Nearly caught up now. Just 3 more reviews to post. Those will all be up by the end of the week. Then, it's back off to the movies. Come on back.



El Mariachi
Review by Jon Waterman

***1/2

A humble mariachi (that’s guitarist/singer for those who don’t know) rides into a new town on his motorcycle. He goes to every bar and restaurant looking for work. Instead of finding a job, he finds himself in the middle of a case of mistaken identity. Azul is out on a vendetta mission, looking to kill Moco, the drug lord, that ordered his killing. He carries a guitar case full of weapons and wears nothing but black. Moco’s underlings mistake the mariachi for the former inmate and now he has to kill or be killed…and he still needs to pay the bills.

The story doesn’t sound like the best idea in the world, but the execution is great. Most action-oriented films would either provide a short set-up or jump right into pure adrenaline with no stopping. “El Mariachi” actually starts off the same way. The opening scene where Azul escapes from jail and kills his assailants makes for a cheesy short film. After this initial attention grabbing sequence, the film alternates the pace appropriately. It’s not afraid to slow down and let the story build. An actual love story builds up, rather than providing a gratuitous sex scene. There’s a necessity for all the action that takes place. Instead of a battle between who’s got the bigger guns, we watch a man who must shoot these people in order to get away from them.

Robert Rodriguez did virtually everything but act in his first cinematic outing – performing 11 duties. Already he has developed an interesting style. Robert makes this film slightly disorienting without making the audience uneasy. He’s one of the few directors out there that could actually speed up some actions and get away with it. Most films overuse the slow motion, so to see an action movie where nearly every jump or fall was shown at a normal frame rate is quite refreshing.

The extremely low budget has been made common knowledge. The low budget can be easily seen in the lack of lighting and in the sound track. Despite a large supply of lighting equipment at his disposal, Rodriguez creates a nice variation of moods between his locations. It goes to show how effective paint on a wall and time of day can be. Also, due to the lack of synchronous sound capability, he inserted many insert shots of people picking up cups and things like that. Actually, these shots provide two functions. It masks the bad synch points and brings out his attention to detail and willingness to get the scene right.

My only real complaint on Robert’s style is that the fish-eye is a little overused. “El Mariachi” is a wonderful film. It has heart, great action, suspenseful chase sequences and a good amount of humor as well. If I could change anything, it would be the acting. These people are not exactly professionals, but they spoke too dramatically and it turned out forced. Had the film been made as a farce, the performances would be perfect. However, they are not so terrible that the film suffers. It’s a spectacularly fun flick to watch. Not only do you see the mariachi transform his personality, you see the director transform into a future big shot.

Alright. It's friday. The end of a semi-productive week of reviewing. I'm keeping my promise: Here's my latest review. Stay tuned for more to come next week. Goodnight, folks.



Can’t Hardly Wait
Review by Jon Waterman

***1/2

School just let out. Now it’s time to party. Practically the whole graduating class shows up at this one girls house for the best party they’ll see for three or four months (assuming the kids don’t skip college and enter the work force). Everyone is there. The loser kids, the stoners, the hippies, the jocks, the band members (but interestingly enough, no band geeks), the snobby intellectuals and the posers are all together at last. With all the different people to choose from, how could a cohesive movie come about?

Well, writer/directors Harry Elfont and Deborah Kaplan decided to split the film up between as many characters as possible. Typical High School kids aren’t interesting enough to fill a whole movie. “Can’t Hardly Wait” is full of typical High School kids: It plays off of the bland characterizations of people found in schools of that time. Thus, we are given several stories to follow.

The main plot involves Preston (Ethan Embry) and his vow to finally tell Amanda (Jennifer Love Hewitt) how he loves her, despite the fact they’ve never talked to each other. Denise (Lauren Ambrose) struggles to find a purpose for following Preston to the party. Mike wants to start a new life or get back together with Amanda, whichever is more convenient for him. Kenny is looking to find a girl to help him lose his “V Card.” William is out for revenge on the bullies that caused him pain and humiliation for four years. Surrounding all of these subplots are quirky characters used for a quick gag or two or three.

With a huge cast full of young people, there’s a huge chance for failure. Of course there are exaggerated characters in there, but there would not be a joke without overplaying the stereotype. Elfont and Kaplan give an equal opportunity to each group to be made fun of. But the wide varieties of personality types represented here all have one thing in common: Character arc. Everyone experiences some type of change or growth. It’s not always positive, but it’s there.

Also with a huge cast full of young people, there’s a huge chance for up and comers to get exposure and for established young stars to make cameos. For instance, this movie boasts three future cast members for “Six Feet Under” with Lauren Ambrose, Freddy Rodriguez (Mike’s Jock friend, T.J.) and Eric Balfour (Hippie Guy) as well as cameos from Jenna Elfman, Jerry O’Connell.

Since this is a party movie, the music is very important. The majority of American youth would enjoy this set list at their house party. It mixes a wide range of contemporary (at the time) and older, yet cool, music. Not only does it work well for background noise, but it also provides help towards the emotional tone of the scene. The score by David Kitay, however, does not have the same effect. Even though it’s somewhat of a wacky comedy, the music is too overdone at times. Comedic music works best when it’s subtle and serious.

Although the film has its out-there hijinx humor, what really keeps me entertained is the subtleness. There are jokes in the film that aren’t laugh-out-loud funny, but undoubtedly clever. “Can’t Hardly Wait” is a rare mix of humor and solid, yet still somewhat two-dimensional acting that surpasses most of the screwball comedies of the past decade.

Hey all. It's part two of the back to school series. My Can't Hardly Wait review will have to wait. I'm going to be gone all day tomorrow (literally) and so I won't have a chance to post until Friday evening. So, enjoy the break and I'll see you all soon.



Rushmore
Review by Jon Waterman

****

Max Fischer already knows the meaning of life. All you have to do is find something you love and stick with it for as long as possible. His love is his school. That’s why he participates in dozens of extracurricular activities. Then he meets the new teacher. His love becomes an actual person. Max has a harder time manipulating this aspect of his life and having competition doesn’t make his job any easier.

One of the main elements to pop out is the music. The choice of songs mixed with the fantastic score by Mark Mothersbaugh hit the emotional points right on the head. If any fault could be found in this area, it would be that they’re too prominent too often. The songs almost take over by grabbing your attention with the first few chords before they settle into the background. I would say the music makes the movie, but that’s not true. Instead, it’s easier to say that if you don’t like the music, you may not enjoy the film as much.

What makes the movie is a combination of the music, the acting and the script and the visuals. Without a doubt, this is the best performance given by Bill Murray. Newcomer Jason Schwartzman (Max Fischer) knocks his first acting attempt out of the park and quickly shows that he belongs in the business. He doesn’t exactly look fifteen, but he’s probably the best for the role. Brian Cox (Dr. Nelson Guggenheim) is always a quality actor. This time is no exception. But Murray steals the show. What makes him so good to watch is knowing where he came from. Any time a comedic actor steps into a more serious role and does it believably, that actor should be commended. I’d like to see Bob-O Deniro give a quality comedic performance.

Director Wes Anderson wrote (along with Owen Wilson) an intelligent and darkly funny script. The humor is there to be laughed at, but one must have the right mindset to enjoy it. You must be willing to look for satirical, subtle jokes, because the overt prat falls and fart gags just won’t be found. Every character in the film serves a purpose and is used effectively. It’s an eclectic mix of unusual people, but its done without going overboard. The dialogue is taut, precise and the back and forth banter is nothing short of amazing.

There was so much thought put into the film. From the incredible locations to the script to the cinematography by Robert Yeoman, everything falls into place very nicely. The film isn’t for everyone. If you don’t like it, then it’s just another film you’ve seen, but if you do like the film, then you’ll probably want to watch it several times and put it in your regular rotation. I’ve found it enjoyable all the way through, every time I’ve seen it.

If anything will get me hate mail, it'll probably be this review. Here's the first of my back to school series. Look for Rushmore and Can't Hardly Wait in the coming days. Then I'll have the El Mariachi Trilogy and Underworld for you all after that. Come back often.



Animal House
Review by Jon Waterman

**

Flounder and Pinto look to rush a fraternity their freshman year of college. When the prestigious posh house turns them down, they have no place to turn other than to the party frat. The Deltas are the scourge of the university. No one wants them around. Not the fancy pretty boys. Not the dean. Not anyone. Threatened with expulsion, these “animals” must find a way to keep the party going.

I had only seen small fragments of the film on television prior to this and so watching the full, unedited version for the first time was somewhat shocking. What surprised me most was not all the stuff that TV cut out, but rather all the time that should have been cut out. If it’s been awhile or if you’ve never seen it, go back and look. You’ll find that there is little actual dialogue in the film. A lot of time is spent transitioning from one scene to the next with no comic value. We get a lot of shots of people just hanging or walking or driving around. When words are exchanged, there is almost always a conversational gap (meaning: one person talks, then a pause for the cut, then the other person talks, repeat). The film is 109 minutes long. Take out all the unnecessary dead air and you’ve saved fifteen minutes or more.

I think the reason the film seems so out of it is because it never really takes a direction. It mindlessly floats from one scene to the next out of nowhere and with no motivating factors. Basically, every scene is an excuse to show a joke or two that the writers thought up. The film is just a series of loosely connected sketches that share little more than the same characters and settings. The plot is never really described, it just sort of forms as time goes on. In a way, that’s good, because centering a comedy around a lame, cheesy plot can ruin it completely. If you hide the lame, cheesy plot, people will enjoy the trip to it a whole lot more.

Mostly I felt they missed a lot of comic opportunities. They glance over some characters in the frat that could have been great for a couple gags. Instead, they’re given a name and pushed to the side completely. Even some of the bigger names are not given a full chance so that some type of structure could be established. Perhaps it could have benefited from a more “Kentucky Fried Movie” type of organization rather than a character-driven story.

If you’re looking for a college movie, though, this would be one to watch. It has all the makings. You’ll see wild parties, hear great music (which is perhaps to prominent at times) and for the guys…lots of boobies. Surprisingly enough, it did not make fun of college life or frats (not even the snobby one). They let the jokes arise out of non-related situations, which is an interesting, yet good way to go.

For a film that has been deemed a classic, I certainly don’t see what all the fuss is about. I found it mediocre at best. It’s amazing how much comedy has changed over the years. Some things can make you laugh over and over again (especially if watched at a more impressionable age), but the effectiveness of others sometimes withers away. The film probably still appeals to many of those kids going out to college now, just as it appealed to the youth of the past. It’s quotable to be sure, but don’t expect a gut-buster.

Alright. Let's keep 'em coming. I'm still not caught up. I have enough to keep posting everyday, though so keep coming on back to me. I won't let you down...I hope.



Dirty Pretty Things
Review by Jon Waterman

***1/2

Okwe is an illegal immigrant that’s working two jobs just to get by. Senay is a legal immigrant that’s working illegally. Both of them work at a top-notch hotel in London. When Okwe finds something unusual while cleaning a toilet, they get entangled in an unusual world they could never imagine.

The film is dark and gritty with an interesting visual style. Director Stephen Frears and cinematographer Chris Menges show London as a horrid place, full of grimy locations and equally disgusting people. The underbelly of the city sometimes looks a bit too seedy and I found myself paying more attention to the tinted lighting than the story, if only for a couple seconds. Each location had a specific look and characterization to it, which aided the film by negating the need for establishing shots.

The story moved along just as efficiently. Actions and situations were not repeated. At times similar confrontations arose, but new circumstances had been added on, thus putting more pressure on the characters. The script by Steve Knight works very well. He wrote a fascinating movie full of suspense, confusion, intrigue, and raw emotions. Some may see the story as predictable, but only if one tries to figure out what’s going to happen. Watch the film more as a drama than a mystery and it will be more enjoyable.

Chiwetel Ejiofor as Okwe somehow out acts the charming Audrey Tautou (Senay). Although Audrey speaks English with a Turkish accent and still delivers her lines flawlessly, Chiwetel tops her. He didn’t have to go through as many hoops to deliver his lines, but it was more subdued and enigmatic. Also, with more time on screen, it’s easier to watch him grow and identify with his plight. The acting all around was fantastic. Everyone has their subtle quirks or creepy side. It was great to see so many people from different cultural backgrounds and languages come together for this film. With so much talent around the world, it can be humbling to be made aware of how little we know about. Even British actors don’t show up on American radar. Here we have a major motion picture with actors from the UK, France, Spain and Croatia all in the same amazing film.

“Dirty Pretty Things” is exactly what the title indicates. It’s dark and disturbing, but somehow enchantingly beautiful at the same time. The acting and direction astound and amaze. If you’re looking for an incredible movie to see in theatres this week, you won’t find one much more moving than this one.

It's a good day to write and catch up. Here's a little gem for you to keep you going. Come back often and don't forget to scroll down for any reviews you may have missed.



Cabin Fever
Review by Jon Waterman

1/2 star

Welcome to “28 Days Later” meets sheer stupidity. A few young people go off to a cabin for a week of partying. After an overly long and uneventful setup, they come across a man wandering in the woods. He’s infected with some strange disease that seems to be eating his flesh. So, of course, they kill him instead of trying to help him. Now they have to find some way to stop the disease from spreading and make it out of there alive.

Are we really meant to care if these people live or not? Usually as a story goes on, we’re given some reason as to why we should like someone such as a main character or an underling we know will die near the end. Instead, everyone turns into a worse human being than they started as. Maybe some would welcome this change, praising the against the grain nature. Not me. If I don’t care what happens to the people I’m watching, why should I keep watching?

The characters are all pretty shallow and very ignorant. Nothing gets accomplished except for furthering disease and making me hate the movie more. And then there are the people that are thrown in just to lengthen the already way too long movie (at 94 min). We got the stoner that really only shows up once, the partying cop that’s as pointless and as awkward as anything else you’ll see on screen this year, and to top it all off the little boy that sits on a bench and bites people (and provides one of the most ridiculously random things put into a non-comedic movie).

Perhaps I should use the term “non-comedic” lightly. It’s quite funny, but I seriously doubt most of it is intentional. I’ve never seen BB gun with a clip that sounds like a rifle before. The blatantly funny stuff of course doesn’t work. But it’s scenes like listening to the party cop blabber on with the horribly goofy music in the background or seeing one of the girls crying in the bathtub as she shaves her diseased legs that add the real humor to it. I probably haven’t laughed harder this year…and I saw “Grind.”

Speaking of that crap on wheels movie, Joey Kern is in both that and this. He pretty much plays the same character here, except without sunglasses and a dance break. Of course the rest of the cast sucks, too.

The director, Eli Roth (who came up with the story, produced and co-wrote with Randy Pearlstein – actor in “Dead Man on Campus”), for some reason allowed a slew of weird shots that tried to make the movie look more artistic, but really just looked incredibly staged. That mailbox doesn’t need to be so prominent in the frame if it serves no purpose. Overall, though, the film looked nice. It was shot well, and I applaud the use of makeup rather than computers, but as soon as people started talking, it was all down hill.

Avoid this one like the plague…or “Cabin Fever.”

I'm slowly getting to everything, I swear. I still have one heck of a backlog to get to and it'll get worked on as the days go by. Don't worry, loyal readers. You should get a steady dose of criticism. I have my Back To School trio, El Mariachi trilogy, Dirty Pretty Things and Underworld on deck for your reading pleasure. Check back often.



The Secret Lives of Dentists
Review by Jon Waterman

***

Dave has some problems. He has a customer that’s trying to hurt his reputation, three increasingly troublesome daughters and a wife that may be cheating on him. The first two seem to be byproducts of the latter. Dave’s letting his imagination run wild and begins to feel like nothing good can come from the situation at hand.

The film deals with Dave’s mental anxiety by separating the multiple levels of fiction that his mind works with and creates. There is little in the film that would keep anyone’s attention or interest until these psychoses grow more prominent. If you can hang in through the first half, you’ll be rewarded by the second.

All throughout, however, you’ll get to see some wonderful acting. Denis Leary, as the irate client, gives his best performance to date. Sure it’s basically just a rehashing of his stand-up persona, but he tones it down to give it a sense of realism and emotes true bitterness that doesn’t come across in the comedy act. Campbell Scott as Dave stood out in a remarkable way. This is some of the greatest acting I’ve seen all year. His monotone voice makes him first appear as a bland and boring guy. As time goes on, you can see that he expresses himself more with the subtle actions he performs and occasionally with a slight raise of volume in his voice. It’s easy to call Dave dull, but the way he is played is anything but. We also see some good child actors (this is a current trend that I hope continues). The three daughters speak naturally and without staginess.

To be honest, it’s hard to believe the film held my interest all the way through. There’s a solid ten-minute stretch – if not longer – where Dave does nothing but run around taking care of his sick family. He bounces back and forth between his wife and three kids that are all infected with the same flu he has. The entire sequence seems like an eternity and I very much wanted to escape all the screaming and calling out. It’s a true testament to the skills of the writer Craig Lucas that I stuck around to see how it all turned out.

I’d also like to applaud the ending. Despite opening with a rocky and somewhat dull first half complete with hokey “student film-like” narration, it all comes to fruition by the end. It could have gone many ways, most of them horrible. I feel this potentially standard story worked itself out in a believable and very much acceptable way. Any movie dealing with the concept of infidelity has the potential for an ending that only cheats the audience. “The Secret Lives of Dentists” left me satisfied.

Here you go. I wasn't home Thursday, so to make it up to you: A surprise review. This one wasn't on my to do list, but I went and saw it and here you go. Also, you can expect a review of Dirty Pretty Things and the Upcoming Underworld in the future. Check back often.


Capturing the Friedmans
Review by Jon Waterman

***

The Friedmans used to be a relatively normal family. Everyone joked around with each other and life was good. Arnold, the father, had a successful teaching career and even won awards. One day that all changed when the police came knocking on the door. Both Arnold and the youngest son, Jesse, were arrested and charged with taking sexual liberties with the young boys enrolled in the computer class Arnold ran out of his basement.

Through home movies, audio recordings and new interviews with most of the family, we learn what family life became for the Friedmans. Essentially it's an hour and a half of the three sons arguing with their mother, Elaine, who thinks her husband may have committed these crimes. On the other side of the equation, we get interviews with the officers that brought about and conducted the investigation, the lawyers that worked towards defending the accused and several former computer class students and parents of former students.

The documentary becomes a back and forth of, "Did they do it or not?" Some of the students claim sexual activity took place all the time, while the rest completely deny it and have no idea where the others are getting that notion. In all of the letters and recordings of the Friedman family both Arnold and Jesse maintain their innocence.

The subject matter isn't as interesting as the abundance of archival material the family gives to the filmmakers. It seems that nearly all family moments were taped by the oldest son, David's new camcorder. He felt the need to carry it around and record the multitudes of arguments that occurred. Jesse also taped conversations through audio cassette. These make up the bulk of the length, but less of the substance. Any advance in helping the audience decide for themselves comes with the interviews.

Talking with the police and the students, the filmmakers create that all too valuable shadow of doubt. Procedures and techniques are questioned and one can never decipher who can completely be trusted.

"Capturing the Friedmans" ends up being something of a poor man's "Paradise Lost." It's not as emotionally rousing and doubtfully will start a groundswell like the latter. It works more effectively as a personal test. The viewer must take the form of the jury and is given a wide array of "evidence" with which to work. It leaves a lot of questions unanswered, but how satisfying would it really be to know everything when watching a movie like this? It's captivating, creepy, well made and a nice break from fluffy narratives.

I have now dubbed this one of the top 5 worst movies of all time. It goes Freddy Got Fingered, Tomb Raider (I refused to see the sequel) Mission to Mars and now this. Read why. Check back with us for another new review. Later on you can expect to see the El Mariachi trilogy all reviewed on this site. Enjoy.


Grind
Review by Jon Waterman

Zero stars

I had seen the previews. I knew what to expect. Secretly, though, I hoped it wouldn’t be as bad as it looked. I gotta stop hoping.

The jokes in “Grind” are just as transparent as the motivations behind making the film. Obviously trying to cash in on the not-so-much-recent-anymore skateboarding craze, it fails to capture any of the sport’s charm or excitement. The script seems like it was hurried through the process to take advantage of this hip new fad. So, instead of making it good, they just threw in a bunch of guys from “Jackass” and assumed people would laugh. What a horrible, horrible film.

You got this one guy that’s supposed to be the clown of the group – and you later find out his parents are clowns --- Oh, Randy Quaid, why are you in this movie? --- – but basically that means acting like an idiot and making random noises. He’s played by Vince Vieluf from “Rat Race.” I liked him much more when he couldn’t talk. The other main characters are throwaways. None of them are funny. Ever. The guy that hits on all the girls and gets them in bed with little effort? Not funny. The guy that leads them all on the road trip to get a skater to sponsor him? Not funny. The other guy I can’t even remember? Definitely not funny. Please find other careers that don’t involve me having to look at you. And let me ask this. They had professional skaters in the film. I saw a couple. So, why is the main guy played by one of the London twins? Makes no sense. And why do they need that specific guy to sponsor them? In reality, any of them would work. Dumb. Dumb. Dumb. Super Duper dumb. By the way, Super Duper Skateboards is the name of the fake team they create in order to tour. Could they really not think of anything better? Something related to the movie, perhaps?

Perhaps the problem is that the movie is written by Ralph Sall. Ralph is a first time writer working from his extensive knowledge of skateboarding that he learned as executive music producer for a few dozen films.

I’ve already griped about the lack of prominent pro skaters. Now I’m going to complain about the lack of skate action to begin with. I seriously doubt any of the “talent” learned to do anything themselves. Any tricks are shown from the knee down. There were maybe three awe-worthy moves – performed by the seldom-seen pros. Now, supposedly, the lead guy has been working on this one trick really hard and if he were to land it, the local skate shop would sponsor him. I guess I should mention for those of you that don’t know…sponsoring is good. It means you get paid to skateboard and you can tour and make more money to skateboard. Well, if he’s been working on this trick so hard, why do we never see it? I think we see it at the end – I don’t mean to spoil the magic here – but it’s the only MTV edited thing in the movie and thus gets broken up so much you can’t really tell what happened.

What was with the dance break?

Come on guys. Take a hint from “Rad.” Now that’s how you make a hokey, fun movie about an extreme sport – that includes a better dance sequence, actually. If you really want to see the movie, grab your Nash deck and a bunch of friends and make fun of it, because that’ll be the only way to enjoy yourself.

It's Tuesday. That means it's time for another review. Who would have thought this one would have been so popular, eh? Keep checking back. Eventually I'll hit you with my back to school tribute with Rushmore, Can't Hardly Wait and National Lampoon's Animal House. I have others on the way, too. Check back tomorrow.


Freddy Vs. Jason
Review by Jon Waterman

**1/2

Because the “Pinhead Vs. Chucky” script was taking just a little bit too long in development, we get those other horror guys fighting each other. How this ends up working is like this: Freddy has no power, because no one fears him anymore. He gets Jason to come back and kill kids on Elm Street instead of his usual Camp Crystal Lake. People get afraid and they can both kill. However, Jason starts taking too much glory and, as we all know, the slasher game is all about greed.

The film is full of problems. Where to start.... Where. To. Start.

I could start from the opening credits, which contain the most annoying, pointless, laughable musical cue possibly of all time. But that one little thing gets overshadowed by all the other plot points and lines of dialogue that just make you go “What the….” The characters somehow figure out absolutely everything that’s going on no matter how absurd and then explain it to all of us even though we already know what’s happening. Not only is it repetition, its ridiculous repetition. Ridiculous, ridiculous repetition. I didn’t understand why the stoner guy became a main character half way through. Yeah, they utilized him, but when did he get to be close friends with those preppy kids. Another thing, Freddy only kills kids, right? Apparently, he gets his power from their fear. What’s the cut off point? How old is too old. Once you graduate high school you’re free? Why doesn’t Freddy go after the second graders like he did when he was alive and leave the dumb cheerleaders alone.

On the plus side, the movie seems to realize the humor in most of what it does. The battles between the two evil monsters turn into excuses for jokes mixed with a little bit of gore. And all of the horror flick staples are firmly in place: Sex, nudity, parties, ignorance, falling down and a whole lot of blood and gore. However, the film truly lacks any inventive deaths. It feels like a waste, considering Freddy’s nature. He appears in dreams and can do basically whatever he wants. But people still die in rather straightforward ways.

Another positive element is Robert Englund’s acting. He’s been playing the role for a long time and the facial expressions he makes are genuinely funny and thus, good. I cannot say the same about anyone else. I won’t be the first to say this, but I’m against the trend of “musicians” turning into actors. There are thousands of students out there that could do better and these singers are already making enough money on their own. The same goes for actors turned musicians. Anyways. The cast sucked.

“Freddy Vs. Jason” gives you everything you’d expect. You’ll laugh – sometimes intentionally, others not. You may get scared a little bit – sometimes from the film, others from thinking about how much money these people got paid to work on this thing. Overall, you’ll have a lot of fun.

Well...I'm back! I'll try to post one a day until I'm all caught up. Here's the first. The last movie I saw before going back to school and officially the last movie of the summer for me. A lot of you are still rushing out to see this one months later. Come back tomorrow. It's good to be back.


Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl
Review by Jon Waterman

**1/2

Evil pirates who are looking to lift a curse capture the fair Elizabeth. Young Will wants to get her back. So, he enlists the help of the legendary Captain Jack Sparrow. The sword savvy duo sail the seas seeking the lovely lass. On the way they encounter a great deal of action, adventure and all of that other stuff.

First we got “The Country Bears” and soon we’ll have “The Haunted Mansion.” Right now, we’re talkin’ ‘bout “Pirates.” Even in this age of Hollywood, where it appears as if the idea well has dried up a couple times over, the concept of basing a movie on an amusement park ride seems over-the-top. If this film is to succeed, it needs to somehow come off as being more substantial than just a way to make a quick buck (…aneer… sorry). The movie does exactly that. Rather than just cranking out a quick movie out of a popular tourist attraction, Disney puts time, effort, money and, most importantly, talent into the equation. The result is a relatively fun experience.

The weak point lies in the script. It’s not nearly as funny as it tries to be. It attempts many bad jokes, but almost all lack timing, delivery and basic humorous situations. The supporting cast of evil pirates (aka the token dumb ones) just served little real purpose and I quickly grew to hate them. To top it all off, we’re sent on a long voyage, too. It would have been nice to bypass some of the plot, because there are situations that are repeated. Personally, I can’t think of a way to get around this problem, and luckily you don’t feel the length. Other than the small script problems, talent truly makes this one worthwhile. Johnny Depp, as Sparrow, steals the show (and the ships) as the staggeringly graceful and clever alcoholic exiled captain. Geoffrey Rush as evil pirate Barbossa makes for an entertaining villain. Unlike many, he doesn’t overplay the evilness (at least not all the time). Besides the throwaway pirates, the rest of the supporting cast (Kiera Knightly, Orlando Bloom, etc.) all hold their own as well.

“Pirates” may not be spectacular or mind-blowing, but there’s still a lot of fun to be had. Perhaps I only feel that way due to the lack-luster performance of the rest of the summer’s offerings, but either way, I’ll stand by my judgment. Decent action, great acting and the ability to hold your attention all make this one of the better films of the season.

Hello everyone. Sorry about the delay. It's taking a long time for me to get back online here at school. I have been writing, though. As soon as I have internet access on my computer, I'll be hitting you with somewhere around ten reviews including Pirates of the Caribbean, Freddy Vs. Jason, Grind, Animal House, Rushmore, Can't Hardly Wait, The Secret Lives of Dentists, Once Upon A Time in Mexico and a couple others yet to be named. Hopefully it won't be much longer now. Come on back to us.

-- Jon