Reviews written by registered user

4 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
We've all seen this movie before haven't we?, 6 June 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Well I'm not sure whether you could call this review a spoiler. After all, I think we all knew what was going to happen.

Let's see, It's about an underdeveloped villain and criminal mastermind who wants to make America suffer like they made him & his country people suffer and confidently thinks he can take down the most powerful nation of the world by plotting a direct assault that destroys several flags & monuments that symbolize American freedom and kidnapping a tough president who would rather die than negotiate with terrorists though his only weakness is that he cares for his colleagues and family who have all been taken hostage by the army of offensively portrayed foreign terrorists who apparently outclass an entire group of well-trained security guards but are still taken out one by one by a rugged patriotic soldier who doesn't seem to impress the terrorists despite his achievements and taunting one-liners and who according to a skeptic high military official cannot be trusted because he failed his job years before which also means the hero now has a chance to redeem himself by saving the president who then proceeds to give an inspiring "USA! USA!" speech that celebrates the fact that the country's system failed miserably and had to be saved by one man who remains extremely discrete about it and wants nothing but to return to his wife to make up for a previously missed date.

*Spoilers end here*

Yup, I've seen this film before. All in all I think this movie was done better than most other flicks of the same genre. It doesn't reach the Independence Day level of cheesiness. That still doesn't take away the fact that the story was one big cliché. It had entertainment value though.


Sadly, just another way to prove that the series should have died along with Peter Sellers., 2 July 2009

Over the years, the Pink panther series have faced dozens of "Jump the Shark" moments. I have always enjoyed the first five movies of this franchise although I agree that after a while, the movies started to get a bit weaker and become more child friendly. Even so, Peter Sellers's performance of the character "Inspector Clouseau" was enough to make any decent movie. Clouseau still remains one of the greatest characters on screen to me and it was logical that the entire plot of each film more or less revolved around that character.

After Sellers's death, several attempts were made to revive the series in the form of various movies. Each one of them was more horrific than the previous one.

Director Blake Edwards eventually decided to retire from the series. Does this mean that the presence of Sellers was essential for the creation of a new Pink Panther movie? This question was eventually answered with the release of this movie. I was already disappointed with the news that they were making another Pink Panther movie but I still gave it a chance. Basically, I think it's a bit better that Blake Edwards's last movie but that doesn't mean a lot.

The first problem of this film lies with the basic formula its-self. The Pink Panther was more than just a slapstick movie. The slapstick genre was revised with the introduction of a brilliant character which was able to turn a small problem into a chaos without being aware of it. THIS movie simply follows a chain of over the top childish old-school humor. They completely missed the point! The other reason why I think that this movie doesn't work has to do with the portrayal of the characters: Clouseau: Peter Sellers had completely mastered his own character. It was perfect. The idea of a stupid and arrogant French inspector who destroys everything seems a bit absurd but Sellers was able to create such a natural appearance that the public could soon grow accustomed to it. Sellers BECAME his own character. Steve Martin on the other hand failed to turn himself into Clouseau. His version of the character looked more like a poor impersonation. Apart from that, the French accent he used wasn't his own making him very annoying.

Ponton: What happened to Cato!? I heard the character was removed in order to avoid stereotyping. My reaction was: They still want to make a film about some fake French guy who's unable to pronounce Hamburger but they can't include an Asian guy performing martial arts because they think it's too offensive!? Dreyfus: Kevin Kline is a great comedian but his version of Dreyfus was pretty weak. Instead of doing the psychotic Dreyfus who's about to lose his mind, he played just another angry police commissioner.

Xania: Beyoncé is NOT an actress. They should have known that after seeing Austin Powers 3: Goldmember.

I might sound a bit conservative when analyzing all those characters but I think it just proves how difficult it is to repeat a a certain idea with a different formula. In this case, they intended to bring the franchise to a younger audience but took the essence out. There were only a few moments in the entire film which made me laugh but there were also lot's of sequences which almost made me cry. I'm not going to mention them.

I know that there's a sequel of this movie that has just been released. My first reaction was:'WHY!? Haven't they learned jet?' If you're a long time Pink Panther fan. I don't recommend this movie to you. Tom me, the real Pink Panther died a long time ago.

10 out of 10 people found the following review useful:
Definitely beats its sequels, 20 October 2008

I've lived in Mexico for a few years and grew up watching various anime. For some reason, many of them such as Dragonball weren't as popular in the US and many European countries back then. It's only since the turn of the century that this franchise hit the US.

I stopped watching the series years ago. This has mainly to do because I didn't really like the English dub of DBZ with lot's of cuts and a complete new soundtrack. It's just recently that I rediscovered the whole franchise through the internet and my conclusion is that these original series from the DB trilogy are actually much better than DBZ.

If you don't like DBZ & DBGT or think they Jumped the Shark at some point, it's probably due to one of these reasons:

-The characters grew ridiculously strong and got stronger every minute.

-The battles became long and monotonous.

-Too much time was wasted in having people stare at each other explaining the plot which wasn't always that interesting.

-The villains got too far fetched (Majin Buu is a great example).

-Several characters lost its importance.

-You don't like these kind of anime at all.

Except if it's the last one, I think you're probably going to prefer the original DB cause most of these aspects weren't nearly as exaggerated. This show is in its essence an adventure story based on an old Chinese tale called A Journey to the West. It revolves, in this case, around several martial artists so it does contain a lot of fights. What differentiates this show from its successors is that, since this is where it all began, none of the characters were too Godlike to start with. The fights were therefore not only way shorter (a few episodes at max) but also funnier and more interesting. It wasn't all about who's the strongest one? The reason why I prefer DB above DBZ is almost the same one as why I never really liked the English dubbed DBZ. It really became too over the top at one point and I felt like they tried to make the show cooler than it already was.

Another characteristic that DBZ and DBGT lacked is the atmosphere. Most of this anime takes place in a fictional type of China with a plot which belonged to the fantasy genre. In DBZ however, it switched over to science fiction and most of the fights took place in open fields.

The last aspect is the characters. Of course, Goku is the protagonist, but this series also introduced a lot more iconic characters with all unique aspects. The antagonists on the other hand were also much more interesting since most of the weren't actually "super villains". At the beginning you had Pilaf who was basically a comic relief followed by the Red Ribbon army containing several kinds of bad guys and ending up with Piccolo Daimaoh who, up to date, is my favourite DB villain.

I still like DBZ but sometimes I really wonder whether it would've been better for them to quit much earlier because I was a bit disappointed by the way it ended.

One other thing. It's only now when I realize that this anime is definitely not meant for little children, it's meant for everyone who likes anime. Some parts, I enjoy more than I used to because of the mature sense of humour. If you want to watch it, look for uncut versions.

52 out of 68 people found the following review useful:
Still my favorite Batman movie but wait... let me tell you why!, 17 October 2008

I've enjoyed this movie ever since I was a kid and I still do. I also liked Batman forever back then but the real difference is that THIS movie didn't date when I grew up. I did notice a few scenes in this film that didn't make any sense like: 'Hhmm... the crowd is angry. Hey! Where did they get those tomatoes from?' Then I thought: 'who cares? This movie is not 100% serious anyway!'

The original Tim Burton Batman was great as well but it was a bit cheesy at some parts and I didn't like all the actors. This movie improved on almost every aspect with a wonderful cast, a more Gothic style and no involvement of Prince.

Nowadays, many fans of the Christopher Nolan movies dislike Burton claiming that the Nolan movies are more serious and therefore more loyal to the comics. I don't think this is entirely true: -There has never been an adaptation of the original concept of Batman which was a vengeful criminal killer with a gun. -Batman has taken many forms over the years peeking its silliness in the 60's (and a bit with Batman & Robin). A director is free to choose what kind of Batman he's going to portray as long if it's good.

My opinion: Batman doesn't necessarily have to be serious. It's about a man in a rubber suit with pointy ears. Burton managed to create a perfect balance between the silliness and the darkness surrounding the whole idea.

I just recently watched the Nolan movies and I love those ones as well (especially The Dark Knight). There's simply something about this movie that interests me more. Nolan's goal was to give the character much more depth and in doing so, he looked for an explanation of nearly every aspect of Batman. That's a bit too much for me, I'm a bigger fan of the more abstract version of Batman. The Burton movies are more theatrical and centered around the atmosphere.

My conclusion is that you shouldn't compare the Nolan with the Burton movies. They're just different and it's up to you to decide which one you like better. My respect is for both directors.