Change Your Image
Upload An Image
Crop And Save
Terra Nova (2011)
The puzzle is being put together
The puzzle is being put together, meaning that the series attacks sf ideas that so far have been scattered in less publicized series, some of them very good but tanked. of course these ideas had to be picked up by Spielberg, but I will not go on on this line of ideas. I will just say that we need a hardened sf movie fan to explain to us which idea came from where. Notice that the director of the pilot, Alex Graves,also directed Fringe's pilot and Journeyman, that Jason O'Mara was in Life of Mars US (which I like best that the UK version...), that René Echevarria was in fact the producer of The 4400 (great show until it went downhill and away) in which we find the same aliens-are-from-the-future and change the past ideas. Also Brannon Braga produced Flash Forward and Star Trek. There are things familiar from lost and from Jurassic Park, so there a huge mix of old and recent anticipative ideas. The crazier genre lovers would say "they are showing us what we always suspected it happened", and, less crazy would be to say that the ideas go well together and make sense in the "what if" world, and that we have a great show ahead of us if they do not over do it. Indeed, the teenager drama is a bit out of tune, the talking and acting in the future just as now is also...safe, but not so memorable. But if the action has some pretty good twists and strong sf ideas tied up together, original or not, we might just skip over the lamer parts just to see what's next. I don't know why I was under the impression that JJ Abrams is working on this one, too :)That would have been a reunion all right.
Mount Pleasant (2011)
The soap opera of sitcoms
Not having looked up the actors or the creators though, The series feels like a B series show, or like a soap opera of the sitcoms. Maybe the actors usually star in such movies, maybe the director has a hand for that genre. But the mix of working class people and their jobs, serious problems that they have and comical situations that are not instant, but diluted throughout the entire episodes sure gives that feeling of programmed fun. Programmed to be understood by everybody, to stir some empathy in the tired employee watching in the evening, in the younger and naive office girl, in the retired couple who occupy their late years trying not to remain out of touch with the modern world. It vaguely triggers memories of Peep Show, probably because of the suffocating office world feeling. It is much more traditional, yet not dumb, so far. It remains to be seen where is it going, because this closed universe and tiny everyday issues are starting to seem tiring.
Supermarkets in a nutshell and a nutcracker for it
This feels so familiar, because so many times we have seen the people who sit at the counter, stock the goods or chop the meat in the "no man's land" that supermarkets are, yet we have seen them with the corner of out eye. In Trollied they are filmed, they have names and lives, they actually don't care too much about the hatred management, which is repulsive to the managers themselves after all...spending day after day in the "merchandise forest", the guys get around the stiff rules and go on being the guys.
It's a slow paced comedy, under the neon lights everybody knows that the surveillance cameras or the bosses eyes cannot work everywhere and all the time. Before the digital supervision, a friend once told me stories about working in a supermarket and stuffing his face in the back alleys together with the other shelf boys. Now it's a bit harder, but still...everyone is bored, everyone compensated...talks, is naughty, reads from the shelves, eats from the shelves. the scenes are like bits and bobs, sometimes cameos. As I said, it looks so familiar, but not from other shows, but from life.
The show stand out because it does not wretch of forced script, concept or performances. They just struck gold by keeping it real, observing and adapting for screen.
Finally I laughed as I used to do at comedies in my childhood
Definitely, people nowadays are growing more and more different and apart; otherwise I couldn't explain why this movie has so contrasting reviews on IMDb whilst other movies tend to polarise the opinions. I found myself wondering how do those who hated it look or feel or think - maybe it would have been useful if they had offered examples of what they consider good comedies... Or maybe it's just the people involved in the movie that provoked the rebellious reactions? I did not know who directed the movie or that Kristen Wii is a SNL regular. And I enjoyed the movie as it was, not very elaborated but alive, kind in a surprising way. A zillion kudos to Kristen Wiig - I for one loved her character! Brought a lot of optimism and compassion in a world obsessed with perfection, rules, the right look, relationship, job...the right everything. The gross moments did not seem artificial, one could laugh at them shamelessly because the action slowly build up to them. And they were decent, I've seen comedies with out of order icky situations and it did not feel that bad way here. The character is great: we have a loser who cannot stop herself from saying the most daring truths in the face of strangers or friends and who can accept herself and go on with her life as it is, even when things go from bad to worse. Oh, I miss the times when people like this roamed free, and they were not relaxed only if they were stupid enough not to realise how inadequate they were!The others are also good, kinda cooky but still plausible. I know: in a particular way, the movie manages to be innocent, fresh, childish. Which is rare nowadays. Maybe I was heat struck (the negative reviews really made me wonder), but it sure felt that way to us. I recommend watching it free of analysis, comparisons and antipathies.
Source Code (2011)
This movie is good...
...even though it is unclear if it is good by intent or by incidence.
The best part was the reversed Nirvana, in which the better for a soul being would be not to completely cease existing, but to remain forever inserted in a reality as created by his best dreams. The scope is not to rid oneself from all attachments, but to unify the source with the best particular manifestation of those.
Great! As for the soldier twisted plot, i do not see it as the centre idea, maybe if we shift the soldier term to the less material idea that in a way we are all soldiers, but somehow it is unclear in which army:). but I'd rather leave that alone, it seems nonessential and somehow propagandistic compared to the other part, about how we live our lives and how we could actually live them, maybe...
"Everything is gonna be OK"
Happy Endings (2011)
Woth more seasons
They are like some updated more relaxed Friends, with which one feels it is nice to spend some time during the week.
The premise is just a pretext: a girl leaves a guy at the altar, then they have to work out how to live as dudes, in order not to split their friends. Their friends are not so deep or sentimental, but they are a support, they are there.
So, in every episode, we have a couple of funny events from this group's life. They are a happy-ish bunch, no economy crisis, no money trouble, we have diversity in their gender, sexual orientation etc. But it doesn't have to be a depiction of reality, and it feels happy, as the title, to see everyone having a lot of time for themselves, a lot of money obviously and a lot of good moods.
It's a feel good, chill out series, and the fact that maybe it has ended, well, this is just mean. Somebody just doesn't feel the public needs to have casual fun...just dramas and such clenched-buttocks shows, and even there some of the best just get cancellations.
Happy endings is worth more than just a season, the characters are nice people...they should let them live.
Hideous western spoof
Amidst the other ugly animated characters of this movie, Rango, the self-made hero of the "west" almost looks less crocked and annoying.
The fake hero plot is old, we've seen it in animated movies too, like Chicken Run. The liar with a potential good heart returns to save the city...The rotten leader who sells out his people is not a bright and blossomy idea either, only in this here movie, we have the tortoise, usually an animal of wisdom, representing the corrupted character, in a rather uninspired association made out of negligence or just to avoid a more clicheistic animal.
The rest of the fauna is not so detailed, but they are all an ugly bunch, even the hero's girl is one uninspired piece of animation.
The humour is as dry as the desert, the western genre a bad choice, are they trying to revive it or what? The music certainly is reviving a lot of previously heard vibes.
The violence is present, in the dialogues as well as all the killing, fighting and frightening stories of the West. The rattle snake is so horrible that it suffices to make the kids have nightmares for at least one year. The movie should have a warning that specifies it will introduce such ugly images.
Hated it and even more hated it for the viral early promos which falsely gave the impression of a nice retro-themed movie, with a funny wacky chameleon. Well it is not, we can barely remember that Rango is a colour-changing lizard, it is not funny at all, not even wacky, more like lame mixed with ugly sad life enquiries like "who am I?"
I would answer to that: an animated chameleon in bad bad movie, sheriff.
Don't care if it's an accurate depiction or not, the movie creates a fascinating universe
The movie-pilot from 2008 left me with an unclear impression: it seemed so naive compared to other up to date shows, so simple, that I thought it cannot hold it together. I watched it with some friends, it was my idea to pick it, and I was prepared to say sorry for wasting their time.
But later we realised that the characters were lovable and the Gabrone city with all of them had entered our imagination and was there to stick. They wouldn't go away, every day seemed to settle what I had seen. And i found myself longing to see more...
From here on, the series made their own perfect sense. A happier, simpler world, no swearing, human values, please and thank you...and yet they didn't seem unreal.
The atmosphere of the series is extremely enjoyable, and I suppose it originates in the books. The accent adds to that, I love it. The characters, the names...it's a small world that I am looking forward to see again.
The aesthetics of the show is also outstanding: the colours, the fabrics, the expressive faces and the great camera movements. The music is good, too.
It is definitely not the usual cup of tea, no use comparing to other HBO products. But forget the ratings and bring it back, reruns, follow-ups,whatever, if the spirit is still there. It is a precious piece of work about a brave woman also named Precious.And it depicts beauty, in many forms.
Kama Sutra: A Tale of Love (1996)
Boring and lacking sense
The movie does not do justice to India, nor women. It feels weird to watch it, as if someone tore up random pages from the script and just filmed what was left. As for the erotic recommendations, they do not meet their match, probably those belong to people who are compelled to associate the word "Kamasutra" with sensuality and eroticism, without bothering to actually see the movie for what it is.
The central character is very unclear: what are Maya's relationships with the other girl and all the women from the palace she grew up in? What is the purpose of the disturbing hunchback elderly man that seems to love her, yet ends up by calling her a whore? It is incredible how much babble about sex and love we have to sit through without any real story about either of them.overall, what is the purpose of this entire movie?
The "bad" prince (N.Andrews)is more convincing than the lover/sculptor, who purposelessly waves his long hair around; somebody must have miscasted the actors... Maya is an unlikely mix of good naive girl and extremely sex driven fox, what is this bouillabaisse?? Only French movies manage to create such confusions, yet this claims to be a movie representing India.Very disappointing.
The fight, the ending, the girl...they are just not making sense. As for the sexual tension, old school Bollywood movies managed to create more without even featuring any nudity.
So, see it or not see it...depending on how much time you have to waste.
"You are a coward! Yes I am"
I am no professional critic, so I received the movie in the personal way in which every viewer should do with every movie, at least in their inner forum.
It is the first Bergman movie, and I cannot estimate if it will be the last or not. I found it recommended as "soothing" somewhere, and being aware of how much of an important director Bergman is considered, I thought why not give it a try.
It wasn't really soothing, but it wasn't difficult to watch either. The Swedish are weird for the less Nordic Europeans, that showed here too. Why are they so quiet, then so dramatic all of a sudden? And in this movie why were they marring cousins? Someone said once it is their climate...
I also wondered why it seemed that upper class could meditate of their lives and in the same time waste them, suffer and sigh (not only in this movie, but this one brought it back), while the financially undetermined characters are supposed to always be occupied with the simpler yet equally cruel struggles of everyday life?
So, I would contest the validity of the life cameo here because of the main character being so particular. Why take an individual so atypical and expand on life philosophy through him? And the greatest objection is that this movie seems purposeless, a luxury that in our era is very rarely permitted. Maybe judging it by the year it was made this would be less disturbing, but now...The old man has his dreams, his childhood flashbacks, the vague thoughts to change some things, yet it is considered somehow enough that he achieved some kind of human connection with his daughter in law, an encounter with some youngsters and half of a discussion with his son.
Well, it is not. People who do not bend all their lives for those close to them, leave traumas and marks that may not heal even after generations have come and gone. It is not enough to have a few dreams and half of a conversation, then forgive oneself and talk about epiphany. The film does not take a stand, therefore the likes of Isak could watch it and think that having thoughts is enough to change the world for the better, even the wrongs they have done.
And this is not moralistic talk. It is hard for humans to tell each other the truth, even harder to accept it. A movie, a book, a play can build a bridge over this gap. If a piece of such art tackles such a delicate subject it shouldn't let it in the air.
The movie is a cowardly approach of regret.
Interesting little thing: the way he was mixing with the past characters, him as an old man, the others young, telling him they remained young.