xirishdreamx
http://www.flixster.com/user/xirishdreamx
|
|
||||||||||||||||
| Movie: | 300, Hostel, Lord of the Rings Trilogy, Troy, Gladiator, Legends of the Fall, Green Mile, Beauty and the Beast |
|---|---|
| Actor: | LISTED ON PROFILE |
| Director: | |
| Quote: | The experiences in life you miss out on, are the chances you didn't take. |
Skin art by
SexiVixxEN
| Grab this skin
Amber's Recent Reviews
View All Ratings (58) |
Rate Movies
No new reviews. Rate some more movies.
Amber's Favorite Movies
View All
(13) | Create a MovieBoard
Amber's Movie Scrapbook
Amber's Talk
View All (83)
-
I recommend you see...
Lady Snowblood (Lady Snowblood: Blizzard from the Netherworld) (Shurayukihime)
by Davidposted 1 day ago -
I recommend you see...
Street Kings
by DavidI've read some reviews here and there about this movie because they claim the plot is incoherent and makes no sense. Well I have to totally disagree with that for starters, and can only assume that those reviewers must have tuned out on the movie pretty early into it.
The film follows a few days in the life of Keanu's character- an old school cop who ruthlessly takes out the bad guys and lies through his teeth to get the job done. In that sense he is a corrupt cop, but he's not on the take, and as the movie unfolds he discovers his ex partner is grassing him up to Internal Affairs and he must get to the bottom of a cop killing incident that increasingly stinks of blackmail, dirty money and cops betraying cops. I think that's as much as I can say without giving anything away.
My main criticism of this film is that for me, the plot and the twists were far too obvious. So if your one of those people like me who sees twists coming a mile off, but hates it when that happens, you may be disappointed. So I recommend either switching off your brain or giving yourself a congratulatory pat on the back when your guesses are gradually confirmed as the movie unfolds.
There's plenty of shoot outs, some decent action, and an interesting slant on the Internal Affairs scenario. Admittedly many of the characters are clichés but what cop thriller isn't riddled with them? And besides, clichés are clichés because they are often spot on to reality. The great Hugh Laurie has a small but significant role as a Internal Affairs officer, I for one wish his part was bigger.One other thing I was annoyed by was the ending, in that certain faceless and unknown corrupt officials appear to end up being protected and not pay for their crimes, but on reflection I realise that had this story been a true one, then that would have been exactly what would have happened.
All in all a good effort, Its not as good as some films of its type like Dark Blue or tv series like The Shield but is worth checking outHey, you should really see this!
posted 5 days ago -
I recommend you see...
Ghostbusters
by DavidThere is a reason why "Ghostbusters," the supernatural comedy hit from 1984 that was directed by Ivan Reitman, is a classic today: "Ghostbusters" is a film that easily worked its way into cinema and pop culture, spawning a 1989 sequel, a spin-off animated series, merchandise, songs (by Ray Parker, Jr.), and Slimer!!! It has a top-notch cast, including Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, and Harold Ramis as three parapsychologists who go into business eliminating poltergeists in New York City.
That plot outline sounds pretty simple, doesn't it? Well, OK, it is. "Ghostbusters" has one of those "novelty plots" (trademark), where a seemingly simple, maybe even random idea snowballs and becomes something truly unique altogether. That is what "Ghostbusters" is, and that is what its plot has. I still don't think Reitman, Aykroyd, and Ramis had too many brainstorming sessions where they just sat in a room and tossed around random ideas for three hours.
No. In "Ghostbusters," three unemployed parapsychologists, Dr. Peter Venkman (Murray), Dr. Raymond Stantz (Aykroyd) and Dr. Egon Spengler (Ramis), are thrown out of the university because their studies into the paranormal have failed to yield any positive results. So they get the idea to put their heads together and go into the ghost-busting business. Of course, things are slow at first and people have difficulty taking their ads seriously (save for the opening sequence where a librarian has a creepy encounter with the specter haunting the library).
They then get a break when Dana Barrett (Sigourney Weaver) discovers that a monstrous dog-thing has taken up residence in her refrigerator. (If you think that's bad, just watch out for those eggs that start frying themselves on the kitchen counter.) Oddly enough, none of her neighbors have complained to the super of any supernatural activity in the building, not even her loser neighbor Louis Tulley (Rick Moranis), who I think, obviously, secretly has a crush on her.
So the boys go about investigating Dana's claim, while Venkman initiates some poorly timed moves on her. More calls of ghostly encounters continue, and soon the general public has no choice but to let the Ghostbusters believe them. Cool. Venkman, Stantz and Spengler are eventually joined by a fourth, an Everyman named Winston Zeddmore (Ernie Hudson), who proves to probably be the emotional and spiritual anchor the other three need as they find themselves going up against an otherworldly threat that is far bigger than anything any of them ever expected.
"Ghostbusters" is just as imaginative as it is funny and timeless. The cast members know their roles and fill them out with equal pizazz, including William Atherton as slimy EPA agent Walter Peck and Annie Potts as cynical secretary Janine Melnitz. The real spectacle of course, are the inventive special effects. Of course, it's pretty easy to computer generate ghosts and goblins and film them interacting with live actors. Back in 1984, the filmmakers still had to use lighting and other camera trickery to make such things possible and in my eyes it makes things seem alot more real.
And lastly, who can forget Mr. Stay Puft's classic rampage down through lower Manhattan?
One of my all time favorite movies. For the few who haven't seen it. Check it out.I'm Sure You Have Seen This But Thought It Was Worth Recommending For Another Viewing
posted 7 days ago -
-
-
-
Friends are angels that come from above. Sent down from God for you to love. So if you are sad, and don't know what to do. Just remember that I care for you. am abass a 35yr old guy from Ghana looking for true love if u think u have the same interest pls give me ur email so that we chat more. pls take care till i hear from and have a nice day. am hoping to hear from u soon and best of luck in anything u do
love abassposted 9 days ago -
can i plz add u to my yahoo friends if so this is mine ben.brown47@yahoo.com it will be nice to hr frm u take care brownLove comforteth like sunshine after rain
posted 9 days ago -
I recommend you see...
V for Vendetta
by DavidAfter a disappointing attempt in making The Matrix into a totally forgettable trilogy, the Wachowski brothers write a new film tackling the issues of terrorism and corruption between the bureaucratic governments in this futuristic look of Britain.Now this film is based on a graphic novel which I love and changes were made as with most books adapted to the big screen but with everyone involved in this movie it goes without saying I would have only high expectations for this film. The directorJames McTeigue, who served as an assistant director on the Matrix series, really impressed me with the outcome of this film.
In a state of government that is controlled by a tyrant and is in a state of civil war, there's nowhere safe for anyone that is a possible suspect of terrorism. With corrupt leaders and crooked officers, there is only one thing that is suspected of this and that is the right to rebel against the government. Evey Hammond (Natalie Portman) becomes cornered in a dark alley by several government officers who have only one thing on their mind. Luckily she is saved from the power hungry officers by a man in black that wears the a Guy-Fawkes mask and whose weapon of choice is the dozen of daggers that he carries around. She's intrigued by the man in black, who has no second thought of using violence as a mean of expression for his rebellious ideas, who latter has been labeled as the terrorist of the new generation and given the name "V". With her curiosity, Evey is kidnapped by V and learns of his lifestyles that he carries on. Meanwhile, Inspector Eric Finch, (Stephen Rea) is questioning the authority of the nations dictator Creedy, whose face is blown up on a large movie screen as he dictates his committee, displaying his ego and attempt to be intimidating to his council. All I can picture is that this guy is probably 5'1'', drives cars that are large and fast, and makes sure to be yelling and/or frowning at the same time. As the film continues, you begin to learn the reasoning for V's acts of terrorism involving explosions of national monuments and the mentality that violence is the only way to rebel.
The pace of the film isn't what you would expect from the trailer that you can see online but that doesn't change anything, the film shows the stylistic traits of the graphic novel that seems to be the new wave of interpretation as seen through most recent films such as The History of Violence and Sin City. There are several high class references in V's humble layer, underneath the rocky ledge near the coast of some river, being that there are rare paintings on the wall, operatic music playing in the background and other nick-nacks that show the intellect that V truly is, giving him the approval rating for his actions. Even though he seemed to be justifying the rights of all mankind in this totalitarian government, it seems like I've heard or seen this story before at least a half a dozen times, I don't seem to mind. The ending is what ties everyone together and the effect that V had on society is what is special about the film and shows the overpowering force of the people against a tyrant. To sum it up John Locke would approve with the idea, disapprove of the actions, while Machiavelli would be frustrated beyond belief. A great look at the rise and fall of power in a time were the nation is trying to understand how there future might evolve. Check this one outHey, you should really see this!
posted 16 days ago -
Hey - try this personality test and see how we compare
Which Mean Girl Are You?posted 20 days ago -
-
-
I recommend you see...
To Live and Die in L.A.
by DavidSome Minor Spoilers Here***********************************************************
There are three things going for this crime thriller: it's a great in the sense of being a believable and well-constructed story; for the time, it has ordinary and not top box-office stars, a cast that produce star quality performances; and, of course, it's directed by William Friedkin, a director well known for constructing cinema designed to shock.
The narrative which I understand only barely resembles the story line of the novel is a piece of nasty work in the form of the moral ambiguity that constantly arises when 'good' guys exceed their authority to do whatever it takes to bag the 'bad' guys. Friedkin had already explored that in The French Connection (1971) but, at that time, he used a big star draw card with Gene Hackman, who, as Popeye Doyle, trod on a lot of toes and faces to do the job and still managed to garner sympathy from this viewer, and many others, despite his excesses.
That is not the case for Richard Chance (William Petersen), the T-man who'll do anything to get Rick Masters (Willem Dafoe) for murdering another T-man, Jim Hart (Michael Greene), Chance's partner in crime, so to speak. You see (literally and visually) the trouble with Chance, is that he always wants to take a chance on bridging the gap between doing what's right and proper, and doing what he wants to get the job done; ethically, he's a true pragmatist totally vacuous when it comes to core principles. And that's in direct contrast to Rick Masters, who's loyal to all those around him, until they double-cross him; only then do those real 'bad' guys pay the price for their double trouble.
From the narrative perspective, Chance and Masters are mirror images, of course, and each shares the same first name (although, for Masters, Rick is a nick-name), thus providing a duality of principle and purpose in the totally corrupt society as presented by Freidkin; and all of which is summed up with Bob Grimes' (an urbane and consummate Dean Stockwell) pithy rebuttal to Bianca (Debra Feuer) when she asked him why he was lawyer for Masters: "It's just business". Note the great grimy name for Stockwell's totally debased character...
So, the great irony for this story is that Chance works within the law as a T-man, but operates as much as he can outside of it to further his personal interests; while Masters works outside of the law as an anti-T-man (he counterfeits money), while operating within it as much as he can using corrupt lawyers and the legal system to further his own interests. So, who is the real bad guy? Who deserves more sympathy from society?
The ending is fitting, as it should be: out with the old, in with the new. Society continues to function, in all its grime and glory, such as it is; but it is also Friedkin's Disconnection on a grand scale for telling the truth about how it all works. Little wonder: most people can't handle the truth, as somebody said, because there's a little bit of Chance and Masters in all of us. And, we all know what happened to Friedkin's career as a director after this one was released.
There are, however, few thrillers, in the last twenty-five years, better than this one for irony, suspense and action. Add to that the sexually pulsating sound track from Wang Chung and the on-site location shooting around Los Angeles and you have a very believable story in a city where angels always fear to tread.
Is it just co-incidental that many of the actors went on to greater recognition. For William Petersen, this was his second movie; for Willem Dafoe, it was his sixth; for John Pankow, his third; Turturro, his fifth and so on.
See it for sure, if you haven't already; see it again for what you missed first time around. Highly recommendedHey, you should really see this!
posted 43 days ago -
I recommend you see...
Roger Dodger
by DavidSome Minor Spoilers Here **************************************************************Critics adore independent films. Made usually on shoestring budgets and starring either no-bodies, wannabees or actors trying to make a statement, independent films are usually made by people who love movies for people who love movies. Enter Dylan Kidd's writing and directing debut, the 2002 very funny and memorable film Roger Dodger.
Campbell Scott (The Spanish Prisoner) plays Roger Swanson, a fast talking, chain-smoking, ever drinking 30-something that believes he is truly God's gift to earthly women. We are first introduced to Roger as he engages in conversation with fellow co-workers at a public restaurant and Roger dominates the conversation offering his views on man's ability over women to read maps, the workings and history of the female genatalia and why science and evolution will have men being reduced to servitude in 10 to 15 generations. Roger dominates the dialogue and with rapid fire crass and the occasional sneer at those that joke at his revelations, we are introduced to a man who is on a conceited high that will eventually lead to his emotional crisis.
Enter Roger's nephew, Nick (played by Jesse Eisenberg) who shows up from out of town and looks to Roger for help in the disposing of his virginity. Roger, acting more like someone who wants to show off his masculine powers than act that of a big brother, takes Nick under his wing for a night of adventure. The self-professed `FN lightening rod' for sex sneaks Nick into bars, takes him to a house party and eventually to an underground brothel in an attempt to shed the youngster of his innocence. But with each new venue, we are exposed to Roger's vulnerability and we experience a man who is on a kamikaze mission to destruction.
In a touching scene between Nick and two women picked up at a local bar (played understatedly by Jennifer Beals and Elizabeth Berkley), it is Nick's innocence and honestly that has the women swoon over Roger's frank and demeaning manner. The scene is wonderfully lit with just street lights and the camera angles which sometimes don't focus on the talking character, suck you in so that you believe you are on that cold park bench with them.
This is the genius that is usually associated with the independent films. People talk over each other, and sets are usually actual locations that lend to the aura and feel of the film. Dylan Kidd uses what light is available to him and sometimes that means that characters are talking in the dark corners of an alley or are blocked out by the backs of other actors. However, one is never lost or feels betrayed by the filmmakers because the dialogue remains so crisp and real.
Campbell Scott won a best actor award from the National Board of Review of Motion Pictures for his role in Roger Dodger and in my opinion, he was overlooked for an Academy Award nomination for the same role. He delivers the Tarantino-ish dialogue with precision and makes this disgusting character of a man someone that we can relate to or at least understand.
My final note about independent films is that they don't have the pressure to produce the 'Hollywood' ending. Roger Dodger ends not with Roger realizing the err of his way, but with a poignant adult talk with some school boys who show us the same immaturity as Roger, just at a younger understanding. Kudos to all those involved with this marvelous film that was indeed one of the best of 2002. It goes without saying but this is one to check outHey, you should really see this!
posted 43 days ago -
I recommend you see...
WarGames
by DavidWargames is one of my favorite movies out of the 80's I know that Joshua (the computer) is outdated by today's standards and David (Matthew Brodrick) never would have broken into NORAD but it's still one of the best hacker movies ever made and a great cold war thriller. Now I was only 10 when this movie came out so I didn't understand the finer elements of the story.
The acting is solid across the board. Broderick and Sheedy do top notch acting work here. With Dabney Coleman leading a great supporting cast but even though there is a good cast here, the story is what I think makes Wargames the classic that it is. There really is a sense of menace that World War III might actually start and that it might just be all David's fault. This should serve as a reminder to never play Global Thermonuclear War when your computer has tapped into the national defense network.
The NORAD sets are pretty damn cool and they manage to look quite authentic. The soundtrack also must be given special attention just because it has that special 80's flavor and they even made it electronic sounding for the movie. In the beginning you can find a young Michael Madsen in one of his first roles. Maybe even the first I'm not sure.
To sum up here. Wargames is a quality film that will take older moviegoers back to their childhood or young adulthood and will make younger viewers think "they had computers back then?!" A true classic and one that makes a great addition to any DVD collection.Hey, you should really see this!
posted 45 days ago
View All (83)
