CriticSociety- film reviews

Review

Primal Fear

Director

Gregory Hoblit

Year

1996

Rating

Reviewed by

José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris

Review date

Tuesday, April 30, 2002

Primal Fear is the movie that brought Edward Norton to the film world. Perhaps that’s what the movie is most remembered for. It certainly was an impressive debut, one that showed a little bit of how much one of the best actors working today is able to do.

Hotshot lawyer Martin Vail (Richard Gere) takes the apparently unwinnable case of an altar boy (Edward Norton) accused of murdering a prominent catholic priest when he’s captured running away from the murder scene. The case gets more and more complicated by the minute...

It was 1996 when Primal Fear was released. It was a time when serious adult thrillers were scarce and when Richard Gere was not in the high point of his career. This movie came to prove that there was still life in the genre and that Gere still had it. He simply delivers here one of the most important performances of his life.

The interaction between Gere, Linney and Norton works so well that the movie grows because of this. It certainly is compelling and entertaining, but add to that the word intelligent. It deserves it.

There’s also the great fact that the movie is not as much about what happens in a courtroom as it is about what goes on behind it. There’s a lot to find out in this mystery that will keep surprising you until the end.

And that’s where the main and strongest asset of the movie comes. It has a killer twist ending that became, and still is, extremely popular among general masses. It could even be considered a classic in it’s very own way.

Anyway, I’ve already mentioned everyone’s strong acting here, but I’d like to single out Norton once again for providing a performance worthy of recognition in every sense of the word. He’s brilliant here. Simply outstanding!

“If your mother says she loves you, get a second opinion.”

CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook

Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter

Review

Last Tango in Paris

Director

Bernardo Bertolucci

Year

1972

Rating

Reviewed by

Gon Curiel a.k.a. Groucho

Review date

Monday, April 29, 2002

An American in Paris (Marlon Brando), going through the worst kind of emotional crisis after his wife’s suicide, forgets everything about affection. Then he meets young and lonely Jeanne (Maria Schneider), and they both become addicted in a sexual liaison with no names, no past and no future. Is something of the sort as simple as it seems?

Bernardo Bertolucci’s most controversial film is surely a menace to the viewer’s feelings, as the characters slowly destroy themselves in an unlimited whirlpool of guilty pleasure. Some scenes are unbearable, others simply unbelievable. Filming this must have been a shattering experience for the two leads, at least.

Brando is completely unforgettable in the role of a decadent man who drags another soul into his hole of self-destruction. This performance being decisive in his career and one of his greatest, is one reason to make this movie a must-see, though its shocking nature makes it quite difficult to watch. Maria Schneider follows with great ability, as her character does.

Serious and unrewarding, but extremely thought-provoking, this is a movie that made history.

“Fucking God!!”

Gon C Curiel en Twitter | CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook

Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter

Review

The General

Director

Clyde Bruckman

Buster Keaton

Year

1927

Rating

Reviewed by

Gon Curiel a.k.a. Groucho

Review date

Thursday, April 25, 2002

A hard-working train engineer (Buster Keaton) fancies to marry Annabelle (Marion Mack) but she won’t see him again until he’s in uniform to fight the Civil War, though he won’t be enlisted because he’s more useful to the south as an engineer. Broken-hearted, Johnnie carries on with his work, until the engine of his beloved “General” is stolen by Union spies, Annabelle kidnapped as a hostage, and guess who goes to the rescue…

This Buster Keaton comedy might be one of his simplest, but it’s also one of his greatest. He chases, bounces and prepares schemes to fool and beat his enemies, while the very serious story (based on fact) evolves. Prodigiously directed action scenes, only matched by Keaton himself in other movies, surround some genuinely classic moments of silent comedy: Johnnie dragged away in sadness by the joint of the locomotive’s wheels is just one of this gem’s precious bits.

Try to catch the version appropriately scored (in piano) by William P. Perry. Anyway you see it, this is a must of the silent genre and especially of the great Stone-Face.

Gon C Curiel en Twitter | CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook

Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter

Review

The Godfather: Part III

Director

Francis Ford Coppola

Year

1990

Rating

Reviewed by

Gon Curiel a.k.a. Groucho

Review date

Monday, April 22, 2002

Senior Mafia “Don” Michael Corleone (Al Pacino), after years of surrounding himself with good-natured business, decides to retire from crime for good. Simultaneously, his ex-wife (Diane Keaton) visits, bringing their grown children with her. As former partners of Corleone get mad at his decision and his daughter (Sofia Coppola, the director’s daughter) falls in love with his newest heir (Andy Garcia), worlds collide and good fortune gets lost.

Needless third part (and conclusion) to The Godfather saga hasn’t got what it takes to stand next to its two predecessors (I, II) but is not bad either. As a matter of fact, it is a good Mafia tale that borrows well-known character’s names to attract attention. In ways it’s good to know what’s been of Michael, Connie (Talia Shire) and some others, but mostly it’s sad to see this sorry attempt to transform a great saga into a great trilogy, which instead is quite uneven.

Pacino is good (if not great) in the lead, Sofia bad but fun as his daughter. Though usually trashed, she does bring joy to the screen, especially next to Garcia, who is excellent as late Sonny’s illegitimate son who’s as impulsive as his father, though in many ways smarter.

Involvement with the church (especially with Pope John Paul I) and a climatic crime/opera scene in the end do find a rightful place in the saga… but are not nearly enough to carry such a powerful title.

This was the last collaboration of director/co-writer Coppola, co-writer (and author of the original novel) Mario Puzo and composer Nino Rota.

Gon C Curiel en Twitter | CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook

Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter

Review

Maverick

Director

Richard Donner

Year

1994

Rating

Reviewed by

José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris

Review date

Thursday, April 18, 2002

Since I was very young Maverick has been a favorite of mine. I’ve seen it countless times on TV and it simply never loses its charm. A winner I’m very fond of talking about...

Bret Maverick (Mel Gibson) needs a whole lot of money to enter an important poker tournament. He’s a gambler who would do anything to get what he wants and so he gets involved in various mishaps that lead him to meet lovely Annabelle Bransofrd (Jodie Foster), a woman gambler who will also stop at nothing to get whatever she wants.

Maverick is based on the 50’s TV show starring James Garner (who also appears here to great appeal). It is an updated and different version, but the essence is still there and it pays off. It’s one of those rare occasions when TV shows translate ok to the big screen.

The main achievement here is the charm the movie exudes at every turn. Nobody takes themselves seriously and that’s the main ingredient for the audience to have a good time. We have a very appealing leading man, a wonderful leading lady and great supporting characters who are all incredibly charismatic.

It also helps to have a fun story to work with. There’s action, romance, suspense and a funny twist at the end that will leave you smiling. After all it’s one great scene after another and it’s always cool to see a modern western that actually works.

I also wouldn’t know which parts work better, if those of Gibson and Foster together or those of Gibson and Garner sharing the screen. The all have great chemistry and their scenes are hilarious.

Overall it is a movie that intends to be entertaining and to make you have a good time. The actors are all extraordinary and Richard Donner directs with just the right touch and comic timing. A blast!

“You can’t help it, can you? You are irresistible!”

CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook

Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter

Review

The Straight Story

Director

David Lynch

Year

1999

Rating

Reviewed by

José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris

Review date

Tuesday, April 16, 2002

When David Lynch showed this movie at the Cannes Film Festival people couldn’t have been more shocked, albeit in a way you would never think. The controversial and eccentric director had made a movie that exuded simplicity and that actually had a very positive message. Talk about versatility.

Alvin Straight (Richard Farnsworth) is a 73-years old man who decides to make a trip in a lawn mower to visit his 75-years old brother Lyle and mend things up with him. He’s got a shy daughter (Sissy Spacek) who takes care of him, although nothing will stop him from his quest. In the way he meets several people which he influences in some unexpected ways.

The Straight Story is based on a real-life event in which an extraordinary man put his sight in something most people would consider extremely stupid. Still, his humility and innocence helped him underway every difficulty he faced.

It’s also a story about the triumph of life and love. Alvin has nothing but good advices for everyone. It’s up to them to listen to him, but the positive view of the world Lynch portrays can’t but seem incredibly poignant... and melancholic.

I loved the message about being as optimistic as you can be and going for your dreams. It’s impossible to ask for a perfect world, but if you fight for your own happiness by thinking simple it’s probable that you’ll end up having a satisfying life just as Alvin did.

Richard Farnsworth died shortly after receiving high acclaim for his role in this movie. It was the perfect ending to a great career. His Alvin is simply a memorable character and he plays it with extreme respect and humanity. He will always be remembered for it.

CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook

Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter

Review

Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace

Director

George Lucas

Year

1999

Rating

Reviewed by

Gon Curiel a.k.a. Groucho

Review date

Wednesday, April 10, 2002

Two Jedi knights (Liam Neeson and Ewan McGregor, the latter playing Obi-Wan Kenobi) try to negotiate peace in a moment of tension in the Cosmic Republic but instead find out how dirty the actual business is, as hidden forces seemingly struggle to cause disorder—for no apparent reason.

On their way, they encounter Queen Amidala (Natalie Portman) and guard her, eventually meeting a gifted young boy called Anakin Skywalker (Jake Lloyd) who’s unusually strong on the Force.

The first part of the prequel trilogy of the Star Wars saga is in fact a disappointment, compared to any of the previous trilogy’s movies (IV, V, VI) because it lacks emotion, intensity and a life of its own, as it completely depends on the other movies to make any sense (in fact, the happy ending is actually a sad ending—but only we know).

However, I found it to be a very entertaining movie. Forgiving the dull moments and the forced references to the previous trilogy (like the origins of R2D2 and C-3PO), as well as the unjustified quick pace at times, it is fun: the pod race being deadly entertaining and technically dazzling, as are many moments in this triumph of visual effects. Even the very annoying creature called Jar-Jar Binks is visually irresistible, considering it’s fully animated by computers. Not to mention the hidden city!

The cast mostly lacks a heart, all except Natalie Portman, who really transmits her sadness and determination to help her people.

In ways it’s chilling to see how it all started, in ways it’s sad because it was best left to the imagination. However, this will hopefully be regarded as the worst part of the saga when it’s all done, so why worry? If the idea was to give us a good time, the goal was reached. Let the best ones come…

“Are you an angel?”

Gon C Curiel en Twitter | CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook

Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter

Review

The Opposite of Sex

Director

Don Roos

Year

1998

Rating

Reviewed by

José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris

Review date

Tuesday, April 09, 2002

The Opposite of Sex is one of my favorite independent movies of all-time. Every time I see it it’s the same reaction: I can’t stop laughing for a second. It’s hilarious and it’s also strikingly original.

Deedee (Chirstina Ricci) is a rebellious teenager who has had a very difficult life and suddenly decides to run away. She goes to visit her gay brother (Martin Donovan) who’s got a new boyfriend (Ivan Sergei) whom she likes immediately. The problem is that there’s an old friend (Lisa Kudrow) who’s always been in love with Deedee’s brother and does not like Deedee at all. Matters get even more complicated when Deedee gets pregnant. From then on, it’s anybody’s guess what will happen.

Don Roos is the man behind this very different movie. Why is it different? Well, to start off, the main character, Deedee, sort of knows she’s in a movie and keeps addressing the audience in the most unconventional of ways. She’s also one of the most unique leading characters I’ve seen on screen. She’s kind of a terrible person, but somehow we sympathize with her. At least I did. She’s so sarcastic and I just love that kind of humor.

Helping out to provoke hilariously awkward moments in this black comedy is Lisa Kudrow. As Leonard Maltin put it when the movie came out: it’s difficult to tell who’s got the best lines, Ricci or Kudrow. They are both dynamite and the script they have in their hands is simply out-of-this-world. One could say this is a comedy of situations. It’s hard to tell where it’s leading or what it’s up to. The movie is simply the journey of a spoiled girl who doesn’t give a damn about anyone else but who might also learn something in the way instead of just thinking about herself. Or mightn’t she?

I always appreciate movies that are as daring as this one. It’s a difficult movie to make since it’s got to strike the right note from frame one in order to work. Fortunately everyone involved did a good job. They also took a great risk and went for it. Roos is the man!

One might also wonder where the title comes from. Well, it’s a little abstract, but the movie definitely has a lot to do with sex and all of its ramifications. Maybe that’s what the movie is after all: a character study about people’s sexuality and the motifs and consequences of it.

As I mentioned before, Christina Ricci and Lisa Kudrow are simply incomparable in this movie. Ricci, especially, was born to play this role. It’s the kind of self-confident character with an attitude that people have got to identify her with. If you thought her Wednesday in The Addams Family was a delicious treat you definitely have to see this movie.

Unpredictable, laugh-out-loud funny, not for all tastes, thoughtful, different, that’s what The Opposite of Sex is!

“Sex always ends in kids or disease or like, you know, relationships”

CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook

Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter

Review

Cliffhanger

Director

Renny Harlin

Year

1993

Rating

Reviewed by

José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris

Review date

Thursday, April 04, 2002

Cliffhanger is one of my favorite action movies ever made. Each time I see it I stare in awe at how well all the pieces came together to form something memorable. This is how action movies should be made, and I’ll tell you why...

Gabe (Sylverster Stallone) is asked to rescue a bunch of people stranded somewhere on the Rocky Mountains. Among them is an old friend (Michael Rooker) with whom he doesn’t get along because of an incident one year before which was fatal to both of them. The problem is that these people are not who they appear and they’re actually looking for three suitcases full of money that fell there. Soon it’s a kidnap situation as well and Gabe is the only one who could stop them.

After an unforgettable initial sequence that you won’t be able to ever forget and that has now become almost a classic of the genre, Cliffanger builds into an unstoppable action-thriller in which, even though you might know the outcome, everything that happens in the middle is worthy of your time. It’s not about getting there, but about the way you get there.

A good script is the right start for a movie to work. Rarely do this kind of movies leave this kind of impression because they’re always so dumb. Not here folks. The creators do a wonderful job at mixing an exciting story with several twists, a good villain, a good hero and an amazing landscape to situate the action. There’s nothing more you could ask and Renny Harlin got it right-on.

Sylvester Stallone used to be much better than he is now and this movie is an example. He’s perfect for the role and we root for him. John Lithgow, as the main villain, also does a pretty good job.

Overall an explosive movie in every sense of the word.

“Kill a few people they call you a murderer. Kill a million and you’re a conqueror.”

CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook

Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter

Review

The Gospel According to St. Matthew

Director

Pier Paolo Pasolini

Year

1964

Rating

Reviewed by

Gon Curiel a.k.a. Groucho

Review date

Wednesday, April 03, 2002

The tale of the life of Jesus of Nazareth, his glory, his death and his resurrection has never been told as beautifully as it is written in the Gospels… or has it?

Pier Paolo Pasolini taught the world a lesson in 1964, when he filmed this straightforward, absolutely unpretentious, anti-Hollywood version of the Gospel. Since Pasolini was a fervent Marxist, he based his screenplay in the writings of the Apostle Matthew. Jesus is thus portrayed as a man who defends equality and good deeds with no need of remuneration, at least in the world as we know it.

One of the biggest assets of this movie is its cast. All unknown faces, all newcomers. A Spanish actor by the name of Enrique Irazoqui plays Jesus with such simplicity and humbleness that it’s unbelievable. The same happens with Susanna Pasolini, the director’s mother, who plays Mary. The film puts these people in believable sets that have nothing extraordinary in them, which continuously gives the viewer a feeling of realism like no Hollywood movie could ever attempt. The photography is exquisite too.

This masterpiece could very well be considered the best film about Jesus Christ to date. Out of the hundreds that have been made, it’s surely the best I’ve seen.

Gon C Curiel en Twitter | CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook

Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter

Review

Sleepers

Director

Barry Levinson

Year

1996

Rating

Reviewed by

José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris

Review date

Tuesday, April 02, 2002

When I saw this picture it was in a time when I was discovering the magic of movies from a more serious point of view. I was also very young and it was one of the first adult dramas I’d seen. But what I remember most about this movie is the way it affected me so much. The day I saw it I couldn’t stop thinking about it. I had to see it again the next day to calm down a little. I remember my sister felt the same way. It’s just a movie that struck a chord with us...

It tells the true story of Lorenzo (Joseph Perrino, later Jason Patric) and his three best friends: Michael (Brad Renfro, later Brad Pitt), Tommy (Jonathan Tucker, later Billy Cudrup) and John (Geoffrey Widgor, later Ron Eldard) as we first meet them in their teens, living in Hell’s Kitchen and trying to survive a way too hot summer. One day an innocent prank goes wrong and a man gets seriously hurt. Thus the boys are sentenced to one year at the Wilkinson Center in upstate New York where they are victims of violent and sexual abuse by some of the guards, specially by one: Sean Nokes (Kevin Bacon). Years later these four friends and another childhood friend (Minnie Driver) meet again under very difficult circumstances. Two of them have committed a serious crime and a trial takes place. Danny Snyder (Dustin Hoffman) is hired to defend the guys in a case in which their all-time friend, Father Bobby (Robert De Niro), might have a lot do.

Much has been said about the verisimilitude of Lorenzo Carcaterra’s story. The movie even ends up with a disclaimer addressing this issue. This is one of those cases in which a movie had to succumb to a series of attacks by people who claim the truth hasn’t been told. Since it is a very serious issue I won’t take a position, but I will say this: a movie is a movie, and that’s exactly what I’m reviewing here.

From the get-go you know this isn’t going to be an easy movie to handle or experience. There’s a claustrophobic feel to it that is only enhanced by John William’s terrific score. At the beginning of the movie these four boys are common innocent kids with a whole life ahead of them. The fact that a single event can change so drastically the destiny of one’s life is something that has always claimed my attention. It’s only too sad when the consequences are as horrible as those depicted here.

The movie is a bit graphic in its depiction of those crimes committed against the boys, yet the psychological effect we see them go through is what actually ends up horrifying us as viewers and them as characters. Even if they have somehow survived to become adults there’s a sadness in everyone’s eyes that is omnipresent. Nothing was the same after that summer. Nothing would ever be...

I won’t say anything about the outcome of the movie. I will only say that some very controversial things happen. You won’t go out of this movie with a smile on your face whatever the verdict is. The last moments are very poignant, even nostalgic, in a way hard to describe.

Acting-wise the movie is flawless. With a cast like this what could go wrong? All of them: De Niro, Pitt, Cudrup, Driver, Patric, Hoffman, the kids, even the supporting actors do an extraordinary job with their characters. This is a tough movie to experience, let alone act. These are all very brave actors trying to tell an important story and also trying to make a statement that comes off as clear as water.

This is one of director Barry Levinson’s best pictures; a story about revenge, about friendship, about survival, about destiny, about life.

Carol: “The boy I know is not the boy you remember.”
Lorenzo: “None of us are.”

CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook

Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter

Review

The Little Shop of Horrors

Director

Roger Corman

Year

1960

Rating

Reviewed by

Gon Curiel a.k.a. Groucho

Review date

Monday, April 01, 2002

The dumb clerk of a flower shop (Jonathan Haze) will be fired by his boss (Mel Welles) unless a plant he’s created from mysterious seeds attracts more clients. His plant is indeed impressive, but also a carnivore that actually eats human flesh, talks, and grows rapidly!

This sleeper has so many continuity mistakes that it shows its low budget, but it contains such black humor as is impossible to dislike: the plant gets more and more hungry and everyone who’s benefited by the success it brings to the shop becomes a murderer.

All the characters are hilarious, especially Jack Nicholson as a masochist dental patient and Dick Miller as a flower-eater.

The finale really surprised me, as it opposes most endings we’re used to, even in black comedies.

Later remade as a stage musical and a colorful movie that kind of lack this gem’s darkness (and ending).

“Feed me!”

Gon C Curiel en Twitter | CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook

Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter