Day 158 - 6/7/09 - Movie #158
BEFORE: I was just up in Newport, RI for the annual Chowder Cook-Off. After watching so many movies about the end of humanity, it was nice to get outside, get a bit of sun and sample 23 or 24 different versions of chowder in three categories (Clam, Seafood, and Creative). However, there were THREE different tomato-based chowders in the "Clam" category this year, which I believe is a sign of the coming apocalypse. It just goes to show how an event can go downhill when my friends and I, the official arbiters of good taste, take a year off from attending the event. If I were in charge, any chowder not cream-based would automatically be relegated to the Creative section (aka "Variety Chowders"). One must have standards, after all.
On the train back to NY, I rode in Amtrak's "Quiet Car", where cell phone use is a no-no (except for quiet texting) and even loud talking is frowned upon. The man sitting next to me declared himself the official "library monitor" for the car, and stood up and YELLED whenever someone was talking too loud. I didn't dare point out that he himself was breaking the silence - I even wondered if my Bugles chips were too crunchy for this guy. Where was he when I needed him at the Dennis DeYoung concert?
Almost finished with the armageddon/apocalypse theme - only one type remaining: the biblical Good Ol' Religious Prophesies (or GORP, for short).
THE PLOT: A former Christian missionary, who specializes in debunking religious phenomena, investigates a small town which seems to be suffering from the 10 biblical plagues.
AFTER: Again, I'm not an expert on today's horror movies - I'm more of an "Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein" kind of guy. So I'm a little put off by a supposedly scientific investigator who gets started by a whistling teakettle (really?). I know these sudden noises are meant to startle the audience, but come on.... Also, her "investigation" proceeds at a snail's pace, while a little girl is being blamed for bringing on the plagues. She also has these odd visions and nightmares about her dead husband and daughter - maybe she should take some time off and get her head together, instead of investigating a situation almost exactly like the one in which her daughter died (what are the odds of that...?)
Actually, the movie mentions the possible scientific causes of the "Exodus" plagues, and gets it ALMOST right. There was a fascinating TV special in 2006 on the History Channel called "The Exodus Decoded", which theorized that the plagues of Egypt were caused by the eruption of a volcano near Santorini, Greece, and a related underground earthquake that could have released toxic gas into the Nile River to turn it blood-red, and this would have killed the fish. Since the fish eat frog eggs, this would have led to the overabundance of frogs, which would have died and led to the flies, etc. etc. Meanwhile the volcanic ash caused the plague of darkness, and toxic fumes from the river would have crept low into town at night, killing the first-born children who slept on the first floor of Egyptian houses. ("The Reaping" screenwriters prefer to blame the plagues of Egypt on a bacteria, rather than a volcano. Maybe they didn't see that show...)
I prefer to think that the Exodus story is real, but that Moses didn't "call his shot" - he merely went to the Pharaoh and said that God would cause some bad mojo to come down on Egypt if he didn't let his people go - we don't know how much time passed between Moses' threat and the first plague. So when disaster (eventually) struck, Moses was all over that like white on rice. There's a big difference between Babe Ruth saying "I'm gonna hit a home run for you tomorrow, kid!" and him pointing to the center-field bleachers during the fifth-inning. The first prediction is quite feasible, given Ruth's home-run totals, the second becomes the stuff of baseball legend.
Most prophets succeed due to a combination of luck and sheer volume. If I send out 100 letters to people claiming that I can predict the outcome of baseball games, all I have to do is make sure that 50 letters say "The Red Sox will win their first game" and 50 say "The Red Sox will lose their first game." I'll be right on half of the letters - then to those 50 people, I send 25 of them a letter that says "The Red Sox will win their second game", and the other 25 get the opposite letter. And so on, until after 5 games I've got three suckers who got the right letter 5 times in a row, and they'll be convinced that I've got "the gift". Similarly, Moses seemed like a genius, but only after disaster struck.
But try explaining science to the bunch of Southern yokels in this movie (one of whom has an Irish accent, which never gets explained...). A former missionary who debunks religious phenomena is a great idea for a character - it's just too bad that the movie forces her to do a complete reversal of her beliefs in order to advance the plot.
RATING: 6 out of 10 plagues
Sunday, June 7, 2009
The Happening
Day 157 - 6/6/09 - Movie #157
BEFORE: Friday night, we went to B.B. King's in Times Square to see Dennis DeYoung, formerly of Styx, perform with an acoustic trio that included Glen Burtnik (formerly of both Styx and REO Speedwagon) and Jeff Watson (formerly of Night Ranger). It's the third time that we've seen a "nostalgia" act there, the previous were Toto and Air Supply, and having seen Styx twice without DeYoung in the line-up, this was just done to complete the cycle. Two complaints: in between the perfunctory "Babe", "Lady" and "Come Sail Away" were just too darn many cuts from the new album. I realize you need to pimp it, but that doesn't mean the audience actually wants to HEAR it. Second complaint: people really have forgotten how to act in public places. B.B. King's is a combination restaurant and concert venue, so they tend to seat you across from your dinner companion, so it's really not appropriate during the performance of "Desert Moon" for someone to tell their friend, at full volume, that this was his biggest solo hit, from an album released in 1985, and that the video had a LOT OF PERSONAL MEANING FOR HIM! Some of us want to hear the music, Screamy!
I stayed up all night to catch a morning train to Rhode Island, so I had time for a movie early on Sat. morning. Enough sci-fi and robots, lets get back to basics - like real end-of-the-world stuff. This is one of the few films by M. Night Shyamalan that I know almost nothing about, so any twist or shock ending won't be spoiled for me.
THE PLOT: A strange, horrible and unprecedented crisis begins in Central Park. A high school science teacher, his wife and a young girl do what they can to survive it.
AFTER: Obviously I don't want to spoil the ending (or its explanation) for anyone else - instead I'll quote the late, great George Carlin on environmental issues:
"there is nothing wrong with the planet. Nothing wrong with the planet. The planet is fine. The PEOPLE are f**ked. Difference. Difference. The planet is fine. Compared to the people, the planet is doing great. Been here four and a half billion years."
"The planet will be here for a long, long, LONG time after we're gone, and it will heal itself, it will cleanse itself, 'cause that's what it does. It's a self-correcting system."
"I think, to be fair, the planet sees us as a mild threat. Something to be dealt with. And the planet can defend itself in an organized, collective way, the way a beehive or an ant colony can. A collective defense mechanism."
I can't quote any more, because Carlin's monologue then hits very close to the plot of this movie. In fact, it might even have inspired the plot. Bottom line, I'm not a big fan of horror movies, and watching people commit suicide on film isn't my idea of a good time. And seeing the guy who played Cameron in "Ferris Bueller's Day Off" in a cameo as a high-school principal just made me feel very old.
RATING: 3 out of 10 construction workers
BEFORE: Friday night, we went to B.B. King's in Times Square to see Dennis DeYoung, formerly of Styx, perform with an acoustic trio that included Glen Burtnik (formerly of both Styx and REO Speedwagon) and Jeff Watson (formerly of Night Ranger). It's the third time that we've seen a "nostalgia" act there, the previous were Toto and Air Supply, and having seen Styx twice without DeYoung in the line-up, this was just done to complete the cycle. Two complaints: in between the perfunctory "Babe", "Lady" and "Come Sail Away" were just too darn many cuts from the new album. I realize you need to pimp it, but that doesn't mean the audience actually wants to HEAR it. Second complaint: people really have forgotten how to act in public places. B.B. King's is a combination restaurant and concert venue, so they tend to seat you across from your dinner companion, so it's really not appropriate during the performance of "Desert Moon" for someone to tell their friend, at full volume, that this was his biggest solo hit, from an album released in 1985, and that the video had a LOT OF PERSONAL MEANING FOR HIM! Some of us want to hear the music, Screamy!
I stayed up all night to catch a morning train to Rhode Island, so I had time for a movie early on Sat. morning. Enough sci-fi and robots, lets get back to basics - like real end-of-the-world stuff. This is one of the few films by M. Night Shyamalan that I know almost nothing about, so any twist or shock ending won't be spoiled for me.
THE PLOT: A strange, horrible and unprecedented crisis begins in Central Park. A high school science teacher, his wife and a young girl do what they can to survive it.
AFTER: Obviously I don't want to spoil the ending (or its explanation) for anyone else - instead I'll quote the late, great George Carlin on environmental issues:
"there is nothing wrong with the planet. Nothing wrong with the planet. The planet is fine. The PEOPLE are f**ked. Difference. Difference. The planet is fine. Compared to the people, the planet is doing great. Been here four and a half billion years."
"The planet will be here for a long, long, LONG time after we're gone, and it will heal itself, it will cleanse itself, 'cause that's what it does. It's a self-correcting system."
"I think, to be fair, the planet sees us as a mild threat. Something to be dealt with. And the planet can defend itself in an organized, collective way, the way a beehive or an ant colony can. A collective defense mechanism."
I can't quote any more, because Carlin's monologue then hits very close to the plot of this movie. In fact, it might even have inspired the plot. Bottom line, I'm not a big fan of horror movies, and watching people commit suicide on film isn't my idea of a good time. And seeing the guy who played Cameron in "Ferris Bueller's Day Off" in a cameo as a high-school principal just made me feel very old.
RATING: 3 out of 10 construction workers
Friday, June 5, 2009
The Matrix Revolutions
Day 156 - 6/5/09 - Movie #156
BEFORE: Well, I passed the written test for "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire" - which got me a sit-down interview with a contestant selector, who was no doubt judging me not on smarts, but on looks and personality. For me, this is the much more difficult part of the audition. I tried to remember to smile, answer coherently, and be interesting without looking like I was trying to remember to do all those things... Nope, nothing came up on the test relating to any of the movies I've watched so far this year - but I did mention my New Year's resolution, in the hopes that the movie project itself is somewhat interesting.
Let me get this over with as well - I hope this movie clears up the "Matrix" storyline somehow. If ever a film series got bogged down in the weight of its own mythology, it's this one. More complicated than the "Terminator" and "Star Trek" storylines combined... There's the Oracle, the Architect, the Frenchman, the Train Man...and I still don't understand exactly who or what any of them are.
THE PLOT: The human city of Zion defends itself against the massive invasion of the machines as Neo fights to end the war at another front while also opposing the rogue Agent Smith.
AFTER: Well, we finally see the giant techno-battle that kept getting mentioned in the last film - those "diggers" kept getting closer and closer to the city, but never seemed to arrive. I was starting to wonder if they weren't real either... This becomes a tale of triumph and tragedy - yes, the remains of humanity rise up, band together, and attempt to throw off the shackles of their alien robot (?) oppressors, as Neo tries to broker peace between man and machine. The tragedy is, I still haven't the foggiest grasp of the specifics - it all just seems to be beyond comprehension somehow.
And the REAL tragedy is what could have been accomplished with the money that was spent making this movie. Wouldn't humanity have been better off if that money had been put toward finding a cure for some disease, or feeding an African nation for a decade, or sending some inner-city youths to college? What a pointless waste.
RATING: 6 out of 10 Sentinels (again, I'm averaging between a 9 for amazing effects and a 3 for insufficient plot details)
BEFORE: Well, I passed the written test for "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire" - which got me a sit-down interview with a contestant selector, who was no doubt judging me not on smarts, but on looks and personality. For me, this is the much more difficult part of the audition. I tried to remember to smile, answer coherently, and be interesting without looking like I was trying to remember to do all those things... Nope, nothing came up on the test relating to any of the movies I've watched so far this year - but I did mention my New Year's resolution, in the hopes that the movie project itself is somewhat interesting.
Let me get this over with as well - I hope this movie clears up the "Matrix" storyline somehow. If ever a film series got bogged down in the weight of its own mythology, it's this one. More complicated than the "Terminator" and "Star Trek" storylines combined... There's the Oracle, the Architect, the Frenchman, the Train Man...and I still don't understand exactly who or what any of them are.
THE PLOT: The human city of Zion defends itself against the massive invasion of the machines as Neo fights to end the war at another front while also opposing the rogue Agent Smith.
AFTER: Well, we finally see the giant techno-battle that kept getting mentioned in the last film - those "diggers" kept getting closer and closer to the city, but never seemed to arrive. I was starting to wonder if they weren't real either... This becomes a tale of triumph and tragedy - yes, the remains of humanity rise up, band together, and attempt to throw off the shackles of their alien robot (?) oppressors, as Neo tries to broker peace between man and machine. The tragedy is, I still haven't the foggiest grasp of the specifics - it all just seems to be beyond comprehension somehow.
And the REAL tragedy is what could have been accomplished with the money that was spent making this movie. Wouldn't humanity have been better off if that money had been put toward finding a cure for some disease, or feeding an African nation for a decade, or sending some inner-city youths to college? What a pointless waste.
RATING: 6 out of 10 Sentinels (again, I'm averaging between a 9 for amazing effects and a 3 for insufficient plot details)
Thursday, June 4, 2009
The Matrix Reloaded
Day 155 - 6/4/09 - Movie #155
BEFORE: Of course I've seen "The Matrix", but I never followed up and watched its sequels. Since I've seen the world destroyed several times already this week, plus I'm in a robot vibe, and since I just found a new hole-in-the-wall store in Manhattan that's selling loads of older DVDs for $5.99 each, it's a perfect time for this film. These DVDs don't seem to be "previously viewed", they may just be unloading stock before Hi-Def and/or Blu-Ray take over the marketplace. Walking out with a stack of cheap DVDs has helped me clear some films from my want list, but unfortunately at the same time it's increasing my "to watch" list. I better watch one of these DVDs to make sure I didn't just buy a bunch of empty cases...
I don't know why this Matrix sequel didn't do so well - I think it's because the title made it sound like just a re-edit of the original film? I bet if they had just broke down and called it "Matrix 2" it would have done better.
THE PLOT: Neo and the rebel leaders estimate that they have 72 hours until 250,000 probes discover Zion and destroy it and its inhabitants. During this, Neo must decide how he can save Trinity from a dark fate in his dreams.
AFTER: The action sequences are spectacular - but I probably should have re-watched the original film first. I remember that the fights take place in some kind of virtual reality, but that's about where my understanding of the film ends. If the reality we see isn't real, then how do the fights matter? If they're not really "there" and can't be damaged, then why all the punching?
I don't understand all the "rules" of the virtual reality - do people in the matrix represent computer programs? Viruses? Or the humans that are kept alive in those stasis chambers we saw in the first film?
The movie is loud, flashy, and action-packed, but it leaves me wishing I understood more of the "science" in this science-fiction. I'm guessing they worked out the action sequences first, and then made a narrative that would tie them together...
So, is Neo the "One" or not? WTF just happened? Now I have to go to IMDB and read the plot so I can understand the movie I just watched...
RATING: 5 out of 10 tractor-trailers (an average derived from an 8 for technical wizardry and a 2 for an incomprehensible story)
BEFORE: Of course I've seen "The Matrix", but I never followed up and watched its sequels. Since I've seen the world destroyed several times already this week, plus I'm in a robot vibe, and since I just found a new hole-in-the-wall store in Manhattan that's selling loads of older DVDs for $5.99 each, it's a perfect time for this film. These DVDs don't seem to be "previously viewed", they may just be unloading stock before Hi-Def and/or Blu-Ray take over the marketplace. Walking out with a stack of cheap DVDs has helped me clear some films from my want list, but unfortunately at the same time it's increasing my "to watch" list. I better watch one of these DVDs to make sure I didn't just buy a bunch of empty cases...
I don't know why this Matrix sequel didn't do so well - I think it's because the title made it sound like just a re-edit of the original film? I bet if they had just broke down and called it "Matrix 2" it would have done better.
THE PLOT: Neo and the rebel leaders estimate that they have 72 hours until 250,000 probes discover Zion and destroy it and its inhabitants. During this, Neo must decide how he can save Trinity from a dark fate in his dreams.
AFTER: The action sequences are spectacular - but I probably should have re-watched the original film first. I remember that the fights take place in some kind of virtual reality, but that's about where my understanding of the film ends. If the reality we see isn't real, then how do the fights matter? If they're not really "there" and can't be damaged, then why all the punching?
I don't understand all the "rules" of the virtual reality - do people in the matrix represent computer programs? Viruses? Or the humans that are kept alive in those stasis chambers we saw in the first film?
The movie is loud, flashy, and action-packed, but it leaves me wishing I understood more of the "science" in this science-fiction. I'm guessing they worked out the action sequences first, and then made a narrative that would tie them together...
So, is Neo the "One" or not? WTF just happened? Now I have to go to IMDB and read the plot so I can understand the movie I just watched...
RATING: 5 out of 10 tractor-trailers (an average derived from an 8 for technical wizardry and a 2 for an incomprehensible story)
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
I, Robot
Day 154 - 5/3/09 - Movie #154
BEFORE: Another movie that I've been TRYING to watch for a couple years, since bringing home one of those promo Academy screeners. OK, so it's not really an "apocalypse" film, it's more like a murder-mystery with robots - but it is a depiction of a bleak future where the robots are threatening to take control, and I'm not interested in watching any Terminator film without Ah-nold in it. This looks like it might be a cross between "I Am Legend" and "Wall-E" ?
THE PLOT: In the year 2035 a techno-phobic cop investigates a crime that may have been perpetrated by a robot, which leads to a larger threat to humanity.
AFTER: When I was a kid, I read the Isaac Asimov story that this is based on, so I'm familiar with the "three laws" that are supposed to govern robot behavior - the first one says that robots are forbidden to harm humans, but it seems like someone forgot to tell these robots! Either the robots have evolved, or there's some kind of loophole that Will Smith's character has to uncover. Any conflict in their programming should cause a HAL-type meltdown, but the film sidesteps this is a rather neat way.
I found the multi-layered tanks full of robots to be VERY similar to the Battle tanks in Star Wars: Episode I, and the logic behind the robot takeover to be a thinly-veiled take on the Patriot Act. The robots need to destroy humans' freedoms to keep them safe...or something like that. The climactic ending actually seemed more like "The Terminator" crossed with "The Matrix".
And hey, cool, the lead robot, Sonny, was "played" by Alan Tudyk, aka Steve the Pirate from "Dodgeball". Didn't care too much for the female lead, she just seemed like Sandra Bullock Lite. Another thrilling action movie with Will Smith - doesn't this guy ever get tired?
RATING: 8 out of 10 positronic doohickeys.
Today's my test for "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire - Movie Edition". There better be at least one question about a movie I've seen in the past 2 weeks, or else I've made a horrible miscalculation.
BEFORE: Another movie that I've been TRYING to watch for a couple years, since bringing home one of those promo Academy screeners. OK, so it's not really an "apocalypse" film, it's more like a murder-mystery with robots - but it is a depiction of a bleak future where the robots are threatening to take control, and I'm not interested in watching any Terminator film without Ah-nold in it. This looks like it might be a cross between "I Am Legend" and "Wall-E" ?
THE PLOT: In the year 2035 a techno-phobic cop investigates a crime that may have been perpetrated by a robot, which leads to a larger threat to humanity.
AFTER: When I was a kid, I read the Isaac Asimov story that this is based on, so I'm familiar with the "three laws" that are supposed to govern robot behavior - the first one says that robots are forbidden to harm humans, but it seems like someone forgot to tell these robots! Either the robots have evolved, or there's some kind of loophole that Will Smith's character has to uncover. Any conflict in their programming should cause a HAL-type meltdown, but the film sidesteps this is a rather neat way.
I found the multi-layered tanks full of robots to be VERY similar to the Battle tanks in Star Wars: Episode I, and the logic behind the robot takeover to be a thinly-veiled take on the Patriot Act. The robots need to destroy humans' freedoms to keep them safe...or something like that. The climactic ending actually seemed more like "The Terminator" crossed with "The Matrix".
And hey, cool, the lead robot, Sonny, was "played" by Alan Tudyk, aka Steve the Pirate from "Dodgeball". Didn't care too much for the female lead, she just seemed like Sandra Bullock Lite. Another thrilling action movie with Will Smith - doesn't this guy ever get tired?
RATING: 8 out of 10 positronic doohickeys.
Today's my test for "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire - Movie Edition". There better be at least one question about a movie I've seen in the past 2 weeks, or else I've made a horrible miscalculation.
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
WALL-E
Day 153 - 6/2/09 - Movie #153
BEFORE: Yes, this counts as an apocalyptic film. Who says they can't feature lovable animated characters?
THE PLOT: In the distant future, a small waste-collecting robot inadvertently embarks on a space journey that will ultimately decide the fate of mankind.
AFTER: This is a great illustration of the point I was trying to make yesterday. This movie was universally loved by audiences, made a kajillion dollars at the box office, and was listed by many critics as one of the top movies of 2008 - so why did it rub me the wrong way?
First, it's very preachy - those irresponsible humans polluted their planet so much, they had to leave it and go into space. There go those Hollywood liberals again, with their hybrid cars and their recycling bins...the politics of the filmmakers are very transparent.
Second, there's the portrayal of all the humans as fat, lazy, tech-addicted morons. Suggesting a link between a big gut and a low I.Q. - as a person of above-average waist size, I think I'm offended. And as a filmmaker, I have to question the wisdom of ridiculing humans - you do realize they make up the majority of your target audience, don't you? Do you think that fat kids are so dumb they won't realize that they should go out and exercise unless you exaggerate it to the extreme and place it in a parable with some goofy robots? If anything, overweight people are SMART - it's the muscle-bound exercising jocks that are dumb, as long as we're stereotyping.
Third, we come to a common problem in animated films - the over-slapstickification of the robots' actions. A lot of falling down, falling over and bumping into things is not a good-enough substitute for proper dialogue and characterization, in my opinion. The ro(bot)mance between the high-tech WALL-E and the higher-tech EVE was interesting and charming, but since their only communication seemed to be saying their names to each other, over and over (with slightly different inflections, I'll admit), it's too repetitive to be considered some kind of ground-breaking minimalism.
You can disagree with my rating, go ahead, that's what makes this country (and planet) great. But I have to give it a...
RATING: 6 out of 10 compacted trash-blocks (I was all set to give it a 4, but I'm a sucker for a happy ending)
BEFORE: Yes, this counts as an apocalyptic film. Who says they can't feature lovable animated characters?
THE PLOT: In the distant future, a small waste-collecting robot inadvertently embarks on a space journey that will ultimately decide the fate of mankind.
AFTER: This is a great illustration of the point I was trying to make yesterday. This movie was universally loved by audiences, made a kajillion dollars at the box office, and was listed by many critics as one of the top movies of 2008 - so why did it rub me the wrong way?
First, it's very preachy - those irresponsible humans polluted their planet so much, they had to leave it and go into space. There go those Hollywood liberals again, with their hybrid cars and their recycling bins...the politics of the filmmakers are very transparent.
Second, there's the portrayal of all the humans as fat, lazy, tech-addicted morons. Suggesting a link between a big gut and a low I.Q. - as a person of above-average waist size, I think I'm offended. And as a filmmaker, I have to question the wisdom of ridiculing humans - you do realize they make up the majority of your target audience, don't you? Do you think that fat kids are so dumb they won't realize that they should go out and exercise unless you exaggerate it to the extreme and place it in a parable with some goofy robots? If anything, overweight people are SMART - it's the muscle-bound exercising jocks that are dumb, as long as we're stereotyping.
Third, we come to a common problem in animated films - the over-slapstickification of the robots' actions. A lot of falling down, falling over and bumping into things is not a good-enough substitute for proper dialogue and characterization, in my opinion. The ro(bot)mance between the high-tech WALL-E and the higher-tech EVE was interesting and charming, but since their only communication seemed to be saying their names to each other, over and over (with slightly different inflections, I'll admit), it's too repetitive to be considered some kind of ground-breaking minimalism.
You can disagree with my rating, go ahead, that's what makes this country (and planet) great. But I have to give it a...
RATING: 6 out of 10 compacted trash-blocks (I was all set to give it a 4, but I'm a sucker for a happy ending)
Monday, June 1, 2009
Waterworld
Day 152 - 6/1/09 - Movie #152
BEFORE: So, I'm in a quandary - I'm scheduled this Wednesday to take the test for the movie week of "Who Wants To Be a Millionaire". I could try to cram a lot of movie trivia in before then, or just stay the course. I'd hate to stop watching my daily movie to absorb a lot of useless facts, only to have a question come up about a movie that I WOULD have watched if I stuck to my schedule...this is how I'll drive myself crazy.
Continuing with the theme of planetary disasters and apocalypses, I'll watch this critically-panned disaster. What if the icecaps melted, and the world flooded so that humans had to live on boats and floating platforms?
THE PLOT: In a future where most of Earth is underwater, a mutated mariner fights starvation and outlaw "smokers," and reluctantly tries to help a woman and a young girl find dry land.
AFTER: This movie tanked at the box office, so it's got that smell of failure about it, but I don't think it's as bad as its repuation. It's a solid action movie, the hero is heroic, the villains are nasty, the main characters are on a quest - essentially it's just "The Road Warrior" on an ocean instead of a desert, right? RIGHT?
It's visually impressive, too - looks like a lot of money got wasted making this movie, based on what it brought in, but that in itself doesn't make it a bad film. I don't know, my rating system was called into question this weekend, when a friend of my BFF disagreed with my low rating of "The Man Who Fell to Earth", but you know what? It's all subjective. There are bound to be critically-acclaimed or well-liked films that I don't care for, and conversely there are bound to be critically-panned films that I'm going to rave about.
"Waterworld" probably won't become one of my favorite films, but it didn't bother or offend me either. Also, there was no grand message, or even much of an overall point, so in the end it gets a fairly neutral rating. As always, your mileage may vary, no money orders or C.O.D.s accepted, offer good in 49 out of 50 states. Sorry, Tennessee!
RATING: 6 out of 10 jet-skis
BEFORE: So, I'm in a quandary - I'm scheduled this Wednesday to take the test for the movie week of "Who Wants To Be a Millionaire". I could try to cram a lot of movie trivia in before then, or just stay the course. I'd hate to stop watching my daily movie to absorb a lot of useless facts, only to have a question come up about a movie that I WOULD have watched if I stuck to my schedule...this is how I'll drive myself crazy.
Continuing with the theme of planetary disasters and apocalypses, I'll watch this critically-panned disaster. What if the icecaps melted, and the world flooded so that humans had to live on boats and floating platforms?
THE PLOT: In a future where most of Earth is underwater, a mutated mariner fights starvation and outlaw "smokers," and reluctantly tries to help a woman and a young girl find dry land.
AFTER: This movie tanked at the box office, so it's got that smell of failure about it, but I don't think it's as bad as its repuation. It's a solid action movie, the hero is heroic, the villains are nasty, the main characters are on a quest - essentially it's just "The Road Warrior" on an ocean instead of a desert, right? RIGHT?
It's visually impressive, too - looks like a lot of money got wasted making this movie, based on what it brought in, but that in itself doesn't make it a bad film. I don't know, my rating system was called into question this weekend, when a friend of my BFF disagreed with my low rating of "The Man Who Fell to Earth", but you know what? It's all subjective. There are bound to be critically-acclaimed or well-liked films that I don't care for, and conversely there are bound to be critically-panned films that I'm going to rave about.
"Waterworld" probably won't become one of my favorite films, but it didn't bother or offend me either. Also, there was no grand message, or even much of an overall point, so in the end it gets a fairly neutral rating. As always, your mileage may vary, no money orders or C.O.D.s accepted, offer good in 49 out of 50 states. Sorry, Tennessee!
RATING: 6 out of 10 jet-skis
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
