Change Your Image
EagletHarbin
Reviews
Finding Neverland (2004)
A fantastic film
Here's what you'll hear about 'Neverland': it's 'Shadowlands,' only with Johnny Depp instead of Anthony Hopkins, and much better. That, to be sure, is the movie in a nutshell, although it does not do it near enough justice. I won't bother going into the plot, but, as everyone knows, Johnny Depp plays J. M. Barrie, Scottish author of the play Peter Pan, in the early 1900s.
The accent is impeccable. You'll forget he's doing one after the first ten minutes, in fact, you'll forget you're watching Johnny Depp (and comparing him to his other roles), after twenty. Some movies are horrible, but watchable because of Depp ('Secret Window'), some are good, but needed Depp's performance to give it the edge it needs ('Pirates of the Caribbean'), but yet others, including this one, are fantastic pictures that have Depp so at the heart of the movie that he becomes the character, and the character becomes him. I could not see 'Neverland' working without Depp, not because he makes a bad film good, but because he is so integral to what the picture is, the two become inseparable. Think of a cake, and Johnny Depp is the sugar.
The movie itself, however, is the flour. It melds together Barrie's imagination and reality in such a way as I've never before see. Marc Foster cuts between shots of Barrie playing with the children to shots of the same people in various fantasy worlds, and the effect is mesmerizing. I was supremely impressed by the cinematography as well. There were numerous times that I simply marveled at a brilliant camera move or framing. Many of those all-important moments that send chills down your spine are also there.
All of the acting is magnificent, especially the little boy playing the child Peter Davies, to whom Barrie takes special attachment to (and for whom Barrie names his titular flying boy), who will also be playing Charlie in the upcoming Burton adaptation of 'Charlie and the Chocolate Factory,' next to Depp. Kate Winslet and Julie Christie also impress as Peter's mother and grandmother, respectively. If there is one ill note I felt in the acting, it was in Dustin Hoffman's portrayal of Barrie's producer. Hoffman's acting simply felt a little too Hoffman-y for me. Take from that what you will.
The film moves along at a perfect pace. The film was about an hour and a half, although it felt nowhere near that short. In fact, the film began exactly when it should, did not rush through anything, and then ended exactly where it needed to.
Do not expect perfect historical accuracy. The film's opening credits include the title 'Inspired by True Events,' and so do not be surprised when the film deviates from true events, or eliminates people here and there.
How did 'Neverland' stack up, then? Let me put it this way: About halfway through the film I decided that every writer should see this movie. By the end I decided every human should. The picture becomes more than about a writer and the family he loves, it becomes a story about what love is, and how it is best expressed. I cannot describe how incredible the movie is. I won't say that to me it was a life changing experience, but perhaps it will be to many in the audience.
Go see 'Neverland.' 5 stars out of 5.
Radio (2003)
I hate this film
Okay, this review is for everyone who complained that I only wrote 10/10 reviews. First off, the background. I like to give people the background of what I thought of the film before I saw it, so they know where I'm coming from. So...I've not EVER been a fan of this film. I saw the trailer, and said to myself, 'Wow, another 'inspired by a true story, Remember the Titans-esque, 'uplifting' film, only now we've got Cuba 'I'm an Academy Award winnner, yet I did 'Snow Dogs' Gooding Jr. as a retarded kid. Whoopdifriggingdo.' My fears stayed unabated, especially when reviews popped up on AICN, such as one proclaiming that the reviewer would rather razor blade his gums than see the film again. So, I had decided to skip 'Radio,' and just not ever bother with it. I saw RtT, as well as 'The Rookie,' (which, by the way, was written by the same guy who wrote this) and found them not too bad, and I actually LIKED 'Rookie,' but the concept to this one just seemed TOO dumb to bother with.
However, turns out that this story happened in Anderson, South Carolina, which happens to be my Dad's home town. In fact, if you watch the film, they talk about 'West Side,' and there's even a game against this 'West Side,' and that school turns out to be the one my father went to. He was even attending West Side in 1976, which is the time that the story took place (not the actual event, mind you, that happened in the early 60s). My Dad even worked at the only Burger King in town, so when the assistant goes out for burgers from said chain, he very well may have gotten they served to him by my Dad. So a lot of connections. My interest was piqued a TEENY bit, but definatly not enough to spend seven dollars on.
Which brings us to Saturday. 'Oh, we're going to a movie this afternoon,' my mom says. 'Which one?' I ask, begging that they want to take me to 'Lost in Translation,' or, even better, 'Thirteen.' 'We're gonna see 'Radio.'' I inwardly and outwardly groaned. 'Isn't there anything better out?' Yes, there is. 'No, and plus, it takes place in Anderson.' 'You're paying for it?' 'Yes.' 'Alright, then.' So once I get off work, I trundle down to the local multiplex, not excited at ALL about seeing the film, but actually excited about reviewing the film later.
So...to what you've all been waiting for, the actual review.
THE ACTING:
I'm going to put off talking about Cuba for a moment to talk about everyone else. AHH!!! Gah! Dangnabit, people! Alright, Ed Harris (whom I LOVED in 'The Truman Show') did an OKAY job in his part as the coach, but EVERYONE ELSE WAS TERRIBLE. Part of it was the lines given to them, i.e. 'All along we thought we were teaching Radio, but it turns out Radio was teaching us,' but the other part is that the people were just NOT good actors. From the WB wannabes playing the football players, to even the (so I hear) living legend Debra Winger was terrible. Off, off, OFF line readings. I've seen better line reading by ME, for crying out loud. (Note to actors: if I can act better than you, then you don't deserve to be on the big screen.)
Now on to good old Cuba Gooding Junior. Now, I like this guy, I really do. He was great in 'Jerry Maguire,' 'Pearl Harbor,' and even 'Men of Honor.' Then he decided to go do 'Snow Dogs,' 'Boat Trip,' and 'The Fighting Temptations.' UGH. I guess he decided he needed to do and *acting* film to make up for his tresspasses against the silver screen. But lemme tell you something, Cuba, this is NOT the role for you. First off, you are TOO DAMN OLD! The guy is going on 36, and he's playing a role where he's supposed to be in his twenties! The age is showing, man. I had no idea how old the guy was supposed to be until they finally told us, because he looks like an old guy already, and I knew the character wasn't supposed to be that old. Okay, he did an okay job of doing the mentally retarded thing. Not Oscar worthy, no where NEAR what Tom Hanks in 'Forrest Gump,' or even Sean Penn in 'i am sam' were able to pull off. He's just a comical 'retarded kid.' I couldn't feel sorry for him, because I kept being told I shouldn't, and I couldn't feel happy for him, because he's MENTALLY RETARDED! The movie didn't try to show HOW being mentally retarded is a good thing...but I'm getting off topic.
Just know that everyone sucked except for Cuba who was good but not great.
ACTING SCORE: 4/10
THE WRITING:
'Radio's got a good heart.' 'All along, Radio's been the one teaching us.' GIVE ME A FRIGGING BREAK! The key to a good movie is that you don't tell us everything! And this film TOLD US EVERYTHING! And on top of it, it didn't let us SEE everything!
The whole premise (I think, it was very unclear) was that through something, Radio was able to inspire a football team, or a town, or something. He did not do this. The things we see him do are, in no particular order:
1. Go in a girl's locker room and then be sad about it 2. Get a penatly called on the team for shouting 'chickingshitchickingshitchickenshit!' at the coach (which was not as funny as you might think it would be 3. Cause a whole bunch of ruckas at the school with the school board investigating 4. Listen to a radio 5. Tear up his room 6. Talk funny 7. Give out presents for no particular reason
The things this resulted in:
1. The coach left the team, and they didn't win a championship 2. We find out that the coach is going to start paying closer attention to his family
Yes, that's it. No OVERCOMING RASCISM, no INSPIRING THE TEAM TO THE CHAMPIONSHIP, no REALISING THAT IT WOULD BE BETTER IF WE WERE RETARDED, none of that stuff we've come to expect from this type of film. NOTHING HAPPENED! NOTHING! I left the theatre not sure why I bothered in the first place. All we did was watch some semi-interesting events that happened, and see a coach get reunited to his family (which wasn't even shown well).
Overall, it felt like they wanted to make a movie about Radio, but didn't have a real point to it all, so just gave us some things to look at, and a couple of events to make the woman cry. Pathetic.
WRITING SCORE: 1/10 (with extreme prejudice)
THE DIRECTING:
Michael Tollin shows us that he did, in fact, pass 'How to direct a movie TYPICALLY 101' with flying colours. HE does nothing new, he does nothing bold. He directs the film like any other director would have done it, only he's latched on to the recent 'zoom at random moments in sports events' trend, and figured out (like everyone else) that sports are more exciting when the camera in on the field instead of on the sidelines. Wooo.
I guess I shouldn't have expected anything astounding, but I sure didn't get it anyway. The film felt like it was shot by a group of ADs.
DIRECTING SCORE: 3/10
OVERALL:
I hated this film. I'll just go out and say it, the only redeeming factor in this film was Sarah Drew, who was the voice of 'Sarah Rowe' in the CLASSIC Mtv animated series 'Daria,' which I'm afraid far too many people have forgotten. She was hot. The rest of the film...was not.
However: If you are:
A. An adult
and
B. You have no taste in film
Then you will LOVE this film. I know this because I heard everyone raving about how good it was, and how sad it was, and how uplifting it was, and how good Cuba Gooding Jr. was...everything the studio execs wanted them to think. They obviously were not paying any attention to what the film actually WAS, they made up their minds the second they saw Cuba going down that hill in the shopping cart. (Which, once again, was nowhere near as touching as they meant it to be.)
But, if you are in those categories, then you will love the film. (Chris' Mom and Dad, and speaking to you ) The rest of you: aviod this film like the Plague.
OVERALL SCORE: 3/10
Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (2003)
A perfect 10
Alright, I'll start this review off by saying that I am rather biased on the issue of this film. I'm one of those Tarnentino-followers that you hear so much about, that would follow him to the grave as long as it meant they could see another one of his films. The difference for me, of course, is that I've (gasp) never seen a Tarnetino film. Yes, I know, this is terrible, and it will be remedied soon. However, Kill Bill Vol. 1 just made me know WHY I am a Tarnetino fan.
The second reason I am biased is because I read the script before seeing the film, a couple weeks before, in fact. Why does this make me biased? Because I can view the film as the whole that I wish it was, rather than the half of a film that it turned out to be. Okay, let's get down to the nitty-gritty, and hopefully I'll explain a little bit more of that in the review.
THE ACTING:
I've not much to say about the acting in this film. It was perfect for what it was supposed to be, it was perfect with what I was expecting from the script. There were some awesome moments, Uma's first line in the film still haunts me to this day, because of the way it was written, yes, but also because of her delivery. I have no complaints with the acting in Kill Bill, so it deserves a 10.
ACTING SCORE: 10/10
THE WRITING:
I love Writer/Directors. I hate it when a bad director takes a good script and makes a bad film out of it. I hate it when good directors mid-understand a script, and make a bad film out of it. Neither of those can happen when you've got a writer/director. Tarentino knew what he wanted to write, and he wrote it. Perfectly. The brilliance of the script is not understood, I don't believe, until you've seen Vol. 2 (I love the script version of Vol. 2 a bit better than Vol. 1), but once you see it, the amazingness of Vol. 1 is shown. Yes, it is a revenge film, but it is THE revenge film of all time. Every line, every scene, is perfect.
WRITING SCORE: 10/10
THE DIRECTING:
And this is where the film truly shines. Every shot is amazing, every shot is what it should be, every shot delivers exactly the right sensation to the viewer. Okay, I had some different shots in mind from when I read the script, but it's okay, because what Tarentino has delivered is better than what I could have come up with. Everyone imagining going into the film industry must see the chapter entitled 'The House of Blue Leaves,' simply for the four amazing styles in which the fights are shot.
DIRECTING SCORE: 10/10
OVERALL:
I admitted at the beginning that I was biased for this film before I saw it, but I don't think that that means I think a crappy film is a good film. Any film that puts this much effort into being good deserves to be seen, and this film not only tries to be good, it accomplishes that goal stunningly.
The only problem I have with this film is not a problem with the director, actors, or anyone...but MIRIMAX. I have a problem with cutting the film in half. Yes, it is a four hour movie, and yes, people don't like four hour movies. I don't know what the solution was, but I hate that they had to cut the film in half.
Just know that you will not be disappointed when Vol. 2 rolls around. It is better than Vol. 1 through and through.
So, should you see Kill Bill Vol. 1? I would say 'yes' for sure, but I do want to say: there is a LOT of violence in the film. Not as much as I was lead to believe was in it from the script, but still a TON. Some of it is unrealistic (and meant to be so), but there is a lot that was so realistic that the more squeamish among you may want to skip this. The rest of you: yes, go see the film.
OVERALL SCORE: 10/10
Anything Else (2003)
A movie better than anything else
One day, I'm really bored, and I'm looking at trailers on Windows Media Player. I happen upon this film called 'Anything Else,' with that guy from 'American Pie' (insert Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back joke here) and the girl from 'Casper the Friendly Ghost.' It looked like a rather lame sex comedy at first, although a couple of jokes in the trailer were funny. Then, at the end, it showed that the film was directed by Woody Allen.
I recently caught part of Allen's first big film, 'Annie Hall,' and I was astounded by it. It was like 'High Fidelity,' if Rob was even more insane and was from New York. I didn't catch the whole thing, but the second half that I did watch was amazing. Now, we all know I'm not here to review 'Annie Hall,' so why am I bringing it up? Because it is the only reason I went to see 'Anything Else.'
I have to pretty much force one of my best friends to go to the theatre to catch this film, he says that reviews he read after I brought up the subject (he hadn't heard of it before) said that it was horrible, and he really didn't want to subject himself to that sort of crap.
This is why I am writing this review. I'll say it right here, to make sure we're on the same page: go see 'Anything Else' right now. Right now. Why do I say this?
THE ACTING:
The film starts with Jerry Falk (Biggs) and David Dobel (Allen) having a conversation in a park. This is where you first realize that this is not a normal film. They seem...SO REAL. Biggs and Allen deliver performances in this scene that draw you into their characters and make you excited to watch the rest of the film.
Then Amanda (Ricci) entres the picture, and you're now hooked for life. Ricci does the performance of a lifetime. Then, we meet more people, such as Stockard Channing (TV's The West Wing) and Jimmy Fallon (TV's SNL), and everyone just delivers so amazingly.
What is so astounding is that everyone seems like a real person. I'll get into this more in a second with the writing, but what sells the writing is how they deliver their lines. They stumble over words, you can see them thinking about the next thing they're going to say, and everything runs smoothly.
ACTING SCORE: 10/10
THE WRITING:
Woody Allen is a great writer, I'll say it right now. He writes real characters, characters that you believe in, characters that you worry about, characters that do things that real people would do. No one does something simply because that is what works for the plot, they do it because that is what the character would do given the situation. It is as if Allen had a couple characters, and an ending, and just started writing, and when he was done, he handed the script to a bunch of phenominal actors, who delivered on the characters.
The plot is not cliche at all, unless you say that any film with a relationship is cliche. But something that is so great about the film is that the relationship is done in an original way (although some may argue that it is a cookie-cutter Allen plot--I would disagree).
WRITING SCORE: 10/10
THE DIRECTING:
Allen has a way with the camera. Sometimes less is more, and this film had less up to its waist. He would sit a camera on two (or more) people, and just have them talk. You feel like you are there, in the scene, watching these people. There is one part that you have to see, where he utilized split-screen more brilliantly than I have ever seen before. Sure, he doesn't do the amazing moves with a camera ala what David Fincher did in 'Fight Club,' but it's just not nesseary here. The cameras are placed perfectly, the film is shot perfectly, then the footage is edited perfectly.
DIRECTING SCORE: 10/10
OVERALL:
I waited a week or so to review this film, because I did not want to rush out of the theatre praising the hell out of it because of what the music and editing did to me in the theatre (like I did with The Two Towers, and only later saw its many shortcomings). I wanted to sit for a little bit, and think over what I actually felt about the film as a whole, so I could bring you a good review.
My admiration for this film has only grown since my viewing. Every element in the film was spot-on, from the script, to the acting, to the filming.
'Anything Else' joins my very short list of perfect films (Fight Club, Fellowship of the Ring, and the original Star Wars).
Please, go see this film. New Line evidentially decided that there is no use in promoting the film at all, so I have had a hard time finding people who have heard of the film, much less are interested in seeing it. We need to fund good films like this. They only come every few years.
OVERALL SCORE: 10/10
Hulk (2003)
Amazing
Ang Lee's Hulk is a brilliant work of art. He balances perfectly the action and the drama, and never lets your brain turn off. His groundbreaking wipes, transitions, and other things I don't even have words for yet, will certainly be copied by lesser films. This film will stand the test of time, and will be up there in the greats.