Johnny-Sack Reviews

The Sopranos (1999–2007)

A Reminder That Not All Modern TV is Poor

[10/10 · 11 March 2006]

The Sopranos is arguably the greatest show in Dramatic Television history.

Its hard to think of another series that boasts so much intelligence, sublime writing or first rate performances.

Across its epic scope it produces fresh and iconic characters and a constant level of high quality. Centering around the life of one Tony Soprano, a man who lives in two families. One is the conventional wife and two kids nuclear family the other a huge New Jersey Mafia group, of which he is the boss of both. Played by James Gandolfini, of True Romance and The Mexican fame, Tony is a fascinating, scary but also likable guy. Full praise must be given to Gandolfini for making a womanising and horrifically aggressive brute a genuinely identifiable and perfect leading man. Contemporay American drama has never had such an arresting and iconic figure as Tony.

The cast of hundreds never boasts a flat performance and such stand out characters like Paulie Walnuts and Ralph Cifaretto will stick in your memory for ever.

The true genius of this tale however, is the creator and writers bravery and revolutionary take on a conventional drama series. Twenty minute long dream sequences, powerful and original use of symbolism and metaphorical imagery and truly shocking scenes of violence. Yet all this style is met by truly touching themes of love, honour and respect for family. The series never becomes cold hearted or gratuitous.

With TV now competitive and often poor The Sopranos stands tall above the rest as America's most original and compelling drama. Forget Family Redifined. This is Television Redifined.

Land of the Dead (2005)

Romero's Fourth Zombie Epic

[6/10 · 21 January 2006]

After the low budget entrails of Night of the Living Dead, the more opulent blood spewing Dawn Of The Dead and the militant guts of Day of the Dead,George A Romero returns to the horror sub-genre he practically invented. With the epic and thrilling Land Of The Dead.

It was questioned as too whether Romero still had it. Enough vitality and anger to make a fourth Dead picture, as the previous ones are studied as cultural allegories of their time. And if studied like that then Land truly does have things to say about post-9/11 America and The Bush Administration. And this time he casts the black lead(usually a heroic figure in his vision) as the lead zombie. The ultimate irony being that this zombie seems smarter than lots of the central characters.

The film boasts strong performances, although Asia Argento looks too much like a Resident Evil reject and Simon Baker gets blander the more you watch it. But Dennis Hopper excels as Kaufman, the villain of the piece in a role that could have been horribly one dimensional.

But the real test of Romero's talent is can he still pull of the horror. And he still remains the daddy of gore. His eclectic and visionary collection of new zombies are inspired and revolting(the women missing half her cheek exposing her tongue is genius!) Only occasionally does Romero fault with a soggy scene and the ending is a little too abrupt. But these flaws do not matter.

Romero returns to his definitive genre and not a moment too soon. Strongly recommended.

Kill Bill: Vol. 2 (2004)

And Tarantino Knocks One Out The Park

[9/10 · 2 December 2005]

And Tarantino brings his cinematic opus to a close.

But not in a way that people expected. This has hardly any of Vol. 1's searing colours, splashing crimson or R-rated cartoons. Instead Tarantino, a true genius of modern cinema, immerses himself in characters and dialogue. He reveals all exposition and backstory vitally missing from the first installment. And he does it with sheer class. Utterly beautiful shots, perfect performances and his trademark humour blacker than Elle Driver's eye patch.

But this is a true case of substance finally killing style, unlike Vol. 1. The emotional journey that the Bride goes through is stunning. And both Thurman and Carradine deliver iconic performances filled with weight and depth. And the final scenes, drenched in emotion and operatic Morricone are some of the best Tarantino or anybody has ever done.

In short one of the best films of the last ten years.

Lost (2004–2010)

A Classic TV Show

[7/10 · 1 October 2005]

"Lost" is one of those rare television shows that generates an excitement and interest from the viewer. It is indeed very rare for a TV show to make you think and contemplate things. Few spring to mind e.g. David Lynch's excellent and short lived show "Twin Peaks" and Alan Ball's terrific "Six Feet Under". Both fresh and entertaining while offering genuine ideas and issues and creating stunning performances worthy of any big screen.

"Lost" is one of these shows. Written, staged and performed like a great film with it's stylised look and fast paced narrative it rarely puts a foot wrong.

Each episode offers fresh ideas and dilemmas for the 47 survivors of the plane crash.

The show features many excellent actors. Yunjin Kim is gripping as the oppressed wife and Matthew Fox is a likable hero. But the real great actors are Dominic Monaghan and Terry O'Quinn. The latter playing Locke. A mysterious and creepy man with a jaw dropping past acted with ever watchable relish. Monaghan plays washed up rock star Charlie and flawlessly balances chirpy humour with dark intensity.

It remains to be seen if "Lost" will answer all the questions it raises but until that time it will no doubt remain as chilling, gripping and unashamedly entertaining as when it first began.

Revolver (2005)

A Perfectly Polished Turd

[1/10 · 1 October 2005]

It's evident that Guy Ritchie is trying to grow. Either bored or desperate to escape the world of "cheeky chappy" British criminals he made Swept Away. Nothing more needs to be said about that. But then he spent 18 months of his life writing this piece. And in many ways that is terribly depressing, much like the finished product. From the trailer this looked like it could be his masterpiece. A dialogue free short selection of clips, all beautifully stylised and inviting. And it's true that the only reason you should even go and see this is the look of the piece. A quite beautiful collection of shots and styles. Anything else to recommend? Well no. From the constant repetition of meaningless and foolishly pretentious quotes littered throughout the narrative to the utterly stupid characters (Ray Liotta is embarrassing) this is the perfect depiction of turkey. Simply throwing ideas around without the intelligence, it seems, to actually see what they mean Ritchie only proves that he has lost it. Jason Statham's voice-over soon becomes mind numbing and meaningless and the constant barrage of images induces headaches. It's quite impossible to describe how awful this confused mess is. Finally what is even more apparent is that Ritchie is clearly ripping off other films. From the mysterious presence of a crime boss called Mr Gold that reminds strongly of The Usual Suspects to the cartoon violence scenes so clearly ripped from Kill Bill Ritchie allows what originality he had to slip away. Quite ironic considering he's trying to broaden out.

A cinematic turd and without doubt the worst film of the year.

Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith (2005)

The Most Visually Stunning and Dramatically Powerful of all Star Wars Films!

[5/10 · 26 August 2005]

There's a shot halfway through Revenge of the Sith that has a disgruntled Yoda rub his forehead and sigh. While it's not a glorious battle scene (of which this film has many) its a strong image for Star Wars. One it signals a breakthrough in modern CGI film-making. Two it shows a subtextual sigh of relief from all the artists at Lucasfilm. All showing their collective talents and saying a weary goodbye to the greatest cinematic franchise of all time. The visual style of this film is flawless, gone are the rather static scenes of Phantom Menace and the overly gaudy CGI splashes of Attack of the Clones. And present is beautifully designed planets and environments and some of the most epic and awe inspiring sequences in film history. As Anakin and Obi-Wan battle it out to a truly rousing operatic track on the hellish planet Mustafar it switches(in vintage Lucas style) to Emperor Palpatine and Yoda tearing the Senate building apart in a relentlessly exciting duel. As far as action and spectacle go, you can't beat this. But the narrative and acting has been improved too. For once in the prequels we have a fully realised and dramatically engaging story. Anakin's perilous plunge to the Dark Side dealt with in an adult fashion, so no midi-chlorians and young cringeworthy cries of "yippee!" Just powerfully moving scenes of Jedi genocide and good become soured to bad. Some scenes show real dramatic charge and others political poignancy ("This war represents a failure to listen!") Evreyone does there best with Lucas's notoriously strange dialogue and all do fine. But particular praise MUST be given to Ian McDiarmid's excellent performance in this film. Boasting incredible acting gravitas and finally given something to do in he prequels, he delivers his lines with relish and energy. If there's any justice he'll be clutching a golden statue next year! Only occasionally does Lucas falter with poor dialogue and slow pacing but no film is perfect. And above all Lucas triumphs so well, with this visually thrilling soap opera, that any self respecting cinema fan can't help but tingle with excitement as they see the last piece of history from that Galaxy far, far away. BY RM.

Full Tilt Boogie (1997)

An Amazing Look at the Magic of Movie-making.

[9/10 · 18 June 2005]

DVD extras can often be mind numbingly low on interest. Where the "making of" docs consist of boring technical computer crap and actors telling us what they do in the movie. However Full Tilt Boogie is the most in depth and funny making of I have ever seen. Not only does it show the commitment and passion (that wear's thin at times when the dreaded Union come in) of the filmmakers it also shows a intimate group of friends working together on a movie. It has a movie like narrative including a stylized openening, a conflict and a happy ending. It also features several great artists playing around and partying (including Quentin Tarantino, Robert Rodriquez etc). There are numerous stand out moments including the AD'S discussing who they find attractive, what George Clooney got for Juliette Lewis on her birthday, Quentin Tarantino singing "Momma Tried" and Michael Parks being predictably hilarious. Put all this together and what do you have? One of the rare treats where a making of documentary is better tho the actual film. A true Gem.

Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (2003)

Action and style make up for a weak script.

[7/10 · 12 February 2005]

Tarantino is a true talent in the eyes of many. Few debuts have been as handsomely constructed and powerfully original as Reservoir Dogs and few films have been as enjoyable and influential as Pulp Fiction. Both celebrate the art of script writing that awarded the supreme motor mouthed auteur with an Oscar. However with Volume 1 of his martial art epic Kill Bill, we see his weakest script work yet. The dialogue is slightly clunky at times and reams away from his most celebrated work but what it lacks in lines it exceeds in action. Compared with the other so-called action films released that year Kill Bill screams talent. Crash zooms, jump cuts and glowing crimson abound. The final 30 minutes or so of this film, where Tarantino flexes his action muscles are some of the most thrilling of the year. It should be clear to most that with this film Tarantino is showing us a different side of his world, and in terms of action and style he simply excels.

Collateral (2004)

A Contempory Classic

[9/10 · 3 January 2005]

What looks like a very pretentious piece of studio action rubbish is actually one of the few films of the last five years that I personally would hold up as a classic. Of course it is easy to see how some could disagree but I feel some will agree. This was one of the best of last years mixed bag of offerings and is a truly impressive piece of work. With Tom Cruise using more than his boyish good looks and snow white smile to create a character he plays a killer with a subtle sense of relish and manages to create a very threatening character. Jamie Foxx and Jada Pinkett provide good work too but the real star of this film is Michael Mann. Mann is a great film stylist and this is arguably his most stylised effort yet. Using advanced DV he creates a visually arresting portrayal of his beloved LA and gives the scene's a raw quality that would, perhaps, not been as effective on film. The scene in the club where his use of action becomes very rough and gritty is superb and extremely enjoyable to view, especially on the big screen. There is also a strong independent style of film-making in the mood and design of this movie and that along with two stars being excellently cast against type (if you will) only further prove that this is a devilishly gritty and gripping portrayal of contempory LA. And one if not THE best film of last year.

The Chronicles of Riddick (2004)

A MODERN DAY DUNE

[1/10 · 4 December 2004]

I believe that Pitch Black was overrated. That said I still went to see this film. With the small hope that it would be an epic visual treat. Or maybe an interesting new take on the very tired sci-fi genre. Or maybe a no brain actioner.

I was wrong.

Horrific performances compliment flat direction. Vin Diesel does what he can, dare I say more. And Judi Dench (bess her) floats around lost in a world of rushed looking sets and half arsed action scenes.

Unoriginal and completely lacking in anything remotely exciting.

An extremely poor effort from what could have been quite good.

ROB'S REVIEW *_ _ _ _ AWFUL

Alien vs. Predator (2004)

A Tragic misfire

[2/10 · 23 October 2004]

Paul WS Anderson is possibly the most hated director alive. But he really shouldn't be. Its all about opinion and talent level at the end of the filmic day. "Soldier" was not that bad. I can think of dozens of higher rated films that fit comfortably (in my opinion) next to it, Spider Man 2 springs to mind, however i do think its always a little harsh to be that unkind to the guy. However here you are all justified really. It seems amazing how a genuine fan of these two franchises could mess it up so spectacularly. The fights are not very well filmed, the characters are thinner than toe nail clippings and the fact that there's little to no gore means this will never be treated with the same prestigious opinions as Scott's or McTiernan's work.

This really is a bad film in anyone's eyes (whether some parts were mildly enjoyable or not). And a terrific misfire with a capital m. An almost instantly forgettable film experience. Really all you needed was thrilling one on one bitch fights, buckets of gore and slime, stylish direction and a few winking in jokes to the previous films and it would have been serviceable enough. Oh well.

Blue Velvet (1986)

One of the greatest films

[10/10 · 16 October 2004]

In the days of hopelessly overbugeted films and trashy remakes it seems that their are few originals working. It is also ironic that this superb film came of the back of a hopelessly bloated blockbuster. Blue Velvet is an original, haunting masterpiece. Filled with ambiguous images, haunting shots and surreal scenes it may not be for all tastes sure, but no one can deny its power and viscerality. Dennis Hopper WILL never get a better role to showcase his talent and gives a masterclass in psycho. Forget Perkins and Hopkins, Hopper's character is as scary and haunting as he is psychotic. A truly original piece of work that stands up as a fantastic achievement in modern film. God bless you Lynch.

Eraserhead (1977)

One truly unforgettable film

[10/10 · 4 September 2004]

To begin with i personally, and i guarantee I'm not alone here, think David Lynch is one of the greatest filmmakers ever. And Eraserhead is one of his greatest. The film is not necessarily a film of full on symbolism. Its more the phenomenal director pouring his thoughts, moods and subconscious feelings into what is essentially a fairly straight forward "plot." He is interested in mood and imagery, obviously more so than dialogue. This does pit him aside from Mamet etc obviously and does limit his commercial appeal but it does not render him some arty weirdo. It is perhaps a mistake to view this film as a puzzle you must solve, unlike Mullholand dr, it is more you just surrendering yourself to Lynch's completely bizarre style and thoughts. Because more likely than not you'll just tie yourself up in knots about subtext and symbolism although I'm not saying its wrong to do this. Anyhow, instead you should just buckle up for one the most imaginative, surreal and unforgettable films in the history of cinema.