Well finally decided to see Wonder Woman... yawn... if it wasn't for the fact that Gal Gadot is beautiful and has a cute accent, I'd have switch it off in 5 minutes... I'm always amused that female warriors in Hollywood films are shown with no protection for their thighs or for that mater most of their body.... shin guards and arm guards apparently are enough to protect her from machine guns etc.. Overall a very badly scripted movie based on an incredibly stupid story... Very predictable. Great special effects. If you wanted to watch a film solely for special effects then this would be your film. It had its moment I guess... The humans don't need Aries to be violent (duhh)... otherwise what a pathetic film... Of course to be honest I hate superhero films in general with Logan being about the only exception to the bad scripting bad story telling stupid idea rule in superhero films... I wish Hollywood would grow up and stop telling children stories about fake super heroes in movies. Been hoping since the 1980s for an end to the endless parade of awful movies based on comic books... please let it end!!! I want movies with a story that is worth paying attention to!!! HBO can do it... why can't Hollywood.
Reviews
62 Reviews
Reach Me
(2014)
Lousy self help advice; lousy depiction of traffic injury.
13 August 2016
Movie Review: Reach Me. A ensemble film including several different actors including minor roles for Sylvester Stallone and Kelsey Grammar. The main plot centres around an anonymous writer who has written an inspiration self help book (Tom Berenger) which everyone thinks is great. In fact the self help is really total BS, but that little detail is overlooked by the movie.... Apparently you can quit smoking by just yelling to the ocean that you don't smoke and like magic, the addiction is gone... forever... as the young reporter claims, the next morning... apparently relapses don't occur in this Hollywood film.. why do American movies get self-help soooo wrong. Characters include a reporter would be novelist, gangsters, an aspiring movie actress, an ex-con, a cop who apparently moonlights as a vigilante killer, a priest who he confesses to, and of course the writer of the self help trash, One of the characters inspired by the book is a woman just released from prison where she served a sentence for burning down her house. She meets up with her actress friend who is upset over being groped during a movie sex scene... the friend cries while driving, crashes into another car driven by an cop / vigilante killer. In spite of potentially serious injuries (at least two have of the characters concussions, and one would likely have had a spinal injury)... the vigilante pulls the actress from her car seriously endangering more serious complication... completely the WRONG thing to do in a traffic accident... details details... they all choose not to call for ambulances or their insurance companies for some unknown reason, and sneak off to the actresses home... no reason is given... nuts... The man collapses with a delayed concussion. later he wakes up from his concussion and finds out that the actress was horribly groped during her sex scene, so he goes off to find the actor and bashes out the teeth of the actor who groped her during her sex scene. The vigilante also makes a career out of gunning down criminals... judge jury and executioner... The film over all has the sleekness of "Get Shorty", but the story is just so totally stupid... and like many Hollywood films is very pro gun violence. I advise anyone not to reach out to Reach Me and in fact to avoid this movie like that plague.
Secret in Their Eyes
(2015)
Original and remake
21 February 2016
The guy at my local CD/BlueRay rental store (and yes they still do exist)... recommended the film by Juan José Campanella staring Ricardo Darín, Soledad Villamil, & Pablo Rago about a former investigator who is now writing a novel about a case that still haunts him. The case was about a rapist / murder who was found after a difficult investigation and then released because he was an asset to the intelligence service. After watching it, the next day when I returned the film, he handed me a recent American remake of the same movie by Billy Ray, staring Chiwetel Ejiofor, Nicole Kidman, and Julia Roberts. The American story is essentially the same except that the murder victim is the daughter of one of the main characters, making the pain more salient. I often dislike American remakes because they typically change the story and lose too much of what made the original worth watching. Not this time. In some ways the remake is more coherent and the character's motivation, in particular the main characters sense of guilt, is better developed. Julia Roberts in particular gave a truly phenomenal performance in the remake. I'll leave it as that as to avoid presenting spoilers for either film. Both films were well done and well worth watching.
Interstellar
(2014)
Silly new age spiritualism
18 November 2014
Warning: Spoilers
This movie is terrible on so many levels... good graphics... AMAZING GRAHICS... but the film made me want to gag so often... Not just the new age misinterpretation of quantum physics, and the non-sense of the power of love... and the paradoxical time loop that would mean he created his own destiny by tinkering with the past But moreover, the whole premise of a unfixable world where the only hope is to create space habitats to save people... Seriously folks, if all the food sources are being destroyed by a fungus, it will be pretty much impossible to get into space without bringing that fungus with them. Furthermore, if they have the technology to create a space habitat... they have the technology to fix this planet or at the very least to make habitable space on earth... so why not fix the world we have (or build biospheres) instead of wasting all that money and time and scientific brilliance on building a space habitat!!!
RED 2
(2013)
pointless non-sense, but entertaining
21 January 2014
If you enjoy an endless series of unrealistic car chases, gun fights, hand-to-hand combat and pyrotechnics then Red2 is your film.
The plot is a tad absurd, none of it makes any real sense.
And then there are the logical gaps. At times their opponents can pin point their location across the world yet at one moment, they fly across the Atlantic or sneak into Russia without difficulty.
However, the acting is great, and the story is entertaining... so if you like brainless action films staring some incredibly talented star... you'll like it. I gave it a 5... 8 for action, 8 for acting, 2 for plot, 2 for logic... averaged it all out to 5.
The plot is a tad absurd, none of it makes any real sense.
And then there are the logical gaps. At times their opponents can pin point their location across the world yet at one moment, they fly across the Atlantic or sneak into Russia without difficulty.
However, the acting is great, and the story is entertaining... so if you like brainless action films staring some incredibly talented star... you'll like it. I gave it a 5... 8 for action, 8 for acting, 2 for plot, 2 for logic... averaged it all out to 5.
To Rome with Love
(2012)
Hilarious study of love and life in Rome
21 January 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Cute movie. Four stories of love and life in Rome. One story was of an older man following what appeared to be his younger self around and advising him about falling in love with a friend of his girlfriend.
In another story an ordinary man is suddenly made into a celebrity complete with a photo paparazzi. and the media hangs on his every word for a couple of day... and then he is dropped as an object of importance. I'm not sure if that was supposed to be some sort of cruel reality TV show.
The film was directed by Woody Allen. He also played a part as the father of one of the other characters, and he used to be involved in the music business, but was ahead of his time. The most hilarious part, to me anyway, was Woody's discovered of a fantastic opera singer, who can only sing in the shower. I shall now always expect an opera star to be carted onto the stage in a shower.
The fourth story is about a shy couple in the big city for the first time, lost and confused, and who accidentally end up both cheating on each other.
Enjoy.
In another story an ordinary man is suddenly made into a celebrity complete with a photo paparazzi. and the media hangs on his every word for a couple of day... and then he is dropped as an object of importance. I'm not sure if that was supposed to be some sort of cruel reality TV show.
The film was directed by Woody Allen. He also played a part as the father of one of the other characters, and he used to be involved in the music business, but was ahead of his time. The most hilarious part, to me anyway, was Woody's discovered of a fantastic opera singer, who can only sing in the shower. I shall now always expect an opera star to be carted onto the stage in a shower.
The fourth story is about a shy couple in the big city for the first time, lost and confused, and who accidentally end up both cheating on each other.
Enjoy.
Escape Plan
(2013)
Lots of action, not much else
12 November 2013
Warning: Spoilers
This was probably one of dumbest films I've seen in a while. Stallone is a professional who goes into prison to try and figure out how to escape so that the prison can then tighten up security, etc.. This job makes no sense. Why not just inspect it and make recommendations; why risk death by being in the prison. Anyway, he is paid to enter a particularly secure prison for the worst of the worst. When he gets there he finds out he has been double crossed. He befriends the Governator (former), who has tried to take down the banking system with software. The Governator is a criminal with a heart of gold, or something like that and they become friends. I suppose because he's hurting the banking system, the producers figure he'll be seen as a heroic criminal, so its OK if he goes free. I don't want to give away too much of the story (not much of a story to give away anyway) but in the end Stallone escapes, but surely in killing guards while escaping he is no longer an innocent professional, but just a run of the mill criminal. Oh well, such details are usually ignored in Hollywood films. If you like pointless action, this is the film for you. If you like implausible escapes and miraculous shot outs where the hero somehow survives... then you'll love this one. If you are looking for drama, good acting, a rational plot, or a meaningful theme then this is probably not what you are looking for.
Skirt Day
(2008)
A dark claustrophobic little thriller
10 September 2013
I suspect every teacher has wondered if she/he be able to get the kids attention by pointing a gun at them. Having spent some time teaching I can really emphasize with Sonia Bergerac in this film. I loved the part where she starts to actually teach the lesson on Moliere and uses the gun to force an unruly student to cooperate. Of course real education can't function like that, but its probably a fantasy of many teachers.
The film contains quite a bit of irony, and random chaos. I don't wish to give away too much of the story, other than to say taking the students hostage was accidental, and once she had started she was completely unable to figure out how to get out of the situation. The film has a very claustrophobic feel to it. They are trapped in a small little drama while outside larger dramas unfold including political issues, debates about how the crisis should be handed by the police, dispute between cultures, and sexual exploitation of some students. But Sonia and her class are locked within a small sound proof room.
Isabelle Adjani once again demonstrates that she is a extraordinary actress who is entirely convincing in her role. Vulnerable at times, and scary in the next moment.
The film has comic moments such as her demand for a national skirt day, but is largely dramatic and tragic in its tone. The film explores the clash of cultures, prejudice, and the real meaning of sexual liberation.
The film contains quite a bit of irony, and random chaos. I don't wish to give away too much of the story, other than to say taking the students hostage was accidental, and once she had started she was completely unable to figure out how to get out of the situation. The film has a very claustrophobic feel to it. They are trapped in a small little drama while outside larger dramas unfold including political issues, debates about how the crisis should be handed by the police, dispute between cultures, and sexual exploitation of some students. But Sonia and her class are locked within a small sound proof room.
Isabelle Adjani once again demonstrates that she is a extraordinary actress who is entirely convincing in her role. Vulnerable at times, and scary in the next moment.
The film has comic moments such as her demand for a national skirt day, but is largely dramatic and tragic in its tone. The film explores the clash of cultures, prejudice, and the real meaning of sexual liberation.
How to Make Love to a Woman
(2010)
Amusing exploration of love and sex
4 September 2013
This film can best be described as a romantic comedy. Its not the greatest film, but its quite funny in places. The plot begins when after having sex, Lauren sighs in disappointment. Andy becomes alarmed that if he isn't satisfying his girlfriend his days with her may be numbered. So begins a quest to find out what he's doing wrong. Sexperts he consults with includes his best friend, porn stars, his colleagues in the music business, lesbians, a medical doctor, his parents, his younger brother, and grand parents... but at no point does he just ask her. Meanwhile she also talks to her friends about the issue, but not to him. Some of the best advice actually comes from his grand mother. The secret of what she really wants is hinted a couple minutes before her initial sigh, but I'll leave that to you to catch the problem. Some of the most amusing scenes involve the use of split screen reminiscent of Annie Hall, where a couple is talking about each other, contradicting each other, and showing very different perspectives on sex. At a number of points they interact with each other across the splits screens.
Given the topic under discussion it was somewhat of a surprise to me that the film has no explicit sex scenes or even any frontal nudity. In the sex scenes that are depicted in the film, their bodies are almost entirely covered under the blankets. But because of the topic under discussion -- pursuit of her orgasm -- this is a film for adults only.
Its not a great film, but its a lot more amusing then the usual stupidity based humor so rampant in Hollywood today. A good film to watch with your significant other.
Given the topic under discussion it was somewhat of a surprise to me that the film has no explicit sex scenes or even any frontal nudity. In the sex scenes that are depicted in the film, their bodies are almost entirely covered under the blankets. But because of the topic under discussion -- pursuit of her orgasm -- this is a film for adults only.
Its not a great film, but its a lot more amusing then the usual stupidity based humor so rampant in Hollywood today. A good film to watch with your significant other.
One Deadly Summer
(1983)
Loved it
17 August 2013
Warning: Spoilers
This is one of the most riveting films I've seen in a long time. Isabelle is captivating, flirtatious, beautiful, and the girlfriend from hell. I loved the dinner date. What an amazing scene. Isabelle is entirely convincing in all her moods from sexually flirtatious to depressed to passionate rage. This film is a virtuoso performance showcasing a great actress. In addition to great acting, she is simply gorgeous leaving you wanting to see more of her and this being a French film, one is not disappointed in that respect. The way the story unfolds forces one to pay attention to every little nuance. Sometimes its a bit corny like when they zoom in on her when she first asks about the organ in the barn, but overall the directing, acting, and cinematography are fabulous. I highly recommend this. To me the mark of a really good film is wanting to watch it again and getting a different understanding of scene each time you watch it. In part this is to get the point of the story. There are scenes that seem to be out of place like the scene in the forest, but everything fits together in the end. The first time I watched it I couldn't quite understand why she was so depressed when she found out that the revenge had already been done, but when I watched it again, it all made sense -- to find out that knowing that it was all done did not make her feel better; revenge does not solve ones problems. But it is too late, she has already set things in motion that make the ending ironic and tragic.
Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy
(2011)
counter, counter, counter espionage at its finest
21 January 2012
I've always been a fan of John le Carre's novels. I was thrilled to here that one of my favourite novels had been made into a movie, but until this week it didn't look like I was going to be able to get a chance to see it on the big screen.
John le Carre's novels are an intimate look at the day to day work of a spy during the cold war era. Not James Bond, who all the villains know, but real spys. This has no absurd escapes like one would see in the Bourne Identity and no major shot outs like the A team. Its not an action film, its a spy story.
The basis of the story is that control believed that there was a mole in the British secret service and wanted to find out who it was. The speculation was that some one in a position of power in the circus was a soviet agent. The phrase trust no one really is apt in this film. George Smiley, a character who never seems to smile, is asked to come out of retirement and spy on his colleague in order to figure out who is the enemy spy hiding in the British secret service.
Its not an easy film to watch. The film has a grainy quality that gives it the look of a film from the 70's. The flash backs can get confusing and George Smiley spends a lot of time just thinking.
From what what I recall, the book is not an easy book to follow either. But once you are immersed in this world of paranoia and betrayal and intrigue, its very enjoyable. My 12 year old son also enjoyed it. If you like films about intrigue and puzzles, this is the film for you I truly wish they would make more films like this.
John le Carre's novels are an intimate look at the day to day work of a spy during the cold war era. Not James Bond, who all the villains know, but real spys. This has no absurd escapes like one would see in the Bourne Identity and no major shot outs like the A team. Its not an action film, its a spy story.
The basis of the story is that control believed that there was a mole in the British secret service and wanted to find out who it was. The speculation was that some one in a position of power in the circus was a soviet agent. The phrase trust no one really is apt in this film. George Smiley, a character who never seems to smile, is asked to come out of retirement and spy on his colleague in order to figure out who is the enemy spy hiding in the British secret service.
Its not an easy film to watch. The film has a grainy quality that gives it the look of a film from the 70's. The flash backs can get confusing and George Smiley spends a lot of time just thinking.
From what what I recall, the book is not an easy book to follow either. But once you are immersed in this world of paranoia and betrayal and intrigue, its very enjoyable. My 12 year old son also enjoyed it. If you like films about intrigue and puzzles, this is the film for you I truly wish they would make more films like this.
The American
(2010)
not your usual assassin story
21 June 2011
Warning: Spoilers
This is not your usual assassin story... Thankfully.
The story begins in Sweeden where Jack/Edward/Mr Butterfly is hiding with a beautiful woman. Why he is in Sweden, who the girl is, or why people are trying to kill him is never stated. Some "Swedes" attempt to kill him, he kills them instead, but also kills the woman. This shocking beginning clearly shows that this film is not the normal run of the mill American action film.
The main character played beautifully by Clooney is not a hero. He doesn't do a decent thing in the entire film, but in the course of the film you come to empathize with him anyway, as one often does in films.
The murder of the girl haunts him throughout the film, but this character is thoroughly paranoid about everyone.
Throughout most of the film he is hiding in a medieval Italian village. He keeps in regular contact with Pavel, his boss, and at the request of his boss, customizes a gun and bullets for a woman who needs it for some undisclosed assassination attempt.
He is befriended by a priest who is shown in a remarkably positive light compared to the depiction of many religious figures in American films.
He also forms a relationship with a prostitute who starts seeing him outside of her usual office hours (her idea).
In the end, his paranoia pays off, but I will leave it to the reader to find out how.
The film is beautifully filmed in Italy. The action is subdued, and the sound track is quiet with some beautiful music in the background. The film makers often do not explicitly tell the audience what is going on, but hint at the story and leave much up to the imagination of the viewer. I thoroughly enjoyed the film and have already watched it several times, in part trying to pick up on some of the subtleties of the story such as his various names Jack, Edward(o) and Mr. Butterfly.
The story begins in Sweeden where Jack/Edward/Mr Butterfly is hiding with a beautiful woman. Why he is in Sweden, who the girl is, or why people are trying to kill him is never stated. Some "Swedes" attempt to kill him, he kills them instead, but also kills the woman. This shocking beginning clearly shows that this film is not the normal run of the mill American action film.
The main character played beautifully by Clooney is not a hero. He doesn't do a decent thing in the entire film, but in the course of the film you come to empathize with him anyway, as one often does in films.
The murder of the girl haunts him throughout the film, but this character is thoroughly paranoid about everyone.
Throughout most of the film he is hiding in a medieval Italian village. He keeps in regular contact with Pavel, his boss, and at the request of his boss, customizes a gun and bullets for a woman who needs it for some undisclosed assassination attempt.
He is befriended by a priest who is shown in a remarkably positive light compared to the depiction of many religious figures in American films.
He also forms a relationship with a prostitute who starts seeing him outside of her usual office hours (her idea).
In the end, his paranoia pays off, but I will leave it to the reader to find out how.
The film is beautifully filmed in Italy. The action is subdued, and the sound track is quiet with some beautiful music in the background. The film makers often do not explicitly tell the audience what is going on, but hint at the story and leave much up to the imagination of the viewer. I thoroughly enjoyed the film and have already watched it several times, in part trying to pick up on some of the subtleties of the story such as his various names Jack, Edward(o) and Mr. Butterfly.
Robin Hood
(2010)
fantasy adventure and freedom, but not much history
16 May 2010
Warning: Spoilers
If you are looking for the "real" Robbin Hood (Rob-ing ood), this ain't it by a mile, but its a fun fantasy adventure that is sure to stir up the national pride of those of us descended from Jolly Old England.
In terms of the visual images. Excellent.
Action: Excellent.
A way to waste an afternoon in a fantasy adventure: Excellent.
History: Not at all.
A plausible story: Not so much.
Robin, fresh back from the crusades with Richard I gets in trouble with King Richard by telling him the truth... always a bad idea when dealing with a king... but escape when Richard I is killed in battle (roughly historically accurate, though he lingered)... he comes upon an ambush in progress but a bit too late and chases the bad guys away. He promises to return a sword to Sir Locksly and takes on the identity of Robert of Locksly. They get back to England, hand over the crown, its placed on John head. The old Sir Locksly asks him to become Robert (for a while). Meanwhile bad K. John wants taxes, and some evil knight pretending to work for him, goes out ravishing the country and stirring up a rebelling etc.. This culminates in a Magna Carter episode in which Robin, posing as Robert asks for Freedom. It would have been nice if they'd have read the Magna Carter and they might then have known that it is not a document for freedom, its a guarantee of property rights (for freemen), an advance for the time, but not as big a deal as its often made out to be. If they had stuck to property rights, it might have worked much better.... Anyway with a promise they ride off to fight the french. In history, it was the Barrons that invited the French king's son (the son, not the king) to take over because of John's incompetence and greed and if John hadn't died (perhaps of poison), the next king of England would have been Louis I. But he died, and the Barons decided that John's young son would be OK on the throne.
After winning the battle, John changes his mind and outlaws Robin. John did indeed try to rescind the Magna carter. The only thing that didn't really make sense was the outlawing of Robin.
The whole backdating the ideal of freedom to the middle ages is so so so annoying and seems rather common in films. But ignoring the historical problems, it really not a bad movie... not great, but better than some historically based films.
Turn off your brain, and wait for the sequel.
In terms of the visual images. Excellent.
Action: Excellent.
A way to waste an afternoon in a fantasy adventure: Excellent.
History: Not at all.
A plausible story: Not so much.
Robin, fresh back from the crusades with Richard I gets in trouble with King Richard by telling him the truth... always a bad idea when dealing with a king... but escape when Richard I is killed in battle (roughly historically accurate, though he lingered)... he comes upon an ambush in progress but a bit too late and chases the bad guys away. He promises to return a sword to Sir Locksly and takes on the identity of Robert of Locksly. They get back to England, hand over the crown, its placed on John head. The old Sir Locksly asks him to become Robert (for a while). Meanwhile bad K. John wants taxes, and some evil knight pretending to work for him, goes out ravishing the country and stirring up a rebelling etc.. This culminates in a Magna Carter episode in which Robin, posing as Robert asks for Freedom. It would have been nice if they'd have read the Magna Carter and they might then have known that it is not a document for freedom, its a guarantee of property rights (for freemen), an advance for the time, but not as big a deal as its often made out to be. If they had stuck to property rights, it might have worked much better.... Anyway with a promise they ride off to fight the french. In history, it was the Barrons that invited the French king's son (the son, not the king) to take over because of John's incompetence and greed and if John hadn't died (perhaps of poison), the next king of England would have been Louis I. But he died, and the Barons decided that John's young son would be OK on the throne.
After winning the battle, John changes his mind and outlaws Robin. John did indeed try to rescind the Magna carter. The only thing that didn't really make sense was the outlawing of Robin.
The whole backdating the ideal of freedom to the middle ages is so so so annoying and seems rather common in films. But ignoring the historical problems, it really not a bad movie... not great, but better than some historically based films.
Turn off your brain, and wait for the sequel.
Sherlock Holmes
(2009)
Ironman meets the Angels and demons.
11 April 2010
Warning: Spoilers
This film is basically the plot (if such a word can be applied) of the Angels and demons combined with the good vs. evil of Iron man. It includes much action without much purpose and a conspiracy that might lead to everyones death or enslavement if not exposed. Holmes is not quite invulnerable as iron man, but comes close. I certainly didn't get a sense of Sherlock Holmes; He just didn't look English. the hats all wrong.
They also threw in a little bit of (thinly disguised) masonic conspiracy in there as well, perhaps a touch of Da Vinci code and just to make sure American's cared about the ridiculous plot the bad guy planned on taking back American. Imagine borrowing plot elements from that classic the Wild Wild West!). The bad buy looks a bit like a cross between Dracula and some Natzi Gestapo officer.
Not really worth the rental.
They also threw in a little bit of (thinly disguised) masonic conspiracy in there as well, perhaps a touch of Da Vinci code and just to make sure American's cared about the ridiculous plot the bad guy planned on taking back American. Imagine borrowing plot elements from that classic the Wild Wild West!). The bad buy looks a bit like a cross between Dracula and some Natzi Gestapo officer.
Not really worth the rental.
2012
(I) (2009)
This is what happens when special effects drive the story
29 March 2010
Warning: Spoilers
2012 is not just another end of the world film; its the dumbest of the lot. Knowing, had some intense emotion; deep impact had drama; the day the world stood still and the day after tomorrow had a message. 2012 has none of that. It has special effects of plane dodging around earthquakes, falling buildings, and volcanic bombs and ash. The story is basically some scientist find out the world is doomed to have catastrophic disasters -- that apparently happen every 600,000 year if I recall correctly. Nutrinos then mutate (nutrinos don't mutate because they are not alive) and start reacting with the core heating it up and causing the crust to destabilize and move. If they had change to become reactive, why would they react on the core and not the crush.... ahahahahahaha logic does not work with the mess of a plot. Although one would think that magma would be the first sign of the impending disaster, no, its non-tectonic earthquakes that are the first sign. Anyway to save parts of humanity, the governments of the world team up and build arks (as in Noah's ark) to save life as we know it - well the very rich and important people anyway. But instead of building them on the coast where they could be launched they build them in the mountains where they'd be crushed during earthquakes... But wait only one is damaged by an earthquake. Add to this the government that keep it all a secret for some unstated reason... why not give everyone a change to buy their own boat and have a chance to survive.
Anyway. the fact real tsunamis are only dangerous on land and barely register out in the open sea is never mentioned... apparently these Tsunamies are unique and require mountain top arks to survive. and these tsunamis stay on land for quite some time, but the film does not explain why these tsunamis defy gravity so well -- this is something about ocean floor stability is some confused non-sense in the background.
Everest is flooded by a wave 1500 metres high -- math was not a strong point of the directors I think. Oh, and lets not forget that China moves 1000 miles and yet only one ark is damaged in the ensuing earthquake... compare this to the Indonesian earthquake/tsunami that was around 9 on the Richter scale that moved the ocean floor a 100 feet or so... how could China move 1000 miles would out the mountain caves collapsing!!!!! OK, yes you go to a movie to be entertained, but this movie was not entertaining it was just a stupid film designed entirely around the special effects with not a moments thought to creating a satisfying story. It was not entertaining because it was not interesting to be entertaining.
With all the man made disasters that are much more probable, having a film maker stir up the audience with a silly contrived film about an improbable global disaster is just irresponsible. Its seemed designed to distract the audience from the more real disasters we are busy creating for ourselves (polutions, CO2, depleted oceans, dead patches in the oceans, ozone depletion etc.).
Anyway. the fact real tsunamis are only dangerous on land and barely register out in the open sea is never mentioned... apparently these Tsunamies are unique and require mountain top arks to survive. and these tsunamis stay on land for quite some time, but the film does not explain why these tsunamis defy gravity so well -- this is something about ocean floor stability is some confused non-sense in the background.
Everest is flooded by a wave 1500 metres high -- math was not a strong point of the directors I think. Oh, and lets not forget that China moves 1000 miles and yet only one ark is damaged in the ensuing earthquake... compare this to the Indonesian earthquake/tsunami that was around 9 on the Richter scale that moved the ocean floor a 100 feet or so... how could China move 1000 miles would out the mountain caves collapsing!!!!! OK, yes you go to a movie to be entertained, but this movie was not entertaining it was just a stupid film designed entirely around the special effects with not a moments thought to creating a satisfying story. It was not entertaining because it was not interesting to be entertaining.
With all the man made disasters that are much more probable, having a film maker stir up the audience with a silly contrived film about an improbable global disaster is just irresponsible. Its seemed designed to distract the audience from the more real disasters we are busy creating for ourselves (polutions, CO2, depleted oceans, dead patches in the oceans, ozone depletion etc.).
Fast & Furious
(2009)
In a field of stupid films... this one wins the race
24 August 2009
Warning: Spoilers
Its fast, its furious, its also ridiculous, stupid, and immoral.
If you approve of torture, criminals who are good guys, cops who act like criminals, and organized criminals who kill their successful employees, well, heres the film for you.
Vin Deisal plays the most anti-heroic hero I've seen in recent years. The fact that he is an unrepentant pirate is ignored as we are supposed to feel sorry for his incarceration at the end. But of all the scenes, the one where the crime boss tries to kill the successful drives who deliver the drugs. Why would they do that. Its an echo of a similarly ridiculous scene from the Dark Knight but this guy doesn't wear a scared smile. How did Hollywood get so out of touch with criminal behaviour.
Anyway, check your brain at the door cause this one is remarkably senseless, and pointless and idiotic etc..
Its not all bad. The action is pretty cool at times, though you can tell the stunts are fake.
If you approve of torture, criminals who are good guys, cops who act like criminals, and organized criminals who kill their successful employees, well, heres the film for you.
Vin Deisal plays the most anti-heroic hero I've seen in recent years. The fact that he is an unrepentant pirate is ignored as we are supposed to feel sorry for his incarceration at the end. But of all the scenes, the one where the crime boss tries to kill the successful drives who deliver the drugs. Why would they do that. Its an echo of a similarly ridiculous scene from the Dark Knight but this guy doesn't wear a scared smile. How did Hollywood get so out of touch with criminal behaviour.
Anyway, check your brain at the door cause this one is remarkably senseless, and pointless and idiotic etc..
Its not all bad. The action is pretty cool at times, though you can tell the stunts are fake.
The Code
(I) (2009)
mediocre film which substitute plot twists to hide the missing story
28 July 2009
Warning: Spoilers
"Code" is a mediocre film which substitutes plot twists to hide the missing story.
Double, double, double crossing... that about the story.
Oh, of course there is a vault which has a remarkable weakness -- the tumblers turn if you enter one number correctly, and of course there are the laser motion detectors (which don't exist in real life), that can be switched off by some mysterious electronic device. A vault with no internal alarms. Really stupid security guards. secured building with easy access to the subway. A bad guy who is a cop. An organized crime boss who is really a murder victim. A very sexy lawyer who somehow manages to associate with criminals without being disbarred. and lots of other non-sense.
Hollywood seems to be under the impression that plot twists can hide the fact that the story makes no sense.
Double, double, double crossing... that about the story.
Oh, of course there is a vault which has a remarkable weakness -- the tumblers turn if you enter one number correctly, and of course there are the laser motion detectors (which don't exist in real life), that can be switched off by some mysterious electronic device. A vault with no internal alarms. Really stupid security guards. secured building with easy access to the subway. A bad guy who is a cop. An organized crime boss who is really a murder victim. A very sexy lawyer who somehow manages to associate with criminals without being disbarred. and lots of other non-sense.
Hollywood seems to be under the impression that plot twists can hide the fact that the story makes no sense.
Hilarious
14 July 2009
Warning: Spoilers
I enjoyed Night at the Museum, but found it somewhat uneven. In part hilarious and at other part not so much.
Sequels are nearly always grossly inferior to the original. This one is about as good at the first film, perhaps even better.
It simply hilarious.
Highlights Custer -- everything he does including "we are not going to attack now" and "we're Americans, we don't plan". I felt the need to point out that Custer was a very successful officer during the civil war, but nay... just sit back and have fun.
Darth Vader and Oscar considered for membership in the leadership of the bad guys... and impotently trying to strangle with his mind.
The Einstein bobble heads.
The sculptures casually walking around in the background.
Pictures that you can go into or water can splash out of.
I highly recommend this film.
I did puzzle over who was going to clean up the mess left by the exhibits and why did no alarm sound... but it was fun and thats all that really mattered.
Sequels are nearly always grossly inferior to the original. This one is about as good at the first film, perhaps even better.
It simply hilarious.
Highlights Custer -- everything he does including "we are not going to attack now" and "we're Americans, we don't plan". I felt the need to point out that Custer was a very successful officer during the civil war, but nay... just sit back and have fun.
Darth Vader and Oscar considered for membership in the leadership of the bad guys... and impotently trying to strangle with his mind.
The Einstein bobble heads.
The sculptures casually walking around in the background.
Pictures that you can go into or water can splash out of.
I highly recommend this film.
I did puzzle over who was going to clean up the mess left by the exhibits and why did no alarm sound... but it was fun and thats all that really mattered.
Taken
(I) (2008)
Daddy knows best and France is dangerous
2 June 2009
Warning: Spoilers
This silly but very violent bit of non-sense could be summed up neatly as daddy knows best and France is dangerous. Not much else to the story.
Basically a girl from a well off background gets trapped into the sex slavery market through kidnapping and drugs, while visiting Paris.
The Daddy is some sort of superman super spy who now works as a body guard. He knows all about the world and was immediately worried when his daughter set off to spend some time in Europe with a friend. He knows how dangerous the world is and of course, in the traditional Daddy knows best theme... it turns out that France IS a dangerous country. So, then daddy turns into superman secret agent and kicks butt all over Europe.
If you don't mind pointless violence, like French bashing, the obligatory Arabic sounding bad guys, or if you think that outrage over a daughters abduction justifies torture, murder and other atrocities (shoting some French cop's wife) than, well, perhaps this is your film.
Personally I vacillated between laughing at the stupidity of the premise, thrilled at the display of martial arts, and at the same time disgusted over the film's violence.
Regarding the stupidity of the premise, I should explain that there is a terrible irony in the depiction of Europe as dangerous when the murder rate is 3.6 times higher in the US than in France. In addition, sexual slavery often involves importing 3rd world women into the US (and into France for that matter); not kidnapping well off US kids in France.
Basically a girl from a well off background gets trapped into the sex slavery market through kidnapping and drugs, while visiting Paris.
The Daddy is some sort of superman super spy who now works as a body guard. He knows all about the world and was immediately worried when his daughter set off to spend some time in Europe with a friend. He knows how dangerous the world is and of course, in the traditional Daddy knows best theme... it turns out that France IS a dangerous country. So, then daddy turns into superman secret agent and kicks butt all over Europe.
If you don't mind pointless violence, like French bashing, the obligatory Arabic sounding bad guys, or if you think that outrage over a daughters abduction justifies torture, murder and other atrocities (shoting some French cop's wife) than, well, perhaps this is your film.
Personally I vacillated between laughing at the stupidity of the premise, thrilled at the display of martial arts, and at the same time disgusted over the film's violence.
Regarding the stupidity of the premise, I should explain that there is a terrible irony in the depiction of Europe as dangerous when the murder rate is 3.6 times higher in the US than in France. In addition, sexual slavery often involves importing 3rd world women into the US (and into France for that matter); not kidnapping well off US kids in France.
OK time waster
17 April 2009
This film is not nearly as bad as some people seem to think (I liked it better than the recent batman that was so gosh darn popular). Yeah its corny, and the acting is not the best I've seen (to say the least), but it had some decent action. The evil wizard guy kept reminding me of William Shatner. Not too many actors have the skill to channel Shatner -- that guy will go far.
To confess I saw it on a cross ocean plane ride of some 13 hours in duration and I can think of worst ways to spend time on a long international flight.
As I said, its an OK for wasting time, and I'd recommend it to anyone who wants to laugh at a movie.
To confess I saw it on a cross ocean plane ride of some 13 hours in duration and I can think of worst ways to spend time on a long international flight.
As I said, its an OK for wasting time, and I'd recommend it to anyone who wants to laugh at a movie.
Nim's Island
(2008)
cute family film
9 September 2008
One of the best children fantasy films that I've ever seen. I'm really surprised at how low its rating is. Its amusing and fun and promotes important values such as courage, self-reliance, and heroism. It also does a great job in exploring what it means to be a hero and shows how a person can overcome the greatest phobias and other obstacles if motivated.
I'm a bit tired of fantasy films that always end in battles. This was a film that you could show to the entire family.
The DVD has some unusually interesting deleted scene that show a different take on the story.
My congratulations to the film makers.
I'm a bit tired of fantasy films that always end in battles. This was a film that you could show to the entire family.
The DVD has some unusually interesting deleted scene that show a different take on the story.
My congratulations to the film makers.
A Midsummer Night's Dream
(1999)
A dream
11 August 2008
The dream is my favourite Shakepearean play. Truth be told if I had the choice, I'd rather seen the Dream performed live. This is one of the most entertaining adaptations of Shakespeare I've seen on film. Most films of a Shakespearean play are boring, but this one was beautiful and hilarious. I rented it, but then purchase a copy so that I could enjoy it over and over again.
The soundtrack was perfect, the setting was elegant, and everything worked together.
Puck played by Stanley Tucciin was superb. I think he should get much larger movie roles then he has in the past. I also really enjoyed Kevin Klines interpretation of Bottom.
If you love the Dream, you'll love this film.
The soundtrack was perfect, the setting was elegant, and everything worked together.
Puck played by Stanley Tucciin was superb. I think he should get much larger movie roles then he has in the past. I also really enjoyed Kevin Klines interpretation of Bottom.
If you love the Dream, you'll love this film.
OK film, but terrible fight scenes
3 February 2008
Badly choreographed fights scenes detract from what would otherwise have been a decent film. The traditional Kung Fu movie always had the actors perform superhuman feats, but they were done in a way that always left one thinking, wow, how did he do that. But in this movie, the wire work is so obvious it kills all possible enjoyment of the martial arts. One doesn't think, "how did she do that" because the wires are just so obvious. And if the flying and jumping is so obviously fake that it make you think the entire fight scene is fake. Realism is fight scene is especially important when viewing a woman engaged in martial arts; to buy into the idea that she is a great warrior, the audience has to believe in her skill. So its particularly important that skill show be at least plausible.
Visually the film is stunning. The story might have been interesting, but I was so turned off by the poor quality of the action sequences that I really stopped paying attention to the story. I've seen many, many eastern martial arts films and this one has the worse choreography of them all.
Visually the film is stunning. The story might have been interesting, but I was so turned off by the poor quality of the action sequences that I really stopped paying attention to the story. I've seen many, many eastern martial arts films and this one has the worse choreography of them all.
The Simpsons Movie
(2007)
The Simpson's have truly lost their edge
4 January 2008
Warning: Spoilers
To tell the truth I had low expectations about this movie. Movies made to cash in on the popularity of a TV show are almost always terrible.
The best joke comes just after the opening sequence where Homer complains about paying to watch a show that he could see at home for free... I always appreciate a show that makes fun of its own audience. After that.... downhill all the way.
The story is that the lake is polluted and Lisa runs a campaign to clean it up. Homer, steals a pig from Crusty thereby saving it from death (something one would think that Lisa would congratulate him for). He appears to be a loving pet owner, which is rather out of character because loving pet owners tend to also be loving parents.
Anyway, he saves the waste in a silo which Marg tells him to get rid of properly. Instead he dumps it in the lake. The pig waste tips the balance of nature and a mutated squirrel grows new eyes. The EPA comes in, gives President Swartzenegar 5 options, a dome is placed over the city, the Simpson's escape and go to Alaska, blah, blah, blah.
OK, Simpson writers. I have news for you. Pig waste is natural. Pig waste is less disgusting than typical dog waste. If used properly is GOOD for the environment (fertilizer); placed in a lake is certainly not an ideal solution, but it would not create a mutant squirrel. Get your environmental problems straight. Industrial waste, or nuclear waste (doesn't Homer work at a nuclear energy plant! Duh!) or even careless disposal of household clearer or batteries would have made a more realistic story that would of made a point about pollution. But pig waste is natural! Anyway, why wouldn't Homer, just dispose of the pig waste like any dog owner gets rid of dog waste (e.g., flush it down the toilet, or put it in the garbage, or let it sit on the lawn, or let the pig poop in the park; yuck); why would he collect it in a silo? After that stupid story, the movie does not get better, it goes downhill.
The Simpson's used to be a marvelously cynical satire on modern life. I find the show has really gone downhill in recent years; the jokes are getting rather old and lame and repetitious; and much of the slapstick is getting rather juvenile. But the show is still much much better than this movie.
There are funny jokes in the movie -- especially centered around how politicians make decisions (so I give it a 2 for that, rather than a 1), also the spider pig theme is rather catchy, but is also very pointless. Overall there are few jokes worth listening too.
On the whole this is a really bad movie; if you love the Simpson's, watch the show. Don't waste your money on this movie.
The best joke comes just after the opening sequence where Homer complains about paying to watch a show that he could see at home for free... I always appreciate a show that makes fun of its own audience. After that.... downhill all the way.
The story is that the lake is polluted and Lisa runs a campaign to clean it up. Homer, steals a pig from Crusty thereby saving it from death (something one would think that Lisa would congratulate him for). He appears to be a loving pet owner, which is rather out of character because loving pet owners tend to also be loving parents.
Anyway, he saves the waste in a silo which Marg tells him to get rid of properly. Instead he dumps it in the lake. The pig waste tips the balance of nature and a mutated squirrel grows new eyes. The EPA comes in, gives President Swartzenegar 5 options, a dome is placed over the city, the Simpson's escape and go to Alaska, blah, blah, blah.
OK, Simpson writers. I have news for you. Pig waste is natural. Pig waste is less disgusting than typical dog waste. If used properly is GOOD for the environment (fertilizer); placed in a lake is certainly not an ideal solution, but it would not create a mutant squirrel. Get your environmental problems straight. Industrial waste, or nuclear waste (doesn't Homer work at a nuclear energy plant! Duh!) or even careless disposal of household clearer or batteries would have made a more realistic story that would of made a point about pollution. But pig waste is natural! Anyway, why wouldn't Homer, just dispose of the pig waste like any dog owner gets rid of dog waste (e.g., flush it down the toilet, or put it in the garbage, or let it sit on the lawn, or let the pig poop in the park; yuck); why would he collect it in a silo? After that stupid story, the movie does not get better, it goes downhill.
The Simpson's used to be a marvelously cynical satire on modern life. I find the show has really gone downhill in recent years; the jokes are getting rather old and lame and repetitious; and much of the slapstick is getting rather juvenile. But the show is still much much better than this movie.
There are funny jokes in the movie -- especially centered around how politicians make decisions (so I give it a 2 for that, rather than a 1), also the spider pig theme is rather catchy, but is also very pointless. Overall there are few jokes worth listening too.
On the whole this is a really bad movie; if you love the Simpson's, watch the show. Don't waste your money on this movie.
Lucky You
(2007)
part chick flick, part poker story; a failure at both
2 January 2008
Warning: Spoilers
To sum this mess up "Luck You" is 1 part chick flick, 1 part poker story and it is a miserable failure at both.
Who is the intended audience? My wife and I watched it together, I fast forwarded at 1.5 speed (where one can still here the vocal track) through the chick flick bits (they even managed to make sex boring) and she wanted to fast forward through the poker bits. But neither of us thought much of the film.
The poker in the film is lame. This is not a film for poker fans!!! Seeing real bets by real players, for stakes in the millions can be exciting. Watching well staged hands in seedy card club where life hangs in the balance (e.g., Rounders, Cincinatti Kid) can also be exciting in a film. But watching actors mess it up with fake posturing in a fake tournament, and folding out of sympathy (to his hated dad!), just isn't exciting to watch. To make matter worse nothing is really riding upon the game. Big deal if he make up with his dad, nothing in the film makes us care one way or the other.
I give it a two because the stupid lengths that Huck the gambler goes through to get his cash may educate someone. I told my daughter, you meet a guy like this dump him. But the movie unfortunately has a happy ending for the lovers (til they get the next rent if due notice). I'd have given it a 4 if she had dumped the loser and found someone more reliable to get it on with (his dad for example).
Overall, the film is one unrelentingly boring film.
Who is the intended audience? My wife and I watched it together, I fast forwarded at 1.5 speed (where one can still here the vocal track) through the chick flick bits (they even managed to make sex boring) and she wanted to fast forward through the poker bits. But neither of us thought much of the film.
The poker in the film is lame. This is not a film for poker fans!!! Seeing real bets by real players, for stakes in the millions can be exciting. Watching well staged hands in seedy card club where life hangs in the balance (e.g., Rounders, Cincinatti Kid) can also be exciting in a film. But watching actors mess it up with fake posturing in a fake tournament, and folding out of sympathy (to his hated dad!), just isn't exciting to watch. To make matter worse nothing is really riding upon the game. Big deal if he make up with his dad, nothing in the film makes us care one way or the other.
I give it a two because the stupid lengths that Huck the gambler goes through to get his cash may educate someone. I told my daughter, you meet a guy like this dump him. But the movie unfortunately has a happy ending for the lovers (til they get the next rent if due notice). I'd have given it a 4 if she had dumped the loser and found someone more reliable to get it on with (his dad for example).
Overall, the film is one unrelentingly boring film.
Tell Your Friends