bluestylus

Okay, so I gave one grade point for special effects. Otherwise, this movie is best left for teenagers with raging hormones, no girl-friend, and a dark closet. The most annoying performance (from accent to flounce) of all time in Hollywood goes to Kate Beckinsale for her hideous performance as Anna. If I had seen this movie in the theatre, I would have sued for damages. It would appear the true monster in this film is Beckinsale. I don't know what other movies she's been in, so I cannot comment on her overall worth as an actor, but based alone on this performance, I'd say she should be paid in toilet paper because her talent is non-existent and/or crap at best.

Tom Cruise delivers another stellar performance in Collateral. Unfortunately, he's the sole actor who sells the tickets. Jamie Foxx and Jada Pinkett Smith are *horrible* actors -- especially the latter. The beginning of the movie crawls to a start. It's a snooze fest until Cruise enters the story line as the wild coyote-eyed assassin. Granted, the above-the-city cinematography is stunning, but the edits leave us dangling above the lights for far too long, boring the viewing audience. The dialogue between Cruise and Foxx for the most part is good, but the exchange between Foxx and Smith is torturous & tedious. The second shining performance is Barry Shabaka Henley as Daniel. Too bad his part was so short... Folks, you had your money on the wrong pony -- I'd have hired a million Smiths to one Henley. The man is the complete package and wanting for nothing. The worst part of this film is the sub-story, or "love" story. I tried to be patient, but ended up skipping most of it. Please, don't insult your audience, directors! Who would believe Smith could hire a taxi, become seduced by the driver far enough to offer her card (she's a prosecutor, for crying out loud), and then she ends up being the last target of the assassin in the same cab, who Foxx rescues. Even trying to play the "destiny" card flops, it's just too ridiculous. And what an X through the credibility of strong female characters in movie-land. Is this the 70s or what? Definitely not a 2004 plot line with such a lame spin. To cap it, the movie's ending was as boring and stupid as its beginning. This garbage ending has only one gem - that's the Cruise line maxing out on the subway (note: teleology works here). Otherwise, the whole story is a royal tosser.

If you like Curve Your Enthusiasm, you'll most likely enjoy this movie -- it has the flavour of Woody Allen on lithium. What I can say in favour of this movie is that the cinematography was great... there were some beautiful scenes. But then often I felt as though I was being sold on wine country, and that the flick was nothing more than propaganda/advertising for California wines. But I'm a tough critique (since I was raised in wine country). Rolfe Kent made the movie what it is, and if it wasn't for him and Virginia Madsen I'd have given it a 0 out of 10. He created the perfect, jazzy atmosphere, that had you roaming through the back roads of wine country, tasting here, sloshing there. Virginia Madsen, I will add, absolutely glowed -- her character was as well-rounded in bouquet as a fine cabernet sauvignon. She *was* the movie (particularly the scene where she described why she likes wine). And Sandra Oh is always a good actress. No matter what she plays, she delivers. But Paul Giamatti was soooooooooo boring. I almost shut the movie off three times, but persisted only because I hoped it would get better. The only scene Giamatti showed promise in was when he ran down the hill like a madman into the vineyard with that bottle of wine. I laughed out loud. Otherwise, there was only one other scene that got a rise out of me, and that was when they were playing golf. I imagine it's because we've all been there, and dreamt of doing exactly what they did to the obnoxious players coming up from hind quarters. Thomas Haden Church was there, though he came across too much as a Nick Nolte knock-off. Sorry guys, I rate this movie 2 out of 10.

Oh my gosh, two horrible movies in one night. This movie was absolute trash. First of all, there can't possibly be a worse voice than Tracey Wilkinson's. That is, at least when it was apparent she wasn't lip-sinc'ing! And who would buy the story-line? Mark Addy isn't exactly Brad Pitt -- he couldn't swing being married to one, let alone two, of these lovely older ladies. The only characters who are worth giving any merit to in this movie are Freddie Jones as Jasper (absolutely hilarious), the fellow who played the mad-bomber (reminded me of a British Christopher Lloyd), and Fedorah the dog. And I'm serious about the last one. The worst scene had to be the police chase at the end. The stunt doubles were obvious, the jokes were worse than lame, and the stupid Benny Hill music... need I say more? Trash, trash, trash. Save your money and your time and rent the Station Agent instead of this tripe. That's right, park this garbage on the curb. That is, if the garbage men will even accept it!!!

Note: mild spoilers and healthy ranting [and at least one statement to make you laugh, & another to anger you]

Every non-hot teen / young male has the hots for at least one hot teen / young female during their puberty / adolescence / coming of age. The male who is capable of putting the scenario into perspective, learning to accept and like himself, and in turn, learning to open his eyes and love / respect the women who are around him and in his league, evolves into a healthy human being who everyone enjoys being in the company of.

However, there is the unhealthy male. This individual cannot move beyond the desire to possess and conquer the hot female and call her his own. He becomes an obsessive, bitter person, spiteful, feeling cheated because he did not get what he believes he rightly deserved. He dreams about her (which is fine), but then goes on to measure every female then and into the future by her [perceived] perfection. Instead of just accepting and enjoying the fantasy, once rejected, he holds onto the dream as if it were a reality and pines, dooming his possible relationships, never building a positive self-esteem, and in the process, ripping apart the self-esteem of every unfortunate female he intimates himself with after "the one that got away".

THIS is a movie that helps perpetuate such an unhealthy fixation. Instead of being based on reality, and helping the young male move through the rites of passage (early rejection) and heal via self-discovery and the discovery of others, it finishes the unhealthy fantasy re: the "underdog" ugly guy (who btw is almost 30) gets the girl (who is barely out of her teens -- coincidence?).

For once I'd like to see a movie where the ugly guy does NOT get the girl. Why can't a beautiful girl just be allowed to be beautiful? Why can't she get a good looking, successful guy, and live the life she is destined to have? Instead of being crammed into an old shoe, setting a horrible example for ugly guys who think they can get the hot chicks (and then treating average and ugly girls like dirt) and trapping pretty girls into feeling guilty for setting their ideals higher than the goof who cracks his neck in home room when he thinks no one is looking?

This is typical chauvinistic garbage being shoved down the throats of women yet again by Hollywood. Free the beautiful, average, and ugly women from your persecution! Let the average and ugly guy come to terms with his fate and learn to appreciate the women who are at par...

It is a scenario played out in Hollywood too often. Oppressive really. So many times there is the male, he has all the hoochie he could want, or, he gets the good looking girl who sacrifices all just to be with him, or, he is an old fart and NATURALLY the younger woman is who Hollywood saddles him up to be with.

Why don't you writers just do us a favour, and keep the old boy's club fantasies for your girlie magazines, and leave us women out of your brainwashing techniques? We don't need to settle.

What WOULD make a good movie is the stupid fixation fantasy gone right. Girl meets boy. Boy is a jack-off who has a stupid fixation. Boy thinks he is hot crap, and treats girl like refuse. Girl sees guy for what he is. Guy gets dumped. Girl goes on to meet healthy guy. Girl's best-friend, hot girl, does not get duped into staying with some ugly guy in some small town, settling for a mediocre life. Hot girl gets hot guy, moves to hot town, lives a hot life. Average / ugly girl remains best friends with hot girl, and they respect one another. No petty jealousy. Simply perspective, self acceptance, and genuine liking. They visit one another into their old age, sharing stories about their lives, careers, travels, families, and then the flash back to obsessive guy: compare him to healthy guy. Healthy guy is LOOKING FINE. Obsessive guy - pathetic.

Way more interesting story than stuffing a beautiful girl into an old sock. GRRR!

Signed, a beautiful girl not willing to settle & darn tired of 1950s drive-in movie propaganda - vivre la belle femme!

P.S. Kate Bosworth would look WAY better in her natural brunette hair colour. Free Kate! She is beautiful just as she is. Down with peroxide! Or better yet, shove it up the ante of whoever has duped her into changing her beautiful, natural, locks.

If you enjoy scantily clad jazz dancers, you will like this movie. If you like jazz music & dancing, you will like this movie. If you like musicals, well, you'll like this movie. If you like costumes, yes, you will enjoy this movie. If you like the 1920s, then you will enjoy this movie... And last but not least, if you like Catherine Zeta-Jones and Renee Zellweger, you will like this movie.

Who is overlooked? The best performances were by Queen Latifah and John C. Reilly, particularly the latter. And who is the hair dresser of Renee? Give that man an award!! Kudos to Dale Brownell and Colleen Callaghan... outstandingly creative.

But what of the story-line? There are spoilers here, so if you haven't seen the movie -- STOP RIGHT HERE.

If you have seen the movie, here are seeds for thought. This movie is about two spoiled, selfish, white girls who get away with murder and still have their cakes and eat them too. All the while, husbands suffer, and the innocent immigrant hangs because she can't come up with the dough to pay for a sleazy lawyer to get her off.

Social critique? Or misogynist bent? Even the press comes off less than pretty. The only decent character in the whole she-bang [puns intended] is the woman who didn't kill her husband and hangs for someone else's crime. The reporters, the legal system, and even the audience partake in the guilt of the guilty for adoring infamy, and dismissing nobility.

Is this story the workings of someone truly brilliant? Or is it the sour bigotry of someone who can't see beyond the crescent of the landscape they're standing on? Hard to tell, but fun to wonder about.

A cinematography masterpiece. Well written. Beautiful music score. Take a voyage with Matheson, Bass, and Serra through an Alighierian adventure. Robin Williams' character, Christy, narrates the life and death of a family whose bond is greater than the physical. Strong Buddhist overtones. Students of philosophy, religion, art, anthropology, and literature will appreciate this movie. The character of Annie, his wife, is less credible to the audience -- but not because of any lack within the ability of Annabella Sciorra to convey the character through her talented acting. Annie is a "Beatrice" -- the character is always a bit distant, almost intangible, always dangling just before the audience. She is vibrant and lively, but not quite real. The character is meant to be this way... we strive to attain what we don't quite possess, and if she were to be any more tangible, our hero -- Christy -- would not have anything to reach out for... and we would not have the journey ahead of us to travel. Highly recommended. Be sure not to miss this treat. Best viewed on a wide screen in digital w/ stereo.

Big names, pretentious photography. Intellectually absent, bodice ripper. It's value is a 5 cent paperback at a flea market [best offer]. Predictable. Lacking in depth. Recommended for spoon fed zombies who lack personality. If you need to be told what is good without recognising it for yourself, you'll appreciate "Cold Mountain".

In other words --- 65% of the population process life via the visual. They most likely will tolerate this movie. 30% process life via the audile -- they will most likely find this movie uncomfortable to sit through due to the lack of dialogue. 5% process life through feeling. They most likely will either love or hate this movie. Why?

Because it is pathetic, rhetorically speaking. Overdone. Over-the-top. Excessive. Over-kill.

See where you fit. Hear it for yourself. Feel free to exercise your own thoughts. It's a democracy, and so crap like this movie can proliferate.

WILL SOMEONE OUT THERE WRITE, DIRECT, AND PRODUCE SOMETHING FOR THE REST OF CIVILIZATION PLEASE? This movie's mundaneness is more exciting than porridge.

Spoilers... so scroll down to see review...............

Yet another lame plot where partners just dissolve and immediately hook up with someone else, effortlessly. Happy ending: a brand new family. I'm tired of seeing "alternative family" movies. Would have been better if he had been a widow, and that's not much better. The cinematography was par to a Hallmark presentation - slow moving, full of props, golden. There were the usual "loveable" characters - two gruff old brothers. The reason I gave this movie a 2 instead of lower is because of the performances of these two old fellows and the best performance of all the actors - the Native American young woman, pregnant, and dealing with some tough issues. The teachers, boring. The other students, boring. The old lady who dies, well, not so boring but definitely too stereo-typical (even more so than the old brothers). The kids are cute, as kids tend to be. . With made-for-tv movies that have slid down the slippery slope to devolve into this washed out stuff, no wonder I belong to a generation that is jaded and cynical. Writers and directors, wise up.

A teleology that is well woven and true to classical form. Artful writing on the part of Canin and Tolkin. If you are familiar with political philosophy, history and rhetoric you will appreciate the Emperor's Club more than the average movie-goer. Unfortunately, it lacks strong female characters - where is our Cleopatra, our Hypathia, our intelligent women who were solid and outspoken? They historically exist, but remain buried for all the intents and purposes of this film.

For an intellectual analysis, see Jennifer Parchesky's article "Lois Weber's The Blot: Rewriting Melodrama, Reproducing the Middle Class" in Cinema Journal 39.1 (1999) 23-53 [University of Texas Press].

Through an examination of social conditions during the 1920s, Parchesky defines the ethos, pathos & logos that Lois Weber most likely deduced in the writing and directing the film, the Blot.