6 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
1st hour of the film is too long and dull to make this a good film
22 October 2011
Warning: Spoilers
1st thing I have to say is that unlike 99% films i go to see, i didn't know anything about this film, from the plot to who starred in it. Most people would think this to be rather silly spending money to see something that wasn't my type of film, but that is if I actually spent the money, but the fact is my friend got some free tickets so i went along.

Now the reason for the open paragraph is this could be down to the whole reason of me not liking the film too much, in fact I checked my clock on my phone twice inside the 1st hour, which is a record for me. The reason i did this, was because i didn't see a point/meaning to the film for the 1st hour - hour and half and with a meaning to the story i find it hard to concentrate, i finally got the meaning after a hour and half of the film, which after that point i started to like the film.

The film tells the life story of Sam Childers (Gerard Butler) after he gets out of jail. A quick review of the plot is that a bike gets released from jail. The man is a right bastard, who threatens his wife, drinks far too much, does drugs and hangs out with same kind of people. One night he kills a man who was threaten to kill his friend. This leaves him into a state of mind where he knows he must change so he finds god. After a tornado hits his town, he get rich by setting up his own building business. After his business has taken off he decides to but his building skills to use in Africa for a few weeks. While there he take a trip into Sudan where he see homeless kids leaving in fear and getting killed. This starts him to build an orphanage for the children.

What i just describe to you in 6 and bit lines is the 1st hour and half of the film. Looking back now i can see the reason for the overall long build up and this is because the film makers are trying to say it doesn't matter how bad you have been in your life, if you find god you can become a better person. Still i thought it was far too long and could have been done in half the time.

The late half of the film is where the film takes off and gets interesting and without giving to much away, he shows the path of Childers takes in Africa from originally just wanting to help the children by building an orphanage, to becoming a freedom fighter to help protect them.

Butler was conversing enough, to make believe he was a con going on the right path. The supporting cast, of his wife, Lynn Childers (Michelle Monaghan as a former stripper, who found the lord, was an average character, who was mainly there 1st to show how badly her husband treated her and then to show him to the path of the lord.

While the film was an interesting story, I am not sure how much of the true story is actually true, the film could have been 20-30 minutes shorter, if this was so i would have been as bored in the 1st half, but the 2nd half saved it.

My rating of the film would be 2.5/5
9 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
A Great film for all ages
22 October 2011
I went to see this film in a free screening and took my nephew and niece with me, seeing as it was a family film to try and get different reactions to the film.

Let me start off with my view of the film, I've been a fan of Tintin since I first saw the cartoon back in the early 90's, though never read the comics. When I saw the credits of who wrote, produced and directed the film, you think to yourself this film is going to be awesome, there is no way with all that talent they can't possible f**k this up (and they didn't). You have Spielberg directing, Peter Jackson as a producer. Also the writing team great with Steven Moffat, known for Sherlock, Dr who, Coupling and another of my child hood favs, Press Gang. Finally you have Edgar Wright, who wrote and directed Shawn of the Dead, Hot Fuzz and Scott Pilgrim vs. the World.

The version of the film i saw was 3d, as it was a preview and i didn't have a choice. Normally i watch all my showing in 2d as i think its personally a fad and a rip off and the films i have seen excluding Avatar, i didn't think the 3d aspect improved the film going enjoyment one bit. This again is my option while the 3d is nice, and the shots going through glass and water was really good, there was nothing else that would have me pulling out another £2 a ticket. I would have been happy with a basic 2d version.

On to the film story, TinTin (voice by Billy Elliott's Jamie Bell) buys a handmade ship in market. As soon as he buys it he gets a number of offers of people willing to buy it from him, which TinTtn rejects. When he gets home Snowy, Tintin dog, breaks the ship and a hidden clue rolls out, which begins Tintin trying to work out what it means. Tintin then gets kidnapped by the evil Ivanovich Sakharine (Daniel Craig), who is after the clue. This where Tintin mets up with Captain Haddock as they set of trying to work out the meaning of Tintin clue.

The film is a really mixture of action and adventure. We see the heroes on board ships, rowing boats, fly airplanes, riding camels, having car\bike chases and crane fights. The time flew past for me and not once did i feel bored, this was probably down to the amount going with the film, the quick pace of the action and the different locations of the characters were always in. It reminded me of the Indiana Jones films a lot, where he is on the hunt for treasure, and he only has half of the clues, and the bad guys have the others half and both sides are trying to get the other half for the themselves. He then needs to go around the globe via different transportation to get the info he needs to find the treasure.

There is also a large amount of humour in the film, seeing as Moffat, who wrote coupling helped write it, this is no big surprise. While i got the jokes neither my nephew (3) nor niece (8) did. So I am assuming that these were aim at the adults watching.

The characters the film makers can't chance much from the original Hergé comics, but Tintin I did find too goody goody, the captain is great character, who is drunk loser, but has a kind heart and wants to do the right thing. The bad guy, Sakharine, is perfect, scary enough to make you believe that he is ruthless killer who is a greedy and after revenge, but on the other had not going over board to make the kids feel scared or afraid of him when he was on screen. There is also the two comic relief characters of inspector Thomson, who are on screen just enough to make you smile at the pratfalls and their stupidness, but not too long for the jokes to wear thin so you're sick of seeing them.

My rating of the film would be 4 out of 5.

On to the kids view of the film. 1st my nephew who is 3 years old (4 in November). He told me he liked the film a lot especially the pirate bits, but he didn't understand why the pirates were bad. He also said he liked the motorcycle chase because the bikes were cool. As i was sitting next to him i could tell the film was slightly too long for him as he started to fidgit a bit in the last 15 mins.

My niece who is 8 (9 in December), i didn't get a lot of information from her, when i asked if she liked all her answer was yes it was good, and when i asked what her favourite bit was, she told me all of it.

As a reference for taking children during the half term break, i would say 4 and under while enjoy the film like my nephew did, but they won't fully understand the plot of the film or why certain things are happening, but for 5 years old and up this film and adults included this is a must see.
146 out of 216 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Watch the Film before reading the Book, else you will be disappointed
4 August 2009
Warning: Spoilers
Cast: Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson & Rupert Grint Harry's 6th year at Hogwarts. Dumbledor (Gambon) persuades Slughorn (Broadbent) back from retirement so Harry can find out a memory that will unlock the secret into beating Voldemort.

This is the 1st potter film i have seen, when i have read the book first. The previous films i went and read the book after, and i would advice anybody to do what i have done previously. By watching the films first i got to enjoy the film with out knowing what was going to happen and then got to read a much more detailed book leaving me enjoying the film and loving the book.

In the early books they were short enough not miss anything or nothing of any importants out of the film, but as in the last film, in this there is so much missed out, or scenes that didn't go into any detail that you always left thinking why haven't they done this or that.

Possible spoilers - As an example to anybody who has read the book, one of the scene, or collection of scenes that I felt need a lot more time or even just a few minutes of screen time as it played a very important part of the plot was the death of the Hagrid (Robbie Coltrane) spider. In the book there is a lot of references to how the spider had died and that he would like the 3 students to come the funeral, but harry (Radcliffe) and Ron (Grint) hated the spider and didn't want to go. In the film harry and Slughorn(Jim Broadbent), just happened to appear when Hagrid is mourning over it.

Also they left out the entire fight between the teachers + DA vs Deatheaters and most of the back story of Lord Voldemort. -Possible spoiler end That's aside the film wasn't a bad watch, but it never made you leaving cinema thing wow and i must see that again. When watch the Prisoner of Azkaban & Goblet of Fire, i felt that this was must get DVD when it came out.

The special effects and the Cinematography of the grounds and castle were excellent as ever.

The acting in my option like the last 5 films from the three leads was average, but on a good note Alan Rickman who plays Snape, is out standing and worth seeing just for his performance. He plays the character brilliantly as the evil, cunning sly teacher (really should give him an Oscar nomination).

In short the film missed far to much from the book and I'm glad seeing on the size of the last book they decided to split the next film into two. Anybody who has read the book will be disappointed by the film. On a high note Rickman is fantastic. 6/10

Read more of my reviews here:
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
I would recommend, that nobody buys or rents this film
26 July 2009
Warning: Spoilers
Jenny Johnson (Thurman) is sitting on train when Saunders (Wilson) tries to ask her out, in the middle of this a thug nick Johnson bag. Saunders gives chase and gets back the bag. Johnson is so thankful she agrees to go out with him. After dating for a bit Johnson tells Saunders her alter ego G-Girl. After tell him Johnson turns into a crazy jealous bitch so Saunders dumps her, she then makes his life a living hell.

I decided i would skyplus this film for when i was bored and has nothing else to do. Looking at the cast i thought a film with Luke Wilson in would have lots of laugh out loud moments, how wrong could i have been. This film seems to just drag on, and made me just as bored if i was watching paint dry.

As with most Rom Coms you know which character Matt Saunders would end up with after the 1st 10 minutes of the film. Also it you know that either the pretty girl will either have a fat friend or the man will have a not so good-looking pervert and the latter was true in this. The friend is normally the comic relief but i found the character annoying and not amusing.

The only couple of funny moment (minor spoilers) are when G-girl flies so fast round the meeting room at all Saunders clothes come off so he stark naked in an important business meting and when Saunders and his super girlfriend are shagging so hard they make the bed go through the wall, much to his neighbour surprise.

The two leads just seemed to be there for the money and really looked liked they couldn't be bothered how the film turned out and it showed, while Anna Faris seemed to play the normal Anna Faris character, the likable but dump-witted blond.

The best character in the film was Carla Dunkirk played by Wanda Sykes. She only had two scenes in the film, but she played her feminist, up in the mans face well.

I would recommend, that nobody buys or rents this film and only watch this film if you really really have nothing in your life better to do. 3/10

Read more of my reviews here:
1 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Would advise anybody to watch the original, but if this is all you can find, its worth a watch.
24 July 2009
Striker(Hays) is now in a metal hospital after his shuttle crash while working as a test pilot. He blames the construction for the crash and nobody believes him. When he finds out that the same shuttle is going on its maiden voyage he breaks out to try and stop the launch. The on-board computer then goes wrong killing the crew leaving Striker the man to save the day once again.

The best way of describing this film, is like going to watch a stand up comedian new show and finding out that the three quarters of the show is the same jokes as the one you saw last time. The jokes are still funny but you wish you probably hasn't paid for the privilege. Examples of this, is play on the crews names and airplane signs. The new jokes are very funny, but you just wish there was more of them.

Another disappointing thing on the film was Stephen Stucker character (Jonny in the first, Jacobs in this). In the first film he was one of my favorite characters, he only have a few minutes on screen, but everything he did was funny. In the squeal i don't remember laughing at him at all.

If you have seen this film before the original then you will laugh for nearly all 1hr 20 mins of the film, if you seen the original then you will still laugh but wish they put more effort in finding some different gags. I would advise anybody to watch the original over this, but if this is all you can get your hands on it worth a watch. 6/10

To read more of my reviews please visit:
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
The Proposal (I) (2009)
Good film for a first date
23 July 2009
Margaret Tate (Bullock) is a fierce, editor-in-chief of a publishing company, who all the office staff are scared of. Her assistant Andrew Paxton (Reynolds), who has taken a lot of crap off Tate for years and now hate her so, also he can live his dream of becoming an editor.

After Tate is told her visa has run out so will be deported back to Canada, Tate blackmails Paxton to marry her. When government investigator finds out they haven told Paxtons family, they tell him they were leaving it for a big occasion that's coming up this weekend (his Grandma 90th birthday), so they end up going to meet his family in Alaska.

Normally with rom coms you know exactly how its going to end , 5 minutes into the film, and this rom com is no exception. How ever for a chick flick, there were a lot of laugh out loud movements, which you don't normally find and no "oh the stuck up bitch fell over" gags which is always a good thing.

The supporting cast had its moments, Betty White as the Grandma was the best family member, this was because you believed that she was a fun loving granny that was a little outrageous , example of this was giving the happy couple a blanket which she calls the baby maker.

The character that stole the show was Ramone. I think was because he was the comic re-leaf and popped up, every time the film was slowing slightly. The best part was him as the towns stripper and making Tate spank his arse.

As of the leads, i was a little disappointed, Reynolds just seemed to be going through the motions, as a the used assistant, and i never believed Bullock was a bitch of a boss.

Overall this film was enjoyable film that i would recommend to anybody on a date, were you are trying to impress by choosing an appropriate film that she would like without getting total bored yourself. 6/10

Read more of my reviews here:
0 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.

Recently Viewed