The MOVIE REVIEW Thread

[crezi_munky]

AUGUST UNDERGROUND'S MORDUM

 

The premise is pretty basic - three young serial killers videotape their exploits. The footage captures their descent into total depravity and along the way we witness what they’re up to. Towards the end of film, a fourth character is introduced and it all goes downhill from there. Men and women are raped, killed, tortured, degraded and even puked on – all in graphic, unflinching detail. You want corpse f**king? Fetus eating? A man f**king a wound in a woman's chest? Maggot eating? Cannibalism? Self castration? Fellatio on a severed penis? Or maybe you want to see a woman vomit onto her victim's naked ass? All this and more packed into just over eighty minutes of the harshest mind-f**k I've ever had.

 

rating: 4/5

[Kaftig]

I thought nothing could top Miss Congeniality 2 for being the worst movie of the year. I was wrong. Sandra Bullock's former flame, Matthew McConaughey, has taken the crown away from her.

 

Sahara is a dizzying, confusing movie about two men, McConaughey and Steve Zahn, who are trying to find an American Civil War ship and its haul of gold coins. Their search leads them deep into Africa, where they bump into a WHO volunteer, Penelope Cruz, who is trying to discover the source of a deadly epidemic. They later find out that an African warlord, Lennie James, and his business partner, Lambert Wilson, are to be blamed for the epidemic. By the way, McConaughey, Zahn and Cruz end up discovering the Civil War ship as they fight off the bad guys.

 

True, the plot of Sahara wasn't predictable, but it wasn't clear either. The movie feels like a combination of subplots with no main plot. Somewhere along the way, it loses its focus and simply becomes an action scene-after-action scene movie. By the middle of the movie, I was asking myself, "What is this all about?" Maybe that's what happens when a script goes through different hands just to get the producer's approval.

 

Also, It didn't help that the characters described the plot complications in scientific jargon. That is probably one of the reasons why I simply didn't care when the characters find themselves in trouble. Another reason is that the characters are always "lucky" enough to find a way out of their troubles. Heck, they even discovered the Civil War ship accidentally!

 

What's worse is that the movie left so many questions unanswered, e.g. How did the Civil War ship "really" got to Africa? I'm no ecologist, but I don't think the Sahara desert went from wet to dry in just 150 years.

 

If Harrison Ford was the lead actor, I might have been more forgiving. McConaughey simply doesn't have the aura and the appeal of an action-adventure hero. Even his leading lady, Cruz, has to be photographed from certain angles in order to look beautiful. Worse, they don't have on-screen chemistry. No sparks, nothing!

 

Just to be fair, I did enjoy the stylistic opening billboards, and some action scenes were well-edited. The full shots of the desert were also impressive. Zahn was amusing for the most part of the movie, but on certain scenes, he reminded me of an overacting cartoon character.

 

I always knew that the Sahara desert is dry, but I never expected that a movie set there could be dry as well.

[dragonei]

Title: The Jacket

 

Cast: Adrien Bordy, Kiera Knightly, Kris Kristofferson, Jeniffer Jason Leigh

 

Director: John Maybury

 

Plot: A gulf war veteran (Jack) suffering from selective amnesia, as a result of being shot in the head, heads to his hometown. While he was walking on a desserted road, he meets a little girl (Jackie) and his mother who were stranded because thier car won't start. Jack helps them fix the car and gives the little girl his dog tags as some sort of gift. He attempted to talk to the little girls mother, but because the mother was so drunk, he shooed him away and drove off with her daughter. So Jack moves along and later on was able to hitch a ride from a stranger. Suddenly a police mobile forces them to pull over, and the stranger who was driving that car shoots the policeman and jack, leaves the murder weapon on the crime scene, and flees. Jack was then accused of a murder even he himself is not sure he commited, because of his mental condition. The only thing he could remember were the names of the mother and daughter he met on that road. Jack was then senteced to be confined in a hospital for the criminaly insane. This is where the story begins.

 

In that hospital, he becomes a subject of an experimental treatment procedure that involves strapping him in a straight jacket, injecting him with an experimental drug, and finally, locking him up in a body drawer that is desinged to store corpses. This procedure enables him to (dellusionaly?) travel 15 years in the future where he meets the all grown up Jackie, and learns that he is about to die in four days. Jacks sessions with this treatment procedure allows him to make several trips in the future where Jackie helps him get the information that he needs to fix the present. Will he be able to escape death in time?

 

Review: This movie is definetly not for the claustophobic. If you are not a fan of thinking and cerbral entertainment, then this movie is also not for you. The concept of time travel has been pretty much of a cliche in past movies, but trust me this one gives it a whole new perspective.

 

ACTING: Kiera knightly is not just some pretty face onscreen. This is one of the movies that showcases her versatility as an actress. She is the exact opposite of what our local pretty faces are. She does not even try one bit to look cute infront of the camera. Altough a British in origin, she gives a convincing american accent.

 

Adrien Brody fits his character perfectly, you get to understand and feel what he goes trough whenever he is locked in that body drawer...... Need I say more?

 

Kris Kristofferson manages to give me the goose bumps, he is one doctor I wouldn't wanna meet if ever Id be sent to a mental assylum.

 

Direction: Not great, but good enough to provide a fluid transition from one time set to another. The director manages to create the perfect illusion of what its like being locked in a body drawer wide awake, while you are pumped up with drugs.

 

STORY: The concept is original even though time travel has been pretty uch of a cliche. The main weakness of this movie was the presence of many untied loose ends of this movie. Some of those loose ends somehow manages to make the story more engaging. The story does not emphasize on the "how" factor but on the "why" factor. In which it does a very good job. Its not a question of How jack was able to see the future. But a question of why did he have to travel fifteen years ahead of time, and why did he speciffically meet the all grown up jackie there? Was he supposed to escape death? What was he suppose to change in the present and why? does he have enough time to do so?

 

Sure enough this movie will engage you from start to finish.

 

I give it a 4 out of 5 stars.

[Kaftig]

FINDING NEVERLAND

 

Second to the right, and straight on till morning.

 

Since I was a child, I have been trying to find that wonderful place called Neverland. I would repeat Peter Pan's directions to myself as I scan the evening sky. Unfortunately, I never found Neverland.

 

That is why I was excited when I heard that Marc Forster has directed a film about the life of Neverland's creator, James Barrie. Inspired by true events, Finding Neverland follows the "friendship" of Barrie (Johnny Depp) with a young widow, Sylvia (Kate Winslet), and her four sons. Married but without children, Barrie immediately bonds with the boys. His creative mind transports Sylvia and her sons to places that they could never imagine. However, not everyone is comfortable with this set-up. Devoting most of his time with this "other" family, Barrie has unconsciously neglected the needs of his wife, Mary. On the other hand, Sylvia's mother believes that her daughter's friendship with Barrie hinders her from getting suitors who could help them have better lives. Even Barrie's friends are questioning his "friendship" with the boys. Could it be another excuse for pedophilia? Despite these complications, Barrie remains close and loyal to Sylvia and her sons.

 

In this age of audio-visual effects-laden movies, Finding Neverland is a rarity. It is a light and simple film about people touching each other's lives. The issues it tackles are real and relevant; thus, it packs an emotional wallop. I am not ashamed to admit that I cried several times while watching it.

 

As a writer, my favorite scenes are the ones when Barrie transports the boys to wonderful places through his stories. The lines between reality and imagination become indistinct. My brain is saying these places aren't real, but in my heart I believe they are real. This is the primary reason why I became a writer - to create my own world that is so different from the one I'm living in, and to tell stories that happened in that world.

 

My only problem with the movie was the ending, which I felt was stretched. The final scene between Barrie and Peter (Freddie Highmore), one of Sylvia's sons, was too heartwarming that it became corny. I even got the feeling that the story was too neat, i.e. all conflicts were properly and easily resolved.

 

Still, Finding Neverland never ceases to amaze. Even if I watch it over and over, I will still be captivated with its story. Its magic will remain in my heart forever.

 

Now, I have no need to look out of my window each night. I have finally found my Neverland.

 

P.S. It is wise to watch this film in a cinema that has a good sound system. Otherwise, you'll have hard time understanding the dialogues because of the actors' accent.

[Kaftig]

RICE RHAPSODY

 

What will you do when you learn that all your three sons are gay?

 

That is the premise of Rice Rhapsody, the new film by Hong Kong director Kenneth Bi. Sylvia Chang plays the role of Jen Fan, owner of a restaurant in Singapore that offers the famous Hainanese chicken rice. She is also the mother of three handsome young men - Daniel (Alvin Chiang), Harry (Craig Toh), and Leo (Tan Lepham). She has already "accepted" ("tolerate" is a better term) that her first two sons are gay, but she will not allow her youngest son to turn out gay as well. She still yearns to have grandchildren to take care of. With the help of her "suitor" and business rival, Tan Kim Chui (Martin Yan), Jen takes in a French foreign exchange student, Sabine (Melanie Laurent). She hopes that Sabine and Leo would fall for each other, and that Leo would stay clear of his best friend, Batman (Andy Mok). Of course, things don't go as well she planned them to be.

 

While the film is light and entertaining, it suffers from slow pacing and a lack of narrative focus. The characters and the situations they find themselves in are interesting, but the story was weaved too loosely. First of all, it isn't clear whose point of view the story is following. Is it Jen's story, Leo's story or Sabine's story? Second, the story did not plunge into the emotional core of the concept - How does it feel to be a Chinese mother with three gay sons and vice-versa? Instead of showing us the emotional struggles encountered by the mother and her sons, what we get is one comic situation after another. Thus, the ending did not achieve the emotional wallop it desired. Staying clear of the social issues connected with homosexuality, what we see onscreen are stereotypical portrayals of gays. Kenneth Bi could have chosen to say more with his film, but he decided to remain silent.

 

On the positive side, the film benefits from the excellent performances of Chang, Lepham and Laurent. Chang certainly deserves praise for her restrained yet powerful performance. She easily conveyed the wide range of emotions that her character went through. Lepham proves that he's not just a pretty face. He showed his characters' strength and vulnerability at the same time, and he did it effortlessly. Laurent, for her part, was charming as the quirky yet soulful French-New Age girl.

 

Rice Rhapsody could have been sumptuous banquet of emotions. Sadly, it turned out to be merely an appetizer.

[Kaftig]

The Interpreter is not your ordinary suspense thriller. Instead of bombarding our senses with car chases, exploding buildings and bullet exchanges, Sydney Pollack's new film appeals to our intelligence.

 

Nicole Kidman plays the role of Silvia Broom, a United Nations interpreter who overhears a death threat against African dictator Zuwanie (Earl Cameron). Tobin Keller (Sean Penn), a Secret Service agent, is assigned to Broom. After a preliminary investigation, Keller begins to doubt the veracity of Broom's statement. It appears that Broom herself has a motive to k*ll Zuwanie. Keller is hell-bent to find out the truth behind the death threats. If Broom is telling the truth, he will protect her from the people behind the assassination plot.

 

While the dramatic voice (plot) of The Interpreter is interesting and exciting, it is the film's narrative voice (subtext) that remains with us long after we have left the cinema. Pollack has painted a picture of Africa where race isn't an issue anymore. Everyone, either black or white, suffers the same fate in the hands of a tyrannical dictator. Zuwanie, the president of the fictional Matobo country, is representative of liberators turned dictators found in most third-world countries. Power corrupts - this is the inevitable truth expressed in Pollack's film.

 

Sean Penn's performance is highly commendable. Once again, he proves to us that he is a great actor. Penn effortlessly expresses the nuances of his character, so much so that Keller becomes a real human being. Even in situations where he has to keep a clear, logical mind, Penn subtly expresses his character's emotional baggage. We understand why he reacts that way, and we sympathize with him.

 

The same could not be said of Nicole Kidman. While she is beautifully photographed in this movie, her approach to her character is cold and unnatural. Her reactions are so repressed that she comes off as a cold-hearted woman. Thus, I wasn't able to sympathize with her when she turned the tables on Keller and Zuwanie.

 

I would also like to commend the film's musical director for his modern yet restrained musical score. It gives the movie a certain edge that pushes the movie's narrative voice.

 

The Interpreter raises a lot of issues, but it also offers a solution. The crimes against humanity committed by corrupt leaders like Zuwanie could be prevented and given justice if all countries, through the United Nations, would work towards diplomatic resolutions instead of aggression. There are peaceful solutions to violent situations. "Vengeance is a lazy form of grief," Broom tells Keller. It will not help us process our "grief" and move on towards a peaceful life.

[dragonei]

Title: XXX2 the next level/state of the union

Cast: Ice Cube, Samule L. Jackson, Willem Defoe

Director: Lee Tamahori

 

There has been an attack on the NSA head quarters in Langley Virginia. Whoever did it is loaded for war and might be making a move on the U.S. Capital. Now agent Agustus Gibbons (Jackson) must find a new XXX agent that is deadlier, more dangerous and more attitude. Enter Darius Stone (Ice Cube), an ex navy seal jailed in a military prison for insubordination. They break him out of prison, then its all guns blazing galore. Can the new XXX save the day?

 

First of I can't help but compare this semi-sequel to the original. The original was entertaining in a dumb minded kinda way, but it delivered what it had to and it catapoulted Diesel's carreer into unimaginable heights. It changed the way at how we looked at secret agents. We got to see suave secret agents who never mess up thier hair or tuxedo after fist fighting with six men and getting out of a car explosion. But in XXX we got to see a bald, tatooed, uncivilized, buffed up and attitude ridden secret agent who's just out there to kick ass! And surprisingly it worked. Now if you liked Vin Diesel in XXX1 you will hate this movie!

 

Acting: The first mistake that this movie did was replace diesel with Ice cube. Ice Cube? No way! I was willing to give the premise a chance that a new criminal-turned-secret-agent will be featured in each series, but not with Ice Cube hell no! Why does he always have to be a ghetto hood in all of his films? Even tupac shakur played Janet Jackson's love interest, and Eminem did a quite convincing heavy drama. But Ice Cube really needs a complete idiots guide manual on how to act. he became a ghetto hood bum (Friday), a ghetto hood bounty hunter (All about the benjimens), a ghetto hood biker (Torque), A ghetto hood in outer space (ghost of mars) and of course a ghetto hood in the hood (Boyz n d hood). Ok maybe diesel is not an oscar worthy actor, but the reason why we all loved him in the first triple XXX was that he effectively fits his character, and we adored him with that attitude. Who could forget lines like "Ah the things I have to do for my country"! Ice cube delivered the same line in this movie, the only difference was that it sounded really cheesey and stupid. He couldn't even sound appealing when he was doing all that trash talking. Oh well at least Defeo was great as the villain, and Jackson undeniably is such a charismatic actor.

 

Story: Unoriginal! Boring! And too straightforward sometimes it didn't make a lot of sense. It didn't even make me wan't to empathize with the hero of this movie. The dialouges were verrrrrry lame and inept. But for those of you seeking explosions and all guns balzing kinda script, you will get it.

 

Direction: A lot of action scences enough to make a great eye candy. But! if you have been inside a bullet train running about 250 mph, you should know that the inside should be entirely sealed. Because that speed causes enough air friction or pressure to catapult a cow 50 to a hundred feet up. Yet we see them blowing holes in that train and still being able to coreograph a good fight scenes. Nobody can jump of a bridge that is a hundred feet tall, and swim out of the water without worrying about any concusions. But not only were the stunts not cool, they were also dumb. It kinda reminded me with the unforgettable movie Torque

 

I never thought I would have to say this, but here it goes! I missed Vin Diesel the whole time. Why oh why did he refuse this project? Why did I have to see him in the pacifier insetead of him returning as Xander Cage. And why was he killed in this sequel (They mentioned that he was killed), and ruining the possibility of him returning?

 

This movie does not live up to its subtitle "The Next Level" it should have been "the beginners level" instead. This is the diet coke of the old XXX

[sickness]

SHUTTER

 

Cast: Ananda Everingham and Natthaweeranuch Thongmee

 

Director: Banjong Pisanthanakun, Parkpoom Wongpoom

 

Plot: The horror begins when Thun (Ananda Everingham), a young photographer and his girlfriend, Jane (Natthaweeranuch Thongmee) accidentally crash into a woman by the street while driving a car. They decide to leave the dead woman and drive away. Later, Thun discovers an unexplained event when he finds a mysterious shadow appears on his photo. He thinks that's just a bad picture, but then he realizes there's something more behind the shadow -- the shadow shows as the shape of the face that's familiar to the dead woman. Now, the couple gradually finds out a terrible connection between the shadow and the photo.

 

Review: I was surprised, because this movie was actually pretty good, especially for a Thai movie. I have seen a lot of Asian horror, mostly Japanese and Korean, and lately they kinda bore, because they all look the same, and all have the same concept, a long black haired girl chasing people to their deaths. Yes, this film is extremely derivative of the genre, but everything Shutter does it does stylishly and effortlessly. Not only is it scary as hell, it has a wonderful and original plot line. This movie gets you in the right atmosphere right from the start, and it has almost every type of scene a horror fan can ask for. Most of the scare effect are things not seen in any movies and will really get a jump reaction. The storyline also has some really good twists that just make the movie even creepier. As well as the scares you've got good acting, a well structured plot and a really great ending - I didn't see it coming at all. What a fantastically well-made horror film. If you like a good scare, this film is not to be missed! This is a definite must see for all horror/thriller fans!

 

Rating: 4.5 out of 5

Edited May 7, 2005 by sickness

[dragonei]

Title: Kingdom of Heaven

 

Cast: Orlando Bloom, Jeremy Irons, Liam Neeson and Eva Green.

 

Director: Ridely Scott

 

PLOT: When a widowed young blacksmith (bloom) meets his long lost father (neeson), who happens to be a knight serving the king of jerusalem, he joins him on his crusade to jerusalem to seek forgiveness for his wife's suicide and the murder he commited. But on the way, his father becomes gravely injured, defending his son from an attack of marshalls that were there to arrest him for the murder he commited. Eventually, his father's last wishes was for him to become a knight and serve the King of jerusalem. The blacksmiths journey takes hum to jerusalem, where he must rise to knighthood, and defend the kingdom of jerusalem against an overwhelming army of muslims.

 

Ridely scott is such an amazing director, and he did what oliver stone failed to do in Alexander. Simply putting it, Alexander was the wrong way of doing an epic time piece, Kingdom of heaven is the right way to do it. The script and some of the dialougues however are at times too complicated to make the story sensible. Little flaws in the script here and there nonetheless still made a good epic movie.......but not a great one.

 

Acting: The casting of this movie was perfect. It seems that time period-based films is becoming Orlando bloom's forte. Liam neeson and Jeremy Irons' presence, are short-lived in the entire film, but nonetheless memorable as loyal knights. Eva green's portrayal as the queen was simply outstanding.

 

Direction: The direction was good but not that great. Battle scenes are not that exciting but are decent enough to create eye candy. Its still however a notch down as compared to Scotts previous film gladitator.

 

Story: The story had promise as much as it had flaws. The premise itself had that promise to create a good story, but inconsistencies here and there made the whole movie flaw itself. For instance, a blacksmith who only had weeks of sword training suddenly becomes not only an expert swordsman but a genius military tacticioner. There are also time when the story could be a bit dragging.

 

All in all, its a good movie......just not great.

[Kaftig]

It's still a mystery to me why Ridley Scott's Gladiator won the Oscar for Best Picture. In the hopes of being enlightened, I decided to watch Scott's new film, Kingdom of Heaven.

 

The first time I watched it, I slept through half of the film. Maybe it wasn't the film's entire fault that I fell asleep. Maybe I was too tired. Maybe I ate too much. Whatever the reason may be, I decided to watch the film again to give it a fair review.

 

The second time I watched it, I nearly fell asleep. Now, I know the film is to be blamed entirely for altering my body clock.

 

In a nutshell, Kingdom of Heaven follows the story of Balian (Orlando Bloom), a blacksmith who went to Jerusalem to seek redemption for himself and his damned wife. On his way to Jerusalem, Balian meets his long-lost father (Liam Neeson), becomes a knight, falls in love with the sister (Eva Green) of the king (Edward Norton) of Jerusalem, and ultimately becomes the defender of the city against the Muslims.

 

Sounds simple and easy-to-follow, right? Well, Scott "unfortunately" succeeded in making it confusing and boring. The script's primary problem is its lack of interesting and well-defined characters. Balian's primary objective is to seek redemption. After the first 1/3 of the film, this objective was abandoned in favor of Balian playing the hero. When Balian returns to his hometown and visits the grave of his wife, we do not know if he was able to get the redemption he desperately wanted.

 

At the end of the film, you cannot sympathize with any of the characters because you are not given the opportunity to know them better. That is the reason why characters are given back stories, so that the audience will understand the characters beliefs, values and decision-making processes. Devoid of the characters' back stories, we do not understand why the Templar Knights are so blood-thirsty or why Tiberias (Jeremy Irons), the king's adviser, is so open to the Muslims.

 

The film also suffers from logical lapses. For example, where did Balian get his training for being such an intelligent and highly-skilled warrior? Is it really possible for a blacksmith to become a great knight in such a short span of time?

 

Kingdom of Heaven aims to launch Orlando Bloom as an action hero in the footsteps of Russell Crowe. Well, Bloom still has a lot to prove. He drowns under the performances of experienced actors like Norton and Irons. Among all the actors, Norton was the best as the leper-king of Jerusalem. He gave life to the film's only interesting character, and he did it without removing his character's mask. Norton's commanding presence was more effective than Bloom's uninspired speech to his men.

 

Given that this was directed by the director of Gladiator , the film fulfilled its promise of grand battle scenes. However, they failed to impress. We've seen better battle scenes in the Lord of the Rings trilogy.

 

The reason I'm giving this film two stars is its noble intentions. Kingdom of Heaven intends to give the present-day Jerusalem conflict an historical perspective. A holy city for three of the world's biggest religions, Jerusalem has been a witness to countless armed conflicts. It's as if who ever controls Jerusalem controls heaven as well. However, we have to bear in mind that good intentions are not enough to make a good film.

 

What a waste of talent! What a waste of money! And I still don't understand why Gladiator won the Oscar for Best Picture!

[s_wrdfish]

It's still a mystery to me why Ridley Scott's Gladiator won the Oscar for Best Picture. In the hopes of being enlightened, I decided to watch Scott's new film, Kingdom of Heaven.

 

The first time I watched it, I slept through half of the film. Maybe it wasn't the film's entire fault that I fell asleep. Maybe I was too tired. Maybe I ate too much. Whatever the reason may be, I decided to watch the film again to give it a fair review.

 

The second time I watched it, I nearly fell asleep. Now, I know the film is to be blamed entirely for altering my body clock.

 

In a nutshell, Kingdom of Heaven follows the story of Balian (Orlando Bloom), a blacksmith who went to Jerusalem to seek redemption for himself and his damned wife. On his way to Jerusalem, Balian meets his long-lost father (Liam Neeson), becomes a knight, falls in love with the sister (Eva Green) of the king (Edward Norton) of Jerusalem, and ultimately becomes the defender of the city against the Muslims.

 

Sounds simple and easy-to-follow, right? Well, Scott "unfortunately" succeeded in making it confusing and boring. The script's primary problem is its lack of interesting and well-defined characters. Balian's primary objective is to seek redemption. After the first 1/3 of the film, this objective was abandoned in favor of Balian playing the hero. When Balian returns to his hometown and visits the grave of his wife, we do not know if he was able to get the redemption he desperately wanted.

 

At the end of the film, you cannot sympathize with any of the characters because you are not given the opportunity to know them better. That is the reason why characters are given back stories, so that the audience will understand the characters beliefs, values and decision-making processes. Devoid of the characters' back stories, we do not understand why the Templar Knights are so blood-thirsty or why Tiberias (Jeremy Irons), the king's adviser, is so open to the Muslims.

 

The film also suffers from logical lapses. For example, where did Balian get his training for being such an intelligent and highly-skilled warrior? Is it really possible for a blacksmith to become a great knight in such a short span of time?

 

Kingdom of Heaven aims to launch Orlando Bloom as an action hero in the footsteps of Russell Crowe. Well, Bloom still has a lot to prove. He drowns under the performances of experienced actors like Norton and Irons. Among all the actors, Norton was the best as the leper-king of Jerusalem. He gave life to the film's only interesting character, and he did it without removing his character's mask. Norton's commanding presence was more effective than Bloom's uninspired speech to his men.

 

Given that this was directed by the director of Gladiator , the film fulfilled its promise of grand battle scenes. However, they failed to impress. We've seen better battle scenes in the Lord of the Rings trilogy.

 

The reason I'm giving this film two stars is its noble intentions. Kingdom of Heaven intends to give the present-day Jerusalem conflict an historical perspective. A holy city for three of the world's biggest religions, Jerusalem has been a witness to countless armed conflicts. It's as if who ever controls Jerusalem controls heaven as well. However, we have to bear in mind that good intentions are not enough to make a good film.

 

What a waste of talent! What a waste of money! And I still don't understand why Gladiator won the Oscar for Best Picture!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

excellent review!

 

actually its really difficult for Orlando Bloom to assume such a lead role.. such casting i believe shortchanged the Crusades' story..

 

I still hav a very high respect for Ridley Scott as a director.. i want them to have the credit of portraying a very very challenging story considering the heightening rift between Christians and Moslems today.. actually, it's the Moslems who were lifted in this film.. thanks to the "dignified and gentleman" character of the Moslem conqueror Salahadin.. i believe that the production became extra sensitive.. that for me exemplifies social responsibility..

[Anaheim]

A. Caption

Title of the Film Star Wars Episode III Revenge of the Sith

 

Director George Lucas

 

Lead Actors/Actresses Hayden Christensen, Natalie Portman, Ewan Mcgregor, Samuel L. Jackson, Anthony Daniels, Jimmy Smits, Ian McDiarmid

 

Remarks Saw the film at Greenhills Cinema 2 May 18, 2005 10:25pm premiere showing of Episode III. Regular showing – May 19, 2005

 

B. Synopsis of the Movie War still rages on between the clone army and the trade federation. Chancellor Palpatine has been kidnapped by the trade federation army led by Count Dooku. Jedis Anakin Skywalker and Obi-Wan Kenobi came to the rescue of Palpatine. Palpatine sense a new and powerful apprentice in the guise of Anakin Skywalker. Anakin was seduced by the dark side of the force because of his weakness on dealings with failure. He dreamt of his wife Padme Amidala of pain and suffering. He was conditioned by Palpatine on the belief that in order to save Padme from sure death he must learn the ways of the Dark side of the force.

 

C. Review/Criticism I just came home from watching Episode III…It’s 2:00am and I just have to get this off my chest. Being a fan and an avid follower of the Star Wars saga since 1977, I must say that this is the best Star Wars episode directed by George Lucas (he directed Episodes IV, I and II). The story is now in full circle. We finally came to understand why Anakin Skywalker was seduced into the dark side of the force. Personally, I already knew the story of Episode III before watching the movie but what I didn’t know how amazing George Lucas has translated it. Fans (myself included) have been criticizing Episodes I and II, but after watching Episode III, I would say Episodes I and II has been made better because of Episode III. Ian McDiarmid as Palpatine is the heart of the film in terms of acting. You could sense his deception of Anakin in terms of his facial expression. The love scenes between Anakin and Padme now felt real, you could feel Anakin’s love for Padme this time (in Episode II their love for each other seems forceful….sabi kasi ng director eh). In terms of special effects…who could argue against it? The special effects wizadry by Industrial Light and Magic has matured over the years since their training ground on Star Wars (1977). I wouldn’t want to be a spoiler so I won’t recount the story in details. My affection for Star Wars was somewhat diminished because of the lamed Episode II and the riduculous Episode I. Episode III changed my previous impression of the saga for the better. Episode III is a grand finale for the Star Wars saga and for Lucas himself (redeeming himself after the silly Episodes I and II) and it’s also a sad thing for me personally because there won’t be any Episodes VII, VIII and IX

 

D. Rating 5 out of 5 :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool:

[sickness]

STAR WARS EPISODE 3: REVENGE OF THE SITH

 

Cast: Hayden Christensen, Natalie Portman, and Ewan McGregor

 

Director: George Lucas

 

Plot: In this third and final episode, Jedi Knight Anakin Skywalker will make a fateful decision. Having to choose between losing the one he loves or giving up his soul to gain the power to save her, Anakin will be seduced by the dark side of the Force.

 

Review: The Revenge of the Sith is the movie which completes the trilogy of prequels of Star Wars, the rise of the Empire and the transformation of Anakin to Darth Vader. We now know why. Why Anakin fell to the dark side, how the Jedi were destroyed, how the Skywalker twins were hidden- and how the empire was born.

 

I loved this film purely because it finished off what was started nearly 30 years ago, and it ends the Star Wars beautifully. This film soars as an achievement in storytelling and as a bridge to the original Star Wars trilogy. This film unlike both previous prequels does not suffer from the fatal flaw of bad pacing. The story is amazing. The acting is good overall. Hayden Christiansen is greatly improved, taking on a brooding style that slowly evolves into rage and menace that is, for the most part, entirely convincing. Ewan McGregor is also much improved, he takes on the character with an air of wisdom and dignity which shines through in the performance. The main weak link for me was Portman who still seems wooden and uncomfortable, especially in comparison to the improved cast.

 

The battle scenes are amazing. The light saber combat is the best of the series, from the first battle against droids, to General Grievous' 4-way saber wielding, to the spectacular fight above the lava. Even the Yoda is impressive this time, taking place in the Senate chambers, as the green guy faces up to Palpatine. They effects and the CGI work is truly stunning, and Lucas and his team have really excelled here. The huge swooping scenes, scale of battles and ships, camera movement through the CGI, etc. it's a wonderful sight to behold, and this time it doesn't overtake the story. Even the Jedi fighting scenes are a huge improvement, there are more, they seem slicker and involve the use of more powers.

 

It was wonderful to see the concept of what was good and what was evil from different perspectives, and how cheap the dark side really was. My favorite scene is when Anakin is defeated and almost burns to death, with just his hatred keeping him alive!

 

Episodes I and II do not even totally compare to this movie. I am completely satisfied by this film's ability to tie up the saga for me. The saga is now complete. Everyone can see this and enjoy its pure storytelling essence.

 

Rating: 4.5 out of 5

[macx98]

Revenge of the Sith.....or is it?

 

Yup, just saw episode 3 and it was just ok. I guess the original trilogy set a really high bar that the new set of Star Wars movies seem to struggle plot-wise.

 

The effects were downright awesome and so was the sound (Hail THX!). Its story is the darkest of the three but it seems to feel like they tried to jam so much in so little time that the plot sometimes went rediculously fast. It felt like being "force"(excuse me for the pun) fed at times and they tried to tie some lose ends with regards to the lore, with different results.

 

 

Overall, a good bit of entertainment for the 2.5 hours or so it runs. Word to the would be watcher try watching both volumes of the mini-cartoon series "Clone Wars" so you can better understand what happens in the movie including the beginning and a lot of subtle nuances.

 

3.5 out of 5 stars

[Kaftig]

BIKINI OPEN

 

If you're looking for a good alternative to Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith, watch Jeffrey Jeturian's new movie, Bikini Open. Surprisingly, it is the best Filipino movie I have seen this year. (Not counting Dreamboy, of course.)

 

Everything about the film is "alternative" - from the screenplay's structure to the director's treatment. Even the medium used (HD video) is "alternative."

 

Bikini Open is a "mock-cumentary" on the Filipinos latest star-search shows. Cherry Pie Picache plays the role of an investigative reporter who is forced to cater to her viewers' demands (for purposes of higher ratings, of course). She covers a bikini open being held in one of Manila's cheap comedy bars. Throughout the movie, Picache interviews the contestants and investigates their private lives. She presents to us a batch of young Filipinos who would do anything to win the contest. Their reasons range from extreme poverty to extreme narcissism. That doesn't mean that Picache's character is noble. In fact, she resorts to "reality TV" to cater to her viewers' voyeuristic demands.

 

Bikini Open is a well-made satire on Philippine media and pop culture. It succeeds in making fun of the Filipinos' interest in beauty contests and star-search shows without forcing its theme down the viewers' throats. Jeturian and his writer, Chris Martinez, certainly know how to use comedy to bring their message across.

 

The cast is highly commendable, especially Picache. She easily shifts from nice to nasty in a beat. The use of new actors and actresses enhanced the "mock-cumentary" feel of the movie. Most of them acted so natural that you begin to doubt if they're acting or not. However, Jeturian could have spared Ricky Davao and Michael De Mesa from reprising gay roles that they have done before.

 

The HD video allowed Jeturian so much creative flexibility that his visuals looked fresh and innovative. Computer-generated graphics and visual effects spiced up most of the scenes. The sharp colors might jar the viewers at first, but they will eventually adjust to it.

 

The same could not be said about the audio, which is often out-of-synch and incomprehensible. Be sure to watch the movie in a cinema with a good sound system.

 

With the summer heat still going up, it's nice to know that there's a refreshing Filipino film to cool you down.