Change Your Image
teppo-2
Reviews
The Wheel of Time (2021)
I put watching the finale off for months...
... because I figured it'd be disappointing, just like the entire season. But it managed to be even worse than expected. I'm a pretty forgiving guy which is why my given score is most likely still too high, but this would've been a pretty poor series even if it was just an original generic fantasy series. However it is an outright crime when supposedly being about the Wheel of Time.
Aside from the plethora of changes to the core storyline - which were necessary in some form, even if not this form - none of the on-screen characters are even recognizable from the books. And I don't even mean the "racial diversification" of the cast - which in itself is unnecessary, given the breadth of cultures and races to be found in the world of WoT - but the characters, their personalities, motivations and everything that makes them, them. They even aged them up to avoid making it a "teen show" or some such nonsense that they stated, but yet their versions of the characters act like dumbass teens at best anyway, more so than their book counterparts. Heck, even the older cast are basically hopeless idiots here. Additionally magic here is mostly a deus ex machina-like crutch that pops up to save the day randomly in a manner entirely inconsistent with the magic system of the books.
Why does the showrunner and writers hate the source material so much? It wasn't a perfect book series by any means but this is just malicious. I'm entirely aware of the scope of the books and changes having to be made to adapt it to a TV show, but this is nonsense. Just because some changes are needed doesn't mean you scrap the original entirely. If the first 7 episodes were a progressing dumpster fire, in the finale the dumpster suffered a direct hit from a Tsar bomba after which the moon was derailed from orbit and landed on the damn thing for good measure.
I can't but conclude that the people behind this show are actually Darkfriends looking to tarnish Jordan's legacy. Nothing else really makes sense at this point.
The Matrix Resurrections (2021)
A passable/mediocre effort.
I always liked the trilogy overall, the latter parts probably more than most people despite some of the nonsense in Revolutions in particular. I would've been more surprised than not if a sequel didn't appear eventually.
So, here it is, then. And... well, it could've been worse, but it definitely could've definitely been better as well. I do reckon it is weaker than even Revolutions, though rating Revolutions on its own is a bit tricky for me.
The film starts rather slowly. I must say it feels like a bit of a slog for a good while. It is somewhat of a similar "setup" as in the first film, but takes much longer to get going. The overall story isn't exactly all that surprising, treading a lot of old ground instead. Expected, but unfortunate when true to this extent.
One issue is also that there seems to be a bit of a lack of memorable characters. This continues throughout the film. The "replacements" for old cast members are forgettable, and especially a certain ex-agent just... doesn't even try to evoke the feeling of the original character. The way the possessed "Bane/Smith" did in the original trilogy, for example. Both of these two end up feeling pointless additions. The entirely new characters don't get much treatment either. Little backstory or anything, even if what little acting they do get to do is okay. There's also Niobe, who's also decent but very different (but hey, at least it's still Jada), and also a fourth sort-of-familiar face who I fully expected to appear... and did. (Talking of appearances, there are a bunch of "flashbacks" to the trilogy, which in a way perhaps fit story-wise but on the other felt a bit annoying.)
With the other cast out of the way, that then leaves us with Neo & Trinity. The latter gets much less screen time. Both performances are actually fairly good, though the characters definitely have changed. But that was to be expected two decades later, and given the story setup.
Finally, the main item of Matrix movies generally speaking - the action. I think this was probably the most disappointing aspect. It wasn't bad, but it was quite tame compared to the trilogy, lacking a lot of what made it cool. Quite basic and uninspired stuff, really. Action movie scenes have come a long way especially for melee fights since the trilogy, and while the trilogy still holds up (at least to me), here we - or at least I - are left wanting. Though one thing that still remains much the same is that no one can shoot worth a damn. Oh, perhaps worth mentioning that the imposing agents from the trilogy are basically gone. For whatever reason they are replaced by what are basically just mindless zombies. Just... why?
In summary we are left with a passable but uninspired effort. In typical fashion the ending definitely leaves open the option for more movies, but whether that happens or not is anyone's guess, and obviously also affected by how the movie performs with audiences and the box office. Despite my less than glowing review personally I wouldn't say no to another go, because if nothing else the ending does provide for the possibility of getting more of that juicier kind of action. Though there is the valid question of where to go with the story that doesn't just do more retreading of old ground.
Mortal Kombat (2021)
"OK", but could've been more
It's not a BAD movie, especially for a "video game movie". But despite the director's self-professed MK fanboyism, it kinda manages to miss the mark.
The basic story was never going to be Shakespeare, obviously. But for some reason they decided to alter things quite a bit for no real reason, and not really for the better. Firstly, there's no tournament. Not a catastrophe by default, but still a somewhat unfortunate choice. The whole thing does kinda seem unnecessary for Shang Tsung's plan.
Then there's the matter of Cole, the main protagonist. Like a lot of reviewers, I find the character pointless. So many characters in the franchise, and they feel the need to make one up from thin air for no real reason. Why? It's kind of a slap in the face for fans. Doesn't help that the character really isn't particularly interesting at all.
Also, it's clearly designed as a franchise starter. Which also isn't necessarily a catastrophe by default, but at times it just feels painfully obvious that that is what this is, instead of a movie standing simply on its own right. Now, I don't mind as far as the sequel(s) actually see the light of day, but with video game movies being what they generally are revenue-wise, I'm not holding my breath,
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, given this is Mortal Kombat after all... the action. Well, it's R-rated, alright. But to me it seems strange that this really isn't much of a martial marts movie at all. The action is... I mean, it's not Star Trek (pre-Abrams) level of clunky or anything, but if this really was "Earth's champions" and even the Outlanders' best, man, that's some slim pickings. There's no "virtuosity" to be found. Hell, for all its flaws and campiness the 1995 movie had way better martial arts. For the most part this was like pulling a bunch of random thugs off the street and have them go at it. Things focused way too much on the "arcanas" of the characters rather than any real fighting skills.
Mixed feelings, in the end. It has better production value and acting than the 1995 movie, but they could've done so much better. If this does get a sequel, I really hope they'll improve the action if nothing else. After all this is quite clearly designed a franchise starter, but with how "successful" video game movies generally tend to be and especially with COVID in the mix lowering revenues further I'm not holding my breath about that actually happening.
Zack Snyder's Justice League (2021)
Quite the redemption
I honestly wasn't expecting much going into it. I figured there was going to be some additions and all obviously, given the longer duration, but the changes go beyond that - far more fleshed out characters and story, improved action, a more gripping ending and so forth. I didn't hate the original, but it was very mediocre. 6/10 for my somewhat forgiving taste. This is a solid 8+ and has nothing to feel ashamed about at all standing next to Avengers movies, unlike the theatrical version. Basically it went from "meh" to "gimme the damn sequel."
All this 10/10 spam you see in the reviews is a bit over the top, typical fanboy stuff where everything is either 1/10 or 10/10. But still, the improvement is very clear. Whedon & WB really gutted the film, which is a shame because at this point it's extremely unlikely we'll get the sequel(s) Snyder intended, no matter how well this ends up being received going forward.
Away (2020)
Mostly enjoyable, yet improbable
Some of the complaints I've seen in other reviews seem a bit off the mark. Like being able to call to cell phones - why not? This is the future. It's not exactly a huge technical feat, satellite phones are already a thing and connect to the regular phone network. Too busy for communicating with their families? They're traveling for over 6 months (I kinda lost track how long exactly), so it's not like they don't have plenty of downtime.
Still, there's plenty to criticize and if you're looking for hard science this isn't it. As far as the calls go, whether to their families or to Houston, the real problem realism-wise is the lack of delay. Magically they can communicate with no delays until one magical point in time where the delay then instantly becomes like 20 minutes or something, and then hardly getting longer despite the growing distance. For reference, even light-speed comms would have a minimum delay of about a second just to the moon, never mind after months of traveling towards Mars. Light-speed comms from Mars to Earth could be as fast as 3 minutes, for that matter.
Also as often happens with shows like this, the people certainly don't represent "the best of us" very well. Lots of unnecessary drama, silly decisions etc to give the events some "spice". Like when a stuck cable prevents opening a solar sail, instead of prying it into place from safety - which would've worked just fine with a tool in hand rather than by hand - just to add drama they make it super-dangerous by flipping to the other side of the panel. Similarly the water-collecting scene makes no sense, why mess with "static suits" for redirecting the flow very ineffectively when they could've just put the damn bags in the path of the spraying ice and have less wasted water, faster? Geniuses, indeed. Not that said commander always is much of a genius either, like the whole water rationing debacle. Also the drilling for water thing. I don't get how you can acccidentally pierce the second layer like that, but mostly I also don't get how they supposedly had nothing available to even temporarily plug the resulting hole with. Also lack of spare parts for the water recycling system seemed unlikely.
Oh well. Mostly the show is about the personal relationships anyway. Here too there are some improbability follies, like a single mistake suddenly making crew members distrust the commander they've trained two years with. Very professional. But at least almost all the actors - especially the space crew - do a quite good job of portraying the characters within the direction the show went. I think this is the saving grace of the show, managing to make it more enjoyable than I would've thought looking at the various individual aspects of the show. It ends up being better than the sum of its parts and I never felt like I was wasting my time. I binged almost the entire season in one night.
Chuck (2007)
Chuck Versus Great Fun
Ah yes, Chuck. A show with romance, comedy, action, drama, and even a bit of scifi. A sort of "something for everyone" show - except unlike most shows I've seen that try to achieve that, Chuck actually succeeds with flying colors.
With that said, it's still not necessarily truly "something for everyone" - I would assume that many types of audiences can like this, but it probably hits closest to home for those who are a bit nerdy themselves. There's a lot of fun references and homages throughout the series for people to spot, from video game and scifi references to the planting of the flag at Iwo Jima.
On to the main thing: the cast and characters. Zachary Levi does an excellent job playing the somewhat goofy nerd title character that is working at a day job way below his competence level, fixing computers at a "Buy More" store, yet at the same time ends up working for the CIA, turning his whole life upside down. Yvonne Strahots... I mean, Strahovski plays a CIA agent assigned to protect him. Having only seen her work in Mass Effect 2 and The Canyon before this, I think it's safe to say that Chuck has secured her place as one of my favorite actresses. Looks great, acts great - what's not to like?
Most of the rest of the cast is excellent as well. Adam Baldwin as the grouchy weapons nut, Josh Gomez as Chuck's goofy best friend, Sarah Lancaster as Chuck's wonderful big sister... There aren't much in the way of weak links, although Lester and Jeff sometimes make me "grrr" quite like Baldwin's character... and Harry Tang felt a bit uninspired in the first season, though he did leave mid-season.
I was actually surprised I ended up liking Chuck so much, mostly because of the comedy aspect. I generally don't watch/like comedies much. But in this unique mix it ends up working nicely.
No show is flawless though. Sometimes the goofiness is perhaps a bit over the top for my taste, and at times the romances push the limits of suspension of disbelief (even for a comedic series), especially in the first half or so of the third season.
The show has really been picking up in pace and suspense in my books (luckily dodging an attempt at cancellation too, from what I've read). Though it was good from the beginning, especially the second half or so of the third season was basically a consistent edge-of-the-seat experience. I watched all three seasons inside a week, that's how firmly the show grabbed me.
So, overall Chuck has been a great series for me. Like any show, it has its flaws, but they're rather minor and barely detract from the overall enjoyability of the show. Definitely worth a watch especially if there's a little inner nerd inside you. Now, to anxiously await for season 4 to start!
Painkiller Jane (2007)
"Standard-fare"
Painkiller Jane is a show that is plagued with... well, mediocrity. It's not a bad show, but there's really nothing that stands out either - unless you want to count Kristanna Loken's cleavage, which gets ample presentation, to the point where it's an obvious attempt to keep people interested via sex appeal. Obviously Loken is pleasing to the eye in general, but they should've paid as much attention to the rest of the series as they did on capitalizing on her good looks.
So, as said, nothing really stands out as "great". First off, the neuros. Call 'em what you will, but a potato is still a potato, and these guys are just like the ones you see in, say, Heroes or X-Men. Basically identical powers, genes to blame, and so on. Obviously not overly original - though I suppose this stems from the comic this show is based on, but I've never read the comic so I don't know how faithful the show is to it.
Then there's the main characters - the usual "freak-hunter" squad. Sadly, the team personalities are pretty much as uninspired as the neuros are. There's the sexy tough chick (well, two for the first half of the series). Then there's the kind of egoistic and annoying "ohmygod I'm so smart and soooo gooood at what I do" techie geek that you see in just about every damn series, or so it feels at least. Don't forget the "muscle" of the group either, a brawny guy whose function is pretty much just the combat side of things. And of course he has to throw sexist comments around all the time, just like you'd expect. The roster is rounded out by the usual reclusive, not-great-with-people doctor and the ex-special forces team leader.
Aside from the uninspired character templates there's the acting. Well, it's also on the mediocre region. It rarely makes you cringe, but just as rarely shines. This is true for all cast members.
The writing continues the standard-fare trend, with not many gems to be found. There are several rather weak episodes, many more so than really good ones. It feels they forgot the main premise altogether for a majority of the season, only returning to it at the last four or so episodes. That's generally not a good thing, as they could've kept things much more interesting by giving us more than just separated incidents with random neuros.
The bottom line: Not bad, but not exactly good. It really does summarize the series as a whole. It's something to keep you occupied in the lack of something better. At least for my part, I didn't feel I wasted time watching it. It was sufficiently enjoyable to prevent that feeling. But certainly it could've been better if the makers had put some extra effort into it.
Despite not being so great, I wouldn't have minded seeing a second season. Perhaps they would've focused more on the real bad guys instead of just the "symptom". But it's not surprising that show got stopped, so this is all we'll get.
Good Will Hunting (1997)
An amazing movie
This movie is definitely one of the best I've seen. There's really nothing to dislike about it.
The characters are all well-acted and interesting. Robin Williams and Minnie Driver take the crown in the well-acted department though. Especially Driver is simply fantastic in her portrayal of Skylar. From the lovable joke-teller to the empathy-inducing grief-stricken girl, it's a career-defining performance.
The story itself has many layers and subplots, and delve deeply into inter-character relationships. The interaction between Will and his buddies and Skylar and McGuire, the interaction between McGuire and Lambeau... there's a lot more depth than in most movies. Combined with the excellent acting, it really makes this one one to remember and savor.
The whole thing makes you think about your own life and your own choices, both past and future ones. And that on its own is enough to make it a good movie, but it's still so much more. As said in the beginning, definitely one of my all-time favorites.
RoboCop 3 (1993)
Downtrodding the franchise
RoboCop 3 is one of the best attempts I've seen at laying waste to a good franchise - only bested in that regard by the infamous Batman & Robin and Batman Forever. It lacks pretty much everything that made the first two films good (and yes, I considered RoboCop 2 to be a good movie).
Firstly, the "new guy" just isn't RoboCop. Sure, he does the movement part quite well, but the face, the voice... it just isn't the same. This shouldn't reflect badly on his ability though, but it's just the way it is.
Second, I could spot many, many parts where to movie tried to be funny. Where the original and the first sequel managed to mix humor into the mix, this installment just fails to be funny no matter how much it tries. It ends up being simply embarrassing.
Then there's the whole deal with Lewis. I'm surprised Allen took any part in this. Her character is effectively thrown aside in the middle of the movie like a used... erm, well, you get the point. Since she apparently insisted her character has to die "early", I guess she wasn't too happy about the whole project either ;)
The new head of OCP is also just plain bad. He also attempts to be funny I guess, but he's just pathetic and annoying.
The theme of the story has potential to be decent, but it is just simply very poorly executed. Overall the characters are boring (and RoboCop much weaker than in the previous movies), which doesn't help the story at all.
Oh, and don't even get me started on Otomo. Good grief. Not only does he change his facial appearance to something completely retarded every times his face is damaged, but he's in general a pathetic thing in every way. On first seeing him you expect him to be a badass, but boy, how wrong that assessment is.
Long story short: this movie is just one long anti-climax that never should have seen the light of day.
The Snowman (1982)
"Classic" defined
If there is one piece of work I would name when asked for something classic, this would be it.
"The Snowman" is a great piece of work in all respects. It is an animation with no dialogue - it doesn't need any. Just the visuals and excellent music provide all you need for an emotional, well thought-out experience. It's a tale of a young boy's dream come true, yet also of the realities (and inevitabilities) of life.
The style of the animation itself is quite unlike anything I've seen. I'm sure there can be other works with the same style, but I haven't come across any. It's quite fascinating, and works quite well. The style and coloring of the animation really conveys a dream-like yet captivating mood throughout the film.
Overall, I rate this as my favorite animated film of all time. Nothing else has come close on an emotional level, which, in the end, is the level that matters the most.
Hulk (2003)
A great movie
This is, to date, my favorite superhero movie. I can but wonder why so many people think it is so bad.
First, since it's a superhero movie, there's the action scenes. There's not too many of them, and what there is, is quite good.
I recall there being some criticism about the Hulk's 3D model and how it is not detailed enough. While I kinda agree that it could be better, I do not think it is too distracting.
Now, on to the story and characters. And here is the strongest part of the movie. The interaction of Hulk and Betty Ross is something that touches me on a personal level. And in general the characters are mainly well developed and have interesting enough interaction. The story progresses at a nice pace, not being too fast or too slow. It's definitely a "smarter" and even more emotional than, say, the Spider-Man movies.
I can't think of too much else to say, since to me so much of what is good about this movie I can't really find the words for, and in the end it's the overall feeling that counts. I'll end this by saying that while the new "The Incredible Hulk" was a decent movie on its own right, in my books it doesn't hold a candle to this movie.
Babylon 5: Sleeping in Light (1998)
The most touching TV piece, ever
A lot can be said about this episode.
The acting is great throughout, with Bruce Boxleitner and Mira Furlan topping the list. We also get to see Claudia Christian as Ivanova once more, after her having been absent for the rest of season 5 (as fans probably know, this episode was originally shot - while Christian was still in the cast - as the last episode of season 4 in case the series wasn't getting its fifth season, but was then shown at the end of season 5).
The music is, as usual, top notch, and supports the mood of the episode's story very well. The mood is possibly best described as melancholic. The story doesn't offer much in the way of unexpected twists here, but that is in no way a bad thing in this case. It is just a peaceful, emotional ending to an intelligent series.
Overall, perhaps the biggest praise I can give this episode us that while no other episode of any series, or any movie for that matter, has ever managed to do it, this episode made me cry - it is the best, most memorable and most touching conclusion of any series to date.
Babylon 5: Thirdspace (1998)
Predictable, yet enjoyable
The premise of this movie isn't all that original (but then what is, these days). An old artifact is found in Hyperspace, and brought to B5. An Interplanetary Expeditions researcher group them comes to examine it. Odd things start happening at the same time, including violent outbreaks inside the station. Eventually the device is activated, and it turns out to be effectively the gate to hell (as in some other dimension) from which super-advanced aliens hellbent on the destruction of everyone else they come across pour out, and the B5 crew have to shut the gate down before it's too late.
As said, not all that unique. The concept of a way more advanced enemy trying to invade has been seen elsewhere. Even if not exactly a similar happening, the Borg in Star Trek come to mind (as well as the race from another dimension in Star Trek Voyager, but that actually came out later than this movie). And of course this has been seen in other formats, such as fantasy and horror, as well - as said, it's pretty much the whole "gates of hell" theme. In this sense it is also reminiscent of the great sci-fi horror movie Event Horizon, in what comes to the portion before the gate is activated, and also loosely tied together by the link to attempting to find new travel methods.
Even though the main plot line is what it is and quite predictable indeed, and even though it doesn't really tie in to the series that much, I found this to be a quite nice movie. There's always something to be said for the excitement of theoretically hopeless battles and ancient evils, but the whole ominous feel of the movie from the moment the gate device is first found in hyperspace is quite gripping.
The acting is good throughout, featuring many of the B5 regulars. The CGI effects are slightly better than even in the late parts of the series, and are enjoyable to watch. Music is done by Christopher Franke, composer for the whole main B5 series, guaranteeing a suitable and familiar mood for the story.
Overall while this movie doesn't reinvent sci-fi plot lines to new dimensions (bad pun only half-intended) and isn't up to par with some of the best episodes of the series, it's an enjoyable flick with a nice mood, and definitely worth a watch for any B5 fan. Those not familiar with B5 might not get as much out of it since they won't be familiar with the back story, but it should still definitely be watchable without being hopelessly confusing.
Babylon 5: A Call to Arms (1999)
Not entirely sure what to make of it
Many seem to consider this the best of the movies. Even the creators themselves. I'm not really sure why.
First of all, the music is horrible. Saying that may sound harsh, but then so does the movie. Music can make or break a movie, and here it almost manages to break it. It's plain bad. "The Gathering" had a similar problem with music. It's not even just that it's not Franke making the music, it's bad in both of the titles regardless of what you compare it to.
Second, the plot doesn't seem that strong. Invasion of Earth with leftover shadow tech? Plausible, but not exactly groundbreaking. The whole thing is, overall, quite uneventful in its predictability. But that's not the worst point. I actually can't even say for certain what is, but overall the whole feel is slightly off (same goes for the whole short-lived Crusade series that followed this, actually). Also the new characters don't really have enough time to "grow" on you, and you don't have that many of the old B5 cast around, even though the performance of the few that are there is decent.
I'd personally certainly rate this the weakest of the B5 movies, even though it still is decent. But I'd rate it more along the lines of some of the weakest B5 series episodes.
Overall I'd probably give it a seven, if not for the atrocious music - considering that, it's a 6+. By comparison, In the Beginning would be 8,5, Thirdspace and River of Souls would be 8, and The Gathering 7.
Talvisota (1989)
The best of the Finnish war movies
The Winter War is the most battle-oriented of the Finnish war movies, except for Tali-Ihantala. Not only that, the combat scenes are actually better than in any of the other movies. There's plenty of soldiers (as well as Soviet planes and tanks) shown from both sides. More Soviet foot soldiers than in any other movie. And that's a very good thing. I hated how, despite them being reasonably good movies otherwise, in both of the "Unknown Soldier" movies (the 1955 original and the 1985 remake) most of the "combat" was just the Finns being shown getting bombarded by artillery, and shooting at an invisible enemy. This also happened to some extent in some other movies. No such flaw here - the manpower in some of the scenes is absolutely huge for a Finnish movie, and doesn't have to pale in comparison to most "foreign" movies either.
Aside from manpower, most of the combat scenes are nicely realistic. This is by far the most violent and gritty movie of the bunch and contains the most gory scenes of any Finnish movie to date. There's also plenty of explosions to go around. Sometimes the troop movements may seem a bit clunky, but that can be forgiven - and you wouldn't expect people in heavy winter clothing to perform acrobatics anyway.
Even given how much combat there is and how good it is, that's definitely not all this movie has to offer. There is plenty of drama and character development especially in the extended version that is sometimes shown in TV in Finland (it's not available on DVD for some reason). The movie tells about men from the same neighborhood going to war together, so most of the main characters are more or less close to each other, giving a good starting point. Also the movie includes parts where the men get to visit their families and friends, giving more depth to their backgrounds.
Tapani Mäkelä is the leading actor of the film, and does a great job at it. I'm not really a fan of the man's work elsewhere, but here he does a convincing job, definitely being the best of the cast. Though there are other good performances as well. For non-Finns some of the acting might seem a bit clunky or reserved, but it should be kept in mind that Finns aren't as "open" as people in many other countries. In this sense the representation here isn't too much off the mark, and overall the acting is in my opinion mostly better than in the other movies.
Compared to other Finnish war movies, The Winter War simply comes on top. It offers the best battle scenes and the best drama. While especially the original Unknown Soldier is decent in portraying the characters, in lacks in combat scenes and still doesn't live up to the fantastic book it is based on. On the other hand Tali-Ihanta 1944 is nothing but combat, and isn't really comparable as a movie, since it's more of a segmented document. Even Beyond the Front Line is more like a documentary, with not too much in-depth character development shown, and overall the feel is much less gritty and war-like. Other movies, like Ambush, fall somewhere in between, but in the end, The Winter War definitely stands above the rest.
In summary: a gritty, violent and quite realistic battle-packed war movie with good characters and drama. Definitely a must-see for any war- movie fans, and in my opinion most likely the best Finnish movie, of any genre, to date. You won't get any Hollywood-shininess here, but you won't miss not having it either. Down to earth is as it should be. Too bad we probably can't expect to get more of this kind of goodness about the Finnish wars any time soon.
Vantage Point (2008)
An unexpectedly good showing
I really didn't expect too much from this movie as I started watching it. But in the end, it ended up keeping me figuratively at the edge of my seat more than any movie in a long time. Exactly why? It's hard to say. I suppose it's how the different elements of the film play together so well.
The "recursive" style the first half or so of this movie was shot in definitely was a big factor. Since the events are replayed from many perspectives, it kind of leaves you with several "cliffhangers" throughout the first part of he movie, as well as paces the film well. Some might dislike the style and consider it just an annoyance - and heck, I usually hate stuff like series episodes that recount previous episodes etc. But in this case, this method just works, and keeps you gripped as you wait for more of the plot to reveal itself.
Once the continuous part of the film starts, it's basically packed with well-directed fast-paced action as the preludes from the different viewpoints start to combine into linear real-time story progression. Acting in the movie was quite respectable throughout the movie. There's a few faces like Dennis Quaid and Forest Whitaker (and to a lesser extent Sigourney Weaver, but only because she doesn't get much screen time) that you know to expect a decent performance from, but the less known folks mostly put up a decent showing as well.
Overall, the film puts together some conventional and less conventional elements in a convincing manner, backed up with nice overall acting, directing and story-telling. Pacing is good, and keeps the adrenaline pumping and the mood intense. There's no big weaknesses in my books. I suppose the closest thing would be the ending, as it is slightly "cheesy", but it does wrap up the different viewpoints quite effectively.
It might not be the greatest masterpiece of all time, but definitely worth a watch.
War of the Worlds 2: The Next Wave (2008)
Good grief...
I really liked Cruise's War of the Worlds. When I heard that there's "War of the Worlds 2" I was kind of excited, and decided to get my hands on it and watch the first one and this back-to-back. Those who have seen this and liked Cruise's movie can probably emphatize what a shocker that was, as I had no idea about anything in the second movie, at all. My doubts started when I saw that I didn't even recognize ANY of the actor/producer/director names during the starting credits.
How this thing ever even got to use the same name, and to imply itself as a sequel, is beyond me. Going from huge-budget to clearly low-budget, which in itself doesn't excuse many of the things that are wrong with this movie. Acting was bad across the board, with Howell being the only one to put up at least a somewhat bearable performance.
Aside from bad acting... the plot was bad. The effects were quite bad. Although if the former two hadn't been so bad, it wouldn't have been so bad overall. And yes, I use the word "bad" a lot, because that's a good three-letter summarization of this movie.
Overall, there's only one movie (that is supposed to be serious) that I've seen that is worse than this, and that's Yonggary. But this one right here comes quite close in pure overall badness. And at least Yonggary was hilarious in a way due to being so sucky, while this "movie" doesn't even offer that, and is simply annoying instead. So, save your money and your brain, and skip this if you still can.
Batman & Robin (1997)
A 2-hour long facepalm of embarrassment
If Batman Forever was like a bad parody, Batman & Robin is a parody from hell. It seems as if they intentionally threw all credibility into the wind and TRIED to drive down the franchise. The plot is the weakest so far, and the villains leave much to be desired. The main character castings are again a case of highly reputable names, but with performances that are subpar compared to their usual level - and Clooney simply isn't Batman material in my books, and especially not with this "performance". As the only positive note of sorts I have to say I feel kinda sorry for Michael Gough, as he is the only one putting in a respectable performance with nothing bad to say about it.
What is also painstakingly evident is the horrid extras. The acting is just so bad and over the top that it rivals the worst B-class movies I've seen, and this apparently being an attempt at comedy/parody is simply no excuse for it. The guards, the crowd noises, the telescope event hostess... it's painful.
How Schumacher managed to go so low with his Batman interpretations is a real mystery to me. I'm glad I never had to pay to watch this (aside from TV permit). But even the time spent watching this (and spent making this comment) is more than this sad husk of a movie deserves.
Batman Forever (1995)
After dark, there comes light...
And sadly, that's not always a good thing, such as in the transition from Batman and Batman Returns to Batman Forever. Having watched the first two just the previous day, this third movie simply doesn't match up to them in any way.
They've gone more the comedy route this time around more than anything else. Unfortunately, it feels more like a bad parody. And while Burton's Batmans were visual masterpieces with a soundtrack to match and an uncanny intense feel to them that kept you glued to the screen, Schumacher's go at it is shallow and uninspired both visually (the city, the way it's directed, everything) and music-wise, and makes you think your time would be better spent doing something else.
Also, despite numerous quite respected and popular actors, the acting just feels off. It's probably just due to the whole trying-to-be-funny- but-is-not-even-close thing that's going on. I've never been a fan of Jim Carrey, his performances are too often one-trick ponies, and that can be said of this one. Even worse, there's nothing about Jones as Two- Face that would be any better. And that's not even the end of it - I just don't feel the chemistry between Kidman and Kilmer. The romances weren't the strong part of the earlier movies either, but when nothing else works (hell, even the new Batsuit sucks), one would hope that even this one thing would've. Kilmer comes out as more of a "Playbat" than Batman, and more Kidman as a pushy vixen, though thankfully less so as the movie progresses.
The whole dark fairy-tale kind of feel was what made Burton's Batmans as good as they were. It was simply art-like in its style, all-around. There's not many movies I'd use the term "art piece" of, but Burton's Batmans qualify. The drastic change seen in this movie is definitely a step in the waaay wrong direction. Granted, the fourth movie is even worse, but that doesn't excuse this one. I think the error was realized later on and thus Batman Begins and The Dark Knight are again indeed dark in theme and style, even though in a different way than Burton's movies.
It just feels this third movie was made with dollar-signs clouding any and all judgment. There's just no heart in this movie. Overall - there's something to be said about Bats being creatures of the night and dark, not clowny performers in a neon-colored circus.
Tali-Ihantala 1944 (2007)
An unconventional movie for war buffs
Tali-Ihantala 1944 isn't an ordinary movie in any sense, really. There's no continuation with the characters, as the movie is basically split into several parts, between which there is no direct correlation or continuation. The parts are only woven together lightly by some "narrative" cut-scenes between them, explaining some of the major movements and events in the battles, but even so most of the time the events portrayed don't really tie in to the "large scale events" explained by the cut-scenes.
As the different parts have different characters each time, there's no character development or any major social interaction. For a large part, the actors aren't really top notch either - an unfortunate side effect of this being a Finnish film, as there simply aren't many good Finnish actors. But it has to be said that there's not even that much "real" acting to be done the way this film is made.
The main feature of the movie is the documentary-like battle scenes. The events depicted are based on real occurrences during the Tali-Ihantala battles, taken from various sources.
Of particular interest to WW2 "hardware" buffs is the part about the Finnish Armored forces. It features many authentic WW2 armored vehicles. The depicted T-34 tanks are all authentic, and so are the StuG III G assault guns. That aside, the KV tanks shown are mock-ups if memory serves, since while the real KVs that took part in those events still exist in a museum, they are not in a running condition. There's some other details not spot on as well, but that's a topic for another time.
One thing to note is that it's obvious the movie makers didn't have access to all that many tanks, as it can clearly be seen the same tanks are reused to portray tanks on both sides. It's not a big issue given the authenticity of the tanks to begin with though, and someone not more familiar with it all probably wouldn't even notice.
Most of the other battle scenes are infantry-related, which comes as no surprise since not only are they the easiest and cheapest to make, but also because infantry was the main feature of the Finnish army, since armored and air forces were very limited in size. These infantry scenes are decently made, even if nothing spectacular. Still, for many battles I ended up wishing for more sheer manpower on the screen, both for the visuals of it as well as historical accuracy.
Overall it's clear this isn't a huge-budget production. The whole film was funded in a rather unconventional fashion to make it possible to begin with. It also has to be said that indeed for the Average Joe this movie might not offer much, but for war buffs it should certainly be worth watching. Even for the average viewer, perhaps more names and details would've helped with immersing into the events more, and for war buffs this could've helped with finding more information on the depicted events.
It's a mixed review, I know (it's my first), so to summarize I'll just say that even with the budget-imposed limitations and often less than stellar acting, it was well worth watching for someone familiar with the events and with a keen interest on the whole war era, and I'll certainly buy the DVD as well, hopefully soon. For those with no real interest in war history and somewhat plain depiction of events however, it's probably best to look elsewhere, or at least make sure you know what to expect.
I'll add as an afterthought that I would have wished for a depiction of the Finnish Air Force's operations, but sadly it was not really possible with the film's style and budget (even the small part about the German flight group Kuhlmey is rather crude). The FAF's part and actions in the war are not very widely known even within Finland, so they'd deserve some publicity.