Change Your Image
Collie_M
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
The Secret Life of Walter Mitty (2013)
One to enjoy
The Secret Life of Walter Mitty has many things going for it, and I'm glad the public seem to rate it more accurately than the critics as I feel it is certainly deserving of its 7.7-8 rating on here.
It has many things going for it. The scenery is spectacular and the whole film oozes adventure. Little seen places such as Greenland and Afghanistan show up in a great light and like all good adventure stories, this one makes the viewer want to pack up their travel journal and set off to far-flung places in search of an adventure to call their own.
The acting is good overall: Stiller is solid if not spectacular but Sean Penn really excels during his short time on screen. The humour is quirky if not laugh out loud (in most cases) and in general is effective. The often mentioned companies such as eharmony and Papa Johns add a sense of reality and modernity that eclipses talk of sell-out product placement: people saying these companies were mentioned just for product placement don't fully understand the film in my opinion. These companies are part of the real world and play a big part in the plot of the story also and so I think Stiller is justified in using them as he does.
One not-so-positive aspect of the film, a pet peeve if you will, is the 'shark' scene. The fact that a what looked like a great white shark could live in ice-cold water, and just happen to be around for the few seconds when Mitty occupied it with him, seemed like a typical daydream (when Mitty zones out) but it was meant to have really happened. That for me throws some doubt over the validity of subsequent happenings such as the volcano eruption, meeting the Afghan warlords etc. I think the film would be better if the shark hadn't made an appearance at all.
The ending I think is very suitable and really helps make this a feel good film. You will know what I mean when you see 25.
I saw the film twice and felt it was money well spent. I think it will age well and would advise anybody who hasn't seen it yet to do so.
Go On (2012)
It was good while it lasted
I was disappointed to learn that this show was cancelled after the first series. I thought it had many things going for it, despite the fact that it was flawed in places also.
I feel most for Matthew Perry, who is great in the series as the overly- confident (almost to the point of being obnoxious at times) but very likable sports radio presenter, Ryan King, dealing with the loss of his wife, Janie. The supporting cast is strong also: John Cho and Perry work very well together as the workmates/friends. The plot centers around the support group that Ryan attends, reluctantly at first, led by novice guidance councilor Lauren (with problems of her own). Almost all of these members are acted well and have their own quirks: it is a diverse group and their characters are well-written and acted.
I found myself laughing out loud for during the first few episodes, but the laughs became a little less and less as the series progressed. It isn't the most laugh out loud comedy: it is more the quirkiness of the characters that provides humour. There is little doubt the show is entertaining. But there are moments of depth also and underneath it all is the serious issue of dealing with loss. Again, this is acted very well, especially by Perry.
So why did the show get cancelled? Well, there are a few aspects that let it down somewhat. There is a sense that at times, its just not very... real. The mix-and-match group are interesting but almost cartoon-like at times with their quirkiness. But more importantly is the recurrence of King's dead wife Janie. The fact that he talks to her and eventually invents a boyfriend for her lets the show down. Also, the fact that his encounters with her aren't shown to be inside his head make her seem more of a ghost than a figment of King's mind. This is shown when he is talking to a coat-rack in real time when he sees his wife there: this just doesn't happen, King is far from insane and it is just a bad way to describe grieving. Another unrealistic aspect that annoyed me was the fact that he woke up at 1.23am every night, almost to the second. I was tempted to reach into the TV and put the time forward on the clock 5mins just to see would the world end. This is just very unrealistic and a poor way to show his grieving process. Also, the philosophical metaphors King sprouts at the end of the episodes on his radio show, almost describing the lesson of the episode using a sports analogy, is just a little overdone and corny (reminded me of desperate housewives somewhat). Another negative was the fact that there were too many love interests for King. Once he decides to start dating again, he meets a group of very attractive beech volley-ballers, then he has a relationship with a returning group member, who is also predictably out- of-this world attractive. The underlying chemistry between King and his cute assistant Carrie is well done but the one-episode romance with guest Courtney Cox and the continual hinting at a romance between him and the group leader is unnecessary. It is just hard to believe all of these beautiful women are linked to King (his wife Janie was smoking hot too). Its all just a little unbelievable and the direction down that route that the show takes halfway through is a little distracting. The best moments and episodes are probably ones focusing on when the group characters get explored and developed.
Overall it was good viewing and had an interesting context, with very good acting and clever wittiness at times. Perhaps the long-term feasibility of more series was not there: I guess there are only so many times you can share your problems to a support group before the whole thing becomes repetitive. Which is a pity, but such is life.
It's a Wonderful Life (1946)
It's a Wonderful Film
When my father proposed this black and white film about a guardian angel for me to watch years ago, as a teenager, my initial reaction could hardly have been a more overwhelming 'no.' But after persistence that for weeks was just below the surface, waiting to be unleashed every evening pickings on the television were slim, one especially uneventful night I succumbed and with a sigh agreed to watch it with mostly the intention of getting him off my case. Little I knew it would be the best film recommendation I had ever, and likely will ever receive.
Most of the superlatives have been used up when describing this film so I will not go into them in too much detail again. The term perfection is thrown around loosely but I believe this is one of the very few films that can claim wear that lofty tag with comfort. Jimmy Stewart gives a stunning performance as George Bailey, one of the most endearing characters in cinematic history. The whole cast is excellent and the on- screen chemistry between George and Mary is a sight to behold.
The true power in this film is how it manages to, almost effortlessly but with complete conviction, leave a profound emotional impact upon the viewer. It is a film that the viewer can get so emotionally connected to and can relate to so deeply that it can become part of that viewers person and change their outlook, philosophy, and indeed, their life. Personally I have seen the film too many times to remember and it still manages to leave a lump in my throat and a tear in my eye.
It is perhaps ironic that years after that first viewing, I mirrored my father in turning pest and badgered my group of college housemates into watching. It is perhaps the best measure of a film's greatness that six sceptical 20year old college students could sit down, abandon the alternative option of an alcohol-propelled night out, and sit in silence as the film happened and blink away tears in the semi-darkness as the bells signalling the end of the masterpiece tolled.
Pacific Rim (2013)
Action-packed film in the mould of Godzilla and Transformers
This film is a great one to watch of you want to sit back and enjoy great special effects, fantasy fight scenes and not-to-taxing but relatively enjoyable storyline. Essentially, it is good escapism and if you suspend your disbelief, its an enjoyable trip to the cinema, especially in Imax/3D.
The plot is like a cross between Godzilla and Transformers, with huge aliens/monsters emerging from the sea with increasing regularity to be combated by huge man-made and piloted robots in the general shape of humans, with an array of weapons and attributes. Unlike Godzilla though, no sympathy is expressed towards the Kayju (monsters) as they are portrayed as purely evil: although it is not the intention of the film to make the reader feel much other than awe and excitement at the action scenes.
The acting is surprisingly good. Many cliché characters are there: The battle hardened captain, the female love interest, the hero returning with scarred memories, the 'rival' good-guy, and the computer/nerdy types trying to think a way to victory. The use of stereotypes allows the viewer not to worry too much about character formation as much of the character formation is already done through preconceived ideas, and this allows the film to concentrate on what it does best: Provide action. The characters aren't too shallow or empty though either for the most part: there is some complexity to their relationships at times and this is due to the decent acting quality. Granted there won't be any Oscar-nominations for the performances, but there won't be any Razzie nominated ones either.
The film, like many of its kind, is predictable but the journey along the way is filled with enough action to make it enjoyable. Many parts are fantasy but the film knows what it is and doesn't try to be anything it is not. It plays to it and achieves its goals. It's not one that will stay with the audience for long after they leave the cinema doors, but it is a solid, action- packed, fantasy/end-of-the-world flick which does exactly what it says on the tin.
The Dark Knight Rises (2012)
Spectacular scenes, good acting, real heroes, but flaws and plot holes stop it achieving greatness.
The Dark Night Rises grips the viewer on many levels and appeals as a film to return to. It's success is based on many aspects which combine to make this an overall satisfying end to Nolan's triumphant trilogy (even if it doesn't reach the same heights as The Dark Knight.) Some flaws hinder the film's greatness but these flaws are by and large minor enough (if you let them be) and just about eclipsed by the positives to be of too detrimental damage.
As one would expect, special effects are up to scratch and on the most basic level of thrilling the audience with well filmed fight scenes and pyrotechnics, it succeeds. The reader is never bored despite its length. But the soundtrack, acting and some/most character formation all help elevate the film above and beyond another average action or superhero movie. Oldman and Caine are excellent as usual, Bale continues to play a fantastic Bruce Wayne and Batman, while performances from Gordan-Levitt and Hathaway are equally impressive in breathing new life into traditional Batman characters. Most characters are developed, but not over-developed, and there is never a sense that the director is trying too hard to develop characters. It seems to happen in a natural way which doesn't bog down the plot but enhances it.
The character of Batman/Bruce Wayne is the truest and most inspiring 'superhero' yet to grace the big screen. The fact that he is human, with a human weakness and fragility (Bane is as strong if not stronger than him physically) helps make his sacrifices tug at the emotions of the audience and remind us what a true hero is: Not a mutant with superpowers but an ordinary person doing their best to help others and follow a moral code. Lines such as 'Not everything, not yet' and 'A hero can be anyone, even a man doing something as simple and reassuring as putting a coat around a young boy's shoulders to let him know that the world hadn't ended' can make the hair on the back of ones neck stand up. It is the central appeal of the entire trilogy.
The film goes back to its predecessors successfully to remind the viewer that it is a trilogy with one interconnected story. It is, however, not too convoluted or concerned with the past: a good balance is achieved.
The ending is exciting and captivating right until the end and largely satisfying. It could have been more ambiguous, to keep us guessing about the true fate of Bruce Wayne, but the way it was handled was still effective and the score really helps in these final minutes to end the film on a high.
On a negative side, there are plot holes, many of which become more noticeable and damaging upon each new viewing. Some moments make one consciously try to ignore their impossibility and not dwell on them because to do so would allow doubts to creep in over the authenticity of the whole film. For example, the fact that 3000 policemen (almost all except Blake and Commissioner Gordan it seems) are trapped in tunnels for 3 months without escape is difficult to believe, if you allow yourself to think about it. As is the fact that Gothom appears isolated entirely from outside civilisation: There is no action from outside forces or government to protect one of its biggest cities. It seems hard to believe that Miranda Tate would be holed up with Fox for most of the revolution when she is essentially Bane's partner/boss and the angle that fear (no rope) is required for her's and Bruce Wayne's successful jump out of the prison is dramatic stuff but defies the laws of physics, and, lets be honest, the laws of common sense. Many more minor, smaller details and plot gaps appear if you look for them. Such plot holes and question marks don't really reduce the enjoyment, dramatic appeal and sheer spectacle of the film, but they leave some regrets when reflected upon.
Another slight disappointment is the way in which some parts of plot and character are underexposed. For example, we see Bane's initial revolution and all of a sudden it's three months in. The public aren't seen in this film: there is no sense to what life is like in this revolution. All we see is essentially Blake and co. on the streets following the three trucks. It doesn't have the same gripping angle that The Dark Knight had where the audience saw the ordinary citizens, whom Batman is trying to save, in the two boats loaded with explosives. We know what it is Batman is fighting for in The Dark Knight Rises, but we don't really see it.
Although Bane is well acted for much of the film, essentially he is neutralised and demoted to petty villain in the end after playing such a central and menacing role for the most part. It is tough to follow the brilliance of Heath Ledger as the Joker but Tate and Bane don't provide as menacing a presence when their slightly clichéd plan to 'blow up the city' is fully revealed. That, along with the traditional villain characteristic of explaining herself, allowing Gordan to disable the detonator, reduce the impact of the villain. All the energy had been poured into making Bane the bad guy (successfully) but it was undone when they made him little more than hired muscle to the real mastermind who gets killed very soon after (also, her relationship with Wayne is under-developed.)
Comparisons to The Dark Knight are inevitable and overall, I think the Dark Knight Rises matches it in terms of excitement and spectacle but not in terms of greatness. The flaws mentioned above hold it back from being a truly great, even though it has many good points that make it an good, enjoyable film in its own right.