Tuesday, February 28, 2006

50 movies I really like in the order I thought of them.








  1. Unforgiven
  2. The Shawshank Redemption
  3. Blade Runner (Director's Cut)
  4. The House of Sand and Fog
  5. A Bronx Tale
  6. Stuck on you
  7. Goodfellas
  8. Sideways
  9. Ong-Bak, the Thai Warrior
  10. Old School
  11. The Usual Suspects
  12. Sling Blade
  13. Saving Private Ryan
  14. Apocalypse Now
  15. The Sixth Sense
  16. In the Name of the Father
  17. Tombstone
  18. Full Metal Jacket
  19. Office Space
  20. The Road Warrior
  21. UHF
  22. Fargo
  23. Jacob's Ladder
  24. The Sweet Smell of Success
  25. True Romance
  26. The Professional
  27. Taxi Driver
  28. The Truman Show
  29. The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
  30. The Godfather
  31. The Godfather part II
  32. Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
  33. Cool Hand Luke
  34. Ran
  35. Hana-bi (Fireworks)
  36. Akira
  37. Pulp Fiction
  38. Pet Semetary
  39. Zatoichi, the Blind Swordsman
  40. The Terminator
  41. Galaxy Quest
  42. The Matrix
  43. From Russia with Love
  44. Reservoir Dogs
  45. Pale Rider
  46. 12 Angry Men
  47. Desperado
  48. Above the Law
  49. Brother
  50. Audition

Review: The Core



The glamorous Aaron Eckhart and the super hunky Hillary Swank ride inside a giant penis headed towards the center of the Earth, hilarity ensues.

Hard to know where to start with this one. Frankly, it's bad. What can I really say about a movie so bad that it made me wish I was watching Armageddon?

Okay, maybe that's not true. I'd sooner sit through a 10 hour PBS maraton of the Lawrence Welk show than watch either of these movies ever again. The Core invokes the tired themes of every disaster movie ever made, and more specifically rips off Armageddon so badly I bet Michael Bay is kicking himself for not taking the opportunity to direct it. Actually, judging by the production value and the quality of the CGI scenes (some little better than Sci-Fi channel movies of the week), I imagine they couldn't afford Bay.

Apart from a ludicrous plot involving some business about the Earth's magnetic field breaking down, (the effects of which are helpfully demonstrated by Eckhart taking a homemade blow torch to a peach and saying "This is the earth without that shield!!!"), we are treated to such brilliant exchanges as this:

"We must be in the wrong place."

"If you were in the wrong place, you would already have been shot."

That's quality. Additionally, Eckhart's usage of the word "nukuler" (pronounced ala G.W. Bush) has put him on my long term shit list. Swank's entry into the film involves her crash landing a space shuttle in the middle of a city, somehow managing to avoid any casualties, while damaging the shuttle only minimally.

I'm not really geeky enough to get into all the bad science, which abounds, and I could go on and on about this and that but I won't. If you need more convincing that this movie sucks it hard, go outside and sit down in the middle of the street to think it over.

Rating: 3 out of 10

Monday, February 27, 2006

My first review: The House of Sand and Fog



I wanted to make this my first review because I still feel that this movie did not get the recognition it deserved. Overshadowed by many critics and the Oscars (which do a great deal to decide what people are actually going to go see) by the mediocre offering of Clint Eastwood's "Mystic River", I feel that this is one of the best major Hollywood releases in a long time.

Adapted from a surely wonderful book, this film shook me to the core. The story is unconventional, and quite mundane on the surface, but this is not a movie about grand heros, epic romances or clashes between good and evil. It is a movie about life, self-interest, and true crisis. The things that make and break people are not earthshattering nor are they newsworthy. They happen quietly and over time. These are the things we are made to see through the awesome storytelling of Perelman's screenplay adaptation.

There are no villains in this film. No protagonists, either. Just two sides, locked in a bitter and strikingly real dispute over the rights to a house which seems to have no easy resolution.

First we have Kathy Niccolo (Connelly), a recovering alcoholic who doesn't clean her kitchen or get up in the morning. Her sole possession of value is in fact the house she lives in, which was left to her by her father who passed away. Her husband left her months ago but she has yet to tell her family. She doesn't open her mail for months, and wakes up one morning with a cop at her door ready to evict her for non-payment of taxes which were mistakenly leveed against her by the county.

She befriends the sympathetic trooper (Eldard) who offers to help her move and with whom she strikes up an affair later on as her situation deteriorates so badly she is forced to live in her car.

On the other half, we have the Behrani family, mother and son led by their patriarch, the indomitable Sir Ben Kingsley. Col. Massoud Emir Behrani has held high station in life. When the Shah of Iran was in power, he was an important man. A man of great means. This fact he has not forgotten, despite having been driven from his homeland by opposition forces when the Shah's rule ended. Now treated in this country like a lowly immigrant laborer by his employers and people around him who formerly (to quote the film) "would not have been allowed to raise their eyes" to him, he holds onto his dignity with a desperate grip.

Now he works two jobs. The first with a road crew, shoveling gravel during the day and working as a cashier at a gas station at night, all the time, scrounging every penny he can in the hopes that he once again will have for his family the beautiful life they experienced in Iran.

When he leaves a day of work with the road crew, he changes into a crisp suit before he returns home and tells his teenage son that he works for Boeing. They live in a fancy and expensive hotel room, wasting away what is left of their old fortune so that Ismael (Col.'s son) may not know the truth of how much they have fallen.

When Kathy Niccolo's house goes up for auction it is eagerly bought by Behrani, who hopes to sell the house at 4x profit and move his wife and son to a larger home more fitting of their former station in life.

Though noone is truly villainized, at times the viewer may feel more sympathetic to one side or the other. Yet under it all lies the inescapable reality that neither side is wrong. The wants and the needs they feel are natural, driving forces behind all human action. The need for shelter, the need for tradition, the need to protect inadequecies and the need to be loved.

Both sides are really one and the same, a fact which they both come to realize in one of the most well acted scenes ever, when Kathy attempts to kill herself sitting in her car outside Behrani's/her home. Connelly's acting, here in particular, is just magnificent, in this scene actually managing to shine as bright as Kingsley. The combination of their performances together brought me to tears, even during many repeated viewings. This scene (for me) actually outshines the powerful climax (which I will not spoil), and is possibly the most important part of the movie. It is here that the overwhelming humanity of both characters comes to full bloom, and they become one and the same. No longer adversaries bickering over a plot of land or some unseen prize (which up until that point had been exclusively how one viewed the other). For a brief time, it is their house. Their home, their crisis.

The minimal supporting cast is very strong, even Eldard who usually bothers me is at his best here. Shohreh Aghdashloo, who plays Ms. Behrani, has to be seen to appreciate the subtle, brilliant performance she effortlessly provides.

The only flaw, and this may be nitpicking but so be it, is during Kingsley's most empassioned moment right near then end. He is stricken with grief so mightily that he has fallen on his knees to pray desperately to Allah. Though it is most moving and effective, this scene asks us to beleive that an Iranian man who is in his most desperate hour of need, would cry out to his God in English, rather than in his native tongue. Kingsley's acting skill is quite possibly unrivaled, and I surely can beleive that he could have learned enough Arabic to carry this scene the way it should have been played. I then fault Perelman, for at best not having this flaw occur to him, or at worst deciding to be more friendly to his audience by not forcing them to endure subtitles.

None of the slight flaws dull the radiance of this film. House of Sand and Fog stabs deep into the heart of human issues and will not leave the viewer unaffected.

Rating: 9 out of 10

I hate Michael Bay.


Not only do I hate him, I hate his parents for committing the sleazy, barnyard incest that most surely must have occurred for this man to have spawned. I especially hate whoever it is that let Michael Bay suck his cock and eat his hot lunch in exchange for giving Bay his "big break".

Here's 6 reasons why:

1. He makes crappy movies

This of course is a given but is the root of my hatred.

2. The Hero Shot

Ever notice how there are at least a dozen shots in any given movie of his that are centered from around knee level to frame the hero, or heroes (as is often the case) from a nauseating, nosehair revealing angle? If there is anyone walking, then it's usually in slow-mo also.

Obviously, this cheesy manuever is meant to give the actors a larger than life appearance (they ARE moviestars, after all.) . It is however, also meant to cow the dumbshit viewer (hey, I'VE never paid $10.50 to watch one of these shitfests in the theatre, nor have I ever rented one, so screw you if you did.) with the HUGENESS of the movie and to heighten the importance of characters that anyone with half a brain should not give a flying fuck about. Bay is saying "Hey! Listen up, dumbfuck, this scene is important and the stakes are VERY high!!!"

3. Constant Panning

Like a 7 year old with ADHD who has stolen his parents digital camcorder, Bay is seemingly unable to keep a steady shot. This highly stylized technique is the result of him being artistically unable to use a steady frame to create passable cinematography. Watch one of his movies. Anytime the camera is fixed (and not pointing up from the ground), the cinematography is decidedly lack-luster.

By keeping things moving so fast, he dumbfounds the lowest common denominator viewership, which is of course his primary target and sole cash cow, with vertigo inducing pepsi commercial camera work.

4. He always uses the same shitty actors

I used to like Steve Buscemi. That was back when the only movie of his I'd seen was Fargo (THAT was a great fucking movie with cinematography of the highest order). Even after I saw "Imma-crap-on" (you know, the one where God answers my prayers and sends a giant asteroid to kill Michael Bay), I still liked Steve Buscemi, though perhaps I respected him less. Since my wife forced me to watch the "Island" (I can't think of a funny name for that one) I have one question:

Can we get somebody else to play "Quirky, perverted weirdo" in your next shitfest???

Then there's Michael Clarke Duncan. Black actors complain that there's no work for them, and that's because Bay will only hire Duncan to play "Huge, but sensitive and non-threatening, Black dude".

Ben Affleck...don't get me fucking started. I haven't seen "Pearl Necklace Harbor". I refuse to sink that low.

5. His movies look so goddamn polished

As if every scene is airbrushed within an inch of it's life, the polarized and color-enhanced shots give all his movies a sense of otherworldlyness that is once again designed to awe the retarded, but in reality succeeds only in taking the discerning viewer further out of touch with whatever the hell it is that's supposed to be going on.

6. This shit makes money

LOTS and LOTS of money. People actually go and see these movies in numbers great enough to make Bay a kajillionaire when true genius like Vadim Perelman (see my upcoming "House of Sand and Fog" review) goes largely unnoticed by the American veiwing audience.

What am I looking at?

Good question!

This is my attempt to convince the world of my correctness about all things film, thinly veiled as an attempt to be an amateur movie reviewer.