ironman0304manutd

Oi Vey, what can I say about this film? It's starts strong with seemingly good potential gore wise, and an OK storyline, but as the minutes pass by the storyline just gets worse, and worse, until finally at the end, the only thing you can say is "WTF?" The film does have some positives though, the special effects/gore is above par and done very well, and it's fun to watch the cute "Eiko" prance around, I'd like to see her in more films, hopefully in a more serious role though next time. (like Battle Royale II maybe?) The film also gives some nice nods to Romero and Bruce Campbell, and for that you have to respect it, as it's paying homage to the great zombie/gore films that are it's precedent.

My recommendation is this: If you are a fan of zombies AND Japanese culture, give this film a go, but I wouldn't go out of my way to see it, it's really a case of 'take it or leave it'.

Rounders is I believe, one of the most widely underrated movies of our time.

I first saw this movie as it was a 'bonus DVD' thrown in for free with my DVD player back in 2000, so naturally I didn't expect much (as the other bonus DVD's were very mediocre), but what I found was a very enjoyable movie.

At that stage in my life, I had only played a little poker as a child growing up, and never 'Texas Hold'em' so to be honest, a lot of the terminology went 'over my head', but even so, the film became an instant favorite of mine purely because of the performances.

The film has so much star power, and yet none of the fine actors try to 'steal' scenes. Damon, Norton, Malkovich, Landau ... and then the fine supporting cast of Turturro, Jansen, and Mol.

In fact, there is a scene with Martin Landau and Matt Damon that is perhaps one of the most beautiful performances I have seen in a long time between two very fine actors.

So even if you're not a poker player, the story is tighter than a lot of Hollywood 'pop fluff' and the performances alone can sell the film as an enjoyable movie capable of multiple viewings.

But ... if you start playing poker and get really into what they are talking about, and reading about poker theory (like Doyle Brunson's book Super System) then the movie moves up to a whole different level.

A lot of the time, Hollywood will attempt to cover a specialized error, and usually fail, or at best only partially succeed, whereas Rounders managed to get everything 'spot on', just look at the US DVD, it has a commentary track from 4 World Champion Poker players, if that's not a stamp of approval then I don't know what is.

When you factor in how the film can be enjoyed by someone who has little to no idea about Poker (as I did when I first saw the film) just because of the tight story and stellar performances and also be 'immortalized' by poker enthusiasts as the best movie ever made on the subject (and truth be told, a big reason why the World Series of Poker has been doubling it's entries year after year) ... what you have here is a true gem that works on so many levels and what I believe is, as I said initially, one of the most widely underrated movies of our time.

I write this review in contrast of Aaron1375's comments so that IMDb users will have a chance to compare thoughts regarding "The Village". The trailer for The Village prompted me to see it, and without giving anything away, the film was quite different from what I originally expected. But in saying that, was The Village such a disappointment to be considered the worst movie of 2004 as Aaron1375 would suggest? No, far from it. The fact that The Village throws a 'curve-ball' is why I liked it so much, and the story, (the "true" story) once it is revealed, provides much to think about in regards to our society and humanity, of what we have become, what we have gained, but also more importantly of what we have lost.

I can't say anymore because I want this review to be understood by those that have seen the film, but more so to warn those that haven't seen The Village, that the film should not be dismissed by the reasons given by Aaron1375. In my eyes, Aaron1375 was someone looking for a particular type of story, only to find something different, and because of that, was disappointed. But what was found, is far better than if the story had gone the way of a typical horror film, to eventually sit beside the many other empty-storied, "I know what you did last summer" style of suspense/horror flicks in every video store around the world, to be passed over by genuine movie seekers who want substance in their films. I will say this, the only disappointment The Village gave me was it's ending, yet upon after thought, I'm not disappointed because I see why the director chose to end the film as such, and to keep in mind that actions speak louder than words ... so keep an open mind. I am also shocked that Aaron1375 thought 28 Days Later was awful, yet that is another rebuttal for another time.

In closing, do yourself a favor and see the Village, but unlike Aaron1375 don't look for what you "think" the film will be, but rather sit back and let the film take you where it "needs" to go ... and if you do this, you will discover so much more than you originally expected.