ignatiusloyala Reviews

Murder on the Orient Express (2017)

Appalling

[3/10 · 18 November 2017]

Murder on the Orient Express will make Agatha Christie turn in her coffin: this adaptation resembles nothing she wrote and it would have been fine if significant revision had resulted in something good but in this case it has not.

Standing on the back of a successful adaptation starring Albert Finney, it is understandable that the producer wanted to make this version different to avoid direct comparison. However, remaking Poirot as a character does not work, not when the character is already so established - Branagh's Belgian detective is emotional, lacks cool, sulky and dull, i.e. he does not look in any way like Christie's Poirot. By way of comparison, Sherlock gives us a new Holmes too, but the classic and modern Sherlock still share some likeness to which audience can relate.

More importantly, Sherlock retains logic in its storytelling, as opposed to Murder on the Orient Express, where Poirot's solution of the case seems heaped upon speculations. They might not have been speculations - as the book has all the clues - but this adaptation leaves out a lot of information essential for solving the case. As a minor spoiler, not all passengers were interviewed and one wonders how Poirot came to guess so many things right. Add all these to the phony ending, and you have a star-studded whodunit murdered by a disastrously poor script.

The Oxford Murders (2008)

Painful to watch

[3/10 · 15 June 2013]

As an Oxonian, this film is really painful to watch. It captured little of Oxford's beauty or intellectual wealth. All it has were a bunch of mediocre actors (save John Hurt) that complement an equally terrible screenplay.

I don't know how truthful it is to the original, but I find the attempted wittiness in the dialogues very unnatural and clumsily pretentious. It didn't help that it had Elijah Wood and other unexciting actors to deliver them in the most monotonous way possible. Burn Gorman (the Russian, if you can tell) was a constant eyesore whose character seems to have served absolutely no purpose in the story. In fact, the so-called sub-plots and the characters in them were all unpleasantly and purposelessly distracting that one is left wondering what the story is trying to take the audience to.

And then of course there's the main plot, which is full of plot holes. Just to mention one, if the series is common enough to be mentioned in a diagram that takes up half a page of a textbook, how convincing is it for Elijah Wood, supposedly a nerdy mathematician, not to figure the pattern out upon seeing the second symbol in the series? I mean, I don't do maths, but hell, I knew the second I saw the 'fish'.

John Hurt was excellent and that's all the good things I can say about this movie. Seriously, if the plot of a murder mystery sucks, you don't expect the movie to go anywhere near greatness. Too bad this film happened to be set in my town and my uni, and let's hope the audience won't think we Oxonians are as dumb.

To Rome with Love (2012)

Hackneyed

[4/10 · 28 August 2012]

Hollywood should stop Woody Allen producing movies if he is to recycle his genres over and over and over again.

'To Rome With Love' is a clichéd Woody Allen piece with his hackneyed signatures like multi-layered love stories, couples that came together due to accidents and a babbling, irritating Woody Allen in whichever boring roles he wrote for himself - that last bit has not changed a bit since Annie Hall and man, that was over 30 years ago.

While the film has moments of brilliance, the odd but banal plot does not save the day: Alec Baldwin's part was cheesy and awkward, and one wonders why his younger companions were not annoyed by his presence; what happened to Benigni was left unexplained - in a way it needs no explanation but it sounds ridiculous from the beginning - leaving one feeling somewhat disconnected to the story. In fact, all the stories are not connected, but it is not like Paris Je T'aime where the audience knows it contains unrelated stories. At times, I feel that Woody Allen was trying to make the stories stick together but failed. The incoherence has created such distance between the plot and the audience that the whole film looks like nothing more than a showcase of brilliant actors whose only job was to be beautiful in Rome.

The Expendables (2010)

Another action movies with stars

[6/10 · 29 August 2010]

The Expendables is like any other action movies with a star - no, stars. The story is nothing but cheesy and predictable. There're a number of lines which make you laugh (not least the ones around Arnold) but other attempts at being humorous are just pathetic. Jet Li's lines are best deleted. And generally speaking, non-English speakers don't miss much watching this. The thing I hate most is the deliberate inclusion of two chicks in a man-dominated film, who don't actually contribute anything constructive to the storyline at all. They don't even help to make any men in the movie look cool, as other action movies with chicks usually manage to do...

OK, so much about dissatisfaction with the story. But ultimately, it's the action that counts and I say The Expendables does OK. Despite the age of the actors, performance is solid and some action scenes are quite original. The attack made by Statham on the plane is particularly memorable. Others look vaguely familiar, although they can still pump up your adrenaline. Towards the end, the film jumped between shots too much that I started to get confused about who did what, but generally, the action part is fine.

For me, the movie on the whole is OK, and whether one likes this film or not I believe really depends on one's expectation. If you're lured by the number of stars the ads have you believe the film carries, be prepared to be disappointed. But if all you want is a Saturday night with popcorn and your brain shut down, watching The Expendables isn't a bad choice.

Bella (2006)

Not impressed

[5/10 · 20 November 2008]

Spoiler alert.

I believe that Bella is meant to be a touching story about family, relationship, responsibility and perhaps race and love. However, the film didn't get there. In fact, there are a couple of strange nuances which I find difficult to understand. The biggest of all is Nina's decision of not aborting her pregnancy but leaving her to Jose - why??? I thought she was cool about having the child. And then why bother going back to see her child years later if she had decided not to raise her? I don't think I feel that sympathetic to her cause.

Also, the relationship between Nina and Jose is really a puzzle. Good friends? Soulmates? Near-lovers? Or what? The film may not be focusing on this but the story was allowed to evolve to this ambiguity without giving it a satisfactory close.

Bella simply didn't give me the warmth that the director apparently had tried hard to deliver. It's that kind of movie that leave you with a lot of questions, which popped up and then lost in the weak story development.

A History of Violence (2005)

Mixed feelings

[7/10 · 29 June 2006]

I just watched this movie on DVD and I don't know how to describe it. It's a very simple story with basically one storyline. It hasn't attempted to be sophisticated, which is good... But stop there. Shouldn't there be something more?? The 1.5 hours of this film revolves a family in a small town and some ill-willed men kind of come in sequence into the life of the man in the family. Yes, we know those people are connected somehow, but there was no hint of their appearance: they just show up and say I am blah blah blah and there comes a fight. I would've expected the story to have a more layered structure where a guy is mentioned somewhere before he pops up on the screen. People might argue that the writer did it deliberately to keep Tom's identity a secret. However, I think coherence is somewhat lacking in 'A History of Violence'. That said, the film on the whole is still entertaining. The acting is superb and the ending is subtle yet complete. Most importantly, it's not overly emotional or overly long.

Ice Age: The Meltdown (2006)

Sequel's never as good

[7/10 · 19 April 2006]

I've just seen Ice Age 2. What can I say? It's funny at times and certainly can get the smile out of you. But the story largely doesn't work. The basic plot is very simple: the fear of global warming looms large and the animals plan an exodus. However, the story has absolutely nothing other than that. The so-called subplots are tiringly heaped on top of the main body of the story and often have nothing to do with the basic plot itself. So the film is like a loose collection of tales held weakly by a bunch of characters. Also, the pronounced biblical references makes the story on the whole rather unoriginal. This contrasts badly against Ice Age 1 which bubbles with creativity.

It's true that Ice Age 2 has interesting moments and sometimes clever dialogues. But perhaps it's a good idea to stop producing sequels which obviously aren't as good as the original to spoil that good name. In short, certainly a good laugh for kids. Adults may want more.

Good Night, and Good Luck. (2005)

Documentary like

[9/10 · 17 February 2006]

'Good Night, and Good Luck' is a movie which one'll either like or hate. I, however, as a non-American, take a more neutral stance.

GDAGL is a honest movie depicting the Red Scare of the 50s when the fear for Communism was very heightened in the US. To say it's a movie might be an exaggeration, since in many ways, it looks more like a documentary. Historical footages feature rather strongly in the film, making the acted part seem like its supplement. It is interesting, however, that the story told by the acted part, which is very great by the way, thanks to both Strathairn and Clooney, is the main storyline. We saw a group of TV programme producers struggle to censure the madness of a senator whose influence gained weight over the years and brought the political terror to new heights. The story was not very powerfully delivered, but it is this relatively calmness of the atmosphere (e.g. no music or sound effect most of the time; no emotion-provoking elements found in similar movies like 'The Insider') which brings out the seriousness of the issue.

The movie, however, suffers from a relatively weak character development. While the story about Strathairn and Clooney was reasonably well-told, other characters which have a measurable screen time are like blackboxes to the audience. Although one may argue that it is the story which matters in the movie, one cannot but wonder what the significance of Patricia Clarkson's story is.

GNAGL is not a thriller with cliffhangers popping up every five minutes. It is on the contrary a solid piece of historical work: it only reminds the audience of a story which the director finds important. In other words, no viewers should watch it and expect a breath-taking experience but should be prepared to be briefed on a serious political event retold by an amazing cast.

Walk the Line (2005)

Like Ray

[8/10 · 17 February 2006]

I haven't read about what other people wrote, but I must say that Walk the Line is in many ways similar to Ray. It's about a little-known musician turning into a big star; it's about a star's slow sink into drugs; it's about a star who's haunted by his past - the death of his brother... I understand that both Ray Charles and Johnny Cash were real. However, when the image of Ray has yet faded from my mind, an extra shot of Johnny Cash just inevitably leads me to make comparisons between the two. It's not that Walk the Line is not good. It's very well done, especially in terms of the performances delivered by Joaquin Phoenix and Reese Witherspoon. Yet, the film just happens to suffer from a timing problem, making it a less attractive picture for me this year. But again, it's a very good movie and you should see it - just make sure that you don't see both Ray and Walk the Line within a short period of time and spoil the fun.

Cinderella Man (2005)

Good but...

[7/10 · 10 January 2006]

I just watched Cinderella Man on DVD. It's a good movie: good story, good acting, good action, good setting, but still not quite there. The story is very well told. However, it's also quite clichéd. From the point when the Braddock family sank deep in the Depression, everything sounds too familiar. The rest of the film is the classical mix of melodrama: sickness, unhappiness, apprehension, quarrel... I don't have to wait till Renee opens her mouth to know what she's gonna say and how Crowe will reply. Also, too many films have already used boxing as their subject, which may I add is painfully short of variations. When there was Million Dollar Baby already last year, Cinderella Man doesn't seem fresh.

It's a very well done movie. Yet it's built on a rather weak foundation that it simply can't make it up to the top tier however many buckets of tears it can win from the audience. Just as the Golden Globe has reflected, acting is its only big trump card.

Howl's Moving Castle (2004)

Yet another Miyazaki anime

[7/10 · 30 October 2005]

Howl's moving castle is a very Miyazaki anime. And like the recent Miyazaki amines, e.g. Spirited Away, this is a slight let-down.

I don't know whether it is intended in the original or whether the adaptation just wasn't good, but the plot of the movie is rather thin. It's set in a warring European state (Germany? Austria?) and there's this sorcerer, Howl, who wants to use his power to stop this war. Impressive, but not quite there. The fact that this subplot seems so weighty but weakly developed makes it ultimately look superfluous. So is Howl's obsession with beauty and the involvement of the Queen of the Dump.

There's a lot of dazzle in the movie (walking and flying in the air, exploring Howl's past, Califer's powering the moving castle) like Spirited Away, but like Spirited Away, the film floats on too thin a plot to make it memorable like Miyazaki's previous works. And in fact, Spirited Away and Howl's moving Castle share a lot of common elements (a monster/animal/what-do-you-call-it turned human, which or who can fly, an ingenuous girl brought to a place full of magic, black-shadow like demons, etc) one constantly reminds the audience of the other.

While still enjoyable on the whole, the lack of freshness of the storyline renders it an anime with a Miyazaki plot built on a different set.

Red Eye (2005)

Clichéd

[4/10 · 17 September 2005]

One has to wonder why so many people give this film 10 out of 10. This movie is so clichéd that after 10 minutes I could guess the rest. And I want to ask: how come all those people sitting right next to Rachel and Cillian didn't notice what Cillian did to Rach? I mean his banging his head against hers is so explicit an action that others should've noticed. And, hell, if somebody banged his head against mine, I would scream the house down! One more thing: I must say that Cillian has a creepy look that I had goosebumps since the minute he appeared. Eyes too blue, perhaps? Try coloured contact next time, for God's sake...

And yet one more thing: that Cynthia is really stupid. One positive point about this movie. XD

The Phantom of the Opera (2004)

Just OK

[7/10 · 5 January 2005]

I went to the cinema with much expectation, but the film is just OK. I haven't read the original, but this story is rather different from the one I know (the story I know was like, three people died: Carlotta killed by the chandelier, another man strangled to death and a third guy drowned in the drain). Anyway, it's not the most important point. Being a musical, singing is the essence of the movie, but god! Gerald Butler sings like a 6-year-old~! Emmy and Patrick are decent but not as good as they should be. One more point to make: the ending is too long and no doubt I don't like the ending long or short coz Christine is such a bitch~! In short, so-so. 7/10

The Longest Day (1962)

OK

[7/10 · 22 October 2004]

Certainly it's not easy to film this in the sixties. The battles are quite faithfully portrayed and the effects are good - of course, we can't compare it with Saving Private Ryan. I also like the idea of describing what the Germans were up to, and thank God, no one attempted to play Hitler. It could be potentially disastrous otherwise!

However, I wonder if the soldiers on the battlefield could really be moving so slowly, and actually had time to get down to talk about the boots worn by the Germans and why one wore a lifecoat. Also, the ending is rather abrupt without much reference to the reaction of the Germans or the French who played a heavier role in the beginning of the film.

Cold Mountain (2003)

Lengthy but good

[9/10 · 12 February 2004]

Cold Mountain is no way better than The English Patient, but like any Minghella's movie, there are always the acting and scenery which dazzle. I haven't read the original, but I do think the story is rather weak, and it's certainly the reason for most of the negative comments made by others on this film. Yet, Minghella managed to portray this weak romance into something fabulous that at least in the middle of the movie, we somehow FEEL that Inman and Ada do love each other.

The scene in which Ada and Inman sit by the fire chatting is superb -definitely one of the highest point of the film, but the film goes stale after that. The final shooting scene is somewhat redundant (kinda remind me of old stupid Westerns); it's like a reminder of the lingering of the civil war but it simply falls into the wrong place. The last 15 minutes are largely unnecessary and should have ended up in the editing room. But on the whole, Cold Mountain is a good movie and a more enjoyable tragi-romance in recent years. Worth a look. 9/10.

Solaris (2002)

Long and illogical

[5/10 · 7 December 2003]

Minor spoiler

Solaris has a pretty simple story, which can be told easily in 30 minutes or so. So what I am suggesting is it is excessively long.

Also, it doesn't sound very logical to me: if Gordon had 'killed' her 'visitor' and the station was clean, WHY WOULDN'T SHE JUST TAKE EVERYONE BACK IMMEDIATELY? I mean, apparently, she was the one to suggest to head back toward the end of the film, but Chris didn't bring any changes to the station really, except for summoning up that robot-like Rheya, whose death is the only point in the film which made me high --- and, p.s., why was Chris wanted in the first place? For a trip to the space and have some virtual sex??

Arty and dumb. 5/10

And Your Mother Too (2001)

What?

[6/10 · 24 September 2003]

People say that it's a good, meaningful movie. But when questioned what the meaning is, many go mute. Hey, be honest: you can't praise a movie because YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND IT. I reckon that I'm not clever and that I don't get the meaning. And in this case, I'll tell the truth - I don't understand this and I don't like it.

6/10

25th Hour (2002)

No good!

[8 July 2003]

I just don't get it: is this movie about 911 attack or about Monty's last day? If it is about 911, what's the purpose of all the partying, racial criticism, etc? If it is about Monty's last day, what does it have to do with the WTC and Osama bin Laden?

I find this movie quite confusing at this point. It seems to me that Lee wants to salute to the deceased in 911 attack while telling the story of Monty. But the movie is definitely not a coherent whole. AND THE TAGLINE!!! I don't think Monty has done anything to CHANGE HIS LIFE IN ONE DAY except for making Frank beat him up. Jacob's little love affair is also too superficial and meaningless to the whole story, if it is meant to portray the last day of Monty's life before going to jail.

OK. There's one great thing about this movie: the acting. But apart from that, nah! A movie for you if you are a Norton fan. Otherwise, just enjoy your 24 hours and forget this pathetic extra hour of trash.

Grade: C

Secretary (2002)

Yuck

[6/10 · 21 June 2003]

I find this film rather irritating, especially about the sadomasochistic relationship between Edward and Lee. Though it has some dark humour and has an interesting portrayal of the insanity of the two protagonists, the movie on the whole left me feeling disgusted on my seat in the theatre. If people want SM, why don't they just try it at home (yuck...) but have to see it on the big screen?

6/10

Annie Hall (1977)

Not again!

[4/10 · 28 May 2003]

I don't understand why people are so crazy about this movie. Perhaps I've seen other Allen's movies first; I'm really fed up with his character - a haggard, nervous, balding 40-year-old again?????? Give me a break.

Yet, I must say that Keaton's done a good job.

I couldn't bear Allen any more. Can Hollywood stop allowing him to make movies, or at least give a total ban on Allen the old, tired middle-aged?

8 Women (2002)

Just okay

[8/10 · 2 November 2002]

French movies which can make their ways to international theatres cannot be too bad. And indeed, Huit Femmes is not a disappointing picture. The story revolves around a whodunit with a heavy Gosford Park style of storytelling - that is the relationship among the characters is more important than the murder itself.

Yet, I don't think the story is very well developed. I mean different events just pop up suddenly without 'intros': the audience is simply not psychologically prepared for the many truths the women have to tell! Just like Gaby and Pierrette's erotic relationship. Can you just provide us with some hints of their sexual orientation (okay, there ARE hints for Pierrette, but what about Gaby?). My friends and I find this very disturbing as we are pushed into the mist and all of a sudden pulled out of it when some new truths dash across our eyes!

Nevertheless, on the whole, the movie is okay. 8/10

Red Dragon (2002)

Great acting

[9/10 · 25 October 2002]

If you ask me what is good about Red Dragon, great acting will be my only answer.

I am not very surprised by the plot. In fact, the story is pretty similar to the Silence of the Lambs, only this time we have a male investigator and Hannibal doesn't escape. I give this movie a 9 (out of 10) mainly for the superb performance of the dazzling ensemble cast.

Hopkins continues with his interest in making exotic cuisine out of human organs as Lecter. The same unspoken violence and evil in his eyes make him shine as brightly as he was in Lambs. Yet, Norton's presence often steals the show. In fact, this is the best job Norton has done after American History X. He successfully portrays the traumatized ex-FBI agent's hatred and fear for Lecter, and at the same time his determination and sensibility as a smart, talented officer who has a family to protect. Fiennes' performance is good, though room for improvement certainly exists; equally brilliant are Hoffman and Watson who illuminate the picture so beautifully. All in all, Red Dragon is a great film with an impeccable cast. I can say for sure that the movie wouldn't have been so good if it weren't delivered by these very actors. An enjoyable movie and a potential Oscar contender.

Road to Perdition (2002)

Good but old

[8/10 · 26 September 2002]

I had read Entertainment Weekly before I went to the movie, so I didn't expect too much from the first. And as it turns out, EW is right: the movie is good, but it's not going to be an Oscar movie. The problem is the story is all too familiar. Built on a father-and-son framework, the movie could have been infiltrated by twists and surprises. However, none came! I would say Sullivan's killing Rooney is by far the biggest surprise. Other things are pretty predictable. It's quite a pity, you know? The music is so fine, the cinematography is pretty well done, the cast is attractive and the director is great. Yet, the story is just too weak! Seeing this movie is a pleasure, but it won't be any movies like 'Talk to Her' or Mendes' old work 'American Beauty' which can lead to hours of discussion and make us remember. A decent picture which is worth a look.

8/10

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)

So-so

[7/10 · 16 August 2002]

MILD SPOILER

I bought the DVD with much expectation, but I am rather disappointed. To tell the truth, this film is only a western version of Hongkongnese action movie. The movie is an action flick with violence coming scene after scene. I can't say I don't appreciate the effort made by the producers but watching people fight for 3 consecutive hours is not so interesting. One more thing is that some characters in the fellowship are so thinly developed that I feel nothing for them at all!

The story is okay, the acting is great and the cinematography is impeccable. Yet, it is not the best among the 5 films nominated for Oscar Best Picture. To me, 7/10 is all it deserves.

Signs (2002)

Awful

[1/10 · 15 August 2002]

SPOILER

What a disappointment!!! Shyalaman did so well last time with The Sixth Sense, but Signs is so terrible! Bad things? To name but just a few:

1. The pace of the movie is soooooooo slow. 2. That walky-talky Morgan had is utterly a stupid thing.

3. Phoenix and Gibson are not adults but big puppets in children's hands 4. That f**king creature (so called alien) is nonsense! Appearing to be so mighty, but actually weaker than a scarecrow! 5. Phoenix was a coward throughout the film, but suddenly became so courageous in the end. My ass, 6. The film is NOT SCARY AT ALL. DON"T SEE IT. IT'S A PURE WASTE OF MONEY!