Runinrider
Joined Oct 2002
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.
Reviews6
Runinrider's rating
Woody Allen hit gold with his second film, "Take the Money and Run", which is a basic film that works on so many levels and is memorable strictly for its charm and good wit.
The story follows Allen's Virgil Starkwell, whose life is told in documentary fashion. We learn he had a strange childhood and turned to crime to fulfill his needs. We learn of his romance and sympathize with him as we engage in prison escapes and witness him put in a chain gang. The documentary style might prove to be a "gimmick" of sorts, but it works because had the story been told any other way it simply would not have worked.
Also, "Take the Money" is an early token of what's to come and what the general audience will expect of Allen; smooth drama balanced by fast, witty monologues and lots of self-humiliation. To see this is to witness the early work of the director who ultimately brought us "Bananas", "Sleeper", "Manhattan", and the Oscar-winning "Annie Hall". And if anything, just track it for its over-the-top humor, not as in-your-face funny as "Sleeper" or as sexually hilarious as "Annie Hall", but it's warm and withdrawn, balanced all together by a very good ending (always one of the weaker parts in almost all of Allen's films).
Highly recommended! ***+ (8.5/10)
The story follows Allen's Virgil Starkwell, whose life is told in documentary fashion. We learn he had a strange childhood and turned to crime to fulfill his needs. We learn of his romance and sympathize with him as we engage in prison escapes and witness him put in a chain gang. The documentary style might prove to be a "gimmick" of sorts, but it works because had the story been told any other way it simply would not have worked.
Also, "Take the Money" is an early token of what's to come and what the general audience will expect of Allen; smooth drama balanced by fast, witty monologues and lots of self-humiliation. To see this is to witness the early work of the director who ultimately brought us "Bananas", "Sleeper", "Manhattan", and the Oscar-winning "Annie Hall". And if anything, just track it for its over-the-top humor, not as in-your-face funny as "Sleeper" or as sexually hilarious as "Annie Hall", but it's warm and withdrawn, balanced all together by a very good ending (always one of the weaker parts in almost all of Allen's films).
Highly recommended! ***+ (8.5/10)
Spider-Man 2 comes at a time when people just can't seem to get enough of these superhero flicks. From Van Helsing to The Hulk or Daredevil, the success of "flicks" like X-Men have made big bucks for companies willing to catch on to the coming trend. But superhero films are nothing new. Superman broke huge ground in 1978 and Batman is still in the upper-tier section of Tim Burton's catalogue of films.
Yet, with the exception of the original X-Men, only 2002's Spider-Man has proved to be the best superhero film of this the modern age of summer blockbusters. X2: X-Men United was mere above-average work, and Daredevil and others were just awful. Spider-Man, directed by cult director Sam Raimi, was a fun film. It had its problems, and it sure as hell didn't even follow the comics as closely as other comic-book-themed films like Dick Tracy, but it came as a surprise to me and this is a huge reason as to why I'm so particularly fond of it.
The sequel, Spider-Man 2, further surprised me as it lived up to the original's standards, and then some. It's a rare oddity to be sure, but Spider-Man 2 is a more grown-up film that's eager to take the series to a new direction. The surviving cast is largely the same; Tobey Maguire as Peter Parker, Kirsten Dunst as Mary Jane Watson, James Franco as Harry Osborn, et all. What's also great about the film is that it's also quite different from what most casual fans expected. This being that the film's story doesn't revolve around the villain and his plans, but rather on the physical and emotional problems of the protagonist. We're meant to feel Maguire's thoughts, pains, and successes and for 130 minutes, Raimi perfectly accomplishes this.
The villain in the film is Dr. Octopus, a comic book favorite, who's brilliantly played by Frida co-star Alfred Molina. Molina is pitch-perfect in his role, and the villain is much more likeable then the original's Green Goblin (though Willem Dafoe's acting I prefer more, the entire Goblin get-up looked like something out of the original Power Rangers). Furthermore, we learn and see what Harry's been doing with himself after discovering Spider-Man was the person who killed his father. His goal is to discover who's behind the mask and to get his revenge. His interest in knowing the truth becomes a key factor in ending his relationship with his friend Peter (he doesn't know he's Spider-Man, but he does know that Peter is a "friend" of the 'bug').
The problems the characters face lead to a great climactic ending, leaving room for more to be sure, but also giving just enough so people will be satisfied. Mind you the mindless audiences who don't care about good films will most likely prefer the free-form style of the original, but the sequel is much better because it makes you care about everything that's going on around the character. The film isn't perfect, though. Computer effects, though slightly improved from the previous outing, still look weak given the huge budget of the film, and some of the acting is only exceptional, and the jokes flat. The "Raindrops.." song from Butch Cassidy & the Sundance Kid fits greatly into the movie though, and Elfman's soundtrack is an improvement to the original's. The rest of the soundtrack, performed by major players like Dashboard Confessional, is all weak though.
But the film prevails from the proverbial trappings of the normal summer blockbuster. It's a good film, that's the surprise, and it's also one to be remembered. We're fed with problems that plague our beloved characters. But if Billy Wilder's "Some Like It Hot" taught us anything, it's that "No one's perfect".
8.5/10 (***+/****)
Yet, with the exception of the original X-Men, only 2002's Spider-Man has proved to be the best superhero film of this the modern age of summer blockbusters. X2: X-Men United was mere above-average work, and Daredevil and others were just awful. Spider-Man, directed by cult director Sam Raimi, was a fun film. It had its problems, and it sure as hell didn't even follow the comics as closely as other comic-book-themed films like Dick Tracy, but it came as a surprise to me and this is a huge reason as to why I'm so particularly fond of it.
The sequel, Spider-Man 2, further surprised me as it lived up to the original's standards, and then some. It's a rare oddity to be sure, but Spider-Man 2 is a more grown-up film that's eager to take the series to a new direction. The surviving cast is largely the same; Tobey Maguire as Peter Parker, Kirsten Dunst as Mary Jane Watson, James Franco as Harry Osborn, et all. What's also great about the film is that it's also quite different from what most casual fans expected. This being that the film's story doesn't revolve around the villain and his plans, but rather on the physical and emotional problems of the protagonist. We're meant to feel Maguire's thoughts, pains, and successes and for 130 minutes, Raimi perfectly accomplishes this.
The villain in the film is Dr. Octopus, a comic book favorite, who's brilliantly played by Frida co-star Alfred Molina. Molina is pitch-perfect in his role, and the villain is much more likeable then the original's Green Goblin (though Willem Dafoe's acting I prefer more, the entire Goblin get-up looked like something out of the original Power Rangers). Furthermore, we learn and see what Harry's been doing with himself after discovering Spider-Man was the person who killed his father. His goal is to discover who's behind the mask and to get his revenge. His interest in knowing the truth becomes a key factor in ending his relationship with his friend Peter (he doesn't know he's Spider-Man, but he does know that Peter is a "friend" of the 'bug').
The problems the characters face lead to a great climactic ending, leaving room for more to be sure, but also giving just enough so people will be satisfied. Mind you the mindless audiences who don't care about good films will most likely prefer the free-form style of the original, but the sequel is much better because it makes you care about everything that's going on around the character. The film isn't perfect, though. Computer effects, though slightly improved from the previous outing, still look weak given the huge budget of the film, and some of the acting is only exceptional, and the jokes flat. The "Raindrops.." song from Butch Cassidy & the Sundance Kid fits greatly into the movie though, and Elfman's soundtrack is an improvement to the original's. The rest of the soundtrack, performed by major players like Dashboard Confessional, is all weak though.
But the film prevails from the proverbial trappings of the normal summer blockbuster. It's a good film, that's the surprise, and it's also one to be remembered. We're fed with problems that plague our beloved characters. But if Billy Wilder's "Some Like It Hot" taught us anything, it's that "No one's perfect".
8.5/10 (***+/****)
Stanley Kubrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey" does the impossible. No filmmaker since, or before Kubrick, has ever done a film of this scale, following such a complex story that begins with the dawn of man and ends with the birth of the space baby. "2001", easily one of the greatest films of the 60's, is difficult to follow and it can prove confusing to those expecting something entirely different (mind you, this is no "Star Wars"). However, if people can get the message and can understand what Kubrick was trying to do with the film, you'll see how far ahead of its time it was.
Kubrick himself recorded over 200+ walk-outs on a screening of the film. Though not one to take things like this seriously, this was a blow to Kubrick's public reception. Furtunately for Kubrick, he won an Oscar and the film became one of the most critically acclaimed films of all time.
Talking about the film is difficult, but what it's mostly about is evolution and birth. The film begins with the Dawn of the Man, as apes live together in a normal society, prey to tigers and other predators. One day, the ape clan encounter a black monolith and changes begin to follow. Apes discover tools (brilliantly showed in a very memorable scene by Kubrick) and with it they learn to hunt. Now they've become sophisticated and smart, and ultimately learn to kill each other.
Then the scene changes to a large space background. We are introduced to Heywood Floyd, whose home city have discovered evidence of early life. They keep it a secret, and we slowly learn that this discovery is similar to what the apes encountered. No one knows what it is, other then it's million years old and was proven to have been "deliberately" buried. When Heywood and his crew see the monolith for themselves, a radio siren goes off.
18 months later, the scene remains the same; only now we are introduced to different characters. The astronauts, led by Dave Bowman, are on a Jupiter mission, the first for humans. Two of the astronauts, including Dave, are still on board, while the three others are kept in hibernation. Also aboard the ship is the perfect human, the H.A.L. 9000 supercomputer. HAL, as he's called, controls all operations on the ship, and is entitled to the survival of the three hibernated members. Much appears normal, until HAL, somewhat "intentionally", fouls up. Dave and his friend discuss what to do with HAL, they plan to disconnect him so that he doesn't mess up again. HAL reads their lips and turns murderous, killing off the crew, but is ultimately disconnected by Dave (HAL's begging is another memorable moment). After disconnection, Dave receives a video transmission that was only known on board by the HAL computer, this being of the existence of the black monolith.
After this follows a near-30 minute trip to the Infinite, Dave's trip through the space-gate with images that will keep you glued to your seat. As it ends, Dave's life is shown in the birth of the space baby, and the monolith that triggered the change. (It's an Odyssey, all right)
Much of what makes "2001" so captivating and powerful is particularly due to Kubrick's careful use of classical compositions with which to tell his story. Originally, he planned to have a seperate score, but changed his mind (and for the better). The most memorable of Stanley's choices is by far Richard Strauss's "Thus Spoke Zarathustra", and Johann's "The Blue Danube". Both perfectly accompany their scenes and make all the more memorable. The rest of the soundtrack is made of strictly eerie sounds, which also fit very well in with the overall mood of the film, particularly the trip to the Infinite.
The acting is all average, done by unknown European actors like Keir Dullea as Dave. The most memorable piece of acting in the film, though, was through the voice of the HAL 9000. Trust me, his voice is so powerful and mysterious that you'll end up having similar opinions as the members on board. But acting isn't even essential to a film like "2001", in which images are the main story (and one in which true appreciation comes from how much one can "read" visual films). "2001" could've gotten away as a silent film if it wanted to. Conversations aren't important and the first ten minutes are all animal sounds.
Finally, "2001", though not quite my favorite Kubrick film, is a solid piece of cinema. It's a film that we'll question you throughout its entire time span, and it's easily a film that one will have to continue reading on to really just touch the surface of what it's about. It's Kubrick's most difficult film, and his most visually appealing, but it's one that everybody interested in the director's films, or film in general, needs to watch ("carefully watch").
9/10
(***+/****)
Kubrick himself recorded over 200+ walk-outs on a screening of the film. Though not one to take things like this seriously, this was a blow to Kubrick's public reception. Furtunately for Kubrick, he won an Oscar and the film became one of the most critically acclaimed films of all time.
Talking about the film is difficult, but what it's mostly about is evolution and birth. The film begins with the Dawn of the Man, as apes live together in a normal society, prey to tigers and other predators. One day, the ape clan encounter a black monolith and changes begin to follow. Apes discover tools (brilliantly showed in a very memorable scene by Kubrick) and with it they learn to hunt. Now they've become sophisticated and smart, and ultimately learn to kill each other.
Then the scene changes to a large space background. We are introduced to Heywood Floyd, whose home city have discovered evidence of early life. They keep it a secret, and we slowly learn that this discovery is similar to what the apes encountered. No one knows what it is, other then it's million years old and was proven to have been "deliberately" buried. When Heywood and his crew see the monolith for themselves, a radio siren goes off.
18 months later, the scene remains the same; only now we are introduced to different characters. The astronauts, led by Dave Bowman, are on a Jupiter mission, the first for humans. Two of the astronauts, including Dave, are still on board, while the three others are kept in hibernation. Also aboard the ship is the perfect human, the H.A.L. 9000 supercomputer. HAL, as he's called, controls all operations on the ship, and is entitled to the survival of the three hibernated members. Much appears normal, until HAL, somewhat "intentionally", fouls up. Dave and his friend discuss what to do with HAL, they plan to disconnect him so that he doesn't mess up again. HAL reads their lips and turns murderous, killing off the crew, but is ultimately disconnected by Dave (HAL's begging is another memorable moment). After disconnection, Dave receives a video transmission that was only known on board by the HAL computer, this being of the existence of the black monolith.
After this follows a near-30 minute trip to the Infinite, Dave's trip through the space-gate with images that will keep you glued to your seat. As it ends, Dave's life is shown in the birth of the space baby, and the monolith that triggered the change. (It's an Odyssey, all right)
Much of what makes "2001" so captivating and powerful is particularly due to Kubrick's careful use of classical compositions with which to tell his story. Originally, he planned to have a seperate score, but changed his mind (and for the better). The most memorable of Stanley's choices is by far Richard Strauss's "Thus Spoke Zarathustra", and Johann's "The Blue Danube". Both perfectly accompany their scenes and make all the more memorable. The rest of the soundtrack is made of strictly eerie sounds, which also fit very well in with the overall mood of the film, particularly the trip to the Infinite.
The acting is all average, done by unknown European actors like Keir Dullea as Dave. The most memorable piece of acting in the film, though, was through the voice of the HAL 9000. Trust me, his voice is so powerful and mysterious that you'll end up having similar opinions as the members on board. But acting isn't even essential to a film like "2001", in which images are the main story (and one in which true appreciation comes from how much one can "read" visual films). "2001" could've gotten away as a silent film if it wanted to. Conversations aren't important and the first ten minutes are all animal sounds.
Finally, "2001", though not quite my favorite Kubrick film, is a solid piece of cinema. It's a film that we'll question you throughout its entire time span, and it's easily a film that one will have to continue reading on to really just touch the surface of what it's about. It's Kubrick's most difficult film, and his most visually appealing, but it's one that everybody interested in the director's films, or film in general, needs to watch ("carefully watch").
9/10
(***+/****)