Reviews written by registered user

Send an IMDb private message to this author or view their message board profile.

Page 1 of 9:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [Next]
88 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

7 out of 10 people found the following review useful:
Interesting, but technically flawed., 6 February 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Louis CK is a master at creating his own stuff that sells on his own website. Not many other people could pull that off.

The first episode of Horace & Pete (and as I'm writing this, the 2nd will be released in a few hours), was emailed to customers on his email-list, but with only a price tag of $5 - and nothing more! We didn't know what to expect. Or, actually, of course everyone expected an episode similar to Louis, or maybe a stand-up special.

Horace & Pete is neither of these things.

What strikes you first is the set, very similar to Cheers. Even some of the camera-angles are the same. Second, the cast. Steve Buscemi, Alan Alda, Jessica Lange - and that's only the top. The cast goes on.

Buscemi and Alda are perfectly cast. So perfectly cast that Louis himself seems awkwardly out of place. Alda also has the best lines, and it is with his barrages of unpleasant, misogynous and racist dialogue that Louis CK's script really shines. You can see that those parts were the easy parts for Louis CK to write.

The DRAMA though - and this is what strikes you, third - is good, but balances on a fine line of becoming either a bit boring, or a bit too over-the-top. BUT it is the first episode, AND it is Louis CK, so you can forgive this. Easily. Because it never dips into the pretentiousness that it could've with a less experienced writer and director.

Impressivly, this production is made by Louis CK himself. Financing, directing, writing, producing - even distributing! That also means that the product has some technical flaws. The worst one being sound! Please oh please, Louis - clean up the sound! This is filmed theater, and as such it's great - but we still need a perfect product. This is the hardest part to forgive - but I do know how extremely difficult this type of sound is. It will hopefully, and probably, be better in the later episodes.

Editing is also a bit jumpy in some parts, and too lengthy in others, but the type of product this is means that we don't mind.

But prepare yourself for a slow moving drama-comedy. This is not Louis, this is not a one-hour-special, this is something Louis CK never really done before. It IS different. And with all the cool action-packed nudeness TV-series with chaotic violence ála Gotham, Black Sails and Game of Thrones - Horace and Pete sticks out like a 60s dramedy.

To be able to be part of this is amazing. Don't stop Louis CK! All your fans are eagerly awaiting the next episode.

Automata (2014/I)
1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Slow but interesting., 30 November 2014

It is I, ROBOT (2004), but slower. Starts out very nice with cool city locations, nice detective story, a bit noir-ish sci-fi. Then makes some bad choices and becomes a European drama - in a stupid way. Danish Sörensen is worst - but she doesn't have anything to work with either. Terrible dialog and a boring (almost mean) character, does make it difficult for her. Griffith doesn't understand her own dialog as Dr Dupre - she does a better job as Cleo. Though her movie CHERRY 2000 (1987), with a similar story, is better.

Overall it's an interesting film with some really cool locations and neat robots. Dialogue is awful at places and the action moments are completely off. Suspense is not there at all, and the slow movements of the robots doesn't make them interesting - mainly, they're furniture.

Antonio Banderas does a great job though. He seems to enjoy himself, and that's the only reason why you're going to be able to watch the whole thing. If you're not used to watch European films, this will be difficult for you.

It surprises me a bit that it isn't better. Someone made a bad decision on making this too much drama, and that's what kills it. Had it stayed a detective story, without a shot fired, no wife and robots that actually does something, it had been a better film.

Maybe a fan edit will save this one someday...

Elysium (2013/I)
Looks nice, but has too many problems., 5 February 2014

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

With a cast of Matt Damon, Jodie Foster, Sharlto Copley and Wagner Moura, directed by Neill Blomkamp, with a huge budget - what can go wrong? Apparently, a lot.

ELYSIUM is like OBLIVION (2013) (the sci-fi-disaster starring Cruise). It is visually really neat, cast and budget is as good as it gets and directors are considered some of the best right now.

But both have major problems. I won't go into Oblivion - that's a different story.

Elysium starts out with great visuals, which is its strength. It then goes on to try to describe the main character Max (Damon), but fails to deliver something interesting. It's a misch-masch of boring scenes where nothing really happens.

Introduction to other (major) characters, as Spider (Moura) is sloppy. Foster gets a lot of screen time, but her direction was obviously not great. Feels like she's reading cue-cards. She looks and feels extremely uncomfortable until her death scene - which seems to be a relief of finally being written out of this mess. That's also her best performance in this film, maybe just because of that.

Best of the actors, however, is the too little used character Frey, played by the excellent Alice Braga. She doesn't seem to have anything to prove, and because of this, she makes a small and pretty insignificant character believable and good.

Worst if the character Spider (though the always good Moura does what he can with the badly written part), who is presented as a bad-guy in the beginning, but turns good in the end - for no particular reason at all.

But it is the script that makes this a bland and uninteresting film. It simply doesn't make sense.

Yes - SPOILERS ahead: If the "med bays" was so important to the story - why not introduce them a bit better and earlier? And why didn't we see that this is the reason why Elysium is fighting against the Earth population? As it is presented now, there seem to be an enormous amount of med-bays - and if that is the case, why not give the Earth population access to them (as they do in the end, which doesn't affect Elysium at all, by the way) and in one blow remove the will and reason for the Earth population to try to gain access to Elysium. Now sure, there are other reasons to go to Elysium, but the Elysium powers-at-be, would have a stronger power over the Planet's population.

All this is never addressed, and it's the main flaw in the whole script. Worse is: the whole story hangs on it. Which actually makes the whole movie completely illogical and totally useless. What's the point, really? I still give this movie a 5 out of 10. It deserves some points for visuals, cast and for some interesting scenes. I like the locations (most, except those that look like taken from ESCAPE FROM NEW YORK), props, costumes and vehicles.

Music is bland, gore and violence is extremely uneven (very gory at a few points, and nothing at most other instances), script is terrible and direction is lacking.

It's disappointing to see such a promising director as Bloomkamp not being successful here. I can only assume it has something to do with the high budget. With this high budget, the producers and investors get way too much power - both over storyline as over final edit. Maybe Bloomkamp can, in the future, go back and re-edit something better out of this. It kind of deserves it.

2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Corny and childish - but nice action., 16 October 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

It still surprises me that one can get $190M USD to make superior action and wonderful CGI in a 131 minute movie - but leave out character development and serious and realistic sounding dialog. The "scientists" sounds like mice (are probably supposed to be funny) and the characters are, well... kinda boring.

Too many HOORAH's and applauding scenes for me - not really sure why they're there anyway, it just makes a pretty stupid film more dorky.

That said - the action sequences are beautiful and cool. The "aliens" are nice, though nothing you haven't seen before. Conveniantly, they have flashlights in their mouths too! It's sad that there are almost no Huge Robot-movies that can handle this theme with respect and make something serious. All Giant Robot movies doesn't have to be for kids. GANHEDDO (1989) is probably one of the only darker live-action giant robot films ever made.

Pacific Rim is nothing but CGI animations battling it out for total destruction. There's no suspense, no build ups, no real movie here. But as a CGI show-reel, this is amazing.

To be honest - the live action parts can be fast-forwarded (except for the Mako flashback scene, which is good - especially since it lacks dialog).

I give it a 6 out of 10 anyway, because the director is a hero, Rinko Kikuchi did a great job - and I simply LOVE Giant Robots!

Oblivion (2013/I)
4 out of 7 people found the following review useful:
Directed by Captain Obvious for kids., 30 July 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

First - OBLIVION has a great cast and looks wonderful! The post-apocalyptic setting is one of the best I've ever seen, it's beautiful and cool, tough and a bit epic.

Sounds - especially the sound effects of the drones - are equally great. Maybe the sounds of the drones are actually the best thing of the whole film! Yes - they are.

However, that's it. The story is messy with tons of irregularities. It doesn't stick to it's own logic/realism and is very obvious. You will know what's going to happen next - you can even tell what LINES they're going to say! It's that obvious.

This makes it a bit boring at places. Especially the whole dream-sequence (which the film-makers for some reason seem forced to show you ten times) is a tired shot that doesn't add anything to the film at all. Yes - we understood the concept in the first frame - now get on with it! Yes, it's a summer-blockbuster-movie, but it's so dumbed down that it feels like the title should be OBVIOUS FOR DUMMIES instead.

It's based on a graphic novel (which I haven't read), but the film uses re-hashes from IMMORTAL (also graphic novels from the 80's + a 2004-feature film), the FALLOUT games and a bit of MATRIX thrown in for the "mystery" + MOON of course.

It's a pretty stupid film though, even though it's entertaining at parts. If it was a low-budget feature with no known names I wouldn't complain. But this is a major sci-fi with a $120M budget! Question is: why didn't they spend at least a few hundred bucks on a script that was air-tight? Watch this with your brain turned off.

Prometheus (2012/I)
8 out of 16 people found the following review useful:
Doesn't live up to the hype., 1 June 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I expected more. ALIEN + the trailer tells the whole story. There's just nothing more in this. And sadly, there's no characters and no antagonist either.

That said - this is a very well made movie with tons of great effects and nice settings. Beautiful at places and down right nasty at others. Really cool.

But you know - if you stretch out a film over 120 minutes, you should really have material for it. Sadly, PROMETHEUS does not have that.

Sure - Scott wants to save something for the sequel to this, but we who pay to watch the film actually wants to see THIS film. Hence, this film has to stand alone - and it doesn't.

Without the next installment, and ALIEN, this movie would make no sense at all - and scriptwise, it would go directly to an extensive re-write.

Most significant of script errors is the lack of an antagonist. There's just no suspense in the first part of the film. The second part kicks off good - and is really watchable - but only because of cheap thrills and tricks.

It's still a far better film than much else being made today, but for $120M dollars you'd expect them to hire writers that can really really write. We've actually seen much of this in tons of other films, and it's just not fun anymore. Give us something new! If it was a $1M movie, then I wouldn't complain. For that budget, this would be super.

But when you play around with $120M and you still make old-make-up that looks like in the BACK TO THE FUTURE-films - then you know that someone needs to get a reality check.

0 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Looks great - is boring., 6 November 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Extremely well made. Looks wonderful. Child actors in the first 30 minutes are super impressive. Actually, ALL actors in the film are impressive! So are the action, the music, the sound effects, the CGI - everything is impressive! Except one thing and that is Conan the character. He's Superman without cryptonite. Which makes him completely boring. Which makes the movie boring.

Sadly, but the film is so well made that they forgot to make the main character interesting. Well - if you have a billion dollars and don't care about what you're doing, this is what you end up with.

Schwarzenegger's version was more entertaining - this one looks better.

If you're looking for a movie - rent the 1982-version.

If you're looking for something visually cool - watch this.


Mass Effect 2 (2010) (VG)
6 out of 73 people found the following review useful:
A bit boring., 23 January 2011

I don't know what I expected, but I felt ME2 was a bit boring. It felt like I've already played through this. Story is very straight forward and narrow.

Overall, everything is very competent done, and voice-acting is extremely good, graphics are good, music nice etc. But it feels like something is lacking.

It felt like someone else was controlling Shepard. I didn't have enough choices, everything was already there. Not like filling blanks, but more like following a drawing-by-numbers.

In 2011, we actually expect more from a super-high-budget game than this.

12 out of 15 people found the following review useful:
Back to Italin post-nuke!, 15 January 2011

Since I've made low-budget films myself, I first must say that I am impressed by what Simone put together with Philip Kim's script.

It's a professional product and very nice production value throughout. Especially some of the car-scenes had some complicated and really nice filming. I enjoyed the editing with the German-like experimental split-screen - especially since it was mostly used to tell two sides of the same scene.

Of course, we have seen most of this before. Especially in the MAD MAX-films, of course, but mostly, this film resembles A BOY AND HIS DOG (1975) and there's also a lot of nods to Enzo Castellari's incredible Italian Mad Max-rip off I NUOVI BARBARI (1982).

Downstream IS very Italian. If you haven't seen any of the Italian post-nuke films, then you're missing out on a lot of the films inspiration.

Mostly, I thought this was well-made and for the low budget these people worked with, they created a nice film that works. Sadly, the ending is a bit slow.

Otherwise, the fights and car-action was very good. It reminds me a lot of Marshall's DOOMSDAY (2008), of course - but do remember that that film had a $30M budget and this only a $1M! So if you like the casual Italian post-apocalypse thing, then this is for you.

Predators (2010)
2 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
Nothing special..., 7 October 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

We've seen humans being hunted by predators before. Many times. This is just one more movie showing the same thing. Sadly! PREDATORS could have been a great film. It has nice CGI (I love the spaceships and the planets!), good acting and nice filming and editing. Sound is OK, but nothing unique.

However, the storyline and the locations are actually pretty boring. There's nothing new presented here, even AvP and its sequel are more interesting than this.

The film is placed in some generic forests, not even jungles, and low camera hints of small and cheap sets and locations. The predator "main camp" looks like a small camp-fire setup that was built for $1000. The rest is, well, nothing special...

Storywise we see much more interesting development in PREDATOR 2 (1990). The story could've used much more predator-character development, and almost tries, but looses it. Instead, the film goes for a generic (and extremely boring and unfit!) character "twist" in the end, which is just silly. (And the "yakuza sword fight scene" in the middle is even more misplaced - and boring).

$45 Million in budget should show a better script than this.

Sad - could've been so much better. Right now, it's just plain.

Page 1 of 9:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [Next]