Short Review: Why not just show video of Mel Gibson picking up a paycheck? Really that's all we're seeing here anyway.


Night of the Living Gibson. Mel Gibson seriously sleepwalks through the whole production. I understand that he plays a Boston detective who witnesses his daughter get mowed down by a shotgun blast, so he should be somewhat in a haze, but his numb performance begins the opening credits role. Its not that he is in a production that is beneath him, he's been in plenty of movies that don't make his resume. He reveals a lack of confidence on screen, a lack of bravado he used to have. Is this due to his age, this film really affirms it is time for him to move to older-aged roles, or is it due to his first real appearance following his public meltdown? I found myself more interested in figuring that out rather than figuring out the boring questions posed by the plot.

The film is a tedious, paint-by-numbers thriller sans thrills. The main reason the film does not work is due to the script by William Monahan (The Departed) and Andrew Bovell (Strictly Ballroom).

The pacing is very sloppy and rushed. We are introduced to Thomas Craven (Gibson) and his daughter Emma (Bojana Novakovic). They share a few minutes of awkward banter and then there is a mad dash to her death. Monahan and Bovell get to her death like they have a personal grudge against the character. It happens far too soon. We aren't given any time to get a real feel for Craven's love for her. We don't know why he would love her, for that matter. There is no mystery established, no deep concerns that threaten their relationship. She shows up, she pukes (yes, another shot of someone vomiting on screen) and then she is killed. It seems there is more time spent on Craven mourning silently than there are moments of him talking to her.

This mishandled relationship hollows out the rest of the film because it takes out the reason for us to care about what happens. From there Craven works to uncover the mystery of his daughter's murder. Of course he finds a government conspiracy, blah, blah, blah. It doesn't matter, she couldn't have been gunned down because of a conspiracy hatched at the fry machine in the local McDonalds - without an emotional connection to the victim, the audience has no reason to invest in the details of her death.

The standout in this film is Ray Winstone, a "I can't place where I've seen him before" kind of actor. He is compelling in his simple role as an assassin or "cleaner". He is the Grim Reaper but he doesn't much like his job. He is at the end of his career and is beginning to understand the folly of his brutal life. There is much for Winstone to work with and he does manage to delve into some good moments. If there is any reason to see this film - he is it.


Cautions: The film contains some language. It also contains a good bit of violence, although it is typical Hollywood violence. Mostly, I can say I've seen worse on television.




Related Reviews:
Mel Gibson Movies
The Road Warrior (1981)
Lethal Weapon (1987)


Other Critic's Reviews:
Cinema Blend
DarkMatters: The Mind of Matt



Click here to buy your copy of
You Are What You See and learn
to change the world from your couch

Labels: Danny Huston, film, Mel Gibson, movie review, Ray Winstone

Short Review: One of the best films ever made. What else can be said?


This film proves that the most controversial figure in human history is Christ Jesus. Even a film about Him stirs up all manner of emotions.

Mel Gibson's masterwork is a challenging film. It is an unflinching look at the torments in the last day of Jesus' life. The brutality shown in the film is the biggest takeaway for both the believer and non-believer. The audience is asked to endure a prolonged torture sequence, graphically displayed in all of its crimson horror. To some this is little more than a sick torture porn flick dressed up in religious clothing. To others it is frank and gut wrenching reminder of the sacrificed paid by our Savior. Obviously, I fall in the second camp.


The Passion of the Christ is one of the most important films made. First, it is a brilliant film both technically and artistically. It stands head and shoulders above most films and rises to the level of other great films of our age such as Schindler's List or Saving Private Ryan. The film also reinvigorated Christian film. Following the stellar success of this film, the concept of the "passion dollar" came into being. "Passion dollars" refers to the ability of faith-based groups and individuals to create massive profits at the box office. Since 2004, studios have been chasing down these people, hoping to replicate Gibson's unbelievable success.


This film also stands as perhaps the most touching, realistic portrayal of Christ ever to be presented. James Caviezel, speaking the original Aramaic, gives an authentic dimension to his Christ that has been missing in all other portrayals. Generally, Jesus is shown as a glowing, stoic figure. Caviezel opens the human aspect of Christ, showing his love as well as his leadership. Through Caviezel, we can see how Jesus could reach so many in such a short time.

Another outstanding performance comes from Maia Morgenstern as Mary. Morgenstern, overlooked by the Academy, provides one of the most striking performances in years. Through her we experience the horrors of Christ. She is the audience's emotional usher throughout the film. Her pain as a mother and as a Christ-follower is difficult to see and Morgenstern deserves high praise for bringing this complicated character to screen.

This is a film everyone should see at least once. While not something you want to sit down with while chomping on popcorn, it is important and moving enough to warrant at least a single viewing - believer or not.


Cautions: This film shows the final moments of Christ's life. The Roman's didn't hug Him to death. There is graphic scenes of torture and brutality. Strong, strong caution should be applied here. This not for the kiddies or anyone who has just eaten a sloppy Joe.


Worldview: The Christian reaction to the film has been interesting to see. They are, at first, very defensive of the piece. They also tend to treat the film as something that is nearly holy. While I understand why Christians are so closely attached to this film, I find myself a little concerned.

Christian artists’ commission is to allow The Holy Spirit to inform their work. This doesn’t mean our work should always blatantly tell the story of Christ. It should however always be mindful to present The Word in some fashion to the audience. We should also endeavor to keep Christ before us when we work. The work should be for Him, not for ourselves. This is easier said than done.

While this film puts Christ first, much of the marketing places the emphasis on the artist. The issue I find myself struggling with is exactly where the line between embracing a work of Christian art and worshiping the artist for his/her work?

Gibson obvious deserves praise for his efforts, but at the end of the day this isn’t his film. If you are like me and believe the hand of providence has touched this production, then falling over yourself praising Gibson is misplacing your heart. Christian art is not about the artist. It is about Christ and it is Christ who should be praised for the work. Gibson, as brilliant as his work is, is merely the vessel of God as are the rest of us.


Often I see Christians using this film as a touchstone to show the modern bias against Christian expression. While there may be a bias, this film should be used by Christians to show how that bias is a thin veil that can be torn through with the Truth of The Word. Yes, we have our enemies in the Arts, but we should not allow our sinful desires for attention (in this case the negative attention of playing the victim) to keep us from praising The Lord.

Enjoy this film. It is one of the great works of art in decades. All I ask is that you don’t forget who really brought it before you and why.


Related Reviews:
Mel Gibson movies
The Road Warrior (1981)
What Women Want (2000)



Other Critic's Reviews:
ReelViews
ScreenIt!



Click here to buy your copy of
You Are What You See and learn
to change the world from your couch

Labels: film, Jesus Christ, Jim Caviezel, Mel Gibson, Monica Bellucci, movie review

Short Review: Is this how Australians behave when they think no one is watching?


The popular sequel to George Miller's apocalyptic action film classic Mad Max has the cranky ex-cop lone wolf Max coming to the aid of a group of survivors who are besieged by a violent motorcycle gang.

The survivors, fronted by their hopeful leader Pappagallo (Michael Preston) are protecting an oil refinery, the last vestige of the old Australian civilization. The wolf pack of psychotic, homosexual (or at least bisexual) bikers led by their evil leader "The Humungus" lust for the oil. Either the innocents or the wolves will remain, one group must yield. Into this conflict comes ol' Mad Max, the cold-hearted loner.


The film is not really about Mad Max (Mel Gibson). This film is really about Pappagallo. Max is an antihero and in that role, he is a selfish, uncaring villain. An antihero is not a hero – he’s a bad guy we have an emotional connection with. There is a reason why the refinery community members are dressed in whites and earth-tones and Max dons black – he’s not an valiant, he offers no hope, he's not a hero.

Pappagallo is faced with a choice. Stay with the refinery and die, or leave and probably die while escaping. His people are getting killed every day clinging to the refinery, a symbol of the Old World. They all dream of leaving and going onto paradise, but they fear the horde amassed behind the gates. One can make a connection here to our earthbound safety and the desire for the paradise of Heaven – the gang offers a dusty Valley of the Shadows for the innocents to pass through.

Pappagallo uses Max’s villainous greed and selfishness as a tool to save the rest of the community. Once the community decides to risk an escape, it is not long before Max volunteers to drive the tank truck at the front of the caravan. He does this for the for the same reason the evil gang will chase the tanker – selfishness and greed.


Max truly doesn’t care about the people, every choice he makes is for himself. He is stuck in the Old World and is unable to see the promise of paradise. He never crosses over to stand with the community members for any reason other than continuing his own self-obsessed journey. Pappagallo is the true sacrificial character in the story, as he dies helping Max lead the gang members away from the unprotected innocents.

Thanks to this sacrifice, the surviving members of the community are able to travel onto paradise, far beyond the distance any gang member can reach. Pappagallo uses the evil before him to produce a good. He lures the evil men (the gang members and Max) and through their sin and offers the innocent a way to live in the process.

This is an extraordinarily violent film. It is rare to see this kind of carnage in the film today – which is good. However, the violence is needed in this film to set up the stakes of what is waiting for the innocents if they leave their protected home.


Beyond the death toll and the gore, there is a strong moral message about good and evil in this world. Evil is an aggressive weakness for this world played out and all sin, left unchecked, will cannibalize. Goodness comes from not only sacrifice, but also hope for what is to come. Without this hope we have no reason in this world. Our journeys become senseless. We can offer ourselves to the greater good like Pappagallo and help those around us or we can travel through life without purpose, holding out for the next day and nothing more – like Max. That is our choice.


Related Reviews:
Mel Gibson movies
Lethal Weapon (1987)
Signs (2002)


Other Critic's Reviews:
ReelViews
Roger Ebert



Click here to buy your copy of
You Are What You See and learn
to change the world from your couch

Labels: Bruce Spence, film, George Miller, Mel Gibson, movie review

Screenwriters: William Monohan (The Departed) and Andrew Bovell (The Book of Revelation)
Director: Martin Campbell (Casino Royale)
Actors: Mel Gibson (What Women Want), Danny Huston (X-Men Origins: Wolverine), Ray Winstone (Sexy Beast) and Caterina Scorsone

Labels: Caterina Scorsone, Danny Huston, film, Mel Gibson, movie trailer, Ray Winstone

This is the cinematic equivalent to eating left overs of left overs.

Instead of South Africans, Riggs (Mel Gibson) and Murtaugh (Danny Glover) battle Chinese Triads. Other than fighting Jet Li, the partners whine about getting old...well, actually Murtaugh always complained about being old but in this outing Riggs joins him. Chris Rock is thrown in as a over pronunciating soon to be son-in-law to Murtaugh and Riggs shack up girl Lorna (Rene Russo) is knocked up. That's about it. A bunch of characters who have been kept on life support being shoved into convienent plot twists. You get the feeling like you've watched a movie without really watching one.


Related Reviews:
Mel Gibson movies
Signs (2002)
The Patriot (1999)


Other Critic's Reviews:
Roger Ebert
Christian Spotlight on the Movies

Labels: cops, Danny Glover, film, Mel Gibson, movie review, Shane Black

It's all of the stupid from the first two Lethal Weapon movies without any of the fun. The poster for the film pretty much says it all. It's a Hollywood-kinda-dumb, directed from the balance sheet, McMovie. Riggs and Murtaugh are back and this time there's a cop girlfriend accessory!

Violent and appealing to the lowest common denominator, this is utter pap and not worth the bother.


Related Reviews:
Mel Gibson movies
The Man Without a Face (1993)
What Women Want (2000)


Other Critic's Reviews:
Roger Ebert
Jester's Movie Reviews

Labels: cops, Danny Glover, film, Mel Gibson, movie review, Shane Black

Related Reviews:
Mel Gibson movies
Million Dollar Hotel (2000)
The Patriot (1999)


Other Critic's Reviews:
Roger Ebert
eFilm Critic

Labels: cops, Danny Glover, film, Mel Gibson, movie review, Shane Black

Screenwriting legend Shane Black's first big gig. This fat, stupid movie about self-destructive white cop Martin Riggs (Mel Gibson) and his beleaguered black partner Roger Murtaugh (Danny Glover) is a vacuous, ridiculous waste of time - but still a fun way to waste it.

The film is an amoral carnival ride of stupid. Not a second of the film makes sense, its completely out of the realm of the possible and ultimately we're all along to have our brains tickled for ninety minutes. Black manages to manipulate all matter of elements into his film to elicit visceral responses. The film opens with a sexy whore dying, Riggs makes light of suicide, plenty of references to Vietnam, there's a silly bit about Riggs being an expert sniper (if he's a sniper then why isn't he on S.W.A.T.?) and carefully crafted scenes with Murtaugh's Cosby-lite family. All of this mashed together with a intruding saxophone soundtrack that may as well been loud fart noises. It's all so obtuse and it's all so dumb.

Gibson was a known actor prior to his turn as Riggs, having found success in the Mad Max films. It was his energetic performance launched him to wider fame. Gibson's wild-eye Riggs makes psychotic suicidal tenancies approachable and funny and gave him a place to showcase his natural humor and charm. Gibson turned a buddy film into a star vehicle.

This is a fun movie, there is no taking that away. It is also an utter waste of time and a obscenely moronic. Shane Black is a great screenwriter. He can take something idiotic and revel in the depths of its stupidity and pull out something that makes you not care that you're being presented vapid. This is not a small feat. Black makes crap, but it is impressive crap.


Related Reviews:
Mel Gibson movies
Signs (2002)
What Women Want (2000)


Other Critic's Reviews:
Movie Vault
The Washington Post

Labels: cops, Danny Glover, film, Mel Gibson, movie review, Shane Black

A good comfort movie about Nick, a womanizing ad executive who, following a freak accident, mysteriously gains the ability to hear women’s secret thoughts. A very simple premise expertly executed. The script by the writing team of Josh Goldsmith and Cathy Yuspa (13 Going on 30) is sharp and lean. The duo have a talent for infusing silly concept movies with charm and wit. Combined with the inspired casting of Mel Gibson in the lead opposite Helen Hunt as Nick’s professional nemesis/new boss Darcy the dialog and situational comedy provide some good payoffs. This is not a perfect film however, the inclusion of a side-love interest played by Marisa Tomei distracts from the main drive of the story and consumes too much time on screen without giving much back.

Taken as a whole, this is worth seeing. It’s a fun movie and plays the gender battles for laughs but isn’t without it thoughtful moments. To put it simply, if you enjoyed 13 Going on 30 then you will most likely enjoy this film. Note, since the main character is a womanizer and sexual activity is a key component of his life, sexuality is often at the forefront of the story. Viewers sensitive to sexual language and nudity may want to employ some caution.


Related Reviews:
Mel Gibson movies
Signs (2002)
The Patriot (2000)


Other Critic's Reviews:
FilmHead
ReelViews

Labels: Helen Hunt, Marisa Tomei, Mel Gibson, movie review

Screenwriter: Randall Wallace (We Were Soldiers)
Director: Mel Gibson (Apocalyto)
Actors: Mel Gibson (Lethal Weapon), Brian Cox (Manhunter), Sophie Marceau (The World is Not Enough) Brendan Gleeson (28 Days Later) and Patrick McGoohan (Scanners)

Labels: Brian Cox, film, Mel Gibson, movie trailer, Sophie Marceau

Screenwriter: Mel Gibson (Passion of the Christ) and Farhad Safinia
Director: Mel Gibson (Braveheart)
Actors: Rudy Youngblood and Dalia Hernández

Labels: chase film, film, Mel Gibson, movie trailer, Rudy Youngblood

Short Review: A quiet and inspired film. It is like The 6th Sense but with more annoying children.


For the most part, this is a good film. It is a study in how to patiently unfold a story and its characters. It is certainly refreshing to see a movie where the filmmaker knows that solid scenes don’t need to be rushed. M. Night Shamalamadingdong handles most of the film with a delicate hand and gently presents the horror of the alien invasion without becoming overbearing (until the end of the film.)

I have great appreciated the sound design. It would have been easy to make the aliens growling, violent creatures. M. Night Snuffleupagus’ genius in this film was making them so silent. Quiet horror is unsettling horror. Have you have wakened from a dead sleep thinking you’ve heard something in your house? Have you ever thought someone had broken in? This film plays on that terrified listening we fall into when we try to discern if there is a menace that we cannot see.

The ending of the film is weak, it's Michael Jackson in competitive arm wrestling weak. It wraps up too nicely and too conveniently. The ending wouldn't have lost anything if M. Night Shyma-something-or-another, stopped the action, stepped into the shot and simply said "and everyone lives happily ever after". I understand the point M. Night Sha-Na-Na was attempting to make, I just feel he could have done it less forcefully.

Overall, good film. If you haven’t seen it yet, do. Well worth the rental price.


Related Reviews:
Mel Gibson movies
Chicken Run (2000)
Million Dollar Hotel (2000)


Other Critic's Reviews:
Popmatters
3 Black Chicks Review Flicks

Labels: alien, film, Joaquin Phoenix, M Night Shyamalan, Mel Gibson, movie review