Change Your Image
delahoc
Reviews
Antitrust (2001)
It took the time to be accurate - but at what cost?
This is one of the few movies about computers, programming and those that make it happen that actually demonstrates that at least a little research was done by the writer/s. Not only is the script filled with real technical lingo (IP addresses, LZ compression, etc), but it actually uses it all in the correct context. (For examples of correct lingo in incorrect usage, see films like 'Jurassic Park'). So in that sense at least, the writer did their job.
Alas, in other areas they let the team down.
I like the basic premise. Tim Robbins (Gary Winston) as an evil Bill Gates (Gary Winston = William Gates, GW=WG) is certainly an idea that appeals to me (as a an anti-Microsofter from way back). There are even a number of little in-jokes through the plot that pick out the Gates-Microsoft connection (the artwork screens in Winston's house, a character called Redmond, the Dept of Justice accusations, etc). And it was so nice to see so many computers on screen, and not one Windows window anywhere.
Into all of this comes Ryan Phillipe as a hotshot programmer - who, as far as I can see, never actually programs anything. He stares at a lot of code on screens, and types in some pseudo-unix commands, but I can't recall him actually coding anything. As a geek he looks the part, and certainly has the introvert/social inept bit down pat. But even geeks have other emotions.
And how the hell does a guy like him get a girl like Claire Forlani?? Surely that must have sent alarm bells ringing for him early on? Yes, even allowing for the plot twist half way through, guys like him just don't get girls like her - because they're rarely out of the garage.
Rachel Leigh Cook - stunning, and wasted. There was so much more scope for her in this. And the final twist with her character at the end just was not believable.
I'm glad to finally see a movie in which computers and computer programming are an essential device actually treat them with some accuracy. It's fantastic to have a fantasy in which an evil Bill Gates actually gets whats coming to him.
All it needed was a little more character injected into the three main young characters and it would have worked perfectly.
Star Trek: Insurrection (1998)
Good, but not up to the best of Trek
Insurrection is one of those Star Trek movies that would have made a great double episode. The story and character development are really not sufficiently grand or large scale enough for a movie. Of course, the special effects are definitely theatre quality, but sfx alone do not a good Star Trek make.
The plot alone is just not big enough. We've seen prime directive motivated stories many times through most of the franchise shows (from original series through to Voyager). We've seen utopia-type cultures many times, too. Even the fountain-of-youth kinda plot has been used a few times before. Okay, this was an interesting mix of the three, but there just wasn't anything different enough about this one to really make it work. Star Trek motion picture plots should - in my opinion at least - be painted on a much broader canvas. Take 'Undiscovered Country', for example - despite it's reliance on a murder mystery, some pretty corny Kirk-jokes, and an anti-climactic ending, at least we were talking about a big, large-canvas issue.
The relationships between the crew are not working as well in this one, I feel. Certainly the renewed romance between Troi and Riker comes across as forced and unimaginative - the dialogue is trite, and the performances just don't carry it off. Data is, yet again, wasted (except, perhaps, for the "firm boobs" line...). Worf had something of a contribution to make to the humour ("Definitely experiencing aggressive tendencies, Sir!"), but was otherwise underused. But some of the wink-wink, buddy-buddy stuff was excruciating, and reminiscent of the worst of Wesley Crusher.
Picard's relationship with Anij could have been better developed and explored. It's becoming a little cliched to have the captain (any captain) find romance with the first good-looking support character that comes along - it was often one of the worst aspects of the original series. There were a few little differences in this one, but they weren't fully explored, and Donna Murphy was certainly underutilised.
Whilst this one was good, I won't be placing it at the top of my ordered list of Star Trek movies. It's not the worst, but it's not the best.
If this franchise is going to last at the cinemas, then the producers are going to have to start thinking BIG. Not only was there little visually in this one (other than the superior effects) that wouldn't have worked on the smaller screen (even the colonist's village seemed like a set from the TV show), but the opportunity to explore bigger issues and more complex plots was also wasted.
Day of the Woman (1978)
Sorry people, it's not good.
Having read the various comments about this movie, I feel the need to add my two cents' worth.
Let's get one thing straight. This is NOT a good movie. The direction is pathetic, the editing is almost non-existent, the script must have been made up on the spot (the dialogue is atrocious), the characters are stereotyped, the acting is worse than lousy and the sound unlistenable. Have I missed anything?
For a horror movie there is no horror. For a suspense movie there is no suspense. For a titillation movie there is no titillation. For a character study there are no characters.
I felt no anger for the perpetrators, no sympathy for the victim; nothing, for anyone.
Some have mentioned interesting ironies or dichotomies. If such things exist (rich/poor, city/country, etc) then they are accidental. Some have mentioned the revenge theme and the transfer of power - merely excuses in my book.
This is also not a 'classic' bad movie in the Ed Wood vein. At least Ed had the best of intentions. I see no intention here but an excuse on the part of the director to spend a large amount of time with a reasonably attractive naked woman - who, unfortunately, seems to have little or no acting ability (a definite minus, given that the movie hinges on her performance).
I did not see the X-rated version, but the rape scenes that I saw were laughable. Seems to me the gents concerned had no concept of how to perform during sex, flinging about in all odd directions - in ways that would have reduced the opportunity for any physical satisfaction at all!! The revenge murders were also laughable. I don't know what the commotion is about the castration scene - certainly didn't make me twinge.
I found myself fast forwarding through much of this. It could easily have been cut down considerably without losing anything, but then the total lack of anything approaching an acting performance would have made that effort a waste of time.
Final comment? Don't bother.
The Matrix (1999)
Whoa ... !
These days, with all the loud, intense marketing that accompanies major movies, it's sometimes difficult to separate the film from the hype. 'The Matrix', however, is one film that is even bigger and better than the hype that tries to sell it.
It's rare these days to find movies with no plot holes, no plot flaws. Even with the recent improvements in SFX and CGI, it's rare to find a movie where the effects just cannot be flawed (well, on freeze-frame I actually found a bungee cord that the wore-removal guys didn't do such a good job on).
The Matrix not only lives up to it's promise, but far exceeds it. It redefines excitement.
Hugo Weaving is a much under-utilised actor, one of Australia's best. It's good to see Australian actors like Russell Crow and Guy Pearce getting the attention and plaudits they deserve, but Hugo Weaving should be working more. Whilst he is superb here as the evil and emotionless villain, check out some of his previous Australian miniseries ('Dirtwater Dynasty' and 'Bodyline') to see him really shine.
Intensity (1997)
It had potential, but doesn't deliver
With plot holes big enough to drive a Mack truck through, this effort is a big disappointment. (Note: I viewed this as a single 3 hour movie, not as a mini-series; heavy editing may have accounted for some of the ridiculousness)
For a person with only one apparent state of mind (blind terror), Chyna does, says, and deduces too much. No one in that state of mind would be able to act that way. Perhaps it was just lousy acting on the part of the actress - but there was absolutely no credibility in her choosing to do what she does.
There was no reasonable motivation whatsoever put forward for the catatonic state of Ariel. And then to have her able to slip out of it a couple of times just when it suited the plot was far too unbelievable.
Piper Laurie's character had stupid dialogue and also no motivation to do what she was doing.
And why do the dogs only attack when it's convenient for the drama, but not when it's inconvenient for the plot? Dumb.
Sorry, but what was a reasonable initial premise with some promise was, by the end, completely destroyed by poor acting, lousy script, and a contrived plot that held no twists or surprises. All in all a poor, predictable and ultimately unexciting effort all round.
Score = 2/10
Bad Timing (1980)
A waste of celluloid but for two minor redeeming qualities
This is one of those movies that you have to force yourself to sit through - and ultimately the experience is almost completely unrewarding.
The use of cross-over dialogue (most of which seems ad-libbed) becomes tedious and tiring. The repetition of lines and phrases is quickly irritating.
Art Garfunkel gives a limp (no pun intended), lifeless performance. We end up with no sympathy for his character (which may have been the intent), little concern for the character's fate, and absolutely no understanding of his motivations or behaviour.
There are only two reasons for tuning in: Harvey Keitel gives another stand-out performance (his character is probably the only interesting and sympathetic one in the film, and physically reminiscent of John Travolta in Pulp Fiction); and Theresa Russell's attractive and very watchable body is given ample exposure on numerous occassions. If only Art Garfunkel kept his clothes on a little more ...
How to improve the movie? Less Garfunkel, more Keitel, and more of Theresa Russell's body. Oh, and a script would have helped.
The World Is Not Enough (1999)
Another great Bond, and a big elephant stamp to Pierce Brosnan
I've been a big Bond fan since I saw my first Connery Bond (I think it was Goldfinger). To me, there have always been several elements that make a Bond film work, and they must be perfectly balanced to make the film work. These include action (top chase scenes or action scenes are a must), humour (but laconic, and without falling into the traps of so many other films), villains (and other characters) you love to hate, and above all a believable Bond. The girls are secondary as window dressing, but important if their characters are well developed (character is king).
This one has them all, and in the best balance for a while.
The opening chase is brilliant, classic Bond. A nifty gadget, top speed, unbelievable stunts and a hero to cheer. The rest of the action sequences struggle to keep up with it - the ski chase is okay for a little while, but goes just a little long - though the chopper chase and gun fight on the docks is excellent.
The humour is finely balanced, with Brosnan once again showing his perfect timing. He is as laconic and self-effacing a Bond as one could hope for. As much as I like John Cleese (I'm a Python and Fawlty Towers fan from way back) I fear that his inclusion in the cast as the probable successor to Q may swing the pendulum too far toward satire. I'd watch that one with caution if I were the producers.
Elektra fills two roles wonderfully - a classic Bond girl with haunting, sultry good looks, and a calculating, heartless villain. Hers is a great addition to the story. Christmas Jones was a nothing character, and the movie would not have missed her being written out. It seems that Bond must sleep with someone at the end of the film, The name seems merely an excuse for the film's last line - straight out of Benny Hill.
Brosnan is Bond. He has given the role a life and a depth that it has missed for many, many years. For my money, Connery is still the best Bond, but Brosnan is so close behind him as to be a real threat. Lazenby, Moore, and Dalton are so far behind these two as to be completely out of the race. Brosnan has kept the charm and the cool of the other Bonds, and given him the humour and the cold killer-instinct that he lost when Connery left. Dalton tried to bring that back but failed. Moore relied too heavily on the charm and the humour, and Lazenby just failed.
The look on Brosnan's face during the opening scene in the banker's office when he displays his repulsion at those that tried to kill him, gives Bond a new depth. Brosnan is brilliant again.
Oh, and where can I get a pair of those x-ray glasses????
Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace (1999)
The legend continues
I was one of the few people I knew who was reading about the making of the original Star Wars months before it's release and looking forward to seeing it. The trilogy broke new ground in story-telling, special effects, and movie genres, and deserved all the recognition it got.
Like everyone else, I anxiously awaited the release of more movies, and hearing of Episode 1, waited the eighteen months or so before it finally arrived in our cinemas then rushed out to see it. On one level I was not disappointed - new characters, new stories, filling in some holes, and great special effects. On another level I was a little let down - perhaps I was expecting too much, but the marketing, pre-release promotion and hoopla certainly encouraged me to.
I'm very pleased with Anakin, and I am not looking forward to seeing him turn to the dark side. I like him now, and I don't want him spoiled - yet I know it must happen.
I was disappointed with Obi-wan. While Ewan McGregor has made me believe that he will grow into the character as portrayed by Sir Alec Guiness, the character was still flat, and seemed to have little to do or say.
Qui-Gon Jinn seemed to be developing nicely, and was killed far too early. It seemed to me that this was little more than plot mimicry - we killed Obi-Wan early in Star Wars and it worked, we need to do it again this time. He had scope, and Liam Neeson lent the stage a presence. Not a good idea. He will, no doubt, be resurrected in spirit form during the next movies (as was Obi-Wan), but that will be little consolation.
Queen Amidala needs a little more work, and I look forward to seeing Natalie Portman develop her further. She's a great actress and was underutilised in this film. Perhaps when she and Anakin get it together the love story there will allow her to grow - and perhaps watching Anakin turn to the dark side will see her blossom.
I take it we wont see Jar Jar Binks any more. My daughter likes him, and I thought he was okay, but he grated a little after a while.
The script was trying to achieve too much, I thought. There were so many stories, sub-plots and twists that my daughters started to lose track of it all. Not a good sign. A little more pacing would have helped.
Still, a brilliant addition to the legend, and a worthy start to the next trilogy. It can only get better from here.
And George, if you need someone to direct the next one, my phone number is....
Strange Days (1995)
A great concept, great style, great cast
Strange Days is a strange film. Considering the names behind it, the incredible production values and it's obvious budget, it's a wonder it died so dismally at the box office.
James Cameron's script takes a science fiction premise we've seen before (Brainstorm, Lawnmower Man) and gives it a bit of a dark twist. Not his best script, but he keeps the action and the twists coming.
The direction is sharp, lavish and stylish. Ralph Fiennes gives a manic performance, creating great sympathy for a less than sympathetic character. Juliette Lewis is just plain sexy, and shown off to great effect here. Like Nero, we want her, but at the end of the film, perhaps just a little sooner than Nero, we no longer care. Still, it was great looking at her in the meantime!
I didn't think much of Angela Bassett in this one. Her scenes were too predictable, her character too thin.
A grim look at life; a dirty, sexy, lustful, repulsive view of what we could easily become.
Is It Legal? (1995)
Another pleasant but original English comedy series
English sitcoms always seem so much fresher than American ones, and this is a perfect example of why.
There is very little slapstick or visual comedy in the series, but what they do have works. The real strength of 'Is it Legal?' is in the characterisations, and this is typical of English sitcoms.
Most American sitcoms that try to create comedic characters tend to go overboard. The word 'subtlety' appears to have gone missing from the US dictionaries. Let's look at some examples here.
Bob is such an understated and self-effacing character, but without making it depressing. He is naive, shy and lacks self-confidence - very much the bumbling English nobody that Hugh Grant used to specialise in. Only here, Bob is believable, worthy of our sympathy, and funny.
My favourite character though is Alison. The essentially talentless but scheming and bitchy secretary that many of us have probably seen in a thousand workplaces. Yet at the same time we know exactly what her weaknesses and vulnerabilities are, and they are used to perfection in many scripts. By the way, if anyone has any more details on Kate Isitt, the beautiful actress who plays Alison, then I would love to hear from them.
This is not English comedy in the style of Monty Python (which I dearly love). It is subtle, quiet, unassuming, but nevertheless extremely amusing. Not belly laughs or gross-outs but a pleasant, undemanding and wholly entertaining comedy.
Léon (1994)
A rich experience - at once delightful, sensual and disturbing.
An unexpected delight when I first caught it. It has so many highlights - the sensitive, imaginative direction, three powerful and moving performances from it's main cast, and a story rich in character, emotion and twists.
It took me a moment to get over Mathilda's immediate presence of mind when she returned home - an emotional control and quick thinking well beyond her years. But from then on it didn't look back.
I'd seen 'Fifth Element' prior to this, and was blown away by the rich imagery, innovative storylines, and imaginative direction. I thought it a grossly underrated film. But here, Besson really shows his skill. I was hooked from start to finish.
Jean Reno, is - as always - a commanding screen presence. His Leon is complex: at times bumbling, intelligent, naive and worldly, yet all the time played with such subtlety. He is so totally believable at all times. A sympathetic character despite his profession, we feel so totally for him that the final moments of the film are strong and lasting.
Natalie Portman is a gem. What a find. A maturity of performance well beyond her years, able to evoke whatever emotion is required with conviction and utter believability. So totally sensual at such a young age, one can hardly imagine what we can look forward to in the years to come. This is a tour-de-force performance from a talented actress. I'll be watching out for her ...
Gary Oldman once again delivers a stunning performance. No one goes mad like Gary Oldman. The insanity is hypnotic, and yet another faultless performance from this incredibly underrated and under-used actor. hen Jack Nicholson goes mad you can hear it clear across the country. When Gary Oldman goes mad it's a fire that burns from within and consumes you quietly and willingly.
I wish there were more films like this.