Fight Club

                                                                                                                                                                     

                                                                                                                                      

Fight Club

An insomniac office worker, looking for a way to change his life, crosses paths with a devil-may-care soap maker, forming an underground fight club that evolves into something much, much more...

Director: David Fincher
Writers: Chuck Palahniuk (novel), Jim Uhls (screenplay)
Stars: Brad Pitt, Edward Norton, Helena Bonham Carter

 

Storyline

A ticking-time-bomb insomniac and a slippery soap salesman channel primal male aggression into a shocking new form of therapy. Their concept catches on, with underground "fight clubs" forming in every town, until an eccentric gets in the way and ignites an out-of-control spiral toward oblivion.

Reviews

 

When I first saw the previews for this movie, it had me interested. A movie about guys who fight - it didn't seem to deep, but I thought it would provide entertainment. I had heard buzz about, a few of my friends raved about it for a few days, and I was convinced. I should see this movie. I went to my local video store and picked up the last remaining DVD. I popped it in, sat in amazement until the last credit rolled, and then watched it again. And again. And again.

This movie is dark and disturbing, however, it is equally smart and stylistic. I found it hard to watch at points, but I couldn't turn my eyes away. Fight Club makes many bold statements against the modern consumer-driven society, and produces Norton's best performance and Pitt's second best (12 Monkeys).

Norton plays an average-Joe who is living a dead-end life. He needs something to change his life. Tyler and Marla will take care of this, and that is all I want to give away. Other comments will tell you more, but I suggest you let it all sink in while watching. As for it's ending, it doesn't rival 'The Sixth Sense' - it blows it away. One of the best movie endings I've seen. Even better if you're a Pixies fan.

As for it being important, don't worry. You will be hearing about this movie. When 'A Clockwork Orange' came out, it was met with mixed reviews, deemed too dark and violent, and is now considered a classic. These two movies share quite a bit in common - both were based on great books. If you haven't read either, get to it. Politicians will use this movie as a demonstration of careless and consequenceless violence in movies, and as a perfect example of what today's youth are being influenced by.

Watch this movie, and watch it again with some of your more intelligent friends. 10 out of 10.

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King

 

 

Gandalf and Aragorn lead the World of Men against Sauron's army to draw his gaze from Frodo and Sam as they approach Mount Doom with the One Ring.

Director: Peter Jackson
Writers: J.R.R. Tolkien (novel), Fran Walsh (screenplay), 2 more credits »
Stars: Elijah Wood, Viggo Mortensen, Ian McKellen

 

 

Storyline

While Frodo & Sam continue to approach Mount Doom to destroy the One Ring, unaware of the path Gollum is leading them, the former Fellowship aid Rohan & Gondor in a great battle in the Pelennor Fields, Minas Tirith and the Black Gates as Sauron wages his last war against Middle-Earth.

Reviews

 

Peter Jackson has done it. He has created an all-encompassing epic saga of Tolkien's Lord of the Rings books, and after coming away from the final chapter, how does this rate not only as a film on its own, but as a part of the whole?

Perfect.

I've never seen a series like this. A trilogy of movies created with such love and care and utter perfection of craft that you can't help but walk away and wonder how did Peter Jackson make this possible? I have always loved the original "Star Wars" and "Indiana Jones" series for their epic storytelling, and just for just fitting in as a great moment in cinema. This should be, will be, remembered with as much revered fondness for generations to come. They do not make films like these anymore.

As a stand alone film, it picks up immediately where "Two Towers" ends, so brush up before seeing it. I've read the books, and the anticipation of seeing some of the more profound moments in this film made me kind of view it with a rushed sense of perspective. I wanted to make sure everything in this film was done "right". And when it happened, it was. I will need to see this again to enjoy everything on a more casual level.

The cast comes through once more. The musical score retains its beauty, elegance and power. The special effects, notably Gollum again, are nothing less than breathtaking, and simply move the story along. The battles are monumentally huge and exciting. There are some liberties taken with the story, especially during the end with the homecoming, and yet, everything that needed to be covered regarding the main characters was handled. After the greatest moment of the series resolves itself, the story provided a breather. And gives a good-bye to friends seen on screen for the last three years. It was truly a bittersweet feeling in realizing that there will be no "Rings" movie in 2004. I will miss this talented group of actors.

As with the first two, the film is very long, but goes by without you ever truly realizing it. This film is so much more than a simple "fantasy" epic. It's a story about strength of character, friendship, loyalty and love. And while every member of the Fellowship has their part to play, I finally understood why some critics have said this series is a story about Sam. It's his unwavering resolve that led the quest to its victory. Sean Astin is a true credit for adding the inspirational heart to this epic. As as far as the ending goes, they ended it the way that it had to be ended. Jackson ended this film the way it should have been.

I will miss looking forward to a new "Rings" movie, but these movies provide hope that high-quality films can still be made without special effects taking over a story, bathroom humor, or a "Top 40" soundtrack. George Lucas could learn a lot from these films about how not to alienate the fanbase.

Each film has earned a "10" from me for the last two years, which for me to give is a rarity. This one, however, is as equally deserving as its two predecessors. The Academy had better not look over this film for "Best Picture" of 2003. To do so would be greatly disrespectful of the craft and care that anyone involved with these films put into them.

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

 

A bounty hunting scam joins two men in an uneasy alliance against a third in a race to find a fortune in gold buried in a remote cemetery.

Director: Sergio Leone
Writers: Luciano Vincenzoni (story), Sergio Leone (story), 5 more credits »
Stars: Clint Eastwood, Eli Wallach, Lee Van Cleef

 

 

Storyline

Blondie (The Good) is a professional gunslinger who is out trying to earn a few dollars. Angel Eyes (The Bad) is a hit man who always commits to a task and sees it through, as long as he is paid to do so. And Tuco (The Ugly) is a wanted outlaw trying to take care of his own hide. Tuco and Blondie share a partnership together making money off Tuco's bounty, but when Blondie unties the partnership, Tuco tries to hunt down Blondie. When Blondie and Tuco come across a horse carriage loaded with dead bodies, they soon learn from the only survivor (Bill Carson) that he and a few other men have buried a stash of gold in a cemetery. Unfortunately Carson dies and Tuco only finds out the name of the cemetery, while Blondie finds out the name on the grave. Now the two must keep each other alive in order to find the gold. Angel Eyes (who had been looking for Bill Carson) discovers that Tuco and Blondie meet with Carson and knows they know the location of the gold. All he needs is for the two to 

Reviews

 A sprawling Western epic that follows the adventures of three gunfighters looking for $200,000 in stolen gold, Sergio Leone's `The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly' is a masterpiece, one that continues to get better and better with each viewing. In a way, it's a morality play, weighing the consequences of good and evil, but it does so in a realistic manner. Sometimes, crime does pay, at least in the short term, and sometimes good does go unrewarded. This film probably signaled the death knell of the traditional John Wayne `White Hat/Black Hat' Western.

The three main characters make the film. Lee Van Cleef (`The Bad') is evil personified. Totally ruthless, he'll do whatever it takes to get what he wants. Clint Eastwood (`The Good') is the Man With No Name, not really `good' in a traditional sense . . . but he has a certain sense of honor and tries to do the right thing. (Watch the scene when he gives a dying Confederate soldier a puff of his cigar - powerful, and it sums up everything that the Man With No Name is all about, without saying a single word.) Eli Wallach (`The Ugly') is Tuco, and he's easily the most complex - if not the best - character in the film. All impulse and rage, Tuco spins wildly throughout the movie, stealing, lying, pretending to be Clint Eastwood's best friend in one scene, trying to kill him in another - Tuco truly represents `the ugly' side of people.

The movie is long, but there's not a wasted scene in the film. Each one slowly lets the film unfold with a certain style and grace, revealing more about each character and what's going on. The pacing is incredible, as is the direction - Sergio Leone manages to build a lot of uncomfortable tension in the film, keeping the film from ever getting predictable. Any typical Western cliché that you can possibly think of is either given a unique twist or utterly destroyed by Leone's masterful storytelling. Of special mention is Ennio Morricone's score, which is absolutely perfect. Two scenes - one in a Union prison camp, one in the climatic gunfight in the cemetery at the end of the film - are amazing on their own, but they become absolutely astonishing with combined with Morricone's powerful score. 

This movie is absolutely brilliant. If you haven't seen it yet, I strongly urge to do so. Immediately. (And then, go watch `Unforgiven' . . . in a way, I think that `Unforgiven' is the sequel to `The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly - it's the story of what eventually happened to the Man With No Name.) `The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly' is easily one of the best Westerns ever made. A++

Schindler's List

 

 

In Poland during World War II, Oskar Schindler gradually becomes concerned for his Jewish workforce after witnessing their persecution by the Nazis.

Director: Steven Spielberg
Writers: Thomas Keneally (book), Steven Zaillian (screenplay)
Stars: Liam Neeson, Ralph Fiennes, Ben Kingsley

 

 

Storyline

Oskar Schindler is a vainglorious and greedy German businessman who becomes an unlikely humanitarian amid the barbaric Nazi reign when he feels compelled to turn his factory into a refuge for Jews. Based on the true story of Oskar Schindler who managed to save about 1100 Jews from being gassed at the Auschwitz concentration camp, it is a testament for the good in all of us.

Reviews

 I know many of you, out there will disagree with me, when I say that Schindler's List is one of the greatest film that there has ever been. It does sound that I'm extremely overrating it, but I truly believe that Schindler's List is up there with The Godfather and Citizen Kane I mean everything about is so good, that its close to perfection.

The acting is brilliant, every actor does an amazing job. Liam Neeson as Schindler is incredible, no doubt about it. He should of won an Oscar for Best Actor. Ralph Fiennes is the one, who truly is the best actor in the film. He plays his antagonist role as Amon Goeth, so well that it is a travesty, he didn't win an Oscar for Best Supporting Actor.

I'm happy though, that the Academy chose this film for Best Picture, it was one of the best decisions they ever made. Because if this film wasn't considered Best Picture by the Academy, I don't know which film would be, expect maybe for The Godfather.

Steven Spielberg certainly deserved an Oscar for Best Director. It was a smart idea for Steven Spielberg to make this film in black-white because it made the movie more bleak, emotional, hopelessness. But you see small patches of color -- A candle and a child's coat bringing the evilness of the tragedy into a agonizing focus.

There's no doubt about it, this film will be a classic in decades, even hundreds of years to come in cinema. This film is without a doubt, the Best film that Spielberg has ever made. With many other Steven Spielberg's classics like Jurassic Park,Jaws,E.T, Raider of the Lost Ark, Saving Private Ryan, etc. Schindler's List will always be Steven Spielberg's most finest, important film. He blends his humanism to the tragic horror of the Holocaust to create an emotional masterpiece.

12 Angry Men

 

A dissenting juror in a murder trial slowly manages to convince the others that the case is not as obviously clear as it seemed in court.

Director: Sidney Lumet
Writer: Reginald Rose (story)
Stars: Henry Fonda, Lee J. Cobb, Martin Balsam

Storyline

The defense and the prosecution have rested and the jury is filing into the jury room to decide if a young Spanish-American is guilty or innocent of murdering his father. What begins as an open and shut case of murder soon becomes a detective story that presents a succession of clues creating doubt, and a mini-drama of each of the jurors' prejudices and preconceptions about the trial, the accused, and each other. Based on the play, all of the action takes place on the stage of the jury room.

Reviews

 Gosh, I don't know how many times I studied this play and performed it in high school, not to mention how many television shows had an episode that was inspired by 12 Angry Men. It was always a great drama because of the raw human emotions that were so true and remain timeless, this play will never be dated. I couldn't wait to see this movie when I saw it at the video store and it was the first movie I slipped into the DVD player. First off, I was incredibly impressed with the credits, we not only had Henry Fonda, we had Lee J. Cobb in the cast! This movie was so well performed and such a treasure, god, I couldn't ever say any words to justify it. I've done this a million times, but here is another summary of what 12 Angry Men is all about.

12 jurors are about to make a decision about a murder case, over all it seems like an open and shut case with tons of evidence that would make any good man look guilty, an 18 year old boy is about to be put to death if convicted. 11 of the men vote guilty, only one vote holds them back and they have to discuss the trial once again due to one vote being not guilty. Jurour #8 refuses to just jump to conclusions and brings up incredible possibilities that can always make a man think of "reasonable doubts", one by one the jurors begin to see the points he is making, except for one stubborn #3 who would rather just pull the switch to the chair himself.

12 Angry Men is a timeless tale that could either be told very badly, i.e. 7th Heaven, or incredibly well and bring out terrific performances like Henry and Lee did. Actually, the whole cast was terrific, there wasn't a performance that was off key, movies like this are so needed in Hollywood today, it was so simple, but added so much for a 30 minute play. Please, if you have any taste, you will truly enjoy 12 Angry Men and have a great appreciation for it!

Pulp Fiction

 The lives of two mob hit men, a boxer, a gangster's wife, and a pair of diner bandits intertwine in four tales of violence and redemption.

Director: Quentin Tarantino
Writers: Quentin Tarantino (story), Roger Avary (story), 1 more credit »
Stars: John Travolta, Uma Thurman, Samuel L. Jackson 

 

Storyline

Jules Winnfield and Vincent Vega are two hitmen who are out to retrieve a suitcase stolen from their employer, mob boss Marsellus Wallace. Wallace has also asked Vincent to take his wife Mia out a few days later when Wallace himself will be out of town. Butch Coolidge is an aging boxer who is paid by Wallace to lose his next fight. The lives of these seemingly unrelated people are woven together comprising of a series of funny, bizarre and uncalled-for incidents.

 

Reviews

 

I can only speak for myself, but I had never seen anything as stylish, cleverly constructed, well written and electrifying as this milestone when I first saw it in 1994. What really pulled me in right from the start is what we've now come to know as a Tarantino trademark: the dialogue. When gangsters Jules and Vincent talk to each other (or all the other characters, for that matter) there is a natural flow, a sense of realism and yet something slightly over the top and very theatrical about their lines – it's a mixture that immediately grabs your attention (even if it's just two dudes talking about what kind of hamburger they prefer, or contemplating the value of a foot-massage). Then there's the music: the songs Tarantino chose for his masterpiece fit their respective scenes so perfectly that most of those pieces of music are now immediately associated with 'Pulp Fiction'. And the narrative: the different story lines that come together, the elegantly used flashbacks, the use of "chapters" – there is so much playful creativity at play here, it's just a pure joy to watch.

If you're a bit of a film geek, you realize how much knowledge about film and love for the work of other greats – and inspiration from them

• went into this (Leone, DePalma, Scorsese and, of course, dozens of

hyper-stylized Asian gangster flicks), but to those accusing Tarantino of copying or even "stealing" from other film-makers I can only say: There has never been an artist who adored his kind of art that was NOT inspired or influenced by his favorite artists. And if you watch Tarantino's masterpiece today, it's impossible not to recognize just what a breath of fresh air it was (still is, actually). Somehow, movies

• especially gangster films - never looked quite the same after 'Pulp

Fiction'. Probably the most influential film of the last 20 years, it's got simply everything: amazing performances (especially Sam Jackson); it features some of the most sizzling, iconic dialogue ever written; it has arguably one of the best non-original soundtracks ever - it's such a crazy, cool, inspirational ride that you feel dizzy after watching it for the first time. It's – well: it's 'Pulp Fiction'. 10 stars out of 10.

 

                                      The Dark Knight

 

 

When the menace known as the Joker wreaks havoc and chaos on the people of Gotham, the caped crusader must come to terms with one of the greatest psychological tests of his ability to fight injustice.

Director: Christopher Nolan
Writers: Jonathan Nolan (screenplay), Christopher Nolan (screenplay), 3 more credits »
Stars: Christian Bale, Heath Ledger, Aaron Eckhart

 

Storyline

Batman raises the stakes in his war on crime. With the help of Lieutenant Jim Gordon and District Attorney Harvey Dent, Batman sets out to dismantle the remaining criminal organizations that plague the city streets. The partnership proves to be effective, but they soon find themselves prey to a reign of chaos unleashed by a rising criminal mastermind known to the terrified citizens of Gotham as The Joker.

Reviews

 Im just gonna start off by saying I LOVE this movie.Its one of my favorites of all time. I honestly cant think of too much wrong with this movie other than its a little long and Batmans by now infamous voice. But everything else is top notch. The acting,story,atmosphere,and actions scenes are all amazing. If you haven't seen this movie see it right now! I went into this not expecting to much but I came out blown away, I cant imagine any movie being much better. I'll just have to wait for The Dark Knight Rises to release to see if anything can be better. Until then, this stands as the best movie I've ever seen

 

The Godfather: Part II     The early life and career of Vito Corleone in 1920s New York is portrayed while his son, Michael, expands and tightens his grip on his crime syndicate stretching from Lake Tahoe, Nevada to pre-revolution 1958 Cuba. Director: Francis Ford Coppola Writers: Francis Ford Coppola (screenplay), Mario Puzo(screenplay), 1 more credit » Stars: Al Pacino, Robert De Niro, Robert Duvall   Storyline The continuing saga of the Corleone crime family tells the story of a young Vito Corleone growing up in Sicily and in 1910s New York; and follows Michael Corleone in the 1950s as he attempts to expand the family business into Las Vegas, Hollywood and Cuba.  Reviews  To me and probably to many other people The Godfather Part II is more of a continuation than sequel to The Godfather. Just look at the IMDb rating and you'll see I'm not the only one who feels this way. To me it as good as the first. The acting may have been better than the acting in the original. Robert De Niro gave a perfect subtle performance as Vito Corleone. His portrayal was powerful and breathtaking. When I think De Niro I definitely do not think subtle and smooth but that is exactly what he was in here. It is definitely one of his top three performances in his career. The depth in his portrayal was able to justify the Vito Corleone that Marlon Brando portrayed in the first. Al Pacino gave a very strong performance playing Michael Corleone. In here we get to see more of the tough decisions that have to be made and the consequences of certain actions. Al Pacino perfectly displayed the amount of thought and struggle that goes into and comes out of every action you make; the way it affects relationships, family, power and influence. Diane Keaton was not really given a lot of room to act in the first but in here she is very good. She did not play the stereotypical wife who always stands behind her husband but rather the woman with a mind of her own who is willing to go after what she feels she deserves. Robert Duvall again to me was the glue to the movie. Just having him in there kind of makes you feel safe. John Cazale also had more of an impact in here than in the first playing the half-witted brother always needing to be bailed out. A lot of these characters sound so familiar and stereotypical but in The Godfather Part II every character is played out with such extraordinary depth. Everyone from Talia Shire who gave a fine performance to Lee Strasberg all the way down to the kid who played young Vito Corleone were perfect. Part II seems to me to be more of a character study than the original. The directing once again is perfect. Francis Ford Coppola know or at least knew how to make a movie. The first to Godfather movie are done so precisely and perfectly that nothing really sticks out because they are so perfect throughout. Coppola just lets his actors play everything out as he should with type of cast he has here. Not to many movies can maintain such a consistent flow over 3 hours let alone even an hour and 45 minutes. The writing may not have been quite as good as the first in terms of quoting but the storyline was perfect. Seeing the decisions made by new mob boss Michael Corleone was common sense but flashing back on Vito Corleone's life was genius. The storyline to me could not have been better and Coppola and Puzo do a great job with it all the way. Like the first the cinematography was amazing but it had a slightly different tone to it. The first had more of a majestic, mythical look to it. In Part II you feel the modern times creeping in and the Corleones having to adjust to it. Part II has more of a corrupt and evil twist to it but I guess the end signifies that. The music obviously the same as the first was perfect and just fit so greatly with the rest of the movie. The first to movies of The Godfather series are really like the same movie. They are not the same though, they are actually very different but the greatness of them both and the continuation of the storyline from the first to the second really create a strong band between each other. To me it is only a sequel in that it was the second movie of a great series. No let downs, no disappointments just a continuation of of the greatness from the first one.