Reviews written by registered user
jock75

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

6 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

200 out of 330 people found the following review useful:
JJ should be banned from touching Star Trek...., 12 May 2013
2/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I am a huge Star Trek fan, and really did enjoy the first instalment of this re-boot when it came out a few years ago. So it was with very high expectations that I went to the theatre on Saturday night to see "Into Darkness". I saw it in 3-D IMAX.

Well, what a disappointment. And it is pretty much completely the fault of the director, Jar Jar Abrams. Abrams is a classic example of someone that got too popular too quickly, as sooner or later his inexperience and immaturity were going to screw it up for him… unfortunately, Into Darkness is where he finally messed up (although some might say Super 8 was that film).

Basically, Abrams only knows how to make one thing: "Lost". Everything else he has done since then has essentially been Lost, re-badged.

The style of this one-trick-pony has just become tiresome, and oh so predictable. Injecting drama into everything is hardly the right formula for a sci-fi action flick, but it is like he couldn't help himself.

The resulting plot and dialogue was so very lame.

I can't remember the exact lines, but let me paraphrase some for you:

Kirk: "Spock! Damn you, why can't you feel any emotions???" Spock: "I do Kirk! But I hide them coz my mother died and I was so sad". Kirk: "You have always been my bestest friend!" Spock: "Don't die Kirk! You are my bestest friend too!"

Basically the entire film was ruined with terrible dramatic scenes and tears and just really uncomfortable acting – this definitely ain't how Star Trek should be.

Abrams over-played the Kirk-Spock relationship so much I was almost expecting them to have sex. Seriously.

And of course there are some completely useless and WTF characters e.g. Dr. Carol Marcus. I know she was in the original, but in this one she basically had no role other than large boobs.

Here is praying that Abrams doesn't get to direct the next one….

Iron Man 3 (2013)
4 out of 10 people found the following review useful:
As Cameron Diaz said, "I'd rather be shot in the face"......, 10 May 2013
1/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Wow. Where to begin? I had SUCH high hopes, but was bitterly disappointed.

As many of the other reviews have pointed out, this film was flawed in soooooooooooo many ways.

The script was appalling. Like it was written by 20 different people. No rhyme or reason for half of the plot points.

WTF with the kid????? Who the hell cares??? He was as bad and as annoying as the pointless kid in insert-name-of-movie (i thought of Indiana Jones).

And the premise behind the fire/lava/hot people was completely impossible nor even explained.

Total utter crap.

Stay at home and poke out your eyes with hot pokers rather than sit through this trash.

Fail.

Oblivion (2013/I)
3 out of 7 people found the following review useful:
Excellent example of Sci-Fi at its best, 14 April 2013
9/10

I don't usually feel the need to write about movies, but this one I think deserves my support.

First of all, let me say that I am not a Tom Cruise fan; the mere fact that he is in a film is sometimes enough to put me off. But I had heard so little of this film – seriously, it seemed to have snuck into the theatres – that I decided I would give it a go. So I went to a Saturday afternoon session, on my own…. And I wasn't disappointed.

This was Sci-Fi at its best:, sometimes as awesome as the Matrix with regard to the VFX, but often very understated like Gattaca. The themes were really interesting and the characters were also well developed. The pace was also perfect, with a good combination of suspense, drama… sometimes it was even scary.

Without going on and on (I don't want to give too much away), I definitely think this is worth seeing at the cinema. Visually it is amazing. The bigger the screen, the better, in my opinion. Also has a great score.

People who say they didn't "get" it obviously don't understand Sci-Fi.

42 out of 107 people found the following review useful:
Possibly the worst movie this year - so far, 8 May 2012
1/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Honestly, I had heard so many people say this was going to be "great". I think I even read some good reviews by reputable critics. And I am left wondering…. DID WE SEE THE SAME MOVIE????????? Wow – what a total load of crap. And I thought that "Battleship" was going to be lemon of the year…. Honestly, "Battleship" was better than "The Avengers". Basically it was a sequel to Thor, which was crap and nobody saw.

The script was shocking, the acting appalling. Even the real actors had a hard time delivering their crappy lines. Thor especially was dreadful – WTF with the weird English accent? He's a terrible actor so I didn't expect much – but I'd rather his foul Australian accent than whatever he was trying to do in this movie. Scarlet's character was also bad. She's not a bad actress but her character was terrible (what, exactly, was her superpower supposed to be anyway??)

The whole thing was corny, cheesy and completely over the top – a flying aircraft carrier??? WTF?? By the end of the film you didn't care what happened - you just needed it to end. If this movie represents what the majority of people think of as "good filmmaking", then surely as a species we are doomed. Appealing to the lowest of the lowest common denominators.

The best part was seeing the trailers (in 3D) of "Dark Knight" and "Prometheus". Seriously.

Battleship (2012)
11 out of 23 people found the following review useful:
Easily the worst movie this year.... so far...., 15 April 2012
3/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Where to begin? Firstly, let me say that the only reason I did not give this a 1 is because the visual effects were amazing - truly awesome. Yes, yes, it looked like a Transformers rip-off, but nonetheless, they were excellent.

The rest of the movie was total utter crap.

Storyline - unnecessarily complicated, inconsistent, full of flaws. Half of it should have been edited out as it was just filler. It was like the guy that made it just got out of film school and tried to accomplish every genre in the one film. Fail.

Dialogue - cheesy. Very cheesy. The whole thing read like the worst lines from Independence Day, Pearl Harbor, and every other total crap film. Fail.

Acting - where to begin????? Rhianna was just HORRIBLE, but really, is anyone surprised? She is also extremely unattractive. Some of the other main characters were OK, but generally the acting was very poor. Fail.

I had very low expectations from this film... and it delivered!

20 out of 33 people found the following review useful:
Better than Twilight but still a load of rubbish, 25 March 2012
3/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Where to begin….. I did not have high expectations, but went to see the film yesterday, which was the opening weekend. Interestingly we had no trouble getting good seats at very short notice even though the media had hyped the film as being "sold out" all weekend.

First of all, any film about kids requires young actors and therefore the level of acting falls instantly - young people are often not great actors, generally speaking. Having said that, Jennifer Lawrence in the lead role of Katniss was excellent. It's a pity the rest of the film let her down. Like so many films these days, the PR and spin machine went into total overdrive in the weeks leading up the release - here in Australia, the trailer and PR blitz lead me to believe that Liam Hemsworth (Australian actor who plays Gale) was actually the star of the film! In reality, however, he had total screen time of about 6 minutes and was basically no more than a glorified extra - in fact, some extras had more screen time than him. But that is just typical of the media these days - they think that if they push the local talent people will flock to see it. Just as well we hardly saw him in the film because he was just terrible. He should really go back to his daytime soap job or maybe make another flop with Miley Cyrus.

But back to the film…. technically it wasn't very good either. The visual effects ranged from OK to just embarrassing. Having worked in the industry for many years there several scenes where I just cringed at the sloppiness of some of the effects work - it looked as though they let some intern have a go on Final Cut Pro. Particularly the chariot scene when Katniss and co become engulfed in fire. Fail.

The films borrows extensive from other films (as many people have noted), and sometimes I forgot what I was actually watching - Minority Report? Bladerunner? The Truman Show? And a few times, when the CG was particularly fake looking, I was reminded of Star Wars Ep 1.

But back to the "acting", and I use the term very loosely…. Fail. There will be no Oscar nominees from this bunch, I can tell you.

Was it the worst film I have ever seen? Definitely not. Did I want the 2.5 hrs of my life back? No. Was it worth $22 at the cinema? No. Was it better than Twilight? Yes, but that is a very low benchmark to compare against.

If I was to summarise it in one sentence, it would be like this: "A forgettable teenage action/adventure with a few surprises and one noteworthy performance (Jennifer Lawrence) but overall lacking in substance and coherence and probably better left for viewing when it comes out on DVD".