Change Your Image
Upload An Image
Crop And Save
Visually amazing, but otherwise average at best
Yeah this movie took several steps forward in terms of cinematography and filming technology, but that is all that can really be said to be what makes this film worth seeing. Everything else that makes a film great is totally lack luster.
There is no deep character development. Why does Jake Sully really want to become a part of the Navi? What was life on Earth like? What really makes him want to break away from his roots there? Is it just the ability to walk? I mean are there no more Native Americans or Buddhists left on Earth (which is clearly who the Navi were based off of) to give him that spiritual satisfaction? How does he feel about filling his brother's shoes? Twin relationship? The conflict between scientists and the military is not developed. Every supporting character was a stock character. Michelle Rodriguez somehow manages to have a place in Hollywood after literally playing the same type of character in every film she is in (Fast and the Furious, SWAT, Blue Crush...yeah just put her in a futuristic helicopter and thats her in this one). Was Sigourney Weaver supposed to be a mother figure? How did the bad guy from the Last of the Mohicans feel about faking a Native American language? The plot was totally predictable, and the dialogue was crap. It was like James Cameron turned in his dialogue assignment a day late.
This movie deserves no award nominations at all outside of those in technical categories.
Review of Watchmen
I think I may have had too much of a biased opinion when I saw this film, because I had just finished reading the graphic novel, which I do recommend. So plot wise I knew everything that was going to happen and all the little fussy details were still fresh in my mind. Yet, it is unfair to say that a movie must follow every detail of its former medium, because that would just be pointless. This movie disappointed me in other ways.
For one, it was too short and because of that they rushed things: Important story elements like Dr. Mahnhattan's perception on time, Rorscach's back story (or any character back story, it is so important to the over riding theme of who superheroes really would be should they actually exist), why the alternate history really happened the way it did, and so on. I feel like it was a bit hard to follow for someone who never ever read the novel.
Also, there was some cheesy dialog with some surface acting, but it is forgivable I suppose.
It was beautifully shot, the crew was very creative and effective especially in the beginning. Soundtrack is wonderful. And there are other entertaining perks, like Silk Spectre whooping some ACE in prison dressed up in a skin tight outfit, lots of Sin City/300esque violence, and others.
In short, I feel like the biggest fault of this movie was that they had to make it short, and at nearly three hours that is saying something about the original work's depth, and dumbed it down for the general audience. Oh well what can you expect? They have to make money somehow, and that they did.
Day of the Dead (2008)
First Look Does a Nice Job
OK...so the writing was awful, the characters' reactions unrealistic and cookie cutter...and the acting was pretty amateur.
But as far as actual filming, lighting, editing, and every other aspect of the film...for its budget it does very well.
My hat off to First Look Studios for that.
This film does not at all follow the original plot of Day of the Dead...it is a B movie of B movies.
It is mildly entertaining. I mean I am a horror movie lover, and this really did nothing for me. The only really entertaining parts was when they started to actually thwart of the zombies.
If you got nothing else to do...rent it...maybe. And that is if The Evil Dead is not available.
The Shining (1980)
What the Shining Book does for Literature, this movie does for film.
Now everyone always says that, "Oh well it was different from the book... or the book was better." Typically that is the case, because movies cannot provide such intricate details as a novel can.
And yes, Kubrick changes the ending, again, and it is a bit of a different story than the book tells. So if you have been living in a cave and have not seen/read either, know that beforehand.
Now...Stephen King's novel plays such an interesting story about the effects of past ghosts, suppressed issues, mistrust in relationships, tension, pressure, and of course a haunted hotel on a family on the brink of falling apart. It is unique, well thought out, and nearly perfectly paced. Like always the characters are completely believable in their actions (minus some paranormal happenings) and it makes quite a good piece of literature.
So how the hell can we expect Kubrick to remake that on the film? We cannot and we do not need to.
He brings his own genius to the screen with his use of chilling photography. Jack N. plays the perfect Jack Torrance FOR THE SCREEN and for the purpose of what Kubrick was doing. It was an interesting combination of cinematography, writing, music, imagery, and suspense. Just as King's elements made for a good piece of literature, Kubrick's made for a good piece of film.
I recommend both the movie and the film.
Shin Seiki Evangerion (1995)
I cannot stress enough how much I appreciate this work of art. And that is just what it is, art. It is an iterpretation, a point of view on various aspects of society.
The creator of this, shows his views on military issues, human emotion, what makes a human human, human relationship, science, and much much more. All of those topics are beatufiully developed throughout the story. The character development and interaction makes you think that these are not cartoons, but real people.
The main story itself: Humans fighting against Angels...is interesting and very symbolic in itself. The sub-plots and sub themes are just as materfully done as the main theme.
I highly recommend this to absolutely anyone who wants to think about what they are watching.
Cyrano de Bergerac (1990)
Greatest Literary Character...IMO
I thought this movie did a fantastic job of bringing, IMO, the greatest literary character to life. Cyrano is portrayed flawlessly in his larger than life exploits. The drama is compelling and timeless, the acting is superb, the cinematography is pleasing to the eye and the plot is easy enough to follow for almost anyone.
Overall, I give this movie a 10/10.
People should truly watch this movie in French. Watching it in its original language really brings out ALL of the art poured into this film. The French language, though I find impossible and distasteful to learn, has many beautiful sounds that go well with Cyrano.
Sorry this review isn't so detailed, I am really just astounded by the portrayal of Cyrano and the overall quality of this film. Really just and enjoyable film.
Visually Stunning...not an epic however
To Sum this movie up, it was indeed an excellent film.
The visual features of this film were landmark and astounding. The acting was overall convincing, especially from those actors portraying Persians.
The Fight Scenes were the most artistically choreographed battle scenes I have ever seen. The were astounding to say the least.
The story itself has been told over and over again. Few stood against many for what they believed in and died as all people should, for something greater than themselves.
However, due to that story, the movie was handicapped. That story could not provide a wide enough scope for this film. The scope of this film is only on that story, and some other minor and insignificant and under-developed sub-plots.
Because of that handicap, this movie will never be quite as good as Braveheart, Gangs of New York, Saving Private Ryan, and other epics like those films.
Still...extremely well done film by all involved. I highly recommend anyone to see it.
Blade Runner (1982)
The more you think about it, the better it gets.
I saw this movie at the end of 2006. I had heard many great things about it from people who appreciate Sci-Fi and thinking movies, and terrible things from people who just like movies. After buying it, i wondered if I had wasted my money. I did not.
Blade Runner is one of the greatest achievements in cinema. The idea is taken from a book, "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep." And of course, a movie can never fully translate from the book, but this movie would stand alone if the book never existed.
The director gave such a vivid and detailed glimpse into a world dominated by a sort of "super capitalistic" view. The world is over crowded, over polluted, full of strange mutants, and almost everyone smokes. The mood set by the atmosphere of this potential future is perfect for the theme of the movie. The constant rain and low lighting provide a somewhat depressing atmosphere. And in some ways, the theme of the movie is depressing. What is the meaning of life? What does it mean to be human? Not that those questions themselves are depressing, but when you see this movie and you see the way things turn out and how the theme is presented, you will understand how well it reflects the atmosphere provided.
The acting is above average in this movie. The plot is interesting. It was well filmed.
I highly recommend this movie for anyone who wants to ponder about life and its meaning. Or for anyone who wants to see a cinematic accomplishment.
Ring of Fire (1991)
What happened to movies like this?
Despite the fact that this is just yet another mindless kung-fu action movie, isn't that part of the culture of the late 80s early 90s? It is a snapshot of American culture and dreams in that time era. The movie centers around two kick boxing gangs, what more do you want? Cheesy plot outline, mindless action that makes you wish you could fight like that, and a predictable ending with a cool training sequence. All of the ingredients that made us love movies like Rocky.
I think movie goers should lighten up and enjoy these kind of films more. Even though they aren't through provoking, not every movie can be, it still entertains you if you have a light heart going in.
The Godfather: Part III (1990)
Not as great as the first two, yet still a profound movie.
The Gofather series is of course arguably one of the most influential and captivating works of contemporary art. The first two in the series hardly need to be spoken for with regard to their magnificence. The third one however, I feel, needs someone to stand up for it. It is the younger brother who only played college ball while its brother played professional, for lack of a better analogy.
The Godfather part 3, at first glance, is just a poor sequel which was meant to appease hardcore fans, make money, and start off some careers. Yet, if you really look at the 'summary' of all the Godfather conflicts that were put into this movie, you will see that it is just as artistic as the first two.
Michael is a hero. A hero whose life ends in tragedy. His fatal flaw is the ability to understand the nature of good versus evil. To elaborate on that further, Michael understands that he must sacrifice his peace and plans for the future to save his family. This of course will take sacrifice, what he fails to understand is, that good conquering evil will always come with a price, and that sometimes it is hard to distinguish the two. That will seal his doom.
Michael cannot differentiate between what is right and what is wrong while he doing the right thing. Telling God that he will sin no more if he is let out of the business, then handing the wheel over to a man who he knows will commit great acts of violence, is, I'm afraid to say, committing a sin. He also fails to realize that killing your brother who was just stupid, is probably not gonna look good on God's account. Many other instances of synonymous circumstances occur throughout the movies and I doubt I have to elaborate for anyone who has seen them.
Michael fails to see, that after many of his loved ones death, he still did his job well, he saved his family, but doomed himself for not listening. And it is understood in the end that he dies alone, hating God, hating life, hating all that he did for he thinks he failed.
All in all, the Godfather 3 is actually a damn good movie, which sums up all of the points the first two did not make emphatically clear. I suggest that if you find this movie to be bad and your a fan of the series , to watch it again and look for all the summaries.