FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION should have been a phenomenal piece of entertainment as well as an intelligent and relevant pop-culture satire. Alas, it only allowed itself to be mediocre. Christopher Guest has laid out an excellent outline for a better film. I feel like I was given a plot synopsis and character description but nothing more. What it needed was Guest and Company's traditional mockumentary formula. Because there is so much going on and so many characters to keep track of we lose any deeper qualities to the characters and they come off two dimensional as a result. I sat through whole film nearly begging for interview segments where we would understand the director's vision for the film, the agents commenting on how great their untalented clients are and the actors discussing their craft while juxtaposed with images of them doing anything BUT their craft. FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION is a superficial look at a business and mentality that is deeper and much more bizarre than what this talented cast and crew has presented.
Reviews
13 Reviews
The Departed
(2006)
Fantastic Bro
29 September 2006
Excellent. A great, great movie. I saw it last night at a special screening and must say it was a tour de force. Even though Boston is not really a gritty town Scorsese was able to capture a darker side of the city. Coming from that area, I am always concerned when actors put on the local accent as it tends to be distracting rather than supportive. However, with local pros like Damon and Wahlberg they were able to really grab hold of it and not go overboard... most of the time. The true stand out performance has to go to DiCaprio. He has really come into his since hooking up with Scorsese, having scored a number of original performances all of which have expanded his range. He really snagged onto a deep and tragic character and created something that will hopefully be recognized come awards season. One of my favorite aspects was the friendly hostility the characters had for each other. It is a specific trademark that I have never noticed in any other city. In Boston, when you are really close with someone (or not really) it is, more or less, a requirement to bust their balls and shoot cruel insults back and forth in rhythmic banter. That detail was extensively realized in THE DEPARTED and I doubt anybody who was raised outside of the metro Boston area, or at least visited at some point, would find it nearly as hilarious as those who were. As for Scorsese's direction, I think he scored big with this one. While many have criticized that his movies have become more commercial I believe that he has just evolved. There were some classic Scorsese moments here, my favorite being a scene where DiCaprio is alone and packing his things in his apartment. Beautifully cut and stylistically directed. Is it his best effort? No. But it still is truly mesmerizing. He has created something truly special from a city that is highly underrated.
The Da Vinci Code
(2006)
Here's the secret to the DaVinci Code... IT SUCKS!
20 May 2006
I just came back from seeing the film and I couldn't be more disappointed. I am not some religious addict or a freedom fighter for albinos, nor am I a purist who demands that the movie stay close to the book (which it most certainly does, to an awful degree). The problem with the movie is that Ron Howard was so preoccupied with trying to stay as close to the novel as possible that he forgot to tell his own story. I have enjoyed as many of Howard's films as I have disliked, but I thought he knew what he was doing with this one. It seemed like a the first cut of the film. There was no focus, everything was jumbled together and squeezed into a very long 2 1/2 hours. He should have gone the simple route and focused on the plot, not try to deepen the characters with an excessive use of flashbacks. The story is what people loved about the book, the hunt for clues, not understanding Langdon's claustrophobia or Sophie's personal issues. It's the story that was fascinating and Ron Howard forgot about that. Also, there was no suspense. It was predictable and dull. Not even during the car chases was there ever a moment of pure excitement. Truly the biggest surprise at the end of the DaVinci Code was indeed that it sucks.
The Pink Panther
(2006)
An Insult to the Series
17 February 2006
Warning: Spoilers
From the beginning I knew a prequel to the PINK PANTHER series would be an abomination. I did not, however, think it would be worse than I expected. I went to see the movie because I am a fan of Steve Martin and his writing. His attempt at either imitating or recreating the Clouseau role (whichever it was) was, in the very least, a failed accomplishment. The beauty of the Sellers "Clouseau" was the subtlety that Sellers brought to the character. He was clumsy as opposed to stupid. The real humor in the originals is that Clouseau would solve the case, more or less, by accident through his faults. Thus when he received acclaim it was that much more humorous. Martin's "Clouseau" is stupid and vain and has no likable traits. He actually has some police skills that help him in the end, but are not in the vain of Clouseau. He is NOT Clouseau. Why would anyone want to recreate a character that was perfect? Some may say to introduce the series to a new generation. I say buy the DVDs. They are well worth the investment. There is one good scene in the film, which revolves around a cameo by Clive Owen. Granted the scene contains inside jokes but if you get them then you'll laugh. However the scene has nothing to do with the story of the film and Steve Martin should be ashamed of himself for writing such rubbish. The bottom line Peter Sellers must turning over in his grave, but I am sure he's glad he is dead so he does not have to see his legacy damaged.
Predator Island
(2005 Video)
Despite One Good Performance I'd Rather Watch a Toilet Flush
9 November 2005
It's incredible how a movie can take so much time and effort and still end up being abominable. For those of you who appreciate painstaking special effects and inconceivable detail in every shot you will watch this film in awe. Simply because Predator Island contains none of this. It is a redundant remake of every horror monster movie in the last two decades. Now I appreciate bad horror films, they have a certain flare for humor in the most dramatic of circumstances. However, if your goal is to create a memorable work that will thus be engulfed in the Cult Hall of Fame then my first suggestion is to find some imagination/creativity plus get some talent. Oh, and a few extra bucks to put into your picture.
One horror film tradition has been to shock the audience with violent deaths and gore. However, shock doesn't deliver for more than a few seconds. To really evoke a satisfying reaction from paying crowd there should b development of characters, some identifiable traits. I know, you're probably saying this guy is not providing anything intelligent to the filmmakers, he's just stating an amateur remark. Well, that goes to show you how amateur these filmmakers are.
Despite having to go through the horror of watching this movie, there was a silver lining. The performance by Dan Gordon as Chris is splendid. He is given nothing to work with in a script and yet he is able to come out of that film looking like a star. Out of all of the actors he is the only who believes in what he is reciting. He not only provides the audience with someone we can identify with but we also have someone we look forward to watching so we can get through the rest of the film. Gordon shows genuine talent and the ability to pull off quality work and overcoming a huge obstacle, that being the rest of the cast. Dan Gordon is going to be a star, hopefully sooner than later. That is to say if he can get away films like this that will hold him back.
One horror film tradition has been to shock the audience with violent deaths and gore. However, shock doesn't deliver for more than a few seconds. To really evoke a satisfying reaction from paying crowd there should b development of characters, some identifiable traits. I know, you're probably saying this guy is not providing anything intelligent to the filmmakers, he's just stating an amateur remark. Well, that goes to show you how amateur these filmmakers are.
Despite having to go through the horror of watching this movie, there was a silver lining. The performance by Dan Gordon as Chris is splendid. He is given nothing to work with in a script and yet he is able to come out of that film looking like a star. Out of all of the actors he is the only who believes in what he is reciting. He not only provides the audience with someone we can identify with but we also have someone we look forward to watching so we can get through the rest of the film. Gordon shows genuine talent and the ability to pull off quality work and overcoming a huge obstacle, that being the rest of the cast. Dan Gordon is going to be a star, hopefully sooner than later. That is to say if he can get away films like this that will hold him back.
The Constant Gardener
(2005)
Visually Astounding but Falls Flat
4 September 2005
The Constant Gardner has been given rave reviews during the past few weeks, with some critics claiming it to be the best picture of the year. Needless to say, that kind of feedback can create interest in even a movie-hater's mind. However, when leaving the film I found myself to be rather disappointed. I love a complex plot. There is nothing like a movie that makes you think. However, the story here is SO complex that it dilutes the importance of the drug in reference. In fact the conspiracy plot line is referenced in such a subtle method that I never cared on way or another if Ralph Fiennes went through with it. The only part of the script that I could identify with was the blind jealousy that haunts Fiennes for half of the movie. The other portion of the film that really turned me off was the beginning. The love story was so uneventful that I would rather have cut out the first half hour, opened the movie up with her funeral and moved forward from there. If there was need for some character information and development the scenes that were cut could have created very powerful flashbacks. I felt no need for the film to indulge in the pregnancy angle. The movie wasn't built around it and it didn't follow through to the end. Pointless. However, the saving graces of the film were the astounding performances and the stunning photography. While the love scenes themselves were dull and uninspired the performances of Ralph Fiennes and Rachel Weiscz were incredible and were the only reasons why those scenes were watchable. Both performers main evented in this film. Finally the photography. Gorgeous use of color and composition. The camera here is used, not as a canvas to watch a film, but as a window into a reality that may reflect our own in the coming years. However, besides those two elements the movie falls flat. With a film containing such important content you would think the filmmakers could be more effective relaying that content back to its audience.
Wrestling the Way it Was Meant to Be Seen
16 June 2005
Warning: Spoilers
**** MAY BE SPOILERS ****
Finally, a movie that represents professional wrestling as exciting, powerful and important. RIKIDOZAN is a fantastic work that illuminates the desire of a man who wants to be something more and how that same passion caused his self-destruction. One important aspect of this film is the portrayal of Rikidozan as a hero instead of the usual representation of wrestlers as animals and baffoons. It not only showed his professional success but allowed us to follow in the demise of his private life. I'm sure there are many wrestlers from yesterday and today who can identify with his rapid climb and fall as well as the struggle to hold on to what you had.
Professional wrestling, in the United States, is considered the "male soap opera" and as of right now is regarded as little more than a joke. Are the matches pre-determined? Yes. Is it "fake"? No. Because in that ring you have wrestlers who have spent years perfecting their craft, to try and make you believe. They get injured more frequently and more severely than many athletes in other professional sports. They train and pull off stunts that other professional athletes can't even begin to dream about. But do wrestlers get the proper recognition for their efforts? No. Why? Well, they're not real athletes are they?
Rikidozan was a real athlete and has been immortalized in this film. When Japan was crippled from World War II, Rikidozan became the nations inspiration. After, being rejected from sumo wrestling because he was Korean, he went to America where he became an in ring sensation. Upon his return he made the biggest impact of his life on the people of Japan as they considered him to have conquered America, their wartime enemy. He was a national hero. He brought professional wrestling to Japan, where it has flourished ever since. In Japan wrestling is not a fad that comes every now and again, it's a rite of passage.
The downfall opposite Rikidozan's rise somewhat reflects today's current state of the business. He simply did not want to lose his status. The movie sees Rikidozan even change the finish of a match on the fly so he would not have to lose which was then topped by his already violent temper growing even worse due to his paranoia of the Yakuza murdering him. Here Rikidozan represents Triple H. Triple H refuses to build up new talent in wee because he is paranoid about losing his "top spot" and insists that he is still the top draw. Rikidozan followed this same path and ultimately succumbed to using drugs ("Western Medicine") like so many of the greats have like Jake "The Snake" Roberts and Mr. Perfect. This movie portrays wrestling as what it really is: A gritty business, full of politics and corruption and pain, with the only light being performing for the fans.
Technically speaking the movie is no wunderkind. The translation of the dialog is weak. The performances tend to be a little over the top at times. The direction is not strong and at times (during the montages) can be a bit overbearing. But none of that is as important as the story. It follows the path of one of the all time great wrestlers, a true legend, who, despite his personal problems, brought a nation out of their seats at the mere mention of his name.
Finally, a movie that represents professional wrestling as exciting, powerful and important. RIKIDOZAN is a fantastic work that illuminates the desire of a man who wants to be something more and how that same passion caused his self-destruction. One important aspect of this film is the portrayal of Rikidozan as a hero instead of the usual representation of wrestlers as animals and baffoons. It not only showed his professional success but allowed us to follow in the demise of his private life. I'm sure there are many wrestlers from yesterday and today who can identify with his rapid climb and fall as well as the struggle to hold on to what you had.
Professional wrestling, in the United States, is considered the "male soap opera" and as of right now is regarded as little more than a joke. Are the matches pre-determined? Yes. Is it "fake"? No. Because in that ring you have wrestlers who have spent years perfecting their craft, to try and make you believe. They get injured more frequently and more severely than many athletes in other professional sports. They train and pull off stunts that other professional athletes can't even begin to dream about. But do wrestlers get the proper recognition for their efforts? No. Why? Well, they're not real athletes are they?
Rikidozan was a real athlete and has been immortalized in this film. When Japan was crippled from World War II, Rikidozan became the nations inspiration. After, being rejected from sumo wrestling because he was Korean, he went to America where he became an in ring sensation. Upon his return he made the biggest impact of his life on the people of Japan as they considered him to have conquered America, their wartime enemy. He was a national hero. He brought professional wrestling to Japan, where it has flourished ever since. In Japan wrestling is not a fad that comes every now and again, it's a rite of passage.
The downfall opposite Rikidozan's rise somewhat reflects today's current state of the business. He simply did not want to lose his status. The movie sees Rikidozan even change the finish of a match on the fly so he would not have to lose which was then topped by his already violent temper growing even worse due to his paranoia of the Yakuza murdering him. Here Rikidozan represents Triple H. Triple H refuses to build up new talent in wee because he is paranoid about losing his "top spot" and insists that he is still the top draw. Rikidozan followed this same path and ultimately succumbed to using drugs ("Western Medicine") like so many of the greats have like Jake "The Snake" Roberts and Mr. Perfect. This movie portrays wrestling as what it really is: A gritty business, full of politics and corruption and pain, with the only light being performing for the fans.
Technically speaking the movie is no wunderkind. The translation of the dialog is weak. The performances tend to be a little over the top at times. The direction is not strong and at times (during the montages) can be a bit overbearing. But none of that is as important as the story. It follows the path of one of the all time great wrestlers, a true legend, who, despite his personal problems, brought a nation out of their seats at the mere mention of his name.
Triple Header
17 December 2003
I was one of the few thousand dorks that was lucky enough to attend the "Trilogy Tuesday" screenings yesterday where they showed the first two in their extended format followed by the national debut of the third. I went into the finale knowing that Return of the King had much to live up to. The first two are cemented pieces of film history. Does the third installment live up to the expectations? I would say for the most yes.
There were definitely some issues that I had with it. The post-coronation scenes in the Shire and beyond were too drawn out. I'm not sure if my feelings around that are genuine or just because I had sat through nearly twelve hours of Lord of the Rings, but never the less last night I felt like the ending could have been shortened. My other problem with it was I felt the battle sequences at the end were too broad and left little room for small, detailed character moments minus the women's rights moment of course.
As for positives, the part that I loved the most and still gives me chills to this moment was the way Gollum was brought up from being the third wheel to the prominent villain. Absolutely fantastic. Jackson made some great directorial decisions about how to make him such a creep, and just plain nuts. Kudos to him for that. One other thing I noticed was nearing the end I really discovered how much I cared for these characters, some of whom were introduced only in the second movie. I shared every emotion with them and that is not a common event these days when referring to the movies.
My final thought is about a statement I heard before this movie came out about who really shined in the three films. I heard that Fellowship was Gandalf's movie, which I agree with. The Two Towers was Gollum's movie which I definitely agree with. The Return of the King was supposed to be Aragorn's movie... I disagree. This was Sam's movie. Out of all of the characters that shined in this movie (and they all did, cameo or not) Sam was the true star, he overcame so many obstacles and personal defeats in the film that it made him one of the true heroes. Overall I think it has elements to be the best in the series, but until I see again with a fresh mind (as opposed to seeing the previous two immediately beforehand) I have to give the trophy to the Two Towers.
There were definitely some issues that I had with it. The post-coronation scenes in the Shire and beyond were too drawn out. I'm not sure if my feelings around that are genuine or just because I had sat through nearly twelve hours of Lord of the Rings, but never the less last night I felt like the ending could have been shortened. My other problem with it was I felt the battle sequences at the end were too broad and left little room for small, detailed character moments minus the women's rights moment of course.
As for positives, the part that I loved the most and still gives me chills to this moment was the way Gollum was brought up from being the third wheel to the prominent villain. Absolutely fantastic. Jackson made some great directorial decisions about how to make him such a creep, and just plain nuts. Kudos to him for that. One other thing I noticed was nearing the end I really discovered how much I cared for these characters, some of whom were introduced only in the second movie. I shared every emotion with them and that is not a common event these days when referring to the movies.
My final thought is about a statement I heard before this movie came out about who really shined in the three films. I heard that Fellowship was Gandalf's movie, which I agree with. The Two Towers was Gollum's movie which I definitely agree with. The Return of the King was supposed to be Aragorn's movie... I disagree. This was Sam's movie. Out of all of the characters that shined in this movie (and they all did, cameo or not) Sam was the true star, he overcame so many obstacles and personal defeats in the film that it made him one of the true heroes. Overall I think it has elements to be the best in the series, but until I see again with a fresh mind (as opposed to seeing the previous two immediately beforehand) I have to give the trophy to the Two Towers.
The Black Hole
(1979)
Cheese in Space
19 August 2003
Warning: Spoilers
********PSEUDO-SPOILERS*********
I hadn't seen this movie in YEARS. In fact I hadn't even thought about in 17 years. However the other I was flipping through the channels and instantly recognized the over saturated red color tone that encompasses the entire movie. I was immediately drawn in, reliving my former youth. It was much worse than I remembered, but it was still as much fun. The robots were PATHETIC even for the time! I mean this was post Star Wars, robots had taken an incredible turn. There was no need to go retro. I could make better robots out of my grandmothers bed pan. I felt like I was watching an old episode of Lost in Space. However, suck-bots aside it was still fun and retained that dark look although avoiding dark story like a real bad beating. One sequence made me laugh at how unnecessary it was. I think it was Alex who trips or something and is sent out into space and, in a an action that couldn't make me care even if my least favorite person was run over by a chariot, is suddenly saved by one of the robots. WHY?! How does this advance the story? Oh wait, it doesn't! It doesn't even add tension. But like I said I still find it to be a fun movie, despite its tendencies to touch upon the ludicrous. I'll tell you though, one of the final images in the movie to this day creeps me out. When Reinhart is flying in the air at the end and he disappears out of frame followed by his head suddenly emerging from nowehere... damn, still gives me chills. He is one scary SOB. Anyway, I recommend it if you haven't seen and likewise if you have.
I hadn't seen this movie in YEARS. In fact I hadn't even thought about in 17 years. However the other I was flipping through the channels and instantly recognized the over saturated red color tone that encompasses the entire movie. I was immediately drawn in, reliving my former youth. It was much worse than I remembered, but it was still as much fun. The robots were PATHETIC even for the time! I mean this was post Star Wars, robots had taken an incredible turn. There was no need to go retro. I could make better robots out of my grandmothers bed pan. I felt like I was watching an old episode of Lost in Space. However, suck-bots aside it was still fun and retained that dark look although avoiding dark story like a real bad beating. One sequence made me laugh at how unnecessary it was. I think it was Alex who trips or something and is sent out into space and, in a an action that couldn't make me care even if my least favorite person was run over by a chariot, is suddenly saved by one of the robots. WHY?! How does this advance the story? Oh wait, it doesn't! It doesn't even add tension. But like I said I still find it to be a fun movie, despite its tendencies to touch upon the ludicrous. I'll tell you though, one of the final images in the movie to this day creeps me out. When Reinhart is flying in the air at the end and he disappears out of frame followed by his head suddenly emerging from nowehere... damn, still gives me chills. He is one scary SOB. Anyway, I recommend it if you haven't seen and likewise if you have.
DEPP! DEPP! DEPP! DEPP! DEPP! DEPP! DEPP! DEPP! DEPP! DEPP! DEPP!
10 July 2003
I sat there in the movie theater and just could understand something. How is that no matter what Johnny Depp is in he keeps bringing the awesome. He was in top form for this picture. It amazes me how this guy is so quiet and not media sociable and yet can pull of this cocky, funny over the top character. He's just nuts and it is fantastic. Orlando Bloom? Meh, he was okay. He took nothing away from the experience of the film but he was just a bit too righteous for me. Geoffrey Rush is another impeccable talent. He just knows what he needs to do to get the job done and then he adds a little spark to make his character go over in a big way. Jonathan Pryce is always good to watch. I love how during one of the big scenes he just sits around like a taco but then takes credit in the end. Hysterical. The rest of the film is just plain fun, not an Oscar contender but just a feel good, action packed adventure. The film's plot and storytelling are told with outstanding visuals and clever dialogue, but it is carried by the subtle, yet exciting score of Klaus Badelt. I have followed Klaus's career since his early work with Hans Zimmer. He wrote a convincing and exciting score that keeps up with the manic pace of the film, at times driving it. Truly a gem. However, with all that said, it is Johnny Depp's vehicle. He branded the film with his magnificent sense and talent. I find one thing funny though, whenever a film does well the star is always commended and sometimes the director is left out. Gore Verbinski pulled out a sharp, crazy spectacle that hasn't been seen in a while. It appeals to movie fans of all ages and not many films these days do that. Kudos to him.
People Just Don't Get It
1 July 2003
I know loads and loads of people who have seen this movie and they have all told me how insulting and disrespectful it was toward the memory of the people lost in the Pearl Harbor attack. Folks, it is not making fun of the situations that it represents, it is a satire of the films directed by Michael Bay. It's accuracy in portraying the superficial storytelling and ludicrous shots that have been famous with Bay is unmatched. I think it is truly creative to blend three movies, Armageddon, The Rock and Pearl Harbor, into own ridiculous tale. I give the director of Pearlmageddon mad props for making this film. I laughed and laughed and laughed. My only problem with the film is that I didn't make it first.
Watership Down
(1978)
Dark and Intense... But What I Saw Before Was Even BETTER!
23 June 2003
I will always remember this movie. I don't remember every exact detail, since I have not seen it in quite some time. However, the intensity of the film is what has stuck with me. As well as the risk that the filmmakers took in producing such a dark cartoon especially during the bloody scratching battles between the rabbits. However, one thing sticks out more than any part of the movie and that is the ever popular short that took place before hand. The VHS copy that I rented as a child had BAMBI vs. GODZILLA beforehand, almost like a trailer. What a way to open up such a powerful film with the most original animated short film I have ever seen. Sometimes I wish Bambi won.
Starship Troopers
(1997)
Humor, cheese, action and a little propaganda are all a growing boy needs.
15 March 2003
I have not read the book, and according to some the book is better, however as I come from a single frame of mind I will NOT go out on a limb and say that this movie is phenomenal. The first time you see it you are glued to the special effects, the second time you see it you discover the extreme over the top humor and further viewings get you to see what some call "Nazis in Space". The film is basically a World War II Nazi propaganda film and when looking at it under that eye it becomes so much more intriguing. I love sitting down and watching the movie and going through different moments in the movie and relating them to events happening in WWII, especially the representation of the D-Day invasion. Granted it was over the top, but never the less exciting. And with Paul Verhoeven at the helm how can you go wrong? Paul gives it that rugged yet glamorous flavor that has become regonized throughout his resume. Paul is not afraid to show his audience graphic violence. That is a very bold move to make, knowing that kind of expression could cause a blow in the box offic. And so from the director who brought us such spectacles as RoboCop and Showgirls (I do not include Total Recall as the movie is a dreadful romp into nothingness) comes a true over the top masterpiece, not equally the great dramas of our time, but definitely giving us a little dose of entertainment in world consumed with artists.
Tell Your Friends