Reviews written by registered user

Page 3 of 6: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [Next]
53 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
Yates' Best is not good enough, 17 July 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

First of all, it is indeed David Yates' 'Best'. BUT his best is average in comparison to other directors' great works. It is one of those cases where someone's best is just not good enough. The movie's opening scene was good (For a second, I was like 'Can this be? Can this be the one from David Yates'?'). Well, what did I know? There were undoubtedly some moments. There was humor in some occasions. Examples: A) The thing which qualified this movie as the best amongst yates works ( which is only the 4 HP movies :P) is the way he showed the prince's tale chapter. A lot of the credits has to be given to Alan Rickman. I have only seen him showing that much emotion in 'Rasputin'. But Yates also deserves some credits because he got the great out of his actor and portrayed it well. B) Then the moment when Mcgonagall (Maggie Smith) draws herself between harry and snape and start duelling. C) The moment when snape said 'You have got your mother eyes'. D) Helena Bonham Carter did well in portraying 'hermione trying to be Bellatrix'. E) Some moments from the war at hogwarts too.

--All of these moments deserves plaudits.

But a great movie is not just about a fistful of moments. The movie 'Deathly Hallows' is divided in two parts. Still it could not fit some of the events which could have made into great scenes. J.K.Rowling provided a story which, arguably could have been made into a series which surpasses LOTR trilogy. Well forget about LOTR now. Here are some examples of those events I am talking about : 1) Harry and Luna go to the Ravenclaw common room. They see Amycus spitting on mcgonagall. The intensity in harry in that scene could have been a treat to watch as he performs the cruciatus curse. But I guess yates does not know what intense drama is. Someone advice him to watch Daniel Day Lewis' Performance in 'There will be blood'. 2) Fred's death seemed more tragic and hard reality to us because the reaction of Percy. J.K.Rowling knew what she was doing. Alas! the same could not be said about Yates. 3) Now it maybe my personal observation, but somehow Lord Voldemort seemed very vulnerable and less powerful and ruthless in the movie. Except a random scene where he killed his death eater for calling him 'My lord'. Maybe I am mistaken, but what I gathered from reading the series of books for roundabout 200 times, is that lord voldemort is a very hard person to duel. There were scenes in the movie where harry actually matches him in the duel, whereas Rowling had mentioned only one spell from each one of them in their duels. Those were Avada Kedavra and Expelliarmus. She made us believe that the reason harry triumphed over voldemort is love and not because harry is more powerful wizard. 4) Sorry! I could not find Yates creativity very appealing or fascinating. Grabbing voldemort and jumping of a tower. Not great. But the worst is Bellatrix and Voldemort burst into confetti. What were they? Boggarts of Molly Weasley and Harry? 5) Hagrid plays a cameo role here. As far as I remember he was very much involved in the war with grawp. 6) Though I mentioned that the scene where mcgonagall starts duelling with snape is good. But the actual duel which followed is very poorly shown. Yates' himself once portrayed dumbledore v/s voldemort. Why could not he do the same here? According to the book snape and mcgonagall did much more than just sending sparks at each other. 7) The Epilogue is pathetic. Except Emma Watson everyone seemed pretty much awkward in the roles of mid-age moms and dads. Emma Watson was good, she made herself look like a really caring mom. All the humor of the epilogue is gone.

I stop at this as I have mentioned 7 flaws. ( Could have gone further but as 7 is the most magical number..) The finale along with the past few parts will always remind me that how great the movie could have been.

1 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
Great story shown in a crafty camera-work., 14 July 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I first watched Alfonso Cuaron's direction in the third movie of Harry Potter, Prisoner of Azkaban. I was deeply impressed by his direction skills. This movie reflects the brilliance in him. Set upon a futuristic world of 2027, where the fertility of human is under question and no human baby had born for the past decades or some, the movie shows a person's grit to escort the last hope of mankind, a pregnant teenager to a safe place known as 'Human Project'. The movie and the events portrayed in it revolves around a futuristic England where fascism has cropped up and expanding it's roots.

Clive Owen is very good as a former activist, having trouble in his personal life and then bestowed with the job of saving the pregnant girl from people who would have used her as some political bait; and Michael Caine can never cease to amaze us.

Another aspect of the movie is its cinematography and the camera work. Not for once one can dare to look elsewhere, such is the quality of the cinematography in this movie. The bewilderment of why they chose David Yates to direct HP series over Cuaron keeps increasing.

The Game (1997)
1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Expected end in an unexpected way, 2 July 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

It is another David Fincher thriller. There is one thing about all these David Fincher thrillers; they all hit the bulls-eye to give the viewers a roller-coaster ride in terms of thrill and suspense. Nicholas Van Orton is an investment banker, who is super successful when it comes to making money. But he is alone, and he does not mind himself getting alienated from most of the people including his wife and brother, Conrad. His luxurious, routine and also boring life took a drastic turn when he enrolled himself in a 'game',which was given to him by Conrad as a Birthday gift.

From that moment, the movie revolves to show erroneous events occurring. Even though one can expect or predict the end, but they certainly can't expect or predict the 'way' it comes to that expected end. Michael Douglas as Nicholas is great and delivers a good performance. Sean Penn, as Conrad is also according and just. Credits to David Fincher for keeping the suspense unaltered throughout the movie.

Watch this one, and you will have a great time.

Brillian portrayal of the brutality of the Nazis, 25 June 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Roman Polanski's take on the infamous Nazi Torture on the Jews is fascinating and enthralling. It is based on the autobiography of the same name by Wladyslaw Szpilman. The movie is based on the survival journey of a Jew Pianist, Szpilman, during the horrible times of World War-II.

Credit has to be given to the director for portraying the brutality of the Nazi Germans with impeccable perfection. If anyone requires any justification of the Basterds' cruel works against Nazis in Quentin Tarantino's 'Inglourious Basterds' , then this is the movie which provides it. Basically this movie is shown from the eyes of a common Jew whose life drastically changed due to the Germans' invasion in Poland.

Though there are many side-characters, but there is only main character; and that is Szpilman. Adrien Brody does full justification to my expectation from him in this movie. I expected him to be better than Daniel-Day-Lewis in 'Gangs of New-York' and Jack Nicholson in 'About Schmidt' as he have beaten both of them to win the Oscar of best actor. So if I say he fulfills my expectation - that says a lot.

Roman Polanski's direction is brilliant, so is the musical notes of the piano used in the movie. Thomas Kretschmann did a good cameo sort of performance too.

True Grit (2010)
3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
This remake of retribution is good, 19 June 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

"The wicked flee when none pursueth"; the movie starts off with showing this proverb, and it starts off well. The movie is a remake of a western by the same name. Well, if one can make remakes like this, then there should not be any objections on remaking movies. A determined young girl hires an U.S marshal to help her get revenge of her father's death by punishing and killing the man responsible for her father's death. The director duo Ethan-Joel Coens have done a fantastic job to portray the classic western, especially with the accent of language that the characters speak in.

The characters, themselves, are well depicted too. Jeff Bridges as the seemingly-little-lazy-but-actually-not U.S marshal, Rooster Cogburn is brilliant. Matt Damon has, once again, delivered a consistent performance as the Texas Ranger(LaBoeuf),who is also in pursuit of the same man,Tom Chaney. He is certainly one of the most versatile actors amongst our times. Hailee Steinfield is wonderful as Mattie Ross, the revenge-seeking girl. The scene involving the bargaining of the ponies shows the excellence of her character and thus performance. Josh Brolin only appears at the end, and does produce a believable performance according to his character.

The other aspects of the movie, which stands out, are cinematography and background score. The background score, which is soft and kind of a rom- com type, incredulously fits the situation in the movie.

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
I can watch it again and again and again .., 13 June 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

One can say it's not a classic or masterpiece, but honestly they will have a great time watching this movie. It's a musical romantic comedy, based on the book of same name, where the 'romantic' part of it takes the back seat.

After breaking up with his girlfriend Laura(Iben Hjejle), Rob tries to measure his faults in his past break-ups, by listing his top-5 break- ups. The story goes as Rob tries to do the right thing to get himself sorted out with Laura. Meanwhile he also deals with all the problems of his Record-store,which he owns.

Honestly, the best and most hilarious moments of the movie happens in Rob's music store, along with his two assistants( or in Rob's words 'Musical moron twins').

John Cusack is great to watch with his impeccable dialogue delivery. The musical moron twins, Barry and Dick, played by Jack Black and Todd Louiso, is an absolute treat to watch. As mentioned earlier, the liveliest parts of the movie involves this threesome of Rob, Barry and Dick. Frankly, Jack Black stole the show whenever he appeared on screen. 'Special mention' should be here for Tim Robbins for his cameo kind of a role.

Finally, 'High Fidelity' is a movie which we can watch as many times as we desire. The characters and the moments stays with oneself, even after they finished watching it.

Adam (2009/I)
0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Touching and Nice, 9 June 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Adam is a movie which will touch your heart, in some aspects it's similar to Forrest Gump (Forrest Gump is even mentioned with comic consequences), I am Sam or Rain man. But, saying so, Adam has an appeal of its own.

Adam(Hugh Dancy) is a young man trying to overcome his Asperger's syndrome and blend in with the crowd. After the death of his father Adam tries to cope with the situation and things starts to go uphill for him when a beautiful school teacher,Beth(Rose Byrne) comes in his life as his neighbour. The movie revolves around the life of Adam and events occurred in that life. Also, it shows the ever-changing relation between Adam and Beth.

It's always hard to perform as a, let's just say, mentally challenged character. Comparison with the likes of Dustin Hoffman,Tom Hanks, Sean Penn is bound to happen (all of them are double Oscar winners). But Hugh Dancy has been able to pull it off in a brilliant fashion and also added some uniqueness too. Rose Byrne was good as both the actor and narrator.

Another which is great about the movie is the music. Some of the songs are really good and very well according to the movie. Especially the climax song by weepies.

Enjoyable movie, 6 June 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This movie is a dark comedy.That is, it is both a comedy and a crime movie, directed by George Armitage.

John Cusack plays the role of a professional killer Martin Blank, who is dissatisfied and seemingly losing interest in his job. He is, then, persuaded by his secretary and his psychologist, to take an invitation of his old high school re-union party. The story moves on as Martin visits his birthplace, Grosse Pointe, and meets his old school friends including his high school sweet heart.

The movie is a nice combination of humor and actions. Martin's constant rivalry and duel with his arch-rival Grocer (Dan Aykroyd) is brilliantly portrayed. The scenes featuring Aykroyd and Cusack is really humorous and good to watch. Same can be said about the climax.

Everyone's performance is according and really good. John Cusack and Aykroyd, both of them gave great performances. Overall, it's a thoroughly enjoyable movie.

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Good but not Great, 3 June 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I had a lot of expectations from this Clint Eastwood movie, and sadly the movie falls short to my expectations, maybe a little but still falls short nevertheless.

To be honest, the movie starts well and it really grips one's fascination. One unfortunate event occurred in three boy's life and changed their lives forever when they grew old. The whole movie is centered around the murder of the daughter of one those three boys, who grew old now.

Eastwood did a good job of portraying and hence building the suspense around the movie. Performances are the biggest assets of this movie. Sean Penn as Jimmy Markum, the father of the murdered daughter was really good. He is excellent in both emotional and the intense climax scenes. Kevin Bacon, as Sean Devine, another boy amongst those three, did a good job as the investigating officer. But it was Tim Robbins as Dave Boyle, the boy to whom that actual event occurred and which changed his entire life drastically, gives the most powerful performance.

Notwithstanding those performances, the thing which maybe termed as the 'loose end' is the climax and the motive of the murder. Apart from that the movie is good and certainly worth a watch.

0 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
A reminiscent of the first part - not a 'Classic', 31 May 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

To be very honest this installment of Hangover is reminiscent of its predecessor. It's kind of a tribute to the first part, and both consequently and sadly lacks any kind of creativity. There is hardly anything new in this movie.

Phil, Doug and Alan went to Thailand for Stu's wedding, and predictably got drunk and then our story starts. They woke up in a god-forsaken place , and then starts the journey to retrace their previous night's activities to find their friend (This time it's not Doug).

The awesome threesome of Phil, Stu and Alan is still great to watch. Phil's charismatic presence and tries of making the situation stable, Stu's hysteria and Alan's brilliant dumbness will still keep you hooked in this one.Though,quite a lot of the scenes and consequently the humor is taken from the part I. Especially the last ending scene. That was way to predictable and one can say a complete rip-off from the predecessor.

There's nothing new for the ones who have watched the old 1st part. But there's still some funny one-liners and the movie undeniably enjoyable. Only don't get your hopes too high for this one because of the super 'The Hangover'.

Page 3 of 6: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [Next]