5 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Money Monster (2016)
7/10
Tension Heavy but Predictable
13 May 2016
Money Monster is financial crime thriller directed by Jodie Foster. It centers around Lee Gates (George Clooney) a financial reporter and Patty Fenn (Julia Roberts), his executive producer as they are in the midst of a hostage situation being run by Kyle Budwell (Jack O'Connell) as he attempts to get answers as to why 800 million dollars was lost by a financial company that Gates recommended everyone buy stock in.

Being that the majority of the film takes place in a secluded area with our three main characters, Jodie Foster does a great job making sure that the film never feels claustrophobic. Part of this is due to the performances of George Clooney and Jack O'Connell. The two of them spend the majority of the screen time together and they have great chemistry. It almost reminded me of the strange yet surprisingly believable chemistry between Bryan Cranston and Aaron Paul in Breaking Bad. Throughout the hour and forty minute run length, the two of these characters have extremely development that is represented extremely well by the two of their performances. They each portray a believable character as we see under each of their fake personalities and truly digest the fact that they are just regular people.

Throughout the entire film, my heart was pounding. The tension was extremely well written and directed as we are constantly worried that Budwell's thumb could slip at the slightest of moments. The movie doesn't just use one type of tension--it moves some scenes slow and other scenes are much more fast paced. But I can tell you this; throughout the whole film, I was on the edge of my seat, constantly waiting to see what would happen next. A lot of this is due to the well done pacing. The mix between humor, drama and tension made the film feel more realistic. When the movie went from drama to action based, it felt natural as opposed to being forced onto the audience for the sake of just having an action scene.

Now let's get into why this film isn't phenomenal. First of all, the sheer predictability of the film. From about 10 minutes in, I knew exactly how the movie was going to end. This did take away from the film for me, as there were times that I almost wasn't nervous for the characters as the big "twist" at the end could be seen coming from a mile away.

Julia Roberts was just okay in this movie. She didn't necessarily take away from the film, but she certainly didn't add to the quality of it with her performance. She felt somewhat bland at points and only had a couple of moments where she really came out to shine

The beginning 10 minutes was extremely rushed. An extra few minutes onto the film wouldn't have killed them. Instead, it probably would have helped them. Kyle is on the set within at least 5 minutes of the film and it would have been nice to have a little more introduction to Gates and to see a little more about the crash that happened with the market.

Overall, I really enjoyed the film. It held my attention and had believable pacing, but the predictability did take away a far bit for me.

7/10
15 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Revenant (I) (2015)
8/10
DiCaprio and Hardy Shine in a Well Thought Out Film
27 January 2016
When 'The Revenant' was announced, I figured it was just another movie that Leo signed on for to get his Oscar. Then the first trailer dropped and my opinion turned on a dime. This film was very well done. I see where people are coming from when they think the movie is hollow. However, people need to think a bit deeper in this film. There are multiple deeper messages than just being a revenge story throughout the piece.

First things first, Emmanuel Lubezki's cinematography is some of the greatest of all time. People will lean forward in their seats from multiple long and up close shots that blow your mind and make you wonder just how each shot was done.

Many people are talking about DiCaprio's performance and ignoring another large part of the film. While Leonardo DiCaprio's performance is mainly physical as he only has about 20 or so lines of dialogue (most of which not even in English), Tom Hardy's performance is mainly dialogue driven as he provides context for pivotal points within the film. Hardy and DiCaprio's performance go hand in hand to create a very interesting dynamic between the two characters.

The directing by Alejandro G. Innaritu is also extremely well done. The shots and acting wouldn't have been possible without his brains behind the computer.

Overall, the film overstays it's welcome a bit. The two and a half hour run time begins to become prevalent to the two hour mark. It would have been possible to shave off some scenes like the horse sleeping scene. I have a specific opinion that the last shot of a film is extremely important. I believe this film wastes it's last shot and leaves a strange taste in your mouth as opposed to the mystery it wants to leave you with. In the end, the film is well done and well delivered with the help of a likely Oscar winning performance from Leonardo DiCaprio and a strong supporting cast of Tom Hardy, Domnhall Gleason, and Will Poulter.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Spectre (I) (2015)
5/10
Too much fan service, not its own movie
10 November 2015
Warning: Spoilers
While the film does a great job being fan service and making long time Bond fans smile and gasp, it doesn't exactly work as its own film. The opening shot we receive promises a strong fourth installment into Daniel Craig's James Bond world. However, what we receive is not particularly what we expected. After a great and promising opening credits scene, we see a lot of talking and a lot of unnecessary things. Firstly, whatever happened to the girl after she tells James about Spectre. We think that she is going to be a primary character but simply ends up disappearing. There was no closure on her character whatsoever.

Dave Bautista does a great job at being a villain. The silent, beat the hell out of you type of guy came across extremely well for him. However, his character was used very poorly. Only having a few on screen moments, only one of these scenes really made my jaw drop. The car chase in which the two are involved was awful. This may be due to the fact that Bond is talking on the phone the whole time and the car chase needed much more focus. In the end we are only treated to about 30 seconds of the chase. The next scene is yet another chase scene which comes across as "okay." It doesn't make much sense but it is a cool scene nonetheless. And then Dave gets to show his stuff. In one of the greatest Bond fights of all time, he beats the crap out of Bond on a train. And then they kill him off. They needed more of him…everywhere.

Staying on villains, let's talk about Christoph Waltz. By far one of the best actors they've ever nabbed in the Bond series, we expected him to play a key role in the film. However, his story gets twisted in the fan service with all of the previous villains working for him? There is also the added fact that Waltz is only in about 4 scenes which is unforgivable.

Despite some intense scenes, the movies two and a half hour run time is simply too much. If I could sum this movie up, it would be too much where there should have been less and too little where there should have been more. Though Daniel Craig and Lea Seadoux are great, there relationship feels somewhat forced and is difficult for the audience to buy it. Ralph Fiennes is able to show some action chops and more. However, a couple fight scenes isn't enough to save this film from the scriptwriter's desire for nostalgia and money.
3 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
I mean... it's not that bad
27 October 2015
Let's face it, this is should not have been a Best Picture nominee. But is the movie complete garbage? Absolutely not. Bradley Cooper has an incredible performance as Chris Kyle as well as Sienna Miller. Clint Eastwood's direction also makes you feel like you're dead smack in the middle of this war. The problem with the film lies in the scriptwriting. It's flimsy and didn't really know what it was doing. The directing was unable to match with the screen writing. Eastwood's realistic directing and the unrealistic dialogue clash into this weird mesh of a film. However, it is definitely worth seeing for the sake of Cooper, Miller, and Eastwood.
0 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
I just watched The Maze Runner?
28 September 2015
Warning: Spoilers
First of all, I would like to state that despite reading the book, I have never seen the original film. However one of the few things that this movie does well is provide ways to be able to pick up where they left off and have newcomers know what is happening. The problem with this movie is that it is all over the place. It doesn't know what it wants to be. A good portion of the film is a zombie horror movie. 20 minutes later it's a romance movie and then it's an action movie, so on and so forth. The plot doesn't move forward much, especially since the runners are in the Scorch 20 minutes into the film. They are constantly introducing new characters and ask us to care for them even though we've just met them. It had the same problem with Quicksilver from Avengers. When he died, nobody cared. When Brenda starts talking about her brothers tragic story with Thomas, it is hard to care due to the fact that this is a new character. There is barely any character development and that can be a major problem for movies. By the end of the movie, it's basically a worse version of The Hunger Games. The directing was like a mix of J.J. Abrams and Zack Snyder and that isn't a mix that should ever happen. The DOP must have seen The Hunger Games and said, "I LIKE THAT!" and went with it. I don't think there is ever a shot where you actually see the zombies or the action that is going on. By the end, there are so many points where the movie should have ended, but just kept on going. You feel like you've been watching for hours upon hours by the time it ends. Plot holes shine throughout the entire movie. How did those two kids get into the Scorch and let the rest in? That's just one of the many questions you are scratching your head over through the movie. Continuity is a problem as well. There are just a few shining lights in this movie. Despite the lazy and cheesy script, the acting does stand out, even on the kid actors side. Giancarlo Esposito is always great and Alan Tudyk (though his 5 minutes of screen time did nothing and made NO sense) did great as this deadbeat club owner. The action sequences ended up being pretty cool and somewhat entertaining to watch.

A movie that makes me want to see it redone as a Zack Snyder R-rated gore fest is not necessarily a good thing.

Overall, if you're a fan of the book you might as well see the film. But if you're just going to see it as a movie, spend your money on Black Mass or save it for The Martian.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed