Change Your Image
nino-jovcov
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Lists
An error has ocurred. Please try againReviews
The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013)
It took a deep breath and then blew me away
The Beorn scene: I see it as taking a deep breath. Insecure one, for sure, but deep enough to blow me away after wards. In that scene I kind of had a felling that Jackson intention was to "correct the mistake" from the previous one, on which critics had pointed out. He rushed into really serious tone, being "afraid" that he will be criticized for silly humor again. I think, that the Beorn scene, in the book, belongs to that silly and childish part of the story, and then, slowly, gets serious. Maybe then Tolkien realized he could write a story for everyone. But, thanks to that deep breath, nevertheless Beorns segment was left out of the competition, the movie accomplishes to rise in speed of light to a level of a real spectacle. Using the "further reading" and his imagination, Jackson finally succeeds to place this trilogy very close to his old one, on the scale of epic adaptations of Tolkiens Middle-earth. Luke Evans in the role of Bard proved to be an excellent compensation of Beorns "shortcomings", and Orlando Bloom finally passed the exam. Evangeline Lilly took his title from LOTR trilogy, being the weakest link in the cast. This sequel cleverly and seriously maintains tension and brings new breathtaking scenes, it also leaves plenty of space for third to catch the momentum. I wouldn't recommend it to the youngest, unlike its predecessor, because it has completely lost children's atmosphere, as the book itself was developing in that manner, so that's commendable. Scenes with Smaug represent homework for any film maker out there. Highest level of cinematography. Brilliant!
9.7 out of 10.
After Earth (2013)
Film is real. Liking it is a choice.
It's not the best Shyamalan's edition, but I must say that I had read the critics before watching the movie, and I can't see what is so wrong about this movie? It's nothing special, I know, I don't think so either, but not worth watching? How that came up? I recognized classical Shyamalan's work, which I like, pretty much in this as in his other movies. Fear motive was carved and elaborated pretty ingenious. Visually, movie captures you, and doesn't let you go till the end. Story is a bit cliché and on a WoW (World of WarCraft) quest level, but that's something that I got used to, lately, especially in science fiction. I also noticed that Smith Jr. was critically acclaimed the worst child actor, but I strongly disagree. He carries his part as every child of his age would, with some minimal exceptions. Smith Sr. was indifferently good (never too good or too bad) as always, that man does not age. That classical parts I was talking about earlier, sometimes giving the inside of the character's thoughts, sometimes not, persistently repeating one main trauma and memory was something that kept the movie going. With a great ride, I got something to think about, Shyamalan's interpretation of one of the most interesting motives in history of man kind, fear. It has been brought to the audience by simply , physically showing and presenting, but through the story we can see it interpreted as a biggest fear, fear for your future, something that hasn't yet happened, fear we all feel and live with every day. From that point of view, it doesn't exist, only danger is real, it inspires you not only to think, yet to experiment with your own life. This film is real, liking it is a choice. I've chosen to like it.
Anna Karenina (2012)
Only for people who didn't read the book
A classic like Anna Karenina can't be done in a single movie, by my opinion. I had many problems with this movie. It is sad when a man from Serbia (where trains are often late more than one hour) has to say that this train was the one he's been waiting for the longest time. Somewhere at half of the movie I was trying to summon the train, and the director kept poking the audience with it, something Leo didn't bother his readers with, more than once. Interesting scene changes were pretty symbolic and lifelike, so I didn't have problem with them. Maybe the biggest negative point could be given to the cast, actually the choice. I don't think Keira and Aaron are bad actors, but they were seriously lost in this movie, not for the parts. Well, Aaron isn't even old enough to play Vronsky. I didn't like Domhnall Gleeson as Levin, neither. Jude Law did a pretty good job. Matthew Macfadyen, Alicia Vikander did great jobs also, but, their characters, Oblonsky and Kitty, were extremely neglected and forgotten by the director and/or the screenwriter. They were somehow too busy dealing with the love story, which was not the main accent of the book. The main accent is the family and society, just check the first sentence. We didn't see at least f or s of those two words. This is romantic tragicomedy and parody, only for people who didn't read the book. Let's say that there are more people who read the book, so this movie deserves a 4 out of 10.
The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012)
I didn't want to believe it was over
I was rubbing my eyes, trying to convince myself that i don't see the credits. Fastest 169 minutes of my life, and i didn't watch it in 48fps, only 3D. First, i must say i am a big Tolkien fan, and my favorite books and movies are trilogy "The Lord of The Rings". Second, i must say i am a big fantasy fan, i even write it (not famous yet). Third, i must say i have traveled 200km (100 in one direction) only to see this movie (i don't have a cinema in my town), and paid 1200 Serbian dinars (about 10 euros) for the trip and cinema ticket. Even if the movie was bad, i would't have the guts to say i didn't like it. But i have the honor to say that i was worth even much more.
That have been said, i can review the title. Simply, amazing. I don't want to diminish Tolkien's work, but i think it exceeded the book (it's not better, those two are different type of art, they cannot be compared like that), it has more to say but in a simpler way. I don't want to spoil anything, you will see which of the parts of the book are in there, which aren't, which are changed and which are added from other Tolkien's work and director's and screen writer's imagination. Peter Jackson outdone himself (it's not better than LOTR but i can equal it with TFOTR) in making a movie after the book.
Peter Jackson with help of Del Toro made a really good, family classic, expanding the book, popping up many questions and making it for all ages (book was written chiefly for kids). Martin Freeman (except for the first 20 sec of appearance) did an Oscar worth job. Ian McKellen, Richard Armitage, Andy Serkis and rest of the cast did really good too. Music is fantastic, both the new theme and the old ones which awoke nostalgia. Visual effects and costume design are probably the best i have seen ever, even better than LOTR. My mouth were dry after the movie, i couldn't close them, from scene to scene effects and landscape get more and more breathtaking. Orcs, Goblins and Trolls were updated and enhanced (you'll see how when you watch the movie).
I wanted this review to get an objective tone, so i must mention flaws of the film, which he had, like every other thing in this world. A few logical and material mistakes, story not rounded (it couldn't be, it's one book split in 2 + 1 movies) and some motives repeated from LOTR. But i must say, i am quite impressed, and my expectations which were high, were surpassed maybe even twice. If it came out before LOTR series, maybe, just maybe it would have been better, but even now the future trilogy will be a really wonderful and appropriate prequel. Can't wait for the second part. I warmly recommend it to everyone (not just fantasy and Tolkien's or LOTR fans). Really nice Christmas gift from Mr. Jackson and rest of the crew.
Secret Window (2004)
Movie that fits it's genre
I'm not going to try to summarize the movie through the plot, because this is my first review, and i could spoil it in some way, by accident. So let's just start with my opinion. I was pleased with the film, acting, effects, music and directing. I must say i did predict the ending, because (King is not a saint nor the lord of the ideas) motive and the story aren't really something new and original, it has been present for centuries in literature and other art, nevertheless, i was surprised with director's solutions that have brought vibrancy and excitement in the plot and the movie itself. I shall also add that Depp's performance did half of the job. Now the main thing, the genre. Movie fits it's genre, thriller, it doesn't jump out of it in any way, it's not a horror, it's not a crime - drama, it's a thriller, as the matter of fact, it's a shiny example of that genre. Ending, the strongest part of the movie gives you something to think about, and it gives you the final thrills. Seen better and worse, so i would say the movie is... average. Graders of my review, don't be harsh, it's my first review. Thank you.