danielhalton Reviews

Apocalypto (2006)

Sadistically Violent/Amazingly Brilliant

[8/10 · 12 April 2007]

Let me begin by saying that I am used to violence in film. Some of my favorite movies include Scarface, Saving Private Ryan, Boondock Saints, Sin City, Pulp Fiction, etc.

Given that previous statement, it should hold some gravity when I say that Apocalypto is the only movie that has made me squirm from the level of violence. I did not merely flinch - I literally squirmed for almost the entirety of this film.

However, there is so much more to Apocalypto than a near-pathological level of violence. It is quite truly a brilliant piece of art and is equally brilliant in its storytelling. If you can deal with the violence, it is very much worth the watching.

Vanilla Sky (2001)

Nothing Short of a Remarkable Feature

[10/10 · 14 July 2006]

When released, a lot of people did not really like this movie - I believe there are certainly reasons for this, the three majors ones being that (1) I believe the trailer for it does an inadequate job of showing what this movie is truly about, (2) This is a mid-winter type release, and this movie was released while summer blockbusters were still hot, which is a recipe for disaster no matter how good the movie, and (3) Many people were expecting a Tom Cruise flick where it is easy to watch, predictable, etc. And some were disappointed that "Vanilla Sky" is not that and others were not able to move past the stereotype that Tom Cruise cannot act (which, in all fairness, is very true at times - just look at "MI-3").

Now, if you can move past all Tom Cruise stereotypes and view this film as any other movie, regardless of who is in it, then you can come to find yourself really getting into it. In fact, you'll be blown away by it.

But if you cannot move past that or do not like movies that really make you think, then maybe you should go rent something like "Fantastic Four" instead. . . .

Logan's Run (1976)

One Movie Buff's Opinion

[8/10 · 12 December 2004]

This is most definitely a movie worth watching, and despite the 70s pre-Star Wars effects, it really has a very good story line and a pretty decently written script that is well acted. Whether you should buy it or not, to some I would say yes and to some I would say no.

If you naturally like Sci-Fi, then this would be a must. The effects for the time are cheesy, but for the time they are quite good. This movie won an Oscar for the effects.

If you are a fan of negative utopia stories like 1984 or Brave New World, this one goes along beautifully with those.

If you simply love movies, buy it.

If you are not fitting into those categories, watch it first.

A Midsummer Night's Dream (1999)

One Movie Buff's Opinion

[10/10 · 12 December 2004]

I have seen criticism of this movie saying that the language should have been changed to our post-modern English instead of being the original late-middle/early modern English that Shakespeare used. But those who say that miss the point that what makes these plays so magnificent IS the language that Shakespeare used, and to change it would be to ruin the movie.

Anyways, the acting is marvelous, as it should be from such a cast as this. Michelle Pfeiffer plays the part of Titania with the utmost perfection. Kevin Kline as Nick Bottom is equally as good, and the two end up having a chemistry that is unmistakable (even if he is an ass at this point).

The directing is also great - almost as good as the acting, if not as good. Costumes, sets, everything with exception of there being headlights on the bicycles, is perfect. Michael Hoffman truly pulled of a great feat with this movie, and I would recommend it to anyone.

Also, on a side note, if you have trouble understanding the language, though it be English, watch the DVD and turn on the subtext.