|
|
Post by ZapRowsdower on Oct 17, 2004 2:35:49 GMT -5
Shall We Dance? (October 15th, 2004) No, I did NOT see the original Japanese version, Shall We Dansu. Perhaps that is why I don't care whether or not this is a Hollywood bastardization. First of all, if you're on the Lopez-hating bandwagon, that's yesterday's news. That was back when everyone was talking about how HORRIBLE Gigli was, and how it was the WORST movie ever made.  Now for those of us who put such "travesties" behind us, I think we can all agree Jennifer Lopez is a talented actress. I've been a fan of hers ever since Selena. Back to the movie. All around, the performances were EXCELLENT. Richard Gere, Susan Sarandon, Jennifer Lopez, and Stanley Tucci all give wonderful performances... And Stanley Tucci's comic relief is probably the best comic relief I've seen in a long, long time. Nick Cannon sucked, but his part only lasts about 5 minutes anyway. The story moves a little slow in the beginning. For those of you who are like me and DON'T find dancing to be all that exciting, the first half hour will probably seem to drag. But halfway through the movie, it begins to pick up. You begin to relate with the characters, feel for them, and most importantly of all, have a good time. I guess that's why this can be classified as a "feel-good" movie. You will feel good watching it. "Waah, the Japanese version will always be better. Waah!" Fucking duh! Next try comparing Star Wars to the Hidden Fortress. Or the Magnificent Seven to the Seven Samurai. A Fistful of Dollars to Yojimbo. Come on, such comparisons are not fair. If a movie is good on it's own, then it doesn't disgrace the source material, and if it doesn't disgrace the source material, what's the fucking harm? |
|
|
|
Post by ZapRowsdower on Oct 22, 2004 13:16:18 GMT -5
Surviving Christmas (October 22nd, 2004) Critics will tell you not to see this movie, but remember, critics want you to go out there and watch shit like Open Water. Ben Affleck, just start paying the critics. Maybe then you'll get them off your back. Honestly, I found this movie to be very, very funny. Ben Affleck, as I have said before, is very good in comedic roles. His character is very, very energetic but at the same time does not overdo it. James Gandolfini is freakin' brilliant, too. I was laughing about every 2-3 minutes. I must warn you though, if you're on the "I Hate Ben Affleck" bandwagon, you won't like it. Mostly because you won't WANT to like it. Which would explain the critics. 7/10 |
|
|
|
Post by ZapRowsdower on Oct 22, 2004 21:01:09 GMT -5
I Heart Huckabees (October 1st, 2004)
The second strangest movie of the year, right after Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. An all-star cast, all of whom are great. I never thought I'd find myself saying this, but Mark Wahlberg freakin' ROCKED. Naomi Watts, Jude Law, Dustin Hoffman, Lily Tomlin... a strong cast made this a very strong movie. Very funny, very intelligent. If this is playing anywhere near you, check it out. Most definitely one of the best movies this year.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bartwald on Oct 24, 2004 14:07:46 GMT -5
Very funny, very intelligent. If this is playing anywhere near you, check it out. Most definitely one of the best movies this year. Cool! I've been waiting for this movie for a long, long time! That is - since David O. Russel's last movie, the mighty Three Kings. And I want to see Surviving Christmas, too. Heard lots of good things about the book it's based on (not a typical one in John Grisham's career). |
|
|
|
Post by ZapRowsdower on Oct 24, 2004 22:40:15 GMT -5
Actually, Bart, you're thinking of Christmas With the Kranks, which is based on Grisham's Skipping Christmas. Tim Allen and Jamie Lee Curtis are in that one.
Surviving Christmas was on original screenplay, I believe. That's the one with Ben Affleck and James Gandolfini. Still a fine film.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bartwald on Oct 25, 2004 12:42:21 GMT -5
Actually, Bart, you're thinking of Christmas With the Kranks, which is based on Grisham's Skipping Christmas. Tim Allen and Jamie Lee Curtis are in that one. Yeah, thanks... I thought I might be mixing titles there. Still want to see it, though - based on Grisham or not.  |
|
|
|
Post by ZapRowsdower on Oct 29, 2004 16:34:46 GMT -5
Saw (October 29th, 2004)
This is the first time in a long time that bad acting just didn't seem to matter because the movie itself was that damn good.
Cary Elwes and Danny Glover disappointed me big time. I have seen the both of them do way better.
But again, who cares when the movie's good? The story was original, and just a little bit disturbing. This was everything House of 1000 Corpses should have been, without a doubt, this was the most fucked up movie I had ever seen.
It's not without its flaws, but I'm not complaining. This was a damn good movie. A good, old-fashioned snuff flick that has "cult following" written all over it.
The Smitty most certainly approves.
|
|
|
|
Post by ZapRowsdower on Oct 30, 2004 0:20:55 GMT -5
Ray (October 29th, 2004)
Not much I can say about this film. It's almost 3 hours long, very well-made, direction was-
Well, might as well cut the bullshit. This movie was all about Jamie Foxx's performance... and yes, it was excellent. Yes, this man is going to WIN the Oscar this year. We know it. We knew it before the movie even came out. It will be no surprise come March/April 2005, when Jamie Foxx is called onstage to accept his Oscar... And he didn't even need to mess up his face to do it.
If you can appreciate a damn good performance, check out Ray. May not be one of the best movies of the year, but thus far, it's got the best damn performance of the year...
...next to Jim Caviezel in the Passion. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Phoenix on Nov 1, 2004 12:04:07 GMT -5
Saw (October 29th, 2004) This is the first time in a long time that bad acting just didn't seem to matter because the movie itself was that damn good.. Gotta disagree with you Smitty! I thought it was pure made-for-cable cheese. Totally disappointing. People were laughing at the end because the drama was so poorly done and the acting (like you said) was soooo painful. Plus I thought the director was attempting to be like M.Night with all his bad flashbacks and dark shots. And where was the gore? I wanted to see that guy saw his foot off damn it! That is the title of the movie! Loved the first 20 minutes, hated the rest. Just providing a different opinion.  |
|
|
|
Post by Heineken Skywalker on Nov 1, 2004 13:51:38 GMT -5
I know how much Smitty loves critics, but I watched "Ebert & Roeper" last night and guess what? SAW got "Two big thumbs down". They really hated this movie, but it has gotten some good reviews too. I'll catch it on cable.
And most critics seem to agree with you Smitty regarding RAY. Fantastic performance by Foxx in an "okay" movie.
|
|
|
|
Post by ZapRowsdower on Nov 1, 2004 13:59:08 GMT -5
Yeah, Saw isn't for everybody (which is why it will never go anywhere above cult following), but there's pretty much a general consensus that Saw is just bad acting in a good movie. My friends and I agreed on that. And let's face it, it's WAY better than the Grudge.
As for Ray, I felt the movie was much better than okay, it just doesn't fall under one of the best of the year. I'm not booting I Heart Huckabees off my 2004 top 10 for Ray... but I wouldn't mind seeing it again.
|
|
|
|
Post by ZapRowsdower on Nov 6, 2004 2:29:41 GMT -5
Saints and Soldiers (September 11th, 2003 - Released in my area October 29th 2004)
An independent war movie. A very well-done independent war movie. A war movie that doesn't require intense violence and swearing, but still holds its ground. If you are fortunate enough to live near a theater that's playing this film, check it out. You won't regret it.
The Incredibles (November 5th, 2004)
The best of the Disney/Pixar bunch. See the Incredibles thread in Animation Station for a more complete review.
|
|
|
|
Post by frankenjohn on Nov 6, 2004 17:49:25 GMT -5
I loved The Incredibles. I've never seen so many deaths in a Disney movie since Pirates. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by ZapRowsdower on Nov 11, 2004 12:44:52 GMT -5
The Polar Express (November 10th, 2004)
Before you read on, understand this movie was intended for kids. Understand that this is a story about why kids should believe in Santa Claus. Is the story anything deep and profound? No. But it was fun to watch.
The animation had to be the best I've seen it since Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within. If you like impressive animation, you should check this one out.
Tom Hanks provides us with many great performances in this film. Once again reminding me why he's one of my favorite actors of all time.
Director Robert Zemeckis did it again... Except this time, he did it for kids.
If you got a kid, or a little brother or sister, or a nephew or niece, you should probably take them to see this movie.
And for all the adults in the audience, there's a little cameo surprise at the end.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bartwald on Nov 11, 2004 12:59:41 GMT -5
Oh yeah! With The Polar Express I'll wait till I have kids!
|
|
