Change Your Image
roger-a
Reviews
The Love Guru (2008)
Not very good... and i really enjoyed it.
Movies are rather personal, aren't they? Enjoying this one helps if you are a Leafs fan and of Mike Myers and Deepak Chopra. I am on all three accounts.
I played hockey with nice guy, Mike, while I was in L.A. in 2000. Since then my daughter (who was five in 2000) have gotten hooked on his Austin Powers films.
We both walked out of the theatre after viewing Guru and said, "It wasn't very good and I really liked it." The spiritual ideas are sound but it's his joy of life that comes through. Like that of Deepak Chopra.
Yes, the pooh-pooh jokes are sometimes old, sometimes gross but for those that are used to it, they don't deter.
Compare the joyous nature of Mike's character in this film (which truly is 'his') and that of Cat in the Hat. How can you go wrong with Dr. Suess? But Cat falls flat.
This is not a hit for the masses. Screw that! I hope he continues to make 'his' films, his way.
Sicko (2007)
How dare you get ill !
SPOILER ALERT
Michael Moore, like all good film makers, manipulates his audience well. It really is not all that difficult. He uses the documentary format to make his point.
Documentaries do not need to present both sides of each story - and this film, like his previous films, do not.
In Sicko, he finds some examples of American citizens who are not treated well by the U.S. health care system. Of course we don't know how many Americans receive such shoddy treatment, but the point is, that it happens at all, when compared to other nations systems.
He gives examples of other 'Western' nations like Canada, Britain and France, who's healthcare is free and available to anyone. In Canada they had a 'Greatest Canadian' contest and the most votes went to the man who started their universal healthcare system.
He touches for a moment on the system that has been so corrupted, starting in congress, manipulated by powerful drug companies. But only for a moment.
The real punch comes when Mr. Moore reached into the 'emotional heart of America' and pulled it out! That is, the 'heroes of 911' - the rescue workers - who were at ground zero and now are suffering the effects of inhaling the air from that area, who now cannot get the healthcare they need.
But he doesn't stop there - he then takes them to Guantano Bay, Cuba to see if he can get some of the healthcare that the supposed terrorists who caused 911 are themselves getting for free! And if that's not enough there is yet another slap in the face - or punch to the gut - to America's horrible system... he DOES get the rescue workers treatment in Cuba! Where they turn down no one. Yes, this evil third world country treats them for free.
In the end he makes the point very simple - if something, no matter what it is, is better else where, would we not want to adapt and change that 'thing' here? If poorer nations can do it...
Finally he makes his plea... it makes sense to care for one another. A strong nation would do that.
Simple compassion is all he asks for.
Why Wal-Mart Works: And Why That Drives Some People C-r-a-z-y (2005)
Wal-mart is a profitable company... duh
This poorly made documentary spends a lot of time telling us they are successful. Who cares? Profitabilty at all costs is unacceptable. They're a company that once sold America on 'Made in the U.S.A.'. Now that most of their goods are made in foreign countries, by humans under horrible conditions, I guess 'Made in America' isn't so important.
But issues like 'Slave Labour' or the closing of manufacturing plants in North America, go pretty much ignored in this film. As do most of the serious allegations against Wal-mart.
I found it funny that considering how much America hates Communism, this company, that wraps itself in the American flag, eagerly accepts a large Communist country as its main source of goods. As long as its profitable - screw moral integrity!
Its a silly little film made by people who must not think much beyond themselves, which is why Wal-mart succeeds in the end.
Team America: World Police (2004)
stand in the middle and blow raspberries at both sides
SPOILERS
I love South Park. Trey Parker and Matt Stone have given us an episode of SP. Its the one where the 'redneck war lovers', at the end of the show, embrace the 'hippie peace-nicks' because then America can be looked at as sensitive but also the ass-kickers of world. This time its with marionettes.
TA;WP is just that. But standing in the middle and making fun of both the left and right isn't terribly gutsy. In TA, they take a position. By making fun of the various celebrities (who are the voices of dissent of the current war), throughout the picture and calling them 'fags' 'pussies' and putting them on side of a North Korean dictator, they take a position.
They're terribly creative in using marionettes. The humor is more of the same... sex/violence/extended vomiting, and I laughed. But its starting to wear a little thin.
If you like South Park, you'll like TA... UNLESS you also see the war with Iraq as terribly tragic, lie infested, overly simplified and something we must not allow to continue. Then you may be frustrated while watching.
Had they not spent so much time making fun of and 'killing' those celebrities who have spoken out (especially Michael Moore), I wouldn't have minded. This could have been a great satire.
But if you think there is a possibility that the world can be a more human place then that makes you a 'pussy'. According to Trey and Matt, anyway.
Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977)
human consciousness evolves
Roy is driven by something he can't explain. Everything he's ever learned has no relevance. Despite this, he will risk all he has, all meaning, all that he has been taught to believe as truth... house, job, friends and even his family... to try to get an explanation.
As a few others also have some kind of strange experience that compels them as well, he is driven even harder to find the meaning. Despite what status quo says.
In the end, even his own life is risked.
This is nothing less than the evolution of human consciousness.
UFOs are used as a metaphor which makes it fun and accessible.
Great film. I don't think Spielberg realizes how wonderful it is.
Napoleon Dynamite (2004)
more nerds than you can shake a geek at
Poignant.
Film can make you empathize with just about anyone. It leads you down the path. But this path we all recognize as part of our teen lives. We were to some extent 'the nerds' or knew of people exactly like Napoleon. The humor comes from the exaggeration - but how exaggerated is it?
The bizarre social world of high school is shown to us and it is all too painful. Of course you want him to win, in the end. But the 'winning' may just be a matter of getting through it relatively unscathed, and simply moving on with the next stage of your life.
The film maker 'winks' at us every once in a while just to show us he's cool and really, we shouldn't act like Napoleon after all.
Code (2003)
A man wakes up to discover all the things that require a password in his life suddenly don't work.
When a man wakes up and discovers that all the things in life that require a password suddenly don't work, he begins to freak out. His telephone answering service, computer, even his entry access code at work... all reject him. Intriguing idea.
With production value higher than most shorts, its easy to watch. But this story lacks any punch. Acting is not very good and it suffers from audio problems as is often the case with low budget productions. But in the end, the story is really going to work for you or its not. It didn't for me. It had potential. But it didn't quite hit the mark.
It does show that the director is capable to direct. That's something.
Kill Bill: Vol. 2 (2004)
much ado about nothing
Quentin Tarantino writes dialogue that is empty yet very interesting. It was sadly lacking in KBVI and completely gone in Volume II. The opening scene in VII is his homage to Sergio Leone's spaghetti westerns - tight close ups and music by Ennio Morricone. But I don't call it homage. Its a straight rip off. And why? To what end?
In this film I was on the edge of my seat... hoping someone on the big screen would say even one line remotely interesting. Nope. Not even the acting was interesting. Just some bits and pieces of many movies that have come before.
But isn't that what Tarantino does best? Its hip hop. Its editing. Its sampling. Clever use of other people's ideas is by no means art. But it is so cool, isn't it?
Candy will not sustain one's hunger. It only gives you a quick fix. QT does have talent but someone has to shake him and tell him that at some point he needs to take the craft of film making more seriously. It is as if he is too scared to actually try and say something - to try something original.
How long did it take Spielberg to finally let go of all the tried and true conventions of his craft and try something serious (Schindler's List), not letting 'box office opening weekend grosses' mentality be the bottom line?
My respect for both QT and UT have dropped but what do they care? In ego land cash is king.
I guess for many, success is the worst thing that can happen to you.
The Passion of the Christ (2004)
violence... the basis of Christianity?
Being brought up as a Christian but without the religious icons about the physical suffering of Jesus, I found it difficult to sit through The Passion of the Christ. Although Mel Gibson completely manipulates the audience by the relentless torture of Jesus I found myself completely removed from any emotional impact many viewers felt when viewing this film.
Many human beings have ben tortured and killed for a cause. That doesn't make them The Messiah. This overly simplistic message is dangerous. Jesus' words and actions take a back seat to the emphasis of his physical being. Which was completely the opposite of his words and deeds... that there is more to our lives than the physical.
The message he emphasized over and over was one of love, turning the other
cheek, the power of forgiveness, of the rejection of violence... the things that the organized Christian movement seemed so lacking in, since its inception 1700 years ago. But here is a movie that emphasizes violence above all. Not surprising looking at Gibson's list of pictures using violence as a means to an end.
How is it that many 'Christians' who thinks there is too much violence in films can accept that violence when its portrayed against their Lord? Bizarre indeed! But an overly simplistic faith will lead to strange behaviour. The violence used in films like the Lethal Weapons series can be dismissed easily. But this is important subject matter and deserves more thought.
As a film lover and film maker I was also unmoved when watching this movie. I completely respect Gibson for financially backing the project but as a story, it lacks that which is necessary to be complete. The slo-mo. stuff was so uninspired. The fact that Jesus never blacked out during the ordeal made him not human - but super human.
Other films, even epics like Ben Hur, deal with the story of The Christ much better. Better written, acted(excluding prince Heston), photographed and far more compelling. The Passion was an experimental film that tweaks those who lack strong conviction or the desire to search for the truth themselves.
What is the message of this motion picture? Jesus was a man and suffered physically in the end? What a waste of time and money.
BUT... as Roger Ebert said recently, "People who normally talk about sports or the weather seem to be talking about this... something more important." And as Martha Stewart said before being dragged off to prison, "And that's a good thing."
The Buddha or Jesus or in modern times Gandhi or Martin Luther King Jr., is there not enough material from these individuals for us to be moved, compelled, challenged or driven toward their message without these overly simplistic stories?
'What Would Jesus Do?' if he saw this film? Probably shake his head yet again and exclaim, "After 2000 years, they just don't get it!"