the overuse of the already worn out ?Boo Radley-like misfit who is also a
the films many protagonistic representatives of society describes Powders
Powder says with more credibility because he has the use of more of his brain
by developing a philosophy in an attempt to affect the audience, and having
obviuosly missed the boat here.
Instead of the independence imbodied in most people, Powder belives in a
unification of all humans, every single one, through some sort of single-
audience has to view powder as being worthy. Here Powder views people, unwilling
to accept the idea of a single-consciousness solely on faith, as closed-minded.
This dogmatic type of view nullifies any worth powder might have had as a role
presents a different, better, and higher, view of things, ever had of
Besides the implied message, the film itself is just plain awful. With
clich? after clich? and an abundance of predictable scenes, its a wonder anyone
could think this movie was worth making. A semi-conscious two-year old could
film. The whole addition of a love interest was inane and irrelevant to the
point the writer was trying to get across. The suposedly touching scenes were
obviously predictable, and although some are well acted, they add nothong but
another impractical twist to the story
it works wonderfully. His delivery of lines in the film is impeccable, often
magnifying the script to more than it deserves to be. His talent as an actor
electolysis…..drink that in.?
Though powder is interesting and a bit thought provoking it is best used
are to model our lives around what Powder would do, or what he would think about
what we are doing. Goldblum admits that ?we live in a dark age of man,? where ?
we are doing everythin we can merely so we don’t kill each other.? Therefore, we