Change Your Image
filmfortheblind
Reviews
Laserhawk (1997)
Laserhawk: More Than Just the Greatest Sci-Fi Ever Made
Runner up at Cannes in 1997, this sci-fi masterpiece is a film that any cinema aficionado should have in their collection. Part Cinéma vérité, part Neo-noir, the aptly titled "Laserhawk" is a movie that has changed the face of cinema, and for that matter the art of story telling as we know it.
Set in mid-western America at the turn of the millennium, "Laserhawk" stars Jason James Richter, who the academy has egregiously passed over numerous times after his Oscar worthy performances in "Free Willy" and "Free Willy 2: The Adventure Home". Richter's character borders a delicate balance between adolescent angst and brimming masculinity. Richter frames this duality between boy and man with incredible poise as he valiantly saves the world from a species of invading alien spiders. His acting clearly raises the bar for his accompanying cast, who help mold "Laserhawk" into a pinnacle of thespianism.
The story follows three teenagers (two of which are inhabited by alien spirits) who defend earth from a race of evil alien spider invaders who have returned to harvest their crop: humanity. Their tale, spanning from suburban America into the cosmos, is brilliantly interlaced with twists and turns, including a run in with a human inhabited by a 250 million year old alien played by Mark Hamill (who also happens to be the best star-fighter in the galaxy). Sadly he meets his death when he crashes an army supply truck at 15 mph (cue explosion).
The brilliant plot is supported by exquisite dialog weaved by the maestro screenwriter himself John A. Curtis ("Xtro II: The Second Encounter"). Characters transcend their very own existence and evolve almost into living beings that the audience cares and feels for, like when the trio's third wheel, M.K. Ultra aka Rodney Terence Stanko, questions his own existence by asking, "Am I only here for comic relief?" Yes, M.K. Ultra aka Rodney Terence Stanko, sadly you are.
People may question "Laserhawks" quote un-quote similarities to other sci-fi movies, such as the fact that the evil alien's mother ship looks very close to the one in "Independence Day" and that the heroes have to fly into the ship, dock with it and blow it up from the inside; the fact that Mark Hamill is cast as a star-fighter from a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away and takes part in leading an "intergalactic rebel force"; that the story slightly resembles various episodes of the "X-Files" and the movie "Alien"; or even that the concept of evil alien bugs was used in "Starship Troopers" and "Men in Black". There are so many movies out there that any film will have a coincidental similarity here and there. However, if you look deeper into the intricate story, "Laserhawk" is the precipice of originality.
Much can be said about "Laserhawk": a modern day epic with plot that rivals "The Godfather" in quality, with "Citizen Kane" caliber cinematography shored by "Matrix"-style special- effects, but for "Laserhawk" there is no comparison. This pièce de résistance or magnum opus if you will, could enter into the annals of cinema as the greatest movie ever made (that is until "Laserhawk II"). Let us thank director Jean Pellerin for leaving us with an open ending, so we may be privy enough to witness a possible sequel in our lifetime.
Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo (2005)
Funny (that it was made)
Remember way back when Rob Schneider was funny? Yeah, I don't either. Yet some how, against the odds of all likely probability (and logic), he has managed a semi-successful movie career. After riding the Adam Sandler train from funny to Annoyingville, Schneider has turned in gems like "The Hot Chick", "The Animal" and of course the first chapter in his epic testimony of male prostitution, "Deuce Bigalow: Male Gigolo".
The second installment, "Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo", takes concept of the first movie and sets Deuce in the awkwardness of Europe. The concept is similar to "Euro-Trip". Sadly for the producers, the formula for a successful film isn't like mathematical multiplication; two negatives don't make a positive and European Gigolo is (hard to believe that it's possible) worse than the original.
The plot of the movie can be described as disjointed and confusing, sacrificing any sense of story to get across jokes that for the most part don't pay off. After realizing then that there is nowhere to go, the plot reverts back to the weak original story where Deuce has to court odd women to achieve some goal. While not dealing with strange women we are serenaded by the comedy of Deuce's pimp, TJ Hicks played by Eddie Griffin. Oh and this just in
Eddie Griffin is not funny and never has been.
This movie would be perceived as offensive to Europeans if it wasn't completely retarded. In truth it is more offensive to Americans because our country actually produced this steaming pile of poop.
Special (2006)
Promising Debut for Writer/Directors and Rapaport is Super
Special is a very enjoyable movie that includes some of the best acting by Michael Rapaport and an extremely promising debut from first time directors Hal Haberman & Jeremy Passmore. The movie is shot on a low budget which negatively effects the look of the film as well as the music and titling. The story and acting however rise above this and create a very entertaining and ultimately gratifying movie.
Rapaport's role as a delusional meter maid who thinks he becomes a superhero is one that the audience can laugh at, yet identify with. The film does a great job of balancing the humor with drama and Rapaport plays out his character very well. I was skeptical before I saw the film but any hesitations I had were gone by the end of the first act.
Writer and directors Hal Haberman & Jeremy Passmore did an incredibly good job with the script. The movie seemed to remain alive throughout the duration of the film with very few slow points. Again, the blend of humor and drama was amazing and Hal & Jeremy showed capability beyond most seasoned Hollywood filmmakers.
Destricted (2006)
Obscene, Rude, Edgy and Pretty Damn Funny
I just watched this film at Sundance. Clearly the most challenging portion of this film for the audience was Gasper Noe's use of strobe for his part of the film titled We F--- Alone. A good fifth of the audience cleared out during We F--- because they were bothered by the strobing. During the Q&A following the film when asked why he used the effect Noe replied, "Because it looks better." The style used in We F--- Alone may not appeal to most audiences, but the premise of the film promised shorts by director's giving their impression of the world of porn and We F--- Alone was obviously Gasper Noe's take on the world of porn.
Other engaging portions of the film included Matthew Barney's Hoist, which involved a man having sex with a industrial machine lifted a dozen feet off the ground; Larry Clarks Doc/ Porn, hosting try outs for young men willing to satisfy their dreams of being a porn star; Marco Brambilla's amazing short splicing together frames from his own porn collection. The rest of the other shorts mixed in seemed to lack depth and were rather bland with the exception of Marina Abramovic's vignettes on superstitious Balkan sexual behavior which was very funny.
The movie is all that is promised and is an absorbing take on porn from these artistic talents. This isn't something to watch on a television and should be experienced in the theater environment.
Working Tra$h (1990)
Ugh...
Every once in a while there comes a movie who's title could be used as a review for the movie. This is that movie.
I can't tell you that much about Working Trash being that I turned it off after about 20 minutes from the sheer agony it was causing me and the others in the room watching it. Yes this movie may have Ben Stiller, George Carlin and even voice of Homer Simpson (Dan Castellaneta), but none of them had a hope of helping save this.
I had trouble when I tried to categorize this film. Apparently blockbuster claims it is a comedy. The only joke here is that this movie made it on to the shelf.
Open Water (2003)
Open Water Made Me Want to Give Myself Open Wounds
*Caution Spoliers With In*
Wow. First off let me start by saying that I don't know why this movie didn't go straight to video. Granted the movie was shot on a only a 100,000 dollar budget, but that doesn't warrant a major release in theaters.
First off the quality of this movie sucked. When movies like Collateral are beautiful examples of what a movie shot in a digital format can look like, Open Water is the extreme opposite. The entire thing looks like it was shot on a camcorder. The camera work (when it's not giving the audience sea-sickness) is amateur at best. The movie starts off with the couple having a cell phone conversation and getting into a car. A simple 1 or 2 shots might have worked. Not in Open Water. The tame dialog of the characters is juxtaposed by 20 or so different camera angles and extreme close-ups. This isn't the @#$!ing Matrix, just set the camera down and shoot!
All in all the not-quite-feature-length film clocks in at just under 80 minutes. Aside from being shorter than your average Disney film, Open Water also lacks in substance. On top of that about thirty minutes of the movie is montage with ambiguous shots of the ocean that has nothing to do with progressing the plot. With the filler removed you have... what... 50 minutes of actual film.
One thing that you see in most movies that I hoped to see in Open Water was... I don't know maybe acting. The two main characters couldn't convince me that they were even interested each other let alone trapped in the middle of the ocean. I think for a film like this that relies on having the viewer imagine what can't be shown cinematically needs decent acting to maintain a sense of believability.
All in all if I have to sum this movie up in one word it would be "retarded". Like when the characters are being stung by white jelly-fish (that can't sting): retarded. Like when the male character mysteriously dies after a night in the warm tropical water in his warm wetsuit: retarded. Or even when the female character decides to drown herself after the rescue crews are sent out to find them: retarded.
Basically you won't like this movie unless you are retarded.
Ghost Rock (2003)
Two Thumbs Way Up...
When I saw this movie I gave it two thumbs up... and then proceeded to use those thumbs to gouge out my eyes to end the visceral torment this movie had inflicted on me. As much as I wanted to like this movie it didn't make sense, contradicted itself multiple times and stole countless scenes from other movies.
First off the martial arts in the Wild West: Okay this is original. It's not like Jackie Chan didn't do this three years ago in Shanghi Noon. Second, it's almost insulting to watch the movie confuse Asian cultures. The Chinese were brought over to construct rail roads. Even the martial arts style used in this film is Chinese. So why does the main character say to his leaving Chinese friend, "Arigato." Someone needed to grab the director and say "Hey... That's Japanese you moron."
So other than the entire stolen concept for the film, there were multiple other scenes stolen from other movies. When the three badass gun-slingers arrive in town (pretentiously played by the Director and his two brothers) taken from "Once Upon a Time in the West". The shot for shot copy of Tomb Raider with the gunslinging woman whipping her hair out of the water and drawing her guns. I can keep on going but I think you get the idea.
Now to the disaster also known as Ghost Rock's plot... *Caution Spoilers (HAHAHAHAaaa)* Okay there are two main characters in Ghost Rock, John & Savanah. Both kill people, move objects, talk to others but at the end one of them is a ghost. How this is possible I don't have a clue but even more confusing is we don't know which one is the ghost... we don't even know if there is a ghost. I'm not even sure that the Director even knows.
Wow I don't know who I would recommend Ghost Rock to... the movie is the cinematic equivalent to crap. Don't rent it, don't buy it, don't waste your time.
The Last Samurai (2003)
An Epic Comprimised Only by Itself
I just saw the latest Tom Cruise Action/Melodrama, The Last Samurai. The film was a mixed blend of good and bad cinema that culminated in an all too Hollywood ending. The film was directed by Edward Zwick who has a long history of making average but memorable films such as Glory and The Siege. The Last Samurai was no different.
The film is a story about Civil War hero Nathan Algren (Tom Cruise) trekking to Japan to teach the new Japanese army the western ways of killing. Once there, he leads the shaky soldiers into battle against the Samurai and their leader, Katsumoto (Ken Watanabe). Algren is captured by the Samurai an ala Dances with Wolves adopts their ways and joins them. The two main themes of the movie are acceptance and redemption. The movie becomes an educational lesson for the viewer by underling the ignorance of the American's of the time and showing the greatness of the culture that they are saturating and destroying. The other theme of the movie that came to light was redemption. Through the film Algren has constant flashbacks that came to describe how his cavalry massacred a village of Native Americans.
The story is written fairly well but seems to lose believability and substance at key times. The dialogue of most of the conversations carries well, but many of the characters seem to contradict themselves. For instance Katsumoto seems to be content with halting modernization and does so by burning railways. Yet later on he tells Algren that he is the perfect samurai blending modern with the past.
The acting in this film, with the exclusion of Tom Cruise, was great. Ken Watanabe had a very commanding presence and was the star of the movie. In fact, the lot of Japanese actors and actresses in the movie were great. Tom Cruise on the other hand was the usual. It seems that for some reason he thinks that staring at something really hard is acting. I personally found him to be playing the same character arch from Vanilla Sky.
Some of the underlying plots were either good or blatantly unnecessary. Algren seems to bout with alcoholism through out the first half of the story but it magically goes away after one screaming night of pain. One of the other underlying plots that was presented very well is the film's depiction of the Japanese's repressed sexual tension by the supporting character Taka (Koyuki). This is an accurate subject that still can be sensed throughout Japan today.
The visual of the film is good but is laden with a mess of mediocre shots. The spacious establishing shots are constantly compromised by TV-like close-ups. It's almost like the cinematographer, John Toll, gave the camera to his assistant and went back to his trailer. The variation in visual style is shown best in back-to-back shots during a montage in the middle of the film. The first shot is a beautiful silhouette of Algren whisking his sword in the blowing grass in front of a setting sun. The second shot is of Alrgren and Katsumoto strolling through fake falling snow that blatantly screams sound-stage.
Probably the worst part about the film was the Hollywood ending (Spoiler
but nothing really to spoil). In it the film Japanese Emperor Meiji accepts Alrgren's plea and decides that Japan should turn back from is modernization. In actuality Meiji led the Japanese on a whirlwind of modernization and took them to war against China, Korea and Russia during his reign. Despite being historically false, the Emperor also seems to belt out a lengthy conversation in English.
Being highly critical of the movie, there were still many great parts. One of the parts that I like was that the movie was done in the real dialogue of the characters. This meaning that for the large part of the movie that was in Japanese, they spoke it in Japanese. I really like this and felt that it added to the creditability of the film. It also created a film that relies less on its dialogue and more on its visual components.
The best part in the movie came when it actually submersed it's self in Japanese culture and sent in a team of ninjas to take out the samurai leader. I thoroughly enjoyed this part of the movie. Samurais versus ninjas, what else could you want?
Batman & Robin (1997)
Let's Kick Some Ice!
If that doesn't get you excited about this movie I don't know what will! This movie has it all Batman, Robin, Batgirl, Mr. Freeze, Poison Ivy... it's like an orgy of retarded catch phrases and bad acting.
This was the first, only, and possibly last movie that I have ever walked out of. I couldn't decided what to do with my hands: use them to gorge my eyes out so I didn't have to watch the horrible wire work or rip my ears of so I didn't have to listen to the babyish dialog. George Clooney is about as convincing as Batman as my grandma would have been. And don't get me started on Alicia Silverstone. She gained so much weight during filming that they had to cut her batsuit in half and film her from the waste up for the second half of shooting.
Horrible movie... not just a low point for Batman movies, this was a low point for cinema.
Man on Fire (2004)
Lost Under Avalanche of Bad Production
Man on Fire is a good movie who's story is lost among bad lines, horrible camera work and some of the worst subtitling I have ever seen. Bad subtitling? Yeah you're laughing now. wait till you see the movie.
First off the script leaves something to be desired. Despite being predictable, during a handful of key lines you can almost feel the actors asking themselves, `Seriously, would this person really be talking like this?' The good part is that the long drawn out dialog takes away from the horrible camera work.
The cinematography for this movie was simple. Buy a grainy film (probably EXR), zoom in really close and shake the camera like your sitting on a vibrating bed. Don't get me wrong the raw, gritty look can be cool if you do it right (Example: Amores Perros, 25th Hour, 21 Grams) but when you over do it, you start to have problems. And Man on Fire is way over done.
To make matters worse, for some reason the maniacal editor (or whoever) found it necessary to go do hallucinogens while they were subtitling. Granted the movie takes place in Mexico City, so naturally there is subtitling for the Spanish. Then the subtitling gets a little bit fancier. words don't appear until they're said. Alright no harm done. Then for some reason they decided to start subtitling the English. Yes an English movie subtitled in English. I can only imagine a deaf person having to watch double the subtitles because the editor thought it would be artsy if half-way through the movie he started subtitling in his own language. Just when you think it can't get any worse, it does. the subtitles start changing font, sizes and start reacting to what the people on screen are saying. It hits a breaking point when Denzel's character, Creasy, starts shouting and the subtitles take up the whole screen. I go to movies to watch a movie not to read what I can already hear.
Other than that Dakota Fanning and Denzel Washington were awesome. Marc Anthony out acts Mickey Rourke and Christopher Walkin plays himself... again.
Man on Fire 6/10