This film has its obvious flaws, especially in storyline, acting and special effects, yet it wasn't horrible.
Wouldn't advice anyone to rent or buy it, but when it's on TV you might want to give it a chance.
It has some entertainment value, and it didn't feel as if I had wasted one-and-a-half hours of my life.
Perhaps I'm just a little milder because I had the displeasure to see Miss Congeniality 2 and Drunken Jackasses: The Quest within the time-span of 2 days. Especially compared to the last one, Rottweiler managed to offer some form of entertainment.
It was the tag-line "in the tradition of American Pie" that fooled me into renting this movie. What I got was a piece of junk in the style of Jackass, with the major difference that compared to this Jackass the Movie seems like a Citizen Kane.
This movie made me regret that I rewarded other movies with 1 out of 10, because now I can't go beneath that. This one makes quite some bad movies look like cinematic feats.
I actually turned it off after 45 minutes, and that's something I very rarely do. But it was just too plain boring, stupid, uninteresting and unnecessary.
Can't believe some people actually reward this with 10 out of 10. What did your parents do? Drop you on the head when you were just a child? Or was it the very first movie you ever saw, so you got nothing to compare it to? Are you still a virgin and are breasts all you ever think off? Something must be wrong, at least.
My advice: stay clear of this one. Even if your in the mood for a simple movie that doesn't require thinking, choose something else, or you'll regret it for sure.
Avoid at all costs, if you don't want to damage your sense of humor for good.
We rented this film because my girlfriend wanted to see it. But even she didn't like it at all, and she normally likes these kind of comedies.
What a terrible waste of budget once again. Why don't they understand that a good movie is more than spending a lot of cash to make it look good.
Not even a halfway decent storyline, no character development, not one original joke (not even one successful joke for that matter), no chemistry between any of the actors, nothing that gives this movie a right to exist. It is nothing more than an inadequate succession of clichés.
Avoid at all costs, if you don't want to damage your sense of humor for good.
This one won't rank amongst some of the horror classics, but still it's reasonably good, reasonably original, has some nice directing and some beautiful shots and sequences and is reasonably entertaining. In short it's reasonable enough to rent it sometime when you're in the mood.
Well, as often with these boy/girl comedies the story line isn't very original: boy gets dumped by one girl, meets another one who becomes his best friend, keeps hoping to get together with his ex, but in the end discovers that this new girl he has met, has become more than just a friend to him and is the one he really wants. How predictable can it get. And yet this movie isn't completely boring, but at times even quite funny, and David Krumholtz and Milla Jovovich have the kind of chemistry that you need for this type of movie, and which makes it still quite entertaining. If you're in the mood for something that doesn't require thinking, and you don't mind the cliches then this one might be worth renting some time.
Only thing that baffled me though was how someone can remain stuck up on Denise Richards, while meeting Milla Jovovich who is about 10 times as beautiful. It would've taken me about 10 seconds to forget about Richards. Oh well. Must be me.
Amazing movie. It led me on and had me walking the dead ends in the maze
First, let me help people who still want to see this movie, but aren't too sure after reading all the comments posted here, whether this is their kind of movie or not. I myself agree with everyone who says this work is nothing short of a masterpiece, but I can understand that this is not a movie for everyone. It is an intelligently contrived movie with beautiful camera work, bleak and haunting scenery, great acting, great and misleading directing, slow pacing, and a very intense overall atmosphere. Does the above mean anything to you and did you like movies such as Mamoru Oshii's Avalon and The Coen brother's The Man Who Wasn't There, then this might be the right kind of movie for you and I advise to make sure you don't read too much about it beforehand, because it is more interesting when you don't know what to expect. I knew nothing about it, and therefore was fully prepared to be misled and manipulated as a viewer. If all the above means nothing to you, please don't watch the movie, and if you still wish to do so, don't come here and complain if you don't like it. This is simply a high quality movie like we only see a few each year, and undeniably a great work of art. So if you don't like it, it is not because it is a bad movie, but it is simply a matter of taste and the inability to recognise certain aspects of the film.
Secondly, and this part contains ***spoilers*** so I advise anyone who still has to see the movie not to read on, I want to say something about how I experienced this movie. I was dead tired when I started this movie, but within ten minutes I was sucked into it and feeling quite awake again. And perhaps because I was tired I was more easily misled but I still think it had a lot to do with the great directing by Cronenberg and the brilliant work of the actors. For instance: I didn't know Miranda Richardson played two parts in the movie, and I only found out after I finished the movie and saw the end credits and then additionally read some comments here. Incredible, the roles of the mother and the mistress of his father are so differently portrayed that I never noticed that it were both the same actress, partly due of course to good costumes and make-up, but mainly to her performance.
Another example: The owner of the halfhouse, where Spider stays is Miss Wilkinson. Then you don't see her for quite a while, but you learn that the mistress of the father is also called Wilkinson, and you start wondering if this might be the same person. When the owner of the halfhouse is reintroduced she looks like an older version of his fathers mistress, and since it has been quite a while since you've seen her I didn't notice that it was a completely different actor all together. But the role is played exactly the same and it got me wondering if this movie was all about Spider meeting up with someone out of his past who had something to do with the traumatic experience that had made Spider what he is today.
And I could go on mentioning other examples. Not knowing what subject the movie was going to be about, I was completely misled into creating a completely different story than the one that was lying underneath. While piecing together all the pieces of the puzzle, I as a viewer was manipulated into trying to find one kind of story from the perspective of Spider, while at the same time the real story was craftly hidden underneath and revealed in the twisting end. And looking back in retrospective you see that it all fits. All the points where I was led on, and fooled into believing the other story, and all the points where I had the feeling there was something odd going on, come together in the real story of spider. The story you've really been watching for the past one-and-a-half hours. incredibly well done. and I could probably go on for hours talking about this movie and what i loved about it but maybe it is just sufficient to say: I gave it 10 out 10 as a rating.
Well, it may not be exactly 28 days since I've seen this movie, but you might get the idea. Every once in a while the memory of this movie pops back into my mind, and I'm remembered to make sure to see this film again. I rank it amongst the best zombie movies I have seen. People who are into those old italian splatter zombie movies might not agree, but I often feel that those are a completely different genre.
This work compares to the George A. Romero trilogy night/dawn/day of the dead, where tension is partly build with the threat of the undead, but mostly with the psychological effects on the survivors and the strain, carelessness and inhumanity that comes with that. I have always found it an interesting idea what would happen if suddenly for some reason only a small group of people would survive, there would be a 'natural' enemy again, and all boundaries of human civilization and conduct were to fall away. It is a theme that also can be found in John Wyndham's book Day of the Triffids (don't bother with the film, it stinks), that gives cause for reflection on our society and its rules of behaviour, which are more elusive than we generally stop to think about. (for instance: what if there are only a few people left and you have to build a new society, is monogamy in that case a smart idea or should a man have as many wives as possible just in order to sustain our race?(interesting question, isn't it?)). 28 days later... doesn't go as far as to consider the rebuilding of a civilization, but it touches on quite a few points that are amiss with ours, and makes an interesting search through the different kind of views and behaviour that people will expose in this kind of situation. This gives a depth to the movie that makes it very interesting.
The effect of all this on the movie is that there a quite a few long sequences where you won't see a zombie whatsoever, but where there's still an enormous tension, or sometimes even complete relaxation as the main characters almost seem to forget the situation and indulge in old habits. a fairly human trait I think, just remember people going to the theatres a few days after WTC-incident to forget it all for a moment. But when the undead show up they are really scary. The filmmakers really managed to create monsters that are more effective than any old zombie could have been in a modern movie.
The fairly low budget with which this film was made is also a blessing for the movie I think. It demands from a director to be more creative with his possibilities and the camerawork, which results in very atmospheric scenery and beautiful shots. (keep for instance an eye out for scenes with rain in it, and you'll know what I mean). This all is combined with strong acting and a hell of a soundtrack ( to hear God Speed You Black Emperor underneath images of deserted London sends shivers down my spine).
In short: this film kept me spellbound for its full length and I can recommend it to anyone who wants to see a horror film with depth instead of cheap thrills. And if you like it then you should also check out Romero's Trilogy of the Dead and Wyndham's novel Day of the Triffids.
I've just got back from Anger Management and I'm buzzing. I've read the comments and some reviews beforehand, and thankfully ignored them. There will probably always be criticism on Adam Sandler's movies, and many people hate them, but I can't help wondering what people are complaining about. Okay, his movies don't rank amongst personal favorites such as Fight Club or Requiem For A Dream, but they are entertaining, funny, reasonably original for feel-good-movies (except for the obvious boy gets girl scenario, but hey, even that can be nice from time to time (unless you're a cynic)), full of hilarious cameos and supporting roles, and you can see how much fun all the actors have in playing their roles and that they are having a great time doing these movies. And for me that's all I need if I want to have a good night out. Save the classics for when you're in the mood, and watch these movies once in a while so you don't get too serious about it all. And compare it to all the other comedy trash (romantic or teen) that come out every year and you'll see: in his genre Adam Sandler is in a league of his own. So for all the fans, don't miss out on this one, and for those out there that cannot appreciate it, too bad you don't understand it because you are the ones that are missing the point.
This film is a must-see for everyone who enjoys manga or anime. Most of the times real-life mangas end up as corny hollywood productions which should be avoided at all costs (I'm referring to movies such as Mortal Combat or Streetfighter, if you liked these, please skip Avalon because you won't get it, and probably will only be able to complain). This movie, on the other hand, bears all the characteristics of Mamoru Oshii's previous animated features: the slow pace, the settings, the use of color and especially shadows, the camera angles, which make this movie a stunning, visual experience. The beautiful music and the use of sound (or the lack of it at times) efficiently enhance the atmosphere. What I also found to be quite funny was the use of Polish actors, and hence the Polish language, throughout a film that is so typically Japanese. Well, maybe that's just me. :-) All in all I loved it, and I have bought the DVD (with four-and-a-half hours of bonus material, mind that), so I can watch Avalon another couple of times to get to all the depths of this film and its storyline, because I now know one thing for sure, it's going to be worth the effort.
I don't often watch sequels to movies, because they are often disappointing, but since this one starred Kirsten Dunst I decided to give it a try. And I loved it. Contrary to general opinion, or so it seems.
The acting is strong with quite a good cast for a second sequel, the imagery is beautiful with nice camera movements and an interesting use of light and contrast, and the soundtrack exists of really cool industrial rock music. this creates a very dark, atmospheric movie that managed to thrill me for the whole ride. The script might not be the most original or best script ever, but at least the dialogue wasn't too corny, and the story quite interesting.
I can't recall the first Crow movie too clearly, but then again this gives me an opportunity to watch this installment in the series as a movie on it's own, and from that point of view it is simply a good movie. And isn't that perhaps what you should expect from a sequel? Most sequels end up as cheap B-movies that are completely dispensable. But a strong sequel doesn't neccesarily always have to fit in with the first movie (why should every crow have to have long black hair and a painted face for instance), as long as it is enjoyable on its own. And that is what this one was to me: Another story by a different storyteller about the crow. And (as often in oral storytelling) no two storytellers will tell you the same story, but sometimes both stories can be just as fascinating.
great alternative reality of the jack the ripper story
if you want to see real facts about Jack the ripper then you should better see a documentation. but I feel that fictional movies don't always have to correspond with the facts that are known. they can be an altogether alternative reality to what we know so far. and that is what From Hell is. around a legend a fictional account of what happened is created, and this results in a beautiful mystery film that kept me on the edge of my seat for the full 117 minutes. the plot is somewhat complex, but worthwile the effort. the imagery is very powerful,dark and atmospheric and creates a wonderful, romantic and sometimes surreal setting of london around the turn of the century. the sequences where Johnny Depp 'chases the dragon' are very intense and beautifully done. great camerawork, nice cutting, and strong acting. if you don't like a complex plot, or get annoyed when facts don't correspond to life, you simply won't get what this film is about, and probably hate it. But if you can let yourself be led into an alternative world for two hours and just immerse in the story, then you'll recognise this film for what it is: a really great movie.