Movie reviews for movies released in 2002.
1. Punch-Drunk Love, directed by Paul Thomas Anderson (10/10)
The sound-design – hell the overall design – in this movie is life-changing. One of the great works of art from the early 21st century and finally a role for which Sandler was actually suited.
2. City of God, directed by Fernando Meirelles, Katia Lund (9/10)
I saw this at 23 or 24 and was blown away. I haven’t seen it since.
3. Adaptation., directed by Spike Jonze (9/10)
The thing that I never understood about the criticism of its Hollywood ending is that this film is about the corruption of the artistic process by both writer’s block and especially commerce. How could it not end that way?
4. Bloody Sunday, directed by Paul Greengrass (9/10)
An exceptional docudrama. I really don’t remember what made me dock it down from 10.
5. Dark Side of the Moon, directed by (9/10)
Looks all the more prescient the further we move into this 24-hour “news” and internet-dominated world. An absolute must-watch for anyone hoping to be media conscious in this day and age.
5. Stevie, directed by Steve James (9/10)
Though I am generally not a huge fan of what you might call “small subject” or “human interest” documentaries where there isn’t some greater theme in discussion, this is about as good as one of those gets. It is incredibly heart-wrenching at times and had me as close to tears with a movie as I’ve been in years. It is immensely powerful stuff. At the same time, it also implicitly asks serious questions about the role of the documentarian, James cannot be objective about his little brother’s life. Where do his responsibilities start/stop?
7. Spellbound, directed by Jeffrey Blitz (9/10)
Like so many others I fell under this movie’s spell. (So. Fucking. Clever. I. Am.) I haven’t seen it since I was like 24 or 25, so maybe I would feel differently now. But at the time, I was blown away.
8. About Schmidt, directed by Alexander Payne (8/10)
Frankly is there another performance of Nicholson’s around this era that’s actually any good? (I haven’t seen The Departed.) One of his best roles.
9. Lord the Rings: the Two Towers, directed by Peter Jackson (8/10)
When I say the film, I said the following: “Better than the first one as spectacle. Still overlong and over the top. But incredible to look at, of course.”
In 2018 I read the books. I didn’t enjoy the books but I found the middle part to be the most compelling for what it is. Once again, I understand the criticisms of the films much better now and I think that the books might have been best adapted as a TV show a la Game of Thrones. But I’m not sure I could handle that, given the nature of the story itself and all its inherent problems.
To tell the truth, I’d rather it only be a 9 hour long movie, than a 30-36 hour long TV show. And, as movie spectacle, there was really nothing like this series in 2002. And given that it has none of the buildup of the first or the denouement of the second, it is the most entertaining of the three.
10. The Pianist, directed by Roman Polankski (8/10)
This is a fine holocaust film that is kept from being truly exceptional by some minor quibbles. First off, Brody is great. I haven’t seen him in too much other stuff (and I have heard bad things) but here he carries this film. If he didn’t, it would probably be a lot weaker. The conceit appears to be that we experience his experience. Because Polanski violates this a few times, the film is slightly less than what it could have been. Also, the CGI is occasionally too obvious. But, this is unflinching and it features a truly remarkable performance. It is almost everything you would want from this ‘subgenre.’
11. The Man Without a Past, directed by Aki Kaurismaki (8/10)
The Man Without a Past is a great Finnish film about a man who loses his memory and basically lives in some slums and falls in love with a Salvation Army woman. It’s a funny and bizarre, and fascinating movie. It also has a whole bunch of great lines. One other thing before I get to the lines, the man with no past is arrested because he has no identity. Now, me being a recovering libertarian, that strikes me as absolutely outrageous and unacceptable. Who cares? Why should the state arrest people who don’t have names? How does that make any sense?
“What do I owe you?”
“If you ever find me face down in the gutter, turn me around to my back.”
Unfortunately that’s the only good one at IMDB. The rest I can’t really remember (I’m horrible with movie quotes unless I’ve seen the film tons o’ times). But here’s a great pick up line I remember:
“Lookout! There’s something in your eye!”
“I don’t see anything…”
“Hold on, I’ll get it for you…”
And then he kisses her. That’s classy!
12. 24-Hour Party People, directed by Michael Winterbottom (8/10)
I have lost my review for this crazy history of a groundbreaking music label through the eyes of its egocentric founder.
13. The Bourne Identity, directed by Doug Liman (8/10)
A very refreshing anti-Bond that manages to bring some elements of realism to one of the least realistic movie genres.
14. Rabbit-Proof Fence, directed by Phillip Noyce (8/10)
Rabbit Proof Fence is an incredible story about aboriginal girls who walked over 1000 miles to flee a school for “half-castes.” I guess Noyce is making good movies these days.
15. Lost in La Mancha, directed by Keith Fulton, Louis Pepe (8/10)
A fascinating movie about the problems of making movies.
16. In the Mirror of Maya Deren, directed by Martina Kudlacek (8/10)
I had no idea who Maya Deren was and I’m glad I found out. Though I am not a huge fan of interpretive dance (I don’t get it), some of the stuff she did is mind-blowing (some of her cuts are so seamless for the time, I can’t figure out how she did them). In one film, she somehow mixes slow mo and regular speed without us being able to tell the transition. It is a shame that she isn’t more famous. I figure that it’s because of her gender and that really is too bad. This movie also illuminated how crazy creative people indeed are. This is something I knew, but Brakhage in particular really conveys this. In order to be very creative, you usually have to be fragile…or at least not normal.
17. Dirty Pretty Things, directed by Stephen Frears (8/10)
I think I watched this before I started regularly writing down my thoughts. Alas.
18. 28 Days Later, directed by Danny Boyle (8/10)
A pretty great zombie movie update.
19. The Quiet American, directed by Philip Noyce (8/10)
A massive improvement over the original.
20. Intimate Stories, directed by Carlos Sorin (8/10)
This seems to presage the work of Inarritu but it’s less pretentious, which is really nice. That’s perhaps the main reason why this works so well: the stories are simple even though the concept is “high.” It also revealed a totally different world to me, as I have never seen the country this is filmed in (that I can remember); most films set in Argentina are a little choose more scenic country, at least in my experience. Certainly the scenery informs the emotional content.
21. Talk to Her, directed by Pedro Almodovar (8/10)
This is an interesting, and dare I say touching, film that manages to go somewhere I wouldn’t have expected even though in retrospect it’s somewhat obvious. The acting is good all around and the story turns out to be pretty compelling despite my initial reservations. There is a good mix of a little bit of a light humour with the more… well, serious – for lack of a better word – subject matter.
22. The Salton Sea, directed by D.J. Caruso (8/10)
The first time I saw this I absolutely loved it. It doesn’t quite hold up to repeat viewings as I found out.
23. Auto Focus, directed by Paul Schrader (8/10)
I had no idea. Fascinating.
24. Confessions of a Dangerous Mind, directed by George Clooney (8/10)
Sort of like the flip-side of the coin compared to Auto Focus in terms of celebrity insanity.
25. Stone Reader, directed by Mark Moskowitz (8/10)
This is a fascinating, if a little tangential, story of a man trying to find out the whys of one of his favourite books. It covers a whole range of fascinating topics, such as how we judge genius, how we deal with it, the strangeness of the publishing industry, why we love books so much, and lots of other things. But it’s a little all-over-the-place and honestly it could have been a little shorter (not that I found it boring but because some of the material was unnecessary).
26. Eight-Legged Freaks, directed by Ellory Elkayem (8/10)
A classic horror / ’50s monster-plague movie comedy.
27. Bubba Ho-Tep, directed by Don Coscarelli (8/10*)
Seen in the midst of a semi-obsession with all things Bruce Campbell, I perhaps wanted to like this a little too much.
28. Ripley’s Game, directed by Liliana Cavani (8/10)
I found Malkovich a better Ripley than Damon.
29. Distant, directed by Nuri Bilge Ceylan (8/10)
Lost my review.
30. The Trials of Henry Kissinger, directed by Eugene Jarecki (8/10)
Yes, if we apply international standards of war crimes to Kissinger, he doesn’t come off to good. But these standards are clearly for other people.
31. Hero, directed by Yimou Zhang (8/10*)
I think the asterisk is because I don’t remember liking it this much.
32. Insomnia, directed by Christopher Nolan (8/10)
I believe I liked parts of this version enough to prefer it slightly overall to the original but I think that the protagonist is way better in the original.
33. Devil’s Playground, directed by Lucy Walker (7/10)
I lost my review for this interesting but incomplete depiction of rumspringa.
34. The Kid Stays in the Picture, Nanette Burstein, Brett Morgen (7/10)
A fascinating film that relies perhaps a little too much on the braggadocio of its subject.
35. Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance, directed by Chan-wook Park (7/10)
It’s been ages since I saw the other two and I am struggling to remember how they compare. The one thing here that I find doesn’t work as well as the other films is there is the odd skip over what some would regard as an important point or two. I guess we can assume that the man has so much money he is going to find out all this info off-screen, but it does seem like he does it rather quickly. If memory serves (and it may not) I still prefer Oldboy to this and its sister.
36. Sahara [TV], directed by John Paul Davidson
This is an entertaining and fairly informative travel documentary. I do agree that sometimes Palin gets in the way of his own role when he is trying to be funny, and I feel like this is a little more apparent than in Pole to Pole. It’s still good to watch and it makes me pretty desperate to travel to Africa ASAP.
I find Palin’s latest career to be pretty much the greatest job ever and I wish I could somehow steal it from him. 3 months traveling around a single desert. Amazing.
37. Cuckoo, directed by Aleksandr Rogozhkin (7/10)
I lost my review!
38. City of Ghosts, directed by Matt Dillon (7/10)
This film is apparently cultural imperialism in a bottle. I missed that.
39. The Good Thief, directed by Neil Jordan (7/10)
Lost my review.
40. The Eye, directed by Oxide Pang Chung, Danny Pang (7/10)
41. Secretary, directed by Steven Shainberg (7/10)
Lost my review. It wasn’t nearly as provocative as the hype led me to believe.
42. Solaris, directed by Steven Soderbergh (7/10)
I have lost my review, but I remember this was less obscure than the original, which was both a good thing and a bad thing.
43. Far From Heaven, directed by Todd Haynes (7/10)
What I said at the time: Watched: Far From Heaven which was decent but I don’t have enough of an appreciation for classic Hollywood melodramas to truly get it.
Sometimes the homage is better than the real thing. (See “So Fine” re Johnny Thunders.)
44. Spider, directed by David Cronenberg (7/10)
Lost my review.
45. Undercover Brother, directed by Malcolm D. Lee (7/10*)
When I was 22 or so, this movie was amazing.
46. 8 Mile, directed by Curtis Hanson (7/10)
Way better than it has any right to be.
47. Phone Booth, directed by Joel Schumacher (7/10)
Another contender for best Schumacher film ever.
48. Divine Intervention, directed by Elia Suleiman (7/10)
Divine Intervention is an absolutely absurd movie about an absurd situation (the situation in Israel). It’s hysterical but it’s also (like La Dolce Vita) episodic, so it doesn’t have much of a narrative. It’s definitely worth a watch, even though it’s flawed. I can’t help but feel let down by the ending, but perhaps that was totally intentional. Anyway, there are some absolutely brilliant moments but in the end it kind of feels smashed together (though that may be deliberate…anyway, I don’t think it quite works).
49. Interview with the Assassin, directed by Neil Burger (7/10*)
Despite it’s low budget, I really wanted to like this.
50. Revengers Tragedy, directed by Alex Cox (7/10)
I was not familiar with Middleton. That being said, it’s nice to see another Elizabethan playwright getting the modern updates a la Shakespeare. The problem with this movie, as much as many of Cox’s more recent films, is a lack of budget. Despite the concept, and the cast, the film is very obviously cheaply made on fairly early digital video equipment. It’s too bad, because this could have been as interesting an adaptation as Titus. And it certainly opened my mind to the play. So that’s good, anyway.
51. Fubar, directed by Michael Dowse (7/10)
On a night when a bunch of us in grad school were renting movies – from a physical store! – and I had literally seen every film anyone else wanted to see – but of course! – I was asked to recommend a few. I picked this one, among others. And all of them went down like lead balloons. On second viewing, with these grad students who never got drunk like this – unlike the friends I watched it with the first time – I felt like a bit of a weirdo. I still thought it was enjoyable, even though nobody else did.
52. Run Ronnie Run, directed by (7/10*)
I wanted to like this so much that I think I ignored everything bad about it while rating it.
53. Russian Ark, directed by Aleksandr Sokurov (6/10)
Russian Ark is an extended museum tour of the Hermitage, essentially. What is notable about the film, and what I liked about it most, is that it’s one take. One take! It’s 90+ minutes long and it’s one take! That in itself is a masterful accomplishment. Then, it also manages to jump through time during this take. However, the problem with it is that, aside from the sets and costumes, it’s not very interesting. Still, it is a remarkable accomplishment as a first in cinema. But if you’re not interested in such things, don’t see the movie.
54. Gangs of New York, directed by Martin Scorsese (6*/10)
I hated the opening. I seem to have lost my review otherwise.
55. The Weather Underground, directed by Sam Green, Bill Siegel (6/10)
I lost my review. I remember feeling as if this was one-sided and a bit of a mess.
56. One Hour Photo, directed by Mark Romanek (6/10)
An impression-changing performance by Williams wasn’t enough for me to overlook some of the films other problems.
57. Cabin Fever, directed by Eli Roth (6/10)
This has an amazing joke in it, one of the best payoffs I’ve seen in ages, the problem is it’s a horror movie and the joke has nothing to do with the plot.
58. Panic Room, directed by David Fincher (6/10*)
I had unreasonable expectations for this movie. They were not met.
59. Signs, directed by M. Night Shyamalan (6/10*)
The first time I saw this, I got hammered on cheap Australian wine, and my roommates apparently didn’t realize I was drunk and got mad at me for talking. I can’t understand how they didn’t know I was drunk. But it seemed pretty good. Then I watched it again the next day and they were further confused. Don’t remember what the asterisk is for.
(Just to insert my two cents about Shyamalan’s defense of his speaking parts: “Hitchcock had non-speaking, momentary cameos. Your parts are fairly significant speaking roles. Not the same thing.”)
60. Bowling for Columbine, directed by Michael Moore (6/10)
Incredibly manipulative even if he is correct.
61. Dark Water, directed by Hideo Nakata (6/10)
Don’t really remember what I disliked about it now. Maybe I was getting tired of the genre.
62. Catch Me if You Can, directed by Steven Spielberg (6/10)
There was yet another love fest with this one. It was enjoyable but that’s about it.
63. Standing in the Shadow of Motown, directed by Paul Justman (6/10)
The Funk Brothers sound like they should have gotten writing credits, mentions in liner notes, and way more money for what they did, if what they say is anything to go by. But they don’t seem bitter, which either means they don’t understand that they were exploited, or maybe they just enjoyed the music so much they didn’t care. But Standing in the Shadows of Motown could use to be a bit more informative and it could use a lot less of the old people playing their old songs exactly the same way. Whatever.
64. Chicago, directed by Rob Marshall (6/10*)
I watched this?
65. Unfaithful, directed by Adrian Lyne (6/10)
Doesn’t Lyne sort of make the same movies all the time?
66. Stars Wars: Episode II – Attack of the Clones, directed by George Lucas (6/10*)
Well, I think I was just happy this was better than Episode I – which I liked the first time – and of course there’s that snappy title.
67. Australia: Land Before Time, directed by David Flatman (6/10)
Just remember the pictures.
68. The Grudge, directed by Takashi Shimizu (6/10)
Who can keep track? Way too many of these.
69. Spider-Man, directed by Sam Raimi (6/10)
I am definitely a Batman guy if I’m anything (and really I’m not). Still, this is at least well-made.
70. Dog Soldiers, directed by Neil Marshall (6/10)
The first time I watched this, I really really liked it. But I think I was half-asleep. The second time, I couldn’t figure out why I liked it the first time.
71. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, directed by Chris Columbus (6/10)
It’s amazing what a year will do in terms of technology in the 21st century: this film looks a lot better, and a lot less dated than the first Harry Potter film.
That being said, there is a whole lot of Return of the Living Dead Part II-type “we’ve done this before!” only without the self-aware winking. (That is a bad thing, I guess – though really the winking wouldn’t make the movie more palatable). Everything about the story is bigger and more dangerous – and there is a lot less setup this time around – but it is pretty repetitive from the first.
As a result, I’m torn. I think it’s the better movie, but I feel like I’ve lived through it before. Perhaps a better comparison than the zombie movie one above: this is the With the Beatles to Philosopher’s Stone’s Please Please Me. (Don’t really like that one either – as it implies a level of importance these movies do not possess – but it’s all I can come up with right now.)
72. 25th Hour, directed by Spike Lee (6/10)
I have not read the book and so I can’t fully judge this as an adaptation but something is not working here. For one thing, the film (like a number of Lee’s films) is over-scored. There are a number of Hollywood Music Climaxes throughout the film which make you go “what???” because nothing is happening. I have a really hard time getting the relationship between the three friends, especially between Hoffman and Norton, who really don’t seem to like each other or anything like that. The pacing is also really strange. And there’s a moment which is basically a poetry reading, and another section seemingly also adapted straight from the book with not all that much thought as to how it works visually (it doesn’t). I can’t quite put my finger on what else about it doesn’t work, but it just doesn’t feel right.
73. Biggie and Tupac, directed by Nick Broomfield (6/10)
I don’t mind Broomfield’s annoying narration voice – which is noticeably different from his interview voice…why? – and his informal style when his material’s good. But here, it’s a mixed bag.
He conducts numerous interviews with people involved or interested in both murders and those interviews, you would think, would certainly provide enough reason for a less vested party – say, the State of California or the State of Nevada – to re-open the investigations, but beyond that, I’m not sure there’s anything revelatory here. The thing is, it’s all circumstantial: it’s just a bunch of people telling you stuff, and maybe they’re telling the truth and maybe they’re lying, but that is not proof. It certainly seems as though the LAPD in particular at the very least did not do a good job investigating either murder – not that the first murder was even their case… – and that, at worst, they were complicit in the second murder. But that’s all speculation.
And, for good or ill, the film can’t find out the truth. And so it feels, to a great degree, like he’s just interviewing a bunch of people about what they think happened.
74. Ônibus 174, directed by José Padilha, Felipe Lacerda (5/10)
At least one too many stories and just too much content. Read the review.
75. Blissfully Yours, directed by Apichatpong Weerasethakul (5/10)
76. Orange County, directed by Jake Kasdan (5/10)
I liked this a lot more the first time I saw it.
77. Blade II, directed by Guillermo del Toro (5/10)
I really enjoyed the first one. Don’t remember what I disliked more about this one, arguably made by a better director.
78. About a Boy, directed by Chris Weitz, Paul Weitz (5/10)
I hate shit like this, no matter how well done.
79. Slackers, directed by Dewey Nicks (5/10*)
780. My Little Eye, directed by Marc Evans(5/10)
I lost my review – which I swear I wrote – but I remember being kind of let down by the whole thing.
81. Die Another Day, directed by Lee Tamahori (5/10*)
I really don’t remember whether this asterisk is because I have since come to realize this was better or worse. I seem to remember the opening was a breath of fresh air but who knows.
82. Austin Powers in Goldmember, directed by Jay Roach (5/10)
At this point it was getting all a little tired.
83. Kung Pow: Enter the Fist, directed by Steve Oedekerk (5/10*)
I watched this in a room full of people laughing hysterically; some of us may have been drinking (I don’t remember). Laughter is contagious.
84. Laurel Canyon, directed by Lisa Cholodenko (5/10)
I watched this for one reason and one reason alone.
85. Demonlover, directed by Oliver Assayas (5/10)
I lost my review but I generally do not like Assayas.
86. The Rookie, directed by John Lee Hancock (5/10)
Though this particular story was “new” or unique, we have seen something like this so many times already.
87. Changing Lanes, directed by Roger Michell (5/10)
Some people actually think highly of this. I was not convinced.
88. Road to Perdition, directed by Sam Mendes (4/10*)
I had ridiculous expectations for this film; again they were not met. I’m sure it’s not bad. I should watch it again.
89. Minority Report, directed by Steven Spielberg (4/10*)
Two reasons why I disliked this movie irrationally: it was made by Spielberg and tons of critics had it as one of the best movies of the year. That being said, the friend I watched it with hated it too. So maybe I was not letting my Spielberg-loathing get the better of me.
90. Reign of Fire, directed by Rob Bowman (4/10)
Wasn’t this supposed to be legendarily bad? I don’t remember it that way.
91. S1m0ne, directed by Andrew Nicool (4/10)
I think there was potential here, actually. But the execution is pretty weak. And Pacino is doing his scene chewing thing.
92. Hart’s War, directed by Gregory Hoblit (4/10)
93. John Q, directed by Nick Cassavettes (4/10)
Don’t remember it.
94. Men in Black II, directed by Barry Sonnenfeld (4/10)
Same thing all over again, right?
95. 40 Days and 40 Nights, directed by Michael Lehmann (4/10)
I’m pretty sure I wanted to fall in love with Sossamon too, but that doesn’t mean the premise was any good or that the film made much sense.
96. Raising Victor Vargas, directed by Peter Sollett (4/10)
It’s hard to take rom-coms about rich Anglo-Americans seriously, so I guess the theory is here that if it’s about Latino Americans in an inner city, the same story will be easier to take. Well, that’s not true. Nothing about this is more palatable just because these people are poor. I knew the odd kid like Victor when I was a teen (which, I guess, is a credit to the lead) and I have no interest in being reminded of kids like that. They weren’t likable then and they aren’t now. These are the popular kids, even if they do live in a ghetto. Why do we care about the popular kids? We don’t.
97. Serving Sara, directed by Reginald Hudlin (4/10)
Seems very charitable, no?
98. The Ring, directed by Gore Verbinski (3/10*)
Watching a lot of Japanese horror movies in my early 20s – thanks Dave! – made me a bit of a snob about these things, I fear.
99. Red Dragon, directed by Brett Ratner (3/10)
100. A Walk to Remember, directed by Adam Shankman (3/10*)
We must really doubt whether I actually saw more than a few minutes of this.
101. The Rules of Attraction, directed by Roger Avary (3/10)
Do we make an adult movie and risk alienating the very people who want to see these actors or do we tone it down , lose whatever edge it had, so it doesn’t get an adult rating? Let’s not make up our minds!
102. Equilibrium, directed by Kurt Wimmer (3/10)
Someone actually recommended I watch this.
103. Bollywood / Hollywood, directed by (3/10)
I don’t know why everyone thinks Bollywood is any good, it’s just classic Hollywood cinema transplanted to India, and given that we have learned about all the problems with classic Hollywood conventions, there’s no reason to celebrate them being resurrected en masse by another country’s film industry.
104. The Circle aka Fraternity, directed by Sidney J. Furie (3/10)
105. Ararat, directed by Atom Egoyan (3/10)
Ararat is the worst movie I’ve seen by Atom Egoyan. I liked The Sweet Hereafter (though I’ve heard he made it deliberately confusing). Exotica is strange but interesting, so is Felelicia’s Journey (though I’m not huge fans of either). Ararat is a steaming piece of shit.
It is ostensibly about the 1915 massacre of 1 million Armenians by the Turks. The end of the film confirms this (there is factual information on what happened) but it’s really about trying to connect with the past, which is illusory, and the truth, which is also illusory, and about families. So he can’t make up his mind. This is the first problem. Then there are the terrible plot devices. They are so contrived that it’s all you can think about through the movie. It comes off as not just a really pretentious way to tell us about the massacre (which I wouldn’t necessarily mind) but also as extremely ineffective. You don’t think about the massacre except when a few scenes from the “film within a film” appear. And then those are not as good as they could be, because we are made aware that they are scenes in a film (incidentally, that doesn’t hold up either…just because you reveal a camera to one side, doesn’t make the audience believes that you were taking all those shots with the one, motionless camera you reveal).
I don’t know what Egoyan was trying to do. I have a theory. But in the end it doesn’t seem to matter. If I were of Armenian descent, I think I might have a huge problem with this film. Since I’m not, I’ll just say it failed to educate me, it failed to stir me (in the sense of filling me with self-righteous anger at what was done or causing me to experience empathy), it failed to successfully tell the story of the events itself, or of the painter that was supposedly a focus of the film, or of the family at the heart of this film. What you get on screen is “look at me! I’m directing! I could have made a film about this terrible incident that stirred you, but I’m far too creative for that! Ooh, I’m jumping around in time and space! I can do whatever I want and it will work!” But it doesn’t. In any way shape or form. Because the approach is so wrong, everything else feels wrong too. Lines that would have seemed slightly corny in another film, but would be forgiveable given the subject matter, become howl-inducing.
One other thing: Egoyan, your wife is not a good actress. Stop putting her in everything.
A huge, huge, huge disappointment. The only reason why I would give it more than 1/10 is because of the potential for what it could have been.
I think that Egoyan was trying to make his own Hiroshima Mon Amour and he just missed the bus and then some.
106. The Truth About Charlie, directed by Jonathan Demme (3/10)
Demme’s worst movie?
107. Outta Time, directed by Lorena David (3/10)
This was horrible. 3 feels charitable.
108. Feardotcom, directed by William Malone (3/10)
This feels charitable.
109. Sniper 2, directed by Craig R. Baxley (3/10)
Just as good as Sniper.
110. The Hot Chick, directed by Tom Brady (3/10)
Rob Schneider is The Stapler.
111. Drumline, directed by Charles Stone III (3/10*)
I doubt I watched more than 20 minutes of this. Wasn’t there a craze around these films though? What’s wrong with people?
112. Nine Lives, directed by Andrew Green (2/10)
113. The Time Machine, directed by Simon Wells (2/10*)
I think I was in a really bad mood. I don’t actually think this was quite as bad as I made it out to be.
114. Bad Company, directed by Joel Schumacker (2/10)
115. Femme Fatale, directed by Brian De Palma (2/10)
I saw this for one reason and one reason alone and even that wasn’t very good. Self-parody.
116. The Wisher, directed by Gavin Wilding (2/10)
117. Queen of the Damned, directed by Michael Rymer (2/10)
I’m pretty much of the opinion that any movie whose star dies – whether bad or good – should just be killed.
118. Hollywood Ending, directed by Woody Allen (2/10)
The second worst movie Allen ever made?
119. Resident Evil, directed by Paul W.S. Anderson (2/10)
One of my favourite terrible movie series. I can watch these over and over.
120. Killer Bees, directed by Penelope Buitenhuis (1/10)
Just terrible, terrible stuff.
121. Clockstoppers, directed by Jonathan Frakes (1/10*)
I think this was one of those “This premise is stupid and I’ll watch 15 minutes of it and then rate it on IMDB out of spite.”
122. The Mangler 2, directed by Michael-Hamilton Wright (1/10)
No I have not seen the first one.
123. Stranded aka Black Horizon, directed by Fred Olen Ray (1/10)
124. Deathbed, directed by Danny Draven (1/10)
So very lame.
125. Wishmaster 4: The Prophecy Fulfilled, directed by Chris Angel (1/10)
So, so very terrible.
“Neo Noir” directed by Chase Palmer (8/10)
All I remember is that I liked it.
“Virgin” directed by David Mitchell (4/10)
Don’t remember it.