Change Your Image
Demarates
Not the pain of dying, but rather the concept of ceasing to exist. The dread of checking out while leaving ambitions unfulfilled.
But as I grow older, I feel that on some level, I will one day welcome death, the peace and tranquillity of it.
And the absence of regret.
Lists
Latest Message Board Posts
Reviews
The Magnificent Seven (1960)
The Mediocre Seven
-------------SPOILER WARNING ----------------- As a kid I really enjoyed this film, but back in those days I also enjoyed the CHIPS, Knight Rider, The A-Team and the great Buck Rogers so it is safe to say my taste was still in the development phase.
Watching it again recently, I must say I was somewhat disappointed by the movie, both in terms of form as in terms of content.
Let's start with Form. Here's a few things that really bothered me :
1)Death scenes. Whatever happened to taking a bullet, keeling over and dying ? Maybe it was part of the whole young-bucks-trying-to-outdo-each-other, but why the hopelessly overacted song-and-dance routines by Bronson, Vaughn, Wallace and Coburn ? What were these guys (and the director, I might add) thinking ? Being shot, doing a few twirls and squeezing in a spot of conversation with your adversary, preaching to a couple of kids, throwing the odd knife (at a dodgy looking brick, no less) or (my personal favorite) doing a veritable love scene which practically includes frenching a stone wall !? That's not just stretching credibility, that's outright laughable...
2) Stunts. Badly performed and thus very obviously fake scenes once again stretch the credibility of the movie. The worst one is where a farmer strikes at one of the bandits seated on his horse with a scythe.
3) Horst Buchholz. Clearly the least convincing actor of the bunch and also the least charismatic. Yet for some reason, he is pretty much the center of this film... Compared to Seven Samurai his character is a blend of two of the most important samurai (the young one and the farmer-turned samurai). Why ? Am I wrong in saying the focus on Chico causes other (much more interesting) characters played by charisma-oozing guys like Coburn, Bronson and McQueen to remain quite one-dimensional ? In my opinion the attention devoted to the development of the other 5 (besides Chico and Chris) was just too small.
But these visual flaws pale in comparison to the plot holes, the illogical twists and turns in the Content of the film :
1) Chico infiltrating in the bandido gang. At that point the bandits are NAMING their fallen comrades, which implies they know damn well who is part of their gang and who isn't. Yet Chico (who was shooting at them hours before) can mosey on into their camp in his bandido hat disguise without anyone going "The hell is this guy ?"
2) The farmers betray the gunfighters. The reason why is a bit dodgy to begin with, but what about their reaction to it ? Why would they even bother returning to help the villagers who clearly show they no longer want their help ? What is their MOTIVATION at that point ? Also, why not follow up on punishing the traitor(s) (I believe this Sotero character was the main culprit) who are in fact responsible for the deaths of 4 of their comrades ?
3) Calvera returning the guns, complete with ammo. In the very beginning Calvera explains it's not easy being a bandit chieftain. It seems this type of business venture includes important overhead costs, not in the least the feeding and arming of your bandido employees. So why GIVE AWAY free guns and ammo (to people who tried to kill you) ? Letting them go in order to avoid payback, sure. But why not send them on their way empty-handed or even with their guns minus the ammo.
In light of all these points, I experienced The Magnificent Seven not as an important western, but rather as a contrived unconvincing star-vehicle remake of an important Japanese film.
And in reference to the previous poster, this movie was shot in Mexico, not in Spain.
Mindhunters (2004)
Not bad at all
I don't want to give away too much about the story, so I'll stick to the basics.
A small group of FBI-serial killer experts are in a training program. Val Kilmer is the trainer, an eccentric character named Harris who runs the show in his own way. The whole idea is putting them in situations where they are likely to mess up, so that they will think twice before acting to quickly or jumping to the wrong conclusions in real life.
The idea of this last exercise is to isolate the group on a deserted island, so they can focus on "profiling" a killer without any help from forensics, witnesses and so forth. Things take a very unexpected turn when one of the team gets killed.
It would seem that instead of an exercise they are faced with the real thing : Profiling and identifying a killer before he kills all of them. Is the killer an outsider or someone from within their team ?
---------
Stuck on an island, people ending up dead one after another... Yes, there is a more than a dash of Agatha Christie there. But there are plenty of interesting add-ons to this Ten Little Indians clone. The acting is pretty decent, although in my opinion LL Cool J was a little too cool to be convincing (some of lines really are over-the-top...) and maybe Miss Valesquez should limit herself to non-speaking parts as her English sounds very laboured.
Don't go in expecting a masterpiece, just enjoy the ride. This movie is a fun high-adrenaline action movie /thriller. I give it 8/10
The Last Samurai (2003)
Been there, seen that,...OK, bored now.
SPOILERS !!!!!!
Watched it yesterday at the Avant-Premiere. Most people seemed to like it, although few were overly enthusiastic. It was a decent film, nice Japanese sceneries, professional acting and the occasional laugh. (Bob and the dress)
But somehow it failed to get under my skin because I had the feeling that none of what I was seeing was new, it all felt too familiar, like it had all been done before. And let's face it, it has !
You take a Dances With Wolves/Man called Horse protagonist, put him into a Shogun setting where he is introduced to a tribe. He is of course completely fascinated by them and becomes one of them. Then you through in a battle that's straight out of Braveheart (yeah, let's light a campfire behind the enemy to box them in, how innovative) and finish it off with a senseless (but epic-looking) charge just like in the Charge of the Light Brigade.
OK, so far, I could maybe live with it. But then the corny ending where the young Emperor grows a pair of cojones out of nowhere, puh-lease ! That was just too much.
Also, if a writer thinks it's cool to bring up the battle of Thermopylae, he really should get his facts straight... 1 million Persians against 300 Greeks, my ass !
Anyways, I'm being mild today with a 5/10.
The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)
Even for not-Tolkienreaders
I have never read the books by Tolkien and am not a Tolkien-freak (unlike some others in the theatre who came equiped with Spock-ears and everything). I can say that I went to Lords of the Rings slightly sceptical.
Still, even I can only confirm that this movie kicks anus.
Bring It On (2000)
The line between fiction and reality
Never have I had a more obvious confrontation with the line between fiction and reality...
Eliza Dushku portrays the role of a Slayer in the "Buffy The Vampire Slayer" series. She is however, only an actress and not an actual protector of the innocent and warrior against the forces of evil.
For if she were, surely she would not have played the role of Missy in this picture.
Instead she would have come to the shooting of "Bring it on" with a wooden stake, some holy water and a crucifix in order to finish off most the cast, the director, the camera crew and the writers.
Unfortunately she did not do so and thus these people were able to unleash this demonic monster of a movie upon us.
The end.
The Mexican (2001)
Why did she ever win an Oscar ?
All in all an interesting and often amusing tale of a clumsy criminal in search of a valuable pistol. But certainly not a great film.
Brad Pitt portrays this criminal and I must say he does a pretty decent job. However, while I consider him to be one of the best actors around, this performance is little more than "slightly above average". In one of the first scenes (Julia Roberts throws luggage at him), his acting is even quite lame. My conclusion is that Brad Pitt should stick to serious acting and not try to be Woody Harrelson or something else he is not.
Julia Roberts was excellent at playing the same character she has been playing for the last 20 years now, in every single movie she has been in. I still cannot believe they gave her an Oscar for repeating herself over and over again. I was actually reminded of Kevin Costner, another actor who, in every part, use the same gestures, the same ticks, the same looks, the same everything. It's almost like being in Groundhog Day...Please God, make them stop.
James Gandolfini, now there is a performance. Even before the, blessed be thy name, SOPRANOS, this guy played a number of interesting characters, although mostly small parts. Well, this time it's bigger and even more interesting. If you're looking for one good reason to go see this film, well voila !
Finally there was Gene Hackman, although one needs to wonder why... A very short, almost marginal appearance with absolutely no charisma. The actor from Unforgiven, French Connection and many other great movies was nowhere in sight. Acting on auto-pilot, no dedication as if he'd rather be out playing golf or something.
6/10 , but no more than that. Vaya con dios.
Good Will Hunting (1997)
One of the best movies I have EVER seen.
And since I am considered quite a movie freak that does say something.
I must say I came to this film with rather low expectations, mostly due to Robin Willimas who I generally find an over-actor and quite often flat out annoying. In this film however, he does a great job, no silly faces, no voices, just sober, yet very strong acting. A perfect sparring partner for the awesome Matt Damon. The same can be said about Matts buddy Ben Affleck, another very strong performer in this film.
This film is at moments so very moving that it brings tears to your eyes, yet very funny at the same time. I obviously rate it 10 out of 10 and rest assured that it will remain in my collection for a very long time. A film I am sure I will watch over and over again, until I know every tiny piece of dialogue by heart and still these performances will touch my soul...
An absolute MUST SEE.
Dogma (1999)
This movie bites
What a huge disappointment... After the brilliant Clerks (I really enjoyed that one and rate it 10/10) and the sensitive Chasing Amy (8/10) I was hoping for a grand finale in the third part of this Kevin Smith trilogy. In the cast were two awesome guys from Good Will Hunting (another 10/10) but now with a bigger budget, that had to result in one hell of a movie, right ?
Wrong. It resulted in a huge pile of crap. Seldom funny, I felt no connection with any of the characters and there was little excitement all round. This kind of films almost makes one look forward to an apocalypse !
There are better things to spend your money on folks ...
The Last Supper (1995)
Quite refreshing
A very nice film, that shocks you yet amuses you at the same time. A few familiar faces Bill Paxton, Ron Pearlman and the yummy Cameron Diaz, although everyone in the cast does a good job.
I went to see it in a sneak preview (so did not know what I was gonna get) and it turned out to be an excellent choice. A must see.
As Good as It Gets (1997)
The very best of Jack Nicholson
Absolutely brilliant, Melvin Udall is the most dislikable - yet at the same time most likable - character ever portrayed in a movie. Jack Nicholson is the perfect casting choice for this absolute nutcase.