nayadonis Reviews

Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones (2002)

truth

[9/10 · 16 May 2002]

unbelievable, such cynical people. i don't listen to critics, i've been to film school myself and film students are snobs, critics are just hybrid snobs. I realize it's a generalization, but it's an accurate one. just remember that those who can- do, those who can't- just gripe... Critics are often completely inept of a creative drop of blood in their body, and yet they so freely critique the creative work of others. They're failed screenplay writers in alot of cases, and failed film makers in other cases. Yet, we listen to them? why?- Would we ask a high school drop-out to take the bar exam? Think about it, was anyone honestly blown away by A Beautiful Mind? - The critics' pick for this year's best picture; a decent movie, but unoriginal and stupid. Russell Crow would have done a pretty good job- if his character had turrets, because his nervous impulses weren't indicative of schizophrenia (which was what his character really suffered from). Film is art, which infers creativity and yet one of the most creative films that we will likely see this year is slammed, why? A man with money and influence tries to do something to advance his profession into the 21st century so they're not using ancient methods of filming. His methods would allow for longer lasting and better quality film. Yet, he is condemned for this, why? Film is entertainment 1st and foremost, and George Lucas has made movie-going into an event again with the Star Wars series. Yet, he is trashed for this as well, why? Is it jealousy? Are those who "can't do" jealous of the one who so obviously can? Perhaps that's too simple an answer. Don't make the movie going experience into something it's not, there's no need for such pretension. No one should let critics b.s. them into believing that a grainy film which is long and boring is worth the 10 bucks over Episode 2, which is built for the soul purpose of entertaining. In the end all that critics are doing is giving opinions and opinions are subjective. I am sure many films are better examples than Star Wars of aesthetically perfect movies, but it doesn't matter because movie making is about one thing, the audience. Not the reviews. Critics are not the final word on movies as much as they might like to believe they are, the box office has proven this fact time and again. I've seen Episode 2 and it was a truly amazing experience, the electricity in the room was like a rock concert, the effects were wild and fast, the story was good and I walked out with a smile on my face and a heart beating fast. That's MY opinion. It's fun to go to the movies again, let's keep it that way.

Sincerely, Tired of Cynicism

Gorgeous (1999)

good fight scenes, but who's that girl?

[6/10 · 2 July 2001]

I didn't watch this Jackie Chan movie expecting anything that might set it apart from most other Jackie Chan films. However, I was surprised by the performance of Shu Qi, surprised might not even be a sufficient enough word, shocked might be more appropriate. She stole this whole film from Jackie Chan. I couldn't take my eyes off of her. I would think that there are not many actors or actresses in the world who could steal the attention away from the amazing action in a Jackie Chan movie, but she succeeds. She's an extraordinary presence that transcended any language barrier I felt by being an English speaking American watching this movie. Filmmakers here in the states might find themselves a diamond in the rough if they give this young actress any kind of role in an American movie. She will certainly have the same magical effect on American audiences as I'm sure she does on those on other side of the Pacific. See this film for some great fights, but make sure you see it for Shu Qi as well. I have a feeling that there is a bright future ahead for this young, energetic beauty.

Quills (2000)

excruciatingly close to brilliance

[6/10 · 29 November 2000]

I haven't written a review on here in a while, but I felt as though I should write a few comments on this particular picture as I have always been fascinated by the Marquis De Sade. Perhaps my expectations were too high going into the theater to watch this film with an kind of unbiased mind, because I was let down. I went expecting what could have been a break-through film, that really could have said a lot about the society we are living in today, but it did not even come near to fulfilling those expectations. As just an ordinary film it was good. The writing was top notch. The performances were all very good, especially Geoffrey Rush who I believe is one of the most under appreciated actors out there today. I can't think of many film stars that can compare to his talent as an actor. The way he plays a character is similar to Peter Sellers, yet much deeper somehow. Geoffrey Rush did not disappoint at all and if anything is going to win an Oscar in this film it will be his performance. The other actors put in adequate performances, with Phoenix, Winslet and Caine seemingly going through the motions of putting in good, but hardly Oscar worthy performances. I should be fair and say that Caine had a couple of scenes that were gems. Also, cheers to newcomer Amelia Warner, I suspect there's going to be a bright future ahead for this young beauty. However, the writing and performances were not enough to make this a great film. What I think was most aggravating was how little we really learned about the Marquis De Sade, at certain points it seemed like he was hated just for being a wicked gossip, while at other times he came off as a dirty old man. The Marquis De Sade was an amazingly complex figure because his ideas were so perverse to the absolute extreme and yet his expression of those ideas was utterly brilliant. We did not see many of those qualities in this film at all. The story of the laundry maid was twisted and changed around, as were a few other characters in this story who were real figures. This made me ask, why couldn't this film simply have told the life of the Marquis De Sade as it was, rather than changing the true story into a fictional one that is far less interesting? At times I almost felt like I was watching "Disney Does De Sade" it was light and fluffy when it should have been provocative and erotic. I don't usually complain about how a film should have been made, but this one could have been much better.