Change Your Image
halliejopo
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002)
My favorite of the Lord of the Rings trilogy
It's a shame to see that the Two Towers did not receive quite as high of a rating as Fellowship of the Ring and Return of the King. In my honest opinion, Two Towers is the best of three.
The Two Towers is a great follow-up to Fellowship. The great thing about Two Towers is that it is a bit more complicated than Fellowship, since in Two Towers the fellowship has broken up and the movie follows each of their own stories. I love the introductions of the new characters present in this movie.
The landscape scenes are even more breathtaking than in Fellowship.
My favorite parts of the movie are the battle sequences. They are intense, complete with Howard Shore's epic score, and feature realistic effects.
The Two Towers is practically perfection. Like with the other two, I have hardly anything negative to state about this movie. Peter Jackson absolutely nailed it in a way that I don't think any other director could have.
The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)
A modern classic and a great start to an incredible trilogy
Peter Jackson proves that even the seemingly most unadaptable books can still be turned into great movies. Fellowship of the Ring is an outstanding beginning to the Lord of the Rings trilogy. Though lighter in tone than the other two, it successfully establishes the characters, setting, and plot in an entertaining way. Fellowship of the Ring, along with the other two, is not merely a fantasy film; it is an epic.
Each actor was born to play the character they portrayed in this movie. The casting was nothing short of perfection. The characters have become so iconic that even those who have not yet seen the Lord of the Rings movies know the characters. The vast majority of the characters are dynamic, with only a few static characters present in the entire trilogy. With so many characters present in this movie, that is incredibly impressive for a director to do.
The cinematography and the special effects are most notable aspects of the Lord of the Rings trilogy. In Fellowship of the Ring, the color scheme is very bright and colorful, specifically in scenes taking place in the Shire. For a film that released in 2001, the CGI is breathtaking. If you compare Fellowship with others movies that released around the same time, their effects do not even compare.
The Fellowship of the Ring is overall an excellent film. There really are no parts to this movie that I have anything negative to say about. Decades from now, this film and the rest of the trilogy will be considered classics.
The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012)
A warm welcome back to Middle Earth
Peter Jackson did such an utterly fantastic job on the Lord of the Rings trilogy that the Hobbit was bound to great. The Lord of the Rings movies are modern classics, so the Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey had a lot to live up to. Overall, I feel as though the Hobbit met those expectations.
Unfortunately, the Hobbit did not receive the critical rave that the Lord of the Rings did. Many critics (and fans) criticized the Hobbit's use of 48 fps and its light and humorous tone. I disagree with both of these claims.
1. The critics should not have reviewed the Hobbit based on its use of 48 fps. Peter Jackson simply wanted to experiment with this new film form to see the reaction. Obviously, the reaction to 48 fps was not a positive one. But the frame rate of the movie should not be taken into account when reviewing it. It holds no significance in the movie's quality.
2. The light and humorous tone was absolutely intentional, but for a reason that many people did not understand. Many compared the Hobbit to the Star Wars prequels, saying that both had a lighter tone to accommodate children and the younger generation. This claim is false. The Hobbit had a lighter tone than the Lord of the Rings had because it takes place before the rise of Mordor and the discovery of the ring, so the world is much more peaceful and happy. Most likely, an Unexpected Journey will be followed by a much darker Desolation of Smaug.
The Hobbit did a fantastic job at being its own movie while also paying homage to the Lord of the Rings. I saw this film twice in theaters, and both times the audience was enthralled by the reappearance of characters and references to the original trilogy.
The actors were all perfectly cast, no doubt about it. Ian McKellan was Gandalf in the flesh (as he was before), it was wonderful to see Andy Serkis back as Gollum/Smeagol, and Richard Armitage had great presence as Thorin, but the actor that truly impressed me was Martin Freeman as Bilbo. Having read the Hobbit, Martin Freeman IS Bilbo. The rest of the cast was also charming.
Overall, the Hobbit is fantastic. It may not be considered a modern classic like its predecessors, but it still deserves recognition as a great fantasy film.
Ju Dou (1990)
A unique, yet strange, look at Chinese culture
Throughout the story, I didn't really know what type of movie Ju Dou was supposed to be. It came off as an emotional drama, but at the same time, there were many instances of quirky humor that blended into the drama. However, the humor was very entertaining. The cinematography was quite beautiful, capturing the rural Chinese landscape. I also liked the in-depth look at Chinese society. The actors were all fairly good in their roles.
The worst thing I have to say about this film would be the strangeness of it and also the slow pace of the beginning. I feel like the film spent too much time introducing the characters and not enough time explaining their situations.
Overall, Ju Dou is an interesting film. It's not a classic or one that I will want to watch again, but parts of the film were entertaining enough for me to enjoy.
Cidade de Deus (2002)
Okay movie, but not a masterpiece like the reviews make it out to be.
City of God is one of the highest rated movies here on IMDb, which has me ask the question: why? Yes, it has some intense scenes, endearing acting, and interesting usage of camera angles, but other than that, City of God is unremarkable.
My first and main complaint about City of God is the high number of characters. There were so many different characters (who all looked very similar) that it became hard to follow what was going on in the story. With so many different characters, it was also difficult to make a connection with any one of them.
I am on the fence when it comes to the cinematography of City of God. I think during some of the scenes the camera angles and filters were very clever in conveying a certain mood. On the other hand, sometimes these aspects felt unnecessary and almost seemed as though the filmmakers were just experimenting around.
Overall, I don't think City of God is as great as I was lead to believe. In some instances, it feels like a cheaply made movie. Plus, the run time was much too long. The filmmakers probably should have cut some characters and subplots out of the film to focus more on the main character.
Gravity (2013)
Good film, very overrated.
I am definitely in the minority here, but I will go ahead and admit that Gravity failed to impress me that much. I went to the theater with very high expectations after hearing how it was "the best movie of the year" and seeing its 97% score on Rotten Tomatoes. Although I thought that, yes, Gravity was good, it was not nearly as amazing as the critics made is out to be.
The visual effects are obviously the best aspect of Gravity. The scenery was stunning and some of the effects the filmmakers were able to pull off were awe-inducing. Another great aspect of the film was its ability to thrill and stress the audience. Gravity was made centered around the audience.
Sandra Bullock's performance was mostly very good. There were parts that I felt her acting went a bit over-the-top.
The main aspect of Gravity that I had a problem with was the characters, or lack thereof. The movie obviously centered itself around Sandra Bullock's character, almost too much so. There were basically only two other actors that you ever saw. I can understand why Alfonso Cuaron would do this, to make the audience feel the sense of isolation, but it was way too much. With only one character to focus on, the movie's plot was almost uninteresting. Also, another thing that bothered me was how cliché Sandra Bullock's character was. Her back story is almost identical to every other Hollywood Blockbuster character's story.
Overall, the visuals were fantastic, but the plot and characters were only so-so. I have seen critics mention these downfalls before, then defend Gravity by saying that it isn't a movie about the story, its about the visuals. Yet I find it somewhat ironic that these same critics praising Gravity slammed Avatar back in 2009 for it being all about the visuals.
So yes, Gravity is good. It's a nice, solid movie. But it is not a movie to watch more than once, or to watch outside of a theater. Undoubtedly, Gravity will win a substantial amount of awards. I am not saying that it does not deserve it. I can tell that the filmmakers put their heart and souls into making this film, but Gravity still has several weak points that should have been fixed.
The Magnificent Seven (1960)
If you do not like westerns, you will not like this movie.
I have never been a big fan of westerns. I have never understood the appeal, so it came as no surprise to me when I did not like the Magnificent Seven.
The Magnificent Seven starts off very slow. Once the plot gets going, its better. The acting is awful, especially for the (SPOILER) death scenes.
Overall, the Magnificent Seven is rather dull. The action sequences are not very exciting, the characters are one-dimensional, and the ending is somewhat predictable. This movie has not aged well and I would personally not recommend it to anyone.
Le fabuleux destin d'Amélie Poulain (2001)
A good but overrated film
When viewing Amelie, I had high expectations. I heard so many wonderful reviews of this movie that I expected it to be nothing short of excellent. I was somewhat disappointed, but it still remains a solid film.
The best part of this film was the beginning. After the beginning, it started to falter, and the movie didn't seem like it knew what it wanted to be. There was no real clear plot, so at times Amelie felt a bit pointless. Also, the actress who played Amelie was a bit creepy.
The cinematography was very well done. The color scheme was unique and made the movie stand out.
A bit of comedy here, a bit of romance here, some mystery over there. Amelie is a quirky film that is sort of all over the place, but its sweet story and its uniqueness are memorable.
The Human Centipede (First Sequence) (2009)
Perfect example of an interesting concept that is poorly executed
At first glance, The Human Centipede is an intriguing, original premise. Disgusting and perverted, but original. However, this film was so badly directed, written, and acted, that it fails in almost every way possible.
The two main actresses were laughably bad. Of course, most of it probably wasn't entirely their fault, as they didn't have much of a script to work with. The dialogue was so cringe inducing that this movie became comical at times. But kudos to all the actors for doing the most they could with so little.
For those who are considering watching this movie, I can't say that I would recommend it. Even for people who like slasher films, the Human Centipede does not make the cut. Very little scares, brief nudity, and only moderate gore makes this movie very disappointing. Perhaps if the director had made this movie more of a horror movie, it could have been a bit better.
Despite all of these criticisms, I have to say that the Human Centipede was a great way to kill time. And it is short, with only about a 90 minute running time. So if your curiosity gets the better of you (like it did me), give the Human Centipede a shot. You won't be frightened or have nightmares, but you will be grossed out and laughing all the way.
Nuovo Cinema Paradiso (1988)
A sweet little Italian film
Cinema Paradiso is a movie about a little boy who works in a theater with an old man, to put it in a short summary. There are several positive aspects of this movie, but also a few negatives.
Cinema Paradiso is very simplistic. It isn't overly complicated, so it is relaxing to watch. It didn't try to be more than it was. The acting by the older man and the young boy Toto (and teenager when he is older) is well done. The ending scene could not have been more perfect to close the film.
The main problem I had with this film was the actor who played the adult version of Toto. He looked nothing like the child or teenage version of Toto, so it threw me off a bit. Also, some parts of the film were much too slow or pointless and could have been cut out. The overall running time was a tad too long to keep the movie interesting.
Cinema Paradiso is a nice, if somewhat forgettable, film that I think most would enjoy watching. It is far from any sort of masterpiece, but its innocence and view on life are to be admired.