Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Reviews15
cinevox's rating
The WWII life of Wladyslaw Szpilman could have been even more fascinating with forty minutes cut from the film. With attention spans being what they currently are, modern audiences may squirm uncomfortably from this series of long scenes with few dialogue and very little background music. And yet, these scenes we're subjected to are important and dramatic in a realist sense.
The piano playing sequences are breathtakingly dramatic, being what they are in this, Polanski's most personally directed film to date.
If things go a little slow for you, watch half of The Pianist one night, and the other half when your nerves are back to normal. It is genuinely a fantastic film, far better than "Schindler's List."
The piano playing sequences are breathtakingly dramatic, being what they are in this, Polanski's most personally directed film to date.
If things go a little slow for you, watch half of The Pianist one night, and the other half when your nerves are back to normal. It is genuinely a fantastic film, far better than "Schindler's List."
I love most disaster films, don't get me wrong. But...
'Comet,' 'Meteor,' 'Asteroid'... there's generally nothing complex about them, so don't make of them more that what they're really worth. Sure, they're usually entertaining and largely exciting to watch, but 'Armageddon' is not one of them. Neither is 'Deep Impact,' its sister film.
Armageddon features way too many reels invested in the 'planting the bombs' end sequence (snore-whistle-wheeze-snooze!!) so how's this supposed to keep us glued to the events. Just land, plant the explosives-or-whatever, and get the hell off the-thing-hurtling-towards-Earth...sheeesh, its not that difficult to anticipate! And movies like this one should never run longer than 90 mins. unless they're rrreeaaalll good story-wise.
You don't need to know anymore than that... and I'm not a fan of Bruce Willis either so, understandably, I took several naps during the course of this movie. ZZZZZZ
'Comet,' 'Meteor,' 'Asteroid'... there's generally nothing complex about them, so don't make of them more that what they're really worth. Sure, they're usually entertaining and largely exciting to watch, but 'Armageddon' is not one of them. Neither is 'Deep Impact,' its sister film.
Armageddon features way too many reels invested in the 'planting the bombs' end sequence (snore-whistle-wheeze-snooze!!) so how's this supposed to keep us glued to the events. Just land, plant the explosives-or-whatever, and get the hell off the-thing-hurtling-towards-Earth...sheeesh, its not that difficult to anticipate! And movies like this one should never run longer than 90 mins. unless they're rrreeaaalll good story-wise.
You don't need to know anymore than that... and I'm not a fan of Bruce Willis either so, understandably, I took several naps during the course of this movie. ZZZZZZ
I saw this movie last month (March 2003) so forgive my lateness...
Raimi's "The Evil Dead" is not entirely bad (heavy influence here from Romero's "Night of the Living Dead," Craven's "The Hills Have Eyes," and Carpenter's "Halloween"). It has a worthwhile script, make-up effects and camerawork, but the Rankin/Bass-like stop-motion ending is just too much and we can sense the 'tongue' slipping out of the 'cheek' and trying too hard to 'touch the tip of the nose.'
Five friends (two romantic couples and an extra girl) set out to spend some r&r at a Tennessee cabin. Soon they discover a forbidden tome in the cellar that, when its contents are read aloud, has the power to release an evil, demonic force on the world.
Irritating are the demonic cackles and the occasionally sloppy production values. But this is, after all, an 8mm production.
Raimi since directed the 2002 Spiderman movie, but Bruce Campbell's career appears to have come to a grinding halt.
In the working stages, this post-grad project was known as "The Book of the Dead." The two sequels (done that) are best left 'in the cellar.'
Raimi's "The Evil Dead" is not entirely bad (heavy influence here from Romero's "Night of the Living Dead," Craven's "The Hills Have Eyes," and Carpenter's "Halloween"). It has a worthwhile script, make-up effects and camerawork, but the Rankin/Bass-like stop-motion ending is just too much and we can sense the 'tongue' slipping out of the 'cheek' and trying too hard to 'touch the tip of the nose.'
Five friends (two romantic couples and an extra girl) set out to spend some r&r at a Tennessee cabin. Soon they discover a forbidden tome in the cellar that, when its contents are read aloud, has the power to release an evil, demonic force on the world.
Irritating are the demonic cackles and the occasionally sloppy production values. But this is, after all, an 8mm production.
Raimi since directed the 2002 Spiderman movie, but Bruce Campbell's career appears to have come to a grinding halt.
In the working stages, this post-grad project was known as "The Book of the Dead." The two sequels (done that) are best left 'in the cellar.'