Thanks mr Simon Kinberg for bringing us yet another piece of propaganda poo from the propaganda poo volcano that is Hollywood today.
I believe that every connoisseur of the original comic culture had run away from X-men series (ah, sorry! to quote the movie: X-women, in fact scratch that white cis male X and call it J-women) long time ago and is lurking somewhere on the fringes of cinematography (i'm looking at you dredd)
With any canon and any sense butchered to oblivion we learn that xaviers school gets renamed to jean school because, well... she only killed few people and he... he LIED to her.
At least propaganda pamphlets dropped from airplanes during WW2 were free, I had to pay for this...
Reviews
31 Reviews
Avengers: Endgame
(2019)
3 hours of cringe
30 July 2019
Absolute deconstruction of original characters and the universe, this nonsensical circus seems only aiming to cram as much "political correctness", painful attempts at humor and cheap pathos into torturous 3 hours.
One can only wish for infinity gauntlet to snap away the bad acting, horrible scenario and hollywood itself.
Long Shot
(2019)
2 hours of cringe
16 July 2019
Guess this is what Hollywood produces now instead of movies.
A deeply racist, chauvinistic drivel, this Goebbels like propaganda trash has some nonsensical but utterly cliched romantic sugar sprinkled over the top with no real substance or emotion. I had to take regular breaks to be able to watch this cringefest and not give up.
A far, far cry from "Knocked Up"
A deeply racist, chauvinistic drivel, this Goebbels like propaganda trash has some nonsensical but utterly cliched romantic sugar sprinkled over the top with no real substance or emotion. I had to take regular breaks to be able to watch this cringefest and not give up.
A far, far cry from "Knocked Up"
Earthtastrophe
(2016 TV Movie)
Bad but...
26 October 2017
This movie is bad, but I expected that going in. I'd say its biggest problem is poor character development, basically you don't care for anyone. Its great strength is the refreshing tho maybe a bit overly ambitious story-line which puts much larger productions to shame. Not sure if it's all Ashley O'Neil's contribution but will check her other work.
CGI is, as expected, amateurish, and there are some smaller problems with acting (or maybe director instructing actors) but nothing really horrendous like in similar budget movies. Everyone from the crew should be proud and continue bringing us new projects.
CGI is, as expected, amateurish, and there are some smaller problems with acting (or maybe director instructing actors) but nothing really horrendous like in similar budget movies. Everyone from the crew should be proud and continue bringing us new projects.
Blade Runner 2049
(2017)
It's a replicant.
13 October 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Well, I tried to stay out of trailers and press and watch this with a clean slate.
It is beautiful, great cinematography. Music isn't too shabby, tho it's no Vangelis either. Casting is solid, I like Gosling though the biggest impression on me probably made Bautista. Again.
But the story... For some reason all modern sequels are not unique expansion based on established lore, but modernized replicas of what has already been a successful movie. Formula for writing sequel scripts in 2017 is - go to fan forum, read up everything people praise about original and stuff it into sequel then shake it, don't stir. And here's what this shake resulted with:
Now the main guy is definitely a replicant, he's again stuck on artificial woman but she is now a hologram, he experiences the Dream but it's now a horse and not a unicorn... The main guy is also the main focus point for exploring the existential philosophy of an artificial life, the question that burdened our fallen angel, Roy Batty, so much. (This, however, is too prolonged, obvious and weak to be able to present the same emotional impact in 2017). The nasty, "beat the crap out of you", part of Roy Batty is delegated to some random woman serving the Creator on the position of Rachel. Luckily for the movie, after doing its job of rescuing Harrison Ford for the final scene, the philosophical part of Roy Batty this time dies quietly alone caressing the snow (instead of caressing the dove). My biggest fear that he'd die one scene before in the rain and recite some haiku warp of Rutger Hauers original dialog was averted. Points for taste there.
It isn't too bad, it just have too many "nods" to original and too little of its own unique soul. It's a sad, modern replicant.
It is beautiful, great cinematography. Music isn't too shabby, tho it's no Vangelis either. Casting is solid, I like Gosling though the biggest impression on me probably made Bautista. Again.
But the story... For some reason all modern sequels are not unique expansion based on established lore, but modernized replicas of what has already been a successful movie. Formula for writing sequel scripts in 2017 is - go to fan forum, read up everything people praise about original and stuff it into sequel then shake it, don't stir. And here's what this shake resulted with:
Now the main guy is definitely a replicant, he's again stuck on artificial woman but she is now a hologram, he experiences the Dream but it's now a horse and not a unicorn... The main guy is also the main focus point for exploring the existential philosophy of an artificial life, the question that burdened our fallen angel, Roy Batty, so much. (This, however, is too prolonged, obvious and weak to be able to present the same emotional impact in 2017). The nasty, "beat the crap out of you", part of Roy Batty is delegated to some random woman serving the Creator on the position of Rachel. Luckily for the movie, after doing its job of rescuing Harrison Ford for the final scene, the philosophical part of Roy Batty this time dies quietly alone caressing the snow (instead of caressing the dove). My biggest fear that he'd die one scene before in the rain and recite some haiku warp of Rutger Hauers original dialog was averted. Points for taste there.
It isn't too bad, it just have too many "nods" to original and too little of its own unique soul. It's a sad, modern replicant.
Once Upon a Time in Venice
(2017)
Sad
12 August 2017
I really love this kind of movies, lighthearted low ambition comedies with detectives or heists, sun and sea, and there are fewer and fewer being made. They can be really great, put in few famous actors that are having fun and it is a recipe for a classic.
Unfortunately this is really bad, great casting on paper, but actors do not have fun, they act stiff, maybe because the script was poor (even though the basic plot itself isn't too shabby) or maybe they just didn't care. Goodman looks like he's focused on not falling dead at any moment, and Willis looks really uncomfortable outside of his standard action hero scenes. Jason Momoa's performance was the only one I felt up to star standards.
Yes the actors are getting old and we can't expect blockbuster but I watched amazing comedies from Lemon, Matthau or Newman in their late years. This could be a gem and the wasted opportunity makes me really sad.
Unfortunately this is really bad, great casting on paper, but actors do not have fun, they act stiff, maybe because the script was poor (even though the basic plot itself isn't too shabby) or maybe they just didn't care. Goodman looks like he's focused on not falling dead at any moment, and Willis looks really uncomfortable outside of his standard action hero scenes. Jason Momoa's performance was the only one I felt up to star standards.
Yes the actors are getting old and we can't expect blockbuster but I watched amazing comedies from Lemon, Matthau or Newman in their late years. This could be a gem and the wasted opportunity makes me really sad.
Here's how not to do a sequel
7 August 2017
Warning: Spoilers
OMG, what a terrible sequel to one of the best movies of the decade...
Shallow, unfunny, clichéd, predictable and often pathetic, in many places poorly acted and directed, with overabundance of cheesy fake-looking rainbow effects.
It's like writers read all viewer comments to Vol.1 then added whatever people liked 100 times over into Vol.2. So the lovely 80s music vignette now becomes massive bore shoveled into every scene, complex Yondu-Peter relationship gets butchered into cheesy pathos, Yondu's character gets reduced to repeating Vol.1 whistling scene over and over, Rocket goes boring with highlights being Vol.1 repeats, Gamora/Nebula relation - again repeats, Groot no development at all beyond Vol.1 ending cute cgi.
The only character that actually gets improved is Drax, his lines are written and get delivered in the best manner of the first movie, unfortunately that can't keep this wreck afloat.
Shallow, unfunny, clichéd, predictable and often pathetic, in many places poorly acted and directed, with overabundance of cheesy fake-looking rainbow effects.
It's like writers read all viewer comments to Vol.1 then added whatever people liked 100 times over into Vol.2. So the lovely 80s music vignette now becomes massive bore shoveled into every scene, complex Yondu-Peter relationship gets butchered into cheesy pathos, Yondu's character gets reduced to repeating Vol.1 whistling scene over and over, Rocket goes boring with highlights being Vol.1 repeats, Gamora/Nebula relation - again repeats, Groot no development at all beyond Vol.1 ending cute cgi.
The only character that actually gets improved is Drax, his lines are written and get delivered in the best manner of the first movie, unfortunately that can't keep this wreck afloat.
A disrespectful filler
3 August 2017
There are fillers in almost every series, but this must be one of the worst, a blatant spit in the face of audience, probably aimed at some studio head Lynch had problem with at the time.
Almost completely consisting of long trivial scenes going nowhere it's the paint drying episode that can be summarized in 10 seconds tops. Just bad.
Almost completely consisting of long trivial scenes going nowhere it's the paint drying episode that can be summarized in 10 seconds tops. Just bad.
Entropy
(II) (2017)
lol
29 July 2017
I literally want to blow my head off for wasting my time on this. What a torture.
A pretentious chauvinistic drivel with no ambition at all beyond pushing shallow social agenda. Hope this doesn't mean a return of 70s period of bad movies when you had westerns with mind expanding drugs/Buddhism talk just to fit the narrative of the time.
Consisting 97% of Nicole Harbeck's drawn out macho closeups, with car-alarm soundtrack and some sad pseudoscience sprinkled in, this can't be labeled a Sci-Fi in any imaginable way. At best it is an amateur project of several sexually like-minded friends, aiming to spice up their Facebook and Tinder profiles.
If not a friend of production crew, avoid, otherwise good luck.
A pretentious chauvinistic drivel with no ambition at all beyond pushing shallow social agenda. Hope this doesn't mean a return of 70s period of bad movies when you had westerns with mind expanding drugs/Buddhism talk just to fit the narrative of the time.
Consisting 97% of Nicole Harbeck's drawn out macho closeups, with car-alarm soundtrack and some sad pseudoscience sprinkled in, this can't be labeled a Sci-Fi in any imaginable way. At best it is an amateur project of several sexually like-minded friends, aiming to spice up their Facebook and Tinder profiles.
If not a friend of production crew, avoid, otherwise good luck.
After Earth
(2013)
Ugh
22 September 2013
Talk about a bad film.
I could ignore the fact two main actors can't act at all. Throughout the whole movie they both use some weird grimaces that convey nothing. But, hey, OK, bad casting, it's sci-fi, my favorite genre, let's move on.
Unfortunately the only other part of this movie is a stupid plot.
Let's see, why would hyper-advanced, warp traveling human civilization in war with aliens use a spear for weapon. Beats me. At least we have a smart suit that will turn black in danger, that's helpful.
Ursa smell fear pheromones, if you hide in a plastic box they can't smell you. Hey, here's an idea, let's invent a smart suit that encloses the wearer, and kill em all. We could call it a space suit, or a hazmat suit. But I guess for mega advanced civilization it's just cheaper to train soldiers not to fear then produce a helmet.
Lush green world that freezes every night, noble giant eagle, fragile intergalactic distress beacon that must be held high to avoid electric interference... Funny? Not really.
I could ignore the fact two main actors can't act at all. Throughout the whole movie they both use some weird grimaces that convey nothing. But, hey, OK, bad casting, it's sci-fi, my favorite genre, let's move on.
Unfortunately the only other part of this movie is a stupid plot.
Let's see, why would hyper-advanced, warp traveling human civilization in war with aliens use a spear for weapon. Beats me. At least we have a smart suit that will turn black in danger, that's helpful.
Ursa smell fear pheromones, if you hide in a plastic box they can't smell you. Hey, here's an idea, let's invent a smart suit that encloses the wearer, and kill em all. We could call it a space suit, or a hazmat suit. But I guess for mega advanced civilization it's just cheaper to train soldiers not to fear then produce a helmet.
Lush green world that freezes every night, noble giant eagle, fragile intergalactic distress beacon that must be held high to avoid electric interference... Funny? Not really.
Moonrise Kingdom
(2012)
As bad as it can get
22 September 2012
As usual Wes Anderson's army of voters skew the votes on IMDb to push his latest movie. Of course in time the ratings will drop as with all of his other "masterpieces" but at the time of this writing it's still glorious 8.3.
How much it's really worth? 1, maybe 2 for Willis and Norton performances that were really solid. Leading child actors are bad and their script is even worse, they are like 2 kids heavily sedated forced to move around and speak lines. That might be Anderson's idea of quirky characters but it's just dull, pointless and boring. We had 2 gloomy kids in summer camp in Addams Family Values and it made more sense and was infinitely more funny. So, this is NOT a comedy. It may be a boring children drama, except there is no plot - you have two main characters going from one spot to another (repeat that 3 times) and others just following them.
There is absolutely no value at all in this movie. Putting kids in front of the camera to french-kiss, touch each other and talk dirty might be "artistic" in Anderson's head, but talentless writers often reach into cultural taboos trying to seem original, just showing a bad taste instead. Don't be tricked by rating, this is just like Darjeeling Limited - a plain bad over-hyped piece of trash. Willis and Norton characters are somewhat interesting as a starting point, and that's what probably drives most of the crowd into cinema to pay for this disaster.
How much it's really worth? 1, maybe 2 for Willis and Norton performances that were really solid. Leading child actors are bad and their script is even worse, they are like 2 kids heavily sedated forced to move around and speak lines. That might be Anderson's idea of quirky characters but it's just dull, pointless and boring. We had 2 gloomy kids in summer camp in Addams Family Values and it made more sense and was infinitely more funny. So, this is NOT a comedy. It may be a boring children drama, except there is no plot - you have two main characters going from one spot to another (repeat that 3 times) and others just following them.
There is absolutely no value at all in this movie. Putting kids in front of the camera to french-kiss, touch each other and talk dirty might be "artistic" in Anderson's head, but talentless writers often reach into cultural taboos trying to seem original, just showing a bad taste instead. Don't be tricked by rating, this is just like Darjeeling Limited - a plain bad over-hyped piece of trash. Willis and Norton characters are somewhat interesting as a starting point, and that's what probably drives most of the crowd into cinema to pay for this disaster.
Super 8
(2011)
Drop dead Hollywood
4 November 2011
Kids witness a train crash that starts series of weird happenings in a small town. Doesn't sound too original, but expert storytelling really glues you to the chair, I love watching these kids obsess with zombie-movie making, great young actors, great character development. Adult support cast is solid too. Effects - flawless as can be expected at this day and age.
Yes, this should be a GREAT movie. It really starts superbly and it keeps the pace till the last third. And then suddenly it fumbles. I suspect rewrites due to studio/producer pressure as usual. And that made ending nonsensically Spilberg-ish and dropped overall value of the movie to an average. What a shame.
Yes, this should be a GREAT movie. It really starts superbly and it keeps the pace till the last third. And then suddenly it fumbles. I suspect rewrites due to studio/producer pressure as usual. And that made ending nonsensically Spilberg-ish and dropped overall value of the movie to an average. What a shame.
Black Swan
(2010)
Yin-Yang
19 March 2011
With "Black Swan" Aronofsky presents the other side to his "Wrestler".
While "Wrestler" is a male, linear, lucid story of a guy struggling to get away from his everyday hell, "Black Swan" is a female principle, dreamy, artistic, about a girl trying to set her dark side free.
For me, the biggest asset of both movies are amazing performances of relevant leading actors, Rourke and Portman. Just amazing casting.
As for the content, like every Aronofsky, this one is worth seeing. For me duality with "Wrestler", ballet on screen, actors and directing are what makes it good, I could live without explicit sex scenes and occasional gore, but guess that wouldn't work with younger audience.
Watch, but unless you're already a D.A. fan, don't get into theater expecting to be blown away.
While "Wrestler" is a male, linear, lucid story of a guy struggling to get away from his everyday hell, "Black Swan" is a female principle, dreamy, artistic, about a girl trying to set her dark side free.
For me, the biggest asset of both movies are amazing performances of relevant leading actors, Rourke and Portman. Just amazing casting.
As for the content, like every Aronofsky, this one is worth seeing. For me duality with "Wrestler", ballet on screen, actors and directing are what makes it good, I could live without explicit sex scenes and occasional gore, but guess that wouldn't work with younger audience.
Watch, but unless you're already a D.A. fan, don't get into theater expecting to be blown away.
The Secret in Their Eyes
(2009)
In 21st century, eyes still speak
1 February 2010
OK, frankly, I didn't expect much of this.
I'm not familiar with Argentinian cinema, so this was my first acquaintance with director, writer and actors.
Boy, what a surprise this movie made. It's beautifully filmed, it has lovely slow parts where director and actors narrate emotions through silence, this feature is almost vanquished from modern cinema where any frame that doesn't contain action is considered boring.
I thoroughly enjoyed directing, but acting left me pining for Spanish classes. Impressive portrayal of characters if self-evident, with Soledad Villamil's performance shining out as an example of true actress. Unfortunately, we Spanish-impaired people can only sense the beauty lying within spoken lines and rhythm of the language that subtitles just cannot convey.
As for violence and nudity they are used in glimpses, not more than necessary and in meaningful places, I spent good part of the movie fearing that it must eventually get ruined with some trendy shocker effect. But it doesn't, it flows it's own way beautifully to the end.
If one can use small court office and a rape case to tell a love story in such subtle and profound manner it leaves me wandering what Argentinian cinema has for us for the future. I'll jump on digging through it's past right away, and I hope anyone wondering if this movie is worth their time can be swayed to yes side by my humble recommendation.
I'm not familiar with Argentinian cinema, so this was my first acquaintance with director, writer and actors.
Boy, what a surprise this movie made. It's beautifully filmed, it has lovely slow parts where director and actors narrate emotions through silence, this feature is almost vanquished from modern cinema where any frame that doesn't contain action is considered boring.
I thoroughly enjoyed directing, but acting left me pining for Spanish classes. Impressive portrayal of characters if self-evident, with Soledad Villamil's performance shining out as an example of true actress. Unfortunately, we Spanish-impaired people can only sense the beauty lying within spoken lines and rhythm of the language that subtitles just cannot convey.
As for violence and nudity they are used in glimpses, not more than necessary and in meaningful places, I spent good part of the movie fearing that it must eventually get ruined with some trendy shocker effect. But it doesn't, it flows it's own way beautifully to the end.
If one can use small court office and a rape case to tell a love story in such subtle and profound manner it leaves me wandering what Argentinian cinema has for us for the future. I'll jump on digging through it's past right away, and I hope anyone wondering if this movie is worth their time can be swayed to yes side by my humble recommendation.
Give 'em Hell Malone
(2009)
Nice looking but mediocre
24 December 2009
Lots of gory effects and nice idea about throwing them into ambient of film-noir. That's about it for this movie.
As for acting, I only liked supporting actors French Stewart and Leland Orser (Frankie and Murphy) as rest of the cast was mediocre at the best. Never felt any spark between boring Elsa Pataky (Evelyn) and not-so-believable-as-unbuttoned-drunkard Thomas Jane (Malone). Malone does get a cool voice, that seems to be a standard for cinematography these days :)
Characters are cartoonish, we can see bits of Sin City in it, unfortunately they are clumsily developed and often over the top. World is mix of 50s and cell-phones, music is scarce but appropriate and pleasant. There are few fresh spots and lot more clichés and borrowed places. Too bad, with more creative freedom it could be fun flick.
Overall movie looks good, it just doesn't have good enough script. I doubt you could say who actually hired who to do what and why when you finish watching.
As for acting, I only liked supporting actors French Stewart and Leland Orser (Frankie and Murphy) as rest of the cast was mediocre at the best. Never felt any spark between boring Elsa Pataky (Evelyn) and not-so-believable-as-unbuttoned-drunkard Thomas Jane (Malone). Malone does get a cool voice, that seems to be a standard for cinematography these days :)
Characters are cartoonish, we can see bits of Sin City in it, unfortunately they are clumsily developed and often over the top. World is mix of 50s and cell-phones, music is scarce but appropriate and pleasant. There are few fresh spots and lot more clichés and borrowed places. Too bad, with more creative freedom it could be fun flick.
Overall movie looks good, it just doesn't have good enough script. I doubt you could say who actually hired who to do what and why when you finish watching.
Firefly
(2002–2003)
cult
22 October 2008
I did this other way around. I watched movie "Serenity" first, liked it and went back to see the series.
I expected series to be basically watered down version of the movie, with stretched plot and weak dialogs, as it's common in most serials. But what the hell??? These are not episodes, these are 14 movies bursting with gritty essence and originality. For such thing to be canceled while the 99.9% of shows out there are bland trash speaks volume on how networks pick their favorites.
So, now I'm sorry that movie took place, I would prefer that there was at least one more season available instead, there's just so much craft that this creative crew posses.
Buy this DVD, buy Serenity, buy t-shirts, posters, mugs and bags. Make a stand, true quality should be supported.
I expected series to be basically watered down version of the movie, with stretched plot and weak dialogs, as it's common in most serials. But what the hell??? These are not episodes, these are 14 movies bursting with gritty essence and originality. For such thing to be canceled while the 99.9% of shows out there are bland trash speaks volume on how networks pick their favorites.
So, now I'm sorry that movie took place, I would prefer that there was at least one more season available instead, there's just so much craft that this creative crew posses.
Buy this DVD, buy Serenity, buy t-shirts, posters, mugs and bags. Make a stand, true quality should be supported.
Serenity
(2005)
Brilliant!
2 October 2008
I for one didn't watch "Firefly" series, nor did I bother to check who is the writer or the director of this movie prior to watching. And as I haven't seen space movie in a long time, I would be grateful even if it was half-decent flick, and this one didn't promise much...
It turned out to be a real gem, with greatest strength in most important segments - story doesn't follow any clichés, dialogs are masterfully written, played and directed, and visuals don't reveal budget. I even dare to say that this movie would work just as well if it was made with zero budget, that is the difference of having a story and just trashing effects around in a hope you will make a film.
I guess the important directors decision to make story flow rich and realistic without explaining every single scene to viewers like they were a bunch of brain-dead morons, didn't went well with brain-dead morons, hence the low box office success. Nevertheless, this movie deserves it's place high among the greatest of a genre, nodding to classics here and there but steering far away from plagiarism, bringing freshness and uniqueness that spell love for art more than money.
Timeless.
It turned out to be a real gem, with greatest strength in most important segments - story doesn't follow any clichés, dialogs are masterfully written, played and directed, and visuals don't reveal budget. I even dare to say that this movie would work just as well if it was made with zero budget, that is the difference of having a story and just trashing effects around in a hope you will make a film.
I guess the important directors decision to make story flow rich and realistic without explaining every single scene to viewers like they were a bunch of brain-dead morons, didn't went well with brain-dead morons, hence the low box office success. Nevertheless, this movie deserves it's place high among the greatest of a genre, nodding to classics here and there but steering far away from plagiarism, bringing freshness and uniqueness that spell love for art more than money.
Timeless.
Penelope
(2006)
Lovely :)
1 April 2008
I really enjoyed this one, it's a very pleasant and refreshing little movie. Dealing with acceptance and self-acceptance in a sweet fairytale way, without violence or any true "bad guy" role, it is simply stunning most of the way. Unfortunately I think that last 15 minutes are a bit rushed and too sweetened, IMHO movie should have continued in it's previous pace and direction disregarding length and box office...
Also, I would prefer to have seen Ricci's mask a bit more on the gross side, otherwise everything is technically very solid. The cast is strong, I must repeat other comments and hail great Peter Dinklage for his brilliant role of Lemon.
Watch it please, it has laughs and tears in it and I'm not the type of guy who's easily impressed by sweetness :)
Also, I would prefer to have seen Ricci's mask a bit more on the gross side, otherwise everything is technically very solid. The cast is strong, I must repeat other comments and hail great Peter Dinklage for his brilliant role of Lemon.
Watch it please, it has laughs and tears in it and I'm not the type of guy who's easily impressed by sweetness :)
Live Free or Die Hard
(2007)
21st Century John McClane
21 December 2007
Very good :) To begin explaining how much I'm pleasantly surprised with this movie I must say that I'm not a big Bruce Willis fan, I ain't impressed by his acting skills and I'm certainly not a worshiper of "Die Hard" series. In fact I was AVOIDING watching this flick as I didn't expect anything but a dull Sunday afternoon action thriller.
But as said, this is a huge surprise. 4th installment of the series is by far the best in my book. Like modern trends obviously dictate it, it's tough and brutal, gritty, action packed and masterfully filmed. Yes the story is somewhat loose and doesn't quite complement brilliant visuals, but hey, it's an action movie. Computer themed movies almost always have those huge gaps in stories, either from original scripts itself, or from those unavoidable simplifications necessary for movie to communicate with wide enough audience. And as this story unfolds it will thin out to the point of breaking near the end, with some overblown transformers-like scenes thrown in...
But that's about all the bad; brilliant filming, impressive stunts and effects, very solid acting, adequate atmospheric score and many little thingies I'll leave out for your personal enjoyment, outweigh bad by far. Coming from someone that was bound to ignore this movie if not just plain hate it, this amount of satisfaction can only be summarized in two words - absolute recommendation :)
But as said, this is a huge surprise. 4th installment of the series is by far the best in my book. Like modern trends obviously dictate it, it's tough and brutal, gritty, action packed and masterfully filmed. Yes the story is somewhat loose and doesn't quite complement brilliant visuals, but hey, it's an action movie. Computer themed movies almost always have those huge gaps in stories, either from original scripts itself, or from those unavoidable simplifications necessary for movie to communicate with wide enough audience. And as this story unfolds it will thin out to the point of breaking near the end, with some overblown transformers-like scenes thrown in...
But that's about all the bad; brilliant filming, impressive stunts and effects, very solid acting, adequate atmospheric score and many little thingies I'll leave out for your personal enjoyment, outweigh bad by far. Coming from someone that was bound to ignore this movie if not just plain hate it, this amount of satisfaction can only be summarized in two words - absolute recommendation :)
try that again
13 October 2007
Well I loved original Pirates very much. Second part had it's moments. So I was anxious for number three. First off, this is visually spectacular movie. I watched it twice and I'm bound to buy a DVD. It's adventurous and long, as I like it.
But besides that it doesn't deliver too much. As for cast, Yun-Fat Chow is a great addition, Kevin McNally gives his standard enchanting side-kick part, and Geoffrey Rush is simply BRILLIANT, I'm really glad this sequel returns masterful captain Barbossa into play. On the other side Keira Knightley and Orlando Bloom are leading in their horrendous acting that's getting worse from sequel to sequel. My favorite Johnny Depp with the help of the script slowly but surely crosses the line in overacting his Jack Sparrow making it less and less attractive. Keith Richards role is superfluous although acceptable. As for the story, it repeats the standard mistake of sequels, trying to tie up all loose ends and reveal everything mentioned in all other parts. We all saw that before with Star Wars and dissection of Anakin Skywalker mystery, but obviously makers thought why not, it brings good money. Eternal love, eternal suffer, some story concepts sound good but are laid down too weekly and they miss the spot. Big adventure, but if I ask you who, where, why, what at the end of this movie, I doubt you could give me a coherent answer.
So if you like pirate stories like I do, watch this movie for it's brilliant sets, costumes, photography and effects. What we could yearn for is masterpiece that this kind of visuals could bring if coupled with a better, more daring script. This could be a cult movie, forging and crafting peoples taste instead of blockbuster conforming to the bland average taste of masses. Well, let's wait for number 4 (pirates and the fountain of life as we learn), this movie is just good enough to make you crave for more...
But besides that it doesn't deliver too much. As for cast, Yun-Fat Chow is a great addition, Kevin McNally gives his standard enchanting side-kick part, and Geoffrey Rush is simply BRILLIANT, I'm really glad this sequel returns masterful captain Barbossa into play. On the other side Keira Knightley and Orlando Bloom are leading in their horrendous acting that's getting worse from sequel to sequel. My favorite Johnny Depp with the help of the script slowly but surely crosses the line in overacting his Jack Sparrow making it less and less attractive. Keith Richards role is superfluous although acceptable. As for the story, it repeats the standard mistake of sequels, trying to tie up all loose ends and reveal everything mentioned in all other parts. We all saw that before with Star Wars and dissection of Anakin Skywalker mystery, but obviously makers thought why not, it brings good money. Eternal love, eternal suffer, some story concepts sound good but are laid down too weekly and they miss the spot. Big adventure, but if I ask you who, where, why, what at the end of this movie, I doubt you could give me a coherent answer.
So if you like pirate stories like I do, watch this movie for it's brilliant sets, costumes, photography and effects. What we could yearn for is masterpiece that this kind of visuals could bring if coupled with a better, more daring script. This could be a cult movie, forging and crafting peoples taste instead of blockbuster conforming to the bland average taste of masses. Well, let's wait for number 4 (pirates and the fountain of life as we learn), this movie is just good enough to make you crave for more...
Transformers
(2007)
average
21 September 2007
actually, it's below average, but i'm a great fan of transformers so i can't give it less than 5.
good, solid effects, but that's it. actors are mostly bland. kid (labeouf) is OK, turturro was a pleasant surprise and refreshment and voight gives his standard solid act. everybody else are mediocre at best. script? what script? this movie shouts "robot porno", there are some lines thrown in here and there just to connect the "action" scenes. my guess is that spending big budget on cgi forced creators to make story as watery and mass-appealing as possible to get the money back. and they've made it. story doesn't make any sense, gets pathetic too often and is full of holes. in fact, EVERY single dialog mentioning autobots and decepticons has some plot hole. in the year 2007, i find that unacceptable.
if you are casual watcher and want a fun robot movie, don't let my review affect you, this movie WILL give you expected fireworks. but if you are transformers fan, you would probably cringe with me over the fact that big studios can't invest real emotion and passion into something legendary and beloved as transformers are. shame.
good, solid effects, but that's it. actors are mostly bland. kid (labeouf) is OK, turturro was a pleasant surprise and refreshment and voight gives his standard solid act. everybody else are mediocre at best. script? what script? this movie shouts "robot porno", there are some lines thrown in here and there just to connect the "action" scenes. my guess is that spending big budget on cgi forced creators to make story as watery and mass-appealing as possible to get the money back. and they've made it. story doesn't make any sense, gets pathetic too often and is full of holes. in fact, EVERY single dialog mentioning autobots and decepticons has some plot hole. in the year 2007, i find that unacceptable.
if you are casual watcher and want a fun robot movie, don't let my review affect you, this movie WILL give you expected fireworks. but if you are transformers fan, you would probably cringe with me over the fact that big studios can't invest real emotion and passion into something legendary and beloved as transformers are. shame.
Wild Seven
(2006)
mess
9 September 2007
this one starts off quite nicely and promising. unfortunately that's all. old casting crew is solid and delivers well even when script obviously lacks. young crew on the other hand has looks but no guts. makes me wonder if sexual revolution left us with just a few young actors able to play tough guy roles. anyway, movie has some nice photography and a nice soundtrack. unfortunately THEY are not USED properly to emphasise right SCENES in THE movie, SO it JUST makes the whole MOVIE look messy AS THIS sentence. too bad, had some potential, but falls miserably - mostly due to an awful script. makes you appreciate masters of this genre even more...
Barking Dogs Never Bite
(2000)
watch
31 August 2007
Warning: Spoilers
well, i'm another one that got this deep into past following trail of masterful joon-ho bong :) so, what can i tell you about this movie. first, i wouldn't say this is exactly a comedy, so i advise you not to approach it as such :) yes, there are few great laughs, but directing gives it profound look that makes us search deeper. that wonderful way of story-telling is the major strength of this movie, much more than the story itself i would say. every character in this movie has his own little world, and gets his own attention and time from the director.
***spoiler***
so the basic plot revolves around quiet part-time professor frustrated by his situation. living with pregnant working wife he concentrates his anger toward neighborhood dog whose barking drives him mad. he captures the dog, unfortunately it's the wrong one and by the time professor finds that out, poor thing gets killed and eaten by janitor :) as he kidnaps and kills the right culprit he is seen and chased by local goodhearted girl, unfortunately she doesn't get to see his face. but as a twist next dog that's gone missing in brand new one professors wife bought and that professor himself looses in the park. girl helps him search for it...
so you see, story has it's moments, but in my opinion presentation gets the better of this movie. you'll learn how much annoying wife is indeed willing to sacrifice for her husband, what dreams inspire local girl to become a hero, how her overweight friend will readily fight for her, sad note that a scary maniac is really just a poor hungry man, and you'll witness a masterful storytelling by dog-eating janitor :)
***
and when the final curtain is literally drawn over, you'll get a feeling that events themselves weren't that special as much as relations between humans that participated them. this is a story about small circle of people that could be living anywhere in the world. directing is great and acting is nothing short of a brilliant. i think it deserves your time.
***spoiler***
so the basic plot revolves around quiet part-time professor frustrated by his situation. living with pregnant working wife he concentrates his anger toward neighborhood dog whose barking drives him mad. he captures the dog, unfortunately it's the wrong one and by the time professor finds that out, poor thing gets killed and eaten by janitor :) as he kidnaps and kills the right culprit he is seen and chased by local goodhearted girl, unfortunately she doesn't get to see his face. but as a twist next dog that's gone missing in brand new one professors wife bought and that professor himself looses in the park. girl helps him search for it...
so you see, story has it's moments, but in my opinion presentation gets the better of this movie. you'll learn how much annoying wife is indeed willing to sacrifice for her husband, what dreams inspire local girl to become a hero, how her overweight friend will readily fight for her, sad note that a scary maniac is really just a poor hungry man, and you'll witness a masterful storytelling by dog-eating janitor :)
***
and when the final curtain is literally drawn over, you'll get a feeling that events themselves weren't that special as much as relations between humans that participated them. this is a story about small circle of people that could be living anywhere in the world. directing is great and acting is nothing short of a brilliant. i think it deserves your time.
Cinema Paradiso
(1988)
mediocre
1 August 2007
well i really wanted to like this movie, and i was ready for a treat. but unfortunately, it never came.
movie starts promising, base for the story is laid down wide, and it looks like it will grow into a masterpiece. but it doesn't. phillipe noiret deserves recommendations for his role of alfredo and young salvatore cascio is nothing short of a brilliant in his role of salvatore as a child. other than that, everything is mediocre at best. story, while full of potential, is presented in an utterly corny and clichéd manner, acting is (besides those two honorable exceptions) amateurish and overplayed, and plot is (as expected) non-existent. filmed 4 years after "once upon a time in America", this flick at the moments resonates the great masterpiece, and i kinda expected old salvatore to look through projection booth while recalling his childhood :)
while i can always swallow eternal-love type of story, this one is too shallow, too unfocused and watered. i haven't missed any of the movies messages, they are just too obvious and pathetic, and could appeal to me only if i was 18 again. for a 1988 movie that pretend to be something more, i find that inexcusable. there a tons of beautiful films, much older than this, dealing with same subjects in much more profound and original manner. this one settles with portraying love for art with endless clips of old movies, and shots of people watching them. for most passionate lovers of cinema and celluloid magic this might be a great movie as they can find their favorites in every clip featured. i personally don't like cinema as a whole nor it's "magic" nor do i respect every "classic". what i do like are good stories told in a good way, whether spoken, written or made into movies. and i don't like the way this one is told so i would probably give it 2 stars if there wasn't for legendary morricone that can singlehandedly elevate experience of every movie with the simplest of his tunes. watch and forget.
movie starts promising, base for the story is laid down wide, and it looks like it will grow into a masterpiece. but it doesn't. phillipe noiret deserves recommendations for his role of alfredo and young salvatore cascio is nothing short of a brilliant in his role of salvatore as a child. other than that, everything is mediocre at best. story, while full of potential, is presented in an utterly corny and clichéd manner, acting is (besides those two honorable exceptions) amateurish and overplayed, and plot is (as expected) non-existent. filmed 4 years after "once upon a time in America", this flick at the moments resonates the great masterpiece, and i kinda expected old salvatore to look through projection booth while recalling his childhood :)
while i can always swallow eternal-love type of story, this one is too shallow, too unfocused and watered. i haven't missed any of the movies messages, they are just too obvious and pathetic, and could appeal to me only if i was 18 again. for a 1988 movie that pretend to be something more, i find that inexcusable. there a tons of beautiful films, much older than this, dealing with same subjects in much more profound and original manner. this one settles with portraying love for art with endless clips of old movies, and shots of people watching them. for most passionate lovers of cinema and celluloid magic this might be a great movie as they can find their favorites in every clip featured. i personally don't like cinema as a whole nor it's "magic" nor do i respect every "classic". what i do like are good stories told in a good way, whether spoken, written or made into movies. and i don't like the way this one is told so i would probably give it 2 stars if there wasn't for legendary morricone that can singlehandedly elevate experience of every movie with the simplest of his tunes. watch and forget.
They Live
(1988)
we sleep
22 June 2007
6.6 for they live? too low :) that's why i'll add an extra star. again, movie that too many take too literally. if you do too, you'll have classic b sci-fi movie with enough entertainment to last you through hot summer night. but i think this movie deserves more from you :)
john nada, john nobody, the small hard working man in a fight against evil aliens that infiltrated our society and corrupted it. money, greed, obedience, television, vices, all the bad is programmed into us by evil aliens and their ambitious human servants that rule the world. we are not like that, so there is hope :) where do we, poor and wronged, go when our houses are torn down to make place for new rich peoples shopping mall? what can we do, enslaved into everyday labor and consuming circle? don't worry, in steps nada, the hero, to kick some asses. paradigm of the modern society and it's spiraling downfall, this movie is epic ode to ordinary lower class man still believing in values of humanity, and a sentimental portrait of long gone American spirit willing to sacrifice for truth and justice. turn off your TV, put your glasses on and remember the freedom.
john nada, john nobody, the small hard working man in a fight against evil aliens that infiltrated our society and corrupted it. money, greed, obedience, television, vices, all the bad is programmed into us by evil aliens and their ambitious human servants that rule the world. we are not like that, so there is hope :) where do we, poor and wronged, go when our houses are torn down to make place for new rich peoples shopping mall? what can we do, enslaved into everyday labor and consuming circle? don't worry, in steps nada, the hero, to kick some asses. paradigm of the modern society and it's spiraling downfall, this movie is epic ode to ordinary lower class man still believing in values of humanity, and a sentimental portrait of long gone American spirit willing to sacrifice for truth and justice. turn off your TV, put your glasses on and remember the freedom.
Tell Your Friends