Reviews
Li xiao long (2010)
A good movie about Bruce Lee from his siblings' perspective
I enjoyed the movie. I am a fan of Bruce Lee and had read his books and of course, saw his movies. I also read numerous articles and other biographies from his wife and friends.
This movie is about Bruce when he was living in Hong Kong from his sibling's viewpoint. The biggest reason why I enjoyed this movie was that it filled in some information gaps that I had about Bruce Lee.
I knew that he was born in San Francisco because his father was a performer in the Chinese Opera and was performing here when his wife gave birth to Bruce. What I always wondered was why did the parents pick the name Bruce? It seems the mother said "push" when the American nurse asked what name they wanted for the baby. The father's English was not so good so he garbled "push" and it sounded like "Bruce" to the nurse. Unfortunately, another question has popped up that I hope the book will answer when I read it is why did the mother say "push." According to the movie, during the labor, the American nurse kept saying "push," and maybe the mother liked that word and stated this when the American nurse asked for the name. I'm wondering whether Bruce's mother even knew the meaning of the word "push" and whether the father even knew what the wife was saying? Again, I hope the book will answer these questions.
I knew his family was in entertainment area but I did not know how connected they were in the Hong Kong entertainment scene. It seems the Lee family knew most of the performers in Hong Kong.
I knew that the family lived under the same house but I did not know they had several servants and the servants' family living under the same house. This signifies that they were pretty well off.
Bruce was a natural leader and it showed when early on, he became the leader of his newly formed friends. He was also a born entertainer. He began acting at an early age when one his father's friend put Bruce in one of his movies.
Bruce did not like studying but loved hanging out with friends and getting into fights. The movie fills in on how and why he learned Wing Chun Kung Fu. The major basis of his subsequent fighting style.
He loved dancing. I knew he was a Cha Cha Cha champion in Hong Kong but I did not know he did not win that without a female partner. In fact, he won that with his younger brother Robert Lee, as his dancing partner. The movie told the story why his younger brother became his dancing partner, and that was due to a love triangle.
One of the biggest question that I had about Bruce was why did he have to leave for America so quickly? From various articles, I knew he was in trouble but there was no real elaboration. According to the movie, one of his close friends was a drug addict. Bruce went to save him but the friend was in a drug den. There was a confrontation with a drug boss. In the ensuing struggle, some of the boss' men were injured and some of the drug was lost.
As stated in the movie, the father told him that if he stayed in Hong Kong, he will either be killed by the drug gang or be put in jail by the authorities. Therefore, he had to leave immediately for the U.S.A. By the way, there was a minor mistake in the movie in that the $100 bill was the modern bill with the giant portrait of Benjamin Franklin.
This also filled in some gaps in that I always wondered why some people in Hong Kong thought that he was killed by the Triads or some Chinese gang. Thus the conspiracy theory.
I am sure like any movie based on a real person, the movie company took some liberty with the facts but I hope it was not much. Overall a good movie that emphasized his family, friends, and career while growing up in Hong Kong.
13 (2010)
I was surprised how good this movie was. I really enjoyed it.
Someone gave me this movie and I never heard of it. It had some stars as well as solid veteran actors. One of the cast members was 50 Cent, the rapper. That immediately made me wary of this film because any movie with rappers will usually suck. Luckily, 50 Cent was only a peripheral character; in fact, he was OK .
The movie is quite gritty and realistic in its outcome. The premise though was unexpected but I kind of thought there would be some sort of illegal activity but nothing like this.
The movie starts out with a family in Talbot, Ohio. The father had an accident and is in a full body cast at the hospital. The son tells the father that they sold their home to pay for his medical expense. The father laments over this but the son states it is OK and that he will be working as an electrician. At a job, he hears a man state that this letter will make him wealthy but does not elaborate. The man overdoses on drugs and dies. While the ambulance is taking the body, the son steals the letter.
At home, the son reads the letter. It states to go to a certain location to pick up a letter. He does and it has money and cell phone. It states he has to go to New York City to await further instruction. He does but unknown to him, he is being followed by police. At New York, he gets a phone call to come to a particular point in a rural road somewhere in Pennsylvania. He does and he is picked up and driven to a house deep in the woods. The police lose him during this time. At the house, he is stripped searched for police detection device but there is none so he is allowed to dress and he is driven to a mansion in a middle of nowhere.
In front of the mansion are expensive cars. He meets the people who have been given him his instruction. They see him and recognize it is not the correct person. He tells them truthfully what happened and that he can leave if they are not satisfied but they tell him it is too late to find someone else and he has no choice but to participate. All this time, he does not know what is going on but you can tell he really wishes to leave now but he knows they will not let him leave alive. There are only men at this scene and they are placing bets.
He is told to wear a shirt with a number 13 on it and to stand on a platform. There are other participants, maybe a total of 14. The participants are in a circle. Each one faces the back of the head of one of the other participants. Each one is given a revolver and 1 bullet and told to put it in. They are told to raise the gun up in the air and to spin the cylinder. After several spins, they are told to stop and cock the gun and point it to the back of the head of the person in front of them. There is one ceiling light in the middle of this circle. They are to look at it and when the light comes on, they are to pull the trigger. When the light comes on, some of the gun fires and kills those people. Those that are alive have a momentary break. More bets are placed.
The next round, 2 bullets are put in the gun. They do the same thing and more people are killed. They have a break again. Next round, 3 bullets are used. More people are killed and now only five people are left. The next round is the duel. Each sponsor of the respective participants is told to pick a ball that has tin foil wrapped around it. After each sponsor has the ball, they are told to unwrap it. It is revealed that there are two balls that are black. Those two will go to the duel. The other three are free to go with prize money.
At the duel, 4 bullets are used. They face each other and spin the cylinder of the gun and they point it at each other's head. When the light comes on they shoot and the son wins. He takes 1.8 million dollars. Afterward, his sponsor offers him a ride to wherever he wants. He does not trust them so he states OK but he wants to go get his stuff first. Using that as a pretext, he makes his escape.
While waiting for a train, he is spotted by the police. He hides the money in a trash can. He is taken to the police station and questioned but he tells them only half truths. The police let him go because they have no evidence against him. He goes back and after some searching, finds the money bag. He takes the money and puts it in a United States Postal package with certified receipt, to be mailed to his home. He then calls his mother and tells him to expect a package with some money. She asks him what is wrong but tells her nothing and hangs up. He buys a toy and puts it in the money bag and boards the train. On the train is the sponsor of a participant who lost in the duel. The son rides in an empty car of the train. This sponsor shoots the son and takes the money bag and leaves the train. The son takes the certified receipt and eats it all before he dies. The End.
Kitty (1945)
Very good movie but the ending was less than desired.
My three friends and I watched this movie and we all enjoyed it, however, we disagreed whether the ending hurt the overall quality of this movie. I felt that Kitty's last minute decision to go with Hugh rather than Brett was not realistic. If this movie was made presently, Kitty would have chosen Brett instead of Hugh. That is why I give it 7 out of 10 stars even though as I write this, maybe this movie should deserve a 6 instead. One other friend agreed with me while the other two felt that the ending was "just right."
I thought that the movie could have been 2 hours long instead of 101 minute in order to elaborate on some characters like show Kitty when she was young perhaps. But that is what makes this movie so good in that you want it to be longer in order to see more of your favorite characters.
Themovie begins in 1783 where Kitty lives in a terrible section of London. She is an indentured servant of Old Meg who makes her steal things for a living. One day, she tries to steal the shoes off of a man named Thomas but gets caught. Thomas is a noted painter and decides to "clean her up" and paint her portrait. While painting her, two men drop by, Brett and Hugh. They both see Kitty and is enamored with her but Brett is on his way to India so Hugh tries his luck. After her portrait is finished, Thomas let her go, whereupon Hugh gives her a ride in his coach. During the ride, he discovers who she really is and feels sorry for her so he makes her his servant. However, it is soon shown that he and his aunt, Lady Susan Dowitt, whom he lives with, are both in debt.
During a gallery showing of Thomas painting, Kitty's portrait called the "Anonymous Lady" is getting rave reviews and powerful and rich men want to know who this woman is. It is at this time that Hugh gets the idea to make a "lady" out of Kitty and have her marry a rich aristocrat, especially Duke of Malmunster, in order to alleviate his finances. Hugh and Susan begin to train Kitty but it is very difficult. One day, Hugh's neighbor Selby sees Kitty and is taken aback by her. Kitty is introduced as a relative to Hugh. Selby is a rich merchant but is of the wrong class so Hugh does not want to marry Kitty to him. That changes when Hugh is sent to debtor's prison. Kitty marries Selby in order to use the dowry money to free Hugh. Soon though, Hugh goes into debt again and Susan ask Kitty for money. Kitty ask Selby for money. He ask what it is for and she states it is to buy things but only gives 5 pounds from his lock wooden box. When Selby is gone, she breaks into the box and gets more money but Selby's housekeeper sees that and reports it to Selby. Selby confronts Kitty but she denies it. He begins to threaten her and she loses her composure and reverts back to her Cockney accent. Selby sees he has been lied to and begins to beat Kitty in order to get the truth out of her when another made helps Kitty by striking Selby with an object and killing him. The maid then commits suicide. Kitty is now a wealthy widow.
Kitty is in love with Hugh and makes this known to Susan. Susan is sympathetic. Hugh tells them Kitty is going to marry Duke of Malmunster. Susan is against it but Kitty agrees because she loves Hugh even though Kitty and Susan never tells him. Unknown to all but Susan and Kitty, Kitty is pregnant with Selby's child. After Kitty is married to very old Duke of Malmunster, she announces she is pregnant. Duke of Malmunster believes he is the father. A male heir is born and right after, Duke of Malmunster dies. She is now not only a duchess but also very wealthy. Hugh ask for a castle and Kitty gives it to him. After a series of conversation, Kitty professes her love for him and the reason why she did all this was because she loved him. However, Hugh cannot believe Kitty is serious because he never thought of her as nothing but a "guttersnipe." They argue and smack each other in the face and do not see each other for awhile. Hugh's friend Brett comes back from India and sees Kitty in an event and courts her. Soon they are to be married. Kitty and Brett goes to Thomas to see another painting of Kitty but Hugh is there and make condescending remarks to Kitty so she leaves. Thomas tells Hugh to leave Kitty alone because while Hugh may see Kitty as a guttersnipe, however, Kitty is truly now a lady. Hugh now sees he was wrong and goes to Kitty to stop the wedding and profess his love to Kitty but she states it is too late. Hugh threatens her but Kitty does not care. On the eve of the wedding, Hugh brings Old Meg and confronts this fact to both Kitty and Brett. Kitty admits to everything and tells Brett it is OK if he does not want to marry her but Brett does not care and wants to marry her. Hugh admits defeat and sees Kitty is the better person and tells her he will stay out her life. As Hugh is leaving, it dawns on Kitty that she still loves Hugh so she goes after him and they kiss. The End.
Quantum of Solace (2008)
Terrible movie!
Where do I start. First of all, I want to say that I left the theater after 30 minutes because I could no longer stay and watch the rest of the movie. The movie, in my opinion, was that bad.
What was wrong with it?
(1) Bond movies usually have a great central villain. If you look at Bond movies from the 1960's through the 1980's, and for the most part the 1990's, Bond movies had interesting villains. The villain in this movie evokes little or no emotion in that you do not care if he wins or not because he is not diabolical enough. Bond villains are usually over the top and megalomaniac. The villain in this movie is just a generic bad guy in my opinion. Totally uninteresting.
(2) This movie had no real substance in that there was a great deal of action but no real dialog. In a Bond movie, there is usually a great conversation between the characters. For example, those smart quips between Q and Bond or Moneypenny and Bond or the head of the MI6 and Bond. Most of the conversation in this movie very terse and uninteresting.
(3) The gadgets is what makes Bond movies so interesting and something that people cannot wait to see. Do you all remember when Q would demonstrate some cool gadget to Bond and you just had to exclaim "wow" because it was so interesting? There was none like that here. That is not to say that there was no interesting gadgets but that the gadgets that were presented only got a lukewarm response. For instance, Bond had this IPhone like cell phone that does more than your average IPhone but it does not evoke any exciting response because you know it will be within reach in a couple of years.
(4) The action while "nice" was scattered and not focused. The type of cinematography presently is to shake the camera, more or less, with the action. I personally never liked that style of movie making and find that disorienting. That's not to say that it was like that throughout the film but I noticed it during action sequences.
(5) The new Bond is still not my cup of tea. Yes, he is probably more close to what Ian Fleming envisioned for Bond; meaning, gritty and no nonsense British agent but I grew up with Roger Moore, and in my opinion, Pierce Brosnan, and of course Sean Connery, are the "classic" Bond.
I will describe what I saw in that 30 minutes and you make up your mind.
The movie starts with some chase scene through what looks like the Italian Alps. In the back of Bond car is some guy and he is delivered to MI6. The guy claims he is from some secretive agency and that they have members all over the world. At that point, one of the British agent in the room kills the guy and kills some of the people in the room and takes off, and Bond chases him until he is killed. He later searches for some clue of this organization in Haiti where he kills some man and assumes his identity. He saves a girl who is supposed to be killed by the very man whose identity he has stolen. The person who wanted her dead is suppose to be the central villain in this movie where he wants to destabilize some Latin American country so that they can take over a patch of land where there might be oil. That's it.
Låt den rätte komma in (2008)
A movie worthy of 9 out of 10 stars
It has been awhile since I have seen a movie that moved me. This movie, while a horror story, has a "human story" behind it to give it a certain dimension that you do not normally see in a typical horror movie. But, this is not a typical horror movie given that the principal characters are young children. One of the main character is a "human" boy named Oscar who is 12 year old. The other main character is a girl named Eli who looks 12 years old physically, but in reality, she is much older. The movie, however, never states her real age.
By the way, this is a Swedish movie with English subtitles. I know many people do not like seeing foreign films because they have to read subtitles but please give it a chance. You will not be disappointed.
The setting of the story seems to begin sometime in late 1970's or the early 1980's in Stockholm, Sweden. Oscar is an introvert. His parents seemed to have divorced and he is living with his mother in an apartment. At school, Oscar is constantly bullied. His life changes when a man and his daughter moves in next door to him.
Cloverfield (2008)
Terrible movie!
Wow! I thought Blair Witch Project sucked but this movie brings suckiness to a whole new level. First, I am not a fan of the 'Blair Witch' movie where you see the movie from the point of view of the person who is holding the camcorder. As you might expect, the movie shakes A lot. Now I heard from people and on the news that some people vomited and even fainted in the movie theaters because the erratic movie shots made them dizzy. I was not one of them. However, 'Blair Witch' type movies do annoy me. This movie feels like an indie movie but it's not because millions of dollars have been poured into this piece of dirt.
The story is about a group of twenty somethings in New York City and one of them is going to Japan because he got a promotion. They throw a going away party where one of their friends shoots the event on his camcorder. During this party, there is an explosion many blocks away. They all go out and the head of Statue of Liberty falls onto their street. Then they see some sort of giant alien but don't know what it is since the movie only shows couple of seconds of it. Then there is more explosion. The power goes off. They see the military fighting it. The people try to escape on the Brooklyn Bridge but it collapse and some of the friends don't make it. Then they try to go and rescue a girl/friend who is in the alien attack area. They find her alive and try to escape on a military helicopter but the aliens attack it and they fall back on to the ground. They survive but the one who is carrying camcorder gets attacked. I think he is killed. I'm not sure because I was about throw my popcorn at this crappy movie along with what was left of my soda drink. The friends take the camcorder and take off to who knows where. The End.
The only good thing about this movie was that the aliens looked cool.
Caligola (1979)
Good but not a great movie.
I saw this movie many years ago and thought it was just OK. I thought it was too sexually graphic and a bit too melodramatic but I saw this again several years ago and found the movie to be quite good. The reason for my change in attitude is that, in between the two viewings, I had the chance to learn more about Roman history; specifically their culture. This movie portrays Rome as it really was during Caligula time. They were very sexual and openly displayed it.
This is the story of Caligula or Caligola, the emperor of Rome. In historical context, he was not as bad as some would have it. He actually accomplished quite a bit even though he was not mentally all there. But then given how he grew up, I am surprised he was able to accomplish the amount that he did.
When he was young, his uncle Emperor Tiberius killed Caligula's mother and father. He went to live with his uncle who subsequently molested him countless times. I was shocked by this but pederasty, an intimate or erotic relationship between an adolescent boy and an adult male, was quite common in those times. The real shocker was that Tiberius had his Praetorian Guards throw many young boys over a cliff after he was bored with them. If I recall, hundreds if not thousands of boys met their doom in this way. Caligula constantly lived in fear that he too would be thrown over the cliff like those other boys.
If you don't know much about Roman history, I don't think you will fully appreciate this movie. There are intricacies here that will escape those who are unfamiliar or are a novice to Roman history. I'm not saying that you should read a whole college textbook on Roman history but do some internet research on it and afterward watch movie. I'm sure you will like the movie more if you do so rather than just watching it without doing any research at all.
Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles (2008)
A huge disappointment.
So far I have seen 4 episodes due to a friend loaning me his copy. I know that only 2 or 3 episodes have been shown so far on TV so I won't go into details but rather explain generally why I don't like this series.
I want to start off by saying that I am a BIG fan of all three Terminator movies. I remember when I was young and I saw Terminator 1, and my reaction was like, "wow!" In my opinion, Terminator 1 is a seminal movie in the science fiction genre.
When I heard that there would be a TV series on the Terminator movie, I was really excited to see it. Once I got the copies and saw it one by one, I was really disappointed and now see why James Cameron did not participate in this TV series.
My first criticism is the story itself. The story eliminates Terminator 3. In fact, Terminator 3 story never happened in this timeline and instead, Sarah and John Connor is shown in the aftermath after Terminator 2. Sarah and John thinks "end of the world" scenario is now over but that changes when a terminator tries to kill John and another terminator, Cameron, is sent by future John to protect Sarah and John. Cameron tells Sarah and John that they must go back in time to stop Skynet....again.
Sarah Conner in Terminator 2 was portrayed as mentally and physically tough woman whose sole purpose was to train and safeguard her son to be the "great leader" of mankind. Watching Linda Hamilton in Terminator 2, I had no doubt this woman can beat the hell out of people to protect her son. The Sarah Connor here seems less deliberate and not physically tough. Maybe it is the actress that was chosen to play Sarah Connor but I just did not feel the same way for this actress as oppose to Linda Hamilton. I get the feeling that they want Sarah Connor to be more reflective and also show the day to day grind on trying to raise her son. Don't get me wrong, Lena Headey who plays Sarah Connor here, seems like a good actress but she is no Linda Hamilton. That woman in Terminator 2, as she is doing pullups and pushups and beating those hospital orderlies like a martial arts expert---you know she can open up some serious hurt on anybody.
Second, John Connor in this series WHINES a great deal. He is unhappy that he has to stay home for his own protection, and so instead, goes out and gets into situations where he gets everyone into jeopardy. In terms of acting ability, Thomas Dekker who plays John, is fine but his character is really annoying.
Third, Cameron seems to be a permanent character on this series. While I like her character but I do not want her to be a permanent part of the show. The way the story seems to be going, I think Cameron may become a love interest of John Connor as well as their protector, although the story seems to suggest Cameron has secrets that she is not telling Sarah and John.
Fourth, Sarah and John are wanted by the FBI and is being pursued by an overzealous FBI agent named James Ellison. I get the feeling that the James Ellison character is going to be like Scully in the X-Files. Scully had all these damn evidence that there is extra terrestial life out there but instead chooses to ignore it all until towards the end. James Ellison already has reports of people displaying unbelievable strengths that are going on a rampage but chooses to ignore these findings and instead, pursues Sarah and John Connor.
Fifth and most importantly, the special effects sucks! A show based on the Terminator movie has to have great special effects but from what I have seen so far, it does not impress me one bit.
Who knows? Maybe the story and the character will get better as time goes by but I am not going to invest my time hoping that it will. If later on, a friend tells me the series is great, then I might buy the DVD but for now, I'm not watching it.
First Sunday (2008)
What a piece of crap!
I went into the theater, sat down with my popcorn, saw 25 minutes and then left the theater. In fact, I should have left 15 minutes sooner. Where to start with this crap of a movie. First, the characters are so lazy that you have no sympathy for them. Whaaaa! I don't like my job! Whaaaa! Well who does?! Whaaaa! The boss orders me around. Whaaa! So of course, they turn to crime and surprise! They get caught. They get 5000 hours of community service from the judge instead of jail time. That's where all the fun is suppose to begin but none of that happened. It was just one long tedious boredom after another.
Ice Cube: You better stick with Barbershop 3,4,5,... Or better yet, why don't you come out with a new album instead of scaring us with your crummy acting ability.
Tracy Morgan and Kat Williams: It's back to stand-up gigs again!
Transformers (2007)
If I was not a Transformer fan, I would have given this movie a 1.
Basically, the special effects were awesome. I could not get enough of the way the robots transformed. That was the high point. The low points are the story, dialog, and acting----they were terrible. The dialog was just stupid. The love interest of the main character was pretty but just a filler and was placed in this movie so that juvenile boys could go crazy over, which is not a bad thing if she had some decent script to work with and if she had the ability to act. Both of which I did not see.
If I was not a fan of Transformers already, I would have given this movie a 1. If you want to check out a good Transformer series, then go rent Beast Wars or the old Transformer animation. The latter though is dated since it came out during the 1980's.
The Simpsons Movie (2007)
It is only a 30 minute episode that has been stretched into a movie
I wanted to like it but I was disappointed. This movie is basically three thirty minute episode combined into one. The story is OK, nothing great. You do see it on a big screen so that is interesting but that is not enough to warrant a full ticket price. The story is basically Homer messes up again and causes Springfield to be designated as a toxic dump so the government places a dome around Springfield trapping everyone inside. Homer redeems himself and saves Springfield and cleans up the toxic waste. If you are a Simpson fan like myself, then there is nothing new here. My friends child liked it though so if you have a small child, they should enjoy it. If you really don't have to watch it, then wait for it on DVD or even cable.
I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry (2007)
God! How unfunny.
Where do I start? The story seems interesting but it is not. The acting is OK but nothing great. I am all for sexual tolerance but stop beating the audience with the message over and over again.
The jokes! How few there were and the ones that hit the mark only received a chuckle here and there from the audience.
The actor who plays the life mate of Adam Sandler is not funny. Although, given the weak script and stale jokes, I guess you can only try to work with what you got. Adam Sandler....Geez! What happened to this guy! I mean Happy Gilmore and Billy Madison and Waterboy are classic comedy as far as I am concerned. From Little Nicky onward, he has been steadily gone downhill. Don't even get me started on his movie Click which I still want my money back.
Wait for it on TV.
28 Weeks Later (2007)
Not a good movie.
I remember how I was really entertained when I saw 28 Days Later. I mean, zombies that run like an Olympic sprinter was simply genius! I have to admit though that the last half of that movie was not that good but the running zombies made the defect seemed minor.
When I found out that there was going to be a sequel, I was waiting in anticipation of it. Unfortunately, I should have just waited for it to come out on DVD because the movie sucked. This time, the novelty of running zombies could no longer hide the poor story line.
In 28 Weeks Later, the movie begins with British Isle still in the beginning stage of running zombies. In a countryside, you have a group of people that is barricaded in a house. They are being quiet so that they don't attract the attention of the zombies. One day, they hear a knocking on the door and it is a boy who is asking for help. They are hesitant at first but decide to open the door. They do but this attracts the zombies and they crash in and do what zombies do. In that group is a husband and wife. They are trying to escape but gets split up. The zombies will soon reach the wife and the kid. The husband wants to rescue them but fear grips him and decides to escape alone. The wife cries out for help but he keeps running and he escapes.
Fast forward and over a month later, all the zombies die from starvation. The NATO led by the US, lead to assess the situation and then decides to repopulate the British Isle 28 weeks later.
They bring in all those British expatriates back to England. In London, they have a "green zone" where it is safe and there are plenty of US soldiers guarding it. Many of the soldiers are trying to bag up the dead bodies in order to burn it but there are too many and bodies are piling up on the side of the streets.
Of the 15 thousand British expatriates are two teenagers, a boy and a girl. They are the children of the husband who ran away. They meet with the father and are happy but sad since their mother died. The father lies to the children how their mother died because he is too ashamed.
The children later go to their old house and finds their mother in the house alive. The US soldier picks them up and examines the wife. She is found to be clean and not a zombie. The reason for this is that she has a genetic mutation that stops her from becoming a zombie. Her children also has the genetic mutation. The scientist discover that she is a carrier of the zombie virus even though she is immune to the virus.
Before the scientist can decide what to do with her, the husband sees the wife and kisses her. She bites him on the tongue and instantly he becomes a zombie and kills her. Then he goes and starts making zombies and they in turn make zombies. Soon they are overrun with zombies. Some survivors try to escape and blow up the whole area. But some of the zombies escaped and went onto the continent of Europe, specifically France. So I guess this means there is going to be another one. I guess the next one is going to be 28 Months Later.
My first problem with this movie is the repatriation after 28 weeks later. That does not make sense. Why would the authorities approve repatriation without knowing if the virus had truly been wiped out? I understand the story writers had to think of something but they had several years to think of a good plot. Is this the best they could do?! Also, I don't know about any of you but if my country just have been wiped out because of zombies, I would want to know what the hell happened and is there a cure for it before I go back. In the movies, you see all these expatriates just excited about going back home like it is some Woodstock fest.
My second problem with the movie is that you have sole survivor of a zombie attack. I mean no one had survived except her and also she is found to be a carrier of the virus. Hello! You put guards around that woman like the kind that guards Fort Knox. But in the movie, there is one or two guards at most. That does not make sense.
I mean, the movie tries to make the military in the movie like they are some bumbling idiot. Give me a break. If this is going to be comedic zombie movie then fine, but if it is going to be a serious horror movie, then use realistic story line. I could go on and tell you others but this is enough. You get the picture.
Fracture (2007)
A smart and well acted crime movie.
Before seeing this movie, I saw Anthony Hopkins on Entertainment Tonight where he mentions that he played the evil character in this movie in the mold of Hannibal Lechter of Silence of the Lambs. After seeing the movie I could see the comparison. Both Hannibal and the character he portrays in this movie are diabolical, very smart, and have a certain amount of hubris to their respective characters.
I found this movie to be well written in terms of the story as well as the dialog. The plot itself is nothing new. You have a husband who finds out that his wife is cheating on him. The quirk in the story here is that the other man is a high ranking police officer. Also, the husband develops a elaborate and brilliant plan to kill his wife and ruin, instead of killing, the other man.
In this mix is a deputy district attorney who has an excellent conviction rate and who cannot wait to enter private practice with a high paying law firm. The killer uses the deputy D.A.'s cockiness to his advantage.
The ending itself was quite unexpected. I mean, I expected the usual plot of the killer being caught in some form or another and going off to prison. Here, the audience is left to their own imagination of how the movie ends. I liked that aspect. It leaves a certain cliff hanger but you know that the killer will probably be found guilty given the direction of the movie towards the end.
That being said, the movie did have weak points. After the killer gets off the attempted murder charge, the other man kills himself on the steps of the courthouse. I don't know but usually if a killer is freed, someone close to the victim would be so outraged that they would try to kill the killer rather than themselves.
Also, I did not particularly care for the actor who portrayed the deputy district attorney. I have seen him in various supporting roles and he has a face and acting ability that is fine as a supporting character but not as a main character. He did not have the acting range to adequately portray the deputy D.A. very well. But in fairness, his adversary was Anthony Hopkins and Hopkins is such a great actor that his acting ability dwarfs other actors and actresses around him unless their acting ability is equal or above him.
But overall, the movie was very entertaining. A good crime thriller movie. I highly recommend it.
Spider-Man 3 (2007)
A big disappointment.
I am a fan of Spiderman comic book. I have been collecting them since I was a young child. I know the origins of Peter Parker, how he became Spiderman, the origins of Sandman and his interaction with Spidey, and etc.
That being said, I know you have to change the story when you adapt a book/comic book for movie purpose. I get that but I don't think they did it well. On top of that, the movie had just too many things going on. Due to this, the movie could not sufficiently delve deeper into a particular story line, even though the movie was over 2 hours. The movie just glossed over major characters or conflicts leaving the viewer, or at least me, less than satisfied.
First of all, I cannot stand seeing Kirsten Dunst as Mary Jane Watson. This just annoys greatly. If you are a Spiderman comic book collector like myself, you know that Mary Jane Watson was gorgeous. She was a supermodel and therefore, very beautiful. Dunst is cute but she is no supermodel. I don't know who picked her for this role, but as I said before in Spiderman 1 and 2, she should have been replaced. Hopefully she will be gone for Spiderman 4.
Tobey Macguire is OK. He would not have been my first choice for Peter Parker role but he grew on me.
In this movie, these are the things that were covered (the movie did not cover these things in this order): Petey's (Peter Parker) problems include finding out Sandman is the real killer of his uncle, he wants to propose to MJ (MaryJane Watson) but ultimately does not due to other reasons discussed below, Harry Osborne (his best friend) wants to kill him, MJ's career is in ruins and is now a waitress, Steve Brock is trying take Petey's job at the Daily Bugle so Petey's career is going nowhere, Petey has a new costume that is a living symbiotic-life form from out of space which makes him stronger and gives him self-confidence but is also trying to overtake his body, the origin of Sandman is shown and he is battling Spidey, and on and on.
Let's start off with Harry Osborne. In the comic book, he becomes the Hobgoblin. Here, he has no name and his costume should be a variant of the Green Goblin but it is not. Fine, I could overlook this.
Next, you have Sandman, a major villain and character within Spiderman stories. He becomes just ONE of the villains in this story. I mean you have 3 MAJOR villains in this story! I could understand 2 but 3! If they had done it well it would be OK but they did not.
Next is the symbiotic life form. This life form's name escapes me now but he bonds with this life form when he was on another planet. Here, the life form comes to Earth as a meteorite in a fashion very much like the Blob. The story of this life form and its interaction with Petey should have been sufficient to constitute as being the sole villain in this movie but they brought in 2 more! I know I am belaboring the point but they just gloss over these great villains and it really annoys me.
This movie had great special effects. That I will not deny but all of you know that that alone will not make a good movie. You have to have a good and smart script as well as good performance from your actors and actresses. Here, the story/script which is a major component of this movie was weak. There was too many superficial topics and characters covered but not in depth.
I understand why Sony wanted to create a movie to override your senses because if I was a studio executive and I had OK'ed nearly 400 million dollars budget for this movie, I would want to make sure that I put in as many action scenes as possible to override the audience senses but at a certain point, enough is enough. You have to start developing the characters so that the audience can feel for these characters.
I went to the movies with my friend and her 10 year old child. My friend and I did not like it while the child did. My friend does not know anything about Spiderman except what she saw in the movies.
In my assessment of the Spiderman trilogy so far, I would have to say that Spiderman 1 was the best for me. Spiderman 1 was better than Spiderman 2 and 3 because Tom Osborne, the Green Goblin's character was really developed enough that you could really understand the villain; meaning, how he thinks and why he does such evil things. By the way, Willem Dafoe played this character really great.
In the end, I recommend waiting for it to be released on DVD. If you cannot wait, then at least see it at matinée price.
Vacancy (2007)
Unexpectly good horror movie. Go see it.
I give this movie 7 out of 10 stars.
First of all, I am sick of seeing the Wilson brothers, both Luke and Owen. As for Kate Beckinsale, the only movie she did great was in Underworld. With this kind of mindset, I had no desire to go and see this movie but my friends pestered me to go so I went. I am very glad that I did.
Ever since Saw, movies have been trying to outdo each other in terms of gore and more over the top scenarios of people killing each other. After, Hostel, I had pretty much given up on a good horror movie that had thriller aspect without much gore. This is not to say that I don't like gore in my movies but movies like Saw was coming out in such succession that I missed those thriller/horror movies where over the top gore was not their sole mission.
The formula for this movie was so simple and clichéd that you would think this movie would suck but the movie was done in a way that they were able to pull this movie off in an entertaining fashion. This movie is a great example of how a movie can use a common story line but do it still in a refreshing and entertaining way.
In this movie, you have a couple driving at night on a deserted road far away from any town. They come upon a motel with a gas station that seemed like no one has patronized in a long time. In the motel is a creepy man who shows them to a room that seems like it has not changed since the 1960's. The husband puts a videotape into the VCR and sees what seems like someone getting killed but it is taking place in their room. From there, the fun begins.
The movie was so good and scary that I was gripping my seat. I looked around the movie theater to see if others had the same reaction and the feelings seems mutual throughout the whole theater. I give kudos to the director and to the two stars, Luke Wilson and Kate Beckinsale. They did a good job. I also loved the performance of the motel manager. I remember him in many films during the 1980's, but usually in some comedic role.
Overall a good horror movie. I highly recommend it.
Dead Silence (2007)
Man this movie is a real crap!
I wish I could give this movie a negative number but I can't so I am given it a 1.
Where do I begin...
The movie begins with a young couple in an apartment. They get a knock on the door and there is a small box with no note. They open it and it is a wooden dummy--the kind you use in a ventriloquist act. I don't know about you but if I get an anonymous box with a creepy looking wooden dummy on my doorstep, that s**t is going into the fireplace or my BBQ pit or into the wood chipper. Of course, like some dumb idiots, they take it in and then they start talking about some curse from their hometown about some woman and her wooden dolls. Now, that should give an indication to throw that crap out but nooooooo. They keep it.
Husband goes out for some grocery and in the meantime, the dummy comes to life---surpriseeee! The dummy kills the wife. Husband comes home and finds the wife dead with her tongue ripped out and her jaw lowered down like a dummy.
The detective, played by Wahlberg, thinks the husband did it and tries to get him to confess but the husband says he did not do it. The husband is let go for insufficient evidence. Man, Wahlberg's acting sucks! Get the younger Wahlberg. He's at least decent.
Any normal person would have destroyed the doll but this guy decides to play hero so he goes back to the apartment and look in the box that the dummy came in and it has his hometown name on it.
The husband arrives back home and sees his estranged father. They talk briefly and he takes off. At the funeral home, the embalmer takes the dead wife's body for embalming. He opens the body bag and when he sees the corpse he freaks out because he's seen this before.
At the funeral, the embalmer's wife says it is about Mary Shaw, the puppeteer who is buried on the same cemetery as the dead wife. Later, the embalmer tells the husband that long time ago, a puppeteer was performing and a young child was heckling Mary Shaw. Some weeks later, the child disappeared but was never found. The family and some friends of the missing child believed it was Mary Shaw who did it and killed her and then ripping her tongue out.
Well from then on all those who killed her is killed by ripping out their tongue. In fact, all the generations of those who participated in the killing are killed.
Fast forward, Wahlberg shows up and he and husband go to Mary Shaw's place where there are whole bunch of wooden dolls. The dolls go after them and Wahlberg is killed and husband burns the dolls. Husband comes home but finds out that his father is a puppet and that Mary Shaw's spirit is pulling the string. In the end, husband gets his tongue ripped out.
Jesus Christ this movie sucks! The people who gave the approval to make this movie should have their tongues ripped out.
Premonition (2007)
Man this movie is so bad.
Let me first start out that the premise of the story is interesting but the script and the execution of it was off and in some scenes, waaaay off. This is about a woman, played by Sandra Bullock, who gets a strange phone call and then she gets a knock on the door and a policeman informs her that her husband was killed in an auto accident.
That night, she sleeps and wakes up to find that her husband is alive and nothing bad has happened. She keeps going forward and then backward in time. This is all causing her to question her sanity. On top of that, she suspects that her husband is cheating which is causing her conflicted emotions.
Now this seems interesting and it was to a degree but the execution and certain scenes just made this movie suck big time. For instance, there was a scene where she could not believe that her husband's body was in the coffin that was inside a hearse. As the pallbearers were taking the coffin out, she grabs at the coffin to see who is in the coffin. Well, this causes the coffin to be dropped and the top half of the coffin to be ripped out of the coffin where a head pops out and rolls around the ground. I can tell you that I busted out laughing so hard that tears were streaming down my face. I mean what kind of coffin is it that the top half just falls apart and then like a scene from Jackass, the head starts rolling around on the ground? I mention Jackass because there was a scene where Johnny Knoxville was driving a hearse up a hill and the coffin slid out and a body burst out causing people to gasp in horror. The creators of the movie must of thought of that when they made this scene.
Another laughable scene was where the daughter runs around the house and manages to burst through the glass door to the patio and her face is all cut from the broken glass. Can such a thing happen? Possibly but this kid was not going full tilt straight to the glass door but rather was lazily running to the glass door. Now, I don't know about you guys but I have a glass door myself that leads to back of the house and I have had kids hit the glass door and nothing like that has happened.
There were some CGI's in this movie that seem poorly done such as the bird and the bees scene.
Overall, a dumb movie.
Let's Go to Prison (2006)
A funny movie that is underrated.
I found this movie to be quite funny with an original story line. The story is about a habitual criminal who repeatedly comes before the same judge to be sentenced. He devises a method of revenge upon this judge whereupon his release from prison, he frames the judge's son on a crime which sends the judge's son to prison. The habitual criminal then commits a crime to be his cell mate and there the fun begins.
This is obviously a dark-humored comedy and it had me laughing more than I had anticipated. It was given only a 5 star by IMDb users so I did not expect much but it was quite good. I am surprised it did not get that much notoriety in the theaters. In fact, I never heard of this film at all. It's amazing that crappy comedy movies like Wild Hogs and I Think I Love My Wife get all the attention while really funny movie like this get passed by. But what can you do since there really is no star power in this movie. You will recognize actors and actresses since many of them have appeared in many films as supporting characters. It's just that they don't have the name recognition.
The only weakness I found in this movies was the crime by with which the judge's son was framed. The writers should have thought of a more plausible reason for his incarceration. However, after some thought, I figure this is comedy and the whole movie is a stretch of the imagination so I am overlooking this weakness.
I am not saying, however, that this is a great comedy but it was good and it had me laughing pretty much throughout the movie and in my opinion, that warrants a 7. If you like Van Wilder, Sorority Boys, and Harold and Kumar Goes to White Castle type of movies, then you will like this as well.
Black Snake Moan (2006)
I liked it but this movie is not for everyone.
This is a quirky or strange type of movie that will not appeal to the mass audience. The movie is about a poor white girl (Christina Ricci) from the South, somewhere in Tennessee I think, who is a nymphomaniac. Due to certain circumstances, she ends up on the road beaten up and unconscious. A black man (Samuel Jackson) finds her and takes her into his house. From there, they develop a strange relationship where they both try to help each other from their personal demons.
When I saw the trailer and read the story about this movie, I thought, "oh well...another crappy movie." However, the movie was quite good. It certainly was different. This movie is not for everyone but then again, who knows. I think if people gave it a try, they might like it. It is gritty drama with moments that will make you laugh and perhaps cry.
I thought everyone did a good job except Justin Timberlake. He was not bad but not good either. I rate his performance as OK. I understand why they chose him. It will certainly give the movie more exposure than without him.
I also have to criticize the movie studio for the improper advertisement. If you see the trailer and the advertisement for this movie, you might think this is some sort of sadomasochistic movie involving a sex starved white female with a black man but that is far from the truth.
A good movie with an original story and an excellent acting by most of the crew---sans Justin Timberlake.
Ghost Rider (2007)
This movie sucked.
Where do I start. The screenplay was done poorly. The dialog was inane. Nicolas spewed out all these stupid one liners which really annoyed me. When will movie studios recognize that one liners alone do not make a good movie?! The special effects were fine. They were not ground breaking but good for what it was. That is the only positive thing I could say about this movie. Like the movie Daredevil, the wrong actor was placed to play the main character, Johnny Blaze. I am not saying Nicolas Cage is a bad actor---far from it. However, he should not have been chosen for this part. Whoever chose him should be fired. Remember, Michael Keaton was chosen to play Batman and he was a good actor but as Batman, he sucked. It was not until Christian Bale was chosen to play Batman that you could really see what Batman was about. Also, the last Batman movie in "Batman Begins," the story was told in a serious and thoughtful manner. Previous Batman movies were campy and just stupid. Ghost rider, unfortunately, follows those terrible Batman movies by being campy and just stupid.
In this movie, Nicolas Cage was comical. You could tell by watching this movie that he thought this movie sucked so he overplayed his part.
Just stay away. Wait for it on video or cable.
The Departed (2006)
Wow! You people are easy to please.
I am a fan of Martin Scorsese but this movie sucks. This movie is a remake of a Hong Kong movie called "Internal Affairs." If you have never seen the original, then please do so because you will definitely appreciate how well the original was as opposed to this crap made by Scorsese.
Why do I hate "Departed?" First, Scorsese was an idiot putting Jack Nicholson as the crime boss because he is going to steal the whole damn movie. Nicholson is that talented. Plus, Scorsese gave too much part to the crime boss character. He should have been a tangential character with the real crux of the movie focused on Matt Damon and Di Caprio.
Second, Matt Damon's character was too one dimensional or there was no real complexity to his character. He was simply bad. In Internal Affairs, the bad cop was more complex. In that movie, you see a cop becoming annoyed by the crime boss who he sees as a threat to his future.
Third, there was more violence and sex in this movie than in Internal Affairs and I love gratuitous violence and sex in a movie so long as it is done properly. Scorsese just injected more sex and violence to cover up his terrible script adaption of an excellent film.
Fourth, the dialog was fine but again, it lacks intelligent discourse among the principal characters so I cannot say it was great writing. It was simply mediocre at best.
Fifth, and primary reason I hate this movie is that there is no real TENSION between the characters. Oh sure, Damon character wants to kill Di Caprio and vice a versa but there has to more to this than that. In the original, there was interaction between the bad cop and good cop, but you see that the bad cop is not so truly bad and therefore, the audience is torn. What I am trying to say is that there was a subtle buildup to the real tension in that movie which makes you really appreciative of the quality of that movie as oppose to this crap.
That being said, if you have never seen Internal Affairs, then you will like this movie. But if you are like myself and some others who have seen it and have seen this movie as well, then you will be disappointed. In fact, for those who decide to rent Internal Affairs, I can almost guarantee that you will like Internal Affairs much more than Departed. You will like Internal Affairs so much more that you will see what a junk Departed really is.
Tom yum goong (2005)
Ten Stars! Are you kidding me! One Star OK!
Look you people who are unfamiliar with Asian or European movies. A great deal of them have already been released on movie theaters on their respective continents waaaaaayyyy before arriving here. Case in point, this movie. I saw this movie like 2 years ago if not more. I got into Thai movie because of Ong Bak to which the star of this movie also starred in. Both movie sucks like big time in the story and acting category but is loaded with action. Now, I love action movies like many people but pleaaassse people, there has to be some decent story and acting! Ong Bak had both a DECENT story and acting as well as great action! This movie, however, had good action but acting and story was even worse than Ong Bak! Now, does that mean Ong Bak sucks more than this movie? No. But at least in Ong Bak, you could feel that the people behind the movie were trying their best in bringing you an entertaining movie with what little they had. Here, this movie does not even attempt to try. They bring you rehashed crappy action to hide a really bad story and acting.
If you have an Asian community around your city or town, then try to find a video store around there and you probably would find them renting this movie with Engish dub or subtitle. Better yet, go online and buy this movie. I guarantee it will be cheaper than going to a movie theater and paying a full admission price! God! Has the Weinstein brothers lost all their creative energy! Do they have to try to rehash a movie released at least several years ago? More importantly, what the hell is wrong with Quentin Tarantino? Is he crazy and allowing the Weinstein brothers use him name on this crappy movie?! I have no respect for him at all anymore. Whatever good feeling I had toward him because of Pulp Fiction is now long gone.
Lady in the Water (2006)
This is not as terrible as the "Village" but close to it.
Wow! Where do I start. This movie is not that bad as the Village but it certainly is no improvement from it.
What also bothers me is that M. Night Shyamalan acts in this movie and he does not simply do a cameo appearance but rather portrays an important character in this movie. If M. Night Shyamalan is reading this, YOU CANNOT ACT!!! Leave the acting to people who know how.
From what I understand, when M. Night Shyamalan sent the studio his script, they immediately recognized that this picture was going to suck like the Village and tried to persuade him to change certain things about it. He threatened to walk out on them if they did so they acquiesced to his demands and did not change anything and look what happened---they were right. This movie does suck.
This movie should have been an indie movie and not a major motion picture. The whole feel of the movie as well as the story line fits just perfectly as an indie movie. At least if it was an indie movie, not many people would have had the chance to watch this terrible movie. The only thing I liked about this movie was Paul Giamatti. He gives a solid performance. Some of the supporting characters also gave good performances as well.
The story is about some children story that no one knows about except one tenant in an apartment building where Paul Giamatti's character works as a manager. A woman mysteriously appears and seemed to be in trouble so Giamatti tries to help the woman and in time, discovers what she is and he tries to help her escape so that she can return to her world.
The story just sucked. There simply is no other words to describe it. M. Night Shyamalan! If you are reading this, I want my money back. This is twice you burned me with your crappy movies!
Nightmares & Dreamscapes: From the Stories of Stephen King (2006)
Truly disappointing.
I just saw the third week of Stephen Kings' Nightmares and Dreamscapes mini series; meaning, I saw 6 episodes so far. I have to say that the stories are really weak. I have read Stephen King's Skeleton Crew, a collection of his short stories that was published way back. I recall most of the stories were average to poor but there was one that was really excellent, if not outstanding.
What I'm trying to say is that just because this mini series is from a collection of stories from Stephen King does not mean that it will be any good. In fact, if his previous collection of short stories are of any indication, then most of this mini series will be average to poor.
In Stephen King's defense, I have not read these new short stories. Perhaps they are good as stories in a book and not readily adaptable to television, or perhaps it was the fault of the scriptwriters in trying to write an interesting script. Who knows. Also, these short stories may have been made exclusively for this mini series and not not for print purpose. Maybe that may have been the problem. If Stephen King had submitted these crap stories to an editor, I am sure the editor would have immediately told him to make it more interesting because as is, it is simply boring.
What is clear from all of this is that the problem is with the stories/script and not the actors and actresses because this mini series has some excellent people acting on it.
Seeing this mini series really makes me appreciate those old "Twilight Zone" series. Each series was only half an hour but it was compelling and riveting. I don't understand why this mini series could not accomplish similar feat. I am sure this mini series had a good deal of money to make a good mini series but unfortunately, something must not have clicked.
For instance, this week there were two episodes shown. The first involved a horror story writer who buys a picture drawn by an artist who committed suicide. The writer begins to see changes in the picture as he is driving homeward. Feeling uncomfortable, he throws away the painting but it keeps appearing near him. Also, the portrait of an individual in that picture is killing people and is out to kill him. (I will not even mention the second episode for this week involving criminals and their loot because it was even more boring than this episode!)
This premise is interesting and so the story should be good but after seeing it, I was frustrated because there were too many gaps in the story as well as extraneous materials that was shown that did nothing to help the story. After the last scene, I was left with more questions than answers.
I tried for 3 weeks to get into this mini series but it was just too aggravating due to poor stories/script. If this was a movie, I would have recommended that people should wait for the movie to come out on cable or such. I would not even recommend that it be rented in your video store. However, given that this is on TNT, a cable channel, I would say if you have not seen it already, then try it for one week. If you do not like it that week, then you will not like the past series nor the future ones, since they all share the same boring trait.