Review: Herbie: Fully Loaded

Director : Angela Robinson
Main Cast : Lindsay Lohan, Justin Long, Michael Keaton



Ok, so normally I don’t really pay to watch these type of films, but then (a) it was the only film on show (besides Bewitched which was fully-booked), and (b) it’s got Lindsay Lohan. Enough said.

I can still remember watching the original Herbie films about 15 years ago on Saturday mornings during the school holidays. (Alam Ria cuti sekolah, kembali semula bersama-sama anda! Bergembira bersama, dalam rancangan Alam Ria di TV Tiiiiiga!) How I used to laugh and cheer at the antics of the car with a mind of its own. Man, to think how gullible and easily entertained I was at the time!

Anyway, the latest incarnation neither failed to meet my expectations, nor exceeded it. Lohan practically spent the whole film trying to look cute, and despite having a sizeable chest does her best to screech as high as possible most of the time. And it also confirmed her, sadly Michael Keaton, and (not so sadly) Matt Dillon as permanent B-movie stars. Though, looking at the recent output of the latter two, you could’ve seen it coming.

Herbie himself, with the help of CGI that wasn’t available back then, has added a few more assets to his repertoire, namely insane flips and a bigger range of “expressions”. Not that you might notice, though, as there were other bigger “assets” that really “filled” out the screen. Which, I guess, is really “fitting”, since the title is “Fully Loaded” after all.

Review: Batman Begins

Director : Christopher Nolan
Main Cast : Christian Bale, Liam Neeson, Michael Caine, Katie Holmes, Morgan Freeman

Ladies and gents, we have a new winner! Winner of the title of “Best Superhero Flick” that is. Yes, in my humble opinion, Batman Begins is that good. The film, based largely on Frank Miller’s Batman: Year One series of comics, is better even than Sam Raimi’s Spiderman films. Maybe not the best comic adaptation though. For that, you just need to scroll further down for the answer.


Anyway, let’s just go back a bit here. When it was announced that a new Batman film was going to be made, you could understand the paranoia and skepticism towards it. I mean, after two relative classics by Tim Burton, we then saw the franchise gloriously die in the next two films. Just let the dead rest in peace! After all, with the multitude of new superhero flicks released in the last few years, surely there was no need for another Batman? How wrong were they, me included.

Batman Begins continues the trend of serious critically-acclaimed directors known for producing classic small-budget indies given responsibility to helm big-budget comic-to-screen blockbusters. Recent examples include Sam Raimi (Evil Dead) directing Spiderman, and Bryan Singer (The Usual Suspects) with X-Men. For Batman Begins, enter Christopher Nolan, director of Memento, a personal favourite of mine.

As the title says, Batman Begins is the story of the making of Batman. Of what drove the millionaire orphan Bruce Wayne to be this one-man vigilante, the training he went through, where he got his cool costume and gadgets, and why he’s so intrigued with bats in the first place. Indeed, like the recent superhero flicks which similarly place more emphasis on the making, we only see Batman in full garb more than halfway through the film. And Batman Begins is not merely about the beginning of Batman, as it also explains how all of Batman’s plethora of OTT and colourful villains came into existence. In that way it’s very similar to the new trilogy of Star Wars films explaining the beginning of Darth Vader and other characters. You could just imagine a George Lucas version of Batman Begins though, dragging it over 3 full-length films, with many needless and pointless characters and scenes, when he could explain everything neatly in just one film.

Brit actor Christian Bale proves with Batman Begins and the underrated dragon-flick Reign Of Fire that he can cut it as an action hero, and I might add that (without starting to sound too gay) that he’s really got the muscles, man! More inspiration for me to continue slogging it out at the gym, then. Though he did carry himself well in the more serious scenes. When you watched Spielberg’s Empire Of The Sun that many years ago (or more recently on Astro or DVD), you wouldn’t have thought that the little annoying white boy running around would turn out to be a major star. Or maybe you did. Hmmm… I may need to watch that film again, think I saw a Special Edition at the local “DVD shop” *winks*. Anyway, Christian Bale as the next James Bond, anyone?

Liam Neeson has yet another role in recent memory where he plays a sword/lightsaber wielding “sifu” to a younger apprentice. Besides Neeson and Bale, the Brit/Irish influence on the cast is considerable, with the amiable Michael Caine (The Cider House Rules) as the loyal butler Alfred, a very understated Gary Oldman (Leon, Harry Potter) as the future Commissioner Gordon, an effeminate and daft Cillian Murphy (28 Days Later) as Dr. Crane/Scarecrow, Tom Wilkinson (old bloke from The Full Monty) with a very fake NY mobster accent as Carmine Falcone, and last but not least, the very Japanese (though London trained) Ken Watanabe (The Last Samurai) as Ra’s Al Ghul.

Batman Begins and Sin City are certainly the two best films so far this year. Mere coincidence, then, that both were based on Frank Miller comics? Anyway, the Batman franchise is well and truly alive and kicking again. Bring on the sequels, I say! To satisfy my thirst in the mean time, looks like I’ll just have to make do by getting some sort of Batman movie tie-in thingy from one of the fast-food chains. Now, how on earth am I supposed to have a bod like Christian Bale’s then?

Review: The Interpreter

Director : Sydney Pollack
Main Cast : Sean Penn, Nicole Kidman

The Interpreter is a taut, emotional and gripping thriller about political intrigue and conspiracy starring two of the biggest acting heavyweights in the trade today in Nicole Kidman and Sean Penn. Even though the film opens with a cold-blooded murder carried out by - seemingly innocent at first - machine-gun wielding children, it’s not a sign of things to come. Instead, we get a clever drama that relies heavily on the storyline and the tension created throughout the film. Something like The Bourne Supremacy, but without the guns and explosives. Ironic then that the best scene in The Interpreter was the bomb-on-a-bus scene where 3 of the characters involved, together with their respective undercover Secret Service “tails”, unknowingly converge on a bus that later explodes.



Like so many post-9/11 films, The Interpreter is a film with a message, that diplomacy and the UN is the best and only way to solve major conflicts, rather than casting it aside and do things unilaterally, and we are constantly reminded (a bit too much, I think) about this by Nicole Kidman’s character. Indeed, besides the two leads, the star of the show is very much the United Nations itself, finally making its debut on the silver screen. It’s been reported that even Alfred Hitchcock himself didn’t get permission to film there in the past.

Review: Sin City

Director : Robert Rodriguez

Main Cast : Mickey Rourke, Bruce Willis, Clive Owen, Jessica Alba, Benicio Del Toro

First of all, let me make clear that other than my daily dose of Calvin & Hobbes, I'm not really a comic 'person', and prior to this have never before heard of Frank Miller. Therefore, this review on Sin City would be based entirely on its merits as a film, and nothing more.

I was really excited when I first found out that Sin City would be Robert Rodriguez' latest project. Along with Tarantino and Tim Burton, Rodriguez is one of my favourite 'fun' directors, as can be seen in films like Desperado, From Dusk 'Til Dawn, Once Upon A Time In Mexico and the Spy Kids trilogy. One thing about him is that he simply adores CGI and digital film-making, and embraces it with arms wide open. In fact, the Spy Kids films were actually his 'experiment' on the wonders of this new technology.

Sin City is based on 3 in a series of graphic novels (comics) penned by Miller, about 3 very separate yet inter-twining stories, ala Pulp Fiction. First we have Mickey Rourke as a seemingly indestructible ex-con avenging the murder of "the best laid he ever had". Then we have Clive Owen helping a town run by S&M-attired prostitute amazons defend their town from the local Mob. And last but not least Bruce Willis as a cop on a mission to catch a pedophile. Yup, it's that kind of film, and together with its nudity and graphic violence I very much think that the only way Malaysian viewers would get to see Sin City is via the neighbourhood DVD seller.

With its anti-heroes, voiceovers, echoing dialogue, night-only scenes and saxophone-filled soundtrack, Sin City is certainly classic Film Noir. It's set in black-and-white with splashes of colour here and there, much like chilies would make any bland plate of "mee goreng" look nicer. This certainly makes a major contribution to the film's uniqueness and ultimate cool-factor. Sin City also retains much of its comic roots in its visuals, certainly the best since Dick Tracy.

Sin City probably has one of the biggest ensemble casts of the year. Besides Rourke, Owen and Willis, there’s also Jessica Alba (in the first of her two blonde comic characters this summer), Elijah Wood, Benicio Del Toro, Brittany Murphy, Josh Hartnett and Nick Stahl. Though honestly I just don’t dig the idea of Mr. Frodo Baggins himself, Elijah Wood, as a cold-blooded cannibal.

As I mentioned earlier, there’s certainly a lot of graphic violence in Sin City, with severed limbs literally flying in all directions. The last time I saw so much blood was in the superb Kill Bill Volume 1 by Tarantino. Speaking of which, QT himself is a guest director on Sin City, directing the conversation that Clive Owen has with the “dead” Del Toro in the car. It was his idea in fact for Del Toro to change the way he speaks because of the large slit in his throat.

After watching the film, I came across a bookstore in London that had copies of the Sin City comics by Frank Miller. I flipped through the first few pages of one, from which one of the stories in the film was based on. And guess what: every single angle, dialogue, pose, costume and expression was exactly the same as it was in the film. I later read that Rodriguez actually used the comic as his storyboard while making the film. No wonder he sacrificed his place in the Director’s Guild of America (DGA) just so that he can have Frank Miller’s name as co-director of the film. Rodriguez also indicated that he had to leave certain scenes from the comic out as he had to fit three stories into a feasible running time. However, when the official DVD comes out later in the year, we should be able to watch each of the 3 stories IN FULL. Now that’s something to look forward to.

There are rumours going around that Rodriguez plans to make two sequels. I honestly see this happenning, as there are after all another 4 as-yet-unfilmed Sin City comics, and Rodriguez has this knack of making trilogies. I certainly hope that he does make those sequels, as Sin City certainly lives up to its billing as the coolest film of the year, and may even be the coolest film since Pulp Fiction. Watch Sin City if you have the chance, ‘cos it’ll be a sin to miss it!

Review: Star Wars Episode III: Revenge Of The Sith

Director : George Lucas
Main Cast : Hayden Christensen, Ewan McGregor, Samuel L. Jackson, Ian McDiarmind

After 28 long years since the release of the first film in 1977, the end has finally come. Or rather, the beginning, as you could say that the whole new trilogy is just an introduction to the first one.

Anyway, there I was in the large cavernous theatre of the Odeon Leicester Square. As the trailers for upcoming films were shown on the screen, you could sense the feeling of excitedness and eager anticipation from the audience, most (like me) having bought their tickets weeks in advance. As the lights were dimmed and the screen turned blank, suddenly the whole cinema erupted in applause. This was it. The first prequel was crap, with stupid and annoying characters like the young Anakin and Jar Jar Binks. The second one was much better, though spoilt by the cheeeesy “love” scenes. Let’s hope that Mr Lucas would somehow be able to produce a magnificent film in Revenge Of The Sith (Revenge) to erase all the bad memories of the first two ones.



After the customary crawl at the beginning of the film, bringing the viewer up-to-date with events since the last film, the next 20 minutes were simply awe-inducing, nail-biting, edge-of-your-seat all-out action. Certainly the most frenzied start to a Star Wars film ever, ending with a light saber battle between a much improved Anakin and the evil Count Dooku. With Dooku finally losing his hand, and his life at the mercy of Anakin, there was Palpatine, sitting on a throne-like seat and salivating at the prospect of a new convert to the Dark Side, urging Anakin to kill Dooku. The new apprentice to kill the old one. To most of us Star Wars fans (the proper ones anyway) we've been here before, albeit between Luke and Vader in The Empire Strikes Back instead of Anakin and Dooku. However, whereas Luke resisted the Dark Side and spared his daddy's life, Anakin coldheartedly decapitates Dooku. Indeed, this scene is the first of several with an eye to the first Trilogy.

However, after all the action of the first 20 minutes, it's back to the politics and romance that bogged down the first two films. The chemistry between the wooden Natalie Portman and Hayden Christensen was simply non-existent. And you’ll find more wood in the twosome’s acting than in a furniture shop. Of course, they were not helped by the cheesy lines. And man, were they cheesy! You could actually hear the older audience cringe when lines like “Hold me like you used to hold me in Naboo” were said. Fortunately it wasn’t as bad as the rolling-in-the-fields scene in Episode II, a scene that would make any Bollywood director proud. Thankfully too that with no Jar Jar Binks (tortured and died a slow death I hope), the Natalie-Hayden scenes were the only real big negative points of the film.

Lucas has certainly listened to fans' gripes over the first two films, and upped the ante in Revenge especially in terms of the action. Indeed, we are treated to no less then five lightsaber battles! The best of which being the climatic double duels of Yoda-Emperor and Vader-Kenobi. We are also shown a host of new worlds, albeit only given a brief glimpse of some of them during the Order 66 scenes.

Lucas has also created a new villain for Revenge in the asthmatic General Grievous, the half-alien half-robot commander of the separatist forces, a precursor to what would become of Anakin in the not-too-distant future. He certainly lacks the coolness factor of the villains of the first two films, but where Darth Maul had his double-bladed lightsaber and Count Dooku his cool lightsaber hilt, General Grievous himself wields four lightsabers! However saying that, the whole film, indeed the whole prequel trilogy, is about the creation of the ultimate uber-villain, the Sith Lord Darth Vader himself.

When Episode I was released in 1999, fully computer-generated backgrounds and characters were still considered a new thing in moviemaking, and an equal amount of praise and criticism was given to the profuseness of its use in that film. However since then, (a) the realism of CGI has increased tenfold, and (b) almost every other film uses it. Both contributing to the ironic fact that, for all its state-of-the-art stunning visuals, in Revenge the attention is drawn away from the special effects towards the real actors and acting. Don’t get me wrong though, the graphics are really superb. General Grievous looks so real that you’d think that he’s a guy in a robot suit, rather then been created out of thin air. And the different diverse environments blend in with the characters so flawlessly that you wonder if such worlds really do exist. Especially so if you you’re lucky enough to watch it in a cinema equipped with a digital projector, such as the Odeon was. Crystal clear picture that literally jumps out from the screen, you’ll be hard-pressed to find even the minutest of blemishes.



Much has been said about the darkness in mood of Revenge compared to anything before in the Star Wars saga, with the film even given a PG13 rating in the States. Well, it certainly is very dark and disturbing at times, with slain Jedi younglings, and a limbless Anakin burnt beyond recognition, writhing in pain. It’s the darkest film of the second trilogy, much as The Empire Strikes Back was to the first one. The intercutting between the birth of Luke and Leia with the “birth” of Darth Vader, though somewhat clichéd, was quite poignant. However the mood is spoilt when Vader, after taking his first step in his robo-suit, ala Frankenstein, upon learning from the Emperor that he killed Padme, suddenly lets out a squeal of “Noooooooooo!”. I’m sure most of you, like me, burst into laughter when this happened. I mean, what was Lucas thinking about? This is DARTH VADER, for heck’s sake. Large, imposing, menacing, heartless, merciless, and with a deep and booming voice that commands your respect, fear and attention all at once. He’s not supposed to have emotions. I think it would be better if he knew about Padme’s death before he was transformed into Vader, while he was still bleeding and writhing in pain. Now that will be cruel.

Revenge, without doubt, is much much better than the first two films. It almost erases the bad memories of those films and the utter disappointment that us fans experienced after all the hype and anticipation. Plot-wise, a lot of things happen in Revenge, without doubt more than Episodes I and II combined. In fact, I am of the opinion that by adding 20-odd minutes to the start of Revenge, Lucas could’ve told the whole story of the prequel trilogy in just one film. Earlier I compared Revenge with The Empire Strikes Back. Well, many would disagree with this, but I am hereby (controversially) saying that Revenge gives The Empire Strikes Back a real run for its money as the best of the whole series. Enough said. May the Force be with you, always.

London Trip

I’m proud and happy to announce that I’ll be in London from 20^th May until 4^th June! First time back since I finished uni almost 3 years ago. Also means that for the first time in 3 years I’ll be able to watch the latest releases at the cinema without the following (in no particular order):

• Subtitles (in two languages!) that cover half the screen
• Censored scenes/dialogue
• Dirty film prints
• Out of focus pictures
• Ringing phones (and people answering them in the cinema!)
• Kids/babies crying/talking/running about, even though it’s an 18+ film and they shouldn’t be there in the first place
• People talking without even attempting to doing it discreetly
• Someone in the row behind constantly kicking your seat

I’m sure all of you have experienced at least one of the above every time you go to the cinema. Unless you’re one of the perpetrators, that is.

As you may well have guessed, I’ll be watching quite a few films during my trip (as far as my budget permits, anyway). So expect reviews for the following films in the coming weeks:

• Star Wars Episode III: Revenge Of The Sith
• Simply the film to watch of Summer 2005, certainly for me anyway. I’ve even bought my ticket already to watch it at the Odeon Leicester Square, the biggest and bestest cinema in London (if not the priciest!). Early reviews have been impressive, and it’s said that Star Wars fans won’t be disappointed. Really looking forward to this one!
• Hitchhiker’s Guide To The Galaxy
• I’ve got to confess, I’m a new convert to the Guide, only picking up the first book a month ago. The book on which the film is based on has produced a cult following over the years, rivalling that only of the Lord Of The Rings’. Should be great fun.
• Sin City
• The latest from one of my favourite fun directors, Robert Rodriguez (Desperado, Once Upon A Time In Mexico, Spy Kids films). Based on a series of graphic novels (a.k.a. comics), and is film noir at its blackest. Great ensemble cast including Bruce Willis, Benicio Del Toro, Jessica Alba and Clive Owen.

Review: Kingdom Of Heaven

Director : Ridley Scott
Main Cast : Orlando Bloom, Jeremy Irons, Eva Green

I was a wee bit – no, make that much – apprehensive when I first found out that this film was in production some time ago. To those who know, The Crusades were a sensitive and controversial part of history for both Muslims and Christians, and I couldn’t imagine how a film can be done without aggravating at least one faction in one way or the other. More so considering the current political climate in that part of the world. I also genuinely doubted its release here in Malaysia knowing the “open-mindedness” of the local censors, so imagine my surprise when it did actually open at the local TGV/GSC.

Since Gladiator came out a few years ago, a few films were released to take advantage of the revival of the sword-and-sandal epic. However, they failed miserably to even coming close to reaching the mighty heights of Gladiator, most notably last year’s butt-cramping snorefest that was Alexander. So who best to give a shot of adrenaline to the genre’s heart than the director of Gladiator himself, Ridley Scott. Indeed, there are hints and traces of Gladiator throughout, from the bleak overcast skies, to the fast-edit technique used in the bloody and really graphic fight sequences. Some screen time too was given to the development of the characters and plot, providing a nice balance to the spectacular action scenes. However the film’s last act is all action, with Bloom defending the high-walled Jerusalem from the massive Muslim army with hardly any soldiers at all. Helm’s Deep from Lord Of The Rings, anyone? It even includes a scene where he knights peasants and children who take up arms to defend the city.


Lord Of The Rings has been both a boon and a bane for Bloom. Since bursting into the scene as the main pulling-power of teenage girls to the otherwise guy-friendly Lord Of The Rings trilogy, he has been somewhat pigeonholed, landing roles in similar sword-wielding period-set films such as the unsatisfactory Troy, delightful Pirates Of The Caribbean, and Kingdom Of Heaven. However, the significance of Kingdom Of Heaven is that it’s the first time that Bloom has to carry the burden of a big-budget blockbuster solely on his (slender) shoulders. This he does surprisingly well, doing miles better than the Irish-speaking Alexander of Collin Farrell. He shows that he has certainly grown up from his previous boyish (and somewhat sissy) roles, sporting the same beard and grave “there’s-something-up-my-a$$” expression as Russell Crowe did in Gladiator. I expect great things from him in future years. Only thing against him is he has yet to prove himself in a more dramatic role set in contemporary settings, away from all the swords and action. Maybe a small-budget indie film, or even a romantic comedy. Sadly though it won’t be happening anytime soon, as he’s currently behind cameras with Johnny Depp for the two sequels of Pirates Of The Caribbean. Oh well.

So what about the controversy surrounding the film, then? Well, given the current unrest surrounding George Bush’s foreign policy, the film is unsurprisingly very PC and is filled with preaches on how people from different religions can indeed live in harmony. In fact, religion and faith is the underlying theme in the film, with numerous references to Christianity and Islam, both visually on the screen and on the haunting soundtrack. However the film is neither pro or anti-Islam, nor pro or anti-Christian. Neither party was portrayed as being the villain. I think that this is mainly due to the choice of period that the film relates to, a period of peace in between crusades, where Muslims, Christians and Jews live peacefully side-by-side in Jerusalem (thus Kingdom Of Peace), ruled by the leper king played by Ed Norton. Yes, the Ed Norton was the man behind the mask the whole time. Anyway, Arab critics have come out supporting the film, as can be read in a BBC report by clicking here.

Kingdom Of Heaven does indeed have great parallels to modern events, both in modern-day Jerusalem (part of Israel) and other places of the world. This point is strengthened at the very end of the film, with the following caption:

A thousand years later, we're still doing the same thing, still fighting one another over the same religious divides, and Jerusalem is still in conflict.

Maybe one day peace would triumph, bringing an end to the fighting and killing. We can only hope and pray.

Review: The Jacket

Director : John Maybury
Main Cast : Adrien Brody, Keira Knightley, Kris Kristofferson

Here in Malaysia, we get virtually all the latest big-budget blockbusters the same time they’re released in the States. From the Lord Of The Rings trilogy, to Star Wars, to the gazillion comic superhero flicks, we’re always up to date. However, good independent films very rarely get a chance. One film in recent memory was Saw, a deliciously wicked kind of film, which owed a lot to Se7en.

And here we have The Jacket. A film that promises much, especially after a decent debut at the Sundance Festival for independent films. Sad to say though, the film falls short of expectations.

It’s about army vet Jack Starks who’s found guilty for a murder he didn’t commit, then sent to a mental institution. There he’s the subject of an experiment whereby he’s strapped into the eponymous straightjacket, injected with a cocktail of drugs and then sealed shut in a morgue drawer - the kind you see in TV shows like C.S.I. - for hours at a time. Certainly not for the claustrophobic, then.

But then, things start becoming bizarre. You see, when the drugs take effect, Starks suddenly finds himself in the future, bumping into a girl who was barely 10 years old when he got convicted but now a young adult, and also finding out that he was already dead. And it’s this premise, on which the whole plot hinges upon, is what I personally think failed the film. I mean, it’s a really crazy concept that sounds like it was concocted from one of the mental patients in the film. Was Starks physically transported to the future, or did he appear as some sort of ghost? Or was it all in his mind, hallucinations as a result of the treatment? I think that the writers could’ve focused more on the terrible conditions, as well as the mental and physical effects of the torture he goes through, especially from the claustrophobia of being left all alone in a small and dark morgue drawer.

Adrien Brody is in fine form as the bone-thin Jack Starks. You could say though that the role is merely an amalgamation of his previous roles in The Pianist and The Village. The luscious Keira Knightley, the cheerful everyday English lass as shown so perfectly in Bend It Like Beckham and Love Actually, forays into the "Dark Side'' of acting in her first grown-up role as the dark and brooding Jackie Price. This she does quite well, speaking in a deep voice contradicting her young age and petite figure, in a performance reminiscent of Helena Bonham-Carter's in Fight Club. Knightley has clearly grown up in more ways than one, as shown in a bath scene surprisingly overlooked by the Malaysian censors. Needs to improve on her accent though. We’ll next see Keira as a machine-gun-wielding bounty hunter in Domino. Now that will be interesting.

The Jacket is a nice change to the usual cinema fare, but disappointingly falls short of expectations.

Review: Guess Who

Director : Kevin Rodney Sullivan
Main Cast : Ashton Kushter, Bernie Mac, Zoe Saldana

Guess Who is supposed to be remake of a 1960s film, though watching it, you would’ve thought that it’s actually a remake of the more recent Meet The Parents and My Big Fat Greek Wedding, amongst others. It’s the all-too-familiar tale of meeting the other half’s family for the very first time, usually went said family come from a very different background with different customs.



It stars Ashton “Kelso-Dude-Where’s-My-Car-Demi-Moore’s-Toyboy” Kutcher as a hotshot stock trader (yeah rite!), spending the weekend with his black fiancé’s parents for the very first time. Cue the white-man-meets-black-family jokes then. And boy, do they come thick and fast! The best scene to me is the dinner with Grandpa. Simply hilarious! Strangely though, only my date and I were laughing in the cinema.

Guess Who is an enjoyable enough film, certainly better than what I expected anyway. However I think that Meet The Parents is still way better. After all, Bernie Mac is no match for Bobby De Niro in full comedy mode. Same goes for Kutcher in comparison with Ben Stiller. However, saying that, a smartly dressed Kutcher, with a good haircut for once, does show that he can be taken seriously. Well, sort of, anyway, as half the time the Kelso does shine through, so to speak.

Review: Coach Carter

Director : Thomas Carter
Main Cast : Samuel L. Jackson, Rob Brown, Ashanti

Not much to say, as Coach Carter is your normal run-of-the-mill sports film: shit team, unorthodox new coach comes in, team not happy with coach’s methods, team and coach solve their problems, team not shit anymore. Everyone’s happy. End of story.

What may set this apart from other similar films though, is Samuel L. Jackson, Jedi Knight Mace Windu himself. Man, when he speaks, everyone else shuts up. Can’t imagine anyone else who can be as effective in that same role. Saying that though, it is more or less the same role that he had in the Collin Farrell-starring SWAT.

At about two hours long, it’s 20 minutes too long. It gets 3 stars out of 5 for Jackson’s performance. Can’t wait to see him wielding a light saber again when the new Star Wars comes out!

Intro

Welcome to my Blog. Well, not actually a Blog per se, but more a place where I can put up my thoughts and feelings about the latest film releases, both at the cinema and DVDs. I may also occasionally put up something with nothing to do with any particular film, just a discussion maybe of something to do with the movie industry, or a rant on the state of the current Malaysian movie scene. Actually this is the long-delayed resumption of my series of reviews of 30-odd films from 1998 to 2000 on a previous site I had. Click
here for those reviews. Before you read on, a few notes of warning.

1. These are just my personal views on things, and you may (most probably) disagree. If you do disagree, I strongly encourage you to leave your comments/views, so maybe we can have some intelligent discussion on the matter.
2. To promote item (1) above, I feel that the only viable way for it to be done is if the reviews and resulting discussions are based on the whole film, including any twists and turns in the plot (which is the norm with most films nowadays). Therefore people, there are PLOT SPOILERS galore in the reviews. If you’re kind that doesn’t want to know the ending beforehand, then I strongly advise you to only read my reviews AFTER you see the film.
3. Please feel free to leave your comments, as the main objective why I’ve set up this Blog is to promote an active discussion on films. However, please don’t make any personal attacks towards me or any other “discussees”, or any remarks that may offend.

So that’s it guys! Again, please feel free to leave your comments. On my part, I’ll do my best to find the time to reply to your comments, and put up new reviews often. Enjoy!