Monday, December 10, 2001

months ago, i read an article that asked whether or not Angel Eyes was a supernatural thriller. the answer from the director was "The supernatural aspect of it is love. Love is supernatural." (actually, that's just stupid. it's natural. someone send Louis Mandoki an American Heritage please).

anyway, i saw it last night (VSG wanted to see it). i can answer that question now. it is neither supernatural, nor a thriller. this is another of those 'Is it over yet?' movies. BORING! it takes all of 5 minutes to figure it all out. it made me wish i'd had a fifth of anything to pass the time with.

i gave this movie an honest chance. i think Jennifer Lopez is a cardboard actress. though her performance in this was much better than anything else i've seen her in, i still couldn't like her. she evoked no pathos. i couldn't care about her or any other character. there was no chemistry between the two leads, and the backstory was a hokey attempt to get the audience to say 'oh, such pain! and she fixed it for him!' blech. and what was the crap about her and her father? who cares!

btw, the DVD extras suck. nothing worth noting there. geez, i'd rather sit through a Hugh Grant film marathon than see Angel Eyes again.

also saw Hedwig and the Angry Inch. much better! effectively washed the foul Jennifer-Lopez-film taste out of my mouth.

No comments: