Change Your Image
bagso
Reviews
The Dark Side of the Sun (1988)
No
Fair dinkum, this is close to the worst movie I have ever seen (and I've seen The Lawnmower Man part 2). This film has no redeeming qualities, except being so bad, that it was actually funny.
Pitt must be ashamed of this, and the movie being listed as being released in 1997, must embarass him further. It is clearly one of his earliest works (originally made in 1988), and it shows. There is no way that the person who starred in Seven and Twelve Monkeys, would've then turned around and done this tripe.
Not Pitt's fault, but how a movie like this gets financial backing is one of the world's great mysteries. Avoid if your looking for a good film. Watch it if you want to see how bad a movie a young actor is willing to work in before they hit it big
Once Upon a Time in Mexico (2003)
Great Conclusion
This has taken nearly 10 years to follow the 'heavy on action', 'light on story' "Desperado", and the 'heavy on substance', 'light on budget' "El Mariachi". Was it worth the wait? Yes and No
First all the positives- It is a very good movie. It succeeds where people say Desperado suffered- story. This movie has a great story of intertwining plot lines, and the characters that filled them. Johnny Depp's 'Agent Sands' must surely be one of the great film characters of the last 10 years. The rest of the cast are also solid (even Enrique!), with Ruben Blades being the next best to Depp.
It is very well paced. There are no slow bits, and there is always an action scene of a plot development to keep you interested. This is also where El Mariachi failed. Mariachi had the old mistaken idea story that we've seen countless times, but was just shot in such a way that made it original (camera angles, editing, and pacing of scenes). Not OUATIM. Not only are there plot twists, but characters develop, and are not always as they first seem to be.
The running time is only 100 mins. Rare these days, especially when the movie is an epic conclusion to a trilogy. But it's refreshing to know that a director is not so far up himself to think that a movie has to go for 150+ mins to be great. 100 mins is actually my preferred running time. It means that you can buy a large coke, watch it, and not have to worry about running off to the gents as they approach the climax.
But to completely contradict myself, I must say this movie could have been assisted by an extra 20 mins. With the exception of Banderas and Hayek's characters, the rest were all new. It could have assisted to have some back story on them (Depp does have a small scene with Blades that provides some insight into his character). Yet the character we get some back story on, is the Mariachi. Basically the only one we already knew!
But apart from this, there aren't too many problems with it. Why would I suggest that it wasn't worth the wait? Firstly, the length of time it took to be released (still not released in Australia until Feb '04!). Secondly, some Desperado fans will be disappointed. Some people highlight the frenetic shoot-outs as their main reason for liking Desperado. The ones in OUATIM come nowhere near those. However, they completely exceed the ones in Mariachi.
To some it up, OUATIM will eventually be seen as the superior film of the trilogy, but on first viewing, those after the Desperado-style gunplay, may be a bit disappointed.
Hmmm...imagine what an extra 20 minutes of character back story, and a shoot-out or two could have done for this movie.....
**** stars
Le pacte des loups (2001)
I enjoyed the first 6 hours, but...
If you can't gauge from my Summary line, I found this movie a bit too long. The opening to this film was the best that I've seen this year. There's a 'Jaws'-like attack and a Jet Li style fight scene. This is brought to you with excellent cinematography (I never thought someone stepping in puddles would look so good) and surrounded by awesome sound. Then what happens? Unnecessary character development, a painfully obvious mysterious bad guy, and a drawn out love story. This sounds like the whail of someone who just wants to watch a good action film. And whilst I am a John Woo fan, my movie tastes do extend beyond Van Damme. My problem with it is as follows- Some of the characters are mysterious, without their intentions being completely black and white. What's wrong with this? Yes character development is needed for plot progression, but not for every single character. As far as the bad guy goes, my 11 year old niece picked who it is, and she's been blind for 18 months. The drawn out love story? I'm not big on love stories at the best of times, but I accept them (hell, I like 'True Romance' and 'Private Parts'), but this was frustratingly long, and involved a guy that was so much in love that he visited whorehouses on regular occasions (I didn't mind that part so much). When I was beginning to lose hope in this flick, and write it off as a wasted opening, the movie became a mix of 'The Ghost and The Darkness', 'Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon' and 'End Of Days' (with it's 'Brotherhood' theme). This had some great scenes. A pis*ed off good guy out for vengeance, great hunting/FX/fight scenes, and solid blood levels. If edited by Robert Rodriguez, this movie would've been a 95 minute movie that was the envy of Hollywood. What we end up with is a 150 minute movie that is trying a bit too hard to be an 'epic' than what it really is - a monster movie/action film. 7.5/10