Reviews

19 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
King Arthur (2004)
5/10
I really wanted to like this
23 October 2023
Warning: Spoilers
There aren't too many "historic" medieval fantasy romps out there so this was a must watch. I had bought this on DVD like 15+ years ago (lol) and now I finally watched it. For once the "critics" were somewhat right. This is just no brain mediocre popcorn entertainment at best. I've should have know from Jerry Bruckheimer stamp from the get go but you just can't fail with story about king Arthur, right? Wrong.

For starters you can see the low budget everywhere from cinematography to casting and set. You just can't mix king Arthur and low budget. It doesn't work. Casting is just awful and wrong. Clive Owen is as wooden as it gets and I have no idea how they came up with this guy as a leading actor in this film. Guy was just bored whole way and didn't have any required charisma to be Arthur. Second miscast was Lancelot who was just a whiny skinny bit*** and didn't exactly look my fantasy of legendary Lancelot. Then there is that blonde "guy" who is clearly a transformer. Conchita Wurst. Hollywood never disappoints. Only good anctors were Stellan Skaatsgård and Mads Mikkelsen who had only small roles. Directing was crap, script was crap. So sad. I liked the middle part best, especially the frozen lake scene. I never thought one can depict king Arthur as a Roman centurion. The back story was just weird. And Briton being some kind of savage tribals and "Merlin" being facepaint goofball instead of great wizard. Just ridiculous. And the obligatory hero moment for the leading woman actor at the end. Turning into wonder woman with Avatar face paint. Sigh.

I really wanted a good rendition of Arthur with some epic fights and quality acting. I guess that was too much to ask. You could do that with low budget too if you concentrate on script and acting.

Thanks and sorry for incoherent review. Just typed straight from mobile.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Knives Out (2019)
6/10
Predictable but entertaining mystery romp
4 January 2020
A guy got killed. Who's the guilty one? Hmm, pretty obvious from the get go but lets watch... Actor list at least is filled with semi-famous names. Some of them play their roles routinely well, some overact. Especially Craig's accent was ridiculous and goofballing doesn't fit his persona at all. Plummer was solid and it was nice to see Don Johnson too. Rest were okay.

The film had "humorous" tone with it which was completely unnecessary. Comedy is hard and clearly it missed the mark in this one. Not just me, but the whole theatre audience laughed perhaps once. Barfing main protagonist immigrant lady wasn't funny at all and belonged to b-class family movie. Craig acting as a goofball detective was another miss (I like him nonetheless). Rest of the small "comedy" bits were all somewhat off. Just do full comedy if you intend to do so, and not half arsed like this which just gets on the way of otherwise decent movie.

The plot wasn't very original, been there, seen that, but it kept the movie going. At least to me there were practically no "twists" in the plot. I expected more and something original. What else? One thing to mention (scriptwriter thought to be funny?) is the under-aged boy who's been called as a "nazi" because of his political views. Twice, with no remorse. Sounds pretty familiar at these times doesn't it? Not cool.

Knives out has a stupid name but nonetheless is quite good representative of "murder mystery" genre movie. There was pro-feminist Star Wars, Frozen 2, and this running in theatres. I chose this and was pretty happy about it.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Not as good as the first one, still excellent action
18 November 2019
These types of movies are starting to get rarer and rarer. In these "woke" times we only get feminators, fembusters, and blackened new movies to please small, but loud feminist crowd. In Wrath, we still get to see epic heroes fighting fantastic monsters and have a blast. The story is pretty thin "save the world" type, but that doesn't stop one to enjoy it since the rest of the package is in good order. If you have any sense of masculinity left and you enjoy pure effect laden action movies with good actors, this one is for you. Just switch your brains off and get you popcorn ready!
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Doomsday (I) (2008)
2/10
Over the top feminist action flick
2 July 2018
Warning: Spoilers
Lets start with the good parts. I liked the overall visuals and sets and seemingly this was quite a big budget film minus the actual star actors which were missing. Especially the Mad Max style gang scenes were believable and quite intense. The main baddie could also act (unlike the main heroine). Some of the scenes were pretty cool like the first attack scene from the raiders and there was a sense of danger in it.

Overall the acting was hit and miss. Needless to say that the main character was a huge miscast. I haven't seen this wooden and uncharismatic acting since, forever. Malcolm McDowell, a great actor, was mentioned in the initial credits, I waited him, and he had like 5 minutes of screen time. Figures. Mostly it was cringe-worthy performances and cliched dialogue from b-grade actors. The story and screenplay was crazy jumping from futuristic "Aliens" style of military stuff towards a zombie flick, and then to Mad Max, and eventually to some medieval castle with knights and all. A lot of it made no sense. I guess they just wanted to show cool scenery and costumes to audience.

Action scenes went on and quickly it was made clear that the main lady could take any kind of damage and pretty much kill anybody and everybody. That, and the fact that she was annoying and arrogant bitch made this film lose most of the stars from my eyes. It is very typical in these times to set a woman to be the "bring best man you can find" as it was said in the film. Forget the physics and realities, this skinny woman can take down any man twice at her size, even unarmed against steel armor-plated warrior. No problem. Can take full force punches to stomach without any injury. Also she can just run away from motorbike raiders coming right at her. Surely, if this is a superhero film, I'd have no problem with that or anything else happened in the movie. But if you lose believability, you lose everything. Mostly that was because of lazy scripting and when all the suspense and danger disappears, you get numb and bored.

As said, there were some cool scenes in this film but they were quickly forgotten by crazy out of place bits. Most definitely, the most ridiculous scene was at the end when the Bentley pierced straight through a bus without even a dent in its bumpers. I guess the bus was made out of paper or something. Just like all the bad guys.

Final verdict: 2/10 with the lead actress, 6/10 with Jason Statham.
1 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Thrilling ride up to Luc Bessons standards
3 August 2017
If you like Luc Bessons movies and sci-fi, this movie certainly won't let you down no matter what the so called "critics" say. Visually this is one of the most impressive films to date and the richness of the universe compares that to what have you have seen in Valerian comic books. The adaptation in that sense is pretty good although everything is tuned to be a bit darker (surprise).

The plot is good and pretty well built although don't expect any Oscars on that side. Think of Avatar / Pocahontas and you are quite close. The lead actors are okay but I think they are quite far from the original tone set in the comics. I don't mind the Valerian's Keanu Reeves -voice which seem to bother some and he's overall pretty cool and solid, although clearly, he's not an A-listed actor. The minus star point goes to Laureline who is a bitch. In the comics she was very kind and always smiling etc but here, they have decided (as typical in modern action films) to make her hard to catch playing arrogant femme fatale that has only one expression throughout the film: anger. If you can look past her semi-poor acting and always hateful face, everything else in the cast and acting is good to very good. The 3D- rendered aliens are very imaginative and have lots of character.

At least to me, this beats blackened Star Wars 10-0. Go watch and decide for yourself. I hope they get enough money from this to make sequels possible.
2 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Multiculti letdown
13 July 2017
A quick summary of the rating: Yet another reboot of Spider-man clearly intended for younger adults (teens / pre-teens) with typical modern Hollywood touch to blackwash characters. Peter Parker's stepmom is now Mexican (?), girlfriend African and his best buddy Malaysian. How about that for a zoo? Minus 2 stars for that. The actual actor for Peter aka Spidey was at least good and likable, even better so than the previous. Still far from Tobey Maquires charisma.

I don't know about others but I'm personally tired of these continuous reboots that start the whole thing over and over again. The whole core plot was about some low-level "boss" getting his hands on some "stolen" sci-fi/alien stuff to do some weapon selling business. Bringing alien stuff is just silly and out of place in Spider-man universe. At least the normally excellent Keaton as the bad guy brings some missing mojo to the movie although his character development is pretty nonexistent. As a side note, the most charismatic guy in his gang faces a quick death to give room to some boring quota actor. Besides the alien stuff, bringing the Avenger's characters to the plot is equally stupid and belongs to a completely different movie (something called "This vs That").

The sub-plots were OK and quite well balanced but none of them made me feel anything. It was like watching movie scenes that I have seen before, only with crappy actors. Comedic fatso sidekick was meh, although I liked when he dropped his "death-star". Script overall was pretty solid but the whole movie was missing The spark that makes or breaks a movie. Sad to say but this one won't be in my movie collection.
6 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Oh dear what a mess
31 December 2016
Warning: Spoilers
I don't even know where to start but if I would have to choose a single word to describe this movie, "mess" would do just fine. Shortly, for lovers of mindless kung-fu action, this movie is watchable but gives viewer very little satisfaction. Don't let the good cast and well known game franchise fool you. This is not a good movie. Sitting for the whole two hours was a painful experience and at around 1:30 mark, I prayed that the movie would just finish.

Overall the plot seemed complicated but actually, it's paper-thin chase of an mythical "apple" and "good" vs "evil" in a very stupid context. The complicated stuff comes from the fact that nothing gets explained to audience, things just happen while camera is shaking. Perhaps the gamers know a bit better what is happening, but I'm sure most of them are not content with this crappy movie anyways. Essentially, we have some fancy "virtual reality" gizmo that allows the user to jump in and "live the past" of a guy who died 500 years ago in Spain. I don't see how that could be technically possible even after a 1000 years but fine, at least its not super used concept. Actually that apparatus was the only even remotely original idea in the whole film. Fassbender gets lured to that device quite easily considering things, goes back in time and starts killing people to "stop the violence", as the bug eyed female doctor explains so seriously. Now that is ludicrous. Actually, the line between good and evil in this movie is non-existent and I didn't root the "good guys" at all.

When Fassbender is in the machine, he kills a lot of people in action sequences we have seen 100 times. We have some parkour stuff and saber swinging in ancient Spain in scenes stolen straight from Prince of Persia (video game too with movie adaptation that is 10 times better) and plenty of other films. Our hero is a super human killing machine that can take more bad guys out than Spiderman without breaking a sweat. Of course this is a game movie but still, I'm getting numb of this bs. And again, since its the year 2010+, we need to have EQUALLY strong female side kick that can easily take men double of her size down like flies, can jump as high as the male counterpart and can do all the same tricks. Sorry, but women just don't match men in any type of physical action no matter what year we are living. But surely, Hollywood needs to carter the feminist audience too.

This movie has no character development, no deep moral story, has mostly crappy dialogue, its unimaginative, incoherent and bloated. What the movie has is over-the-top action and "dramatic" orchestral music booming all the time, while still managing to be boring. Fassbender does what he can with the material, Jeremy Irons is there for nothing (just to getting mocked by some inferior actress), never before heard or cared Marion Cotillard who has too much screen time and is completely wooden and emotionless, Brendan Gleeson has about 5 minutes of screen time, wow, and still listed fourth in the credits. I don't know why these great actors went to this crap-fest of a game movie. Are they short on cash? At least the visuals for the movie look good but don't they always in modern movies. Really hard to find positive points here.

This is honestly the worst movie I've seen in theaters. Yesterday this movie had a 6.8 rating here. Today, 6,6 and I'm expecting it goes down even further since generally people (even gamer kids) are not that stupid.
115 out of 195 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Chappie (2015)
7/10
I see a trend in Blomkamp's movies: down
23 December 2016
Warning: Spoilers
But luckily not as quickly down as M. Night Shyamalan's movies. First the good stuff: action sequences are bad ass and gritty as we have accustomed by now in Blomkamp's movies. VFX, cinematography and soundtrack are all top notch as be expected. Die Antwoords are a spot on choice as antagonists and perform unexpectedly well. They basically hold the movie together. Also the bad guys are convincing.

Then the not so good things. The movie is basically a mash up of Robocop and Short Circuit with not much intelligence added. We have this million times seen setup where we have a robot that starts getting human-like traits and has to deal with moral issues. Then we have a that mechwarrior-type bad robot with missile launchers and mini-guns ripped straight from Robocop. We have plot somewhere there to fill things up, although quite thin and unsurprising. Both great actors, Hugh Jackman and Sigourney Weaver are completely wasted on this film and basically just execute colorlessly the tiny roles they have been given. Slumdog millionaire is only good and convincing acting Slumdog millionaire. In Chappie he is the "creator" and gets the most screen time which is unfortunate, since he is barely decent actor with minimal charisma and likability. Tech- stuff goes some times so ridiculous that its better to turn your brains off and try not to think about it (PS4 clusters, "neural helmet", copying human's consciousness to an USB stick,...). I gotta say, one hell of a company that Tetravaal. They are like 100 years ahead of anything else in the movie world.

The biggest gripe I have is for the ending, which is exceptionally crappy: stretched and Hollywoodish happy. Also the message given that humanity is just ones and zeroes is pretty silly and downright depressing. They should have let the Chappie "die" and forget that mind transfer foolishness. Open ending would have been much better choice. Instead they chose to spoon feed all to get that happy ending for everyone. Other than that, still entertaining movie worth checking out.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Furious 7 (2015)
4/10
B-class action movie with A-class sfx
3 May 2015
I don't even know where to start but this film was perhaps the most mind numbing action film I've seen for a long time. Definitely not worth going to theaters. That's it in a nutshell.

Fast and Furious has come a long way from the first movie to its seventh installment. Franchise is very popular and hence the high amount of sequels. I genuinely liked the first one and few sequels were okay too. But now, director James Wan tries to poke the series with his "vision" that seems more like a producers and studios vision. Director has made a lot of good horror movies which I like a lot. Seemingly the guy can technically make a fast paced action films like this one too but the end result lacks charisma and is very messy with music video style fast cuts, shaky cams, "camera rolls" and what not. This is a movie for ADHD generation for sure since its mostly hard to make out anything what's happening on the screen. Viewer is filled with constant stream of V8 growl, fist fights, missiles blowing up, cars flying trough mountain cliffs, cars flying trough sky scrapers, ... well you get the point. You can leave your brains home if you go see this. There is very little drama or calm moments and when there is such, the dialog is juvenile and ultra clichéd. "I should have done that long time ago", "I belong home and I love you forever after", etc etc. Such poor and uninspired writing. Even much poorer than I though is possible for this franchise.

So the script was pretty ridiculous with a lot taken from James Bond, Oceans Eleven series or your generic buddy agent film. I guess they are starting to run out of ideas if they have to transform a street racing subculture film into an agent romp with bullets flying. FF was never about guns or "breaking in to top secret facility with a team of highly skilled specialist". Script was just all over the place with explosions, fist fights, going to random places, throwing forgettable one liners... That saddened me. Cars and racing culture were not in the limelight. I was so begging the film to end midways since there was too much non-stop generic action that I've seen million times before. There is absolutely nothing new and memorable in this film you haven't seen in any b-class action movie already.

Physics and realism were totally forgot and people jumped from high speed moving cars to asphalt, rolled 100 meters down a mountain cliff, had head-to-head car crash, got hit multiple times with iron bar, flew from fourth floor landing on top of a car, and all this without characters barely sustaining a scratch! Wow. This is actually more superhero movie than Avengers because you can't kill those guys! I expect mindless action movies at least have a decent respect to laws of physics and human body. Oh yeah, and then there was a scene with cars dropped from a plane and landing perfectly on the tiny road many kilometers below them. Just splendid... Also the action and sfx wasn't that spectacular either and I'm truly baffled how they managed to spend 190M on this. They actually used stickers as "bullet holes" on cars in many shots. Last time I saw that being done was some Steven Seagal movie from 90s. Surely there was lots of cars being wrecked but somehow it all seemed bland perhaps because of fast cutting or shaky cam.

I will give this 4 instead of 3 just because of the touching montage and salute they put for Paul Walker at the end. Too damn shame that he passed away since I liked him a lot as an actor and he seemed like a nice guy. He would have deserved a lot better movie than this unmemorable piece of action mess.
2 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
John Wick (2014)
4/10
Juvenile video game violence with lots of Ford and Apple product placement
31 March 2015
Warning: Spoilers
Where to start? I'm so baffled. The title says it all. I'm hoping that this movie is based on a comic book character because the events that took place in the movie are so ludicrous and clichéd that realism flies right out of the window about after 15 minute mark.

It's starts with a basic plot for this type of movie: Some rough boy has lost his wife and he's trying to live a "normal" life. After awhile some random bad guys appear to the scene out of thin air. For no reason, these bad guys want to steal our hero's ancient Ford (which is constantly being glorified throughout the film) and they end up taking it and killing the "poor" guys dog in the process. Up to this point, I really was on Keanu's side for all things considered. Then the movie really starts going crazy so you don't need your brains anymore. Of course, the guy now starts seeking revenge for them taking his beloved Ford and killing his puppy he owned about 24 hours. Soon we get to see that Keanu is some kind of "retired" super invincible contract killer that can take masses of bad guys out with a snap of his finger. The movies story is basically about a man who wants to revenge to those evil "foreign" (well of course!) bastards who killed his puppy. That's it! I'm not kidding.

Okay, this movie could be cool and very entertaining action flick because of loads of good/great actors like Willem Dafoe and the guy from Game of Thrones who gets the torture treatment. Cinematography is great, lots of gun fights and Kung Fu fights and whatnot. But the plot is so damn juvenile and video-gamish that I, 30-something, just couldn't take it. I'll give an example. 20 or so fully armed and trained killers arrive at Keanu's house in the middle of the night. He kills them all with little effort like in Steven Seagal movies taking only scratch to his head. You need to have superpowers to survive that situation. In another scene, Keanu enters bad guys nightclub, which is full of trained and armed guards WAITING him to arrive. That doesn't stop him waltzing trough the building and pretty much dodging all the punches and bullets aimed at him. Only one cool guy with a scar (of course) manages to put even a little fight against our hero. That was the best moment because I really was rooting for the bad guys this time. Senseless slaughtering goes on and on while body-count keeps growing. There was actually a scene where they showed a van full of wrapped up bodies our hero was able to kill at this "first level" of his. "Cool" rock music plays loud at the background while Keanu keeps slicing and dicing the bad guys like some Marvel superhero. I would be OK if this was Superman or Batman but it isn't. All this "coolness" is added with very visible product placements from Apple and Ford mainly which almost made me puke.

The plot is like straight from some video-game like Splinter Cell or Metal Gear Solid. I think even they have better story than this one. This basic revenge type of movie plot is just so overdone already and John Wick surely adds nothing new to the genre. Should I say the movie lacks soul. I managed to watch it one hour and that was it. I like action movies but this was just too over the top for me thank you. I could predict pretty much everything that was going to happen on screen.

If you like video-game style violence and Steven Seagal style high body-count action with a script that's lacking any intelligence or realism, this movie is definitely for you.
3 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Day (I) (2011)
3/10
A b-class zombie movie for those who fantasize tough manlike bitches
28 August 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Uhh, what a crapfest of a movie. OK, it had some positive thinks like the black and white filter they used gave the movie a nice apocalyptic mood and it had that guy from Lost (for short while). I generally like post apocalyptic zombie movies but this one is quite poor and has nothing new to give to the staled genre. If this type of movie has non- existing and generic plot, irrelevant actors and bad guys that are lame as hell I can't help but giving this film low score.

It's OK in a sense not telling the audience are we dealing with zombies, vampires, mentally crazy or what but in this movie it was kind of ridiculous. Apparently "they" wiped the mankind but that's all you get from them. Just give us a background story please. Any kind of short intro would have helped but no. We get to know absolutely nothing about the situation.

What about the baddies that pest our good ol' heroes then. The "bad guys" have some sort of tattoos in their arses that made them belong to specific "clan" and those clan people just need to other people for fun and for nourishment. That's reason enough for a film, huh? But the bad people were no zombies or cannibals. They have kids who they love and care, they can plan attack strategies, they talk like normal people etc. But apparently they are dumb as boots not using any weapons when attacking to the house full of people with firearms. They just run there bare handed to get themselves brutally killed. And oh boy they are easily killed and pose little or no threat to our heroes. Not so exciting is it?

And our small group of ragged heroes (Sorry, no plot description here because there wasn't any)? That tough renegade lady was almost cute when she had that sour and "tough" face throughout the movie. She's so tough she even cuts a head off from a cute little girl. A real miss Rambo for sure who can kill men double the size with ease using just knives, axes and similar medieval weaponry. She could take beating like no other and still come out barely having a scratch and in full strength. And in the end, I think she wasn't supposed to be superhuman. A tip for scriptwriters: If you want to make viewers get immersed to the situation, be afraid, and root for the so called good guys, don't make them superhuman OK. The others weren't much more likable either. Token black guy who is clearly ill but at some point the writers forgot about it and he becomes a real killing machine again with full strength. Perhaps the most likable character and actor who can act a bit dies stupidly at the very early stage. Yeah, that guy from Lost is the only actor worth mentioning. Rest of them are just some random bozos found from the street.

Oh well. A positive thing is that the movie is quite short. That is a good thing because I couldn't have bear it any longer.
4 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Third one is a turd
7 April 2014
Warning: Spoilers
This was one of the crappiest movies I've EVER watched. Well at least in the bottom five. I liked the first two from the installation were quite good and entertaining and also got some real horror too. That's why I watched this third one although I almost turned the TV off middle ways. "Lord of the Dead" is just too ludicrous and not even fun in a b-class horror movie way.

This time we get to see Home Alone -kid that kills people with razor blade -Frisbee in cold blood, unattractive lesbian kun-fu afro lady, stupid zombies (no more just midgets) who survive massive explosion seemingly unharmed, baddies popping up around every corner, silver sentry balls that were supposed to be just guarding the premise all the sudden have brains inside and can transform to people, just very very bad acting from pretty much everybody in the cast,.. List can go on and on. What happened with this one? All the good qualities from the first two are pretty much absent and replaced with random crap.

What is there left to say? Director seemed to make up the story while filming. I could make up a better script sitting on a can taking a dump. Just horrible...I'm speechless. 1/10.
2 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Prophecy (1995)
6/10
Awful lead actors ruined the movie
24 October 2013
Supporting actors Christopher Walken, Viggo Mortensen and Eric Stoltz pretty much are the only reasons for this movie not to fall utter garbage category. Lead actors Elias Koteas and Virginia Madsen are extremely wooden card board cuts with no emotion, no charisma, no nothing. Where did they find these nobodies makes me wonder? Koteas has the same dumb face for the whole movie no matter whether he finds a box full of human faces or tries to pray for God in a desperate and sentimental act. Madsen has a same monotonous repertoire for emotions and expression. Lady schoolteacher finds a burned dead human body from their schools attic and what is her reaction? Nothing. Just like she would have found a dead rat. Or maybe burned "homeless people" are so common in the states and have no human value that you can just shrug your shoulders and continue with your daily chores. That was just a one example. Sure, you can also blame the script but for some reason, I don't think Walken had any better script and he managed to improvise the hell out of his role.

While the story was interesting, it was pretty weak and there wasn't much more into this except brilliant performances from supporting actors. What a waste of a good fantasy/thriller movie. 6/10
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
What a crappy "sci-fi" movie!
12 September 2011
Warning: Spoilers
And I thought that I could enjoy nice "lost gem" type of old school sci- fi movie but instead I got bucket of s**t. 7.1 on IMDb? People have totally lost their senses. I'd say that I have somewhat good taste in movies but this was total crap at all levels. One of the worst acting I've ever encountered, unlikable stupid characters, bad script, bad effects, boring story, and a cherry on the cake: no sci-fi at all! No, talking about electrons to a tape recorder doesn't count as a sci-fi! There is absolutely nothing sci-fi in this movie. I checked out the that nice cover image with a blue eerie landscape and some Saturn kind of planet popping up from horizon but damn, that's a hoax to let you believe there is actually something sci-fi happening. Sorry if I "spoiled" your wishes about this movie.

The main character, "doctor" the baldie, is The dumbest "doctor/scientist" ever. He seems to be like truck driver in a suit. The way he speaks, behaves and even looks like doesn't hint any kind of intelligence that should be required from a man of science. A total miscast. The girl, the token black dude, both horrible actors too. You haven't seen bad acting until you see these guys in action I tell you that much. Perhaps some actor students can use this material to learn how NOT to act.

Why is this turd getting such a high rates? All the cast and their relatives and their relatives have visited here to throw 10? I downloaded this crap for free and still feel ripped off. I give this 2/10 instead of 1/10 because this painful borefest lasts under two hours. Can't think anything else positive.
8 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Inception (2010)
10/10
Almost as good as the Matrix
27 July 2010
The first thing to come in my mind about this movie is the Matrix. Same kind of enigmatic feeling, original and fresh concept, being "jacked in" to (without spoiling) another world, kick ass atmospheric soundtrack. I have to say that the ambient music was spot on and correlated well with the movie atmosphere. Great performances from each cast member and especially DiCaprio which showed again that he's more than just a pretty face. I enjoyed the presence of Cillian Murphy (the coolest baddie from Dark Knight). Plot was well written and far more intelligent than average Hollywood blockbuster. Most of the time the fiction sounded and felt very believable. Every aspect from the movie was just very well executed. If something negative must be said the action was a bit too tense and there wasn't enough breathers. It started to numb my mind at the end because action was too tightly packed. Almost whole film is a one big action scene. But still, have to give this 10/10 because this just is an epic movie. If you liked the Matrix you will definitely like this too.
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Appleseed (2004)
1/10
Awful fem-anime-bot shoot em up
24 July 2010
This apple ipad thing was awful. I couldn't take more than 10 minutes. Graphics were straight from video game (I think my video-card could render that kind of graphics in real time). Some bitch killed in clichéd matrix -style 10 orcs without breaking sweat and same time macho guys get picked up like cherries from a tree. No dialog whatsoever in first 10 min. Plot seemed to be just shoot and smash everything that moves. I fast forwarded a lot. Still no meaningful dialog. Many modern video games as a lot better and enjoyable cut scenes than what's shown in this movie. I didn't like the anime style so i just quit watching. Final Fantasy (movie) was a lot more impressive in many ways and wasn't half bad movie. You can call FF a movie but this is just some game engine demo. 1/10 stars.
1 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Avatar (2009)
9/10
Truly an epic adventure film
3 January 2010
I guess I just have to write a small review of the biggest movie of the 2009. After some two weeks from watching it, I still remember most of the details, so I guess that marks it as a very good movie. The main thanks of that course belongs for the breath taking visuals which current 3D technology complimented quite well although the 3D effect taxed the overall picture sharpness.

As the movie got poured a vast amount of money to get the aesthetics to a new level the the story itself wasn't that unique. Of course it is understandable when a movie is weighting heavily on the visuals with big budget it has to make compromises for deep character development and plot originality. Film's pacing was solid, there were emotional lows and highs, no dull or unnecessary scenes. Some say Avatar is a rip off from Pocahontas, Bravehart, or whatever similar movie, and they are in a way correct but that didn't bother me so much. It's a basic conflict story between "bad" advanced civilization clashing with "good" primitive civilization with added love drama of course. The "avatar" concept although is, if not previously entirely unseen, a fresh one. Avatar is "The New World (2005)" in an alien planet if you will.

Acting was solid as it should be in this class of film. Only thing worried me a bit beforehand was scenes with arrogant "strong women" spitting their lines in some sneak preview clips. In real world if some skinny scientist woman calls hard boiled marine dumb and worthless with nasty attitude, she would find herself pretty soon collecting her teeth on the floor even if the guy is in a wheelchair. Of course Cameron's own Sigourney Weaver has to portray "bad-**s" (again) but in this time she only manages to annoy and gain zero sympathy. Particularly the very presence of Michelle Rodriguez, who was very annoying in Lost, made me worried but luckily she didn't play that tough invincible bitch role again. She was alright. Our lead star Sam Worthington was somewhat uncharismatic and lacked seriously balls (as a marine) but no big complaints from me. Zoe as a primitive alien did well but i would given her less screen time. But who would definitely had demanded more screen time was Giovanni Ribisi as the leader of the whole mining expedition. Truly a talented guy. Too bad he had so few lines.

Avatar is no Citizen Kane. Despite lacking somewhat story wise, all other production values were top notch which makes Avatar a must see on the big screen. Small TV-apparatus without 3D setup won't make the film justice. Go and see it on the big screen while you still can!

9/10
6 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Spider-Man 3 (2007)
1/10
Love this, love that, but where is spider-man?
18 October 2009
Warning: Spoilers
What a hell was this? After first two good spidey movies we get this? Oh boy, where should I start.

Firstly, the biggest gripe. The whole love triangle subplot took about 2/3 of the film. I'm not kidding. It seemed the whole movie revolved around some adolescent boy-girl love drama. spider-man is a god damn cartoon character with lots of fights against cool villains and heroic moments and not some Casablanca! How many 9-12 aged boys want to see their idol kissing and whining for some red haired girl all the time? I'm an adult and even I don't want to see that crap.

Secondly, what a mess the script was. There is sandman who is poorly acted by some no-name no-personality actor. There is some black goo that turn people into evil spideys. There is green goblin junior with a grudge (I liked the actor though). There is red haired diva girl with mannerism that already start to annoy. Total mess. The black spidey was a cool concept and I liked it but I didn't like Peter Parker acting like some "cool" bad-ass guy. It was mostly embarrassing to watch and totally pointless to show to audiences (did they actually screen this movie to test audiences?). OK, OK we get it! He turns into a bad guy by the goo. I wanted to see black spider-man doing bad things wearing the suit, not Peter Parker with Hitler hairdo trying to score chicks! Also related to this: keep the damn spider-man mask on! People want spider-man, not Peter Parker with a suit.

Thirdly, the acting and dialog was sub par. Good ol' granma blasts clichés and "pearls of wisdom" like "man's gotta put girls needs before him". Right. Platitudes include things like "You're okay?", "Yeah", "Good" (aaand, cut!).

I wanted to see great thrilling action and witty dialog and inventive plot that would nail my eyes on the movie. I wanted to see spider-man, not Peter Parker and his personal love affairs. There was a lot of cheesy parts some of I just had to rewind. This movie is disgrace to spider-man canon and that's why I don't give any slack with my one star rating. I could give this easily 4 or even 5 stars but I just don't want to. I'm so disappointed. I want to end this with a positive note and say that at least the sandman was technically well made. Props for CGI team.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Invasion (I) (2007)
1/10
Another generic remake with feminist touch
30 June 2009
Warning: Spoilers
This movie is all about a mom groping and kissing his son and underlining how unnecessary and obnoxious dads really are for little boys. And oh, there is a generic "invasion" plot too.

As for main characters, Nicole Kidman is starring as a single mom with a boy (of course its not a girl) and works as a psychiatric for some kind of feminist help center. Daniel Graig is just some kind of ad-hoc lapdog boyfriend who is only called for help when needed. And then there is the dad who pretty quickly turns into the "dark side" and can be hit with an iron bar. Movie pretty much goes like mom and son running around the city avoiding bad guys.

There is no suspense, acting is throughly wooden and plot is non- existent ripoff from previous body snatcher movies without any twists. The amount of plot holes and illogical behavior is high as would be expected from a dumbed down remake of a remake. There is a few good special effects if something positive must be said. Thats it. I can't think of anything more to say from this POS. The movie is maybe worth 3 or 4 out of 10 but as a protest depicting dads as "locusts", I give this crap 1/10. Thank you.
12 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed