Reviews written by registered user
|19 reviews in total|
At first sight, Whiplash seemed to me as another talent movie, which
features the same clichés, no matter it's about music, dancing or
sports. But the great reviews made me really curious about it, and I
can honestly say, that it's nothing like your usual film about music.
Damien Chazelle's work, like every beginner director's is full of raw power and energy. Every moment of Whiplash has so much dynamics and tension. You wouldn't expect surprising twists from these kind of movies, but Whiplash has the quality to show you something unexpected in every minute. The director incorporates a few small, but clever twist in the narrative, and these aren't twists for the twists' sake. Chazelle is unlike any other young director: his work is unbelievably calculated, there's not a single unnecessary frame in this picture, and he can always capture the essence of the moment or the actors' performances.
And that's a good thing, because Whiplash relies hugely on those actors. Simmons' presence rules every scene he's in, he has clever lines, but the actor is doing most of the work. Miles Teller is a bit shadowed by him, but the young actor also does a great job, and the chemistry between the two of them is the absolute highlight of this movie. And with that, Chazelle can achieve that the songs are not just some promotional material, but important storytelling devices in the conflict of the main characters. The director is also great at capturing emotions through these song.
Which takes us to my only problem with Whiplash: the scenes of the rehearsals or the musical performances are so intense and strong, that they make every other scene disappoint you a little. That's exactly the case with the storyline of the love interest or the middle part of the runtime.
Whiplash is not the film of great words, act or emotional effects. But I think, nobody's going to care about that, because Chazelle's perfectionist storytelling is going to compensate everybody for that. It's not an flaming improvisation, it's not a shitty, but catchy pop song, but it's an artistic symphony. It may not be a classic, but it's brilliant cinema.
Hercules wants to follow the footsteps of the self-proclaimed
"historically accurate" movies like King Arthur or Kingdom of Heaven:
it strips down the legend of the mythical-creature-fighting demigod to
a skilled mercenary, who uses the help of his fellow warriors creating
his fame. But at the same time the movie has a similar design to a 300-
copycat: cheap dialogs, cheap sets, cheap costumes, weak characters,
horrible acting (I mean, what the hell was Joseph Fiennes doing???) and
pretentious slow-motion. Most of the battle are like they're from the
pages of a comic book (of course, it IS a comic book adaptation, but
still...): every swing of Dwayne Johnson's sword kills two or three of
his enemies, one of his warriors can shoot 3 lethal arrows at the same
time, and most of these things are just simply laughable. Although I
must admit, while Brett Ratner's action scenes might not be the most
creative, they look cool, and they deliver a little fun in this weak
So the main problem is, that while the movie wants us to take it seriously, and not to look like an immature fable, that's exactly what it turns out to be: a shallow, dumbed down, generic fantasy-blockbuster.
Most movies about revenge tend to focus on the spectacle of cruelty and
bloodshed, delivering a film filled with somewhat morally justified
killings, but no meaning behind them. This one is not like them. Like
other Scandinavian masterpieces, In Order of Disapperance delivers a
deep and meaningful story. In Hungary, the distributor tried to
advertise the movie as a dark comedy, however, besides a few morbid
jokes, there is nothing funny about it. Instead, the script tries to
focus on the conflicts and the person tragedies behind the murders and
the shootouts, which makes it not just a great gangster flick, but also
a great drama. In Hans Petter Moland directing style, every gesture,
look, sentence has a meaning, and this is the reason, why for example
the main character can function in the story without merely saying any
words. Of course, this impact is helped by some performances by
Skarsgard, Bruno Ganz and Pal Sverre Hagen.
My only problem with this movie was that it has a somewhat slow pace, and because of that, sometimes it struggled to keep up my attention, but nonetheless, it's a quality piece and I'd definitely recommend it.
This movie strikes at some interesting subjects as a dramedy, but besides a couple of nice twists, it offers nothing to enjoy. It never really picks up a pace, hasn't got more than 2 or 3 funny moments, so basically it's like a very light drama. The main storyline featuring the protagonist, who learns how to stand up for himself, is not the most original one, but is written well, and would have worked well in a comedy with actual jokes. But this way it's more like a corny and shallow drama. The actors are doing a great job, especially Rockwell and Monaghan, but it's all for nothing. Basically this movie isn't satisfying as a comedy nor as a drama.
If you're searching for something unique and original, this might not
be your movie. But if you're looking for entertainment and a couple of
good laughs, this one can easily satisfy your needs. The movie's about
Dani, a 30-something man with a boring and overbearing fianceé (I told
you, it's not original), who bangs Tímea, his old high- school
classmate at the 15th reunion. What they don't suspect, that Bögőcs,
another classmate of theirs, takes the whole thing on video, and
blackmails Dani. And what he wants in exchange, is to get laid with
Tímea. Despite that every twist in this movie is quite predictable, the
director can use the tiny details to make them look less worn-out. A
couple of jokes fell flat for me, but luckily the script builds on
funny one-liners instead of situation humor. And the actors are doing
quite well at delivering the jokes.
There's not much to say about this film, it's not the greatest comedy in the world, but entertaining enough.
To be honest, I've only watched the first 30 minutes of the film, because I haven't seen a single plot point or character intriguing enough to make me continue. But during these thirty minutes there were heist/con movie clichés enough for 3 other films. It's got a kind of a comedic undertone, which would go well with the not- so-serious mood of these con movies, except that it hasn't got any good laughs, which makes the movie feel a little childish. The main storyline involving forging and stealing artworks is exactly like every other film about stealing artworks. The characters are unoriginal too, and I couldn't care less about them. So don't repeat my mistake, even 30 minutes is too much time to waste on this one.
This movie is really as crazy as you would think based on the synopsis.
The world and the atmosphere of the film is unique in every aspect,
which makes it quite enjoyable and fun. Something I can't say about the
whole story and the humor. The main storyline is pretty thin, which
would be okay in a comedy, but there are no laughs to compensate that.
The bizarre characters and the world are funny in some way, but there
are no actual jokes written in the script to laugh at. Anyway, this
movie remains true to its title, and it's extremely awesome and badass,
something which just makes it better than an average comedy.
It's a must-see for geeks, but for everyone else it's still a decent comedy with an interesting (and cool) setting.
Lots of thing will seem familiar in this one, including the sympathetic
criminals with a strict moral code, the conflict between the brothers.
There isn't much depth in the characters, the flashback scenes are just
there for the sake of telling the story.
But there's one thing why should see this movie: everything is just so elaborately made in it. The sets, the cinematography, the dialogues show a huge amount of works. And Salvatore's directing can make even the most pretentious scenes effective. Among the actors, there's no difference between the young Litvanian ones and stars like Malkovich, they're all great. (The only thing that bothered me was the forced and unrealistic Russian accent.)
It's less about its characters and more about guilt and morals, but it's atmosphere makes you forget about all of the weaknesses. It's not really original, but the atmosphere makes it a unique film.
I really liked Ozon's last film (Dans la maison), but this one was a
disappointment for me. It's hard not to see this story as a bunch of
first world problems. But at its core, there are several good ideas and
stories - and none of them gets the spotlight. The director goes from
one subplot to the other, without really developing the characters, and
seemingly has no idea what to do with this story. (And this makes the
ending even worse.) But time to time, some settings or the actors'
performance can tell us more than a thousand words.
Anyway, it's a thoughtful and basically a good movie, but it's too unfocused, unbalanced to go anywhere. If you haven't seen Dans la maison from Ozon, I'd recommend that one instead.
There are a couple of problems with this movie, the characters are
lacking a proper backstory, the actors aren't good either, but after
all it doesn't matter. Because these are minor issues in a much better
The most surprising thing for me was that there's no right or wrong in this movie. There are no moral winners, the director let's the story flow and it's up to the viewer to decide what to think. Another positive aspect of the film is, that it's very down to earth. It's about current social issues in Europe like immigration, ethnic tensions and radical movements based on the inability of the justice. (Maybe this would make difficult for non-European viewers to connect, but it worked for me.)
So if you're tired of movies about slavery and oversimplified topics that are way beyond us, here's a film about the world we're living in and the issues we have to deal with.
|Page 1 of 2:|| |