The Gnat: Fly on the Wall Reviews

→ in
Tools    





Not a big fan of Escape From LA but do like American Werewolf in London


Thanks for your reviews
__________________
Health is the greatest gift, contentment the greatest wealth, faithfulness the best relationship.
Buddha



Lost in never never land
Evolution

I don't know how to classify this film. I liked it as a comedy, but I really can't point out anything all that good about it. The story is predictable and the characters are as well. The alien/evolutionary creatures are pretty cool a lot of the time, but otherwise there really isn't anything that stood out to me, but I still enjoyed it.

This film works a lot with stupid humor. Little running gags, such as Jullianne Moore's characters clumsiness, or the stupidity of a couple of Duchovney's students. Unlike a lot of comedies that run on stupid/juvinille jokes, Evolution doesn't run them too long, or bring them up too many times. They are done more subtly then obviously as in a lot of stupid comedy films. For example, Jullianne Moore's characters clumsiness is shown four or five times, but often in the back of a scene, and it is quickly glossed over with a single punch-line of a statement like "Are you okay." drawing attention to the fact that the action did take place. A lot of stupid comedies would put the action in the front of the scene and try and have some much "wittier" comment that would likely fail immediately.

The creatures in this film are good as well. They do a good job creating an interesting variety of creatures. This is important, because as the name suggests, they need to have a wide variety of creatures as they evolve. The final creature is a bit more cliche as compared to a lot of the other creatures, just with how that creature works/acts as compared to the other creatures, but that doesn't detract too much from the film. It is a bit disappointing with the final creature with how it is killed, and what it looks like, but it isn't bad for a film like this one. But it is one of the few spots where it does feel quite cliche.

Overall this is just a stupid funny film. It isn't all that great, and probably a film that would lose its humor after it had been watched a few times. But first time through, it was a pretty funny film with some quite good parts.

Overall Grade: B-

Acting: C
Story: C
Audio/Visual: B-
__________________
"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



Lost in never never land
The Island of Dr. Moreau (1996)

If my memory serves me correctly, I read the book a couple of years ago, this film doesn't really stay extremely true to the story, but it does keep the idea in general. Albeit that the idea hasn't been something that has been all that scary to people for a while. It is an interesting retelling, and while pretty entertaining, it really doesn't stick with me all that well.

The main things I remember about the film are the performances of Brando and Kilmer. Brando's performance because it was odd, and Kilmer's because it was good. Brando's portrayel of Dr. Moreau was interestingly done. I don't feel like it quite captured the spirit of the character from the book, so that was somewhat disappointing, as the character of Dr. Moreau became as much odd as creepy, and he was almost laughable at points. Val Kilmer did a good job in his role though, as Montgomery. He definitely put on a show as that character, and while his characters oddness as similar to that of Brando's, it was done is more disturbingly odd way, as compared to Brando's odd, and sometimes funnily odd way.

The imagery of the various characters in the film is done pretty well. It definitely looks like a film where there had to be a lot of extensive costuming. They also did a solid job of the costuming, as it really would have hurt the film if the costuming had looked so-so. The film is based a ton around what the side characters actually look like. So they had to look viable for what Dr. Moreau was doing. There were a few who were a bit out there, but for the most part it was good. And even for the ones that were out there, they were at least plausible.

Overall this is a somewhat entertaining film, and does a good job with the message of its story, the problem is, that message lost some of its bunch as technology and the knowledge of biology continued to advance over time. It isn't a film that I would highly recommend, but it is a Sci-Fi sort of film that a lot of hard core Sci-Fi fans should find enjoyable because of the depth of the story.

Overall Grade: C+

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



Gah, I can't even keep up! I've tagged most of these, but the pace has been so frantic.

This dude's got just over 500 posts, more than 100 of which are reviews. And that's not even counting all of the unmarked ones. The real total probably comes to about 25% of his posts.



Lost in never never land
When you try and watch 100 films in 100 days, you end up seeing a lot of films so there are a lot of reviews. Plus, I'm trying to watch new films, so I really haven't repeated any, so there are a lot of new ones to review. Which brings me to some more reviews:

Weird Science

I think that the one thing that the eighties ended up getting right was the teen comedy. They have a very fun feel to them, and they never take themselves to seriously, which is a very good thing. Superbad was billed as a once in a decade type team coming of age comedy film, and I'm pretty sure that Weird Science is about the fifth or sixth movie from the eighties that I can think of that is like that.

What works so well are the hearfelt main characters. They both feel to clueless in what they do and say and how they act, that even though the situation is completely absurd, they feel like they could be actual people, and you care for them. A lot of the other characters are pretty out there.

The storyline, as I hinted at, is completely absurd. The probability of bringing a magical "barbie doll" to life is simply astronomical. However, it is an entertaining storyline that keeps one attention throughout the whole thing. How random the story is helps a lot as well. The brother in the film, Chet, is definitely one of the most random characters, and what happens to him is also extremely random.

Overall this story is a lot of fun. There isn't any real message besides it being another coming of age story for a couple of high school losers, but everyone likes to pull for the underdog, and these two underdogs definitely make you want to do that for them. One odd note is that Robert Downey Jr. is actually in this film as well, as one of the "bad boy" characters.

Overall Grade: B

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



Lost in never never land
They Live

This is a classic John Carpenter film. It is absurd and feels exactly like a cult classic. He does a wonderful job with his story in this film, keeping it light and entertaining enough, while having a message in it.

What works well in this film is the story. The whole story is absurd, and so when the visuals or acting aren't quite up to snuff, it doesn't matter, because they are just odd like the rest of the film. It does have message mixed in with the story about the potential pitfalls of consumerism when it is driven too far, but it is mainly about the odd story, at least now to the viewer. The whole idea of a giant conspiracy with subliminal messaging used through mass media is pretty scary to think about, but how it is done in this film is pretty absurd.

One thing that doesn't work so well is the main fight scene. It is too pseudo-friends beating each other up, and they are beating the snot out of each other. One of the characters gets kneed in the groin four or five times and immediately gets up. It jost goes on and on and on. It was somewhat humorous to watch at times, but dragged on for about a minute or two longer then it ideally should have. That was about the only scene that didn't feel like it had a correct pacing to it though.

One last thing that was good about this film was the dialog. This film has one of the best one-liners that I've heard in a while:
I have come here to chew gum and kick a--, and I'm all out of gum
It had a few other absurd lines like that one in the film, and it was quite funny to listen to the dialog.

Overall this film is pretty absurd. It has a good message to it and it has some other good elements, but it is mainly absurd and entertaining. This is classic John Carpenter and it would be nice if he could do something like this again, even though I wonder if his current films might become cult classic type of films in a decade or two.

Overall Grade: B+

Story: B
Acting: C
Audio/Visual: B



Lost in never never land
Black Christmas

This is the new version of it that came out two (or so) years ago. It is a remake of a classic slasher film by the same name, in which a sorority house is "attacked" by a killer who had lived there and had recently escaped from a mental institution that wasn't all that far away.

This is a pretty average slasher film. There are some good parts, and it doesn't a pretty good job of keeping ones pulse rate up, but it doesn't do much more then that. The twist in the story is hinted at from a long way away, and the whole storyline is pretty cliche and overdone. Even how it ends was a little disappointing. They have a false ending, not surprising, but then the real ending is less climatic then it should be, in my opinion.

In a slasher film in a sorority house, the main thing about the actresses is looks, so the acting really doesn't matter, and it is very obvious that it doesn't matter. I don't think that there was really a good performance out of any of the actors/actresses in the film. It really didn't detract that much from the film, because you don't expect good acting in a slasher film, but it also didn't help the film at all. There was one actresses who was grating though every time she was on the screen and spoke, but none of the rest really bothered me that much.

The one very well done thing in the film was the music in the background. It did a very good job of keeping the film moving and keeping the adreneline up. They actually used "Dance of the Sugar Plum Fairy" from The Nutcracker very well in this film. The fact that that song has sticatto to it (and I know sticatto is likely not spelled correctly) actually works quite well in a horror film. It is high energy and helps keep the adreneline flowing while watching the film.

Overall this is a very average slasher film. I'm curious to see the original Black Christmas film to see if that one is any better. But this version was somewhat entertaining, but nothing sticks out as being really good about this film.

Overall Grade: C

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



Lost in never never land
Excellent reviews Gnat. I promised myself I'd try and watch Primer again cos two times I've fallen asleep watching it
Thanks.

You really need to try and stay awake for it. It might not be the fastest moving film, but for the budget it hand, it is really well done, and it is really smart.



Lost in never never land
The Perfect Storm

This is going to be a poorer review then normal as I did recently see it again, but it was hit or miss with how many of the details I got the second time through, so it is also based off of the first time I saw it which was a while ago.

This film is an interesting film. The story is very good, but the presentation of the story doesn't impress me as much. It is a long film, and because it is very clear what is happening, and what is going to happen in the film, it seems to be to be drawn out longer then it needs to be. Even some good acting performances can't help that part of the film.

The acting in the film is also quite solid. When you have actors like Mark Wahlberg and George Clooney in it, you are going to get solid acting performances. This helps redeem the film some from the length of the film, but I don't think that any of the performances in the film are more then just solid. Neither Clooney or Wahlberg really stand out as having great formances.

Visually this film is also solid. The detail of the ocean with its giant swells is done very well, and it feels real enough. It definitely helps show the magnitude of the storm and the size of the situation. Again, though, because the story is so cut and dry and you know how things are going to happen, even impressive visuals aren't going to save this film.

Overall this is just an average film. It has a good story, good acting and good visuals, but it tries and make it too long, and stretches out a story which while good, can easily be condensenced.

Overall Grade: C

Story: B
Acting: B
Audio/Visual: B



Lost in never never land
The Gravedancers

This cheaply made horror film is stock full of cliches and missing any horror. It has its cliche lines, stock characters, and cheesy horror creations, and it doesn't hit really on anything. The premise could have been good, but with the stock characters and cliche lines, it fails miserably at doing anything.

The characters are really what you expect. There is the brash friend, the love interest, the protaganist and his jealous/paranoid wife, the scientist, the person obsessed with the haunting. Besides the characters being very stock, there is little depth to any of the characters. Dominic Purcells character (protaganist) is probably the closest to being a character with depth, as they try and build a little around him at the beginning, but the whole film quickly degrades from being set up for that.

Visually this film is terrible as well. The end scene is what is the kicker dropping this film from being simply average to terrible in this area. At the start, the ghosts are shwon in a somewhat creepy forum, but at the end of the film it is giant, non-caporial being that simply looks terrible. It is very laughable, and the whole ending scene is absurdly cliche.

The film's dialog is more cliche then the last scene. The few fights and frights and the peoples reactions to them are just terrible, and they aren't so terrible that they are funny either. There is only one expected line that is funny and that is at the end of the last scene, probably the only slightly redeeming thing.

Overall avoid this film at all costs. It is a terrible horror film that completely misses on any scares and is terribly cliche in everything that it does. The only potentially good thing would be the use of dull colors throughout the whole film, so visually that part isn't terrible, but the special effects help ruin the scenes anyways.

Overall Grade: D

Acting: C-
Story: D+
Audio/Visual: D+



Lost in never never land
The Return of the Living Dead

This punk-rock zombie film definitely hits a good note. It isn't really meant to be scary at any point in time, it is just mainly absurd with funny characters and an odd story line. You know that it isn't going to take itself seriously when it starts the film with a screen stating that the film is based completely on true events, and then implying in the film that Dawn of the Dead is as well.

The characters are what really make the film. The employees at the warehouse where the infection starts are just odd, the old guy reminds me in some ways of Rodney Dangerfield in how he acts, and the punk kid is also odd as well. Then there is the enbalmer, who is an absurd character as well, in how he acts and the interesting things which he does. Finally the rest of the gang of punk kids are just out there. They seemingly fit in nicely with the gangs from in The Warriors and how they act is just absurd and how they looking as well.

The story itself is pretty typical. Something occurs to re-animate the corpses, they have to try and figure out how to kill the corpses, some of the group become zombies/get eaten, and the government comes in and takes out the corpses. Even though it is typical, the cliches don't fail here, because the whole film isn't meant to be scary, but it is meant to be odd and cliche. The references to other zombie films, such as Dawn of the Dead, great in the film, and this is more of a parody then anything else.

Overall this is a pretty funny zombie film, and it does a good job in that it doesn't take itself seriously. It is one of those '80's films that have now reached a status of being a cult classic type of film.

Overall Grade: B-

Story: B
Acting: C
Audio/Visual: B



Lost in never never land
Inland Empire

This starts out like a surrealist fantasy, but then ends in a nightmare. It simply drags itself on way to long with too many superfulous scenes that don't add anything to the meaning.

I'm a fan of surrealist film, so don't knock me for not liking surrealist films and that is why I don't like this one, because that isn't the case. I don't like it because it drags on, it doesn't have the depth that people want to believe that it has, and generally is just a mess, even for a surrealist film.

What works well in this film is how visually interesting it is. At some points in time the shots are quite lousy, but generally it is interestingly shot, with the various color schemes and filters that are used. In particular there are some shots which have a golden/orange color to them, that are just wonderfully done. And there are other shots that are quite ameture in how they are done, which are likely intentionally done that way, but are still very poorly done for being done that way.

I know that people like to talk about the depth in the film, about how everything ends up tying together, but the truth is, that isn't the case. At a showing of the film in L.A., Lynch was asked how he came up with the idea/meaning for the film. Lynch's response was that it really was just a bunch of random ideas and scenes that came to him over a long period of time, and that whenever he happened to come up with one he would get the cast together and they would shoot it. And I'm sure that there is something that can be read into some of the scenes, but as a whole, as people want to be able to find meaning, it isn't there, it especially falls apart at the end when you are looking for a complete meaning to the film.

Overall this is a solid surrealist film, but it stops at a much shallower level then one would like. And while it is possible to read more into the film, it isn't necesarily there to be read into.

Overall: C

Story: D
Acting: C+
Audio/Visual: B



Lost in never never land
Barbarella

This is the female version of Flash Gordon, or at least that is what I felt. She flies around in her little space ship saving the universe from the little bit of evil that is left. This is a cheesy, odd film, but it is fairly entertaining.

The big thing about this film is obviously Jane Fonda. People will often watch it based only on the fact that she is scantily clad. And while that is the case, I don't think that it is a very good reason for watching the film. Her performance, a long with the rest of the cast, was pretty bad.

But what makes this film good are the very odd sets and characters. The fact that there are group of kids that are left to run wild on one part of the planet, a labrinyth in another part, and a city that is built on top of a liquid that feeds off of evil, is just completely odd. Then there is an "angel" character, and all sorts of other odd characters. The fact that everything is so absurd makes it fun because you really wonder what odd thing is going to happen next, and what odd character will appear next.

They also tried and theme the movie really heavily to the idea that if everyone just loves everyone else, everything will be good. And that jealousy and violence lead to ones destruction. Now, there might be some truth to that, at least that jealousy and violence can lead to destruction and all, but things don't quite work to the absurd extent that they would like to suggest in the film. The most absurd line from this film comes from the Angel:
An angel does not make love, an angel *is* love.
But that is really what the whole film is themed about. It is about being love to everyone and everything and how that will make everything good and happy.

Overall this is really a laughable film. The characters and acting are so odd and poor that it really shouldn't be good, but it just oddly entertaining because of how absurd everything is surrounding the film.

Overall Grade: C+

Story: C-
Acting: D+
Audio/Visual: B-



Thanks for the great reviews

I saw Barbarella at the movies I thought it was great back then I watched it recently and found so cheesy and bad that it could become a classic



Lost in never never land
Return of the Living Dead Part II

What was good about the first one was completely dropped for the second one. Gone were the interesting characters, gone were the good lines, and in their place were rehashed/stock characters and cliche lines. The only redeeming thing about this film was seeing Michael Jackson's zombie.

In the first film there were unique characters, odd costumes, odd attitudes, etc. for the characters. In this second one, the odd character was a rehash of one of the characters from the first one. He had the same odd quirks and mannerisms (Rodney Dangerfield-esque), but it had already been played out in the first film. The rest of the characters were simply dreadful stock characters. There was the meathead type of character and his stupid girlfriend, the bratty stupid older sibling, the highschool boy/crush, the absent minded professor type of character, the neighborhood bully, and the smart little brother. They all were played out as cliche as they sound. It is really sad when you start the film and within five minutes are pulling for the death of a character who is so obviously slated not to die and slated to play a very important part in the film. All of the protaganist characters just rubbed me the wrong way, with the exception of the absent minded professor type who had a minor roll as compared to the other characters.

Also, the dialog for the characters was just cliche. I know that it was somewhat cliche in the other film as well, but the characters were unique enough so that it was lost in that film, but in this film with cliche/stock characters and cliche lines, everything was just grating as I watched it. The scene where the meathead character turns the girlfriend into a zombie, or at least eats her brains (this really isn't a spoiler because you shouldn't watch it anyway and within the first five minutes you know that they will die/turn), and the dialog in that scene, it is just terrible. Also the last scene where the goverment is cleaning up the mess there are some wonderfully cliche lines that made me wonder why I had sat through the whole film.

Overall this is a film that should be avoided. As good as the first one is, this one is bad. There isn't much redeeming about it, other then the Michael Jackson zombie, and that is about a 15 second (or less) part of the film, so that doesn't make it nearly worth it.

Overall Grade: D-

Story: D-
Acting: D-
Audio/Visual: D



Lost in never never land
The Day After Tomorrow

This is a film that I have a love/hate relationship with. I hate parts of it because it becomes a heavy handed propoganda film as it preaches against the evils of using gas and how that is ruining the environment, when there is little evidence to suggest so, but it also has a fairly compelling storyline. I'm a sucker for the self-sacrifice to save others type of storyline that this film has.

What doesn't work well in this film, as I've already said, is the heavy handed propoganda that is in this film. There definitely is some truth to what it is saying about the troubles of polution, but the way in which it does it is most of the time not based on any aspect of reality, so it become grating because while it is a fiction film, it tries and treat these moments like it is a documentary based on fact.

But there is more good then bad in this film. The acting performances by Jake Gyllenhaal, Dennis Quaid, and Emmy Rossum are all pretty solid. Gyllenhaal and Quaid are much better then they normally are in films, and Rossum, who is normally solid, gives a good performance in this film. The side characters are also done well, with the exception of the Vice President who is a very grating character, somewhat intentionally so, but when he becomes a "good guy" at the end of the film, he is still grating.

Also this film is pretty impressive visually. They had a good amount of money to spend on the special effects and with very few exceptions, it looks good. The fact that they had to show some enormous disaster scenes and were able to pull them off without them looking bad, it is quite impressive. There are a few parts that look a little off, but they are very minor and brief, so they don't distract much at all from the film.

Overall this is a very entertaining film. If it wasn't that it tried to preach instead of just tell a story which would have had a similar effect as the preaching drops it down some in my book, but the preaching is fortunately minor. This is primarily a popcorn type of film, but it is definitely enjoyable and easy to watch.

Overall Grade B-

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



Thursday Next's Avatar
I never could get the hang of Thursdays.
I really like the way you put that you have a 'love/hate relationship' with the film...it isn't always clearly cut into which films you loved and hated, there can be films you admire in some ways but dislike, or like aspects of but dislike other aspects, or are almost embarrassed to like because something lets it down. It is difficult to express your feelings about a film in simple grade terms sometimes.



Lost in never never land
Heavy Metal

After seeing the South Park episode a week ago, I knew that I was going to have to watch these movies in order to fully appreciate it. So I have now watched the first one. It starts out being a little confusing, but once the story telling style has been done a time or two, it comes together quite nicely and is a pretty entertaining film.

I enjoyed the animation style. It wasn't purely cartoonish, even though it had a lot of cartoonish points. But the car, for example, at the beginning of the film is actually very realistic as compared to some of the later animation in the film. And I think the combination of the realistic animation there, and the more standard animation that is often used throughout the film is done quite well. It offers a little more to look at and think about when watching the film.

Also, the music in this film is right up my alley. I'm a big fan of the heavy metal from the mid '80's and bands like Blue Oyster Cult, Grand Funk Railroad, Sammy Hagar, Black Sabbath, and Nazarath. So I enjoyed the music a lot. It is interesting to see movies done purely with rock music and heavier rock music as, in general, that type of music isn't usually purely the back drop for a film.

The story(ies) in the film was interesting. As I said, it seems to be disjointed at first, but once you figure out how the disjoint is working, it actually comes together quite well. The various stories are all quite interesting, and definitely seem to work well in telling the whole story. It is a little bit confusing as to whether or not the Loc-Nar is telling tales that are going on simaltaneously through time for it, or what exactly, but the story/message is fairly clear in how it ends.

Overall this isn't a bad adult cartoon film. It has its moments and while a slightly larger budget wouldn't have hurt it, it definitely didn't need it badly. It was entertaining, and the soundtrack was very good. The idea in the film did come through in the end, so that was also nice, but it wasn't an amazing film. Even with the strong points that I listed, it was fairly average. The animation while unique, wasn't great, and the the story comes more as an anthology (and not an extremely well done one) then anything else.

Overall Grade: B-

Story: C
Acting: N/A
Audio/Visual: B (because of the sound track)