Change Your Image
mowglisj
Reviews
Lara Croft: Tomb Raider (2001)
Avoid like the plague - Zero Stars.
No doubt about it. Angelina Jolie is quite easy on the eyes. But overall, this movie was one of the hardest movies to watch as I've seen in a long time.
I love action-adventure flicks, especially ones set in exotic locations. I can even tolerate a bit of cheese and sketchy science, if it's done with style. "Tomb Raider" has been compared to the "Mummy" and "Indiana Jones" movies. If plagiarism constitutes inspiration, than this movie was quite inspired. It's an insult to the intelligence; enough to make a five-year-old roll his eyes with disbelief. Certain scenes and images were practically carbon copies of "The Mummy" and "Indiana Jones", but it failed miserably at capturing the charm and wit that made those movies so much fun.
Its ludicrous and incongruous "plot," if you can call it that, appears to have been conjured up by a couple of thirteen-year-old potheads... which leads me to believe that this was probably the target audience.
But what should I expect from a movie based on a video game? It certainly had all the suspense and intrigue of "Space Invaders" and the character development of "Asteroids". And the F/X weren't much better.
If you value your time, stay away from this movie. Don't rent it, don't even watch it when it makes its shameful "world network premiere", which is inevitable. (Of course, no self-respecting network will pick it up, but UPN or FOX might.) It consumed 100 minutes of my lifespan that I can never regain. Don't let the same thing happen to you.
The War (1994)
This is one for my collection
I've never been big on the coming-of-age genre of films, but this one is a notable exception, and it just joined my small DVD collection which says something...
It's been accused of being contrived and sentimental, and I will grant that there is a kernel of truth to that--its biggest weakness probably lies in the broad assortment of values it tries to cover in an overly idealistic fashion--family, hope, loyalty, self-sacrifice, and so forth. It probably would have been more effective had its moral focus been a bit narrower.
Nevertheless, the story and characters are very engaging. The acting was excellent, in particular, that of Elijah Wood. What can I say? The kid can act. His challenging portrayal of a complex character alone makes the movie worth watching.
It's a beautifully-shot, well-acted period film (with a great soundtrack!). If you can forgive its occasional un-subtle lapses into philosophical preachiness, you will enjoy the film very much.
Held for Ransom (2000)
"Awful" is the nicest thing I can think of to say about this movie.
I will never see that $4.25 again. Why did I rent this movie?
I sit here, in utter shock at just how terribly awful this movie was, on practically all accounts. Oh, how naive I used to be, to think that even the worst movie would have some redeeming qualities. This one had none whatsoever.
The wretchedness of the acting was obscured only by the abysmal script. The basic plot line (high school students from wealthy families, kidnapped and held captive in the Everglades), if it had been used to its full potential, could have become a C-minus teen thriller.
I would typically call a poorly developed character "two dimensional." Now, to call ANY of the characters in this waste of perfectly good celluloid as "one dimensional" would be an obsequious compliment. There WERE no characters in this movie. Just bad guys and worse guys.
My recurring thought throughout the movie was "Please, please, Mr. Alligator, just eat SOMEBODY, ANYBODY, EVERYBODY." In this small thing I was not disappointed.
Stay away from this movie! Stay away! Please, please, for the love of all that is good and decent, STAY AWAY!
A.I. Artificial Intelligence (2001)
A bit too artificial?
I'm still not sure whether I liked this movie or not.
The special effects were impressive. The acting was excellent on most counts, and Haley Osment as "David" was extremely well-cast. (It was worth seeing the movie simply to watch this kid act.)
While the plot was an intriguing twist on the Pinocchio theme, it seemed to pander to it a little too much, and yet at the same time, it went out of its way, in a contrived manner, to be tragic. A recurring theme, it would seem, in the young Osment's career as of late (c.f., "Pay it Forward").
But then again, I'll admit, I'm a sucker for a happy ending. But I knew more or less what I was getting into when I saw this movie, so I can't say I was surprised. The "feel good" movie of the year it ain't, but there are many things that make it worth watching.
The Faculty (1998)
Clever dark satire of teen horror movies.
This was one of those movies I passed by in the video store a number of times, picked up the box, and set it back down. It finally came on TV. So I watched it.
The movie (or at least the edited-for-TV version of it) was either brilliant or asinine. I'm still trying to figure out which.
If you watch it as a satire of teen slash flicks, it's got its clever moments. At least, that's what I tell myself to justify the two hours of time it absorbed on a Monday night. It contained the strange combination of decent acting, decent script-writing, and a plot that was so sublimely ridiculous and cliché as to be beyond redemption. We're talking on the order of 1950's Sci-Fi horror flicks, complete with 3-D glasses! I can only hope that this was the intent of the movie. Otherwise I've been taken for a ride!
With a heavy dose of willing suspension of disbelief, and a tolerance for gooey monster slime, it's entertaining.
Deep Impact (1998)
I was pleasantly surprised
This movie was pretty universally panned, and I didn't expect to like it, but as it turned out, I liked it enough to purchase the video.
Of all the disaster-genre movies that came out that summer, this one required the least willing-suspension-of-disbelief. (Compared to "Armageddon" it was a scientific masterpiece, though that's not saying much.)
There was also a much greater depth of dialogue and character in this movie than its contemporary disaster flicks. It painted a picture of the human response to global disaster that was, if not realistic, at least believable. It had moderate doses of schmaltz, but it wasn't shamelessly sentimental, nor did I walk away from it feeling like the movie was trying to manipulate one's emotions.
I'd give this movie a good 7.5 out of 10.
Collateral Damage (2002)
Walked into Wrong Movie
I didn't see this movie on purpose. We went to see "Orange County" but ended up walking into the wrong theater, and by the time it started, we figured, ah, what the heck...
It was a fairly archetypical Schwarzenegger revenge movie, in true melodramatic fashion, the good guys were good, and the bad guys were extremely bad. A few attempts at twists and turns in an otherwise eyeball-rollingly predictable plot make for some cheap entertainment if you don't anticipate any real depth; it will never be accused of causing any brain strain.
My advice: If you love Schwarzenegger movies, go ahead and see it on the big screen, you'll probably like it. If you just like Schwarzenegger, wait till it comes out on video. If you hate his genre, well, this movie won't do anything to change your mind.
Evolution (2001)
It Ain't No "MIB"
I rented this movie because I enjoyed "Men in Black" and it had been compared to this movie.
I was very disappointed. It had all the weird "silliness" of Men in Black but lacked the fundamental cleverness and little plot twists that made MIB so fun to watch. There were a few good lines (most of which were in the theatrical trailers, go figure) but not enough to make it outstanding as a comedy.
Warning...The following paragraph contains a "spoiler"...at least it is if you don't know how to recognize a pitifully predictable story line.
The basic plot is this: meteor hits earth, releases life-form, stuff grows and gets big and ugly, the protagonists save the world. Boom, there you go.