Reviews

This is one of those films that i catch by accident on TV while eating a dinner, and that immediately raise my eyebrows, set up a big question-mark above my head, make me forget about how good dinner i cooked, and instead make me immediately look up the title on IMDb while first set of commercials is on.

First i see a face from sugary Beverly Hills in a _very_ different role, and he seems to be a hit-man (i didn't see the beginning of the movie), but he goes to yoga classes, and he seems to be at once simple and honest (and a virgin), and a successful professional killer, and the movie seems to somehow balance the opposites quite skillfully. Really, i can still feel my eyebrows up there where they were for the most of the movie.

I laughed hard in few places, but like with best films, those funniest scenes had absolutely nothing obviously funny in them... it's the absurdness of the characters and their situations that makes those so funny.

Still, i didn't feel this to be a comedy at all, it's here that saw people call it a dark comedy.

Well, it's dark alright, and strangely uncomfortable, but i did laugh hard in some scenes so i guess it qualifies as comedy too.

Anyway, if you like quirky off-the-beaten-path films, this is one you won't regret seeing.

In my youth i used to play in bands and make music, and my pals and bands we played in loved to explore, and to play together on whatever we could find, in house, city or nature; and many times we have played music on kitchen or bathroom stuff like characters in this brilliant little movie; the difference being that we were improvising and just jamming, usually spaced-out on weed; while the "band" in this movie clearly plays exact and precisely thought-out and rehearsed pieces, additionally wrapped in a tight and razor-sharp 10-minute plan.

Well, we were Balkanians, and they're Swedes, so i guess it figures.

The music they produce "out of stuff" in 4 rooms of a house is surprisingly good; a solid and sensible percussion (and not only percussion) groove, and it will draw at least a smile on face of any musician worth his name. The greatest advantage of the film is its concept - a 'game' of playing music on stuff found around house - because it allows for many great little ideas; and authors came up with surprisingly many; majority of them being surprising and funny in their own little ways.

Add to this good little mock-thriller wrapper story of a break-in; add great execution from actors/musicians; add solid editing and direction, and you have probably one of the best exactly-ten-minutes-long films ever.

Apart from 'those obsessed with order' (as some clearly non-musician commentors have suggested), this film will also resonate with:

* All musicians everywhere (including those who aren't ones yet, but should be; and excluding those that are, but shouldn't be) * All fans of good groove in funk and electronica * All who can feel groove in any kind of music * All fans of good short film with a good idea and great execution * Admirers of creativity in general.

Rarely has a sh*t this bad been packaged this nicely.

I didn't catch the beginning of this movie, but from second one i did see, it was so screaming with BAD i just had to continue watching. Such an overload of clichés is not easy to find. I have an urge to say the acting stinks too, and although it is absolutely true, the actors are totally excused, simply because there's nothing to act on. You simply cannot utter sentences and act out story bits seen and heard so many times and have an expression, apart from cartoon-like mimic and eye-brow work. EVERYTHING was so bad here, from direction to acting to perhaps-good-but-totally-misplaced score to camera, i just had to comment aloud all the time, although i was home alone! I don't do that usually; it was really that bad. Occasionally, computer graphics would appear which, to my surprise, looked exceptionally good (although very kitchy). This made me think "how the hell a director and a story this crappy got so much money for CGI??".

When after the film i read that this is a Brian De Palma movie, i was shocked. Something MUST have gone terribly wrong in the production of this. A badly timed deadline? Urgent need of money? I don't know. And i don't want to know. I want to forget this, as soon as i write this review.

Now, as a youngster i was a great fan of sci-fi literature, and even today i like to see a good SF movie; alas, by now i already realized there is almost no such thing; with very rare exceptions. So i continue to watch the bad ones, this piece of crap included. Thus, as a principal SF fan, i agree with all the people here who say they are sick of all the 'fight the alien monster' movies. But, contrary to most of them, i don't think that making aliens nice and wise makes it a good film, or even story. _Sh*t_stinks_, whatever shade of brown it may be.

Not to forget: shameless ripping off also stinks, especially when it is so obvious, as this rip-off of 2001 Space Odissey is; and even more so when the rip-off is such a simplistic version of the original. As i watched, i kept thinking "When this guy (i.e. director) was young, he wished he made 2001 SO". Eventually he did, and he screwed it up to last bit, and he called it "Mission to Mars".

watching first half hour of this movie, i couldn't stop thinking how the level of the script (and many other aspect of the movie) would be more appropriate for a comic, than for a Hollywood movie. And not a good comic, but kind of B-comic, which might fill the last pages of a cheap comic mag. As it turned out, the director used to direct Xena the Warrior Princess TV series, along with other cartoon-like flicks. Figures.

It was funny, but mostly unintentionally. Each and every bit is either too simplified, or too common-place, or too overdone. There's rare funny remarks, like "our passes are accepted world-wide". Oh, and special effects are sometimes half-way to Beasty Boys' video clip.

Thus, it was funny enough if you don't have anything better to do with your time.

I have, so i more or less won't see the rest after i write this; while i would watch the rest of it if i was resting on the couch, but it would be a waste of my only joint i just had. (it's on TV). I wish it had started later, i'd perhaps watch it whole.

Here's a conspiracy theory for you.

I agree with all the bad comments about this lukewarm bowl of slimy nothing. The reason this acting/directing/storytelling disaster happened is that art was the last thing important (or at least clear) to it's producers. This is a project, not a movie. Like "Reefer Madness" in fifties (forties?), the now-hilarious-to-watch propaganda on dangers of marijuana, from McCarthy times and circles, this film is meant to be a public lesson, not art or entertainment ; or better yet, a paid advertisement ; ordered and paid for, obviously, by the same people who ordered Reefer Madness to be made. The whole point of this movie is to "show" that so-called conspiracy theorists are (at best, benign) neurotic fools, who even if occasionally turn out to be right, it's because of sheer probability laws; or, as on Balkan they say, "even a blind chicken sometimes picks a corn". Since this image is already vaguely present in public opinion, this is supposed to enhance it in public eye in times of crisis, when people who ask awkward questions need to be dealt in every possible way; and ad-hominem attacks and public humiliation and resent always work best with masses. If you can do it even preventively, all the better! When stakes are high, big names are employed and paid; but to judge how they actually performed or how well the movie was directed is far beyond the scope of the closed minds that have the last word on it. Thence invariably come results like this, which serve as as a tea-time fun for Sunday afternoons of sensible people when enough time passes that you can look at it as quirky vintage and laugh, and the period when it just made you vomit has safely passed.

Edutainment at it's very worst. Scratching the ugly bottom of corny political propaganda. Be sure to watch it! - in 20-30 years. Till then, avoid desperately. PARENTAL GUIDANCE: If you find your child watching this video, shoot it. The video.

And by the way, if one educates themselves outside the cinema theater and TV box, and pays attention to life, one eventually finds out that most of the so-called conspiracy theorists are in fact journalists, often some of best among them, and not crazy taxi-drivers.

Amazingly for those who haven't seen it (and usually neither heard of it), this unknown animated masterpiece regularly makes it into the shortest short-list of best films of those who have - and i don't mean list of animated movies, but movies in general. Uncomparable to anything else - much like Twain himself - it's every aspect is just amazing. It will feast your eyes (as much as any claymation can), fill your heart (with a both joy, sorrow, warmth and eeriness), boggle your brain, and make your jaw hurt. And you'll still have to find time to enjoy acting (yes, _acting_ of the clay figures here is just amazing) and clever solutions. For example, Mysterious Stranger is the best visualization of Devil(?) i ever saw in film.

Some have pointed out that it is "not necessarily a kids movie"; Not AT ALL a kids movie, i'd rather say.

Nobody forgets seeing it, and as soon as one remembers it later, one starts to look for it. Alas, it is extremely hard to find - at least i never succeeded. I saw it only twice, on TV, no less than 10 and 14 years ago, and my filmometer jumps high every time i think about it.

Find it. See it. Enjoy the ride. Copy it. Copy it again, for your grandchildren, and save the copy somewhere safe till they grow up.

Even the first Matrix movie was a disappointment for me, because i was being told by everyone and his aunt that (besides having very original fighting scenes) this is something unheard of in Sci Fi, such hyper-original story involving virtual reality and something that really makes you think. I went to cinema happily expecting a subtle interplay of virtual and "real" reality, finally a SF film worthy of best SF literature, only to find out that it's about stupid evil robots eating people (or whatever). Where i expected wit and originality, subtleness and philosophy, i found Hollywood clichés, really not so different from Alien type of movie, as everyone thinks it to be. But i'll grant them (Matrix fans) that at least in the world of SF _cinema_, Matrix did scratch a surface - but no more - of something interesting, which can't be said for 99% of other SF movies.

As for Matrix Revolutions, i really thought i'll die of boredom. The forced pump-up to the siege of Zion was so shallow i was almost congratulating myself on seeing through the hype (and into nothingness) already in the first movie. These guys obviously don't have anything to say apart from hitherto unseen camera-angles and shooting speeds. I saw the film on DVD, and while i barely survived through the film itself, i enjoyed the second disk, which is all about how they made it, immensely. I really do appreciate all the effort put into special effects. It is all ground breaking, no doubt. But absent this insight into all the intricacies of virtual humans, computer graphics and miniature models, while you watch the movie it just boils down to "yeah, nice effects, but..."

My point being that SFX is NOT ENOUGH to make a good movie. And virtually everything else in this movie S U C K S. Acting? There is no. Characters? They're all carton cutouts 1 milimeter thick ans seen a zillion times. Story? Who can honestly say they got it? If it's about "fight for what you believe in and believe in love", as some here say, i think it takes some finesse if you want to make the message work - it's not enough that a character in the film says those words. In these fascinating "the-making-of" documentaries, most people were talking about what they did and how they did it. But occasionally, some would find it appropriate to talk about "deep philosophy" that this movie carries.

The effects were great, but philosophy - please spare me.

Others have commented the "unusual" combination of serial killer as a friendly person. I'd say here it's more than unusual, it is so down-right unbelievable that writer(s) either never met real people in their scribbling lives and don't have a clue about people and character (in which case they're in wrong profession, and judging by this film, i'd say they are), or they have some other reasons for their strange invention. Now, i'm not saying that a serial killer simply can't seem like a friendly guy - on the contrary, some probably are, and it IS an interesting start for a story - but i think not just ANY kind of a friendly guy. Certainly not THIS type of man. Judging by the fact that the villain in this film is the only black man in the movie, it seems to me that there may be a hidden racist agenda lurking from the depths of this ugly movie, trying to "show" how even your friendly uncle-Jim type of "nigga", amiable, wise, reliable, loved and known by everybody and his aunt 500 miles around, could any time rip your guts if you don't watch your back when he's around... Motivation? Who needs it when you're black. BOO!

* Maybe Dennis Quaid realised (only after signing the contract?) what he's part of here, and that's why he refused to act in this movie? Because, he is not (acting). He uses a single - literally - face throughout the movie, and a dead one at that. I bet he got cramps in the face for weeks after the shooting, from the worried smirk he's uniformly wearing all the time here.

It seems this movie gets watched either because of Jon Bon Jovi or in spite of him. I'm one of the latter - it was on TV right after my supper and i said ok, now i'll watch this movie even if JBJ is starring... i must say that my prejudice wasn't based on his acting, as i never watched him act - it's more that i find his music trash. But he turned out quite a ok actor. But even better was the movie overall - a smart relationships- and looking-for-love story with a nice plot revolving around 5-and-a-half characters and taking sharp turns every 10 minutes, with (almost) everything happening at wrong times. I did find the style of some of the main characters' various confessions slightly over-styled for the confidant at hand, but i did like the idea of every character having his own way of analysing him/herself aloud (confession booth, support-group, taxi-dispatcher, shrink, diary); but i also didn't mind the glitch in light of the rest of this witty, funny, honest, warm movie. I especially liked the acts of Josh Charles and Annabella Sciorra.

I've seen AKIRA 5 or 6 times by now, and i'm looking forward to more. I used to work in animation industry, so that's half of the interest. In that regard, Akira is one of the few best i've seen, with others coming only equal, hardly better (espec. considering it's about 10 yrs old by now). The second part of the reason is that i used to be an active Science Fiction fan, and in that regard, again this is one of the best movies i've seen - at least when you get the whole story, for which i'm sure you need more than one viewing. When i watched it first time, i felt like most people, confused and lost in the complexity of the story, wondering after the movie is "Akira" a person or a power, or an energy? Luckily, the animation and a "sense" of a good SF story behind it made me see it several times, and actually i'm thankful now for the complexity of the story because each time i get a new level straight. Not to mention noticing ever new levels of detail in almost any given scene. This is one of my favourite movies of all times, so much so that i'll have to repeat my first sentence: I've seen it 5 or 6 times by now, and i'm looking forward to more.

The movie is as mixed as it's comments here. First you think it's science fiction, but soon you realize it's a pure thriller; yet it's basic premise is pure SF, and good one at that - simple, yet somehow unused in SF before... makes you wonder how come no one else thought of this before. And also makes you wish somebody else did, because they might have gotten more out of it. Yet, it was watchable...

The story has many holes though - one of the most stupid details for me was the thing with the clone's countdown clock: when it turns out that the clock can be tracked via satellite - and therefore also the body carrying it - Baldwin (with the help of his gf) cuts it out of his arm, including about 100g of arm flesh; but then he carries it around in his pocket for the rest of the movie... why the hell did he cut it off if he keeps it with him afterwards??? :)

I watched this movie just tonight (caught it on TV) and as i watched it, i laughed many times, and cried quite a few, much more than i'd expect (i don't usually cry when watching cinema).

While i was amazed at what i was watching, i was also amazed that this is a Hollywood production... and i wondered if this is (i.e. how much) a copy of some other uknown (to me) endeavours, and how much watered-down version of what it's about or what it could have been... just because it's Hollywood, and it (as i found out later) it won some Oscars.

After i've seen the movie, i quickly came to IMDB to see people's comments. Because, this definitely IS one of the movies that DO make you (me?) do that, weather you like them or not. And, it lived up to my expectation of being a totally controversial one. I think in average there's 2 or 3 praising comments to 1 spitting comment. But one thing is sure: there's no "undecided votes". People obviously think this is either THE best movie they've seen, or that it's a total crap, stolen moments from better, real artistic films, or a Hollywood misguided/misguiding version of suburbia life, or whatever.

Now, i can, couriously enough, understand both sides. And still not be "in the middle". I think this is a very USEFUL movie, and -- now hold yer pants -- i thing God likes it. Why? Because it is so moving, in a good (very good) way. I know a thing or two about the old God pal, and i know He likes that. From the IMDB comments alone i can see that it turned more than one (young?) person's mind and heart to things more substantial than "career" and "successs". A film so moving is definitely at least SIGNIFICANT. A film so moving, EXCEPT to those who have seen better "versions" of it, and i do believe there are some (films). Of all mentioned "originals" i've seen only Happyness, and i too think that in essence, it is better, stronger, and both more real and surreal at the same time. But this movie has one advantage over those films, the very dread of those who hate it: it has won Oscars, and it's a A-production Hollywood movie.

Because, how many people have seen Happyness, and espec. all other films better than American Beauty? If you're not living in dreams, you know: VERY little.

This IS a "people's" version of high art, of _real_value_ in art and (more importantly) in life; but people ARE exactly those who need the message of this, and other similar, films. And this film shows excellence in getting this message across, and at the same time appealing to much (MUCH) broader audience than all it's "originals". And NOT by selling out the main guts of the movie, but by production and style. If you call it just another Hollywood buff, please count how many times you have seen movies where main characters indulge in sex fantasies (and realities) with minors winning Oscars. Or where pot-smoking and selling (!) by main characters gets no judgment. Not that i'm advocating Sex'n'Drugs, but -- for an Oscar winner! -- this is a hard-core.

On another note, i see much disagreement about "reality", or "realness" of the film - and it's characters. Although i belong to those who like this film very much, i don't share the majority's view that the characters, situations are "realistic". They're NOT. They're not inexistent (God knows thare's much worse things going on around the world and around the clock). But they're not average. But they were not meant to be. They're all caricatures, and representing each a certain portion of people around you and me (us included). It is the same in Happyness, and in Pianist, and in all other "good" movies. They're NOT real; they're hyper-real. They're more-than-real. They're Reality Overdone. Because, art simply does that.

Just before i quit (this is getting long!), i'd also like to mention the adorable music score by Thomas Newman. Before it hit me what a movie i was watching (and alongside the amazing lines, dialogues, scenes, FEELINGS), i was amazed at the music. The best possible compliment: i wished i this was my music.

For those of you who are wondering to watch this film or not: there's no way to tell weather you'll like it or not: but be certain: you won't be undecided about it. Chances are, you'll LOVE it. If you're one of those who regard art more important than life, maybe you won't. Not that i'm against really good art (meaning better than this); no, i'm an artist myself, and i can see why certain people don't like this. But still i think art is a part of life and not vice-versa, and i regard this film (at least) IMPORTANT, life-wise.

Just see it, tonight, and know for sure.

P.S. appologies for excessive use of CAPITALS, sometimes i feel i need to accent some words :)