Change Your Image
lorddnarbsy
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Lists
An error has ocurred. Please try againReviews
Peter Pan & Wendy (2023)
A mixed bag: lots of things to love, lots of things to hate
Peter Pan & Wendy. The movie is a mixed bag.
It does a whole lot wrong but also a whole lot right. It sticks to it's own themes quite well, but does betray the source material (J. M. Barrie's book) in the process.
I love the sea shanties. It brought a very distinct vibe to the movie. The cinematography was good as well. A little dreary, but that fitted the tone of the story. Jude Law's Hook is great and a completely different take on the character. The design for his Hook as this giant meat hook was very inspired. It was also brilliant in it's little details. Having Hook dye his hair brown and seeing him becoming more grey over the course of the movie was an absolutely brilliant touch. Or Lowery switching parts of the dialogue between Pan and Hook (dark and sinister man, prepare to meet thy doom. Proud and insolent youth, have at thee) I liked that. His sad backstory (taken from Christina Henry's book Lost Boy) works quite well. But unfortunately they don't have the courage to drive this story home. Dying is part of his arc and the way he is presented in this movie, it would be even more fitting. If you deal with grief, loss, sadness and regret in life, you shouldn't sideline the Crocodile as much as this movie did. It should have eaten Hook. But Disney does not want to kill their one-handed captain I guess. Also it would have made the movie too bleak for the children.
Also having Tinkerbell lose her jealous character trait towards Wendy makes her boring. She could start jealous and then in the end develop more sympathetic feelings for Wendy and then rescue her. Then you would have given her growth as a character.
The Neverland landscape felt a bit empty. Couldn't they have included the mermaids and Indians some more? What do they do all day? In the original text the Indians hunt the pirates, the pirates hunt the lost boys and the lost boys hunt the animals. And the animals hunt the Indians. It felt there was a natural order of things. In this new Neverland it feels really empty and it did not really come alive in the movie. Tigerlily gets a lot more to do plot-wise which is fine. But could you not have written her more interestingly? She is pretty bland. And how does her magic moss bring people back from the dead?
Peter Pan himself was quite annoying, which is actually in line with the source material. He is supposed to be a little psychopath that has a narrow childlike view of the world. Unfortunately Alexander Molony is not able to fully embrace the psychotic elements, which is also a director's choice probably.
I could go on and on about little personal nitpicks (like the wasted potential of the great Alan Tudyk) but these points were what really bothered me the most. I really wanted to like it. I hoped I would like it. There are parts I really loved in this movie and there are parts I absolutely hated. This movie is at war with itself. On one hand it wants to do it's own thing with themes of growing up, sadness and regret. On the other it needs to be a remake of the animated movie and an adaptation of the J. M. Barrie's book. These two don't always match. I do like that it chose it's own aesthetic and didn't copy much from the the animated movie, like some other (visually) lazy adaptations did. (looking at you Lion King, Pinocchio, Beauty and the Beast and The Little Mermaid)
If you love Peter Pan and all it's thematic depths (from the play to the book to the screen) try to look through the things it lacks to see what good things it also has to offer. It does something that no other Peter Pan story did. And that's somewhat commendable. Unfortunately it also has some very bad things. Does it deserve the 20% audience score on rotten tomatoes? No, absolutely not! It's way better than that. Unfortunately it's also not much higher than 55%.
John Wick: Chapter 3 - Parabellum (2019)
Awesome action, no dramatic stakes
I am a huge fan of the first movie and liked the second one as well. This one, however, was a bit disappointing. While the action, the choreography and cinematography are better then ever, it feels John Wick is out of stories to tell.
I don't expect much story from a movie like John Wick, but a little bit more emotional stakes or a goal would have been nice. Because the movie is 2 hours and 10 minutes long, only action and no narrative makes the action repetitive and boring. The ending also felt really cheap. The promise they made in the second movie is only prolonged by a similar ending in this one. What will likely be John Wick 4, should have been the second half of this movie. I really wanted to like this movie. I really did. But I was overall a little disappointed.
Prison Break: Phaecia (2017)
It all feels a bit sloppy and aimless.
I thought the episode was okay. A bit silly, but okay. The episode got to focus almost entirely on the action happening in the middle east. Without spending time on the Sarah plot, this episode was much more engaging and fast-paced. It was an exciting chase episode, shot on nice locations.
With the group of characters on the run getting smaller, as a viewer you become more invested in them. Although the characters act pretty stupid and make poor decisions, due to the current quality of the current Prison Break, it didn't bother me much.
The Poseidon stuff is still a little bit lame and corny though. And some of the dialogue feels really forced and corny. It probably has also to do with the fact that the two poseidon agents are being played by not-so-convincing actors.
But overall I enjoyed myself for 40 minutes. But I won't deny that it all feels a bit sloppy and aimless.
Prison Break: Contingency (2017)
Pacing is fast enough to forget the weaknesses
I like the 'city is a prison approach' but nothing really memorable happens in this episode. The dialogue that has been written for these characters is so poor, that you don't feel anything when they try to be emotional. This show is spoon feeding the audience the information though forced dialogue, because apparently we can't think and make connections for ourselves. Fortunately, the pacing is fast enough, so you don't dwell on these shortcomings.
It's a shame that the prison plot was resolved so quickly because now they rehash the overused conspiracy plot lines which are the far less interesting aspects of the show in my opinion.
On a side note: please develop your characters more, Scheuring. Don't use the old familiar ones on the sidelines where don't actual contribute much to the plot and use new faces which you don't give any development (because that screen time is given to the familiar faces; T-Bag, C-Note etc.) If you develop your characters more, than we actually might give a sh*t when someone gets killed of. There all completely forgettable, dull and bland now.
But to end on a positive note, the action and pacing keeps me interested and I will tune in next time.
Prison Break: The Prisoner's Dilemma (2017)
Best of the new batch so far
Well that was fast. They're already out of prison. Okay. Lacks build-up or cleverness but okay. I did actually enjoy this episode. For the first time during it's new run I was engaged in what happened. It was fast-paced, well edited and the story gave us a couple of twist I did not expect to happen (so soon in the season). I'm a bit worried that they will go all out with the conspiracy crap (Poseidon) and I really hope it doesn't become a fast repeat of that A-team bullshit from the fourth season.
Because we're already out of the prison, the show has lost it's most interesting concept pretty fast without using it to their advantage for an engaging story. Overall a decent thrilling episode and the best of the new batch so far.
Prison Break: The Liar (2017)
Have a little faith in your audience
More on the nose dialogue!! "You know that American is Michael, right?" Really C-Note? Lincoln is dumb, but if he didn't figure that out by himself maybe someone else should help Michael escape.
. Oh wait... Sorry! He told him so the audience wouldn't be confused..
This show really doesn't expect it's audience to be too smart. You can explain things by suggestions or visual imagery, other than have your character flat out tell the audience the information. And if that same information was already painfully clear by the events preceding the scene, you definitely don't have much faith in the attention span of your audience. Come on, Scheuring! Have a little faith in your audience.
The episode is still an improvement over the previous episode. But it's a shame that the new series wants to focus on more conspiracies again. It's an element that killed the previous season. The prison stuff could be way more interesting if they would focus more on the life inside such a prison (like they did with Fox River or even Sona). But most of the time they try to develop a conspiracy outside of the prison with Sarah in the middle.
Spoiler: We get an emotional last couple of minutes, when Michael's escape fails. But as a viewer I was glad. Maybe now as a viewer we can get invested in an escape plan which we see Michael develop. Because constantly having Wentworth Miller say; we're going to escape tonight" and You have to trust me" is not a good way to build your tension and excitement. Because you don't even know what they want to do. Which results in you not being very invested in what's going on. (With Fox River and Sona, you were on the edge of your seat because you saw a plan develop and it felt like you were escaping with them.) And if Michael's character is too smart for audiences to follow, please develop a character inside the prison next to Michael. (as an ally, not as a potential distrustful backstabber) The show needs a new focal point (like Fernando Sucre) with whom the audience can identify more. Because it sure as hell isn't Michael.
Let's see what Michael will pull out of his ass in the next couple of episodes.
Prison Break: Kaniel Outis (2017)
Bites off more than it can chew
Heyo! It's Osama bin Laden. Only now he's called Abdul Ramal and he's locked up with Michael Scofield.
Maybe Prison Break is taking it a step too far. I don't want to take this new season in the Prison Break series too seriously because then I might actually enjoy it more. But the thing is that beheadings and religious intolerance are not issues to be taken lightly. The second episode takes itself very serious with the introduction of these story lines. I'm curious to see where they take this series, but so far I'm not the least bit impressed.
Show more Scofield and his Prison Break plan and show less of the dumber brother in the middle of simplified middle eastern conflicts.
Prison Break: Ogygia (2017)
Let's see where this goes
Lazily plotted and corny ham-fisted set-up episode which, despite these aspects still leaves you wanting to watch the rest of the series. As a former Prison Break watcher, who loved the first season, liked the second season, enjoyed the third season and hated most of the fourth season, I went in expecting lazily plotted overused story lines and poorly written on the nose expositionary dialogue. It was exactly what I got. ISIL??... Really?
I had a hard time getting through the predictable first 30 minutes which establishes that Sarah Wayne Callies is just as annoying and boring as she has always been as Sarah Tancredi (except maybe in the first season). These first 30 minutes also make you remember how bad the fourth season was, because they pull the same conspiracy bullsh*t here. The last five minutes gave me hope that they will give more of the vibes from the first season and (poor but still enjoyable) third season.
When you go into this revival series not giving a damn, you will actually like more than you'd expected in the first place. Let's see where this goes.
Alien: Covenant (2017)
Meh....
Meh, it was okay I guess. Prometheus was better and more consistent with it's story-line. Covenant threw the entire story-line set-up from that movie out of the window for the sake of a 20 minutes version of the first alien movie. Although the visuals were good, some of the characters were still nicely portrayed (I'm looking at you Danny McBride) but the script is out of focus and doesn't delve too deep in characters and development. So everything is kinda bland and boring. The movie also tries to be clever, but becomes highly predictable near the end.
To sum it all up, you won't be completely bored when watching the movie but you won't be seeing something memorable either. Don't think about it too much afterwards. The movie get's dumber every time you logically think about it. -5,5/10-
Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides (2011)
Lower your expectations. It helps!
'We're all back together again!' Jerry Bruckheimer (Producer) tells the audience in a featurette. And it feels that the main purpose for this movie was some kind of reunion, because it was fun for them to make the first three.
Gore Verbinski is not directing this anymore. And it shows. There is nothing particular memorable about this movie in style or direction. They kept the DOP from the previous movies and the movie is still beautifully shot.
When I went to the cinema expecting nothing of the movie (because every story finished nicely at the end of the third movie) I was still entertained. Upon re-watching it, boredom struck. The movie's basic structure is like this: Here you have characters, they need to do these things, okay let's do these things, movie end. It's narratively speaking quite straight forward and therefore the movie doesn't feel pretentious or bloated. What does bother me is that the characters are so uninteresting and what happens during the movie is also quite uninteresting. The movie lost the grandeur of the previous entries.
Hey Jerry! What did you say? 'Blackbeard is one of the most evil characters we have ever given you?' Nah, sorry to burst your bubble but the only positive thing about the Blackbeard character is that he is played by Ian McShane. McShane does everything to make the character interesting, because the script is lacking. Blackbeard is really boring and underdeveloped. The second and third movies had time to develop their villains, whereas this movie did not take it's time or tried to bother. Probably because this movie was meant to be the Johnny Depp Show!
I'm not even going to mention the forced love-couple in this movie, because that was laughable. The Penelope Cruz character was a nice addition though and she was OK. Johnny himself was not that memorable. He was more on repeat of what he did in previous entries, but now he was the main focus of the movie.
But, overall, the highlights of the movie were the Mermaid scene and Geoffrey Rush's Barbossa. (he always looks like he's having fun with the character he plays) You can decide for yourself if that's worth your time to go see this movie.
Lower your expectations. It helps!
Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales (2017)
Dear Jerry, please don't make another one!
'What we bring to the screen is great storytelling, with wonderful characters caught up in this magical fantastic world' - Jerry Bruckheimer (Producer) on this fifth installment.
Sorry Jerry, NO! This movie did not have great storytelling, it had boring uninteresting characters (even the ones that were interesting in former installments were stale and washed up) and the world was anything but magical.
If anything, this made me love the first three movies even more. (even the second and the third on what they were attempting to do with the epic scale and world-building storytelling)
This movie was utter trash. This is coming from someone who tolerated the fourth movie (On Stranger Tides). On Stranger Tides was mediocre but it was sometimes enjoyable at least when you watched it the first time. This thing (if you can even call it a movie) was like staying too long at a dance party. The lights are already turned on, there is no music playing anymore and some really drunk people are still dancing but only because they had too much to drink. And you are in the middle of the room, looking around you and wonder: why didn't I leave sooner. This party isn't fun anymore.
The main problem was the uninspiring story-line, it's contradicting script, boring characters,the cringe-worthy forced jokes were not funny and worst of all it's retconning and undermining of the lore from previous (much better) movies.
Here's another quote from Jerry: 'Johnny Depp has created an iconic character. One of the best characters ever created in cinema.'
Thanks Jerry. Depp indeed created an iconic character in the first movie (and kinda continued with that in the second and third movies) but his performance is best described as a washed-up former rock star with alcohol issues. You almost feel bad for Depp when you watch his performance in this movie.
Dear Jerry, please don't make another one!
The Mummy's Shroud (1967)
Must see for Michael Ripper fans!
Well, going in expecting nothing but hoping to enjoy myself, I put this movie into my blu-ray player. I've got a major Hammer DVD collection and this was one of the movies I hadn't seen before.
Starting of with the main thing that defines this movie: When you've got a movie solely designed to show your Mummy killing people, you might want to invest time in developing your characters. This wasn't the case unfortunately and brings the movie down for me. The best thing in the movie though was Michael Ripper. The Hammer regular gave one of his best performances and was perhaps the most likable character in the movie. (perhaps because he got more opportunities to make his character seem emphatic than for example the underused Andre Morrell) Another great element in the movie was the musical score. I think, for me, this is one of the more memorable music cue's that Hammer produced for their movies. On another positive note, the way the Mummy sneaks up on it's victims were different in a creative way every time. Director John Gilling tried to visually make those sequences as interesting as possible. (although the Mummy suit looked like a worn-out pyjama ha ha)
I'm a huge fan of the first Hammer Mummy movie and I also found Blood of the Mummy's Tomb pretty good. In comparison, this movie was a bit underwhelming. It could have done a little more with the content it had. This movie is a simple slasher. An interesting watch nonetheless and surely a fine addition to my Hammer collection.
Game of Thrones: First of His Name (2014)
I wanted to like it, but there were some things that really bothered me (mainly from the craster's keep filler plot)
First of all, I'm a huge fan of the series and the books. Now I'm not one of those book-readers that will choose the books over the TV series. I think that they both have there value, but I'm thrilled that the show runners handle some sub-character way better than the book does. Margary Tyrell, for example, is a much richer character in the show than she is in the books. Overall it was a nice episode with several great sequences, of course the great reveal of Littlefinger, the growing tension between Margary and Cercei and the relationship between the Hound and Arya Stark. The only thing that I actually did not like at all was the pointless Night's Watch / Locke storyline. That was so incredibly stupid and ultimately disappointing. Game of thrones can do much better than that.
I liked the Craster's keep plot in the previous episode, although it wasn't in the book. It was exciting and I was curious where the writers would take this. Bran being captured and Locke undercover in the Night's Watch were nice additions and I was really looking forward to how this was going to resolve itself. Unfortunately the pay off is a bit anti-climactic and stupid.
The first dumb thing happens when Locke finds Bran, although he couldn't have known if Bran was actually there in the first place. Afterward he tells Jon to stay away from the cabin where Bran is being held because there could be dogs locked up inside. These dogs could warn the enemies and would ruin their surprise attack. But the attack can't be called a surprise attack because they attack screaming, alarming their enemies (including the fictional dogs) in the process. So what's the point of staying away from the cabin?
Anyway, Locke captures Bran unseen instead of killing him. That raises another question: Why didn't he just kill him and resolve Roose Bolton's problem altogether? How did he hope to escape with Bran and return to the Dreadfort unseen by the Night's Watch? (should he not need to pass trough the wall to get south of the wall?) Locke runs off with Bran only to get himself killed by Hodor. This was an unceremonious way to kill off his character. (which, in this season, almost didn't resemble any of his sadistic characteristic traits established from the previous season) It was like the writers needed him gone as soon as possible because the show is too stuffed with many characters already so there wouldn't be room for the ones they made up in the TV show.
It also felt a bit repetitive to have Bran almost run into Jon Snow AGAIN only to leave him AGAIN. It worked the previous time in the third season, but now it felt forced and unnecessary to me. The plot went nowhere and the characters didn't advance anything of the overall plot.
The character of Karl Tanner was a nice addition and he was interesting. His final fight with Jon Snow, unfortunately, was not all that exciting not to mention rather corny. Having him ignore Jon when the random woman attacks him was incredibly stupid for example.
It was disappointing that the writers handled this plot so poorly. (especially with all the build up for, in the end, such a useless character as Locke) Otherwise it was a great episode, but due to the reasons I pointed out above, I was a bit underwhelmed.
Lost: The End: Part 1 (2010)
Everything I hoped it to be
My expectations were very high and I must say that the series finale didn't disappoint one second. Sure there are some unanswered questions but that typical Lost and that's what the finale was: typical greatness of Lost! This finale had everything it needed: there were enough emotional scenes which literally made me cry during the episode and there was also the epicness we expected in the finale (the final showdown between Jack and Locke for example). Lost will be one of the greatest shows I've ever watched and I'm glad I sometimes gave up my social life completely just to be completely obsessed by this show. Thank you Carlton Cuse & Damon Lindelof for creating this masterpiece!
Lost: What They Died For (2010)
great set-up for the series finale!
I was hoping that this episode would redeem for the somewhat disappointing episode "Across the Sea". And fortunately it did!! I thought that this episode was a logical follow-up because we see jack undergo the same ritual as Jacob did all those years ago. I think my favorite part was seeing the alternate universe coming together piece by piece. Henry Ian Cusick gave as usual a great performance as Desmond Hume. It's also notable that Lost has made a habit out of killing off major characters in the past episodes and this episode is no different. This time it was Widmore's turn to go and I thought it was somewhat disappointing the way he died.(In Lost they almost always die the same way: with a gun, blowing up, drowning in sea) I still hope the writers will solve the unresolved questions around him (for example why he sent the ship of mercenary's to the island to kill everybody in season 4) It makes me curious how the writers will end the story of Ben Linus though. Personally I don't think he will obey the orders of MIB and only did it in this episode so he could avenge his daughter Alex. Anyway make sure you don't miss this episode. The last minute of the episode alone makes it all worthwhile. It's a great set-up for the series finale! Can't wait to see it!!
Lost: Across the Sea (2010)
Judge this episode when the story comes full circle
Well, where do I start? I didn't have high expectations of this episode because i've been disappointed before (Ab Aeterno)! But I guess the reason why I love "Lost" is not because of the answers they give but because of the characters who are undergoing all these adventures. This episode was necessary to explain things that happened in the story but I understand why people hate it. I guess I will judge this episode better when the story comes full circle with the series finale. (and let me say, my expectations are high for the finale!!) Overall it was a DECENT EPISODE but didn't have the same tension and excitement as the last two episodes (The Last Recruit and The Candidate). But it still deserves some credit for the acting skills of Titus Welliver and Mark Pellegrino.
Heroes: Chapter Fifteen 'Pass/Fail' (2010)
The only really enjoyable Episode of the Fourth Season
I know most of the people who still watch the fourth season of Heroes would disagree with me. The episode doesn't really move the plot forward (if there really is plot). But nonetheless I found it one of the more enjoyable episode of the season. I especially liked the Hiro trial scene and having Hiro facing off against his old nemesis Adam Monroe (david anders) -the character was killed off way to soon in the awful third season. The scenes of Robert Knepper and his long lost love Vanessa were kind of cheesy but it still shows us the great acting ability of Knepper. Overall it was a enjoyable episode. Only one minor point was the Sylar/Claire storyline. It seems that the writers just can't decide what to do with Sylar. It's also a shame that Claire wasn't killed off in the third season (instead of Adam Monroe) because she's now the most annoying character on the show.
Heroes: Chapter Eighteen 'Brave New World' (2010)
Heroes fails to deliver "Redemption"
Unfortunately Heroes fails to deliver AGAIN! After the terrible third season I was hoping for some improvement in the fourth season. In the beginning the show seemed to be getting back on track. But in the end it was a plot less and pointless finale. The entire plot development of Samuel and his Carnival could be solved in (maybe) five or six episodes. It just seemed stretched out by the writers over an entire season with bad Hiro stories and Nathan/Sylar/Parkman stories. There are a few episode which revealed things about the carnival and it's past and plans, but most of the episodes was just about every single Hero just visiting the carnival and then leaving it again. Most of the time the Carnival doesn't do anything. (another problem was that they kept talking about Samuel's plan, while in fact he really didn't have a big plan in the end) In the last 5 episodes there is absolutely no mystery or revelation and plot twist that made the first season great but this plot development was very flat and simple-minded. The writing was really bad. series recap: When I first watched Heroes it blew me away. The first season was great with the build up to the Sylar confrontation in the final episode. The second season started a little slow, but when Adam was revealed as the villain behind it all it started to pick up speed. Alltough the season had a lot of potential, it unfortunately never got the chance to finish it up the way it was originally planned (with the virus being released) But instead of finishing the original plan they messed things up in the last minutes of the season finale. The third season messed things up completely in "Villains" with the annoying Arthur Petrelli killing off all the cool characters and a storyline that was a rip-off from the 4400 (love that show btw). "Fugitives" tried to make up for the mistakes but couldn't deliver. The Fourth season started great with the introduction of the brilliant Robert Knepper from Prison Break. But I think the problem with this season was that the writers didn't really have a plan from the beginning. They just made things up as the show progressed. Don't get me wrong, I never stopped watching Heroes and that would prove that I gave the show the chance to redeem itself. But now with the disappointing finale of the fourth season (I'm so angry with myself for wasting my time with this crappy season and believing that it would get better) that I must say that this is the series finale for me.