OG- 'Reviews' You Up

→ in
Tools    





In Soviet America, you sue MPAA!
I wanted to like it more, but I just wasn't drawn in enough within the first 25 minutes that I just didn't care at all about what happened in the last 2/3rds of the movie.

The creatures were great, though. Very original and very creepy at times. But ultimately, I thought it was just a very distant movie. I am glad other people do get a kick out if, it was a pretty decent rating on imdb, but it just didn't click with me.
__________________
Horror's Not Dead
Latest Movie Review(s): Too lazy to keep this up to date. New reviews every week.



In Soviet America, you sue MPAA!
Green Street Hooligans, directed by Lexi Alexander, 2005



I am impressed. Green Street Hooligans is not a film you will quickly forget. It isn't overtly powerful, but it is subtle in its teachings. One could be quick to pass judgement on the film because explaining the concept sounds like a pitch for one of many "self discovery" films, but that isn't what it is. And yet here is the pitch anyway...

Elijah Wood gets expelled from Harvard for taking the fall of his coke addict, rich kid roommate. He travels to England on a whim to go see his distanced sister and soon melts into the crowd of the local firm; a gang of soccer (football, by the folks across the pond) hooligans who do exactly what you'd expect. He isn't accepted into the group right away, but earns his place. Yadda, yadda, yadda he learns a lot about himself in the process.

Typical pitch, eh? But it is soo much strong than that. It may sound and look like what you expect, but the end result is an emotional beast. Lexi Alexander does an utterly fantastic job of supply Elijah Wood's yank as the means for the viewer to live vicariously through - to become part of the gang. We may not completely buy the motives of a recently ex-Harvard student suddenly becoming one with the way of the hooligan, but we sure as hell want to because it is fun. The simple idea of possibility to live that lifestyle, even if it were brief, is incredibly inticing and is what the director banks the film heavily on throughout.

We know he shouldn't be in these fights, because we know we shouldn't be in these fights - but god it would be cool, wouldn't it? It takes the question of "what if?" and creates a masterful scenario that answers it ten fold.

That may imply that this film caters to the typical male fantasy of particpating in a brotherhood of unrestrained violence, but it isn't just a guy thing - it is a human thing. The entire point of this film is about humanity, about the desire to cling on to life, to stand your ground as the tagline on the poster says. Having a fetish for violence isn't a requisite to enjoy this film because you'll be subject to just as much of an emotional journey if you hate the violence.

You will smile at the highs and you will revel at the strength of the lows. It is progressively somber and yet is still one of those films that can brighten up your day because it is just that good.

The performances are all around wonderful. Elijah Wood to me is a very tame face and always comes off as a tame actor because of it, especially when he talks, which is why he is at his best in this film when he is destroying that tame face. Claire Forlani is awesome as his sister and incredibly admirable during the last reel. But the MVP goes to Charlie Hunnam as the head of the Green Street Elite. That guy is more than a great jawline, he can actually act. Hell, I'd follow him into a street brawl if he shouted at me.

I'd consider it in my top ten of '05 not because of the complete body of the film, but that the story and the way it is told has so much iron in its bones that it never breaks despite any faults in the filmmaking (such as the odd and somewhat out of place voice over). I highly recommend it.



Green Street Hooligans probably won't knock you on your ass, but it is a film you won't forget.



Wonder why it was only called Green Street over here. Anyway, glad you enjoyed it but it neer held any appeal for me.



In Soviet America, you sue MPAA!
Originally Posted by Pyro Tramp
Wonder why it was only called Green Street over here. Anyway, glad you enjoyed it but it neer held any appeal for me.
It's actually only called Hooligans over here, but that's retarded so I stuck with what I thought was the UK title (didn't realize they dropped the Hooligans bit).



In Soviet America, you sue MPAA!
Tom Yum Goong, directed by Prachya Pinkaew, 2005



I will preface by saying this film contains the best martial arts choreography I have ever seen in my life.

As much of a physical riot as Ong-Bak is, it has nothing on Tom Yum Goong. If aliens came to earth and simply demanded we send them our best fighter to fight in some intergalactic martial arts tournament, Tony Jaa should be the man to go. The legwork on display here is absolutely on par with any of the physical stunts that Jackie Chan was capable of in his best pictures. The speed in which Jaa works may not be as good as, but is at least on par with that of Bruce Lee. And the amount of bones broken is exponentially higher than even the amount in some of Jet Li's earlier films. Yes.

Even the plot is more interesting than that of Ong-Bak (though, as with all old-school martial arts flick, the plot is largely irrelevant); The elephant(s) that meant so much to Tony Jaa and his family, have been kidnapped (yes, the plot revolves around kidnapped elephants!) and taken to Sydney for an unknown reason (which is revealed to be kinda interesting, in a sick, unexpected way) and of course Jaa follows to retrieve them. The side characters introduced are almost entirely meaningless as are their stories, but there is so much action in this film that it is hard to complain.

Now, I'm sure there are hundreds and hundreds of martial arts films that I've never even heard of that have some rediculous choreography and a diehard cult following, but I highly doubt they're on the same level as what Jaa put together here. There is actually a sequence where he fights his way up 4 flights of stairs, through 40+ people, in a giant restraunt/hotel that is one continuous steadicam shot! I cannot even fathom how many takes it got them to do it right and if they did it on the first try, no one involved with this production was human.

On top of that outstanding sequence, the film contains one of the coolest moments of badass unleashings ever. You know what I'm talking about; the part in the movie when the hero is getting beat to **** and something causes him to snap. I love those moments in movies and obviously so does Prachya Pinkaew. After the snap, which is actually pretty funny, Tony Jaa proceeds to break the limbs of over 30 people in one room in an absolutely phenomenal sequence. It is the type of scene where you know you're imagining bones breaking because of the sound effects, but what you actually see here convinces the brain that bones are really being broken. There are some blows that I don't see how they possibly could have been faked. Unless every actor he was fighting was either a contortionist or was capable of dislocating either their hip, wrist, shoulder, knee or even their elbow. It is a remarkable sequence that had my jaw floored.

See Tom Yum Goong, it is awe inspiring.




In Soviet America, you sue MPAA!
Originally Posted by Pyro Tramp
Awaiting a review of Lady Vengeance......
And that you shall have in a day or two. (silly New Years!)



In Soviet America, you sue MPAA!
Sympathy for Lady Vengeance, Directed by Chan-Wook Park, 2005



Chan-Wook Park's revenge trilogy, comprised of Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance and Oldboy, comes to a close with Lady Vengeance. If the two previous installments (completely unrelated in plot or characters) were any indication, Lady Vengeance was poised to be the final gauntlet of all revenge movies. For me, just with Mr. Vengeance and Oldboy, Park had become practically the law in regards to unflinching portrayls of the all-consuming parasite that is vengeance. He went straight for the throat early on and showed that vengeance, in all its glory, is ugly, brutal and inevitably suicidal. This is not the case with Lady Vengeance.

I could not help but think throughout the first hour of the film that this is what a revenge movie would be like if it were made by Jean-Pierre Jeunet. It was as if Amelie, A Very Long Engagement and Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance had a three-way that some how resulted in this child. The first hour isn't like anything Park has done before. It is whimsical. It is fantastical. He emulated Jeunet at his best, in introducing minor characters left and right that all had a quirk to them that defined them uniquely to the film, but that were ultimately unimportant and quickly disgarded. And well, honestly, I wasn't a huge fan of it - initially.

First, the story. Geum-Ja, our lady of vegeance, is imprisioned for 14 years for the murder of a 5 year old boy. She is released and as she re-encounters all the contacts she made in prison (the minor characters I made mention of above) we learn that she is seeking revenge agains the man who is the reason she went to jail. Figuring out why she is seeking revenge is almost fruitless. Doing so in Oldboy was fun, we were greatly attached to Oh Dae-Su and wanted to know why he was putting in a cell for 15 years, but that same sense of warranted adventure was absent here. It almost felt bland, but it only felt bland because stylistically it, again, wasn't what I was expecting.

It was interesting and will often times put a smile on your face, but it wasn't the Park I knew and love. It was too stylized, but I guess this is the end result of where he wants to be as a director. All signs certainly pointed towards it. Mr. Vengeance is cold and realistic, with little flare in regards to composition and direction. The same could be said of JSA, though it was a little more energetic and interesting. Oldboy certainly included many winks at the audience in regards to style - and to much enjoyment by all - and Cut was his experimentation with CGI transitions and aided camera movements, but all of it culminates in Lady Vengeance. It doesn't have any of the lovely fantasy of Amelie - such as when she bursts into a puddle of water - but it does bare a striking resemblance often and I just wasn't expecting it.

I'm not sure if this is a fair criticism of the film, as Park did not at all fail with this style of subtle grandoise, it just didn't feel like Park to me. And then the film takes a turn towards the darker and I felt right at home in the realm of the reality of vengeance. I won't mention what these moments are, you'll know what I'm talking about, but they begin with the introduction of Choi Min-Sik's character and result in a sequence that is just wonderfully inspired. It is perhaps, my favorite debate in the arena of how vengeance affects people so far. This stretch of the film has some wonderful shots and seeing people in transparent rain coats to protect themselves from blood always makes me smile. It was the highlight of the film, for me.

Simply put, the movie is soft. Is this Park's way of saying a lady's vengeance is more pure and beautiful than a man's? I'm not sure, but it certainly comes off that way. Regardless of the message in regards to sexuality, I was just disappointed that it didn't knock me on my ass the same way Mr. and Oldboy did. It isn't powerful.

This "review" hasn't been a rave, so this may not carry the weight it should, but I do recommend the movie. It is a good movie - I stress again; it is a good movie - it just isn't the closure you'd expect for a trilogy whose first two instalments were powerful portraits of forces out of control. It has great performances all around and a tremendous score. It just felt foreign and not nearly as involving as the prevous films.


Sympathy for Lady Vengeance is certainly a unique bookend to Park's revenge trilogy, but feels nothing like the final word in the definition of vengeance.

If you LOVED A Very Long Engagement and Oldboy, you'll LOVE Sympathy for Lady Vengeance. I, however, only liked Engagement and felt the same reasons that kept me from loving that film were the same ones that kept me from loving Lady Vengeance.



In Soviet America, you sue MPAA!
Hostel, Directed by Eli Roth, 2005


Hostel is a horrible, ugly piece of ****. No bull****ting around in this review, it is an abysmal film. It fails in every area and simply has no redeemable features. You can stop reading the review here, because there isn't anything better to say about it - plus I'm so angry about it I'll probably curse a lot.

Eli Roth knows horror. Anyone who has ever seen an interview with him knows that the blood in his veins is really Karo syrup. This absolute devotion to the genre was wildly obvious in Cabin Fever, which is a movie I love to death. But, you'd have to have a brain tumor to think that was the case here.

Two college buddies and one random Icelandic man are lured to a Hostel in run down Eastern Europe with the promise that the girls will be beautiful and easy. Once there, two "beautiful" girls (only one of them is actually attractive) drug them and sell them to a group called Elite Hunting; A group that lets people pay to torture a kidnapped victim. A decent enough plot that could be very powerful if Roth could write above a highschool level. The dialogue is insultingly bad, even though it was supposed to have been beefed up by Tarantino (a man I hate anyway).

The movie is so bad that I almost walked out in the first 15 minutes. And I don't walk out during movies. I rarely even consider it. Not to mention I was possibly one of the biggest fans of Eli Roth out there prior to this film. Hell, I even bought a website with the intention of devoting it to him. I'm also impulsively stupid.

I had drastically high hopes for this movie. I thought Eli Roth was going to knock it out of the park. I'm not talking about delivering a perfect film, but I was convinced that he would deliver a brutal, unflinching sledgehammer to the senses. I was expecting to be traumatized. I got **** in return.

There isn't an instance in the film that inspires any emotion that could resemble fear. It consists of about an hour of "character" (if you can call them that) build up to an ending that is flacid at best. The 20 minutes of gore that are in the movie aren't even that gory. They're far from original and the edits hide anything that would have any punch anyway. It is a monumental failure at even being an exploitation film, which is not that ****ing hard to do. If it was, the horror genre would have died years ago.

It has no humor. That isn't to say it doesn't try to be funny, it just isn't. It has a mob of children which are supposed to be menacing, but who are really just completely and utterly retarded. That concept in the film was surely concieved after huffing glue. And if it wasn't, I'm in awe. The acting was barely passable by even Sci-Fi channel standards. And the sheer abundance of gross nudity was actually a turn off. Not to mention save for a handful of shots, the cinematography was worse than what I've achieved on my own - and I'm a horrible cinematographer. If you've got a bad movie, at least make it pretty.

To sum it up, a story. My friend Beau and I are huge horror buffs and I (more so than him) will consistently sing the praise of Roth as the future of horror. We were eagerly awaiting Hostel, but as I was driving down to FL on its release I missed it opening day. Beau called me at about 2 am asking if I had seen it yet, I hadn't and he asked me to call him when I had. The next day he called again, but I hadn't seen it yet and he wouldn't comment on whether he liked it or not, he just wanted me to call when I had seen it. On Monday I did and the first words out of my mouth were "What a huge piece of ****" and his were, "I know, I'm so sorry. The first thing I thought of when I walked out of the theater was, 'Peter is going to be so heartbroken'."

I am heartbroken. You betrayed me, Eli Roth. Seriously, what the **** were you thinking?




Sir Sean Connery's love-child
Cheers for the reviews OG, I will check out Lady Vengence as I loved the first two films, Oldboy is my fave so far, as for Hostel, anything that is recommended by Tarantino seems to be the kiss of death!!!
__________________
Hey Pepe, would you say I have a plethora of presents?


Toga, toga, toga......


Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbour?



Great reviews OG… I had a feeling about Hostel… and will definitely bypass it… but you've reviewed a lot of movies I've never even heard of (which is one of the reasons I love MoFo) that sound very interesting… so my "to see list" has gotten a bit longer…
__________________
You never know what is enough, until you know what is more than enough.
~William Blake ~

AiSv Nv wa do hi ya do...
(Walk in Peace)




In Soviet America, you sue MPAA!
The President's Last Bang, directed by Im Sang Soo, 2005



A modestly satirical retelling of the assassination of South Korean dictator in hiding/President in name, Park Chun-hee in 1979, The President's Last Bang is a highly engaging and entertaining political drama that moves with a quickness.

For me, the selling point of the movie is the completely relaxed nature from which it approaches government. The president is portrayed as a depressed, lonely old man who just wants to be loved. His chiefs of staff are all foolish, self-absorbed men who lounge around in life. The only redeemable man in his employ is the disease ridden Director of the Korean Central Intelligence Agency, who is the man who carries out the quite impulsive assassination.

One night the president decides he wants a famous Korean singer to come perform for him privately (along with an escort type college girl). He moans about being misunderstood as a dictator by other foreign powers as he coaxes affection out of the naive college girl who is just impressed with his power. His chief bodyguard cracks a joke at the expense of the Director of the KCIA, who snaps, rounds his men up and plans the assassination for that very night.

It isn't a long drawn out consipiracy. It doesn't involve months and months of elaborate planning. It is impulsive and sloppy. And I love that about it. I love that it isn't completely procedural like other governmental upsets, I love that movie has a very "in the moment" feel to it. The whole movie encompasses the 4 or so hours before, during, and after the assassination and ends with a brief narration of what happened to all who played a part in this monumentally pivotal, historical event. Though often times slightly disorienting to understand who all plays what role in the government, the characters are very relateable and loveable, which just makes everything all the more fascinating.

The cinematography is quite memorable as well as the upbeat and quirkly, modern score, but one of the other stronger points of the film is the slick and subtle humor throughout. I love that the soldiers at Army Headquarters never have any real bullets and their walkie talkies aren't even strong enough to reach the front gate. I love the mopy president and his impish advisors. I love the hapless grunts who aide in the even sloppier assassination. And I love that it all snowballs into a very poignant end. Democracy prevails, but those who ushered in its return to South Korea are executed as a result. It stings just enough without ever being preachy.

A great pleasure. Seek it out if you get the chance.




28 days...6 hours...42 minutes...12 seconds
Too bad you didn't like HOSTEL.
But I will check this one out for sure.
__________________
"A laugh can be a very powerful thing. Why, sometimes in life, it's the only weapon we have."

Suspect's Reviews



In Soviet America, you sue MPAA!
Fearless, directed by Ronny Yu, 2006



I'd been looking forward to Fearless for a while entirely because I'm a huge Jet Li fan. He is my favorite martial artist and I love all his work - even stuff like Romeo Must Die. Then there was the controversy when China banned the movie from its theaters, stating that it encouraged violence - even though it is about China's own Huo Yuanjia, a national hero from the early 20th century.

I certainly have some complaints about the film, but as a whole I actually really did enjoy it. I don't think Ronny Yu was the right man for the job. Huo Yuanjia's story is actually a pretty remarkable one, but Yu's recent dabble in Western cinema is a little apparent here as he goes for slicker visuals over steady character development - which is what you'd normally expect from a biopic. I'm not an expert on Huo's life, but it was still a little disheartening to learn the most emotionally poignant points of the film were complete fabrications of evens that really did happen.

Now having seen the movie, I can understand why so many people thought China's ban was ludicrous. The movie does not at all encourage or glorify violence. In fact, it actively discourages violence by the time the movie ends. On top of that, it is still a film about a Chinese hero who greatly helped raise the morale of China after their war loss. It may not be a legendary film, but its still about a legendary figure so why they wouldn't want to endorse that is beyond me.

The martial arts in the film are top notch, of course. However, there is still a hint of wire-fu here and there, but nothing as offensively unrealistic as other recent Chinese fare. It isn't breakthrough choreography (not in the same way Tony Jaa's last films have been), but it still makes for some fairly memorable fights. Man, Jet Li can work a sword...

The story, though highly fictionalized, is still surprisingly inspiring. It is a delight to see Li fight prize fighters from England, America, France and Japan. I get a kick out of that, for some reason. Maybe its the costumes or maybe its just that that part of the film really did happen, but it brought a smile to my face to see Li kick the asses of these Western caricatures.

And man, I loved seeing Nathan Jones again. That man is a freaking giant. Fox should have just cast him as the Juggernaut and saved themselves thousands in effects.