Covert One: The Hades Factor (2006) (TV)

Not bad for a $3 DVD, 14 August 2009

Had I not found Covert One: The Hades Factor in the $3 bin at Big Lots, I seriously doubt I would have ever even heard of the movie - much less purchased the DVD. Based on a book by acclaimed author Robert Ludlum, Covert One: The Hades Factor was apparently made as a mini-series for CBS. The plot deals with the timely topic of bio-terrorism. In the movie (and I'll keep this brief because it would take paragraphs to do justice to the plot), secret agent/doctor/all-around good guy, Jon Smith (Stephen Dorff) is trying to track down the source of a deadly virus released by terrorists. Meanwhile, half-way around the world, another secret agent, Rachel Russel (Mira Sorvino), is on the run having been accused of playing a part in the virus' release. Behind the scenes, a secret governmental agency known as Covert One is pulling strings to protect the government and to find the terrorists. There's a lot more to the plot, but these three sentences will have to do.

On the whole, I enjoyed Covert One: The Hades Factor. It has its faults, but overall it was an exciting adventure. First, for a movie that's over 160 minutes long, I thought director Mick Jackson did an admiral job with the pacing. There are only a couple of instances where things got really slow. Good action, interesting scientific mumbo-jumbo, international intrigue involving terrorists, nice locations, some surprisingly graphic gore effects (remember, this was made for CBS), and solid supporting performances from Sophia Myles, Anjelica Huston, and especially Colm Meany are all highlights for me. Another big plus was Mira Sorvino. But then again, I'm hardly unbiased when it comes to Sorvino. I seem to go nuts over just about anything she does. Unfortunately, the same can't be said for her co-star, Stephen Dorff. Don't misunderstand – his acting is okay, he just seemed terribly miscast to me as the secret agent/doctor/all-around good guy. While I'm on the subject of negatives, I didn't care at all for the film's final act. First, I suppose that the identity of the boss behind the terrorists was supposed to be something of a twist, but it doesn't work. It's far too easy to spot the bad guys as soon as they appear on screen. Second, I hated the final outcome. Sure, the virus is stopped, but nothing else is resolved. We don't even get the satisfaction of seeing the bad guy come to justice. What's up with that? In the end though, the good outweighs the bad and I'll give Covert One: The Hades Factor a 6/10.

6/10

Supernatural "The Usual Suspects" #2.7 (2006) (TV)

"You know, Casper - the blood thirsty ghost.", 29 June 2009

"The Usual Suspects" isn't my favorite episode of Supernatural, but it's a darn good one. Sam and Dean find themselves in custody for a couple of murders they didn't commit. The brothers are convinced that a vengeful spirit committed the murders, but how do you tell that to the police? When Detective Diana Ballard (Linda Blair) has a run in with the ghost, she begins to believe the boys. With Dean locked-up, she works with Sam to solve the mystery and, hopefully, put a spirit to rest.

As soon as I saw Linda Blair pop up on the screen, I knew I was going to enjoy this episode. I mean come on – it's Linda Blair for goodness sake! What's not to like about that? Horror legend Linda Blair guest starring on the best horror television show to come down the pike in years – I loved it! Besides Blair, "The Usual Suspects" has a lot going for it – rock solid plot (even if it is terribly predictable), good special effects, and some nice humorous moments. Two things I really enjoyed were the way the story unfolded through flashback (i.e. the truth vs. Sam and Dean's story) and the little comments at the end referencing The Exorcist. Very cool. I've gotta give this one an 8/10. I'm really looking forward to sitting down with the rest of Season 2.

8/10

Supernatural "Provenance" #1.19 (2006) (TV)

"Well, this isn't exactly the first grave we've dug.", 26 June 2009

MAJOR SPOILERS AHEAD --- I recently finished watching the first season of Supernatural and, overall, I'm impressed. There are been a few things that have bugged me and some episodes that didn't necessarily work, but those instances have been rare. This particular episode, known as "Provenance", is a particular favorite of mine. In this one-off episode, Sam and Dean investigate a series of deaths that appear to be related to an unusual painting. It seems that each time someone takes ownership of the painting, they have their throats slit in the night. The painting depicts a family from roughly around the turn of the century. The story goes that the Father in the painting was a barber who went mad and killed himself and his family with a straight razor. But as Sam and Den eventually discover, it's not the Father who's come back for murder – it's the adopted daughter. And for me, that's what makes this episode so especially creepy – there aren't many images that frighten me like a murderous little girl, complete with frilly dress, welding a razor in one hand and dragging a doll behind her in the other. Spooky! It's a smartly written little story filled with wonderful atmosphere. The special effects, the cinematography (especially when the little girl makes her presence known), and the lighting are all as good as you'll find in any big budget movie. "Provenance" is a very entertaining, leave-the-lights-on-when-you-go-to-bed kind of episode.

9/10

Poirot "Taken at the Flood" #10.4 (2006) (TV)

One of poorest entries in the series, 19 April 2008

From IMDb: "Hercule Poirot finds himself trying to solve the mystery of the Cloade family. Rosaleen is the young widow of Gordon Cloade who was killed in a gas explosion in his London home. Rosaleen has inherited her late husband's substantial fortune and she and her brother David Hunter are refusing to share it with other members of Gordon Cloade's family. There have been persistent rumors that Rosaleen's first husband, an intrepid explorer, is still alive and as such would nullify her marriage to Gordon. What Poirot learns however is of a far greater deception that will alter everyone's perception of what they believe to their reality."

Taken at the Flood has to be one of my very least favorite of the entire Poirot series (I disliked it so much that I didn't even bother to write my own plot synopsis). I was never a huge fan of the book, but this adaptation has some real weaknesses and problems that I just can't get past. Chief among them is that it never "feels" like an Agatha Christie story. Who decided to sauce up Christie's work with all the sex and talk of abortion? I suppose it was done in an attempt to attract the more modern viewer. What about those of us who watch these movies because they aren't filled with the same garbage you can find in every other modern movie? Beyond the bastardization of Chirsite's novel, the denouement is terribly disappointing. Poirot brings up things about a murder that happened years ago that, not only would Poirot have had no way of knowing, the audience couldn't begin to come up with the solution. Kreskin couldn't have come up with half the things Poirot reveals. And it's not as much fun when you can't play along. I realize that Christie would often spring a surprise or two during one of Poirot's final monologues, but here Poirot offers no proof. Based on the evidence, his accusations seems to be little more than wild speculation.

4/10

Poirot "After the Funeral" #10.3 (2006) (TV)

"To be right all the time might get a bit monotonous.", 13 April 2008

Richard Abernethie, a very wealthy man, has died and his relatives have assembled for his funeral. Included in the funeral party is Abernathie's youngest sister Cora Galaccio. While none of the family has seen Cora in at least 20 years, they all agree that Cora was always a bit different. So when Cora says something about Abemethie having been murdered, most laugh it off as one of Cora's eccentricities. But someone is obviously taking Cora seriously. The next day, Cora is found dead in her bed having been beaten violently. Is there a connection between the two deaths? It's up to Hercule Poirot to find a killer.

After the Funeral is one of the most well put together episodes of the entire Poirot series. I've always been a fan of this particular Agatha Christie book and, from what I remember, the movie is as faithful to Christie's source material as any of the Poirot installments. The mystery is top notch with plenty of clues, suspects, and red herrings. And as I've written before, I always enjoy an Christie story where Hercule Poirot gathers everyone together in a drawing room for the final reveal. It might be old fashioned, but that's the way I like it. Getting beyond the plot, technically and artistically After the Funeral is a winner. Sets, editing, direction, and cinematography are as good as you'll find in one of these movies. The acting is equally impressive. I've come to expect an enjoyable performance from David Suchet as Poirot and he doesn't disappoint here. The rest of the cast is just as strong with Monica Dolan giving an especially noteworthy performance. Other than a minor quibble with the rapid fire way the characters are introduced, I've got no real complaints. It's a good show all the way around.

8/10

Dracula (2006) (TV)

A weak, unsatisfying, and disappointing affair, 6 April 2008

Based on several aspects of the plot description for this 2006 BBC version of Dracula, it would be understandable to ask what this production has to do with either the Bram Stoker novel or the many film adaptations that came before it. In this version, Lord Holmwood, with the assistance of a Satanic/blood cult, sends for Count Dracula hoping for a cure to the syphilis he inherited from his parents. He saw what the disease did to them and wants to rid his body of the disease before he marries his fiancé, Lucy. Count Dracula arrives in England, but has other plans in mind that do not include Lord Holmwood. Dracula views England as the center of a new empire he wants to control. And his first victim – Lucy.

Honestly, though, these changes to the traditional Dracula plot (other than those involving the Van Helsing character) had little effect on my enjoyment or lack thereof of this movie. What really did in the BBC's Dracula for me was the sloppy direction and poor acting. While much of the movie looked good (And don't all period BBC pieces?), it felt so rushed that there was never a chance to get to know the characters or to build atmosphere or do any of those things necessary for effective period horror. The movie jumps from scene to scene to scene without providing either establishing shots or taking the time for a scene to end properly. Quick camera cuts, poor lighting, overusing hand held camera shots, and MTV-style editing are just a few of the sins that I'm laying at the feet of director Bill Eagles. As for the problems I had with the acting, other than David Suchet (who is on camera far too briefly), I cannot name an actor who stood out. They were either just plain old bad (Sophia Myles as Lucy and Stephanie Leonides as Mina) or they were wrong for their part (Tom Burke as Dr. Seward and Marc Warren as Dracula). While a few random set-pieces were quite nice, there are too many problems for me to call this Dracula a good movie.

Overall, the BBC's most recent stab at filming Dracula is a weak, unsatisfying, and disappointing affair. For what it's worth, I'll give it a 4/10.

4/10

Deep Sea (2006)

If you get the chance, see it in 3D on an IMAX screen, 11 March 2008

This past weekend, the family and I went to the Tennessee Aquarium in Chattanooga. While there, we caught Deep Sea 3D at the IMAX theater. My son has a copy of the movie on DVD, so I knew what to expect and knew the basic premise of the film. What I didn't expect were some truly amazing visuals. I was completely blown away by the images. There's a scene at the very beginning where the waves come rolling in toward the camera. The 3D effects actually made me jump. It looked like we were about to get soaked. The underwater scenes were just as cool with great colors, interesting and unusual animal life, and solid 3D visuals. Both Johnny Depp and Kate Winslet do an acceptable job with the narration. I've read where some complained that the script was geared toward smaller children. Well, I was with a small child so that didn't bother me. My only complaint with the experience is some of the added sound effects. The folly guys worked overtime and the end result is pretty bad. Scallops fleeing from a marauding sea star do not sound like school kids on the playground.

Having watched Deep Sea 3D on an IMAX screen in 3D, I don't know that my son will be able to watch his DVD on a regular TV anymore. The IMAX 3D was that amazing.

8/10

Yo-Yo Girl Cop (2006)

- Sukeban Deka: Kôdo nêmu = Asamiya Saki
I really wanted to like this movie, 4 March 2008

I really wanted to like Yo-Yo Girl Cop and, for a while anyway, I thought I was going to. To begin with, just take a look at the DVD cover – a Japanese school-girl complete with uniform and a lethal yo-yo striking a pose in front of a fiery explosion. How awesome is that? And the plot sounded very promising: Saki Asamiya (Aya Matsuura is terrific in the role), a very troubled and violent teen, is hand-picked by a secret government agency to infiltrate a group of would-be high school terrorists. The group has already killed at least one other agent. They tied her hands together, strapped a bomb to her, and sent her out into the crowded streets. Nice, huh? On the group's website, they've started a 72 hour countdown clock, but a countdown to what? It's Saki Asamiya's job to find out – and do it before time runs out. The film gets off to a great start with the whole explosion in the streets scene, Saki's fight on her first day at school, and a chase through a crowded mall. Add to that a funky vibe that runs through much of the movie, the incredibly stylized look, and a nice score, the makings were here for a real winner. Unfortunately, Yo-Yo Girl Cop abandons the promised action and all but slams on the brakes in favor of melodramatic, teen-angst clap-trap during the second act. It was enough to make me want to hurl. Life's tough – get over it already and get back to the yo-yo butt-kicking! The movie does redeem itself somewhat in the finale as Saki and her female nemesis don leather outfits for the highly anticipated all-girl yo-yo fight to the death. As cool as that may be, it comes way too late to save Yo-Yo Girl Cop from being anything other than average at best.

5/10

The Wicker Man (2006)

"Oh, no! Not the bees! Not the bees!", 9 February 2008

What a freakin' joke! The 1973 version of The Wicker Man is a true classic and one of the most powerful movies I've ever seen. The final scenes have lost nothing and remain as strong today as they were over 30 years ago. The 2006 version of The Wicker Man manages to take most everything that made the original such a wonderfully compelling piece of cinema and chuck it out the window. How you can take out the religious and sexual aspects that were a focus of the original story and still call it The Wicker Man? And what do you use to replace the religious and sexual aspects so key to understanding the central character? Bees! Yes, that's right – bees, for God's sake! What an insult! There's a story that the original negatives of the 1973 film were buried in a landfill under a roadway in England. Why couldn't it have been the 2006 abomination?

2/10

The Host (2006)

- Gwoemul
A rousing success and a ton of fun, 11 August 2007

An irresponsible U.S. Army doctor has his Korean aid dump a large quantity of toxic chemicals into the sink. The chemicals drain straight into the Han River with an unexpected and disastrous result. The chemicals are responsible for the creation of a giant mutant monster with a taste for human flesh. The creature goes on a rampage and takes a girl named Hyun-seo into the river. She is presumed dead until her father receives a garbled call from Hyun-seo's cell phone. Is she really alive? Hyun-seo's family takes to the sewers in search of her.

I've been a fan of Creature Features for as long as I can remember. I grew up on stuff like Godzilla, Rodan, and the other multitude of giant creatures attacking every major city on the planet. With The Host, we have a new giant creature for a new millennium. And for the most part, it's a rousing success and a ton of fun. The opening scenes are some of the best and most believable (if any of this stuff can really be called believable) giant creature on a rampage that I've ever seen. The creature design is great. It's just what I would picture from a something horribly mutated by toxic chemicals. And I can't think of many movies where CGI was used better or more appropriately. It's really quite phenomenal. Equally amazing is the mix of humor and horror present in The Host. Some scenes are creepy while others had me all but laughing out loud. And then there's the ending. I'm not going to give it away, so I'll just say that it's much more touching than I could have imagined. It all but brought a tear to my eye. Overall, The Host features quite an intelligent, well-written script and is surely one of the better movies of this type I've seen in a long time.

As much as I enjoyed The Host, it's far from perfect. To begin with, I tend to agree with some of those who found the second act disappointing. It's not that the middle portion of the movie is bad or anything, it's just not the thrill-a-minute of the opening scenes. My other problem relates to the film's anti-American stance. While I would agree that the filmmakers have every right to express whatever political opinion they may have, it's a bit overdone and too obvious in my opinion.

8/10

Bandidas (2006)

"Always count your bullets, senoritas", 26 July 2007

Sara Sandoval (Salma Hayek) and Maria Alvarez (Penélope Cruz) are two very different women. They may be from the same area of Mexico, but everything else about their upbringing couldn't be more different. Sara comes from a wealthy family and has just returned home after having completed her studies in Europe. Maria is the daughter of a dirt poor farmer and has received little in the way of a formal education. But these two women are brought together when an enforcer (Dwight Yoakam) representing a NY bank comes to town to buy up land for the railroad. His methods include killing Sara's father to take control of his bank and seriously wounding Maria's father to get his farm. How are these two women going to right the injustices and get revenge? The pair come up with a plan – why not rob banks?

If you're looking for a deep, meaningful movie that explores life's mysteries – Bandidas is the wrong movie for you. I've seen the word "cute" used several times to describe Bandidas and that's better than any I can come up with. This is a light, fluffy, silly, popcorn movie from the word go. I mean, seriously, can you imagine a more unlikely pair of turn of the century, would-be bank robbers than Salma Hayek and Penélope Cruz? But that doesn't make it any less enjoyable. For me, it's all about suspending reality and just having fun with it. It doesn't hurt that Hayek and Cruz are two of the most stunning actresses working today. But their appeal here goes far beyond their looks. They have a definite chemistry on-screen that's very natural. And the constant bickering between the two is often quite funny. Yoakam and Steve Zahn provide solid support. Yoakam's bad guy performance is especially well done.

Overall, I don't have much to complain about. For me, Bandidas made for an entertaining way to spend 90 minutes. I don't want to get into my spiel about the importance of entertainment to me in rating a movie, but Bandidas is a good example. It's just a fun movie!

7/10

300 (2006)

"Give them nothing! But take from them everything! ", 10 March 2007

It seems there are only two or three movie releases each year that get me excited. 300 just happened to be one of those movies. Overall, while I enjoyed 300, it wasn't quite the movie I had hoped for. Part of the reason could be that I had over-hyped it in my mind to the point where no movie could live up to that lofty of an expectation. However, with a rating of 7/10, it should be obvious that there was plenty here for me to enjoy.

To begin, the "look" of the film is phenomenal. The stylized visuals perfectly suit 300's graphic novel origins. The action scenes are breathtaking. There is enough slicing and dicing to make any action fan happy. Finally, I found the acting surprisingly good. Gerard Butler may get most of the notice, but most everyone gave a convincing and solid performance. I was especially impressed with Lena Headey as Queen Gorgo. She just seemed so real and natural.

But where 300 falters, in my opinion, is in its extremes. Director Zack Snyder walks a fine line between these extremes and, for the most part, does so successfully. However, moments when historical accuracy bubble to the surface tend to put a drag on the film. Conversely, scenes and images that take 300 into the realm of fantasy and take it too far from its historical roots become all but absurd. It may be a small complaint to some, but this keeps me from rating 300 any higher.

7/10

Cars (2006)

"These white wall tires, they say look at me, here I am, Love me.", 25 June 2006

It was inevitable. The string of winners churned out by Pixar and Disney had to end sometime. And it ends with Cars. That's not to say there aren't moments in the film to enjoy. The beginning and ending of the film are great. As long as the action is centered on the racetrack, Cars is good and entertaining. Unfortunately, there's that whole middle hour or so where things get incredibly dull. After the slam-bang start, the next hour is talk, talk, and more talk. I took my three year-old to see the movie and both he and I were squirming about half way through. I had to bribe him to get him to stay through the finish. The problem with much of the film is that it's so predictable. There are no surprises anywhere in the bland and tired script.

I'll give the makers of the film credit for one thing – Cars looks good. There was a time when I thought Toy Story was the be all, end all of computer animation. I couldn't have been more wrong. Cars looks far better in comparison.

Finally, one of the great things about the Disney films of the past is how well they have withstood the test of time. I wonder if some of these newer Pixar films will do the same. For example, Cars features Darrell Waltrip doing the same lame shtick he uses when broadcasting a race of television. How well is " Boogity Boogity Boogity! Let's go racin'!" going to stand-up?

5/10

X-Men: The Last Stand (2006)

What a mistake!, 28 May 2006

Sadly, the third movie in the X-Men series doesn't come close to living up to either its potential or the precedent established by the first two movies. But before I get to that, I'll cover a couple aspects of the film that really worked for me. First, the action sequences are generally well done. As individual set pieces, the action scenes work. Second, when I first heard that Kelsey Grammar was brought on board to play the Beast in X-Men: The Last Stand, I was a little apprehensive. I mean the thought of Frasier Crane doesn't exactly conjure images of an action hero. After seeing the film, I cannot imagine anyone else in the role. Grammar is the center of attention in every scene in which he appears – and it's not just the makeup.

On to the problems:

I can sum up most of the issues I have with X-Men: The Last Stand in two words – Brett Ratner. The decision to allow Ratner to direct X-Men: The Last Stand was a total mistake. Ratner seems to think that throwing together action sequences and CGI effects is all you need to make a good movie. Sorry Mr. Ratner, but the first two films were much more than this. The script and direction feel rushed and sloppy with little thought given to what made the series so good to begin with. There is no character development. Mutants are thrown on screen with the sole purpose of showing off special effects – not in an attempt to create memorable characters. And the characters from the previous two movies are handled poorly. Jean Grey's conversion to the Phoenix isn't explained at all. And she does nothing for most of the movie other than standing around looking like a reject from an army of the undead. Cyclops, a major character from the other movies, is killed off with no fanfare. And his death occurs off-screen! Why? Rogue is totally unnecessary. None of her scenes have anything to do with the plot other than adding some unneeded WB style melodrama. Professor Xavier and Mystique – gone far too quickly. And Wolverine has been reduced to little more than an Arnold Schwarzenegger wannabe spouting one-liners like he's working at the local comedy club.

I could go on and on, but you get the idea. In short, it's a disaster.

4/10

Over the Hedge (2006)

After a few missteps, DreamWorks comes up with a winner, 21 May 2006

Having seen the abysmal products DreamWorks has put out recently (Madagascar was bad and Shark Tale was unwatchable), I wasn't expecting much from Over the Hedge. I couldn't have been more wrong. Over the Hedge is an enjoyable story of a band of animals faced with the prospect of finding food as suburbia encroaches on their home. While there are a few slow spots, most of it is very well done. There are some segments that are genuinely laugh-out-loud funny, none more so than a 2 minute scene near the end featuring the spastic, hyper Hammy. The script is well written, taking pokes at rampant consumerism and the need to preserve the environment without ever feeling preachy. The animation in Over the Hedge is top notch and the voice work is exceptional with Wanda Sykes being the standout to me. In short, my wife and I had a great time with it and our three year old stayed entertained throughout. What more can you ask?

7/10

The Hills Have Eyes (2006)

A worthy remake, 10 March 2006

I've been a fan of the original The Hills Have Eyes since I first saw it during a midnight showing while in college. I had my doubts about the remake, but as I enjoyed Aja's High Tension more than I probably should have, I at least felt the film was in good hands. I still enjoy the 1977 version more, but my faith in Aja as an up and coming player in horror was not misplaced.

The film is very faithful to the plot Craven used in 1977 - a family traveling cross country finds themselves stranded in the desert and under attack from a mutant family living in the nearby hills. There are a few significant changes (the crater full of abandoned vehicles and the nuclear test city) probably due more than anything to a much larger budget, but these changes actually add even more interest and variety to the script.

There's a lot here to enjoy. The acting is great and definitely an improvement over the first film. I especially enjoyed Dan Byrd and Aaron Stanford's performances over the same characters from 1977. The new film is much more graphic than the first film. Aja doesn't skimp when it comes to showing the blood and gore. Aja has done his best to keep the brutality and savagery from the first film in his remake. And, for the most part, he has succeeded. One complaint I've already read on the internet is the movie is too slow. I completely disagree with that statement. I enjoyed the pacing throughout the film. The Hills Have Eyes may start off slow, but it builds to finale full of violence.

But there are a few areas where I had problems with the film. One thing that bothered me was the treatment of the mutant family. They never felt like real characters as there was virtually no character development within the mutant family. They are just there. I was also bothered by some technical aspects involving camera work and editing. The movies features what I consider to be way too many shots filmed with a hand-held camera and edited in a rapid, MTV style. Maybe I'm just getting old, but there were several moments during the film where I wanted to scream at Aja, "Be still and let me see what's going on". It was too much for me. Also, I thought the exposition was handled rather clumsily. The preaching like exposition given by the immobile mutant felt forced. Finally, and I realize many will disagree, I enjoy the low-budget look of the original. The look helped to give the movie a feeling that anything could happen. In contrast, Aja's film is much more polished looking. I won't go so far as to call it over-produced, but the look of the movie doesn't add as much atmosphere as the lower budget look.

In the end, while I did have problems with certain aspects of the film, overall The Hills Have Eyes is a solid horror film. Fans of the original should be able to find something here to enjoy that doesn't trample all over their memories of the first film.

6/10