Reviews

i'm sorry. i was expecting it. i was dread it. but it never threatened me. i've seen far 'gorier' films than the Passion. freddy vs. jason, titus, gladiator, bravehart, saving private ryan to name a few. in my opinion, the hypocrisy among the critics is astonishing. i can understand if some critics really felt like the message of jesus' love was overshadowed by his scourging (peter travers, rolling stone for example) - i can respect such reviews. but to call this a 'gorefest' - sadistic and even pornographically violent - is dishonest and wrong. i hate gore. i wince at blood and guts. but i was able to watch with eyes were wide open. no guts. plenty of bruises, flesh and blood. dont get me wrong - this deserved the R - but did not live up to the critics embellished NC17 reviews. and such reviews come from the same critics that praised schindler's list for its realism and kill bill and titus (julie taymor) for their style, gladiator and braveheart for their bravery. hmmm?

futhermore, this was a depiction of reality. schindlers list anyone? private ryan? this happened. this wasn't made up or intended for sensationalizing the death of jesus. this was a window in time. definitely not entertainment, but an experience. this is THE most famous death in the history of mankind - carrying with it both political and spiritual ramifications that have changed our world more than any other event in history. i was pleased to see that history was preserved, giving us the political and theological context not found at face value in the Gospels. i believe mel's interpretation of pilate's role in the death of christ to be true to history despite the absolutism with which liberal scholars treat this event. it is mel's interpretation of history and when put in context, it makes total sense (given the political ramifications combined with his wife's prophetic nightmare concerning Jesus...it makes absolute sense that he washed his hands free of Jesus' blood - but remember...although he did

ultimately condemn him to die, Jesus went willingly. wow.) and although there was no hint of anti-semitism, there was definitely a staggering sentiment of anti-corrupt-political-jewish-leaders-belonging-to-the-sanhedrin-in 33 AD-ism. the message of this film couldn't be more obvious and anyone who misconstrues its intended message of Love - finding hate or any sense of malice - went to the movie looking to pick a fight with it. Jesus' love couldn't be MORE obvious. read the subtitles.

bottom line: mel did an EXCELLENT job focusing on the personhood of Jesus and on the lives of those who were touched by Him. he created a moving picture with integrity. it was as lyrical and poetic as it was real...exactly what he set out to do. a real god as a real man met with real evil exuding real love. wow. a moving artistic cinematic portrait reminiscent of the rennaisance accentuated by a sweeping score, this was a beautiful film. A+

Story: A Acting: B Direction: A Visuals: A+ Overall Grade: A

Okay, first of all, I loved the first Matrix. I couldn't wait for the next 2. BUT I did not see Reloaded in the theater because the critics and my friends told me it was terrible. I listened to them and ignored it all the way until last week when I reluctantly rented the DVD. Much to my bittersweet chagrin, I liked it. A lot. The action + special effects were awesome (in the true sense of the word), the story was fluid and the themes dealt with were relevant and intelligently handled (the major theme being free will vs. predestination and how love works out out within that apparently paradoxical framework). Excellently executed in a taut, thrilling, butt-kicking, name-taking rollercoaster ride of a movie. Good stuff.

First lesson learned: Movies are subjective. Everyone has different tastes. Your taste is not mine. I will never listen with absolute attention to a critic or my friends again. Of course, I will weigh their opinions and tack them on to my "discretionary buffer zone" before deciding to see a movie - but I will never make an absolute decision based on others opinions in matters of subjectivity again. Second lesson learned: Expectations suck. (Which is probably why the critics and my friends were let down with Reloaded)

Now, onto dealing with Revolutions...from my perspective:

After my unexpectedly pleasant encounter with Reloaded, I eagerly anticipated seeing Revolutions. This time around, critically speaking, the critics reviews were tougher and my friends expectations were once again shattered. They either *liked* it, mildly disliked it or hated it. All were disappointed by it. Hmmm...what was I to think? I learned my lesson after seeing Reloaded...this time around I was going to ignore them and go into it with no expectations. I decided to let the story take me where it was going instead of me having a preconceived idea as to where I 'expected' it to go. I just saw it. I LOVED it.

First lesson reinforced: Critics suck. I can't fully trust my friends' judgments ever again. Second lesson reinforced: Drop expectations (of a subjective nature of course...moral expectations are a different ball game). Sometimes when it comes to judging film, instead of letting the storytellers take us on a journey, we become the backseat drivers. We kick and scream, begging the driver to change his/her course because it's not where we wanted to go. I surmise that this could be the reason that most folks disliked Revolutions. They jumped into the car wanting to go somewhere else.

Now Revolutions was definitely a change of atmosphere and pacing in comparison to the previous two. In this movie, most of the story took place in either ZION or a spacecraft. The feel of this movie reminded me of ALIENS (Alien 2)...dark and at times creepily suspenseful. And unlike the first Matrix and Reloaded, the filling isn't comprised of mind-blowing special effect laced - reality-defying kung-fu action sequences. Instead, the action, however quantified, is INTENSE in a different way. Replacing the usually ever-present hand-to-hand combat is a craaazy techno-war between the humans and machines with an insane amount of bullets being fired. FUN. Furthermore, for the first time in this trilogy, I felt a genuine sense of fear. I actually feared for the lives of the characters faced with imminent death. The Wachowski's did a tremendous job portraying courage in times of absolute terror...which is a large part of the movie. And the ending...wow...now this is RIDICULOUSLY COOL. Neo and Agent Smith duke it out for the last time. I must say that this is the BEST fight scene depicted in the trilogy (again...in my opinion). I left the theater very satisfied.

For many, the depth of philosophical exploration in the Matrix series was not adequate enough. I disagree. Although I concede that I did leave the theater with some questions still unanswered (ontological in nature), the simple truths brought out by this series WERE more than enough for me. Revolutions was a terrific compliment to the previous two, ending the series brilliantly - tying together the loose strings Morpheus, Trinity and the people of Zion were anticipating. Simplicity is often very profound. Faith. Hope. Courage. Love. Hate. Life. Death. Choice. Fate. These are the concepts the Matrix tautly grappled with - and with boldness like no other film I have ever seen. Simple concepts...yet each with significant relation to our core existence.

Now, the movie did end kind of open-ended. We weren't really given complete answers to everything. Well...I hypothesize that the Wachowski bros. left our questions insufficiently answered for a purpose. Not that they want us to believe there is another movie coming that will seek to offer further explanation, but they want us to choose what we believe. Maybe they want us to take the journey Neo and the others took instead of telling us plainly. If all the questions were answered, we wouldn't have to think. Now that would be a shame. Hmmmm...could it be? It's possible. :)

10/10 (a 10 is a rarity from me)

Technically, Time Changer is sound. The lighting was excellent. The cinematography was good - as was the editing. I was pleasantly surprised by the quality of the production.

However, that's not why we go to the movies. I've seen and enjoyed all of Rich Christiano's films. This one is the most sermon-like. It made me cringe in several areas. First - the dialogue as spoken by the main character - Russel Carslile. Rehearsed, cardboard - mechanical. He was reciting lines, not speaking his mind or from his heart. His character was forced. Gavin McLeod, however, was excellent. He spoke with conviction - the ONLY believable character in the story. Second - the story - the most important aspect of any film - the meat if you will. Although Time Changer follows an excellent premise, it falls flat on its face in its heavy handed preaching. The characters were obviously tools of the writer to preach at the audience. The characters weren't speaking for themselves - they weren't believable. It's as if Rich possessed them and spoke right through them. There were no unique characters in the movie...no REAL characters, no real human beings - all stereotypical, all cliched cutouts of Rich's version of reality to make his point.

In short, there was no depth. Pure propaganda (and not like thats a bad thing...propaganda simply means to propagate - to put forth a message. every single movie we watch has propaganda. some more subtle than others.) though for most, propaganda leaks through the story in which the characters and their reactions to adverse situations propagate values, etc. but here in time changer, the agenda is transparent. the message is propagated through puppeteering. the writer paints the good guys as happy-go-lucky righteous minded Christians - the bad guys are ugly 'dont tread on me' non-believers or nominal church goers. there's no in between. and the Bible thumping Christians look good - the normal non-believing and common church folk look terrible. It seems as if being appalled at immorality should be the prerogative of a true Christian when in fact, our prerogative should be to Love people as God Loves us and to point people to Him...even when it's hard.

Definitely an uncomfortable movie to watch. interesting ideas and i would have to say that the message being propagated, though stiffly put forth, makes sense...just terribly articulated.

Great pacing marked with a perfect balance of humor, suspense, and purpose accentuated by an intense musical score. I'm buying this on DVD.

But a movie is more than entertainment...it's a commentary. And this is an all too important film in light of the times we live in.

Father Hess breaks it down for us -- When 'bad things' happen, they scream at our flesh one of two options: God a) does not exist or b) must be malevolent.

SIGNS tells us though God may seem aloof, apathetic or nonexistent, He is ever present and He cares. SIGNS tells us that God is good and He is in control. SIGNS is a story about faith...about listening closely.

I thought Night used the aliens as a clever plot device to communicate an all important message to an otherwise deaf world. Our world is very intrigued by 'aliens' and entertained by the possibility of their existence...and night used our interest to feed us simple truth. And since Sept 11th, the whole world has been asking: Why do bad things happen to good people? How can a good God exist in the face of such evil? Well...SIGNS answers those questions.

There is no such thing as coincidence. Chaos cannot produce order. Everything happens for a reason and is under the providence of

one good God.

Thank you Mr. Shyamalan

Atheists will probably hate it.

Good production, but cheesey plot. This movie is based on end-times prophecy from the Bible concerning the tribulation period. Through the story, they show the mark of the beast coming about by means of virtual reality (Virtual reality sets are mailed to everyone in the world). I found this far-fetched and completely unrealistic. The ending was also awful. The writers of this movie must not have a clear connection to reality.