Reviews written by registered user

6 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

Inception (2010)
2 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
In a word: brilliant., 22 July 2010

'Inception' is a work of bold ambition. It is Nolan's true masterpiece and one of the most original pieces of fiction ever put on film.

The story, although multi-layered and complex, is incredibly engrossing and a wonder to behold on screen. The movie follows Dom Cobb(DiCaprio) as he leads a specialized team, tasked with putting an idea inside the mind of Robert Fischer Jr.(Cillian Murphy). This task is called Inception. Cobb specializes in the Extraction of ideas from people's minds in their dreams, but Inception is an entirely different story. Removing an idea from a person's mind proves easier because the person has already thought it, but adding an idea is something that can't be done without carefully manipulating the mind to create the idea on it's own.

This is the premise of 'Inception', and that's only the surface. There are so many layers to the plot that it's almost impossible to divulge even a fraction of the story in any less than a few pages. The script, which took ten years to write, is pure brilliance. As the film progresses it only becomes more intriguing, even up to the very end.

The acting is superb across the board. The standout being DiCaprio, but the entire cast delivers amazing performances.

'Inception' is visually dazzling and unlike anything i've ever seen on film. But even the amazing visuals don't detract from the depth and complexities of the plot. With amazing cinematography and a remarkably well-crafted and fitting original score from Hans Zimmer, there isn't an area where the film doesn't shine.

This is truly Nolan's best, and that is definitely saying something.


Kick-Ass (2010)
371 out of 582 people found the following review useful:
KICK-ASS kicked my ass, 16 April 2010

This is definitely the best movie of 2010 so far, hands down. Not only is it insanely funny throughout, it has a great story and in-your-face action that will (pun intended) kick your ass.

It's the story of a high school comic book nerd who decides he's going to take up being a costumed hero because no one else will. Early on he discovers that society could care less about the evils that be, and he takes it upon himself to do something about it. But of course none of the "super heroes" in the movie actually have powers, because it's about real people kicking real ass. Early on you'll find the protagonist, Dave, is a pushover and even as his costumed alter-ego, Kick-Ass, he can't succeed in anything he does. He comes off as an extremely unlikable character, but as the story unfolds and he gets mixed up with other costumed heroes who really do kick ass, he slowly becomes the perfect anti-hero and a character which will most likely be a new icon in popular culture.

The script for the film is remarkably well written and it managed to combine hilarious comedy with incredibly graphic, stylized violence. Never have I seen a movie that combined the two so well. One moment, you'll be crying from laughter and the next you'll be squinching at a little girl slaughtering grown men with the slightest of ease.

The directing was top-notch and this is the first film i've seen from Matthew Vaughn. If Kick-Ass doesn't put him on the map as one of the most sought after directors in Hollywood then I don't know what will.

The acting was superb from the entire cast, especially from veteran Nicolas Cage. He played his part perfectly and I couldn't see any one else as Big Daddy. As impressed as I was with Cage's performance, I was blown away with how well Chloe Moretz, Hit-Girl, played her part. She definitely stole the show.

I honestly couldn't recommend this movie more, and it has become one of my new personal favorites. Kick-Ass is a film about finding your identity and daring to do something no one else will. Yet it's also an intricate tale of revenge, which is masterfully crafted to be one of the most entertaining pieces of fiction I have ever had the pleasure of viewing.

10 out of 10

7 out of 22 people found the following review useful:
Inaccuracies aside, this is an excellent film, 8 March 2010

With this film having such a limited release, I had never heard of it or had any interest in it until it started winning awards. And obviously with a Best Picture Oscar under it's belt I had to break down and actually see it for myself.

The movie starts off with a quote stating that war is a drug. To me, this encompasses the entire point of the movie. Just like people get addicted to heroin and cocaine, people can get addicted to a lifestyle, the lifestyle here obviously being the military. But as I said, that quote encompasses the entire film, so you won't necessarily understand it until the end credits roll.

Iraq War inaccuracies aside, the movie was incredibly intense and well shot. It had a "realistic" feel to it even though it may not be the most accurate war movie ever made. But it never claims to be. The gritty, almost documentary-style camera work and spot-on directing made it feel like these were real men going through real-life situations.

There is a subtle depth to each character that builds throughout, so you must pay attention to understand their reasoning for doing certain things. The plot of the movie is very hard to explain because of the way the story unfolds, it's hard to give a general synopsis without divulging key points to the story and or writing up another two or three paragraphs. But the beauty of it is that the story is so well told, in the end, it makes sense. Pretty much all you need to know is that the main characters are a bomb squad in the army and they have about a month until they get to go home. What happens throughout the film is what happens over the course of that month.

Excellent performances from all the actors(especially Renner) ensure that there isn't a dull moment in the film's entirety. It also boasts an extremely fitting original score which helps set the tone for certain scenes.

It's hard to explain the film because it's a movie that must be seen to be understood. But from sniping in the desert, to disarming bombs in street cars, the movie is masterfully crafted in every scene. It's a film that will resonate even after repeated viewings and it will go down in history as Kathryn Bigelow's crowning achievement.

An overall excellent film as long as you put the war inaccuracies aside. It showcases the ugliness of war, but yet depicts how the lifestyle can become addicting. Everybody loves something. People love what they're good at. And some people... are good at war.

10 out of 10.

59 out of 108 people found the following review useful:
letdown., 27 August 2009

Yes I'm one of the few people who thoroughly enjoyed rob zombie's remake of halloween. So I was extremely excited to find out he was making the second one.

I love Zombie's directing style and I do think he is somewhat talented. But this movie just wasn't his best. The style and feel of the film was perfect. But the storyline was complete trash. He should have stuck to the original story.

Zombie's "re-imagining" of the second coming of Michael Myers was way off. Yeah he spiced up the original with Michael's backstory, but he completely redid the second one.

So if you just want to see people get stabbed with a cool directorial style and nice lighting(oh and boobs, lots of those) then yeah you might like it.

But for what it's worth, the backbone of any good movie is good source material, and the source material for this was Zombie's lackluster screenplay.

Shame. The first one was so promising. This one definitely ended it. Not only because Zombie says he won't direct another, but because it went so far downhill from the first one it basically killed itself.

Oh and the final scene in the movie is ridiculously laughable and will most likely give you a WTF look on your face.

5/10 for this one. Just don't take it too seriously and think of it as another slasher flick and you may enjoy it for what it is. Just another slasher flick. Nothing special here.

252 out of 451 people found the following review useful:
As a movie it's the most well crafted of the series. But as an adaptation of the book, it was by far the worst., 19 July 2009

Let me say this. Half Blood Prince as a movie alone was very good. It stands it's ground as a film better than any of the others of the series. But only as a film. And only because there are so many parts to a film. This installment obviously stepped everything up a notch: the cinematography, the special effects, the darker score, the improved acting, etc... But the key element which was boosted this franchise into world-class fame, is the story. And in this one, it's just not there. As a fan of the books and having had no SERIOUS gripes with any of the other films, I must say i HATED the screenplay for this one. Everything that made the book amazing was ripped from the film, and instead replaced by annoying large quantities of romantic subplot. Yes, there is romance in the sixth book but not shoved down your throat. JK Rowling masterfully crafted a novel that was perfectly balanced. The romance was there although it didn't detract from the main plot and at times was intertwined with the larger goings-on at hogwarts. In the movie the romance takes up most of the screen time. Not to mention the ending of the film was brutally butchered.

So much time could have been detracted from the silly romances to focus on more important things which were completely ommitted or deliberately changed. The ending is extremely anti-climactic and once it's over it'll leave you in your seat thinking "it's over?"

My final gripe with this movie is that it really should have been PG-13. If you've read the novel then you know the subject matter is MUCH darker and the story would have been done greater justice with just a higher rating(and a better screenwriter, yes i'm looking at you Steve Kloves).

Overall as a movie i'd give it an 8 out of 10.

But as a HARRY POTTER movie it gets 4 out of 10. And that's pushing it.

Well heres to 2010 to see how they screw up the finale. Oh wait, they already did. I didn't know there were 8 years at hogwarts...

Twilight (2008/I)
4 out of 9 people found the following review useful:
A letdown even though some things were done right., 23 November 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Okay. So first thing's first. Twilight just isn't a good movie. even if you haven't read the books. However there are some things that were done right. Some things that were done horribly wrong.

THE GOOD: -The scenery was perfect. Almost exactly how i imagined it in the book. Very well done.

-Edward and Bella were almost perfectly cast, even though their acting at most parts was sub-par.

-Bella's Lullaby was a great song. I'm surprised at how good the song itself was.

-The baseball scene was exceptionally well filmed. This was by far my favorite part of the movie.

-The casting for the most part was pretty good. My favorite character was definitely Alice Cullen. She was gorgeous and she played her part perfectly.

-I think the music for the most part fit the scenes.

-There is a notable amount of dialogue that is taken directly from the book.

THE BAD: -The acting was just flat out bad. This is especially noted by Bella's constant erratic blinking and Edward's first scene in Biology where he looks like he is having a bowel movement.

-The transitions. The movie had terrible pacing and the transitions were choppy. This is a result of poor directing and editing.

-Visual Effects were extremely low budget and very cheesy.

-The storyline was not just tweaked a bit to adapt the book to film. It was butchered. Things were in the wrong order, characters were added, important details were completely removed, and some details were awkwardly placed or barely mentioned so it would be confusing to someone who hasn't read the book.

-Cinematography. Okay. So the scenery was beautiful. But the angles and camera movements were comparable to a high school film project.

-Many scenes that were meant to be serious were unintentionally funny. And there was some added intentional humor which didn't fit the tone set by the book.

-My BIGGEST gripe with the film is that the book is a love story. And the movie was so incredibly cheesy that it didn't even feel like Bella and Edward were in love. Moreso awkwardly infatuated with each other.

VERDICT: -If you've read the book you will obviously want to see the film. no mater how bad the things you heard about it are. But the bottom line is, even if it wasn't based off a popular novel, it still wouldn't be a good movie. paying 10 dollars to see a film of this quality is ridiculous. I honestly think that if this film were to be redone with a higher budget, better director, and had the cast actually read the book, it would be 10 times better.

Awkwardly enough, even though i KNOW that this movie wasn't good. I want to see it again. So they must have done something right. Maybe its just because i love the book so much. I honestly hope they will remake this movie and capture the real magic of the book properly on film. Because the story is very film worthy. It just wasn't done correctly.

And to anyone who compares this movie to the harry potter films or the lord of the rings films. Please stop being biased because of your love of book. Because the main difference between those films and this one, is that those movies were actually GOOD.

SCORE: 6/10