BaiNst Reviews

Molli and Max in the Future (2023)

When Harry Met Sally in Space...and then some...

[9/10 · 15 February 2024]

Snappy, thoughtful, and insightful dialog drives the audience through a surreal deep future. Science Fiction with a good dose of absurd fantasy and special effects that set the tone perfectly. Most immediately reminiscent of The American Astronaut (2001).

The level of absurd fantasy sci-fi in this movie is for anyone who likes Rick and Morty or Adventuretime; ridiculously sublime.

The music is a perfect jazz score. The acting is superb from those with one line to the main cast. Spot on delivery.

With a running time of a tight 90 minutes it left me wanting more, especially once treated to the outtakes that run through the credits. Some hilarious lines that didn't make it in.

Climax (I) (2018)

The Donald Trump of Cinema -- Biggest let down since M. Night Shamalama

[4/10 · 21 March 2019]

Raw emotion. Uninformed opinions. Another established filmmaker getting high off the smell of his own farts.

CLIMAX has all of the charm, wit, and insight of a 1984 anti-drug campaign. As soon as the acid kicked in, it became clear to me that Noe has never dropped a tab in his life. Every little story in this sloppy and gross pastiche is the most simple take on every LSD cliché ever told. Nancy Reagan would be proud of our little French director, here.

I loved ENTER THE VOID. The "artistic license" he's taken, since, to create half-assed student films from underdeveloped scripts is a complete joke.

If this is his first shot across the bow in his declared (yes, actually declared at the start of this movie) war against American Art, he may as well tie his warship up to the docks, now. Or scuttle it mid-sea, because if this is how he continues to conduct his campaign of Art War, he's just going to further reveal himself as the pathetic poseur displayed in this film.

Absolutely embarrassing. "Write what you know," Gaspar. That's the first rule of good writing and good film making.

Ant-Man and the Wasp (2018)

Ant-Man 2 (oh...and there's a chick in it...)

[9/10 · 10 July 2018]

I left this movie feeling like I'd just seen Star Wars for the first time. What Marvel and Disney (or at least the people they hire) have managed to do here is finally capture a single issue of a comic book from the 70s in movie form.

Just like a child's first comic picked off the corner store spinner rack, this movie has all of the information a first time viewer (nee reader) would need to understand all of the character motivations and story developments. It's only problem is that the story and dialog is buried beneath so much entertaining action that it can be difficult (due to constant distraction) to follow the complexity of the expertly crafted presentation.

I would put this in the octagon with Thor:Ragnarok, The Incredible Hulk, and Spider-Man:Homecoming to duke it out for the number one Marvel movie. I think Hulk would still come out on top, but this is a great contender. Your mileage may vary.

Lost in London (I) (2017)

Astounding! First rate comedy!

[9/10 · 19 January 2017]

If you can imagine BIRDMAN done as a CURB YOUR ENTHUSIASM "bearing and rending of Ego"...you've got a good understanding of what to expect from LOST IN London. Absolutely amazing, and it's really hard to believe they pulled it off in a single take...LIVE. If I hadn't stayed for the Q'n'A afterwards, I'd still have my doubts...it was that impressive of a feat.

It would be difficult to ruin the plot, as it's mostly an excuse to follow Woody through one entertaining night of fumbling...I really hope this will be available as a recorded purchase, so that I can revisit it, and have a closer look at the artistry of it. The acting is superb, the camera work is as good as anyone could do (and better than most!), and the cinematography was spot on.

The biggest possible flaw a project like this may suffer from (as with any project, even) is a flinching, uninsightful, uninspired, and semi- conscious delving into the ego of the writer/director/actor. Harrelson avoids these pitfalls, and handles it like a master. From his acting over the course of his career, there's always been a hint of brilliance beneath...but it's always tough to tell in a truly great actor where the acting ends and real person begins. He handles this roll (admittedly one with which he should be very familiar and had lots of practice) with an honesty and depth of character that shows he's been through it and come out the other side wiser for it...unless it's all an act.

Hard to tell, but a damn fine yarn, and funny as hell. I'm honored to have borne witness, and really hope to see it again, soon.

Jason Bourne (I) (2016)

All The Worst of the Other Bourne Movies Shoved Into One

[4/10 · 29 July 2016]

Jason Bourne: Boring. The summary title of this review says it all.

The most interesting part of this movie was a unique experience that happened just before the movie began. I arrived to the theater just as the last trailer was ending, walked in with my tub of popcorn, motorcycle helmet, and satchel. There were more people in the theater than I'd expected based upon the seating chart when I bought my ticket an hour earlier, but it still wasn't close to packed. My row had some space, in fact, so I was able to choose a chair based upon others seats. There was someone sitting behind the seat I was meant to sit in, so I chose the one next to it.

There was someone in the seat in front of me, and I thought to myself "have to be careful not to kick his seat". He turned around.

"Well played," he said. He was smiling, so I smiled back, not quite sure where this was going. "Last one in, and you take the seat behind me. Who sent you?"

"Excuse me?"

He stood up. "I guess you're going to kick my seat the whole time, huh?"

"Did I kick your seat?" I was pretty sure I hadn't kicked his seat.

"Dirty tricks. You don't fool me."

"You're crazy," I said.

"You're insane. I'm not going to sit here and let you intimidate me."

"You need to get back to the..." I couldn't think of the word "asylum". He said something else, but I couldn't hear him, stuck in my head, trying to figure out how to finish my sentence.

"You need to get back to the Farm," I said, as he made his way down the aisle, then down the stairs and out. I guess I was thinking Funny Farm, but only Farm came out...and that probably served his paranoia even more (assuming he took it to mean the CIA training facility).

So...unless you can get lucky enough to sit yourself behind an aerospace engineer suffering from paranoid delusions (or perhaps really in fear for his life...who knows what's going down in the big city), you can do yourself a favor and skip Jason Bourne. If you must see it, wait for video.

Zero Charisma (2013)

Subtle Insights and Honest Humor Propel This Critical Hit

[10/10 · 15 August 2013]

Whether you've grown up with table top role playing games (RPGs), or have only looked upon it with the eyes of an outsider (including those of you who've only played computerized RPGs), I think you'll find this movie very entertaining. The humor and pathos of ZERO CHARISMA are presented with loving and honest insight, so that even if your impulse is to laugh at the "pathetic losers", you will be hard pressed to not also find some resonance of the characters' actions and feelings in your own life.

The respectful and subtle presentation of the character motivations and interactions is more akin to the geek/nerd trope presented in RUSHMORE or (the very excellent) WHITEBOYS, and not at all like the outsider's take in NAPOLEON DYNAMITE (though if you're a fan of that film, you'll find equally ridiculous behaviors and situations to guffaw over in this movie...they're just a little more layered).

There's no need to go into the story in any depth, as the logline of this film is all you need to know going in. It's a good movie, although I may only think it's a 10 because I've played D&D for thirty years...and I recognize that this movie is celebrating that at the same time that it shines a light on the negative aspects of giving up Real Life for a fantasy world that we can control.

Wake Up (2010 Video)

Is it real? Dunno. Is it good? Yes.

[7/10 · 14 August 2013]

This is a good documentation of the early steps of a spiritual journey/awakening, but it is so generic and leaves so much unanswered (what was/were the experience(s) leading up to waking up one day to just suddenly see angels and demons?...just the dream of his friend that came to truly happen?...), that it's not fulfilling as either a documentary or a mocumentary.

As it is, it comes off as another WHAT THE BLEEP DO WE KNOW? attempt by the Ramtha organization to bring in a few more students. Maybe if the lead character and his girlfriend hadn't both had previous filmmaking experience...although, it certainly makes it more understandable that they would choose to shoot a documentary of his exploration of possible meanings to his experiences.

The reason I gave this a seven out of ten is because it is structurally sound, decent craft in the cinematography/directing/...acting?, and got me into it enough that I watched it to the end to see how it developed (even though I was questioning its reality the entire time). In any case, it's better than Juaquim Phoenix's satire of this sort of spiritual path...so even if it's a more constructed "documentary" it's very well done.

p.s. (real spoiler here) -- The "answer" that is hinted at but never stated is that we are in Hell, ruled and tormented by demons...including many of the spiritual masters featured in this story. When you die, don't come back. Party's over (if it ever really got started).

Iron Sky (2012)

What if Mel Brooks made DR. STRANGELOVE?

[10/10 · 30 May 2013]

You would have IRON SKY. A mix of racial humor, satire of Nazi thoughts, and the political militarism of our day, IRON SKY is a brilliant movie that returns more and more on each viewing. The ability to mix subtle satire, humor, and story construction with over the top absurdism is very difficult to pull together, and the creators of this film do it brilliantly. It's quite a surprise, given the sophomoric precedent in the STAR WRECK series (I've only seen the Picarding or whatever it's called, but presume it is representative of the series), that they really hit this one out of the park.

Great, entertaining characters. Dialog that vacillates evenly between the absurd and the sublime, and all wrapped together in wonderful CGI, pitch perfect acting, tight editing, brilliant story and thematic structure, and on the nose musical score. Really impressive stuff.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012)

An Unexpected Tedium

[6/10 · 7 January 2013]

If this and KING KONG are what Peter Jackson are capable of when he's given free rein, then someone please bring back the bit and bridle. I've heard complaints about the movie from purists, but I am not one, and don't really care that the story has been extended...just that it's been done so tediously. Don't look for anything similar to the theatrical releases for the LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy...think more the DVD director's cuts.

I liked the background presented in the opening of the movie, but in hindsight it is a rather long prologue that is a good indicator for the next two and a half hours. Other than the interesting scenes of character interaction and dialog, it feels like half of the movie is an extended chase/combat sequence and/or majestic (CGI?) aerial views (though actual minute count may be lower, and I wouldn't be surprised if it was actually more than half of the movie). It's not action-porn like the last couple of TRANSFORMERS movies, but it's more like adventure-porn ("porn" in the sense that much of it seems gratuitous and unnecessary to furthering the story).

If you have a high tolerance for drawn out adventure (with occasional ridiculous feats having more in common with THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL than the first trilogy), this movie may be for you. Otherwise, take a blanket, and prepare to pay for a ten dollar nap.

***SPOILER???*** It reminded me of the difference between episodes one through three of the STAR WARS trilogy when compared to episodes four through six. Perhaps if I wasn't already familiar with how things turn out, there would be a real sense of adventure and danger in the action and chase...but probably not. There are plenty of movies I watch repeatedly, regardless of knowing how they turn out. With this one, I only stayed to the ending because I was interested to see where they chose to make a chapter break in the story. As it turns out, not any place worth my revisiting.

Looper (2012)

Dick-ish (P.K., that is)

[8/10 · 12 October 2012]

LOOPER is a fun movie that is very reminiscent of the stories that Philip K. Dick wrote in the 60s and 70s. I can't explain the similarities in too much detail without spoiling anything (see below, if you'd like), but anyone familiar with Dick's oeuvre shouldn't be too put off by my comparison.

This film does something unusual in this day and age, which is to make its theme the primary motivation for the story to exist. Plot elements and character motivations all go to support the ultimate conclusion, which is a fulfillment of the thematic premise (which, again, can't be disclosed without spoiling said ending).

If you are a fan of films that transcend the modern concept of screen writing, which holds genre and "high-concept" (doublespeak if I've ever heard it) above all else, then you may find LOOPER a refreshing investigation of meaning and purpose in life.

No, you will not find instructions on building a time machine, nor evidence that time travel may actually exist without paradox. Turn off your science brain, and go in for a good and well told story, with interesting characters, intriguing twists, and a purposeful ending, and I'd bet on you having a good time.

If you enjoyed THE MATRIX, you should be able to enjoy this movie. If, in THE MATRIX, you found yourself concerned about the reality of a person's mind being able to somehow break the operational code of a computerized world while within that world, through sheer force of will (note, that there are no scenes in THE MATRIX in which Neo is being taught to use real computers or their source code properly), then you will probably hate this movie.

**SPOILERS** **SPOILERS** **SPOILERS**

Similarities:

1. Primarily the introduction of a seemingly pointless (and magical) fact of the future that becomes a main point of the plot. The TK abilities in the film were very reminiscent of Dick's use of synthetic animals, aliens, changeling suits, etc. (that last example always having bothered me as too much of a necessity for the telling of that story).

2. A near future that's really not very different from our own, but has contact with a race of people (those 30 years in the future of the time the main action takes place) that are nearly alien (if not completely alien).

3. Primary concern is with thematic exploration. See THE MAN IN THE HIGH CASTLE.

Not a lot to hang my hat on, but since they were such hallmarks of Dick's novels, when used in an s.f. trope, it's difficult to escape comparison.

Meek's Cutoff (2010)

A Cuckoo Tease of a Movie

[2/10 · 6 May 2011]

If you like nearly two hours of dramatic build up with no climax, you will enjoy this film. From the first two laborious shots of a wagon train crossing a river, you can easily guess what you're in for...but if you've seen the trailer, you might be hoping for more. Unfortunately, what there is of characterization and hints at a plot are only window dressing for a two hour distilled view of what it was like to travel in a wagon train in the 1850s. **Spoiler Alert**: It sucked.

I've marked this review as having spoilers, because I'm going to tell you the details of the film, but in revealing them, it's not much more of a spoiler than telling you that a police drama is going to have guns and crime in it. This movie has lots and lots and lots of walking, dust, and concerns over having enough water. That's it. There's some great acting, and some nice cinematography, but there is little insight into the human condition (no more than you might get from sitting on a bench at the local mall for two hours...possibly less). There are two or three tense scenes, but they all, just like the movie as a whole, come to nothing.

I had a second review for this movie in mind, because after seeing the ending, I saw a very obvious connection to ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S NEST. The writer basically dressed Nurse Ratched in a beard and made the inmates into a wagon train; their search for sanity is now a quest for proto-Portland; and the symbol of the suffocating pillow is replaced by a lone tree.

I can only guess that the writer could not come up with any ending that wasn't obvious, and opted instead for having no ending at all. "Let the viewer decide" is something I can enjoy in a few movies, but with the constant build up of tension in this movie, the ending felt more like an unfulfilled promise.

Hanna (2011)

A Fairy Tale Without Rhyme or Reason

[4/10 · 22 April 2011]

If you read other reviews of this film, you will undoubtedly come across some mention of it having the tropes of a fairy tale or myth, but it does so in such an awkward and shallow fashion, that it only helps in making the film a disjointed mess. I can't help but think that an inept producer took this over in post-production, because there are still some seeds of a good movie that try to shine through, but ultimately the characters behave in such odd and unexplained ways (odd is fine, if it is explained) that anyone who doesn't just turn their brains off when a movie begins is going to have a difficult time walking out without feeling robbed. Asking for suspension of disbelief is not a license to ignore the most simple human logic, nor to have character behavior turn on a dime...and this film begs your suspended disbelief for more than a few character inconsistencies, in addition to the usual list of "yeah, right, that could happen" stuff. In effect, they got the first rule of fairy tales down pat: sacrifice all other considerations in favor of having the story develop as you wish.

If that is appealing to you, or doesn't matter to you, you will enjoy this movie very much, as it does have a lot to offer to anyone who likes to feel and not think.

A Serious Man (2009)

The Story of Synchronicity Without End

[8/10 · 29 September 2009]

I sat all the way through the credits, so that I might better digest the ending of the film. I enjoyed the film all the way up to the end, yet I found a dissatisfaction in the wrap up similar to the feeling I had at the end of "No Country for Old Men". Not a dislike...just a resounding disquiet in my heart that yearned to know more. A need to understand what it was all leading up to.

When I finally left the theater with the other few stragglers (the theater had been more than half full at this advanced screening in L.A. hosted by L.A.Magazine) there was a young Jewish woman in the lobby loudly complaining to one of the ushers that it was the worst movie she'd ever seen. She continued to complain (not yelling, but at full volume) about it while leaving the theater (she and her date were right behind me), and from what I could understand didn't like anything leading up to the end, and was let down when the ending didn't tie everything up with a neat little bow.

I, on the other hand, really enjoyed everything leading up to the ending. It was funny, observant, touching, and insightful. The acting and characters were superb, and it was beautiful to look at. Actually, it was quite similar to "Barton Fink", in that the lead character is quite a trod-upon push-over, and the ending enigmatic, yet seeming to imply a deeper connection to the world...though the light at the end of the tunnel is further and further off. The Coens seem to be leading up to something big in the screenplay, hinting at messages from God, and deeper meaning behind math and physics (almost a response to "Pi"), which may be why the young woman found it so disappointing. The Coens have no summation of answers for us.

The Fountain (2006)

Visual Poetry in Motion

[10/10 · 29 November 2006]

I'm not sure what the professional critics seem to have against this film. To me it seemed to be what David Lynch, The Wachoski's, and Tim Burton have all aspired to, and never quite reached. I'm fairly jaded and film weary, myself, but when something like THE FOUNTAIN comes along, it reminds me of why I keep going to the movies. This is the perfect sort of film to enter into without expectations...meet it on the filmmakers terms, and you won't be disappointed. In the films by the previously mentioned folks, I'd often leave with the sense that they were poking fun at the audience, or aware of the concept of deeper meaning, but simply unable to express it. They seem pretentious. Aronofsky, on the other hand, knows how to tell a story, and knows how to tell one that resonates with those who are prepared to listen.

This truly is a poem in film form. The use of interweaved layers of story and repetition of symbolism maintains a steady pace, which slowly builds to a truly climactic (when you look up "climax" in the dictionary, this film's could be the definition of the word) crescendo.

Rennie's Landing (2001)

Decent Low-Budget Film with Great Acting

[7/10 · 23 October 2006]

The worst thing I can say about this movie is that the plot reminded me of the story that Chevy Chase's character was writing in FUNNY FARM (a very funny film for those who like Chevy Chase humor). That is, there's not much original to the plot, and it's delivered in a rather clumsy way.

That said, I could see what the writer/director was trying for, and appreciated the attempt. This appreciation was bolstered by the great acting, which really carried the film. I was not familiar with more than two of the actors who made cameos (Garner and the old guy, who's name escapes me), so I wasn't distracted by knowing where they are today (doing fairly well on television, it seems).

I won't go into details of the plot, as there are several reviewers that have already covered the main beats, and the subsequent problems. However, the dialog and direction was decent enough, the cinematography and camera movement excellent, and the acting superb. I was expecting a train wreck, but was pleasantly surprised, and even though a portion of the ending left me a bit let down (the reveal is not handled as well as it could have been...and degrades the story up until that point), the overall tenor and message was something that many of today's films don't succeed at, if they even try.

I am a person who will turn off a DVD, or walk out of a film, if I don't enjoy it. I watched this through to the end, because I found the actors enthralling, and their characters well developed. And as far as story and the rest, it's certainly on a par with most everything else released by major studios.

X-Men: The Last Stand (2006)

My super power is "x", and that's the extent of my personality.

[4/10 · 26 May 2006]

If the dialog and story presented in the film were the final shooting script presented to Bryan Singer, it's easy to see why he walked from the follow up to the two initial successes. Otherwise, Brett Ratner has a lot to account for in this completely underwhelming film. The dialog does nothing for characterization or plot. The story is too cumbersome to fit into less than two hours (to anyone that knows the story lines the film is based off of, it's easy to see how this should have been two or three separate movies). The actors do the best they can with the material they're given, but when your lines consist of "You know what you need to do, now do it, or don't," it's pretty much a still birth of a film, guaranteed.

Characterization? Personality? Nothing more than a description of your super powers. The story and characters were incidental to the action, and given only cursory attention.

A great disappointment.

The Survivors (1983)

Some great dialogue, falls apart in the end

[7/10 · 16 August 2005]

I've seen this movie dozens of times, mostly because of some of the funniest dialogue ever written, and mostly when I was younger and the uneven story, problematic direction and distracting editing were more easily over-looked. Rewatching it tonight, I can still see a good movie in there, somewhere, but the uneven bits and long stretches of not-funny really stand out. In particular, the very last five minutes of the film ruin the rest; a bit like heartburn or food poisoning after a tasty meal.

Someone should remake this movie. It would be a shame for the great moments of dialogue to be lost gems within this average and uneven whole.

Spider-Man 2 (2004)

Amazingly Disappointing, Spectacularly Average

[6/10 · 30 June 2004]

The dialogue was often witty, the fight scenes were entertaining, the actors did their job well, and the cinematography was competent. However, the story, inconsistencies, and level to which we're asked to sustain our disbelief made for a very disappointing film.

I won't complain about Spider-Man being stronger and more invulnerable than usual. Since they're reinventing the history, anyhow, may as well make him more Super, man. The real Spider-Man's arms should have ripped out of their sockets at least twice, and there would have been more broken bones with all of that getting thrown into brick walls. But, okay, I'll accept it.

SPOILER BELOW *** BUT READ THEM, AND SAVE YOURSELF

However, if you want me to believe that a fusion reaction is magically contained by being drowned in water, you're going to need to give me some more information. Plus, tell me why the water doesn't boil. Cold fusion? Fine, but then why mention that the tentacles are impervious to heat?

Speaking of tentacles, their introduction to the spectators was met by dull stairs, despite: having no power source, each being stronger than a horse, being integrated into the wearer's nervous system, having an unprecedented artificial intelligence of their own, and being a metal impervious to heat or magnetic forces. What's going on there? Okay, they investors and spectators had come to see the fusion, right, so maybe they were in such focused anticipation, that an elephant could have stepped into the room, and they'd be bored stiff, because they'd come for the fusion, and anything else just wasn't going to raise an eyebrow.

These two flaws were disturbing and distracting enough to warrant a disappointingly average rating for Spider-Man II. There were others, but these stood out.

Van Helsing (2004)

proves nothing can save a bad script

[3/10 · 14 June 2004]

Either the original script for this film was awful, or the writing was mangled while in production or during the editing process, but in any case the final affect is the same: The story arch and dialogue is the equivalent to what a fifteen year old might come up with for a Dungeons and Dragons adventure. Don't get me wrong; I was fifteen, once, and still play D&D, but I expect a little more from movies. If a film doesn't provide a plot more complex than the flight of an arrow, or dialogue more realistic than a video game (except in the case of ExistenZ), it's most likely going to be a disappointment in my book (unless it matches the sheer primordial success of The Matrix). The plot is an interesting one, but it's criminal to have packed such a fine collection of classic monsters into a single plot that has been so hamfistedly presented.

Van Helsing is beautiful to look at. The art direction and effects are fantastic, and made me believe that this gothic fantasy land could actually have existed at one time. It gives the movie a style and beauty all its own, and if this were an arthouse film, that would be enough. However, there is supposed to be a story, here, and the telling of a story needs more than just a cool plot, and a nice looking presentation. Even the most extravagant and elegant airplane can't fly without adhering to the fundamental principles of aerodynamics.

The Chronicles of Riddick (2004)

A How To Guide For Survival On An Uninhabitable Planet

[5/10 · 14 June 2004]

The only reason I went to see this film is that I read another review on IMDB stating that it wasn't great, but it was better than Hellboy or Van Helsing. It's true that it wasn't great, but neither was it any better than either of those other two films. After having seen it, I'd agree with another reviewer here, comparing it to a cross of Conan, Battlefield Earth, and XXX (or some other third film that I'm not recalling correctly).

The combat sequences are hard to follow, reminding me of cartoon fights, where the combatants are hidden in a cloud of smoke, with fists and feet and stars flying around inside the cloud, and you don't know what's happening exactly, or who's winning, but by god you know there's a fight taking place, and once the dust settles, then you see who's come out on top.

And there's certainly a suspension of disbelief called for when watching any action or science fiction film, but this doesn't mean you have to believe that characters can swim through hot lava. Not that this film had anything quite that ridiculous, but when you're having your heroes running around in minus 300 degree weather wearing only t-shirts, it's insulting to ask the audience to believe that they'd be able to make it more than a hundred yards before going into catatonic shock. I'd have warned of a spoiler there, but thought it better that you know this before going in.

This ridiculous movie had me in stitches, and despite there being a full theater, and my normal aversion to creating a nuisance unless drunk, I couldn't help but cough out a pseudo-stifled "b*llsh*t" when Riddick managed to "dodge" the 700 degree wave of flames created by the rising sun, only to hide in the miraculous shade of this planet where apparently there's a 600 degree difference between shade and sunshine. Imagine that on Earth, eh? I was laughing out loud for most of the last third of the movie.

If you want to see a very bad movie that lends itself well to ridicule, and you're entertained by such things, I highly recommend seeing this. Take some drugs or alcohol with you to enhance the experience.

Hellboy (2004)

well...it certainly was a movie

[4/10 · 14 June 2004]

It's going to be difficult to find 1000 words to use in reviewing a movie that put me to sleep, but I'll try my darnedest, because I think it's important that people be warned of its sombulatory effects. Given my druthers, I'd like this review to be a simple five word sentence: "It put me to sleep.", but IMDB guidelines force me to go on. Still, my further review will just be fluff around the fact that I fell asleep, so if you're just reading for the primary point, you've already passed it, and can now stop reading the rest.

First, I love action/adventure movies. If I'd never seen one before, Hellboy would probably be a favorite. But, as I've seen many, there wasn't a single thing in Hellboy to keep my interest. Not in the plot, not in the dialogue, and not in the details (except for one of the villains, who had a cool ability, that the film makers than ruinned by completely circumventing it). If you've seen both Men In Black movies, then you already know the full plot arch of this film, as well as many of the details. If you've seen more than two action films since the mid-80s, then you know all of the dialogue.

I can't believe there's a sequel already in the works. Hollywood is out of ideas.

Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (2003)

If it weren't done by Tarantino...

[4/10 · 5 May 2004]

...people would be laughing it off of the screen.

I couldn't tell the difference between this movie and "Ecks vs. Severe". Maybe if I'd never seen a movie before, or wasn't distracted by Tarantino referencing himself. Plenty of good ideas, but strung out through a pretty boring story about characters I couldn't care less for. There's plenty of action, but eventually it becomes too much, and anything interesting that might be happening in the combat sequences is swallowed up by the ridiculous length of the scenes. It could have used some very heavy editing, but Tarantino's name carries too much weight, and (like Lucas's episode's one and two) nobody seems to have been able to convince him to make the cuts. It's still hip to love the Q.T., though. Eh. I'd like my money back, sir.

Bring It on: Again (2004 Video)

Fun

[7/10 · 14 May 2003]

Don't be mislead by the title, because other than cheerleading, this movie has little (actually, nothing) to do with "Bring It On". However, I only say that so that you won't be disappointed if you were expecting it to tie in.

That said, this movie is a lot of fun, and has some great lines and superb actors. It's got more in common with "Animal House" and "Revenge of the Nerds", plot-wise, and what it lacks in character development, it makes up for in spirit, and a charming innocence.

The Royal Tenenbaums (2001)

Subtle Humor and Subdued Drama

[8/10 · 13 December 2001]

Although I preferred the humor of RUSHMORE, Wes Anderson has

definitely succeeded, once again, with THE ROYAL TENENBAUMS

in presenting high drama in a very light hearted manner.

He does have a knack for making a two hour film seem like a three

hour film, but I don't mind, because I'm completely enthralled

through the entire length. The writing is what makes Wes

Anderson's films stand out from most of the other tripe that spews

out of Hollywood every year. When you combine this great writing

with a superb cast, talented acting, perfect direction and

cinematography, and a music score that hits all the right

notes...well...you can't really go wrong, can you?

This film practices "subtlety", which is something you won't find

with most films, today. If you are expecting explosions, people

screaming at every other turn, and non-stop slapstick, you might

want to rent ACE VENTURA again, instead. Not to say THE ROYAL

TENENBAUMS doesn't have one or two instances of each of those

things, but they are hardly the main source of humor.

The obvious and cliched are torn away, which may confuse and

befuddle many viewers. One can't tell what the next person will

say, which is (again) a refreshing change from the typical movie

one sees nowadays.

Ocean's Eleven (2001)

On the edge of my seat...READY TO LEAVE!!

[4/10 · 13 December 2001]

OCEAN'S ELEVEN is Soderbergh's worst film. A huge disappointment. That said and out of the way, it was average.

This was your average "heist" film, and from anyone else might

have been forgivable. Well, with his track record of excellence, thus

far, I guess Soderbergh has been long overdue for something

mediocre. TRAFFIC almost filled that position, but this film has

definitely won out for the bottom of the heap. In other comparisons,

it does not even approach PAYBACK or THE THOMAS CROWN AFFAIR in script, direction, cinematography or acting...don't be

fooled by anyone that says it's close.

The cast had fun filming this, they say, and it shows. I don't know

what it is, but every time I hear a cast say what fun it was to make

the movie, it seems to be in direct opposition to how good the

movie turns out. I saw a blurb that said they worked an average of

six (6) hours a day on this thing...and it shows.

There was not a single surprise through the entire film. No, I have

not seen the original, but I have seen movies before. If you have

never seen a movie before, or have forgotten all those you have

already seen, you may find this one entertaining. If your idea of a

"good and complex" storyline is MISSION IMPOSSIBLE, then you

will probably like this.

If, however, you have liked all of Soderbergh's previous films, I will

be surprised if you don't find this disappointing. The film has only

one thing that stands out, and that is the soundtrack...which is a

rehash of the soundtrack used in OUT OF SIGHT. The writing is

uninspired, the directing is competent (but uninspired), the acting

is phoned in, the ... oh, who cares? They had fun making it!