shadownlite Reviews

Serenity (2005)

Waste of Time

[1/10 · 5 January 2006]

I was told by many friends and acquaintances that this film was something I "HAD" to see. I am not a huge TV watcher so have never seen the show "Firefly" but they told me that would not matter and I would still enjoy the movie. They were wrong.

"Serenity" tried to be smart, tries to be edgy, and tries to be witty yet falls flat every time. The acting is very Z-Grade and "Sci Fi Channel Movie" like. The lines try way too hard to be witty and cool but embarrassing to hear uttered by human beings because they try so hard to be "cool/witty/funny" with them, The editing was all over the place and attempted to be edgy but came off as if someone in just randomly edited parts of the film together. The special effects were not special at all.

I spent most the time wondering what the hell was going on, why, and why should I care in the first place. Maybe, if I was into TV shows so bad that they get canceled, I would watch all the "Firefly" episodes so that I would know what was going on in this film. Unfortunately, I doubt that would be fun and I can think of millions of things I would much rather do with my time than sit through any of the TV show.

I know there are some almost rabid fans of this movie and the TV show Serenity. I am not knocking you in your fandom of this show. I just don't think a wide section of society would find this film interesting at all and that it was made for the small fandom that surrounded the show. So, fans of the show, enjoy the movie, just don't expect others to instantly like it unless they are into cheesy, Sci Fi Channel, movies.

The Purifiers (2004)

Just Bad.

[3/10 · 7 September 2005]

I had a urge to watch this film since I saw the awful trailer for it online. I know, I know, I am a glutton for punishment but I have always enjoyed the laughable badness of B-movies so decided to give it a go, especially since "Lost" actor Dominic Monaghan is in it.

How can I describe my experience watching it? I was bored, I laughed quite a bit, I got confused when action jumped to strange places, and I thought, "What the hell was this director thinking?" as the film's end titles rolled with the awful music accompanying them.

I won't even want to mention Monaghan's performance in this film because I am sure this is a film he hopes disappears off his resume, especially now he is on "Lost". I will just say that he seemed to do the best he could in this bad movie and leave it at that.

This film was a big old mess. It dragged in the action which is bad for a martial arts film. The fight scenes were awful, the dialog was awful, the John character spouting poetic at the beginning and end of the film was awful, and even the clothing was awful. It was a bad rip-off of the movie "The Warriors" simple as that....and a bad attempt to copy the film.

I did think that the film had beautiful lighting and the colours were very beautiful as well. High definition digital can be beautiful to look at. Too bad the movie wasn't good itself.

I tortured myself twice because after I watched the film through, I thought "What the hell was the director thinking?" so watched the film with his commentary. It seems he is fully aware he is making a bad B movie and that is what he set out to do. He was so earnest about it that I found myself liking bits of the movie after he talking about the "Whys" of them. This is why I gave the movie a "3" in rating. The director did do his very best to make a bad movie with the limited budget he had.

But, it is a bad movie so if you don't want to be bored, and don't find amusement in awful films, give this film a pass and rent something better.

The Ring (2002)

Waste Of Time

[1/10 · 15 April 2005]

I won't give away any of the plot, if you can say this film has a plot which is a stretch. I will just give my reaction to the film.

I was told by many people how impressive and scary this film was. I avoided it for 3 years because I am not a fan of horror films. I borrowed this film yesterday because I was curious why people where so into this film.

I spent the whole time heckling it and making snarky comments about it because it was not even the slightest bit scary. It was just a movie with a barely there plot line with lots of lame, random images that were suppose to be freaky. I was able to sit through the whole thing and instead of feeling scared, had to resist the urge to laugh all the way through.

The only freaky thing was the little kid. He was definitely a piece of work and needed therapy even before viewing the videotape.

I think my brother, who joined me in heckling the film (and he is a horror film lover) summed it up best when he said: "I guess the point of the movie is VHS is evil so watch DVDs." *Thumbs WAY Down*

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004)

Disjointed and Lame

[2/10 · 7 June 2004]

I admit to not being a Harry Potter fan but I have seen the other two movies, and found them enjoyable so went to see the new film today.

My main problem with the movie is it is so disjointed. It doesn't have a good, steady flow to storyline and jumps around way too much. You never get to see anything in the film play out from beginning to end....you suddenly join the action in progress or jump out of the action right in the middle and are suddenly at the end. I found that extremely annoying and it really hurt the film. Shoe me the whole Quiddich match...don't just join it in progress and stop it when Harry falls without showing how everyone reacted to Harry's fall. Things like this just ruined the flow and made it seem like there were huge plot holes in the film.

They also didn't explain things fully in the film. They left out key parts of the book...like why the map was so important...and then would give you a rushed explanation later through character dialogue. If they had explained the map earlier, as well as the adult characters relationships to one another through their history, all the adult characters wouldn't have had to spout, in rapid fire delivery, loads of dialogue to explain their relationships with one another in the Shreiking Shack. Which left many adults in the movie theatre actually saying out loud, "What the hell?" and looking confused. If I hadn't read the book I would have been very confused as well which is a problem, you shouldn't have to read the book to enjoy the film. You should be able to at least get an idea of what is going on so you can enjoy it without prior knowledge of the story.

Malfoy got very little screen time this time around and I seem to remember him having a lot more to do with the story in the book. The way that this movie made the relationship to Harry Potter, Ron, and Hermione and Malfoy look pathetic. It truly made it look like the three were bullying Malfoy and not the other way around. This is not a good thing and I really feel it did his character a dis-service. He doesn't seem as menacing now and you actually start to feel a bit sorry for him because he appears so picked on.

I did like the way it showed the surroundings of Hogwarts. The hillsides, lakes, and forests were stunning though, I kept expecting to hear the "The King from the Golden Hall", complete with Norwegian fiddle, from the LOTR soundtrack to start playing as the camera swept over the hillsides and forests or orcs to attack them in the forest. I think the director did steal a bit of the countryside idea from LOTR. It was nice to finally see the surroundings of the school because it explained what was so special about it.

I also liked the transitions that showed the passing of time. It was done in a really nice way...the owl flying into snowflakes which turn to snow covering the ground....the tree losing one leaf and then suddenly dropping them all. That was well done.

The kids playing Potter, Hermione, and Ron are starting to really relax in their roles and grow a little as actors. Especially Daniel Radcliff. I think that they should try to keep the kids in the roles they have as long as they can because it would be a bit jarring to have to recast them. I know that they are quickly growing up so this may be impossible.

The Dementors were cool and would appear very scary to small children. The effect of "sucking the soul" out of people that they do would also scare small children a lot so it really surprised me that many adults brought their small children to this film. The Dementors and the werewolf would definitely not be good for small children to watch and may give them nightmares.

It will be interesting to see where this series goes and how the, even longer, next book will be brought to film. Hopefully, it will not be as disjointed as this one.

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003)

Excellent

[10/10 · 19 December 2003]

I saw Return of the King on opening day and have to say that it was worth the buying the tickets in advance and waiting to get in for a good seat.

It was full of drama, humor, action, emotion, and the most impressive battle scenes I have seen in recent time. I sat awestruck for 3 1/2 hours not once wishing for it to end and feelings ad when it did. take in with just one sitting.

I was a little surprised that a lot of the film was of actions that took place in the Two Towers book of the trilogy...but they included just enough of the Return of the King book to be satisfying to this fan.

I am planning to see Return of the King again and take more of it in because there is so much happening in the book and it is impossible to take in with just one viewing.

Bravo Peter Jackson!

The Matrix Reloaded (2003)

Glad I Waited For It To Come Out On Video

[2/10 · 20 November 2003]

I have the original, The Matrix, listed as one of my favorite films of all time. I was excited to hear the squels were coming out. Then, on release my friends who saw the Matrix:Reloaded told me what a middle of the road movie it was. So, I pocketed my $9.50 and waited for the video release.

I was so glad I did! Matrix:Reloaded is boring, full of plotholes, and inane. It was like watching one long videogame without much plot and I am sorry..I didn't rent a videogame...I rented a movie! I didn't buy the "love" between Trinty and Neo. They seemed bored with each other and the sex scene...well Trinty looked less than into Neo during it. So, when he brings her back after she is shot...I just yelled "PLEASE!!!!" I mean he saves Trinty, who seems bored with him, over saving Zion...what a LAMER!

I also thought the scene where Neo flew and the shipmate (sorry forgot his name) said "He is doing the Superman thing" was beyond stupid. What? Neo flies now? Ummm yeah.

The only sequence I enjoyed was the chase on the freeway. That was very impressive and made me watch the video twice...well this scene and my next head scratching moment.

That moment would be....where the hell did "The Kid" come from and how doe she know Neo...I don't remember Neo saving him in the first Matrix movie so why does this kid say he did? What the hell happens to the spoon the kid gives Neo to give to the Oracle? I never saw him give it to her? Did he lie to the Kid about giving it to her?

This film needed a lot of work to make it able to stand out there on it's own. I thought it just had a syndicated scifi-show feeling and the "To Be Continued" at the end stamped the feeling deep into my soul.

I am now leery of watching Matrix: Revolutions....because I now it will tarnish the first movies greatness even further. I think the first movie should have been the only movie. Then we could have all imagined what happened....or at least the film-makers should have done a better job with the storyline instead of making it a long, boring, videogame.

Phone Booth (2002)

Pass On This One

[1/10 · 12 July 2003]

"Phone Booth" was not worth the rental fee. I was hoping to like this film due to the good reviews that friends had given it and the presence of Colin Farrell, whom I like as an actor. I was very disappointed.

I was confused by the beginning because it was all Colin Farrell talking on a cell phone about deals with magazines. It was not fast paced and very slow. It also looked like it had been filmed on poor quality film. I got used to the look but, cringed as the story just went nowhere.

It was 81 minutes of Colin Farrell in a phone booth...and even he cannot make that interesting. I found myself fighting the urge to get up and walk away to do something else. It was a movie that made me want to walk away and not bother with the rest of the story.

I never felt the sense of unease or suspense in his character's situation since only one person was killed with the sniper gun. Really, it took away from the urgency of the phone call and Farrell not hanging up to not have more danger. Yes, the sniper killed someone and caused Farrell some pain by shooting his earlobe...but I never worried about the situation or got caught up in it.

It was also very "anti-climax", or as my brother told me, "The ending is a cop out". It just ends...nothing is really resolved except that Farrell is gotten out of the situation and then threatened by caller for the future. It left me thinking, "That's it????".

I was so disgusted that I turned the movie back into the video store so I wouldn't forget about it and have to pay overdue charges on such a terrible movie.

I say pass on this one, save your money, and rent something else. I have to give it a 1/10.

Gangs of New York (2002)

Waste Of Time

[4/10 · 10 July 2003]

"Gangs of New York" wasted my time as I viewed it. It was long, slow, and had little of interest in it. I had rented it with the hopes that a lot of action and a good storyline would be contained within the movie. Sadly, it let me down.

I should have known it would be a yawner when the starting fight bored me. All slow motion, fake looking blood, and not at all exciting. It proved to be a movie that had a lot of drag to it and I find my mind wandering at times and myself just taking in the whole look of the film, the sets, the clothing, the background players, ect.

I also should have been prepared when I saw the first error in the movie right at the beginning of the film! The cut on "Priest" Vallon's face kept changing sides on his face and appearing/disappearing. I noticed it on the first viewing so I know that it is obvious. If the first minutes contain an error like that, that is so noticable, then it shows that the movie will not be that great. It shows some slackness on the moviemaker's side when this sort of thing happens.

The acting was decent...I just wish the actors where in a better movie than this. Cameron Diaz really stands out in my mind because she did a very good performance in this film...and she was hardly recognizable as the blonde, peppy, bubblehead she usually plays in films.

I did like the look of "Old New York" and the clothing. It's just too bad the story is not as good as the whole "look" of the movie. I am glad I waited for it to come out on video/DVD to see because I would have felt I had wasted money if I had gone to see it in the theatre. It was a true waste of my time.

Manos: The Hands of Fate (1966)

It is a bad movie...but funny as well.

[5/10 · 7 June 2003]

I have to agree it is one of the worst movies ever made...but if you saw it on Mystery Science Theatre....it can be very, very funny.

I really loved the goat guy (Maaaaaaaaaster!) on this film...how bizarre is this guy? I laugh so hard at him that I cannot stop and have trouble breathing.

It is a mustsee for fans of bad movies though.

Pépé le Moko (1937)

Interesting Film

[5/10 · 24 May 2003]

The setting was great with the showing of the city but the story was a little silly. I had to laugh at the ending...a bit to melodramatic. It is a good film to watch to pass the time however. I would watch it again if given the chance.