blackbriar246 Reviews

The Mummy (2017)

Don't believe the butthurt from Fraser fans - a good film and a great start to a new cinematic universe

[8/10 · 9 June 2017]

First of all, I was expecting this movie to be total garbage.

Second, this is definitely intended as the first of several Universal monster movie remakes, which will all take place in the same universe and have some degree of crossover. Some not too subtle nods to Jekyll and Hyde, Dracula, and the Creature from the Black Lagoon. Could have been more that I missed.

Third, this film strays quite a bit from the original Mummy film and Fraser's Mummy movies.

I was very worried about this movie. I'm a big fan of the original Universal monster films, and I was afraid that this would be another 2010 Wolfman. Thankfully, this time, the filmmakers hit the sweet spot - the movie fits well with modern audiences but pays homage to the original Universal monsters. It's not a fantastic movie, but it excels at what it is: an action monster romp and the introduction to the monster cinematic universe.

The film differs quite a bit from the original: it is set in modern day, and the mummy is female. The mummy being female doesn't change things that much, although the back story is changed quite a bit. I enjoyed the new back story and found it more interesting than the one in the original film and in Fraser's. The modern day setting added something fresh: let's not forget that we have seen 3 mummy films set back several decades in Egypt.

Tom Cruise plays the same sort of character that he always does, but it wasn't offensive here. Sofia is great as the mummy. Jake Johnson is enjoyable and funny, but thankfully doesn't overshadow the darker tones of the film. Russell Crowe is a treat. The other characters are serviceable.

Without getting too into spoilers, this new cinematic universe seems off to a great start. The concept of monsters in the modern age is handled mostly seriously, but with the occasional humor - this topic can't be taken completely seriously after all. It isn't as dim and grim and depressing as the DC universe seems to be headed, but it is more serious and gritty than the Marvel films.

A pleasant surprise. Don't expect it to hold to the original film or the Fraser movies and you'll enjoy it. And with any amount of success, there will be more monster movies to follow.

Fear the Walking Dead (2015–2023)

Don't believe the current 8/10 stars; read the reviews

[3/10 · 24 August 2015]

The Walking Dead at least had a strong first season, even if it went back and forth from awful to mediocre from season 2 on. But Fear the Walking Dead stutters and stalls as soon as the light turns green. Everything moved so slowly; after an hour and a half still not much has happened. It could be called character building, but the characters are thin and boring. It could be called drawing out suspense, but we've had multiple seasons of what will be the aftermath of Fear the Walking Dead, so we already know, in a sense, what will happen. There is no tension to draw out. Almost every single plot point in this pilot event was predictable. It felt like it was written by a middle schooler. Boring and predictable. Like The Walking Dead but without any of the beloved characters like Rick or Michonne or Daryl. Doubt I'll be tuning in again.

The Maze Runner (2014)

Book is way better, but there are worse book-to-movie adaptions

[5/10 · 26 September 2014]

To start, if you're torn between reading the book first or seeing the movie first, read the book. Then go see the movie knowing that it's changed some things around and is an overall lesser experience. If you HAVE TO SEE THE MOVIE RIGHT NOW, then give the book a whirl if you don't absolutely hate the movie.

If you read the book, you'll probably be a bit disappointed. The more I think about it, the more things I remember were left out. I'd say that overall the movie kept about 55% of the content from the book.

A lot of stuff was either compressed or completely cut. A lot of things were changed around too. Characters act and/or look different, some key elements from the plot are shortened or absent, etc. The movie isn't an incoherent, awful mess like Eragon was, but it isn't as faithful an adaption as the Harry Potter movies were.

To give some examples without spoiling anything:

• the relationships between the characters are shadows of what they are in the book, especially Thomas/Theresa

• the 'rules' of the Maze are different and thus key events unfold differently

• the whole story moves much quicker and things happen pretty fast. It's very action-driven and things sort of happen to the characters rather than them figuring things out. I also think that the movie takes place over a shorter period of time than the book.

• the whole thing is less violent and dark, probably to appeal to the tween girls that cling to leading man Dylan O'Brien's ankles

But as I said, not a disaster. Visually, the movie looks pretty decent. The CGI isn't bad and the sets for the Glade, Maze, etc were cool. The acting was all on point, especially Dylan O'Brien and whoever did Chuck and Newt. I remember seeing the Newt dude in Doctor Who a while back. Hopefully they move on to bigger and better things, especially Dylan. the dude's the one bright spot in Teen Wolf and he was also the person who brought this movie up from a 4/10 to a 5. Guy's a good actor. And yea I'll admit, I went into this movie already a fan of his.

ANYWAY

I'm a bit torn on how I feel about all the changes made.... on the one hand, it grinds my gears a bit because I feel like the book's version of events is better. On the other hand, it keeps things fresh for people who have already read the book. But you know what, if you go to see a movie based on a book you've read, you aren't going for a new experience. You're going to see the story that you read on paper and acted out in your head played out on the big screen. So in that regard, the movie fails.

Go into the theater knowing the experience will be different, and you might not hate it. You might even enjoy it a little bit.

But on its own, it's a 'meh' movie, and as an adaption, it doesn't do the best job. So if I had to sum up my feelings about this movie in one sentence, it would be:

Not the worst thing ever.

How's that for advertising. Stick it on the posters and trailers.

THE MAZE RUNNER Not the worst thing ever. - blackbriar246

The Wolfman (2010)

Just keep in mind that it's a remake of the first real werewolf movie, it's gonna be cheesy

[6/10 · 2 April 2010]

While this movie was a bit of a disappointment, it was still really fun.

First the good. The atmosphere is great, tons of fog with an amazing score by Danny Elfman. Del Toro does a good job as a tortured Lawrence Talbot and Hopkins is great as a tragedy-ridden, world-weary old man.The werewolf, while not exactly the most terrifying creature to grace a screen, does look pretty cool (better than the original anyway), and the action scenes give you that sense of spine-tingling, smile-inducing awesomeness. The transformation scenes are where the Wolfman really shines. They are by far the best parts of the movie.

Now, the bad. While Del Toro is nice as Talbot, he isn't given much time to work with Talbot's emotions because very little screen time is spent on character development or backstory. This causes three things: 1)it a bit difficult to sympathize with Talbot 2)some plot turns can be hard to follow and 3)his and Gwen's relationship gets serious out of nowhere. While the werewolf does look cool, it's also pretty cheesy. His teeth in particular made me cringe. I think they should have gone the way the Nightmare on Elm Street remake is: 80-90% makeup, 10-20% CGI. Because the villain is insanely easy to guess, (just look at the cast list), the plot twist at the end is not that surprising. The fight scene at the end of the movie was a good idea, but poorly executed. And some parts of the movie felt rushed.

Overall, not scary, but just fun. Let's call it a creepy action flick.

The Last Song (2010)

It was just so..... flat

[4/10 · 2 April 2010]

I didn't read the book, didn't want to. A bunch of my friends went to go see this movie, and I went with them. There are a few things wrong with this movie. First, Miley Cyrus cannot act. I mean, at all. It's painful to watch. Second, there is no originality. Just mix up a bit Twilight and most of Dear John, and you've got rather predictable The Last Song. Third, the characters. Ronnie is annoying enough without Cyrus, unbearable with her. She was such a brat at the beginning that I felt no pity the rest of the movie. Will makes several idiotic mistakes that cause Ronnie to have another temper tantrum. The little brother is cute, but irritating at times. Overall, this is just a flat, overrated chick flick that has the depth of a Disney Channel movie.

Avatar (2009)

Once you get past the impressive visuals, it's just an okay movie

[6/10 · 31 March 2010]

Maybe the fact that my friends and family were gushing about the movie on our way to see it (they had seen it once before) added to my disappointment. Avatar is amazing visually, and I'm sure it would be even more so in 3D (I saw it in 2D). But once you get used to how the world, creatures, and Na'vi look, it starts to lose some of it's pizazz. The storyline is pretty predictable, preachy, and just not that exciting. The heroine is vaguely annoying, and the end battle is just way too long. The humans (us) are made out to be the bad guys, and while the captain guy is a jerk, their cause is a good one. They're trying to get enough fuel to evacuate the earth; they have a good reason to invade Pandora. Overall, this movie is okay, but predictable and not worth the hype. If you missed your chance to see it in 3D, it's not really worth a buy. Maybe a rent.

Shutter Island (2010)

Meh, alright

[22 February 2010]

From the trailer, I expected Shutter Island to be a thrilling, edge-of-your-seat, gripping experience. To be frank, it's not. This is probably partly due to the movie's fairly long run time, 2 hrs and 18 min. It's very rare that a movie that long can hold my attention successfully. Lord of the Rings was almost the death of me. But I digress. I think that this movie wouldn't have dragged so much if they cut out, or at least severely shortened all of the main character's hallucinations. But there are some good points. Leonardo does a good job as a mentally disturbed cop, and this movie does get a bit disturbing and creepy at parts. The twist at the end is pretty awesome too. So, there isn't much wrong with this movie, but what is wrong really hurts it. To summarize: Good: Nice acting, good twist, creepy and sometimes disturbing Bad: Not as creepy as hoped, way too long with too many boring parts