3 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
10/10
Excellent, almost flawless.
17 February 2005
The storyline of this film is deliberately slow, and I cannot stress this enough, it is deliberately slow.

It it done this way so that you are left with no feelings for the lead character (Val Kilmer) until he get's off his chest the full horror of what he has endured with the loss of his wife.

The unfortunate thing these days is that too many films have started slow and remained slow, or that they start fast paced and have an anti-climatic end to them.

However, this film needs patience from the audience, and when you reach the longest flash back scene you see why he has become or is acting as a regular tweaker (junkie). The depth of the storyline from this point on WILL get to you and then the audience will be rooting for him all the way.

The only flaw which is hardly even a flaw, is the rather pointless scene involving his tweaker associates (not friends, but associates)when they plan a heist.

It seems a little unnecessary, but when added to the excellent Dirty Harry style '6 shots or only 5' this may seem the only way to introduce the final scene; i.e you can't have the final scene without a similar cartoon style scene from earlier.

Any, given patience, you will love this film.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Hannibal (1959)
8/10
Good Film, good acting.
17 February 2005
This film was good, it followed the series of battles from 218 to 216 BC which culminated in Hannibal's victorious, heavy defeat of the biggest ever assembled Roman Army of 80,000 (Battle of Cannae).

This film even mentions the siege of Saguntum (Rome's Ally in Spain) which brought on the second Punic War when the Carthaginian senate refused to surrender Hannibal Barca to them.

After briefly showing the events of the Battle of Trebia (December 218BC) and the battle of Lake Trasimene (June 217BC) there are political scenes involving both the Carthaginians and the Romans as Fabius Maximus tries to persuade the Roman senate not to engage Hannibal in open battle, rather skirmish and harass.

Victor Mature played Hannibal well, but the only element which was wrong with this film was that it did not appear to command the same budget available for it's production as The 300 Spartans or Spartacus (in particular had) so the battle of Cannae, Hannibal's finest hour (or hours) did not come across as the battle would have done.

The reason for this is that they would have needed to assemble AT LEAST 130,000 extras in order to portray the events at Cannae. However, they still managed to assemble a lot of extras for the battle scene, just not nearly as much as 130,000 Aside from this minor flaw, I LOVED IT.
7 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
I bought this for £7.99 at Blockbuster Video, now I would like my £15 back please.
11 February 2005
Warning: Spoilers
How can I begin? Well let's start with the price I paid for this err film. £7.99 was "On Special Offer", unfortunately Blockbuster sold me this on special offer with the disk still inside.

If John Travolta would like to maintain his fan-base, he needs to steer clear of film which incorporate his bazaar religious beliefs. OK, it's an interesting theory, but complete crap to be fair. I can't even bring myself to say the word because of it now being a recognised "religion".

However, when you start making films based on Scientology and one of L Ron Hubbard's insane novels, you are crying out for a mauling form the critics and anyone who just loves to make a mock of crap films.

Remnants of a Semi-developed human race, throw-backs from several centuries of Alien subjugation, OK this is a good idea, but not a new one in fairness.

However, the rot starts not with the 45 degree angle shots where the director appears to be wearing an orthopaedic shoe, no, it's with the unexplained imminent self-destruction of the Psyclo planet and the miraculous crash-course these throw back humans take (and complete) in learning how to fly and attack in Harrier Jump Jets.

The special effects aren't too bad, good cast includes John Travolta (I don't mind him), Forest Whitaker (should be in better films with his calibre), and Barry Pepper, but the thin story development and ridiculous finale leads me to conclude that the £7.99 I invested in this will ultimately only pay for one viewing of this joke.

Severe constipation is far more tolerable.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed