Reviews

9 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
7/10
Welcome Back 007
14 November 2008
Warning: Spoilers
I'll go on record and say this might be my second favorite Bond film after Casino Royale.

MAJOR Spoilers AHEAD!!!!

An engaging Bond film on both levels. The action was fulfilling. Since people are complaining so much about plot and character development, I'll start there.

The plot moves a little fast, but it's there. Some people just seem too brain dead to watch, because they're too awestruck by Casino Royale that they can't find the sense to move on and accept newer Bond films.

Bond wants revenge and he stumbles on an organization that is behind the death of Vesper from CR: The villain wants control of the world's oil supply in exchange for control of certain South American Governments. It turns out that the main villain, Dominic Greene, actually wants control over the country's water supply and send it into drought.

Certain characters are back from CR including Felix Leiter, Mathis, and Mr. White.

Felix. Not as much depth as the last one, but he serves his purpose, and the scene in the bar shows the blossoming of his relationship with James for me.

Mathis was given much more to do this time around and I really loved the scenes between him and Bond. It was a crushing blow when he died, and it was downright cruel of Bond to just stick him in the dumpster, but if any of you bother to read the novels which the CREATOR WROTE!, you'd find Bond is a cold bastard, which is more what we see in this film. No boner jokes, no gadgets, just flesh, blood, and duty.

My favorite scene between Bond and Mathis is on the flight back to South America and Bond is grieving over Vesper with about 6 drinks. Now, who can say they haven't dealt with loss like that? I'm willing to bet a large number of people would do exactly as Bond does. Everyone complains that BOnd is too cold and humorless for a man seeking revenge. Well, CHARACTER CHANGE! We shouldn't be looking for a copy of what he was in CR.

For those of you who watched CR, Bond knew he had to toughen up. He's a government agent, and if he doesn't shut off his emotions, then he's as good as dead. Yes, he's human, he hurts, but Bond can't show it. In GoldenEye, Bond himself says being cold is what keeps him alive. That's all in here. Everyone is just itching for an emotional breakdown or some kind of pointless quip. That'd be more unBond than a Roger Moore movie.

Mr. White, gets his chance to shine in the beginning of the film and he turns a bit more maniacal this time around. (GASP) CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT!!

GIRLS

M. She is given more screen time than in any other Bond film, and there is one scene that shows her vulnerability. She genuinely does care about him, and they both know that. Bond saved M's life in this movie, and her gratitude shows at the end.

Camille. Sexy, tough, but emotionally damaged, similar to Melina from FOR YOUR EYES ONLY. II had to complain about anything here, it would be the chemistry between them. It felt a little flat, but there were moments that made up for it, such as when Bond gives her his jacket and listens to what happened to her and why she is seeking revenge. I rated Casino Royale a 10 because the Bond and Vesper's relationship worked so well, and they met as verbal equals. This time it was more balance for Camille's character, and I think Olga will get far more chances to shine. Bond doesn't ride off into the sunset this time, and it seems like he finds his so called Quantum of Solace with her. As much as I would have liked to see her as another notch on his belt, she isn't, which sets her apart from other Bond girls.

Fields. Yes, she was a waste of Bond girl. Nice reference to Goldfinger, but in her defense, Jill Masterson was also a wasted Bond girl, but essential in giving Bond a lead on Goldfinger. Fields gave her life for Bond as many have. I don't think the main Bond girl needs to die like Vesper to make it a good movie, but there could have been more there.

As for Greene and Modrano, decent Bond villains. Modrano was somewhat Camille's villain but Greene was better than I expected and I wasn't expecting much. CR had many wasted villains. Even Le Chiffe who beat Bond to a pulp probably couldn't compete with Bond in a fair fight. Greene was more ruthless, especially when he was verbally attacking Bond at the party. There's no bull behind him. He doesn't want to invite him in for tea. He simply wants BOnd out of the way, that plus he's a return to the megalomaniac villains of the past. Him and Fields were nice past tributes.

The humor is dry, but funny. My favorite being when Bond tells the man on the motorcycle that he missed, and knocks him over to steal the bike. Very Bondish.

My only other complaint was the obvious CGI drop from the plane. Not a delight to see anymore CGI in Bond films, but it's better than a damn ice wave and surfing on it.

SPOILER! As for the ending, I was very satisfied to see Bond tie up the loose ends. He was able to let go and let himself become the cold hard killer we love, both inside and out. And I think it was a wise move saving the gun barrel for the end, because you know by that time, Bond has returned.
3 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
The Best Comedy FIlm ever made
17 April 2008
Notice how I said comedy. If you look at this film as a horror movie, you'll come to realize that it is quite possible the worst feces of film reel ever to disgrace the silver screen. However, looking at it as a light hearted, and somewhat cruel comedy when pertaining to beating up women who look like they couldn't quite get out of the quaker age, it is a brilliant achievement in side-splitting and loss of oxygen, because Cage never fails to disappoint as a comedic actor.

Yet, I still have to see leaving Las Vegas.

It's honestly hit or miss with Cage. Ghost rider was a miss. This was fortunately both.
7 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Quite possibly turning out to be the greatest trilogy since the original Star Wars
8 July 2006
First off, Pirates 2 was miles ahead of the first one, and there are many reasons why. It had a darker story, which was more in depth and complicated than the first one, and probably will take more than one viewing to understand the entire plot. HOwever, everything was indeed taken to the next level in this one, as well as any sequel should.

(Spoilers) (majorly) There is more than one plot going on if you think about it. Because there's the issue of Jack fighting to keep his life, there's will and Elizabeth trying to ensure their freedom, and there's also Will trying to save his father's soul as well.

The characters are much more in depth in this one as well. Jack becomes a lot more noble at one point. Will is much less of a pansy in this one. Not that he was in the first, but he's a lot more bad ass this time around. Even Elizabeth brings a lot more edge to her character. The minor characters have much more comic relief to them in this movie, and there are also a lot more twists as well with plot and characters who you never even thought to come back.

The action sequences are twice as intense as well as the swordfights, and Davy Jones is a far more fearsome villain than Barbossa ever will be. Stellan Skaarsgard gives a great performance as Will's father as well.

As far as the comedic gags go. I felt that they were somewhat needed at times, especially with Jack's character as always, but even the other characters had quite a bit as well, which made it much more fun to watch.

Now, comparing this to the original trilogy of Star Wars. Look at Jack Sparrow. He reeks of Han Solo throughout the movie, albeit he's a lot more lax than Han, but he has the roguish, mercenary swagger that Han does. Will is basically Luke Skywalker, because he's the goody goody fighting for justice all the time, even though he's quite the pirate as well. Elizabeth is obviously Princess Leia, and the fact that her and Will are to be married is basically Luke and Leia without the brother sister plot involved. As for other characters. Barbossa can be compared best to Moff Tarkin in the first movie, cuz he is not the most fearsome villain in the seas, like Tarkin wasn't the most evil figure in the galaxy. Davy Jones is the evil emperor, and Will's father is like Anakin if he didn't get burned, but he still has done something he eventually is not proud of and does want to save his son, only it happens in #2 instead of #3. Gibbs can be compared to Yoda, cuz he's like a mentor to will at times. The two pirates (the fat guy and the one with the odd Eye) can be compared to R2 D2 and C3P0 in that order as well. The government and the undead could all be compared to the empire, just cuz they're the bad guys in the story. As far as plot goes, none of it has to really do with blowing up Death stars and stuff.

However, the first one did go a bit like the first one in a sense that Will is a farmboy (blacksmith) who meets up with Jack(Han Solo) and wants to save Elizabeth (Leia.) Only, no death star. Curse must be lifted instead.

In number 2 of Pirates, the plot had a lot more twists and turns, and a surprise at the end. The government and the undead are after the Pearl and Jack (Millenium Falcon and Solo) Will has to save his father, which is his goal by the 3rd movie, and finally, there is a HUGE twist as it ends, only no (Will, I am your father.) That's just how it seems to me, but not only that. If you think about it, times have changed again like they did back in the 70s when all those realistic movies came out and Star wars came along and changed everything. The new trilogy didn't do as well, and pray God Pirates doesn't do the same thing. Nowadays, in the world where there's all these remakes of classic movies that were sometimes better the first time around, Pirates comes along. It may be based on something already in existence, but the plot and the characters really came out of nowhere. And no one expected the first one to do so well, just like Star Wars. The second even surpassed my expectations at least and surprised the heck out of me. Pirates is the only series these days doing anything original and new. It's an old concept, but it is finally being shown the way it was meant to be shown. Everyone loves it so much, and it is a great legacy that is being sewn into history. Here's to Pirates 3.

10/10
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Different Story, but definitely some of the best action sequences form the old era.
19 December 2005
OK, a lot of my friends simply shoot down OHMSS because it isn't Connery, Moore, or Brosnan. Let me put all the Bond actors in line. Connery and Brosnan do it the best out of any Bond. Connery for the old, and Brosnan for the new. They just mirror each other in talent, charisma, and just plain kick ass. Dalton, eh, I won't p*ss on Dalton, but I won't praise him much either. he did what he could. Lazenby is probably the worst actor for Bond next to possibly Dalton, but I'll give him the kudo that he can LITERALLY KICK ASS. I don't think I've seen anyone fight as fast as he did as Bond in this movie. Plus he made the action sequences make the audience just want more.

Story. well. I guess this movie could be for Bond what attack of the clones is for Star Wars, a love story. However, this one is more in the ballpark of Bond since he is all for women, and it is a change of pace for him. After Tracy got killed, it just ties together every time someone asks him about losing a loved one, and not just Tracy, but his parents as well. It just makes sense when I watch any other bond movie after this one. The whole clinic thing was a little bit boring and repetitive though, and it kind of made me go: "I could really use an explosion right about now" at times. However, it made a watchable movie, and I thank Lazenby for his action contribution, but I'm glad he only did one, and I think we need Brosnan to do one more before he gets TOO old.

7/10
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
after reading the book BEFORE watching it.
20 November 2005
Well, I will have my complaints in this, and will have my praises. Let me start by complaining.

They did in fact leave a lot out of the plot of people like Crouch, Bagman (who isn't even in the movie, but I suppose could have done without), and the thing that really got me that they missed was the part of Snape being a Death Eater. That was completely crucial to the plot, and it really bummed me out that it wasn't there.

Secondly, whatever happened to that scene of Harry sneaking around in the invisibility cloak, and him nearly getting caught by Snape and Crouch, but Moody saves him. That would have been cool to see, but that's just me. So would them finding out that skeeter was an Animagus.

Overall, I'm not much of a book fan, and I suppose I just read these things to get a sense of what is going on. I liked it when I read Azkaban AFTER seeing the movie, because that way I could fully enjoy the movie without critiquing it too much. After reading the book and watching it again, then I guess I had a few more complaints, because they kind of messed up with azkaban, even though I thought the movie was brilliant as a MOVIE. If you put every little thing from a book into a movie, then you'll have a 6-7 hour movie, and you will fall asleep by the end. If they had tried to make this one a little bit longer, then they might have been able to do better with it, but I still loved Goblet better than Azkaban.

Last complaints. WHERE IN THE BLOODY HELL WAS SIRIUS? HE"S THE MOST IMPORTANT SUPPORTING CHARACTER IN THE ENTIRE BOOK, QUITE LITERALLY. THEY COMPLETELY BUTCHERED THAT! Also WHERE THE HELL DID QUIDITTCH GO, they just used that whole World Cup scene to introduce Krum. there were so many interesting parts of the Quidditch Cup in the book. all we get is a bloody talent show, and then we don't even see a match. The sorry excuse for a match in Azkaban would have been like a Quidditch Globetrotters game compared to the crap Quidditch we got here.

OK, now for the good stuff.

I liked how they got the main plot of Harry in the Goblet of Fire, and Voldemort returning pretty dead on. The other thing that I liked that Newell did was how the small stuff was paid closer attention to, but in a very subtle way in some areas, and a huge part in others. there were some very interesting things that could have been put into the movie from the book that were very little and insignificant, but would have worked on film. The stuff they did cut out, some of it was worth it, some of it just screams "why the heck did they leave that out?" For example, I personally am getting a little tired of the Dursleys in the beginning of every movie now. The cut was bound to happen if you ask me. Harry's dream is much more interesting, plus it took forever in the books to actually get to the Quidditch world cup.

The whole save the elves thing in the book could have been done subtly but I wouldn't have been too interested in that. Those elves were annoying if you ask me, and I'm a wee bit thankful for their cut.

As for Hagrid's whole giant-allowed-to-teach-at-Hogwarts dilemma, could have been done, but wasn't. Again, another thing that took forever to solve in the book when it wasn't moving along the main plot at all.

As for the Tri wizard tournament scenes. Brilliance scenes, especially in the Dragon scenes. The Yule Ball was well done, and it was key to the movie, so I'm glad they got that in there. There was enough of the Indian twins as well as Cho Chang, and I'm glad they stayed true to the books with those subtle details. The Voldemort return was kind of quick at first, but as it went along, it became more interesting to watch. The ending where Harry broke down after Diggory died was major kudos on Radcliffe's's part. The ending with Moody was a good end to all the peril in the movie. I think they could have done more with the Trio at the end, but hey, it's the movies. They always butcher something from a book or game.

I guess I'm saying that they can't do every single thing in the books, and they often leave out wonderful parts that would work well on screen. I felt somewhat gypped from the books, but I guess that is my punishment for reading the books first. Cinematically, it's a fantastic film to watch, as for being faithful to the books, the first and second one do it the best, but it gets a little boring if you follow every detail again. I think in order to absolutely defend this movie's future, I can say that I think they cut out some of the subtle things to avoid repeating themselves in the movies as far as goes events that have already happened in a similar way. My two main disappoints are the ones in capital letters, but all in all, it's entertainment, and it's Hollywood, and this is what we get. I know I'm waiting 'till after Phoenix comes out to read that book.

7/10
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Doom (2005)
5/10
good enough to be a fun movie, but not enough justice to the game.
23 October 2005
OK, where must I begin. I might as well point out the bad things first in respect to the game. Now, what the hell was with the whole 24th chromosome thing? Makes sense to me, yes. However, what the hell happened to, well, HELL? These monsters in the movie were respectable enough to relate to the imps and hell knights in the game, but WHERE THE HELL ARE THE FIRE AND PLAMSA BALLS?! Where are the flying lost souls? Where are the CACODEMONS? where's the F**kin demon lord and spider demon for crying out loud. Maybe I'm being a little vain and asking for too much, but the monsters in the game were different breeds, and all came from hell, not mutated. The whole plot was actually somewhat too similar to Resident Evil. It p*s*e* me off. They completely abandoned all that the game was based on plot wise.

Now, as for the characters, I'm glad that they made it a team effort in this, and the characters were funny at times, but they seemed so underdone, except for of course, Reaper and Sarge, even Rosamund Pike couldn't add to anything in the film. I know I'm being picky, but blood and guts game? One man fighting to stop hell (or team effort)? Hello?

The good things were that they stayed on Mars, they had the BFG in it, but it was so underused. I think the highlight of it was the first person thing, which I feel quite gypped on because of the short amount of time that we see it. I feel like they just put it in there for the game fans so they'd have their glory, and I am a die hard doom fan, but i feel somewhat insulted by it. They have had plenty of technology available to them to make this so much better, but they didn't use what they could've had available to them. Maybe if ID worked with them on it, it wouldn't have been such a disappointment, but this was just insulting to us gamers once again. however, a SMALL improvement when it comes to other VG movies. The action was however enjoyable, and the fight at the end made it fun, but I almost felt like Rock had to do it to show off that he still has his smack-down glory. Oh well, lets see if they don't butcher Halo. (God Forbid)

5/10
49 out of 94 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
what do you want? Another Lord of the Rings Movie?
8 August 2005
I'm sick of people bitching and moaning about how bad a movie it was. When are people gonna realize that THAT IS THE POINT OF THE MOVIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It was never supposed to be GOOD. I thoroughly enjoyed it. It's purpose was to HAVE FUN!! Why can't people just enjoy themselves at the movie and stop over analyzing this stuff. Sean Will Scott and Johnny Knoxville are no De Niro and Pacino, Jessica Simson is no Angelina Jolie, but they pull off the roles quite well, and unless people can come up with a cast that could have had more fun doing this film and letting those of us who want to enjoy it enjoy it, SHUT UP AND GO COMPLAIN ABOUT STEALTH's CRAPPY DIALOGUE instead. Yes, the story was simple and somewhat predictable, but it worked for the movie. What? would you rather have the Dukes stop Voldemort from returning to power? NO, the movie worked with the plot it had. Just take it for what it is, people. God.

6/10
3 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Batman Begins (2005)
10/10
Who is this Keaton you speak of?
17 June 2005
Warning: Spoilers
OK, I was actually expecting this movie to only be VERY GOOD at best. I was beyond astonished. Everyone was perfectly cast, brilliant directing, and everything you could ever want in a movie. It's got the sadness, touch of dry comedy, action, story, everything. I loved the first batman, but Keaton didn't quite do it for me so much as Kilmer in FOREVER. I loved him as Batman, but not as much as Kilmer, and of course, BALE is BATMAN. Kilmer and Bale just have a way of capturing wayne and batman in different ways, and I didn't really see that in Keaton. However, Burton did do fantastic, but his chair has been well taken by Nolan. Everyone else does splendid too, especially Liam Neeson as (MAJOR SPOILER) Henri Ducard/Raz Al Gul. (END SPOILER) Chris Nolan could not have been a better choice for this movie, After seeing at least Insomnia, I thought, "ok this is gonna work," And I was right. So again, thank you Nolan, Bale, Neeson, Caine, even Holmes, I liked her performance as good as everyone else's. I just think everyone doesn't like her cuz of some of the other movies she's done. Just watch this movie, and prepare to be blown away. 10/10
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Now this is the star wars movie that was meant to be
21 May 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I just saw it last night, and must say, loved it from start to finish. To get the bad stuff out of the way first, which there is very little, Jar Jar actually is in the movie, HOWEVER, he only says "scuse me" and THAT"S IT, plus is walking up in a (SPOILER) Funeral scene for Amidala.(END SPOILER) Other than that, the only thing you really have to worry about is the scenes being too slow, which when they are are actually well done scenes (SPOILER) either dealing with Anakin and his slide to the dark side, disputes with the Council, and romance scenes.(END SPOILER) Now for the wonderful stuff, at least in my opinion. I wanted to believe that this one, in the end, was only a tad better than episode 2, but instead, I got what is miles and miles over that, and even better than return of the Jedi. As for New Hope and Empire, it does in my opinion surpass both of them, but only by a tiny margin. Why because I found the acting to be very well done, thanks to a supposed dialogue coach that Coppolla got Lucas, but still, no cheesy dialogue in love scenes, and no overacting the part of a drama king this time by Christensen. I know most people will say he can't act, but for crying out loud. Watch his other movies like Shattered Glass and Life as a House. The only reason he didn't do well in Episode 2 is because Lucas CANNOT communicate with his actors. But in this one, he has matured a little bit, but it's really when he's in the dark side that you'll see a greater performance.

Other than Christensen, Kudos to Portman, Ian McDiarmand, and Ewan McGregor, they did miles better than in the last one, particularly McDiarmand.

As for the story, well, duh, it's the one everyone's been wanting to see, and it is done carefully and effectively. need I say more? Special Effects- Well, that's the other thing that helps this movie, for me, surpass the original trilogy. It is basically modern movie technology at it's finest, especially in the battle scenes with Grievous, the battle above Coruscant, Obi Wan vs Anakin, the wookie battle, and (possible spoiler) scenes of the Jedi getting wiped out (end spoiler)

Overall, my eyes were glued to the screen from start to finish, especially during the fight scenes, which were beyond electrefying. They were moving so fast in some of them, I couldn't even tell where they were putting their lightsabers at times. It will not disappoint even those who are just looking for a good movie, and it is a very good movie, and a fantastic closure to STAR WARS. 9/10
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed