Reviews written by registered user
james-forrest

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

Page 1 of 3:[1] [2] [3] [Next]
24 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

2 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
"I just do....things", 20 July 2008
10/10

Wow. Well, as usual people have nailed the comments for this movie already. But, not usually being the one to follow the development and filming of movies so closely, I need to put my 2 cents in.

Yes this is the best comic book movie ever made. There are some crazy scenes with the Joker that really do scare me, just the way Heath did the voice, and how he can go from a playful kid to a psycho is frightening.

All the other cast members are great, special props to Maggie who surprised me with her great acting.

My only complaints is although it is intense is does seem a little rushed, particularly towards the end. A few lines thrown in there were cheesy but for the most part it was a wild ride leading up to the release of this movie.

However, it was hyped so much, and I was hyping it so much, that I actually believed that this is a masterpiece and the best movie ever made, as per some of the first rave reviews. Guys, this isn't a masterpiece or the best movie ever made. It shouldn't be number one as of this review (better than the Godfather? Please. Best comic book movie yes (although Superman 78...damn it is a tough call)), but to cast it this high amongst all the other genres is a little bit out of place. Save the 10s for your Godfathers and Empire Strikes Backs.

But stuff it, after coming out of Indiana Jones and a list of mediocre movies, this one is still getting a 10 on IMDb. Realistically though it is probably a 8 or an 8.5. Still very good but masterpiece it is not. Close

11 out of 20 people found the following review useful:
Making an Indy Movie after all this time- "Not as easy as it used to be", 23 May 2008
4/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Indy 4 was barely an average movie. It was trying too hard to be Indiana Jones. Here is my rant bullet point style:

Most of those cute little references didn't work for me.

Indy looking at that mole or whatever which are so blatantly CGI and unnecessary! (especially seeing as it opened with one- what the hell were they thinking!) This is Indy Jones after 19 years, and what do we get....some crappy animation right at the start! Don't they understand this is Indy after such a long time and people were anticipating this like hell- they should have had a better opening than that.

I want scenic shots, I want the Indy music I want something that anticipates nicely from the get go that Indy is back...not wondering if I have stumbled into some advance screening of Kung Fu Panda or something.

It is just as bad as putting Jar Jar Binks in Star Wars The bantering didn't seem natural.

The part where Cate Blanchett put the Crystal Skull back on the aliens head or whatever where she just falls done and looks like she is having some sort of fit looked totally retarded.

John Hurt who is a seasoned actor had a stupid role which was just annoying.

The comedy of the snake being thrown at Indy was amusing, however the argument between Marion and Jones before this was pretty crap.

The wedding ending seemed like a bit of a joke. Like it was some sort of weird parody. OK the hat blowing to Shia only for Indy to pick it up to create that ambiguity of 'What's next' was OK.

George Lucas and Jeff Nathanson pull your heads in and stop ruining important material for the fans.

Im not saying i expected this to be Raiders, however this should have been a 4/5 movie at least.....unfortunately it was quite average.

Steven Spielberg said this one was for the fans. And he was right- the fans are the only ones trying as hard as they can to find the bits and pieces in this mess to make it pass as an average movie because they don't want to accept that Indy comes back after 19 years with this crappy effort.

Indiana 4 never had that "Kick ass Indy is back" moment I was waiting for.

Good points -Some good lines "Er...big ants...run!" Lines like this worked. Lines like "I have a bad feeling about this" "Damn I thought that was closer" and "Not as easy as it used to be" did not hit. There has to be a way to do this backwards referencing without the lines being as forced or brimming with cheddar cheese.

-Liked the references with Sean Connery's picture ( I liked the extra shot of Indy pausing to look at the photo and the shot of his picture transitioning to the train station scene) and the other old friend, i forget his name, the one the statue's head fell off of. (Marco?) -Good suspension of disbelief that Indy is younger like in the old school days when you just see his back/outline of his hat in shadows etc.

-Even though the CGI was overused, I did like the part at the end with Indy standing back to us facing this huge UFO. Crazy but cool.

Overall though, could I stand up and cheer in the cinema proclaiming "Hell yeah Indy is BACK!" Absolutely not.

Thanks George for bringing back Indy mostly ruined. What is next on your table of destruction? Oh yes, that Star Wars animation. Nice times.

-James.

4 out of 11 people found the following review useful:
"Sometimes you have to hold on to the ones you care about", 17 January 2008
10/10

OK so having anticipated this movie for quite some time I just got back from a screening of it.

It was funny. I was pumping myself up for it for a while, then as a sat there in the cinema i thought, wow, in 90 minutes this will all be over...will this be worth it? Overall though the answer to that question is yes. Yes there is a set up of 20 minutes or so...doesn't matter guys! It is necessary to gain some connection to the characters, so lets not complain about that.

The part where the monster first hits interrupts a conversation between Rob ("Im like your main dude") and his bro Jason -which, by the way, has very relevant dialogue to set the tone for the rest of the movie, so pay attention.

Because, as been mentioned in another review, this is a step up from a monster movie; that is to say, when something terrible is happening, how would you react, what would you do for the ones you love? With the immediate threat, we get answers to these questions from our main characters.

To quote a poster at the Rotten Tomato forums "If life as you know it is ending, the world around you is crumbling, you are probably going to reach out for the ones you love." I loved this movie, and i hope you reach out for it.

OK, too cheesy end to a review, just see this movie! PS: There has been a lot of talk over motion sickness- i was fine with it, however the person i saw it with got a little nauseous, so be careful.

Die Hard 2 (1990)
0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Just as good as the first, 7 January 2008
7/10

OK so having decided to sit down and watch these films, so I came to the second one in the series. I've always had a thing for movies involving airports/aircraft, so this one looked to be good.

Overall though, i would say it is just as good as the first, which is, nothing terribly special, but a good pop corn flick when you want a bit of action and humour, which hey, on some nights at home- there is a time and a place for.

Im about to watch the 3rd one so we'll see how that squares up. For me though this was on level with the first, I am unsure why this is lower rated- so 7/10

Die Hard (1988)
0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Decent action flick, 7 January 2008
7/10

Having seen bits and pieces of this on TV, i decided to rent out all the Die Hard films and watch them over a couple of evenings. Can't say I was blown away, but entertained- yes i was.

Bruce indeed was born to play roles like this, and the humour in between is amusing. Classical bad guy, hostage situations- yes so OK this is no complex picture, but hey, when you don't want to think and want entertainment, that is OK too.

I'll check out the other Die Hard films and see how they pair up to this original, which people say is the best.

7/10

Tsotsi (2005)
1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
A tear jerker, 7 January 2008
9/10

Good movie. Great story devices used here. Centres around someone that is into the bad side of things in life. We may hate him a little at the beginning. Then, he finds a baby, he cares for it. We start to like him.

Then, we start to understand his past, and realise we have a good soul underneath the layers of his personality which were influenced by his environment in order to survive.

I expected this movie to have a different ending to have a greater impact, but if it did..i would probably burst into tears, so perhaps that is a good thing.

Go see this movie: 9/10

4 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
Great at the start...then.....worse...and don't get me started on the ending!, 3 January 2008
6/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

OK, thought id give this a watch on its opening day in Australia, today.

The start of the movie was good for a psychological point of view- him talking to mannequin's and so badly wanting one to talk..OK fair enough, him killing his dog-yes,pretty bad. But people were right when they said the moment it got bad was when his dog dies...yeah, boom bring in 2 people- i wanted more hard-core reactions for living in isolation in 3 years and then coming into human contact, not stupid lines like "I was saving that bacon"!

It got worse: Bob Marley reference- pointless. God reference- just as bad. Then, to crown it off- the butterfly reference at the end- i am sick of Hollywood movies spelling out these metaphors to the point where it is insulting as they take us for people that can't put 2 and 2 together- which reminds me of that scene in Home Alone where Joe Pieci's (sp?) character comes into the house and they put that twinkling tooth animation in there...ah, yes, we get the point- he was the same guy as before!

If that wasn't worse enough the writers wrote themselves into a hole at the very end, as with the characters-

1) There is room for you in here Will- yeah, don't bother going in there with them 2)Will has more experience surviving rather than her and the kid- he should have stayed there to protect them 3)He blows himself up..ahh yeah i see how that would have destroyed all those other infected people in the room 4) The writers cut to the end scene which don't even show how the hell the 2 characters get out of that crazy situation with many, many infected people coming to get them. 5) Didn't like the idea of the cure.

Overall- good at the start, but waaaay too big crash at the end! 6/10

16 out of 25 people found the following review useful:
Um, yes, I need to deliver some information to prevent a war, is that cool with you guys? Worth a rent., 30 December 2007
7/10

First thing that struck me was the casting of Ben Affleck- im not sure why and if this was just me, but i expected him to come out with some punch lines and start cracking jokes at any second- he just didn't fit the role for me personally. Morgan Freeman also didn't seem to have a solid cast in this movie.

The story was fairly captivating however, Cromwell was good to watch as always and Morgan Freeman did his best given the role Overall worth a rent but probably not a buy guys. Catch it on TV if you can and you will be probably entertained for that night.

7/10

Flatliners (1990)
10 out of 15 people found the following review useful:
"Hello, I'm nice, he's nice, we're both f**king lunatics. Can I come in, please?", 30 December 2007
10/10

Im usually wary of movies hovering around the 6/10 mark on IMDb. Id like to think people know what they are talking about and know what they like. I guess the trick with reviewing is to take an approach of "Hey, if i liked types of movies like these- would i give it a higher score than i am about to give it now since I don't like these types of movies" Then again people judge differently , basing more value on acting, or perhaps story or directing. Anyway, landing the plane here- i had rented this movie out before and hadn't had time to watch it, this morning i did.

Wow! See this movie. I am personally interested in the paranormal/have read a bit about near death experiences, so automatically i was hooked. I am unsure about some of the comments here saying that a quality cast here was wasted - i disagree- the acting here was superb from all- i think this is the only time i didn't mind Julia Roberts, it was good to see 24's Kiefer Sutherland (Currently at the time of this review, serving a jail sentence for DUI), and Kevin Bacon sporting an interesting hair style.

Overall- i liked the direction, the atmosphere, the acting, and the story line most of all- particularly the idea of karma, and , to quote Nelson Wright "Everything we does matters" So true.

10/10!

4 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
"Im going to be with my brother...", 30 December 2007
10/10

Just watched this film for a second time- it deserves a review.

I first watched this film when a friend convinced me- Im usually not into these types of movies per se, however, the story drew me in, and renting it out again today i sat and watched it with my family, and they all enjoyed it immensely.

The direction is fantastic, the use of poetry throughout is excellent (in the middle of the film there is a nice overlay when a character sings and it blends with this montage with focus on other characters- i love it when movies do that) It was also nice to see David Wenham with an English accent demonstrating his versatility.

Basically, go see this movie. Close to perfection- im glad they did this movie perfectly to show to the world how Australia once was.

10/10


Page 1 of 3:[1] [2] [3] [Next]