Change Your Image
BeatleFloydZeppelin
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.: Pilot (2013)
Not A Very Good Pilot...
I read somewhere that this show had the highest viewer ship for a paid TV drama pilot in the last 4 years, and it is obvious why. Marvel has created an interesting and fantastic franchise, and a television show based off the SHIELD organization is a great concept. It is obvious from the production value that the show has a high budget, and a ton of effort must have gone into the first episode. The sets and props look fantastic, and the special effects are actually really good.
Unfortunately, my praise ends here. Every other aspect of the Pilot is average at best, and in the end the show fails to live up to the hype and quality that the Marvel movies have achieved. There are two main reasons for this; the writing and the acting. The writers had a good idea. Get a group of young SHIELD agents together, and show the daily adventures of these agents as they fight to hide and assist the many "hero's and monsters." Its such a good concept that it is hard to get it wrong, but they do. The story of this episode is very much an introduction to the characters (as most pilots are), but the plot seems to wonder and jump from place to place with little overall plot being laid out. This is only a minor issue this early in the show, but still doesn't help to improve this specific episode. Of course with this type of television show, the most important thing is to have deeply interesting characters, as we are expected to spend hours with them. Unfortunately, each of these agents are written have the same sarcastic, slightly humorous personalities. In the end, they all seem like the same characters in different bodies. This would be bad on its own, but it is worse because the joke attempts fall flat every time. When a characters only interesting quality is the humour, it should at least generate a chuckle from the audience if it hopes to succeed. This is especially obvious with characters like Skye, who is written to be so over the top it is almost awkward to watch.
Some of the blame can be placed on the actors as well. I love it when they cast unknown actors because it allows the actors to really become the characters without being related back to previous roles. But the actors have to be good as well, and none of the agents can pull off the role. They don't have a lot to work with because of the bland writing, but it is still obvious that they are quite amateur.
Despite these two major issues, there is still some interesting action and visuals, and the concept can still go places, but this leaves us with a show that is only average, and I really don't see an only average show surviving for very long. It is much too soon to say whether this show will stand the test of time or not. Who knows, maybe in the next couple of episodes the characters will find their place and the story will start to go places. But for now, my expectations have been lowered greatly (not that they were that high to begin with after the trailers). I give this episode a 4/10
Game of Thrones (2011)
Easily The Greatest Fantasy Television Show Ever, And Better Than Most Fantasy Films.
Before I start, let me say that I watched the first two seasons without reading the books, but after season two I was interested enough to read all five novels before season three. In this way I have the perspective of both a watcher and a reader. The purpose of this review is to help people decide whether or not this show is for them.
A Game of Thrones (and the series of novels that it is based on) is somewhat unique in its story telling. Although it is a fantasy world, it is more based on our actual history than previous fantasy writings such as Lord of the Rings. It is also very dark, depicting many events that would have (and often did) take place in our own medieval time period. For these reasons, it is very difficult for some viewers to get into the series without previously reading the books.
After reading some of the more negative reviews here, I feel the need to clear up some of the main criticisms. There seem to be three major complaints:
1. It is too slow. Do not make the mistake of thinking that this is an action show. While there is a lot of fighting, it is often split up between a ton of politics, history, and character moments. This is a political drama, and the characters come first. I for one really enjoy the "slower" moments and find the dialogue just as interesting as the battles. If you like constant action and battle sequences, this is not a show for you.
2. Too much violence and sex. This show is not meant for the squeamish. It deals with many themes that are normally shied away from. The violence isn't constant, but when it arrives it is realistic and gruesome. The blood and gore is meant to emulate real injury and death in order to add realism. There is also a lot of nudity and sex. I will actually agree that the nudity sometimes goes overboard, but again, the show attempts to represent reality, and sex and nudity actually happens in real life (if you can believe it). If you cannot handle nudity and violence, this is not a show for you.
3. There are too many characters and plots to keep track of. Yes, there are hundreds of characters, spread out over two huge land masses, each with their own back story, motives, and positions. There is a history to the world that stretches back thousands of years, with epic events and battles. And there are many different kingdoms, all battling to better their own political position. It is not impossible to fallow (as some reviewers will have you believe), but it does require some time and patience to understand all of the people and the history. If you have trouble focusing, this is not a show for you.
If you got past these three major criticisms without second guessing yourself, and you like fantasy, there is no reason that you shouldn't like this show. Everything from the story, to music, to set pieces, to wardrobe, to acting and beyond, is top notch. It may take a few episodes to be fully immersed, but once your into the show its hard to get out! 10 out of 10.
Iron Man Three (2013)
Better than I expected, but worse than I'd hoped.
The first Iron Man movie changed the way comic book adaptions were made. It (for better or worse) began the "Marvel Cinematic Universe" that climaxed with The Avengers. This is the first marvel movie to be released after The Avengers, and in many ways it proves that the series is still going strong, however, it is far from perfect.
ACTING: 8/10
The acting from the main cast members is great. Robert Downey Jr. continues to be the perfect Iron Man, I just can't imagine a better suited actor. His comedic timing is perfect, and he allows Tony Stark to be lovable while being a total jerk. Gwyneth Paltrow and Don Cheadle don't get a ton of screen time, however, they are wonderful when they do. Ben Kingsley, Guy Pearce, and Rebecca Hall are all fantastic and underused. The rest of the cast is perfectly adequate, however, there seems to be a theme of casting great talents and completely under using them.
WRITING: 3/10
This is the biggest failure of the movie. The comedy works well (partially thanks to Robert Downey Jr.) and the action scenes are good, however the plot hidden behind the popcorn fun is plain awful. I have never really liked movies that deal with "super soldiers" and "protecting the president," and this movie deals with both badly. The technology written into the series continues to become more and more ridiculous. And the twist is both easy to predict and manages to reduce the main villains role to nothing. Finally, the scene after the credits is a bit of a let down as it gives no hint towards the direction of the series.
DESIGN: 6/10
The design is just as good as previous films in the series, which is to say that it fits somewhere between satisfactory and slightly above average. The tech looks great despite its lack of plausibility, and the wardrobe and sets fit the overall tone of the movie.
EFFECTS: 10/10
The CGI is near perfect in this film, and there is a ton of it. There are scenes where Iron Man's suit magnetically attaches to Tony in separate pieces and it looks totally convincing. The explosions and impossible technology looks great too.
MUSIC: 4/10
The soundtrack in this movie is awful. Hans Zimmer has inspired many with his booming and electronic score for Inception and the Batman franchise. This concept has been replicated a hundred times since those movies, and in lesser hands it is nothing but a loud mess. This is the case with Iron Man 3. The score is loud and booming, and completely forgettable, dull and repetitive.
VERDICT:
This movie is mindless, unimpressive, forgettable, action packed... and thoroughly enjoyable. It is a great summer blockbuster popcorn movie that will leave your mind as soon as you leave the theater. That being said, if you liked The Avengers and Iron Man 2, you will likely enjoy this movie as well. Overall, I give it a 6.2/10
The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012)
Really Good, But not Quite The Lord Of the Rings!
The Lord of the Rings movies are some of my favourite films of all time, and The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey comes close, but a few problems hold it back from being truly fantastic.
ACTING: 8/10
The acting from the main cast members is on par with the Lord of the Rings. Ian Mckellen is always wonderful, and Richard Armitage is fantastic as the dwarf king Thorin. Martin Freeman was very well cast as Bilbo, and he gives a lot of humanity to the film. The rest of the dwarfs are fine, however, they never really get their chance to shine as they only have a few lines each. Hopefully we will see more of the dwarfs in the next two sequels. There are a few returning cast members as well, including some big names. While their acting was good overall, Cate Blanchett, Hugo Weaving, and Ian Holm occasionally over act their parts, perhaps to make up for their lack of screen time.
WRITING: 6/10
This is where most of the problems of the film arise. The movie is too long in parts. The Old Bilbo/ Frodo scenes (while interesting) could have been trimmed, much of the unexpected party scene could have been cut (especially the first song about dishes), and the chase scene with Radagast could have been trimmed. A few of the scenes that connect the Lord of the Rings (the white council, Radagast, etc) could have been shortened. There are also a few one liners and toilet humour jokes that fall flat. Also, the film has a number of "fan boy moments" that mimic or reference the Lord of the Rings but do not progress the plot in any way. The Hobbit is a very difficult film to bring to the big screen, and overall the writers did decent job. The first part of the trilogy was always going to be the worst. I expect that the next movie will end with the destruction of Lake Town, and the third film will be a huge battle, so I have no problem with the way they decided to split the film into three parts.
DESIGN: 9/10
The design is just as good as the Lord of the Rings, which makes sense as it is the same people. The map paintings, sets, miniatures, characters, wardrobe, and weapons all look great. Some of the dwarfs look a little bit strange, however, maybe this is intentional.
EFFECTS: 8/10
Some have complained that the CGI in this movie looks fake, and I couldn't disagree more. The CGI looks fantastic, maybe better than any movie this year. There is a problem with too much CGI though. The great thing about the Lord of the Rings is that they avoided using CGI unless necessary, and used sets, prosthetics, and camera angle tricks instead. In the Hobbit, CGI is the go to method, which is unfortunate because no matter how good it is, CGI will always look worse than the real thing.
MUSIC: 7/10
The soundtrack is very similar to the Lord of the Rings, in fact, it is too similar. I loved the soundtrack the Lord of the Rings, however, the Hobbit soundtrack feels like a repeat of the same thing. There are a few new songs such as the Lonely Mountain theme, and they all sound great. I hope that Howard Shore expands on these themes and adds new ones in the next two films.
VERDICT:
This is an enjoyable film, but it never quite reaches the heights of the Lord of the Rings (except for perhaps the gollum scene). As long as people except that, there is no reason that anyone should not enjoy this movie. Overall, I give it a 7.6/10
Aliens (1986)
More action than horror, but still great!
This movie is more of a action movie than a horror film like the first alien movie, however this is not necessarily a bad thing. While Alien was one of the most frightening movies ever made, Aliens is one of the most entertaining film ever made! Rarely is there a sequel so different but so satisfying as this one.
ACTING: 9/10
The acting in this movie is better than Alien. The space marines are all unique and have wonderful chemistry with each other. Highlights include Bill Paxton as the hilarious Pvt. Hudson and Sigourney Weaver who plays a more likable Ripley. Carrie Henn plays my favorite character Newt to perfection. It is a shame that she quit acting after Aliens, which remains her only role in a movie.
WRITING: 9.5/10
Most action movies are cheep cash ins with little value other than one time entertainment. Thankfully, this movie has a plot behind it and well written characters. Some have complained that this movie has too many clichés without realizing that many of these clichés come from directly copying plot points in this movie. Great writing, however I must take a half point off though for the predictable ending.
DESIGN: 10/10
Although H. R. Giger wasn't directly involved with this movie, he was definitely in mind. His aliens and sets return, as do some new designs such as the queen alien done by James Cameron himself. The planet station and space ships are also well done, and are unique to the one in the first film.
EFFECTS: 9/10
Similar to Alien, most of the effects in this movie are done before the camera and look realistic. The first time I face hugger scene I was amazed with how realistic it moved, which was achieved by pulling the creature backwards and reversing the shot. A simple and excellent effect that worked very well. The film does suffer slightly from the lack of alien costumes. In fact, there were only 6 suits created for the film, and most of them were meant only for long shots. This is usually well hidden, however there are a few scenes where the amount of aliens on screen is a bit underwhelming.
MUSIC: 8.5/10
The soundtrack is slightly louder than alien, to fit the action a bit more. The only problem with this is when the music swells a bit too much, it becomes too in your face. However, when the music is slow and in the background, it adds greatly to the film.
VERDICT:
This is one of the greatest action movies ever created. Not quite as good as the very different Alien film, but still wonderful and exciting to watch. I give it a 9.2/10
Alien (1979)
Great Film!
This is a fantastic example of how horror films should be made. There are few jumps, cheep thrills, and excessive gore. Instead, the film is eerily slow and full of tension. This mostly comes from the way the film is shot. Almost all of the sets are filmed in darkness, and the alien itself gets little screen time. This causes the viewer to feel unsure of the monsters whereabouts, much as the characters would feel.
ACTING: 8.5/10
The acting in this movie is good. The cast gives life to likable characters, something sorely missing from more recent horror films. There are no standouts however, and the actors have great chemistry.
WRITING: 10/10
The most well written horror film of all time. The plot is slow and dark, frighteningly so. The evolution of the alien is unique, the characters are well written, and the ending is satisfying. No complaints here.
DESIGN: 10/10
H. R. Giger is a genius! He alone designed some of the most unsettling sets of all time. He also designed the alien itself, which may be the most frightening creature ever in film. You will never see scarier art direction than that found in this movie.
EFFECTS: 10/10
Most, if not all of the effects in this movie are done before the camera, the way it should be done. For this reason, it is the most realistic alien movie of the four. The blood and gore is shocking, the alien moves wonderfully, and the sets look real. The darkness helped hide any flaws in effects for this film.
MUSIC: 9/10
There are no "songs" that I would listen to outside of this movie, however the soundtrack fits the movie perfectly and adds to the scariness immensely.
VERDICT:
This is the greatest scary movie ever created. Everything from the design to the music is nearly perfect. The atmosphere in this film is dark and slow, something that present day horror films could learn from. I give it a 9.5/10