Change Your Image
joshbarker7
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
God's Not Dead (2014)
Nietzsche would be spinning in his grave.
Well, what an awful movie. Apart from the very very bad acting, this film also suffers from poor writing and lack of knowledge necessary for its' premise.
To begin with, as a philosophy student myself, I understand the philosophy professor's need to have an atheist class. But there is absolutely no need to be an ass-hole about it. Especially not in the first lecture! So this I didn't understand.
Also in the opening lecture scene, the prof states that all the philosopher's on the board were atheists. Now here comes the films lack of knowledge of its' own premise - as Scottish Philosopher David Hume was arguably not an atheist. Although he would've been more inclined to this belief, because of his devout Empiricism, he can never rule out the possibility of things such as God or Miracles, even though he thinks it's not rationally justifiable to believe in them. Thus leading to many interpretations of Hume as being a "skeptical agnostic" (including my Philosophy lecturer - who is Hume's biggest fan!)
A few more scenes in and very poor acting is apparent, as well as huge script flaws with dialogue riddled with clichés.
However, this isn't the worst part.
When the main character (the God believing student) starts giving his lectures on how and why God exists and why you should believe him, the professor seems to become more and more unable to cope with his arguments. I was watching this and thinking "how has someone who cannot argue against a student about the existence of God get a degree in anything, let alone Philosophy and thus teach this subject?????". It is genuinely baffling, as the professor cannot respond to simple suggestions which are ridiculed by today's atheists and philosophers.
About 3 quarters of the way through then, I come to the conclusion that this film is bad. However, the student's 3rd and final lecture to the other students provided me with what I believe to be one of the most ridiculous and laughable scenes to ever come from a serious production.
Supposedly, the students have been convinced by the theist's reasons for believing in God, to the dismay of the professor. And, one by one, the students begin to stand up and say "God's Not Dead" in contrast to Nietzsche's famous quote. It's an "I'm Spartacus"-like event happening in the lecture theatre and as a result is both cringe-worthy and appalling from any perspective. How any production company looked at this part of the script in particular and gave it the go ahead to be made as quite a big movie is completely beyond me. It is an offence to both Kubrick and "Spartacus", as well as Nietzsche and his brilliant quote.
Top tip: don't watch this film. Top tip #2: Definitely don't watch this film if you're someone with even the slightest bit of philosophical knowledge - it will just anger you. As it did with me.
But please, do yourself a favour and watch some Dawkins/Hitchens on YouTube instead.
X
Her (2013)
Jonze takes something seemingly impossible and makes it Beautiful with "Her".
Spike Jonze has never really stood out for me as a Director. I was always used to seeing him dressed up in Jackass. But this film changed that. "Her" is how films come to be known as 'beautiful' and life changing, which makes it one of the best films of 2013 and, for me, a worthy winner of the Best Picture Oscar it has been nominated for.
Throughout the film, we see an unlikely relationship forming between Joaquin Phoenix as Theodore and Scarlett Johansson as his new AI operating system "Samantha". I remember reading this premise a few months back and never thought it could be done. But Jonze somehow pulls it off. The emotions between the person and the AI brings into question so many moral and philosophical issues as well as making the viewer wonder whether this is actually right or normal. And the beauty is, what you think doesn't matter. The film is a testament to going with what your heart tells you to do, and not caring what others think.
The score is also executed perfectly by Arcade Fire, as well as the original movie song "The Moon Song" co-written by Spike Jonze himself being emotionally relevant, fitting into the film at just the right time.
Mostly though, "Her" focuses on our need for emotional connection, and shows that loneliness is a devastating thing for anyone to experience. What makes "Her" different though, is that you seem to understand with empathy what Theodore is going through, and so when his relationship does form with Samantha, you feel everything he feels. From the elation of his new found love, to the heartbreak the film eventually brings for him.
A premise that many thought (including I) wasn't doable, has been made beautiful by Jonze. "Her" is a masterpiece.
X
Monsters (2010)
The 'Infected Zone' is now MY EYES
Don't know why I watched this film. I suppose I wanted to see another new-ish take on the "imminent" alien invasion of the world (District 9, Battle LA). I was hoping however for it to be on the District 9 side of things (i.e Good), but unfortunately it wasn't.
First of all, the title is misleading. We don't learn about Monsters, we learn about a half-price love story where the chemistry is nil until the very last moment so that the Directors' cliché fantasy can be met. I genuinely think the "Monsters" were shown about twice. And I wouldn't define them as "Monsters" either. I've woken up with girls who look scarier.
There are no plot twists or turns, no jaw dropping moments, no feel for ANY of the characters and the script is riddled with flaws as well as a boring/draining back story to each character which I think the director thought was a good thing. Erm.....no. If I go to see a film called "Monsters" I expect MONSTERS Mr Gareth Edwards. Not "generic American guy and girl have relationship problems and so fall in love whilst travelling through the 'Infected Zone'"...which didn't seem very infected considering they only had their damn masks on half the time.
Overall - genuinely terrible. A lesson to people wanting to make an alien film: Make sure you include A LOT more aliens! Or monsters.....whatever. X
Man of Steel (2013)
Could've been better, could've been worse.
I was fairly excited to see Man of Steel. I have seen the original Superman movies and thought they were OK given the time they were made. Therefore I came to the conclusion that if they're gonna start the franchise again, Man of Steel should be at least good, if not Super.
First of all, it takes the film 30 minutes to introduce its "hero" and he's not even got his costume on yet. To see that, you have to wait another 40 minutes.
So at this point, I wasn't that happy. General Zod then comes to visit and sends his dark message via the televisions in the entire world. It was like something off a poor comedy horror which again, annoyed me.
But, then Superman started to pull his finger out, and the first time I saw him use his eyes as a weapon made me smile, and this ultimately got me back in to the film, purely because up until then, all superman had been doing was using brute strength to fight his opponents. And every time Superman was on the receiving end of a "beating" he would get up panting and injured.....but hang on.....this is the "Man of STEEL"....It irritated me the amount of times he fell on the floor in pain. He's an unrelenting beast! Not a wuss.
Superman also seemed to cause more damage than he prevented. How many buildings did he destroy whilst in fights!? Just throwing enemies into buildings, not using any superhero initiative.
However, the end of the film is a face off between Superman and General Zod which i actually thought was a good thing to see, as in recent superhero films, I don't think there has been enough Hero vs Villain air time. It's all become more in depth with other ways to get the villain. And, although the ending was a tad weak with Zod dying via a snapped neck, it's good to see the Superhero actually killing the villain which again has been lost in recent superhero films (e.g. The Dark Knight Rises, Iron Man 3).
I suppose though, there was more things that annoyed me about Man of Steel, but the reason it gets a 6/10 from me is that on the whole, it did its' job of entertaining me for 2 and a half hours. I also gave the film the benefit of the doubt on the little annoyances I have about the Superman character as I feel the sequel will put these right and be much better than the first film.
But on the whole, worth the watch; but nothing Super.
X
Breaking Bad (2008)
Perfection.
Breaking Bad is by far one of the best TV shows I have ever seen or ever will see. Just reading the plot is enough to get you intrigued;an underachieving Chemistry genius turned high school teacher learns about his cancer diagnosis and so becomes a CRYSTAL METH COOK!? I had just had to watch this, and the pilot episode did not disappoint.
Although the pilot episode is a fantastic introduction to the show, the First Season consisting of 7 episodes is rather quite slow going at first but this is not necessarily a bad thing, as it gives a little insight into every character which is completely necessary when you take into account that the main character - Walter White (played superbly by Bryan Cranston) has a brother-in-law whom is a DEA Agent and quite frankly - his worst enemy.
The seasons proceeding the first one get better and better and at the end of every season you will just not think it is logically possible for this show to get any better! But it does, and by the time you start Season 5 it becomes almost part of your life this show as the character development is better than I have seen in any other show! The once quiet high school teacher Walt has become something more than just a Crystal Meth cooker, with him following in the boots of his drug dealing alter ego - "Heisenberg". You can just never know what to expect with this show.
The acting is also very good and I couldn't believe it when I read on IMDb that Aaron Paul (who plays Jesse - Walt's partner in crime) was lined up to be killed off after the first season. The show would just not be the same without him.
If you haven't seen this show already, I suggest you do. And quick.
All Hail The King!
x
Hugo (2011)
If you call this film a masterpiece, you're wrong.
After reading many reviews on IMDb itself and seeing "Hugo" being given 8's, 9's and 10's everywhere I just had to see this movie. The fact that Martin Scorsese was given $170,000,000 to make this film raised my expectations and made me even more intrigued. So when I payed £10 to watch this film (in 3D) the bar was raised even higher.
From the start of the film though, nothing is made clear, and I'm not a fan of what children call "acting" so for the first 10 - 20 minutes I wasn't impressed. But I thought "it's going to open up, something will happen that is going to make this movie incredible!". But, unfortunately, that moment never came. The story and script was bland leaving no room for anticipation as well boring the audience. Seriously, I saw this film with my brother and no one in the screen looked remotely interested. And that's because this is a BORING film. OK there's the odd chase and a few funny moments but for the first hour, literally, all that the film is is a little boy running round operating clocks! Which I'm sure a child would love to see! After all isn't that what cinema is all about for children? Going to watch clocks being worked on? John Logan (screenplay writer) seems to think so.
From then on the film takes you nowhere and the "journey" that the trailer claims is really just a boy running from the station inspector who is played by Sacha Baron Cohen. Now not only is he funny, but he's the only reason why I didn't walk out of the cinema. His part is played superbly as the dark side of a "baddy" is mixed with ridiculousness. If it weren't for him then this really would have been the worst film I have ever seen.
But I suppose that's what annoyed me most about "Hugo", the fact that Scorsese has been a legendary character when it comes to film! Goodfellas, Taxi Driver, Shutter Island and Gangs of New York were all brilliant films and now, I feel, that Scorsese has let himself down. The 3D was OK, but in reality it was a film about a boy called Hugo, when really, he didn't do anything at all in 2 hours.
Scorsese's first Children's movie is more of a disappointment, not a masterpiece.