2004 Top Movies

Amongst all the recent Hollywood generics and clutter of movies, The Station Agent is one of those rare treats that you can take a liking to immediately. Not only is the film very observant but you also have three likable characters where you'd wished you were invited to one of their walks or book readings. Though the movie is less subtle than Lost In Translation it is more brilliant in parts, IMO.

Forget 'Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon', this is the movie that should've been championed to the Western culture. With a formidable cast of Asian cinematic icons and absorbing cinematography, Ying Xiong unfolds more like poetry than theatre.

An amazing film through and through. Outstanding production values and custome designs, the cinematography a sight to behold, the score was extremely stirring, and the leading performances were remarkable, in particular Jim Caviezel in an Oscar worthy portrayal as Jesus Christ.

IMO, the The Passion of the Christ is an important film. The label of 'Masterpiece' may be contentious but it has thus far already made an imprint in cinematic history IMO. And it's not due to the religious content but rather for the film-making achievements from Mel Gibson.

While I would not place this movie in the 'highly recommended' section, it is however still a 'must see' film. A word of advice though, one must be strong in order to withstand the powerful onscreen images.

Upped the rating because of Natalie Portman and after rewatched. My initial thoughts on first viewing:

There is a lot to like about Zach Braff's Garden State but in an odd way it is too a forgettable movie for reasons that, to me the movie had outstayed it's 'jaded outlook of the world' commentary and that it took too long to get Natalie Portman onscreen.

And another reason that the movie did not work as well was perhaps the 'convenient' ending of the film. Unlike Lost in Translation or Before Sunset, there is no room for interpretation, no comfort of hope and/or hopelessness, no departing gift for the viewer to ponder, no trust in the audience...

The comedy in the movie is well written and the depiction of his main character's imperfect and dissatisfaction in his sleepwalking existence to-date was well directed. However, it seems like Braff has opted too much of the quirky and offbeat humour at certain times where a more of a serious focus was needed, particular with the relationship with his father.

But as mentioned earlier that I liked the movie so let's get to the best bits. Outstanding soundtrack. Braff had managed to set the movie in the right tone with Alexi Murdoch's "Orange Sky" to convey the melancholy feel of the film while Coldplay's "Don't Panic" and Frou Frou's "Let Go" will remain a sub-conscience favourite of mine.

While all the credit (deservingly) goes Zach Braff for his triple effort, Natalie Portman is the soul of the movie. The film just gets a jolt of sunshine when she enters into the picture. Her performance is outstanding. She's like the cinematic best friend because you cannot hate her onscreen in whatever she does. As Sam, she's the girl every guy dreams to have as a companion... smart, funny, and attractive. She is imperfect in so many ways that her quirkiness and free-spirited nature makes her instantly likeable and engaging.

The movie may have passed me by but the feeling and poignancy of the film will remain in my conscience for some time yet.

This is one of them movies that is perhaps better than what the trailer suggest and as such avoids the "I told ya so" syndrome of having a decent trailer and a diabolical film. It's a surprisingly good movie that I'd enjoyed.

Yes, I, Robot has its cliches (cop has a conflicting past, gets suspended but carries on with the investigation nevertheless; an attractive female psychiatrist doctor who remarkably can hold a firearm if the situation calls for it), it has its flaws, and it has its overkills with the extensive slow-motions and unbelievable action sequences involving balancing, leaping, jumping, or running. But as a whole the movie was commendable because it could have been a lot worse. It delivered the goods as a satisfying Hollywood popcorn summer action movie should. And like the other movies that I'd enjoyed this year before this - Troy, The Day After Tomorrow, Spider-Man 2 - it was solid entertainment.

Sure, the movie could've have been more thought-provoking and had a darker edge but I took pleasure at the way how it played safe by avoiding to adapt too much of Asimov's much more in-depth concepts and ideas (which would've been a disappointment anyway since his work is widely considered to be visionary) but presented us with a neatly and snappy packaged Hollywood fare. To that end, Alex Proyas did a grand job - it could've been much worst with another Director, IMO. And unlike the recent Sci-Fi action/adventures such as A.I. & Minority Report, the conclusion (as conventional as it was) did not leave me with an empty feeling that I needed more from the narratives and/or characters.

One question though: Why does Will Smith has to always save the world?

Though it was a very good movie, it just didn't have that knockout punch I'd expected. Perhaps it was due to the average screenplay but the cinematography and direction kept it entertaining; goes to show how good a director Mann is to manouvre around a sloppy script at times.

Shot digitally, the look of the digital print worked well for the movie. The way L.A. was lit up was just stunning to see. It gave life and an added dimension to the landscape. In fact, the L.A. nightscape is used as Vincent's accomplice in his pursuits as Cruise's character is able to blend in without suspicion.

And, yes, the final act is somewhat conventional and predictable (the final hit/contract is somewhat rather obvious) but Mann's direction keeps the movie from falling into a sandpit of disappointments. Cruise is a bada$$ and very entertaining to watch him trying to shape the character - almost to a point of justification for his profession and reasoning.

Brilliant, but Lazy. Brilliant in the character development, but Lazy in giving us a truly "evil" and menacing super-villian that we can really love to hate.

Much like Happiness I think Irreversible is the same kinda film that it would be hard to recommend. You can come to admire and respect the film-making techniques of this movie but I think it'll either offend or disgust many that you don't want to be the person responsible for their walkouts and hatred of the images they'll be seeing on screen. So be warned, this movie is not the kind of movie you should bring your family to see and it is definitely the "anti-first-date" movie.

Irreversible is indeed a powerful movie but also profoundly 'ugly' - one you'll have trouble in watching it the first time let alone a repeated viewing.

The storytelling style is very much similar to Memento but the similarities stops there.

It does have two most unrelenting scenes you'll ever see in film history. But to get through to those scenes, viewers must put up with a jolting hand-held camera scene that rivals The Blair Witch Project for most nauseating in recent memory. It only last for the first 20 minutes or so though and the technique does have motif and becomes very effective in showcasing our protagonist's rage.

While it has the cliched characters where there is the hooker with the heart of gold, the cop with the absent mind as he battles his demons and tries to reclaim his personal life, and the unknown hitman on assignment, the movie does move along in a casual but enjoyable pace as we get to know more of the characters and their purpose. A tense ending will leave viewers glued to the finale. One of the better Hong Kong action/thrillers out now.

Here's a film that looks good but suffers from an uninspiring/uninteresting character and murder case (though some may be fascinated by the legend of John Holmes). I've read that this is Val Kilmer's best work but he has been in better form playing Jim Morrison in The Doors. Yes, Wonderland is a wonder. You will be left wondering what a good movie it would've been if it were for some interesting characters and acts. The soundtrack to this movie is good though.

The movie took a while to shift gears into a second act but when it did it was decent. No real inventiveness in Washington's character or acting here as he's doing the same he's been doing in his previous movies such as John Q or Fallen. It's watchable.

Funny set-up but the laughs were too divided thereafter.

I cannot get too enthused about this movie. The characters are cliched, the plot is very slim, the script is rather slack and poor while the action sequences are mostly revisits of the old JC movies and what is currently available now (e.g. Infernal Affairs - the rooftop showdown at the end). There is, however, a spectacular bus scene that would make Speed look somewhat pedestrian - though that particular action sequence does remind me of the first two Police Stories.

Another negative was perhaps the casting of the movie. Daniel Wu - JC's protege - was poorly casted as the villian of the movie. To me he seems somewhat overexposed at the moment, though I do not doubt his ability (see One Nite in Mongkok for instance).

Overall, it was rather a disappointment. Even though the movie is of a total new spin to the other three movies, this new movie offers nothing thrilling and at one point it was almost laughable and predictable at the turns of the storyline.

Big Fish is a rather frustrating movie as it builds up as this enchanting tale that can be used as a metaphor in your own pursuits in life. Instead we get a movie where the person sharing the story becomes larger than life itself. This was exactly how Will felt through most of the movie. The truth of it all becomes an order of disappointment.

This movie lacked any magic or appeal due to its charmless character of Edward Bloom and in turn the bigger picture message of living life to its fullest falls flat. You're either taking the position of Edward Bloom if you enjoyed it or took the view of William Bloom (Edwards's son) if you were frustrated by it.

In there is a movie that could have been a delightful film about a father and son relationship that would've been an overwhelming experience for great parenting. sigh... looks like I'll have to fabricate that movie up myself

The ending (which was the payoff for the entire film) was not much of a secret. Johnny Depp's performance is great though, shows how much he has progressed in his skills as an actor since his television 21 Jump Street days.

I cannot believe this movie was directed by the same guy (Mathieu Kassovitz) who made the brilliant La Haine. And I cannot believe that this movie had such poor performances from an Oscar nominee of Downey Jr. and an Oscar winner of Berry.

Not scary, not suspenseful, not dramactic, and definitely nor engaging. Give me Stir of Echoes over this anytime.

Outrageous and Extreme.

It seems to me that Stephen Sommers is all about action and not much else interests him. Though I must admit that he can direct some good action sequences in the past that can leap out of the screens but even that does not amount to the title of a good action movie. In most instances his action direction is too fast and too furious to make a lasting impact. Take The Mummy Returns for example with the double-decker bus chase scene. With Van Helsing we are given the same treatment in many of its action sequence. For instance, the horse-carriage sequence. While its all fun to watch but if you were to ask me to reference each shot or the finer details of the scene than you'll have little luck. Now, if you were to ask me about some of the great action sequence from Indiana Jones, Speed, Die Hard, etc... than I may be able to help you out on that. Basically, that's the differential.

While they may have spent over $100 million on the movie, the budget invested on the script was less than $1 dollar, IMO. Most of the lines were totally bad, evil even. Van Helsing shoulda done a Van Helsing on the Van Helsing screenplay. For example: "If you want to kill someone, just kill them. Don't just talk about it."

Another distracting aspect of the movie were the phony accents used by the actors (Beckinsale & Roxbergh).

Van Helsing is watchable, but also forgettable.