schroeder-gustavo Reviews

Finding Dory (2016)

WORTHY Sequel

[8/10 · 21 July 2016]

"Hi. I'm Dory. I suffer from short-term "remembery" loss."

These are the very first words we hear in Finding Dory. And we hear them SEVERAL times throughout the film. Look, I love Dory as much as everybody else, but I was really worried this was gonna suffer from "Minions Syndrome". You know how the Minions kinda work in Despicable Me in small measures but a movie filled with them was just annoying as hell?. Luckily, Finding Dory finds ways to avoid that and I am glad to say it succeeds as a sequel.

Finding Dory is able to introduce NEW, MEMORABLE, COOL and FUNNY characters to the universe and it proves that this was not a cash grab by Pixar by selling a well established brand (Cars 2). Destiny and the other whale are funny, Hank the Octopus (or whatever you call an octopus with seven tentacles) is awesome, we are introduced to some pretty hilarious sea lions, and more. One particular scene involving a clam had me laughing HYSTERICALLY.

The ultimate flaw of Finding Dory is that it relies a lot (too much if you ask me) on call backs from the original. It is a sequel and you have to have that connection to the first movie (I get it), but it seemed that all this movie was gonna do was do things that we already knew from the original, especially in the opening of the movie. "Oh, remember the cool turtle who talks like a surfer? And remember Dory talking to a whale?" Things like that are scattered throughout the film and it appears as if they are just there for the sake of people remembering how great the original Finding Nemo was.

So the question everyone wants to know is is it better than Finding Nemo? NO. Not by a long shot. But here's the thing. Finding Nemo is the Lion King of Pixar in terms of scope and epicness. It is as perfect of an animated film as I would ever want any animated film to be. But in the end, I can say with confidence that this is a WORTHY sequel. I was invested in the story, I was thoroughly entertained, I laughed, I didn't cry but some scenes got pretty emotional. And the story is worth experiencing. If you liked the first movie, I can almost guarantee you WILL like this one too IF you don't go in thinking this will be better than arguably the greatest Pixar movie ever made. That's just a dumb mindset. Enjoy Dory for what it is: A good, entertaining sequel to a perfect (or nearly perfect) movie.

Boogie Nights (1997)

The Greatest film about porn

[9/10 · 14 July 2016]

Perhaps the greatest story about the porn industry ever committed to a motion picture? Probably. In Boogie Nights, a movie filled with outstanding performances and pop culture for days, Paul Thomas Anderson shows us a movie in which he is truly and utterly in control of. Every single shot in this 2 and a half hour celebration of excess exists for a purpose and Anderson shows us his skill as a director. Like I said, it is a film filled with great performances, but really outstanding work from Mark Wahlberg in a truly committed performance. The movie delivers in a great use of music, filled with popular songs of the 70s and 80s and an amazing use of volume in the music (when to make it louder, quieter).

All of this brings me to the ultimate flaw of Boogie Nights. There is a fine line between paying homage to a certain movie or a director and for a while, Boogie Nights rides this line with Martin Scorsese's Goodfellas. But after about the first half of the film, Anderson bluntly just rips off Scorsese. The story in itself is essentially a Goodfellas remake. A story about a young man joining a frowned upon business, starting from nothing, the film explores the inner workings of this business and we see it through the eyes of our main character (fish out of water) and we see his rise and ultimate fall through addiction and excess caused by the very business he started out in. In Goodfellas, it's organized crime. In Boogie Nights, it is the porn industry. Of course, there have been several movies to use the cookie cutter provided by Scorsese's seminal film (including two by Scorsese in Casino and more recently The Wolf of Wall Street), but Anderson also copies many of the shots used by Scorsese: Many tracking shots, the snorting of the coke then rapidly zooming in on the character's face, etc. The use of music (not the songs, but its use in the film) is nearly identical.

But the similarities do not stop there. Anderson goes further in copying Scorsese's technique in using almost the same film shots used in Mean Streets. And the one that was just too much for me, personally, were the parts where Mark Wahlberg talks to himself in his dressing room, then by the end of the film it's the same thing but he is now a much different person and he starts shadow boxing (right after showing his giant c**k to the audience, of course). It is literally the exact same camera positioning (or nearly identical) as in Raging Bull. Like I said, this may be purely seen as homage to many, but for me it took it a bit too far.

But overall, I can't really not like this film. Sure, Scorsese's framework is used in Boogie Nights, but as its own story it is truly gripping and compelling. It's not only a movie about the porn industry in the late 70s and early 80s, but a movie about addiction, the troubles of life and overcoming them. I have to confess, even after all of the similarities, I really like Boogie Nights and it is definitely worth a watch. The movie is two and a half hours long, but it flies by because it is insanely entertaining to watch. This is a sign of a pretty good film.

Captain America: Civil War (2016)

Loads of fun

[9/10 · 3 May 2016]

9.3/10 "Oh what's this? Another comic book movie? Oh well. Wait, is it just Captain America v. Iron Man? I bet it'll be just as bad as that Batman v. Superman movie." I may be a little tired of comic book movies, as I am sure other people already are and I do not really approve Marvel has planned films until like 2023. However, if they continue to deliver movies of this caliber, they are very welcome to do so. Civil War is a pretty good movie. It has some great action, good stunt work and some pretty good performances and introductions to some secondary characters.

First, the things I liked. You're constantly switching teams. I was "Team Iron Man " when I went into the movie theater, but the movie presents both sides with great, understandable motivation and you identify with both sides. You never grow to hate anyone but you kind of know where they're coming from and that's a sign of a well written film. It's funny when it need to be, serious when the story demands it and just badass all around. Also, these movies are actually fun and don't feel like the most depressing thing in the world. Yep, I'm looking at you Zack Snyder. Most of the action is pretty good, especially the airport fight which is simply phenomenal, I would even say perfect. The movie also addresses some heavier themes, which are thought provoking and the movie isn't afraid to do so. Another thing I love about these Marvel films is that, sure they are a part this massive MCU, however, most of these films you could watch, without having any previous idea what the other films were about or about who these characters are, and you could still completely follow what is going on. And this is something to be praised: Civil War stands alone as its own movie. This is the first we see of Black Panther and not knowing anything about him I liked his intro to this universe. Spider-Man was the best part of the movie, at least for me. Tom Holland really captured the character of Peter Parker like no one else has and was a great Spider-Man. I can't wait to see more of him.

Now, for the things I did not like. The first thing is the villain. The whole movie you're wondering what his plan is but he never feels like a real threat amongst our heroes. He's just kind of there and does bad things. There is a point in the movie where I even forgot he was in it. His motivation was clear and in the end your questions are answered, but overall I think his plan was a little too "Dr. Evilish" if you catch my drift. Upon further thought, I realized everything of importance in the film could have easily happened if he wasn't in the film. Sure, the catalyst for the actions would have been different but the outcome would have been pretty much the same. The action was great for the most part, but particularly at the beginning of the film it did get a bit shaky at times, maybe even a little too shaky. You could almost always follow what was going on but it made me kind of dizzy. I've said this several times for the Marvel movies and it does take some points away for me, but the score in these movies is inexcusably mediocre. It always (or at least most of the time) feels like generic superhero music in these Marvel films and it is something that needs to be addressed. No spoilers, but I was disappointed with the way the movie ended and it felt kind of dumb to be honest. It involves a letter so you know exactly what I'm talking about.

But overall, Marvel has really done a great job once again with Civil War. The best thing about this film is that every character has something to do and every single one of them has a certain depth to them and you can identify with their actions. No one feels out of place (Well, maybe Hawkeye a little bit, but you can identify with him and you know where he's coming from) and in a movie with as many characters as this, it should be praised. Civil War is action packed and loads of fun.

10 Cloverfield Lane (2016)

10 Cloverfield Lane Review

[9/10 · 17 April 2016]

Dan Trachtenberg's directorial debut is a very good movie. Let's start off with that. However, for people looking to see a Cloverfield sequel or something, this probably isn't the movie for you. I heard this movie was going to be called originally "The Cellar" or "The Bunker" or something of that sort, but the producers decided nobody would have seen it if it was called that, so they incorporated the Cloverfield name to it and did a few re-shoots in post-production so it could fit into the Cloverfield universe. Sort of. But the movie really has nothing to do with Cloverfield.

So about the movie itself. This is a very claustrophobic, eerie thriller with great direction and performances. John Goodman plays this guy who is keeping this girl played by Mary Elizabeth Winstead captive in his bunker after she's in a car accident and he claims the air outside is unbreathable because there has been a sort of attack. This is the core of the film. The entire time you're wondering "Is this guy crazy? Or is he right?" And the movie excels at shaking it up making you think something happened, but then it didn't or maybe it did. Every scene in the movie has a point and it leads somewhere, there really is no filler. Every scene is filled with this tension and is punctuated by Goodman's great performance. The movie is an hour and 43 minutes long, it certainly felt a lot shorter because you're so invested in the story and the characters that you almost forget you're watching a movie. What I loved about Mary Elizabeth Winstead's character is that she's always ahead of the audience. She's very smart and everything the movie sets up about her has a payoff, which is great. What she does in the movie is very clever and I loved that about her character. I haven't mentioned the other guy who is in there with them, but he's pretty good as well.

OK so here's the deal with 10 Cloverfield Lane. Everything up until the last 10 minutes or so is absolutely perfect, at least for me. But then (long story short), she escapes and when she does she realizes the air isn't really contaminated. Then she hears something in the distance, she looks and there's clearly an alien ship flying around. She says something like "Oh, come on," Now, if the credits rolled right after that, I s**t you not I would have gotten up in the theater and applauded. But I guess you can't end the movie like that because it would have been too confusing for audiences and you have to have an action scene or something. And this is where the movie falls apart. She starts being chased by this alien dog or whatever and then she is pulled up into the alien ship and she builds a Molotov cocktail at the alien mouth in the ship or whatever and she escapes. I'm pretty sure the entire point of that scene was that you would have at least some action in the movie so audiences got their "money's worth" and so you could have the movie in IMAX and make some more bucks. But then the dumbest thing ever happens. She's driving around and hears in the radio there are survivors in Baton Rouge and she can find refuge there. But then they say they could use some help in Houston if you have some sort of medical or military training. Immediately when she hears that she stops the car and coincidentally right in front of her is a sign that says like "Baton Rouge go straight. Houston go left". So she goes left of course, but the thing is you do not have to treat your audience like children.

Overall, the ending really disappointed me. But everything else in 10 Cloverfield Lane is great. The acting is pretty good and the directing is great because the movie gives you like clues and you start to put the puzzle pieces together about what is really happening. A solid film.

9.2/10

Apocalypse Now (1979)

Apocalypse Now

[10/10 · 3 April 2016]

Much like The Evil Dead, a lot of the reason why I admire Francis Ford Coppola's masterpiece Apocalypse Now is because of the trouble he went through to film this. Hearts of Darkness is a great documentary that tells the story of the production of Apocalypse Now and I definitely recommend it. Pretty much everything that could have gone wrong did and it's amazing that they could come up with what is now considered to be one of the greatest movies ever made.

Saying Apocalypse Now is a war movie is like saying Fight Club is a movie about a fight club. Sure the movie takes place during the Vietnam War and it is a very important part of the movie but it's more about the characters and the things that they go through, both psychologically and physically. In a nutshell? For me, Apocalypse Now is a movie about dehumanization because of the War, losing one's mind and, commonly agreed, a descent into madness.

Most of the film takes place in the river, going down to where General Kurtz is and every stop represents a part of the dehumanizing process. Example, the first stop is where Robert Duvall's character is. He is a man who loves war and the "smell of napalm in the morning". He takes pleasure in killing and has no morality left in that area. Another stop, where the playboy girls are, everyone loses their morality and they try to harass the women. The stop in the bridge, there is no one in charge and people are just killing. The last stop, Lance completely loses his mind and everyone there has gone insane. Our main character, played by Martin Sheen is also very damaged. The contrast between him and Kurtz is also very intriguing.

I don't want to talk too much about Apocalypse Now because most of what needs to be said has already been said by many critics. But it's a perfect movie, with amazing sound effects and practical effects, amazing direction, perfect and inventive cinematography, a haunting score, great characters you come to care about and amazing dialogue. It's one of my favorite movies.

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016)

Convoluted Mess

[3/10 · 26 March 2016]

I was really excited for this film until I saw that one trailer that pretty much revealed the whole plot of the movie and I hoped that I was wrong and the movie would surprise me. But I wasn't, the trailer spoiled the entire movie for me and that really isn't a negative for the movie itself but I just wanted to mention the worst marketing campaign ever.

Now about the movie, there were things I loved and things I hated. Let's talk about the things I loved, first. I thought Ben Affleck was great, not only as Batman but I think he was a great Bruce Wayne too. There were some things I disliked about the character as well but more about that later. Jeremy Irons is fantastic as Alfred and he actually has a lot to do in this movie. I'm one of those guys who likes Henry Cavill and he's good in the movie as well. One performance that surprised me was Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman, she was pretty good too. I liked the opening of the movie and the first maybe 30 minutes I thought were pretty solid, although kind of convoluted and way too much stuff was going on and the editing and transitioning from scene to scene was all over the place. Still, I enjoyed the first part of the film and most of the action and visuals are pretty solid throughout.

OK so there are many reasons why I mostly disliked the film and a lot of people are saying "well it's cause you're not a fan of the comics" or "you just want to seem smart because critics didn't like it." Truth is I didn't like Batman v Superman because the movie is a mess. I'm just gonna list the things I disliked about it without any particular order.

The movie tries too hard to set up its own universe with the Justice League and its characters that it forgets to be its own good film. It's happened before with The Amazing Spider-Man 2 and now we get this. I really mean it when I say I wanted to love this movie, but I just can't. The editing is all over the place, scenes happen that do not need to be in the movie and the pacing is just off. Everything feels rushed and out of place. Jesse Eisenberg is a good actor, but he sucks as Lex Luthor. He's terrible, he could have been a much better Joker than Lex and it's not because he's a bad actor, but he is just a miscast for the role. Also, his motivations are pretty unclear. Lois Lane has absolutely nothing to do in the movie so they just send her off on these little tasks so she is kind of relevant. Luthor creating Doomsday out of a conveniently placed genetic chamber in the Kryptonian ship was so stupid and it felt rushed and shoe-horned into the movie, kind of like Venom in Spider-Man 3. Batman was good, for the most part. He is one of my favorite characters of all time and one of the things that intrigues me so much about him is his moral code. Well, not anymore apparently because Batman is a murderer in this movie. He's just killing people left and right. And when he decides he wants to kill Superman he just lets him live because their moms have the same name. Like, really? Also, why the hell does Superman suddenly decide that he wants the Batman to stop operating, for some reason? Why does Wonder Woman need to be in the movie? Gal Gadot was pretty good but the movie really should have been a lot more focused on Batman v Superman and that's it. Throw away Lex and Wonder Woman and everything else that does not matter, because your movie is about these two guys fighting each other. Also, this movie could have easily been 90 minutes long if it just focused on that. The pacing is all off and scenes that have absolutely nothing to do with each other suddenly transition into one another. That dream sequence with Batman killing guys in the desert with the flying thing had nothing to do with the plot of the film. Also, how the hell is a non-comic book reader gonna know that it was Flash who conveniently came back and said Lois is the key or something? How bad were those Justice League introductions anyway? Wonder Woman learns about them through an e-mail that conveniently already had the logos to their characters placed on the videos to them. Someone took the time to do that, really? So Superman dies at the end. That must have taken a lot of ball, right? Not really, because he's not really dead at the end. Saying Hans Zimmer's score is disappointing is an understatement, it's mostly loud noises all over the place.

I didn't know what was going on most of the time. The real reason this movie is getting panned by critics isn't the small details, it's the fact that it's a big convoluted mess of a movie that tries harder to set up a universe of movies than be a good movie on its own.

The VVitch: A New-England Folktale (2015)

Disturbing

[9/10 · 23 March 2016]

The Witch is Robert Eggers' directorial debut, he also wrote the film. It tells the story of a family that is banned from New England and moves into a farm in the middle of nowhere in the 17th century. There, they start to experience weird things as there may or may not be a witch causing trouble nearby. I'll just start off by saying I really liked The Witch, but I think a lot of people will be disappointed in the movie because it's really not a conventional horror film.

In all honesty, parts of the first act kind of bored me. There were parts in the beginning of the film where the movie does slow down a lot and I actually nearly fell asleep. But that's where I realized this movie was more about the characters than the actual witch. It's a film about this struggling religious family and how they react to this certain type of situation. Even if the first act was pretty slow and I didn't know where it was all going, nearing the second act of the film, all of the third act and especially the ending was amazing. It is a movie filled with tension, every scene is filled with it. You feel like something could happen at any moment.

There are many things in the movie that just blew me away: the directing is brilliant, the cinematography is beautiful and surprisingly, the acting was spectacular, especially from Anya- Taylor Joy who plays Thomasin, the main character. Her performance is brilliant and I really hope to see her in more films in the future. The score is haunting and really fits the movie's tone and the editing is pretty unconventional and I loved it. The editing lets you in at take a peek at the horrific things happening, but it never gives away too much information and it really is a prime example that the things you don't see are more terrifying than the things you do see.

One of the things I really liked about the movie was that it felt pretty real and accurate. It's a very good depiction of the 17th century I believe and one thing in there that was great was the dialogue. Everyone speaks in old English. You know, like "How art thou this morning?" And things like that made the film feel real. The dialogue is kind of hard to follow but I can't really say that's a negative because it's built into the fabric of the film and how it wants to be more realistic.

The last act and the ending is some of the best horror I have seen in years, maybe even ever. It's so gripping and tense and I just felt dirty and disturbed after watching it. It got under my skin in the best way, I thought the Witch was terrifying. However, like I said I think most mainstream movie-goers will be disappointed in the film, because there are no unnecessary jump scares and the movie moves pretty slowly.

Besides from a few boring parts, I loved the Witch. It's a brilliantly crafted film, tonally perfect and scary as hell, too. One other thing I really liked is that this movie features some blood and gore at parts but it was never like violence for the sake of violence. The violent parts of the movie were there because the story needed it.

8.5/10

The King of Comedy (1982)

King of Comedy

[7/10 · 20 March 2016]

The King of Comedy is a film that you don't hear much about. It's a Martin Scorsese film that I think is often forgotten and I actually had no idea it existed until about a year ago and I thought it was good. It has very good performances by Robert De Niro and Jerry Lewis, and I thought the characters were very interesting, especially Rupert Pupkin (De Niro).

Pupkin is a psychopath who is obsessed with being on Jerry Lewis' show so he can become famous as a stand up comedian. De Niro's performance is pretty compelling and I thought there were many similarities to Taxi Driver, as far as the character goes. Pupkin is a very interesting character to watch and it's just entertaining to see how he reacts to the world around him and he's a strangely sympathetic character as well. Jerry Lewis' character is also great. I loved how he's presented as a very famous person who seems like a nice person but is just tired of the public eye and I think Scorsese and Lewis did a great job in portraying these emotions. These are the things I liked the most about King of Comedy, I think it's a movie completely driven by the performances and the compelling characters.

Unlike Taxi Driver however, King of Comedy is a very straight forward film as far as directing and cinematography goes. The movie doesn't really have any moment that stands out and it just feels like the whole movie we are watching these characters interact with the environment but since the direction is pretty straightforward there's almost no artistic stamp on the movie, so it doesn't really feel like a Scorsese film.

Because our main character is so stubborn and is completely set on accomplishing his goal, the movie does seem a little repetitive at times and the best word to describe it would be frustrating. Frustrating in the sense that the characters are frustrating and the way they end up interacting with each other is frustrating. They experience no arc. There is no catharsis so in the end as a viewer it feels unsatisfying.

The King of Comedy is not a perfect film, but it's a movie that did something different and it features great performances and compelling characters, even if the story may be frustrating at times, I can't deny I was invested in Pupkin and his actions. 7.0/10

Dirty Grandpa (2016)

I'm just glad it's over

[1/10 · 20 March 2016]

I really don't have a problem with any genre of movies, even dumb juvenile comedies like this one, as long as they aren't dumb or terrible. This movie was a disaster in every imaginable way. It's a movie that's by the numbers and after the first 5 minutes you know everything that's gonna happen in the movie and maybe it would have helped if the movie was funny but there really isn't anything funny in this movie. I chuckled one time. The writing is terrible and pretty much everything about the movie is disgustingly bad.

I want to clarify that there's a very big difference between good bad and bad bad movies. Movies like "The Room" are classics because they are so bad that you laugh at it because it's a complete failure and you enjoy it. But then there's bad bad movies where I really don't know how you can derive any enjoyment from it. This was bad bad. None of the characters are likable or even realistic. You can't identify to any one of them and you can't care about them because they don't feel like real people. The dialogue isn't realistic and the scenarios aren't realistic either. Every character in this movie feels either like a cartoon character or a straight up psychopath.

The level of intelligence of the characters is basically zero. None of their actions make any sense and the whole movie just feels like a bunch of stuff happening for the sake of a joke and it's never cohesive. I literally have never said this before because I am really not insulted or offended easily, but this movie really was offensive and insulting. The difficult thing about reviewing a comedy is that it's really hard to pinpoint why something is funny or why it isn't, but this movie was definitely not funny. An example is in the beginning of the movie you kind of get to know the main characters cousin, who is just a total unfunny jerk and you don't see him for the rest of the movie until almost the ending. And the payoff to that "joke" happens like an hour later. So it takes way too long for them to get to the "payoff" and it doesn't work. That's the only joke I can think of that felt like it had a setup and at least attempted to have a payoff. Pretty much everything else was racist and homophobic jokes.

It's pretty amazing how a crap screenplay like this can get sold but thinking about Hollywood it makes sense. It had the right stars attached to it with De Niro and Zac Efron so it appeals to a larger audience: De Niro for older folks and Efron for teenage girls who wanna see him shirtless for almost half the movie. It's a pathetic movie and it doesn't even deserve to be called a film because there's no coherence in the story. It's a movie that's clearly made to gain a profit and it feels like they shot it two weeks and it tries to make you think that the movie is about people and relationships, but it's not.

I actually take a lot of personal offense with these kinds of movies because I happen to love movies and I know it's just a product made for a certain audience or for anyone who's dumb enough to pay for it (apparently including myself because I did) but I really found this movie offensive.

I disliked every character in the movie and I genuinely hated the drug dealer and the cousin characters. None of the jokes worked, it was the most offensively stupid movie I have ever seen in my life. It never seemed to end, it was a nightmare. Dirty Grandpa is hands down one of the worst if not the worst movie I have ever seen.

Army of Darkness (1992)

Cult Classic

[18 March 2016]

Army of Darkness A.K.A. Evil Dead 3 is once again directed by Sam Raimi and it's the epic return of Bruce Campbell as Ash, our hero with a chainsaw for an arm. The Evil Dead is one of my favorite movies ever and Evil Dead 2 is so different that's it's also pretty good in its own right (although I am one of those weirdos who prefers the first Evil Dead). While the first film in the series was going for a campy horror tone, the second one was more of a goofy campy horror movie and now Army of Darkness leaves all the horror behind and focuses 100% on comedy.

The movie is a slapstick comedy and it never tries to be anything else. It's goofy, schlocky and it never takes itself seriously, at all. I love the set designs, costumes and makeup too. It's all pretty schlocky and weird but it's so great especially because of the movie's tone. I love the skeletons that move in stop-motion. And I really love about the first 30 minutes of Army of Darkness, it's constant laughter. After that however, after the scene Ash goes into the mill, the movie starts to go downhill. The comedy doesn't always work and it becomes very hit or miss. The story also becomes predictable when everyone thinks Ash will abandon them to die and it's so obvious that he's gonna stay and fight. The battle feels way too long (even if it's not) and it's because not all of the humor works. Oddly, I found so many similarities between The Two Towers and Army of Darkness. Many shots and set designs of the castle during the battle looked pretty similar to the battle of Helm's Deep in Lord of the Rings. Also some of the things that happen are very similar: like Henry's army arriving to save the day when all hope seems lost. It's like when Gandalf shows up with the Rohirrim.

Anyway, Army of Darkness is certainly not a great film, I probably wouldn't even call it a good film but it works (for the most part) and there's a reason it's become a cult classic by now. Bruce Campbell is amazing and delivers some of the best one-liners ever and it's just a movie that has so much energy. It always puts a big smile on my face.

3:10 to Yuma (2007)

3:10 to Yuma Review

[5/10 · 18 March 2016]

I wouldn't call this movie a total mess because I really enjoyed certain elements of it but I really hated a lot of other things. First of all, I really liked Christian Bale and Russell Crowe in this, especially Crowe. I thought his character was very interesting and had a lot of depth and Russell Crowe does a pretty good job. The parts I enjoyed the most about the movie was some of the banter between Crowe and Bale.

The main problem I have with the movie is the script and some if not most of the dialogue. It felt very clunky at times, like they were trying too hard to get the Western dialogue going on but a lot of it didn't work. Speaking of the dialogue, there were was just too much expository dialogue in the film and very little was actually explained through actions. Some of the things the characters did were just retarded and stupid. Some things in the movie make no sense whatsoever and the characters aren't fleshed out enough for us to care. Except perhaps for Bale and Crowe, every other character in the film was like a cardboard cutout, with no layers to them.

I thought most of the directing and cinematography was serviceable, but nothing spectacular either. There was nothing really memorable in the movie for me I just liked the confrontation between Bale and Russell Crowe but that's pretty much the only thing I enjoyed about the film. Not a terrible movie, but considering the talented cast it should have been better. Also, the movie felt an hour longer than it actually was.

The Muppets Take Manhattan (1984)

Baby Muppets!

[7/10 · 12 March 2016]

The Muppets Take Manhattan is about the Muppets trying to get their show into Broadway. First of all the Muppet characters are great. I loved Kermit, Piggy and Rizzo in the movie. Everyone else should have stayed home for this one. Look, I love the Muppets, but one of the things that just does not work in this movie is that there is an overabundance of characters and most of them are not really used at all. Take Gonzo and Fozzie for example. Great characters, but in this movie they really had nothing to do and most of the other like ten muppets were kind of shoehorned in. Muppets movie or not, rule number one of screen writing is everything that happens in the movie should advance the plot in some way and there were so many characters that did not belong in this movie because they had nothing to do. The story should have focused entirely on Kermit, Rizzo and Piggy, which is what they kind of did but they also let the other characters interfere every now and then and it took me out of the movie.

The movie really starts off strong but after the first 30 minutes or so it's really hit or miss. The humor isn't as clever as in the first part of the movie and things just conveniently happen like Kermit getting hit by the car to get the amnesia subplot going on or the son of the producer picking up the script to the Muppets' play. Also, there was a part where I laughed out loud but it's unintentionally funny. The part where Piggy gets her purse stolen and she chases the guy with the roller blades, they show these shots from far away of Piggy chasing the guy and it's just so clear that it's someone in a Piggy costume chasing after the guy. I laughed really hard at that.

The movie has some great sequences like when they split up and they sing. That's pretty good and the best part about this film is the Baby Muppets sequence. I love that part. Some great songs and the design of the Muppets is great of course. Very lighthearted movie and really not offensive, but I would say most of it is forgettable, mostly due to the script. But I still had an enjoyable enough time with The Muppets Take Manhattan, although the script isn't too solid and there are way too many characters for me to care. It's an OK movie with one or two great moments.

6.5/10

Evil Dead II (1987)

Roller Coaster Ride

[8/10 · 12 March 2016]

Evil Dead 2 was once again directed by Sam Raimi and it's supposedly a sequel to the original The Evil Dead, although I see this film as more of a remake of the original with a bigger budget and a different goal. The Evil Dead is one of my favorite films of all time, it's a film that took many chances and I respect Raimi for going through hell to create that project. Evil Dead 2 had about 10 times the budget of the original film, so is it good?

For the most part, I really like Evil Dead 2. It's a completely different film than the first one. The first one was actually trying to be creepy and campy. This one is a straight-up slapstick comedy with horror and gore elements in it. And it really works. For me, the first minutes of the film that are focused entirely on Ash are just as good or even better than the original. And for me, that's saying something. I know a lot of people prefer this over the original film and I can definitely see why. Ash becomes the iconic character people have grown to love and the film is just hilarious and crazy. Some things don't make any sense at all, but it's established by the tone of the film that it doesn't matter. However I do think this is a flawed movie, at least for me. And yes, I do prefer the first movie in the franchise and I'll explain why.

Ash is one of the coolest characters in movie history. He's funny and delivers some of the best One-Liners ever. Every second of the film he's in frame is gold. However, the film deviates into this subplot of other people getting in the cabin with Ash and for me personally, I don't like any of them. To the extent where I just want them to die, quickly. If the entire movie focused entirely on Ash, it would have been great. Instead, when these people reach the cabin, some of the focus is taken off him and it just hurts the movie for me. Also, in Evil Dead 2 there are many jump scares that seem to be there for the sake of being jump scares. In the original there were some, but they all felt earned and they came when the movie needed them. Here, they're just all over the place.

In my opinion, Evil Dead 2 feels more than a roller coaster ride than a movie. It's crazy, the gore is ludicrous and nothing really makes sense. Again, these are positives. However, I do believe the movie should have been entirely about Ash and they should have brought down the jump scares. But again, the costumes and makeup are amazing and the effects are great. The ending also pretty much sums up how insane this movie is. It's a flawed movie, but an entertaining and enjoyable one. Funny as hell, too. It's worth your time.

7.5/10

The Evil Dead (1981)

The Evil Dead Review

[10/10 · 12 March 2016]

I'm just gonna go ahead and say this, I truly believe The Evil Dead is one of the greatest movies ever made. I admire this movie on so many levels it's insane. Quick back story on The Evil Dead: Bruce Campbell and Sam Raimi grew up together and made several low budget Super-8 mm films. Sam Raimi then had the idea of directing a horror movie and had a budget of about $1500 and he made a short film called Within the Woods. The idea of that film was to attract producers and use the money gained from that to create a full-length film. He then even asked friends and family for money to create his project. With around $350 000, Raimi set out to make a remake of his short film. What we got was The Evil Dead. The thing that interests me about the film so much (other than the film itself) is the production. With limited budget, Raimi had to cast friends of his (including Campbell) for the film. The crew consisted almost entirely of Raimi and Campbell's friends and family. The team had absolutely no assistance from location scouts and they had to find a fitting location for the film. They found an actual abandoned cabin in the woods in Tennessee to shoot. During pre-production, the entire team had to stay in the isolated cabin that had no plumbing, no heating and was far away from any medical assistance. Due to the crew's inexperience, many of them got lost in the woods and several got injured. One of the actresses even had her eyelashes completely torn off while taking off her mask. Because of the low budget, contact lenses to create the "demon-eyes look" were very thick and had to be taken off every 15 minutes because they eyes could not breathe. They could not afford a camera dolly so they had to build several things to create the desired camera movement, including attaching the camera to lumber. On the last few days of shooting, the conditions were so terrible, they began to burn furniture in order to stay warm. The actors went weeks without showering and many caught a cold because of the poor conditions. Shooting took 3 months and shortly after that, looking at the footage Raimi realized there were holes that needed to be filled (no pun intended) but the actors had already left the set and were already busy with other projects. So family members of Raimi filled in for the actors for the re- shooting of some scenes. Several sounds were not recorded properly, so dead chickens were stabbed to replicate the sound of mutilated flesh and Campbell had to scream into a mic for several hours. After months of torture, the project was finished.

So, is the film any good? Absolutely. It's a staple of modern horror. It's a clichéd script by now but it's executed perfectly. The movie knows what it is and it never tries to be anything else than what it needs to be. It's gory, silly and unapologetic. It has just the right amount of gore, horror, and black humor to be great. Campbell's great in the film, although he doesn't really shine as much in this as in Evil Dead II. But the film isn't about the acting. As a matter of fact, the script is minimal and so is the acting, but the movie's purpose is to be campy horror schlock and it succeeds in every way possible. Every jump scare is earned through tension. The gore is so ludicrous, it's great. I love the creative angles they used with the camera, as well as the use of fog. This is a perfect example of an extremely low budget movie executed to perfection. The Evil Dead isn't really that scary (at least to me) but it's so much fun and so much effort went into making it, I love it for that. The Evil Dead is one of my favorite films of all time and to end this review I want to quote critic James Berardinelli from his review of the film: "The extreme nature of the gore isn't beside the point - it is the point. Raimi goes so far over the top in presenting these displays that they take on a campy, almost humorous appearance. It's impossible to take all this blood seriously. So, instead of being sickened, we're strangely amused - and this is all intentional."

10/10

The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou (2004)

Life Aquatic

[8/10 · 12 March 2016]

The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou is written, directed and produced by Wes Anderson. It tells the story of an oceanographer trying to get revenge on a shark after it ate his best friend. And for the most part, I really liked the Life Aquatic. Anderson's style resonates throughout the film: it's silly, goofy and bright. Some of it doesn't really make sense, but it's established by the tone of the film that that doesn't really matter. The cast is great: Bill Murray, Willem Dafoe, Cate Blanchett, Jeff Goldblum and others. Almost everyone is great, especially Murray with his sarcastic humor that never gets old and Goldblum with his eccentric antics. For me though, hat's off for Willem Dafoe. He stole every scene he was in as the German engineer. He was so funny and just great. I have to say I did not like Owen Wilson in this, at all. He plays this pilot from Kentucky, which is fine as a character, but the problem is I didn't see the character in the movie, I just saw Owen Wilson trying to do a terrible accent. Either cast someone else or don't have Wilson's character be from Kentucky.

Also, for me the movie is at its best when it's silly and joyful, but the movie does fall back to melancholy and drama at times and that for me didn't really work that well in this type of film after the tone of silliness was established.

However, overall The Life Aquatic is a very good movie, with great set designs and characters and great silly creatures and props. Things you don't see a lot in movies anymore and I really appreciate those kinds of things. You can tell a lot of heart went into doing this and I love that. The Life Aquatic is one of a kind and although it may get tedious at times, it's still a project that was made with a lot of love and creativity, so I respect it for that.

7.5/10

Zoolander 2 (2016)

Almost Unwatchable

[2/10 · 12 March 2016]

Zoolander 2 is once again directed by Ben Stiller and we get to see Owen Wilson, Will Ferrell and Stiller himself return to their former roles, which is the one positive thing I can say about this movie. The cast is still good in their roles. Derek and Hansel are still the same characters and they play them with enthusiasm and Mugatu is well, OK. Sadly, everything else is pretty much garbage. The humor did not work at all and I just wanted it to be over. After 5 minutes of the movie I was just exhausted. This is a clear example that bigger does not mean better. I am a fan of the original Zoolander and one of the things I liked about that film is that it was just a small comedy with a relatively small budget and it evolved as a cult film. Zoolander 2 tries to be bigger than the first one and it just doesn't work. The first was pretty much about Mugatu trying to hypnotize a male model to assassinate the prime minister of Malaysia. That was the plot. Stupid? Definitely, but it worked in its own right. This one's about Derek trying to locate his son, while male models are being assassinated, which actually did not pay off at all in the end.

The movie is filled with unnecessary cameos and there can be too much of a good thing. It happened last year with the Entourage movie and now with this. Like I said, everything is bigger, the scope and even the effects, but what Stiller and his production crew don't get is that what made the original Zoolander so funny and good was that it seemed like they were taking a chance. It was kind of cheap and small but it worked.

The film doesn't work at all but I'll say this: At least it didn't feel cynical. To me it seemed like they were actually trying to make a good film and a funny one but it just did not work. The humor is mostly like people getting hit in the face and stuff like that. The movie also tries way too hard to recall on things from the original that were funny. As a fan of the original and as a moviegoer in general, I would not recommend Zoolander 2. I laughed 5 times in the whole movie. I counted them. And as a comedy that's the main problem with the movie: It was not funny.

1.5/10

Goodfellas (1990)

Masterpiece

[10/10 · 5 March 2016]

Goodfellas is what I would call a masterpiece, a wonderful movie and a representation of everything I love about movies. It's a movie I have loved pretty much all my life and I just had the privilege to experience it in a theater, so I'll do my best to explain why Goodfellas is not just an ordinary crime film and why it's one of the greatest movies ever made for me.

There are so many movies about crime and gangsters and many before Goodfellas and this movie is often considered as the best mob movie ever made next to The Godfather. One the things that makes Goodfellas so good is the way it shows the gangster life and how it can be so attractive. We follow Henry Hill since he was a kid and he explains throughout his journey how "being a gangster was better than being president of the United States" Henry never had to wait for anything, he got what he wanted every time and he loved it. He explains how he thought people that worked every day just to get a paycheck had no balls. It's interesting because it shows why so many people join the mob in the first place, no matter how ugly it may seem. But one thing the film never does and it's also a reason why it's so great, is that it never glorifies the life of a gangster. Scorsese makes sure the audience feels how filthy and dangerous it is and how awful the people that live it can be. This is something Goodfellas excels at.

Goodfellas is also probably the most fast paced movie I have ever seen. The editing is amazing, but it's never confusing and this movie may be a lot of things but it is certainly not a boring film. It's an extremely entertaining and engaging film. The performances are just amazing and you get to know every main character. Joe Pesci won the Oscar for his performance, of course, but Ray Liotta and Robert De Niro are just great in the film. The cinematography is great and the movie just has Scorsese written all over it. His directorial choices are so evident in the film and they are beautiful. The combination of soundtrack and the film is beautiful and perfect. I love every bit of the movie but two of my favorite scenes are the steadicam shot when Henry takes Karen to the Copacabana and when Robert de Niro decides to kill Morty with Sunshine of Your Love playing intensely.

The fast pacing of the film works very well because if you pay attention, you will realize the pacing gets faster as the movie advances. This is paralleled with how Henry starts to lose control over his life through drug addiction, sloppiness (as he gets caught) and cheating on his wife. In the end we realize how deranged these people really are. Tommy (Pesci) is a psychopath, Jimmy (Robert de Niro) acts as a father figure and close friend to Henry most of the film and in the end he tries to get him (and probably his wife, too) killed. Henry rats everyone out and he doesn't even feel sorry for it. He feels sorry because he can't live the life anymore. He has to "wait around like everybody else" The audience realizes how dull and boring a "regular" life can be and we understand why he lived the life he lived. Scorsese never tries to moralize the actions of these people, but he makes sure we understand them.

For me, the movie is pretty much flawless. You could argue that there are too many freeze frames, but they all work. Also, you could argue that it's crazy that Henry's character is 21 years old at a point in the film when he looks 40. Think about it, though. If it was played with different actors the movie would not have the same effect and it would degrade the film. And remember, the movie plays out over a course of 30 years. This was the best way of shooting the movie.

In conclusion, Goodfellas is a must watch for any film lover. A classic and a masterpiece.

10/10

Dumbo (1941)

Dumbo Review

[6/10 · 28 February 2016]

Dumbo is one of Disney's "classics" and it's a movie that doesn't always work for me. I really like most of the scenes and the scenes that get to you emotionally. Every time Dumbo cries or when he visits his mother in the cage I really like. However it's a movie that doesn't have the best voice performances and the animation is mostly great but there are one or two scenes in which there are some inconsistencies, like there is a moment in which Dumbo's eyes are black. These are minor details, but the main issue I have with the film is the tone. It goes from being very happy and Disney like to very dark and sad and then at the end from sad to happy again. The tone of a movie, animated or not should always be defined within the first few minutes of the film and there are some major tonal inconsistencies here. Also, there are some weird stereotypes in the movie and I understand it was released in the 40's but it also feels weird. Like the workers of the circus who put up the circus tent are all black and the first words to come out of their mouths are something like "We work all day, work all night." I'm probably paraphrasing though. Also, the crows all play African- American stereotypes for some reason and it's just odd. Some of the songs are great though, especially the "When I see an elephant fly" song and the pink elephant sequence is great. The ending is kind of heart- warming too. I can find enjoyment in Dumbo despite its flaws, but I do believe it is a very inconsistent movie and probably gets more credit than it deserves, in my opinion.

Prisoners (2013)

Tense

[10/10 · 28 February 2016]

Prisoners features a pitch perfect cast with Hugh Jackman, Jake Gyllenhaal, Viola Davis, Maria Bello, Terrence Howard, Melissa Leo and Paul Dano, among others. Mostly every performance in the film was great but I loved especially Hugh Jackman, Gyllenhaal, Melissa Leo and Paul Dano. Jackman as the father of the missing girl is really believable and he delivers a performance that is truly Oscar worthy. My favorite scene with Jackman is when he meets Gyllenhaal for the first time in his house, you can really tell he is committed to the character but pretty much every scene he's in is great. Gyllenhaal as the detective investigating the case is great and he just continues to prove to me why he's one of my favorite actors. He's so versatile and can play a very wide range of roles. Melissa Leo plays the aunt of Paul Dano who plays a very troubled young man who is treated as a suspect in the film. Both of them are great and Paul Dano delivers a pretty odd and kind of disturbing performance.

Prisoners is the kind of movie you think is going a certain way and it mostly does but it shakes it and twists it along the way enough to keep you guessing. From the opening shot you feel the tension of the film that endures until the movie is over. This is mostly thanks to the beautiful cinematography and the smart direction of Villeneuve. He knows exactly where to put the camera in exactly what situation, especially given the talent he had on this production. So prisoners is pretty much an excellent movie, the tone of the movie is defined very early, there is a clear structure and everything is executed beautifully. Everything that happened advanced the plot or developed the characters. It reminded me of a David Fincher film. This is a very different film than Enemy, which was also directed by Villeneuve but they're both amazing films and this is definitely worth a watch.

10/10

Enemy (2013)

Enemy

[10/10 · 28 February 2016]

Enemy is most likely the most enigmatic, confusing movie I have ever seen. There are other movies like "Only God Forgives" that may be more confusing perhaps, but this movie actually felt like it led somewhere. Like "2001: A Space Odyssey", Enemy had a great setup and a great payoff, if one can understand what the movie is trying to say.

"Chaos is order, yet undeciphered." Nothing could be more true. These are the first words we see on screen, right after a shot of the city of Toronto. Enemy is deep on symbolism, especially with spiders.So what does it all mean? Spiders represent women in the way our main character sees them. He has a deep fear of commitment and likes to cheat on his wife. Spiders catch their prey in their webs and then eat them The film is trying to say that the main character feels like he has lost his freedom and he feels "trapped" in the web of his marriage. He does not like the idea of commitment nor of having to take care of his soon to be born child. Dictatorship and being unwillingly ruled are important themes in the story. The lectures he gives on the subject are basically Jake telling the audience how he feels about his marriage, he feels oppressed. In the opening of the film, in the sex club we see a woman about to squash a spider. This represents that Jake wishes to squash his wife (women are spiders) through his own unfaithfulness. The short dream sequence where he sees a woman with a spider head supports that spiders represent women, Now the next spider is pretty interesting: Directly after the scene where he meets his mother, we see a huge spider roaming Toronto. Well, it turns out there is a monument in Ontario called the "Mother Spider" which looks almost exactly the same as the one we see in the film (only smaller, of course). So the huge spider represents his mother and how he feels she is trying to control his life. When his wife turns into a huge spider at the end, why does it react in fear? This means she was afraid of being squashed by her husband. She was afraid that her love would be "squashed" by his unfaithfulness. This happens immediately after he feels tempted to go to the sex club again. Everything in the movie supports the idea that the main character is unfaithful and is "a spider killer" and hates the idea of being "oppressed". When he walks home after work at school he walks by some wall art of people doing the Roman salute. Every one is painted black, except the one in the middle who is painted red. This means two things: Jake is lost in his subconscious and he opposes the idea of being oppressed. Later, when he rents the movie, two interesting things are happening in the store: 1) There is a poster of "Attack of the Fifty Foot Woman" and 2) The song playing is called "The Cheater", a song about a man who cannot control his impulses and can't remain faithful. These are all manifestations of his fears of commitment and marriage. We constantly see low shots of street wires that look a lot like spider webs all over the city and at the end of the film when Anthony and Mary crash, the broken window of the car looks like a spider web, which for me represents the moment his wife "catches" him cheating. He is once again "caught in her web". But at the end of the actual storyline, at the sex club the woman symbolically squashes the spider and Jake breaks free of his wife's clasp.

Jake Gyllenhaal delivers an amazing performance, especially because he has to portray two very different characters. The overall cast is pretty good as well. I love the cinematography in the movie, too. Every shot looks very Grey and dark which is the overall tone of the movie. Something I did not expect to love was the score. It is very tense and it adds so much to the overall tension of the film and I loved it. Enemy is not a conventional film and it is not for everyone, I can understand that. However, Enemy is one of the few films I consider to be "perfect". There is not a single thing I would change in it. Every time I watch it I get new things out of it. Enemy is a great example on a movie working on every level possible, the difficult thing is to understand what the movie is trying to say. "Chaos is order, yet undeciphered."

10/10

1408 (2007)

Solid Horror Flick

[7/10 · 20 February 2016]

1408 is a movie that relies much more on old-school scares than what you see in most horror films these days. It's a movie that relies on deep psychological horror and building tension rather than cheap and unnecessary, ineffective jump scares. This is something I love about 1408.

The movie follows Mike Enslin, a not so successful writer that writes about "haunted" hotels, rooms, cemeteries and such. What is interesting about his character is the fact that he is a skeptic. He has never seen anything to make him believe in ghosts or in the paranormal. Interestingly though, this was also kind of a flaw for me, because it does make the character more interesting, but at the same time it sets up the later events of the film a little too perfect for me. Even if you knew nothing about the plot of this film, within the first 5 minutes of it you would know exactly where it's going, so it makes the movie predictable. You know the character will undergo some kind of cathartic situation that will make him change his mind, which is great, but predictable.

Performance-wise, John Cusack as Enslin is good, nothing outstanding but he does get the job done. Samuel L. Jackson is also in the film as the hotel manager. I thought he was miscast. The fact that he's Sam Jackson and knowing his roles of the past distracted me, however he does a great job with the material he is given.

The build up to the room and the first few minutes in the room are brilliant. Definitely the best parts of the movie, because the tension is great. After the first few minutes in the room, the movie does, unfortunately, slow down and begins to roll downhill. The tension starts to fade away and the movie feels way too slow, even a little boring at times. It does pick up the pace at times and regain speed, but those scenes that are slow do take you out of the movie.

There are certain things in 1408 that also make no sense: If it's established early in the film by Samuel L. Jackson that electronics do not function in 1408, why is there a TV and a radio in there and why do they work even before things start to escalate? Just don't say electronics don't work in the room and it would have worked fine. At a point in the film, Enslin starts to see like TV projections of the people that killed themselves. We see this woman jump out of the window and kill herself. Then, when Enslin climbs out of the window and tries to get back in, the same projection tries to kill him, although we did see her every move before and she definitely did not try to kill anyone. If the room is so smart and evil and even turns on the water sprinklers at one point to wreck Enslin's laptop, how come it didn't notice his intentions when he wanted to literally burn the room and start sprinkling away? Like I said, Sam Jackson does the best he can with the material, but some of his lines are just retarded. Like when he says "It's an evil f'ing room". Also the electronics situation which is just not true. But the worst one is at the end when he's just sitting in his room with a cigar and his glass of scotch and says "Well done Mr. Enslin, well done." or something like that. Welcome to schlock town. Why is Enslin's first book even mentioned at the beginning of the film if it has no payoff whatsoever. Great setup for something but absolutely no payoff. Are we supposed to interpret that he started writing his horror books after his daughter died? It's never really explained or made clear at which point in his life he started writing the books. The things with the daughter were interesting, it gave the character depth and stuff the room could mess around with to alter him. But what's up with his dad? He's in one scene and it's never mentioned ever again.

In the end, 1408 is a flawed movie, sure. But the flaws I have with it are almost exclusively with the script. But I can't deny the fact that it's a well made movie. I love how it starts to build tension and there are absolutely no stupid cheap jump scares in the movie. Almost no blood, the movie is almost purely psychological. It's a solid horror movie, an entertaining one and I would definitely recommend it to anyone who can appreciate a good psychological horror movie.

7.0/10

Deadpool (2016)

One of the best comic book movies ever

[10/10 · 14 February 2016]

I remember the negative, hateful reactions X-Men Origins: Wolverine got for what it did to the awesome character of Deadpool, who is very loved by the fans. At the time I basically knew nothing about the character, so I decided to look into him. What I found was one of the coolest, funniest and most entertaining characters I had ever seen. After so many years, I am happy to say, we finally got the Deadpool movie we deserved.

First of all, Ryan Reynolds is perfect for playing the role of Deadpool and he owns every second he's on screen. The thing I like about it is you can actually tell he loves the character and most importantly he UNDERSTANDS the character he is playing. Watching him in interviews just lets you know how much he enjoyed playing the Merc with a Mouth.

This is an R-Rated comic book film and it doesn't hold anything back, literally. It is violent, funny, meta. Basically everything I love in a movie. And I mean it probably doesn't get any more meta than this and that's why Deadpool works perfectly because it knows exactly what it is and what it needs to be and it expresses that.

The movie is told in a nonlinear way, which absolutely works to its advantage because the plot is very simple, especially as a comic book film, so the nonlinear way of telling makes it feel original. The thing I knew some people were worried about was if the love story was gonna work or not. The answer to that is yes, because everything that happens between Deadpool and his girl feels real, especially knowing her background and who she is and especially because it actually advances the plot of the movie, building our main character.

Sure, like most movies, Deadpool has flaws, but they are minimal, and I mean minimal. It did NOT take me out of the experience for the most part. The only two things that kinda bothered me were that they never really explain exactly what his powers are (and considering he jumps abnormally high and does super inhuman back flips, I think it should have been explained more), although it is implied and it doesn't make any sense at all that the eyes of the costume show emotions and that he himself made a suit that is absolutely perfectly made and tactical, but it's so awesome. And who the hell cares anyway? The movie surely doesn't. have to emphasize I am looking at this through a microscope, because I loved every minute of Deadpool. Moshe of the humor works, but upon a second viewing, it seemed to me that they were trying a little too hard to be funny at times.

But Deadpool blew me away with its humor, violence and especially the meta. The scenes I loved the most were when they referenced something real or when it made fun of itself. There are some clichés in the movie, like the evil British bad guy and the comic relief character, but the movie makes fun of those clichés. I had a blast with Deadpool, from the opening credits to the post-credits scene, I had a big smile on my face 96% of the time. It's a movie that understands exactly what it is and it executes the things it has to do perfectly. Deadpool is not only one of the greatest comic book movies ever made, it is one of the funniest movies I have seen in awhile.

9.6/10

Creed (II) (2015)

Wow

[10/10 · 13 February 2016]

When I first heard a new Rocky film was in production I thought to myself "Man, do we really need ANOTHER Rocky flick?". And the answer to that is no. This movie was thoroughly unnecessary. That being said, Creed is great. It is in fact so good, it actually justifies its own existence.

I am a huge fan of the Rocky franchise, the Rocky movies are films that I grew up watching. I've seen 1-4 probably a million times, those are the movies that actually inspired me to start working out. I don't like 5 and Rocky Balboa was OK. I would have never thought another good thing would come out of this franchise, so when I started reading and watching very, extreme positive reviews to this, I was shocked. I had to see it for myself. Now, even as a huge fan of the series, I have to admit, I think the only really good film, from a critical standpoint is the original Rocky. As a matter of fact, Rocky 4 is one of the dumbest movies ever. But I still love it and it's the one I've seen most times, probably. Well that has changed, because Creed is a great film, as well.

This movie does such a great job at trying to recapture the feel of the original Rocky film, which was not really about boxing, but about the characters, an underdog stepping up to fight the champ. That's the main theme in this movie, too. Not saying the fights in this movie aren't great, though, cause they were. This may come off as bold, but the fights in this movie are the most brutal in the entire series. Every punch feels real, I constantly found myself saying "ouch" while sitting in the theater. The first fight of Adonis, the main character is wonderfully shot. The entire fight is just one, continuous long shot and was expertly directed. The movie is slow paced and it's really a drama that takes itself seriously, like the original film.

Performance-wise, Michael B. Jordan was great as Apollo Creed's son in the film, but we have to talk about Sylvester Stallone. Wow, just wow. Stallone's performance is amazing, he really impressed me and what captivated me the most about him is that it felt heartfelt, it really seemed like this is a character he was invested in and because of his performance, I nearly cried during a few scenes in the movie.

I loved the score of the film as well. It does a great job of taking fragments of the classic, iconic Rocky songs and making them original, I loved it. I have one flaw with the movie and it's that they introduce a character, who serves purely as a love interest for Adonis and for me it was pretty clear that they just had her in the movie as a manipulative device for the audience to care more about the main character, but it really didn't work for and it actually took me out of the movie. Luckily, she does not have that many important scenes or anything so it's a minor thing. I do think they could have cut her out of the film entirely and it wouldn't have affected it in any way possible.

Besides that, I loved pretty much everything in Creed! It's a great surprise to see a movie like this. In an age of reboots and remakes, which many exist just to make a crapload of money, regardless of content, it's so amazingly refreshing to see a movie like this, which actually takes its time and cares about quality. Creed respects the original film, but at the same time creates its own legacy. A very good film.

9.5/10

The Hateful Eight (2015)

Another Home Run from Tarantino

[10/10 · 7 February 2016]

The Hateful Eight is written and directed by Quentin Tarantino and stars Samuel L. Jackson, Kurt Russell, Jennifer Jason Leigh among others. It really is a star filled cast.

First of all props to Tarantino for releasing this film even after the script was leaked back in the day. Thank you for releasing this movie. I have to say, I applaud his efforts. I really do. He is really trying to pay homage to the westerns of the 1960's and just from the opening you get that feel. Everything from the locations to the shots makes this feel like a legitimate western. As much as I love Tarantino's previous film, Django Unchained, it didn't really feel like a western to me, but a really good Tarantino film. The Hateful Eight feels like a western. Something that really helps add to that feel is the score by Ennio Morricone, who composed the scores for many westerns back in the day, including The Good, the Bad and the Ugly.

Now, did the movie HAVE to be released in 70mm? No, I don't think so, but the Roadshow showings this movie had and the effort Tarantino put into it makes me respect him even more because that's just the love he has for cinema. He makes every movie of his so cool, but it seems effortless and that's one of the many things I love about him as a filmmaker.

Every performance in the film is spectacular, but I really particularly enjoyed the performances by Samuel L. Jackson, Jennifer Jason Leigh and Walton Goggins. They were great in the film. Some people I heard saying this movie was boring, which at least for me it really wasn't. The movie is 3 hours long, it did not feel that long, at all. I can see why people would find the lack of locations maybe boring for them, but really I find that lack of locations the reason why this movie succeeds for me. Most of the movie takes place in a cabin, which works great because you feel the isolation, you feel the tension building up to the climax of the film. The use of location was great, it actually felt cold as I sat in the theater and watched this. I love that they filmed in real snow, as well. Every single chapter in the film is great and the story does advance rather slowly, but this is a movie that relies on that tension that is a result from that slow pace and from the amazing dialogue.

I found the cinematography great, the direction was great, the performances as well. There is to me but one, I don't want to call it a flaw, because it really isn't, but it's more of an observation, but I want to mention it. Without spoiling anything from Django Unchained, I want to relate something from that film to this one. You can say that the "meat" of the film in Django is everything that happens until the last few minutes of the film. And what happens at the end of Django (which is actually great, by the way) feels just like a cherry on top of the film. It doesn't really advance the plot anymore, but it gives the viewer a certain kind of satisfaction. The same goes for The Hateful Eight. You are constantly trying to figure out throughout the first chapters of the story, who the bad guy or guys is/are, and it's pretty cool, it's much like playing Clue with Tarantino characters and dialogue. So as the plot advances, you realize this person isn't the bad guy and then this person and so on, so you start discarding characters, but there is a point in the movie where just abruptly find out who the bad guys are and their real motivation. After that, in Tarantino fashion, you know what's coming. What happens next feels like the movie is almost over, but the movie gives the viewer a certain satisfaction. Now, like I said, this isn't really a complaint or a flaw but it's an observation in the last Tarantino films.

There is a part of the movie where Daisy starts playing the guitar and singing a song, I loved every single thing about that. It was directed perfectly and the tension just starts building up. It's one of my favorite scenes in the movie.

That being said, I loved the Hateful Eight. I am sure I even liked it more than Django. You can nitpick all you want and you may or may not like Quentin Tarantino as a filmmaker, but you can't deny the fact that the man puts so much love and effort into his films. That has to add something to it. Like many Tarantino films, the Hateful Eight doesn't feel like a movie, it's an experience, kind of trip back in time to the great films and times of the past. The Hateful Eight is a great film.

Pulp Fiction (1994)

What is it about?

[10/10 · 9 December 2015]

Pulp Fiction made Quentin Tarantino who he is today. He showed us what he was capable of with Reservoir Dogs, but with Pulp Fiction, he made his mark in cinema and it will stay there forever. I love Pulp Fiction, I love it so much. It's just one of those movies I could watch on repeat for the rest of my life and I wouldn't mind it. But what makes it so great? It's basically just a bunch of people talking, the entire movie. But it so well scripted and directed, the Pulp Fiction script is perhaps the best script ever written. Royale with Cheese? Hell yeah! Everyone in film school should read the script to this masterpiece. Needless to say, all the actors in the film have reached iconic status and deliver great performances. Pulp Fiction is one of the most iconic movies of all time. What makes it so great for me is the fact that it's not really about anything. It's just a bunch of random stuff that happens and it has a great script, that's it. But to make a movie about nothing and make it one of the greatest, most entertaining films of all time, is an achievement. Thank you, Quentin Tarantino. Thank you.

Written and directed by Tarantino, it's considered by many to be one of the most influential and best movies of all time. In my opinion, it is the best written film of all time. Pulp Fiction is a film driven almost completely by its dialogue: It's two and a half hours of mostly people talking and one would think that's a negative but the dialogue is extremely clever and engaging. The performances are brilliant as it features a pitch perfect cast. The directing choices are awesome, the cinematography is perfect for what it needs to be and you can't talk about Pulp Fiction without mentioning the soundtrack. Possibly the greatest soundtrack in a movie ever. The dialogue is so good it features so much quotable dialogue.

I'm a big fan of structure in most movies but the beautiful thing about Pulp Fiction is that it's not really about anything. It's just a bunch of stories mixed together to create an entertaining film about gangsters, dancing the twist and foot massages. There is only one scene in Pulp Fiction I dislike, because I really feel it does not advance the plot and it feels like it slows the movie down for me and that is when Butch and his girlfriend are in the hotel room at night. The scene lasts like 5 minutes only at it feels like it could have been trimmed to two. However, this is really a minor detail. Pulp Fiction is one of the most entertaining movies ever made and it is an essential viewing for any film lover in general.

9.7/10