Room 237 (2013) review

(7/10)

This documentary wasn't particularly my cup of tea, but I enjoyed hearing the different perspectives from different film buffs as well as hearing the possible glorification of Kubrick's master brain.

SUBJECT:Stanley Kubrick's film The Shining deviates away from Stephen King's novel a great handful of times, but is it all for a good reason? A group of film buffs that have seen this film countless times have developed many arguments and theories about what the purpose of Kubrick's adaption of the film mean, deviations and all intact, including hidden messages, mistaken imagery, and subtle hints toward certain subjects. However, is this more a study of the film or critics' obsession with the film? It's great subject discussed fairly well.



PEOPLE:The people chosen to be interviewed for this subject aren't that widely known, from the names of Bill Blakemore to Juli Kearn, which gives the documentary an even more mysterious approach to the film and its possible messages. I believe the opinions of the interviewed persons were very well discussed and very well justified overall. However, I feel that some of their theories are the offspring to blind paranoia and tripped-out minds. The conclusions just seem a bit preposterous overall, but supported with excellent accuracy, along with the discussions of symbolism over the deviations in the film.

SCORE:The score of this documentary is mainly composed of previous themes from Kubrick's films, including this one alike, with a few interesting variations of the classical work Dies Irae by Jonathan Snipes and William Hutson, as well as other interesting themes by them.



OTHER CONTENT:This documentary is enlightening to those who enjoy it in more than one way. If the opinions of the many critics don't please or convince you, the hidden meaning in the whole film will. This documentary could also be seen as a raging cinephilic obsession with the subject film and the obsession of film buffs in general. I found the film to be a very stimulating documentary, but with opinions I don't agree with for the most part. It was enlightening to see the "carefully placed" items in the background I hadn't noticed before as well as hearing the discussion of symbols not included in the King novel. I also enjoyed watching the subject film overlapping itself near the end. The product was pretty shocking. However, I overall found this film to be an over-thought study of cinephiles general deriving mind.

OVERALL,a good documentary with great subject matter, obscure names with seemingly-true theories discussed, interesting original themes by Snipes and Hutson, intelligent hidden meaning, and enlightening opinions, but I don't fully agree with the opinions withheld in this documentary; I'd almost deem them preposterous if I didn't respect Kubrick's eye for detail so much.

Tool: Toology - Unauthorized Biography (2001) review

(4/10)

This independent documentary on Tool is very cheaply made and almost a sad attempt to make a documentary, had it not included real interviews with close friends and more side information I didn't know.

SUBJECT:This documentary covers the subject of the unique hard rock band, Tool, with brief information on their early start and rise to fame, with lawsuits and all, leading up to the release of Lateralus. The documentary includes interviews from a member of the band, some fans, and a few close friends of the band. I believe they covered the subject almost decently. Had it not been made so brief and soon, they could have covered more ground. It also would have helped if they had gotten interviews from more than just one member of the band and more reliable people.

PEOPLE:As I just said, the people they interviewed didn't seem to be the most reliable and knowledgeable sources they could have found. A couple of them seemed to really know what they were talking about, but the rest seemed to be as general as anybody else. Another problem I had is only one member of the band was interviewed. It would have been nice to have seen an interview with Maynard himself or another member of the band.

SCORE:The score is actually lacking Tool's music, due to copyright issues. This is an extremely indie documentary, so they couldn't put any of Tool's music in it, so they used some cheap filler rock and guitar with annoying sound. I know they couldn't use Tool, but I think they could have done at least a little better than that.

EFFECTS:Since they didn't have the license to use Tool's music, the creators also didn't have the license to use their videos. Instead, the director decided to make his own, cheap claymation videos that didn't even look close to Tool but disturbingly unintelligent and nonsensical. It looked more like an old Nine Inch Nails video than a Tool video. It also made me mad that the creators tried to make the viewer infer that was an actual Tool video.

OTHER CONTENT:This documentary was way too cheaply made and behind its time. If the creators had made this documentary later in the future, gotten the right licensing to make it, and made it longer, this documentary wouldn't have been just wasted potential. There were some good points covered in this documentary, but for the most part, it seemed too independent and student-led.

OVERALL,a mediocre documentary with an almost decent topic discussion, unreliable sources, lacking and annoying score, cheap and inaccurate claymation, a too-early start, lack of correct licensing, and a lacking duration, but it covered a few good points, included some interviews by close friends, and added some information I actually didn't know.

*APOLOGY FOR LACK OF PICTURES, AS THERE WERE NONE TO BE FOUND*

Tool: The Ultimate Review (2008) review

(8/10)

This documentary on the popular hard rock band and its rise to fame covers everything from the band's vague origins to their place in rock history after 10,000 Days. I believe this covers and glorifies their history fairly well, but it misses some key points I wished they would have touched further upon.

SUBJECT:This documentary covers the early origins of Tool, from beginnings in the band Green Jello to the details and criticisms of their sounds on all of their projects leading up to 10,000 Days and right in between, including lawsuits and past inspirations of the band. I believe the subject was discussed rather well overall, but it seemed a bit too biased. I heard almost only good things on the band and their style.



PEOPLE:The people in this documentary that were interviewed included members of starting band Green Jello, record executives, artists for the band's album covers, the band itself, and many other individuals the band has collaborated with. I believe they chose some pretty fair acquaintances and relations with the band, but I think they could have dug deeper and found some more personal relationships. However, I believe they did a fairly good job at choosing the people.

SCORE:The score and soundtrack is mainly laden with the songs of Tool and side project, A Perfect Circle, with some quick flashes of early influences like King Crimson and Green Jello, alongside Nirvana and Guns N Roses. I believe the people who arranged and edited this documentary did a good job at picking the music and incorporating it into the documentary.



OTHER CONTENT:As a biography, I think the basics of the band were covered very well. They covered the history, the collaborators, and their distinct style. However, I believe they barely scraped the surface of Tool. I expected them to go more into the art of the videos and the bands possible involvement in drugs. However, most of that was ignored or barely touched. Also, the documentary itself felt too biased. I love Tool and everything about them, but I felt like I was listening to a collection of only positive reviews. There were no possible negative views on the band, but a world of glory for them. I feel a successful biography needs a view from both sides of the story, so to speak. This biography covered the basics of Tool and their stories and glories, but I felt a better job could have been done.

OVERALL,a great documentary with well discussed subject, some pretty close relations to the band and their music, great music editing, and lots of glory to the band, but the documentary seemed a bit too biased, and it left too many questions of mine unanswered.

This Is Not a Film (2012) review

(9/10)

This in-depth documentary was a good attempt at breaking free of the Iranian governments laws and glorifying the art of film.

SUBJECT:Iranian filmmaker Jafar Panahi is about to be sent to prison for six years and banned from filmmaking for 20 years. This mini-documentary shot partially on an iPhone and filmed by Mojtana Mirtahmasb documents the screenplay rejected by the Iranian government and the struggle Jafar has to go through. It's a really in-depth documentary done real well for being shot secretly.



PEOPLE:Jafar Panahi seems to be a real visionary director with a good idea and mind for filmmaking. I appreciate his idea for films and what he points out in his previous films. I also like how Mojtaba Mirtahmasb risked his life to shoot Jafar's struggles. It was a very brave act

OTHER CONTENT:This documentary was very much a picture of life with the Iranian government. I liked how he tried to rebel and get around their laws. I hope one day things are better for these peoples' lives. However, this documentary seemed to be a little bit less enlightening than I expected it to be. I also really wished he finished his screenplay.



OVERALL,an awesome documentary with a real in-depth subject matter, a visionary filmmaker and a brave soul, and a good picture of the Iranian government's oppression., but it wasn't as enlightening as I had hoped it to be.

Bully (2012) review

(8/10)

I've been looking forward to seeing this for a long time, and now that I have seen it, I have to say that it is a very good documentary and proves its point to its audience with little to no effort.

SUBJECT:The subject of this documentary is based on five different families that have kids that are being bullied in school. They focus on the family of a girl being persecuted because she's lesbian, the family of a son who hung himself at 17 because of his classmates' pressure, the family of a daughter who brought a gun to school to scare her bullies, the family of a son who's picked on everyday because of how he looks, and the family of a boy who also committed suicide and is dedicated to the stopping bullying all over the world. It's very good subject matter executed and explored brilliantly.



PEOPLE:The dedication and heart of the people in and behind this documentary is very strong and touching to the purpose of it all. I appreciate their journey to stop bullying, for I've been in that place before. There are some really good kids out there getting abused.

SCORE:The soundtrack is mainly made up of alternative rock and pop, but is used very well.



OTHER CONTENT:This documentary really sheds light on the world of bullying and the effect it has on students and entire towns. I appreciate the goal behind it all, but I have a questionable problem with the documentary. The documentary has caught kids bullying other kids on camera via the camera crew, but I believe that had an impact on the kids on tape. What if the kids only acted up this way because they were on camera? What if they never did it until now? I find that questionable.

OVERALL,a great documentary with a brilliantly explored subject matter, very strong dedication and heart, score used very well, and a needed light shed on the world of bullying, but I wonder if the camera had an impression on how the kids acted or not and how accurate it all actually was.

The Fourth Kind (2009) review

(7/10)

The more I see this movie, the more I realize about it. However, it's still a pretty terrifying "documentary" with scary possibilities.

PLOT:Dr. Abigail Tyler (herself and Milli Jovovich)  is a psychologist in Nome, Alaska. Her husband has recently been killed and Tyler is trying to find out his killer, but things have been weird around. All of her recent patients come in telling about a disturbance in their sleep patterns caused by a mysterious owl. She puts one of her patients in a hypnosis so he can pinpoint what's been disturbing his sleep every night; however, he reacts violently. Things get worse when all of her patients start going crazy and claiming that some alien intelligence is abducting them at night. Tyler and her followers are determined to get down to the bottom of this. This story is told with reenacted footage besides "actual recordings". It's a good plot executed decently.



ACTING:The acting in here was pretty sucky overall. Milli Jovovich tried to play the part of Abigail Tyler with her acting flair while keeping true to the footage, but she just ended up failing the job she was given to do for the character. Will Patton also played a pretty sucky part as Sheriff August. The only two actors that were pretty decent were Elias Koteas as the other psychologist and Hakeem Kae-Kazim as the Sumerian translator. Either way, the "real" footage was done better.

SCORE:Sympatheticand unnerving, but not the best sci-fi/horror score I'll ever hear.


 .
OTHER CONTENT:When this movie hit theaters, a lot of people thought it was real due to the freaky found footage aspect of it and the introduction at the beginning saying to believe what you want. However, research and the twist ending makes a mockery of the belief it's trying to win. I don't think it's as honest as it's trying to be, but either way, the moments where the aliens come in scare the heck out of me still. Though it doesn't seem real, it still succeeds to scare. If it is fake, I do like the effects and camera tricks put into making this work. It's a really confusing movie.

OVERALL,a good alien (mock?)umentary with a decent plot, mainly sucky acting, ok score, scary moments and frightening possibilites, but the research I've done and the twist ending make the belief it's trying to convey a mockery. Either way, it's still entertaining.

The Passion of the Christ (2004) review

(8/10)

Since I'm a devoted Christian, I'll probably like this film a whole lot more than others, but I love how the real aspects of His torture are captured through great direction.

PLOT:This Biblical film takes place shortly after the last supper when Judas (Luca Lionello) betrays Jesus Christ (Jim Caviezel) and turns him in to the head priests who are after him. We follow Jesus, Peter (Francesco De Vito), Mary (Maia Morgenstern), Mary Magdeline (Monica Belluci) and others as we witness the story of Jesus' crucifixion and torture from the streets to Calvary. It's a good story to make a film on executed brilliantly.



ACTING:The acting in here was pretty great. Jim Caviezel played a pretty solid job as the tortured Jesus Christ and made you feel how bad it was for Him. The other shiners would be Francesco De Vito as Peter, Maia Morgenstern as Mary, Monica Belluci as Mary Magdeline, Giovanni Capalbo as Cassus, and Rosalinda Celentano as Satan.

SCORE:The score in this film is very well done by John Debney. I really got into the touching and dramatic themes composed.

EFFECTS:The effects in here were quite realistic to say the least. The blood surprisingly flows freely for such a Christian film. The blood effects used to show Jesus' wounds before and after being formed are very gruesome and detailed. It really captures the brutality of civilization back then along with the pain He felt. The effects used for the corpses and demons were pretty impressive too.



OTHER CONTENT:This is an expertly-crafted version of Christ's torture and crucifixion as I've never seen it before. Mel Gibson does a great job of taking the source material from scripture and putting it on the screen expertly. He put his vision into the story we all know about Jesus and his death. It's a very brutal and realistic look at it. I cried for about half of the film, for no human being needs to go through this kind of torture, especially Him. The only flaws I could find in this film is that it's a bit overlong and a little distracted from the point. Gibson drags out the scene of Jesus hauling his cross to Calvary in pain to be crucified for dramatic effect, but it just starts to become dull and dreadful, as if the film wasn't enough already. Also, there are a few aspects Gibson put in there to get his vision out that distracted from the film, such as some of the Satan scenes and a lot of the brutality; the message is somewhat lost by the end of the film. However, if you're truly a hardcore Christian, you'll love this film regardless.

OVERALL,a great Christian film with a brilliant plot, great acting, touching score, realistic effects, realstic brutality, and a good vision to the classic story, but it's a little overlong and distracts in some parts.

Marley (2012) review

(10/10)

This insightful look into the life of reggae's best star covers everything from childhood, to religion, to reggae origin, and to death.

PLOT/SUBJECT:This insightful documenary is on the life of reggae's greatest star, Bob Marley, and how he defined the genre and inspired peace among everyone. This contains all kinds of photos, concert footage, interviews from friends and relatives, and even past interviews he attended, and it covers everything, from his childhood, to his religion, to an explaination of reggae, to his rise to fame, to his efforts at making world peace, and to his troubles all the way up to his death in the '80s. It's a very great subject to make a documentary on, and it's executed brilliantly.



PEOPLE:The kinds of people we get to hear from that associated with Marley include associates from his record companies, government officials he worked with, relatives of his own, his wife, former members of The Wailers, and even close friends. Each has a different, interesting story or feeling to express about Bob Marley and his life.

SCORE:The soundtrack is made up of nothing less than all Bob Marley songs, from rare concert recordings, to first tapes, to original recordings, and even to his early stuff. All is either upbeat or beautiful, but either way, it's pure, unfiltered reggae that could simmer anybody down.



OTHER CONTENT:This documentary truly does shine light into the late reggae star's life and how he helped thousands of people experience reggae, freedom, and peace. This film tells a lot of facts people may not have known about Bob, from his father being a different color to his experiences with women. It truly captures his personality and vision as it was and still is nowadays. Like Michael Jackson, his legacy will live on in the hearts of all peace-loving reggae fans. One part in particular I really liked was that they showed the entire funeral from his services to his loading into the truck. It was truly a heart-breaking moment for those all-around.

OVERALL,an epic documentary with a brilliantly-executed subject, interesting people, upbeat reggae soundtrack from the king of reggae, many revealing facts, a living legacy, and touching coverage of his funeral.

R.I.P. Bob Marley, The King of Reggae

Tornado Alley (2011) review

(8/10)

I was able to catch this at my local IMAX theater, and I have to say that it was money well spent. This really delves into the nature of tornados and their power.

PLOT/SUBJECT:In this documentary about tornados, we follow two teams of tornado scientists in their journeys. We follow one team called V2 and their mission to capture more information about tornado origin, and we follow another team called NIV(?) and their mission to drive their armored vehicle into the center of a tornado and capture the intense footage. It's a good subject executed pretty well.



PEOPLE:The whole documentary is narrated by Twister's Bill Paxton (of course) and it stars one of the guys from Storm Chasers, Sean Casey. Paxton's narration was pretty good and legit and Casey's dedication to capturing his vision on film was very honest and intense.

SCORE:The background score for enhancing the intensity of the violent weather was pretty well composed. I liked the ending theme.



OTHER CONTENT:This IMAX documentary on the intensity of tornados was pretty intricate and very entertaining. It gave me chills at times and backed up a lot of their findings with scientific facts. However, there were a couple flaws I found with it that brought it down. Firstly, there were a few times where it tended to drag and get a little boring. Secondly, when we finally get to the intense conclusion of NIV's mission, it seems to pass faster than we expect, and it kind of becomes a let down when we find out that it's not as intense as we hoped. Nevertheless, it was still a very entertaining little film, especially with the IMAX film experience.

OVERALL,a great IMAX documentary with a good subject matter, good narration, honest dedication, well composed score, a pretty intricate study, overall entertainment, and scientific facts to back it up, but it dragged a good bit and the end is kind of a letdown.

Jackass: Number Two (2006) review

(7/10)

The things you can find while channel-surfing these days.

PLOT:There isn't really a plot, it's just a group of crazy friends (Johnny Knoxville, Steve-O, Ryan Dunn, "Wee Man", Bam Margera, and Chris Pontius) doing a bunch of outrageous, sickening, painful, and stupid pranks and antics on each other and those around them. From sticking a hook through your lip and swimming with the sharks to getting stuck in a limo full of angry bees, there's nothing these guys won't do. It's a bunch of stupid ideas executed hilariously and unbelievably.

PEOPLE:Since this is all real, there's no acting. These guys are brave, daring, and willing to do almost anything, yet they are also pretty darn stupid. I believe the most daring of them all (shiners, if you will) would be Johnny Knoxville and Steve-O. All of the guys with them were brave and stupid, but those two were the most outrageous.



OTHER CONTENT:I haven't seen the first movie, but I've seen and heard tidbits of the TV show. I literally channel surfed and stopped on this, knowing what stuff these guys were famous for. This movie overloads on creative (yet stupid) ideas, unbelievable situations, and painful hilarity. With some of the stuff these guys do, is impossible NOT to laugh. The flaws in this besides its raving stupidity are that there are a few jokes that aren't really funny and the gross-out level is set pretty high-too high for me.

OVERALL,a good documentary with hilariously unbelievable execution, brave people/characters, creative ideas, and overloading, painful hilarity, but there's times where stupidy reigns, the jokes fail, and the gross-out level is raised a smidge too high.

A Regular Frankie Fan (2001) review

(5/10)

If this doesn't make you a regular Frankie fan, then I don't blame you!

SUBJECT:Rocky Horror Picture Show has been a cult classic since in came out in 1975 with midnight shows being held all over the world. This delves into the spirit and experiences of a midnight show and performance group by interviewing several performers and audience members of the midnight shows. It delves into how it got started, how a performance group lives, the "Virgin Sacrifice", and even how people have gotten laid during a show. I, being a fan of Rocky Horror, love that they touched upon this, but they didn't do the best of jobs capturing the emotion the movie gives.

PEOPLE:Paul Williams narrates parts of the movie, and of what he narrates, he does a great job of. The people intereviewed from the audience and groups give interesting stories about Rocky Horror shows and conventions as well as the feelings they convey, but they don't succeed at fully capturing the theme of Rocky.



SCORE:The score consists of obscure artists performing heavier or more electronic versions of Rocky songs. It lets you know for true that this is an independent documentary, but some of them aren't that bad, trippy in fact.

OTHER CONTENT:With myself being a fan of the Rocky Horror movie and feel, I expected myself to enjoy this documentary, but instead it plunged me into a world of strangeness. I, myself, am strange, but this just mislead me to think that live shows were raving sex parties with people being crazy. That may be part of the spirit of Rocky Horror, but they didn't even choose hardly to cover the feeling the movie gives off standing alone. I found myself asking, "Where's the magic? Where is the feeling I so enjoyed in watching the actual film?" It was greatly missing the point. I still enjoyed the realism it touched upon in the live shows and how it draws everyone together for a wild good time.

OVERALL,a neutral-feeling documentary with a failed execution of subject matter, great narration and indescribable people, indie score that set the mood of the doc, and a wild good time, but it fails greatly to catch the true essence of Rocky Horror.

Stanley Kubrick: A Life in Pictures (2001) review

 
(Just to let you know, I organize documentaries differently than I do regular films.)
(9/10)

To finish off the marathon, I take advantage of the bio disc.

SUBJECT:This is basically a biography on the great filmmaker Stanley Kubrick consisting of his child-life stories, his inspiration stories, and his life in film and family. They discuss the topic very well for a biography, but without his presence to secure his ideas and such, it just feels a bit empty.

PEOPLE:The people in here range from other filmmakers like Woody Allen and Steven Spielberg, to Kubrick's collaborators like Tom Cruise and Jack Nicholson. They all have interesting things to say about Kubrick that just glorify his name more than most would expect.



SCORE:The score in here ranges from the wonderful classical music played in his movies, to the themes he had made specifically for his movies, to themes used to set the emotion for his life and loss.

OTHER CONTENT:This is a pretty decent biography. The introduction and closing are both very powerful, and the body of the film is very thought-provoking, but I believe it misses some of the important points of Kubrick's life. Of course, he wasn't present to express them, but I guess that's one of the movies shortcomings.



OVERALL,an awesome biography with a well discussed subject, ranging people, beautifully mixed score, and a powerful introduction and closing, but without the presence of the man himself, it misses some important points.