dewey22
Joined May 2000
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews58
dewey22's rating
There are many reasons to watch a movie, entertainment being primary. One might also merely appreciate the art of acting in much the same way that one might appreciate a painting, beautiful but one wouldn't call that entertaining. "Monster" is this kind of art as it displays flawless acting, directing, and editing. Its two hours always retains the viewer's interest. Most notable of all is the portrayal of Aileen Wuonos, the notorious serial-killer of Florida. This demanding role was performed by Charlize Theron, and was done to perfection. Not since Crissy Rock's performance in "Ladybird Ladybird" have I seen anyone portray so well a personality type that (thank goodness) is foreign to most of us.
It is surprising that this movie didn't win at least one academy award for Ben Kingsley who played a very persuasive role of an exiled Iranian shortly after the 1979 Iranian revolution when the Ayatollah Khomeini came to power after overthrowing the Shah. Ben Kingsley, an officer in the Shah's army, fled to the U.S. with his wife and son.There,the family bought a home that was being auctioned by the city after a woman failed to pay her property taxes. This house,the one in the title, evolves into a curse to all that want to own it. The script is well edited and the characters well developed. The movie evolves unexpectedly, very much the way life does.This is definitely one of the best movies of 2003, and one of the best acted ever.
Anyone that expects Gods and Generals to be of the same quality as the 1993 production of "Gettysburg", will be disappointed. The first thing to object to is the very poor sub-titling throughout the movie. The letters are much to small, and there isn't enough time to read the small print before its taken off of the screen. Also, there is far too much effort to put various messages into the dialog. Perhaps Ted Turner wanted to make a movie that delivered a message to the viewer. If so, the attempt is far too obvious and clumsy. The only saving graces to the movie are its battle scenes and close conformity to historic accuracy.