Movie Review

  • X-Men (2000)

    X-Men (2000)

    (In theaters, July 2000) When all will have been said and done, the biggest measure of X-Men‘s success is how it didn’t disappoint the legions of fans and hordes of non-fans that went to see it. It’s incredibly hard to make a film about iconic figures, but X-Men manages to pull it off. The script wisely focuses on only a few characters, grounds the fanciful comic elements in reality (such as the black leather uniforms rather than yellow spandex) and plays around the ever-popular theme of discrimination, almost bringing some actual thought in the process. Director Bryan Singer does a decent job on most of the film, but his action scenes clearly show his lack of experience with special effects and action editing: They feel disjointed, don’t flow nearly as well as they should and rarely use wide-angle shots that would firmly establish the action flow in viewers’ mind. Nevertheless, the film is enjoyable, features a breakout performance by Hugh Jackman (as fanboy favourite Wolverine) and delivers value for the money. Not a bad performance for a summer blockbuster.

  • The Undertaker’s Wedding (1997)

    The Undertaker’s Wedding (1997)

    (On VHS, July 2000) Charming, little-known comedy about an undertaker being caught in the middle of a mafia family war. Romantic -and possibly fatal- complications ensue. Sympathetic central characters, gorgeous actresses, fun conclusion and a few funny scenes make this an entirely acceptable, if not essential rental.

  • Small Time Crooks (2000)

    Small Time Crooks (2000)

    (In theaters, July 2000) The type of perfectly adequate film that is neither too impressive nor too awful to talk about. Woody Allen plays his umpteenth neurotic character, the first act is the funniest, the ending isn’t all that good, it’s more of a smiling comedy than a laughing comedy.

  • Scary Movie (2000)

    Scary Movie (2000)

    (In theaters, July 2000) If ever there was a genre which deserved its satiric roasting, it’s the late-nineties “teen slasher horror” craze, which -for all its hip self-awareness- wasn’t all that much better than its early-eighties predecessors. Scary Movie takes up the task with gusto, and despite an annoying intrusion of gross-out comedy, the film is oodles better than most satiric comedies have been in years. The script is filled with genuinely funny material, and most parodies are on-target. I’d have cut about five minutes of unnecessary vulgar material (which gets old real quickly, and ends up annoying rather than amusing), but the rest works well. Wait for the TV network version.

    (Second Viewing, October 2021) After the past few years’ Friday the 13th and Halloween end-of-October horror marathons, I thought I’d do something lighter and have a second look at the five Scary Movie comedies back-to-back. Revisiting them twenty years later is bound to be strange—as parodies, they reference pieces of pop culture that are no longer particularly current—I may remember them, but ever-so-faintly. Blending Scream and I Know What You Did Last Summer (the first one is still a reference, the second one not so much), the script goes in full spoof mode with re-creations going into jokes, background gags (alas, not enough of them) and references that don’t always make sense. The lack of fluidity of the result is more apparent, as is the way some material is jammed in the film without grace. Written and directed by the Wayan Brothers, Scary Movie does not play in subtlety—while it occasionally remains funny, it lacks trust in the audience’s ability to grasp the jokes quickly. If you belong to the school of thought that comedy is surprise, nothing kills a gag faster than having it being so drawn out that you can see it coming. And while it may be strange to complain about the violence and sexual content in an R-rated spoof on R-rated horror films, there are definitely a few instances where the film is more gross than funny, the dial having been set just a bit too high for comfort. While never tasteful, some of the material (about gay or trans characters, in particular) now feels even more dubious. Still, compared to many later spoof comedies (and in particular the repellent Freidman/Seitzer “spoofs” of the 2000s, their credits here as writers heralding the worst) Scary Movie is actually not too bad—it has low but sufficient production values, a script that tells a story, and jokes that don’t stop at being mere recreations. I smiled a few times, maybe even chuckled more often than I expected going in. It’s interesting to see, twenty years later, what happened to the cast: Anna Faris (as a brunette?!?) did well for herself as a comedian, while Regina Hall achieved some dramatic respectability later on. Lochlyn Munroe never quite had the career anticipated for him, although he’s working steadily on lower-budget productions—which is more that can be said for much of the cast. While I had my doubts about the value of revisiting the Scary Movie series, I’m now set straight: It’s not a wise project, but will have its moments. Although I dread that Scary Movie 2 is up next—I recall it as being the worst of the bunch.

  • The Perfect Storm (2000)

    The Perfect Storm (2000)

    (In theaters, July 2000) Upon reading Sebastian Junger’s non-fiction book The Perfect Storm, my first reaction was that it would make a spectacular movie, but probably not a very good one: The historical facts -if played straight- were ill-fitted to a dramatic arc, and carried a definitely anti-happy-ending resonance. Fortunately, director Wolfgang Petersen was able not only to keep the film reasonably faithful to the book, but also to deliver a film that will satisfy most audiences. The first forty minutes of the film, with its land-based action meant to introduce the characters and set up the relevant elements of the plot, are definitely its weakest: The audience is there to see the storm, not some fishermen with clichéd dialogue. But pay attention, as the characters will give meaning to the upcoming mayhem. After the storm starts, you can only sit back and go Wow, because you’re going to see some of the most awe-inspiring storm footage ever computer-generated. This is the point where you realize you should see this film on the biggest screen you can. By this time, the lousy dialogue and jerky character development doesn’t really matter. We’re in ride-movie territory, and as far as those go, The Perfect Storm is better than most. Even the ending, which I was apprehending, felt right. Maybe not a perfect film, but a darn good roller-coaster with some depth.

  • Pâfekuto burû [Perfect Blue] (1997)

    Pâfekuto burû [Perfect Blue] (1997)

    (In theaters, July 2000) Japanese animated film about an actress whose entourage gradually gets killed by some mysterious entity. Putrid rotoscoped animation is compensated, somewhat, by a down-to-earth adult subject matter (so much that it’s unclear why this was done as animation) and gripping plot. The film occasionally gets too twisty for its own good and probably doesn’t make sense even after the last revelations, but it’s worth watching. Needless to say, this is not for kids.

  • The Patriot (2000)

    The Patriot (2000)

    (In theaters, July 2000) The impossible has happened: Emmerich and Devlin -the team behind such stinkers as Stargate, Independence Day and Godzilla– have finally produced a good film. A really good film. Sure, Mel Gibson’s done pretty much all of this before in Braveheart and the film is peppered with occasionally dumb scenes. (Cinepop-quiz: At which point will the little “mute” girl will start to talk? What will she say?) But on the other hand, this is a straightforward war adventure with a decent script, a likeable protagonist, some tension and clear direction. Cultural anthropologists and war buffs will revel in the representation of classical 18th-century European warfare (lines of soldiers advance, shoot, reload. All very civilized) While some liberties have been taken with historical facts, the film feels very convincing in details and atmosphere. Finally, a summer epic that does not disappoint!

    (Second viewing, On DVD, September 2001) This film definitely appreciates with a second viewing. You come to expect the mawkish emotional scenes (“Daddy! I can talk at dramatic junctures of the plot!”) and gloss over them to focus on the wonderful re-creation of the American Revolution. The script, aside from the cheap occasional sentimentalism, isn’t half-bad and the directing is quite good. Who would have thought the one who brought us Stargate, Independence Day and Godzilla could pull it off? The DVD contains a few extras that won’t work on my cheap player, and a moderately interesting commentary track by the directors. The Patriot finally plays like the grand historical epic it’s supposed to be: A good film!

  • For Richer Or Poorer (1997)

    For Richer Or Poorer (1997)

    (On VHS, July 2000) New York City folks (suitably haughty Tim Allen and Kirstie Alley) get stuck in Amish backwoods, laugh at the country folks but ultimately learn better. Some of the humor at the expense of the Amish verges on unpleasantness, but as expected, everything gets set straight before the end credits roll. If this didn’t come from Disney, it should have. An unmemorable, predictable film, good to pass time, but with a high enough budget that it can’t pass as “a little-known gem”.

  • The Big Kahuna (1999)

    The Big Kahuna (1999)

    (In theaters, July 2000) Obviously adapted from a theatrical play (as given away by the one-room setting), this film is more of actor’s showcase than a satisfying movie experience. Kevin Spacey, Danny DeVito and Peter Facinelli all provide great performances, and the dialogue is good enough to tear into. The first act is the best, with the Spacey’s unrepentantly cynical character dominating the film and the mordant dialogue. After that, the film gets preachy and self-important and loses a lot of its appeal. The conclusion is unsatisfying in that “and they he learned an important life lesson despite it being unpleasant” type of fashion.

  • Vertigo (1958)

    Vertigo (1958)

    (In theaters, June 2000) Every great director can make mistakes once in a while, and while Vertigo has its adherents, I can’t help but feel that Hitchcock dropped the ball with this one; it’s a story with huge structural problems and a baffling finale. This being said, it develops quite nicely, and could forever coast on the talents of Kim Novak and James Stewart. Still, there are inexcusable faults, like the disjointed nature of the film (some cutting required), the disappearance of the girl-friend character and the abrupt huh-inducing finale. It doesn’t hold up nearly as well as Hitchcock’s better films…

    (Second viewing, On Cable TV, November 2020) I wasn’t a big Vertigo fan when I first saw it twenty years ago, and considering the impeccable critical acclaim that the film gets these days, I was curious to see it again and see whether two decades’ experiences and a much better understanding of Hitchcock’s career would lead me to another conclusion. Happily, it does; unhappily, I have to live with my first dumb review. Oh, I’m still not overly enthusiastic about Vertigo. I think Hitchcock has done better movies, and its appeal baffles me slightly. I have issues with the construction of the script and its far too hasty revelation (you know the one), as well as the disappearance of a supporting character without explanation. In the wider context of Hitchcock’s career, though, Vertigo is special: Its thematic obsession with, well, obsession neatly reflects other movies of his, and it’s no accident if the object of the protagonist’s fervour is a cool-ice blonde. I strongly suspect that the appeal of the film hovers at a near-unconscious level: not something based on plot or character, but in images, feelings and subtext. But, at long last, I do like it. Not a lot, but I do. James Stewart helps quite a bit, considering that his significantly darker character is epochal. Kim Novak makes for a splendid icon for Hitchcock’s own obsessions. As for San Francisco, well, it’s practically a third character with its multiple landmarks (most of whom I visited during my sole trip to the city!) showing up every few minutes. The plot itself makes slightly more sense than it did twenty years ago, but still hovers on the line of preposterousness. But that’s the nature of Vertigo: not entirely understandable on a purely rational level, and clearly aiming for a wealth of interpretations. I still like Rear Window much better, but I’ve made my peace with Vertigo so much applause.

  • Titan A.E. (2000)

    Titan A.E. (2000)

    (In theaters, June 2000) A terribly frustrating film on several levels. First and foremost is the script, of course, which is a mishmash of fun situations and botched execution. Some of the set-pieces are impressive, and compelling on a teen geez-wow level, but the screenplay is marred by ordinary character development, trite dialogue and an episodic nature that doesn’t cohere very well. Each details that shows that someone has been paying attention (“Exhale!”) is followed by an inanity that destroys the illusion. But beyond the words, there are also several problems with the pictures: The state-of-the-art in Computer-Generated Imagery has advanced so much in recent years that the subpar 2D character animation as practiced by Don Bluth Studios now clashes vividly with the background 3D CGI. This jarring lack of continuity remains through the film, dogging any viewer’s suspension of disbelief. Still, it’s worth a look. Even though it doesn’t approach anywhere near the levels set by The Iron Giant, Titan A.E. is entertaining for its whole duration and should provide adequate entertainment for the whole family. Your inner early teen should appreciate even if you don’t.

  • Shaft (2000)

    Shaft (2000)

    (In theaters, June 2000) The danger with iconic movies -such as this remake of a classic seventies film- is that the hype, the mystique of the characters is always invariably bigger than the end product. In this light, Shaft does a creditable job at re-creating the innate coolness of John Shaft. A large part of this (and a suitably large portion of the film’s appeal) comes from Mr. Badass himself, Samuel L. Jackson. He clicks, and so does the film. As for the story, it’s an average cops-versus-baddies script, with enough fun quirks to make it modern and interesting. Pretty good? Ya damn right!

  • Rear Window (1954)

    Rear Window (1954)

    (Second viewing, In theaters, June 2000) Seeing this justifiably-lauded masterpiece on the big screen again not only re-affirmed this film’s presence on my top-100 film list, but demonstrated many things I didn’t quite remember. It’s easy to remember how insanely great the premise is (what with the single set, limited perspective and particular protagonist), how masterfully the story is developed (great script, superb dialogues, seamless directing) and how suspenseful the whole thing is, but it’s all too easy to forget how darn funny this film is, and how great you feel after watching it. Rent it now, and enjoy every second.

  • Me, Myself & Irene (2000)

    Me, Myself & Irene (2000)

    (In theaters, June 2000) After Jim Carrey’s newfound acting reputation (after more nuanced turns in The Truman Show and Man On The Moon) and the Farrely Brother’s unexpected mega-hit with There’s Something About Mary, there were considerable expectations about their first reunion since Dumb & Dumber. Unfortunately, Me, Myself & Irene would have been a failure even if it hadn’t been hyped. In their rush to bring to screens a bigger, nastier, grosser comedy, The Farrelys have forgotten that There’s Something About Mary‘s biggest strength wasn’t the gross-out gags, but the solid romantic underpinning and the constant comedy (which was funny throughout, with occasional peaks of good-natured outrageousness). Conversely, Me, Myself & Irene goes for the gross-out without any reason to do so. It mixes kind of a serious plot (what with murders, criminals and amputations) with attempts at being funny and the mixture doesn’t hold. Granted, the premise is fantastic (Carrey as fighting against himself? Wasn’t that just great in Liar Liar?) and the three rude black geniuses simply steal every scene they’re in (gotta love that quantum physics discussion!), but overall, Me, Myself & Irene misfires far too often, and the result is simply… not that funny. (As an aside, your reviewer notes that with the accumulation of gross-out humor, he finds myself not repulsed nor amused, but annoyed and left curiously unaffected by the more extreme gags in this vein -see Scary Movie-. Hopefully the pendulum of moviegoer’s tastes will soon swing back.)

  • Flubber (1997)

    Flubber (1997)

    (On TV, June 2000) I was prepared for the worst -what with Robin Williams in a remake of a Disney kid’s movie with cute special effects- but was finally entertained decently by this film. As long as you focus on the sight gags, the good special effects and never worry too much about the dumb plotting, saccharine moments and out-of-place adult elements in a kid’s film.