Reviews

74 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Venom (2018)
8/10
"Now, let's kick their fu*king heads off!"
10 November 2018
Avayte from - venom, in my opinion, failed. I wanted to sneeze at the opinion of critics who were apparently expecting a marvel Studios level film from Sony. After the flow of mixed reviews-went with the most low expectations, with a good mood and in good company. Did it affect my final attitude to the film? I don't know. But let us, as usual, on the specifics.

"Venom" -this is a standard simple original film, which is especially the stars from the sky is not enough, but at the same time did not cause any obvious negative.

I think the most correct step Sony not to be wise and show everything from the beginning, so as not to produce unnecessary questions and misunderstanding of the viewer. Show the history of character formation and its further development.

The narrative can be clearly divided into three classic acts - the tie, the climax, the denouement. Venom simple as a penny - no problems, no unexpected plot twists that have, frankly, a bit fed up in kynoselen Marvel movies.

The plot is definitely built around the character Tom hardy. Once again, I note that he is an amazing actor. Inviting him was a great decision. If he had not played a major role - perhaps someone else could and dragged. Hardy plays actually canonical Eddie Brock-downright really "anti-hero". Hardy is a lot, very much, he pulls the blanket over himself - his screen takes 90% of the time, and that's right for an original movie. Tom was able to make this character and the right way to submit it, so it just crashed into the viewer's memory.

The rest of the cast also did not disappoint. For example, Reese Ahmed gave a good antagonist - Carlton Drake and liked Michelle Williams, who played Ann Weying.

But back to hardy's character. Brock's relationship with the venom symbiote is what the film is built on. The rate at which the creators have put everything. And she played, that's for sure. Dive replicas and exchange of views made funny, and sometimes even witty. I liked this format of "communication" very much. Very cool showed that Eddie and the symbiote are learning from each other, and in the final part of the movie act really as a single unit.

There are, of course, have movie and some cons. In the first place, it's not a very elaborate scenario. There are some logical inconsistencies, and they are striking, there are small sagging scenes and tedious, which could be abandoned. Also, not everywhere like the graphics - sometimes looked frankly cartoon, but we must pay tribute - really improved visual order of magnitude since the trailers and promotions.

About the downgrade something to inflate do not see the point. Personally to me it didn't spoil viewing in General in any way. Moreover, I think that the film only benefited from this. You want blood, Guro and dismemberment-go to slasher. Well, the fact that the symbiote was supposed to do in terms of violence - he did, it was beaten and the coveted "18+".

Was pleasantly surprised to see references to a sort of Canon of the setting Simbiotel. And, of course, the traditional cameo of Stan Lee, which now even our audience has learned to react correctly.

Scene after the credits. The first is just gorgeous, one of the best post-credits scenes I've seen, including all past Marvel and DC movies. The scene gives us an unambiguous reserve and a hint of a sequel.

In General, Sony-well done. If this is the start of your own movie universe, it is very sound and correct. I would like to see further projects. I think the Studio deserved this chance.

Well, in conclusion, I would like to fix this: the opinion of critics-not always fair, downgrade-not always in the red. So, as the saying goes,"go and see."
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Hunter Killer (2018)
5/10
Mission: Save the President. Again.
10 November 2018
It seems that Gerard Butler has the idea of fix, which regularly makes itself felt the last few years: he wants to save the presidents from critical situations. "The fall of Olympus", "the Fall of London", "Geostorm" vivid examples. And all would be well, if not for one thing but: the final product is always the most primitive, cliched and, of course, serious schah. "Hunter Killer" successfully (if that word is appropriate here) continues the appropriate number. Probably, I would pass by this tape, but here the trailer threw the interesting fact: this time will rescue the President of the Russian Federation.

Director's chair took almost debutant Donovan Marsh, previously put only the infamous dilogy "Malek". One of the producers (and how differently?) and the lead role was played directly by Gerard Butler. Surprisingly, the script of the film was adapted: we have a screen version of the novel "Point of fire" by George Wallace and don Keith about the rebellious Russian Admiral, who planned to start a new world war.

First, I would like to talk about the plot advantages of the picture, because they really were not template, and even burning, relevant. First, despite the fact that I do not like when politics and cinema are mixed in one bowl, "hunter Killer", in principle, not bad broadcasts the idea of the most favorable in the future relations between Russia and America: we are talking about cooperation. Secondly, the creators of the Ghost, but still visible hints make it clear that the feud is not the country, not the people, and the political elite, the powers that be. In General, the social and political message is timely and correct: thank you for that. An interesting nuance: replace Russia with some, for example, terrorists and movies will lose all meaning, will be very bad. Praise also deserves a cheerful ending: the long duration of action-Packed smooth dynamics, explosions, shootings: nothing innovative but a catchy. In the end, however, a little tired, but still the denouement works.

But no matter how good the film is in the above, the disadvantages here, I think, outweigh. Open the standard set of typical gaps, which became boring to the viewer utterly, and find there: devoid of reason episodes (killed scene verification Russians lair American task force); a decent number of conventions, taken on faith; pathos of all the cracks; the General atmosphere of what is happening does not allow to consider the tape as an artistic canvas, with the degree of politicization is very high; pseudo-characters. Regarding the latter, it's not just a blank sheet of paper, which I forgot to prescribe the internal filling of history and the adequate explanation (please note that Admiral Durov), it went further: the Russian-speaking heroes among themselves mostly speak English (!), and the President of America, successfully following a feminist bias-a woman. It seems a new peak of craziness has been reached.

Technical design can be noted for the well delivered action scenes, and which blended depressing music. From the cast most impressed me now the late Michael Nyukvist (one of the last roles), charisma and facial expression which speak more than words, from the Russian brotherhood remembered Mikhail Gorevoy, has a powerful negative energy. Gerard Butler almost the entire film goes with the same facial expressions, and appeared in a couple episodes of Gary Oldman here, rather, to attract audience.

"Hunter Killer" - a passable creation, which I would not recommend to go to the cinema: believe me, you do not miss anything, passing by another Butler save the world and the President at the same time. With a strong desire, you can always wait for home viewing.

PS the curtain of the hero Gerard can hear the elegant and hardly a deliberate reference to the iconic words of Dominic Toretto from the "fast and Furious".
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Overlord (2018)
7/10
"Eternal Reich»
10 November 2018
Extremely infrequently Western cinema in recent years pleases the mass audience with pictures of the Second world war, and most of those that come out, are not always really good quality. But even less in production and the final release of the picture comes with a similar setting, but only in the genre of horror. The last thing I remember, is quite ambiguous "Army of Frankenstein", which is also told about a group of American soldiers in a distant province stumbled upon a secret German laboratory, where he conducted experiments on people. But the film was something of a tough thrash, but the picture of Julius Avery was much more expensive spectacle, and coupled with all of the above components, we got pretty not hackneyed spectacle.

A small detachment of soldiers breaks into the depths of one of the villages of France, which is a Church with a radio tower, which must necessarily be destroyed in order to German anti-aircraft guns could not bring down another allied air transport. The above squad includes the main character of the film - rookie Boyce. Almost all of his newly found comrades were killed during the landing on the territory of France, and he remained with corporal Ford, and a few soldiers-recruits. But ahead of them waiting for things much more terrible than just German soldiers.

The "Overlord" is actually just a great opening scene, which is made damn expensive, large-scale and certainly high quality. This is the scene of course repeatedly demonstrated in various trailers of the picture, but it does not spoil the impressions of it when viewing. Everything explodes, people shoot and tear to pieces, all around panic and real hell, the picture immediately makes it clear that everything is more than serious. But in General, in the future, all the dynamics pretty much subsides, but it does not go into any huge minuses "Overlord", as what is happening constantly throws something new for the squad of the main characters. Despite the changing dynamics in a much smaller channel, the film tries to keep some intrigue, and the intrigue sometimes even manage to abide by it. The main problem of "Overlord" is the plot, which is needed here as if for show, just to show the extermination of the Nazis and other villains in the setting of the Second world war. At the same time, the picture is filled with some incredible number of stamps and completely banal types of characters. Here you have the rookie main character, which gradually becomes hardened soldier, but you are his commander, the man for whom to obey orders above all else, he loves to joke, and this behaves like an asshole, and of course nowhere without pavada. But about these things you often forget when the film reappears episodes with action, as well as the injection of a certain atmosphere.

I am glad that from the "Overlord" in fact expect not so much, that is, you certainly expect a little more scale, similar to a larger action, but in principle, and that there is, in my opinion is enough for positive impressions from the view. Here is also important the fact that something like this comes out very rarely and perhaps this is the only opportunity for the next few, or even more years, to see the bloody action with the Nazis and "zombies" in one package. This of course is not so crazy spectacle as some "Iron sky", but noticeable pretty thorough approach of the creators, which is still worth praising.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Incredibles 2 (2018)
8/10
Pretty good!
14 June 2018
"Incredibles-2" - bright, vigorous, dynamic, full of humor and funny cartoon scenes for family viewing. Everything is fine in it, unless you compare it with the original film and especially with the best films "Pixar", published in the pre-Disney era. Alas, after the purchase of "Pixar", in the "Disney" and failed to create a single sequel that can surpass the original films and "The Incredibles-2" was no exception on this list.

The director and scriptwriter of the first "The Incredibles" Brad Bird three years ago peremudril with the failed "Earth of the Future", so this time I decided not to take risks, having made almost a complete remake of my own film. Dramaturgy is again built around playing up family problems and places of people with abilities in society, and the main antagonist still believes that in his troubles, born from a distant childhood, only superheroes are to blame. Of course, watching the same story, retold the second time, even with the addition of a funny Jack Jack, is not as interesting as the first, especially given the number of films about superheroes that have appeared over the last decade.

The expected change in the plot was only the distribution of roles in the superfamily Parrov. Now Elastiko earns money in the corporation "Devor", at the same time saving the world and the reputation of superheroes, and Mister Exclusiveness awaits a full family break-out in one of the mansions of the Devors, a midlife crisis, chronic insomnia, depression and the problem of finding a new identity. Detective intrigue, which was the hallmark of the first "The Incredibles", this time became more predictable. In both films, the main villain reveals long before the final, but if in the original film the appearance of Toddler's kid became a real surprise for the audience, then in the sequel the main villain is easily guessed already in the tenth minute of the film. In order to somehow diversify the plot, Bird tried to go many times to the tried and tested way - to increase the team of superheroes. In theory, this could give the sequel a new breath, but in reality it looks artificially and somewhat strange, especially considering that in the first film Buddy made a total purge of the superhero world. If the original cartoon was equally interesting to children and adults, the new "The Incredibles" turned out to be more straightforward, simplistic and childish. Adult viewers can be more pleased with the guessing of references to various films that permeate all the plot lines of the sequel. Already at the very beginning, Byrd plays with amusement the famous scene of erasing memory from the "Men in Black", then the plot moves along the rolled track of "Hancock", telling about the need for good PR for superheroes, in the middle it smoothly passes to "Bondiana" with the appropriate style and music , and ends with a retelling of a couple episodes of "People X".

Children such complex allusions will be incomprehensible, but they will like the dynamics and humor of the new film, which are significantly added, in comparison with the original. Cartoon cheerfully begins immediately after the battle with Buddy Payne, which ended the first "The Incredibles" and after that famously rushes through a lot of adventures, pursuit and fights, right up to the finale. The fun this time is built, mainly around the polymorphic Jack Jack, who adores not only cookies, but also a zombie, who can not understand anything good a child can. All this, together with the immediacy and uncontrollability of the manifestation of emotions and various superpowers, delivers to the father a lot of hard minutes. However, he gets not only him, but also a thieving raccoon. His fight with Jack Jack, made in the style of Walt Disney's classic films, has tangible moral defects, but it also causes the most laughter in the hall.

Of course, through the abundance of fun and action scenes from all sides, the ideological aspects of the "children's" cartoon also slip. As a positive US Secretary of State, the image of Hollywood's favorite Hollywood Clinton is easily discernible, and feminist ideas permeate all the plot lines of the film from the first to the last frame. Starting with the "Mulan", released in 1998, militant feminism has become the main semantic concept of Disney products, adding with each new cartoon. "The Incredibles-2" raises its banner to such a height that it will be difficult to surpass in the future, because absolutely all the female characters in it from Violet to Evelyn DeVore not only completely surpass their narrow-minded, listless and incapable partners, but also conduct among themselves amusing discussions about the role of women in society. On the one hand, this really reflects certain trends in public life, but on the other hand it directly programs them. It's funny that the villain Ekranotiran is just talking through television to zombie Americans that in the modern world people are completely lazy, they stopped critically assessing information and simply mindlessly absorb the dregs that are pouring on them from every screen every day. Somewhat strange in the cartoon about the family is built and the supply of family values. The Parrov family is in fact completely connected only at the very end, under the threat of survival, and before that, the male and female parts of the family practically do not interact. Elastiko, completely forgetting about the family and the baby Jack Jack, after work prefers to rest in an expensive hotel, and Violet is absorbed in the first teenage love, not noticing anyone around her. In the end, it turns out that Edna Modd, voiced in the original by Brad Bird himself, puts much more effort into the education of the younger son Parov than his own mother.

Well, unlike the dubious value assumptions, the technical side of the cartoon is flawless. A huge time difference between the first and second cartoons allows you to clearly see what a huge path made computer animation in the last decade. Thanks to the improvement of the technologies for the transmission of facial expressions and emotions, from time to time it really seems that on the screen there are actors that are not drawn, but live.

In general, if you do not pay attention to the secondary, banal and straightforward plot and crumpled finale, the cartoon fully fulfills its functions of easy summer entertainment for the whole family. But for many years Piksar has raised the bar not only technical, but also the semantic content of its best cartoons, that against their background, "The Incredibles-2" looks just like a tuned eight next to the newest Mercedes.
185 out of 426 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Future World (2018)
3/10
Franco, desert, same-sex love
13 June 2018
James Franco at the end of 2017 decided to slow down with the development of his career, but managed to participate in so many projects that the films with him continue to come out by inertia. True, the vast majority of them (with the exception of, perhaps, the noise in the award-winning season of "Woe-Creator"), differ in quality rather doubtful, which is not surprising - in fact, Franco rarely limits himself to acting, simultaneously speaking in the image of (co) (co) director and, slightly more rarely, (co) script writer. Do not be an exception and the "World of the Future", in which he paired with his frequent operator Bruce Thierry Chung trying to build his own budget homage to "Mad Max" and others like him, but in fact he simply removes another mediocrity.

The conditional desert terrain appears on the screen in an image (as it is not difficult to guess), the world of the future, which experienced the next world war. The commander (Franko's teeth) at the location of a factory looks for one of the last surviving feminine synthetics (apparently stolen from the set of the "Bad Party" by Suke Waterhouse), and now is in a joyful excitement at what he finally got "Rosurosuchku." At the same time, somewhere in the area called Oasis from fever, the Queen dies (the horizontal cameo by Lewsey Lew), and her son Prince (absolutely gray and unknown to anyone Jeffrey Wahlberg), along with the brothers, goes in search of a cure for illness and disappointment from a rapidly degrading civilization. "The World of the Future" is as original as its name, with its clichés warning the viewer in advance of those "beautiful" plot twists and turns that await him ahead. Franco and his companions are not particularly bothered in the terminology, creating on the screen mythology so conditional that its existence at some point may seem like a fiction of the beholder. General, Prince, Queen, Dead Sea, Neon Forest, Paradise Beach - all this, of course, is easily remembered when viewed, but then completely disappears from the head, as well as the events occurring here. And the reason for this is not only the weakness of the plot, but also the exclusive passivity of the image of the protagonist, which is always inferior to the palm of the screen championship, the notorious grief-creator, Snag Dogg, engaged for filming, then Mille Jovovich on spids - in other words, to virtually any parallel character appearing in the frame .

In the background, there are unsystematic and dull attempts to play ultra-violent, it shines with a heterochrome look of Waterhouse and the rented motorcycles are beating - in general, the post-apocalyptic future is diligently realized. In the end, all these indistinct relationships between a guy and a robot within the boundaries of the metaphysical frendzone and at all begin to resemble a drunken version of the "Turbo-boy". However, despite all attempts to step aside the trash, the film remains a dull trifle, in which Franco beats women, women beat Franco, Jovovich habitually does not forget to put the marathon in the midst of the ruin, and robots are rapidly aware of their elevated humanity and are cultivating love, which, of course, can conquer everything. But in this case, it is practically of no interest to anyone.
73 out of 140 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
I am a traveler of both time and space, to be, where I have been ©
13 June 2018
The story of Stephen Strange, a neurosurgeon-the otherworld defender of the universe-is like a surname. A difficult destiny is the character, which he was able to push into the comic world, gently, with varying success. Charisma uncle is not deprived, but very much chakras-mantras-boddhisattva, accompanying his forces and abilities, went against the brute force of the reader's usual superheroes. At the end of the era, they forgot about him altogether, with a nostalgic smile hidden in that box of the sixties, where beads-rosaries, Pucci's prints, preparations for the expansion of consciousness and faith in the possibility of changing the world with a broad smile lay already.

In the tenth years of the twenty-first century, in which everything new is a tolerantly fused old, the name of Strange again surfaced. It was sparkling, you can say, in the name of the Marvel genius, to make money from the air density of scripts, good visualization and simple humor. While DC breaks both to itself and the spectator with its three-hour, high-flown epics, Marvel, though slightly podraasteravshy old lightness, is still the same trampled caring and mummy road - eat, viewer, our gruel. Do not push (it will not be difficult - we promise). Do not burn yourself (here's the PG-13 rating). Do not be fooled (we sent you sentries so that you will not forget, as it was in the previous thirty-two films). And how about writing a powerful wizard with esoteric powers and psychedelic patterns in this template template? Yes, a trifle, it is not even worth the trouble, it sits like poured.

It helped that Dr. Strange, who appeared to the world not in the best times for comics, is in itself simple as a one-color Rubik's cube. It was not initially difficult - for perception it was complicated by the surrounding situation of a tent under LSD. Reject unnecessary - and get "I do not want to be a hero - it's dangerous! - I must be a hero. " This is what the Marvel script writers used, revealing the hero exactly to the extent that it will help him to be adequately sequenced, trikvelizirovatsya and otsylnichat in the future. But there is one detail in "Strange", which makes it a curious movie for watching not only the fans and ordinary lovers of beautiful bubuhs, but also the comedian who is tired of comics, can bring something in a bowl with strong tea. It's about philosophy. The Strange's world is, first and foremost, a psychedel, which was desperately lacking during the fighting. The fact that the hobo-neurosurgeon was flown once inside the consciousness warms the soul of some pathetic five minutes, and the rest of the time the Mr. Doctor runs on foot and fights with sparks. Not enough skills were not enough for the creators of special effects (the transformations of the buildings were very impressive, Nolan's team puts the class), how much imagination to show something out of the ordinary. Let's say that there was no need to get out of the way because of the desire to not stretch the target audience - which is sad, because walking around the universe of Doctor Strange is at times more fun than drawing another Zakovi, a standard eastern market or a three thousandth Hydra bunker. Believe me, comrades from Hollywood - we are courageous, we are not afraid, we will be happy to see your fantasies. Do not be shy and do not limit yourself, and then, smelling senses, Asgard was our last gift in terms of visualization raisins.

And a skeptical raised eyebrow is given to Marvel for another fused villain. Honestly, you simply did not know to which project to attach the extensive fan base of Mads Mikkelsen. However, this is empty: complaining about the clichés in comic films is like yelling at the wind, so as not to blow.

Enjoy watching
68 out of 136 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Split of the Greatest Heroes of the Earth
13 June 2018
Split of the Greatest Heroes of the Earth

The film "The First Avenger: Confrontation" is the second loudest film comic this year, which tells us about the battle of superheroes against each other, after "Batman vs. Superman" and is a screen version of the comic "Civil War" - one of the most significant and large-scale events in the universe comics Marvel. As always, Marvel made a great movie. What did I like about it? Explain in order.

1. The plot. In "Confrontation" the plot turned out to be very interesting and, most importantly, not trivial. It is difficult to determine until the very end which of the heroes is right and who is not, and even if you have taken some position, at the same time it is difficult not to understand the other side of this conflict. In this story, every hero, every team is both right and wrong. In the struggle of heroes, everything can not be clearly divided into black and white, and in this contradiction there is a huge plus of the plot of the picture.

Humor, although it's not so much, is still present and remembered. Especially, in this regard, the scenes with the Person-Ant and the Spider-Man are strong.

Also very pleased with the final of the picture, which turned out to be as contradictory and ambiguous as the confrontation itself. 2. Characters. Heroes and their motives are revealed in the film quite full and do not make them doubt. Of paramount importance are, of course, the leaders of the warring teams - Captain America and Iron Man.

The captain does not appear to us as an ideal hero, but a man who is compelled to go against all to protect his friend and the ideals in which he believes.

Iron man is also shown somewhat differently, he believes that all heroes need control and are ready to obey a new law, which, he believes, will be able to protect the world from new dangers.

Among the new heroes is worth mentioning the Black Panther, who plays one of the main roles in the film. For him, the film is like a test before his own solo project and we get about him only an initial presentation.

Of course, one can not help noticing the Spider-Man, who personally for me was one of the main reasons for going to the movies. The spider turned out really new. It's hard to say whether he will be the best of all previous ones, but I can say with confidence that he is already sharply different from his previous incarnations, largely due to the fact that the role was taken not by an adult, but by a real teenager. Separately, it is worth mentioning and the voice of the character, the voice reflects perfectly that the hero is just a child and an inexperienced superhero who is just starting his fight with Evil. In my opinion, the filmmakers correctly decided that they did not once again show the story of the origin of the character, but present it as a ready-made hero.

The new villain Helmut Zemo turned out to be very interesting and memorable, thanks to the fact that he is the most ordinary person who managed alone, using only his mind and hatred, to resist the Avengers. It will be interesting to see this character in future films as well. 3. Action. Action, as in any film on the comic books Marvel, is one of the main components and here he, as usual, at the height. I have nothing more to add here.

In the end, before us is one of the most successful films of the cinematic universe of Marvel, which allows us to take a fresh look at familiar characters and leaves us in a pleasant anticipation of future films.
70 out of 139 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Ant-Man (2015)
8/10
The smallest superhero
13 June 2018
Undoubtedly, each of us in childhood had favorite superheroes that we admired. They were in demand and needed, because they always taught a good cause: they clearly demonstrated how to be persistent and strong; how to overcome difficulties and obstacles; To reach heights and conquer new horizons; be able to love and offer a helping hand in a difficult moment; and most importantly - to remain yourself, soul and heart. Such acts and good deeds invariably evoked feelings of pride and enthusiasm, and it was so attractive and tempting that they could not help imitating them - fluttering like a smoke out of everyday everyday life and moving towards a huge peace, in the name of his own salvation. Sometimes it happens that patriotism prevails over soulfulness, and after all the lofty and ambitious, at times haughty and arrogant projects about superheroes, I want to take a break, to look at something that is not burdensome, unconstrained, perhaps even modest and simpler, closer to my liking. Following the loud and sensational "Era of the Altron", the company Marvel, provides just such an opportunity, providing in his universe a place of an Ant-Man, whose name is not so popular and known as other heroes, but nevertheless, it is needed for the purpose of a full set , and also for the completion of the second phase of this very carnival.

The man-ant. In the past, he was Dr. Hank Pym, now - burglar and thief Scott Lang. People do not shout at all, do not shout out his name, they do not sing praises in his honor, but the gifts given by Pim, in particular the reduction in size, clearly stand out Scott on the background of other superheroes, and, of course, find an interesting and fascinating application for themselves. Scott is far from hopeless, like many others, he also has his advantages, in fact skillfully breaks through protective mechanisms. In the same virtuosic way, Marvel draws parallels between the tiny world of the Ant-Man and our ordinary. This is the highlight of the picture, where from a daily routine, such as the running water in the bathroom, the movement of insects, there is a really exciting show that does not get bored, at least because of its novelty and uniqueness. Ants who are a friendly team, attract a lot of attention, manifesting themselves from different sides, and to discover and discover something new and amazing in its own way is always pleasant. Without opposition and struggle, the whole picture does not lining up, so you need an opponent, who is a pupil of Hank Pym - Darren Kross, nicknamed the Yellow Hornet. And yet, it is worth noting that in the picture of Peyton Reed there are no strictly negative characters, there are only people who have lost their way. As a matter of fact, the Cross is the same, and its motives are clear and common, as well as Lang, Pim and others. If the "Man-Ant" and stands out with some ingenuity, then only by that small world, and as to the decoupling of the plot and the characters - they are submitted in the most elementary and uncomplicated manner. Be that as it may, this does not affect the film, which, in addition to its wittyness, wins and due to a good actor's presentation. Paul Rudd, Michael Douglas, Evangeline Lilly, together with their characters perfectly in harmony with each other, do not forget Michael Penny, with his funny character and funny gang, which makes a significant proportion of humor, due to his absurdity and absurdity.

If you reproach the "Person-ant", then only for the accelerated rhythm of the narrative, leaving in the end a feeling of unfinishedness and haste. Shortened actions and incompletely developed relationships experience the same sense of conciseness as the "Altron era", but in this case, based on the above aspect, Peyton Read's film turns out to be more advantageous, perhaps because of the lack of trickery and sophistication . In addition to the fantastic, interesting and without exaggeration of the exciting world, the theme of love and family drama is touched upon. Love between the parent and the child, family ties are not just superficial, or for the species, they occupy an important place in the picture, which also gives an impression of a small share of its dramatic and soulfulness. "Person-ant" can be safely called the most real outlet, against the backdrop of great pathos and excessive heroism. The film is light, casual, pleasant, sometimes ironic and funny. He will certainly find his place among other Marvel projects, thereby expanding his cinematic universe even more.
74 out of 141 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Quality of manual assembly (Simple opinion about "Avengers: Age of Ultron")
13 June 2018
At the moment, "Simple opinion" certainly will do without the husks and garbage. If that's all Weedon cleaned, then what am I? Number ninety-eight, "The Avengers: The Age of the Altron"

It seems that in advertising, neither the cinematic Marvel, nor their apogee - "Avengers" certainly do not need. Especially, the second part of them. But, if you somehow managed to distract / not notice / or just sleep in the ice of the Antarctic for the last twenty years, then the easiest way to describe what you are going to is to go to the amusement park. At what this is the second, improved version of this, which came last time.

The only claim that can somehow put up the "Era of the Altron" - the presence of the previous film, which though not on purpose, but leveling part of the effect. Nevertheless, we have already seen something similar, and we approximately know what to expect. A group of diverse heroes forced to unite for the common goal, a charismatic villain at the head of a crowd of faceless clones ... It's not that we would not see it, or we did not want to look again ... And it looks like Joss Weedon knows all the pitfalls in itself a sequel. It is no longer necessary to tell the stories of the main characters (just like last time, actually), and we do not even need to disclose the reasons for their interactions, and therefore the movie tells the stories of the characters who were deprived of attention last time. Altron is a jerk, he sings songs, runs over himself and avengers, sincerely not understanding why they are needed, if he is - all such in vibnium. And the Scarlet witch and Mercury, having lost the status of mutants, contributed a huge share of diversity to the action and history, not to mention that there are not many sympatians in the frame.

The narrated story serves as a flip bridge to the further development of the cinematic universe, but it was done in a large and effective way, being a worthy continuation of the first part. Joss Weedon thus secured us with you, yourself and the co-owners of the need for the third part and the story of the same story for the third time. Wisely, considering that the history of cinema has repeatedly proved that the same approach in a trickle does not work in ninety-five percent of cases. One way to hide the roughness and surpass the original is an action, and it was brought here with a surplus. Beginning exactly with what the original ended - the interaction of the Avengers as one, one-piece team, shown by one shot, the second part thus hints that there will be even more. And, believe me, "The Age of Altron" does not disappoint, and the viewer will receive a huge amount of beauty and effects, the performance of which is honed in all the previous parts of the universe. Well, we will not forget that this is Marvel - there will be plenty of humor, and even the hammer of the torah will become a real joker.

The second phase of the cinematographic universe is coming to an end, and the result of its evolution was presented to the audience. This is no longer a novelty, but no one promised, honestly on the heart. "The era of the Altron" - an ideal blockbuster, which is the result of the development of entertainment movies.

This is not a streaming production, it's not an attempt to keep up with someone, or to prove to someone something - it's a one-off product, quality and collected manually. Not creativity, not invention, not art. Quality of manual assembly, that's all.
55 out of 117 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
A pleasant surprise, or how I stopped being afraid and again fell in love with blockbusters
13 June 2018
Recently, I began to understand that I was tired of blockbusters: these incredibly spectacular, voluminous, incredibly expensive, but by and large similar to each other and empty films. In 2014, apart from bitter disappointments like the "New Spider-Man 2", there were really standing copies (whether the new "X-Men" or "The Face of the Future"), but they also failed to arouse my special trepidation. And that's why I did not expect the "Guardians of the galaxy". And if it were not for my long-standing affection for the Marvel universe and the invitation for the preposition, I probably would not even have gone to this film and ... Much would have lost!

During the viewing of "The Guardians of the Galaxy" I was surprised at the fact that it was gradually becoming ecstatic. I could not imagine that I can still empathize with screen characters and laugh at their words and deeds. This film really gave me back the love of blockbusters and revived the hope that in the film world of fiction it is really possible to do something new and unusual.

And now I will try to briefly note those components of the film that bribed me the most.

1. Cool plot. This tape contains several storylines, which, due to the abundance of central characters, are revealed as completely as possible. The main action is twisted around an artifact, which everyone abducts from one another. However, developing this storyline, the creators of the tape have time to give us and a spectacular escape from prison, and many spectacular interplanetary battles, and the history of the formation of a real strong friendship between the five main characters. The plot develops very rapidly and practically does not sag, keeping spectators intrigued to the very titles. Personally, I would have sopped the melodramatic part of the film, however, the reaction of the viewers to these episodes was absolutely normal, so it's more of my harmfulness and natural cynicism, and not some miscalculations of the writers. By the way, the film itself is more associated with "Star Trek" or "Star Wars". So not special lovers of the Marvel universe can appreciate this tape.

2. Excellent humor. "Guardians of the galaxy" is a very funny film. And the cool thing is that here there is a place of self-irony, as the tape makers coolly ridicule various clichés peculiar to blockbusters. In general, it is necessary to see and hear. Probably, this is the most cheerful film of this year, although according to official information it is not even a comedy.

3. Team spirit. I remember two years earlier I was choking with enthusiasm, praising the Avengers precisely for their team unity. However, one can not help but notice that in the Ironman and the company the team spirit was a little bit pretentious. The heroes were constantly measured ... hmm ... by forces, and the friendly atmosphere was relegated to the background. In the "Guardians of the galaxy", things are different: the characters are so different that they have nothing to compete with. This five of the losers (and they call themselves that) form a real friendly union, which more than ever realizes the principle "We are different, but we are together."

In connection with the above, it makes sense to mention the work of a stunning cast of actors. Chris Pratt creates a very bright character who can compete with his own charisma, even with Tony Stark himself. It's amazing that I did not pay attention to this actor before: after watching, I was surprised to find that I already watched a dozen films with his participation. Now I will follow with interest the development of his career. Zoe Saldana confirms the status of the most unearthly actress of our time, adding to her track record a new alien image of the charming and daring Gamora. Professional wrestler Dave Batista is very organic in his role. I think he definitely has a future in the film industry. Very pleased with such venerable professionals of their business as Benicio Del Toro, Glenn Close and John Ci Riley, although, not soon, that these fantastic actors would like to see on the screen a little more. Rocket Raccoon is also a rocket (or for many of the fair sex - milash raccoon) - this is the main bomb of the whole film. I can not appreciate the work of Bradley Cooper, since I watched the film in Russian dubbing (which, by the way, is also surprisingly very good). But the character is simply amazing! The hall came in a raging rapture, it cost the raccoon only to appear on the screen. Definitely, this is a find without which this film would not have been so successful. Spectator love was won by another character - Grut (or, again, for many girls and children - just a Tree). By the way, the incredibly laborious work of Vin Diesel on the voice acting of this character you can appreciate in Russian dubbing.

4. Bright special effects. What to say, the film is bright, very beautiful and voluminous. A real holiday for the eyes, on which it is worth to fork out, in order to appreciate all this beauty in IMAX 3D.

5. Music! Even if the film leaves you absolutely indifferent, then the music just needs to please you. The creators of the ribbon collected just the cream, the quintessential culture of the 70s, choosing bright, favorite, but un-played tracks. I was really pleased to share some of this amazing culture with my friends who, outside of this movie, would not for anything agree to listen to "this is not necessary for old people".

TOTAL. "Guardians of the galaxy" is a completely crazy blockbuster that charges the audience with a positive and undoubtedly captivates with an incredibly warm atmosphere, exciting plot, bright special effects, killer jokes and a genuine team spirit. For the first time in a very long time, I felt this naive childlike feeling: I did not want to leave the cinema and leave this amazing, incredibly convincing and soulful world, which was given to us by the creators of the "Guardians of the Galaxy." Probably, this is the first blockbuster this year, which I will want to reconsider. And this is the rare film that I want to assess neither from the point of view of a critic who cares at trifles and searches for story inconsistencies, but from the point of view of the viewer who can easily be bribed by a talking raccoon and a smiling tree. That's why I highly recommend watching this movie literally to all viewers. And that's why "The Guardians of the Galaxy" is becoming a movie that I without any qualms of conscience put an unprecedented 9 points, which I have not been awarded with yet another film from the universe I adore Marvel.

Enjoy watching!
85 out of 152 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Do not trust anyone but yourself.
13 June 2018
On March 19, Marvel and Disney withdrew a ban on the publication of any reviews and reviews of the over-coming spring blockbuster "The First Avenger: Another War." They were removed because it was on this day that a special, first in Russia closed film was shown at the Oktyabr cinema. Unfortunately, no photographs could be made, since Marvel on similar premieres usually requires to hand over at the entrance to the hall all electronic devices. But, nevertheless, the film itself is important.

After the attempt on the very director of "Shield" Nick Fury, it becomes clear that the traitors are deep inside the organization itself. Captain America is involved in a large-scale villainous action to destroy disagreeable "Hydra" personalities. Moreover, he, like the Black Widow, is wanted as a possible supporter of a secret conspiracy. Now he can trust only himself. In addition to everything, a mysterious masked man appears on the scene, known as the Winter Soldier, who has practically the same powers as Steve Rogers himself.

Nothing more on the subject can not say, since it will necessarily entail spoilers, because the movie is directly packed full of intrigues and incredible plot twists. During the show, the hall repeatedly exploded with applause at the next plot move.

As a person who has watched repeatedly any of the existing Marvel films, I can say that "The First Avenger 2" can rightfully be considered one of the best, filmed by the studio. The fact is that after the plague success of the "Avengers" abounding with colorful characters, you involuntarily begin to compare each next film with them. In my opinion, Thor is the weakest hero in order to play solo. If not for the charismatic Loki, the film in general would be very weak. The first "Captain" also did not differ in any scale and originality of the plot, but in the sequel everything is quite different. To begin with, the second part has grown significantly in terms of special effects. It is understandable - after all, the action takes place already in the modern world, and not during the Second World War. In addition to this company Cap was composed of Nick Fury (Samuel Jackson) and the red-haired beauty of the Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson), as well as the new character Sokol (Anthony Maki). All this ensemble is simply superbly interacting with each other, succeeding and joking, and even add a small share of romance. (No blueness, it's all right). Scarlett Johansson has a lot of time, which allows her character and true intentions to be revealed. It makes no sense to say something about the acting, because these characters are performed by the same actors for the first time.

There are a lot of questions in the film, which remain almost unanswered. Why was the attempt on Nick Fury committed? Who is behind this? Who is this Winter Soldier and where did he come from? Who can be trusted when there are only traitors around? Fortunately, you will certainly know the answers by the end of the film. By the way, it is worth saying that the ending leaves room for trikvela, which, of course, will be.

As I wrote earlier, you involuntarily compare any solo film of heroes from the Avengers with the Avengers themselves. So the "First Avenger" can easily compete with the flagship team of superheroes. The plot is twisted much more seriously, than there, jokes and references also suffice in excess. The only drawback of the film - the absence of the agent Phil Colson, which has long been an integral part of the Marvel blockbuster. If someone does not know, the most charming agent of SHIELD does not actually die in Avengers. This is seen in the series "Agents SHIELD", which also produces now Marvel. The picture was shown to us in the IMAX 3D format. And I must say that it looks really cool. Again, comparing with the scale of the "Avengers", the spectacle here is no worse. And somewhere even better. It can be seen that the creators tried to do without the use of computer graphics in those places where it was possible. Therefore, the natural filming in the film is much more than artificially drawn episodes.

In short, strange as it may sound, "The First Avenger: Another War" is different from any other Marvel movie. At least because of the fact that there is not all tied up on the steep heroes and fatal beauties. Here you will find also a certain hidden subtext, which someone, perhaps, will make you think. After all, Captain America is not just another superhero. This is the most patriotic man in America, her symbol. By the will of fate, he was not in his time and not in his world, but he had to make up for what he had missed in 70 years. He is tormented by a sense of guilt and a feeling that he is not the one who needs this world. But only a real hero is able to find the strength to forget about himself and fight for his friends.

And finally, the remark about the localization of the film's name. Someone will find it funny how our distributors translated this title. But I assure you, they did it for a reason. "Other War" in this case conveys the meaning of the film better than the original name itself.
54 out of 117 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Second, but not in quality
13 June 2018
Honestly, Thor was never my favorite superhero. I liked the first film, but did not make much enthusiasm, and in "Avengers" all my sympathies were given to Tony Stark. Therefore, "Torah 2" I waited without much trembling. And if it were not for my love for the Marvel franchise and not the prerequisite on which I managed to visit, then perhaps I would not even have gone to the movie to film ... And I would have lost much! "Thor 2" was just an excellent, incredibly exciting movie adventure. Unequivocally I can say that this film-sequel I liked much more than the first "Thor". The creators of the picture made a serious work on the mistakes, took into account many shortcomings of previous films and significantly raised the level of quality.

In general, I was very pleased and pleasantly surprised. And now I will try to briefly describe my impressions, to reveal the pros and cons of this film.

1. A fascinating and rather original story. "Thor 2" is a film with a completely new, separate narrative. Formally, it is the continuation of the first "Torus" and "Avengers", although the main storylines with these films are not connected in any way. Describe the story - it's a thankless task, a great chance to give undesirable details. Therefore, I will confine myself to general remarks. Firstly, it is very gratifying that the plot of the film does not develop according to the scenario of the "Renaissance of the Legend", according to which, judging by everything, practically all the fantastic films released in the last year were shot. Secondly, it's worth to praise the writers for the fact that the action develops systematically, powerful action scenes alternate with lyrical digressions and small humorous insertions - that's why the film keeps the viewer's attention for all two hours. Thirdly, I am glad that the film will not be delayed: everything is lively, bodrenko and laconic. Well, the last moment, which I wanted to comment on is the ending. For most viewers, it turned out to be very unexpected. As for the inconsistencies and some logical blunders, their presence seems inevitable for almost every fantastic film. Besides, in Torah 2 there are not so many of them (in comparison with the first film, at least). 2. Excellent graphics and special effects. Life in the 21st century taught me not to be surprised at anything. I do not know what special effects need to be invented so that in the current conditions they make a special impression. Therefore, "Torah 2" I'm not going to consider from the point of view of sensationalism and some novelty. Of course, if I had seen a schedule of this level even five years ago, then it is quite possible that I would lose my speech. Today, this film is just dignified. All special effects are well worked out. From this position, this picture can be safely put on a par with the same "Man of Steel", for example. There are, of course, individual details that looked excessively computerized and slightly unnatural, although for fiction it is forgivable. Of course, this tape is worth watching in 3D format, so as to maximize the effect of presence.

3. Beauty! What not to take away from this film, so this is a beautiful picture. And for each viewer the understanding of this beauty will be very special. For example, the male half of the hall was fascinated by the unrealistically divine views of Asgard and really spectacular mass scenes. Their companions were much more interested in Thor himself, or even his material shell, which he actively demonstrated. Undoubtedly, all spectators, regardless of their gender and other characteristics, appreciated the beauty of the night sky, stars, incredible nature and architecture, which is abundantly presented throughout the film. A beautiful picture is accompanied by good music, which has already become quite traditional for the genre of fiction. 4. Friendly cast. After the "Avengers", it seemed that the actors' ensembles of the subsequent crossover movies Marvel would look bleak and insignificant. It is for this reason that the third "Iron Man" caught up with a bunch of actors who, in fact, played no special role in the development of the plot. In "Torah 2", the main actor's skeleton was removed from the first film, and there were almost no new actors. Due to this, the screen does not create an overload in terms of unnecessary dialogues and unnecessary scenes, and the cast seems very friendly and united. Of course, the main thanks are due to Chris Hemsworth (who, incidentally, after the movie "Race" has grown very much in my eyes). He easily becomes the center of the film, brilliantly copes with all the tricks, comfortably feels in the costume of Thor (which is said to be terribly uncomfortable) and perfectly interacts with other actors. In this film, he makes his character more charismatic and profound - and this can not but rejoice. Natalie Portman, of course, is good. But she practically did not show her character development. Although, of course, it should be praised for her work, because in comparison with the first film, from a purely physical point of view, it was much harder for her. Loki Tom Hiddleston continues to be one of the most disgustingly attractive villains in the fantasy world. And the rest of the actors are an excellent way to distract attention from the main characters and bring to the film a share of humor and diversity.

Also worth noting that the film is full of "little joys", calculated on a fan base. For example, very pleased with a small, but very funny cameo Chris Evans in the role of Captain America. Or already become a classic cameo by Stan Lee. There are also soul-stirring allusions to previous franchise films. And most importantly: do not forget to stay at the screen for a few minutes longer! You are waiting for two additional episodes: the first - after the incredibly colorful final titles, the second - after the usual basic titles. Both episodes are very interesting and directly lay the path to the next film Marvel ... (personally my rating of expectations after these episodes at times increased). TOTAL. "Thor 2" is a spectacle that keeps the viewer in suspense from the first to the last seconds. Bright, colorful, saturated, dramatic and even quite unusual, moderately tragic and moderately ridiculous fantastic action, which is absolutely not a pity to spend two hours of free time. This is a solid and high-quality product, which you can safely forgive some plot flaws and inconsistencies. "Thor 2" - perhaps one of the best fantastic films of the year and one of the most worthy sequels for this genre.

Unexpected, very nice gift. A real surprise for fans of fantasy and specifically the magnificent Marvel franchise, which, apparently, only gaining momentum ...

Enjoy watching!
55 out of 119 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Blockbuster-soap opera with elements of comedy
9 June 2018
Now, "Fast and Furious" is more like a Brazilian soap opera, where everyone knows each other and addresses names. After the death of Paul Walker, many, and I among them, thought that the film would be the last, but not the same. Producers and creators do not want to kill a chicken carrying golden eggs. Each film of the franchise brought a good cash and there was no rating below the seven. I watched this movie and I'm ready to share my impressions of the view and thoughts on this matter.

The plot of this film will lead our heroes to the most ill-fated places in the world: from Havana to New York and this time it is necessary to prevent the capture of the world from the charming and pretty hackershee with the pretentiousness and intelligence of the Joker, who talks about world domination and total control with philosophy on the verge of insanity. The action goes on increasing and reaches the boiling point at the time of betrayal, the team faced the most dangerous enemy, with its ideological leader. Not everyone can immediately understand what Dominic saw in that smartphone that immediately stepped on the dark side of the force. The main tie for the drama of the film is family values, which I welcome in any form and let the plot be compared with a soap opera, this is a new generation opera with steep wheelbarrows, well-chased pursuits with dashing tricks, bright and colorful explosions.

A separate article should mention the humor of the picture, built on the recklessness and absurdity of some decisions like rain in fifty cars from the window of a shopping center or "Niva" in the Atlantic Ocean with a submarine. While you are in the cinema your mind does not want to think about the logic and unreality of some tricks and phenomena, perceiving everything as a popcorn blockbuster with an element of situational humor and absurdity, especially well in the verbal skirmishes of Dékard Shaw and Luke Hobbs, in prison they are each other simply they continue to complain and they are no better, but it's so ridiculous! The main humorist was Roman Pierce. As before, he always sticks in curious situations, not without a caustic commentary and in itself he is a good comedian. It seems to me in my new capacity as the franchise organically exists and is fully capable to please the eye, if it does not think about the story logic and violations of the laws of physics, the eyes and the brain in such films have a rest, but here it seems to me the strongest concentration of the humor in the whole franchise and this share of self-irony and banter smoothes not all but many roughness, which for me personally is a good plus. The picture does not stint on the visual beauty and assembly, especially would like to mention that our localizers even translated the names of cities visited by the characters, and that's the solution when mounting the sea white reads "Havana. Cuba "seems to me a good decision, plus I will note the camera and composer work. Why do I evaluate them in a single segment, because often when we see a beautiful landscape picture, or just kinds of beautiful female beauty always comes music and some tunes well as memorable, and the camera in the moment of the explosion, chases and fights pulls out a general plan good angles , helping us to see in detail the environment or just enjoy the action.

Actor's work is not bad. Vin Diesel throughout his career earned three images with which he is associated: Dominique Toretto, Xander Cage and Riddick. Recently released a third film about the agent "Three X" and something he did not particularly like, the top five. Here he plays as if this is what he is, at the same time is the producer of the franchise from the fourth film. In our dubbing he speaks with the voice of Sergei Chonishvili, a strong dubbing actor with many roles in our cinema. Dwayne Johnson, once known as "Rock", wins Hobbs well. In our dubbing he speaks with the voice of Yuri Brezhnev, I do not often hear him, but his timbre is pleasant. Last which sounded: "The Secret Life of Pets", "trolls", "Straight Outta Compton" (director of nominal this film set the eighth "Fast and the Furious"), Ludacris and Tyrese Gibson as always good, their voices sound Alexander Noskov and Peter "Glanz" Ivashchenko, voices and types of actors, it seems to me, coincided.

As a result: Watch only in the cinema, because the spectacle is perceived well in the big hall and looking not particularly analyze the plot and enjoy jokes. The plot completely fits into the coordinates of "afterburner dramaturgy", and the visual emphasizes virtues, humor covers some shortcomings. I liked the movie, I'll appreciate it at eight points, take it as a popcorn blockbuster and enjoy it. All good and pleasant viewing!
110 out of 192 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Iron Man 3 (2013)
8/10
Not a single costume
8 June 2018
It's time to say goodbye. No, Tony Stark will not get anywhere from us, Iron Man is still at the top of Olympus Marvel. But it will never be the same again, because the cycle of the name Robert Downey Jr. comes to the end. Enjoy the same ellipsis of a beautiful trilogy, worthy of his hero.

The third film turned out to be minimal superhero, but as human as possible. To achieve such an effect was possible because of a change of man in the director's chair - the place of joker John Favreau was taken by Shane Black. The screenwriter of The Deadly Guns received an appointment clearly in an old friendship with Downey. It so happened that the iconic for both "The Kiss" (for Robert to a lesser extent, of course) makes itself felt in the story of the "Iron Man" - if the last two films were simply "not serious", then this time we can safely be called the funniest in the trilogy. In addition to abundant jokes, some plot twists from the duo's past collaborative work are also guessed.

Robert Downey Jr. now spends much less time in a suit. After the events in New York ("The Avengers") he is overcome by panic: and suddenly something like this will happen again, suddenly Pepper will again be in danger. In a suit, fear goes, then he and Iron Man, but the battle with yourself has to lead literally with bare hands. The costume, in turn, does not disappear from the screen, it is multiplied either independently, or under the control of the skillful AI Jarvis, thereby preventing Robert's talent, the flow of which is always a little bit, but restrained by the suit. The screen time and Gwyneth Paltrow increased, for this incarnation of beloved Stark, this is actually also the last fight and this time it gives a light to the old one. With enemies everything is much better than last time. First of all, the mysterious Mandarin. Sir Ben Kingsley and his character is SPOILER riding a spoiler, plus a spoiler and chases. It is not enough, but it surprises him fantastically, for it completely changes the preliminary opinion about the film and from fears that ZhCH3 turned into the fall of the Dark Knight, there is no trace. The second villain went to Guy Pearce. The Englishman goes deeper and deeper into the abyss of extremely negative roles, which, incidentally, is not bad, because the hostage of one role is definitely not about him.

Flashed on the screen by tradition and Stan Lee, without which there would be no comic books about Tony Stark and there would not be anything else. A few months before the premiere of Iron Man 3, the master turned 90 years old.

The funny pseudo-realism Iron Man 3 captivates. With the change of director, the film also changed, which pays more time to Tony Stark, and not to Iron Man. Who knows, Robert Downey Jr. may someday. will return to his main superhero role, but so far the film and he himself hint that it's time to move on. Finally, Marvel gives the audience a cocktail of humor, action and nostalgia, supplemented by a slice of the beloved actor and a piece of the universe after the credits.
79 out of 146 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Avengers (2012)
9/10
"I'll free you." - From what? - From freedom.
8 June 2018
I think any viewer, buying a ticket for this film, is aware of what he expects to see on the screen. Recently, the film industry has been criticized for the abundance of projects of a purely entertaining nature, including the "Avengers". However, if you look closely - it turns out that there is not so much really good and quality entertainment cinema. Some films are boring, some are bluntly stupid; and, for the most part, it turns out that "entertainment" can be called only a few luxuriously shot scenes, and at other times the viewer is forced to entertain himself with popcorn and cold cola. So the "Avengers" is a completely different case.

I'm not a fan of comic books, and the attitude towards this genre is rather negative, because of its total zashtamovannosti and uncompromising pathos. However, seeing such a spectacle as the "Avengers", it's hard not to leave your sarcasm aside, and fully enjoy the proposed attraction. Director Joss Weedon, in the beginning, caused me to distrust, in spite of the mass of laudatory reviews, his "Mission Serenity" did not impress me at all; However, in this case, a clear and confident direction is felt throughout the film. Weedon is also responsible for the script, and here I want to note how competently it is worked out to fill the picture with action to the eye, not forgetting about the meaningfulness and clear drawing of the characters' characters. It is a balanced scenario that makes the film look "in one go," and the characters look so charismatic, as necessary for a positive perception of the picture. Undoubtedly, Marvell approached the project very seriously, presenting "Torah" and "First Avenger" last year, these films being technically quite successful in themselves, at the same time became an effective prelude to the main movie event Marvel. And the creators did their best to make the film truly an event that surpassed its historical predecessors. Since almost all the characters are familiar to the viewer, and the story itself is simple and understandable - it makes it possible to fill the picture with spectacular action to the point that it seems unbelievable how all this can fit into one film, even if it lasts more than two hours. At the same time, this is not the case when the entire film is thrown at different locations, trying to diversify the action in this way. The bulk of events takes place on the ship Nick Fury and in New York, but everything is done so qualitatively that not how much it tires. The scene of the massacre in the city in the final is fascinating, although the "scene" is not called the language, because of its wide time frame. For a very long time the heroes will fight the enemy; everything will jump, fly and explode; and all this in an excellent high-quality 3D. And although the film is not without pathos, I was pleased that the question of the police "Who are you to command here?" Captain America did not begin to pronounce his name, which the Russian viewer perceives with his teeth, but simply showed in deed.

Of course, there is a lot of humor in the film. However, if, for example, in the same "Sea Battle" creators used humor as a saving thread, literally pulling the picture from the abyss in certain places; in "Avengers" it is, albeit an obligatory, but an equal part of the overall structure, which works in a complex. This is not the option when you close your eyes to some flaws due to some pluses (an abundance of humor, for example) because there are no obvious shortcomings in all parameters of the production of the film. And the humor itself - yes, sometimes even stiff and sarcastic, chuckling over the heroes and reducing the extra degrees of pathos. In this regard, it is not superfluous to mention that Joss Weedon also had a hand in creating the scenario "Huts in the Forest", but here, of course, everything is in a softer framework.

To say that "Avengers" is a typical entertaining movie would be fundamentally wrong - in fact Marvel was removed practically by the standard representative of the genre, which uses every minute of its timing as effectively as possible. Mass of spectacular action, magnificent picture in high-quality 3D, wonderful soundtrack, sarcastic humor and nice characters. It is this film that should be considered a grandiose opening of the summer season of blockbusters, as it really sets a very high level.
95 out of 161 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
"Captain America - all hysterics" ©
8 June 2018
Warning: Spoilers
For a long time I did not write reviews with sarcasm. So the skill is not lost for long ... And just then a worthy candidate came out - the concentration of Pathos in it is the same as the calories in the cake.

A bit about the previous set of pictures. When gangsters ravage America, masked people begin to clear the streets and return the money of depositors to savings banks. When in America there is a desire at least somehow to take part in the European military conflict - masked people make landing operations into the deep rear of the enemy, demonstrating that only the star-striped forces know how to fight. Actually, the original idea: we have a very correct morally and physically strong soldier, and you all hide behind his shield - safely migrated from the old comic book into today's movie.

It's fun to watch how the directors mask political agitation. Even the name removed the post with a residence permit. As if to the Russian spectator who is not in the tooth with his foot, what kind of "Avengers" are out there for 2012, it's not possible to reach the Wiktionary. No, in advertising materials it was necessary to move as far as possible "Uncle Sam", which in the film is so much that it becomes ridiculous. Eloquent posters "I want you", ten pieces of proud flags, a song and dance number in support of morale - but with emphasis on the strong will of the rickety "simple guy from Brooklyn," he is recruited by the international (from the continent to the subject) , and the plot is torn down, before reaching May 45th. Why was it so easy to blame and reduce the degree of humor? Ideal picture for the final tape: SC, accompanied by a company of elite handsome Americans, thundering the Berlin bunker of Hitler and killing him, forcing him to listen to the US anthem. Then the template story would fit perfectly: the evil nehrist finds an ancient and powerful artifact (the top of originality, right?) And tries to direct its power to the destruction of the old world. Massively stamps Tesla-guns, power tanks, mopeds, submarines, "stealth", the first tests are conducted on the sagging superiors, and all this for a couple of weeks at seven military sites scattered throughout Europe. The production is multi-purpose, since there is nowhere to screw the workpieces - the main hero attacks the bases, breaking everything down to the foundation, and, most importantly, the workshops are always ready to explode. But everything in the factory is environmentally friendly - it burns, it flushes, but no carbon monoxide is released, and the heroes breathe normally, they talk (super-people, yes, they can not).

The main villain has a clearly worked out plan based on a technology that no brain can comprehend. There is a legion of soldiers, whom I can only call "stormtroopers". So stupid and harmless for the protagonist of the Nazis was not even in the "Indiana Jones". Here, at the first appearance of the correct guys with guns, they pretend to be hoses and stacked in stacks. The first assistant is ready to pass strategic plans for a plate of food. Is not it brilliant idea that a bad supermund in his lair to his soldiers pushes a speech in English? After all, they will soon be imbued with those great ideals of their underground organization.

Generally funny inconsistencies in the movie car. A single submarine sailed behind a group of bad saboteurs (and logically, all but one were shot in advance). In the newspapers there is a picture of the hero with the door from the taxi, which, given that the cameras of the 40's is not a modern figure, but the tables on the legs, and the action-scene lasted about fifteen seconds, no one could do it, especially so clearly.Usually actors engaged in comic sets, even to praise for nothing - they just serve time in the frame. But this time a pleasant exception - the basic composition of familiar surnames perfectly rasproboval comedy stuffing tape and tried not to spoil it. Chris Evans was supposed to play a warrior with a code of honor and a sympathetic heart, and he qualitatively makes a frozen face in a heroic setting, but thaws with facial expressions and gestures during dialogues. Haley Atwell is responsible for the romantic component (symbolically arising after the acquisition of the hero pumped biceps), and in the romance the main thing is to look good. Therefore, the case is bright red lipstick and other mandatory make-up, successfully diverting the viewer's attention - it does not matter to him that in places the emotion is not reached to the level required by the stage.

Shikaren Hugo Weaving with his falsh accent, which, most likely, will disappear in dubbing. Yes, if it remains, the voice will still not be the same, but it was the voice of the Australian that "animated" Agent Smith from the "Matrix", Megatron from the "Transformers", "V" from the same neonoire ... The main villain will lose a lot when localizing, alas, this inevitably - we will only have to look at the red computer face (well at least only from the second hour of the film). Tommy Lee Jones noted in the role of a kind and adequate colonel, in the view of which there is always a sparkle "yes, yes, I understand everything". Stanley Tucci and Toby Jones appeared in the image of German geniuses, separated by the front line, and Stan Lee ... Well, he as always, somewhere in the picture appeared for five seconds. Three-dimensional graphics ... Music ... It was all, but it was not created as a separate layer of glaze, but as a cellophane package - just like a package that does not deliver any pleasure. It's not necessary to go to 3D, except in scenes where a round shield flies along a closed path, it's not impressive. Understand where the good, and where the "storm troopers", you can and on a simple screen (thanks to the sane operator and sane editor). According to the stylistics, the stellar composition, the absurdity of everything that is happening in the frame, the tape is very close to the Cobra Brooch, and even closer to the League of Outstanding Gentlemen. So with the preliminary assessment (go / do not go) I recommend doing a retrospective on these pictures, and also not to lose sight of the fact that all this is a preparatory stage for the "Avengers", where already there will be solid berries ... Continuous cloudberry ...
92 out of 162 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Thor (2011)
8/10
Thor: The Mighty Avenger
8 June 2018
It remains only to marvel at the company Marvel, which gives an impressive amount of money for the implementation of films on their comic books under the guidance of "newcomers" in the genre of "summer blockbuster." Four years ago they did this with John Favreau, who previously filmed family comedies and yet surprised many with his "Iron Man". Now, the honored actor and director of the dramatic cinema and theater Kenneth Brana demonstrated miracles by taking off a large-scale fantasy comics epic.

Actors

Chris Hamsworth

Taking advantage of the tested scheme (to take on the role of the protagonist of a little-known actor and surround him with "loud names"), Brana did not lose. Chris Hamsworth is the perfect Thor! Possessing not only impressive physical training and memorable appearance, Hamsworth was able to convey the power and emotions of this character. In some places it is threatening, in places it's funny when it's necessary to be gallant. Yes, and in general, throughout the whole movie you penetrate to the Torah sympathy and you empathize with it.

Natalie Portman

As always, she is charming and charming. The first falls on the Torah and runs after him all the remaining time :)

Anthony Hopkins

Worthy performance of a worthy role. The first experience of Hopkins in the film kinomics was a success.

Tom Hiddleston

Sly, a jealous manipulator. Another one hundred percent hit in the role!

Jamie Alexander, Ray Stevenson, Joshua Dallos, Tadanobu Asana and Idris Elba

Well-written characters, which should still be given a little more time, because each is interesting in its own way. Action

It is many, it is diverse, large-scale, beautiful, impressive and fascinating. The best episode is the battle of the top five warriors with the Ice Giants and a huge monster.

Special Effects

Looking at the trailers it seemed that the "Thor" would not be particularly pleased with the special effects, for both the monster's drawing and the Torah's hammer in action were not so impressive. But fortunately, the effects brought to shine and you can with full confidence to say that the "Torah" is the most grandiose special effects from all the films Marvel.

Locations

Ah, this Asgard! He is beautiful! Incredibly beautiful and the viewer is not satisfied with the monotonous views of the city. In each of Asgard's places shown, there is something unusual and unique. And the more interesting are the transitions from the deserted quiet town of New Mexico to the majestic palaces and structures of Asgard throughout the film.

Music

Patrick Doyle has proved since the time of "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire" that he is an excellent composer, skillfully combining different musical styles. The "Torah" is mostly dominated by pathos and heroic music, but in times of dramatic moments, sad compositions play.

Humor

Humor in the film is not as much as we would like. But he is funny and in no way slips into jokes below the belt. True, it would have been more ridiculous to beat the scenes of "God Tor in the modern world among ordinary people."

Plot

Enough fun and interesting without obvious stupidities and sagging. Although Torah's "rebirth" was worth paying more attention.

Surprises

In the film, a lot of Easter eggs for fans and attentive viewers. Starting from the most obvious (mentioning the Hulk and the Iron Man), ending with the hidden ones (Falcon eye). And at the end of the final credits, the audience expects another bridge to the upcoming "Avengers".

Undoubtedly, the most beautiful and grandiose film Marvel. Excellent entertaining summer movie. Satisfied should remain both the audience and the fans. I want to wish the studio to continue making films about my superheroes with the same love and warmth.
110 out of 177 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
King Hulk
8 June 2018
History. In the sixties, the company made tremendous progress, as it was during these times that such characters as Iron Man, Spider-Man, Fantastic Four, Daredevil, X-Men and many other heroes were created who are still considered to be the main stars of the vast Universe Marvel.

Finished work on the first series of comics about the Fantastic Four, Stan Lee began to look for something completely new and different. Then Lee remembered that one day he really liked the movie "Frankenstein" (1931), then in the makeweight remembered another masterpiece - "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" (also in 1931 the year of release).

Crossing Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde with Frankenstein Stan Lee got the monster he needed: a terrible outside, good inside (which, moreover, could turn from a man into a monster and vice versa). Originally, Lee made the Hulk gray (he explains that the Hulk is a monster, he must frighten, and gray is a suitable color). But when the first edition was printed, it turned out that the shade changes from drawing to drawing. Therefore, it was decided to find a different color. Thinking about what color a superhero did not yet exist at that time, the thought came that no one had thought of making a character green, and Stan decided to "Be to him Green!". So the Hulk became as We know it today.

So, May 1962 was marked by the release of a new character from Lee Incredible Hulk and his "second self" - Doctor Bruce Banner ... Actors and Heroes. Edward Norton (Dr. Bruce Banner aka The Incredible Hulk) - I think that Norton has already come across such a split (meaning "Fight Club", whose main character suffers from a split personality and tries to get rid of his "companion" in the course of the film).

At first glance it may seem that the Hulk is a very primitive character, just an evil monster and nothing more. But everything turns out to be not so simple because there are remnants of human memories in his head (that's why he did not touch Batty and defended her). Part of the Hulk hates Bruce Banner, because for him he is only a miserable nonentity, while the Hulk is an invincible force and power. He constantly feels a split.

Probably this is the case when superpower is not a gift, but a curse. The tragic side is manifested when the Hulk again becomes Bruce, and sees the destruction that he did (in the film - this is the destruction of the laboratory at the time of the first transformation of Banner). Then his conscience and guilt tell him that this monster can not be released, and the Doctor consciously goes into exile. Edward Norton is a wonderful dramatic actor, his game conveys the feelings of a lost person: alienation, anguish and grief - the real Dr. Bruce Banner.

Liv Tyler (Betty Ross) - like Norton, Liv had a similar role - Arwen (The Elf from the movie "The Lord of the Rings"): the same deep feelings and the same "forbidden love", in general, everything is very sad. In Hulk, she plays a strong, and at the same time sincerely loving woman who is ready to fight for her happiness; she is the embodiment of true love. And the way Tyler transmits emotions is really beautiful. In the film, Liv Tyler treats the Hulk as Naomi Watts with King Kong; and the Hulk itself is very similar to Kong: calms down at the sight of his caring beloved, protects her from all the dangerous (and not thinking about his own self-preservation). What more can be said? God grant more such loving women. Tim Roth (Emil Blonsky aka Abomination) - he plays Russian, who grew up in England and became a soldier (who, moreover, does not drink vodka and does not wear a hat with a fur hat!). He leads a group of professionals gathered to catch Bruce Banner. However, after the friend saw what the Hulk is, he immediately became fired with the desire "I want the same!".

During the film, Blonsky is injected with the serum of the super-soldier, after which he becomes very fast, strong and enduring. It seemed that he got what he wanted, but after the Green Giant had made a cutlet from him with one blow of his foot - Emil realized that he did not have enough, and he wants more (and eventually achieves it). And what is most surprising is not to take over the world and rule it (like most super villains); but in order to fight properly. If we talk about the actor - then Roth like his hero is very charismatic. The game is good, not fake. Tim in a beautiful form: in his 47 so quickly run and participate in battle scenes - is respected. In general, Tim Roth disproved the opinion of the Coen brothers and Cormac McCarthy; "Old people" here is the place!

Special Effects. Special effects in the movie a lot. I will not talk about the visualization quality of the Hulk: now, with the modern development of computer graphics, there is simply no need to talk about it, especially with a company like Universal Pictures (which, in my opinion, always wins in quality, both computer graphics and special effects in whole).

If you care, you know: everything is fine, muscles are throbbing, hair is developing in the wind, drool from the mouth flying at crying, clothes are bursting; The Hulk runs, jumps and fights, as befits - really. The explosions themselves, the launch of cars and tractors into each other is done at 5+. All the laws of physics were observed: there will not be a Hulk like in the movie Enga Lee fly like a dandelion: he weighs decently for a mountain of muscles and generally a three-meter bald, so that he will fall swiftly and powerfully.

The battle of the two giants can not be called otherwise simply as a fierce fight, all the tools at hand are used: stones, bricks, cars (the Abomination still used people) - in general, everything is beautiful, beautiful, incredible! The result. "Incredible Hulk" - the second film Marvel Studios. A wonderful cast, good special effects, great sound, not only could one enliven one of the best comics, but also create an incredible film! Adventures, love, hate, good, evil - everything comes into this movie! Sitting in the cinema, I noticed that the Hulk was looking into my eyes, then with a shout of "Hulk Beat" he ran up to me and hit ... on the spot
70 out of 135 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Good!
8 June 2018
There is in this picture one virtue that covers everything else - this is a story. I compare this film with chess - after every turn or word of this or that hero the situation changes dramatically and the alignment of forces acquires a new character.

Better than anyone can manipulate the moves of Jack Sparrow. He is very sensitive to the nerve of conversation, instantly assesses the situation and gives a decent response to any "gifts" of fate. From the first viewing it is difficult to realize how profound the film is.

Behind external beauty, a good game of actors hides a famously twisted, dynamic and very clever plot.

Everyone who does not like the picture, I advise you to review it more carefully, listening to the dialogue of the characters and trying to understand the motives of their actions. I assure you will get a real pleasure! An outstanding film!
69 out of 132 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Gentlemen, ladies .... You will forever remember the day when you first saw the incomparable Captain Jack Sparrow!
8 June 2018
This film impressed me right after the first viewing, in August 2003, after which the following followed and so quietly peacefully, imperceptibly, I probably approached the mark of ten views. In principle, it's worth it, this film can already be called a legend, and it's a pleasure to watch such films.

And now also compare with the sequel, but in fact someone seriously believes that the sequel came out better than the first episode. I, of course, do not agree with this, but I will not argue, everyone has an opinion, and there will be euphoria from viewing (views) of the "Deadlock Chest" and people will soberly look at the "Curse of the Black Pearl" and realize that the second part is not even nearby worth, but it is also a product of the highest class.

The first film is better, maybe not all, but in humor and the plot exactly, and even such a banal sign as novelty, in the second part we saw only a sequel, a slightly different story with the same characters, and in the first film, it was all new , and moments are brilliant. When I speak genius with regard to this film, then, of course, I have the look of Jack Sparrow in the incredible performance of Johnny Depp. This is one of his best roles, from the very beginning he was performed in a genuinely brilliant way, from the first appearance on the screen to the eighth when he sailed on a small boat, flowing through all the cracks, to excellent music - completely capturing the episode, one of the best in all movie. And his first step to Port Royal, an English colony in the Caribbean. And after it began ...

The whole genius of Jack Sparrow's image can not be conveyed in words, that's why we watch this film and review it time after time, and expect the continuation. Especially the second part is the benefit of Jack, and in the first and except for Jack there was a lot of interesting things.

About humor, plot, music, I already said. And also this is the Captain of the "Black Pearl" Barbossa, some minor characters among the Barbosa pirates and among Jack's team. In addition, you can add to the appearance of Jack in the city of Torturra, a meeting with old friends and friends. Or repeated scenes, when Barbossa and Sparrow are in one frame. All these and other episodes can only be admired, for, they do not bother and remain in the memory. The plot of the first part is much more interesting than the plot of continuation, besides the ship full of skeletons under the moonlight, where it surpasses the ship from the team in the form of sea monsters-yudisch. Special effects are here and there at a level, at a high level.

Pirate films now go to the screens of the world a little, and no one can surpass the Pirates of the Caribbean Sea, here in fact there is even a romantic story between Elizabeth and William, the only problem for them is that it moves back to the second or third plan , thanks to the excellent performance of pirates of their roles.

Young Bloom and Knightley could not support the level of their older colleagues, I would say that it's forgivable for them, if they were not so important to the director and producers, and in the eyes of ordinary fans of this film, they are not visible, they swam far beyond the horizon, only, unfortunately, sometimes appear on the screen saying important phrases, for me these characters are superfluous. About Bloom, you can talk separately, his goal is to play a simpleton, spinning around the main character, sometimes trying to throw out an incredible and very daring trick, in the first part he still copes with the role of a simpleton, but when he tries to play the guy, everything fails, he does not go, and should run all career in a skirt of Paris. And in the second part of it they are already trying to make a serious man, give a chance to steer at the head of the film, but time to think, because Jack can not block him, and he does not want to be funny, but could try, maybe an idiot with the protagonist - his role ?

The screen time for the Knightley-Bloom duo is very little allocated, I mean when they are together, and for this it is necessary to say a special thanks to the creators of the film, this does not allow to turn the film into a love story of two childhood friends, but, damn it, from time to time they turn out to be in one frame, and these frames can easily be called not the most interesting for the whole film, in the sense of an acting game, because these young actors do not show anything super-ordinary. Ditch the ocean, shoot cannons (even with forks), rob ships and ports here is the destiny of pirates, and after they also appear on the screen under the magnificent setting of Verbinsky - that's the real movie. The spark from the sensations is getting stronger, the film practically does not allow him to tear himself away for two and a half hours of viewing, except for the episodes of Knightley-Bloom, but this does not prevent the movie from watching when Jack Sparrow appears from the second to the second.

The film really deserves only flattering reviews. The ending of the film, although romantic, but much better than in the second part, when I did not see the ending, it was simply not invented - it's the main and very big minus of the second part, but now the conversation is not about it, because the first part ended very much in rating , I do not mean the MPAA rating, but the main thing is that it's a cobblestone in the sequel garden.

This movie you will remember as the best one in which Captain Jack Sparrow was almost hanged.
54 out of 117 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
The Star Lord of the Jurassic Period
7 June 2018
In 2015, Colin Trevorow brought to life the dying interest of the viewer to the prehistoric inhabitants of the Earth. "The world of the Jurassic period" did not become a revelation, repeating in many ways the concept of the early films initiated by Steven Spielberg. However, the picture managed to break the cash register and prove its relevance even many years after the release of the third Park. Part of this is the merit of the writers, in part Trevorow himself, who brought his vision of history to the viewer.

The sequel studio Universal entrusted the director Juan Antonio Bayon, familiar to the viewer on the recent "Monster's Voice". However, for the script, among others, Colin Trevorow still answers, which is probably why many of the motives from the First World here are developing.

The events of the "Fallen Kingdom" (such a subtitle have a sequel in the original) occur three years after the catastrophic failure of the new Jurassic Park. The island of Nublar is abandoned, and the dinosaurs scattered throughout the territory. Everything changes the sudden awakening of the island volcano, which threatens to destroy the formed ecosystem. Claire Diring (Bryce Dallas Howard), the heroine of the last part, is ready to do anything to save the dinosaurs from the dying island, so when there is a chance to take part in the rescue mission, Claire does not hesitate for a minute. And with it, Owen Grady (Chris Pratt) returns to the island, whose task is to find Blue Raptor, which is of great scientific value due to its cognitive characteristics.

"Jurassic World 2" does not try to be more than he really is. This is an exciting adventure with dinosaurs, which is firmly based on the foundation laid in his novels by Michael Crichton, and after him Steven Spielberg his screen version. The screenwriters once again beat the same stamps that we saw earlier, but they do it unobtrusively and with imagination. It would seem that the roaring tyrannosaurus we see every film, rescuing children from a predator - without it anywhere, a system that gets out of human control - this is what the entire franchise is all about. And yet the World of the Jurassic period raises rather curious ethical questions, which previously in the films were not particularly covered. In particular, the question of cloning and how far a person can go by mastering this technology.

A separate mention is worthy of the storyline of Raptor Blue and Owen Grady. According to the previous film, we remember that Owen was training the raptors, and some of them showed amazing learning abilities. Blue was the most capable of them. And therefore the most tenacious. The sequel continues this line of uneasy relationships between man and predator, and, perhaps, this is the strongest side of the "Jurassic World". If earlier dinosaurs were only a spontaneous force that broke out of the control of a person, and caused little sympathy, now the franchise is trying to fall in love with the viewer into the dinosaurs through the Blue Raptor. And it's not bad at all. Blue, in fact, a full-fledged heroine of the franchise along with Claire and Owen, and the final picture hints that her role in history will be much more important than we thought before.

"The fallen kingdom" could become an exemplary sequel, if not for the frankly undeveloped scenario. The first part of the film, which takes place on the island, and the second - at Lockwood's estate - are so different in tone that it seems like they are two different films that someone glued into one. Instead of the beautiful landscapes of Nublar Island, we spend more and more time in the dark corridors of the park and the enclosed spaces of the estate, so that claustrophobia begins to develop not only in poor dinosaurs, but also in the viewer. The second weak point of the film is its antagonists. Unprincipled businessmen who are eager to cash in on dinosaurs are a terry stamp that works here in so far as, and the next toothy-fanged miracle of genetic engineering differs little from Indominus from the past film.

And yet, despite the unevenness of the script, the World of the Jurassic Period 2 turned out to be spectacular, sometimes dramatic (the lone dying brachiosaur on the beach is Hachiko divided by the sinking in the icy water of Jack) and truly adventurous, in the best traditions of the genre. And this means that the reptiles of the Jurassic period will continue to dominate the cinemas and the minds of the viewer for a long time.
357 out of 663 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Jackals (I) (2017)
5/10
All the same "Jackals"
7 June 2018
It often happens that the directors stand in the place of the editors, and also the editors become directors. So it happened with Kevin Grotert, the same person who mounted all the beloved "Saw" as a "Game of Survival", and several subsequent films. But, unlike the first "Saw", in the projects "Saw 3D" and "Saw 6" Kevin acted as a director. In addition, he withdrew the "Jezabel" and the same horror "Visions" with Jim Parsons.

The story of the "Jackals" or, as decided (cruel and merciless) Russian hire "Circles of the Devil" tells of a family who has gone to a small house in the middle of the forest to get his son out of the sect. The theme of the story is reminiscent of "Strangers", "You are the End!" And of course "The Last Expulsion of the Devil", but here is a much simpler concept, during which we watch an hour and a half as a guy tied to a chair sits and depicts an obsession.

From the positive aspects of the film I can highlight the realistic game of Ben Sullivan and Stephen Dorff, who literally decorated the picture with his presence. As soon as it becomes smaller in the frame, the film ceases to be interesting. Even beautifully shot scenes, with a chilling blue color that enveloped the backyard and killers in masks, does not save this mediocre story.

"We need children ..." - may be needed, but only in this desire there is absolutely no drama, nothing that would catch the viewer. The killers copied from "Strangers" do not have their own character, they are only a murder weapon, whose story is not interesting to learn.

"Jackals" or, excuse me, "Circles of the Devil" - an unfinished project that looks once, and then safely forgotten.
69 out of 74 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Delirium (I) (2018)
5/10
Hysteria is, but there is no movie
7 June 2018
I will say at once - I bought into the experience of producers, who successfully lit up in well-known and successful works.

The plot immediately seemed to me hackneyed and beaten, but I had not been to the cinema for a long time, and there were no intelligible alternatives to the film, so I went to the "Hysteria" with a weakly fading hope for at least an average job. Yeah, how.

In general, the plot is entirely based on one uncomplicated intrigue - is it really happening - or not? And the idea is quite good for itself, but normally it is not realized, because when the curtain falls, there is no such shock from the re-recognition seen as it was in the "Mind Games" or in the "Voices" because the authors did not really play on the basis of deviations of the protagonist, about what is happening really - no, just here you have a couple of scramblers and all.

A separate mention is worthy of the female character of the courier, who in the film is present at the level - just to be. The character is not specified at all - no one who she is, or why she clings to the hero is incomprehensible, the heroine's motivation is absolutely zero, despite the fact that she is essentially one of the main characters, so I hoped until the end that at least at her expense the creators would pull out a picture from the bottom, adding an interesting background to the girl, so that what happened had any meaning.

The result - the main theme is not disclosed, and the final is predictable.
86 out of 125 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Anon (I) (2018)
5/10
Gods of Anonymity
7 June 2018
Andrew Nikkol again returns to his favorite topic (about) social science fiction. This time his fantasy creates a world of a near future, in which there is no longer any concept of anonymity. All the basic data about each person are in the public domain, and it's enough just to look at the interlocutor to find out who he is and what he achieved in life. Also, each and every without exception there is a permanent visual recording of the events taking place with him, which is archived and located in the space of the Ether, from which the detectives of the special police apparatus have access to the memories. Every citizen now has become like an open book, which is easy to scan. This, of course, is for the benefit of society, reducing the number of crimes and finally reducing everyday life to the level of monotonous despondency. But what happens if someone can keep his anonymity? With such a problem and faces the protagonist of the film Saul Freeland, investigating a series of mysterious murders, in which the offender also forges inventive inventories of memories of his victims.

Referring to the topics of online surveillance and shadow total data verification by certain government agencies, the New Zealand director, however, does not risk digging a little deeper than what is originally offered to the viewer. "Anon" comes out with such a great generalization, the world of dominant conventions, starting from an unnamed place of action and ending with key plot points and characters. Substitution of reality here takes place not only in the eyes of Freeland, but also in the viewer - Nikkol seems to be returning to the scenery from his "Time", only changes the basic concept, introduces new, albeit unremarkable characters. Divorced, middle-aged detective with a classic set of tragedies of the past, depression, reflection, fatigue and alcoholism and his main opponent - lonely girl-hacker, sociopath, despises open society to which the glass walls of the world without privacy pressuring other stronger. The remaining types of the at least the templates, as well as conservative construction of the plot itself, in which everything is moving along predefined routes - from exposure, acquainting the viewer with the peculiarities of the activities of the protagonist and ending isolation, designed to cast a shadow over all this seemingly harmonious ranked utopian society.

Having on hand an excellent idea that could be developed well thanks to a fantastic assumption - around the clock functioning in the mind of each interface, Nikkol prefers to focus on things simpler. His "Anon" is basically a standard technotriller, in which the level of intrigue is reduced to a minimum, and to study the geometric proportions of the scenery is much more interesting than watching the actions of the characters. The film after the introductory first act is too quick to make a transition from words to deeds, with every step of starting to lose touch with their own reality. Technical details, if negotiated, are only casual, and the content side is gradually surrendered under the onslaught of minor, but more curious details. Study eclectic interior loft hacker opposed to the local geometry of the totalitarian urbanism, or notice how during a given scene the characters for various reasons, look away somewhere amusing, but this impression is not vyvezesh. Niccol brings his directing style - as if detached from the observation with the academic alignment staging diluted oblique angles and close-ups with a reduced degree of emotions only adds to the feeling of total emptiness of what is happening. Of course, "Anona" could save the final twist, which can turn the languidly lined intrigue into another optical illusion for the dejected viewer, but in this component the plot only finally recognizes its helplessness. The need to believe what they saw in order to protect the system from collapse here is simply a banal attempt to avoid compromise, and cause-and-effect relationships remain without due attention. Nikkol decides to play in symbolic postmodernism, completely guarding the viewer from any answers, but his thoughtful defaults look more like the lack of an ideological opportunity to develop his own concept or lead him to a logical collapse. Increasing paranoia stabilizes by itself, mysterious algorithms and databases remain in the form of graphical links of digital paths, and all motivation turns out to be an ordinary model. After all, maybe Nikkol is right - it's easier to get rid of the general in the finale and to impress the viewer that he already knows the answer, than to directly tell him the obvious conclusions. Accidents are nothing but whim, encryption of data is not reliable and it's much easier to permanently disable the interface and get rid of annoying advertisements and dice with useful information, because memories somehow always remain with us. To delete a record, according to the characters of the film, is much easier than to get rid of its contents, and at some point it seems that a little more, and the story will hit at least in the parable, but this information anti-utopia seems to be still unrevealed.
93 out of 122 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Old Gun (1975)
9/10
Love and fury in French
7 June 2018
One of my favorite childhood French films, which with great success was in the 70's in the Soviet box office. It's hard to say exactly what this film is about - about love, about war or about revenge. As it seems to me, this film from the category of stylish and very thin.

"In a conversation with a Frenchman, never touch upon the theme of the Second World War and, especially, the fascist occupation," - because we are taught by the French experts.

It is known that almost every Frenchman lives with the awareness of his national exclusiveness. This feeling was brought up for many centuries. Therefore, to shoot a French movie about the events that are associated with the defeat and surrender without a fight of entire cities is a very delicate matter for the filmmaker.

Probably, I will leave not far from the truth, if I assume that the French were waiting for such a film. They were waiting to again justify themselves (first of all, before themselves), once again skillfully revenge, and prove that even during the years of occupation they remained real Frenchmen - the cleverest, the strongest and able to truly love.

On the other hand, the authors of the film needed to withstand a certain political correctness and, if possible, not to abuse the demonstration of the cruelty of the German invaders. The fact is that during the filming of the film, two-year talks ended in Europe, concluding with the signing in 1975 of the Final Helsinki Act (the birth of the OSCE). In fact, this meant a great European truce and the beginning of a new life together. And during the truce, it is known what happens to the eye of someone who remembers the old ...

All this complicated the task of director Robert Enrico, but he masterfully operated with all the film tools, coped with it "perfectly", although in an ordinary French manner in a florid manner.

One of the director's finds is the combination of flashbacks, that is, the memories of surgeon Julien about pre-war life, his acquaintance and love with Clara, and the real situation where the Nazis have already occupied his country, and the doctor's hands have to take up his gun. At the same time, transitions to flashbacks do not create an acute contrast, and the romantic soundtrack of the composer Francois de Rubé helps the protagonist to swim in the waves of his memory. These memories, as it were, zombie Julien so that his revenge is not troublesome, filled with confident and prudent actions. It is much more interesting to observe the revenge when it is performed by an ordinary person. It excites and makes the viewer to empathize.

Another director's luck is the successful selection of actors. Philip Noiret and Romy Schneider seem to be created for each other, a great duo. Frames flashbacks are covered with a light haze and this only emphasizes the grace and beauty of Romy Schneider.

In 1976, the film was awarded the CESAR award immediately by categories: Best film (Robert Enrico), Best actor (Philip Noiret), Best music (Francois De Rube) and more ... Thanks to the viewers of different countries.
51 out of 52 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

Recently Viewed