Reviews written by registered user
charlesdickins

5 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

Brave (2012)
2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Much better than expected!, 26 March 2014
9/10

I initially wanted to watch brave when it was released (being a fan of most Pixar moves). However, i found myself being swayed by bad reviews from viewers, even if the critic reviews remained steady.

Finally, a couple years after release, i found a copy for 2 euros at a flea market. Thus i found myself watching Brave for the first time.

Apparently the people handing in bad reviews were watching "another film" called Brave, because i could not see how it could be this one they were talking about.

First of all the animation was out of this world. Especially the rugged Scottish scenery and attention to detail.

But the thing i found most surprising was the fantastic story line which had me paying vivid attention throughout...and this was what most people complained about??? It was a great story about independence and learning to accept differences (interjected with some mystery, history and a little bit of wonderful silliness).

Finally i must mention that i laughed out loud on a least 12 separate occasions! In my opinion...Well done again Pixar!! Give this one a go.

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
1hr and 53 minutes too long, 13 November 2013
1/10

The only film I have ever fallen asleep to in a cinema.

To start with, this is an extremely dull film. The acting was melodramatic, punctuated by supposedly meaningful looks . This film lacks any kind of gumption and includes a truly mind numbingly wishy washy plot.

On the plus side there are some good scenery and costumes. Quite high production values.

I have seen many better Swedish films than this e.g. "As it is in Heaven"

If you really have trouble sleeping at night then i recommend this film and a comfy pillow.

2 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
A truly terrible film, 21 July 2013
2/10

There are some differences in the way that the British and the Americans speak. They say "sidewalk", we say "pavement". They say "good film", we say "pile of rubbish".

Unfortunately I have just spent two hours of my life where I could have been doing better things (i.e. plucking nose hair, de-worming the cat) watching "Olympus has fallen" or "intelligence has fallen" or acting standards have fallen", I don't remember which. Don't get me wrong - I am a true Die Hard, Mission Impossible fan. However, this isn't even a close cousin to those classics. Heck, it isn't even a third cousin twice removed!

I do understand that the Director wanted to use the script written by his 9 year old son. It would have been rude not to. What I don't get is Aaron Eckhart agreeing to act in it. OK, I can understand that he wanted to have 'President' as one of his acting attributes, but now he can add Turkey as another. Morgan Freeman and Gerard Butler I do understand. They have both been known to choose some cheesy roles…only this time the opted for a mature Stilton. So, now we choose the North Koreans as bad guys. Guess we must be running out of enemies to portray. The only thing missing was a kick-boxing, machine gun toting Kim Il-Sung (though this would have probably improved the average quality of the movie). To sum up - Acting was bad (with the slight exception of Finley Jacobsen), writing was incomprehensibly bad, prejudices were high and the audience was robbed blindly. I usually only give good reviews – there's enough grumpiness in this world already – but I feel that people should know what they're letting themselves in for before practicing dental surgery on themselves.

283 out of 370 people found the following review useful:
Watch this film, 20 April 2013
8/10

First of all i would like to ask how any of the other reviewers could possibly give this film 1 out of 10? They must have some deep rooted personal reasons for this i guess.

I nearly didn't watch this film for all of the negative reviews. I would have so missed out on something good.

The film was excellent! Great plot. Creepy bad guy and a reasonable amount of suspense. I have never read the Jack Reacher books, so cannot compare Cruise to the title character. I imagine that some people might have been disappointed at the lack of huge explosions and transforming robots etc etc, but this was a fine old school action thriller with many new tricks which i haven't seen before (check the buss stop scene. Classic!). I loved the pacing and the great interaction between players. Sure, some of the one liners seemed a tad forced, but they were not so common. Well done Cruise again.

Do yourselves a favour. Ignore the negative reviewers and give this a go.

3 out of 9 people found the following review useful:
A piece of art, 16 February 2012
9/10

Wow!

First let me say that i have read the other reviews and agree / contra disagree with them. I am not approaching this film as an independent element, but rather as a large fan of all the Musketeer films.

This one ROCKS! It's not out to get an academy award. It follows some of it's predecessors in giving pure entertainment (remember that the critics didn't like The Fifth Element at first either, but turned their cowardly tails when the public hailed it as a success).

The Three musketeers has all you want from a matinée adventure! Humour, action, suspense, and surprises. Well done Luc Besson! You provide scenes that make you want to hold your breath and still stick true to the original source material. Plus you add a pinch of spice from your French roots...Notre dame amongst others.

Give this film a try if you want entertainment, some fine performances (check out the young actor who plays Dartongnon) and an escape from reality.

I have watched 7 Musketeer films and this is the second best (only being bested by the 1973 version). Vive la France!