wozza10 Reviews

Casino Royale (2006)

3/4 of a great Bond movie

[7/10 · 9 December 2006]

It seems, from viewing comments, that whether you like this Bond movie depends on whether you think Bond movies are about gadgets or not. Or whether you realise Bond was originally a character in a series of novels or just a movie character. If you think Roger Moore or Die Another Day are great Bond then you will not like Casino Royale. Why? Well, in my opinion, because this films is good entertainment set in reality which revolves around an actual story and not a collection of action sequences strung together with silly jokes, daft gadgets (which give away things that have to happen to Bond as soon as he's given them as they generally had such limited use) and sexy ladies.

This, though, in still not a truly great Bond movie. For an hour and 45 minutes or so, up and including the brutal torture sequence, it really is right up there. It's tight, tense, well constructed scripted and acted... Bond even has to do some espionage; something I can't really remember him doing for a long long time. Yet after the surprise (to people who've not read the book) death of the (apparent) main villain the wheels sadly fall off. While the sudden introduction of a new villain who's motivations never become clear (a brief phone call with M does not suffice) is a major part of the stumbling the real problem lies in the sudden inexplicable change of Bond and Vespa's entire personalities. Nothing either of them do ever rings true and because of this the final act of the movie just falls flat and, for the only time in this particular Bond adventure, just seems like an excuse to have another big action sequence.

Still, there's much to be enjoyed in the first two acts. The free running chase sequence at the start is one of the very best action sequences I've seen (although it's so cool the film can never reach the same level of adrenaline) and Craig truly makes an excellent Bond, even if he doesn't have the clichéd suave look.

So, if you want Roger Moore silliness or generic Bond then your chance of enjoying this particular adventure are probably lower than those who want a return to Bond as a cold hearted spy.

As a final side note, the change from Baccara (in the novel) to Texas Hold 'Em is generally well done as it means you don't have to waste 5 minutes of screen time as someone explains how Baccara's played. But for those who know poker (and especially how it's always portrayed in movies) you can work out exactly what hands everyone has from the start. And I really wish they'd have had some "real" poker hands where people win with a pair instead of massive hands every time. The final hand in particular is ludicrous with a flush, 2 full houses and a straight flush all in the same hand. How Roger Moore!

Lady in the Water (2006)

The audacity of the man

[1/10 · 26 August 2006]

M Night Shyamalaan is an excellent film-maker. OK, the twist in The Village was obvious after minutes, but it was a film that did not deserve some of the lashings it received. But 'Lady In The Water' is a different story. It is a film that fails in everything it's trying to be.

Primarily it's trying to be a family, fantasy adventure movie and I cannot imagine what kind of child (the primary audience for this genre) is not going to be bored out of their mind from the off. The reason it fails is Night and Night alone. Again he has made a slow burning dialogue heavy movie set completely in "reality". Where this film should be bright, lively, fun, exciting, magical it is instead dull (this is the worst work Chris Doyle's done), lifeless, turgid, bland and, dare I say, boring. The world of the movie is inappropriate for the genre it's living in.

The reason that this style doesn't work is that the whole point of the movie is that's it's a fantastical bedtime story, yet it's devoid of anything fantastical. This film should be set in a world like ours, but not ours. Night - not everything in your imagination can happen in Philadelphia! This movie also feels like it's only ever gone thru two drafts. First draft was a straight up bedtime story which Night has read back and realised "man, this doesn't work... at all. It's terrible" so he's written in a whole layer of character (allegedly... horrifically inaccurate caricature's more accurate) and dialogue who are there solely to justify how bad some things are. sadly he doesn't seem to have read draft 2 to realise that the layers justifying how rubbish everything is are even worsely executed meaning the script is two layers of $h1t on top of each other.

And then you have the complete audacity of the man in casting himself as the man who will (essentially) write the second bible. This would be ego gone insane if he was actually any good, but his performance is the one in the movie that really isn't anywhere near what it needs to be. There's a moment when the character finds out what his fate will be, a scene which an actor of quality would have been able to wrench your heart with, but a moment where Night actually looks like he's realised the film he's made could destroy his career (although I hope not)! Man, I could go on and on from the backstory being explained to you chunk at a time for no reason other than to flesh out the idea beyond what it ever deserved in such a way that it feels like Night's rewriting the rules of his own film as he goes because he's never had any solid idea of what the rules are at the start to the film critic who's only film criticism is "it sucked" which instantly destroys the attempt to set him up as an arrogant highbrow critic (he also gets possibly the worst cinematic death ever) to how blatantly obvious the red herrings are.

I genuinely cannot see what anyone can see positively about this movie (as a whole), unless they are so sure Night's a genius they cannot see beyond the name to the film that's actually there.

Rancid Aluminum (2000)

Without doubt the worst film I've ever witnessed

[1/10 · 5 November 2004]

I read James Hawes book. It was pretty neat, not great, but entertaining enough. Without having read the book I wouldn't have had the slightest idea what was going on, and it was still a stretch with that knowledge.

Literally every element of this film is abysmal in ways I do not have the capacity to describe. Half digested fish could have made a better film with matchsticks and dayglo lipstick.

Never before or since as a film made me feel so angry. The Mattress sequels came closest, but even they never reached such depths of utterly putrid nauseating appallingness that this bilge did.

Since wasting 90 minutes of my life witnessing this plague on human kind I am now unable to even look at any book by James Hawes without feeling angry. That is the depth of hatred I have for this piece of sh*t. No, that's unfair. Let me apologise to all fecal matter for comparing you to the otherworldly evil that is Rancid Aluminium.

Plain and simply a cancer on the world of cinema.

The Matrix Reloaded (2003)

When the T3 trailer's the highlight there's somthing to worry about

[1/10 · 25 May 2003]

Plenty of Spoilers

To start, I am not a huge fan of The Matrix. I do think it possibly has the greatest trailer even, but the film itself was a major let down. "You cannot be told what the matrix is, you have ot see it". Um... No! The matrix is a computer simulation which we live in, unaware, because machines have taken over the earth. Don't ask me why, but I don't find that the most mind bending complex realisation. But, anyrate, I degress, kinda. Basically the original was great whne in the matrix, mostly, while not very good when outside it. The 'real' world is just not interesting. All the wonderful potential of the ideal thrown away on a lazy comic book explanation. And the last ten minutes, oh my god... What an horrifically terrible ending!

Still, the sequels still interested me. The trailers, while not as phenomenal as the first, were still excellent and I really didn't expect that all the great shots were in the trailer like first time round. This time I thought the Wachowski's had held something back for us. Well, they had. Just not what I had hoped for.

Despite the fact we have already seen the vast majority of the opening in the trailers, it is at least a reasonable start to the movie. But from Neo's waking up from his dream in the 'real' world, everything starts to go horribly wrong. We get 45 minutes or so of Zion.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!

Man, the way the story was set up felt so forced, so ugly. The dialogue reaches a level of dismallity (which probably isn't a real word and would've fit quite eloquently into this script) that I haven't witnessed since "the worst film ever made "(imho) Rancid Aluminium. Every new charcter introduced is an instantly forgettable cliche. And the rave scene... Oh no, the rave scene. In the original the Wachowski's showed an understanding of how to use music and images together wonderfully. The rave scene is the polar opposite. No-one moves in time with the music. The camera doesn't move with the music. Nothing cuts with the music. Never, for a second, do you believe in this rave scene at all. OK, the rave looks good. OK, the tune is good. Put 'em together and what have you got? Bippity Boppity Poo!!!

Inbetween all this dross in the 'real' world we are subjected to a couple of extremely lazy fight sequences. OK, so you don't want to start with the coolest fight scene on the planet and never top it, but you att least start with a fight that matched even the worst fight from the original. Neo is completely static. The fights are uninspired. And the famed 'bullet-time' just doesn't have the impact.

When we finally get to meet the Oracle again there's the hint of a pulse for the movie. The ideas she puts into the movie are interesting, but why we need to be told this for 10 minutes is beyond me. She makes her point, then makes it again, before, finally, making it again. It was like the end of AI (although far less impressive that even the worst moments of that film) in that it just kept hammering and hammering it's point, just so even the most idiotic person can understand. The problem is that if you get it the first time she starts making everything sound more confusing than it it. This problem returns throughout the movie.

Then, at last, a sequence of quality. Neo versus a horde of Agent Smiths is class. Pointless, but class. While there's nothing spectacularly new we didn't see in the trailer, this fight is actually worth it. It builds well and doesn't really hang around too long. But it has it's problems, although I can just about forgive them here. The first is the CGI characters. The lasck of realism isn't the main problem. It's the lack of heart they have. Especially in the 'bullet-time' shots. In the original that was Keanu and Hugo Weaving in slow-mo. This time it's just an animated charcter. So, now, we're not stopping reality for a moment as we were before. We're just seeing a cartoon version of it. The other problem with this fight is that basically it's completely redundant. While I loved it for pure 'cool' value, it is basically only there to inject a bit of life in.

It starts to inject...

then the needle breaks.

TBC...

The Matrix Reloaded (2003)

When the T3 trailer's the highlight there's somthing to worry about (part2)

[1/10 · 25 May 2003]

***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** Continued...

From here on in the whole movie collapses in on itself. First we meet a rogue program with the indication we're gonna get ghosts and vampires and werewolves and the like. We get a guy with a retarded accent talking endless garbage, two 'ghosts' that serve no real purpose and have no character what-so-ever and a bunch of henchmen. Someone's told me they're vampires (straight out of Blade 2), but they're so undefined I didn't realise.

The funny accented guy with a ridiculous name suffers the same problem as the Oracle, only for far longer and far far worse. He has a simple point about cause and effect, makes it, then continues to make it and make it until it becomes convoluted and stupid. His final line before walking off is comparable to Storm's "do you know what happens to a toad..." line in X-men in levels of utter bland baddness. The chocolate cake is such a lazy, pathetic cliche and Monica Bellucci as the wife does nothing other than exactly what we expect the moment we see her.

And then we get another kung fu fight!!! WHY? Neo is, allegedly, The One. He can do anything. He has the ultimate power and what does he use it for. Kung bloody fu all the time. And while he can stop 1000 bullets, he still gets cut by a sword and still makes a meal of 5 undecipherable henchmen (vampires?). I wanted to see mind blowing powers. I wanted to see him do the wildest, craziest most insane s*** to people because he can do anything. I got the same as before without the 'wow'.

The fabled car chase. That can't be bad. Well... no, it's not. It's just not what we've been tyold it was going to be. ALL the cool shots from this scene are in the trailer. Every one. So all possibly Wow has been taken from us so all we now get is a good chase sequence with, guess what, a kung fu fight!!! OK, it's not Neo, but you'd have thought he'd have explained to his closest friends about the reality of the Matrix. At least taught them something. It's not hard.

"Hey, Morpheus, don't worry about what happens to you in the matrix. It's not real. As long as you understand that nothing's real then nothing can really harm you."

There you go. Simple.

OK, so the chase is not bad. It's never boring and it doesn't seem like 16 minutes. It's just so underwhelming. And still, it gets worse.

The final climax to the movie is quite probably the worst imaginable. They have this whole elaborate plan that involves three crews. They then only show it sporadically between Morpheus's over long, super preachy, monologue. To make it worse, they never clearly define what this plan that needs 3 teams is. You know basically, but you don't know who's doing what, when, so when one crew goes down you just don't care and you don't know how this is going to affect what goes on.

I'll sum it up though, it happens so Trinity can get back into the Matrix to setup the end. That's the only reason it happens. Which raises the question, why did they need to send 6 people originally? Trinity gets in in five minutes by herself!

Neo's journey to the centre of the Matrix (so to speak) is handled equally lazily. Ooohhh!!! He runs into another 100 Agent Smiths!!! Woooooo!!! That must've taken a lot of thought. Only now they're in a corridor so the fight has no scale and is over in a moment. Man, what a grand finale!!!

And then the Architect!!!

Remember everything I said was bad about the Oracle and the foreign guy? Add them together and double it, that's how truly appalling the Architect is. The only reasonable potential of him is he's about to set up the cliffhanging climax.

And then he blows it!

Let's look at the options he gives Neo. Choose one door and all humanity dies (except 27!!!). Choose the other and all humanity dies!!! Considering choice is something this film tries to explore it doesn't really give it's hero one. If he had a choice of Save humanity and the missus dies or Save the missus and kill humanity there's the potnetial for inner torment and tension. Also, with Trinity being mid fall, the potential of a real cliffhanger that would've made seeing the third more essential. But no. He has save no-one or save the missus.

Now, the very worst thing about the original Matrix was Neo dying and then coming back to life right at the end. The year it came out everyone was so annoyed by how stupid Jar Jar was they didn't notice that the very end of The Matrix made him look him Steven Hawking. "The Oracle told me I'd fall in love with the One, and I love you".... Come On!!!! How can the whole world have missed how utterly terrible that was?

So, what do the Wachowski's do in the sequel? Well, they make the ending of the original look better. How? Well, by doing almost exactly the same thing again (only swapping characters) only so much worse I think my f a and r keys would be worn out if I kept writing far before I got to worse.

And the cliffhanger is just not really a cliffhanger. It's a reminder.

Basically, this film is just bad. I really didn't want it to be bad, but it is. Bad in just so many ways. And to make matters worse, this isn't a film with not enough budget. It's not a film with too short a schedule. It's not a film that's been rushed out. It's not a film where too much influence has come from the outside. This is exactly the film the Wachowski's set out to make with Warner's fortune fully behind them. And that's what makes this so awful. At least Rancid Aluminium can say that it didn't haev enough time or money.

Matrix Reloaded. The worst film ever made? Maybe not quite. The most disappointing and defalting film ever made.

Undeniably.