Change Your Image
chris-2270
Reviews
Ngo joh ngan gin do gwai (2002)
I couldn't hack it
I couldn't take this movie. Maybe it's a culture barrier, but I have pretty broad taste and tolerance for many films including foreign (non U.S.) films. I had an expectation that my wife and I would both be pleased by what we saw.
This was not the case and within about 40 minutes we abandoned the movie. The storytelling was poor and I quickly became confused as to what the point of the movie was. It was cheesy as some say, but that did not win me over. The production values were actually pretty high. The acting passable.
But these two elements do not make a film ready for an audience. I try to avoid explaining why it is others writing in submit one favorable review after another for a movie I had to put down. If they are not paid publicists, then there's no accounting for taste, right?
Clockwatchers (1997)
One of my all-time favorites
I just looked this film up and saw it was only garnering a 5.8 and I was appalled. I've seen it 3-4 times in the past nine years. I have always been a Parker Posey fan. I love the "elevator music". It moved me to go buy some Les Baxter stuff off i-tunes today. It's a dark view of our strange, modern times. It's well shot. It may appear to some perhaps as a chick flick, but I'm a guy and I don't go for chick flicks. It's a heartfelt and provocative film. Totally cool atmosphere. But apparently not popular with the masses. As it should be, I suppose.
But that's not all! The IMDb has reminded me that I have not provided enough detail in my comment, so I have to add more. Uhhh, Lia Kudrow and Toni Colette both did admirable jobs. Am I done yet?
Inland Empire (2006)
Beyond Belief
I am going to chime in with the chorus of people who did not appreciate this film. I love Lynch (usually). ERASERHEAD was one of my all-time favorites, so I'm no stranger to "strange". But this film makes you cringe, just wondering if its ever going to get any teeth and try to bite you like his other films do so well. And you wait and you wait.
There are a few surreal Lynch moments. A few. Jeremy Irons was good, for sure. Amazing that it was shot it on DV! I turned to my wife at one point and said, could he have shot this on HD?? Later I said, no he would never do that. And then to find out it's DV!! Shot on $3-4K Sony DV Camcorder. That's balls.
Will David ever come back this way again? Who can say.
P.S. When you see a long review on the IMDb that romanticizes the joy and wonder of any given film to the last detail, skip it and read the short ones. They are usually more honest and not out to sell the film to an unsuspecting public.
Fay Grim (2006)
Yes it was Grim
First off, I really loved Henry Fool, which puts me in a very small pool of movie goers. Parker Posey is one of best actresses on-screen today. But this film was a full-out travesty. Watching Hartley and the actors talk about the film in the extras - so full of pride, and making pointless analogies to Star Wars - was stomach-turning. This was hype on the producers part (HDNET) realized to the max. A true example of the Emperor and his new clothes. Mostly I feel that Hal has spoiled HENRY FOOL forever. I don't think I can ever see it again in it's pure, innocent light.
Remember Hal, you can FOOL some of the people some of the time... etc. The director would be nowhere today if all he did was churn out meaningless garbage. Sadly, it's a pure example of the lesson taught in the film ADAPTATION. The story must be exciting and active, or its box-office hopes are dim indeed. Never mind a decent story. For the actors, it was like trying to act in a straitjacket.
The score, I believe Hartley's, is tasteless. With drum hits walking all over dialog. There was one Apple Soundtrack loop I recognized that gave me a smile.
When I saw the trailer, I thought, oh, they're just trying to grab a new audience. But it's really this ridiculous ride. I'd be happy to spoil this movie for you, but it's been done. It's rotten. The FOOL franchise is dead. Long live Henry Fool.
Crash (2004)
A tense, amateurish, derivative film
I had some hope that his film was going to be okay. It has a great cast and some opportunities for good acting. It showed me for the first time that Sandra Bullock can really bang out a good hard scene when sh'es given one. It's the kind of movie where every actor and actress is lining up to be in it like an Altman or Woody Allen movie. But my brain kept firing off throughout the film "something's wrong. This isn't working." I suppose the problem was the script and partly the first-time out director. Every character was angry at everyone else in every scene. From psycho cops to paranoid gun-toting store owners to... everybody else. Except Don Cheadle, he just wore this Bob Newhart frown all the time. Maybe cause he realized the movie (he took part in producing and perhaps financing) was turning into a lemon before his eyes.
A few interesting social insights were raised during the film, but as another IMDb'er pointed out, it felt like a bad version of MAGNOLIA (although in my opinion, the original version of MAGNOLIA was lousy). Also reminiscent of SHORT CUTS - which was a much better film.
When the dynamic of a film is constant tension and anger, there's really nowhere for it to go. I am mystified that the diversity of taste of today's film viewers and amateur REviewers places this film anywhere in the IMDb top 250. This list is pretty meaningless. I'm 46. CRASH must be hitting a chord of banality with the under-30 crowd. Hope they learn that gun-toting and prejudice are BAD! There BAD! And redemption is GOOD! It's GOOD!
Oh - and interesting idea to name it after a then eight-year old Cronenberg film. So odd.
Chris H.