Review: "Lewis and Clark: The Journey of the Corps of Discovery" (1997) Documentary

This documentary, about Lewis and Clark's adventurous journey out west and back is great. I find the documentary extremely detailed. I love the arrangement of the documentary as well, its told on a timeline side by side with a map, showing us just what it was they did. The events described in the film are truly inspiring, to find out just what each man experienced along the way was great.

This was one of the most exciting biographical documentaries I have ever seen. It opened my mind to many new things, things I dwell about now, things I am curious about now. I think if someone wants a great bite of American history, this is a great place to start.

It was even more evident to how great this documentary was when I watched another one narrated by Jeff Bridges and about died of boredom. This documentary was over 3 hours long, each minute as great as the prior.

"Lewis and Clark: The Journey of the Corps of Discovery"

9 / 10

Review: "Blind Spot" (2008) Documentary

This documentary is about what would or could happen if and when we exhaust our supplies of fossil fuels, particularly oil. The film examines potential economic and social concerns.

The documentary was good. I don't find myself excited about political documentaries, as they are so bias in their creations. I haven't watched a documentary which removed it's own bias to bring full truth, and this is no exception. I would prefer to hear more people speaking in terms of what could happen "if" instead of what WILL happen "if". Still, the film does examine some things that I haven't thought too much about, and cannot speak to much about without spoiling the film.

Some of the propositions in the film regarding the nature of people are fascinating as well. I still am not convinced that we are somehow running out of oil, nor am I convinced we aren't. I am being open minded, waiting on true evidence to be revealed about the particulars. I do believe in the laws of production and consumption, or consuming more than is being produced, but that is the number we need most.

There are many documentaries that would be nice to put in with this one, to give an overall picture of human beings and how we condone ourselves concerning fossil fuels. One other documentary is called "Guns, Germs, and Steel". In that documentary it discuses the keys to successful or progressive cultures. The key was food. If you can minimize the necessities of life, food being the biggest one, it creates more time to be progressive in other areas. If you cannot minimize the amount of time it takes to produce food as a culture, then that culture doesn't progress. In the American culture, we have progressed through many means, and our most current and longest lasting means is by the use of oil. The use of oil has allowed for progression in many ways. We have gone to space, dominated in wars, and expanded modern sciences... all because we have minimized the cost and time of the production of food. Food is at the root of the whole mess, we concern ourselves as a culture with non-essentials, as we have mastered the preparations and costs of food. Now, even the lowest citizen is capable of living better than the upper classes of the past.

If we lose our production of oil, or inflate the costs, we will treat oil as our food, because it feeds our lives in all its desires. Going green isn't the problem, the problem is the human condition. Human being will always infect and rape every means of progression we could ever conjure, green energy or not.

"Blind Spot"

7 / 10

Review: "The Fast and the Furious" (2001)

I found this picture to be hilarious.

Saw this film originally in the theaters, and it has been one of my favorite car films in memory, so I decided to give it another go. The film still pleases me, in areas separate from great cinema. There aren't very many films that capture a culture consumed in the auto world at all. This one is a good one for what it appears to try and achieve. I don't believe the director set out with the goal of 'Best Picture', which should be the goal of more directors in Hollywood than actually exist. There is a sense, a large sense of pushing products as advertisements in the film. From the cars themselves, to brand name equipment.

The biggest problem with the film is just about every action sequence. They obviously sacrifice much to wow the audience with obvious flaws. From a car sliding under the trailer of a big rig, to the whizzing effects outside of the car windows. Every scene where a car goes airborne is bad. But, at the end of the day, they weren't horrible enough to have me consider slicing at the film with too harsh of words.

The acting is at the 'B' level, where everything about this film rests. Paul Walker is as much an over-actor as anyone, with a few good scenes. He isn't an actor that can carry a single scene on his own yet. For that, the film relies on Vin Diesel. Vin Diesel's role on the film is easier to carry scenes on his own. They place him in a dark corner and turn up the hard-rock music and we believe he is a mysterious tough guy. No matter what lighting or music you use, Paul Walker is just as bad as his worst scenes, all equally unbelievable. Would have been more conceivable for him to be a cop if he knew just how to hold a gun, but in the film he holds it like he wants to have a squirt-gun contest. Vin Diesel pretty much is everything they ask him to be. He says little, looks big, portraying tough, and uncaring about life. I don't mind his performance in the film, but at the same time much isn't asked. His rage is finely played out, and rage isn't something I often see in film and really feel is authentic. The other cast members are just about all the same, 'C' level. They do their job with low expectations, and clock out. If the actors ever looked horrendous, I wouldn't blame them necessarily, because the dialogue was some of the worst I've heard.

The score of the film was... fine I guess. Not preferred but, it was trying to deliver a hip-hop influenced culture, so the music fit the film. It would still be nice to see a film about a similar culture shot in a serious award winning style with a great original score, but till then, we have this... what do you expect out of a movie with this title?

I believe there to be a nice sized group of people that exist in the U.S. which consider themselves to be fans of the automobile, and particularly ones that move at high rates of speed, and maybe even participate in illegal activity. It is sad to think that we are stuck with this film, Nicolas Cage's "Gone In 60 Seconds", and "Star Wars Episode 1" (podraces). Thats it. Thats all we got. Every other genre seems to have its epic film, but this one is still absent.

The story of the film is a bit easy. I would prefer something a bit more complex, more dramatic, just more creative. But at the end of the day it has cars that go fast for a purpose, says the film.

I also think this film has taken a hit for all the sequels. You scratch off those other films from existence and people might not be as harsh about this one. Maybe I'm wrong. I wouldn't ever say this film is a must see, but if you love cars, fast ones, you don't have many options.

"Fast and the Furious"

6 / 10

Review: "Conviction" (2010)

Tony Goldwyn is probably on the sunnier side of actors turned directors, but still, a very far journey away from true talent behind the screen. He pieced together a solid cast for the film, among other good decisions, but the film falls slightly better than the average movie based on a true story. Normally a true story worth giving screen time has a story interesting enough to carry the viewer anyway. This one had both solid acting and a good story. I think it is apparent enough to say the flaws of the film are in the direction of the story for the film. There are so many moments in the film that would have been better cut out.

Talented directors can reveal a character's personality without showing constant irrelevant moments. Hilary Swank, a 2 time 'Best Actress' again shows me how little I know about winning that award. She is baffling to me, I haven't seen anything that shocked me from her yet, and she managed 2 'Best Actress' awards. She is a good performer, but not one that can carry a whole project herself. If you were to compare her with lets say Julia Roberts, there are different screen presences, a distinct talent separation. Roberts can carry projects on her own shoulders, where as Swank, in my opinion cannot. It is hard to speak my thoughts about Swank without seeming to be harsh. It isn't that I am bothered by her performances, but she doesn't seem to be on the level of greatness her accomplishments would seem to put her in. Overall her performance is a good one with many moments of an unreal human being, she needs to work on that balance.

Sam Rockwell, the most interesting person in the film, and best actor of the film, shows us why he is many levels ahead of Swank. It is nice to finally see him getting more challenging roles to project his talents onto the big screen. It is a pleasure watching him perform. In this film, there are moments that bother me in which Rockwell is in the scene, but its just because the scene itself exists, not the performance.

Melissa Leo, even though she gives a minor amount of screen time, really shows up the whole cast. She could become my most interested actress at the rate of her couple flicks.

The film is very vanilla, it is a fast-forwarded, and blurry version of "Erin Brockovich" meets "Shawshank Redemption".

I really felt like this movie had more of a made for television quality to it, but maybe it was just the recycled story of so many before it, true or not. If the woman was the one jailed, or perhaps of African American ethnicity, it would have been produced by Oprah and aired on her new network. But, regardless, the only reason why the story wouldn't have struck many nerves, regardless of the circumstances, is because in a broad stroke, we have seen this story 2.5 million times already.

"Conviction"

6 / 10

Review: Yimou Zhang's "A Woman, A Gun and A Noodle Shop" (2009)

First things first I want to say all the critics who harshly criticized this film are all dumb. The film isn't a very well received film, and I can only think of 2 reasons why that could be. One, is that it is a retake of an already semi-beloved film. The second, is that the critics were overwhelmed with such awesomeness they crapped themselves, and because they crapped themselves, they hated the experience.

Yimou Zhang is a fairly big name in Hollywood in terms of the body of work he has put together. From making such films as "Hero" and "House of Flying Daggers" which were both well received in America, and then a whole other treasure chest full of films which critics managed to favor in a heavier Chinese party.

Based on critical acceptance, "A Woman, A Gun and A Noodle Shop" was his least bit of work. I on the other hand would rank this on top of both "Hero" and "House of Flying Daggers". I haven't been exposed to his other work.

I was so pleased in watching the film, when I looked into how well it was received, I was baffled. How could I love something so unloved? I really have no clue.

The film was a retake of the Coen Brother's "Blood Simple". I felt this was a better film than theirs. I would also say that the Coen's produce my most anticipated films, based solely on their direction. So by no means am I placing this film over the Coens out of spite in any way.

I felt that artistically, scenes were shot much better. Acting, more on the same level as it's predisessor. And I think direction would still have to go to the creator of the great story found in both films. Originality takes home the most points.

This film could make a great argument for me in declaring it the best film of 2009. I don;t know how well that argument would or could stand against some of my other arguments for other films of 2009, but it would definitely be in the discussions, and definitely in my top 5 for the year.

The film accomplished great humorous sprinkles on top of great mysterious drama. Only a couple scenes had me bothered, mostly in some camera decisions, but only in a couple scenes. One of the most interesting characters I have ever seen is the police officer in the film. Sets and set designs were just awesome, costumes were even better. Just about everything in this film was done to perfection.

The ending leaves us with a random clip of... I don't even know what or how to describe it. It is just odd. I told myself it was the director's signature to someone else's work as his recreation, and that made me feel better. In terms of remakes or retakes, this one gives me reason for hope in the future. A truly great tribute to and from respected directors. Just great.

Watch the movie. Its a foreign film, and with foreign films, come subtitles. Expose yourself to some great foreign films like this and you will be more acceptable to them in the future. Just great.

"A Woman, A Gun and A Noodle Shop"

9 / 10

Review: Sergio Leone's "Once Upon A Time In America" (1984)

Sergio Leone. The man responsible for thrusting Clint Eastwood into a legendary status in the 'Man Without a Face' series. He is also the man who brought us an almost 4 hour film about New York Jewish gangsters starring Robert De Niro. I prefer his westerns, and even more so, I prefer only his westerns in which Clint Eastwood stars.

This film took me about a whole day to watch. 4 hours for a film is no joke, it is a serious expedition, one that needs to have a lot going for it to push me to watch it. I thought Robert De Niro would be the exception to my prior Clint Eastwood theory as to Sergio Leone's success. Nope. Films still rely heavily on writing and this one is no exception. Clint Eastwood's character in the western films was interesting to watch doing anything, but not for a story's sake. This film had a less interesting character in just as mediocre a story. For a mediocre story to last 4 hours is amazing to see and think about how it could have ever have been received so well.

The acting throughout the film, from all the corners of the screen. Robert De Niro doesn't make any stand out performance but it feels like he may have been the only one to carry such a project. This film's success confirm's the film world's belief that Robert De Niro is the world's greatest actor in cinema. Only someone of his fame could have so many so interested.

If the film was squished down to 2 hours, maybe even 2 1/2 hours, it could have been enjoyed. But, the film was way too slow, and at many moments, paused. So many moments looked like it was being ripped, shredded, blended, and then spread back out trying to seem original, while failing, and looking like a Godfather film. The cover has theft on it, the tones have theft on it, and some of the events have theft on it.

The film was about a man who had twisted sexual desires, unable to control those desires, topped off with sprinkles of greed for power. It starts with children, and ends with grey hair, with little to no development in its characters.

Also, the music was like a drill to my brain. Reminded me of the "Karate Kid" soundtrack.

You have 4 hours of time to watch this film? Don't. Not unless you want to chase down all of De Niro's work... and make this the last.

"Once Upon A Time In America"

6 / 10

Review: "Patton" (1970)

I recently watched Franklin Schaffner's "Papillon", and between that film and "Patton", I am not amazed at anything the director has done. The writing on the other hand, has some uniqueness to it. "Patton" was written by a group of people, but it's main influential writer was Francis Ford Coppola, the man behind "The Godfather".

There is a special thing happening when Coppola is inking a film, but I think the strength of this film was in the great person that was George Patton. It would probably be easy to harm a true story about such an awesome person, but between Coppola inking and George C. Scott's performance, this film is nearly impossible to let you down.

The film is a bit long, probably doesn't need to be, but if it was any shorter, you may want to demand more. When I finished watching the film, I felt like I had just finished watching a documentary with real footage of the real man. It was just that good. I could complement the film in many ways, specifically about the character of Patton, but how can anyone but Patton himself receive the credit?

The film wasn't perfect, missing out on some good camera work, but for what it did give, it punched hard. I can't confirm the true nature of the characters or moments in history, but they all felt real. This is just another great character study to be desired. One of the more unique characters and/or stories of World War II.

This is a must watch film for folks who enjoy character studies, war films, or just thoroughly enjoy good cinema.

"Patton"

7.5 / 10