The Gnat: Fly on the Wall Reviews

I liked V for Vendetta too. It is one of the few comic adaptations that I felt really did a good job of recreating that world.

What you said about the acting is interesting. I am not one to find over the top acting as problematic as some, but I was put off by it until I settled into the movie. On second viewing, I appreciated it more.

TMNT

I am a fan of the superhero/comic book/cartoon silver screen flirtations. So I was a fan of this film.

While it didn't stay true to any pre-existing story line, it had a good storyline, it kept important characters, like the Foot Clan, in it, and it kept the turtles the same.

It was a great romp through a fun, action-packed, popcorn movie. They started in early with the action, in the back story at the beginning, and they didn't stop really at all through the film.

I really can't say much about the acting, but the CGI was very well done, and while it definitely wasn't realistic CGI at all, it was right for the type of movie that it was. If the turtles had actually looked like turtles, or April had looked like a real person, it wouldn't have had the same, fun feel that it did. The CGI style was very similar to The Incredibles, which just so happens to be the same style of film.

Just thinking about this film now actually makes me want to watch it again, so that is a good sign about this film. I feel like, as a popcorn film, it is one that won't become boring to watch after the third or fourth viewing, and that it would be hard to be overplayed at all. It is a film that you can turn your brain off for, and because I grew up watching the turtles, I have a soft spot for them in my heart, which probably makes it easier for me to watch.

Overall, there is nothing about this film that makes it great. But what makes this film as good as it is, is that it does a good job updating the story without ruining any of the pre-existing story, and it has the fun cartoon/comic book feel to it.

Overall Grade: B+
Acting: B (by acting in this film I mean voice work)
Story: B-
Visual/Audio: A (this isn't a masterpiece of audio and visual preportions, but everything in it works for the film)

__________________
"As I was walking up the stair,
I met a man who wasn't there.
He wasn't there again today,
I wish, I wish he'd go away."
-From Identity

Nacho Libre

Where to begin with this film, it was a disappointment after the work of Napolean Dynomite, not saying I found that film great, but just that this one was really poor.

The story itself was a humorous idea with a little potential. However, there really wasn't much potential, and with the actors they had and how the story was written, it didn't even live up to that low potential.

Now, I like Jack Black as an actor. Thought that he was solid in School of Rock and Orange County. However, this role didn't suit him because of the style of humor. He couldn't be the lovable loser in this film, and I think that is probably the role that he has to play.

Now his sidekick did a solid job, definitely was the funniest part. However, he was nowhere near good enough to make this a funny film. His role was good, but not large enough or his perforance good enough, to save this film.

What did work were a few awkward, Napolean Dynomite-esque lines delivered between Jack Black's character and the Nun. The sort of relationship/awkward humor as was found in Napolean Dynomite. That was about the only humor that worked in the film though. Very little worked besides that and the sidekick. Even the training sequence was much more stupid then funny.

Overall this is a very poor film. It is made funnier by watching it late at night, when I watched it, and probably drunk (I haven't tried this theory out yet). I wouldn't recommend this film to anyone, even the biggest Jack Black fan out there.

Overall Grade: D-
Acting: D
Story: F
Visual/Audio: D

I will give it a miss thanks for the review

__________________
Health is the greatest gift, contentment the greatest wealth, faithfulness the best relationship.
Buddha

Marie Antoinette

First off, that I like about this film. This film is one of the more beautiful films to watch. I've made the comment that 300 is a beautiful film to watch, that really doesn't hold anything to this film. Sofia Coppola does a great job in crafting the images and displaying them in an aesthetically pleasing way.

There is the montage sequence of the various foods and other parts of Marie Antoinette's life that are shown, to the song "I Want Candy", that is just done beautifully.

Another thing that I appreciate about this film is how, while it is a period peice, the film doesn't feel like it needs to stick to only period music. The soundtrack does a very good job of mixing period music with contemporary music. This gives this film its own, distinct feel to it, that very few other films ever have, because they try and be so close to what the actual period music.

The acting in this film is nothing that impressed me all that much. Dunst and Schwartzman do fine jobs in their roles, but the roles were so under developed that neither of them got that much of a chance to actually act.

The big problem with this film, which is why I don't own it since in general I like Coppola films (Sofia) and I like Dunst films, is the story and the development of the characters in the film. This part of the film is lacking, notably. Especially in the area of the story. While it does follow history, it fails to delve into anything more then what was going on in broad, sweeping strokes. This then hurts the character development because that is again done on a macro level, and the audience doesn't feel as close to the characters because of the macro character development, not developing the intimate details.

Overall, this is a film that I probably will see again sometime, I saw it originally in the theaters, but it isn't a film that I fell in love with for anything more then the visuals. The story if weak enough that it makes it a below average film.

Overall Grade: B-
Acting: B-
Story: C-
Visual/Audio: A-

The Prophecy

This is the first film in the trilogy (I think they stopped at three). As the name suggests the film has something to do with religion and good versus evil. The idea for the film isn't that bad a one, it is somewhat similar to the idea of Constantine, a battle between heaven and hell. However, this film doesn't do a good job of weaving the story.

What works in this film is Christopher Walken (and for some odd reason he is actually in the second film as well). He does a good job in his role as Gabriel, and does an excellent job of being creepy, which is nice to see considering all the comedy that he has done.

Viggo Mortenson is also in the film, and he does a solid job as well. His role is simply that of playing the devil and he shows up for a few minutes at he most, but he does a good job in his role and is also sufficiently creepy.

What is bad about this film is that the story line, while having potential to be original is really cliche and not deep, at all. Also, the acting of the leads in the film leaves a lot to be desired. Even Walken's part, which is decently large, is overshadowed by the two main characters and how poorly they act their roles. It isn't like they were the worst actors ever, but with the story line, they needed to have good acting performances to make up for it.

However, this film isn't a terrible film, while it isn't as amazing a storyline as it could be, they do a good job of holding the storyline together, and it is a pretty entertaining film to watch.

Overall Grade: C+
Acting: C+
Story: C-
Visual/Audio: B

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (1)

This review is of the original live action Teenage Mutant Ninja Tutles movie. I bought it because some buddies and I wanted to a movie to watch while we were drinking, and I figured, and they knew, that this film would be good pointless fun to watch while drinking.

Again, I will add the disclaimer, that I grew up on the Turtles, not as much as some other comic book heroes, but I watched the T.V. show often, so I got a soft spot for their corniness in my heart.

This film really isn't anything all that great, the acting is poor, the story is farfetched, and there are people dressed in turtle costumes.

However, that doesn't begin to scratch the surface as to what this film is. This film isn't ment to be change anything in the film industry, unless it teaches them a few things to avoid, this film is meant to entertain the audience with cheesy dialogue and a farfetched plot which is full of action and these remarkable scenes where, if it weren't for the fact that it was people dressed up on turtle costumes, they could be considered touching.

I find it funny how people are more apt to frown upon this film then many '90's action films saying how cheesy and cliche so many parts of this film are. There is the scene where the turtles finish their training in order to get back Splinter, which if it had been done with real people, there would be some people who would have thought it was a touching scene.

This movie is one that I would consider an above average popcorn movie. If you liked the early 90's comics/cartoons, then you will enjoy this film, because that is what this film is, just with people. There are obviously a lot of people who won't find this film all that great, my suggestion is try a few beers first and then watch it, it helps, even though I do appreciate the film as one that is just fun to watch, even without being tipsy.

Overall Grade: B-
Acting: C
Story: B
Visual/Audio: C-

This was a girlie, drinking eating movie for me I doubt I will add it to my collection

Thanks for the reviews

Blades of Glory

I just watched this film for the first time last night, and I must say that I found it more amusing then I thought it would. The idea of the film is absurd, but if you can look around the problems with it, it is pretty entertaining.

What works in this film is the interplay between Will Ferrell and John Heder's characters. Their voices naturally sound like they are opposites. So their dialogue, especially where they are arguing with eachother, works really well. Also, their body types also help show the difference in characters naturally.

Another set of characters that work are that of Amy Poehler, Will Arnett, and Jenna Fischer. Again there is the interplay of Arnett and Poehler with Fischer. Fischer does a very good job, both in this film and in the office, of playing someone who is very passive and able to be pushed around.

What doesn't work is the absurdity of the story. There are some points in time where it just became to stupid to be all that funny. Especially the parts prior to the training of Ferrell and Heder's characters. It wasn't until the point where they begin training together that it starts to become pretty funny. Before that, where they are working on their own, it is mainly stupid jokes.

Another thing that I thought worked once in a while but mainly failed is the stalker of John Heder's character. There are a few points in time where he is funny, but for the most part, he seems like a poorly added character who doesn't really add anything to the level of the humor.

What I really liked in this film was the use of "Flash" by Queen. I'm a big fan of that song.

Overall this film was funnier then I was guessing it would be. It definitely isn't one of hte funniest films in the world, but it does a good job of not letting itself fall to low at many points in time. And it was cast extremely well.

Overall Grade: B-
Acting: B
Story: C
Visual/Audio: B

The DaVinci Code

I went into this film with low expectations. I had read the book and found it really lousy, not for the subject matter like so many people who haven't read the book claim that it is lousy for, but because the characters were extremely shallow and the main character was perfect (if you didn't think that The DaVinci Code, the book, was like that read Angels and Demons, it is even worse then its sequel).

And the film actually managed to be worse then the book in my opinion. I like the idea for both the book and the film, the combination of religion/mythology and action/mystery always interests me, but The DaVinci Code was one of those books that completely failed at combining those two things.

My biggest gripe about the film is the issue with the characters being shallow and not developed at all. Tom Hanks character has no character flaws, there is nothing in the film that makes him seem at all like a real person. He has claustophobia for the first twenty minutes of the film until he has to ride in the back of a van with some girl who cures him of it. From that point on there is basically nothing that he does that could be considered a mistake.

And the other characters in the film don't have any more depth either. All the characters are extremely stock characters, that if it were a movie that was intentionally cheesy might work in it, but with this subject matter in the film, the stock characters completely ruin any intrigue into what is happening in the film.

The one of the other things that bugged me was how they felt the need to change the ending of the film. The typical argument against the film and book is how it is extremely anti-Christian, which is pretty understandable. The book's ending was anti-Christian and the films ending tried to push it even further. This again fails miserably.

Overall, the only redeeming thing about the film was that Tom Hanks did a pretty solid job acting. The story is purely "summer fiction", something to breeze through and not think about again, but it fails to keep up the same entertainment level as other popcorn films.

Overall Grade: D-
Acting: C-
Story: F
Audio/Visual: B-

The New Guy

This film falls under the category of a teen/popcorn flick. And it does a good job being a popcorn flick having some action, cheesy lines, and Eliza Dushku modeling swimsuits. It is a really good summer, brain off type of movie.

What works in this film is how awkward DJ Qualls is in the film. Even when he tries to act cool, it really looks like he is trying to act cool, and failing. So he does a good job in this film.

Another thing that works, for this type of film, is the type of story that it has. It is very absurd, and would never work, or happen, in reallife, but for this feel good, underdog triumphing, teen, popcorn movie, it is fits perfectly. It doesn't try to be more then it is, which is a very good thing.

Also in this film that makes it fun is the guest appearances. There are a lot of random musicians and celebrities who show up in the film. These appearances are pretty funny to watch typically and range from Tony Hawk to Vanilla Ice to Josh Todd (from Buckcherry). Most of the guest appearances are very funny.

There isn't much that doesn't work in this film. At a few points in time the story gets too absurd, even for itself, and that hurts it. And the acting performances aren't anything to talk about, even Qualls fits his role, but isn't amazing.

Overall this is just a fun film to watch. Like I said, it is one of those films that works really well for turning your brain off for and watching a whole lot of random appearances and odd events happening on screen.

Overall Grade: B+
Acting: C+
Story: B-
Audio/Visual: B-

I'll bet if I ran a search, 90% of your reviews would use the phrase "popcorn film," or some slight derivation of it.

Anyway, keep 'em comin'.

Doesn't shock me, I don't watch what I would consider great films as often as I do what I consider "popcorn films" just because a lot of the time when I want to watch a film I don't want to have to think. Plus, when I write these I'm hungry

Aeon Flux

Now this is a film that got rocked when it came out that I didn't find nearly as bad as the critics did. This film is entertaining, a good popcorn film , but it also does have a little level beyond that.

The antagonist in the film demonstrates how power can corrupt even in the scenerio where something being done is for the greater good of all people. So it deals with that issue, a very common, granted, in films, but it does so in an interesting way.

Also, the action in this film is good. Charlize Theron does a good job in a strong action role. This is a film where little of the acting is considered great, but it is done well enough that it works for the film. Generally speaking, in predominantly action films the acting can be only so-so and still work just fine for the film, because the focus is on the action and the fight sequences.

Another thing that I liked about this film is the sci-fi world in which it was placed. It was on many levels close enough to reality, but there were touches of the creative and weird that don't exist yet. However, none of this stuff was so absurd, such as aliens, that it became more of a focal point of the movie then what was going on in the story. All of the sci-fi changes only seemed at most three steps away from reality as we know it.

What didn't work so well in this film were a few of the side characters. The actress who helps Charlize Theron and then tries to assinate her did a poor job with her acting. So, while this didn't detract from the film, several of the characters definitely didn't add anything to the film like they could have.

Also, the story in this film isn't something that is extremely original. There definitely were some original takes on things, but the general theme of the story has been done many times before.

Overall Grade: B
Acting: C+
Story:B-
Audio/Visual:B+

Sunset Blvd

I watched this film in a film class that I took in college and completely enjoyed the film. There are amny aspects of this film that make it entertaining and good. But I want to go at this film from the point of view as to how it can be interpreted and looked at in different ways.

The first way I will address is that of a horror film. This doesn't seem like a typical way to look at it, but when the prof. had us write up about this film after watching it, he had given us a few different categories, I chose to write about the horror elements in the film. The are some definite horror elements in the film, one of the big ones is the setting of the house in the film. The house is broken and run down. There are bars in the doorways, and shrubs and trees that are all overgrown. Also, the Norma Desmond character is often shown focusing on her long fingers with her clawlike fingernails. So there are several parts in this film that are easy to say that they are in the style of a horror film.

Another way of looking at this film is as a dark comedy, and this is the most common way. The aspects of Norma Desmond's delusions of granduer. The places that Joe Gillis finds himself in, stuck between someone he can't stand and the girlfriend/fianse of his good friend.

The final way that, in my class, we could write about it was as a romance, or a romantic comedy. It does have some elements of a typical romance. Joe Gillis is trapped in this wrong relationship, and then he finds the right person. And he has to win over the right person and figure out some way to get out of the wrong situation. It doesn't end up as a happy romance, but it definitely could be looked at as a romantic tragedy.

I think that the combination of all these different elements, most of which end up causing it to be a dark comedy, blend perfectly into an interesting look at the change from the era of silent film to "talkies", and how that transition occurred for the movie stars. Billy Wilder does an amazing job of creating this dark story.

Overall Grade: A
Acting: B+
Story: A+
Visual/Audio: A-

Waking Life

This film is an attempt at philosophy while on an acid trip, or at least that is what it seems like at times. However, I haven't seen this film in a while, so my review might to be a little rusty in my information on the film.

It does an interesting job with the philosophy delving into a lot of different things around life and death and what happens at death in his interactions with many different characters. However, the different types of characters that show up throughout the film are too often stock/cliche characters like you would expect to find in this type of film. This film, while trying to be original, becomes a rehash of many ideas that are often delved into individually in films, instead of all in one film.

The other big thing about this film is its style. It is a very interesting and trippy style of animation. This style of animation fits well with the film, but it often can cause, even a person who rarely if ever gets motion sick, to start feeling it a little with the constantly shifting edges and perspectives without shifting angle. It feels right for the film though, as it becomes a very surreal look at things, but would be better in moderation.

Overall this was a film that I found interesting to watch once. Looking at it from purely the philosophy aspect of the film, it does a very good job of being interesting. However, acting wise and animation wise it left something to be desired. The content was there, but the film contained a very poor representation of the content.

Overall Grade: B
Acting: C+
Story: B+
Visual/Audio: B

Thanks for the reviews Gnut

Equilibrium

You know, thinking about it, I am actually getting tired of this type of film. Probably the reason that while I find V for Vendetta a good film, I can't watch it all that often. Equilibrium is another film where it is the people versus the government.

This film though is pretty interesting about the specific idea of trying to remove all creativity/originality from society. To me this is something, which the film hints at, that is occuring somewhat now. People really don't think about what they themself do, but instead tend to follow whatever trend is currently popular, even when the trend is allegedly unpopular. So I find this mentality interesting in the film and how it shows up in real life.

However, like all films in this genre, it has to be made into an action film, predominantly. And this one is a pretty solid action film. The fighting, since it is choreographed so much, is interesting to watch, because it is less fighting then a form of dancing. So it is actually fairly beautiful to watch.

But the acting in this film, while at points it was fine, didn't really impress me. The characters for the most part were as expected, so fairly stock characters without stepping too much/if at all outside of the norm. So that is one problem that I have with this film. If the characters had been more original it would have made this film extremely good.

Overall, this is a good film, as I like the ideas, and I like the visuals in the film. The acting leaves a lot to be desired, but this film is solid in most other aspects.

Overall Grade: B+
Acting: C-
Story: B-
Visual/Audio: A

Talledagha Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby

This, I felt, was not one of Will Ferrell's finer films. He does a good job in it, and there are some funny parts, but even for someone who pays attention to NASCAR decently well (I haven't payed up attention as much as I did a few years ago) it wasn't an extremely funny movie.

Like a lot of comedy films, the characters ended up being too stock for my liking. Some stereotyping of characters is fine, but this film most, if not all, were stereotyped. There was the deadbeat dad who was a complete redneck hick. There was the dumb beauty and the cute but un-noticed friend. There was the best buddy who followed and went along with everything that his friend said. There were the two lippy kids and the stupid grandpa. While that might not seem stock, the way that they are portrayed for their characters, you can peg what type they are from a long ways away.

And the story itself was fairly cliche as well. I won't go into detail as to how it was so cliche, because that would give it away for anyone who wants to watch it, but the way things happen is extremely typical for the pseudo-sports drama type of film. It was nice that it added the aspect of humor to this film, but like I already mentioned, the characters were very much stock characters.

Another problem with this film is it basically only used crude/dumb humor. I realize that is typical for a Will Ferrell film, but compared to some of his other films, like Anchorman, this one is worse at it. There aren't really any subtle jokes. Basically all the jokes rely on shock value as much as actual created humor.

However, with that said, some of the shock value jokes are pretty funny. They get a little old as the movie rolls through, but they don't fail on all the jokes. So, it is a film that is humorous, but it isn't nearly as good as some comedies out there, but compared to the typical stupid comedy, it is pretty good.

Overall Grade: C
Acting: C+
Story: C-
Visual/Audio: C+

Must get out my copy of Equilibrium and watch it again every time i go to the Video shop I see Talledagha Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby, for some reason I avoid it maybe that is a good thing Thanks Gnut