feel as if though they are in the characters shoes as they describe with vivid details their emotions and conflicts, and the steps they mean to take to make things right.

But it's not only a script or a great cast that makes this new tale of love and revenge come full circle, it's the images. Each scene is painted or drawn just like the pages right out of Miller's comic book that the film is based off of. The black and white makes the mood feel more dark and desolate (as it should be) making the city feel more alive. With it's splashes of color, one can only vast in it's brilliance. The visuals to this movie are unlike any I have seen and they should be recognized.

The movie follows three stories that are interwoven by the characters passions and ambitions. They live in a city of power and murder and they seek what little honor or dignity they can find in such a dark place. The film open up with a sequence with Josh Hartnett and a beautiful women glowing with a red dress and rich red lips. Hartnett's narration of his thoughts are crucial and set the tone. He explains to this woman who is on the run that he is there for her, and that it's not her figure or face, but her eyes that attract her. Her holds a lighter near her cigarette and the flame fades her eyes to green, so that we may see the beauty. He tells he loves her and there's a whisper of the gun. Sin City in a nutshell.

Mickey Rourke play Marv, a large man with a beastly looking face and temper to match. he falls in love with a woman who treats him kindly, but she is murdered and he is framed for it. Marv's quest and story in the film is to find the truth behind the murder and set things straight. Rourke does an excellent job in this movie, which was surprising to me. He brings life to a man that lives to get his answers by violently interrogating men and viciously murdering them. He does this by constantly reminding himself why he does what he does, for the woman that treated him nice.

Clive Owen plays Dwight, who gets caught up in a kill that could shake a truce that keeps young women alive. His story is a little more shallow than the others, but the element that keeps it true is his willingness to see that none of the girls are hurt.

Then there is Bruce Willis, who play Hartigan, the one honest man in the whole city. He rescues a young girl, Nancy, from the harm an lunatic pedophile (Nick Stahl). But Stahl's character is connected. His father (Powers Boothe) is a Senator and takes his anger of what Hartigan left his son out on him, by making Hartigan look responsible for kidnapping all the children his son did. Hartigan spends eight years in prison, helpless to keep Nancy safe, for it becomes his only will. When he gets out, he knows what he must do and knows that whatever it is, it must keep Nancy (Jessica Alba) safe.

Sin City is one of the best movies of the year so far. It goes beyond the expectations of any mere action film and does it well. With a great story, strong cast, and amazing visuals, it will be easy to see why this film is absolutely stunning.

Four out of four stars.

If I were ever in a hostage situation where a couple of punk teenagers tried to rob me and Bruce Willis came in to talk and negotiate with the perps, I think I'd rather be dead, because with Bruce Willis doing the negotiations, I'm as good as dead anyway. There really isn't much to say about this movie, it's just really bad. I got to admit, I was disappointed when I saw this movie. I love Bruce Willis. Bruce Willis is the man and he's awesome, but this movie was really bad. The biggest and most obvious reason why this movie is really bad is the fact the criminal masterminds in it are some punk teenagers who happen to marksmen with an automatic handgun (one is able to hit accurate shots from probably a hundred yards away with out taking aim) and are able to outsmart a strike team of professional gangsters (taking them out such as crawling through vents and hanging upside down out of them to take one out). Yeah, sounds pretty dumb right? That's because it is. There's even a scene that is supposed to be dramatic and get you feeling for the characters when the little hostage boy asks Bruce Willis if he is Captian Xuemba (or something) and if it's like he's going to save the planet. Willis get choked up and replies "yeah". Wow. How sweet, I was crying too at this point, crying because I was laughing so damn hard. It breaks my heart to say that this will probably be one of the worst movie of the 2005, and meant it. But truth be known, it really is.

I can't say that this is the best film I have ever seen nor can I say it's the worst. Mad Max is set in a post apocalyptic era where gas is scarce and gangs rule the outback. It's an interesting concept, but it's not really explained, it is what it is. You know? If you want your explanation on this, you need to watch the first two minutes of Mad Max 2 (or The Road Warrior). But I guess this is one of those films where story doesn't really matter, so when you hit a gap, just nod your head. What tears me about this movie, obviously, are the car sequences. George Miller odes a great job filming and coordinating all the action for these car sequences. I'm not to sure what it was, but I felt almost a rhythm to the shots he used and how they were moving or tight and how they were all spliced together, it really makes up for the completely lack luster story. All in all, Mad Max is average at best. It's one of those films that you can see once and be satisfied. However, it does make you want to see the next installment.

Undeniably the coolest and most elaborate action film of all time. This is the kind of movie that I as a movie buff could talk about for hours. There is so much to this film that makes it great, it's hard to begin. One reason why this is such a great movie is the drama. John Woo and Chow Yun Fat do great collaborations and we get some of the best action drama the genre has to offer. Chow Un Fat and the co-star (whose name I can't spell) both play cops that walk a very thin line between good and evil. Sometimes they lose sight of what it is they are doing on the force but have a compassion to make society a better place and to do so, they'll do whatever they have to do. The movie has one great action scene after another. The movie is non-stop for if it's not an action scene, it's a great character scene. And action movies aren't made like this anymore. In the film's climax we get an amazing sequence in which the two heroes must save a maternity ward of new borns while engaged in a heavy gun fight with the enemy. It's a scene that is timeless and breathe taking. Hard Boiled is one of the best movies of it's kind and no one should be disappointed.

Prepare for what the tag line tells you for you will be blown away. You will be blown away with how amazing and deep this action film really is. Without wanting to give out too many plot structures, this may in fact be the definitive Hong Kong action-drama. Chow Yun Fat does an excellent job as a torn assassin for a Triad gang, who is looking to become straight and take care of the woman he loves and took sight away from. Because of his choice to leave the Triads plot his death in case he ever decides to talk down the road, a man who can't get out. At the same time, Fat is being investigated by a detective who finds out who he is and grows to respect him for the humanity and compassion he has within him, despite the face he is a killer. The images, such as Chow Yun Fat praying to the Virgin Mary, to the emotion of him losing his best friend to the enemy, to the drama a good heartedness of him and the detective repecting each other and helping each other, down to the intense, stylish action sequences that are far superior to most of those in American action films, the killer is amazing.

I couldn't' agree more than with the comment left by "coldshitaction" and how this film is a masterpiece. I have never seen a film that had my adrenalin flowing that this film did, and that mostly happened when Bronson comes running out a fire escape with like an M-60 and plows down like 20 dude from a gang, it's genius. Quite possibly the best action movie ever made (no exaggeration either), it really could be the best action movie ever made. From the start, one should know that you;re in for something sweet when the police let Bronson go and tell him, tell him, to clean up the slums. Once again, genius. And once again Bronson is a bad ass. Paul Kersey is just as cool, maybe even cooler than John McClain or the Terminator, he's just simply a bad ass. And what else is great is the fact that he's a nice guy and buys a kid some ice cream and helps out an old couple all before he kills some scum bag. genius. Highly recommended, if you hate this movie you're crazy.

It's hard to believe that anyone who didn't like the first one wouldn't like this one. Bronson is back, this time avenging the death of his daughter and he's angrier than he's ever been. This one takes more of a action hero approach than the first one, but that's okay, you see, Bronson is a bad ass and that's all that matters. Movies like this aren't made to win best picture or best screenplay, they're made to be entertaining and filled with action, and that's what this is. Bronson has a great line he give to a punk just before he blows him away; he asks the punk if he believes in Jesus as the punk clutches a cross around his neck. The punk says "yes sir" so Bronson pauses and then tells him "you're going to meet him." Then he shoots him twice, it's great. Classic. I found no insight in this film, all I found was an awesome character who you can't get enough of that gets away with killing pieces of trash that rape, mug, and murder civilians. This formula is timeless, and the whole Death Wish series should be appreciated for proving so, because I'd watch one of these films before I watch any action film that may be produced today.

Before god awful pieces of trash like The Punisher, there was another film that showed a man who's wife was murdered by a gang and wanted justice, but wanted to deliver it in his own way. That film was Death Wish. And instead of a hero that didn't seem to care too much about this killing (though it was mostly just the actor, Tom Jane)we had the cool three dimensional Charles Bronson. You may ask yourself, "three dimensional?". And I say "sure" he cried about his wife before he went on to kill a great many scum bags on the streets of New York. The bottom line is that Bronson was a bad ass in this film and all the rest of the Death Wish films which I also enjoy very much. We know that this movie will be great from the beginning when Bronson cashes in a 20 dollar bill for two rolls of quarters so that he can stuff them in a sock and smash it across some dude's face. It's brilliant. They don't do they kind of raw action in movies anymore, and I guess that's why this movie can be so refreshing even if it was made in the seventies. There's no doubt that anyone who appreciates good action flicks with a bad ass main character will appreciate THIS movie the way I do.

Oliver Stone is a director that you either love or hate, there is no in the middle. I happen to be one of those people who enjoy Oliver Stone films mostly, though, I agree he is excessive with his vision. This is one of those movies that is excessive. Alexander is a huge Roman epic that falls on it's face. I never felt so cheated by a movie as I did when I left this one. I am willing to testify that this is one of the absolute worst movies I have ever seen. I'll give credit to Colin Ferrel and Val Kilmer, I do think they did a fairly good job, but this movie about a great conqueror is undeniably weak. It has the slowest and most exhausting battles sequences, AND THERE'S ONLY TWO! A movie about a warrior and it has only two battles in it that aren't worth a grain of salt. For as many people that chastise Michael Bay, he could have made this movie something interesting. I mean Stone didn't seem to care too much about audience interest in the story, so we might as well have some good action in this film. Stone seemed to want to beat it in your mind so that'll you never forget that Alexander was gay. We understand this when we see Alex's eyes following the men and how close he is to Jared Leto's character but that's enough. It was like every other seen involved some sort of homosexual activity. Stone wondered astray with this movie, losing sight of what Akexander was historically (in the sense). Don't wast your time. Alexander is nothing more than a 3 hour snuff film that is as exciting as watching a worm and a snail race. My apologies to anyone who likes this film.

I think us movie buffs sometimes forget that not all movies are made to have some sort of under lying message that can or will change our lives. That's why it pains me to see some users give this film a bad review because "the dialog is weak" or "the scenery isn't vibrant" or something along those lines. This is not a stab or an insult to you, but what I'm saying is; sometimes movies are made with one intended purpose... ENTERTAINMENT! I could careless if this film had poor actors, poor script, poor lighting, that doesn't matter when you watch an action film. This movie delivers your monies worth too, in my opinion Will Smith and Martin Larwence make such a great team that part of the fun is just watching these two get into it from time to time. And with Michael Bay directing, you know you're going to get some good action scenes. Let's face it, Bad Boys II has one of the best car chase scenes ion recent history, it dominates the dismal over played chase in Matrix Reloaded which was the other big summer sequel of that year. I think all that needs to be said here in a retort is the movie is an action movie ans needs to be looked at as an action movie. To hell with the elements that the Academy looks at, appreciate the film for all the stuff that blows up and the laughs the cast can bring you to.