http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies Tim Skirvin's Movie Reviews en Copyright 2005-2007, Tim Skirvin tskirvin@killfile.org 2006-06-29T00:00-05:00 1 daily http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies&number=90 <pre> Message-ID: &lt;tskirvin.20080324064018$0ee0@vulture.killfile.org> Newsgroups: cmi.movies From: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin) Subject: _Horton Hears A Who_ - 2.5 stars Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 23:40:18 -0700 Dear Gods, a decent Seuss movie! I don't really have anything to complain about, to be honest; I've managed to avoid all of the live-action Dr. Seuss movies to date, and, while it sounds like this was for the best, it does mean that I don't have a lot of credibility on that front. Still, the popular consensus amongst the kind of people I talk to was clear - they weren't actually Seuss. But _Horton Hears A Who_ certainly looked like Seuss, felt like it in parts, and even managed to get some of the sound right. And that's reason to cheer. That's not to say that this was a great movie. While it makes sense that there wasn't much of a plot - this is based on a short kid's book, after all - I still wanted *something* more than I got over an hour and a half. And... you know, that was really my only major gripe. I liked that I didn't recognize Jim Carrey until after the movie was over. I liked all of the random Seuss-ian random machines. And I liked the scary yellow girl monster thingie. ** 1/2 - Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org) -- http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage &lt;FISH>&lt; &lt;*> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/movies/ Skirv's Movie Reviews </pre> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies&number=89 <pre> Message-ID: &lt;tskirvin.20080324062725$57cf@vulture.killfile.org> Newsgroups: cmi.movies From: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin) Subject: _Doomsday_ - 2.5 stars Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 23:27:25 -0700 I don't really know what I was expecting going into _Doomsday_. The trailers implied ludicrous zombie mayhem; this was enough to get me there. But there were no zombies; instead, there was more ludicrousness than I expected. And, well, that was fun. The acting was irrelevant. The explosions were pretty and unnecessary. The sub-plots didn't connect at all. I'm not sure that there was more plot than plot holes. None of that really mattered. ** 1/2 - Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org) -- http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage &lt;FISH>&lt; &lt;*> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/movies/ Skirv's Movie Reviews </pre> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies&number=88 <pre> Message-ID: &lt;tskirvin.20080128015159$6907@vulture.killfile.org> Newsgroups: cmi.movies From: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin) Subject: _Rambo_ - 2 stars Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 17:51:59 -0800 I was never allowed to see movies starring Sylvester Stallone when I was a kid; my mother was opposed to the violence of such movies, and so it just didn't happen. In some cases, this principle was probably a good thing; I still don't like most horror franchises, for instance. But this particular filter did hold back my appreciation of some American Cinema trends, by cutting out two staples - Rocky and Rambo. The former I have since seen in their entirety; but I only saw _First Blood_ a year or so ago, and I still haven't seen any of the sequels. So _Rambo_ - the fourth in the series, first in 20 years - was my first Stallone-in-Asia movie. My views were certainly colored by that. But this movie wasn't really that much of a surprise anyway. _Rambo_ is a bloody movie. It has a message, interestingly, and that message is probably a good thing to repeat: the situation in Burma/ Myanmar is awful, and the world should pay attention to it. But that message, while useful for a good fifteen minutes of the movie, is overshadowed by the constant, over-the-top violence and gore in the other 75. Perhaps that's not an entirely bad thing, though - perhaps such tactics will get the story told to a wider audience. But, well, that's not how it seemed to me. What I saw was a message, followed by lots and lots of violence, padded with some irrelevant character development. Think _Babel_, but with more machine gun fire, land mines, and raping. And I think that's about all I have to say about it. ** - Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org) -- http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage &lt;FISH>&lt; &lt;*> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/movies/ Skirv's Movie Reviews </pre> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies&number=87 <pre> Message-ID: &lt;tskirvin.20080119075356$5fac@vulture.killfile.org> Newsgroups: cmi.movies From: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin) Subject: _Cloverfield_ - 3.25 stars Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 23:53:56 -0800 _Cloverfield_ is an impressive monster movie, heavily laden with product placement (Mountain Dew and Nokia come to mind) and annoying plot twists and stupid decisions, but well made and intense and fairly clever. If you like monster movies, you'll like this movie. But to say much more than that - well, I suppose I could talk about the trailers safely (Hellboy 2 looks like my kind of movie! And the Star Trek teaser was fun too), but spoilers would really ruin the movie pretty badly. That said, I still want to talk about it. I'll just leave a few blank lines.  _Cloverfield_ is, basically, the _Blair Witch Project_ with a giant monster. The camera work is jittery, the characters make stupid decisions, and well, the entire plot device of using the camera the whole time didn't really make much sense. And the characters die in the end, in large part based on their own stupidity. I don't really know if this is a good thing or a bad thing; I suspect that it won't age that well. But it was a good experience. The _Jaws_ aspect of things was also good - we did see the monster, but not all that often, and more often we just saw its effects. In fact, the movie was *really* about the effects of the attack on NYC; the parallels with 9-11 were clear, but no less chilling for that. The horse walking down the street, still attached to its carriage but without a driver - *that* was a creepy image. And there were more such images, from the collapse of the Empire State Building to the poster shot of the head of the Statue of Liberty. The most real, though, was all the people standing close and taking cell-phone shots of that head. Tactically, most of the decisions made by the main characters were horrible - but I suppose that most of them weren't *that* shocking. That the group followed their friend on his question to the middle of town to rescue their mutual friend - that was dumb. The rest stemmed from that first bad decision. Well, there was one other truly bad idea - crossing the Brooklyn Bridge with the attack going on was a *horrible* idea. But that's the movies... It probably should have ended ten minutes earlier than it did. A few random things I liked about this movie: * The spider-things looked like Zerglings. They were too small, yes, but it was the right idea. * The range of alien powers was fairly unexpected. I expected infection, not Infested Terrans. (I have Starcraft on the mind now.) * The cutting between the various videos was interesting. * I don't think there will be a sequel. * Johann Kraus will be in Hellboy 2. Whee! Anyway - I'm happy I saw it before the spoilers came out. I hope that anybody that wanted to see it already did so before reading my spoilers. *** 1/4 - Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org) -- http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage &lt;FISH>&lt; &lt;*> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/movies/ Skirv's Movie Reviews </pre> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies&number=86 <pre> Message-ID: &lt;tskirvin.20071208082845$654d@bristol.ks.uiuc.edu> Newsgroups: cmi.movies From: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin) Subject: _Beowulf_ - 2.75 stars Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2007 02:28:45 -0600 Three weeks ago, back in Champaign, I saw _Beowulf_ in 3D. I should have written a review then, when it was fresh in my mind; but I was busy, and I've been busy ever since. But to write something up quickly, a few thoughts on that movie. * While the animation did look pretty good, I don't really think it was necessary, and I wonder if it detracted from the story. It was interesting that I didn't realize it was animated until I was in the theatre. * The 3D display didn't really detract from the movie either, but again, I don't know how much it helped. At least it wasn't horribly over-played. * Angelina Jolie playing Naked Elemental Angelina Jolie was, in fact, quite hot. * I loved the screenplay (yay, Neil Gaiman), but it was not the real story. That was a bit worrisome in some ways, but in others... well, this is going to be great for English teachers. As my wife noted, those kids that only watch the movie are going to be screwed when the teacher asks "who does Beowulf fight just before he dies?". * I'm still curious which sports team we watched the movie with. They were wearing uniforms, and there were far too many to be the Basketball team; but it didn't seem like the Marching Band. Oh well. ** 3/4 - Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org) -- http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage &lt;FISH>&lt; &lt;*> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/movies/ Skirv's Movie Reviews </pre> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies&number=85 <pre> Message-ID: &lt;tskirvin.20071208081951$1836@bristol.ks.uiuc.edu> Newsgroups: cmi.movies From: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin) Subject: _The Golden Compass_ - 3 stars Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2007 02:19:51 -0600 There really haven't been many times in my life where I have been the sole person in a theatre who has enjoyed the movie. I am generally more critical of problems and less forgiving of mistakes; it is a fault of mine. This is especially pronounced when it comes to adaptations of material that I enjoy, or even remember enjoying (for instance, I was somewhat dubious of the first Narnia movie). But in this case, even with so many strikes against it, I was probably one of the few that really enjoyed _The Golden Compass_. And I find that regrettable. It doesn't hold a candle to the book, of course; it tries to be faithful and it suffers for it. Most concretely, it narrates the world's background rather than simply showing it - and this ruins some small part of the initial wonder of the daemons[1], not to mention a few other elements of the movie that would have been better being introduced later. But the true delight of the movie is the daemons, the animistic souls of men that live with but separate to their master/partners. The daemons seem a bit clunky at first, as they are introduced as more important than their partners instead of equals - but soon they just start to blend into the scene, where they belong. As the relationships become more subtle, it makes up for the earlier heavy-handedness; and soon, they are just natural parts of a whole, as they are supposed to be. This most intriguing of ideas is actually explored in a vaguely reasonable way, and I was both relieved and exhilarated at the success. Most intriguingly, I found the battle sequences much more engaging than in most movies, and more emotionally moving as well. The difference was the daemons - when the human dies, the daemon turn to dust. This makes the battles more real somehow, as the relatively innocent daemons fall with their masters; and certainly, it feels much more tragic. It's been a long time since a simple battle scene has made me flinch so much - and all because I saw a bunch of dogs turn to ash. That said, my criticisms - the plot suffers from, essentially, being on fast-forward. Little is left out (except the last 50 pages or so, as I recall, so that they could have a reasonably tight cliffhanger ending), but, again, much is told rather than shown. Much of the religious subtext is... well, muted. It's there, and it's even clear, but it's not as unrelenting as the book was. To be clear, the Catholic League's protests are legitimate for once - this is a story that is truly anti-Church and anti-Christian, at least in its original form. I find this absolutely fascinating, and while I won't get into it too much for fear of spoilers... well, I hope make more movies in this series, just so I can see the reviews. And surprisingly, the aletheiometer - the titular Golden Compass - is not particularly utilized during the movie. The book gave me the impression that Lyra was growing addicted to the device through the story; the movie made it seem more incidental. Anyway - I enjoyed the movie. I am sad that others didn't enjoy it so much, but I suspect that reading the book first helped immensely. If you've read the books, you'll probably want to see the movie; and regardless of the movie, you should read the books (or at least the first one). *** [1] I always pronounced "daemons" with a long-A. Oh well. I'm not changing just because the movie, and probably the author, disagree. - Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org) -- http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage &lt;FISH>&lt; &lt;*> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/movies/ Skirv's Movie Reviews </pre> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies&number=84 <pre> Message-ID: &lt;tskirvin.20071115171112$3ff0@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu> Newsgroups: cmi.movies From: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin) Subject: _Dan in Real Life_ - 2.5 stars Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 11:11:12 -0600 It took me a couple of days to even come up with a star rating for this movie. The movie made me angry sometimes, and interested me others; and by many definitions that makes it a good movie, but by others that makes me unhappy to have seen it. But even so, it's not even that easy to talk about it, or to write about it... Some points: * Steve Carell did do a very good job. * The family seemed realistic. * It was a romantic comedy, but not anywhere near as bad as I was expecting. * It was part of the sub-category of romantic comedies where the protagonist is repeatedly humiliated. I found this painful. * The art was rather good too. I still don't know, though... ** 1/2 - Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org) -- http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage &lt;FISH>&lt; &lt;*> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/movies/ Skirv's Movie Reviews </pre> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies&number=83 <pre> Message-ID: &lt;tskirvin.20071022160830$092f@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu> Newsgroups: cmi.movies From: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin) Subject: _Nightmare Before Christmas 3-D_ - 2.5 stars Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 11:08:30 -0500 I should start by noting that I was lucky to be able to see _The Nightmare Before Christmas_ in 3-D here in town. The Beverly has apparently picked up a bunch of digital projectors recently, and now shows 3D movies where appropriate. Seeing it locally was much better than the original "drive to Peoria" plan, and even if the theatre is by no means a bastion of gloriousness... it'll do. I have of course seen _Nightmare_ before, many times in fact. I'm a huge fan of parts of the movie - the animation is gorgeous, the art direction is fantastic, the overall story and concept are interesting in a Gaiman-esque mythology kind of way, and I love the song "This Is Halloween". But other parts of the movie have always left me cold - the rest of the music, the story's execution, the wishy-washy Halloween feeling. I think I actually like playing the Nightmare stage in "Kingdom Hearts" more than I like the movie itself. So, why was I willing to go pay to see it again? Partially it was because of my wife - she likes the music - but mostly it was because of the 3-D. This was the first 3-D movie I'd seen in a regular theatre (IMAX doesn't count), and I really wanted to see what it would add. And, well, I'm not sure I came out with a good answer to that question. Technical impressions: the Christie projector was certainly good enough. The glasses were a $2 up-charge, and I'm impressed by their physical quality. But the screen - well, we sat fairly far back, and the 3-D wasn't well-served by that. Perhaps if we'd been closer, it would have been more inversive; as it was, it wasn't anything special on its own. (I find this annoying, because I work with this stuff on a regular basis). I should also note the trailers - and oh Gods, there was horror here! Brendan Frasier is going to star in Disney's first live- action 3D movie - and they spit on the audience (3D spit, that is) in the trailer! Gaah! And even the CGI-movie just looked...dull. I think that there's a while to go before anybody knows how to do 3D properly, and the gimmick-time is going to make me cry. But as for the movie itself - the 3-D was generally pretty subtle. Some scenes didn't benefit from it at all; others, including the moon with the unrolling mountain scene, looked *really* good, with the style of art really helped by having foregrounds and backgrounds distinct. I couldn't tell how often they added new elements to the movie to take advantage of the 3-D, but certainly they added foreground elements on occasion. But, mostly, the only thing that stood out was the moon and mountain. All of that said, I am happy I saw it - it's still pretty (and more so with the 3-D, at least in some parts), the art direction still rules (and wasn't screwed up), and the rest of it hasn't been affected. So if you liked it before, it's worth seeing again; if not, well, rent it first. ** 1/2 I still really want to go see the holiday version of the Haunted Mansion at the Disney parks at some point - that's a more immersive kind of 3-D, and probably suits the material better. But I won't go with my wife to go see this movie in 3-D again, at least not this year. - Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org) -- http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage &lt;FISH>&lt; &lt;*> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/movies/ Skirv's Movie Reviews </pre> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies&number=82 <pre> Message-ID: &lt;tskirvin.20070921155810$0da2@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu> Newsgroups: cmi.movies From: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin) Subject: _Daywatch_ - *** 1/4 Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 10:58:10 -0500 I don't actually remember that much of _Nightwatch_, the first part of a Russian fantasy movie trilogy. I saw it about a year ago on DVD, and, well, it was fairly forgettable; but maybe that was just the dubbed dialogue speaking, which never does well for me. I recall enjoying it at the time; and my wife insists that it was a good movie as well, since she re-watched it a couple of days ago. This movie was better. _Daywatch_ feels like a live-action anime movie, in Russian. The story is big, probably bigger than it needs to be; the characters are more archetypes than anything; and the action is larger-than-life when anything is happening at all. I found this to be a good thing, myself; others may not mesh with it as well. My favorite part of the movie, by far, was the subtitles. This isn't just a standard sub-vs-dub argument, either; the subtitles were *interesting*, like a well-lettered comic book. Words were color-coded based on mood, or faded in and out based on volume or context; they would slide behind the scene sometimes, or shatter where it made sense. It was remarkable, and I really want to see it again in other movies. It's not perfect, but it's fun, and I'm definitely glad I saw it on its last night at our local art theatre. *** 1/4 - Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org) -- http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage &lt;FISH>&lt; &lt;*> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/movies/ Skirv's Movie Reviews </pre> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies&number=81 <pre> Message-ID: &lt;tskirvin.20070919160556$3ae5@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu> Newsgroups: cmi.movies From: tskirvin Subject: _3:10 To Yuma_ - ** 1/2 Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 11:05:53 -0500 I saw this movies on Saturday night, and it's taken me until today to write up a review. I'm not entirely sure why; it's an interesting enough movie, a well-done Western in a time when we don't get such a genre anymore; but I came out of the movie feeling cold, a bit annoyed, and only somewhat entertained. And I still can't come up with a proper review of it. *shrug* ** 1/2 - Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org) -- http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage &lt;FISH>&lt; &lt;*> http://www.killfile.org/dungeon/ The Killfile Dungeon </pre> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies&number=80 <pre> Message-ID: &lt;tskirvin.20070902162740$3f67@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu> Newsgroups: cmi.movies From: tskirvin Subject: _Superbad_ -- ** 3/4 Date: Sun, 02 Sep 2007 11:27:36 -0500 I don't really know what I was expecting going into _Superbad_; I sortof wanted "more of the same" from Judd Apatow (creator of _The 40-Year-Old Virgin_ and _Knocked Up_), but what that meant wasn't obvious, and the trailers assured me that this was going to be more random and less plot-heavy anyway. I guess I mostly wanted it to not suck, and to see more George Michael (Michael Cera, from Arrested Development). _Superbad_ was fun and funny. It was not a great film; its plot was convoluted and somewhat pointless, and while it did a good job at presenting high school, it didn't really connect with me. But there were moments of massive laughing, and that's what I really wanted. And none of the bits from the trailer that I expected to flop were a) all that important or b) done badly. ** 3/4 - Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org) -- http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage &lt;FISH>&lt; &lt;*> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/friends/ Skirv's Friends </pre> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies&number=79 <pre> Message-ID: &lt;tskirvin.20070813153937$271b@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu> Newsgroups: cmi.movies From: tskirvin Subject: _The Bourne Ultimatum_ - *** 1/4 Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 10:39:35 -0500 I was rather shocked to enjoy _The Bourne Ultimatum_ as much as I did. The first movie had been a fun movie, not perfect by any means but worth watching and different than much of its genre; but the second movie was a massive step down, to the extent that I hardly remembered it after it was done. This movie was tight, and simple - there was one plot, and it was followed from beginning to end. The chase scenes were intricate yet easy to follow; the actions that were taken were perhaps somewhat over the top, but at least believable. I never had the conception that anybody had godlike powers, except perhaps for Bourne's ability to read his enemy - and that was kindof the whole point, wasn't it? *** 1/4 - Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org) -- http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage &lt;FISH>&lt; &lt;*> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/buttons/ Skirv's Buttons </pre> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies&number=78 <pre> Message-ID: &lt;tskirvin.20070813151935$0c34@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu> Newsgroups: cmi.movies From: tskirvin Subject: _Stardust_ - *** Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 10:19:33 -0500 I wasn't really that excited when I heard that _Stardust_ was going to be adapted to a movie. This is not one of his best works; I've read the story in at least two other forms so far, the original illustrated story (in issue form) and the novel proper. It's a fairly typical Neil Gaiman story of magic lands, witches, prophecies, and anthropomorphic stellar entities - which, admittedly, is generally far above most other comics out there, and always lends itself to a visual feel more than a simple novel. But... well, I guess that my gripe is that I knew there were better stories to tell. That said, I did want the movie to do well. This is his first "real" movie; _MirrorMask_ was a Dave McKeon work and more of an art flick (not bad, but not really aimed at the wide audience), and before that were _Neverwhere_ (a TV mini-series that I still haven't seen) and the English adaptation of _Princess Mononoke_ (I still haven't gotten around to watching it outside of the Japanese soundtrack with English subtitles - even when I saw it in the theatre!). He's an excellent writer with a lot of good stories to tell, and if he does well, we might actually see them happen. So, for the sake of _Death_, _Sandman_, and others, I wanted this to be as good as anything... The good news: the movie did translate well. This *felt* like Gaiman's material, which means that it was a dark fairy tale with enough twists that it didn't feel like anything else I've seen in theatres before; the closest thing I've seen on film _Pan's Labyrinth_, and that wasn't really very similar either. It was well-acted, subtly put together, funny, and over-the-top as necessary. The special effects did their job, inasmuch as I didn't pay too much attention to them. And I did have the occasional sense of wonder that Gaiman's works are so good at bringing out. The bad news: it's doing horribly in the box office. This should have been another art film, with a low budget and lesser actors; this will hurt the future movies. So this may be the best we ever get... ***. Go see it, if just for the future. - Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org) -- http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage &lt;FISH>&lt; &lt;*> http://www.killfile.org/usenet/ Usenet @ UIUC </pre> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies&number=77 <pre> Message-ID: &lt;tskirvin.20070804035559$7a51@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu> Newsgroups: cmi.movies From: tskirvin Subject: _The Simpsons Movie_ - ** 1/2 Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2007 22:55:56 -0500 I'm not really sure that there's much to say about this. This was an hour and a half long episode of the Simpsons. By the standards of the day, it was pretty good quality; by the standards of its golden age, it was pretty bad. But I came out entertained but still a bit disappointed that I hadn't gotten something better. Well, except for the one musical number. That was brilliant. ** 1/2 - Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org) -- http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage &lt;FISH>&lt; &lt;*> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/friends/ Skirv's Friends </pre> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies&number=76 <pre> Message-ID: &lt;tskirvin.20070724182052$7a42@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu> Newsgroups: cmi.movies From: tskirvin Subject: _Hairspray_ - *** Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 13:20:49 -0500 I don't really have too much to say about this movie. It was fun, the songs were amusing, the humor was raunchier than I would have guessed going in, and I enjoyed it. *** - Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org) -- http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage &lt;FISH>&lt; &lt;*> http://www.killfile.org/dungeon/ The Killfile Dungeon </pre> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies&number=75 <pre> Message-ID: &lt;tskirvin.20070715141940$33bd@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu> Newsgroups: cmi.movies From: tskirvin Subject: _Sicko_ - *** Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 09:19:38 -0500 To disclose this first: I do like Michael Moore, not because I agree with him (I'm still fairly libertarian) but because I enjoy his stunts and his attitude, even in an age where I acknowledge that the world could do with a little bit less confrontation in politics. And I *love* a good comedy/propaganda piece, even as I acknowledge that it *is* propaganda of the basest kind. (The left-wing stuff is just generally funnier to watch, because they don't take themselves quite as seriously. but it's also hard to advertise.) One of my favorite shows of all time was _TV Nation_, which was brilliant and silly and pretty much consisted of Michael Moore stunts told one after another. Still, going in, my expectations for _Sicko_ were fairly low. Why? Probably because I'm still affected by the media, and because I know that Moore can grow fairly tiresome in large doses and when not on his own heavily-edited turf. And with the lead-up to this movie, he was definitely not on his own turf for a lot of it... Given that, I was pleasantly surprised by the movie. It was not his best movie, but it was fun, and interesting. I think it probably argued the point - our health care system sucks, everyone else's is better - fairly successfully for a lot of people. As always, it was told in a slick and amusing manner that surprised me a few times and gave sticks to those watching with which to affect change. And it ended with the hope that, perhaps, change will be affected. Which is neat. There were flaws, don't get me wrong. I may mostly agree with his conclusion (yes, this clashes with the "libertarian" thing above), but I didn't agree with much of his evidence, or how it was presented. I think that his forays into off-topic events (Iraq war, fighting with critics) were ill-advised, even if I agreed with what he was saying. And there were the occasional times when he just presented odd information, like when he was trying to show that people don't pay *that* many taxes in France (he showed a family with a really nice apartment in Paris, with two well-paying jobs that apparently made ~$8,000 US per month [post-taxes, presumably]; I think that he was trying to show how *everyone* could work there and afford a nice lifestyle, but that's still a lot of money...) Special points went to how he talked up Hilary Clinton for the first half of the movie, and blasted her for the second. I find it amusing to see somebody that's interested in the goal and not the politics; it's a rare thing. *** Side note - they attached a mainstream movie trailer, _The Nanny Diaries_, to the movie! This was odd; I had never seen a mainstream trailer at the Boardman's unless they were planning to later show the movie there, and this is *definitely* not going to happen in this case. Odd. Also, I found out that one of the old managers of the Lorraine had moved out here, and is now in charge of the Boardman's. I talked with her for a while about the new place, and the Lorraine, and how things are going; and while I'm not sure I really came out with anything new, I do respect the Boardman's more, now, after that talk. - Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org) -- http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage &lt;FISH>&lt; &lt;*> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/faq/ SkirvFAQ </pre> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies&number=74 <pre> Message-ID: &lt;tskirvin.20070711075525$7ee6@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu> Newsgroups: cmi.movies From: tskirvin Subject: _Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix_ - ** 1/2 Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 02:55:22 -0500 It was workmanlike; my favorite parts of the book were left out (those involving the students fighting with the teachers successfully reminded me of high school in fun ways); I enjoyed the midnight showing. If you like the Harry Potter movies, then see this one; if you don't, then you probably won't see it anyway; and if you're on the fence, this probably isn't a great place to start. ** 1/2 - Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org) -- http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage &lt;FISH>&lt; &lt;*> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/software/ Skirv's Software </pre> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies&number=73 <pre> Message-ID: &lt;tskirvin.20070707035448$46c4@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu> Newsgroups: rec.toys.transformers.moderated,alt.toys.transformers.moderated,cmi.movies From: tskirvin Subject: {REVIEW} _Transformers_ (Live-Action) - *** 1/2 Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 22:54:45 -0500 On Monday, I saw the live-action _Transformers_ movie. As is my want, I wrote up a quick review of the movie in cmi.movies (a local review group), reading simply "[t]he movie was far from perfect, but I loved it. It didn't attack my childhood. I am content. 3.5/4 stars, mostly for sentimental value." I also noted that I needed to write up a longer review of it, after I had some time to both think and to write. Now, having given myself a few days and watched the movie do absolute gangbusters at the box office, I think I may have calmed myself enough to actually write what I need to write. First of all, I'm going to write enough here to count as SPOILER SPACE for those that don't want to be spoiled (not that I'm sure who hasn't seen the movie that is going to by now; but let's be nice). I don't really put too many spoilers into my reviews anyway, but I do want to be polite. So, to kill another couple of lines, I'll link to my movie review page: http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies And, to waste a bit more space with information that is irrelevant to the plot, I'll start with something that will be entirely spoiler free: an explanation of the environment. Overview ======== I can see four groups of people that need a real review of this movie: the rabid fan, the casual fan, the uninitiated looking for a summer action movie, and the uninitiated looking for high art. For that, I offer this chart, based on what I would rate this movie from the four different perspectives: Rabid Casual Action Art Theatre/Experience *** 1/2 *** *** ** 1/2 Storyline *** ** 1/2 ** 1/2 * 1/2 Characters *** *** ** 1/2 * 1/2 Special Effects **** **** **** *** Overall *** 1/2 *** *** * 1/2 Theatre and Experience ====================== I had been looking forward to this movie with a combination of (shrinking) trepidation and (growing) anticipation for well over a year. But one thing that I knew I wanted from the get-go was to see it with as many friends as possible at a specific theatre: the Lorraine in Hoopeston, Illinois (http://www.lorrainetheaters.com/). It's the best theatre in the state, with truly amazing sound, an excellent screen, and good prices on popcorn/tickets/etc, and they have historically thrown wonderful movie opening parties; the only real drawback is that they're also an hour away from me, so I can't see everything there. It came as a bit of a disappointment when I found out that the theatre wasn't going to get the movie until the 6th. I had to scramble to make new plans, which wouldn't as easily drag my friends in from all over the state and beyond; instead, I had to simply take as many friends as possible to the passable but by no means noteworthy Savoy 16. Still, I did things the right way. I saw the movie with about a dozen of my friends, some of which had grown up with the show and toys, most of which had not (including my wife); that offered a nice mix of interest. I knew much of the rest of the theatre as well, and those that I didn't know felt a certain camaraderie simply by virtue of being fellow TransFans at the opening performance of a movie we'd been waiting too long for. And I stopped by before the movie to pick up the prequel comic, which at least got me in the right mood. All in all, the experience was positive. I know how it could have been better, but that's okay. Rabid Casual Action Art Theatre/Experience *** 1/2 *** *** ** 1/2 Storyline ========= For better or worse, this is a Michael Bay movie. The only movie of his to date that I have truly enjoyed was the original _Bad Boys_, because it managed to be over the top in an *amusing* way. This is what I was hoping for in this movie, and I was definitely not disappointed. For better or worse, the storyline was cheesy and ridden with comedy. Some of this comedy was cringe-inducing (anything involving "lubrication", and the Hidden Autobot bits), which didn't seem to offend the audiences that I watched it with; but some was actually fairly clever (various Bumblebee bits, mostly). More important for the movie was the action. This was fairly well done, from my perspective, but I had a pretty good idea of who was who and what was going on, simply based on 20 years of knowing the characters. The romance is probably going to be the least-popular part of the movie, across the board. Mind, it's not really a romantic movie, but there is quite a bit of focus on Sam (LaBeouf, who actually appears to be a very good actor) trying to woo Mikaela (Fox, who is insanely hot). This more-or-less works, in a light-hearted way, though it isn't excellent for the pacing. The question is, in my mind, whether the action scenes hurt the love story or the love story hurts the action scenes... And as for the cohesiveness... well, this was definitely an action movie. There were plot holes everywhere, and some of them were insanely huge. Still, I was able to mostly ignore it, and I think it'll be endearing for the action movie fans out there. Finally, a few comments about the pacing of the movie. The first third of the movie or so - before Peter Cullen starts talking - is actually fairly well paced and interesting, with something happening at a fair clip and the events following each other both casually and causally. The second third - from when Optimus shows up to when the Decepticons appear en masse - drags horribly, but is spiced up with comedy that will appeal more to the casual audience than the fanatics. And then the last third is a giant action scene, very well done and choreographed if, for many people, very difficult to follow. I think that it's important to consider them separately when trying to offer enough information for others to use... Rabid Casual Action Art Comedy ** 1/2 *** *** 1/2 * 1/2 Action *** 1/2 *** 1/2 *** 1/2 ** 1/2 Romance ** 1/2 *** *** * 1/2 Cohesiveness ** 1/2 ** 1/2 *** * 1/2 Pacing ** 1/2 ** 1/2 *** ** Beginning *** 1/2 *** *** ** Middle * 1/2 ** 1/2 ** 1/2 * 1/2 End ** 1/2 *** *** 1/2 ** Overall Storyline ** 1/2 *** *** * 1/2 Characters ========== Shockingly, the movie was fairly character-driven. The most distinctive characters were, unshockingly, the humans, especially the Witwicky Clan and those associated with them. These characters were at least becoming rounded by the end of the movie; the other characters (the military folk, the NSA kids, the other Agency, etc) were caricatures, but fairly well presented and somewhat-iconic ones. The Transformers themselves were a different story. To me, most of the Autobots seemed bland and uninteresting, which is annoying given my predisposition to enjoy the characters. I loved Optimus Prime - he was just who he should be (well, fine, he was a bit clumsier and impatient) - but Ratchet, Ironide, and Jazz were shadows at best. And Bumblebee was a good character, but not letting him speak made it harder to care (though it might have worked out if none of them could talk at all. Maybe.) The Decepticons were at least more interesting because they had a variety of alt-modes, most of them pretty neat. Frenzy was the official "annoying" character, but I liked his spastic behaviour and the revelations he offered as to how the Transformers work on Earth. Megatron was lame, but... aah, whatever, he was just lame, maybe he would have been better with Frank Welker's voice. I wonder if it would have been better to keep them from speaking. So, in summary: Rabid Casual Action Art Humans (Witwicky Plot) *** *** *** ** 1/2 Humans (Other Plots) ** 1/2 ** 1/2 *** * 1/2 Humans (Acting) *** *** *** ** 1/2 Autobots ** ** 1/2 *** * 1/2 Optimus Prime **** **** *** N/A Bumblebee *** *** *** N/A Decepticons *** 1/2 *** *** * 1/2 Frenzy ** 1/2 ** ** 1/2 N/A Megatron ** ** 1/2 *** N/A Starscream *** *** ** 1/2 N/A Overall *** *** ** 1/2 * 1/2 Other ===== The soundtrack of the movie was not what I was hoping for. Of course, what I was looking for was, essentially, the same as the original animated _Transformers: the Movie_, and 80s power ballads aren't as popular anymore. Oh well. The sound mixing was just fine, if not incredibly remarkable. I don't think anybody will have too many problems with it. I *loved* the cameos, and the in-jokes, and all of the references that were there for the fans. And I love that they probably just went by those that didn't know any better without too much concern. Perfect. Some people will be offended by the massive product placement throughout the movie. Personally, I found it somewhat endearing, except for the random Mountain Dew and XBox 360 robots, which were just silly. Finally, while I don't want to dwell on it, I do think that the overall Transformers mythology was handed well. No, it wasn't all that loyal to the TV series, but it carried many of the same tropes, and it bore about as much resemblance as the comic series in recent years. If you really do think of it as "myth" and not "story set in stone", I think you'll be okay. Certainly, they did a better job of it than the recent cartoons... Rabid Casual Action Art Soundtrack ** ** 1/2 *** ** Sound Mixing *** *** *** *** Cameos **** *** N/A N/A Product Placement *** N/A N/A * Mythology *** 1/2 *** N/A N/A Final Thoughts ============== For many of you, the question of whether or not to see this movie can be adequately addressed by answering with the (vulgar) question that I have seen again and again in regards to this movie: "does it rape our childhoods?" I can honestly say that it does not. If you are interested in Transformers for their own sakes, then go see this movie; even if you do come out disappointed, it won't be anything compared to the Armada series. If you're in it to watch an action movie, this won't disappoint. This is probably the best big-action alien invasion blockbuster in recent years. If you're here to watch high art, well, just don't bother. Finally, if you're like me - a rabid TransFan - you've probably already seen the movie, and come out without having truly added a highlight to your life, but happy that they didn't really screw it up. For now, we can just delight in seeing our hobby flourish again, if just for a little while. Be happy this came along. And go see it again... 'Till All Are Won. *** 1/2 - Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org) -- http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage &lt;FISH>&lt; &lt;*> http://tskirvin.livejournal.com/ Skirv's LiveJournal </pre> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies&number=72 <pre> Message-ID: &lt;tskirvin.20070703043830$5e85@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu> Newsgroups: cmi.movies From: tskirvin Subject: _Transformers_ - *** 1/2 Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 23:38:28 -0500 I should write a longer review, but at this point I'm tired and need sleep, so for now I'll keep it short: The movie was far from perfect, but I loved it. It didn't attack my childhood. I am content. *** 1/2, mostly for sentimental value. - Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org) -- http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage &lt;FISH>&lt; &lt;*> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/resume.html Skirv's Resume </pre> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies&number=71 <pre> Message-ID: &lt;tskirvin.20070702165331$3ae9@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu> Newsgroups: cmi.movies From: tskirvin Subject: _Live Free Or Die Hard_ - ** 1/4 Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 11:53:28 -0500 I can't say that I didn't enjoy Die Hard 4; it was silly, over-the-top, and pointless, but that's pretty much what I was expecting. The R rating would have been nice, but I guess I really didn't miss it as much as I expected. And every time anything computer-based was on the screen, I and my friends laughed uproariously. (Best moment: the 'algorithm' status bar.) Otherwise, it was a fun ride and worth the money. So why did I rate it below average? Simple: my brain couldn't take the ludicrous plot. At least in _Die Hard_, which I re-watched last week, the actions of the terrorists were well-motivated and fit their overall goal; this time, the terrorists' actions seemed to be chosen *solely* to out-do the last movie. Whoo-hoo, we can destroy the United States! Wasn't that fun! I can't honestly recommend this to anyone that wouldn't already see it. But I won't dissuade you if you would, either. I expect that I'm going to enjoy _Transformers_ tonight more than this movie. ** 1/4 - Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org) -- http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage &lt;FISH>&lt; &lt;*> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/buttons/ Skirv's Buttons </pre> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies&number=70 <pre> Message-ID: &lt;tskirvin.20070702164702$0eb2@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu> Newsgroups: cmi.movies From: tskirvin Subject: _Ratatouille_ - *** 1/2 Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 11:47:00 -0500 I've enjoyed every Pixar movie to date - even _Cars_ was worth watching, if not high art - and this movie was written by Brad Bird, the same one that wrote _The Incredibles_ (my favorite Pixar movie) and _The Iron Giant_. So I wasn't particularly shocked that I would really enjoy this movie, even after a lackluster trailer or two. The movie is simply *good* - good ideas, good animation, good voice acting, good story. Nothing rings false. The plot is somewhat predictable, but not entirely. And there's a moral, but it's not beaten into your head and it's not delivered as ham-handedly as a lot of animated movies lately. Go see this movie. It's worth it. *** 1/2 - Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org) -- http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage &lt;FISH>&lt; &lt;*> http://www.killfile.org/dungeon/ The Killfile Dungeon </pre> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies&number=69 <pre> Message-ID: &lt;tskirvin.20070613160258$1959@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu> Newsgroups: cmi.movies From: tskirvin Subject: Re: _Pirates of the Caribbean 3: At World's End_ - *** 1/4 Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 11:02:56 -0500 References: &lt;tskirvin.20070608191126$35bb@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu> &lt;slrnf6v441.93q.jaskiern@trumpy.channelsix.org> Jerry Jaskierny &lt;jaskiern@channelsix.org> writes: [...] >> 3. It was a midnight show at an excellent theatre (the Cinerama). > Except the chairs suck almost completely -- I don't enjoy the > laying down to watch a movie and having the seat in front of me > crush my kneecaps. This didn't stick out as a problem in my mind, but I was in the balcony, and that may have changed things somewhat. I had high hopes for the crowd when they stated cheering at the right segments of the _Transformers_ trailer (man, I'm psyched about that movie!). I lost that respect when they cheered just as loud for _Ocean's 13_. Oh well. - Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org) -- http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage &lt;FISH>&lt; &lt;*> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/projects/ Skirv's Projects </pre> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies&number=68 <pre> Message-ID: &lt;tskirvin.20070612190656$12b9@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu> Newsgroups: cmi.movies From: tskirvin Subject: _Knocked Up_ - ** 3/4 Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 14:06:54 -0500 I'm not sure what to say about _Knocked Up_. It's competently done, well-acted, with a style of comedy that I enjoyed and even a topic that was interesting, but... well, it didn't thrill me anyway. I'm happy that I saw it, but I'm not particularly excited to see it again. I laughed quite a bit, but not much stuck with me that wasn't in the trailer. I was at least very amused at the sheer number of regulars of the American version of The Office in the movie. Whee! Oh well. A short review is better than nothing. ** 3/4 - Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org) -- http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage &lt;FISH>&lt; &lt;*> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/resume.html Skirv's Resume </pre> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies&number=67 <pre> Message-ID: &lt;tskirvin.20070608191126$35bb@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu> Newsgroups: cmi.movies From: tskirvin Subject: _Pirates of the Caribbean 3: At World's End_ - *** 1/4 Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2007 14:11:20 -0500 After the incredibly disappointing/anger-inducing experience that was _Pirates 2_, I didn't really want to see this movie. It took the following reasons to get me to see this one: 1. The tickets were purchased for me and my brand-new wife. 2. They were purchased by one of my groomsfolk and an usher (Mel and Ray) who Beth and I wanted to see at least briefly while in Seattle on our honeymoon. 3. It was a midnight show at an excellent theatre (the Cinerama). So I was more than a little shocked to enjoy the movie! It was by no means high art, or even close to the first movie in novelty and value, but this was well-put-together and competently done. The plot was silly but fun, and it *ended*, which was worth a lot on its own. The characters acted in reasonable ways this time, instead of forgetting what had happened before. And I never really felt like they were just wasting time so they could add another special effects sequence or two. It was worth seeing. I'll probably see it again. ** 3/4 for the movie, *** 1/4 when you count the theatre and experience. - Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org) -- http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage &lt;FISH>&lt; &lt;*> http://news.killfile.org/ News&lt;->Web Gateway </pre> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies&number=66 <pre> Message-ID: &lt;tskirvin.20070502211752$02a3@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu> Newsgroups: cmi.movies From: tskirvin Subject: Re: _Gattaca_ - **** Date: Wed, 02 May 2007 16:17:50 -0500 References: &lt;tskirvin.20070427194607$46d8@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu> &lt;f198ng$241$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu> "Daniel E. Weber" &lt;weber@uiuc.edu> writes: > I'm surprised you didn't go see "Beyond the Valley of the Dolls". It seemed > like a movie you would enjoy. I think I was spreading mulch, or something like that. Physical labor, anyway. - Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org) -- http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage &lt;FISH>&lt; &lt;*> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/posts.html Skirv's Posts </pre> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies&number=65 <pre> Message-ID: &lt;tskirvin.20070430204352$16e2@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu> Newsgroups: cmi.movies From: tskirvin Subject: Re: Hot Fuzz Buzz Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2007 15:43:49 -0500 References: &lt;f0u0m1$ep2$2@wildfire.prairienet.org> Karen Fletcher &lt;kefletcher@gmail.com> writes: > From what I've heard, this should be a blast. You have to admire the > dedication it took for two Brits to watch 100+ American cop action flicks > in working on this movie. They're showing it in town now, finally. I still need to get out and see it... I missed seeing _Shaun of the Dead_ in the theatres, and I'm still kicking myself about that now. If you haven't seen that movie, go rent it. - Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org) -- http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage &lt;FISH>&lt; &lt;*> http://tskirvin.livejournal.com/ Skirv's LiveJournal </pre> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies&number=64 <pre> Message-ID: &lt;tskirvin.20070430204321$5d04@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu> Newsgroups: cmi.movies From: tskirvin Subject: Re: _Aqua Teen Hunger Force Colon Movie Film for Theaters_ - ** 1/2 Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2007 15:43:18 -0500 References: &lt;tskirvin.20070423212912$6993@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu> &lt;f0u09g$ep2$1@wildfire.prairienet.org> Karen Fletcher &lt;kefletcher@gmail.com> writes: > Frankly, no idea about the show in satellite-free TV household but the > title caught my eye. You can rent DVDs if you'd like. It's an odd show. It matches my odd sense of humor, at least... - Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org) -- http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage &lt;FISH>&lt; &lt;*> http://news.ks.uiuc.edu/ UIUC News Server </pre> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies&number=63 <pre> Message-ID: &lt;tskirvin.20070427194607$46d8@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu> Newsgroups: cmi.movies From: tskirvin Subject: _Gattaca_ - **** Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 14:46:05 -0500 Since I'm being a completist here, I might as well review _Gattaca_ as well. This was shown at the opening night of EbertFest, on a dark and dingy day; but I was determined to go, and by the end of the evening I even had a free pass to the movie. Hooray! _Gattaca_ is a science fiction story, of the "what would happen with this one small change" variety (as opposed to the "it's in space!" variety). The specific change - the availability of quick, easy DNA testing for identification, disorders and diseases - has grown less sinister-seeming since its release in 1997, but only because it has become that much closer to reality, so we've begun to adapt... Really, I don't want to talk that much about the movie. It's a good one, and you should see it; but apparently, it's being discussed in 2nd grade biology classes, so that's not much of a problem. I'd rather just reflect on my experiences with the movie. This is the third time I've seen it. The first time was at the Co-Ed in downtown Champaign, when I got brought along on what was, to my later surprise, a double-date; it's amusing to look back at that time and see me so clueless! The second time was on DVD, in my dorm room, and was the opportunity of my first kiss with my then-girlfriend. Given that this movie has so much unintended emotional resonance with me, I was surprised to enjoy watching it again on Wednesday. Seeing it with my fiancee would have been ideal, but she was at work; and so instead, I saw it with friends, a pile of townies, and a bunch of movie- goers that were emotionally attached to Roger Ebert. And while that may not have the same resonance, it was still emotion, and I got swept up in it. I don't think I've ever appreciated Ebert, and his festival, as much as I did that night. Anyway. I could write more, but it gets into stuff I'd rather just leave in journals. For now, this will be an odd enough review. **** for the whole experience. - Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org) -- http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage &lt;FISH>&lt; &lt;*> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/buttons/ Skirv's Buttons </pre> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies&number=62 <pre> Message-ID: &lt;tskirvin.20070427193647$1c35@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu> Newsgroups: cmi.movies From: tskirvin Subject: _Perfume_ - *** 1/2 Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 14:36:44 -0500 To preface this, _Perfume_ is not showing in local theatres anymore; I saw it at at the 9th Annual Ebert "Overlooked" Film Festival. This is the first time I've been to the festival at all, for no good reason, and though I'm not sure I'll be able to see more than just the two movies in the last two days (I also saw _Gattaca_), I'm really kicking myself for not going earlier. Film festivals are fun! Anyway. _Perfume: The Story of a Murderer_ is a period piece, amongst other genres. It's about a man with a supernatural sense of smell and essentially no other skills, especially social ones, who decides to become a perfumer. Well, that's part of what it's about; it's more about just plain smells, and a cold-blooded killer, and odd coincidences, and bright red hair (which I suspect is because the director was Tom Twyker, of _Lola Rennt_ fame - man, I love that movie!). It's stylishly violent, but not too bloody. The characters rarely speak, but the background music makes up for it. And, well, I didn't really see the ending coming in the way that it did... It's definitely an interesting movie. It's also a movie that calls out for spoilers, but I'm somehow not in the mood to list 'em... I should also note that I stuck around to listen to Alan Rickman talk afterwards, and came out realizing that I don't really like listening to people ask questions of actors. He may have been an interesting section of a DVD commentary track, but he didn't have much to say about the movie afterwards, and the questions... well, I was more than a bit annoyed at the Godwin question, that's for sure. *** for the movie. *** 1/2 for the viewing environment. - Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org) -- http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage &lt;FISH>&lt; &lt;*> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/cows/ Skirv's Cows </pre> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/archives/posts/?group=cmi.movies&number=61 <pre> Message-ID: &lt;tskirvin.20070423212912$6993@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu> Newsgroups: cmi.movies From: tskirvin Subject: _Aqua Teen Hunger Force Colon Movie Film for Theaters_ - ** 1/2 Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 16:29:10 -0500 I'm fairly certain there's nothing I can say that will convince people to see this movie that don't like the show. Well, actually, that's not true, there's one thing: Bruce Campbell is in it. It was a long episode of ATHF, except that it did a fairly good job of filling the whole 86 minutes. The opening bit was the best. The origin stories were odd. None of it made much sense, but that was the point. ** 1/2 - Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org) -- http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage &lt;FISH>&lt; &lt;*> http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/friends/ Skirv's Friends </pre>