Datasets:

movie_rationales

like 5

the last of vampire - films offers plenty of blood and gore , but beyond that - nothing . jack crow ( james woods ) is a professional vampire slayer that is secretly working for the vatican . his and his men 's mission is to clean the earth from vampires . they have lost count of how many vampires they have slaughtered , but one has always escaped them . valek ( thomas ian griffith ) - the dark messias and ruler of the undead that is older than time itself . for all eternity the vampires have searched for their salvation - the black cross . with the cross in their possesion , the vampires will be able to walk in the sunlight . after that it is either the humans or the vampires who will dominate the earth . . . i have never liked john carpenter and his style . after seeing this film , my opinions have not changed . john carpenter remains john carpenter . however , because of the film 's self - irony , black humour and fascinating cinematography , i would say that it is his greatest achievement in a long , long time . neither the synopses or carpenter 's direction are original . but there are some things that are interesting . the director 's negative view on the catholic church , for instance . at the end of the film it becomes clear that cardinal alba ( maximilian schell ) has simply used crow and his team to find valek , so that he would gain eternal life . otherwise the catholic priests are shown cool - drinking , smoking and breaking the rool of celibacy . carpenter has created an interesting atmosphere . set in new mexican dessert , he switches between bright golden sunrises and bloody sundowns , symbolically illustrating the good and the evil through light and darkness . more than anything in this film , this simple illustration shows the battle between good and evil . the cinematography by gary b . kibbe is probably the film 's greatest achievement . music ( composed by john carpenter himself ) is at times effective , the special effects and makeup are likewise worth a notice . when it comes to the cast ( in an intellectual film like this casting is the last problem ; everyone can scream and swing the axe ! ) , but here james woods is suprisingly convincing . he is macho and cool as the dedicated hunter , who lost his family to the " breed of evil " . woods is constantly overacting , which really saves the film from falling into the trap of serious self importance . daniel baldwin is also entertaining as crow 's loyal partner . the other cast members are struggling . because the film does n't take itself too seriously , it stays afloat . still it is like most vampire - films - a mediocre experience .

0NEG

i 'm not sure who the genius is who came up with the idea of comparing " disturbing behavior " with " scream . " maybe it 's because they 're both horror films ( kinda ) , both have hot young stars , both have an annoying alternative soundtrack , and both are aimed at the teenage crowd , which i guess includes me . but this is not the next in line with the " scream " flicks as well as the " i know what you did last summer " soon to be flicks . it owes less to " halloween " and more to kafka and orwell , which , in my book , makes for a more interesting feature . and it should have been . this is basically a rehash of " the stepford wives , " the great 70s film i never saw starring katherine ross and dealing , as i 've been told , with a bunch of women who are programmed to be perfect housewives . or something like that . " behavior , " starring katie holmes of " dawson 's creek , " deals with a bunch of teenagers , deep in angst , who are being programmed to be perfect teenagers . suck - ups . preppies . it actually , at least to me , sounds like it would work , and with scott rosenberg , that witty penmen who has written stuff like " beautiful girls " and " things to do in denver when you 're dead " ( as well as " con air " ) , it actually sounds like it may be pulled off with the right amount of frights and satiric wit . alas , it 's not , and it plumets into that little group of movies known as " the movies with potential that blow it . " i remember a film called " white man 's burden " which dealt with a reversal of blacks and whites in society that did nothing with it 's potentially brilliant premise . here 's another one . it could be a brilliant satire on how teenagers need to go through teen angst in order to find themselves . it 's a stage , and this film does in fact realize that . it gets its message across and it does it effortlessly . now it just needs to work as a film . which it does n't . it 's too sloppy and too contrived . it paints a bleak portrait of high school life . . . then lets it lie . it brings us a bunch of scary monsters who are all a bunch of disgustingly icky kiss - ups who do food drives and hang out at a 50s diner drinking milk shakes . . . then gives it a cheap twist : when they get horny , they become homicidal . is n't it scary enough that they 're like this , and ca n't the real terror in the town be that you could be next to be just like them - not that you could be next to die ? the film introduces us two three different characters who , in the beginning , are considered outsiders because they 're not ( yet ) part of this clique : the new kid , steve ( james marsden - dull dull dull dull ) , who 's having trouble at home because he has n't gotten over his brother 's ( ethan embry , in quick flashes so you do n't recognize him - i did ) suicide ; the renegade girl , rachel ( katie holmes , from " dawson 's creek " ) , who 's chief personality trait is her prominent nose ring ; and by far the most interesting kid , gavin ( nick stahl , the kid from " the man without a face " ) , who 's the most interesting because he 's the only character who 's given some dimension . in the film 's best scene , he introduces steve to every single clique , nailing each one 's fetishes and hang - ups , and it 's the best scene in the movie because it 's witty , satirical , and interesting - something the rest of this film is n't . gavin suspects there 's something awry with the preppie kids , known as the blue ribbons , and in the tradition of all conspirators , and even when he actually shows hard pure evidence to steve , he 's only treated as a typical raving conspiracy buff . here , we have another case of " the idiot plot , " where not only could steve had done something about gavin and what happens to him , but he may have saved this film from being the dreary , dull film that it is without gavin , who gives it life and humor . the only other half - interesting character is the school janitor , played by william sadler as a retarded , scary guy who may not be what he seems to be . . . but really , we do n't care anyway . i probably should n't mention that this was directed by david nutter , who 's works for " the x - files , " because that would probably tarnish his reputation . like the show , he 's good at setting up weird conspiracies , and creating a general creepy feel . most of this film is shot at night and with dark eerie shadows for the maximum creepy effect , and some of it works . but what this film is not so good at is coming out with a good payoff . he keeps too much inside , so much that when the characters journey to a mental institution in the third act , you wonder why they just do n't get the hell out of there . i think what happens to gavin is proof enough that there 's something rotten in the state of teen angstdom . what this film needs to be is a lot longer , a lot more colorful , and a lot creepier . if the best villain they can come up with is a guidance counselor ( played by bruce greenwood , an atom egoyan regular obviously just trying to pay the rent ) who still thinks he can get away with it even when most is revealed , then they need to come up with a tougher , smarter villain . if he 's so villainous , then why could two dense teenagers who could n't figure out there was something going on until it was way too late find information on him in a couple minutes ? the film , which runs about 80 or so minutes , just needs to work on these things , and become a lot less sloppy . at such a short running time and with such lame , boring characters as these , it 's pretty much obvious that leaving this film leaves a horribly unsatisfied taste in one 's mouth , especially mine .

0NEG

in the interest of being generous , i want to start this review with the scene that i liked in meet joe black . sir anthony hopkins , playing a super - rich media mogul , has gathered his family around him for dinner . his oldest daughter ( played by marcia gay harden from millers crossing ) , who has been obsessively planning his sinfully extravagant birthday party , presents him with three superbly decorated little cakes , which are supposed to be scale models for his big birthday cake . the daughter asks hopkins to pick the one he likes . hopkins , frustrated by the weight of planning for the whole elaborate affair , does what any man in his position would do : he punts . whichever one you like , dear , he says . and the daughter does exactly what any woman in her position would do : she cries . i liked that scene for two reasons . first , the cakes looked really cool . second , it was , perhaps , the only scene in the movie where people acted as you would expect people to act . meet joe black is chock - full of odd performances , people doing things for no discernible reason at all , and doing them in slow motion over the course of three hours to boot . it 's easy to watch meet joe black for the abundant eye candy of the palatial homes and the beauteous claire forlani , but it 's even easier to sleep right through it ( two people on my row managed it quite nicely ) . the difficult part of the movie is understanding the characters and their motivations and why someone thought three hours was an appropriate length for this overwrought mess . i know my audience had problems with the movie , because they thought it was a comedy . case in point : everyone should know by now that brad pitt plays the angel of death in this movie . however , the first we see of him is as a young lawyer in a coffee shop hitting on the glamorous claire forlani . ( it 's not clear from the movie whether you need a law degree to become the angel of death , but it makes a certain kind of sense . ) it should n't take long for the observant moviegoer to realize that bad things are about to happen to mr . pitt . and indeed they do ( after a hideously prolonged sequence where pitt looks over his shoulder at the retreating forlani and forlani looks over her shoulder at the retreating pitt ) , because pitt walks into the road without looking and suddenly gets squished . well , when that happened , the audience howled with laughter , and continued to laugh at every comment that was remotely humorous . so , if you think that sudden violent death and sarcastic drawing - room humor are funny , i encourage you to go see meet joe black immediately . anyway , the deceased lawyer 's body , no worse the wear from its massive injuries , is possessed by the angel of death and brad pitt takes over that role . the idea is that death ( given the pen name of joe black , so as not to disturb others ) wants to take a holiday and experience the world . if this were n't hollywood , we might get an interesting metaphysical discussion of life and death , but since it is , we get scene after scene of fish - out - of - water humor , just as if death is george of the jungle or crocodile dundee or some other poor schmuck who 's wandered in from the jungle or the outback or whatever and does n't know how to act in our society . it also does n't help that the character of death is written so inconsistently . he claims to be on vacation , but he never does anything except hang around the seriously attractive claire forlani ( just try to get your travel agent to book that one ) . he speaks very slow and halting english but perfectly fluent jamaican patois . he knows everything about some characters , nothing about others . and as played by brad pitt , he 's not especially menacing or charming or glamorous or intriguing , he 's just there . it 's as if someone told pitt , " never mind about acting in this picture , son , just stand there and look pretty . " it 's as if pitt is doing his keanu reeves impression throughout the movie . i 've used the phrase " angel of death " in this review very deliberately to contrast pitt 's performance with this year 's best angel performance , nicolas cage 's in city of angels . where pitt is cold and unfeeling , cage is as warm and empathetic as the situation allows . where cage is genuinely curious about the nature of man , pitt is aloof and arrogant . cage struck instant chemical sparks with co - star meg ryan , where the chemistry between pitt and forlani is only understandable if you accept the notion that forlani 's character is so shallow that she ca n't see beyond pitt 's good looks . the movie 's other top name is a much better actor , but that does n't save meet joe black . sir anthony hopkins is n't given much better material to work with , unfortunately . he plays one of these good - hearted multimillionaire media moguls that only exist in hollywood . ( one wonders what might have happened if they had made hopkins 's character more realistically evil . ) hopkins is marked for death due to a bad ticker , but death steps in and grants him some extra time in exchange for being his guide in the world . of course , no one can be sure of how they will act when death taps on their shoulder . but i have to wonder ( and in this movie , you have a very long time to wonder ) how you or i would act in a similar situation , especially if you or i were a multimillionaire . hopkins pretty much goes to the office -- and the major subplot revolves around who will control the corporation . fans of corporate intrigue will be fascinated , i 'm sure . i stayed awake all the way through meet joe black , and i 'm asking myself why . movies about death should encourage you to live life to the fullest , which is what i 'm going to do now . go spend time with your family , go volunteer for a local charity , heck , go take a nap . do n't go see meet joe black , because all it will do is move you three long hours closer to death . -- curtis edmonds " no children have ever meddled with the republican party and lived to tell about it . " -- sideshow bob

0NEG

a cop with a troubled personal life . a ruthless villain . a friend of the cop . a _ dead _ friend of the cop . a quest for vengeance . a new partner . a romantic interest . a chase scene . a chase scene _ in san francisco _ . a woman in peril . a confrontation . an explosion . the end . yawn . yawn . yawn . the preceding has been the plot of approximately twelve thousand and six action films ; this one just happens to be called metro . i have learned to expect little from films like metro , and consequently i am bored by them more often than i am genuinely disappointed . with eddie murphy on board , however , you hope for something extra , some kind of spark . when a film makes watching eddie murphy a tedious experience , you know it is doing something terribly wrong . murphy stars as scott roper , a hostage negotiator for the san francisco police department who is exceedingly good at his job . with his personal life , he is considerably less successful , facing an unhappy ex - girlfriend named veronica ( carmen ejogo ) , a gambling problem and a mountain of debt . then his professional life gets a jolt as well when a friend and colleague ( art evans ) is murdered while investigating suspected jewel thief michael korda ( michael wincott ) . finding korda becomes very personal to scott , and he joins with new partner kevin mccall ( michael rappaport ) to foil korda during an attempted heist . but all is not well even with korda in jail , as scott , veronica and kevin all continue to face life - threatening danger . metro ( the title , in case you are wondering , means absolutely nothing ) is so badly put together that even the most casual viewer may notice the miserable pacing and stray plot threads . in the first place , korda 's rage over being discovered before he can make his big score is rendered completely pointless when he proceeds to hit the target anyway ( and , incidentally , to screw it up ) . a reference to payoffs in the police department , followed by a conspicuous decision to keep scott off the korda case and a couple of pointed glances , is dropped abruptly with no resolution after about forty - five minutes ; even the relationship between scott and new partner kevin is so perfunctory , with kevin disappearing entirely after taking a bullet for scott , that you may yearn for bickering buddies . worst of all is a plot structure which places the main villain ( the always menacing michael wincott ) behind bars for far too long , leaving a lot of time to kill with the tedious reconciliation of scott and veronica . you ca n't blame murphy for being unable to muster any enthusiasm for the scenes with his bland leading lady , but he should have known better than to take this role at all . scott roper exists in an uncomfortable middle ground between the kind of street - wise fast - talker murphy has built a career on and an actual three - dimensional character , and murphy is never able to reconcile the two . the script seems to have been doctored for him , with a gambling problem turned into a bit of character color and his supposed inability to form relationships turned into a cause for gags rather than actual conflict , yet there is still too little comedy for murphy to work with . for much of the film , he walks around with an intense frown , and it is over 90 minutes into metro before you hear that trademark laugh for the first time . murphy is stranded with too few solid punch lines , and nearly all of the ones he does have bounce of ejogo and fall to the ground limply . i suppose i should give director thomas carter credit for taking the obligatory san francisco car chase ( how much do you want to bet on the likelihood of seeing a car soar over a hill ? ) and doing a few interesting things with it . as vehicles are sent flying and passengers sent sprawling by a runaway cable car , it is possible at least for a moment to take some pleasure in a goofy spin on a familiar situation . carter does an even better job by taking that old suspense stand - by -- the medicine cabinet mirror which will close to reveal a killer standing behind someone -- and using it to defuse tension not once , but _ twice _ . the fact that carter was able to demonstrate even that much recognition of cliches , and a willingness to subvert them , makes his involvement in the rest of the disaster that is metro all the more puzzling . an action film like this plods so relentlessly and obviously from point a to point b to point c that you might find yourself shouting out " point c ! " while they 're still getting to point b , or getting up with the rest of the audience after the big explosion which signals that nothing else of any consequence is going to happen .

0NEG

can a horror movie truly be called a horror movie if it has no scares , suspense , or even eerie elements ? i think not , but that 's what children of the corn 666 : issac 's return wants us to believe . the sixth installment in the horrible , worn out series is by far the worst to date . unlike the other five chapters , children of the corn 666 is a confusing , brainless thriller that takes the psychological horror route rather than slasher horror , but either way , none of these movies are the least bit scary . the film follows hannah ( natalie ramsey ) a teen looking for her mother in gatlin , nebraska , on the eve of her 21st birthday . what starts out as a daughter in desperate search of her long lost mother turns into the story of hannah being the first daughter of the children of the corn , who roam the cornfields looking for adults to murder . that 's about all that 's understandable in the film , as after we learn this much , issac ( john franklin ) who led the children of the corn in a previous chapter , now an older , strange man , is looking for hannah to fulfill his prophecy . and this is supposed to make sense . really . from the start the film is unclear of where its going , not developing any characters or throwing any concrete plot details across the table , constantly introducing new characters without personalities or the slightest hint of an individuality , and sub plots that have nothing to do with what seems to the main focus of the film . the film runs at a short 78 minutes , but it seems to be more in the vicinity of two hours , as the bleak , slow pacing makes children of the corn 666 : issac 's return excruciatingly boring . plot holes are everywhere in tim sulka and john franklin 's unbelievably horrible script , as nothing is accomplished or clear when the film reaches its conclusion . everyone and everything involved with children of the corn 666 : issac 's return , namely writers john franklin and tim sulka , along with director kari skogland , should crawl under a rock , and hope no one sees their horrible work of trash . the bottom line : horrible , horrible , horrible . another attempt to revive this worn out genre falls flat . and what 's with that title ? the devil has nothing to do whatsoever with this film . let 's pray that this is the finale in one of the worst current film series . one of the worst horror films in years .

0NEG

arnold schwarzenegger has been an icon for action enthusiasts , since the late 80 's , but lately his films have been very sloppy and the one - liners are getting worse . it 's hard seeing arnold as mr . freeze in batman and robin , especially when he says tons of ice jokes , but hey he got 15 million , what 's it matter to him ? once again arnold has signed to do another expensive blockbuster , that ca n't compare with the likes of the terminator series , true lies and even eraser . in this so called dark thriller , the devil ( gabriel byrne ) has come upon earth , to impregnate a woman ( robin tunney ) which happens every 1000 years , and basically destroy the world , but apparently god has chosen one man , and that one man is jericho cane ( arnold himself ) . with the help of a trusty sidekick ( kevin pollack ) , they will stop at nothing to let the devil take over the world ! parts of this are actually so absurd , that they would fit right in with dogma . yes , the film is that weak , but it 's better than the other blockbuster right now ( sleepy hollow ) , but it makes the world is not enough look like a 4 star film . anyway , this definitely does n't seem like an arnold movie . it just was n't the type of film you can see him doing . sure he gave us a few chuckles with his well known one - liners , but he seemed confused as to where his character and the film was going . it 's understandable , especially when the ending had to be changed according to some sources . aside form that , he still walked through it , much like he has in the past few films . i 'm sorry to say this arnold but maybe these are the end of your action days . speaking of action , where was it in this film ? there was hardly any explosions or fights . the devil made a few places explode , but arnold was n't kicking some devil butt . the ending was changed to make it more spiritual , which undoubtedly ruined the film . i was at least hoping for a cool ending if nothing else occurred , but once again i was let down . i also do n't know why the film took so long and cost so much . there was really no super affects at all , unless you consider an invisible devil , who was in it for 5 minutes tops , worth the overpriced budget . the budget should have gone into a better script , where at least audiences could be somewhat entertained instead of facing boredom . it 's pitiful to see how scripts like these get bought and made into a movie . do they even read these things anymore ? it sure does n't seem like it . thankfully gabriel 's performance gave some light to this poor film . when he walks down the street searching for robin tunney , you ca n't help but feel that he looked like a devil . the guy is creepy looking anyway ! when it 's all over , you 're just glad it 's the end of the movie . do n't bother to see this , if you 're expecting a solid action flick , because it 's neither solid nor does it have action . it 's just another movie that we are suckered in to seeing , due to a strategic marketing campaign . save your money and see the world is not enough for an entertaining experience .

0NEG

i still ca n't figure out why people went in droves to see this movie . now before you go assuming i 'm some sort of high brow snob , who ca n't appreciate a little dumb humor , let me say that i love cheap humor . i thought there 's something about mary was one of the funniest films that i have ever seen and it was certainly one of the best films of 1998 . low brow adolescent humor can be a lot of fun , the problem with the waterboy is that it is just low brow and adolescent , there is no humor component . i wanted to like the waterboy , i really did . i think i only laughed maybe 2 or 3 times throughout the entire movie . actually , i smiled a couple of more times on top of that . not a great record for a 90-minute film . the problem with the waterboy is the same as most other adam sandler movies . those responsible for this mess seem to think that the sheer fact that sandler walks around using a goofy voice and playing dumb the entire movie is a substitute for actual funny material . nothing could be further from the truth , as matter of fact , sandler 's idiot voice started to get on my nerves at points in this film . it 's really a shame too , because this film had the potential to be very funny . i personally believe that sandler is probably a very talented comedian , it 's just that so far he has n't been able to find the right film to showcase his talents . if his only talent is making goofy voices and playing morons , my guess is that his career in the movies will go down the same road as the vast majority of the former stars of saturday night live . most of whom are now happily no longer in the entertainment industry . sandler plays a 31-year - old , somewhat mentally challenged , waterboy for a college football team . the team 's somewhat mentally disturbed coach ( henry winkler ) realizes that his waterboy has a great deal of pent - up rage , which , if harnessed properly , would make him a force to be reckoned with on the football field . you can figure out the rest from here . sandler joins the team and this once lowly waterboy becomes a football star . as i said , the film had a great deal of potential . the idea was a decent one , but the main potential of this movie is a result of the cast . all of whom are very good , just hamstrung by really , really , lousy material . even sandler , annoying goofy voice and all , has enough charisma and natural comedic ability to overcome some of his bad material . even as unfunny as his character is , i still found myself rooting for him throughout the film . but it is the supporting cast that i feel most badly about . if their material had been just a bit better , this film could have been such a funny movie . fairuza balk plays sandler 's leather - wearing biker - chick love interest and does a great job playing sleazy and sexy at the same time . winkler is great as the coach who uses a " coaching for dummies " -style book to help him get through games . the real standout though , is kathy bates . even with some of the worst material of her career to deal with , she is still a treat to watch in her role as sandler 's overprotective and overbearing mama . even with the performances of bates and winkler , there is absolutely no way i would recommend this movie . although i get the distinct impression that without them , this film would have ranked in negative numbers for me . which is sad , because i ca n't really put my finger on a particular element of the movie and single it out as the cause of the disaster that it became . it 's obvious that those involved , specifically the actors , tried very hard to make what they thought was going to be a funny movie . it 's just too bad that 99 percent of all of the jokes fell flat .

0NEG

gordie boggs ( arquette , aptly cast as a moron , as he is one ) and his best friend sean dawkins ( scott caan . the son of james caan should not be reduced to garbage like this ! ) are two losers from wyoming with no jobs and no girlfriends , who look up to world championship wrestling champion jimmy king ( a terribly casted oliver platt ) , as he is everything they are not . they finally get to see him live and he is screwed out of his title by the evil , ruthless promoter titus sinclair ( a wasted palitaliano , in a role originally meant for real - life wcw president eric bischoff , whose name was written all over the role ! ) . gordie and sean track down king in atlanta and discover that he is not really the english king the wcw writers created for him , but a drunken , ignorant southerner who is as irritated by these two lunkheads as bob newhart was by larry , darryl , and darryl . they sneak him back onto wcw tv , after which sinclair agrees to book him in a steel cage match in las vegas at wcw 's next pay - per - view , against his rival , diamond dallas page . if he wins , king gets his title and his career back , plus one million dollars . wcw president eric bischoff , knowing his promotion was desperate with bad writing and ratings skyrocketing down thanks to the far superior world wrestling federation , came up with the idea for this movie hoping it would save wcw . he was then fired and rehired two months ago , but by the time he 'd left , they had already been contracted to do the film , and bischoff could not play sinclair ( which , in itself , is for the best , as anybody who has seen him on wcw programming knows that bischoff is no actor ! ) . the characters of gordie and sean show you exactly what eric bischoff thinks of his fans . he thinks of them as young , dumb pathetic idiots who will believe anything that will be put out in front of them is real . that is why he does n't take the fans into consideration when he books a nitro or a pay - per - view . i have news for you , eric : no wrestling fan in this day and age is dumb enough to believe that professional wrestling is n't for show , unless they are four years old . this is 2000 , you know , not 1985 . bischoff will try to cover up criticism like that by saying it is a comedy , but i have no doubt in my mind that if this had been a dramatic , rocky - style film ( which it probably should have been . professional wrestling is ridiculed enough as it is , why should the first wrestling movie in ten years be a comedy ? ) , gordie and sean would have been portrayed in the same light . anybody who has seen the documentary wrestling with shadows , documenting wwf owner vince mcmahon 's double - crossing of bret hart , will probably realize via the reviews and previews of ready to rumble , that it is basically a rip - off of that film 's storyline with the poor man 's wayne and garth thrown in for comedic affect . you can tell titus sinclair is supposed to poke fun at vince , but any self - respecting wrestling fan knows that sinclair is more inspired by bischoff than vince , and that vince did what he had to do to bret hart . all of these aspects of the film , needless to say , seriously offended me as a wrestling fan . another thing i found disturbing about the film was the romance between gordie and nitro girl sasha ( the lovely rose mcgowan ) . would n't it have been easier to bring something new into the relationship rather than revealing she was only working on gordie at sinclair 's insistance ? i hate that cliche ! the world wrestling federation would have made a better film . they are the promotion everyone cares about , they are winning the ratings , they have better wrestlers , and they take their fans into consideration and do n't treat fans like morons . so , vince , how about a movie ?

0NEG

when i arrived in paris in june , 1992 , i was surprised to find france plastered with posters twin peaks : fire walk with me , since the movie was n't scheduled to open in the u . s . until late august . happily , the film -- the prequel to david lynch 's cult television series -- was playing in a fancy , thx theater . unfortunately , the theater was far more impressive than the movie , which absolutely stinks , much like a french lavatory . worse , actually . fire walk with me ( directed by lynch ) will be completely incomprehensible to anyone who has not seen the tv series or read " laura palmer 's secret diary . " for " twin peaks " junkies , like me , the movie is only marginally improved . the plot is jumbled and illogical , not to mention excruciatingly sluggish . the first 30 minutes , which have almost nothing to do with the main story line , feature chris isaak and kiefer sutherland as fbi agents investigating a murder in portland , oregon . the movie then stops in philadelphia for a nonsensical cameo by david bowie and a brief appearance by kyle maclachlan as dale cooper . lynch then drops this plot strand altogether and abruptly shifts the setting to twin peaks , washington -- one year later . ah , twin peaks : " familiar territory , " you think to yourself as angelo badalamenti 's distinctive musical score chimes in . wrong ! the movie proves that you really ca n't go home again , or at least lynch ca n't . only about a quarter of the characters from the tv series appear in the movie : leland palmer , bobby briggs , james , shelly , leo , the log lady and a few others -- mostly in meaningless cameos . the rest of the " twin peaks " cast is nowhere to be seen , and consequently , lynch fails to recreate the spirit and flavor of tv 's most enigmatic town . cast members michael ontkean , sherilyn fenn , piper laurie , and richard beymer are sorely missed , not to mention lara flynn boyle , who has been replaced by lackluster moira kelly in the crucial role of donna . the movie concentrates solely on laura palmer ( sheryl lee ) as she suffers through drug abuse , prostitution , and incest , during her miserable last seven days on earth . the night of laura 's death , which is truly terrifying , is the film 's only remotely effective sequence . we finally get to see exactly what happened to laura after she jumped off james ' motorcycle and ran into the woods at that lonely traffic light in the middle of nowhere . her murder unfolds just as agent cooper reconstructed it in the tv series , which is gratifying for faithful " twin peaks " viewers . but it 's an awfully small reward for sitting through a painfully awful movie .

0NEG

capsule : this super - light situation comedy from sweden tells the story of two close friends with romantic problems . the script involves formerly taboo subjects like erotic toys and sexual enhancers but otherwise the writing is not a lot different from what is shown free on television . the characters are paper - thin and the interesting ideas purely non - existent . this is a decrement - life - by-90-minutes card . , 0 ( -4 to +4 ) jalla ! jalla ! is basically an exuberant tv situation comedy written instead for the wide screen . it tells the story of two park custodians and the problems they are finding on the path to true love . the film is set in sweden where roro and mans ( fares fares and torkel petersson ) are custodians at a public park . roro is from a tightly knit lebanese family who control him very closely , mans is a swede from a much more liberal background . they spend most of the day in the bushes at their park , cleaning up after dogs . roro and mans each have girlfriends , but each has a problem . roro ( nicknamed " jalla " ) is having family problems . it seems that his family wants to arrange a marriage between him and a nice lebanese woman , yasmin ( laleh pourkarim ) , but he is already in love with lisa ( tuva novotny ) . yasmin likes roro , but does not want to get married either . mans on the other hand has been having a problem of sexual impotence . the two friends worry about their problems and discuss the problems with each other . mans thinks the answer to his problem is to purchase sexual enhancers . the one catch is that he is too shy to go in and buy them . roro and yasmin decide to give themselves some time by telling the families that they want to marry each other , but then plan to break up before the wedding . not too surprisingly neither finds that his idea works out the way he quite expected . the plot turns in several places are contrived . one knows fairly quickly that if things are going to work our happily for everybody certain plot contrivances have to happen . lebanese - born josef fares who wrote and directed is perhaps a better director than he is a writer . when things start to get slow , he just adds throws in another story . for example halfway into the film mans innocently antagonizes some local toughs and a long chase is added to the film . characterization is a little better with roro than it is with mans who does not seem to have a whole lot more personality beyond fear for losing a biological function . we do see some of roro 's family life and his concerns . that may be because roro 's background is a lot like that of the director . while the story was entertaining , i did not feel that i got anything worthwhile from the film . it was just a way to pass about an hour and a half in my life . one does not have to go to the movies to see entertainment like this . i rate it a 4 on the 0 to 10 scale and a 0 on the -4 to +4 scale .

0NEG

remember tom cruise and brian brown as rival bartenders juggling bottles of booze in " cocktail " ? remember how stupid that looked ? and remember the scantily - clad dancers of " flashdance " getting doused with buckets of water ? well , " coyote ugly " does those films five better ( or six better if you count john goodman ) , since here we have piper perado , maria bello , tyra banks , melanie lynskey , and izabella miko doing the absolut spinning and jiggling thing while pouring pitchers of perrier all over their semi - naked torsos . no , goodman does n't flip jim beams or wear anything particularly risqu ? in the film but he * does * get up on the bar and start gyrating with the rest of them . and the central character 's love interest , played by an australian actor named adam garcia , proves * he * can get up on that bar and start shimmying along with the rest of them too . what seems to have started life as a victoria 's secret photo shoot quickly deteriorates into one heck of an embarrassing movie . violet ( perado ) is a south amboy hopeful who tries to make it big as a songwriter ( not a welder ) in new jack city . as na ? ve as they come , she 's fobbed off by music producer 's receptionists by the scorn - ful and has her apartment robbed hours after touching down in chinatown . and , like her mother before her , she gets stage fright whenever she tries to do the open mike night thing . when she sees a trio of babe - a - licious barkeeps thumbing through a stack of $ 20s in an all - night diner , violet simply has to check out this bar they call coyote ugly . lil ( bello ) , the no - nonsense owner , agrees to give violet an audition but violet blows it . still , lil gives violet another chance . a riot breaks out ( riots are the order of the day at ' ugly 's , since the staff are relentless in flaunting their sexual wares , flambeeing the bar , and soaking the patrons with diet sprite -- this is certifiable behavior in case i did n't mention it ) but violet successfully subdues the crowd by singing along to blondie 's " one way or another " on the jukebox . she 's hired ! and cured , since this little episode gives her the confidence to sing in an amateur talent contest where her dad ( goodman ) , the junk food - eating , laundry - impaired toll collector , comes to see her and is as proud as punch . the end .

0NEG

confucius once said , " governing a nation is like cooking a small fish -- do n't overdo it . " his maxim might be easily applied to writing a comedy script , for quantity over quality is one of the worst mistakes an amateur scribe can make . granted , mike judge , writer - director of the workplace satire office space is n't exactly an amateur ( his most infamous work , the mtv series " beavis and butt - head " was pure gold for its network ) . but unfailingly , judge manages to make some rather inexcusable mistakes in office space by spreading an iffy plot over too much ground . the iffiness in judge 's plot -- a group of coworkers plan the downfall of their despicable boss -- is not in its appeal . in fact , based on the popularity of scott adams ' cartoon " dilbert , " which will soon have its own television series , a satirical view of the american workplace is a hot item in hollywood . unfortunately the concept lends itself to skit - length sequences which would be more at home on the set of " saturday night live " rather than a full - length feature . the most convincing evidence of this are the trailers for office space , which feature almost all of the movie 's top content ; this leaves the actual picture appearing very deflated . other evidence of office space 's failure to work are its lack of good jokes . the comedy is marginally funny at best , but not enough to get a packed house of theater - goers to laugh out loud . the material in the movie is on - key for an older demographic than judge is used to targeting , and this could partially explain his work here . however , the movie is loaded with too many misfires -- including the token plot -- to allow for any excuse . the plot centers around three or four cubicled engineers , headed up by peter gibbons ( ron livingston ) , at a company named initech . after the movie elaborately establishes the miserable working conditions at initech , the movie introduces us to two consultants ( john c . mcginley and paul willson ) which are in charge of " downsizing " the company 's payroll . when peter and his gang learns of this , as well as the reason behind it -- so their smooth talking boss bill lumbergh ( gary cole ) 's stock will go up -- they set about creating a plan to see his downfall . the circumstances that follow were obviously intended to be hilarious but they come out as anything but . a sympathetic cast and a muddled jennifer aniston - as - love - interest subplot are all that keep this one together , but it 's definitely missable in lieu of something more intelligent .

0NEG

it seemed like the perfect concept . what better for the farrelly brothers , famous for writing and directing comedies with offensive subject matter , than to make a movie about a guy with a split personality ? it 's exactly the sort of thing the brothers relish : poking fun at something serious ( in this case mental illness ) , throwing all care to the wind to get a laugh . jim carrey 's signed on too ? even better . the national alliance for the mentally ill even helped out by levying complaints against the brothers ' new film before its opening , claiming it was misrepresenting the condition of split personality , labeling it incorrectly as " schizophrenia , " and so forth . such a protest seemed like just the sort of thing that would , of course , only add more fuel to the farrelly brothers ' fire , proving that some people just could n't take a joke , and that the farrellys would be helping the more enlightened viewers to yet another dose of their brilliantly subversive comedy . yes , it all seemed perfect , but one thing went wrong : their movie is n't funny . it 's not for lack of trying . the farrellys utilize in " me , myself & irene " their most high - concept premise ever : carrey plays charlie baileygaites , a man who after being dumped by his wife for a midget limo driver , decides to bury all his aggressive feelings deep down inside and never release them . this , of course , means all his neighbors exploit his entirely too - forgiving nature , making his job as a rhode island state trooper increasingly difficult . soon enough , charlie 's repressed aggression manifests itself into a second , independent personality named hank , a deep - voiced , boorish ogre unafraid of taking the assertive actions his predecessor had been unable to muster . this guy is n't above crashing a car through the wall of the barber shop in which he 's been insulted , or holding a little girl 's head underwater because she refused to stop jump - roping in the street . then things start getting lost in the most complicated plot the farrellys have ever attempted , and the film runs off its tracks . some have suggested that this is n't a problem , because the farrelly brothers ' brand of humor does n't require plot to work . they 're wrong , of course : plot was greatly instrumental in building up the kind of rollicking comic energy that infused the farrellys ' last effort , 1996 's " there 's something about mary . " ( 1999 's " outside providence " was technically an earlier project . ) the brothers ' earlier film was n't funny merely because it contained outrageous gags ( despite what some newsmagazine articles would have you believe ) , but rather because its most outrageous gags were entirely unexpected . in " mary , " the farrellys managed several times to pull off a neat sleight - of - hand trick : they 'd have you thinking the story was going one way , then reveal its real direction in delightfully surprising fashion . " me , myself & irene , " by contrast , seems to have been made by folks who looked at " mary " and saw only the surface grossness , missing all of the subtle machinations that really made it work . having been produced by the same guys who made " mary , " " irene " seems like an even bigger disappointment . the brothers pile on the offensive humor , taking shots at race , midgets , albinos , mental illness , and all manner of bathroom jokes . but they have n't come up with a way to make any of it fresh ; most of " me , myself & irene " comes off as rote , by - the - numbers , adolescent comedy . the plot , with carrey forced to drive alleged fugitive irene p . waters ( renee zellweger ) , who 's in more trouble than anyone knows , back to new york , has an ending that 's entirely predictable from the get - go . ( think charlie and irene will fall in love ? yeah , me too . ) the farrellys then introduce scores of different characters , and none of them ever manage to do anything you have n't already expected them to do , no matter how outrageous their actions might be . compared to the curveballs the farrellys are used to throwing , this stuff is almost entirely soft - tossed , presenting an obvious problem : when gross - out humor loses its shock value , it 's no longer funny , merely gross . the jokes that do work are milked over and over until their effectiveness runs dry . take , for example , the subplot involving charlie 's three black sons ( anthony anderson , mongo brownlee , jerod mixon ) . the incongruity of it all is funny for a while , with three burly black men discussing higher math in ghetto language and white - bread carrey mouthing said language with an entirely too - pleasant smile on his face . but by the end of the film , they 're still doing the same schitck ; it has n't been elevated to another , funnier level , and it has n't been dropped either . that 's too bad , because it ceases to be amusing about halfway through . " me , myself & irene " reeks of wasted opportunities . there ought to be more focus on how other people react to charlie 's new personality , and on how charlie deals with the consequences of hank 's actions . this does n't really happen ; nearly every supporting character learns about charlie 's condition early on , so they do n't have any opportunity to be surprised by it . the film throws what looks like a patented farrelly curve in a scene towards the midway point ( involving an albino companion charlie and irene pick up called , appropriately , " whitey " ) , but the script does n't go anywhere with it , instead leaving the thread twisting in the wind before awkwardly tying it up during the climax . jim carrey is a gifted comedian , both physically and vocally , but he 's left with nothing much to do here except contort himself in a manner similar to steve martin in " all of me . " it 's a great showcase of flexibility and split - second role - shifting , but none of it is terribly funny . carrey does n't pull any stunts we do n't expect him to pull , and the farrellys ' script does n't give him anything else to pull : the situations in which he must perform the role - shifting are n't set up in any meaningful way . perhaps carrey can take solace in the fact that his supporting actors fare no better . zellweger 's irene is not a strong female lead ; mary in " mary " may have been part adolescent fantasy , but she was also intelligent and strong - willed . irene is nothing in particular , as the film never makes clear whether she 's ditzy , clever , or neither . as such , she gives us nothing to latch onto as the only " sane " person in the film . chris cooper is stuck playing exactly one note as a corrupt fbi agent , and his character is entirely too straight - laced for a movie like this . he , like the others , does absolutely nothing unexpected . after viewing the shapeless mess that " me , myself & irene " eventually dissolved into , i was stuck wondering whether or not the farrellys had outsmarted themselves . maybe their kind of comedy can only work for so long until audiences get wise to it and stop being shocked . but i do n't believe it -- good filmmakers find ways of surprising their audiences even after people have grown attuned to their style . if the farrellys are indeed good , smart filmmakers ( and i still think they are ) , they 'll rebound just fine . even after that happens , though , i 'll still consider " me , myself & irene " to be a high - caliber misfire .

0NEG

there 's a scene somewhere in this film where one of the characters reads the book " screenwriting made easy . " this is funny the first time just 'cause it is , but funnier as the film goes on since it 's totally ironic since the screenwriters of this inane film probably read it , outlined it and then wrote this film . it 's like they took the sub - genre of the disaster pic , which can be fun and hokey at the same time , and then forgot one of the greatest parts of them : the stupid , eccentric characters . yes , " the poseidon adventure " is crap , but it 's fun 'cause of all the stupid , eccentric characters . and " earthquake , " my god ! " earthquake " has got to be one of the worst movies of all time , but at least they had the joke of having charlton heston sleeping with genevieve bujold . " volcano " takes a semi - intriguing yet stupendously inane plot ( a volcano no one knew about suddenly errupts one fine morning and then erupts again later then stops . . . only it 's in , dare i say it ? l . a ! ! ! ) and then puts no stupid , stereotypical , eccentric characters in it . they 're just stupid . and the actors are all good ones . tommy lee jones is great , an oscar winner , and a member of the men in black ( my vote for what should be the coolest movie of the summer ) . anne heche is a good indy actress . don cheadle stole the disappointing " devil in a blue dress " from denzel 's feet . and gaby 's one of the few good teenage actors . but they get nothing to do but act dumb and scream at what 's going on . they do their best , god bless them , but they 're all lost in the fake magma ( only don cheadle gets an interesting part and he 's the greatest part of the film ) . there 's no real suspense here 'cause you do n't care about anyone . i actually was rooting for gaby 's character to get killed so tommy lee jones would n't have to keep saving her ( he did it like thirty times ! ) . and there are no interesting sites in l . a . that we see get destroyed . part of the fun of disaster films is watching sites get toppled or destroyed or whatever . in " independence day , " the best part ( other than judd hirsch ) was watching the white house and empire state building get blown up by the aliens . that was cool . watching really fake - looking magma plow down the street is not . okay , so the film 's not devoid of merit . as i already stated , don cheadle was great and the cast does their best . and there 's this really moronic scene which looks cool . john carrol lynch ( norm from " fargo " ) goes on a subway car to save people but the lava comes and surrounds it . he has one guy who 's wounded and could make it . he could throw the guy and jump and still survive . but no ! ! ! he has to go and inanely jump and land right in the middle of the lava . here 's the cool sight : he melts . here 's the dumb part of it : he somehow manages to throw the man to safety as his legs are melting . cool sight . no logic . but cool sight . the volcano erupts twice and for some reason , the film ends there . they are n't worried about it eruting again , they just go home to their toppled homes . but to tell the truth , i was glad they did n't go on . i was hoping the film was over after the first eruption ended . my god , it was actually painful to sit through this little 102 minute long film . i have n't seen " dante 's peak " but i 've heard it 's a masterpiece compared to this . if you want to see a cool disaster flick that 's inane but interesting , rent " the towering inferno " with steve mcqueen , paul newman , and the schweppervescent o . j . simpson ( he saves a cat ) . if you want to waste your time watching a boring , stupid disaster flick ( literally , it almost grossed half of its budget ) , see this . but i warned you .

0NEG

the yet - to - be - released krippendorf 's tribe is being marketed as a family comedy , but buyer beware . this movie ca n't make up its mind . is it a family comedy with vulgar references to both the male and female bodies , menstruation , circumcision , and sex that would make any parents squirm at the thought of having their child next to them ? or is it an adult comedy approached with such immaturity that only adolescents will appreciate the effort ? either way , " unbalanced " is the word to stamp on this hit and miss and miss and miss effort . the premise is catchy - widowed anthropology professor james krippendorf ( richard dreyfuss ) has spent the past two years " getting over " the death of his wife , neglecting key research and squandering grant money on personal living expenses . now it 's time to show what he 's achieved in those two years , and he has absolutely nothing to show for it . with a fabricated tale of studying a previously undiscovered tribe in new guinea , krippendorf petitions for new funds while hiding the fact that the previous $ 100 , 000 grant was spent on trips to mcdonald 's . but when his " discovery " becomes the latest craze among colleagues , the professor finds he must do more than talk about the tribe - he must create it . with the aid of his three children , the headstrong teen shelly ( natasha lyonne of everyone says i love you ) , the slightly younger mickey ( gregory smith ) , and the nine - year - old edmund ( carl michael lindner ) , the " shelmikedmu " tribe ( named from the first half of each child 's name ) is born , and videos quickly produced in krippendorf 's backyard are passed off as stunning documentary footage of the newly found new guinea tribe . despite the professor 's wishes , the buzz surrounding his discovery only grows , due in greatest part to veronica micelli ( jenna elfman ) , an overly vivacious ( and voluptuous ) anthropologist who barges her way into the discovery and basically deems herself krippendorf 's main assistant . hungry for recognition , micelli sets up interviews , lectures , etc . in an effort to make this the biggest sociological event in history , a sure fire way to go down in the history books . krippendorf , on the other hand , is seeing himself go down a jail cell corridor , not in history books , and with each new lecture , he must come up with something impressive to unleash about the tribe - mating habits , domestic structure , etc . thru fumbling improvisation , and often some quick thinking from his oldest son , krippendorf makes it thru each new lecture , but only creates more and more interest in the highly unique tribe . on the opposing end is krippendorf 's arch rival , ruth allen ( lily tomlin ) , an arrogant professor whose jealousy drives her on a mission to disprove the existance of the non - existent tribe . it 's a cute idea , and approached with a more subtle ( and mature ) style , krippendorf 's tribe could 've been a real winner . sadly , the mostly - misfired toilet humor , overly comical musical score ( by bruce broughton ) , and sugar coated sentiments ( all the key ingredients of a " family comedy " ) just are n't the right tone for this film . cut that crap out , add some razor sharp dialogue and witty sociological perceptions and you 've got a good start . at the state it 's in now , you 've got something along the lines of medicine man meets mrs . doubtfire meets dumb & dumber , and that 's not a concoction anyone should be overly anxious to try . the overall product here is a highly forgettable cup of " average " , with a few laugh - out - loud moments and a great big gap in between them . most of the characters are surprisingly two - dimensional , and the only one who seems to exhibit any real acting effort ( lyonne ) seems to go greatly unappreciated . director todd holland has gone about making this film in all the wrong ways . it 's stuck in limbo between disney family fare ( jungle 2 jungle ) and potentially hilarious adult comedy ( a fish called wanda ) . it 's this unbalanced structure that really knocks it down a grade , and it 's a brutal drop . a strong warning to parents : forget the impression given by advertisements , do you want to take your kids to a film that has a woman asking a man if he finds her attractive merely because she 's holding his penis ? yes , it 's put that bluntly ! just be warned - this is merely one example of the many shocking subjects to be brought up in the film , and others might not be as tame .

0NEG

it 's been hours since i returned from the much anticipated sci - fi opus ` mission to mars ' , and i can still detect the reek of moldy cheddar . why ? the movie is a shoddy cheesefest full of digital eye candy , stapled carelessly onto a flimsy screenplay which somehow manages to leapfrog the great promise of a space opera , instead shooting for the angle of a feel - good science fiction drama more akin to ` 2001 : a space odyssey ' . i got the feeling that most of my fellow movie - going patrons were expecting another ` armageddon ' . but no , ` mission to mars ' certainly is n't one large action sequence about colossal disaster . this is a supposedly thoughtful , family - friendly space flick in which the apocalyptic excitement takes a back seat to visual elegance and uplifting drivel . you have been warned . of course , crafting a tightly claustrophobic space drama is not impossible ( see ` apollo 13 ' for an excellent example ) , but few directors possess the skill and craftsmanship to pull it off without seriously scarring their reputation . brian de palma has enough directorial expertise and visual wizardry up his sleeve to pull it off . when he gets his hands on an intelligent , systematically practical script like ` the untouchables ' or ` mission : impossible ' , the director has the ability to create a sound technical achievement ( although his overly indulgent style becomes bothersome more than occasionally ) . of course , there 's also the inexcusable string of crap that has carried his name ( including ` snake eyes ' and the notorious bomb ` the bonfire of the vanities ' ) . . . . all of which makes me want to call de palma the most talented hack in hollywood . that term may be too harsh , but if i were judging him solely on the perpetual waste of talent that is ` mission to mars ' , my choice of words would have been slightly less lenient . if i were gary sinise , i would n't touch de palma with a 10-foot pole . sinise is a wonderful , wonderful actor , but after appearing in ` snake eyes ' and this vomit - inducing sham , i 'm sure he would n't want to risk the embarrassment of a third collaboration . the academy award - winner plays nasa astronaut jim mcconnell , a man who recently lost his wife ( kim delaney ) and is apparently psychologically unfit for an upcoming space shuttle mission to mars ( oops , forgot to mention the year - 2020 ) . after a barbecue get - together for the astronauts , we cut to luc goddard ( don cheadle ) and his team , who are already taking measurements and calculations on the red planet . suddenly , a towering formation of rocks and soil - probably best dubbed a ` sand tornado ' - appears and creates a whirlwind of suction . for some reason , the astronauts just stand there calmly to admire this , as if it were a lovely piece of art . the team is killed within seconds , expect for luc , who was able to send one final transmission and may still be alive . immediately , a second mission - consisting of astronauts mcconnell , husband and wife woody and terri blake ( tim robbins and connie nielsen ) and phil ohlmyer ( jerry o'connell ) - are dispatched to rescue luc and discover the mysterious secret of planet mars . let 's put the ` secret ' on hold for now , and discuss the trip there . it is explained , whether scientifically accurate or not ( probably not ) , that a trip to mars takes roughly six months . i 'm not sure why the quartet of screenwriters behind ` m2 m ' did n't capitalize on this juicy opportunity of creating tension and claustrophobia . instead , we join the team during their final days aboard the ship . what happened during the five months prior to this ? did they just play cards and tell dirty jokes ? still , there are few nicely tense moments ( maybe the only in the movie ) during the time - frame involving a fuel leak . depalma 's direction is quite good in these scenes , although the score by ennio morricone is largely inconsistent ( organ music in space ? c'mon ) . there 's a few good , imaginative ideas in the landslide of cheese , a sad realization that causes me to sigh out loud . it 's a colossal bummer that ` mission to mars ' is poorly assembled and laughably written , with a dubious and supremely silly finale that will only satisfy dedicated optimists . as mentioned before , anyone looking for some disaster - movie carnage is going to feel savagely disappointed . . . maybe even cheated . after the unbelievably hokey final shot ( with the words ? the end ' somehow adding insult to injury ) , a few audience members made the effort to boo and hiss at the screen . others muttered obscenities , shaking their heads in disbelief while mumbling ` jeez , that sucked . ' okay , it did suck . but you have to show the actors some sympathetic mercy . . . after all , they do pretty well . sinise is sincere and effective in many of his scenes , robbins and nielsen wholeheartedly convince as a loving nasa couple , and funnyman o'connell - well , he has a couple lines are actually amusing ( and intentionally so ) . the digital effects accompanying the sand tornado sequence are quite impressive . so , by golly , where did this ` mission ' go wrong ? looking back on the appalling experience , i would say in practically every conduit and crevasse it could have . while watching ` mission to mars ' , my suggestion would be to immediately abort , or better yet , do n't even strap yourself in for lift - off .

0NEG

despite its exceedingly well - done visual effects , 1995 's original species was one big hunk of sci - fi cheese , from the writing to the feeble performances . so , coming from such b - grade roots , its sequel 's stunning ineptitude is not terribly surprising , yet at the same time it is . it would not have been difficult at all for the people behind species ii to top the hokey original , yet they have somehow managed to fabricate something just as bad , if not even worse . something is clearly amiss when the back door left open for a sequel in species -- a sewer rat becomes not quite of this earth after eating a body part from the exploded alien / human hybrid sil -- is never entered into ( perhaps that was left for species iii -- though i 'm not giving away anything when i say that this installment has an open back door of its own ) . the alien fun and games begin this time when a three - person astronaut crew returning from mars inadvertently carries within their soil samples deadly alien dna that eventually infects the mission captain , patrick ross ( justin lazard , late of cbs 's short - lived soap of a few years back , central park west / cpw ) . this alien dna is not identical to that which created the original film 's sil , but it 's close enough , and upon arrival on earth patrick is mating like crazy , engaging in bloody sex with just about every woman he can find . meanwhile , scientist dr . laura baker ( the returning marg helgenberger ) has created a clone of sil named eve ( natasha henstridge again ) for research purposes . it does n't take long for eve to sense another alien presence , which send her libido into hyperdrive . it 's up to laura and her former partner , bounty hunter press lennox ( michael madsen , another returnee ) ; and patrick 's uninfected shipmate dennis gamble ( mykelti williamson ) to find patrick before the in - heat eve does . " this is n't the x - files , goddammit ! " exclaims one character in the early going . in terms of quality , he 's absolutely right , but he 's also wrong . the new alien first appears as an otherworldly oozing sludge that causes patrick 's pupils to dilate once he 's infected . looks and sounds an awful lot like the x - files 's " black cancer " to me . but that 's not the only source director peter medak and writer chris brancato steal from . species was already a ripoff of alien , but medak makes the cribbing much more blatant than the original 's director , roger donaldson , did . human patrick is given a tongue that also has a tongue within itself , and his alien form more closely resembles the alien than eve 's alien body ( which ironically was designed by alien designer h . r . giger ) . a large alien hive that our heros douse with a substance fired from large guns ? aliens sans flamethrowers . the visual effects were by far the best thing about species , and the sequel 's effects crew at steve johnson 's xfx inc . keeps that high - quality tradition alive ; no cheap - looking lost in space cgi here . after the effects , the original 's best asset was the fresh presence of henstridge . however , medak and brancato have no idea what exactly to do with her for this installment . at one point she 's called on to play alien " empath " ? la forest whitaker in the original , but for most of the duration she 's holed up in a glass cell . by the time the big breakout so prominently featured in the trailer actually takes place , the film is well into its home stretch . so the rest of the time we are treated to patrick , played with little zest by lazard . one problem with the first film was that the deadly , horny , but innocent - at - heart sil was too sympathetic ; no such problem with patrick , who comes off as a cocky pretty boy before the alien takes control . the rest of the cast also fails to add much , but the writing can be faulted for that . helgenberger and madsen go through the motions , but they are already hampered by the clich ? d development that somewhere between the two films , the once - linked laura and press stopped getting along . williamson suffers the worst indignity . he tries his best to enliven the token african - american role , but how can anyone recite insulting , derivative lines such as " i 'm gon na get african on someone 's ass " and not appear ridiculous ? but species ii 's worst crime is being a thoroughly uninteresting piece of work . at least the original featured plenty to laugh at -- unaccountably awful performances by the otherwise fine actors ben kingsley and whitaker , and the sight of helgenberger 's character performing fellatio on madsen 's , for a start . but the filmmakers do not display any discernable effort at all , let alone the misguided effort that is required for something to reach the camp level . for all the blood and gore , nudity , and sex thrown in , species ii is , quite simply , a vapid bore .

0NEG

the marvelous british actor derek jacobi stars in writer and director john maybury 's love is the devil about the popular modern artist francis bacon . as always , jacobi 's acting is impeccable , but the movie tries hard and succeeds at being unentertaining and opaque . the movie convincingly argues that francis , played by jacobi , was a completely despicable and vain individual , but it never provides any insight into his work or any motivation for his attitude . when interviewed by a fawning talk show host , francis calls his style " chance brushstrokes . " starting with a burglary of francis 's flat , the film uses loud sound effects that sound like they were lifted from a cheap horror movie . the camera shots are heavy on the avant - garde angles -- lots of wide - angle close - ups and distorted shots filmed through colored - glass reflections . the director is much more interested in filmmaking style than in the substance of the story with the result being a sterile examination of a lonely and vain man . daniel craig , in a lifeless performance , plays the burglar and boxer , george dyer . when francis lays eyes on him after the break - in , francis promises not to call the police if he 'll stay for sex . he stays for the entire movie but never respects the man with whom he shares a bed . he thinks that francis 's paintings have " no bloody use , " and the movie presents no counterargument . writer maybury barely outlines francis 's character , and george and the rest of the supporting cast remain a complete enigma . we learn little of george other than francis 's reason for liking him -- george 's " amorality and innocence . " francis 's love of sadomasochism is shown early and often . " boxing is such a marvelous aperitif for sex , " he reflects to george on the way to watch a boxing match . as the fighter 's head is sliced open with a heavy blow , the camera cuts to a gleeful francis whose own head is soaked by the flying blood . francis appears to be in complete ecstasy . another of francis 's favorite activities is viewing old movies of atrocities . as the carnage mounts , we witness an orgasmically happy francis in the audience . in a film that tries obsessively to shock , one dream sequence portrays a family in a car accident . francis 's mind slowly examines every bloody limb of the mother , the father , and the boy . sometimes the script throws us tidbits of francis 's wisdom which illuminate little while merely sounding insightful . ( " i 'm optimistic by nature . i 'm optimistic about nothing . " " loneliness is my only true companion . " ) we learn more details about francis 's makeup techniques than about the man himself . he prefers shoe polish for his hair and sink cleaning powder for his teeth . full of metaphorical interpretations , the film 's best scene occurs late one night when george has to get up to go to the bathroom . mistaking francis 's picture of a toilet for the genuine article , he urinates on it and then crawls back into bed contentedly . like a parody of a bad art house movie , love is the devil has horrid characters filmed bizarrely and confusingly by a director who is much more interested in technique than storytelling . by the end , the audience has n't learned any more than it could have in a three - minute sketch . love is the devil runs 1 : 30 . the film is not rated but should be considered nc-17 for violence , profanity , graphic sex , nudity and sadomasochism and is unacceptable for most teenagers .

0NEG

" payback , " brian helgeland 's inauspicious directing debut ( coincidentally , he previously penned the award - winning screenplay for 1997 's " l . a . confidential " ) , is a wildly uneven and thoroughly unpleasant revenge thriller that takes one idea --- a movie with non - stop violence , death , and villains --- and runs with it , or should i say , barely manages to crawl away with it . mel gibson , in yet another disappointing picture ( " conspiracy theory " and " lethal weapon 4 , " anyone ? ) , stars as the reprehensible villain / hero , porter , a man who becomes determined to get his 50 % share of $ 140 , 000 , which he stole in a robbery , back when his partner - in - crime ( gregg henry ) and drug - addicted wife ( deborah kara unger ) double - cross him , shoot him , and leave him for dead . porter is not dead , however --- not by a long shot --- as he quickly rehabilitates and , along with his loyal prositute girlfriend , rosie ( maria bello ) , sets out to make everyone involved in the scam pay . the tagline for " payback " is , " get ready to root for the bad guy , " and sure enough , this is true , as pretty much every significant character who appears is crooked in some way . i would n't have a problem with this offbeat detail if the painfully thin story had been of any interest , but it was n't , and therefore , i found myself having an especially laborious time investing myself into a wide array of character that have absolutely no redeeming qualities whatsoever . no attempt is made to flesh the roles into three - dimensional characters , and there are no vacant signs that anyone has any sort of humanity in them . just because the protagonist , a " bad guy , " is played by mel gibson does n't mean i will " root for him , " and i did n't . quite the contrary , every person in the movie deserved to die a gory death ( although some of them did , anyway , just to spice up the dull proceedings ) . since none of the respectable actors in " payback " actually have human beings to play , only one performance managed to stand out . lucy alexis liu ( of t . v . 's " ally mcbeal " ) , who plays a spicy s&m dominatrix , brightens up every scene she is in , and has a definite flair for comedy , something i would have liked to have seen more of , since most of the humor fell with a resounding splat . meanwhile , gibson , who is perfectly fine here , sleepwalks through a role that is not the least bit challenging . unger , who made an impression in 1997 's " the game , " is surprisingly wasted and it is difficult to see why she took such a part since she disappears ten minutes in , and only has two purproses : ( 1 ) to get high on heroin , and ( 2 ) because she plays a key part in an early flashback . finally , kris kristofferson appears in a throwaway role during the climax , and this unnecessary plot development sticks out like a sore thumb ( tellingly , he did n't appear in the original cut of the film , but was cast when extensive reshoots took place months later ) . like most action movies , the star often takes a licking but keeps on ticking . in the course of the 102-minute running time of " payback , " porter is shot three times in the back , hit by a van , beaten up , and has his feet smashed with a sledgehammer . and guess what ? not only does he survive the whole ordeal , but he is happy - go - lucky in the penultimate sequence ( and can still walk ! ) , even though he looks like he had recently substituted for a punching bag . " payback " is not , in any way , an entertaining film , even though i am sure the makers hoped it would be with all the graphic carnage that goes on , but take away that violence and what you are basically left with is a blank screen . perhaps director helgeland would have been smart to consider this , so he could have at least added a few worthwhile elements , like a fresh storyline and characters whom you could even remotely stand to be around for a few hours .

0NEG

did i do something bad ? i must have , because sitting through this movie was sheer punishment . here 's the plot . ricky ( jeff goldblum ) is producer of the good - buy network , one of those 24-hour home shopping channels . the new boss ( robert loggia ) plans to can ricky 's behind if he does n't turn the previous months ' flat sales numbers around , and to add to his problems , ricky also has to work with kate ( kelly preston ) , the ivy league wunderkind whom the boss has brought with him . kate and ricky do n't get along and do n't have any great ideas until they meet g ( eddie murphy ) , a spiritualist who sees something positive in everything . his soothing voice and simple logic makes people feel good , and it 's this quality that will make g the new gbn television star and the key to the network 's success . the first problem is a flaw in the plot . sure , g makes people feel good . sure , we 're told that most people feel guilty after buying an impulse item , no matter how wealthy they might be , and i 'll even believe that g talks a talk that allows people to feel good about what they 've bought . but , hey , that 's after they 've bought it . why do sales skyrocket the first time g is on camera ? far from trying to sell the product , g instead blathers on about how you do n't even need the thing . someone please tell me how this is supposed to move merchandise in the first place . you might say that people feel good about what they 've bought , so they come back and by more , but due to the simple fact that the first round of sales in inexplicable , i 'm not convinced this is what the filmmakers had in mind . the whole movie is therefore seriously undermined because the key point in the plot is never credible . another problem is in the humor . you know , if you see that eddie murphy is in a movie , i think it is not unreasonable for you to expect that the film is a comedy . whoa , partner , are you in for a surprise . holy man is not funny . murphy , the one asset you 'd think this movie has ( remember how they brought him in at the last minute to save best defense ? - then again , maybe you do n't ) is seriously reigned in . the script gives him almost nothing to work with , and it seems as though director stephen herek kept him toned down so that the other actors in the film would n't be left as window dressing . there 's only one moment in the film where murphy is allowed to let loose , and it lasts for three shouted words , which seem totally out of place as a result . pathetic . in all , there are about three jokes that work in the entire picture , and they 're not even that great . as a side note , there are some cameo appearances such as dan marino pitching a contraption which allows you to cook off of your car engine , and james brown introducing a medic - alert device that shouts " help me ! " just like the hardest working man in show business at the push of a button , but these never cause your personal laugh - o - meter to rise above the level of mild bemusement . " well , " you ask , " surely there must be some convincing performances to make up for the lack of humor . " think again , buckwheat . jeff goldblum disappoints . kelly preston is flat ( but not like that ) . robert loggia , in the kind of role for which he has been virtually typecast , ca n't do anything with it . the script is part of the problem , but these actors do n't even look like they believe in the move they 're making . they look a lot like they 're bored . just like the audience . so what do you have when the humor is absent from your comedy , and the acting is like the siberian steppes ? a film that drags more than a dropped anchor . but wait ! as if these problems do n't make the film slow enough , the screenplay 's pacing makes the movie even slower ! it takes the entire first half hour to establish the movie 's premise , then more time as the film wades through a tortuous ( and seemingly mandatory ) romance between ricky and kate , and a sub - plot involving a conniving pr man ( eric mccormack ) who wants to discredit g and take over ricky 's job as producer . when the pr guy 's plan is foiled , the film is climaxes , we 're treated to that little epilogue , and then we can all go home , right ? wrong . the movie goes on for another half hour ! continental drift is the indy 500 compared to the pace of holy man ! the only thing holy about holy man will surely be the number of people exclaiming " holy ! @#% that movie was awful ! " this one is for the truly pious .

0NEG

plot : something about a bunch of kids going into a haunted house and playing out parodies of other horror and non - horror movies . oh yeah , there 's also something about a ghost possessing the mansion and shit , but trust me , you wo n't care much about the " plot " in this film . . . critique : parody movies either work or they do n't and this one just does n't work ! the laughs are n't as pronounced this time around , the energy level , the gags and all of the characters just seem to be going through the motions here . it 's like they were all in a hurry to finish the film or something ( wink , wink ) . and the scariest part of it all ? check out the number of screenwriters it took to pen this puppy : seven ! i say again , it took seven people to write 82-minutes worth of fart jokes , half - assed stunts and spoofs of films other than horror . now i 'm not exactly sure if each of the writers wrote their own parts separately or just tossed " funny sketch " ideas out there while smoking the chronic themselves , but the end result is a film that basically plays out like an extended skit on " saturday night live " . there are a couple of funny one - liners , but mostly just rehashed one - joke scenes , a lot of dead silence and lame gags . add to that the very unoriginal title and movie poster and you got ta start asking yourself if anybody was even trying here ( the film 's website is n't even up yet ! ! ! what the f * * * ? ! ? ) . i do however have to give it up to james woods , the man who opens up this movie with the funniest parody of them all ( the exorcist take - off-- miss this and you 've missed any reason to see the flick ) . i especially liked his one - liner as he walked in to see the possessed woman 's head turning . very funny ! unfortunately , the film plummets straight down after that , with dumb parodies of many teen flicks that have nothing to do with horror such as save the last dance and dude , where 's my car , and other action movies like charlie 's angels and mission impossible 2 . now help me figure this one out , will you ? is n't this supposed to be a parody film of horror movies ? ! ? ( or maybe that 's just the title of the film f - ing with my head ) . well , i 'm sorry to have to say this but the only horror in this film is its lame - ass script ! the wayans brothers should have known better than to look towards the weinstein brothers ( money ) instead of the zucker brothers ( comedy ) for this sequel . unfortunately for us , all we 're left with here is a skeleton of a film which might 've been funny , had it been worked over a few more times , tightened up here and there , and been injected with more solid laughs . but as things stand now , there is no doubt in my mind that the obvious greed to capitalize on the success of last year 's film has led everyone down this path , so screw them for not trying as hard ( critically speaking , of course ) . you should all be ashamed of yourselves for not putting enough " real " effort into this chop - job and for not providing your fans with the ultimate of your talents . pooh on you ! ( that 's telling 'em , joblo ! sheesh ) btw , i 'm allotting one point alone to actress kathleen robertson , whose massive breasts and skanky g - string had me chompin ' at the bit . you go , girl ! everyone else . . . stay ! where 's joblo coming from ? airplane ( 10/10 ) - airplane ii ( 10/10 ) - galaxy quest ( 8/10 ) - hannibal ( 7/10 ) - the haunting ( 3/10 ) - mafia ( 5/10 ) - naked gun ( 8/10 ) - scary movie ( 8/10 ) - top secret ( 9/10 )

0NEG

the cartoon is way better . that 's the bottom line on disney 's incredibly hyped live action version of its 1961 animated feature . the alliance between disney and slapstick king john hughes has produced a frenetic " home alone " with puppies , and not much else . when production of this remake was announced , the big question seemed to be " why ? the original cartoon still works , so what 's the point ? " the answer , it appears , is to give disney an excuse for yet another massive merchandising campaign . the story , for those of you who missed childhood , is simple . two dalmatians , pongo and perdy , fall in love at first sight . they drag their " human pets " together , and in a short time both couples marry . the heavenly match - ups turn chaotic when pongo and perdy 's new - born pups are stolen ; their dog - napping engineered by the evil cruella devil , who wants them for their pelts . everyone in the animal kingdom then joins in a frantic effort to save the puppies . in the original movie , the animated pooches had a broad range of facial expressions and distinct personalities . we also could hear them talk , which quickly established a crucial element to the charm of the film , the dog 's view of humans as their pets . in the new version , the dogs are mute and expressionless . hughes attempts to give them character with repeated shots of the dalmatians draping their heads over each other and licking their faces and necks . while he drew the desired " aww , they 're so cute " reaction from the audience , it was quickly followed by several people whispering " i wonder what kind of food they smeared on the dog 's heads to get them licking like that ? " the canines ' lack of personality would be easier to take if the human beings had a little . joely richardson and jeff daniels are stunningly bland in their lead roles . in previous films , daniels successfully played off his white bread persona . in " something wild " , he revealed the rebellious thrill - seeker beneath his neutral demeanor . in " terms of endearment " , his hapless appearance masked a cold , manipulative womanizer . here , he and richardson are so consistently bland that it 's a wonder their images even stick to the film . glenn close , however , has no problems establishing a distinct personality . as the villainous icon cruella devil , she tears up the screen in a deliciously over - the - top performance . close matches the intensity of the animated cruella by becoming a cartoon herself . with a two - tone fright wig , red gloves with long nails attached to the fingertips , garish animal skin outfits and stiletto heels , close bursts through her scenes like a force of nature . she 's clearly having a ball playing this monstrous icon , and her wicked glee is infectious . when she spits out lines like " you 've won the battle , but i 'm about to win the wardrobe ! , " the film comes briefly to life . " 101 dalmatians " is crammed with john hughes ' typical heavy - handed approach to comedy . after an ingenuous opening showing pongo 's morning routine as he gets daniels prepared for the day , the film quickly tumbles into lame slapstick as the pooch drags daniels on a careening trek through a city park . a little slapstick goes a long way , but hughes just keeps laying it on . the second half of the film , where local animals team up to rescue 99 nondescript dalmatian puppies from devil and her henchmen , is a tedious home alone clone , with the bad guys enduring a variety of sadistic assaults worthy of an itchy & scratchy cartoon , including a thug getting his testicles fried on an electric fence . " 101 dalmatians " has cute puppies and a hoot of a performance from glenn close , but not enough to warrant enduring third rate slapstick , bland characters , and unconvincing animatronic raccoons high - fiving one another . rent the cartoon !

0NEG

" spawn " may be somewhat of an older film . in fact it will probably be on video before anyone who has n't seen it will finally get to see it ( that is , if they see it ) . but i managed to catch it before it made it 's way out of theaters and into the world of rentals and , god forbid , video cassette purchasing . it was n't the worst film of year by any means . it is n't even on the top 5 of the worst films of the year . but it did manage to top the bottom five of the bottom ten , which , in simpler terms , means it comes in at number 6 on my " worst of 1997 " list . the only reason it does n't come in lower is thanks to the special effects , which might actually have been some of the best of the year . performances , however , were either wooden or , for the most part , unforgivingly campy . in fact , this film shows no signs of attempting to avoid campiness ! even the editing seemed to boast a campy quality . i do n't know how to explain that one ; it was n't exactly choppy , but something about it seemed . . . well , annoyingly unprofessional . john leguizamo almost makes it as clown , but not quite . he is the only character who provides the audience with any laughs that can honestly be called intentional . but the main problem i found with " spawn " , as with most films that wind up on my " worst of " lists , is that it was just plain boring . i would n't even say there was a climax to the film . sure , it had the big battle scene at the end , but the only excitement felt was that the movie might be nearing a conclusion . never too soon , the movie did conclude in a very simple , disappointing way . even though it 's one of the shorter movies i 've seen this year , it 's one that i would definitely not want to subject myself to sitting thru again . like i said , the special effects are the only reason that this film should have any sense of pride , no matter how small . i was impressed with the opening sequence , so long as i did n't allow the melodramatic voice - over and lobotomizing editing to get to me . and batman has nothing on the spectacular visuals spawn 's outfit created . but even the effects got tiresome during the final scenes , which looked quite a bit like a modern video game . who knows if " spawn : the video game " was n't part of the plan from the beginning ? keeping in mind that the film was based on a comic book makes it somewhat more approachable , and in a very small amount , makes up for the cheeziness of it all . but none of this movie 's saving graces can it make it something i 'd recommend seeing , no matter what the price of admission . this movie is definitely not for young children , which should n't really be a problem seeing as how only teenagers , if anyone , would likely find it appealing . if you really want to catch a movie , there are many better ones out there , no matter what your tastes might be ! trust me ! " spawn " has very little to offer even the most avid moviegoers !

0NEG

from a major league baseball radio broadcast , featuring play - by- play man harry canary and color man whitey hashbrown , with special guest commentator james berardinelli . hc : as we go to the top of the 8th , we 're joined in the booth by film critic james berardinelli , who 's here fresh from seeing the new baseball movie , major league : back to the minors , the third in the popular saga taking a lighter look at the majors . nice to see you , jim . as a big baseball fan and a movie reviewer , can you give us the scoop on the new flick ? jb : my opinion : the producers should have stopped while they were ahead , and that was nine years ago . one entry was definitely enough , and i 'm surprised there was a third after the anemic showing and low quality of major league 2 . this latest installment has all the earmarks of something that should have been released direct - to - video . it 's worse than a mediocre made - for - tv feature . i should also mention that this movie likely wo n't play all that well in cleveland . now that the real indians are perennial contenders , they have been replaced by the minnesota twins as the cinematic sadsacks . actually , most of the action involves the twins ' aaa minor league club , the buzz , rather than the actual major league franchise . hc : sorry to interrupt , jim , but we still have to do play - by - play for the game on the field . leading off this inning is john warren . he steps into the batter 's box and takes kent 's pitch low for ball one . wh : so , the story 's strictly minor league , right ? what 's it about ? jb : scott bakula , the guy from quantum leap , plays career minor league pitcher gus cantrell . when twins owner roger dorn , once again portrayed by corbin bernsen , needs a new manager for his aaa team , he offers the job to gus , who is now faced with two daunting tasks : turn the team around and groom hot prospect downtown anderson ( played by walt goggins ) for a promotion to " the show . " with the help of former major leaguers pedro cerrano ( dennis haysbert ) , rube baker ( eric bruskotter ) , and isuro tanaka ( takaaki ishibashi ) , gus gets the buzz on the right track . in fact , he is so successful that he earns the enmity of the jealous manager of the big - league club , leonard huff ( played with over - the - top relish by ted mcginley ) . soon , dorn has arranged an exhibition game that pits gus ' overachieving group against huff 's overpaid , last - place bunch . wh : can we guess who wins ? jb : the results have all the suspense of watching the videotape of a game when you 've already seen the box score . on top of that , none of the mock - ups are presented with much flair . they 're not just boring ; they 're lackluster . but the major league movies have never been about drama or tension ; they 've been about using baseball situations to generate laughs . hc : warren fouls off a fastball . 1 and 1 . wh : are there lots of yuks in this one ? jb : not one , from start to finish . i enjoyed the first major league because it was reasonably fresh and funny . okay , a lot of the jokes were sophomoric , but they made me laugh . the two sequels have n't just been stale , but their humor quotient has been abysmally low . even bob uecker 's once - sharp one - liners have turned lame , and they 're the closest the film comes to being even vaguely amusing . hc : here 's the 1 - 1 pitch . looooooong drive ? fair or foul ? foul ball ! the count goes to 1 and 2 . wh : does the film at least get the baseball details correct ? jb : yes . there are n't any glaring errors like there were in one of the best - ever baseball movies , the natural . but i 'd gladly trade a technically accurate film for one with a good story , believable characters , or even a little genuine humor . heck , the naked gun is a better baseball comedy than major league : back to the minors . wh : it 's nice to see old friends one more time , is n't it ? like cerrano , tanaka , and dorn . jb : depends on whether you really care that anyone is back . there are n't any real characters here ? just an assortment of cliched oddballs . yeah , the voodoo hitter , the catcher who ca n't throw back to the pitcher , the japanese player , and the conceited player - turned - owner have all returned , but who really cares ? they have no depth . notable absences include tom berenger 's veteran and charlie sheen 's " wild thing . " we do n't really miss them , though . hc : breaking ball , low and outside . 2 and 2 . wh : so you 're saying that we should give this one a miss ? jb : that 's right . to use baseball terminology , it 's a three - pitch strikeout . if you 're looking for a good movie that involves baseball , try popping the natural , field of dreams , bull durham , or even the first major league into the vcr . actually , this is an oddly - timed release , since baseball fans are likely to be spending more time in parks than in theaters . even the minor league seasons are already underway . do n't bother with major league : back to the minors . it 's a wretched time- waster . wh : thanks for the advice . jb : you 're welcome . hc : and here 's the 2 - 2 pitch . fouled back , right into this booth . hey , jim , heads up ! oops . somebody better get him some ice for that . he may be good at deflecting bad baseball movies , but he needs to learn not to duck into foul balls . odd how warren seemed to aim that ball right at him , almost as if he has a grudge to settle . anyway , back to the action on the field ?

0NEG

it 's time to take cover . after a hiatus of about fifteen years , the disaster movie has come back with renewed zest . in early 1997 , there were no less than three movies about volcanoes alone , one on television and two in the theaters , with dante 's peak and volcano in heavy competition for the moviegoing dollar . of the two , i had heard that dante 's peak was the better film , so i decided to check it out when it was released on video . the film begins with a slow motion scene of people in a third world country trying to evacuate their little town . the town is being covered in ash and sulfuric water from what we presume is a volcanic eruption . flaming rocks of various sizes also fall from the sky , crushing homes and people . we see people panicking , people crying , and even horses rearing . it is a disaster of biblical proportions , signified to us by one person dragging a cross down a road . symbolism does n't get much more blatant than that . we learn that harry dalton ( pierce brosnan ) , a volcanologist with the u . s . geological survey , was there with his wife when the eruption occurred . harry survived , but his wife did not . a few years later , harry is sent to investigate some unusual seismic activity detected near the small town of dante 's peak , washington ( which , we are told , has been voted second most desirable place to live ( under 20 , 000 ) by the readers of money magazine ) . there harry meets rachel wando , a single mother of two who serves as mayor of dante 's peak and proprietor of a small coffee shop . although the mayor does n't seem to be alarmed by the presence of a man sent to determine if the mountain next to their town is going to blow up , a few members of the city council are . they are afraid that harry 's presence is going to scare off an investor who has pledged to put millions of dollars into developing dante 's peak . they would rather have any news of possible stirrings within the neighboring dormant volcano swept under the rug . however , when an amorous young couple takes a skinny - dip in the local hot springs , they turn up cooked by lava which bubbles up from a small fissure underneath . thus begins a chain of events leading up to the inevitable eruption . this film contains a number of cliches . the amorous couple is one . as soon as they doff their clothes , you know they 're going to die . the town busybody and the abrasive mother - in - law make appearances , as does the death - defying dog . countless familiar scenarios only serve to make this film very predictable . watching the movie , i was able to not only anticipate each of the major plot elements , but some of the dialogue as well . unfortunate , since much of the dialog is terrible . for example , harry 's boss , paul ( charles hallahan ) , and a team from the u . s . geological survey join harry to assess the situation . paul basically tells the townsfolk that harry 's eruption predictions are n't cause for alarm . this causes harry to leave in a fit of rage , only to turn up the next day , ready for work . when paul asks harry why he stayed , he says with grim determination , " cause this town 's in trouble and i 'm the best man you 've got . " even better is when harry is trying to explain the need to jolt the residents into leaving . he likens the situation to how a frog will jump out if dropped into a pot of boiling water . if the frog is in cold water which is gradually heated up , however , the frog wo n't move and will allow itself to be cooked . " is that your recipe for frog soup ? " asks one of the team members . " it 's my recipe for disaster , " responds harry . dante 's peak has a singular talent for pointing out the obvious . our heroes are in a boat in the middle of a lake which harry realizes the volcanic activity has turned to acid . mayor wando demonstrates her brilliant powers of deduction by proclaiming , in a very grave tone , " acid eats metal . " thanks for the tip . when we first see the u . s . geological survey building , there 's a caption labeling it as such . this would n't have been so bad if it were n't for the fact that the caption is right above a sign on the building which reads , in large letters , " u . s . geological survey . " i suppose the caption is for people who ca n't read signs . although harry and mayor wando become an item by the end of the film , the viewer has no idea why . there is a severe lack of chemistry between the two characters , and the relationship seems rushed because of this . when they get close to kissing , i was asking myself , " why do they want to kiss ? were they even attracted to each other ? " if i were the mayor , i would sure think twice about kissing a guy who does n't even crack a smile through the whole movie , trying to pull off the rough - yet - debonair act . who does he think he is ? james bond ? the eruption of the volcano feels similarly rushed . there are several " warning signs " prior to the eruption itself , but they are so lackluster and without suspense that we do n't feel as if they are leading up to anything . for example , one of the survey team members makes his way down into the crater of the volcano in order to retrieve a remote controlled robot . a tremor occurs . does he plunge headlong to his death ? is he engulfed in lava which shoots up from below ? no , a couple of rocks fall on him and break his leg . the sole purpose of this scene seemed to be to set up the subsequent chopper rescue scene , which i suppose was intended to be dramatic as well . it was n't . one plot thread left noticeably hanging was the investment in the town of dante 's peak . in a disaster movie , there 's usually one guy who 's greedy enough to cover up the possibility of eruption / fire / earthquake / explosion / tsunami / tornado / meteorite , and usually gets killed by the disaster . it 's okay , of course , because we all think he got what he deserved . if you 're going to be unoriginal , you might as well go all the way . in dante 's peak , the city councilmembers are concerned , but they do n't really try hard enough . maybe the mayor 's abrasive mother - in - law should have been the one . for no apparent reason , she snaps at harry for even positing that the volcano could erupt . perhaps her ancestors invested in some pompeii real estate . there are a couple of good things about this movie . the first is the scenery . there are panoramic shots of forests , lakes and mountains that are absolutely beautiful . the second is the special effects . they are the closest i 've ever seen to a real pyroclastic eruption . but when elements which do n't speak are going to be the best parts of your movie , you 'd probably better rewrite the script .

0NEG

capsule : a ham - handed and over / underwritten morality play masquerading as entertainment , so muddled it does n't even know what it 's really advocating , if anything . a time to kill has been hailed as the best of the grisham adaptations , and it 's easy to see why : it presents a strong , almost rancorously so , story ; it is full of good actors ( samuel l . jackson , matthew mcconaughey , sandra bullock , kevin spacey , charles dutton ) ; and it 's ostensibly about some important social issue that we 're all tangling with . it is not , however , a good movie , and all of the reasons i 've listed above have something to do with why . right from the beginning , the movie is dead - set on stacking its deck as thoroughly and unrepentantly as possible . a pair of redneck whites , boozed and drugged out of their minds , kidnap a young black girl , abuse and rape her horribly , and leave her for dead . after their arrest , their father ( jackson ) takes an assault rifle and guns them down on the way to trial . mcconaughey is then drafted in as his lawyer , and the rest is somehow strangely predictable courtoom movie dramatics . the acting is not quite what it should be , given the cast we have . sandra bullock ( who is a good actress but not a serious one ) looks clueless ; spacey 's accent switches itself on and off at random ( and he 's given a totally thankless role to play as well , a role without an iota of depth ) ; and mcconaughey 's role is stamped from the cardboard back of a cereal box . the most memorable role is donald sutherland 's , and his is a bit part . i always consider it an index of a movie 's desperation when it is able to present shocking and outlandish events , and somehow not have them generate an ounce of impact . there is one scene -- a riot outside the courtroom -- that should have created incredible tension , but winds up playing out like a textbook exercise on how not to deploy a scene like this . because the movie does n't know what it 's really about , it * ca n't * generate any genuine tension , and so it has to artifically inject tension through clumsy plotting . one of the ways it does this is by throwing in a whole subplot about a bunch of vicious kkk cross - burners -- which is tidied up so neatly that it borders on the nihilistic . i was reminded of the despicable betrayed , which tried to tart up a fundamentally empty story by injecting vile , graphic acts of racism as little more than an attention - getter . the movie immolates an enormous amount of its potential by making a few critical mistakes . first of all , the jackson character is not hard to judge ; there 's no tension in his dilemma . he 's self - admittedly guilty and should be sent to jail , no matter how moral his crusade . the old saw about how no court in the land would convict him , if he was white , is supposed to be the underlying theme of the movie , but it 's never developed into an organic component of the story . it just sort of floats around on top while the movie grinds away furiously with its plot mechanics . another mistake is in motivational logic : by not having the two white thugs arraigned first -- or maybe tried and then dismissed from lack of evidence , say -- we have that much less empathy for jackson 's character . i 'm probably supposed to think that just because he had his daughter raped , we are * automatically * supposed to feel empathy for him , but that 's precisely the kind of facile thinking that makes real justice impossible . ( see the virgin spring for more on that note . ) is jackson 's character then simply insane ? that prospect is n't given terribly serious treatment either . one of the most aggravating things about coutroom movies is how little they seem to know about how the law works , or how lawyers get their information . mcconaughey 's character makes an important slipup late in the movie , when one of his witnesses turns out to have been convicted of a capital offense . how did the prosecution get this information ? how come he did n't get it ? the whole way these questions get handled are symptomatic of the movie 's way of dealing with complex legal and moral questions in cheap screenwriterly slam - bang fashion . this is the biggest problem : the movie is n't about jackson 's character , or his dilemma , or this case , or any of its ( frequently interesting despite the porcine writing and direction ) characters . it 's not ultimately about anything at all , except its stupid geared - down plot , which inches onwards in one unremarkable scene after another towards a totally contrived ending . at two and a half hours , the movie is overlong and drastically overwritten : there 's endless stuff about things which ultimately add up to nothing , and no writing about the material that should really matter . it 's all handwaving . the closing argument are also sneaky and underhanded , and underscored my suspicion that the movie is manipulative and unfair . it 's not easy to make a movie about something . the other day i saw kurosawa 's phenomenal rashomon , a movie that is really about the way people deal with truth and reality ( or do n't ) . a time to kill is as empty and ponderous a movie as i 've seen in a long time .

0NEG

" deep rising " gives you that sinking feeling both literally and figuratively : not only does the movie take place on a cruise ship slowly being immersed into the middle of the ocean by a squid - like menace , but the unfolding story is artificial , silly and almost completely derivative of countless other ( and , for the most part , better ) films . while dumb monster movies can at least be decent guilty pleasures -- take , for example , the schlocky mountain highs of last spring 's " anaconda " -- " deep rising " has no tongue to put in its cheek . folks , we 're only a month into the new year , and already here 's a candidate for one of its stinkiest releases . most of the action takes place on the argonautica , a luxury liner in the middle of its maiden voyage ( uh - oh -- if these people had seen " titanic , " then maybe they 'd have known to stay home ) when it 's attacked by a giant , tentacled sea creature . the only survivors are slinky jewel thief trilian ( famke janssen ) , argonautica owner canton ( anthony heald ) and a few other crew members . a mercenary team , lead by resourceful captain john finnegan ( treat williams ) , board the argonautica looking for assistance after their own boat breaks down nearby . but what their search of the ship uncovers is something blood - soaked , hungry and not very helpful . the main problem with " deep rising " is its overt familiarity ; the movie makes absolutely no attempt to differentiate itself from most sci - fi / horror films in recent memory . the concept is " leviathan " meets " titanic , " with a dash of " speed 2 " thrown in for good ( or is that bad ? ) measure . this monster is equal parts " 20 , 000 leagues under the sea " and " the relic , " knows how to open doors like the raptors from " jurassic park " and even gets to expel a half - digested victim ( a neat effect , admittedly ) a la the giant snake in " anaconda . " some of the attack sequences are straight out of " jaws " and " alien . " a scene where the remaining survivors have to travel under water to escape death is right out of " alien resurrection . " there 's even a jet ski chase like " hard rain . " and the list goes on . watching " deep rising " 's cast battle the beast is a murky chore in itself , because none of them have well - developed characters , nor do they seem to project even the slightest sense of fear when facing their enemy . williams is affable enough , but his finnegan just is n't believable . an interesting supporting cast is thoroughly wasted ; pretty famke janssen , best known as " goldeneye " 's killer thighs , is trapped in a forced romantic interest with williams , while kevin j . o'connor , as finnegan 's mechanic , provides comic relief with screechy manic shtick that gets old fast . djimon honsou , who received raves for his performance as a noble slave in december 's " amistad , " pops up in a brief part . he needs to stay away from the water . the movie 's final shot is a groaner , as is the 11th - hour regurgitation of a subplot involving an on - ship saboteur . as if a cast deserving of their snack food - fate is n't bad enough ( when you taunt the monster , you 're really asking for it ) , " deep rising " is a slow , stupid slog through a story without a single bright spot . and since we all know that the higher the casualty rate is , the closer we are to the end of the movie , rooting for this overgrown squid to swallow the whole ship is n't out of the question .

0NEG

" mandingo " has traditionally been seen as one of two things : either a much - needed revisionist look at slavery in the south , or in the words of film critic leonard maltin , " a trashy potboiler " that " appeals only to the s&m crowd . " actually , i think " mandingo " is a strange combination of the two , although it fails on both fronts . it 's too trashy to be good drama , but too dramatic to be good trash . the story takes place on a dilapidated louisiana plantation run by crotchety old warren maxwell ( james mason ) and his son , hammond ( perry king ) . one day in new orleans , hammond comes across a slave trader selling a mandingo named mede ( heavyweight boxer ken norton ) . although the movie never explains it , a mandingo is simply the name for africans who come from the region of the upper niger river valley . according to the movie , mandingos were the rolls royce of african slaves . hammond pays top price for mede and has to fight off others in order to get him . hammond then spends his time training mede to be a fighter in money brawls with other slaves . meanwhile , hammond has married his cousin , blanche ( susan george ) , because she wants to escape her family and he is under pressure from his father to produce a grandchild . hammond , however , is happier spending nights with his " bed wench , " the derogatory name given to female slaves used by their masters for easy sex . it is quickly apparent that hammond , despite his overt racism , is more in love with his bed wench , a sensitive slave girl named ellen ( brenda sykes ) , than he is with blanche . hammond considers blanche tainted goods because he finds out on their wedding night that another man had " pleasured " her before he did . of course , it 's fine that he 's slept with numerous slave girls , but the fact that his wife , a " white lady , " had been with another man out of wedlock destroys his capacity to care for her . so blanche is usually left lonely and sex - starved while hammond is sleeping with ellen . blanche gets back at hammond by seducing the studly mede and bearing his child . hammond and his father can not stand the idea that blanche has given birth to a half - black child ( although it 's okay that ellen was pregnant by hammond ) , so warren kills the child by letting it bleed to death after birth , and hammond poisons blanche . hammond then finds mede , shoots him twice in the shoulder , and pushes him into a giant cauldron of boiling water . yes , you read right : the film ends with hammond getting his revenge by boiling mede alive . judging only by the plot , " mandingo " is pure sexploitation . the main purpose of the film seems to be getting as many blacks and whites into bed together as possible , with only the slightest commentary on what that would mean in 19th century southern society . when " mandingo " was released in 1975 , it was still a bit of a shocker to see miscegenation on screen in such a graphic detail ; this way the movie could revise cinematic history while attracting large audiences of curious voyeurs . dramatically , " mandingo " is weak and unfocused , and historically it 's mostly confused . if one were to judge history by this film , it would be easy to walk away with the notion that the entire system of american slavery was based on sexuality , not economics . not once in the film do we see any of the slaves working , except for a few house servants . the men spend most of the time sitting around , while the sole purpose of a female slave seems to be free sex for the owner . there is historical basis in the notion that slave owners often slept with their female slaves , but " mandingo 's " overwhelming emphasis on this aspect of slavery gives the movie the unpleasant taste of a cheap sex flick ( although there 's plenty of violence -- fights , vicious beatings , shootings , and the aforementioned human boiling sequence -- thrown in for good measure ) . some tried to write off " mandingo " as a blaxploitation film , one of a number of quickly - made , low - budget films appealing to black sensibilities in the early seventies , but it 's not that easy . " mandingo " was studio - financed by paramount pictures , and produced by dino de laurentiis , the grandiose italian producer behind such notorious productions as " the bible " ( 1966 ) , the remake of " king kong " ( 1976 ) , and the ill - fated " dune " ( 1984 ) . the director was richard fleischer , a veteran who was best known for several special effects - laden action movies including " 20 , 000 leagues under the sea " ( 1954 ) and " fantastic voyage " ( 1966 ) , as well as such superior suspense films as " the narrow margin " ( 1952 ) . the script , based on the supermarket best - seller by ken ostott ( and the subsequent play by jack kirkland ) , was penned by norman wexler , who had been nominated for an oscar two years earlier for his work on " serpico . " james mason , perry king , and susan george were well - known and respected actors ( mason already had three oscar nominations under his belt ) , and ken norton appeared to have a promising film career . so why is " mandingo " so bad ? a number of reasons , including the fact that all those experienced filmmakers behind and in front of the camera did a lousy job . wexler 's script is pure poor hokum bordering on the offensive ; it combines stereotyped slave - talk ( " yessuh , massuh " ) , stereotyped southern white trash talk ( " fer whut're you gittin ' outta bed ? " ) , and stereotyped contemporary militant black talk ( " if you see me hang , you gon na know you killed a black brother ! " ) . fleischer 's direction is clumsy , especially during the fight scenes , and all the actors give weak performances , especially susan george whose constant shrieking finally becomes laughable . nevertheless , credit should be given where credit is due . despite its exploitative nature , " mandingo " was one of the first hollywood movies to take an alternative look at slavery . until then , there had been a kind of underlying racism in all hollywood films dealing with slavery . even classics such as " gone with the wind " ( 1939 ) can be seen as inherently racist by its glossing over the subject matter . " mandingo " reassessed the south , and showed that it was n't all beautiful plantations , green fields , and pretty sunsets . but all this is constantly undermined by the film 's negligible point - of - view -- it claims to see things from the black perspective , but the entire narrative focus is on the soap opera tales of the white owners . with a little more maturity and different handling , " mandingo " might have been an effective , worthwhile film . while it portrays many sensitive aspects of slavery , it never deals with them . the issues the movie brings up are worthwhile , but wexler 's script refuses to move them beyond a surface level of trashily vicarious viewing . there is a great deal of potential in honestly exploring the nature of a sexual relationship between slave and owner , but " mandingo " never does it . steven spielberg touched on that same topic in " schindler 's list " ( 1993 ) , by looking at a nazi officer writhing in inner turmoil because of his feelings for a jewish maid . the difference between that film and " mandingo " is that spielberg dealt with the situation in a fair , unexploitive manner that focused on the inherent human dilemma . " mandingo " is satisfied to simply show some skin , and because of that , its " trashy potboiler " nature overshadows any potential social good it might have accomplished .

0NEG

the above is dialogue from this film , taken almost completely in context , and not jazzed up a bit to make it more inept than it is . it is spoken between two of the protagonists somewhere in the film , and basically serves as a perfect example of what this film is about , especially if you realize that this exchange is meant to be taken seriously . mr . gregg " i'm - having - a - mid - life - crisis " araki , the writer and director of this film , wants to show how important teenagers are , and wants to show how they feel in such a horrible , horrible world . and how does he show it ? by really cheap surrealism , and moronic exchanges like this . oh , and it gets better . a similar bit of dialogue is said in the middle of , oh i dunno , the fiftieth sex scene in this film ( i 'm not counting the several masturbation scenes ) . in it , one of the protagonists is humping away on top of another , and he says to her something along the lines of " do you ever wonder what life is all about ? " sorry , man : foreplay takes place before the act of coitus . of course , what do you expect : the film was written and directed by a guy who ca n't even spell his first name right ( yes , i know it 's a cheap joke , but it had to be done ) . " the doom generation " is advertised as a road trip movie about people who go around killing others who attack them , and also as another " teen angst " film ( one of the slogans is " teen is a four - letter word " - hardy har har ) . it 's a film about two angsty teens - amy blue ( rose macgowan , who would later play the buxom tatum in " scream " ) and jordon white ( james duval , who would go on to play randy quaid 's son in " independence day " ) - who pick up an angsty homicidal maniac , xavier red ( jonathan schaech , who would go on to play the angsty lead guitarist in " that thing you do ! " - and by the way , do you get the symbolism ? red , white , and blue ? huh ? huh ? ) , and go on a road trip where three things happen , in no order : 1 ) they have sex ; 2 ) they run into weird people ; 3 ) they kill them . the film is basically a remix of a bunch of other far superior films . gregg araki obviously has seen such films as " easy rider , " " natural born killers , " and " kalifornia , " and tries to borrow elements from all these films and make something which is like a pop culture reference guide . but what he forgets is these films either represented something that this film does not , or that they dug deep into their subjects and brought something out of them to make them deeper . " the doom generation " does n't want to do this ; it just wants to show everything in a surreal manner for the sole reason that araki does not want to deal with them on any kind of real level . he wants to show everything in a weird manner , and forgets what the scenes are supposed to be about . here 's one scene , an earlier scene in the film : amy and jordan go into a quick - e mart type place to get food and other stuff . amy is smoking , and the clerk , an asian man mind you ( i love how racist this film is , i really do ) , tells her to put it out . she tells him to fuck off or something to that note . he points a shotgun at her , and she puts it out reluctantly . jordan makes two hot dogs , and takes them to the counter . the cash register rings up " 6 . 66 " ( oh , and this symbolism does n't stop here ) . jordan checks for his wallet but it 's really in the car . he asks amy for it , but she left her wallet in the car as well . the clerk brings out his shotgun again and asks for the money . they say they do n't have it . he gets ready to kill them , but then xavier , who they ditched in the middle of nowhere a scene before , pops out of nowhere , fights with the clerk , and ends with him blowing the clerk 's head clean off ( clean wound , mind you ) . the head is shown flying through the air , and lands in a fryer , where it begins to scream . i do n't really object to this kind of sick violence , but this scene is in the film for one reason and one reason only : to gross you out . araki thinks that if he takes everything to the extreme , he 'll make some kind of art . wrong . it takes a kind of resistance to make gore art . when george romero made " dawn of the dead , " a very gory flick even for today , he had control over everything and still was able to make everything sick . same goes for peter jackson 's disgustingly gory " dead alive , " which features a 30 minute long fest of blood , guts , dismemberments , flesh chewing , and other assorted stuff , all ending with a guy with a lawn mower strapped to his body , taking out all sorts of zombies . it was sick , but it was also satirical , and controled . a scene like this has no purpose in the film , and it sticks out from everything else that happens . here 's a couple other scenes : jordan and amy have sex in a bath tub and xavier watches , masturbates , and then licks the semen from his hand ; xavier and amy have sex and jordan watches from the window , masturbates , and falls backwards ; a man attacks the trio , and is stabbed in the crotch by a giant sword ( put there just so this could happen ) ; a fast food employee stalks the trio , and his arm is shot off by xavier ; and various other annoyances . also , look for about a million camoes from a wide assortment of people , who probably did n't really know what they were getting into when they signed up to do it ( just like peter o'toole , helen mirren , malcolm macdowell , and john gielgud probably did n't when they signed to be in " caligula " ) . people such as indie actors parker posey and nicky katt , alternative rock stars skinny puppy and perry farrel , hollywood madam heidi fleiss , christopher " peter brady " mcknight , amanda bearse , and margaret cho all grace the screen for a matter of seconds , then disappear so that we can return to the annoying main plot line . why are they here ? so that we can all point to them and say " hey , look it 's ( fill in the blank ) ! wow ! " gimme a break . the film 's meaning is pretty easy to detect : that , you know , teens are so precious , and the world is such a horrible place , that when the two entities collide , there 's a giant explosion of horrific violence . otherwise defined as " teen angst , " or the belief that being a teenager is a horrible thing and that the world is too bad for you . look , i 'm 19 years old . i went through a very brief teen angst thing which curiously lasted about as long as my taste in nirvana did . i 've since moved on to " i do n't really know what to do with my life " phase , but the teen angst phase is something which is so annoyingly sophomoric and ignorant that any film that thinks they 're dealing with it on any kind of serious level is just beating the wrong horse . part of being a teen is experimenting , and testing the waters . it 's not whining about how awful parents are , and purposely feeling dispondent . this is what the characters in this film do , and the film wants to show how they 're these great people who are being punished by the world because they 're teenagers , and how they try to defend themselves but ca n't totally overcome them . it 's not their fault they kill people ; it 's the world 's ! what they really need is a reality check . the world is a bad place , and teenagers can be easily harmed because they are experimenting . but part of it is taking everything that happens to you and learning from it . the film thinks that teenagers are basically doomed , and there 's nothing they can do about it . hence the title . not only does it have bad fallacy , but it ca n't even express this in an intelligent and coherent manner . everything 's overly surreal , and all we get are scenes of graphic violence and graphic sex . how does xavier licking semen off his hand express teen angst ? how does a talking decapitated head show that teens are dispondent because the world makes them this way ? and why does the film constantly go back to the teen angst issue of the film ? if araki had any kind of competence in writing or direction , he 'd show them for what they really are . and if he did n't want the satirical approach , he 'd show the real problems with the world . and if you still do n't think that " the doom generation " is incompetent on every single possible level it could be , take the acting . rose macgowan is horrible . yes , she proved herself talented in " scream , " but she 's so bad in " the doom generation " that if i had not seen her in " scream , " i would have christened her one of the worst actresses working in films today . her entire performance is one - note ( bitchy ) , and the one scene where she cries over a dead animal is so forced that it 's laughable . equally bad is jonathan schaech , who wants to be the slacker serial killer : someone who does n't have any remorse because emotions cause some kind of strain . his performance is annoying as hell , and granted , he was better in " that thing you do ! " and then there 's james duval . let 's just say he makes keanu reeves look like brando . he has the same kind of slacker stuttering , only much much much worse , and every line he says is so bad that i have now deemed him " least talented actor in the world . " i have seen lots of bad actors , but james duval has got to be the worst . or at least somewhere up there . here 's another example of a bad scene , if you 're still not convinced : the film opens up in a club where they 're playing nine inch nail 's most banal song , " heresy " ( example of the lines : " god is dead / and no one cares / if there is a hell / i'll see you there " ) , and as the song plays , and red strobe lights show the patrons dancing , the film pans over to amy , just standing there , looking dispondent . the film closes in on her , she looks right at the camera and says " fuck . " no explanation of this should be necessary . and finally , a note to gregg : grow up . really . move out of your parent 's basement , read something other than salinger , and get a day job . and do n't quit it .

0NEG

" ladybugs " is a typical comedy that relies on three supposed guarantees : the pathetic team who beats the champs ; cross dressing ; and the presence of rodney dangerfield . this picture does n't play like a comedy for children , so who is it aimed at ? and why is it told like a 91-minute sit - com instead of a feature film ? rodney dangerfield stars as chester lee , a total schmuck working at a huge corporation . he obviously does n't have a lot of self esteem and thinks he has to kiss up to get ahead , which he does by volunteering to coach the company 's girls ' soccer team . what a shock to learn chester and his assistant julie ( jackee ) know absolutely nothing about the game , and the players seem to know even less . i did n't laugh , but for some reason it did n't annoy me that much . chester 's fiancee bess ( graff ) thinks he got a promotion in addition to the coaching position , and of course she has a slacker for a son who is doing poorly in school and is kicked off the sports teams . jonathon brandis is a nice surprise as matthew , who agrees to dress up as a girl named martha to help out chester ( probably because the girl he has a crush on plays on the team - what original story ideas ! ) . what we get is just another retread of the " underdog sports team " mixed with some cross dressing . unfortunately , the film is n't smart enough to play upon the drag aspect . in fact , it downplays it so heavily it 's totally unbelievable . could it be any more obvious martha is a boy ? he only wears a girl 's wig , without any makeup , and they do n't even give him falsies . brandis does n't bother to mimic a girl 's voice either . then there is a pointless scene where chester and matthew shop for a dress , but for what reason ? martha is only seen on the soccer field , why would they buy a dress for her ? just when we think the martha character is going to be useful , she disappears , and the story wanders aimlessly looking for a new plot to pick up on . when bess discovers what 's really going on she breaks up with chester , and the relationship is forgotten about and the film focuses on the soccer team and the tension between chester and his boss . this film could 've been less bad had it been the cliche sports comedy , but it feels the need to go off on tangents that are completely unnecessary ( and bad at that ) . there 's just too much of a sit - com feel here , especially during the so - called serious moments , and all the confusion between the characters . i 've seen worse movies than " ladybugs , " but for some reason it contained some sort of bizarre charm , so even when it turns sour it does n't seem as bad as it is . dangerfield finally gets his respect in the end , but at what a price .

0NEG

the happy bastard 's quick movie review the concept of enjoying a stupid comedy is best realized as keeping it stupid , really . shift gears even once and the audience can be thrown miserably out of control . sadly , that is the case with kingpin , a film directed by the farrelly brothers , the duo that brought us there 's something about mary and dumb and dumber . since the duo directed and did n't write the script , i can assume that 's part of the problem . the story seems good enough : a pro bowler in the 1970 's by the name of roy munson ( woody harrelson ) is sitting on top of the world . his popularity has gone through the roof and he 's getting his career off the ground . then , however , he runs into ed mccracken ( bill murray ) , a rival bowler with hardly any real consideration for , well , anything . these two form an ill - timed relationship that involves risky betting , and , before roy sees it coming , ed 's abandoned him and he 's about to lose his hand in a bowling ball machine . forward seventeen years later , where roy has become quite the loser , complete with mechanical hand , torn - up car , and , of course , the occasional knocking up of the ugly - ass landlord to avoid paying rent for a while . however , he finds a glimmer of a hope upon a visit to a local bowling alley , where he runs into an amish kid named ishmael ( randy quaid ) , who has quite the bowling arm . with the kid 's help , he figures he can be known again , particularly at the biggest bowling tournament rapidly approaching in reno , nevada . of course , the amish kid needs some coaxing , particularly when you consider , well , he 's amish . this leads to some of the best comic scenes in the film , such as roy 's process of removing horseshoes or milking the cow . finally , the duo get on the road and , along the way , pick up an additional helper- a beautiful hustler ( played by the gorgeous vanessa angel ) . the main problem i had with kingpin was n't the fact it was n't funny . in fact , it does have some rather hilarious scenes in it , such as the aformentioned above and roy 's explanation of not having children ( something involving a cheese grater ? ) . but that 's just it- scenes . there 's a couple of really serious scenes that throw off the entire momentum of the movie , like the abuse angel takes from her hustler ex - boyfriend . i mean , was this really necessary ? could n't have this been handled just a bit wackier ? i mean , this is a comedy , why throw ethics in ? particularly in a farrelly brothers vehicle , where hair gel can be easily mistaken ? that really ruined it , however , and that 's too bad . the acting is top notch , especially from angel and murray , and the really funny scenes are worth noting . still , if you 're going to think dumb , think dumb all the way through , ok ? at least the farrelly brothers got back on track with mary or i 'd still be a little bit irked .

0NEG

" shagadellic ! " , " groovy , baby ! " " smashing ! " adorn the 1/4 page ad for this movie tabbed as " the # 1 comedy in america " as of may 8th . did we attend the same movie ? ! at 87 minutes it seemed overlong , like a snl skit on steroids , and at any length it seemed unfunny . yes , the sets and costumes were an interesting exaggeration of 60s pop frills , and yes , the concept , dealing with a 60s secret agent / pop icon ( played by myers ) awakened from his cryogenic slumber to battle his arch enemy ( dr . evil , also played by myers ) in the present day , had a great deal of potential . fun costumes and scenery and potential do not a movie make so lets throw in a hefty dose of bathroom humor . do n't get me wrong , i like a good " bubbles in the bathtub joke " as much as the next person , but to have this type of humor be the funniest thing about your movie is a waste of yuor talent and my money . but , the way things work these days in the movie business , all a film has to do is call itself the funniest and people will believe it . i do give this film stars because of the sets , costumes , and sadly , unmet potential .

0NEG

robin williams , this time without a beard , returns to drama in this sloppy , sickly sweet fantasy with few redeeming features apart from the incredible effects . he plays chris nielsen , who meets annie ( annabella sciora ) and promptly marries her . they have two great kids , who sadly die in a car crash . just when it could n't get any worse , chris gets killed in a car crash , and goes to heaven where he meets his guide albert ( gooding jnr . ) annie ca n't take the grief anymore , and kills herself . ( all sounding like good fun so far ? ) the ' penalty ' for suicide is to go to hell , and chris goes on a mission to try and rescue her using the help of the traveller ( max von sydow . ) based on a novel by twilight zone writer richard matheson , what dreams may come is clunky , manufactured material doused with a extra load of sugar . this is the worse spielberg film spielberg never made . everything is wrong about this movie : the performances are forced , and the audiences fail to relate to any of the characters . williams puts on a convincing upset face , but that 's all it is : a face . there 's no emotion behind it . sciora 's performance is lazy , and bogs down the whole film . she may look pretty , but she ca n't act . max von sydow is o . k as the traveller , if nothing special . cuba gooding jnr , thankfully , adds some bounce to his performance , and is certainly the best performer in the film . it 's a shame that his character is so flat and 2-d , and offers no room for improvement . all the performers have to work with a soppy script , that tries it 's best to get some emotion going , but never takes off the ground . there are _ some _ scenes which could be real heartwarmers , but the faceless characters do n't help to get anything out of the performers . while films like e . t used great actors , music and direction to pull of a masterful heart - tugging scene , what dreams may come is haphazard , expecting the emotion to come out of the scene automatically . instead , it 's all rather boring . sure , the music is pretty ( by michael kamen ) and the cinematography is n't bad ( by eduardo serra ) but there 's something lacking . the script does n't help , filled with hopeless romantic clich ? s , and dud speeches . richard matheson can write some awesome science fiction stories , sadly this novel would look embarrassed in a bargain bin , let alone being converted into a $ 70 million vehicle for robin williams . despite being set in heaven , what dreams may come is mightily depressing . the film rushes a happy ending , but everything before this is very , very sad and black , which just adds to make the ending even more hopeless and stupid . but there 's one redeeming feature about this failure of a movie : the special effects . heaven and hell are truly incredible places , and the actors fit perfectly with the virtual sets . but despite this , what dreams may come , proves to be nothing but the biggest disappointment of 1998 . instead of raising questions about existence , it raises boredom . sadly , i recommend you give this film a miss . better luck next time , robin . a david wilcock review ? 1998 " you know , for kids " - norville barnes

0NEG

the catch phrase for disney 's rocket man is one spoken by fred z . randall ( harland williams ) , the bumbling idiot computer programmer turned astronaut who continuously wreaks havoc everywhere he goes . " it was n't me ! " he proclaims over and over as the aftermath of his stupidity brings about looks of disgust from the others . well when it comes to this movie being as horrible as it is , williams ca n't take all the blame , but he sure ca n't justify himself with his own simple tag line either . fred has dreamed of space travel since he was a young boy , turning the clothes dryer into a mock space shuttle and staring out wide - eyed at a poster of the earth . as a 30-year - old , fred has n't grown up much , but at least he 's somewhat closer to his goal , now designing astronaut software for nasa . when an astronaut for an upcoming mission to mars becomes injured , nasa calls on the person who knows the programming inside and out to fill the void . . . fred . yes , although he 's an obviously klutzy moron , nasa does n't think twice about throwing him into a rigorous training program so he can assist one of the most important events the space program , and time itself , has ever known . for the first part of the film , we watch as fred takes on the training program much like an amusement park . he laughs , he screams , but he never once breaks a sweat or views the preparation as anything more than child 's play . his passive approach to the program eventually leads to many record - breaking feats , much to the dismay of cocky counterpart , mission commander captain overbeck ( william sadler ) , who once held the records . overbeck will regretfully accompany fred and two others to the red planet , one being astronaut julie ford ( the stupids ' jessica lundy ) , and the other being a chimpanzee who is much more civilized than our antagonizing protagonist . from here on out , we are subjected to one lame gag after another , dealing with snot , laxatives , and flatulence . you know , standard kid movie material . almost sounding like a poor james stewart impressionist , williams is awful in his first starring role . we get the feeling that if jerry lewis and pee - wee herman were related and produced an inbred offspring , williams would be it . while he 's not as annoying as other actors who cater to zany , stupid comedy , he 's just as unlikeable . to say it more understandably , jim carrey might annoy you more , but this guy is even less funny . why ? because while he possesses the stupidness needed to pull off such a role , his performance is too understated and boring . classic comedic dunces were generally oblivious to their own idiocy . stan laurel , for example , was so innocent in all his trouble - making that we were immediately fond of him . peter sellers , as inspector clouseau , was so self - assured and confident that when he did something as simple as trip , it was humor at it 's best . williams , on the other hand , ca n't garner the pity he needs to make us love him in all his anti - glory . as for the rest of the cast , including some bigger names in smaller roles ( beau bridges and shelley duvall ) , nobody is worth watching whatsoever . this is just another example of the fast - food equivalent of cinema : mass - produced , less than mediocre , over priced , and hard to stomach . giving it one - and - a - half stars is * extremely * generous , but even i 'll admit to laughing a few times . the amazing thing is that even in a theater packed with little kids , laughter was something rarely heard - even from the children ! i must admit that it gave me more respect for the kids when they did n't crack up over every little thing . then again , maybe they were asleep . some people might think critics are harsh on kid movies , claiming adults are n't the targeted audience and therefore are n't meant to , and wo n't , enjoy them . sadly , it 's also true that kids will enjoy almost anything if it 's presented right . a two - hour still shot of a dog with a cartoonish voice over could entertain a lot of toddlers out there , but would that make it as artistic as beauty and the beast , which could easily do the same thing ? and saying that a parent 's perspective is n't important is quite a poor theory to have when they 're the ones who take the kids to these films in the first place .

0NEG

based on the novel set in 1914 by joseph conrad , victory spins a tale of a pair of lovers , heyst ( william dafoe ) and alma ( irene jacob ) , who seek refuge on heyst 's isolated island . however , their idyllic world begins to crumble upon the arrival of mr jones ( sam neil ) , martin ricardo ( rufus sewell ) and their servant , pedro ( graziano marcelli ) , who have come to steal heyst 's rumoured plunder . while the novel is largely complex in characterization , the film sadly transposes conrad 's characters into lacklustre leads , the most disappointing being heyst himself . conrad 's heyst adheres religiously to his late father 's ways of detachment and isolation . his ascetic lifestyle is thrown into question when he meets alma , a helpless orchestra girl who charms him with her voice . the struggle to embrace the arrival of alma into his solitude , however , is lost in mark peploe 's ( director and writer ) diluted version of heyst . without properly establishing the crucial details of heyst 's character , all that is left of conrad 's main character is a very shallow treatment of his internal conflict between detachment and human involvement . on the one hand , actualizing the subtext is a mammoth task ( though not impossible ) , but on the other hand , dafoe 's flat acting can not be excused as an attempt at stoicism . in the end , we are supposed to witness heyst renounce his philosophy and finally come to an understanding of what it is to love another . the final transformation , while perceptible , lacks the cathartic revelation which is undeniable in conrad 's novel . its absence in the film is unforgivable . the film seems more concerned about moving the plot along when so much has yet to be said about the relationship between the two complete strangers . alma is supposed to have overcome great emotional barriers in the relationship , namely heyst 's underlying philosophy of detachment , which heyst himself grapples with . the struggle against heyst 's ignorance of true human involvement accounts for much of the greatness of alma 's love for him . jacob , fair - skinned , gentle and yet passionate , handles the role with precision , detailing nuances where possible . unfortunately , she is let down by a superficial script . the couple 's relationship develops too hastily , leaving all subtlety effaced and replaced with a blatant show - and - tell approach . all we know of the characters are mostly explained by their lines alone . this is unsatisfactory when so much of the turmoil experienced by the two stem from their buried thoughts and emotions . the sketchy handling of their relationship stands out as sorely as dafoe 's american accent ( an inappropriate one since heyst spent most of his life in london ) . the other characters such as schomberg ( jean yanne ) , the owner of a hotel , and mr jones ( sam neill ) , also fall short of conrad 's meticulous characterization . while schomberg should have been more menacing and vindictive , mr jones should have been portrayed as something more of an enigma . sam neil 's caricature of a slightly stout , effeminate and soft - spoken gentleman - at - large nullifies the effect intended by conrad who describes mr jones as " an insolent spectre on leave from hades , endowed with skin and bones and a subtle power of terror " . poor characterization aside , kudos goes to rufus sewell for his excellent portrayal of ricardo , secretary to mr jones , a reckless ruffian capable of murder . sewell , with his cockney accent and large expressive green eyes , becomes the true terror of the unholy trinity , masterminding deceitful plans behind jones ' back . at the same time , we are entertained by the foolhardiness of his plans . despite the authentic setting and marvellous cinematography by bruno de keyzer , very few images are left behind for us to savour after the film has ended . sourabaya and its surrounding islands and volcanoes may have their charm , but mean nothing once the film fails to capture the essence of an epic , which is what victory deserves to be . the delicately inter - woven complexities in the love story are lost to an inadequate production . at the end of the film , we are told that perhaps alma 's victory was in teaching heyst how to love . a hollow victory indeed . the flying inkpot 's rating system : * wait for the video . * * a little creaky , but still better than staying at home with gotcha ! * * * pretty good , bring a friend . * * * * amazing , potent stuff . * * * * * perfection . see it twice .

0NEG

a couple of criminals ( mario van peebles and loretta devine ) move into a rich family 's house in hopes of conning them out of their jewels . however , someone else steals the jewels before they are able to get to them . writer mario van peebles delivers a clever script with several unexpected plot twists , but director mario van peebles undermines his own high points with haphazard camera work , editing and pacing . it felt as though the film should have been wrapping up at the hour mark , but alas there was still 35 more minutes to go . daniel baldwin ( i ca n't believe i 'm about to type this ) gives the best performance in the film , outshining the other talented members of the cast . [ r ]

0NEG

chill factor is a carbon copy of speed with one notable exception : instead of a speeding bus , we now have an ice cream truck . the truck is driven by arlo ( cuba gooding jr . ) and mason ( skeet ulrich ) , who have been instructed by a dying scientist to transport a deadly chemical weapon to a military base by the name of fort mcgruder . this particular weapon ( nicknamed ` elvis ' ) must be kept below a temperature of 50 degrees , or else the shockwave will goo - iffy everything in a mile radius . that would be pretty nasty . the power of elvis is revealed in the opening scene , as dr . richard long ( david paymer ) conducts a test on an isolated tropical island . long accidentally melts 18 soldiers and defoliates virtually the entire island , due to an enormously miscalculated safety distance . the commanding officer , general brynner ( peter firth ) , is sentenced to 10 years in prison for the murder of his troops . upon his release , the general is intent on tracking the good doctor down , snatching elvis , and selling the weapon to the highest international bidder . protecting the fate of the world is a drifting hamburger flipper ( ulrich ) and a feisty ice cream delivery man ( gooding jr . ) , who must elude brynner 's men and get elvis to safety at fort mcgruder . all the while , of course , they must keep the weapon below 50 degrees . this proves to be tricky . among the wild adventures arlo and mason partake in is a trip down a tree - covered mountainside in a boat , and a fist fight on top of a moving vehicle . they also crack a few dozen witty retorts that we are supposed to find amusing . to put it simply , i 'll use a clever pun : chill factor should be put on ice . director hugh johnson has mixed elements from speed , broken arrow and the lethal weapon series to create a lifelessly bland cocktail of a chase movie . when there is some occasional action , the audience seems oddly detached from it . perhaps that 's because we 've already waded through a pool of clich ? s and boring dialogue ; all material that 's been used before , and with a lot more spice . take the villains , for example . they are typical stereotypes of every terrorist that has ever walked the silver screen . they speak lines that have been recycled profusely from one movie to the next , divulge important plot details while holding their enemies at gunpoint , and act in very predictable ways . the tag - team of gooding jr . and ulrich sounds much more exciting than it is . frankly , i 'm not sure i can accept cuba as an ice cream man . i suppose it 's better than him dressed like a giant hot dog , selling jumbo frankfurters on a street corner . gooding displays one single emotion in this movie , which is frequently on display in lines like ` i 'm gon na get on yo ass like last year 's underwear ! ' and the incessant sputtering of ` oh , sh * t ! ' this is virtually the same character he played in jerry maguire and as good as it gets . but where gooding was once an exciting actor , he now seems dull and endlessly monotonous . at least he 's a bit more captivating than ulrich , who has all the film 's worst dialogue , but does nothing noticeable to enliven his character . the supporting cast , which includes every personality you expect to pop up , is also wasted . to be fair , there are a few brief moments of serviceable action . and i did chuckle a few times . one example is when ulrich ( an employee at ` darlene 's diner ' ) is at the counter when brynner walks through the door . ` you own this place ? ' the general asks . ` yeah , ' ulrich says . ` they call me darlene . ' these little tidbits of humor are ( mainly ) welcome in this weak , disappointing wreckage of an action film . as a speed clone , it could have benefited from a lot more suspense and perhaps ( god forbid ) even some decent writing . sadly , i walked away from chill factor only wondering how much fun it could have been .

0NEG

* * * warning - the following review contains spoilers * * * cast : gary sinise , don cheadle , connie nielsen , jerry o'connell , kim delaney , tim robbins , elise neal , jill teed , jody thompson , bill timoney written by : jim thomas , john thomas and graham yost directed by : brian depalma running time : 115 minutes the first big event movie of 2000 turns out to be anything but . gary sinise stars as an astronaut who is removed from a mars mission when his astronaut wife , maggie ( kim delaney ) , becomes ill and passes away . don cheadle is then given the mission along with a russian couple and a young hotshot . when a strange whirlwind shot from the top of a mars mountain range attacks the crew of the mission , sinise and robbins convince their superior to let them , neilsen , and o'connell perform a rescue mission for whatever crew might be remaining . what they discover on the surface of the planet will dramatically change their lives forever ( although no one watching the film will come away profoundly affected ) . before i ever saw the film , i was aware of the promotional campaign with dr . pepper . every time i would see a bottle of the soft drink , the mission to mars logo was emblazoned upon it . little did i know that the plot would be taking a back seat to the product placement of the drink and several other products . dr . pepper saves the day at one point , and a dream sequence / flashback features jerry o'connell shoving m&m 's in our face . these are but a couple of the ridiculous examples of product placement scattered throughout the film . clich ? s are also the order of the day with mission to mars . dialogue and character motivations are all lifted directly from countless other science fiction films that have all done it better and with more style ( even independence day , which lifted all of it 's premises from other sci - fi films was better than this film , and i do n't like independence day ) . films like 2001 : a space odyssey , the abyss , and close encounters of the third kind are all blatantly stolen from ( and poorly at that ) . there is even a sequence where a rover is traveling through a canyon , and i could n't help but whisper " u'tinni " to myself and wait for a jawa to quickly hide in the rocks before the rover could get a glimpse of it . this film also features one of my all - time least favorite movie clich ? s : the " he would have wanted you to have this " moment , where one character gives another a trinket that yet another character is established as constantly having ( and is usually made fun of by the character who ends up getting all sappy over it later on ) . scenes like these always bother me when they come out of nowhere in regular films , but in a film as clich ? ridden as this , it is particularly irritating . ennio morricone 's music is usually considered to be some of the best stuff in the projects he works on , but here it is dreadfully overbearing . his music sounds like it came straight out of a vincent price movie in certain scenes . at other times his music is unbearably over - dramatic . one sequence involving a daring spacewalk rescue is given a particularly cheesy sting when it is discovered that the grappling hook device used for the rescue wo n't reach its intended target . mission to mars is push button filmmaking to the greatest extreme . events are set into motion that are obvious to anyone who has ever seen a movie and seem like they are just there to evoke an emotional response in the audience . we are apparently supposed to be upset that tim robbins character removes his helmet in deep space and kills himself to save his wife , but i felt extreme boredom coupled with a twinge of disinterest . what makes it all worse is that fact that there is no real reason that robbins ' character needs to turn himself into a popsicle , except to invoke an emotional response ( i could think of at least one way to save him , and the nasa clowns in this film are supposed to be " smarter " than i am ) . during the finale , when we are finally introduced to the translucent , conehead , kitty - faced aliens that we ostensibly sprung from , we are presented with some of the most ridiculously cartoonish cgi ever put to film ( just slightly worse than the plane crash at the end of air force one or the hell scenes in spawn ) . a brief history lesson about " where we came from " is proffered , then sinise is whisked away to be with " the rest of our people " ( he does this because his late wife proclaims in a video he watches early on that " this is a chance to step foot where no one else has " ) . > from the press i 've been seeing this film receive , it is apparent that mission to mars will be dying a quick death at the theater . i 'm sure the first weekend or two will be huge , but once word gets out people will stop going . let 's just hope the upcoming red planet is better than this and is n't hurt by the negativity this film is generating . i 'd venture to say it wo n't be worse than this waste of time . [ pg ]

0NEG

retrospective : city of the living dead ( 1980 ) a film review by mike watson copyright 1997 mike watson i once heard someone describe the films of italian schlock horror director lucio fulci as " dim - witted " . and by golly , just about all other words fail me when confronted with a dog like city of the living dead . although the late fulci managed some rather good thrillers in his career , this is not one of them . two points in the movie 's favour - the impressive camerawork of sergio salvati and occasionally evocative score by fabio frizzi - keep things from falling totally into the abyss , but by and large city of the living dead is a failure . and like most cinematic failures , it comes down to bad writing , dumb performances and lousy direction . the story starts in new york when , during a seance , a medium ( katherine mccoll ) sees a vision of a priest hanging himself in the town of dunwich , massachusetts . for reasons we wo n't go into here , this opens the gates of hell which must be closed by all saints day or the dead will rise and walk the earth . the medium apparently dies of fright during the seance , but awakens in her coffin in the graveyard the next day and is rescued by a crusty old journalist ( christopher george ) . that scene in itself is a howler : why would you bust open a coffin with a large pick axe when you know someone is alive inside ? and do n't cadavers have various things stuffed in them and drained out of them before they 're buried ? anyway , off the two of them go to dunwich to save the world , where various grisly goings - on are already happening as all saints day approaches . fulci 's graphic gore is in evidence once again , but here it only serves to further highlight the film 's flimsy script and plodding direction . the dialogue , in all manner of speaking , is unspeakable . not bad in the quotable sense , like an ed wood film , but bad in its sheer dullness or blatantly obvious " lets explain the plot " type approach . mccoll does n't have a clue who her character is : deadly serious one minute , frivolous the next , she at times is genuinely hard to watch . and the geezer ( the actor 's name escapes me ) who plays the town psychiatrist becomes even harder to stomach than mccoll as the film progresses . christopher george 's performance is salvageable , but he gets his brains ripped out in the end by a zombie and we do n't care . in fact we do n't care for anyone in city of the living dead , though in other fulci films that has n't mattered so much when he was on form as a stylist and an ideas man , as he was in the beyond . as a director , some of fulci ' idiosyncrasies are incredibly silly and annoying here . he constantly uses extreme close - ups of people 's eyes , a ridiculous technique which suggests an attempt to convey the emotion that his dialogue and actors are n't capable of . and despite some gruesome violence , he barely manages a single scare in the entire film . long - time collaborator fabio frizzi , talented but always erratic , offers a patchy soundtrack that veers between eerie , gothic death marches and woefully inappropriate electro - pop that 's quite frankly embarrassing . fulci 's other films of this period may be flawed - house by the cemetery , the beyond , the black cat - but they are nonetheless films with more inspiration , atmosphere and better dialogue than this turkey . for completists only .

0NEG

you know the plot : a dimwit with a shady past is seduced into committing a crime only to be double - crossed by a fatal femme . in " palmetto , " the dimwit is harry barber ( woody harrelson ) , a reporter who 's just been released from prison ( he was framed by the gangsters and corrupt officials he was investigating ) . enter la femme : rhea malroux ( elisabeth shue ) , the sexy young wife of the richest man in palmetto , florida ( rolf hoppe ) . she and her stepdaughter odette ( chlo ? sevigny ) have a plot to extort 500k from the old man : harry will " kidnap " odette . after groping both women , harry agrees . as everyone except harry can see , he 's being set up as a fall guy . sure enough , before long , harry has a dead body in his trunk and the cops on his tail . his brother - in - law ( tom wright ) , an assistant da , has hired harry to be the press liaison for the case , so harry gets a front row seat for his own manhunt ( and we get to watch him sweat - literally ) . there are several plot twists , of course - a couple of them even took me by surprise . apparently every woman in palmetto is a raving horndog , and they 're on harry like he 's the only bone in the kennel . shue vamps so broadly that i expected tex avery 's wolf to show up . her incredible performance in " leaving las vegas " seems to have been a fluke . here , she could easily be mistaken for melanie griffith . shue 's character is supposed to be a savvy schemer but she comes off as a brainless bimbo . in addition to shue and sevigny , the kennel includes gina gershon ( who filled the dimwit - with - a - shady - past role in " bound " ) as harry 's girlfriend nina ; when harry gets out of jail , she licks his face ( now there 's a horndog ) . the parts are so overplayed that with a little push " palmetto " could have been an over - the - top parody of film noir a la " romeo is bleeding . " as it is , it 's best watched at 2 am on showtime ( the love scenes seem to have been written for one of that channel 's soft porn programs anyway ) . " palmetto " has a well - known director , volker schl ? ndorff , who 's best known for his adaptations of major literary works , especially " the tin drum . " i suppose he must have been drawn to this plot - by - numbers script by the same admiration for classic film noir that led scorsese to remake " cape fear . " schl ? ndorff tries hard - he makes an interesting motif out of the ubiquitous palmetto bugs - but nothing can freshen up this stale script .

0NEG

the comet - disaster flick is a disaster alright . directed by tony scott ( top gun ) , it tells the story about an asteroid the size of texas caught on a collision course with earth . and you thought that dinky little comet in deep impact was trouble . jeez . after a great opening , in which an american spaceship , plus the city of new york , are completely destroyed by a comet shower , nasa detects the said asteroid and go into a frenzy . they hire the world 's best oil driller ( bruce willis ) , and send him and his crew up into space to fix our globel problem . that 's like sending a mouse into a cat carrier , is n't it ? the action in armageddon are so over the top , nonstop , and too ludicrous for words , i had to sigh and hit my head with my notebook a couple of times . i was not alone . plus , to see a wonderful actor like billy bob thornton is a film like armageddon is a waste of the actor 's talents . the film is just a reel to show off a bunch of snazzy fx shots . the only real reason for making this film was to somehow out - perform deep impact . producer jerry bruckheimer fails with armageddon .

0NEG

years ago , robin williams made _ jumanji _ , a brilliant achievement in special effects , but a travesty on nearly every other level . the same can be said for _ what dreams may come _ , a boring , illogical , weepie - wannabe that left my senses numb . do n't get me wrong : i love breathtaking special effects and pulse - pounding imagery . _ brazil _ is on my personal top ten . _ the city of lost children _ is a great film because of its outlandish scenarios . i even love _ 2001 _ and _ last year at marienbad _ , being in the minority amidst my friends . _ what dreams may come _ , imagery aside , has little daring thought to complement its imagery . the daring thought it _ does _ have is never fully realized . it 's idea of a plot is so lukewarm , that it insults the bigger questions it raises . it would have been better if the filmmakers rid the film of the live action sequences , put on an electronica soundtrack , and sell it as one of those popular _ mind 's eye _ videos . robin williams plays chris nielsen , who dies too prematurely -- not only in the story , but before we have a chance to really know and care for him . the director , vincent ward , and the screenwriter ronald bass , have chosen to tell his life story in flashbacks while having the foreground story focus on his experience with the afterlife . big mistake . it would have been far better to take the half - hour or so needed to tell his life story first ( ala _ it 's a wonderful life _ ) , so that i can build up respect for him , so i could know and possibly care for him , his children , and his long - suffering wife ( played superbly by annabella sciorra ) . instead , the filmmakers insult my intelligence by rushing into the story , expecting that the film to grow in depth as it progresses . it does n't . so in the afterlife , chris learns that ( a ) people still do n't meet god , ( b ) that our thoughts are reality , and ( c ) time does not exist there . hmm . . . i+ll grant one of those silly giant ideas for the sake of the narrative . ( the " not meeting god " part still irks at me , but perhaps there was no possible way to film it and give it due respect ) . that said , this alternate reality still makes no possible sense . read on . . . chris ' wife commits suicide . since suicides go to hell , chris would be separated from his wife forever . the important question is , is heaven really heaven if you are separated from the one you love ? good question . and i like good thought - provoking questions . i don+t like it when the filmmakers deviate from the question . i _ loathe _ it when the filmmakers deviate from the question so that the film becomes a popular rescue film , especially a rescue film which does not take its underlying premise seriously . i _ really _ loathe it when it+s story is no longer run by logic , but by special effects . hey chris : did you forget ? your thoughts are _ real _ . they are more _ real _ than the physical world , according to the new - age screenplay . so , why don+t you conjure up positive thoughts of annie , and let that run wild ? and then she would appear before you , and you two would live in happy bliss for eternity ? because there would be no movie , that+s why . and albert the angel ( played by miscast cuba gooding , jr . ) says bluntly : " that+s fantasy . " umm . . . if your thoughts are more real than the physical , then fantasy is not fantasy , but real . surely some eastern meditation specialist would be able to tell you that . and if you happen to think that you are an unimaginative person , and that your thoughts are n't big enough to sustain you for eternity , well , in all due respect , that 's why i do n't subscribe to this theology . all due respect . another idea , based on " time , ( pause ) , does not exist here ! " so chris , spend your eternity with annie , as she is on earth , reliving your favorite memories , or hang out with her when she was growing up . you+ve got eternity : perhaps you can hang around long enough and learn not to freak her out . and forcing her to write " i still exist " in her diary , imo , is just too tacky . there are many other ideas , all of which are a hundred times better than what+s unraveled in the plot . the great aforementioned question is sidetracked into gimmicky subplots that have been done before , and just come out stale . most insulting is the subplot where important people in chris+ life appear in heaven differently than he expects , so when they finally show themselves , he realizes they were with him all along . and when this happens , the film runs in slow motion , as if to build emotion . _ gag me with a spoon _ . so the only things for me to like are sciorra+s effective performance , who rises far above this mundane material , and the special effects . please note that while i enjoyed some of the visuals , i did not enjoy _ all _ of them : some of the images looked like sandy duncan universe , everybody floating up and down in invisible strings . it sounds like a joke , but it+s really true : i really tried to block out the dialogue , and figure out what music would best work as an alternative soundtrack . my vote goes to a rare cd called " never say die " ( 1981 ) from petra , a christian rock group . it+s pretty good , and they have a song about annie , who commits suicide . ( it+s too late for annie / she+s gone away for good / there+s so much we 'd have told her / and now we wish we could / but it+s too late . . . ) . melancholic , yes . depressing , yes . but far more entertaining . . . so , in case you don+t know , let me be straight . suicide -- bad . _ don+t do it _ . no . no . no . ( got it ? --you shouldn+t have to pay $ 7 . 50 to hear this in an awful robin williams schmaltzfest . )

0NEG

the original _ babe _ was my favorite movie of 1995 , a sleeper hit that transcended its target audience . being a surprise commercial and critical success , it had no marketing tie - ins , which limited its final take . thus , babe 2 arrives , with a budget greater than the money made in babe 1 . plush dolls , vending machines hawking t - shirts , and macy 's thanksgiving day balloons arrive for holiday money - grubbing . too late . this is a sad review to write , because babe 2 not only does _ not _ live up to the original , but it does n't even come to a fraction of it . i should n't expect that sequels to modern fairy tales to match their predecessors ' magic , but this film tries too hard , and loses its charm . consider a driver applying the accelerator with great intensity , unaware that his car is in neutral . imagine with me , if you will , _ scream _ 's jamie kennedy , explaining the " rules " for sequels like babe 2 . ( 1 ) there must be _ more _ talking animals . ( 2 ) there must be _ more _ slapstick comedy . ( 3 ) there must be _ more _ songs for those mice to sing : that 's cute . ( 4 ) keep the story cards to break up the action : that 's cute too , even though " the pig gets wise " made no sense , given the context of that story partition . ( 5 ) there must be action , however illogical , that will conjure up pivotal scenes from the original : the trademark song that nobody remembers the words to , the baa - ram - ewe secret code , the " that 'll do , pig . that 'll do . " now throw in the limitations : ( a ) james cromwell , now a hot commodity , has limited time on the set ( or maybe he did n't approve of the script ) . ( b ) christine cavanaugh , the voice of the original babe , demands more money ( $ 200 , 000 - -paltry considering the $ 80 million budget ) . out . e . g . daily comes in with noticable results . ( c ) george miller , the director , is more well - known for his dark futuristic mad max films and his twilight zone segment , not for kiddie fare ( and no , he did n't direct that _ andre _ film in ' 94 ) . ( d ) the special effects are impressive , _ but limited _ . babe talks , but most of the time from a single shot , repeated over and over again . ( babe is center screen , looking straight into the camera , with a happy smirk -- regardless of whether he 's happy , or scared , or tired ) . season now with the " original " elements , which , as we will find out , are straight from the screenwriting - is - hell bin . ( i ) change the venue into " the big city " . this has been praised as wildly original . excuse me : did n't _ home alone _ do this several years ago ? how about the muppets ? even _ the bad news bears _ travelled to tokyo . sorry . no dice . side note : to give the city a fairy - tale look , george miller crafted a fantastical fantasyland that merges the landmarks of the world 's great cities , and yes , it _ is _ impressive . but this too is over - used , repeating the same view over and again on multiple occasions . and , for the most part , babe _ remains in the hotel _ . ( ii ) given the limitations of cromwell , the human element is taken over by " the boss ' wife " played by magda szubanski . s - t - r - e - t - c - h . she 's not a lead actress - type , she 's not funny enough in her physical comedy , and she 's simply embarrassing in some of her pratfalls . ( have her arrested falsely on drug charges ! have her accidentally incite a riot with biker dudes and scantily clad babes ! have her bounce around on a bungee cord at a prestigious benefit dinner ! ) i was hoping for a little smirk during these scenes , but i felt sorry for the embarrassment that she put herself in . i am restraining myself from talking about the dark nature of the film , the violence , the scene where a pit bull dangles from the bridge , head submerged underwater . even the best fairy tales have a bit of the macabre in it , as the brothers grimm have demonstrated . no . . . my problem is with the story , or lack thereof . _ babe _ is sent out to save the hoggett farm , but once in the city , that story is forgotten . being a good - natured pig in the midst of the cynicism of his environs is nice , but , other than rescue that aforementioned pit bull , what did babe actually _ do _ ? without giving the ending away , the farm is saved from a left - field quirk that had nothing to do with the pig . speaking of " pig " , or , " pig - pig - pig - pig - pig ! " . the word " pig " is so overused , had they changed it to an expletive , and had the pig be al pacino , i could have been watching _ scarface _ . this is screenwriting ? further , i can not explain the deep gnaw at my gut in the many scenes where accidents happen to good people in fantastically elaborate setups . had it been a cartoon , and the victim be an equivalent of elmer fudd , maybe my reaction would have been softened . but to farmer hoggett ? his wife ? an elderly mickey rooney ? much too irreverent . ( " quick ! splice those singing mice into those scenes ! " ) . the film is n't a colossal failure . i did like glenne headley 's schmoozy chimpanzee . i liked the pink poodle . the dog on the cart , who momentarily thinks he 's in dog heaven . and a weird looking guy who may have been doubly - cast as an airport employee and a judge . but most of the time , i was looking down , in boredom , or in embarrassment over the hacked - up script . them singing mice , those chapter partitions , the proficient acting of the animals-- none of these can compensate for a story . let me spoil the final scene : farmer hoggett looks at pig , proud , says " that 'll do , pig . that 'll do . " that 's it . hope i did n't ruin it for you . but tell me this : what the heck did that pig _ do _ ?

0NEG

at first i was intrigued by the strange cast and odd creatures on the galaxy quest trailer , but that was before i saw the film . now my view has completely changed . it 's time to embrace for impact , because this is a very bumpy ride . the story begins with the cast of galaxy quest including : jason nesmith ( tim allen ) , alexander dane ( alan rickman ) , gwen demarco ( sigourney weaver ) signing autographs at a convention . they meet fans who dress up in costumes , fans who worship the ground they walk on , and a group of aliens called thermians who believe that they are the ultimate saviors against the dreaded alien colony lead by sarris ( robin sachs ) . of course they are unaware of this until they actually begin performing their duties , and meet the ugly aliens themselves . thus begins the long adventure to help save the thermians . the movie plays like a really bad star trek episode , in fact it 's worse . i do n't even think trekkies will appreciate this weak spoof , because quite frankly it 's just not funny . all the jokes are basically collected observations from the series . one such continuous joke involves a simple crew member who believes he will die in space , because no extra on the tv show ever lives , as proven in the star trek series . creative jokes like this may seem like a clever idea , but not when they are used to death . a person can only take so much . we do not need to be tortured , especially when you have to pay for it . it 's pretty bad when even tim allen is pitiful . it 's not like i expected an oscar worthy performance form him , but a few laughs would have been helpful . speaking of acting , 2 fine talents were wasted as well . sigourney weaver was here to show cleavage , well at least it worked . it 's pretty bad when the only entertaining value of the film is cleavage . it just shows you how disgraceful the film really is . alan rickman however was not so lucky . after his last hit ( dogma ) he embarrasses himself by doing this sloppy mess . it 's just a shame to see talented actors and actresses throw their ability away . when the film could n't get any worse , thankfully some nice special effects pop up . like many big blockbusters ( armageddon , the haunting to name a few ) they rely heavily on effects to help boost the film 's box office results . times it works , but unfortunately we have to shell out hard earned money and suffer through this junk . when will it stop ? i am getting tired of being suckered into seeing such trash . it may look fine and dandy , but we need to at least have a story . is that too much to ask ? obviously it is . when galaxy quest finally ends , it literally crash lands . aside from the impressive looking creatures from industrial light and magic , it 's an embarrassment to the cast , and it 's embarrassing to the science fiction genre . it 's not the least bit fun , nor was it entertaining . the only place where this movie belongs is to infinity and beyond .

0NEG

the makers of spawn have created something almost as vacuous as this summer 's other comic book adaptation , batman and robin . both films make the mistake of adapting for the screen not only the look of their graphic counterparts , but also their monosyllabic dialogue and empty - headed character motivations . in panel - sized morsels , implausible plots and " rambo " -esque dialogue are often overshadowed by the artwork , but on thirty foot silver screens , it 's much more difficult to dismiss the shallowness behind the pretty pictures . spawn is ostensibly about an assassin named simmons ( white ) who is framed by a corporate baddie ( played without irony by sheen ) , then set on fire and left for dead . though the movie skimps on the next few plot points , here 's what i could determine : said assassin then becomes the leader of satan 's army , under the tutelage of a flatulating midget named clown ( leguizamo , grating as always ) . he is renamed , for reasons unbeknownst , spawn , and granted a really cool costume that enables him to become something of a human chameleon . but when spawn spies on a birthday party for his child , he realizes that he ca n't be the evil superdemon he 's expected to be , and he sets about avenging his untimely death . typical of summer blockbusters , spawn is an effects - laden ninety minute rock video . while the visions of hell are laughably crude ( think the virtual reality sequences of the lawnmower man ) , spawn 's prehensile outfit and the action sequences are truly something to behold . but the storytelling is completely lacking in emotion ( spawn longs for his wife , but they do n't have a single scene together before simmons ' death ! ) , conflict ( who will triumph is not anybody 's guess ) , and believability ( not that i expected it ) . so many questions are left unanswered , and i 'm sure they wo n't be addressed in the inevitable sequel . while last year 's the crow : city of angels suffered similar problems with its narrative ( which was lazy and somewhat incoherent ) , it had atmosphere to spare and genuine moments of hypnotic power . spawn is an in - your - face , screaming banshee of a film ; these guys know how to graft a comic book onto celluloid , but they have n't the faintest idea how to make a movie .

0NEG

phaedra cinema , the distributor of such never - heard - of classics as " soft toilet seats , " " trailer : the movie , " and " the one armed boxer vs . the flying guillotine , " has sneaked its latest release , " the sculptress , " into a few theaters this weekend hoping to cash in on a handful of halloween holidaygoers looking for a right good scare . " the sculptress " is a scary proposition all right , but not in the way its producers intended . from the outset it 's easy to see why some of the larger , more reputable chains are n't carrying it : the film looks like a straight - to - video release from the early ' 80s that 's been dusted off ( not very carefully ) and re - issued in theatrical format . that staple of schlocky z - movies jeff fahey ( " the lawnmower man " ) plays a washed - up shakespearean actor lacking in some basic people skills . when he 's not reliving his glory days in his ramshackle nob hill apartment , screaming scotch - induced " hamlet " soliloquies well into the night , he 's out and about on the streets of san francisco stalking loose women . fahey 's dobie sizes up his victims ( actually just one , a peep show performer name of sylvie ) dressed like one of the guys from kraftwerk , and approaches them in the ridiculous attire of a bavarian count replete with a cane , dark glasses , and a false beard ( just in time for halloween ! ) . " do you have a castle ? " sylvie asks dobie seductively when he flashes the bulging contents of his wallet outside a coffee shop . " jah . with ze many turrets " is dobie 's perplexing reply . the real " star " of the film ( and i use that term extremely loosely ) is katie wright , who plays the sculptress of the title . sarah is new in town , studying at the prestigious sf art institute under the mentorship of a " genius " frenchman , played by the beret - wearing patrick bauchau . that 's convenient , because sarah would one day like to live and work in paris ( you wo n't believe the film 's final shot , with its cheesy eiffel tower backdrop and " rosemary 's baby " -inspired imagery ) . bauchau 's character criticizes sarah 's work publicly ( her clay busts keep turning into gargoyles -- perhaps she 's possessed . . . by an incubus ! ! ? ) but he still manages to talk her into dinner . whereas wright does a decent english accent , her talents pretty much end there . on the other side of the wall , dobie 's troubled past is succinctly summarized in a scene in which he thumbs through an old scrapbook of newspaper clippings with headings like " actor delivers a stunning macbeth , " actor courted by hollywood studio , " " actor renounces hollywood for priesthood , " and " prostitute fingers priest in sex scandal . " the film 's plot could have been just as easily condensed . " artist moves in next door to shakespearean psychopath . " " yawns ensue . " so dobie rants and raves and sarah chips away at large blocks of granite till way past their bedtimes . late in the film , their paths finally cross with mind - numbing results . nobody else in the apartment complex appears to mind all the racket , but one old dear does go ballistic when sarah 's bathtub overflows . no , we do n't see wright in the tub ( or fahey for that matter ) , and the gore quotient is virtually nil , so for a horror film " the sculptress " is surprisingly lacking . the only thing worth looking at is san francisco , and writer / director ian merrick manages to make even it look dreary , windswept , and deserted . " the sculptress " is n't even bad enough to be fun . luckily , a limited release has made it easy to avoid .

0NEG

here is a movie that sadly follows the hong kong - recipe of moviemaking and storytelling to the letter . these kinds of movies are marked by an eye - opening sequence that introduces us to the main characters ; a life - and - death plot in which these characters become involved ; the inclusion of a host of inconsequential characters ; ridiculous subplots , and sunglass - wearing henchmen . that is not to say that i do n't like hong kong influenced movies ; however , it is quite obvious that these moviemakers have n't a clue that the american filmgoer needs more than hip - hop - talking thugs and stupid sight gags . observe the opening sequence . a band of hitmen are about to storm an apartment , led by melvin ( mark wahlberg ) and cisco ( lou diamond phillips ) . they are waiting for their partner to cut off the power so that they can storm the apartment with the help of infrared goggles . however , their partner is unsure of which cable to cut . he is undecided . this happens for about 10 seconds . the audience finds some humor in his foolishness . the lights suddenly go out . cisco is surprised and says : " whoa . . . let 's go ! " and they storm the apartment in a very nicely executed sequence . the big hit of the title refers to a kidnapping that happens a quarter of the way through the film . needing cash , cisco devises a plan to kidnap the daughter ( china chow ) of wealthy japanese industrialist jiro nishi . however , the daughter is also the god - daughter of paris ( avery brooks ) , who is cisco 's and melvin 's boss . infuriated and insufferable , paris commands cisco to uncover the mastermind of the kidnapping . during his ' investigation ' , cisco singles out melvin as the ringleader , and paris orders his capture and execution . melvin must now find a way to stay alive . by the way , do you know how the investigation takes place ? cisco 's partner makes the ransom phone call believing that his call will not be traced because of a trace buster that prevents tracing . but , mr . nishi has a trace buster buster . to counter that , cisco 's partner has a trace buster buster buster . but nishi has a trace buster buster buster buster . and so on . . . there is no doubt that this is an interesting world in which they live . and there are lots of issues that we 'd like to know more about . how does melvin justify his profession to his fiancee ? what goes on among this clique ? why is cisco at odds with melvin ? there is actually a lot of potential material that could have been explored , but it seems that no effort is made to go in that direction , and instead we are given a not - so - engrossing plot filled with one - liners , silly sight gags , extraneous sub - plots and tomfoolery . and , i have n't even mentioned his financee 's visiting parents who want them to separate , nor melvin 's mistress , nor the pimple - faced video clerk demanding the return of an overdue video and on and on and on . if the big hit signals the future of hong kong style movies that are made for american audiences , then shoot me now .

0NEG

after the huge success of " the exorcist " in 1973 a sequel was inevitable , and sadly like most horror fims that make money , the filmmakers decided to make a ridiculous sequel , that makes absolutely no sense at all , and to me was extremely pointless , wasting linda blair and max von sydow completely . needless , dumb sequel flopped in the box office , and never gained much success though it is voted as one of the worst sequels of all time , to which i agree with . to start the " story " it is four years later , and regan is being tormented by memories of what used to be , now a priest played by richard burton , is trying to figure out why this demon tried to possess regan , and now the demon somehow wants to possess her again ( maybe she was good or something ) . now they must try to stop this demon from taking over regan 's body , before it is too late . some of the bad things exorcist ii has in it is : linda blair , she had no need to revive her character , and she is really terrible in this film , she brings it down to a lull , and in places it seems like it just stops in its place , and does n't go anywhere . louise fletcher is alright for what it 's worth , but she could have done a lot better than this . the direction by john boorman , is that of a confused , stylish nature that i really could n't figure out . in fact , i had no idea what was going on in this film , the script was jumbled , the plot was jumbled , and the ending is just laugh out loud hilariosly bad . for those exorcist fans who have n't seen this one , i recommend renting it . i actually gave this one a high rating , if it were any worse it would have deserved zero pumpkins , i went easy on it however because of the fact that it has a bit of good direction , but nothing else ! i m not saying i like the film now , so do nt start going anywhere . bad , bad , bad movie .

0NEG

the people who populate the movie 54 are shallow , self - absorbed and self - indulgent . in other words , they perfectly mirror the era as well as the movie this feature depicts . 54 is the story of that well - publicized new york disco , studio 54 , the in - place in the ' 70s where anybody who was anybody went to be ogled , photographed and pampered . the difficulty with 54 , which was written and directed by mark christopher , is that his script takes no point of view . christopher neither condemns nor glorifies the legendary excesses that were studio 54 's hallmark . he keeps an uninvolved distance , thus keeping us from forming any emotional attachment with any of the protagonists . the movie 's one main asset is the surprising performance by mike myers as steve rubell , the famous owner of the nightspot . he is part rebel , part dreamer , part shrewd entrepreneur . he 's smart enough and childlike enough to pander to the dreams and desires of his clientele , yet stupid enough to brag on tv about hiding profits from the irs . myers , in his first straight character part , is in turn appealing and appalling . at one moment he can try to pressure a male employee into a sexual situation , then at the next moment apologize for his bad behavior and offer the young man a handful of cash . the story is told by shane o'shea ( ryan phillippe ) , a new jersey lad who dreams of crossing the river to the big apple . shades of john travolta 's brooklyn - bound tony in saturday night fever . eventually , shane does come to new york , attracts rubell 's eye and is admitted to the promised land . his looks get him a job as a busboy , and he is later promoted to the prestigious position of bartender , where he mixes with and makes drinks for the rich and famous . shane 's dream is to meet soap star julie black ( neve campbell ) , a fellow garden stater . but both characters are so sketchily drawn that even when they do hook up , it 's no big deal . the chemistry between shane and julie is nonexistent . 54 is a very cold , uninvolving movie . it 's all strobe lights and glitz , all substance . it 's sort of like the musical era it covers .

0NEG

i 've always been a kevin kline fan , silverado , fish called wanda , pirates of penzance , and even his hamlet on pbs ' great performances . the minute i saw the trailer for this film , i resolved to see it . besides the fact that kline starred , it looked like a hilarious film . i got sucker punched by the trailer to an extent , however , as i also thought , " wow , if there 's this much funny stuff in the trailer , there must be a ton of laughs in the rest of the film . " ( oops ) i packed up the wife and headed to les cinemas del diablo ( my name for our local multi - multi - plex . ) the film began . . . . the film concerns an english / drama teacher at a suburban high school , named howard brackett . he loves poetry and great literary works , but his class is more interested in his famous former student , played by matt dillon . ( i 'd put in his name , but my wife wo n't let me take notes during a movie and i 've forgotten it . ) they continually interrupt his long poetic expositions with fawning questions about him . brackett has been engaged to another teacher ( played by joan cusack ) for three years , and has finally gotten up the gumption to marry her . the wedding , however , becomes the big question mark of the film as this famous student of his says during the live oscar broadcast that brackett is a homosexual . kline spends most of the first two - thirds of the film frantically trying to convince everyone that he is n't . the whole town begins to examine every detail of his life and begins to identifying all those things that confirm his sexual preference . his closest friends do n't help matters , bringing nothing but barbara streisand laserdiscs to his stag party . there are some genuinely hilarous moments , one involving a tape geared towards helping men assert their masculinity . kline is hounded by a gay reporter played by tom selleck , who waxes poetic on the benefits of coming out , while at the same time doing his best to exploit the situation for his own sleazy tabloid machinations . the movie moves along fine and slowly builds to the climax of the wedding . kline stands at the altar and is asked to take his vows . . . if you want to be surprised , do n't read , i am going to reveal the ending . . . . instead of saying " i do " in front of his parents and most of the town , and even some cameras , he says " i 'm gay . " this is where the movie , in my opinion falls apart . most of the humor in the film had come from kline 's insistence that he was straight , while at the same time , loving poetry and being a senstivie guy , dressing well , and occaisionally acting prissy . it reminded me of the " effeminate heterosexual " sketch from saturday night live . it was funny , it was sustainably funny , and kline 's performance made it doubly so . however , after the wedding , the film drags on . they should have attempted to come to a quick conclusion , but it then gets into the serious side of what he 's done . he reconciles with his parents and his friends , some of which had turned on him . there are several scenes which seemed like a waste of time , the scene with his mother and her friends , which was hilarious , seemed pointless , and the scene with tom selleck in the bar with joan seemed pointless . finally , even though i am not catholic , i found the scene with the priest to be condescending . the preist can not believe that a man was engaged for three years and had not consumated the relationship , proclaiming to brackett in the third person , " he 's gay . " it got a chuckle from the audience , but i was distracted by it , and began to tire of the film . by the time the wedding had come and gone , i found myself hoping it would be over soon . ( much like this review you are saying ) overall , if i have to quantify it , i say , rising action gets * * * * and climax and falling action gets . see it in economy time .

0NEG

a month ago i wrote that speed 2 was the worst film i 've ever reviewed on paper . i did n't know at the time that i 'd soon encounter and despise batman & robin , which has just overtaken speed 2 as the picture least worthy of your attention this summer . as directed by joel schumacher ( who now specializes in batman sequels and john grisham adaptations and is n't very good at either ) , b & r is one long excuse for a taco bell promotion . the plot , which has mr . freeze and poison ivy ( uma thurman ) planning to take over gotham city and then " the vorld " ( as an oddly ineffective schwarzenegger states ) , is weighted down by repetitive asides about the nature of trust , partnership , blah , blah , blah . but morals are not the point of this film -- topping each bloated , confusing action scene with next one is . the garish art direction and overlit cinematography make this picture oddly comparable to the trashy showgirls . since when did gotham city become a giant las vegas hotel ? only george clooney comes out on top ; he underplays nicely and pretends like he 's in a real movie .

0NEG

call " hush " " stop or my mom will kill . " or " mommy fearest . " or " the hand that robs the cradle . " call it whatever you want , but certainly do n't see it unless you 're in desperate need of a bad movie - induced chuckle -- " hush " scores so many unintentional guffaws that it almost qualifies as a guilty pleasure . chalk its losses up to frequent stupidity lapses and apparent post - production tinkering ( it was supposed to open about a year ago ) , the latter of which appears to have given " hush " a send - off that 's downright infuriating . it 's too bad that " hush " is so laughable , because the on - screen talent -- including the pairing of gwyneth paltrow and jessica lange -- is nothing to laugh at . paltrow and johnathon schaech play helen and jackson , a photogenic new york couple on their way to spend christmas vacation at his wealthy , well - to - do family 's horse farm / estate kilronan . jackson 's mother martha ( lange ) runs kilronan all by herself , and her genteel southern hospitality makes helen feel welcome immediately -- even if her first meeting with martha takes place while helen is in the altogether , caught red - handed after a bedroom romp with her husband - to - be . but it seems that martha 's friendly smile masks a much more threatening demeanor ; she 's what you 'd call someone who loves too much . martha eagerly , deviously wants a grandchild , and then helen will be expendable , as far as she 's concerned . if there 's one reason to catch " hush , " it 's lange . she treats the pedestrian screenplay better than it deserves to be treated , injecting martha ( poorly written though she may be ) with a little empathy to level out the psycho - playing field . when she delves into martha 's dark side , predictable cliches -- chain - smoking , staring in mirrors , praying in a confessional to a priest who is n't there , poking a hole in helen 's diaphragm so she 'll become pregnant ( and she does ) -- abound , but it 's moderately entertaining junk because lange is such an interesting actress to watch . veteran performer nina foch is smart and tart as jackson 's wheelchair - bound paternal grandmother . the rest of the cast looks ill and uncomfortable , especially paltrow . but can you really blame them ? the character relationships in " hush " hold a certain amount of promise , at least until their psychological impact is blown out of the water by sheer stupidity . idiotic situations ( martha yells at a nearby horse so it will bolt up and knock helen over ) compliment idiotic dialogue ( " why did you yell ? " helen yells back at martha ) , and the film takes the form of one of the shoddier fill in the blank - from - hell flicks ever made . you can see through a great deal of martha 's actions and lies from their conception ; why do people who have known this woman for years longer than we have never figure things out ? does nobody communicate or read the newspaper in this town ? if any of her potential victims thought , acted or behaved like normal people , " hush " would be a really short movie . and then there 's the climax and ending , which abruptly come when helen starts having contractions after eating some pound cake spiked with a labor - inducing drug normally used on horses . after a really weird chase scene , martha calmly knits in a rocking chair while forcing helen to give birth in a bed all by herself . i wo n't spoil what happens next except to say that it 's contradictory , illogical and ( probably , since i 'm no doctor ) medically impossible . the final scene offers no closure , no resolution , no confrontation whatsoever . it 's just there , dangling amidst silent displeasure . no one should like this ending , regardless of their feelings on the preceding material . perhaps " hush " 's title is a plea to silence its audience 's likely bitter word of mouth while exiting the theater .

0NEG

a big , busy boxing satire with a surprisingly paltry punch , the great white hype stars samuel l . jackson as a shameless boxing promoter whose plan to boost sagging pay - per - view revenues is to " invent " a white contender ( peter berg ) to challenge his black heavyweight " champ " ( damon wayans ) . ( the logic is that people will pay more to see black vs . white than black vs . black . ) he may be right , in an absurdly accurate way , but the film does n't give us a reason to care . as a scathing sports spoof , hype is just that : unfunny , unfocused , and , at times , just plain pointless . as a commentary on race relations , it 's even * less * effective . the dialogue is the best of this mess , lines like jon lovitz exclaiming " i can not make caviar out of fish eggs ! " writers tony hendra and ron shelton also do good on the street slang , though we never hear enough of it . the script is n't strong enough , though , to support the aggressive camera work of director reginald hudlin ( house party ) . he comes across as absolute overkill . the great white hype * almost * turns around at the end , at the big match , when hudlin attempts an extended gag of rock - concert proportions . with costumed dwarfs , gangsta rappers , and the " champ " dressed as death , only then do we get a glimpse of the spoof that should 've been .

0NEG

i know there were times during this movie that i laughed pretty hard . the problem is , i ca n't remember them as i write this review . that 's not a good sign . in booty call , jamie foxx is bunz , a character whom i ca n't really describe , because i do n't know that much about him . i only know that he likes to shoot dice on the sidewalk , and that he does n't like relationships , just " booty calls " at three in the morning ( no questions , no commitment ) . bunz has a best friend named rushon ( tommy davidson ) , who seems to be bunz 's direct opposite : on the straight and narrow , and currently in a long - term commitment ( a whole seven weeks , wow ! ) . rushon wants to finally sleep with his girlfriend , nikki ( tamala jones ) , but for a reason which is not totally explained , it 's going to happen after a double date with bunz and nikki 's friend lysterine ( vivica a . fox ) , who have never met . to make a long story short , the two couples pair off and spend the rest of the evening having their attempts to do the deed spoiled by nikki 's obsession with safe sex . first she wants condoms , so bunz and rushon go out and get them . oh , no , they have to be latex , not lambskin . back to the store . now they 've got to get dental dams , or there 'll be no foreplay . why are both couples stopped each time nikki makes a demand ? nikki phones lysterine , who lives across the hall , and tells her she 'd better be making these demands , too . talk about coitus interruptus . booty call is a film that does not know whether it wants to be a regular comedy or one of those over - the - top comedies . the difference between the two is that in the latter , things constantly happen which are so far removed from reality . in this category , for example , you have ace ventura : private eye on the mild side , and airplane ! at the extreme . there are times during booty call where the film steps out of its shell and tries for this status , but then too often quickly retreats to the safety of convention . it is disappointing , and even worse , distracting . there are also instances where the screenplay by takashi bufford and bootsie parker ( are those real names ? ) does not live up to its potential , as jokes are left unexploited or even ruined by bad writing . for instance , there is a scene where our main characters are in a chinese restaurant . bunz goes up to an asian gangster and speaks to him in fluent cantonese , much to everyone 's surprise . however , when asked how he learned the language , he goes into this explanation of how he started picking up words from late - night kung - fu films , and soon gained mastery . this negated the ludicrousness of the entire scene . if , on the other hand , when asked how he learned to speak chinese , bunz simply replied with , " kung - fu movies , " and then moved on , the joke would have been much more effective . this is because it would have been totally unbelievable , but funny because we know it is unbelievable . by explaining the point and trying to make the ridiculous plausible , the film is not giving its viewers enough credit . the inconsistency and uncertain believability unfortunately also raise other questions . why are two such disparate people like bunz and rushon best friends ? why do rushon and nikki fix up bunz and lysterine ? if nikki is so obsessed with safe sex , why does n't she have some condoms at her own apartment ? these questions are not answered by the screenplay , but are overlooked for the sole reason of moving the plot forward . a very noticeable quality of booty call is the prevalence of unnecessary foul language . some movies use a lot of swear words , but use them under very justifiable circumstances , as when they are employed consistent with a character 's pattern of speech . other films , such as the recent jackie brown , use them in ways that almost parody themselves . booty call just sticks them in to get laughs , and it does n't work . they stick out like sore thumbs because there is almost no reason to use them . half of the scenes seem to occur for no reason . the chinese restaurant , a holdup at a convenience store , and a trip to the hospital seem to have nothing to do with the story , and are in there for filler . this is surprising , considering that the film is less than eighty minutes long . it 's too bad that the core of the film is n't much better , since it is comprised of sometimes funny , but forgettable dialog . i refer you to the first paragraph of this review .

0NEG

retelling the classic story of joan of arc has been a popular trend this year . earlier this may , leelee sobieski played the passionate title role in the top - rated miniseries that debuted on cbs . and now , director luc besson has delivered his version of the sweeping epic about the teenage girl supposedly sent by god to rescue france from the clutches of their enemies . starring milla jovovich , who is predominantly unconvincing as the heavenly messenger accused of being a witch , ` the messenger : the story of joan of arc ' is a disjointed and overblown historical re - enactment that prevails merely as a bloated mistreatment of the famous legend . besson ( who 's previous work includes the hyperactive sci - fi ` the fifth element ' ) perhaps entrusted a bit too much faith in ex - wife jovovich , because in ` the messenger ' , the actress is drowning in a pool of her own inexperience . at first , when reports were indicating that jovovich had been chosen for such a demanding role , i was highly doubtful that her marginal talent could carry a film of such a caliber . after seeing the rousing trailer , my hesitant optimism suddenly skyrocketed - milla jovovich looked superb . with the hopeful propulsion of her stellar performance , ` the messenger ' looked like a timeless epic in the making . a timeless epic it is not . besson is hesitant to abandon his unique and flashy style , and the story behind ` the messenger ' is not entirely suited to his demands . on the shoulders of besson 's choppy and unexciting direction , the film dissipates into an uninspiring hodgepodge of poorly executed battle sequences and bizarre imagery . there is no human exploration into the character of joan ( or jeanne ) . jovovich merely rambles on about the power of god when we have little or no insight into her visionary objective . jovivich 's unsatisfying portrayal only helps lead to the realization that besson sees jeanne as a piece of spiritual cardboard . she is just another special effect in this continuous visual feast . jovovich does have a few isolated moments of sheer power , but mainly , she looks lost . quite frankly , i do n't know of any actress who could successfully navigate her way through ` the messenger ' without a major fumble . the script is chock - full of laughable dialogue and unfortunate comedy , as jeanne confronts the uncrowned king charles vii ( john malkovich ) and informs him of her heavenly intentions . faye dunaway plays charles ' overbearing mother - in - law , and dustin hoffman appears over two - hours into the story as a character dubbed ? the conscience ' . all three actors juggle limited screen time , although malkovich is uncharacteristically awful . the battle scenes are extremely bloody , but with the presence of such jittery camera work , they capture none of the excitement or finesse of something like ` braveheart ' . there 's a particularly graphic and unsettling scene early on , when jeanne ( as a young girl ) watches in horror from a closet as her older sister is murdered and then savagely raped by a bloodthirsty english soldier . even his fellow troopers are petrified . ` the messenger ' is also strictly a 90 's update on the classic story . almost too 90 's , it seems . there 's gratuitous use of the f - word and a barrage of slang terms like ` she 's nuts ! ' sprinkled throughout the screenplay . i was half - expecting jeanne to invite her homeys to come chill in her crib , but it never happened . there 's also the familiar presence of bizarre besson humor , but none of it comes even remotely close to functioning properly . it seems terribly misplaced , but in a catastrophe as jumbled and disjointed as ` the messenger ' , almost everything does . the musical score by erric serra is spectacular , and the set and production designs are continuously impressive . if it was visual excellence that besson was striving for , then he achieves his goal . but the only time the dramatics come alive in ` the messenger ' is during the closing trial , in which jeanne is found guilty and burned at the stake . during these moments , the historical relevance and dramatic purpose of joan of arc reaches the audience , albeit in a faint stream of light that provokes little power or meaning . it 's just too delayed for besson to revive his lifeless interpretation , in which he is always concerned with the wrong aspects . ` the messenger : the story of joan of arc ' is an unlikely and unwelcome historical addition to the hollywood shelf . anyone searching for an entertaining epic is going to be painfully slapped with an overblown and confusing film . despite my original hopefulness , milla jovovich is not going to have to worry about thanking the academy .

0NEG

violence is bad . violence is ugly . violence breeds yet more violence . kids , do n't try this at home . this weighty message is n't the only barrier to enjoying brother , but it 's certainly one of the largest . written , directed by , and starring the infamous takeshi kitano ( kikujiro , sonatine ) brother is his first film made outside his familial japan , bringing the yakuza tradition to los angeles . ( yakuza translated for the average american is the japanese mafia . ) if you piss a " family " member off , or dishonor yourself in any way , the usual punishment is public display of self - mutilation , usually resulting in the loss of limbs . a definition of dishonor can be anything from making a stupid decision to leaving one family for another . it would be interesting to know more about where these and other customs come from . unfortunately the film does n't give too much of an explanation , assuming its audience is aware of kitano 's earlier work . there are several shots that focus specifically on detailed tattoos that spread across the entire back of the yakuza members , leading one to assume they would be symbolic of something , but you never know what . then there 's a scene in which a man kills himself in front of a rival in exchange for that rival joining the family . granted , this is one of the best scenes in the movie , but it does n't make a lot of sense . instead , the two hours are basically spent watching the following : people go out and shoot each other , talk about it for ten - plus minutes , then go out and do it again . the consistently repetitive discussion of territory during these moments involuntarily provokes yawning . there are also plot details thrown in for no identifiable purpose . all of the sudden yamamoto ( kitano ) has a girlfriend . he barely speaks to her , treats her like crap , and then sends her away . another missed opportunity , considering it is such a big deal for kitano to bring his magic to the united states , is the combination of cultures , which rely too heavily on overused stereotypes . though slow moving , brother does have good elements . the action scenes are well directed , clearly defined , and interesting to watch . some of the violence is more hinted at than shown , which produces the luscious squirm that one goes to see such films for . the actors would be more enticing if they had more to do . shirase 's ( masaya kato ) loud , sarcastic coolness set against yamamoto 's quietly threatening attitude is truly an entertaining combination . their moments together or apart steal the rest of the show . also to its credit , brother tackles the cause and effect of crime with realism . a life of crime is easy to get sucked into with the first reward of quick cash . sure people get rich , but they can also lose just as easily . it 's a great moral , with a great cast , just not much substance to back it up .

0NEG

there 's nothing quite like a gory anime . really , and this is the truth , no other genre in film gets away with such violence without a word being said in the media about it . with anime , a common shot is watching a body getting quickly cut in two , and the rest of the insides falling out seconds afterword . this is a standard practice in anime , or at least the half dozen or so titles that i 've seen . vampire hunter d is a gory , gory film . if they ever made a live version of the film , it would be banned in several countries and given a rating somewhere below xxx . it 's not that it 's gore is unique - it 's just like other gory animes - but this one was supposed to stand out because of the complexity it 's story , characters , animation , etc . . . it really did n't . it was disgusting and gruesome , which overshadowed the story , what little of it there was . it seems that in the not too distant future vampires and evil control the world , because god knows that our local police force just ca n't seem to get a handle on vampires in the movies . one evening , a blond peasant girl , drawn to look 17 and innocent ( a foreshadow that we will see her naked , i guessed early on it would be in the shower or in a rape scene ) is out fighting evil in her local forest preserve when she stumbles onto the private property of a ten thousand year old vampire ( insert strom thurmand joke here . ) of course , he never put a ? no trespassing ? sign on his yard , so one ca n't really blame her , but he 's upset anyway and demands retribution . she gets the obligatory bite on the neck ( are n't there other places to get blood from ? it seems like a bite in the elbow would do well enough . if it 's good enough for doctors to draw blood from , then why do vampires stray from that sight ? ) to fight the spell , she enlists the help of a mysteriously tall , dark and handsome vampire hunter ( you guessed it , his name is d ) . the vampire hunter is torn between fighting vampires , being attracted to the 17 year old peasant girl and finding reasons not to talk too much . you see , like all heroes in these kinds of stories , he 's a brooder , who 's sole purpose in life is to remain really , really silent . when he speaks , it 's in cliches . heroes like this are bad when they 're live , even worse when animated . later the vampire hunter storms the castle to meet the big bad vampire , who wants to marry the peasant girl because he 's bored after 10 , 000 years of living ( the only clever vampire insight made in the movie ) , will vampire hunter d rush to save her in time ? will we see blood and intestines spattering on every place imaginable ? in it 's defense , the animation , when focusing on being original rather than recycling anime slicing , could at times be original . the talking hand was clever - and i think the inspiration for a skateboard - related logo . and that 's the best defense i can think of . i understand that vampire hunter d is supposed to be a fave among anime fans , but i really do n't see it . it 's an excuse to watch blood dripping from teeth , blood exploding out of eye sockets and horses necks , and most importantly , like all violent anime , it is an excuse to see animated breasts . why ? what is the point of that ? maybe i have to understand the genre and look past the obsessive gore and mysogny . i 'm not a prude , i just do n't think it 's warranted . it puts itself so far out in front of the movie that everything else gets lost . is there a neccesity in seeing a 17 year old in the shower ? of course not ? it 's done for shock . it 's tasteless and despicable .

0NEG

lauded as a genius by many , stanley kubrick commands a superlative filmography that includes such critically - acclaimed films as " 2001 : a space odyssey , " " a clockwork orange , " " lolita , " and " dr . strangelove , or : how i learned to stop worrying and love the bomb . " now , sadly , he 's added " eyes wide shut " to that impeccable body of work and his final film is the first and only blot on his near - flawless copybook . kubrick , alas , should have quit while he was ahead . this much - publicized psycho - sexual tease - a - thon , with its star billing of real - life marrieds tom cruise and nicole kidman , is nothing more than one long ( two - and - a - half hours long ) boring exercise that features kubrick operating with talent wide shut . kubrick , faithless to arthur schnitzler 's 1926 novella " dream story , " has confused eroticism with nudity . he has confused intellectualism with talking slowly . he has confused profundity with pretentiousness . in addition , the director has made some strange casting choices , leaving sydney pollack in and leaving accomplished performers harvey keitel and jennifer jason leigh out . pollack , the director of such box - office hits as " tootsie " and " out of africa , " is normally solid in his occasional acting stints but here he 's miserably out of his depth . . . and there is n't much depth to begin with ! unhappily , there 's not likely to be a director 's cut of this film to determine whether the decision to exorcise keitel and leigh was the right one . in fact , with the exception of the stark black - and - white credits , snatches of baroque music on the soundtrack , and many , many grainy tracking shots down lavishly - decorated corridors , there 's none of kubrick 's trademark brilliance in this film . it does n't help that the story , as delivered , is ridiculous . cruise and kidman , who bring little more than marital torpor to the project , play well - to - do new yorkers bill and alice harford . he 's a doctor and she 's an unemployed art gallery director and they share a central park west address . at an opulent party hosted by their friend victor ziegler ( pollack ) , alice gets a little tipsy and starts dancing with a jeremy irons - like hungarian , who 's singularly determined to get her in the sack . bill , too , is seen arm - in - arm with a couple of models before he 's pulled away to deal with an overdoser . back home , bill and alice smoke a little pot before alice 's aggressive jealousy kicks in . as retribution , she confesses to her husband that she once had deep feelings for a naval officer she eyeballed at a hotel where she and bill once stayed . this hurtful admission sends bill into a tailspin ; he pounds the streets of the village in his heavy black overcoat struggling with black - and - white images of alice in the grip of a horny midshipman . it 's all way too much for him . for revenge , bill almost has sex with a hooker . he almost has feelings for a underage girl he sees in a costume store . then he almost does the hooker 's roommate . and he 's almost involved in an overblown rococo orgy when an old college chum of his tips him off to a mysterious , password - protected party where everyone wears masks and " the women are incredible " ( i . e . , naked ) . this " erotic " set piece , a cult - ish bacchanal complete with chanting , incense , and lots of strategically - placed partygoers covering up the dirty , might impress the likes of hugh hefner , but it 's a lot less shocking than it 's intended to be . what 's the big deal ? bill does n't exactly * do * anything ( other than throw his money and credentials around ) , and alice only ever lusted in her heart . whoop - dee - doo . still , they make up at the same agonizingly slow pace -- was kubrick , notorious for multiple takes , paying them at an hourly rate ? even geniuses have their bad days . " eyes wide shut " just happens to be kubrick 's bad day , an unerotic , disappointing , and altogether pointless end to an otherwise memorable career .

0NEG

by starring in amy heckerling 's " clueless " two summers ago , alicia silverstone proved she was n't just another pretty , pouty ingenue , showing a buoyant comedic craftiness that blew all previous jobs -- namely a stint as the aerosmith girl and a silly turn as the lethal lolita of " the crush " -- out of the water . her only work since that 1995 gem has been in june 's " batman & robin , " where she overcame the underwritten role of batgirl . now , she 's the star and producer of " excess baggage , " a hopelessly phony film that demonstrates how an ill - composed story can drag an otherwise solid performer down to its level . silverstone 's emily t . hope is stuck with a billionaire father ( jack thompson ) who neglects her emotionally . in an outlandish plan to gain his affection , she fakes her own kidnapping -- emily uses an electronically disguised voice to call her dad and set a pricey ransom , ties her legs together and mouth shut with duct tape and locks herself in the trunk of her bmw . but before the police can " rescue " her , professional auto thief vincent roche ( benicio del toro ) jimmies the locks , hot - wires the engine and makes off with both the car and emily , who 's still trapped in the back . when vincent discovers emily , the two do n't exactly hit it off -- she annoys him , he annoys her , and at the advice of his slimy car salesman partner ( harry connick , jr . ) , he decides to drive her out to the middle of nowhere and leave her there . along the way , of course , they get into a whole heap of trouble , and come to realize that being together is the only way to get out of their sticky , felony - studded situation . it does n't help matters that emily and vincent are being trailed by cops , crooks and even her shady uncle ray ( christopher walken ) , who 's wise to his niece 's ploys for attention and has mafia connections . for at least a half - hour , " excess baggage " bounces along fast and efficiently . during this time , emily and vincent sport engaging personalities as well as a nice role - reversal twist -- she 's an awfully aggressive , combative victim and he 's quite the aloof , seemingly vulnerable captor . but once it 's past its set - up , the situation suddenly becomes uninvolving as the story tries to be too many things at once . a road movie , a teen comedy , a mob thriller , a drama about family relationships -- you name the cliche and " excess baggage " likely covers its territory . of course a romance develops between the two leads , but it all seems forced , and thus characterization is manipulated to cause the finally happy outcome . " do you like my tummy ? " emily coos to vincent at one point in the film . huh ? did i miss something ? the hard - edged , foul - mouthed grrrl is suddenly gone and replaced with a pair of batting goo - goo eyes . then again , " excess baggage " becomes so weak in so many areas that the personality transplant is not a complete surprise . a supporting cast attempts to do what they can with colorful but empty secondary roles , but the movie is n't game enough to use them all and therefore seems overcrowded . motivations keep shifting , resulting in an often confusing narrative . scant existing story background confuses matters even worse and adds to the growing list of unanswered questions . " excess baggage " has too many characters , too much plot and juggles with one arm behind its back and a remaining shaky hand . i loved silverstone 's turn in " clueless " as an aloof , pampered beverly hills matchmaker inspired by jane austen 's " emma . " looking back at the skill she displayed for comedy there , it 's simple to justify any high expectation or enthusiasm that i had mustered for " excess baggage . " sadly , however , " excess baggage " is no " clueless . " but , on the other hand , it is clueless .

0NEG

" . . . because i 'm a scientist . that 's what we do ! " --- dr . alexander mccabe ( bob gunton ) , in response to why he created evil bats . alright folks , stop me if you 've heard this one : genetically altered animals wreak havoc on a town and a small band of locals , assisted by a specialist in the particular animal 's field , must team up to stop the mutant creatures before they can multiply and spread across the earth . oh yeah , the military is on their way to bomb the town as well , so they are running short on time . sound familiar ? such is the plot of the destination films release of bats . dina meyer stars as the " bat specialist " sheila , who is pulled from her research ( along with her annoying sidekick , played with irritating deftness by leon ) in order to help a small texas town figure out why some local citizens and animals have been chewed to death recently . with the help of the local sheriff ( lou diamond phillips ) , a cdc official ( carlos jacott ) , and a scientist ( bob gunton ) , sheila discovers it is indeed bats ( who have been genetically altered by gunton 's character to be more aggressive and omnivorous , in order to be used as a military weapon ! ) . i have to say here that i knew exactly what i was getting into going into this film . there 's not a frame of promotional footage i have seen for the film that would have led me to believe it was going to be any good . in this respect , the film never disappointed me . this film reaches a level that transcends the " so bad it 's good " level and borders on the downright insane . the effects are awful , the script is contrived , and for most of the feature i was laughing at things that were supposed to be taken seriously ( i think ) . i challenge anyone to sit through the scene , where a bat stalks a baby in a crib while another bat terrorizes a patron eating at a diner , with a straight face . thankfully , the performances are as good as they can be considering the material the actors had to perform with . dina meyer has always been the highlight of any of the films she has been in ( johnny mnemonic , dragonheart , and starship troopers . . . the latter being the only film out of that batch with any actual merit ) , and this one is no exception . while one never really gets the impression that meyer 's character could be a bat expert in reality , one never really cares to doubt it either . she gives as good a performance as could be expected , plus she 's nice to look at for an hour and a half . lou diamond phillips is also serviceable here , as the small town sheriff turned eventual hero . although when we first meet his character he knows bats are the reason for what 's going on in town , for some reason later on he suddenly becomes amazed to learn that the actual cause of the deaths in town are because of bats . the only bad performance in the film is that of leon 's . he is relegated to the " i 'm not sticking around here ! " character and proceeds to repeat variations of that line for the majority of the film even though he stays . anyone who ca n't immediately tell that bob gunton ( the bad guy in patch adams and countless other films ) is going to eventually turn on the gang and side with his creations before his eminent death will probably be surprised , but i highly doubt it . even if he had n't been the villain in just about every film he 's ever been in , so many obvious hints are given to indicate the devious act that it holds no shock whatsoever . in fact , his death is welcome , because it finally starts moving the plot towards the finale . if the plot does n't sound ridiculous to you yet , then check out these little tidbits : a multitude of bats inexplicably disperses when a police officer cocks his pistol . an entire town disregards the sheriff and doctor 's orders to stay indoors after a curfew is instigated , causing mass hysteria when the bats come out in full force , killing several townsfolk . a government official blows off shelia 's instructions ( to wait until dawn to install a cooling unit in the bats ' cave that will kill all of them off ) by pulling a night job , resulting in the death of an entire military unit . a cavern full of bat feces never ignites when a phosphorus flare is lit right in the middle of it . finally , to top it all off , this little texas town is showing nosferatu in it 's single screen theater ( for reference , our town has over a million people in it with nearly 150 movie screens , and we 're lucky to even get kevin smith 's dogma ) . the most laughable part of the movie though comes from the ill - conceived bat puppets . while the actual bat attack scenes are shot with rapid fire editing ( making the scenes nearly impossible to comprehend what 's going on ) , the scenes where a bat is called upon to interact with a live actor are usually shot more low - key . therefore we the audience get loving close - ups of the most unrealistic , rubbery bat puppets ever committed to film . being able to see the puppeteer 's arms would be the only things that could have made these creations worse . after all of this , if you still decide bats might be the movie for you , do n't say you have n't been warned . trust me when i say that it 's a lot more fun to trash than it is to sit through . i just wish that dina meyer would be cast in more roles or at least choose better films to appear in . she 's definitely a talent that is going to waste in films like these .

0NEG

the word to describe sharon stone is " wonder " . not that she _ is _ a wonder , but rather that i wonder how she can be so inconsistent . she has a dynamic screen presence in " basic instinct " , turns in a surprisingly fine acting job in " casino " , but possesses neither of those here . stone teams up with private school headmaster 's wife isabelle adjani to kill adjani 's thoroughly unlikable husband ( chazz palminteri ) . in a comedy of errors and unexpected twists straight out of hitchcock ( as in ` homage to ' [ read " steal from " ] ) , it turns out that someone saw them or he 's not dead or maybe . . . kathy bates turns in a credible , if unspectacular , performance as an investigative police detective . her character is a bit dull but realistic , although her actions at the end are puzzling . adjani is more than satisfactory as the timid beaten spouse driven to desperation . it 's stone that is a disappointment among the actors . how can she be the epitome of a femme fatale in previous films and come off as a blank in this one ? costumed in skin - tight clothes and looking down her nose at everyone , she is someone you would want to avoid because she is boring , not enticingly dangerous . even the threat ( or promise ? ) of a lesbian relationship between the conspirators is only half played out . on the positive side , there are enough unexpected plot developments to keep your interest alive . that is if you can put up with stone 's cardboard cut - out character and scenes directly lifted from hitch 's movies .

0NEG

the tagline on random hearts reads " in a perfect world , they never would have met . " in a perfect world , i never would have seen this movie . the biggest flaw is that 20 minutes into this film , kay chandler ( kristin scott thomas ) and dutch van den broeck ( harrison ford ) are the only two major characters alive ; resulting in little doubt that they will end up together at some point during the laborious two - hours - and - then - some production . dutch is a sergeant in internal affairs at the district of columbia police department . kay is a congresswoman from new hampshire . although they both think they are happily married , their spouses are cheating with each other behind their backs . dutch and kay are soon widowed when a plane goes down carrying their partners ; they subsequently discover the affair . the rest of the film is the pointless , unrealistic and often - times boring story of their researching the sexual relationship that they were blind to , and getting to know each other in the process . two sub plots are of little help to the already problematic film . dutch is trying to arrest a fellow officer , a task that seems rather ordinary for hollywood fare . all the great stereotypes get pulled , including my personal favorite of the key witness that makes bail and is murdered soon thereafter . kay 's distraction from the film 's primary focus is her campaign for re - election and attempts to shield her 15 year old daughter from the truth about the father she put on a pedestal . these sub plots could have made for semi - interesting points , but the film seems afraid to explore politics or mother - daughter relations in depth , and consequently suffers . random hearts ' two primary characters seem to live in shells . although both kay and dutch are given their own sub plots , they seem to never deal with anyone other than themselves or each other . there is plenty of opportunity , dutch having a partner and kay having close friends and her daughter , but the movie shies away from exploring these relationships . veteran actor and director of this film sydney pollack , and critically acclaimed up - and - comer dylan baker both have cameo roles , but be careful not to blink too much or you will miss them both . other than its weak plot , it is hard to criticize random hearts . however , it is also hard to compliment it . had the film taken some small risks and more fully explored its extra characters and plots it may have tasted more like a well frosted cake , rather than the dry one that equates to be .

0NEG

in double jeopardy , the stakes are high . think of the plot as a rehash of sleeping with the enemy , and then rearrange the details and the gender of the stalker . the finished product , although able to maintain the viewer 's attention , is a predictable and unexciting thriller with an idiotic script . ` alex , i 'll take homicide for $ 400 . . . ' libby parsons ( ashley judd ) is a happily married mom leading a normal life . one night , her husband nick ( bruce greenwood ) takes her out for a romantic escape on a sailboat . libby awakens in the middle of the night to find she is covered in blood and nick has strangely disappeared . she follows a trail of bloody footprints up to the deck , where she handles a fallen knife ( like any stupid character ) and is spotted by the coast guard , who are responding to a distress signal sent earlier in the evening . nick is presumed dead , and although she pleads her innocence , libby is tried and convicted for the murder of her husband . now , please do n't think i 'm spoiling any vital plot details , because the informative trailer has already spilled most of the beans . if you have n't seen this preview , do n't read any further . but seriously , the inane screenplay by douglas weisberg and douglas s . cook is so elementary that the average viewer will be two or three steps ahead of the characters . during the most vital scenes in the movie , i was anticipating every twist or ` surprise ' that eventually popped up on the screen . i imagine the writers presume their core audience for double jeopardy is a very naive group of individuals . most , unfortunately , will be too distracted by the moronic plot to appreciate the few positive aspects of the production . one is tommy lee jones , who plays travis lehman , a parole officer given the tedious task of watching over libby after she serves her sentence in prison . jones is always wonderful as an authority figure , and he 's certainly familiar with this sort of role ( as he played so well in the fugitive and us marshals ) . judd , as a likable heroin with gusto , also has a chance to flex her acting abilities . while emotionally unconvincing , the actress is tremendously fun in her juvenile role , perking up the movie like an injection of anti - depressant . the actors , and their relationship together , present the one - two punch that prevents double jeopardy from derailing itself entirely . and now , back to the plot . while behind bars , libby learns an interesting little bit of information : a person ca n't be convicted of the same crime twice . this law , called ` double jeopardy ' , could be her motive for hunting down her husband . . . who may still be alive . yes , you heard right . the movie degenerates into a cross - country chase , where everything you expect to happen . . . does . the final scenes , which could have redeemed the film , are poorly handled by director bruce beresford - whose previous work centers highly around drama ( driving miss daisy , paradise road ) . ironically , it is those elements - like the driving force of libby to reunite with her son - that do n't quite work here . at least double jeopardy is paced well enough to satisfy diehard fans of the two stars . unfortunately , jones lacks some of the edge that he had as sam gerard in the fugitive , and the real depth of his character is only skin deep . but he and ashley judd are more than welcome considering the material , and both have some memorable comic moments . judd , in particular , has a hilarious scene in which she wards off an oncoming male by explaining she has to check in with her ` parole officer ' . hmmm . . . perhaps this would have made a good comedy . it is disappointing , because there are the makings of a competent action film here . it 's nicely shot and choreographed in downtown vancouver , and will entertain those who are n't turned off by the woeful story - line . ? tis a shame that double jeopardy is an adult thriller that would n't fool most children .

0NEG

synopsis : melissa , a mentally - disturbed woman who likes to smoke , seduces doug , a minor - league baseball player who likes to study anatomy , work on motorcycles , and make out with his girlfriend in a public library . when doug decides to stop seeing her , melissa maliciously takes revenge on those around him , including his girlfriend , his mother , and his cat . comments : malicious , i suppose , is an acceptable moview for what it is : a cheap , b - movie thriller which rips off dozens and dozens of spurned - psycho - lover - who - wants - revenge films ( like fatal attraction , hand that rocks the cradle , etc . etc . ) that have come before it . malicious , however , really does n't provide very many particularly suspenseful moments . the plot starts off energetically enough , the main characters are introduced and the affair between doug and melissa begins and ends pretty early on in the film . it starts to drag , unfortunately , after this . melissa will obviously try to take her revenge on doug ( as always seems to happen in movies like these ) , but she does so in unimaginative ways that have been done in other , better thrillers before . she drugs someone . she kills a family pet and leaves it in the girlfriend 's apartment . and , of course , she stalks , so we see a number of shots , which are supposed to be suspenseful , where she 's spying on doug and his girlfriend . i wo n't reveal the ludicrous ending to this turkey , but i warn you that it 's both painfully obvious and a real yawner . john vernon does a remarkably good job at playing the not - so - bright baseball jock who initially gets swept away by melissa ( one of the script 's faults is to try to pass off a character like this as a pre - med student ) . the same can not be said , though , for molly ringwald . at times , she can effectively pull off the obsessed lover routine , especially during her silent , i'm - going - to - stare - you - down scenes . at other times , however , she just seems somehow goofy and out of place . in one particular scene which i guess was supposed to be suspenseful , she screeches " f -- k you , you b-----d " and throws a phone . she delivers the line so ridiculously that one ca n't help but laugh . malicious certainly is n't the worst thriller of its kind out in the video racks ( a number of really fat turkies in this genre are out there ) , but it is n't all that good or original either . feel free to treat this film maliciously , watch something else .

0NEG

warner brothers ; rated pg-13 ( mild violence , sexual situations ) ; 132 minutes director : luis mandoki screenplay : gerald di pego ( from the novel by nicholas sparks ) cast : kevin costner , robin wright - penn , paul newman , illeana douglas , robbie coltrane , jesse james , john savage . review by : geoff berkshire i 'm not an overly cynical guy . there have been many glossy hollywood romances that have carried me away with their romanticism over the years . however , i have my limits and i also have standards . this brings us to the subject at hand : message in a bottle , the big ticket romance that warner brothers ' unleashed upon the movie going public just in time for valentine 's day . the story , what little of it that there is , involves boring chicago tribune reporter theresa osborne ( robin wright - penn ) dealing with her recent divorce and trying to raise her young son jason ( jesse james ) . during a brief stay somewhere in new england she finds the titular message in a bottle while on a morning run by the ocean . the letter , written to a mystery woman named catherine , instantly captivates her . upon her return , theresa shares it with her best friend lina ( illeana douglas ) , her boss charlie ( robbie coltrane ) , and the entire city of chicago ( the newspaper publishes an article about it ) . it turns out that the message was written by grieving widower garret blake ( kevin costner ) and so theresa travels to north carolina and tracks him down . he turns out to have a colorful father ( paul newman ) but is otherwise perfectly dull and overly obsessed with sailing . this is somehow attractive to theresa and the two begin their awkward courtship . of course she does n't tell him that she found his letter , she wants to but the rules of this type of film require him to find out later ( preferably right after they first make love ) . this way garret can get very angry and the relationship can be threatened . the discovery of the message and garret 's discovery that theresa discovered the message are really the only two noteworthy events that happen during the nearly two and a quarter hour running time of this film . there 's a truly lame subplot about garret 's relationship with his dead wife 's family ( he gets into a bar fight with her brother , played by john savage ) and then the necessary tear - jerking ending . a fun way to pass the time is to take bets on exactly who will die , although it becomes pretty clear by the second reel . the actual death sequence is one of the most ridiculously forced , and unintentionally humorous , sequences filmed since . . . well , since costner 's the postman ( 1997 ) . message in a bottle is one slow moving film . last year audiences were offered endurance tests such as the horse whisperer and meet joe black but both of those films resemble jerry bruckheimer productions next to this . they also had redeeming qualities in the form of quality performances and some stand out technical work . message in a bottle has a decent enough cast but they 're fighting the material all the way , and losing badly . costner and , especially , wright - penn are both likable and attractive enough to cheer for but their characters are simply too boring . they also fail to generate any kind of real romantic chemistry . the supporting players are given very little to do . the reliable douglas is particularly wasted . old pro newman gives his all and occasionally threatens to kick some life into this dead horse of a film . a confrontational scene he has with costner near the end is especially well played . however , too frequently he just reminds us how unexciting our lead characters are . the film is very polished on the technical side to be sure but it only works to undercut the story . gabriel yared , who previously set the romantic moods of the english patient ( 1996 ) and city of angels ( 1998 ) with his scores , overdoes it a bit here . caleb deschanel 's camera makes everything look a little too beautiful . do the offices of the chicago tribune really need to look heavenly ? the editing by steven weisberg is troubling not only considering all that could have been cut out but is also simply messy at times . the real offender here is screenwriter gerald di pego . working from a best- selling novel by nicholas sparks ( which i have not read but have been told is on the same literary level as the bridges of madison county ) , di pego creates one of the most uninspired scripts of recent times . its strict adherence to clich ? s brings to mind such disasters as i still know what you did last summer ( 1998 ) . there simply is n't an original scene in this film . the dialogue is rarely better than laughable and this is only accentuated by the excessively long pauses every character takes while speaking . this is director mandoki 's first film since when a man loves a woman ( 1994 ) , the solid meg ryan / andy garcia romance . he 's simply going through the motions with this . message in a bottle is easily the worst of the several romantic offerings available in theaters at the moment and vies with what dreams may come ( 1998 ) as one of the most misguided romances of the decade .

0NEG

disconnect the phone line . do n't accept the charges . do anything you can to avoid the wretched , melodramatic sisterhood dramedy ` hanging up ' . i figured i needed to get in touch with my feminine side , and ` hanging up ' seemed like an ideal opportunity to do so . the film features an incredible palate of female talent , and the capability behind the camera brought to mind such sparkling gems as ` sleepless in seattle ' and ` unsung heroes ' . meg ryan , diane keaton and lisa kudrow play a trio of sisters who , once separated by career judgments over family ties , must reunite when their father ( walter matthau ) is admitted into the hospital with alzheimer 's disease . while this may read like an optimum opportunity to rekindle their relationship and reflect with poignancy on the past , the script by sisters delia and nora ephron is exasperating , shapeless dreck teeming with emotional fakery . ` hanging up ' has the overall effect of a tele - marketer pestering you for two hours , while you do n't have the option of doing as the title suggests . for the first half - hour , the ephron sisters use telephone conversations for a basis of character development . this is an annoying and ineffective device . cell - phones ring every five minutes , and everyone hurriedly rushes along , leaving marginal time for the frustrated viewer to relate to the sisters ' issues and problems . if ` hanging up ' was an apple pie , then i felt as if we were getting the mere crust of the story . granted , there are a few genuine and sincere moments in the film . but they only help to establish that the remainder of the strained emotions are nothing but inferior dramatic muck . the most outrageous strategy in ` hanging up ' is that , after a series of largely unrealized attempts at character development , we are expected to exhibit compassion and courtesy toward the sisters as they join for a melodramatic finale . we are able to identify with eve ( ryan ) , the most open and caring daughter , because she is the one who stayed by her father 's side as everyone else moved forward to pursue a impending career . georgia ( keaton ) , the eldest daughter , is celebrating the fifth year anniversary of her magazine called . . . . ` georgia ' . maddy ( kudrow ) , the soap opera actress , spends time either contemplating her possible path to stardom or nursing her dog . ryan 's convincing performance and diverting cuteness are two of the more agreeable aspects of ` hanging up ' . kudrow , so delightfully eccentric as the off - kilter airhead phoebe in ` friends ' , is totally wasted . ditto for keaton , who is serving a double shift as co - star and director - a time slot that can be a difficult priority juggle . her frenzy is apparent . for a chick flick , there is a distressing lack of chuckles . the reliable matthau is reduced to chaotic shtick that , given his character 's situation , seems more depressing than amusing . even so , the peak form of humor in ` hanging up ' is represented by some of matthau 's nasty quips and ryan 's eternal battle to have the aforementioned pooch swallow a pill . that about accounts for the three or four chuckles you will expel during the film . my curiosity has suddenly been tweaked to discover how such a promising and star - studded approach could turn so viciously sour . but really , it 's no mystery . the predictable , melodramatic filth that is ` hanging up ' is certainly not the fault of these actresses . pin it on the screenplay , which attempts to clear up vital issues in three or four minutes , while spending the rest of the running time in an annoying flurry of phone conversations . it 's certainly a far cry from what one would label as a rewarding experience , but ` hanging up ' should have at least been enjoyable . uh - uh . it 's a wrong number from the beginning .

0NEG

running time approximately 1hr 40mins reviewed by jack choo rating : the movie starts with a rather se7en - ish opening sequence , rather cool and sets the mood for things to come . the story propels the audience into a neo - reality ; somewhat very close to conscious reality but laced with weird tinges of blue and red . existenz is actually the name of a new virtual - reality game . supposedly , vr games are highly popular as is considered a legal - drug in this neo - reality . * * * * ( leigh ) is the ultimate game creator and introduces her ultimate game - experience in the form of existenz . players are required to have bio - ports embedded in their spine , which plugs to a game - pod in order to enjoy the immersive experience . during a secretive beta - testing - cum - teaser meeting for this new game , an assassination attempt on * * * life occurs and she runs off with fellow bodyguard * * * ( law ) . * * * is more of a realists than anything else , afraid that he 'll lose reality if he begin to play these games but * * * requires his help to immerse together with her into existenz to check if the program is still functioning properly after the assassination attempt . as they soon discover , they are transported between realities within existenz uncovering more than they initially expected . existenz has all the cronenberg - gore that is expected of him . even so , this film is no - where near his cult classics such as videodrome or scanners . not even half as suspenseful as the commercially successful the fly . existenz can probably be looked upon as his 90 's version of videodrome , even so , it is a poor follow - up . while in most of his famed films , his penchant for gore always hit the right note with theme of the film and plot . in existenz , the gory sequences are no more attached to spirit of the film and seem to be an act of over - indulgence than anything else . jennifer jason leigh and jude law , both commendable actors , looked aloof and miss - directed throughout the entire film . the scripting and acting barely pulls the film out of the b - grade category . it was obvious that cronenberg worked on a really tight - budget and it seems that he handled that pretty well in the production design and values created for this film ( the opening sequence , though , probably formed a considerable portion of the budget ! ) which is actually quite good . existenz is too predictable and cliched in these times . 10 years ago , it would have been another classic for cronenberg . cronenberg fans however , ( those people who enjoy seeing friends getting queasy over mutilation on film ) should not give this film a miss as some form of appreciation can still be offered by you .

0NEG

in china in 1982 i turned the tables on our national guide and asked him if he had any questions about america . i guess i was expecting some sort of political question . instead , i was dumfounded by what was most on his mind . " in america , do wives and their mothers - in - law get along well ? " he assured me in china that they did , but i am certain if that were true he would not have asked . even in china people seem to have problems relating to in- laws . perhaps some of life 's most difficult relationships arise when families are suddenly artificially joined by marriage . a man trying to relate to his new prospective in - laws and vice - versa could be the basis of a very strong comedy . meet the parents does not demonstrate that fact , however . greg focker ( played by ben stiller ) has been dating and in love with pam byrnes ( teri polo ) for ten months and is now ready to propose to her . he will do it during a weekend visit to meet debbie 's family and to attend her sister 's wedding . from the beginning the relationship is awkward between greg and jack and dina byrnes ( robert deniro and blythe danner ) . through no fault of his own , the airline has lost greg 's luggage . and he has to ask to borrow clothing . it is the beginning of a game of one - upmanship in which greg is nearly always one - down . as the games go on greg is more and more uncomfortable and uneasy which only contributes to the mistakes he makes . greg is playing a game he does not understand , in a league he is new to . but perhaps along the way he will discover some unexpected secrets about his father - in - law . this film had potential in its tale of one - upmanship . it has hit on a situation that many in the audience may find familiar -- one that has not been done overly frequently in films . but the script by jim herzfeld and john hamburg is a little too contrived . too many coincidences in the story work against greg . the script could not decide if the main character was incompetent or simply unlucky . certainly he does not help his situation by doing everything wrong he possibly could , but even when he is trying to do the right things nature conspires against him . there is an uneven mix of slapstick sequences and human comedy . certainly the last part of the film feels awkwardly written . the main reason to see meet the parents is to see robert deniro 's performance . deniro plays the suspicious and not a little fascistic father as tightly wound and threatening as he can . the little judgmental expressions on his face are a show in themselves as greg digs himself deeper and deeper into his insecurities . but we do not really see much of that digging . ben stiller is an affable presence in the film but is not really stretching himself by playing the role as the nebbish to whom so many bad things happen . it is nice to see blythe danner again on the screen . but her character has a basic conflict between a basic decency and her love for her husband and the script should have given her more to do with that . randy newman has written a playful score . in the first few seconds of the film it does something creative i have never heard a film score do before . there is a lot of source music that is popular music of the 1960s . presumably that is what the upper class listens to at least in somebody 's imagination . humor is subjective and some this film has been getting some favorable comment . but this is a comedy that works only occasionally for me . i would have to rate it 4 on the 0 to 10 scale and a 0 on the -4 to +4 scale .

0NEG

the " fab 4 " of ronald reagan high are four stuck - up girls , played by rose mcgowan , rebecca gayheart , julie benz and charlotte roldan , who overdress like 4 posh spice wannabes . their daily ritual is to parade up and down the school halls like royalty , and their constant reflex action is to grab their compacts so they can check their make - up and powder their cheeks . under no circumstances will they ever let themselves be seen eating in public . in writer and director darren stein 's jawbreaker , it is n't as funny as it sounds . in fact , it is n't funny at all . stein has taken the black comedy of a teen movie like heathers and stripped it of any intelligence , wit or charm . his actresses toss off their lines so fast that they do n't have time to add any emotion . and all of his female characters have considerably more lipstick than brains . the setup for the movie has one of the fab 4 , liz , who is referred to as " the princess di of reagan high , " be killed when a prank by the other 3 goes wrong . the princess di reference is in bad taste , as is much of the movie . granted , bad taste can sometimes be funny , but the mere presence of bad taste does n't guarantee it . liz 's girlfriends stick a jawbreaker that is literally larger than a golf ball in her mouth , tape her mouth shut , and stick her bound body in the trunk of a car . when they open the trunk later , liz is dead . they eventually put her blue and bruised body into a sexual position and make it look like liz was the victim of a brutal rape . these realistic and disgusting scenes of a dead , seminude teen have a pornographic feeling that is hard to forget and will likely turn the stomach of many a viewer . the film 's dialog not only is n't funny , it 's trite . one nerdy young girl introduces herself with " my name is fern mayo , as in hold the mayo . " when fern discovers what has happened , the fab 3 make her an offer she ca n't refuse -- make - up ! they cake it on her and welcome her to the clan . the parents in the movie brag about learning parenting skills from watching oprah . the teachers fare no better , especially in the ridiculous lines they are given . " miss shayne , please cover your bosom , " one young teacher , who has been made up to look old and ugly , says without any conviction . " this is a learning institution , not a brothel . " besides the obvious question of why this movie was ever made , there is one other question that i 'd like to ask the director . why do you have a phone number start with 555 if you going to cover the rest of the number anyway ? in a cameo , pam grier plays detective vera cruz , who investigates liz 's murder . as she interrogates the other people , she stares at them like they are all idiots , proving that she is the only one that gets it . i am sure that if the hard nosed detective cruz were to see this movie , she 'd walk out after about 5 minutes , and you 'd be well advised to do the same if you should happen to find yourself in a theater showing it . jawbreaker runs 1 : 27 . it is rated r for violence , gore , profanity and sex . i would advise everyone to avoid it , but if teenagers go they should be older and mature .

0NEG

hollywood never fails to astound me . every time i think those coked - up little buggers have hit rock bottom ; they come up with a new excavating tool . i was truly convinced that " wild wild west " marked 1999 studio filmmaking at its most hapless , but then along comes " end of days " to prove me wrong . this big budget , brain dead apocalyptic thriller bludgeons its audience with overwrought music , grisly violence , explosions galore and lots of cheesy special effects . the result ? nothing but groans and yawns . even the devil himself is unable to produce a decent scare in this festival of the inept . at the very least , " end of days " should have done us the courtesy of being bad - enough - to - be - good , but it ca n't even manage that . it 's just lousy . arnold schwarzenegger , still recovering from heart problems and " batman & robin , " plays an ex - cop turned security agent or bodyguard or something . along with his obligatory comic relief partner ( kevin pollak , impersonating matthew perry 's chandler character from " friends " ) , he gets involved in some major league supernatural hoodoo . it seems that satan ( gabriel byrne ) gets a shot at world domination only once every thousand years ( and here i thought he 'd pulled it off with the republican landslide of ' 94 ) . if he has sex with 20-year old christine york ( robin tunney ) , " the chosen one , " their child will be the antichrist , or at least a brat . ah , but this deal has more catches than a new year 's eve pass from a halfway house . the unholy union must take place on december 31 , 1999 ( you see , 999 is just 666 turned upside down ) , but only between 11 p . m . and midnight ( no wonder this guy is so cranky ) . and if the chosen one is given refuge in a church , the devil wo n't know where she is , because he ca n't see into the sanctuary . you know , it 's kind of like superman 's x - ray vision and lead walls , only evil . a group of guerrilla catholic priests decide the best way to stop the situation is by killing the girl . arnold chooses to save the girl and kick the hell out of satan , if you 'll pardon the expression . and kevin meets up with an exploding van and has to make some decisions of his own . oh , the anguish ! oh , the humanity ! oh , the writing ! andrew w . marlowe 's screenplay ladles implausibility upon implausibility , from the preposterous otherworldly histrionics to his handling of jericho cane , schwarzenegger 's character . cane starts the film a la mel gibson in the first " lethal weapon , " preparing to put a gun in his mouth due to ongoing despondence over the murder of his wife and daughter . twenty minutes later , he 's racing through the bowels of new york city , deciphering clues that sherlock holmes and kreskin would find baffling . when cane meets up with christine york , he instantly switches to terminator father figure mode , with the young woman serving as surrogate daughter . in case anyone misses the connection , the camera comes in for a close up of christine 's music box , which just happens to be identical to one owned by cane 's daughter . subtle , marlowe , subtle . speaking of cameras , director peter hyams is just the man to take marlowe 's script and make it even more self - important , murky and annoying . hyams ' direction shows all the subtlety of a gwar video , with cane running a gauntlet of ridiculous action set pieces , punctuated with loads of big explosions . eager to satisfy arnold 's core audience , he even throws in a few pairs of breasts as well . what a guy . had the film delivered some decent scares , or even maintained a consistently ominous tone , the bombastic clich ? s might have been tolerable , but " end of days " is simply a flaccid special effects show . the cast is just as ineffective . in his early scenes , gabriel byrne attempts to invest beelzebub with some panache , but he all too soon turns into just another standard issue monster . kevin pollak comes and goes quickly , robin tunney comes off like a bargain basement winona ryder and as for arnold , well ? he 's a better actor than casper van dien . that should count for something . way back in the aftermath " the exorcist " and " the omen , " supernatural swill like " end of days " might have passed muster as a b - movie . but that was then and this is now . " the x - files " and " buffy the vampire slayer " deliver real scares on a weekly basis and , if we want to see the devil , all we have to do is flip on " the 700 club " and take a gander at pat robertson 's grinning maw . after enduring " end of days , " all i can say is " get thee behind me , satan . and while you 're at it , get thee a better agent as well . "

0NEG

i have little against remakes and updates of older films and tv series . if there 's a will , there 's a way ; and i believe that anything , no matter how great or revered can be effectively improved upon . this is the reason that i responded so well to gus van sant 's universally panned update of psycho ; i thought it to be not only an intriguing cinematic experience , but also very on - par with an original . but i do have a big problem with remakes that are blatantly bad . you see , the point of a remake is , or at least it should be , to iron out the original 's flaws and bring the work that much closer to greatness or even perfection . but what if the source material on which the remake is based is n't any good to begin with ? that is the only cinematic question pondered by the bland actioner the mod squad . i 've only seen a couple episodes of the late 60s tv series on which it is based , and to be honest , i did n't like it all that much . it has a concept that -- and still is -- interesting ; a group of corrupt young adults , all in their early 20s are given a choice : they either go to jail for the various crimes that they all have committed , or they can become undercover cops , helping the police get into places that they normally would n't be able to access . obviously , all 3 opt for the latter option and become undercover policemen ( and policewomen ) . the three main characters here are played by claire danes , omar epps and giovanni ribisi . of the three , only danes has a real character . ribisi 's dumbass 20 year old is played exclusively for laughs ; epps ' slightly more intelligent one is used to create various chase scenes . when the squad 's superviser gets killed off and his reputation dirtied in death , the three of them , sure that their beloved master was framed , go off and investigate on their own , discovering corrupt cops , lots and lots of expensive whores and very lucrative drug operations . all kinds of good stuff ! the only times that the mod squad comes even close to working is in its comedic moments . although ribisi is a trite actor and his characters repeat movie after movie , his man here is really rather amusing , when the script gives him a chance . epps ' straight man is effectively played against ribisi 's clueless spontaneity . but the rest of the film is dull , boring and singularly uninteresting . a drug - op action plot is no longer anything new , not even with teenage action heroes , and the way it 's executed here , it 's also nowhere near exciting or suspenseful . claire danes ' character has potential , but it is buried under heaps of cliches and her performance is too restrained . she could have been a tour - de - force , but instead director scott silver puts shackles on her and simply does not allow her to do anything really significant with her role . epps and ribisi fare slightly better and do as well as can be expected , although their characters are n't nearly as rich as danes ' could have been . the mod squad is a mind - numbing marketing plot of a film , and teens will jump all over it . it 's full of bad dialogue , scenes and concepts that make no sense and -- get this -- drug dealers that like to tango with other guys in their spare time . nothing is remotely intriguing or worth paying for . claire danes is no longer alluring -- mainly because she 's got a horrible hairdo , so that draw is out . there are , however , cool explosions , guns and chases which may lure a viewer into thinking that he or she is about to experience an exciting thriller of some sort . do not be fooled . some may call this escapist fare -- i call it escape - as - quickly - as - you - can fare .

0NEG

when the mediums in question are video game and feature film , has there ever been a respective here - to - there transformation that achieved any ground higher than noodle - headed mediocrity ? " super mario bros . , " " street fighter " and " mortal kombat " were silly stinkers all , and now the empty , execrable " wing commander " joins their lowly ranks . enduring this spectacularly bad bit of sci - fi , easily the worst of its kind , is like watching someone futz around with a video game for 100 minutes - that is to say , there 's little fun to be had when you 're not the one holding the joystick . the movie , then , is a missed opportunity for director chris roberts , who created the original , groundbreaking pc incarnation of " wing commander " back in 1990 . how an interactive brainchild so revered could end up such a cinematic pile of junk under the helm of the same guy is a head - scratcher . " wing commander " 's story , credited to roberts and screenwriter kevin droney , is clueless chaos melding incoherent narrative and unoriginal ideas . it rips off the finest films of its genre , top gun and , in one scene , even those spiffy " stereoscopic freeze " gap commercials . set in 2654 , " wing commander " stars freddie prinze jr . as a daredevil cosmos cowboy who hopes to be a great fighter pilot like his father before him . along the way , he plays kissy - face with his stoic superior ( saffron burrows ) at the new galaxy hangout where he 's posted , comes to terms with bigots who resent him for his " pilgrim " heritage ( do n't ask ) , and goes on a top - secret mission involving the " jump coordinates " ( what , no death star plans ? ) of a nasty alien race known as the kilrathi . or something like that . given the immensely confusing activity , it 's hard to tell . on the other hand , what 's easy to see is that " wing commander " is a big old mess . the lame dialogue strains , filled with such original lines as " do n't you die on me ! " , " battle stations ! " and repeated ( and frequently unanswered ) calls for a " medic ! " action sequences fizzle . the character conflict garners unintentional giggles . the sole source of suspense here is what these kilrathi creeps look like , as they 're kept out of view until the concluding 15 minutes . imagine bearded siamese cats crossed with something from a ? 50s roger corman cheapie and you 've got a good idea . little but techno - babble happens for an hour , and then it 's as if " wing commander " tries to do too much at once ; when it appears as though the movie 's about to show signs of a pulse , it instead provides a hilarious touch of human drama culminating with a use for a bulldozer that has probably never been seen in this kind of space camp before . matthew lillard , featured prominently in said sequence , is cast as prinze 's hotshot partner , and though the two are fine young actors - recently paired in the hit " she 's all that " - they 're fighting more than otherworldly evil here . rumor has it that " wing commander " was slated as a later - in - the - year release , bumped up to capitalize off this hot casting coup as well as the premiere of the new " star wars : episode i " trailer . but in my audience , there were no females present to make goo - goo eyes at prinze or lillard , and many a member exited after the much - ballyhooed sneak peek . since most cineplexes wo n't be granting refunds to the latter contingency , " commander " might rake in some dough , but be warned : the high wears off as soon as the coming attraction gives way to the feature presentation .

0NEG

it 's almost amusing to watch 21-year old christina ricci get drastically overshadowed in sally potter 's follow - up to 1997 's the tango lesson , the man who cried . the gen - y actress , with her cold stare and big , black eyes , has appeared in an impressive range of films ; but she does n't even come close to being the bold heroine the film , set against the historical backdrop of world war 2 , requires her to be . ricci , whose character is shockingly silent and blank , showing only the occasional smile or hint of concern , shares most of her scenes with the astounding cate blanchett : quite an amusing sight to behold . blanchett 's lola , a paris dwelling dancer who befriends the aspiring singer suzie , is bold , interesting and layered ? everything our heroine lacks . co - star of the upcoming lord of the rings trilogy , blanchett has a good seven inches on ricci , sports twice the makeup and dons a flashy wardrobe . the actress inhabits the role ? as she always so remarkably does ? with a fervor and life that makes you want her to hold the screen as the film 's lead rather than her dull companion . important historical events involving hitler and his nazis scatter themselves across the film ; these landmarks serve as the film 's little conflict . obviously , the tables are turned in the life of suzie by these events , whose jewish origin is unknown among her parisian colleagues . the man who cried has many aspirations , none of which come full circle by the film 's close . there are forced messages here and there : " go forward ; always go forward , " lola preaches to suzie ; there 's romance between suzie and a fellow target of hitler 's nazis , the gypsy cesar ( johnny depp , who , like ricci , barely gets to speak ) ; lola struggles with her character that desires above all things wealth and men who have it ; and at the core of all these devices lies suzie 's desire to travel to america , where her father journeyed after leaving her and her mother years ago . the film 's main problem is that potter is n't skilled enough to tell the epic - sized story of suzie . the time period 's instability , the conflicting social classes , the prejudice against suzie from all those around her in her new life : serving as both writer and director , potter throws in some of each , but hardly an inch of depth is to be found in any . by the time the sigh - inducing climax hits , the believability and complete absence of focus leave one ready to leave the theater . the film 's falling action is weirdly unsatisfying and unlikely ; are we really meant to believe any of this could happen ? contrastingly , in its moving final scene , the man who cried strikes a note that is made effective in its ties to the emotional beginning of the film . although it 's apparent that potter ca n't grasp what she reaches , i 'm puzzled as to why she reaches for so much in the first place . ricci 's suzie is meant to be the film 's core : from the extended flashback at the film 's beginning to the quickly drawn ending , everything seen in the film , in some way , relates to her . so why then does potter spend so much time on subplots involving other individuals ? the character of suzie is too present for the man who cried to work as an ensemble , but not present enough for the film to be ricci 's . the almost constant lack of flow and one - note tone with which potter depicts the man who cried are somewhat improved upon by sacha vierny 's beautiful cinematography that renders the film 's various locations wonderfully . also worthy of note are lindy hemming 's costumes that help to depict the area quite nicely . and then there 's the music . from minute one to minute ninety - seven , there 's hardly a moment when the wavering , skilled voice of an opera singer or the rhythms of the gypsy music do n't undercut the action ; the notes stricken both overwhelm ( particularly john turturro , portraying fictional opera singer dante dominio , whose money and reputation catch lola 's interest ) and accompany ( oftentimes , the perfect chords are captured to undermine the state of the film 's characters and reinforce that state ) . potter obviously cares much about each and every musical note ; unfortunately , the same effort is n't given towards ( almost ) everything else .

0NEG

sandra bullock in high heels and wielding a chainsaw ? yup , it 's got ta be summer . just when you thought the pointless sequel had gone the way of franchise films and direct - to - video releases , into port slams speed 2 : cruise control , the gloriously godawful follow - up to the 1994 sleeper about a bus rigged to explode if it slowed below a certain speed . the gimmick , this time , is an ocean liner rigged to , well , crash into stuff . sound exciting ? dennis hopper 's disgruntled bomb squader , the villain of the first film , has given way to willem dafoe 's disgruntled computer programmer , a maniac whose main beef has something to do with having to use live leeches , i kid you not , as a self - treatment for copper poison- ing . ( and said poisoning induced by prolonged exposure to electro- magnetic fields , no less ! calling dean edell . . . ) so , he overrides the boat 's computer , convinces the crew to abandon ship , and sends the remaining passengers , those who could n't evacuate in time , on a col- lision course with destiny . ( oddly , no one thinks to just . . . jump off the back of the boat . ) with keanu reeves electing not to return-- perhaps he read the script ? -- the job of john mcclane goes to jason patric ( sleepers ) , as the * second * la cop and swat team member that that bus drivin ' babe annie ( bullock ) has dated . ( what are the odds ? ) they 're on this caribbean cruise for pleasure , as are a handful of requisite stock characters , including a deaf teenager ( ! ) who has a crush on the hero ( ! ! ) who also knows how to sign ( ! ! ! ) . ( and you thought the raptor slam was a cool summer movie move ? wait till you see the feats that * this * little girl can do , when stuck on a shipboard elevator ! ) bullock is her pesky , perky self , though she ends up with far less screen time than her top billing suggests . ( those paying attention to her bikini- and tank- tops probably wo n't complain , however ) patric is the main man in motion and that 's damn good , 'cause when he stops to talk , he 's only slightly less monotone than his predecessor . ( his first lol line is to ms . bullock : " i 'd like to boogie with you . " ) of course , nobody in front of the camera embarrasses themselves quite the way that returning director jan de bont does . he also produced this mess , which is insulting even by the most lax summer standards . ( con air , buddy , father 's day , romy and michelle 's high school reunion , murder at 1600 , 8 heads in a duffle bag , anaconda , vegas vacation , meet wally sparks , metro , bevery hills ninja , the relic , all is forgiven ) . worse , he 's spent a hundred mil on a premise that does n't even live up to its title ! there 's no sweat - inducing motion of the ocean here-- just two hours of shaky handheld camera work and a handful of cross - cut exteriors , all leading up to the big slam , when the love boat sideswipes an oil tanker and then plows into a harbor town . ( oh , how far we 've come in twenty years . remember the simple fun of seeing a locomotive smash into railway station in the silver streak ? ) admittedly , either of the aforementioned sequences is worth the price of admission . it 's just the rest of the movie-- the other hundred or so minutes-- that 's pure nonsense . and wonderful nonsense at that . i know he did n't intend to , but de bont has done one thing right : he 's created the hands - down funniest film of the year . so , now , allow to present a few more things that made me laugh : o a box with a big label : " fiber optic converter " o plain english , whole - sentence computer instructions o an entire sequence devoted to opening a fire door o jason patric 's character walks onto the bridge and immediately understands everything that 's happening o a ships ' navigator who speaks in a scottish accent and actually gets to say " i canna override it ! " o willem dafoe 's amazing arm - mounted keyboard o two living , breathing adults ( bullock 's character and the first mate ) who have to be told , step by step , how to disconnect a trip wire from the pin of a hand grenade . duh o " no wait ! " screams the ship 's intercom o yet another damn dog in peril o fishing reel . pontoon plane . memories of weekend at bernie 's

0NEG

how do films like mouse hunt get into theatres ? is n't there a law or something ? this diabolical load of claptrap from steven speilberg 's dreamworks studio is hollywood family fare at its deadly worst . mouse hunt takes the bare threads of a plot and tries to prop it up with overacting and flat - out stupid slapstick that makes comedies like jingle all the way look decent by comparison . writer adam rifkin and director gore verbinski are the names chiefly responsible for this swill . the plot , for what its worth , concerns two brothers ( nathan lane and an appalling lee evens ) who inherit a poorly run string factory and a seemingly worthless house from their eccentric father . deciding to check out the long - abandoned house , they soon learn that it 's worth a fortune and set about selling it in auction to the highest bidder . but battling them at every turn is a very smart mouse , happy with his run - down little abode and wanting it to stay that way . the story alternates between unfunny scenes of the brothers bickering over what to do with their inheritance and endless action sequences as the two take on their increasingly determined furry foe . whatever promise the film starts with soon deteriorates into boring dialogue , terrible overacting , and increasingly uninspired slapstick that becomes all sound and fury , signifying nothing . the script becomes so unspeakably bad that the best line poor lee evens can utter after another run in with the rodent is : " i hate that mouse " . oh cringe ! this is home alone all over again , and ten times worse . one touching scene early on is worth mentioning . we follow the mouse through a maze of walls and pipes until he arrives at his makeshift abode somewhere in a wall . he jumps into a tiny bed , pulls up a makeshift sheet and snuggles up to sleep , seemingly happy and just wanting to be left alone . it 's a magical little moment in an otherwise soulless film . a message to speilberg : if you want dreamworks to be associated with some kind of artistic credibility , then either give all concerned in mouse hunt a swift kick up the arse or hire yourself some decent writers and directors . this kind of rubbish will just not do at all .

0NEG

miramax " disinvited " on - line media from press screenings of scream 3 . they ostensibly feared that folks like me would write spoiler - filled reviews and post them prior to the film 's february 4th release date - unsound reasoning . you see , ' net critics established enough to be on any sort of vip list are professionals - miramax surely knows the difference between a member of the on - line film critics society ( ofcs ) and the type of fanboy who posts spy reports at ai n't it cool news . no , the ? mini major ' was afraid we 'd let a bigger cat out of the bag than whodunit , that scream 3 is a dismal conclusion to the beloved ( by this writer , at least ) franchise . something smells rotten in the state of california right from the get - go : cotton weary ( liev schrieber ) , the former lover and would - be killer of maureen prescott , sidney 's mother , is juggling phone calls in his luxury car . ( once considered a danger to society , weary now hosts his own talk show , " 100 % cotton " , a clever , if dated , jab at american pop culture . ) of course , a new ghostface dials him up , and , with memories of scream 's unbearably suspenseful prologue in mind , we immediately wonder , where is the killer ? the backseat ? the next car ? thrilling prospects , to be sure , but actually , ghostface is at the weary residence , waiting for cotton 's girlfriend ( kelly rutheford ) to finishing showering . what 's missing from this sequence , and indeed scream 3 's remaining frights ( most disappointingly , the moment when an ingenue is forced to hide in a wardrobe room filled with ghostface costumes , one of which might spring to life ) , is an elaborate and attenuated payoff . our other surviving regulars have become estranged . sidney ( campbell ) is living a paranoid existence of electronic gates and password - protected locks , while dewey ( arquette ) acts as technical advisor on the second sequel to scream 2 's movie - within - a - movie , " stab 3 " , and gale weathers ( cox arquette ) headlines a gossipy news program . murder reunites them , as knife - wielding ghostface stalks the set of " stab 3 " , imitating its sadistic screenplay - and his / her / their own personal draft climaxes with sidney 's death . the appeal of ghostface 's villainy is that he / she / they could be your boyfriend , your classmate , your next door neighbour . . . or a combination of people . scream was the first of its kind : a slasher mystery , with the guessing game not only entailing who will be next , but also who is / are the perpetrator ( s ) and what is / are his / her / their motive . ironic self - reflection aside , parts one and two stand out in a crowd that includes umpteen friday the 13th and halloween flicks because there 's at last articulate human beings behind the iconic costume . with scream 3 , the novelty of ghostface 's ever - mutating identity has worn off some , but the character remains conceptually potent . conceptually . the execution of ghostface 's master plan this time around is creaky , because screenwriter ehren kruger has invented a new mythology for the world of sidney prescott far afield from what we 'd come to understand in scream and scream 2 . the movie gets in the silly habit of saying " all bets are off ! " in reference to the " rules " of a trilogy 's third act , but there 's a difference between rule breaking and cheating . with the departure of kevin williamson , who authored the previous screams as well as a tidy outline for scream 3 ( that , for reasons incomprehensible to me , was ignored , save the notion of " stab 3 " ) , kruger needed to be reined in tighter , and by wes craven . craven 's direction of scream 3 is lazy in most respects . how else to explain the jay and silent bob cameo ( the slacker duo of kevin smith movies ) , akin to seeing mickey mouse pop up in mulan and more distracting than funny . it pains me to write this , but scream 3 's comedy is generally laughless , with the exception of well - timed performances by josh pais ( as a police detective possessed of the same personality he had as a persnickety teacher in craven 's music of the heart ) , jamie kennedy ( resurrecting film geek randy for the sendoff he was denied in scream 2 ) , and parker posey ( through sheer force of will as a b - actress ) . the visuals are much weaker in part three , as well - the occasional sweeping gesture of peter deming 's camera is a pale imitation of the stalking steadicam craven gave us twice before . ( aside : in the wake of columbine , craven toned down the violence significantly for scream 3-why the sanctimony , when scream and scream 2 are still readily available on video store shelves ? ) finally , marco beltrami 's music cues the suspense too blatantly - do you recall the tense chase at the college radio station in scream 2 ? it 's mostly silent . sting notes are a whole lot more effective if they spring from nowhere ; here , they act as the crescendos of an incessantly nerve - jangling score . i look at scream 3 as coming from an alternative universe , the same place that birthed the godfather part iii and superman iii - woefully out of synch with its prequels , scream 3 is a nightmare instead of nightmarish , and will likely put the horror genre back in mothballs . the film unintentionally follows the unspoken rule of a trilogy to a t : ? part three must disappoint ' .

0NEG

a backdrop of new year 's eve in 1981 would seem to lend itself to a great party movie . the decor possibilities are endless - disco balls had yet to migrate into the dark corners of the attic , big hair was worth its weight in aquanet , and the louder the fashion , the better the look . but despite this setting , these details and a soundtrack that includes some 40-plus irresistible hits from the early days of the me decade , something is inherently wrong with " 200 cigarettes . " a better title for this nostalgic mess would be " 50 missed opportunities . " what is it that makes this retro - comedy such a downer ? it 's certainly not the cast , which includes enough hot , young talent for several movies . there 's courtney love , cementing her reputation as a serious actress ; christina ricci , hot off her shoulda - been - nominated turn in " the opposite of sex " ; paul rudd , who gets even more appealing with every role ; kate hudson , inheriting some fine acting genes from mom goldie hawn ; and affleck brothers ben and casey , two of the best things about " good will hunting . " perhaps the question is this : what drew these and other immensely talented actors to such a dreary project ? maybe it looked good on paper . " 200 cigarettes " is composed of a series of vignettes , as various characters make their way through new york 's festively decorated east village to a holiday bash thrown by a jittery bundle of nerves named monica ( martha plimpton , all dressed up in her best cyndi lauper ) . among the potential guests are likeable cad kevin ( rudd ) and his best friend lucy ( love ) , busy bickering over his recent break - up , and a clumsy but seemingly charming bartender ( ben affleck ) who opens his mouth only to spew forth bad pick - up lines . more subplots - _ many _ more - dot the big picture , but those listed above are the only ones worth noting in a positive light . all the other story tangents are as frazzled as a cokehead trying to solve a rubick 's cube . ricci and gaby hoffman grate as two ronkonkoma gals ( the kind that have trouble pronouncing hard consonants ) out to have a high time in the big city . infamously acerbic comedienne janeane garofalo is wasted in what amounts to a several - scene cameo . hudson , as a pretty - in - pink klutz recently devirginized by a reprehensible ladies ' man ( jay mohr ) , trips , pukes and gets smeared with dog poop . are we laughing yet ? the film boils down to a mixture of the good , the bad and the gaudy , with the latter two overtaking the former . game performances - especially by love , rudd and plimpton - are almost shot down by the bizarrely colorful parts and a constantly roving focus , here a combination that mostly sputters when it should crackle . too many sidetracks rate as uninteresting and have little payoff until a lengthy final montage where we find out many of the performers served as one night stands for each other . if this is " 200 cigarettes , " then get me 200 nicotine patches .

0NEG

the premise of the new james wong film , final destination , is that alex browning , the protagonist , prevents six of his friends from boarding a doomed airplane , thereby cheating fate . however , fate is not so easily bested , and alex 's friends soon begin dying in unusual circumstances . essentially , this premise is a clever - way to make a slasher - flick without the slasher . unfortunately , this is practically the only clever thing about the film . as far as teen horror flicks go , final destination is better than many . there is enough shocking death , graphic gore , and requisite black humor to provide the essential " roller coaster " type thrill at the heart of the average horror flick . unfortunately , this film also suffers from the worst characteristics of this genre . the relationships between the main characters are tenuous and their motivations are meaningless except as excuse to set - up the next death . the scene where two of the characters break into a funeral home to view the body of their recently killed friend is suppose to be scary and dramatic but features some of the dumbest dialogue i have witnessed . if you are looking for a saturday night thriller to scare your date , this film might do the trick . other than that , wait until it goes into heavy - rotation on cable .

0NEG

there is a scene in patch adams in which patch is in the center of a courtroom , surrounded by people who are giving him a lively standing ovation because of his strong - worded attack on a group of stoic doctors . when i noticed that the audience with whom i saw this film was reacting the same way , i realized that i was going to have a hard time finding someone who agrees with me about the quality of the picture . you see , patch adams revolted me beyond all boundaries . i hated this movie for every second that i sat watching it , and i actively hate it now , days later , with the simpering , superficial , nauseatingly sentimental images forever plaguing my memories . i hate every element of the film , beginning with tom shadyac 's shameless direction , and all the way up to the misguided and mishandled themes that the screenplay wants so desperately to convey . the badness of patch adams is stupefying . it 's confounding . i ca n't believe a film can be this bad . and yet , it 's based on a real man who probably has a good point to make . in the film , patch is played by the undefeatable and indefatigable robin williams , in a performance of such insulting pathos and sledgehammer sympathy that i wonder now if he is even human . in the beginning of the film , patch commits himself to a mental institution because he does n't want to kill himself . while there , he notices that the doctors do n't care about the patients , and that the best way to get through to the patients is to treat them like human beings . so , patch goes on a crusade to be a great doctor who actually talks to his patients . he goes to medical school , where he meets truman ( daniel london ) and convinces him that it 's good to help people . he also meets carin fischer ( monica potters ) , the anti - male med student who just wants to go through the motions and be a successful doctor . naturally , the dean of the medical school ( bob gunton ) hates patch , and wants to thwart his plans , even though patch gets the highest scores on all of his exams . so patch decides that he 's going to build a free clinic in the middle of nowhere to help people with any problem they may have . and that , my friends , is the synopsis for what is easily the most abhorrent picture of 1998 . on a superficial level , the film is not particularly bad : i would n't say the cinematography bothered me , and most of the performances seem to be exactly what shadyac was aiming for ( i actually liked potter 's performance , even if she is wasted ) . but the film fails fundamentally in execution . every scene swells with grand , " emotional " music , played at maximum volume just to get us all to cry real hard . take , for instance , the first scene , which shows patch sitting on a bus . we do n't know patch yet , but there 's sad music , and it 's supposed to make us really sad that he 's sad . later on , patch makes a lot of progress : he helps a dying patient ( peter coyote ) to enjoy the last days of his life , and the music as patch is pushing the patient recklessly through the halls of the hospital is very lively . and when that patient finally dies ( spoiler alert ! ) , the music is very very sad . but the problem with all of this is that the music should not be the center of the emotions . real drama is character - based . you grow to like someone , and then something bad happens , and you feel it . we do n't ever grow to know the dying patient ; he 's simply a vehicle for patch 's greatness . real drama does n't seem forced , or present just to make the audience cry . that 's why patch adams is not real drama . it goes for every cheap tear imaginable , wringing tired and overbearing sentimentality out of every scene . even scenes that have very little impact on the overall film are drowning in marc shaiman 's sickening musical score . sentimentality like this is indeed bad . but it 's not as bad as half - baked , simplistic themes . you see , patch is a really great student . he aces his tests without studying , and does it so effectively that people think he 's cheating . but patch does n't think that memorizing facts is the way to become a good doctor . " why do n't we see patients until the third year ? " he bursts out every three seconds . well , patch , that might have something to do with the fact that you need to learn something before you go treating patients . not everyone has the capability of memorizing facts with no effort . most of us have to study . and a doctor who really wants to help , but does n't know a toe from a finger , probably wo n't be too successful in preventing death . oh wait , i almost forgot : the point of doctors is not just to " prevent death , " but to " improve the quality of life ! " yes ! that is true ! and you can not do that without studying . you can not do that without going to medical school . what patch never seemed to understand was the possibility that maybe , just maybe , it is a good idea to study first and talk to patients later . follow the rules ? bah ! who needs the rules ! only uptight doctors follow the rules . the real saviors are the ones running around the hospitals with big red spheres on their faces and sporting baggy yellow pants . and then there 's the free clinic issue , which i find shockingly , frighteningly idealistic . a free clinic . in the middle of the forest . where patients can be taken to be helped . for free . how will patients be transported to the free clinic ? will it have an emergency room ? or is it just for mental patients ? and who , may i ask , will pay for it ? the film does give some token attempts to question patch 's motives ( i think another character asks him how he 's going to pay for it , in addition to a little bit of meaningless blather about hmos and medical insurance ) , but they certainly do n't explore or challenge patch 's ideas to any meaningful extent . reader , please understand this : i am not making any kind of judgment on the real patch adams . i know nothing about him . if his beliefs mirror those of this film character , then i might like to have an intelligent discussion with him about them . but regardless of what the real patch adams believes , the themes put forth in this film are simplistic and phony . and in the last scene , the big , obligatory courtroom scene that forced my lunch halfway up my esophagus , patch does a lot of shouting . actually , robin williams does a lot of shouting . he shouts a lot about helping people , and a lot of people cry because they are moved by his words . i wo n't tell you that you ca n't be moved by his words , because i , too , was moved by his words . i was moved in such a profoundly negative way that i was reminded of how cheap and phony a cinematic experience can be . patch adams is the cheapest of them all .

0NEG

i have a great idea for a movie , one that ca n't miss . see , i 've got coolio to do a song for the soundtrack , and about fifty athletes and celebrities to do cameo appearances . it 's about professional basketball , so i 'll release it right around the nba finals to guarantee added publicity . as for what the movie is actually about . . . well , that will all sort itself out eventually . i figure it will be a comedy , so i 'll throw a half - dozen writers at it and take the best of whatever they come up with . maybe we 'll put a gender spin on it , see if we can get some women out to see it , too . eddie is one of those phenomenally lazy films that infuriates me more than any other kind . twister , as inane as the script might have been , at least required some creative technicians ; mission : impossible , overwrought plot and all , at least involved genuine effort . eddie just sits there , hawking up a formula story without any laughs , and makes every possible bad decision when a decision is required . whoopi goldberg plays eddie franklin , a new york limo driver and die - hard knicks fan who is suffering through a dismal season for her beloved team . coach john bailey ( dennis farina ) has lost control of his overpaid prima donnas , and the losses are beginning to mount . the dwindling attendance inspires new team owner wild bill burgess ( frank langella ) to try a publicity stunt in which a lucky fan will get to be an honorary coach of the team . the winner ( surprise , surprise ) is eddie , who becomes a fan favorite , and eventually the actual coach . the knicks continue to lose , but eddie has some sassy tricks up her sleeve to inspire her troops . incidentally , the knicks eventually start winning . please raise your hand if that comes as a shock , and i will invite you to my all - night marathon of the bad news bears , major league , angels in the outfield , the mighty ducks , the big green , cool runnings and little giants . awful teams in sports comedies make miraculous turnarounds ; it 's what they do . those teams usually involve kids , for a very sound comedic reason : it 's funnier when they screw up , and they 're more sympathetic . those which _ do n't _ involve kids usually have actual actors in the lead roles , for another very sound comedic reason : they generally have developed some sort of comic timing . eddie was cast under the misguided premise that it 's easier to make basketball players look like actors than it is to make actors look like basketball players . this finds nba players like greg ostertag , dwayne schintzius , rick fox and malik sealy delivering punch lines as though they were reading them for the first time off a bazooka wrapper ( though sacramento kings center olden polynice has a nice moment describing a black hole to fellow players ) . perhaps that all did n't matter to anyone because there are so few punch lines , and because the whole film is one big casting gimmick . steve rash directs the spiritless script as though waving a flag of surrender and screaming , " do n't blame me , i just work here . " perhaps it was patently obvious to him that eddie is n't a movie -- it 's a cameo appearance that trips over a plot every once in a while . among the notables who lend their faces to this travesty are donald trump , new york mayor rudolph giulianni , former new york mayor ed koch , david letterman , letterman regulars mujibur rahman and sirajul islam , espn broadcaster chris berman and knicks announcer marv albert , as well as dozens of nba players and several nba arenas . and those are the real jokes in eddie . nothing these individuals say or do is funny ; you are supposed to be laughing simply because you notice , " hey , it 's donald trump ! " or " hey , it 's mujibur and sirajul ! " it 's difficult to decide whether eddie is so bad because it was so shamelessly lacking in imagination or because it ca n't even get the cliches in a cliche - ridden genre script right . the knicks coach who is eddie 's antagonist early in the film reappears at the end , but he is n't given a chance to be the villain eddie desperately needs . neither is frank langella , and none of the athlete - actors have the ability to give whoopi goldberg anything to play off of . that leaves her to do her street - wise miss thang routine , but with no character , no sharp lines and no help . eddie is n't just a bad movie with a formulaic premise . it 's a movie that makes you feel cheated and offended , because someone came up with a poster and a marketing plan to which they had to attach an actual movie , and you had the nerve to believe it was going to be a comedy .

0NEG

as any reasonable human being would , i must admit that occasionally i am befuddled by certain things . i am befuddled by fight club . now sometimes our favorite films are panned by critics and do not achieve critical success until much later , sometimes as much as ten or twenty years later . perhaps it is because these films are way ahead of their time . perhaps it is because they are so new and complex that only after years of allowing them to sink in do we truly appreciate and understand them . fight club is either garbage or brilliant , but , at least right now , i must lean toward the former . maybe i am subconsciously affected by word of mouth that has been slowly leaking throughout the media for weeks that this film is pure gold . but if it is , i sure do n't see it . edward norton plays jack , a field examiner for a major automobile manufacturer . his insomnia , coupled with his compulsive desires to fill his world with ikea furniture to ? complete ? himself , make him a loser at the game of life . but when all of his worldly possessions are blown out his 15th story window , he seeks comfort in a stranger , tyler ( pitt ) whom he met on a flight home . once jack is sucked into tyler 's world , he ca n't get out , literally . they begin fight club , an organization based on brutal and bloody fistfights that signify nothing other than to provide those that join a sense of belonging . as the fight club grows , things get out of control and take on cult status , beginning with one future soldier who proves his worth by standing still outside tyler 's house for three days . i dare not even begin to bring up the last quarter of the film , since that contains the twist that ? explains ? the pointless journey . suffice it to say i was truly disappointed in fincher , who 's previous two films , se7en and the game put him in a very slim category of truly brilliant young filmmakers of the next generation . this is not to imply by any means that he is no longer a genius or capable of bringing more masterpieces to the table . but with fight club , he has allowed his unique talent for extraordinary vision to be distorted by silly digital experiments and self - referencing film elements , such as talking to the audience about what they are seeing , telling them that the little blips in the right hand corner are signifiers that the projectionist is changing reels and that a slightly altered recurring line is good ? flashback humor ? . now , throughout the film 's coarsely woven texture and over - extended plot lines , fight club is obviously trying to make various social comments about the state of the world today . advertisements , inter - office politics , corporations , you name it , it 's addressed . ( though the media are suspiciously absent from the institutions that are referenced . ) all of them play an important role . how so ? well , i can kinda just tell . i ca n't really put my finger on it . to say that starbucks and barnes & noble are taking over their respective markets and kicking out the small business owner is no big news . is that bad for the world ? probably . not much room for social commentary there . we all know that inter - office politics are just that . . . politics . so what was the point of all this ? the film seems desperate to make a point , or a number of points , but i could n't figure out what they were . all i saw was a very bizarre social satire that was woven with strange film techniques , a bleak visual design and some fine acting . ( pitt , carter , norton . . . all of them are good . even meatloaf is good . ) when you get to the end , you will most likely be filled with questions , many of which the filmmakers wanted you to ask of yourself . not them , because each of them would likely give you a different answer . fight club means what you want it to mean , i think fincher just gives you the stuff to think about . but it could n't be more bizarre and unappealing . sure , it had shock value , but so did se7en and the game , and they were significantly stronger films .

0NEG

staring , george clooney , arnold schwarzenegger , chris o'donnell and uma thurman with alicia silverstone . well to start this off i 'd just like to say a couple things . first is , i miss michael keaton , i miss tim burton and would much prefer to think that these last two batman films are all like a dallas dream sequence . not even from the first film was batman really the ' star ' though he was damn close in the first couple anyway . in ' batman forever ' and now in ' batman & robin ' he 's almost pushed to being a bit player . i ca n't really say if clooney ( who regardless was better than kilmer ) was a very good batman or not . he 's given next to nothing to do at all , he might as well not have been there and it would n't have made much difference . now , joel schumacher has said that he refuses to bend to the masses that have hated his films and cheered for the return of buton that he wo nt make batman brooding and dark . fine , i mean granted ' batman returns ' while being an awsome film was a bit to dark sometimes . yet his bright neon , campy style is just killing anything this series meant to me . i 'm usually very easy on films . i loved ' con air ' and other films some critics have slammed . granted that film really was paper thin , cliche ridden , except for one thing , it was fun . there is virtually no fun in this film at all . i could n't have cared less . it 'll thrill the little ones as there s no violence really , none everyone comes out fine in the end like those old tv shows where it ends with everyone laughing . schwarzenegger is awful , i mean really , really bad . . . and this is coming from a regular fan of his work . i love his movies most of the time and the basic reason is he never says much in any of them . he talks all to often in this movie . i would have much prefered to have seen patric stewart in the roll . i believe to truely like a film you have to care about at least someone in a film . i liked alfred but the reason behind it is a cheap shot .

0NEG

even though i have the utmost respect for richard dreyfuss as an actor , his presence in a motion picture does not guarantee any particular level of quality . like everyone else , dreyfuss has bills to pay , so he occasionally accepts big paychecks for prominent roles in bad movies . consequently , while his career highlights include jaws , close encounters of the third kind , stakeout , and tin men , his resume is dotted with titles like moon over parador , let it ride , and now krippendorf 's tribe . let me start out by saying that krippendorf 's tribe is occasionally funny ( although never riotously so ) , but that 's about its only asset . the best word to describe this film is " asinine . " the target audience would appear to be recent nursery school graduates if not for the numerous sexual innuendoes , which are aimed at someone going through puberty . krippendorf 's tribe tries to be a zany , off - the - wall comedy , but the film makers have forgotten three important rules . the first is that some minimal level of plot credibility has to exist . the second is that viewers should be able to identify with , or at least care about , a character or two . finally , and most importantly , more than 5 % of the jokes have to work . once upon a time , james krippendorf ( dreyfuss ) was a respected professor of anthropology at little bounderby college . he and his wife obtained a grant to seek out a " lost tribe " somewhere in the wilds of new guinea , a goal which they never accomplished . shortly after their return from the failed trip , krippendorf 's wife died and he was left with the herculean task of raising three children -- shelly ( natasha lyonne ) , mickey ( gregory smith ) , and edmund ( carl michael linder ) -- on his own . now , over a year later , the college wants to see the results of the money they gave krippendorf ( which he has spent not on research , but on things for his family ) , so they send a new member of their faculty , professor veronica micelli ( jenna elfman ) , to inform him that he has been scheduled to give a lecture on his findings . when he arrives at the college for the momentous event , rather than telling the truth and risking being sent to jail for misappropriating school funds , he fabricates a tale about a mythical lost tribe , the " shelmikedmu " . to provide video footage , he films his children dressed in native garb . soon , much to krippendorf 's surprise , the shelmikedmu are a national phenomenon . but one disaffected professor ( lily tomlin ) is determined to prove that the tribe is a fraud . the only way krippendorf 's tribe works is if you assume that all of the characters ( not to mention the viewers ) are dumber than dirt . unfortunately , it 's impossible to like or sympathize with a bunch of putzes like this . director todd holland completely fails to develop any character into something more substantial than a device to implement various dubious gags . meanwhile , attempts at satirizing the shallowness of american culture ( i . e . , how easily the public can be fooled into jumping on the bandwagon of the latest trend ) come across as feeble and derivative . the acting in underwhelming . dreyfuss has definitely not given his " all " to the role of james krippendorf . alongside him , jenna elfman , the spunky co - star of tv 's dharma and greg , radiates perkiness and little else . this quality , while fine for a 22-minute television program , quickly becomes irritating in the arena of a feature - length movie . no one in the supporting cast -- lily tomlin , david ogden stiers , natasha lyonne ( woody allen 's daughter in everyone says i love you ) -- excels . i know that a movie 's in trouble when it 's half the length of titanic , but seems much longer . most of what comes on screen is generic sit - com level material -- the kind of slop that people will absorb while dozing off in their favorite easy chair in front of the television set . if there 's any upside , it 's that i do n't see much box - office support developing for this lame , ill - marketed miscue . krippendorf 's tribe will quickly become extinct .

0NEG

movies about teenagers and teenage culture rarely prove to be either interesting , entertaining or convincing , because of one fundamental reason : movies are made by adults and not teenagers . occasionally , however , films like say anything , dazed and confused and the breakfast club will break the mold and offer genuine insight into the lives of those bizarre creatures which surround us called " teenagers . " ca n't hardly wait , however , does not . instead , the writing / directing team of harry elfont and deborah kaplan manages to take every clich ? found in the teenage genre , strip it completely of perception , intelligence and wit - and turn it into one of the most nauseating cinematic experiences i have ever been subjected to . ca n't hardly wait follows a group of characters as they attend a house party on the night of their high school graduation . the main characters are such perfected stereotypes that no analysis needs to be provided to perfectly understand them : there 's the average male protagonist preston ( ethan embry ) , prom queen and cheerleader amanda ( jennifer love - hewitt ) , football star mike ( peter facinelli ) , white rapper wannabe kenny ( seth green ) , computer geek william ( charlie korsmo ) , and brainy outsider denise ( lauren ambrose ) . i could n't stand any of those characters . whether it was william getting drunk and signing along to heavy metal songs or kenny proclaiming " yo , i got ta have sex tonight ! " , all i could think of was how elfont and kaplan possibly managed to con columbia pictures out of ten million dollars to fund their film . apparently , ca n't hardly wait is supposed to be a comedy , but it tends to fail in this respect because of the fact that it 's not funny . in all honesty , elfont and kaplan should be forced by their employers to attend remedial classes in humour . and when i say " forced " , i mean it . they should be strapped down to a chair and have their eyes wedged open in a similar fashion to alex in a clockwork orange . this is how desperately they need to be educated about the concept of humour . for instance , ca n't hardly wait features a foreign exchange student who is instructed to repeat absurd statements such as " i am a sex machine . " for some reason , elfont and kaplan believe that if this character repeats it enough , eventually it will be funny . if only elfont and kaplan could recognise the irony that they actually got paid for making this junk - now that 's funny .

0NEG

way of the gun is brimming with surprises , some good , most bad . one of the good ones is ryan phillippe 's surprisingly halfway decent performance . after the actor gained much attention by posing and preening through teen swill like i know what you did last summer , he hinted at a bit growth in last year 's cruel intentions with his amusingly contemptuous john malkovich meets james spader performance , though his acting in that film faltered around the third act mark , precisely when the screenplay made his character grow a heart ( presumably to appeal to his training bra wearing fans ) and start bellyaching about how he 'd fallen for his " target " . it was a dramatic shift that neither phillippe nor the film 's director could negotiate . but he seems to be trying and that should n't be overlooked ( or probably over praised ) seeing as how , at this point , he really is n't required to do much but look pretty . here , phillippe has procured a five day growth of beard , his hair askew and his affect altered to sound something like james cagney in all his " look here , see " glory . it 's tough to believe a pretty boy like phillippe as a hard ass , but his performance actually helps with the illusion . unlike ben affleck 's puppy dog approach in reindeer games , phillippe is believable and not too bad at that . as for the plot , well , that 's one of the bad surprises ; phillippe and the great benicio del torro play two moronic ( and not even remotely likeable ) criminals ( introduced to us in the parking lot of a rave where they stupidly pick a fight with about twenty people ) who hatch a scheme to kidnap a surrogate mother ( juliette lewis ) after overhearing that she 's carrying the baby of painter ( scott wilson ) , a very well connected wealthy man . the kidnapping devolves into a laborious shoot out where much damage is done and many are killed . but the anti - heroes escape with the woman while an aging hit man ( james caan ) and two scheming bodyguards ( taye diggs and nicky katt ) remain in pursuit . directed by christopher mcquarrie , the screenwriter who won an oscar for his work on usual suspects , an overrated piece of crime noir in many circles ( this one included ) , way of the gun is a hodgepodge of crime thriller motifs that just oozes eye rolling familiarity . unlike phillipe , mcquarrie does n't seem to be growing at all ; he fills his flick with a sprawling labyrinth of plot all snatched from movies i know i 've seen before and worse , it feels like it . the film lacks even a fresh approach ( like what soderbergh did out of sight or the limey ) to its clich ? s , all of which are spewed before us in a picture that tries so desperately to be hip and gritty without bothering to notice how common it is . it features characters living by a code they seemed to have picked up in sam peckinpah 101 rather than any thing resembling life . even attempts at emotional weight feel strained like in preposterous scene where enemies james caan and benicio del torro stop in their tracks to have a cup of coffee and pontificate on life , philosophy , etc . i did n't like the bit much when it first appeared in heat , here , it 's even more self consciously " dramatic " . usual suspects , which also featured a bunch of low lives that seemed to live by a code they learned from the movies , worked to some degree because of that astonishing twist ending . nowadays an astonishing twist per ending is de rigeur , never mind if it deems all that transpired before it completely inconsequential . thus , nearly every character in way comes with at least one dirty little secret ( most amateurishly projected before they appear ) and it too has an ironic little twist at the end ( nothing earth shattering , like in the usual suspects ) but i admit , i did n't see it coming , and i smiled . however most of the movie feels exactly like the interrogation scenes between palminteri and spacey in usual suspects : a lot of faux huffing and puffing with no rhythm or reason . or substance . it 's just as overplotted as suspects , and often dull as any overplotted movie without interesting characters , a distinctive style , or a good script would be . even the good stuff , most of which involves james caan ( doing a fine job ) , feels odd and out of place in a movie that thinks lines like " karma is only justice with out the satisfaction " are clever . at one point caan laments " need is the ultimate monkey " a line so inexplicable he might as well have said " love is like hippo ass " . i 've seen porno with better dialogue . and some with better plot lines too . but rarely has porn offered up such a talented cast ( i mean , can you even compare james caan to ron jeremy ) . caan slips into this role with seeming ease , he could do this kind of soft - spoken tough guy in a coma , but he manages to give his character depth and weariness . benicio del torro is always welcome , though here he plays it fairly straight ( rather than another oddball character creation like the ones the actor gave us in usual suspects and excess baggage ) , adopting a brad pitt - esque quizzical pout to go along with his heavy swaggering . speaking of pitt , his ex , juliette lewis , is a weak link , either shouting her lines with ear shattering shrillness , or waddling about like a silly goose . nicky katt was brilliant in a brief role in the limey , here his role is just as brief only he seems wasted ; he 's only kept around for his cold presence . taye diggs has a similar function , cool as ever , but never a character , though the guy has one helluva death scene . for the most part way is incessantly talky with no reason to give a hippo 's ass about any thing that transpires since its characters are never more than simplistic pawns . it 's vaguely tarantino - ish , but in a bad truth and consequences nm way , with phillippe , in one scene , leaping into a stupid rant about " faggots " migrating to los angeles . you know the routine . the final shoot out is pure bargain basement john woo ( who himself seems to be doing bargain basement john woo ) with interchangeable bad guys lining up to be shot at . but those gun shots sure crack like thunder . just the other day i was watching an old dirty harry movie on cable and was stunned to hear the weak elephant grunt - like sound that emanated from harry 's fetishized smith and wesson . oh how far we 've come .

0NEG

when critics attack seemingly well - intentioned films like patch adams or more recently pay it forward as i am about to do , their opinions are often greeted with a backlash of angry e - mails , sometimes even mock death threats from those who ( i suppose ) like to be shamelessly manipulated by their entertainment . even politicians ( ! ) tend to dismiss film critics as heartless cynics for occasionally dumping on good - hearted films while praising " filth " like pulp fiction . these [ fill in the derogatory term that you are comfortable with ] tend to forget that a film critic 's job is to review the movie , not the message , however sweet and endearing that message may be . thusly patch adams is n't a bad film because it 's about a doctor who cares for his patients ; it 's a bad film because it 's a calculated piece of brazen audience exploitation . similarly while pay it forward may have its heart in the right place ( though i even doubt that , stay tuned , an explanation is forthcoming ) , it 's still an unpleasantly maudlin mess . the picture is about an emotionally guarded 5th grade history teacher ( a somewhat similarly guarded kevin spacey ) , with a burn scared face and equally singed attitude , who gives his class the seemingly impossible assignment of doing one thing over the course of the semester that will change the world . 12 year old trevor ( haley joel osmet ) , a disneyfied do gooder who takes care of his alcoholic mother ( helen hunt ) , comes up with the notion to pay it forward ; this entails a person doing one good deed ( call it an uber favor ) for three others , then telling them to do the same for three others and before long we 're all living in a frank capra movie . meanwhile in a parallel story , a weasely reporter ( jay mohr ) tracks the " movement " which has apparently begun to grow . pay it forward has odd ideas about tone ; at certain points it hurls a smattering of unnecessary cynicism at us as if that would be the appropriate antidote to the unrelenting sappiness at its core . it 's as if director mimi leder did n't have the confidence to make pay it forward the way she intended , and compromised out of fear that her film was n't " gutsy " enough to earn the acclaim it has clearly been made for . so the picture adds grit ( a child molester propositions trevor , a homeless man returns to heroin after being " saved " , a character is knifed while doing a good deed , etc ) though it seems shallow , incorporated into the proceedings because the film itself is n't quite sure if it 's ready to buy into its own utopian blather . pay it forward offers " crowd pleasing " elements for general audiences ; jay mohr 's umpteenth variation on the waspy sleazeball , angie dickinson 's earthy alcoholic bag woman , and the jive - talking " black hoodlum with a heart of gold " ( coming on the heals of the black , god - like inmate embodied by gabriel casseus in bedazzled , this may just be the beginnings of a brand new guilty white liberal clich ? . hurray for hollywood ) who actually calls the mohr character a " nigga " and says things like " can you feel me ? " leave it to pay it forward to happily include a little minstrel act for our further enjoyment . ( maybe spike 's flick was n't so misguided after all ) . these scenes feel as if they belong in a dopey comedy with feel good aspirations rather than the irritatingly saccharine drama that you 'll find yourself trapped in should you not heed my warnings . while the filmmakers have stressed in interviews that they actually hope this is a film that could make the world a better place , to me the final product has the oily feel of a cynical politician contemptuously reciting cookie fortune slogans to a hopeful audience . it 's a picture that looks to be tailor made for academy consideration , with the main players ( all previous oscar winners or nominees ) given big emotional scenes that are practically variations on their most lauded turns . one scene in which a slightly de - glamed helen hunt ( de - glamed here means that not only is she a fashion victim [ her look is somewhere between goth queen and trailer park mama ] , hunt 's hair is also natty and badly bleached ) verbally castigates spacey , feels right out of her as good as it gets oscar clip . spacey , of course , responds in his cultured monotone , that could be straight from his low key american beauty performance . maybe the actor should get an award for coming off the least self consciously irritating ; though how can he not , even when he 's emoting spacey seems somehow shielded by a wry indifference . the usually talented helen hunt is the worst offender . in one atrocious touched by an angel moment hunt slaps osmet , immediately covering her mouth with the guilty hand in that very same stroke , and with said hand still on said mouth , she actually begins convulsing ( dry heaving really ) , then ( and i 'm not making this up ) she scurries to the kitchen tearing the place apart in a frenzied search for alcohol . the scene is so hokey it could very nearly be construed as a parody of hackneyed tv movie blow - ups ; it 's all very theatrical , especially hunt 's performance , which feels like a pathetic plea to the academy for another oscar . pay it forward has the dubious distinction of being a film that could be used as an argument for why actors should n't get academy awards . the picture unknowingly affirms that oscars transform nuanced talent into overwrought expressionists . even haley joel osemt , the wunderkind who was nominated for an academy award for his unforced performance in sixth sense , seems more divisive about his expressions and inflections . his acting has become broader , less intimate ; it 's as if we can make out the little munchkin 's thoughts : " boy this outta floor em " . naturally osmet is made to play one of those only - in - the - movies children , a martyr - figure who cleans up after his mother , lectures her on the ills of drinking , and even fixes her up on a date with his intellectual teacher . never mind that the two could n't be more dissimilar ; his mother is trailer trash dopey , and the teacher is one of those dennis miller - ey intellectuals who hides his insecurities behind a vast vocabulary . nevertheless this little nudnik goes out of his way to bring the pair together in a scene that recalls parent trap - ish cornball antics . but oh how we love bright , articulate , self - sacrificing children who pick adults up by their bootstraps and guide them through life . they 're so adorable . of course the blame ca n't all be hoisted onto the actors ( though with the exception of the little kid , they probably should have known better ) , instead the brunt of it should be passed on to mimi leder , who directed one of the most thrilling episodes of er , then went on to make two awful genre films in a row . the first being the peacemaker , a witless post - cold war george clooney vehicle , and deep impact , one of the two films of 1998 to squander the premise of earth 's possible demise by a crazed meteorite . the first flick was sunk by an over reliance on clich ? s , and a complete absence of any kind of emotional involvement , not aided by an ending which actually centered around the diffusing of a ticking time bomb complete with digital read out ( apparently present for an invisible audience ) . deep impact has more in common with pay it forward ; it 's a movie that treats earth 's impending destruction in awfully simplistic terms , completely ignoring the havoc that would so obviously take place if the world believed its planet would be a goner within days . the film was full of inspirational speeches where people really said nothing , though the sappy score swelled up to make it appear as if they were being profoundly touching . in pay it forward leder continues in this vein with her intermittent dollops of cynicism seeming almost like a rebuttal : " see my movie is n't as na ? ve as you might think " she seems to be saying . no , it 's just horribly confused .

0NEG

where do i begin ? okay , how about with this : starship troopers is one of the worst movies to hit theaters in a long time . in fact , it might even be the worst * major * release film to come out in years . . . or even a decade . this is bad beyond belief . i would * not * suggest paying money to see this . there 's a good chance you 'll regret it . if you see it for free , you could still want to walk out . go right ahead . the movie starts off with cheesy 90210 scenes set in the future world of . . . buenos aires . here we meet the group of horrendously bad actors and actresses playing obnoxious , easy - to- * despise * -with - a - passion characters that have love triangles , love rectangles , and love hexagons screwing up their life . before long they all go off and join the military , primarily in the interest of having sex with the other youngsters that joined . they train . they strut around nude for no reason whatsoever . after an hour of making the audience scream in agony , they start fighting bugs . the big bugs look nice , even though their design is only " okay . " unfortunately , the fights are boring since we * want * all of the characters dead anyway . cue more agony . then some characters have sex . then some more die . * * * who cares ? ? ? * * * cue more agony . the movie ends , the audience runs out to their cars , vomits over the pavement , and attempts to drive home . unfortunately , after that torture , they ca n't think straight , do n't pay attention to the road , and many are in ugly car wrecks . you remember how batman & robin was bad ? well , batman & robin kicked this movie 's sorry butt , people . starship troopers does not succeed as an action movie . it does not succeed as a drama . it does not succeed as a war movie . it does not succeed as a comedy . it does not succeed as a satire . it does not succeed as a parody . it succeeds as being horrible . terrible . gut - wrenchingly bad . i wanted to run away from that movie every minute . but i paid my money and i owed it to others to see if the movie got any better . so i stayed . it never got better . frequently , it did the impossible , and got * worse * . the movie as written , acted , directed , and basically just feels as a whole like it 's about on the mental maturity level of a free willy 4 . the whole thing feels like a movie that only three - year - olds could enjoy . . . except for the ridiculously gratuitous blood and gore , and pointless nudity . it 's written for little children , but children should definitely * not * go anywhere near it . of course , i recommend the same for everyone . do n't go anywhere near it . verhoeven 's got a streak going now . his last movie was showgirls . he seems to be trying to see how bad his movies can get before people finally stop coming . showgirls was a failure , but it appears that , though it 'll be lucky to make near its budget , this movie will still do okay gross - wise . is it really * all * bad ? well , no . troopers has about four or five lines of dialouge / short humorous scenes that are actually funny , mostly from the " do you want to know more ? " commercials that pop up throughout the story , promoting the joys of the joining the troopers . so that adds up to about 30 seconds of entertainment and still about one hour , 59 minutes , and 30 seconds of miserable torture . i 'm totally confused as to the way that some people are really enjoying this movie . but i do admit it . so , if you 're willing to possibly put yourself through torture , go ahead and see it , and decide for yourself if you love it or hate it . i do n't know how anyone or any * thing * could love this movie , but hey , to each his own . feel free to give it a shot . of course , in the interest of saving your souls , i do n't recommend it . but guess what ? alien resurrection comes out november 26th , and , having already seen some of it and having read the script , i assure you that it will blow pretty much everyone away . though opinion on starship troopers is reasonably split , it 'll be difficult to find someone that * wo n't * like alien resurrection when they 've seen it . this is possibly the year 's best intense action film , or at least * one * of the best . if you really want to see alien warfare that 's played out intelligently and seriously , see alien resurrection . please , avoid this .

0NEG

adam sandler turns up the charm in his latest romantic comedy , the wedding singer . unfortunately , that also has the effect of softening his edge . he 's nowhere near his peak of happy gilmore , not that it was much of one . he 's certainly not helped here by a rather frail plot . the year is 1985 , letting the whole film obsess with 80s nostalgia . adam sandler is nice guy robbie , the titular wedding singer , who entertains at the local reception hall by belting out his interpretations of classic 80s hits . robbie 's life is thrown into turmoil when his fiancee , linda ( angela featherstone ) , leaves him at the altar . however , things are looking up when he meets julia ( drew barrymore ) , a waitress at the hall . she 's the perfect woman , but for one small flaw : she 's engaged to be married to a slick junk bond king , glenn ( matthew glave ) . so , most of the film deals with the slow realization by robbie that he and julia are in love , and his attempts to stop the wedding . as far as plots go , it 's a pretty thin and tired one . to fill the gaps , the wedding singer delivers heaping spoonfuls of 1980s nostalgia . from boy george to michael jackson , from miami vice to dallas , from the first cds to the last rubik 's cubes , this film revels in all the minutiae . and then there 's the music . . . learning a lesson from the successful soundtracks to grosse pointe blank , and romy and michele 's high school reunion , this film packs more 80s songs in the film than the running time will allow . as a result , most songs get maybe a lyric or a half , but you can almost see the bright gleam in the record executives ' eyes : the wedding singer vols . 2 , 3 , and 4 ! while the nonstop 80s riffs get incredibly tiring , at least they distract you from the plot . at least last year 's my best friend 's wedding stirred up the standard " keep your true love from marrying someone else " plot by making the rival a nice person . here , glenn is such a lowly rat of a man that you never see what julia saw in him . barrymore , on the other hand , is simply charming as julia . which leaves us with adam sandler . he 's at his best in the film when his nice guy persona fades a little ( such as when he has a breakdown on stage during a wedding reception ) . when he 's in full nice - guy mode , he 's more pathetic than endearing . the film boasts several cameos ( most notably by steve buscemi and jon lovitz ) . but none of them work well at all . buscemi 's role as a drunken best man simply fails to be humorous . lovitz , on the other hand , as a rival wedding singer , makes you long for his good old days on saturday night live , where he was actually funny . the only cameo which has some appeal is a guest appearance by a classic 80s rocker during the film 's finale ( surprisingly , one of the only plot - related scenes which actually works . ) adam sandler still has some work to do before he can become a dependable leading man . while he attempts to change his image in the wedding singer , the end result is no net gain .

0NEG

arriving in a barrage of hype , the blair witch project is one of the biggest box office success of the year . however , like the golden child , although blair witch has made a lot of money , it 's not very good . donahue , williams and leonard play themselves as three students who set out to make a documentary about the blair witch myth . the film is made up of the camcorder footage they recorded , which means grainy footage and woozy camera angles . although events start of normal , they get weird pretty quickly , while the threesome argue more and more as the journey goes on . although an interesting premise , the blair witch project amounts to nothing more than a missed opportunity . the biggest mistake the film makes is to let three mediocre actors the chance to improvise . most of the dialogue is ad - libbed , and still manages to sound like a poor b - movie . the ' script ' eventually degenerates into shouting matches , with the f - word included a lot to sound like students . there are breaks in these arguments where some creepy events occur , but then it 's back to the shouting and swearing , which gets very tiresome very quickly . if i wanted to see three people get lost in the woods , shout a lot and swear , i 'd go on scout camp . but no , the audience is meant to get some entertainment factor out of this , but i 'm not quite sure how . the supernatural parts of the film are actually interesting , especially if close attention is paid to the story developing first twenty minutes . with no music and no budget to work with , the film has to depend on natural , psychological scares , which are sometimes well delivered , sometimes not . i never really felt truly scared during any part of the film , although there is a small sense of fear underlying throughout the film . however , because the actors are so irritating , the scares are lost when it eventually reverts back to heather saying ' what the f * ck is that ? ' a lot , and mike giggling like a loony . there 's also the niggling fact that these student filmmakers do some really stupid things . the main problem is the fact that even though these hapless bunch could be killed at any moment , and are hopelessly lost , heather still insists on filming it all . the film gives a half hearted reason why she should want to do this , but it is n't very convincing . also , the students have no idea how to survive in the woods , such as following a large river flowing through the woods to civilisation . there are also some parts where the ' amateur ' camcorder footage is obviously staged , heather 's apology being a major one . the blair witch project , in the end , just fails to deliver . i suppose if you 've been lost camping before , the film may deliver some chills , but this is no use for the other 99 % of the paying audience who have n't been lost in the woods . apart from the final minutes , the film is mind boggingly unscary , and the shouting matches get hideously dull . the spook scenes are short and far between , and any other horror movie could probably achieve the same amount of fear that these scenes provide . although a good idea , it 's not executed well enough to be a fun , scary cinema experience . it 's a worrying fact when the website ( http : //www . blairwitch . com ) is better than the film .

0NEG

the u . s . army utilizes a number of books known as field manuals which stipulate the specific way in which almost every action imaginable must be done . one particular field manual is known as the fm 22 - 5 , which among other things , covers the practice of saluting . under the " saluting " section is a sub - section which covers how a salute is rendered by a military work detail in the presence of a superior officer . the salute is rendered by the highest - ranking individual present when the superior officer comes within six paces of the detail , and is dropped when the officer passes six paces from the detail . in any event , the salute is rendered only by the man ( or woman ) in charge , rather than by the whole group . almost at the very beginning of the general 's daughter , we see a general 's motorcade passing a work detail . everyone salutes . it looked impressive , but it just was n't right . that little bit showed me that someone either did n't do the appropriate research , or made the conscious decision to go with style over substance for the scene . in fact , this would serve as a metaphor for the rest of the picture , as it seems director simon west tried so hard to craft a film with atmosphere and flash that he forgot a coherent story and good characterization are also crucial to a good movie . what results is a film that looks good , but like that one scene , just is n't right . the first fifteen minutes of the film is a good example . paul brenner ( john travolta ) is an agent for the army 's criminal investigation division , undercover at a georgia army base to investigate an illegal arms sale . prior to the transaction , the buyer gets a whiff that brenner is n't the unscrupulous supply sergeant he 's supposed to be , and later that night attempts to kill him by shooting up the houseboat on which brenner is living . so ensues a cat and mouse action sequence which ends like a certain scene in raiders of the lost ark ( we 'll just say that it involves propellers ) . brenner then receives new orders when the commanding general 's daughter , captain elisabeth campbell ( leslie stefanson ) , is found naked , bound , and dead on one of the base 's training ranges . he is teamed with rape investigator sarah sunhill ( madeleine stowe ) to uncover the truth about the peculiarly gruesome murder . what i want to know is why the whole action scene with the arms buyer was even necessary . it gives no insight into brenner , other than the fact that he 's a little cocky . does the arms subplot turn up later ? no , so why add this extra running time to the film ? the answer : it looked cool . or how about the " atmosphere " ? the beginning of the general 's daughter presents us with imagery of the deep south - thick trees , dirt roads , sultry colors over water - all backed up with bayouesque music . nice immersion in the setting , but it soon does n't matter , for when the film 's plot shifts over to the murder investigation , so does the entire mood . no attention is paid to the location of the story , and the music is altered to fit a very generic thriller theme . did the filmmakers start out thinking they were making a different movie ? instead of creating a cohesive atmospheric theme for the entire film , we get the distraction of one of theme followed by another , just because the director thought he should show off some of the countryside . the above examples also serve to illustrate that inconsistency is another problem with this movie . as i 've already mentioned , an entire section of the film does n't jibe with the rest , and the characterization only adds to the difficulty . brenner , who comes across as a man with little respect for authority , suddenly snaps to in the presence of general campbell ( james cromwell ) and utters some of the corniest " yes , sir " s i 've ever heard . he even delivers an emotion - charged monologue about why he will work so hard to catch the person who killed the general 's daughter , even though he was totally flippant about the whole thing just a couple of minutes previous . sunhill , who initially comes across as a professional investigator , utilizes a couple of blatantly illegal methods to obtain information , and even revels in her ingenuity . both characters are protagonists , but it 's hard to get behind them when their personalities are all over the place , and in some cases , simply unappealing . i could imagine that during filming , west would shoot a scene , then take the actors aside and tell them , " let 's do it again , but this time , i want more . " i say this because although travolta and stowe are normally very good , in this film they overact in most of their scenes . an even worse offender is clarence williams iii as the general 's aide , colonel fowler . i swear the guy says all of his lines from the position of attention . a far cry from his days as linc in " the mod squad " , i ca n't help but think he was acting from west 's direction . a couple of side characters including a west point psychologist ( john beasly ) and a young female private ( ariyan a . johnson ) make their scenes nearly impossible to bear . the only two actors who seem to have escaped west 's influence are james woods , who provides a good performance as colonel moore , elisabeth 's mentor at the psychological operations unit , and timothy hutton as colonel kent of the military police . woods relishes the role of a man whose job is playing with people 's minds , and does so without ever taking it over the top . hutton just kind of hangs around , but at least he was n't overacting . i have n't read the nelson demille novel on which this movie was based , but i 'll bet more than a few dollars that the story was better in book form . the movie version has got characters which come and go with little or nothing to do except fill up space , or provide bits of information which seem to neither mean anything in terms of advancing the story nor reveal any significance once the whole story is finished . every time we 're presented with some new aspect to the case , west gives us more of that flash by playing it up like it 's the most momentous discovery ever , but the information is not used by the investigators at all . instead , when conclusions are drawn , they are such tremendous leaps of faith that you wonder if successful investigations are not based on facts , but lucky guesses instead . the army should have saved time by bringing in brennan and sunhill , letting them play a game of twenty questions with the suspects , then letting them guess who the killer was . would 've been over in a half hour . the film finishes with a sort of bookend , featuring the same style and southern scenery as the very beginning . literally during the closing credits , we get to see brennan get in his car and drive off , then we get to see sunhill get in her car and drive off . they both seem kind of happy . maybe they were driving away from simon west .

0NEG

i do n't appreciate it when a thriller manipulates the viewer into thinking the plot is interesting , when in fact it 's ludicrous . in the case of the general 's daughter , the plot is more than capable of intriguing you to a certain point . but at this juncture in the story , the movie begins to fall apart like a crumbling cookie . this predictable summer thriller is only sporadically involving , and that is unfortunately not enough to compensate for all of it 's detailed flaws . get past one moment early on where john travolta exercises his southern accent , and you 're likely to survive this entire movie . travolta plays criminal investigations divisions officer paul brenner , who 's working undercover at a military base when another situation arises : the apparent rape and murder of a young female officer ( leslie stefanson ) . it turns out that the victim is the daughter of general joe campbell ( james cromwell ) . let the investigation begin . with the assistance of fellow cid investigator sarah sunhill ( played rather on - the - sidelines by madeleine stowe ) , brenner uncovers what appears to be an intricate and bizarre homicide case . things begin to get marginally engrossing when we meet colonel moore ( james woods ) , a former commanding officer of the deceased who has a few secrets up his sleeve . woods submits another scene - stealing performance here as he oozes authority , surrounded by clouds of smoke emitted from his cigar . with echoes of his supporting role in true crime , in which he duked it out with clint eastwood in enjoyably profane verbal exchanges , he makes every moment believable . here though , the intense dialogue comes care of confrontations with travolta , as the two send mindful , knowing glares across the room . there are many scenes such as this in the general 's daughter , in which the veteran cast performs splendidly under pressure , but the circumstances that tie these meetings together are difficult to absorb . director simon west ( con air ) , shows a watchful eye of delivering a stylish looking thriller , but he fails miserably when it comes to the intellectual part of it . the general 's daughter is , more often than not , a predictable and unexciting mess . it does not help matters that the plot is virtually actionless , dragging it 's heels all the way at a mind - numbing snails pace . a few brief action scenes , marvelously handled in the editing department , show that the movie could have delivered such a more proficient package . from a director who does such a great job of staging explosions and miraculous stunts , i suggest west should stick with mindless , rip - roaring action features and attempt to avoid future projects like this . still , the movie is certainly not without it 's merits . the acting is very good from the majority of the experienced cast . the performances range from commanding ( travolta ) to electric ( woods ) to stiff - as - a - board ( cromwell , who does n't show off his real talents here ) . madeleine stowe manages to hold her own for a while , but as the female lead in an action - thriller , she does n't pull through sufficiently . one of the problems with the execution is that it 's very predictable . > from minute one , i had few doubts about the identity of the killer in question . the script even unwillingly points him out for us , using familiar techniques to hide his guilt until the unmasking toward the end . in all fairness , we 've seen many of the devices used in the general 's daughter put to greater effect in other films . the secrets behind the girl 's mysterious death are explained gradually , but by the resolution we have tunneled through so much malarkey that it feels unnecessary and surprisingly silly . the general 's daughter is not a terrible movie , and it is involving enough to sustain a viewer 's attention span for a certain period of time . but it just could have been so much better .

0NEG

at one point in this movie there is a staging of an opera that goes completely wrong . but one member of the crowd stands up and cheers , thinking the performance was planned , and applauding it for their efforts . that 's " dirty work " in a nutshell . a very different kind of movie . this is not a movie that i can easily review . the critic in me analyzes the structure , plot , acting , characters . . . and tells me this movie is terrible . but the norm macdonald fan in me had me rolling on the floor laughing . this movie plays more like an hbo sketch comedy than a movie . it 's a one note concept . mitch and sam need $ 50000 in order to bribe a doctor to give their father a heart transplant before other more needy patients . realizing they are very good at revenge plots , they open a revenge for hire business , eventually running afoul of a rich businessman played by christopher macdonald ( who after roles in " happy gilmore " and " veronica 's closet " seems typcast in this role ) , who sends them to destroy a building that mitch learns is the home of his girlfriend 's grandmother , thus leading them to plot against the rich businessman on the night of the grand opening of a new opera house . first the critic in me . the plot is the standard poor guy vs evil rich guy device , where the main character meets the girl of his dreams along the way . here 's the catch . none of the characters are sympathetic . they 're all selfish jerks who do n't care who they hurt in their attempts to do whatever they want . the jokes are juvenile , crude , appealing to the worst elements in people . there 's jokes about prostitutes , the homeless , beastiality , anal sex . there 's even a subplot that 's developed , it seems , only to make jokes about infidelity and incest . and i loved watching it . i was a huge fan of norm macdonald 's sarcastic , to - the - point comedy on saturday night live , and this movie is an hour and a half of it . norm macdonald takes a joke , strips it to the core , and tells it like it is with a dry wit . like the scene were he and his friend are learning the ropes at a new construction job . the foreman goes over the basics , which mitch and sam do n't understand . how do they get out of it ? by admiting they lied on their resumes , and do n't know a thing about construction ! and surprise , they get fired . the characters are incredibly mean - spirited . there 's a father who 's loud and obnoxious , a gambling addicted doctor played by chevy chase who tells sam of his father 's condition by saying " if i were a gambling man i 'd put a lot of money on death . " the businessman cole who always has his dog spunky , and does who knows what with it . and then there 's mitch and sam , who , thinking they can get $ 50000 by destroying a building , ponder how their actions would ruin the lives of the residents . " too bad we have to do it , " mitch says . here 's a movie where every joke that is executed as it is set up , where you see every punchline coming , where every spot profanity could be used and then is used . at least the film is honest , and makes no mistake that it is anything more than idiotic . but at least it is n't dull , and it is n't predictable . and that 's the way it should be . it 's sketch comedy , and if you 're a fan of norm macdonald , you 'll love it . the jokes are crude , the characters are mean to the core , the attitude of the movie is that it just does n't care . if you do n't like norm macdonald , or stupid movies , then you probably wo n't like this one . the jokes are crude , the characters are mean to the core , the attitude of the movie is that it just does n't care . so before seeing this one , tune your mindset , and prepare for a slew of norm macdonald humor , gay animal sex , prison rape jokes , uncaring characters , and one last performance from chris farley . the critic in me says ( * ) but i give it an 8 ( * * * ) . i just could n't stop laughing .

0NEG

the new austin powers film continues a movie tradition begun in the eighties . produce something , anything , that will get the high school and junior high kids in the theater because they buy more soda and popcorn than senior citizens . the usual hallmarks of this filmmaking tradition are all here . gross humor , sex jokes , silly sight gags , more sex jokes . and the film is a strong contender in the current race to be cruder , grosser and more outrageous than that last film . what the film is not , however , is funny . the plot centers around the return of dr . evil , who goes back in time to steal austin powers ' mojo ( a liquid with red stuff in it extracted from austin 's pelvis ) which gives austin his sexual prowess and the charisma to defeat his enemies . austin must go after him , and returns to the swinging sixties where free love and sexy secret agents had their heyday . i almost avoided this film because i did not like the original . but the films premise sounded like an excellent comic vehicle and the film received many good reviews . i wish i had stuck to my first impression . myers is trying to be the jerry lewis of this generation . and he has the talent to do it , at least as an actor . but the material he is working with here , much of it his own , falls short of anything resembling comic genius . this movie tries to carry the day with sight gags about drinking distilled feces , a five - hundred - pound fat man 's butt crack , and a barrage of sex jokes aimed at the level of the average 15 year old . after some of these scenes , one has to wonder how gross the next generation of films will have to go to get an audiences attention . the direction also helps the film achieve a new low point in cinematic humor . for the most part , i felt as if i was watching a saturday morning chalderns live action tv show . there is no sense of comic timing or subtlety . the director just throws the material at us , giving us nothing except the hope that anyone with a camera could be a film director . i am sure the film will have appeal to many of the under 22 crowd , at least the one 's who have yet to discover literacy . certainly the movie is directed towards the generation that prefers everything described as ' in your face , kick you in the teeth , take no prisoners , ( action - verb + blah blah blah ) . ' if you see the film and you find you 're not laughing , there is nothing wrong with you . it just means you grew up since seventh grade .

0NEG

to sum the entire film " 54 " up in one sentence , it would be : watch a vh1 documentary instead . " 54 " , seems like someone brought william faulkner into 1978 , brought him into studio 54 , got him really drunk , told him to write about it , and then dumbed that down to be released to the public . a sloppy version of almost stream of conciousness spirals down into an oblivion of the illusion of sex , drugs , and disco . the narrator , shane o'shae ( ryan phillippe ) , works as a grease monkey in new jersey who , of course , on a whim decides to go into new york and try to get into studio " 54 " . phillippe gives a passable performance which could have been made by any young , attractive actor with a six pack stomach . he is let in by steve rubbell ( mike myers ) , the infamous co - owner of studio 54 , because he is attractive . he eventually becomes a bus boy and then a bartender . . . you expected more , did n't you . there is n't . the film builds up from nothing and becomes nothing as it 's climax ( is n't that an apt word for studio 54 ) lands with a thud . the glitz of the club and perpetually semi - clothed patrons are used in an to attempt to show the it 's glamour . for much of its target audience , college age to early thirties , it attempts to show celebrities mixing with " normal people . " this even fails since the only two celebs truly introduced are andy warhol and truman capote . you can be sure that half of the audience has n't heard of them , another quarter only know their names , and the other quarter knew they were there already . the humor , if you can call it that , is built on an eighty year old woman getting high and 70s references like john travolta and olivia newton john making us laugh at how stupid we were back then the best performance in the film is given by mike myers as the perpetually high , sexually ambivlaent , very new york steve rubell . he seems to play rubell better than rubell would if he was still alive . he looks like rubell and sounds just like him while giving a subdued , almost nostalgic performance , when needed . it reminds you of his saturday night live character linda richmond on " coffee talk " sans dress and wig . the supporting cast of salma hayek , breckin meyer , and neve cambell are their only there to give added subplots which are introduced but lead absolutely nowhere . the romance between phillippe and cambell , as a soap opera star , is completely implausable . the two share about half as much screen time as there are shots of the eighty year old hooked on amphetimenes . hayek 's wanna - be singer seems extremely forced and her husband , greg ( meyer ) stands in as shane o'shae 's surrogate best friend . the subplots seemed forced and seem like they have been added just to make sure the film was over an hour and a half long . overall , " 54 " tried to give a view of the brashness of the place where crack flowed like heroin which flowed like wine . the film never leads to anything , has no obserable point , and covers up a lack of real plot with a veil of beautiful people . in truth , that reminded me of the eighies .

0NEG

you know , i never really wondered what the tarzan films would have been like had tarzan been an old man . while watching instinct , i could n't help but acknowledge the way the film carelessly rehashes the well - explored themes of those earlier movies . even beside the tarzan comparison , instinct just is n't a very good film . it 's painfully idealistic , manipulative , and silly . i did n't hate it -- it 's simply impossible for me to hate any film starring anthony hopkins ; furthermore , most of the acting is quite good . but i can recognize instinct for what it is beyond my subjective admiration for the actors involved . i can also recognize reasons for wanting to make instinct , and it 's pretty clear that this could have been a good film with a massive script overhaul and a director less interested in imitating movies like patch adams . things start off in the predictable way , as director jon turtletaub introduces us to our hero , theo caulder ( cuba gooding , jr . ) , an ambitious , young psychiatrist under the supervision of an experienced , old psychiatrist ( donald sutherland ) . caulder soon finds himself involved in the case of his life , the one he thinks will make him famous . the subject is ethan powell ( hopkins ) , an anthropologist who has been living among gorillas in africa for the past two years . powell has been charged with the brutal murders of several men in africa , and it 's now caulder 's job to find out of he 's mentally competent enough to stand trial . through a series of short sessions , caulder tries to put together the complex psyche of powell . even though it really is an old man version of tarzan , much of this central idea is rather interesting . as i said , hopkins is captivating for every second he 's on screen ; he has a way of convincing us that he 's not acting , that he 's actually a man who has just spent two years of his life living with a family of wild gorillas . the character himself is n't very interesting -- he 's just an anthropologist who really likes gorillas -- but hopkins makes him interesting with subtleties both in speech and action . gooding jr . does strong work opposite hopkins , playing caulder as an intelligent and flawed individual . the screenplay , written by gerald di pego and " suggested by " a novel by daniel quinn , gives us no background information on caulder , but that seems to be the point ( he has no time for friends because he 's obsessed with his work ) . nonetheless , these two actors are essentially the entire list of things that are good about instinct . unfortunately , filmmaking this inept can mangle the effect of even the best acting . turtletaub and di pego are both guilty of instinct 's artistic failure , for they work together to make the dumbest , most cliche - ridden environment in which their characters are to live , and they do so by means of brainless subplots . first , we have the prison warden subplot . the prison warden is evil and wants to stop caulder 's progress at any cost ; if this means taking caulder off the powell case , then that 's fine . there 's also the prison guard subplot . the prison guard is played by john ashton ; the prison guard seems to enjoy mercilessly beating upon the psychotics under his supervision , and he 's instrumental in helping the story along to its obvious conclusion . then there 's the daughter subplot , in which maura tierney ( playing the daughter ) must look very upset a lot of the time ; after all , she is the daughter of a deranged man . if some of this stuff sounds familiar , that 's because they 're all devices that have been used and reused in countless other films . the evil doctor in patch adams is not unlike the evil warden here . the offensive caricatures of mental patients lack the depth that the similar portrayals in one flew over the cuckoo 's nest had . ashton 's evil prison guard pales in comparison to clancy brown 's in the shawshank redemption . hopkins ' performance will undoubtedly remind audiences of his turn in the silence of the lambs . and then there 's the whole tarzan thing , which is more than a little bit obvious through the entire film . perhaps what irritates me most about instinct is the half - hearted attempt at philosophical depth . the message powell brings back from the wild is not a subtle one : he thinks that humans are " takers , " that they expand and kill and that we should all just live like gorillas . i can sympathize with that , but only when it 's in a compelling film . this is the kind of stupid movie -- just like patch adams -- in which a big group of characters ( psychotic inmates , in this case ) rise against the evil forces oppressing them by tearing up playing cards . what does any of this have to do with a man who has just spent two years of his life with gorillas ? if all the subplots of instinct had been left on the cutting room floor , we would have had a thirty - minute movie far superior to the two - hour one that i watched today . if the central idea had been developed beyond the old man tarzan premise , then we would really have had something interesting -- a movie that does n't rely on the strength of its actors .

0NEG

in the finale of disney 's " mighty joe young , " a 15-foot tall , 2000-pound gorilla holds a frightened young boy in its clutches as it topples from a crippled ferris wheel and plummets to the ground . upon impact , rugged everyman and perennial do - gooder bill paxton rushes in , containing the emotional crowd with an earnest " move along now folks , there 's nothing to see here . " ok , so those are n't exactly the words he uses , but it 's probably one of the few clich ? s not uttered in this unnecessary remake of an unnecessary remake of that mother of all monster movies , " king kong . " 1949 's " mighty joe young " was an update of that classic creature feature , also based on merian c . cooper 's original story ( 16 years after " ' kong " it appeared the world was ready for a new take on the beauty and the beast fable ) . now some 49 years later , at least according to disney 's way of thinking , the world is ready for one more . not so . the only -- and i mean only -- reason to see the 1998 version is for the special effects . and these , unfortunately , run hot and cold . today 's joe young is designed and produced by special - effects whiz rick baker , who has been wowing audiences with his state - of - the - art make - up effects since 1971 's " schlock " ( which , incidentally , featured a baker - enhanced " gorilla " ) . joe is a combination of animatronic effects , computer graphics , and that old standard , a man in a monkey suit . while there are occasional flashes of brilliance -- baker 's had a lot of practice with simian effects , after all , including " gorillas in the mist , " " greystoke : the legend of tarzan , lord of the apes , " and the 1976 remake of " king kong " --there 's also some surprising cheesiness . one of the film 's most embarrassing moments is when paxton 's band of african trackers first encounter and pursue the larger - than - life primate ( in a scene unashamedly ripped off from " the lost world : jurassic park " ) . paxton jubilantly extols the beast 's majestic gait at the same exact moment as joe , and the computer effects driving him , stutter to a halt . also , if the film 's producers had wanted us to focus our attentions on the titular ape they should n't have paraded female lead charlize theron ( " trial & error " ) around in a seemingly - endless wardrobe of spaghetti - strapped tops . even joe seems distracted at times . the film piles on the clich ? s like there 's no tomorrow , including the predictable plot ( anthro - zoologists ship gigantic gorilla to l . a . where urban havoc is inevitably wrought ) , predictable villain ( a lithuanian i think i overheard someplace ) , predictable love story ( bill and charlize -- surprise ! ) , and predictable denouement ( " ' twas box - office receipts that killed the beast " ) . kids raised on " men in black " ( non - monkey effects also by baker ) are going to find ron ( " tremors " ) underwood 's outing a little lame by comparison . while certainly better than 1978 's " king kong lives " ( itself a lousy sequel to a not particularly good remake ) , " mighty joe young " proves how the mighty keep falling .

0NEG

an attempt at florida film noir , palmetto fails at the most fundamental levels . it 's slow moving , uninvolving , and plain just uninteresting . harry barber ( woody harrelson ) is an ex - newspaper man , just out of jail after being framed for a crime . his luck has n't been the best , but things are looking up when a mysterious woman , rhea malroux ( elisabeth shue ) , approaches him with a proposition . she wants harry to help her and her stepdaughter , odette ( chloe sevigny ) , pull off a fake kidnapping scheme to get $ 500 , 000 out of her stingy , but rich , husband felix ( rolf hoppe ) . at first , all harry is expected to do is provide a threatening voice on the phone , and to collect the money ( of which he gets to keep 10 % ) . but , as the deed is carried out , things are not what they seem , and harry gets caught in the ensuing storm . palmetto pulls out all the stops to achieve a film noir film , but the effect never quite comes together . it 's got the sultry florida heat , seductive women , and even curvier plot twists , but the whole thing smells of paint - by - numbers . sure , the right ingredients are there , but the end result is much too artificial . a lot of the problems lie with the script , which , though providing some genuine surprises , is packed full of leaden dialogue and bland situations . even the plot twists do n't seem to flow well with the rest of the story . some of them , for example , come from so far afield that they seemingly only make sense because the writer needed a twist ( for example : harry 's spontaneous job offer , or the whole typewriter situation ) . the characters are mostly lifeless , played to type , but not much more . woody harrelson plays harry with such imbecilic thick - headedness that it 's hard to even picture him as an ex - journalist . elisabeth shue vamps it up , but does n't add anything special to the role . chloe sevigny gives a terrible performance , trying to be a sexy 17-year old , but she just leaves a bad taste in your mouth . some of the supporting cast ( notably gina gershon and michael rapaport ) give stronger , but , in the end , meaningless performances . and to top it off , the pacing of the film is much too slow . as the movie grinds to a halt , you 're given too much time to wonder why you 're wasting it watching palmetto . if you 're in the mood for this type of movie , you 'd be much better off going out and renting some classic film noir .

0NEG

this film is worth seeing for those who want to see what mick jagger looks like when sporting an abe lincoln beard . the rock and roller is asked to carry the film as the action antihero of australian legend . . . ned kelly , the so - called robin hood of the aussies . but he fails to be convincing , in my opinion he is better suited to play gene kelly than ned kelly . the film opens to a b / w prologue of ned kelly bravely going to his execution . then it goes to technicolor and ned is seen in what goes for flashback , coming home from jail after a 3-year sentence to see his mom and reacquaint himself with the large kelly family . this scene is set in 1871 . in the background we hear the booming voice of waylon jennings , as he sings shel silverstein 's lyrics , which tells -- of ned 's hatred for the british rule and hope for ireland to be a republic . ned says a debt must be paid . . . as he hears voices from his dead father , his class - divided country , and his conscience , all telling him to get revenge . so begins ned 's romp through australia 's outback , seeking justice for all the wrongs his people have suffered . he begins by stealing horses , after complaining about the unfair tax law on horses that stray , which favors the rich landowners . when he 's only 20 he forms a gang , causing him to hide the rest of his life from the police , who put a price on his head of two thousand pounds . when ned 's mother ( clarissa kaye ) is jailed on a false charge of abetting criminals and sentenced to 3 - 5 years , ned offers to surrender in exchange for his mother 's freedom . when the authorities refuse , the kelly brothers go on a robbing rampage , burning mortgages of the poor found in postal vaults and murdering some soldiers . rampaging through the outback , they gather sympathy among the poor and lower classes , who do n't trust the traps ( police ) . spoiler to follow in the next paragraph . in the climax , kelly and his gang plan to ambush a train with british police , but someone kelly trusted tips the police on the train and kelly is trapped in a saloon and captured . ned 's brothers commit suicide rather than be taken alive . but kelly 's gang escapes , as ned heroically has the police go after only him and his brothers , as they become decoys . this was a flat presentation , hardly touching an emotional button on what all the fuss was about over ned kelly 's call for justice . jagger did n't have a prayer in succeeding in this dry script offered by ian jones and tony richardson . the story failed to focus on australia , seemingly a more british film than australian . under richardson 's lackluster direction , all jagger seemed to do , was proclaim his innocence and vow revenge , which soon became a shrill cry . if you want to see a better film about ned kelly , catch " mad dog morgan " ( 76 ) , a much truer and more daring version , with dennis hopper giving a much better characterization of ned kelly 's madness , something this film could only do in a ho - hum manner .

0NEG

i think we should , as responsible citizens , all get together and stop jim carrey from making another movie . he 's changing the cinema as we know it -- and for the worst . i would willingly rewatch batman and robin rather then again sit through this miserable collection of filmic moments -- prologues , epilogues , etc . the premise : a lawyer ca n't lie for a day . ho , ho . normally a movie made from this premise would be terrible -- mr . carrey suceeds in making it unwatchable . i laughed once -- and i was laughing at the sight of everyone else laughing . grinding does n't begin to describe . it pounds on your head so forcefully and so unstoppably that , if you are a normal person , you leave feeling sick . when it 's not trying to be funny , it 's trying to be melodramatic -- but it 's just annoying , stupid and sappy . at best . this movie is intended to make people laugh , yes , not to be voted best picture of all time by sight and sound . but , it fails on every possible level . it fails to be funny . it fails to be insightful . it fails to be suspensful . it fails to be fun . they should pay people to see it . it suceeds on one level -- it makes me want to get down on the ground and start thanking orson welles , for having lived . if you go in with the intention of coming out alive , please make sure that you are overly fond of boob , fart , pimple and fat jokes -- otherwise you will go insane . yes , literally insane . stark , raving mad . it is boring , stupid , melodramatic and in the end ugly . i reccemond it strongly . to ed wood .

0NEG

the best thing -- in fact , the only good thing -- i can say about dark city is that it made me want to go see l . a . confidential again . or go rent body heat , to see william hurt do some real noir . or even -- god help me -- palmetto . alex proyas 's new movie screams atmosphere . i screamed , too , " get me out of this theater ! " new line cinema spent millions of dollars creating the expressionistic film noir visuals and paying the actors , and does n't have any way to get it back . i paid $ 4 . 25 for a matinee screening and do n't have any way to get my money back , either . you 'll hear a lot from other critics about the look and feel of this movie . i will admit that the cinematographers and costume designers and set artists and cgi graphics geeks all worked hard to create a stunning , nightmarish future world where it 's always a late night in 1948 , complete with rotary phones and automats and fedoras . i 've got news for you fellows -- i do n't care how hard you worked , or how visually stunning this movie looks -- you wasted your time and mine , working on a movie without a plot , without a clear sense of direction of where it wanted to go , without a soul or a reason to care . the movie starts out oh - so - promising . john murdoch ( rufus sewell ) is lying in a bathtub in the sort of seedy hotel that in real life , would have been boarded up long ago . there is a dead , mutilated prostitute in the other room -- a surprise , as he has lost his memory . the phone rings : it 's a sinister - sounding man , claiming to be his doctor , telling him to flee for his life . all well and good , right ? wrong . apparently , someone decided that the audience was just a bit too dim to figure out the intricacies of the plot . ( this is getting to be a popular assumption in hollywood . ) so , the actual beginning of the movie is not sewell running for his life , rather , it 's a voice - over narration by the aforementioned doctor ( keifer sutherland ) explaining exactly what is going on and who is responsible . it 's as though sam the piano player had told us that rick and ilsa had been getting it on in paris in the first three minutes of casablanca . no , wait , that 's not fair to casablanca . it 's more like watching a new plotline at the first of the show -- or if you want to know how i really feel , having an off - screen narrator explain that gilligan wo n't be getting off the island in this episode . > from here , the coherence of the plot goes down faster than ( insert monica lewinsky joke here ) . the characters just wander around the city aimlessly and bump into each other for no apparent reason , and that 's what moves the plot . what we 're left with is a string of unanswered questions that do n't make any sense . we 're given aliens with unlimited omnipotent powers , yet they forget to use them at critical moments and get themselves killed . we 're given a hero who can " tune " into these same powers , yet he only uses them when it 's convenient to the plot . we 're given a whole long list of loose ends that go nowhere usually , critics will say that an actor playing an underwritten part " is n't given much to do . " in this movie , no one is given anything to do . sewell is given the impossible role of a man who does n't remember anything , and plays it like . . . um . . . a man who does n't remember anything . the aliens are tall , pasty - faced , and bald , and wear long black cloaks and fedoras to remind us that they 're evil -- and there 's a child alien as well , straight out of an anne rice novel . sutherland is saddled with a limp , a twitchy eye , and a breathy accent to remind us that he 's in league with the aliens . to its credit , dark city boasts two impressive bits of casting . william hurt is perfectly cast as the world - weary inspector charged with catching the man who is murdering prostitutes all over the city . jennifer connelly , playing sewell 's love interest , is given two all - too - brief moments on screen as a lounge singer -- and turns in the sexiest performace this side of jessica rabbit . but instead of the dogged policeman and the femme fatale given central treatment in the script ( the way they would be in any self - respecting noir movie ) they 're almost tangiential to the plot , such as it is . the problem with dark city is this : it 's a bad science fiction movie pretending to be film noir . the essence of film noir is n't , as proyas seems to beleive , breathy dialogue or snap - brim fedoras or tall , bald evil villains who would make peter lorre curl up in a corner . dark city has not one bit of intrigue , moral ambiguity , suspense , or anything else that keeps us coming back to the noir classics . dark city is like the intricately carved door that kate winslet floats on in titanic . it 's an exceptionlly well - made and intricately designed piece of flotsam , sailing around and around the middle of the ocean , going nowhere .

0NEG