matthewwright Reviews

Layer Cake (2004)

a brilliant rip-off of hundreds of better movies.

[1/10 · 26 August 2005]

I don't want to waste too much time typing about Layer Cake, but I feel a deep sense of responsibility to say something to those of you lucky enough to have not seen this film. There's nothing I can do for people who have and like it.

First off- The ending is nearly identical to Carlito's Way.

The plot twists are arbitrary, simply there to be plot twists (and there are so many you just don't care about any single character anymore).

The main character makes Roger Moore look like the most masculine actor to ever play a "ladies man" (FYI- to those of you who might have missed it, Roger Moore is about as Masculine as Harvey Fierstein). Daniel Craig is the British version of Andy Dick, only imagine Andy Dick if he had always been cast in drama.

This was the longest movie ever made and it was less than 2 hours, it is an Einsteinian paradox, it absorbs years of your life in its totally co-opted and oppressively dense script. I started watching this 2 hours ago at the age of 31 and I am now 47 years old.

There is not an original thought in the whole thing, it's almost as if it has been so widely mistaken for inventive because it takes so much from so many sources that you lose track halfway and in the absolute deluge of convoluted theft made nonsense by the writer you are too dizzied to think it is anything else but genius. It is not.

Dear screenwriter: we love hacks, but only when they realize they are what they are and write what they are capable of. Don't try to be Mamet when you would do us all a favor being the anonymous well paid idiot who cranks out the same movie over and over again.

Awful. Awful. Awful.

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

A beautiful shell with no heart

[3/10 · 24 May 2005]

This review is for people like me, namely- those who genuinely grew up with the originals (TRANSLATION: you saw them when they came out in the theater the first time, not on tape 10 years later out of curiosity for the movies all your toys were in) and have tried to focus on the good aspects of TPM and AOTC, almost out of a familial loyalty to George for how important the originals were to your youth. Those of you who agree the beginning of the end started with the EWOKS keep reading, everyone else turn away.

I looked forever in these reviews for a synopsis, because I just didn't have the heart to go see ROTS until Monday. That may not seem like a big deal to the casual reader, but I saw EVERY OTHER ONE on Opening weekend. I was 4 years old when ANH came out and I saw it with my Uncle and Dad on a Saturday morning- instead of my favorite cartoons. And I saw AOTC late on the opening Saturday midnight even after working all day and being let down by TPM. Those of you still reading will eventually have to see ROTS for closure, but I will spell out below some of the answers I couldn't find to help you delay what is going to be a brutal experience.

The story behind ROTS is possibly the best of all 6 films. Unfortunately the dark-side arrogance of George kept him from doing with it what made Empire Great: handing off to a writer who could actually write a good script and handing off to a director who could actually HELP actors bring that script to life.

100% Spoilers: Opening-elongated battle as Obi and Ani race to get Palpatine from Grevious. The next 20 minutes are things like CGI "buzz droids" that attack the ships and remind you of Robot Wars on TV, followed by 3 or 4 different kinds of robots at various levels of Grevious' ship as Obi and Ani essentially give the CGI guys a whole lot of meaningless work to do. Obi and Ani meet Dooku again, who throws Obi around without really going that hard after Ani. He throws Obi across the room, knocks him cold, uses the force to collapse the catwalk above him onto both of his legs, but oddly later, after Ani has chopped off both the Count's hands easily and been tricked into cutting off his head by Palpatine, Obi gets up and walks out. Okay- There's literally no room between the collapsed catwalk and the floor Obi is passed out on, so it should be a miracle he even has legs, much less functioning legs. The rest in no particular order because it doesn't really matter- Mace pretty much has Palpatine in the bag- duels with him and relieves him of his light saber, deflects the Force lightning with his light saber and shots it back at him to scar and burn him into the Emperor we all know and love, Ani comes in and because he wants to save his bride with Dark Side stuff that only Palpy can teach him he chops off Mace's hand and the Emperor shoots him into the sky with the same lightning that made him look all busted. This is the "critical moment" where Ani realizes he can't go back to being a good guy ever again. So then Palpy sends the newly named Darth Vader off to the Jedi temple to kill all the kids off and Palpy gives the secret order 66 to the clones all over the galaxy (also known as Robocop Secret Directive #4) to kill every last Jedi. In about 5 minutes of CGI worlds later- They're all dead but Yoda and Obi. Obi battles with Ani on the Volcano planet, Yoda battles with Palpy in the Senate chambers. Obi wins by chopping off Ani's legs and remaining arm and leaving him there to burst into flame. Yoda doesn't kill Palpy but George makes it clear who the biggest baddest practitioner of the Force is (it's YODA by the way). Yoda goes into hiding, Palpy picks up a pulpy Vader and patches him together as Luke and Leia are born. All the CGI ships and creatures from TPM and AOTC are not so slowly replaced with the ships we see at the beginning of Episode 4.

I really expected better based on all these rave reviews, but all I really can say is at least there's closure. From the EWOKS until this it was like watching a loved one slowly decline and die in a hospital bed. The good scenes were those rare and brief moments of clarity. With ROTS there is sadness but relief. The myth is dead. The hardest thing to bear is that the myth-maker is the one who killed it. This movie will keep you entertained from start to finish, but it will not satisfy the child's memory of the what the originals meant. Or what they were before they were recently "improved" by George for the DVD releases.

We'll always have Episodes IV & V, but my feeling now is that the prequels were attempted, but never truly made. Not for the movies I remember at least. George will have to make a new Episode 4, 5, 6 to correspond to this new vision. Based on the amount of tinkering he has done with our past (1997 and now with the DVD versions) I wouldn't be surprised if he did.

Gerry (2002)

Not a "Movie." Thankfully: a Meditation

[7 September 2004]

If you are looking for a Hollywood film that spoon feeds you (ultimately forgettable) entertainment don't Rent Gerry. And I'm not saying there's anything wrong with being spoon fed on a Friday night after an exhausting week of work or on a lazy weekend afternoon.

I knew what was up going into Gerry and I was fully prepared to shrug and say, "Sorry Gus, little too pretentious for me." But it's not. And it's not an acting exercise, not wildly entertaining, not a lot of things. What is it? It's like a slow yoga class that lasts 103 minutes. If you have no patience for that you would want to smother your vinyasa instruction with his or her yoga mat, and you would want to track down Gus Van Sant and slap him in the face.

Like a ritual, you can't judge this movie and enjoy it at the same time.

If you've ever taken a tai chi or yoga class you've probably been asked to do something like "pretend you are holding a beach ball between your hands" or "imagine there is a log jam in your mind that you have to clear one tree at a time." I think most people immediately feel like idiots doing that, but maybe 50% of us do it anyway no matter how stupid we're sure it is because we're there to learn to relax and center ourselves. And maybe it's the second month of that same yoga class and you're picturing your asinine log jam and for the first time you really feel it, like a dream, and you clear that silly image away one log at a time. And it's still silly, but it feels good. And an hour passes and you feel like you've been there for a lifetime.

Gerry is brave and patient for being painstakingly NOT impressive at first glance. Anyone familiar with Gus Van Sant's other films knows he could have made this more complex and "entertaining." The fact that he didn't spruce it up for us doesn't make this film self-indulgent.

Or maybe it does, because he had to believe, along with Matt and Casey, that there would be enough viewers with the patience to stop their busy/important lives for an hour and forty minutes to experience a very personal expression of a simple artistic idea. Maybe Van Sant was a little naive there, to expect so much of such critical people as your average Film Festival attendee. Or maybe it was worth it if just he and his two actors got to experience it themselves and see it finished and on screen. I was thankful to be in the right frame of mind to experience Gerry and all nods to the 3 talents who brought it to life.

High Art (1998)

Taken In Context: Flawless

[10/10 · 30 August 2004]

Just my opinion:

Most of the Actors in High Art have narrow ranges, but that doesn't make them "bad" actors, just limited to a range of motion (like a great distance runner who is a lousy sprinter). It takes a patient and focused Director to recognize what that kind of actor can do in the right setting. Most Directors seem to steam roller through their vision of the script and force actors to conform to an abstract idea (they make the poor sprinter sprint anyway instead of giving them a long quiet run to excel at). High Art isn't about Ally Sheedy showing she's an unappreciated powerhouse, it's about Director Lisa Cholodenko giving Ally the room and role to do the kind of acting she's never been allowed to do. Fellow "distance runner/lousy sprinter" Radha Mitchell is also perfectly placed in every scene. These two are the narrower players, they're like bold colors you can't use to excess and can't water down without ruining the whole painting. Then like a good painter Cholodenko does bring in a powerhouse in someone like Patricia Clarkson. Unlike Sheedy and Mitchell, Clarkson is spread thin and applied liberally. And I don't mean screen time. Clarkson's pull on the plot between Sheedy and Mitchell makes their specialized boldness stand out. It gives them weight and dissolves into itself. The painting analogies are cheesy, but that's what the grace of this film is to me. Clarkson is definitely a deeper actor than Sheedy or Mitchell, but instead of upstaging them her role in this film elevates them. If you were to paint two small but boldly colored flowers on a canvas you would need a more universal, softer backdrop to make the two flowers take form (in a realistic painting at least). This movie is not about a plotline, not really. Like a painting it suggests something with a seemingly straight ahead depiction of, well: drugs and sexual awakenings, career ambition, disillusionment that follows great success. It's flawless to me because it only suggests these things and does not offer any conclusions. It just is. High Art.

Catwoman (2004)

Hello, CATwoman, of course it was lame.

[23 July 2004]

Some super heros are just lame and no amount of video-vixening will change that. Aqua Man. The Wonder Twins. Robin without Batman. And CATwoman: with the powers of not even a tiger or lioness, but a house cat. And the whip. What's with the whip? Why not give her a rolled up newspaper or a spray can of CAT-mace? Even if Indiana Jones made a whip cool on film, it was never something that carried menace. It's a tool, at best, not something that empowers a comic book hero. Growing up, no kid ever pretends to be Catwoman or one of the Wonder Twins. But no complaints. The poster and trailer said it all: the actress who gets paid a million an exposed boob (see- Swordfish) in a PG-13 sex teaser mostly for teenagers with disposable summer income. That's entertainment. Spiderman 2 had Oscar and Pulitzer winners at the writing helm, but it's a fluke. Every other comic book to film project stuck to the images. So go easy on Halle as the large domestic feline. It's eye-candy, not a gourmet meal.

Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy (2004)

A Waste Of Great Comic Talent

[3/10 · 22 July 2004]

Will Ferrell is one of the funniest actor-writers to come from the SNL lineage. When he was on SNL he could make a good joke great, and even keep the worst jokes at least on their feet. The problem here is that Anchorman is that worst joke, that lame last skit of SNL (the one you know was simply filler), made to walk around dead for over 90 minutes. There are a few good laughs, but ultimately it was an idea that should have been recognized as the dud that it was. I had (and have) high hopes for Will in a lead role. His scenes are the highlight of both Old School and Zoolander, and he deserves center stage on another project. If you love Ferrell I would avoid this movie, especially if you want to continue to enjoy his Robert Goulet impression (Anchorman's "Ron" is a modified Robert Goulet).

The Matrix Revolutions (2003)

put simply

[7 November 2003]

everyone going a little nuts about what should have happened, stop and think from a pragmatic level: if the matrix was dissolved/destroyed and the humans controlled everything again there would still be a large population of people living (unaware) in tanks and the surface of the earth would still be, near as the plot seems to demonstrate, uninhabitable. there's no where else to go but the matrix. it's along the same simple point as arguments over atheism and religion that all three movies touch on. to know definitively of some other power (in our case, NEO as Christ figure or what have you, although to digress a bit there were quite a few "Christ" figures before Yeshua came along...) would negate the need for that power. you can't have faith in your foot, you look down and there it is. So, simply chain of events that WON'T work: Neo wins, the matrix is destroyed and everyone... see? what is everyone left to do, sit around eating oatmeal and having a chat with the "messiah." and oh yeah, it's just a few f*#%ing action movies. when was a sequel to anything founded on much more than the basic marketing awareness that if one sold a million, another should do just as well. looking for the GREATEST MOVIE EVER MADE? Excellent, the industry will continue to make a fortune off you. looking to enjoy yourself with a lightly cerebral action flic? you get what you pay for.

Equilibrium (2002)

Misfire- In A Nutshell.

[5/10 · 22 August 2003]

Some of the best action sequences (and not just in the realm of fight choreography, but choreography in general) sandwiched between some of the most predictable, cliché and otherwise unsatisfying writing I have ever seen. This could have been an amazing film. Bale is still quite good, but what a waste of Diggs (For Taye playing the well-written villian his talent deserves see Way Of The Gun) and Watson (For Emily at her best see virtually anything else she's been in: Gosford Park and Cradle Will Rock especially). It's worth a rent if for nothing else to see the juxtaposition of brilliance and idiocy. If you liked David Lynch's Dune for its drastic good and bad you might also be able to enjoy Equilibrium. The plot is beyond transparent, not even slightly an excuse for filler between action sequences- perhaps because they weren't intended to be? I really can't tell. There's an exhaustingly overtold 1984/Brave New World message at work here, but the writing moves beyond (or below) even being trite. Not quite comic book either. It's like an infomercial that tries to get 'deep' and doesn't make the audience laugh so much as stand back and be completely baffled by the guy in the bright red suspenders who seems to sincerely, even passionately, believe that this product is going to 'revolutionize your life!' Yeah, right.

Things to Do in Denver When You're Dead (1995)

subtle and brilliant writing

[10/10 · 14 May 2003]

It would be hard to dislike a film that opens with a Tom Waits tune and gives hitherto typecast actors a chance to, oh, I don't know: Act. First, Andy Garcia. What can I say about Andy? He's an attractive guy who all too often gets slated to play "the attractive guy." (His shamefully undeveloped character from Ocean's Eleven comes to mind). In this little indy film he gets a chance to actually embody a character and not simply be Andy Garcia (with capital letters). Then there's his love interest, Gabrielle Anwar (who elevated the already immortal tango in Scent of a Woman). Poor Anwar has been plagued with a lot of stock roles in lame movies since then, but here, like Garcia, she gets to explore her role and show the audience she can do more than make "hey I'm famous. Where's my check?" Al Pacino look good on the dance floor. Also fantastic are Treat Williams, Steve Buscemi, and Christopher Walken (who bests his Annie Hall AND Pulp Fiction cameos). The story is simple: Andy's character is an ex-mob guy who's gone legit then pulled back in for one last job, things go wrong, and he's got 2 days before he's going to be killed. In many hands this would be a B movie, but the writing is so clever and unique that this excessively played mob-movie thing seems like it's done for the first time. There are as many quotable lines in this film as any cult classic; my favorites include: "I knew the kid was lunchy, but not that lunchy." and meeting Anwar's character for the first time: "What's your name?" "Dagney." "Dagney? Wonderful name. Everyone should know a Dagney."

If you like films like Usual Suspects that combine the action genre with actual thought and character development rent this film and see if you can watch it only once. In the same ballpark try Way Of The Gun with Benicio Del Toro and Ryan Phillippe, another film where "pretty boys" are actually allowed to explore their craft of acting.

Bottle Rocket (1996)

Don't let this happen to you.

[17 April 2003]

First, I adored both Rushmore and The Royal Tenenbaums. Second, first films aren't supposed to be perfect. If I had watched Bottle Rocket before knowing anything of Anderson's work I maybe would have found this to be a harmless throwaway. It doesn't watch like a movie to me, but a collection of screened ideas. Everyone in this film has done remarkably better work. What really rubs the wrong way is that the actress playing Luke Wilson's love interest had even done better work before this (Like Water For Chocolate- for one), unlike the Wilson boys who have since honed their craft (or at least established a niche for themselves, Owen especially). I'm astounded at how many people are raving about this film here. It's not bad, but if you watch a lot of indy film I just want to offer the warning I never got: this is an amateurish, unfocused film with some laughs and good ideas, but is not even farm league in comparison to Anderson's other two films. I almost can't believe he's responsible for this AND the brilliance that followed. I think that's why I'm harsh on this film. If an idiot like Kevin Smith put this out I'd be "that's okay," but Anderson is a real director and not just a guy with a camera crew. I wish I could unwatch this movie because of how much I respect his other two films. Don't let this happen to you.