in 
Movie Review
Movie Review IMPORTANT NOTE ABOUT KIM GENTES MOVIE REVIEWS
The appearance of a movie in this review journal does not mean that the movie is endorsed by Kim. He writes reviews of movies that he saw that he recommends people avoid as well as movies that he considers worth seeing. Aside from just critical approval regarding the film, some movies may not be suitable for you or your family. You must make that kind of determination on your own, and stay true to your own convictions on what is appropriate to see. Some movies are well made, but have offensive or difficult subject matter that is questionable to many viewers. Again, the reviews listed here should not be your only filter for whether or not a film is appropriate for you and and your family.
Additionally, Kim has his own view on what movies are and why he thinks they are a worthwhile aspect of current culture to be investigated. You certainly don't have to agree with Kim on his viewpoints of movies, and he would be surprised if you did.
Kim's thoughts on movies -
Movies are the modern art "experience" of our culture. They are transmitted in many forms, on screens in theatres, DVDs, television and even computers. They are the merge of classical theatrical acting and modern day technical set and experience creation (effects). The reason I enjoy and watch lots of movies is that they not only entertain, they communicate the nuances of our society. Of course, some have nothing to do with culture, its just greedy corporations trying to produce profits. I am a guy, and as such am not the ideal audience for romantic comedies or 'chick fliks'. However I am also a husband, and domestic bliss (as well as common sense) compels me to at least review them...occasionally. For the most part, you will find I like (and therefor review a lot of ) action, drama, science fiction, suspense and similarly themed movies.
The Clearing (2004)
Friday, August 20, 2004 at 10:41PM 
Offbeat and convincing..
Overall Grade: B+ Story: B+ Acting: A- Direction: B+ Visuals: B
This film came and went away with such quickness in 2004 that I doubt many people saw it at all. Grossing just over 5million in US box office receipts, it failed commercially. The movie is unconventional enough that the average movie goer would balk at it, but it sticks to those who stick with it. I liked this film a alot. Redford goes the route of playing an emotionally dismal but successful business man. He and his wife have made the Amercian dream come true, but at the cost of some innocence and integrity with his family.
Dafoe plays a layed-off worker who ultimately seeks to "cash in" against the system that led his life into pain and personal failure to him, and in the eyes of his wife. The story comes to fruition as Dafoe takes Redford hostage, and looks to deliver him to a group of accomplices who wait for Dafoe in a hidden cabin deep in the woods.
The FBI come to the aid of Redfords family, trying to investiage and free Redford before time runs out. Their investigation unearths infidelty on Redford's part and pain for his family, even as they look to try to rescue him. It's a complicated character sketch, especially for Redfords wife, played by Helen Mirren. And this proves to be the strength of the movie. The characters and acting are suberb. But the plot does have some weaknesses, though they aren't problematic in delivering a strong track for the movie train to ride on. Redford and Dafoe deliver exacting performances and you will like the refreshingly non-Hollywood plot and honesty of their characters.
But don't go looking for a heroic happenstance to finish off your night of DVD rentals. This movies spins a yarn that makes you feel like it was too honest. The plot makes you think- "ya, that is how it would really happen". It doesn't leave you with all good or bad feelings, but a mixture that convinces you it was well thought and well executed.
This won't be your favorite movie this year, but it will make you think and feel, which your favorite list may not do.
This movie has brief explicit language and discusses issues you will likely not wanting your children under 13 to hear in a movie. However, this might be an interesting discussion point for older teenage children to talk with their parents about, since it has very central themes that come down to family, fidelty, honesty and love.
The Passion of the Christ (2004)
Friday, August 20, 2004 at 10:37PM 
Perfect story telling of the perfect story
| Overall Grade: | A+ |
| Story: | A+ |
| Acting: | A+ |
| Direction: | A+ |
| Visuals: | A+ |
Mel Gibson's version of the last 12 hours of Jesus on earth is a mesmerizing and detailed vision of Christ's trail, crucifixion and death. While Gibson retains his clearly Catholic heritage in telling the passion story, by drawing from the extra-biblical sources he used as plot line details, his rendering is widely held as embracing of most Christian denominations.
The power of this film cannot be overstated. It is truly a violent film, which matches precisely the topic- a crucifixion of a man. No one could honestly believe that a proper rendering would ignore the brutality of the main event itself. Gibson doesn't make the mistake of avoiding this reality, and serves the film and the viewers with the treatment due the story. No child under 13 should see this film due to its intensely violent and graphic scenes. But when a person is old enough to see this, it will surely bring a level of reality and vulnerability to the topic that could scarcely be imagined without this kind of honesty on film.
The sub plots presented are appropriate and flow swiftly, as the movie does, despite its 2 hour, 6 min length. The uncanny performances of James Caviezel (Jesus), Maia Morgenstern (Mary), and Monica Belluci (Mary Magdalene) make the synthesis of characters seem very human, very real, and very accessible. No contrivance or hint of whimsical attitude, the acting here towers high above the need for the dialog to be rendered in the language of the viewer. While it may have disappointed the casual movie-goer to be required to see this film in Aramaic, with English sub-titles, I think its impact clearly solidifies the power of the story and its universal acceptance and clarity.
You may not convert to Christianity simply by watching this film, but make no mistake about it- this is the real story of what the Christian faith is about: the sin of mankind (from past to present) being placed on the shoulders of the Son of God. The picture clearly articulates the Bible story, and conveys the depth of blame for Christ's death profoundly accurately to the Biblical record. This is a burden on all humanity, for sure. But the extrapolation of the story does not shy away from saying what the New Testament says about the Jewish and Roman leaders who are forging forward in killing Jesus.
Exceptional direction, acting and visuals, this is a powerfully violent film that narrates with excellence from the most revered chronicle in human history.
If you haven't seen this film, you can watch it digitally via Amazon or get the DVD:
Amazon Instant Video: http://amzn.to/YJyM3z
Amazon DVD: http://amzn.to/YGZlU2
Review by Kim Gentes
Primer (2004)
Friday, August 20, 2004 at 6:13PM 
Geeks rule, critics drool.. not for fools...
| Overall Grade: | A- |
| Story: | A |
| Acting: | A |
| Direction: | A |
| Visuals: | C |
First off, it must be said that this movie is one of the most honest and compelling stories told in movie I have ever seen. The problem is, you have to be completely ok with seeing the normal, average, everyday life of a couple of tech geek engineers (the real thing, not the Hollow-wood version) to get both the story context and plot delivery. Because of that, the audience for this film is a thin one.
But if you can handle it, this movie will completely blow your mind. Welcome to what seems like actual footage of someones real struggles with being a workplace engineer trying to turn entrepeneur in their garage. A couple of smart but very believable engineers are just trying to hit the common-mans paydirt of figuring out something that will make them money as a nice new discovery- they just want to make a better refridgeration unit for your home icebox. Not sexy science by any means. The setting is low tech on the computers, and high tech on the physics and chemistry. But in the common-sense approach taken by our two main characters to work through generating a low powered cooling system, they stumble on something that begins with a sustainable energy source and ends up as a mechanism allowing you to pass a human through time, precisely one day into the past.
If you are a science based professional, you must watch this movie to see how this story is taken from common science to science fiction (or is it?). The smartest and most clever thinking in a film for a very long time.
If you think this sounds stupid to you, and you do not have a practical working basis for science (and therefor good science fiction), then don't get this film. No engineer should pass up this film.
Of course, as you can guess, there is tension and need for resolution. In this movie, the plot moves from discovery of this new technology to a reality and morality check with Abe and Aaron (our main characters) trying to figure out.
I won't give away more, but if you are looking for brain teasing then you have hit the motherlode with this film. In the end, true geeks will be rewatching certain scenes of this movie over and over, trying to convince themselves of what happened. The film smartly captures emotion and dialog in a peircing reality of human ambition. You become as wrapped up in the story as the two scientists who are trying to outsmart one another. The results are fabulous, if you can stand the detail and tech talk.
Flat out the A movie for true geeks, but a D movie for people who want to see something predictable and simple. For my money, everyone (even those who hate geeks) should see this movie-- just so they can watch some stark reality filming done masterfully.
I personally give this film an A-, but your mileage may vary extremely different depending on your personality, interests and educational background in science.
Hero (2004)
Friday, August 20, 2004 at 6:03PM 
Good story - bad rendering/ See Crouching Tiger...
| Overall Grade: | C+ |
| Story: | C |
| Acting: | D- |
| Direction: | B+ |
| Visuals: | B+ |
For a while now, I have enjoyed the gifted prowess and movie presentation of Jet Li. As a martial artist he is without equal, including the legendary Bruce Lee in his amazing abilities. To watch a movie with Li is to be assured that you will see something you thought was amazing. Having heard about the story before I saw the movie, I was excited about the prospect of this deeper plot with a great series of Jet Li combat events.
But when I saw this movie, I was mildly dissappointed. Li is, as per usual, beyond belief in his skills. But the engaging thoughts of a complex plot, in which the antagonist and hero are the same person, and where you must think the strategy of the movie as it unfolds-- all that dissappears with Hero. The plot is engaging, but it is poorly acted. Li remains a convincing character, but literally every other person is so maniacally empty and thoughtless, you feel like hitting your head against a wall as this thing drones on through the plot. And this is sad, because every other aspect of the film shines brilliantly.
The visuals, for example, are spectacular. Color, set, effects and motion are played so expertly together that you are transported to a surreal, but honest, place where things seem both heavenly and perfectly war-ridden. The symetry of design around the scenes, the flying arrows, the leaves, the colors of clothing- all of this is perfect.
The ability and execution of the martial arts scenes are amazing. The plot twists are believable and encouraging to the art. The direction seems like a chess master making his grand moves before declaring check-mate.
But the acting and the dialog decline into 60s Japanese martial arts dropouts. This saddened me because the idea of a man giving up his life for the peace of a nation was such a gracious and powerful thing to weave into a violent movie. It would have been wonderful if it was done well. But alas it was not.
The movie will still be good enough for martial arts fans to enjoy, and even a person new to the amazing Jet Li will like the film. But the failure of the supporting cast to make the dialog real delivers a death knell to any "epic" thoughts this director may have had.
I wanted to love this film, but in the end, I was only sad for it not making it to its hoped-for place of excellence.
The Terminal (2004)
Friday, August 20, 2004 at 5:35PM 
Acting like it was meant to be
| Overall Grade: | B+ |
| Story: | C |
| Acting: | A+ |
| Direction: | B- |
| Visuals: | A |
Tom Hanks delivers the performance of a lifetime. Ok, well he has delivered a few of those now (Castaway, Green Mile, and Saving Private Ryan). But there is little doubt that this film that isolates itself on the power of the protagonist (much like Castaway had to) due to his limitations of a story with a single set location is Hanks finest character portrayal. Hanks as Viktor Navorski, a stranded immigrant in the international terminal of Kennedy Airport, totally becomes the culture and language of a euro-slavic fictious "Krakozhia".
I found his portrayal and struggles in the mundane discovery of language, food, people and friends to be genuine and engaging. Less than up to par with him, though, was the story that meandered into listless territory occasionally, developing relationships and circumstances that became less than believable. The direction and story were not up to Hanks acting in this one, though the atmosphere and excellence of story-telling didn't escape the prowess of Speilberg's expertise. Perhaps the screenwriters guild was on contract dispute or something, but kept wondering why Speilberg was covering up the poor screenwriting with Hanks unbelievable ability to rescue a scene with facial expressions and anecdotes. It wasn't clear to me who was to blame, but clearly it was not Hanks.
However, though, there are small parts that do deter from the credibility of this story, this performance will not leave you feeling like you blew any money renting this movie. It's very good, and memorable. Once you watch all the A movies you haven't seen yet, this is the top B+ movie for you to see.