Reviews

the grunting labored breaths of Sir Anthony Hopkins gets painful to watch at times, with his 50 foot mug on the screen so large and laborious that you can feel the panic striking that you yourself have become an old Kiwi determined to drive an old motorcycle as fast and my the skin of your seat (or leg flesh) that you possibly can. Lifting you head up to see the action at 200 mph. This sets up for some major disaster and you can wait and wait for it, but this is based on real life, so the odds are changed, there are no plot predictors just some action and Hopkin's 50 foot mug as large as any wise old actor can be portrayed. A real theatresque piece by this knight. Nothing in the way of real action, just a heart warmer story that keeps them coming from L.A. to Utah back to New Zeland.

a great film for its time held together by acting alone. The trials of the river boat in Africa much different from "The Heart of Darkness" The tough fix-it Canadian Bogart matched up with missionary Hepburn proves to be a hot dynamic. You are sucked into the small details of character and the charming boat itself. Another war film demonizing the Germans circa World War one.

I like to imagine this film shot in Iceland, near the coast with a lot of wind, very strange to think of the scenes with the mosquitoes then, the heat has subsided and the crocodiles would be and the bottom of the lakes smoking cigarettes or something.

This one went down like another sheet of broken glass. Much like 'Taxi Driver' with dream sequences interspersed with the reality of events. Notable for Sandra Burnhart's first 5 minutes. She gets the frantic energy off to a running start. In fact the first 5 minutes sum up the film's plot. Sinister and diabolical this is no comedy. De Niro heads up his usual role as some form of delusional spirited protagonist. I was surprised to see that this film was shot after 'Raging Bull' and yet follows with many of the elements of 'Taxi Driver' except not as cool (minus blood and guns). A real cheap look at different forms of deranged thinking. No real depth just story, albeit one that hits your gut and heaps you at the screen. Two thumbs up.

an entertaining spoonful for heroes. Like fishing in the sea you turn up with something after the day is done. A few smiles and chuckles will follow you through this one. Ad-libb-ly and grabbing at a bowl to make yourself useful. A clean fight the whole way, no shots fired and clean fun for the kids. Jumping rope, hopscotch and calling someone your best friend fills the warm belly of this one. It can stall and fall at times but the whole train arrives at some point and the end closes with some fast smart jokes that pull the uncle out of you. Watch it at night with a glass of Scotch and the lights turned down low, clean slippers on your feet and relax.

Living near the Hogwart's castle/school makes watching a Harry Potter film that much more interesting. I really like the compactness of this film--- i think that it was great to condense the book instead of rendering every bit of it--- that is best left for reading methinks. I have been engaged in conversation(s) with people who very intensely love the Potter--- they tell me things that happen in the books and the background of every character--- I have yet to read one word of it but have been piecing things together from the collaborative voice of my friends--- I have decided to stay away from the books for now--- hoping to escape the prison that I see people engaged in (aka) waiting for the 'next' book---- I admit that the films are staying good if not--- getting better---

well--- the voice of John Gielgud .... Michael Clark's dancing and the visuals of Greenaway--- what could be better--- Well I was actually looking for a coffee before this film and really needed one after. I found the fury to be of stagnant order. The set/costumes and verbiage of the grand old style--- but please give me Jodorowsky any day--- that man understands the subconscious--- he is a 'seer' ---Greenaway is a filmmaker--- and that is the difference. Although the costume and color inspired me to make a drawing of those 'cheese collars'--- ones in which catch the cheese before it falls to the floor--- a useful invention--- the Book of Cheese Collars--- in it you will find words of savory and stained greasy pages, edible pages, leaflets and pamphlets containing stores of pirate cheese and small drawings of earls and dukes eating cheese with these collars---

I seems that in all the lull of originality they have succumbed the the banal task of squeezing the life out of anything interesting for our over indulged and entertained minds. Factotum the book was a much faster and dipping slew of words in account to a transient lifestyle and monotony of the human being's pursuit. The book has a more varied voice using humour with the underlying understanding of deep depression while the film was about alcoholism and gambling.

The film cuts and catches parts of the book rather well--- one scene transcribed from the book was the yachting experience that i clearly remember-- the way that it is handled in the film was almost funnier than the angry and somber tone of the book--- which i guess leads to something more entertaining but missed the point of decadence and depravity that he is possibly showing though this images felt on the boat.

I had some real problems with this film--- but who wouldn't-- Buk fans are usually disgruntled child molesters that drink until they're blind--- reaching out for hope in Buk's words and a sense of meaning through the madness--- either way not many fans could be pleased--- but i think a rendition of 'Pulp' should be made next--- to show that understanding that Buk had in Hollywood etc. etc.

--- This film worked well-- the story and the cast--- a real gem. It has lost a bit over time but the premise of the movie-- the 'everyman' dreaming about becoming--- is great. This gives way to some real 'stuntish' stuff without feeling illegal to the real world (a good way to justify the absurd). I loved reading the comment that B. Keaton broke his neck after hanging from the water pipe near the train tracks--- in fact on watching that i was wondering how that must have felt- now i see the real leap of faith that you 'wont' get hurt too bad and that old gritty life--- I mean today--- what kind of contracts would have to be signed before that stunt--- and what actor has that 'stunt' and humour capacity to pull that off... anyway I digress. The motorcycle scene and in general the chase sequences are always nice in B. Keaton flick--- enjoy this well deserving classic.

---

I still think that Harpo steals the show. Groucho gets annoying after awhile (esp. after several viewings) but there is the subtle and playful mind of Harpo. He demands the viewers attention as soon as he appears and then can run off as if it never even mattered. Plus he can play the harp--- that is some real old school entertaining-- Chico plays well against Harpo's character-- almost a straight man, but even he gets into the 'Italian' jokes/impersonations --- that 'flash' bit still gets me--- almost as much as the card game--- i find that and Groucho's dance are the highlights of the film--- other parts can seem like old fashion filler (note that the TV viewing culture has shifted--- people generally needed more back then)--- but still a funny classic.

watch that card game again--- what a great choreographed masterpiece.

I found that watching this film was interesting and engaging. I didn't feel apathetic about the parts of the film and in general I feel that it would be easy to pick apart due to the content alone.--- but that's OK--- I'll jump into it--- Was this a bit of a music video? Why were all the students fairly attractive--- there wasn't any real repulsive children scowling in the corner--- there were no freaks or real geeks--- the jocks seemed tame and the cross section smelt of private school as opposed to the poor kids that worked 40 hours a week and look ragged after many greasy hours hovering over a fry-o-later--- However most of my slandering of this film only falls on the 'beautified gap kids' cast--- the actual pace of the film and the direction of the mundane was very interesting and seemed to amplify the surreal nature of the 'loosely true' event. It gets you engaged into a world of a few days or day that seems to be well out of place from natural society--- ---I refuse to get into the semantical debate over why--- but I feel that Gus Van Sant covered a nice film of reasons or 'usual suspects' (ie. Hitler, getting spit waded, video games, suppressed homosexuality, social anxiety and insanity) ---for what ever the reason--- the actual act seemed removed and lazily brutal. (I guess that is the advantage of a gun)--- I recommend this one and hopefully you can get over seeing all these drama kids do their bit.

---

well--- i felt that this film was beautifully shot and contained great sound/audio (not much in the way of Nirvana) and some nice subtle scenes that play with the mind's eye. There is nothing here really of fact and the 'fictional' story is loosely based on Cobain's last days. Don't make the mistake (as i did) of thinking that you will find much in the way of fact or of insight to the suicide/murder. It is a stylized account that found the flavor of that time in history (almost 10 years ago!) My favorite element that the film hits on is the suggestion that it was a murder--- it is done with some real class and poetry--- in fact the last 15 minutes of the film are the best (if indeed slow)--- but you need some appreciation and patience to 'enjoy' this film.

I guess that Gus was looking to tease us--- expecting a certain audience that would attend (Nirvana fans, lets say) ---and what a let down for a good number of those fans--- it is almost a real 'up yours' --- but I'm still on the fence wondering if that was his intent.

i'm a fairly patient person--- you may not be--- this might be a hard one to sit through--- but at least it wasn't/isn't a usual take on a fairly standard story.

Well now you see that Johnny Depp wont just stagger around looking interestingly attractive to the female audiences. He actually doesn't seem to care for some of his own self-created image of the melancholy yet charismatic goof-ball. Instead he decides (or it was decided) that he could play a role similar to Michael Keaton in Beetlejuice ---by that I mean slightly annoying and uncomfortable--- lets not forget some of the common elements of Burton films--- when he is making one for the fans and when he is making one for himself--- i think that this falls in the latter category.

Did i find that this movie was good? Well his modern adaption and the depiction of characters went fairly well but in general it didn't jive all the way with a sense of charm or original material--- most of it was the set/props and the look--- the interactions of the characters was fairly diluted and --- yes there was some good flashback scenes of W. Wonka that I felt J. Depp excelled in--- overall not the best--- somehow it just didn't come together.

Why is it that in the U.K. this gets a rating of '15' and in the U.S. an 'R'. The 11 year old kids in Norway seem to be able to watch it alongside 13-year-olds from Spain. If Howard Stern could read this he would have a fit! Why are these films censored the way they are. Granted there is a lot of swearing and nudity etc. but it's content doesn't seem to dictate something harmful. There isn't a lot of swearing for swearing sake. It is an interesting story akin to the Twilite Zone ----I'm wondering how far the religious right have infiltrated the minds of Americans where they aren't allowed to make better decisions for themselves. A rating sets a legal restriction that a parent has full right all the time to make for themselves. Why does the government need to pull the spring back on the wind-up dolls. Let them spin a bit. Let art reflect life and not edit it.

What would Jesus do?

I watched this with a classroom of Spanish students learning English. Due to some of the archaic slang some of this film passed them by--- and not for bad reasons. This film is getting old. Yes it is a classic and I still find it funny--- only so funny. The jokes are lined up and knocked down and there is a constant energy from Gene Wilder. Marty Feldman gets the full cake after all these years. His portrayal of Igor is still one of the best. He fulfills the need of the clumsy comedian that gets you through some of the dull times in the other Frankenstien flicks--- but in this case Igor walks away with most of the show. There is a dancing sequence which still holds up after all this time and reveals Gene Wilder's talents a bit better. The Spanish students generally liked the film and it got me out of teaching (speaking) for 106 minutes---- they also wrote some nice movie reviews in English. I wish I still had them--- one student really slammed the film as being generally 'unwatchable'--- I applauded her freedom to say what she thought and it got her to use some more complex English.

...and i'll leave it at that.

I felt a giant slow insult crashing against my face shortly after starting this flick. I thought it was a made for T.V. film. Lawerence Taylor was my only refuge in this thing. He isn't a great actor but he does represent a message along with the many messages of the film--- mostly commenting on contemporary people in sports. I had a hard time getting into the 'hard-hitting' and celebratory of the players--- none of them really seemed to have a backbone--- i guess that is the way it goes--- not to say that they don't portray exceptional athletes--- it's just the breed of athletes seem less reality based and more self glorified. Al Pachino plays a role that I'm sure is familiar to those involved in the real thing--- but L.T. is the real thing.

I own this beauty--- a wonderful visual to the classic novel. I have watched this film a few times and i can say that it is also easy to fall asleep too. I have recently been having a hard time with some of the cultural baggage to older films--- where the camera can sit for long moments of time--- this one is a bit easier due to the absence of dialog--- which can really throw off the viewer. All in all i can wade through that old fashioned stuff and get to the heart of the beast. This film opens with one of the best visuals in film--- that one scene of the four horsemen sticks to my mind like glue--- the dry ice and puppets come to life--- in great puppetry fashion--- this is an actual relief from all the computer animation that is being deployed these days--- and then follows the story of the alchemist--- i wish that alchemists still existed--- i would major in a university if that were the case--- a beautiful mixture of folklore, science, art and experimentation--- The last thing that I will comment on is the way that Mephisto is dressed/looks reminds me of the way that the Chinese were demonised in the olden days--- giving the film a hard edge that it turns on--- I don't want to lead you too far into thins film--- just see it--- F.W. knows what he is doing---

During most of the film Bruce Wayne just has no idea that he is Batman--- This was great--- you felt like you could take that journey with him in 'becoming' --- I found that the story was captivating (even though Scarecrow seems to be added in)--- the dark and demonic flavor that the Scarecrow brought made Batman dangerous and exciting again--- like an old toy out of the toy box being played again with some new story (instead of the the ol' Batty swishing around and takin' care of business)

---you get into having a contempt for Bruce Wayne and you start to buy the story of how he pulls off his double life--- as a playboy and a weirdo---- in fact after its said and done you wonder how he couldn't become Batman--- Alfred provided nice charm and comic relief to some of the heavier scenes--- (although--- only so heavy) I also liked the Ninja background of Batman's training--- it helps to see where he got so good--- without having any special powers--- Batman just has his money and gadgets--- at least he spent some loot training to be such a bad-a$$.

I nominate this a close finish between the first (keaton) batman--- and in fact there was one scene where Bruce Wayne jumps off a building and kind thumps ungracefully on a fire escape where i saw a flash of the old Adam West Batman--- what great mix---

Dang, that was a good film. I felt that it never really got boring or repetitive (maybe slightly toward the end when it seemed to lack a certain rhythm) ---Of course being a documentary there will not necessarily be a a rescue and redemption after a fiery explosion--- Dan Johnston seemed to have the life of a muse--- one that could have all the aforementioned events in his life--- but in general it seemed like a hard long struggle--- someone who continues to pay his dues to the 'art god'--- his pilgrimages and aquatic sermons prove that his level of practice is beyond a rational explanation other than the ordinary 'crazed genius' or 'unfunctional art freak' (possibly a combination of the 2)--- a definite voyage outside of yourself--- the content and cohesiveness of the film transports you out of your own--- and into the life of an very interesting person--- ---LSD may not always help you--- ---i think that was the Christian Right stepping in--- and sure enough --- it really didn't seem like it helped much.

Enjoy the Dylanesque and W. Willis Fiasco of an unnerved emotional giant.

peace

i found this shire comedy quaint and back from the good IL' days of earlier times--- I don't know why they picked such awful material--- I find that the Scottish people have a great sense of humor but the unfairly represents this. There was a bit too much repetition of characters and jokes--- the skits got a little too 'hammy' and reminded me of things that children do to make you laugh as opposed to a frightful wretch in your gut because you can't breath and you are laughing too hard--- i didn't not find this--- it was more of a bizarre cultural product and not so much a comedy. ---Meanwhile 'Little Britian'--- I'm not sure what these sketch comedies have in common--- they can both be a bit borderline 'shireish' and lose touch of the greatness of all cultures--- but that't the UK for you.

well being a Kinski fan if felt that it didn't contain enough scenes with him in it. There were some nice surprises along the way but nothing of real substance---including 'B' movie substance--- unfortunately it was too boring to be a nice form of kitch. There is one nice scene of a 60's art party where devilry and fornication included some horrible psychodelia and sweaty Italians dancing. Not bad---but not enough to keep a sane person interested. There is a few scenes where Kinski is being a total malicious killer and he thinks much like a wild animal killing anything for his own greed and no human emotion is felt by him. I wouldn't bother with this one leave it and go do something constructive with your time like watch your laundry in the dryer.

Well my fond memories of this film still hold up--- by this i mean sitting as one of the grandfathers of some of the aesthetical decisions in films like LOTR and numerous low budget imitators. Although i don't believe that the budget to this film was that great and being a horror movie that can help add to the intense space and alien scenes--- there is enough characters that keep the pace human. I felt that the technology in the film was quite dated looking specifically tied to the 80's and that feels kinda nice--- i like this idea that cultural aesthetics are changing and this is reflected in as various cultural items as a space horror film.

The models and set of the movie feels realistic (besides a few space ship flying scenes)--- watch it--- it is an essential cultural item--- even if this isn't what your into---

I generally like films with a lot of archive footage--- there seems to be some form of truth to these old clips that surpasses the current raving of Moore. Don't get me wrong this guy has some good things to say and he pushes to get some forms of change---- and he generally seems like a nice guy, but he can be a bit 'too much'--- granted i think that this is necessary to get heard by a wider audience i suppose. I found that the train of thought moved the film through a few social-political problems that occur in the U.S. and that it spread out the topic into a few 'fringe' problems as well. I was hoping for more details and different points of view on the issue (even if they don't agree--- Moore needs to realize that people will make up their minds even when given more than 2 points of view) Nice to see that someone is saying something political---- i know that the politicians never seem to say anything!

After seeing this film again after the first time i saw it a few years ago i came to new conclusions about the film. I understood Jodorowsky's circus background and could clearly see processions of people and props/displays being used--- similar to Fando y Lis and El Topo--- Still good in their own right.... Funny how trapped it is into the 60's counter culture and this sense of free love and sex freaks--- with today's different social climate this seems fairly unreasonable (possibly more fun) version of todays 'Harry Potter' and 'Lord of the Rings' escapists. I like how the spiritual energy kept the film at a high buzzing sound for many staged and well directed delusionals (iconic representations) of the internal world

I like this documentary and recommend owning it. There are so many scenes that one can jump to to find Kinski's leering face and saying something fantastic. I believe that he somehow opened up his third eye and could no longer see most of the world that we live in. ----Or am I being fooled--- either way, Kinski has left his mark or should I say scar across the face of theatre and film. My only wish is that someone somewhere compiles a volume set of his greatest scenes ranging from a star performance in a well considered artful Herzog film to all of his 'B' movie bombs.

I still enjoy hearing Herzog imitating Kinski and saying, "I was Monumental I was Epical!!!!" ---and his description in the beginning of the doc. when he throws a tantrum that lasts for several days, destroying everything in the bathroom to the point where you could pass every bit through a tennis racket.

That is power. Watch it and believe.

this film does take awhile to get going---stick with it. There is some great shots and the pace is deliberately contemplative. I find that the pace of the film is more natural than most of the Hollywood gangster/crime movies.

Hopper is in one of his best roles, scary to say the least. The budget must have been adjusted to the diameter of his nose. Running around like a frickin' five year old.

The plot unravels slowly to reveal who the more powerful characters are in the film--- through the technique of death. I was left guessing for good parts of it (i didn't watch it with the subtitles) Most of it is in English and a few parts German. I pieced most of it together and in the end you understand everything, don't say something sly to a madman. Or make sure you know who a madman is.

A must see---even if what I wrote is uninspiring--- i don't like to give much away---although if you find yourself a Dennis Hopper fan--- I can compare he performance to that in 'A River's Edge' or 'Blue Velvet' that should be enough.

Just wait for the climactic end!