Change Your Image
abyboom-1
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Terminator Genisys (2015)
Once again Hollywood shows us how difficult it is to make a good Terminator movie
The Terminator movies (sans TS - I am not even sure if it's part of the cannon) are basically chase films with the element of time travel thrown in to create unique Sci-fi protagonists and antagonists.
The first two films were smart enough to understand the limitations of time travel as a viable "science" and hence kept the focus on it's characters, surroundings and action (note : I do not say special effects). T3 tried to explain away the canonical inconsistencies (eg. it's existence) with some quantum mumbo-jumbo, but again it was kept at a bare minimum (almost hinted), showing a self awareness from the writers that even if you need to write stupid stuff for exposition, it's not necessary to go full blown Shyamalan on things. Of course, T3 is nowhere clinical in it's nightmarish quality of T1 or matured enough for the majesty of T2, but at least it looked like the people behind the movie were trying sincerely.
TG jumps into the bandwagon of using time travel as a rebooting device, which currently is the go-to template for many franchises (XMEN, Star Trek). But it makes the cardinal sin of driving ALL plot elements through this device multiple times. Hence, you are left with bizarre recitation of quantum fields, alternate time-lines, nexuses in time points associated with important events, all wrapped in "delivery under 60 seconds" by Arnold's "Pops" (Dear me, Arnold and Quantum Theory in the same sentence). Mix into this Internet/Cloud/AI, phase matter, time displacement with a dash of 12 Monkeys - all stamped with Hollywood's grasp of "science", and you start wondering why was the Kitchen Sink left out.
The movie really doesn't have a plot line as such. It's feels more like a re-edited version of separate episodes stitched into a movie, to throw a glimpse into the life of these characters over a period of 2?3?4? days. Each day/episode starts with a shocking (read : spoiled by trailer) reveal, followed by "scientific" explanations, followed by CGI explosions and chase. The less said about the ending the better - the "emotional moment" where the survivors think they will "live happily ever after" has concrete foundations in "Marvel Studio Science" - the current rage of Hollywood. The feeling of clunky and disjointed adventures for our saviors of humankind is more akin to Stargate tag line ("Saving the universe one day at a time") rather than a complete coherent movie, even if it be a summer popcorn/potboiler/studio crash grab event.
Now Arnold can play a terminator without getting out of bed in the morning, and sometimes it feels exactly like that - there are many instances where he was just disinterested in the proceedings. He also has the onerous task of providing dumb plot expositions every time the "plot" takes a hard right/left. One is left to wonder that with this much encyclopedic knowledge on the universe and decades of readiness, why he never leaned how to fist fight against his fellow 800s.
The movie might also be called "The death of Kyle Reese as we came to love him", as Jai Courtney is probably the biggest miscast for the role (bigger than Matthew Goode as Ozymandius in Watchmen) . Gone are Michael Bhein's nuance portrayal of a psychologically scarred and physically fatigued soldier doomed to a tragic fate as he tries to fight impossible odds to save the women he loves. Instead, we have a clean shaved and chiseled smart-ass who spends the entire movie being a HUGE ass**** to Arnold (with multiple stare contests between him and Arnold ALA Twilight) , and who is looking to "score" with Emilia Clarke's Sarah (not bad in the role). Even though he says he will die for her more than once, the delivery is just not reliable. A big element of Reese's character in T1 was his virginity, something the audiences gulped down because of Bhein's performance. Courtney's Reese comes across someone who LOVES his soldier job way too much and has tamed many members of the opposite sex. There is ZERO chemistry between the two, and the inherent romance (which in my opinion was quite smart in Terminator) becomes another obligatory check box for the movie to tick. I wont even go into the "humor" between Arnold and Emilia on this topic (borrowed from T3) that the movie tries to choke it audiences with multiple times.
Mostly everything in the action scenes are CGI, but in majority they are not distracting, except when they CGI-ed Arnold all over. There are multiple chase sequences of varied length and complexities - not bad, but nothing we haven't seen before in other movies.
Twice we hear Fidel's epic Drumbeats from the Terminator theme, but that's it. Rest of the soundtrack is so off, that these two instances come more like a reminder of the good times we had decades ago, while TG gleefully murders everything that was great about T1 and T2 (come to think of it, T3 is a masterpiece compared to this). The final nail in the coffin - "Bad Boys" playing in the background as characters get their mugshots (don't ask).
Poseidon (2006)
one billionth "Das Boot" + one millionth "The Perfect Storm"
...And those are the only good parts of this movie. I have not seen the original(an advantageous position when it comes to remakes, or so I thought!!), and was looking forward to this movie, simply because Wolfgang Peterson and Sea Adventures mix like scotch and water. With Das Boot(one of the greatest movies ever made) and The Perfect Storm (not perfect enough, thanks to the melodrama on the land, but the Sea was once again very impressive.) behind his back, how much can one go wrong? Watch it to believe it.
The opening shot was quite auspicious and so were the first five minutes. Nothing great, but good. Just when one is thinking that things might get interesting with the characters, Poseidon gets angry and sends out a "rougue wave" to play Topsy turvy the vehicle so fondly named after him. And then the story of getting out from the inverted ship starts. And though this is the main storyline, the "inverted" theme rarely features at all after the disaster. It turns out to be just another "escape from locked building" movies with lots of water thrown in randomly, to remind the audience that "we are at sea". And that's where the movie is going. To the bottom of the sea.
And what's the fascination with dead bodies? Every five minutes you open a "hatch", and encounter more water or dead bodies and sometimes both. It is just stupid to show that nobody else survived the wave from anywhere else in the ship. An opportunity of parallel storyline washed into the sea. And I am confident that Razzie will open a new category this year for the "Worst Dialouges" just to honour (no irony intended) this movie. It really takes some effort to come up with dialouges as banal and crass as in this movie.
Needless to say, the characters are monochromatic straight lines. The characters are eager to get off the ship, true. But, looks like the actors playing them were in more hurry of getting this film off their back. And Wolfgang too! With a 140 mill into the water( I am sure he must have realized it early in the shoot, hence the movie was 90 min long) there was really not much choice, but to finish it quickly.
There are some good names associated with this movie. I hope they will forget about this sinker and go-ahead with their lives. Certainly, Wolfgang needs to. He is in the chair for Ender's Game. That's one of my favorite stories. I just hope he does not End it in the beginning, like the Poseidon.
Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines (2003)
How to pass Judgement on the Day I saw T3?
********** Spoilers ********
Well, what can I say? It's still Terminator chasing Terminator and John, plus a host of new chracters. Mind blowing Action and FX and Arnold back in his Terminator boots is good enough for a funtime movie with popcorn.
However, that not what I expect from a T movie. I am a siccccckkk fan of T movies, and to speak the truth after watching T3, I was not sure whether I was dissappointed or satisfied.
I was very happy to see that it wasn't a complete dud like the Matrix Movies and also in the fact that making a Terminator sequel (especially after the emmensly successful T2), would be a very difficult proposition (especially with mentor Cameron not around), it doesn't fail to catch attention.
What makes it disappointing is that it tries to make a mirrior image of T2. Now it's impossible to make something similar to T2 and not get criticised. T2 was perfect. And one can't beat perfection. And after waiting for all these years and watching T2 for around 100 times, I really wasn't hoping to see another T2 look-alike.
Arnold's grown older in the years and he seems tired, but still delivers. What makes the film so weak is the script. It just looks like a concatenation of great action sequences one after the ohter. By the time you start comprehending it, lo! it's over.
The film should have had a much longer run-time with space given to character interactions, which is totally absent in the movie. Plus, there are no sub-plots which takes your attention away from the main theme as so cleverly applied in T2. what made T2 stand alone shining in spite of T1's brillance, was the fact that it ultimately showed a new aspect of the Terminator, which was not viewed in T1. So that given away, and the audience knowing more or less all about T800 thanks to the previous movies, there was not much that T 800 could bring new in this movie. Especially, what I hated most was the slap stick humor of the terminator which is not expected from him. I mean, c'mon he's a killing machine deviod of any human interaction, how can he have humor? The T's humor in T2 stood apart beacuse it was incorporated situations where his brutality and ignorance of humans made it look humorous, rather than making it crack ludicrous jokes like "Talk to the Hand". I mean, if someone asks a terminator for money, what do u expect from it? Either, it kills him or if he's a good terminator gives a stare such that the quails way from him! but not here.
Also, there are couple of situations in the movie which has been borrowed straight from Arnold's Commando. The car driving downhill amidst trees and the line "I lied". Not original at all! Again, some of Arnold's one liners are really inappropiate to the situation.Consider this: kate's father has just been hit by TX, T800 blast her off an elevator shaft, and while Kate's dad is in death thores what does he do? Does he go near him and tries to see what the injury is all about? No way- he stays there and says - "She will be back". I mean who gives a damn at that instant for that line!
Now coming to John Connor! well, if this idiot is to be the leader of human resistance, God save us! The John we witnessed in T2 shows a rebelious quality and self proficency that made the audience feel like that he could be a leader in the future. Even at that age he single handly escapes the T1000 in a bike initially and gives insights into what needs to done correctly at times even when the adults were faultering (one instance that stands apart is the sequnces of T800's chip destrcution by Sarah!). Well, the T3 John is a confused mess. Not only does he try to scare Kate with a phony Gun, but also gets locked up by kate in a Dog cell! now, if you know that JD will not happen , you should be happy about it and go on with your life as a normal person. Again, if you are apprehensive about JD you should be doubly cautious about your surroundings, rahter than being a mess as portrayed in T3. Even at the finale, it is Kate who tells him what they were actually doing in the shelter! the idiot couldn't derive it on it's own. Also, if the leader of human resistance gets killed by a Terminator during the war beacuse he had "weakness" towards it, maybe skynet should not have bothered to sent 3 terminators in the past to kill such a wreck!
Next: Sarah Conner is missing having died of Leukemia! kate tries to fill in as a proxy for that strong female lead, and to tell the truth she does much better than John. but of course, she's no Sarah conner! maybe, if the script had been a bit more strong it would have had a better potrayal of her, which once again bring us back to the script! Was it really necessary to make T3 after such a brilliant and conclusive ending in T2? For my money: No. but then, T3 does bring in some refreshment in terms of concepts (it adds to a lot of confusion and inconsistencies as well!). It does try to put in the humanity angle a bit more than have been shown in the earlier T movies (totally absent in T1, but then t1 wasn't about humanity, it was about T800). They could have tried to propound it more in the movie and cut out the humor. (T movies are not meant to be funny). The greatest zenith in the movie is of course the TX. i mean, when you are going ga ga on a killer over it's sexuality, it's really impossible to fear it , something that was inspired by the previous terminators. And to be very frank, I could not see how Tx was more efficient that T1000 in weapons department except for it's hand doing some funny things. The intrinsic superioirty (if any) of TX over T1000 can never be seen ( Maybe the script wrtier could not come up with something better, viz., a lump of energy as was previously thought to be done). when you watch T1000 you directly see how superior it is to the previous T800. Well, i could see much of TX being superior to T1000. If someone do see it pleadse let me know!
Finally, after all the bad pionts, the good point: the ending. Poetic, brilliant, but a comes a bit too late to repair the damage that has been done before, a saving grace one can say for the T series. It is totally open ended and gives a very good platform for anothet T movie. Now I know, that pulling it a bit, but if Mr. cameron can once again reprise his role as the captain of the terminator ship, and given due hard work, T4 will stand better than T3. And only then can the existence of T3 be justified.
The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003)
"Masterpiece" is an understatement.
******* Might contain spoilers********
When the "Fellowship" came out 3 years before, I was not at all hopeful for it's quality. I had seen many a movies inspired from famous books, and frankly barring the "Godfather", I had been disappointed in each one of them. Especially, since around that time, the first "Harry Potter" was realised, which made a mess of such a brilliant story, though it was a simple one.
Tolkein's LOTR was of course, much more complex a story than many I had read. The core subject matter maybe simple enough, but the descriptions of "Middle Earth" , characters, incidences, battles and everything encompassed, makes the book a very complex, but hugely effective one. So, I had very little/no hope for Peter Jackson's "Fellowship".
However, after watching "Fellowship", I just realised how wrong I was in my assumptions. The movie not only stays true to the storyline most of the times ( a thing not found in many films adapted from novels!), but it also effectively made me feel what Middle Earth looked like with ease. When I re-read "Fellowship" again after watching LOTR1, I realised what Peter jackson has actually achieved is something near perfection.
The story starts from the defeat of Dark Lord Sauran, who with the help of one powerful ring wanted to rule the whole of Middle Earth. The ring then gets lost from the face of the earth, to be retrieved much later by Smeagol. Smeagol's life is totally destroyed by the power the ring exhibits on him, and the only thing that makes him go, is the desire for the ring, which he both loves and hates. However, after a series of incidences the ring finds itself in the hands of a hobbit named Frodo. Frodo decides to destroy the ring, since Lord Sauran whose spirit had survived, was organising an evil amry to regain the ring again. LOTR (in 3 parts), describes this journey of Frodo and his friend Sam. During the journey, they are assisted by numerous friends who want the ring to be destroyed for the good of Middle Earth,and foes, who are trying to kill them to get the ring. The journey encompasses courage, cowardness, betreyal, freindship and redemption.
Getting the story in a movie was one huge task, and Peter jackson succeeds with flying colours.
The fellowship deals with the group destined to destroy the ring and it's ultimate sepration in the face of it's foe. The next two films namely the "towers" and "return" deals with two separate journeys. One being made by Frodo and Sam, for destruction of the ring, while the other traces the rest of the group fighting battles with the dark lord and it's allies.
Some liberties have been taken in the film to make it a bit different from the book, but they are worth doing so. The one liberty that stands out is Gollum's sciznophenic nature. It's a pity that the academy didn't recognise Andy Serkis's achivement, treating it completly as a CGI, but people will know better. Also, it's a pity that the first two parts of the trilogy didn't get the recogniton that they deserved from the academy, for frankly, no other movie came as close as the LOTR's for the last 3 years in terms of perfection in every department. However, the greatest achievemnt of the LOTR films barring thier superb special effects, epic battle scences and scenery comes from the fact that every character was developed so that the audience can relate to them. And there were quite a few of them.
In the "return" when everything was in place, Aragon says to the Hobbits : "My freinds, You bow to no one". And then everybody in the assembly bows in front of these unlikely heros of Middle earth. Well, all I can say is that Peter Jackson deserves a Bow from all the movie lovers, young or old, for making something more than a masterpiece.