Reviews

13 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
This Mummy ain't the Daddy.
21 May 2001
Warning: Spoilers
***POTENTIAL SPOILERS****

I would like to make one point before all others and that is, for an SFX movie, the SFX were ropey. They look like they wouldn't be out of place on Xena. Maybe ILM were rushing through them before Star Wars 2 hit pre-production, but they are just obvious and of poor quality. When ILM are involved I expect the best groundbreaking effects that can be created. The first Mummy did, this did not.

Aside from the cheap looking CGI, the story is poor, but I expected that. What does really annoy me is that the screen time is shared equally between about 10 characters. This ensures that everything that happens is very shallow and uninvolving, because the audience doesn't get to know anyone at all. The two best characters, Rick O'Connell and Ardeth become watered down heros that just fight a lot and pop up to save the day in the nick of time i.e. they are merely plot functions - no longer the characters we met back in 1998. The charm of the two characters and their strengths from the first film aren't built upon, but eroded by their minimal screen time.

The child is a waste of screen time who's role in the narrative could have (and should have) been given over to John Hannah's criminally underused character. In the first film Rachel Weiss made for an excellent damsel in distress, but here she is unable to carry the extra weight. This may well be more to do with her wafer thin character though, than her talent. The Mummy himself has but a cameo performance and once again the only word to describe that is 'wasted'.

The character of Lock-Nah is wasted horribly. Early on he is set up as being someone who is as hard as nails. About 15 minutes later an for the rest of the film, he becomes comic relief. This problem runs deep through the film. Ther isn't a sense of danger in this film. There is not a single point where you can conceivably doubt that the good guys are going to win. No matter what horrible special effects that they face the audience know full well they will emerge unscathed.

Another problem with this film is the action. It is done in a faux Hong Kong style that doesn't work. Lots of slow motion and the like. It doesn't work for two reasons.

1) Hong Kong films have done all this before, with smaller budgets and most importantly they have done it BETTER.

2) The Hong Kong style looks out of place in an American film that was supposed to be a homage to old adventure serials. Stephen Sommers should have stuck with the type of old fashioned action seen in the first film, like the shoot out on the boat.

This whole film reeks of missed opportunities. I get the impression that this should have been tightened up in post production and the SFX worked on, so that by Christmas or New year they would have an awesome film.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Hannibal (2001)
6/10
Great for insomnia!
16 May 2001
Ridley Scott can make ANYTHING look gorgeous on film. However, a poor script can only be disguised so far.

A dull uninteresting film that relied on cheap shocks, taken from Z-grade 1980's horror movies to keep the audience awake for the duration.

I have no more words to waste on this, but I hope Ridley gets a good script soon.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Almost...but not quite.
16 May 2001
What a great idea and premise. Written by John Carpenter and directed by Irvin Kershner of The Empire Strikes back fame. What could go wrong?

Everything.

A great premise is wasted and never used to full effect (did the killer have glaucoma?), a hideous Barbra Streisand title song, pedestrian directing, no tension (the killer is obvious from the start), no pace, wastes good performances by Dunaway and Dourif, the model's look like cheap hookers and finally every conceivable aspect is hideously dated.

It is not even bad in a funny or kitsch way. Everything is so average and expected. It's as if Kershner was ticking the boxes off on his generic 'thriller' check list.

Worth watching if you're a Carpenter completist, but unless you're forced into it - avoid this unforgivably average movie.
3 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Hole (2001)
5/10
I'd rather be in the Hole than see this again.
10 May 2001
The first trailer for this film showed to be a gruelling film about humans trapped in a dark, confined space, slowly withering away. The second trailer pitched this movie as some sort of repellent formulaic teen horror film. It was the first trailer that had been touted since last autumn in the UK that intrigued me enough to see it.

Having watched the film I was disappointed as the film failed to deliver what had been promised in either trailer. What I saw was a bland movie that seemingly doesn't know what it's target demographic is. I am assuming that it wanted to be a psychological horror, but the film is so lightweight that it appears to have been written with twelve-year-olds in mind – which isn't necessarily a bad thing. However, the film is visually aimed at adults, with sex, full frontal nudity, nasty violence and drug use. Thus the film is torn between the two camps; the writing is too simple for adults but the adult material will stop kids seeing it.

Essentially the story is that these toffs at a private boarding school in England would rather spend three days in an old underground World War Two bunker (the titular ‘Hole') than go to Wales on a school trip. Everything is engineered so that the school assumes that they have gone home for the duration whilst their parents think that they have actually gone to Wales. In other words, nobody knows where they are there. Ultimately the events unfold and they end up stuck in the Hole and proceed to go stir crazy.

My biggest hang up is the presence of Thora Birch. Firstly her twee English accent is all over the place. They should have just let her speak with her natural accent, as it would have been less of a distraction. Maybe as an Englishman this is a stick that I can unfairly beat her with and perhaps overseas no one will notice, but for me it was an unwelcome distraction (especially when there are many young British actresses who would've done a better job).

Secondly she brings NOTHING to the movie. The other members of the young cast are relative unknowns and act her off the screen. They all give believable reputations of stuck up self-centred kids and the effects of human physical and mental degradation. I assume that Ms. Birch was brought in to add ‘international appeal' but she stifles and flounders around with her leading role, unable to rise to the challenge of her co-stars.

Before you all assume that I'm bashing her because she's American think again because young American actor Desmond Harrington who plays Mike Steel, is the best thing about this movie.
26 out of 39 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Audition (1999)
9/10
Wow! The first film to make me feel physically sick.
10 May 2001
I saw this recently with my friend and with us included we made up a population of seven people watching the film. By the end of the movie four of the seven had walked out! We were still there, feeling like we had just passed through purgatory.

The people walked out, not because this movie is bad, but that the violence in it is stomach churning. It is prolonged, relatively explicit violence, that bursts out of nowhere - hitting the viewer unexpectedly.

The film works as a beautiful whole and is something that is a must see! Be warned though; this is not anything like a lame slice and dice film. It is a slow burning Japanese film with subtitles about relationships that requires thought and concentration.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Cut (I) (2000)
2/10
Save us please!
29 January 2001
Slasher films are often seen as the derivative, repetitive and frankly unoriginal. I happen to to be a horror movie fan, but this film was just so poor, words fail me. The script is severely lacking, the plot is ridiculous, the acting astoundingly bad. Just an all round stinker, that I wasted time of my life on. This had all the entertainment value of a 15th sequel to a film that was dire in the first place.

Who greenlit this mess?

I only liked two things in this movie. The first was the killer's mask - which was nice. The second was the Austrailian affinity with humourous profanity.

Save yourself, and avoid this hideous mess.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Snatch (2000)
5/10
No More . . . PLEASE
8 January 2001
Apart from Brad Pitt this film is average beyond belief. How long are we going tolerate bad English Gangster films. Jason Stratham is awful in this. How can he possibly be a leading actor with zero charisma and acting ability??? Ze Germans - What is that all about? It's not funny or even explicable - Stop it now!

Mr Ritchie should make something different (preferably without Pearly Kings et al) - the darker side of this film is well done - perhaps a horror film or something with less unfunny comedy would suit him.

Ritchie has talent but his obsession with faux cockney gangsters is not impressive. He has the ability to make a good a film, I just haven't seen it yet.
25 out of 62 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Laughed till I fell over in the Cinema
8 January 2001
Ouch it really hurt!

Anyway this film is brilliant with it's lampooning of everything that is wrong with cinema today. What was disappointing was that I was one of only two people in the whole theatre when I watched it.

Everyone should watch this film to understand how Hollywood is shortchanging them with no-brain guff.

DEMENTED FOREVER!!!!

When it comes to REALLY funny bad taste gags the Farrelly's should take note of Mr. Waters genius. Well done to Mr. Dorff and Ms Griffiths too. They deserve credit for part of this hilarious film.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Banjo the Woodpile Cat (1979 TV Movie)
7/10
At Last I found it!
8 January 2001
When I was growing up my parents had made me a video with loads of cartoons on taped from the TV. Of all the Bugs Bunny and Road Runner cartoons Banjo has always stuck in my mind. Perhaps the accessibility of the Warner cartoons has deteriorated my fond memories of them, but after 15 years I have found proof that this cartoon existed.

All I remember is a cat called Banjo who does something naughty so his father beats him and he runs off to Salt Lake City to live with some showgirls. When I told that synopsis to my friends they really didn't know what I was talking about.

After a bored afternoon it suddenly dawned on my to try the IMDB, low and behold I found Banjo. I've now ordered the VHS - I hope that it is as good as I remembered.
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Falling Down (1993)
8/10
Not Economically Viable
8 January 2001
Apathy is at the heart of this movie, and in that respect can be compared to Se7en. The nature of a city is to reward bad behaviour by ignoring it and allowing it to reap benefits.

Bill takes issue with these people - Bill however has a slight anger management issue, that initially makes him endearing if somewhat scary. During the course of the movies his weapons get bigger, but this is all an impotent man has left. His wife hates him, the world ignores him - the man is theoretically impotent to do anything about the situation until he he starts asserting his masculinity with heavy duty "weapons".

Compare him with Predergast another impotent man, whose dominating wife has ruined his career and made him into a joke - but he loves he non the less - he too is impotent, only able to use his weapon when he finally breaks off the shackles of his overbearing partner. Two very similar men tackling social problems in a different fashion.

It makes one wonder what Schumacher is making trashy Batman movies for . ..
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Memento (2000)
10/10
Wow!
27 October 2000
A great film that requires the viewer to stay alert. It is a shame that my city has over 200 cinema screens and this is having a limited 2 week run on only one. Hopefully DVD and VHS will allow y'all to see this great little flick.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
What is that stench?
27 October 2000
Oh yeah. It's this film. How the hell was this allowed out of the studio? This movie was a commercial for the FX house that did it. Around 2 hours of water FX. Dull, dull, dull, dull, dull.

Expensive Crapola.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
They don't make 'em like they used to
27 October 2000
When you watch this film one must remember that this movie was made before the current trend of ironic (and poor)slasher movies. In doing so you can truly relish this creepy and much ignored movie. Not having a video release in the UK makes this movie even harder to obtain.

Watch it now - you'll be interested to see that horror used to be scary.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed