Change Your Image
MacShoreman
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
How I Live Now (2013)
Did not read the book and I will not.
This film did not make me hot or cold. I did not make me anything. It is a nice made film though. Saoirse Ronan's character "Daisy" starts out overly aggressive for no reason in her interaction with her cousins she never meet before. That she was mad at her dad for sending her to UK and her mothers relatives is not a motive enough for her to be pissy against the other kids. For a 6 years old it would be easier to accept but "Daisy" is bit to old for that. It just puts up a distance between me and the movie at first frame. The story is thin in a way as if one started to watch in the middle of the film. It's like bits are lost and one have to tag along just accepting the fact that one missed out the point A on the cinematic journey to point B. There are movies made like that by purpose and thats OK but for me it does not work well in this film. If this was a true event based biographical drama I could maybe find the movie interesting but this is to me just one heck of a boring vision of some thing and how it could be. I can understand and respect that there is an audience that love this film but on the other hand there is people that is better of not wasting money and time watching it. I did not get anything out of this film but I can not say it is a bad movie. It is a well executed production and the actors are doing their best to "be" in their characters. It is "clean" but boring. A coffee spill over the story board might have been what this production should have needed to be more in my taste. This film didn't create an urge for me to read the book.
Plebs (2013)
How fun was ancient Rome? Pretty fun it seems.
This is fun and timeless even if this happen to be taking place shortly before the time of Jesus. It certainly benefits from the epoch and the public's perceptions and misconceptions about ancient Rome. It's about young singles in a city. It could have been played out in today's London but obviously the ancient setting contributes to an extra twist as the backdrop to the show's hilarious episodes. Slaves, gladiators and corporate orgies are difficult to joke about in a contemporary environment. I think this production has managed to use the collision between todays ethics and historical peculiarities really good. Personally I think the first three episodes felt a little shaky and immature . Six episodes (shown this far) are to few for a fair rating when it comes to this kind of show. It feels like the series is only in its infancy. The series has potential. It feels like it can develop allot more. Give the character an honest chance so perhaps Plebs could become a real classic in the British humor flora. Each episode is a sweet waste of 30 minutes. I think the laughs it brings prolongs life with hours or maybe even days so... not really wasted are they, them minutes? I want more!
How to Lose Friends & Alienate People (2008)
Entertaining sweet love story.
First of all I need to praise the actors. They really made it easy to take in the characters. I liked Gillan Anderson's performance though I'm no fan of her normally. It was a small part and the character was not given much room but I think she nailed it. Many characters felt held back. Among them Jeff Bridges and Danny Huston's. Great potential and it feels like they did what they could with what was given them. Also non favorite of mine, Kirsten Dunst, did a excellent character that fitted right in and gave the story a smooth natural feel. Mr Pegg on the other hand did not surprise me at all. He was, as alway, plain excellent. I would have loved to see the movie take wider swings on things though. For example the integrity of Sidney Young (and Alison Olsen). It was there and had a key function in the story but it was shown in a bit lame way. There was many moments in the story when it could have been pointed out much tougher to pinch the movie a bit to rock the audience out of the comfy zone the movie stayed in from the beginning till the end. Never the less. It is a good romantic comedy with every thing a Simon Pegg fan wants. It is a perfect first at home date rental movie to enjoy within the comfy zone when it's getting late.
Run Fatboy Run (2007)
Does not need to be glorious to be splendid!
I seen this movie 3 times since it was released. First time on the theater, second when I bought the DVD and third just minutes ago when I found it among my other DVD's. I enjoyed it every time I saw it and every time I think I liked it even more and more. Schwimmer found the every day pulse in the lives of the people portrayed in the movie and got it on the camera. The actors seams to have played their parts with such ease that it almost feels under acted. Not said in a negative way, the opposite. The whole production comes out as a genuine warm movie that brings that sweet feel to the audience without becoming Disney ultra sweet. It is nice but not in the negative way. This is a story about ordinary people with ordinary problems, pieces missing from their life puzzle. It is the tale about how small pieces of the puzzle can make things so much brighter even if it is the smallest ones that one by one is fitted in place. It also points out that most of the times it is up to our selves to do what is needed to get the pieces in place. The Marathon race becomes a perfect, easy to relay to, metaphor for that. Brilliant acting, good direction, many well shot scenes and a perfect sense of British humor brings out a movie well worth it. It is a joy to see Pegg work, his interaction with the other actors and the script. He has a complete grip of the personality of Dennis and brings him to life in a balanced way. Despite some scenes that could have been left out that did not bring anything to the movie or the story it is telling, this movie gets 10/10 from me. It is the total experience when seeing it in the right moment and right mood that makes this movie a gem.
Hamilton: I nationens intresse (2012)
I thought it would be worse.
This Swedish movie/TV production ain't that bad as I thought it would be. 6/10 for a Swedish action movie based on a Jan Guillou novel is a high rating in my book.
The film's better features one can thank in particular Michael Pers Brant (who I'm not a huge fan of normally) and Seba Mubarak (her, I would like to see in future major roles). Gustaf Hammarsten as Swedish technical consultant is both believable and nicely played. The role is however small. Seba felt like the filmmakers could not portray fairly. She gave more than enough, but they could not capture it fully. Big, big disappointment is August, Ekborg, Hjulström and in most scenes Anderson. They come in, read their lines and done. Zero intensity. I expected much more from these Swedish giants. The foreign crew how ever did fits into well. They do a good job and feels credible. I would not nominate any actor in this production for any award though.
The close combat scenes stinks and there are other scenes when it feels like someone poured syrup in the machinery. There are times when slow tempo adds ... but usually it will just fall flat, boring and TTBA (Try To Be Artsy).
The screenplay is more pretentious than good. I have no high thoughts of Jan Guillou. In my opinion he is probably one of the most speculative writer, journalist and media personality in Sweden. That and a nasty self-righteous attitude shines through in all his productions.
Many negative words for a movie I rate 6/10 but thats the thing. It is never the less entertaining and if one starts to watch one want to see the whole movie.
Dark Watchers: The Women in Black (2012)
This is awful!
This is confusing. The poster and official web site states the movies name is "Dark Watchers - The Women In Black" but on IMDb the name is "Men in Black: The Dark Watchers". Decide please!
Film projects employs most often a mixed crew. You find professionals with lifelong experience mixed with those who are at the beginning of a career and learning. Some film projects with fantasy budget has perhaps the fewest inexperienced crew members as opposed to low-budget films. This is a super low budget film. I would not really categorize this film as a motion picture. Somewhere there is a lowest level that a film has to reach for me to call it a feature film. This film does not reach anywhere near that level. This is something else. An unsuccessful hobby project or school project maybe but certainly not some thing to charge the public for viewing. This production falls flat. I do mean everything. Among the most notable is the directing and camera / visualization. Regarding the actors performance - this movie will not boost anyone's career. Maybe it's bad directing, which is the cause? In that case, I sincerely hope that the actors and crew are given the opportunity to show what they really can perform in future projects. About the directing. I seldom say things "suck" but in this case after giving it a really long thinking there is no options: The directing of this movie really sucks. After watching this movie I digged in to Philip Gardiners life and production history and I am not surprised this is the result of his craft. Philip Gardiner is the living proof that quantity is not a measurement of quality. I do doubt we will ever see a Gardiner production nominated for an Oscar or any other significant award of recognition. Do not pay to see this movie. Rather call a distant relative you did not want to talk to the last 10 years than spend time on this.
Hogfather (2006)
Excellent TV-movie production!
I love this 2 part TV-movie. Excellent produced, amazing performances from the cast and "simple" genuine and cast adapted direction. I have seen it several times in few days as well as 'The Color of Magic' and 'Going Postal'. Hogfather is the absolute favorite though. The actors are amazing. Marc Warren, Michelle Dockery, Nigel Planer, Ian Richardson and all the others elevates this production to a level that already made it classic. Hogfather was highly enjoyable when it was released, it still is today and it will be for a long, long time. The secret is details, the execution of the special effects, utterly trust in basic theatrical formats but not to be afraid of innovation. This is a proof that genuine craftsmanship is the key to quality. Sound effects and music all through the movie is delicate edited. The story is told in 3 hours without getting slow or boring. Intelligent script with an excellent timing, flow, direction, and all actors' amazing performance is why I can't See any other alternative than to give Hogfather the TV-movie a 10 out of 10. Mr Pratchett must be satisfied with the result and happy that though it does not follow the book letter by letter but depicts and delivers the story in the spirit of the Ring World saga. This is art, craftsmanship and entertainment in perfect combination.
Frequently Asked Questions About Time Travel (2009)
I don't know more about time travel but this is a good movie.
This is a lovely little movie. Amazing actors but I would preferred Ferrel's character less stereotype "blond". O'Dowd, Wootton and Kelly was really great even though the script made them in short moment seem to be bickering brainless protozoans. I love the story. In comparison to Steve Pink's "Hot Tub Time Machine" (2010) it was more action in the story than on the screen, which I found enjoyable. The time jump events might have been bit tricky to follow but they should be, what would be the point of creating a story around paradoxes if not? In general this is a good movie and I think even non SciFi fans with a taste for light British humor would like this movie. It is not a Hollywood production wish is not a negative thing when it comes to this one. No over amazing special effects but high quality set and props framed the story perfect. Gareth Carrivick had a good story to work with and a simple straight forward directing with good timing made this movie to a non stop enjoyment to watch.
Masters of the Universe (1987)
Not perfect but has a sustaining quality
This movie is not among the best but it has far more entertaining value than other in same genre and from same era. When reading reviews, the earliest ones are the ones rating this movie lowest and the later ones gives the higher scores. One explanation can be that He-Man is not as popular these days and knowledge about He-Man's origin as a comics hero is not as common as back when the movie premiered. The movie got a lot of negative reviews because it was not true to the stories the film is based upon. There is three main reason why this movie not get higher rating from me than 6/10. One and obvious reason is the story it self as stated above. It lacks resemblance to the original He-man theme. Another reason is some weak performances from leading actors like Mr Lundgren, Cox and Field. The third reason is the movie it self after the music store scene. I seen the movie couple of times and after the scene where Cox meet Foster in the alley behind the music store, in which a battle is taking place, the whole movie drops from a decent B-movie to C-movie level. Special effects and story becomes more strained. Battle in the heart of the town and no humans seems to react is annoying and the hover pods special effects is far from entertaining. It would have been better for the film if the scene took place on a more deserted place or even not on Earth and if they replaced the pod chase with a less effect depending battle event. However, this is not an all bad movie. It is entertaining and have qualities on many levels. Some performances are better than one is used to see in films from end 80's in this genre and also the costumes and decor are well made. Compared to many sci-fi/fantasy TV productions of today like Farscape for example this movie is still going strong. Compared to Disney Channel movies in the genre this is a master piece. Mr Lundgrens costume could have been bit more modified for movie visuals though. Notable performances without handing out Oscar nominations are Langella, Foster, Barty, McNeill and Cypher. These actors made this movie enjoyable. Lundgren, Field and Tolkan did not reach all the way and to me, Cox was some thing of a disappointment. The movie have a entertainment value still and for a movie released 1987, in a special effect dependent genre where techniques grow old in months, it's actually a bit impressing.
Supergirl (1984)
Not a work of art and not entertaining. Simply nothing.
First time I saw this movie was 2 days after the premier in Stockholm and I walked out after 40 minutes. With my first view in mind I tried really hard to find the good parts but to be honest. There is none. The cast list contains names as Helen Slater, Faye Dunaway, Peter O'Toole, Mia Farrow and Brenda Vaccaro etc, all amazing actors. To extinguish all their talent from the movie is an achievement of some sort. Story, script, direction and production is as bad as it could get. The lines are pompous. O'Toole almost reach a acceptable level but both Dunaway and Slater are put up to an impossible task. Bad lines and what it seem, non thought through direction, makes it just bad. Vaccaro as the villains side kick is probably the most intelligent casting in this movie. Her character, how ever, falls to pieces because the foundation for her character is wiped out by incompetent production. To give this movie 1/10 hurts though I respect the actors. This is not their fault. To me this movie seem like a good idea that has been realized for all the wrong reasons and in all the wrong ways one can imagine.