Change Your Image
Aragorn-7
Reviews
Recount (2008)
I had fun watching
Hey, I'm a conservative and I enjoyed this film. HBO did a credible job in keeping it as balanced as one could expect in this democrat leaning movie world. Of course I loved the West Wing TV show too even if it trashed most of my values. The bottom line here is:
1) was the acting good - yes! The standouts being Tom Wilkinson (as James Baker), Dennis Leary (as Michael Whouley) and Laura Dern (as Katherine Harris). Dern played Harris as a caricature (she was kooky but not that kooky) but it was fun to watch.
2) was the story good - yes. How could it not be when we had an event happen that the country hadn't seen since the early days of the US presidency. The country was tested and passed in flying colors. Sure it was politically rough for both parties afterwords, with finger pointing lasting for years, but the country itself survived the chaos just fine.
3) do we learn some things - maybe. I'm sure some here read every scrap of info on this thing back in the day but while I was riveted to the event, I didn't see every detail. The back room conversations (assuming accuracy) were pretty cool with both parties feeling they had the moral high ground. The more obtuse tidbits the film decided to go with certainly favored the democrats even though there were plenty of oddities on both sides they could have chosen from. But I have to say I'm used to the norm being a lot more biased. And the questions asked at the end were water cooler topics for the next day. Would Gore have been better? If things were reversed would the US Supreme Court have stopped a Bush recount? Would the Florida Supreme Court have allowed a Bush recount to begin with?
I'll leave my own beliefs on those issues to myself but the fact that they brought about talk and anger at home and work the day after this film aired is a pretty good indication that the movie worked as intended.
Entertainment B+, Facts B, Acting B+
King Kong (2005)
King Kong Remake... good, not great
First the Grood: The Special effect are simply incredible. Kongs hair, the dinosaurs, New York City... simply amazing and worth the price of a ticket by itself. And the screenplay while not quite the same as the original is still top notch. Big pluses for Naomi Watts/AnnDarrow, Thomas Kretschmann/CaptEnglehorn, the beast and even Kyle Chandler/BriceBaxter.
Then the poor: Edit, Edit Edit! Most scenes go on way too long. The Bronto sequence should have been cut by 2/3 (it ended in a poor job really). The Tyrano fight... too many creatures and to much corniness with the hanging vines. The spiders/insects/scorpions... there was a reason this was cut from the original... continuity. This really drags the movie down. Jack Black/CarlDenham, eh... so so. He didn't really do it for me. Adrien Brody/JackDriscoll... well good thing they changed his character to a writer because he is terribly miscast as a hero. he's more the bumbling juggler type.
Now this is a good movie, I'd say a solid B overall. However if 2 DVD's are sitting in front of me: one 2005 and one 1933... I'm watching the 1933 version hands down. It's a better movie and the fight with the tyrano is still amazing 73 years later! And New York looks great there too because, well, it WAS the correct time period.
Aragorn
Robots (2005)
What a disappointment
Someone wrote: "Great animated film, adults will enjoy this one" That's backwards imho... 5-10 year olds will like this... adults will be bored. Going into this I had visions of Toy Story, The Incredibles or even Ice Age. What I got was a poor seen-a-million-times story, OK computer visuals and equally just OK voices.
This computer animated movies, while high tech wonders, can suffer from the same big mistake that many action movies do these days... they need a great story first, THEN you add in the great looks. I know many adults who rushed out and bought "The Incredibles" and "Finding Nemo." I can't fathom any adult rushing out to purchase this. C- for parents, B for the tiny tots since they did laugh at the fart jokes.
Cellular (2004)
wake me when it's over
I have read some of the other comments and I can't believe anyone really liked this movie. Maybe it's a sign of the times where we expect so little that if there is a few moments of fun we give it a thumbs up. Not me.
There were maybe 30 people in the theatre and you would have thought this was a comedy... everyone laughed at how poor the acting was (Basinger especially), how stupid the people were, how hokey the lines were and how the tension was non-existent. This would play very well as a 1 hour Charlie's Angel's episode from the 70's. Those can be entertaining but you don't want to spend 10 bucks and two hours to watch one.
Don't get me wrong, I enjoy a little humor in a suspense thriller... it breaks the tension and brings you back to reality, but they forgot the suspense and thrill. I don't even know where this movie would place on a video shelf... Comedy is the closest I can match up. This is NOT edge of your seat stuff, and the more I think about it the director should take most of the blame... he should have been fired for wasting me 2 hours.
Way too silly and corny..... C-
Vanity Fair (2004)
This film can be divided into 3 parts
Maybe some minor SPOILERS.
First off I have neither read Vanity Fair nor seen another version of Vanity Fair. I went in knowing nothing. This film can be divided into 3 parts: the first half, the third quarter and last quarter.
In the first half I loved this movie. I saw character development, interesting minor roles, the music seemed to fit and the costuming was awesome. I couldn't wait for more. In the 3 quarter something changed... the movie started getting choppy, scenes started getting a bit rushed, lines were hokier... I felt the director had somewhat lost his way.
Then came the 4th quarter and it was a total disaster. All the ends get tied up so neatly it was laughable. Lines and scenes were taken right out of "Moulin Rouge" and "Gone with the Wind." It became a comedy/soap opera which was so unbelievable that my group just sat there shaking their heads in disbelief.
Did the director suffer a fatal heart attack and let the actors do their own directing in this film's second half? It felt like this thing was to be a 4 hour 2 or 3 part mini series on pbs, but at the 1 hour 45 minute mark they changed their minds, threw up their hands and ended it as fast as they could. Such promise going right to the gutter.
What a disappointment :-(
The Mummy Returns (2001)
Boy did that stink!
What a waste of money (luckily it was a matinee). 30 minutes in I was looking at my watch and groaning. I didn't think too much of the first one but my honey wanted to see the Mummy Returns so away we went. For what it's worth I would watch the first one over the second any time.
I'm not sure any facet of this movie was good... even the effects seemed poor.
Randy
The Iron Giant (1999)
That's One Small Step for Animation... One Giant Leap For WB
I can't say enough good about this film. No songs and no stupid sidekick, just an old fashioned story with great animation, humor, sadness and joy. The retro 50's look was a big hit and the voices seemed to fit perfectly. Was the animation as good as Tarzan... maybe not as a whole (but the giant was super!); was the story as good as Tarzan... better imho.
I can't believe I actually had a tear in my eye (my girlfriend was sniffling of course) and at the end the whole theatre was applauding. I've read WB is taking a bath on this feature and it just doesn't seem right... this is so much better than Tarzan. I'll have to see it a few more times to help WB out, and I don't even have kids! This was truely a magical animated feature.
Randy
The Mummy (1999)
Second time around is not a charm
Boy this was a stinker (at least for the 30-40 crowd). I see a lot of comments on how fun this was... movie goer's have gotten much less sophisticated these days other than special effects.
I came into this expecting a lesser Raiders of the Lost Ark... it sure was lesser. The narration at the beginning makes it look like a lot was left on the cutting room floor and Brendan Fraser's no Harrison Ford! More like Al Gore.
The dialog was was a sad bit of script writing. I kept waiting for someone to break out laughing. There was no sense of horror... you know the kind where if a phone rang you'd jump two feet off your chair? This was more a comedy/melodrama with special effects. The effects were very good so if that is all that matters to you then go for it. I need more.
Weisz, as Evelyn the librarian and amateur Egyptologist was something to look at for sure. I'll have to visit my local branch more often. :-) But she was given nothing script-wise and was an EXPERT on everything concerning Egypt and the Mummy. There was nothing she didn't know... a super-librarian.
Even the music was poor and led to the non-horror feeling. All this movie has is special effects. The dead army of Imhotep looks great but they fall like bowling pins when confronted and still don't have the magic feeling of the Sinbad/Jason skeletons of the past.
This may be a hit with 10 year old's (it sure is better than last year's Godzilla) but adults should hit another theatre for their money.
Rating - 3 out of 10