Change Your Image
jaimi
Reviews
Lost in Space (2018)
Much better than the 1960s junk it was based on.
You'll see a lot of 1's on here crowing about how they "ruined" the original by rebooting, and making Judy biracial and Dr. Smith female. All I can think is: "These people must have some other reason for posting this, because the 1960's series was complete and utter junk. It was for 8 year olds, at the most. I mean, the 1960's show had Dr. Smith kidnapped by a man in a Carrot suit, and turned into a stalk of celery. Is that the kind of Science Fiction adults actually want? Of course not. That was trash. So I assume that most of the bad reviews are racist/sexist crap. I advise ignoring them.
So with that said, is this a good show? Yes. It has great special effects. The characters aren't 2 dimensional - there's drama. Mystery. Aliens. And the new Dr. Smith is a sociopath, not a clown screaming "you bubble headed booby" every 2 minutes.
It also makes way more sense. The Jupiter 2 is no longer a starship. It's a shuttle designed to take a family unit down to the planet. The Robot is some sort of alien machine life form, apparently military in origin. Will isn't smarter than everyone else, and there's a reason for the Robot to like him.
Yes, Judy is biracial - this is Maureen's second marriage. And Maureen has some secrets - she barely gets along with her husband, and she's involved somehow in some espionage.
And the dad - a stereotypical army dad, who doesn't have time for his family, treats them kind of like they're under his command, but would basically do anything for them -- except take a job close to hom.
Yes, Dr. Smith is female. But not a bumbling clownish secret agent. But the most calculating sociopath you've seen. You really hate her, which you're supposed to. While the science isn't top notch, it's at least on par with Star Wars, Star Trek, etc. Those didn't make much science fiction sense either.
The only downside I see in this, is that there's a lot of tension - things are always going wrong, and that's dialed up to 11. Needs more adventure to it, in my opinion, without everything being life or death. But that is probably more realistic.
Star Wars: Episode VII - The Force Awakens (2015)
Wonderful, with a very "first trilogy" feel to it.
I loved the first three star wars movies, and watched them when they came out on the big screen. I watched them again when they were updated and re-released. They were a lot of fun, but you have to be honest, these are not life-changing movies that really make you think. They're entertainment - good entertainment, but just entertainment. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that.
I watched the first movie of the second trilogy, and it had a spunky little boy who could fly racing bikes. And a princess who was way too old for him. It looked good, but it had very little entertainment value for me. I did not watch the second and third.
With that said, this movie is more like the first trilogy. Way more like it. In fact, it has many of the same people, and there are nods all the way through the movie toward the first trilogy. It's almost like the horrible second trilogy didn't exist. Yes, it has some similar themes -- but not really that similar. The plot is similar to the very first star wars, but honestly only superficially -- and I see that as a way of moving back toward what Star Wars should be.
Watching the movie has a very "Star Wars" feel to it. It's not a "JJ Abrams" movie using the Star Wars characters. It's a Star Wars movie that happens to be directed by JJ Abrams.
Watch it, if you liked the first trilogy (with Luke, Han and Leia). You'll feel right at home.
If you're wanting Jarjar Binks and little boys who can fly star ships... Maybe this isn't the movie for you.
Oh, and Chewie is great too!
Green Lantern (2011)
Pretty good movie - better than Thor to me.
I thought this movie was pretty good. If I had read the reviewers, I might not have seen it, because they latched on some items and all seemed to be repeating each other. There was an exposition at the beginning that the reviewers seemed to hate, but it lasted only about 30 seconds, I don't see what the big deal was. There was a lot of action, and the graphics were quite good. The 3D was great, there weren't any 3d "thrill shots", instead the 3D just made everything look a little more real. While I liked the movie, and my younger daughters liked it as well, my wife did not - she fell to sleep. So perhaps it's not for everyone. But I'd rate this the second best superhero movie this year, after X-Men first class.
Thor (2011)
Slow going, not very much action nor awe-inspiring
Thor starts out really slow. Some scenes of Asgard, Thor and Loki interacting, ho-hum, and then he is banished to earth for starting a war (that never actually got off the ground...). They seem to have skipped all the parts where he didn't know who he was (etc) - This Thor knows he is the God Thor all through the movie, and is a nearly unlikeable fellow. Over the course of a day and a night, he somehow goes through a catharsis that completely, and unbelievably, changes him from a spoiled fool into an noble hero. My kids liked it, but not as much as they've liked any other move they've seen the past few months (rio, etc). My wife fell asleep. I stayed awake, but kept hoping for some emotion, some soul-searching, some well, some anything. Never got it. As for the 3D... Well it's OK. Not great, but not bad either. Succumbs to some of the normal problems with 3D movies (ie, too much out of focus -- the coolness of 3D is that you can focus on anything, not just on what you want us too - remember your view master?)
All in all, this movie is probably near the bottom of super-hero movies, Somewhere between "The Phantom" and "The Punisher". Don't expect Iron Man quality.
Rango (2011)
Boring and pretentious
What a boring movie. My kids wanted to see this, and their general opinion was "well it was OK I guess". Maybe this is a good movie for the 12-15 male crowd. My wife fell asleep, thank goodness she doesn't snore. I'm going to skip how the plot doesn't make sense, or how the "bad guy" rattlesnake doesn't get any comeuppance, or any of the other zillion plot holes, and I'll concentrate on the character. In particular, I didn't feel that the title character was interesting at all - In the beginning he was just a wannabe actor. But by the end he was... well, the sheriff, but all it took to change him was a chat with Clint Eastwood. There was no real catharsis. One minute he was an actor, and the next, nerves of steel.
My advice: Don't see it unless you like formulaic boring movies. And it does play the formula.
Up (2009)
Ignore the studio plants. The movie was good, but not great.
I went into the movie expecting it to be a funny, laugh out loud sort of story. That's what the previews and the studio plants on here are suggesting anyway.
What I got instead, was a semi-dramatic, sometimes funny, many times downright melancholic movie about an old man who is facing his regrets in the twilight of his life.
It's a character study basically. The boy, the dog, the bird, all have very little to do with the movie at all. It's 90% about the old man, and how he deals with the loss of his wife. There's quite a few tearjerker scenes, and only a few funny ones.
The pros: The movie is animated well. The 3D was good, and not "in your face" - you didn't notice it for the most part, it just made the movie subtly better. The ending was good (of course everything turned out well).
The cons: Not much really of a comedy, or an adventure. My kids were bored. They rated it "OK". This is more for grownups, or may you guys can go with your dates, cause she'll be blubbering and holding your hand.
I recommend it, but don't go in expecting it to be a non-stop laughathon.
The Wild (2006)
Terrible movie. My kids were bored.
If you saw the previews, and thought this movie would be an inferior ripoff of "Madagascar" and "Finding Nemo", well, you would be right. The plot is terrible, the movie is not funny, and it's all been done before. Worse, much of it doesn't make sense. A tugboat that can cross the ocean? Chameleons that can make things invisible? Even my kids (7, 5 and 3) thought that was dumb. Matter of fact, they were bored senseless withing 10 minutes. My wife fell asleep. My youngest started wandering the aisle (not disturbing anyone. Hardly anyone was there). Usually when we leave the theater, they talk about the movie, want to get the toys and DVD (when it comes out). Guess what? Not a peep out of them. It's as if the movie didn't exist.
Plot Summary
** spoilers **
A young cub lives in the shadow of his father. He accidentally gets taken away! The dad and friends must save him, and they both must learn a lesson in the process. Wow, it's like they took Madagascar, and Finding Nemo, threw it into a blender (strained out the good parts),and came up with this. A squirrel/Giraffe love affair? What forward thinkers! (not)
** end spoilers **
If you're thinking about watching this because of the "good reviews", think about how funny it is that many of the good reviews are all from Canada (where the film was made) or LA(the distributor). Almost like the people who made it and their friends are here talking it up so they can keep their jobs. Fortunately its a big flop, and even their ballot-stuffing won't make a difference. Shame on you!
Shark Tale (2004)
Slow, boring, "wiseguys with fish"
I brought my kids hoping for something a little entertaining. Instead, we were treated to a boring, poorly written movie. My kids were also bored, and didn't get most of the references. Two fell asleep. Probably OK if you like New York Mob movies, and animated fish, But I didn't care for it. The plot was predictable, and way too "New York" centric. None of the characters were likable, with the exception of Angie (Renee Zellweger). None of the others had any redeeming characteristics.
The Animation was OK, but not not spectacular. The settings seemed kind of bland. Final words: I paid to let my kids sleep in the theatre. I wish I could get my money back.