Change Your Image
oskhen
Not very enlightening, I know, but I don't suppose anybody's actually especially interested, either.
Reviews
Ghost Lake (2004)
Not scary, not good
I'm one of those who really get easily scared by movies, and especially horror movies, of course. I'm so easy scared that it's almost embarrassing. It doesn't even really have to happen anything; if the mood is at least done almost right, I can sit in intense suspense and wait for something to happen.
So the strange thing about this movie is: I did not get scared. I mean - I probably jumped a bit in the seat one or two times, and I think I felt a bit, and only a bit, of suspense maybe three or four minutes together, during the whole movie.
That must mean that they hardly did anything right, right? And that's right - they hardly did anything right: Most of the supposed-to-be-scare-stuff happened in broad daylight. I mean, how scary is broad daylight? And the mentioned stuff was for a big part filmed from far away, and how scary is stuff that is filmed from far away? Another thing: what did they do with the screen all the time?!? That division-stuff - disturbing!!! And I still wonder how the lead-lady figured out the secret of "now is the 13th year, so they are going to kill 13 people", for instance. Much of the plotting was completely not understandable.
Okay, one cool thing to end with: the start really freaked me out - with the place-to-place- and time-jumping.
Oh, did I mentioned that much of the acting (though not all) was completely laughable? The bad-guy-laughter from the three Zombies by the lake near the end was probably the most artificial (both concerning acting and directing) I've ever seen - and I've seen my share of oldies.
The Invisible Man (1933)
Funny, and How did they do that?
This movie is so great mainly because of two things: The effects and Claude Rains.
To take the first thing first: Effects in modern films doesn't amaze me anymore. "Oh, they have some extremely advanced computer-stuff, how amazing!" - no. Of course it's quite amazing that these computers are so advanced, but that leaves the honour to some computer-people - not to the director and special effects crew. No, it's these oldies that really have the effects, simply because they had to be creative. In The invisible man (and several others, like King Kong (from 1931, I think), I can't do anything but letting the technical masterpiece fill me with awe.
To take the second thing secondly: Claude Rains was, or so they say, really a rather bad actor who was taken because of his voice, and a great voice it is! I can't describe it, you have to hear it. I just wonder where that voice has gone in his other films... By the way is he the only one acting really naturally in this movie, which is from a time where every actor had been taken from the stage.
Oh, I almost forgot: The humour is several places really good. I do still, months later, see a couple of dancing trousers for my inner eye, to the song "Here we go gathering nuts in May, nuts in May, nuts in May..." One of the funniest scenes I've ever seen!
Of course, it has its flaws, mainly in the acting, but considering that it is so old and so cool, it gets nine out of ten stars, something I give very, very rarely.
The Matrix (1999)
Hate/love - Hugo Weaving for ever
I've quickly seen through some of the comments and marks gain to the Matrix on this page, and I think it must be because of all the hype that people seem to either worship or hate it. For me it has been a little bit too long since I saw it, but remember that I liked it. Okay, it's not perfect, but got good action sequences and message that may not be extremely deep, fantastic or intelligent, but at least it got one, and it's not a bad one.
Yes, it is a rather good and entertaining movie, even though there must be little doubt that the effects have done much to its rumour. The effects are much of the film, but no too much. It does have some brain too.
To me it has been a really influential movie, mainly because of one of the absolutely coolest bad guys in the history of movies. Hugo Weaving's agent Smith is way up there among Jack Nickolson's Joker and Darth Vader. He really became one of my top favourite actors only because of this movie. I don't care very much about the roles of Keanu Reeves, Laurence Fishburne or that gal-person, and I really don't why so many people do - Hugo Weaving is the really interesting character here. I see him way to rarely, and he was a bit of a disappointment in LOTR.
Loved to read that he's going to play in V for Vendetta (why care about that bimbo then?), but it's a bit too bad that he's going to wear a mask. With that face! What a waste...
Interview with the Vampire: The Vampire Chronicles (1994)
A magnificent drama, but not much of a horror movie.
The biggest problem i've got with this film is that it is obviously considered by many, for instance by the comments in the newspapers, as a horror movie. That's bullshit. It almost (if only almost) as much horror movie as, say, Lord of the Rings, where there also are some exciting part where people are killed by supernatural beings. Is that what is required to put a movie in that genre?
No, its not much horror in it, but as a drama, its wonderful. It's definitely one of my favourite movies with a content that I find unusually deep, at least for Hollywood, it's looking good and most of the actors are superb, save Antonio Banderas. I don't know if he's too old, since I've never read the book, but his acting is all too unrealistic.
Since so many dislike Cruise, I must only say that I think his doing a fantastic job. That man has just grown in my eyes during the years, and this is one of his greatest roles ever. By the way; the makeup on the guy is so good that I didn't recognize him the first time I saw the movie. In fact someone had to tell it to me, and I hardly believed it. Perhaps mainly because of the colour of his hair and eyebrows. That little lass is a children-actor (don't know if that's a word, but I hope you understand it) I have only seen the like of in the sixth sense. The rest of the actors are also good.
One the best things with this movie is that it feels so realistic; it makes you feel that this is how it must be to be a vampire; the problems, the feelings, etc..
Somebody obviously thinks this movie is stupid and ridiculous. I only agree on that on one, and only one, single detail: the coffins. Why the heck are they sleeping in coffins for? Why don't they just have the bed in a basement without windows or something? Yeah, I know vampires, at least in Dracula, have to sleep on the earth of their homeland, but I don't remember that's a topic in the movie. And there are so many other traditions they are breaking, so...
Well, that's a detail. The movie is good, beautiful, in fact. It's one of the most beautiful movies I know, with a mood throughout the whole thing that is quite unique. OK, I admit that it might be a bit boring at times, a bit too slow, but that's is on the other hand necessary - to a certain degree. This movie couldn't handle much more speed.
I definitely recommend it, but don't expect very much horror. Maybe that's why some are disappointed; they expectations were not fulfilled.