I got one of those $14 Blockbuster "rent as many movies as you want" cards, so i'm planning on checking out all the whacky crap i never would. I'll stick all teh reviews in this thread if anyone cares. I'll try to keep em short and sweet.

--Each movie is given a letter grade I came up with based on how well i feel the film achieved it's goals. I didn't compare them to any other movies. So don't get pissed when Running on Karma gets a better grade than The Passion. It doesn't mean one is a better FILM than the other, jsut htat I felt one did a better job telling its story than the other.

(Ratings: A(****), B(***), C(**),D(*), F(if you see it in a store steal it & burn it)

RUNNING ON KARMA: A (Subtitled) (Audio: Cantonese) Andy Lau, Cecilia Cheung
Big, A bodybuilding ex-Buddhist monk has gone astray from his monastery and become a meat eating, womanizing, chain smoking stripper that can see people’s Karma. (Basically this means he can see how people will die).Through a series of whacky events Big meets up with a female cop that is going to die soon. After several save attempts the cop still carries the mark of death. Can Big save her from her KARMA!?!?!.>!12!?!
-THE GOOD
+Great bad guys that Big must defend his pal from. All of these “villains” are done in an over the top fashion and there are some very cool special effects involved.
+Wire work is done very well and accents the martial arts, doesn’t make it look all crazy.
+The Muscle Suit the main guy wears, for the most part looks very good and moves well.
+Has some neat ideas that it tries to put across, and in the end everything makes sense.
-THE BAD
+gets a little high concept towards the end and has kind of a twist, if you can figure it out, or at least rationalize it, then it should be good. Otherwise you’ll just be confused as hell.
+the muscle suit looks little-really fakey at times

This message has been edited. Last edited by: particleman,

Kaena: The Prophecy C+ Voices of: Kirsten Dunst, Richard harris, Angelica Huston
An animated (CG) French movie (in english), made from a game concept; The story is pretty standard video game fare. A world populated by an underdeveloped tribe is slowly beginning to die and the fate of the civilization rests on the shoulders of a young girl, Kaena, who has a mysterious connection with the withering planet. To make things complicated, two alien races (one good one evil) are struggling to understand a magic orb that may be causing the planets unrest.
-THE GOOD
+some of the character designs are pretty good (especially the “Mauraders”)
+some of the character animation is pretty good.
+Gets pretty exciting towards the end
-THE BAD
+First 2/3 are pretty slow and it’s hard to understand what’s going on
+Has some slowdowns in framerate, I didn’t know this was possible in a CG movie
+Should have stayed a Game concept, a little to shallow to make into a film
+Some of the human character models look too goofy (like the TAK video games), others look real
+The animation and CG quality waivers from OK to Great.
+The ending is kind of rushed and doesn’t really make much sense

This message has been edited. Last edited by: particleman,

The Passion Of the Christ A- (Subtitled) (Audio: Aramaeic/Italian) James Caviezel,Hristo Shopov, Maia Morgenstern
A “faithful” depiction of the last 6 hours of Christ’s life before he was crucified. I never saw it in theatres b/c I liked to go around talking about how lame it probably was, and how Mel Gibson was an extremist. I figured if I was going to keep flying my “Why would anyone wanna see Jesus get the **** beat out of him for 2 hours” flag, I should see the film. (On a side Note I ended up liking it a lot)
-THE GOOD
+The cinematography is Beautiful, and breathtaking. Every frame of this film is art.
+The Acting is great. Each actor embodies his or her character. (Especially the pain on James Caviezel Face as Jesus and the torn and uncertain mindset of Pontius Pilot (Hristo Shopov)
+Has several intercut sequences of past events (such as the Last supper) that worked very well
+Some great characterization of difficult concepts (Loved the white kid Devil and the baby demons)
+Some good CG work places unobtrusively within a film that shouldn’t have SFX
+Gets its point across, although does so with a sledgehammer strapped to a car (See BAD)
-THE BAD
+I won’t go into any religious inaccuracies, or stereotyping of particular races, as I noticed neither. HOWEVER I do believe Mel went too far with the violence. Not because it became sickening, not because it was over the top, simply because at a certain point, I just stopped caring. After about the third time Jesus fell while carrying his cross, I started checking my watch. I think the film could have had the same effect with about 1/3 of the violence. All of the brutality sequences go on for too long, and lost their importance to me. I know Gibson wants people to understand that Jesus seriously suffered for their sins (For those that go with that Line of Faith) But I got the point after the man had been whipped 1,000,000 times. I didn’t need 30 minutes of walking up a hill being beaten to drive the point home. Thank God the crucifixion sequence was short.

The Punisher (2004) C Thomas Jane, John Travolta, Rebecca Romijn-Stamos
During his last mission with the CIA, agent Frank Castle plays a role in the death of a powerful money launderer's, Howard Saint, son. In retaliation said crime-lord orders Frank’s entire family, and I mean ENTIRE family, murdered. Although Saint succeeds in killing ALL of Frank’s family, somehow Castle miraculously survives and seeks to bring punishment onto those that wronged him.

-THE GOOD
+The film had a lot of western style showdowns and gunfights. A few shots were stolen directly from “Once upon a Time in the West”. I think it mixed well with the subject.
+The Film had a very comic book feel too it, be it the overly themed villains or the constant one-liners. (This might be a BAD for some people)
+Some interesting fight setups, and the “psychological games” Castle plays on Saint
+Film had a nice style in the color scheme and camera angles.
+Great Intro Credits

-THE BAD
+The acting by pretty much every character was cheese city, although this lent to the comic-book feel at times it was too much
+3 supporting characters whose only purpose was comic relief (not funny) and a weak love interest.
+The music was too weak. It would have been better suited to an 80’s Spiderman TV-movie
+At times it felt like the film was made in 1985
+Choppy editing on some of the scenes, especially on the death of “Harry Heck”
+How did Frank get enough knowledge to build all the crap he built?
+How come: the cops weren’t looking for Frank AT ALL? // no one could find Frank, even though drove around in daylight and lived in an apartment? // no one protected Saint’s wife at all times?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: particleman,

keep these coming man, I like your reviews so far. Good idea.

The Lost Skeleton of Cadavra A (Black and White) Fay Masterson, Andrew Parks, Jennifer Blaire
This film, shot entirely on Mini DV for less than $100,000, is a parody of ultra-hokey 50’s monster movies. A scientist, Dr. Armstrong, and his wife discover a meteor made entirely of Atmosphereum, a rare and highly valuable mineral. What the good doctor doesn’t know is that another scientist and his henchwoman Animalia, a woman created from 4 woodland animals fused together, are searching for the Atmospehereum in hopes that they can resuscitate the long-dead evil “Lost skeleton of Cadavera” and rule the world. What this secondary scientist and Dr. Armstrong don’t know is that a pair of space aliens, who crashed on earth and need the Atmosphereum to blast off again, have accidentally unleashed a murderous mutant into the woods. Who will obtain the Atmosphereum first? Will the Lost Skeleton take over the World? IS OUR PLANET DOOMED!?!?

THE GOOD
+The film takes itself seriously, and could be mistaken for a 1950’s film.
+The dialogue and actions perfectly mimic and poke fun at old Monster movies. All the characters overstate everything and their actions are over the top. Lots of reused shots and stock footage. Overall just a great send-up of old B movies.
+The music is dead on, sounds just like the 50’s films, and fits perfectly.
+The dialogue and monsters are hilarious at times. I laughed throughout the whole thing
+I never lost interest or grew tired of the theme. The film never lags, there’s always something going on.

THE BAD
+If you don’t think the premise is funny/ don’t like B movies then you’ll hate this. The jokes all center around being cheesy and overly expository/explanatory.
+Since it was shot in DV some of the film, especially dark areas, have lots of grain and noise
+Some of the skeletons dialogue didn’t fit well with the feel of the film, he uses a lot of more current slang.

Connie and Carla B+ Nia Vardalos, David Duchovny, Toni Collette
Mia Vardalos'(My Big Fat Greek Wedding) second film bombed at the box-office and was universally considered to suck. Personally I kinda liked it. Connie and Carla sing show tunes in a C grade lounge act at the local airport, but are forced to flee after they accidentally become witness to a murder. The two end up in Los Angeles where they pretend to be drag queens in order to get a job singing in a West Hollywood gay bar. Hilarity ensues as they try to suppress their female urges, hide their true identities and evade their pursuers.

-THE GOOD
+Overall the film was pretty funny. The lines were witty and there was a ton of sight gags; which went well with the often-goofy tone of the film.
+Although the theme is cliché (Victor Victoria, Tootsie) they did a good job of keeping it fresh.
+The singing voices of C&C weren’t amazing but they got the job done w/o making me cringe.
+There was a nice, if under-developed, side story that tries to teach a lesson about accepting those who are “different”. It’s not forced on the audience, but its there if you want it.

-THE BAD
+The orchestral background music is very generic (not the show tunes). It reminded me of the “Home Alone” music.
+None of the characters other than C&C really stand out. I couldn’t tell you anyone else’s name in the film and I just watched it.
+ Duchovny’s character is too accepting too fast. He’s too nonchalant about the situations and positions he’s put in, especially if this is his first experience with gay people.
+The film tries to end too quickly and they leave a few loose ends.
+This isn’t necessarily a bad, it’s more of a warning. The film is a musical comedy set in a gay bar. So if you have an aversion to show tunes or gay folks, this movie isn’t for you.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: particleman,

Russian Ark A / C (see *** below) (subtitled) (audio: Russian) Sergei Dontsov, Mariya Kuznetsova
Shot on DV in one continuous uncut 96 minute take (the longest in film history), Russian Ark details nearly 300 years of Russian history that occurred within the Hermitage museum; previously the palace of the tsars. The viewer sees everything through the eyes of an unidentified dreamer who is led around by his European companion. Stunning and Masterfully filmed, Russian Ark is a true achievement in cinema. That being said, I would never sit through it again.
***The GOOD and BAD of this film are based on my views of the picture as a movie, not a work of art/experiment. As an art film I give Russian Ark an A, because the director sought to unfold history in “a single breath” and he achieved this goal superbly. However, as a movie for someone who is there to be “entertained” the film received a C for the reasons listed below.

THE GOOD
+The costumes for all the classical segments are amazing, especially with 100’s of extras.
+Considering the camera never cut, the cinematography was great. They managed to go from close ups to establishing shots and I never missed the editing.
+Drifted seamlessly between the current and classical situations.
+Interesting to watch at times, almost voyeuristic.

THE BAD
+Some of the classical scenes had modern equipment in them (thermostats)
+Many of the extras look right at the camera
+The entire film is one long walking tour of the museum which, awesome as it sounds, gets old.
+The camera had a hard time keeping everything in focus at times and would create a vertigo effect, gave me a headache.
+Very sparse soundtrack, except during a few ballroom scenes.
+No real storyline, more of a visual journey
+I’m not up to date on my Russian history, and subsequently didn’t know what was going on half the time, or who certain characters were supposed to be. So the film gets boring.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: particleman,

I'll tell you right now that I enjoyed Man On Fire. It was entertaining and well done.

Man on Fire (2004) B+ Denzel Washington, Dakota Fanning, Rachel Ticotin
Ex-special agent and drunkard “Creasy” tries to start a new life for himself in Mexico as the bodyguard for a wealthy families young daughter, Pita. The two soon become good friends and Creasy changes his outlook on life, which makes his rage all the worse when Pita is kidnapped and killed. Determined to exact revenge on anyone who profited from this wicked plot, Creasy goes on a blood-soaked rampage blazing a trail through seedy henchmen and corrupt cops.

THE GOOD
+Extremely stylized. There was a lot of postproduction work done on the editing (jittering frames, fancy colors) and many close-ups of actions (like pouring a drink or lighting a cigarette). It added to the films gritty feel.
+There were a few jumpy (obvious) zooms that brought focus onto characters and helped convey emotion.
+Dakota & Denzel worked well together, sometimes it got a little over the top.
+Bunch of good one-liners once the film got going
+The action/interrogation scenes are intense and cool. Denzel is a hardass
+Subtitles were done in an interactive way where they would move or disappear behind scenery and change size and font depending on what was being said. I felt it really added some emotional intensity (The rest of my family hated it)
+Christopher Walken

THE BAD
+The film is too stylized for some people, who will be annoyed by all the weird movements and compositions
+The film starts kinda slow. It builds the relationship b/w pita and Creasy, but I know action is gonna show up eventually, and I wish they’d hurry up and get there.
+Some of the Pita/ Creasy interaction was too “warm & fuzzy” for me.
+Pretty violent (if you don't like that sort of thing)
+More than a few people will hate the ending.

don't know if this would matter on your opinion on Russian Ark, but here's a few things that I knew when I was going in to see the movie, and so didn't mind as much (I noticed a lot of the things you did too):

no one is allowed to film in the museum, and no one is allowed to touch anything in the museum. they did this on a huge, unprecedented favor to the director.

so this meant he couldn't touch anything, not move anything, nothing. the d.p. had to prove to the authorities that the light would not adversely affect anything in the palace, and they actually used a lot of flourescents in floating balloons so they wouldn't have to use any stands, and not have hot lights on in the rooms.

the museum was only given to them for 10 hours, no picks up, no coming back. so it being a 90 minute movie, and counting all the actors that had to be returned to their starting positions, they could only film it three times. if anything went wrong the first 20 minutes of the film, they could start over. but on the third time, no matter what, they had to go all the way to the end or they would never finish the film. so even if background actors looked into the camera, they had to keep going. they used up all three chances.

the storyline is the rise and fall of imperial culture in Russia. it even has the guide that speaks to the audience in the film comment on the way socities changed and how people were treated. but if you don't think of history as a storyline, i guess there isn't much going on.

Thanks for posting! I'm happy to argue/change a grade based on other Points of view.
I watched the documentary on the disc, so I knew about the time limit and the lighting. I understood the Russian history to be the storyline, I just felt it could have been done differently. Having a guide mention points of importance along the way on the tour didn't interest me all that much. This was the reason I gave it two grades. I didnt think it would be fair to rate a project, that was shot with so many constraints and was meant to be slow and artistic, the same as i would rate a hollywood movie. The extras looking into the camera and the modern equipment didnt really drop the grade, it was more that I wasnt enamored with the film as a whole. The grades come more from story and tone.I dont really rate on technical stuff, unless thats the films point, I just mention positive/negatives in those areas if i see them.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: particleman,

Master & Commander: The Far Side of the World A- Russell Crowe, Paul Bettany, Billy Boyd
A state of the art French privateer ship attacks a British naval craft, the Albatross, rendering it dead in the water. Instead of cutting his losses and heading home, the British captain, Lucky Jack, is determined to catch up to and commandeer the French vessel. As the crew travels further off course their luck steadily decreases, and questions begin to surface about the cause of this ill fortune and whether the captain is merely following orders or is hunting for revenge. (I was expecting to hate the movie, so my grade may be a little skewed, just b/c it wasn’t as bad as I thought it would be)

THE GOOD
+The special effects (physical and digital) are great. Everything from splintering wood to rolling waves is well done.
+Good sound effects really capture the feeling of being at sea or at war.
+The whole film is pretty exciting, not a lot of downtime. Even during periods where they were just sailing.
+Several interesting side characters that added humor and different points of view (Killick, Blakeney, Dr. Maturin)
+Surprisingly not gory, despite a lot of hand-to-hand combat.
+Not as Epic and stuffy as I thought it would be.
+Russell Crowe didn’t annoy the hell outta me, he almost always does.

THE BAD
+The dialogue is sometimes hard to understand/hear due to accents and technical/old jargon.
+Film never gives the P.O.V. of the French ship. I’m sure this was done on purpose, but I still would have liked to see what they were thinking.
+With so many characters, it takes a while before you can associate a name with a face.
+The crew is pretty much always happy, despite some of their hardships

L’ Auberge espagnole (Spanish Apartment) B (subtitled) (Audio: French) Romain Duris, Judith Godrèche, Audrey Tautou
Xavier, a 24-year-old Parisian, spends a year of college in Barcelona after his father pushes him to get a degree in economics. The living situation in Spain is cramped so Xavier ends up living in a small apartment with 5 roommates, each from a different county. As the film progresses our Parisian must juggle several relationships and learn to live in harmony with his multicultural roomies and himself as he looks back to what he once was, and forward to what he is fast becoming.

THE GOOD
+Very stylized in parts. Uses a lot of sped up footage, when Xavier is told what he needs to enroll all the different papers are stapled to the screen. Quirky style
+Nice art direction. Lots of vibrant and bright colors (orange, red, yellow) used to good effect.
+5 people in one apartment led to some funny situations. Had some humorous dialogue.
+Although there isn’t a structured story, and Xavier is lame, I ended up liking him and caring about his journey

THE BAD
+Sometimes the college kids got too preachy about politics, or accepting different races. That’s great, but it’s too blatant when the rest of the film addresses those topics passively.
+The film doesn’t really have a specific storyline per say, it just rambles through Xavier’s first year. A lot happens and I was entertained, but some might find it lacking structure.
+Too long. I could have found life’s meaning in an hour ½. Xavier takes 2.
+They managed to make Audrey Tautou unlikable.

Shaolin Soccer (Chinese Version) A+ (subtitled) (Audio: chinese) Stephen Chow, Vicki Zhao, Yin Tse
Sing (iron leg), an ex-Shaolin master, is looking for a way to effectively market Shaolin Marshal Arts to the general public and after several misfires, decides soccer is the way to go. However, in order to compete, he must convince his retired brethren, who each have a specialty themed to a particular body part (iron shirt, iron head, hooking leg), to drop their dead end jobs and join up on the soccer field. Using a variety of insane and extraordinary techniques, as well as tons of teamwork, Shaolin Soccer makes it to the final round, but can they beat the lethal TEAM EVIL!? The best way I can sum up this movie, is that it’s Airplane, if Airplane was about soccer and not Airplanes.

THE GOOD
+The acting by all the characters is great, each of them is over the top, but plays it straight.
+The special effects are usually awesome, and never dip below pretty damn good.
+There is a ton of postproduction work in this, be it flaming CG soccer balls, or wire work and it all melds seamlessly together to form a movie full of energy and imagination.
+The scope of the film is massive, entire soccer fields get torn apart in all out battle royals of well done wire fu and soccer.
+Really funny, often times hilarious. The dialogue is very good, and the sight gags are great
+The film had a lot of heart. I wanted to see the characters succeed.
+The film made sense. I love when foreign movies make sense.

THE BAD
+Never saw the enemy (team evil) until the final soccer match. Would have liked to have seen more of them
+Sing’s “girlfriend”, Mui, is underused.
+Pretty goofy, people who don’t like Zucker movies, or wacky comedies probably won’t like it

This message has been edited. Last edited by: particleman,

TipToes N/A Matthew McConaughey, Peter Dinklage
In a family of dwarves, Steven is the only averaged sized person. When Steven's girlfriend gets knocked up he must face the music and tell her about his unique parentage.

I only made it 25 minutes into this. The amount of unecessary F-bombs, I don't hate swearing, just thought it was stupid, and the general idea that Dwarve's are not normal and are a strong topic of discussion bothered me to the point that I shut it off. The acting by several of the actors involved was also pretty bad. I'm sure the film got better, but i'm not gonna find out

This message has been edited. Last edited by: particleman,

Good Bye Lenin! A- (subtitled) (Audio: German) Daniel Brühl, Maria Simon, Kathrin Sass
After the Berlin wall fell the entire face of Germany changed as Western capitalism and Ideals flooded East Germany and its culture. Christiane Kerner, a devote East German Socialist who’s been in a coma for the past 8 months, has missed all of this. When she suddenly awakens, it is up to her son Alex to keep her sheltered from all the exciting news so that the stress doesn’t kill her. With the help of some friends, taped tv shows, and old food packaging, Alex recreates a divided Berlin in order to keep his mother in the dark.

THE GOOD
-A very heartfelt story, the dialogue was good and there was enough going on to keep my interest.
-There are several little “mini twists” in the plot that make it much more poignant and meaningful. (ironic what the mother ends up having done to her children, in light of what they do to her)
-Never realized the differences between East and West Germany when the wall was up. This film does a good job of illustrating what an life altering event that was for the Germans.
-Some nice editing tricks and cinematography. Uses sped up motion, and some seamless cuts (current scene becomes a picture in the paper of the next scene). Has some really good camera angles as well (Lenin statue coming down the street).
-Although Alex is the main character, each of them is pretty fleshed out and has at least a little side story.

The Bad
-too long, could have been ½ hour shorter. Didn’t need to keep the hoax alive as long as it did.
-I didn’t think the truth would have been that big of a shock to his mother, so at times the lies felt a little overdone

Yea i agree with you 100% its was very good movie but they kept the hoax going to long. Anyways i have seen some of the movies you reviewed. Thanks are you gona have your own show someday?

Nah. i'm just doing the reviews b/c I have a blockbuster card and no life. Plus I figured if I rent enough weird crap, although some are mainstream, that maybe someone would go and rent a movie thats out of the ordinary for them. Show off a new point of view, film wise. I figure a month i s about as long as anyone would care what I have to say, if that, so when the card expires, I ll stop the reviews