Sledgeh101

I'm all for black comedy, but there is hardly any laughs to be had out of this awful movie. In essence, it's a cross between "Absolutely Fabulous" and "The Big Hit" - three millionaire wives who decide the best medicine for having a cheating husband is to have them killed. The problem is that there's absolutely nothing in this film that you don't see coming a mile away. All the 'jokes' are so badly telegraphed, you could might be excused for thinking the writer/director made this movie over a drunken weekend in Cabo. One of the reasons "AbFab" and black comedies like "War Of The Roses" work is because there's at least one character we can empathize with and laugh with. Here, none of the women make me give a damn about any of them, and the adultery of the three men is shown so briefly, we don't have any real reason to 'cheer' when they meet their demise. Much like "The Big Hit", this was a movie I would never recommend to anyone - unless they need an example of 'worst movie ever'.

I remember watching this movie in the 80s, and thinking it was a good film. There was, however, one major problem that I had with the film - the fact that the main protagonist seems to be a dummy when it comes to anything other than science. Forgetting about the fact that Paul, one of the main characters, essentially exposed a bunch of people to high- grade plutonium (no mention about any medical crisis for all the people around Paul after the happy ending), the kicker comes when he's finally confronted in a hotel in New York by John Lithgow and a bevy of military men who would like nothing more than to lock him away for a long time. Paul's nonchalance comes out in the exchange, "They can't do anything to me." "Why not?" "Because I'm underage."

HUH? You're smart enough to build a freaking nuclear bomb by yourself, including smart enough to know where to get some explosive material needed to blow the bomb up. You're also smart enough to have fooled a high-security system with a bunch of frisbees and a helpful girlfriend in order to get the plutonium (and smart enough to temporarily cover your tracks by inserting shampoo into the jar so it's not immediately noticed as missing). But what in the world makes you think that they'll let you go because "I'm underage?"

I suppose the script writer needed to show a little naiveté - after all, if Paul knew the full gravity of what he was doing, he might not have done something as reckless as he did. Instead, he might just have gone ahead with an expose without needing to win first prize at a science contest.

If you've never seen this movie before, you may be forgiven for thinking that you're about to watch a biography about Mozart. The truth is that the movie (and the play this movie is based on) take quite a few liberties in trying to make a dramatic point. Just as in other movies about larger-than-life personalities (think "JFK" by Oliver Stone, and you get the idea), the point of this is that it's a MOVIE first, and fact second (or possibly further down the line).

Having gotten that out of the way, let me also say - IMHO, this is one of the best movies you'll ever see.

The movie opens with a 17th century composer, Antonio Salieri, who one night decides to attempt suicide by slashing his wrists. He's soon brought to a mental hospital, and in the morning a young priest comes in to talk to him. He then goes on to discuss the events that brought him to this point - specifically, his jealousy and hatred of Mozart (it's quite amusing to see him perform a few bars of his own music for the priest, to try and get some recognition out of him, and only 'succeeds' when he starts playing Mozart's famous Eine Kleine Nachtmusik - you'll recognize it too when it starts playing).

The movie shows in rich detail Mozart's life, primarily starting when Salieri first met him in person at a concert for the Archbishop of Salsburg. What makes Salieri burn is that Mozart appears to be a "filthy, dirty creature" with a foul mind - and that his music seems to come directly out of Mozart's head, "without corrections of any kind". During the course of the movie, Salieri's anger and jealousy start to consume him, until he devises a plot to 'kill' Mozart and get his revenge on God (the anger in old Salieri's eyes, and the fear in the priest's, make that scene the most powerful one for me).

Besides the beautiful music of Mozart that fills the movie, one of the things that makes this movie work so well is how they made 17th century Vienna look authentic, giving you a feel of what life must have been like back then (of course, some of the stuff was probably also enhanced by the people making this movie, but you'd be hard pressed to point out any problems). My favorite 'play within the movie' has to be where Salieri is watching Mozart's version of Don Giovani. Besides the haunting music and wonderful singing, it's the attention to detail - including 'demons' swirling around with lit torches - that really make this movie stand out.

Regardless of what type of movie you normally would watch - action, comedy, horror, whatever - I urge you to watch this movie at least once. You'll be better off for having done so.

Someone asked why Johnny mentioned that "it's too bad that Brandon DiCamillo isn't in the movie more often", and then Dimitry and Jeff are silent. It's because Brandon only participated in skits that were filmed in Pennsylvania. For his own reasons, he decided not to go with the rest of the guys (and of course, nobody wanted to say anything bad about Brandon's decision during the film).

As for some of the haters of this movie - get a life! This is clearly a movie you'll either love or hate (and you'll know where you fall into that category within 10 minutes of watching this movie), but don't talk down to people who love this movie. We love this movie because the stunts and skits are dumb - but they're meant as pranks, as opposed to anything mean- spirited (something most imitators don't seem to be able to get). That, plus these guys clearly have a good time having fun with each other, and it feels almost like you could walk over to them and hang out with them (another thing most imitators don't seem to understand).

If you don't like this movie, that's fine - but people with intelligence can also find stuff to find funny in this movie.

Gangs is one of those movies that could only have been made with a director like Martin Scorcese at the helm - 2 hours and 40 minutes? No problem. Graphic violence? No sweat. A movie with almost no story? You bet.

The story itself starts promisingly enough: Two rival gangs in mid 1800 America vie to see "who will hold sway over these five corners" as the villian, Bill "The Butcher" Cutter (you don't suppose he could have been named anything else?) growls before leading his group of men to do battle with another group called The Dead Rabbits (why they are called that is never really made clear in the story - supposedly a dead rabbit is supposed to represent freedom or something). The combat lasts a few minutes (though there were a few seconds when the editing looked so bad, I thought I was watching American Ninja 5 - a surprise for a Scorcese movie) before the leader of the Dead Rabbits is killed, with his kid watching from the sidelines. The kid is sent to an orphanage school, and all is forgotten about him for 16 years until he grows up to be Leo DiCaprio. After that... well, the thrust of the story seems to lead you to believe that Leo's Amsterdam will try finding a way to kill Bill - but for some reason, it takes him nearly 2 hours before he makes his first attempt. He reasons that he wants to kill Bill in front of everybody so they could see what would happen to him (not that most kings are actually assassinated in full view of the public, as Amsterdam mulls in one of MANY voice-over thoughts). For nearly 2 hours, we see him getting closer and closer to Bill - but showing virtually no signs of his inner struggle. Only when he sees a picture of his dead father - which Bill has hanging in tribute 'to the one man worthy of me' does he show any kind of emotion. After he finally makes an attempt on Bill's life, he spends the remainintg 40 minutes mulling what to do next (which inexplicably includes trying to hurt Bill politically) before finally getting a group of people together for the last big showdown - but even this is a letdown, as it's completely overwhelmed by a secondary storyline (about the people rioting because of the draft for the Civil War). We invest 2 1/2 hours for the son to wreak holy vengeance on his father's murderer - and it turns into something of a TKO instead. Part of the problem I had with this story was the inclusion of Jenny, a woman (played by Cameron Diaz) who doesn't seem to have a true sense of self. At the beginning, she's a pickpocket and a thief. Once Leo runs into her (and she lifts him of a personal memento), she holds a knife to his throat - and from then on she doesn't steal or pickpocket, because she's too much in love with Amsterdam. This would be bad enough, but what makes it even more strange is that there is supposed to be something between Jenny and Amsterdam's friend - at least in HIS mind, there should be - even though she is supposedly Bill's woman. The friend gets incredibly jealous when Ansterdam finally has sex with Jenny - but when Bill sees the two of them together in bed, he doesn't even bat an eye. Amsterdam's friend winds up telling Bill who Amsterdam really is - and Bill kills him for it. If you were able to make sense out of this past paragraph, you might have a future as a screenwriter for Martin Scorcese. Not all of the movie is bad. The visuals are stunning, and the movie does take an unflinching look at life in New York under the sway of "Boss Tweed" as he was known when he was mayor of New York (quick history fact - Tammany Hall, which is mentioned in the movie as a courthouse Tweed wants to build, was recently converted into the new headquarters for the NY Teacher's Association by Mayor Bloomberg, another extremely rich person. It goes to show that God DOES have a sense of irony). Corruption was rampant in that time, and people did whatever they could to make a living. In that sense, this movie does deserve praise for not backing away from this sensitive subject. However - I just wish that the story could have been more compelling - or at least a lot shorter (if this had not been commissioned by the director, the script would easily have had 40 minutes or so lopped off the top, which actually might have made it a better movie). Overall - I'd either go see it in a matinee or wait until it comes out in Blockbuster so you can rent it and fast forward through the boring parts - because trust me, there are a LOT of them in this movie.

The movie itself is not great - there are a couple of nagging questions I had unanswered at the end. One of Williams' other 'dark' movies from earlier this year, 'Insomnia' was a better movie all around. With that said, though, it should also be noted that Williams delivers one of his best performances in this movie, and should definetly be nominated for Best Actor based on this movie. Williams is Sy Parrish, a lonely man who has an huge obsession with the Yorkins. It's one thing to have an obsession and to allow rage to color all your feelings - we've seen that happen many times before - but in this case, he loves this family as if he were part of it, to the point where he breaks down sobbing when he finds some dirt on Will Yorkin (Michael Vartan). He gives a wonderfully creepy performance in this movie, and it's hard not to think about Sy after the movie is over. Between this and Insomnia, Robin Williams is having the movie year of his life, and he should be recognized for it when the Oscar nominations come down.

I admit I was feeling a bit depressed. As an aspiring screenwriter, I tend to have a more critical view of movies than many people (though I also have my indulgences - I love stuff blowing up as much as the next movie goer). I had seen a few movies by writer/directors, where the writing was substantially substandard on their follow-up effort (Magnolia by P.T. Anderson being the prime example for me). About the only writer/director I found I was a fan of was Chris Nolan (If you haven't seen any of his movies, by all means see them). I can now safely add Darren Aronofsky to that short list of writer/directors I admire.

I guess it was a good thing I was watching this movie on DVD - I was able to distract myself a little by looking at the notes inside, the better not to be completely sickened by what I was watching. Not that I was sick in a bad way - but rather, when you watch the three minutes or so that is the climax of this movie - when you see how the dreams of 4 people winds up plunging them into madness, into an abyss where they will never come back from - you too will be sick. Fascinated. Horrified. It takes a great writer and director to make us feel emotionally exhausted after watching one of his movies (I also recommend Pi, which is also gripping, but nowhere near as shocking as this movie). Darren Aronofsky is one of those rare film people - in a class by himself.

I'm sure there will be many people who disagree with me (and considering how almost all of the first 20 comments I read called this movie classic and great, I very well be in the minority here), but I absolutely hated this movie. I wouldn't go so far as to call this a terrible movie - I've seen MUCH worse drivel than this (Hudson Hawk and The Big Hit, to name two) - but watching this movie was like watching a 20 car pile-up happen right before your eyes. It's both fascinating and disgusting at the same time.

Okay, the movie starts out bizarrely enough, with all these little snippets that have absolutely nothing to do with the rest of the movie except to promote the idea that chaos happens, so to speak. My guess is that P.T. Anderson had these wild images of a guy in scuba gear on top of a tree and another guy getting shot while falling, and didn't know what to do with them - so why not put them in this movie?

There are a lot of faults with this movie, but the biggest one for me is all the overacting and bad dialogue that goes on in this movie. One prime example is when Julianne Moore goes to see her lawyer. When she doesn't get what she wants from him, her response to him is "F--- you". Okay, that'd be fine - but she has to repeat it like a mantra as she's walking out the door, raising the pitch of her voice to the point where she sounds like a 2 year old as she gets to the door. Maybe this is supposed to be there and I just don't 'get it' - but the same emotion that she needed to make could have been done much differently and wouldn't have come off making her sound like a baby.

For the whole movie, there are characters that have the thinnest relationship with the other characters' stories, and we're not allowed to be emotionally involved with any of them, because we jump so fast from one story to the other that I watched the credits going "Huh?"

Bottom line - if you want to see a good P.T. Anderson movie - see Boogie Nights (which is not the greatest movie ever either, but a hell of a lot better than this exercise in overindulgence).

I'm going on the assumption here that you saw the first MIB (if you didn't, stop reading this now and rent it - it's a fairly good movie). Remember when Agent K was looking in on his wife, with that wistful smile, then stopped when Agent J caught him and came up with the ham-handed "Well, you know, it's better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all." Remember the reply? "Try it." I know what he felt. That's why I was happy (along with many fans of the movie) to see the picture of a smiling Agent K reunited with his wife at the end of the first movie.

Well, when they wrote this movie, they must have forgotten about all that, because this movie has about as much emotion as a Kleenex tissue paper. They try reversing the roles this time around, giving Agent J someone to be in love with, but it doesn't work. It's forced on us (after all, if he zaps her like he's supposed to, goodbye movie), and thus I didn't care what happened.

Don't get me wrong - this movie still has some funny stuff, including a funny role for Johnny Knoxville (okay, yes, I'm a fan, big deal!), but I'm just glad I was able to get the matinee showing so I wouldn't have to waste any more money seeing this movie than I had to. And at 81 minutes long (not including the end credits), you better not bother going to the bathroom during the middle of the movie - you might wind up missing half the movie.