Reviews
Cast Away (2000)
I'm not one to give out a ten; however . . .
"The Oscar goes to . . . Russell Crowe." Honestly the only man that could have beaten Hanks, or at least could have contended with him (no pun intended) did. "Gladiator" was amazing, as was Crowe, but come on. How much dialogue did Hanks have? And yet three hours felt no more than a breezy and tight hour and a half movie. Simply amazing.
Hanks was just plain fat to start this movie and admits it was done purposely. He and Helen Hunt make an abnormal couple initially, a bit awkward, but solid acting by both makes it very, very real rather quickly. Frears reluctance amidst Noland's patience in union, ironically because it is usually the other way around, gives substance to their relationship. Both are passionate individuals who want each other more that they need each other. I believe they love each other.
Chuck's best friend in the movie is very sincere and earnest. Hanks' realizes how time obsessed he is with his job, then realizes he has let his best friend down. He has an inability to really offer emotional support. That gets tested and amazingly and intimately delved into later in the film.
During Christmas Noland's job calls him and one of the most amazing wreckage scenes (in terms of believably and realism, not morbidness) ensues leaving Chuck to float aimlessly, like his structured life, to a deserted island. A simple idea already used; however, Hanks is outstanding here.
His first instincts are pretty natural for he is not trying to survive, but merely hold over. We see him slowly give up hope of being rescued and turn over to staying alive. Noland finds some FedEx pieces and they literally, figuratively, and emotionally keep him alive, but for how long? Isolation is a killer and that is where Hanks co-star comes in. Hanks goes from outstanding to who will beat me for an Oscar (which was Crowe of course)? Time passes and Chuck's exterior is concurrent with time elapsed, including the makeup. Chuck's sun lesions to his bleached hair gives Hanks tremendous grit and believable desperation. Noland's mind remains very sharp and trivia on this site allow for some of the implausibilities, but certainly not impossibilities, from taking this movie down a notch. Also it is obvious Chuck is knowledgeable, learns continuously through observation, and travels enough that observation seems to occur quite a bit.
The best part is when Chuck is forced to give us backfill. It is an organization tool that doesn't detach or break up the movie. My credit is to Robert Zemeckis and Tom Hanks for keeping this movie sharp until the end. The whole crew was meticulous and brilliant as seen in the "making of special" at the end of the movie.
The beauty of the island, of spiritually, of fate through choice is all explored here. And personally only Tom Hanks could have done it: which is the definition of Oscar.
Masters of the Universe (1987)
It is much better that regarded
I have read a number of reviews on this movie and they are accurate and good for the most part. My credit is to Gary Goddard for all he endured and still getting a credible and succinct movie made.
The fight scenes are real and actual so they seem methodical but they're great. The hair, clothing, make-up, special effects, and down the list we go, is so caked in '80s gunk it would be hard to fight for this as a classic. It is the only He-Man movie out there, and although a sequel beckons, eighteen years have passed without a stir.
If a sequel were to made Langella would have to be Skeletor. I mean the best acting from both he and Lundgren comes when He-Man is being led by the Centaurian. Langella saying "I give you a choice: return to Eternia with me as my slave and save their despicable lives, or perish with them here on this tasteless, and primitive, planet." It's cold and dark and it's authentic. It's chilling and you get chills. Langella overacts sometimes but mostly is great. He took Skeletor from a whiny, irritating, and downright pathetic worm of a guy to a believable, earthy, credible, and despicable evil-doer. We get a taste of the importance of He-man and all that he does, here in this scene, too.
Goddard did something brilliant here, he made the movie personable. He puts these people on Earth, interacting with Earthlings, and putting a grasp on how out there these "aliens" are. But it is also probably why this movie is so widely disregarded, because it doesn't have great and illustrative fight scenes. Instead they are sensible and plotted. To see this movie remade could be a real treat.
Gwildar is, essentially, Orco. He was easy, sensible, irritating, but not nearly as annoying, and unfairly Billy Barty was nominated for a Razzie. The story interlocks with this missing "key" as created by Gwildar. This cosmos idea of God-like power through the manifestation of a fourth dimension is highly advanced. This is why the movie is good. Portals are doors and He-Man is definitely a science fiction adventurer. This puts an Earthy spin on an idea wiling out.
Teela works and Man-in-Arms (Duncan) is good as a faithful sidekick to He-Man. That's what he is. He can hold his own but mostly is fighting for duty of right, and he follows He-Man for he is the epitome of it. Teela's gritty and pitched voice, with her desperate actions, are very formidable. Duncan is best when inspiring Kevin. Kevin is a sensitive guy with a talent. What these Eternians do is showcase pessimism on Earth for their planet is dying at their own hands. They are their own good and evil and it is hard to differentiate, so why care? By the end of the movie Courtney Cox and Robert Duncan McNeill (Julie and Kevin) see that. So does Lubic. The Eternians have no planet and yet they continue to hold hope and forge ahead: He-Man.
Tolkan is not so much a distraction as he is pretentious. McNeill yelling to Tolkan "Lubic this is for real" as he dodges a Centaurian blast doesn't hold much weight, or reality. It is about unity, division, and strength. Both literal and figurative.
Meg Foster is great as Evil-Lyn because she improves the movie rather than take time from Skeletor. Goddard lets most of the acting chops fall to the incomparable Frank Langella. He-Man is the ambassador of good. He is to talk slow, be level-headed, and search for justice. Lundgren does all of these things. He mission isn't to be malicious and blood seeking. When he runs into Julie (and a great fight sequence ensues) it is Duncan and Teela doing some leg work. He-Man is a protector. He'll abate killing Skeletor to keep any and all safe. In all honesty how many lines can you give someone? Someone suggested Brad Pitt as He-Man for a remake. I don't mind Pitt, but he would ham up the screen like some feel Skeletor did. Skeletor's was good, He-Man's would not be. Lundgren, in all honesty, is great. He has a mullet but looks the part, and contrary to popular belief, acts it. He wields the Sword of Grayskull gracefully, yet with force and some clumsiness. It's heavy, but he's well-skilled and versed in the sword. These oppositions are found in the Soceress. She would normally seem bad to us; however, she is the greatest power of good. Christina Pickles gives great lines of philosophy allowing for good banter and humor with Skeletor. And her love for He-Man is very evident and clear with solid acting.
The cartoon is hardly to be found here, aside from the characters and Eternia. Battle cat, and all other characters good and bad, could cloud a remake. But it would be great to see history revealed for He-Man like the new Batman series has done. People forget we like to see depth in our characters. And the character Charlie is filler, not unimportant, but certainly not integral. He's written well. All in all watch this movie because it's really, quite engrossing.
Hide and Seek (2005)
Given thought it borders on great
I was going to give this a five like a number of other reviewers and critics seemingly did. It would have never dipped below because of the superb casting. De Niro and Fanning are phenomenal. They make each other better, rather that conflict with one another. Even Elisabeth Shue is very, very good in her small part. Amy Irving, the mom, is decent, although clearly distant, while Dylan Baker and the guy who sells De Niro's character's David the house, Steven, are both weird, creepy, and coupled with the neighbors, are like suspects in a Scooby Doo cartoon.
Unfortunately, I knew the ending already because I had read the spoiler thinking I'd never see this movie. Knowing the ending still did not fix the unnerving and unbelievably chilling moments and feel of this movie. Fanning with her dark hair style like a thirteen year old, mixing with her bugged out seven year-old-like blue eyes is just freaky.
At first I just thought the game was overplayed, but then I realized the therapeutic symptoms of it. David's career as a psychologist isn't really explored (in deleted scenes it is) and he doesn't seem to be working after moving his daughter. The move comes after the "suicide" of his wife. The cycle starts in the beginning with an apparently struggling relationship between David and his wife. You'll see what seems to be coming, but you'll also be surprised by its real meaning.
The bathtub scenes in the new house are outstanding. How De Niro sleeps there after is beyond me. You walk in to your daughter's room and she's wide awake and bugged eyed, and talking about whom you've perceived as an imaginary friend. It gets worse obviously, but not as you might imagine. By the end of the movie it seems tedious and it becomes clear how it will end.
The theatrical version of the movie contains the best ending by far. It's suggestive, yet clear, optimistic, yet alarmingly dark. It's fitting and creepy. Dakota Fanning's tiredness begins to make sense and it is made clearer in the deleted scenes; moreover, the backfill on this story is great. With the exception of Elizabeth Young. I didn't know the relationship between her and David had gone that far, not to mention some things didn't seem entirely congruent.
De Niro may have been one of the only actors to pull this role off. He's real, passionate, and a good dad. I believe in earnest that he is trying to help his traumatized daughter. His patience is off-the-wall amazing (the psychologist in him), yet he maintains discipline when raising his daughter. Best of all he doesn't give up hope.
I'd love more than anything to break down the "surprise ending" because it is when I feel De Niro is at his subtle best, and Fanning her absolutely most desperate, and it works. Famke Janssen works as Fanning's doctor. She doesn't steal any scene and is such a relaxing presence on screen. She very well-casted as a comforting doctor.
You have to look past this movie as a psychological thriller, although there are unresolved issues. It is a movie about putting behind themselves (both David and Emily) a very traumatic past. That is accomplished and it was more of the point of the movie. De Niro at first looks old, but then seems to settle into his role, yet he clashes sometimes with Shue's character. But I love Shue as Elizabeth Young. This character needed to be strong, confident, yet not arrogant, while still being charismatic, and Shue brilliantly displays that. She and David work very well together. Emily on the other hand is clearly going down the path of a death obsessed woman and won't move on. All of these reasons are why the ending and the movie is quite good, and I've given it a more befitting rating.
As for the whimper of the end: it's not. As aforementioned it gets tedious and redundant, but it is resolution and it is the full circle coming out of the character. Dakota Fanning is at her best here. She has rediscovered human emotion and reality. There is a lot of foreshadowing because it's a mystery movie, but most of all be prepared to be freaked out; and that is why you'll want the movie to be over.
Diary of a Mad Black Woman (2005)
It's better than you might think
Tyler Perry has his Eddie Murphy moments with the character Joe (who really wasn't particularly necessary), and although Madea has "Big Momma" tendencies at time, overall she's compassionate and real. She's meant as comic relief, but at times is written as serious. She's better that way. Her strong-will is a key to the movie.
Elise is a good actress and is decent in this movie. The opening scene and her relationship with her husband seems so over-the-top. But my mouth admittedly dropped when his clear-cut infidel family actually is extended beyond the woman. It's one thing to cheat, quite another to literally have a second family. My apologies if that sucks juice from you.
We knew how the movie would end from the previews, not to mention the evident happenings to Steve Harris's character were so heavily foreshadowed the acting was downright horrible. But Shemar Moore is more that applicable for this movie. Those chiding him as purely a Soap actor are not unfair; however, he is convincing. I believe his pursuit is in earnest and the knowing struggle of Elise's character.
Elise's character is pathetic at times and Moore gives us a trite statement to sum it up; however, it is central to the movie. You do find yourself saying to the screen "What are you doing Helen?" It's clear she needs closure and in a she-devil type of way she begins to receive it. Irony is ever-present in this movie, but best presented when Elise is making herself more miserable when exacting her revenge. It's moments like these that Madea gives sensible advice that appears rather natural.
Tyler Perry does have himself in the flesh in this movie and is a fleshy, decent character. I feel for him, but he certainly is overly tight when trying to eliminate memories of struggle and the ending concerning him is too tidy, whilst Elise is over dramatic, and Steve Harris is unquenched. But I like it at the same time because sometimes when calm and at peace, sense arrives. It arrives here.
Elise and Perry, combined with Shemar Moore and at times Steve Harris do the movie justice, while it was a good casting call to get "Star Search" star Tiffany Evans as Perry's daughter. Harris is so callous it doesn't seem real sometimes; moreover, it is certainly pointed in favor of Helen. It didn't take that much extraneous writing to figure that out or get us to feel that way. But slowly it is revealed how poor this relationship really was. Elise borders on overacting here, but mostly gives grit to the movie.
Perry has messages to give and never subtly delivers them, yet the movie is decent, a bit mushy, and a touch long. It is a five-minute story that most develop as it does: over time.
Constantine (2005)
This movie is extremely good
Contrary to many assertion this movie is well-casted. Keanu Reeves has been parodied and mocked - - and not without just cause - - yet he is more than adequate is this film. He's a bitter and frustrated man, so of course, he seems like he's "been plugged" into this film. Just read the tag-line on this site - - he's a nomad amongst three portals. And honestly no one can figure out which is which, right?
I agree that Hell is this movie was so amazing I certainly do not want to go there. Cheesiness aside, it's vivid, real, and, well, hellish. Rachel Weisz seems to stretch more at times, but is a great actress and has some befitting lines and good notions. Things have to be natural and they feel as such.
Moreover, I could not wait for the next scene. Midnight with the lamp, Weisz in the tub, Reeves with the cat - are all sensational scenes. Demonic fights are great and Gabriel is the bittersweet b---- you would expect. Some parts are sketchy, but Reeves is someone I thoroughly enjoyed in this movie. I watched it and honestly did not want to see anyone else take this part. He fit "The Matrix" and he definitely fit "Constantine." I remember a friend of mine thoroughly enjoying the Devil's appearance, yet it has nothing to do with his being a Rob Zombie fan. I concur because he's more than accurate and wild looking. I can't say much more without giving vitals away.
Justice is a key point in this film, but more aptly responsibility is a bigger themes. Reeves has a responsibility, Weisz a responsibility, Reeve's priest friend, Reeve's lackey, Gabriel, and down the list of characters - - they all have a purpose and a responsibility. It certainly has religious undertones and that will have you saying "duh" to this; however, you can partake your own opinion. The reason I say that is you're not blunted with religious irony, but rather caught up in a religious world. I mean Lucifer keeping a pact?
People never panic when they see these demons because exorcisms are expected and Reeves does make note of some oddities in the movie. What I liked the most was the natural occurrence of humor. It seemed like an effort to detach from atrocity, rather than lines written as such.
The beginning of this movie works, but the ending is just outstanding. This movie breathes stereotypes, yet never tires you. There is theory and there is deep research, but nothing is beyond you in this movie. Furthermore, it is never condescending. You'll be wide-eyed at the sight of bending cars, crawlers, and shattered glass, but you'll also be well-informed.
Drumline (2002)
This movie was banging (it had lines like that too)
I love Nick Cannon's plug for the R. After all he is R. Kelly's protégé and must thank him for "I'm a gigolo" and that essentially is his character. Cannon is decent and talented when he doesn't get overly gung-ho on his ghetto smarts. His main "enemy" screaming I'm tired of your fake ass ghetto" whatever sums it up. It still worked. This movie is not forgettable because Cannon can draw a crowd.
The beginning gives Cannon depth and the movie doesn't lose it. He's cocky, he's brilliant, he is real, and he's confident. The last trait drew me in for the first battle. I was audibly rooting for Cannon and embarrassingly caught myself. That is good acting. Not necessarily great, but a good character.
Orlando Jones deserves his props for he is good. He's stern, with a dry, wry, and fitting sense of humor. He cares for music . . . and his job. There is a part you should see coming, but due to the fact you're not blunted with the situation it can surprise you. It becomes at an at peace moment and offers an honest, refreshing, and tidy wrap up to a very complex and difficult situation. Jones also fits in as a disciplinary character for Cannon helping ease this tension. And Cannon fittingly and naturally honors him (although certainly implied) later.
Cannon's girl interest is attractive and learns from him and he learns from her. They balance each other out and look comfortable. Nick Cannon's character is actually a gentleman, whilst Zoe is surprisingly uptight (in character). The movie has predictability and sentimentality, but that's not the focus. The focus is determination, pride, and self-truth. Charles Stone III entertainingly gives you these ideals without dragging down a movie. Those that compare this to "Remember the Titans" aren't wrong, and that movie is great, but by far more over the head with its message. I say perk your eyes and chill out.
Men in Black II (2002)
It is humor that drives this
I agree with the current commentator on this site that this movie is generally weak in character development and story; however, I don't believe it's milked. Frank is so damn funny and engrossing, the movie was bound to be a hit. Frankly I love the damn dog. He throws one liners, has great scenes (especially while driving around with J), and even converses naturally about women. The best line has to be "I'm attracted to her and she's not even my species." It was clear J was smitten and Frank, ever smitten with J and MIB, called it. He's not a new personality, but he's not old and he's not overused.
Tommy Lee Jones is talented and can stretch any character. He starts humorous, which should have been natural and was, before giving way to his prior character. This again was how it should have been - - it was readjustment. Will Smith may have garnered acclaim for "Ali," and regardless of reviews and appearances, looked decent in "I, Robot;" moreover, he has grit in this movie. Particularly, he is quite good in the beginning before settling into his typical, but still engaging antics. The Jeff part that transverses to the pie sequence is followed by major desperation in J's character. It's unforeseen and initially awkward; however, as his relationship with Laura festers with possibility it becomes more natural and fitting. K gave that to us in the end of "Men in Black" with his obsession of stars. The first movie rushed that and it was a bit contrived, but Jones was able to slow it down and make it work.
How J keeps "Putty" (come on he has no other name, although he isn't a bad actor) for five months as his partner, is beyond me. Especially because K trains J in two days in the first film. The reason it gets me is how awkward they still are and how dumb he still is (although J hits on this).
Before I get to Lara Flynn Boyle, I have to express disappointment in Bo Welch. The costumes of the aliens weren't horrible, but rather really out there and unable to be taken seriously. The first time the aliens were real and the movie rough, but this time it's all about the humor. The aliens designed to bring in K for Lara's character are horrible (a ball-chinian? It's somewhat humorous but it gets ruined when K performs a improbable kick. Even worse is Rip Torn's paddle on Lara Flynn Boyle). The problem with this movie is it is so jokey. I can't stand the automatic driver, and why is a playstation controller the only thing that can commandeer this damn machine at hyperspeed? Overall I love Jack Jeebs, Knoxville's character is forgettable, Ben is cool for five seconds (I get the feeling he cares), Dawson is decent, but K and J are still the men. This movie was focused on J and his definite struggle, not MIB, and that is why the story isn't the focus. But how did David Cross elude being neuralyzed in the first movie? The movie works when the characters act, not when they say choice lines. It's balanced fairly well. And K still throws out some cool guidance to J and leaves the possibility for a MIB III, or MIIIB, if so desired.
Lara Flynn Boyle is not bad, but the woman in power line is just poorly delivered, but fitting because it is Men in Black. She honestly seems dumb because she wastes 25 years and still doesn't locate the light; Knoxville's character does. She works though, especially toward the end and is bright enough to use her sexuality to her advantage. Not to mention her stuffing her face is kind of funny to keep tracking. And the robot alien is wickedly, wickedly cool (while K and J are apparently clairvoyant). Mostly I say enjoy this movie because you should laugh and you get a decent story.
War of the Worlds (2005)
Excellent to be as simplistic as one can
The first thing I must say is the negative because they are few (aside from the actual premise itself). The ending is able to be gotten, but you may be caught in in prior events to fully follow it. Not so much because it is difficult, but because with so much hopelessness and tension your mind is anything but clear. Second is the continuity error some caught, when the guy is taping the attacks right after an EMP kills all in the area. Yet slightly thereafter cars started working again, so it is possible.
Next I will go on a limb and say Tom Cruise deserves nothing less than an Oscar nomination. I spoke with a friend who thought Mel Gibson could pull the role off (when I asked who else might be able to play the part). It's certainly possible and other names could certainly surface; however, Cruise's conversion in natural, understanding, foreseen, yet never blunt: it is expected and it is brilliant. Next is Dakota Fanning, she is the best child actor since Haley Joel Osmont. Justin Chatwin in his short time in the movie and limited lines gives a more than credible performance, although there is a part in the movie that is sketchy (I will not reveal it). It's not impossible and the beauty is you are lost in the moment like he and all others.
This movie does not lose you in the action. You feel hopeless when the characters do. The hardest acting was from Tim Robbins. Making a smaller show - - essentially a cameo - - could have been undone by such a big name, but he is believable and the part "chilling" as most have been describing this movie. Even Rick Gonzalez is credible enough. People act as they do in this movie and I would absolutely expect the actions we see in this movie.
The special effects are award-worthy and Spielberg makes a nearly two hour movie taut, fraught with tension, and disturbing. Honestly, I think Robbins is the sickest dude in this movie and there are some sick, desperate people. Cruise, there, is phenomenal and Fanning may be even better.
The writing is excellent. I half expect to hear of major paranoia being prevalent the next time, well, you'll see. It is no secret now the movie's premise of invasion, nor even their method of travel as alluded to in the line before. God is the greatest, quietest star of this film. Spielberg doesn't blunt you with religion, but it is clear how he feels. Nature is God's truest creature and, we humans, the master of it, right? Overall this is an incredible movie that fulfills Tommy Lee Jones' proclamation that "a person is smart, but people are dumb, panicky animals and you know it."
Denis Leary: No Cure for Cancer (1993)
It is offensive to some, but a clear classic never the less
It's an eight flirting with a nine. Forget that, it is a classic, so it gets nothing less than a nine. Ted Demme, save for the coke problem that unfortunately took his life, is brilliant. I don't mean to be insensitive; however, it is fitting here. I believe the next time someone uses a quote of a movie and criticizes it they should get it correct. Leary says "I'm sick and tired of our generation getting called the TV generation. Well all you guys did was watch TV. What'd ya expect? We watched Lee Harvey Oswald get shot, live on television, one day. We were afraid to change the channel for the next 30 years. This show sucks. Yeah, but someone might get shot during the commercial - -hang on."
The point is Leary is ignorant, but brilliant. He wrote this while he and his wife were shacked up in Massachusetts and unable to move. That family part of him comes through in the movie, not the CD. There are more songs on the CD and as good is it is, the movie is better. The ending is maybe a bit cheesy, but fluent with Leary, and fair. The weakest part is his proclamation of love for New York City, when he in fact he seethes so much Bostonian love that part loses some cred. During "Comics Come Home" he says who cares that Eddie Brill won New York Comic of the year three times? Because he's from Boston. But as if Leary would really care. In addition to that the "poodle man" sequence, with regards to NYC, is out of sight. He plays to the audience, not the camera. It is a movie, not a stand-up special.
As for the Bill Hicks comments: who? I have a feeling Leary would say that. After all, during his roast he roasted Peter Gallagher for having a uni-brow and Mario Cantone for being gay and slipping it past his family. There after, he kissed Cantone on the lips (Gallagher wasn't present). Leary is sincere and honest, for the Comedy troupes, to the charities, to his new show. And like he said he is "an a--hole," but a damn funny one