ezytim
Joined May 2005
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.
Reviews4
ezytim's rating
I saw this film at a sleepover (how exciting) when I was very young and only watched it recently with a critical eye. Since my first and latest viewing, I have heard countless people praise it but also several who found it very forgettable. Troubling for me was that those who thought it was excellent couldn't tell me why whilst those who objected to it stated concise and articulated reason: some questionable dubbing / syncing and a potential hole in the storyline.
I have decided that I think it is, in fact, excellent. Clint couldn't play his role any better as the cunning, hard-faced protagonist; admittedly he doesn't say much, but it's not his dialogue that makes this role so brilliant. Whilst I remained fairly disconnected from all of the characters I think that added to the bleak portrayal of a lawless town where people were killed on a daily basis.
As for a plot hole (and without shouting "spoiler alert!"), I can't see it myself. There are a couple of instances of out-of-sync dubbing and if it were present in a film released tomorrow, it would get slated. However, indulge me if you will while a make a slightly tenuous analogy: the first electric motor. The first electric motor, compared to today's standards and technology would be inefficient and relatively under-powered. However, it is an invention of mind-boggling importance and surely the first production of which was a work of sheer genius. This film is the same.
I loved the plot twists. I loved the way Joe lays out a seemingly random series of events only for us to later discover how his cunning has brought all the fragments together and realise his plan. I loved the camera work, particularly the quick cuts from face to face that would succinctly sum up the evil in a gang's mindset. And of course, there is the score. It is instantly recognisable and drags you into the Mexican world whether you like it or not! It is a good movie. Watch it.
I have decided that I think it is, in fact, excellent. Clint couldn't play his role any better as the cunning, hard-faced protagonist; admittedly he doesn't say much, but it's not his dialogue that makes this role so brilliant. Whilst I remained fairly disconnected from all of the characters I think that added to the bleak portrayal of a lawless town where people were killed on a daily basis.
As for a plot hole (and without shouting "spoiler alert!"), I can't see it myself. There are a couple of instances of out-of-sync dubbing and if it were present in a film released tomorrow, it would get slated. However, indulge me if you will while a make a slightly tenuous analogy: the first electric motor. The first electric motor, compared to today's standards and technology would be inefficient and relatively under-powered. However, it is an invention of mind-boggling importance and surely the first production of which was a work of sheer genius. This film is the same.
I loved the plot twists. I loved the way Joe lays out a seemingly random series of events only for us to later discover how his cunning has brought all the fragments together and realise his plan. I loved the camera work, particularly the quick cuts from face to face that would succinctly sum up the evil in a gang's mindset. And of course, there is the score. It is instantly recognisable and drags you into the Mexican world whether you like it or not! It is a good movie. Watch it.
I must confess, while I reading the book I was already thinking of what a spectacular film it could be. Yes, I'm a bit of a geek and so I love the scientific detail that Crichton goes into, but even without that it was marvellously researched and the historic storyline was gloriously rich.
Oh what a shame.
My major problem stemmed from the disjointedness shown by the cast throughout the entire film. It's not as though they can't act and Richard Donner has directed some classics, so what the hell went wrong? I still haven't entirely figured it out but I'm fairly sure that the screenplay / adaptation is to blame; the characters had no depth and important aspects of the storyline were either omitted entirely or rewritten to try and make them more audience-friendly. How disappointing it was to see Crichton's fantastic theories belittled to "we accidentally discovered a wormhole". Maybe the cast could have developed their characters a bit more but they would have had an uphill struggle from the outset.
If you aren't intimidated by a book, then for God's sake read that version first before judging Crichton's part in this fiasco. It is, in my opinion, one of his best compared to the film which is one of the worst I've ever seen (although that honour is still reserved for "Sacred Cargo").
Oh what a shame.
My major problem stemmed from the disjointedness shown by the cast throughout the entire film. It's not as though they can't act and Richard Donner has directed some classics, so what the hell went wrong? I still haven't entirely figured it out but I'm fairly sure that the screenplay / adaptation is to blame; the characters had no depth and important aspects of the storyline were either omitted entirely or rewritten to try and make them more audience-friendly. How disappointing it was to see Crichton's fantastic theories belittled to "we accidentally discovered a wormhole". Maybe the cast could have developed their characters a bit more but they would have had an uphill struggle from the outset.
If you aren't intimidated by a book, then for God's sake read that version first before judging Crichton's part in this fiasco. It is, in my opinion, one of his best compared to the film which is one of the worst I've ever seen (although that honour is still reserved for "Sacred Cargo").
It really bugs me when people vote 1 star out of ten just because hey didn't like a film. In all honesty, they almost certainly don't mean 1 out of ten, they mean they thought it was below par... why can't people vote responsibly? Having said that, this was not the greatest film ever made, but it was damn good fun. So what if it wasn't like the original TV series?? It still worked just fine as a standalone film and made me laugh out loud a hell of a lot. The production and general direction were great, the script was fantastic, the score fitted the film perfectly, all of which mean this is NOT the worst film ever made.
Don't you people understand that this is just a different interpretation and expression of a story? It the TV series hadn't been around first, would it still be one out of ten? Vote for the film AS A FILM, not as an add-on to a TV series.
Don't you people understand that this is just a different interpretation and expression of a story? It the TV series hadn't been around first, would it still be one out of ten? Vote for the film AS A FILM, not as an add-on to a TV series.