Reviews

I watched the first three episodes of this "documentary" about titanis, mosasaur and spinosaur. There's little science and lots of fireworks, however not even the fireworks are that spectacular. Apparently they have interviewed some paleontologists but just kept the most exaggerated, flashy assertions.

The other two parts of each episode are the CGI and the mechanic reconstructions. The CGI is poor for the year, very poor indeed. Movements are quite jerky many times, and they reuse the same scenes over and over again. The mechanic reconstruction of each episode is, according to the narrator, the very first time something like it has been done, and after three times of listening to that, you simply stop believing anything else they say.

The narration also sells them as if they're the most spectacular thing ever done related to fossils, and it seems the paleontologists who were lucky to work in them had a great time, but they didn't impress me because of the selling point.

Seen as a whole, the thing looks more like a commercial than a documentary. And I'm not buying it. A documentary should lay the facts, and the viewer could reach one or another conclusion, but this thing just tries to convince you that everything is the most extreme thing ever, and it doesn't hold up to expectations.

In short: not awful, but not worth it either. Watch something else instead.

Hulk is an excellent action/drama and science-fiction film based on the classic superhero (or antihero) The Incredible Hulk. Following the trend on the last years about recycling comic superheroes, Hulk's turn became a very interesting alternative to other formulas used in several of these adaptations.

Knowing that many people consider this movie as dull and boring, please let me state that it's far from being dull. After the critics towards Spiderman just scratching the surface of character development, and where other movies simply failed miserably (e.g. Daredevil), we should be grateful that we can finally see some depth in the main character as we're used in the good comics.

Ang Lee's direction shows his usual way of telling stories, in a sensitive and personal way. Instead of letting the movie drown in its limitless action possibilities, he conducted the story through a sensible path. The editing work, which remarkably resembles comic frames in many scenes, and contains some awesome transitions, is simply wonderful.

And all this not forgetting Hulk's main point: a green, angry mass of power and destruction. The movie has some of the best action scenes I've seen lately, which makes me wonder what is expecting some people who blame this movie for its lack of massive fights against entire armies. My opinion is that the action scenes of Hulk are perfectly balanced; more than showing Hulk's sheer strength but never going completely overboard. And also showing some of Hulk's main weaknesses, keeping the character real and not entering the area of fantasy.

One side of this movie that people also seems to throw tantrums about, is the refurbishing of Hulk's origins. The story of Bruce Banner's transformation has been updated with including today's technology, and making it in my humble opinion much more interesting and 'believable' than the original. Not being a huge fan of Hulk's comics, I didn't feel personally attached to the original story, so I actually liked it more. But I can understand that the purists or the die-hard fans will be disappointed by these changes.

Along with Hulk's origins, the plot includes good science-fiction elements. Don't misunderstand me; the stuff is in general barely believable. A scientist conducting advanced genetic experiments in 1965 (all by himself!) is not a good start... But in the end, it doesn't matter. This superhero adaptation is as good science-fiction as other excellent adaptations like X-Men (including its sequel X2), where others will just remain as good or bad action films with just some sci-fi scattered around. Where others lost their opportunity, Hulk didn't.

What other things are good in this movie? Well, the main actors all do a good work, specially Jennifer Conelly and Nick Nolte. The special effects are great, and while there are entire scenes made just of CGI, they're still not the strong point of the movie. The plot and dialogues aren't just bridges between computer generated action scenes, which I'm thankful for. Furthermore, the plot is also rich in references to the comic, Hulk's enemies and other subtle things. The movie is full of small details (has anyone noticed the frog over the hat in the final scene?) which reward you when watching it a second or third time.

The main down of the movie might be that followers aren't used to see Hulk in this way, a deep and sensitive character, and probably expected more action and enemy-smashing and less deep dialogues running after child traumas... Which could explain its relatively low rating and some bad critics. Maybe I just connected very well with this movie and that's why I put it so well, but I can also see that the elements of this film, taken independently, also have their merits and all together form a solid production. In my opinion, of all the comic superhero adaptations, Hulk is the most interesting and best quality one which I've watched to date. I just wish people would concentrate more on enjoying this different view of a superhero's life. But oh well, each one has different tastes.

And one final note. The soundtrack is absolutely wonderful!

That is sadly the truth behind this quite interesting adaptation of the book. If you've read the book, and you liked it, then you'll love the movie. If not, then bad luck. Because the weakest point in this movie is the lack of explanations and logic behind the main character's actions. In the book, it's all beautifully described as the blue transformation of the alien into a human, and his loss of motivation to rescue his planet from a severe draught. In the movie, you just see an alien doing things without much reason or thought about them. This lack of understanding of the main character makes the movie kinda dull and void. However, having read the book, you'll understand what and why is he doing. That's not much help because the majority of the viewers will be lost...

That said, it's a nice movie, maybe a bit on the surrealist side, it has an oniric touch (or maybe the daze of a hang-over after too much booze) which goes well with the atmosphere of the book and story. David Bowie, the obvious star, does very well on the skin of an alien, clearly helped by his quite particular lookings. The supporting actors do well too, but in the end it's just an above-average movie. Not bad, but thousand light-years of the quality and depth of story which the book has.

In short: could have been great if the script was at least decent. Worth a watch, still.

This movie is probably one of the most interesting examples on surrealist comedy in the modern spanish history. It's a critic, acid portrait of what has been Spain under the dictatorship of General Franco, and specially critic with how is Spain actually - which is the same as before, but with other names. Being surrealist (or even totally unreal) it's hard to follow all the metaphors, analogies, hyperboles present in this movie, and besides the language barrier, it will be very hard to understand by non-spanish viewers in this context of being just a critic. Still, many of the critics can be applied to any of the "modern, free" societies all around.

But besides the "serious" part, this is also one of the best comedies, and most underrated, obscure and hardly known spanish movies. Its very special and unique sense of humor can only make you laugh again and again even about the saddest things. Continuous changes of points of view, jokes, absurd situations, killing topics and killer topics too. One of the most funny movies certainly, and worth it for a mindless laugh or for a insightful, deep view of the spanish society, or any other society for what it seems. If you have the opportunity, please watch it.