Explore
 Lists  Reviews  Images  Update feed
Categories
MoviesTV ShowsMusicBooksGamesDVDs/Blu-RayPeopleArt & DesignPlacesWeb TV & PodcastsToys & CollectiblesComic Book SeriesBeautyAnimals   View more categories »
All reviews - Movies (70)

The Collection review

Posted : 4 years, 6 months ago on 27 January 2013 04:52 (A review of The Collection)

When The Collector came out, critics hated it but, a lot of people seemed to love it. Me, I was in the middle. It wasn't as bad as critics proclaimed it to be but, it wasn't great either. It was just a run-of- the-mill torture porn movie. It was never boring but, the execution could have been better. So three years later we get a sequel. I'm not sure who asked for it since there's hardly a fan base for this movie but, I have to say, this is a slight improvement over the first and I like the direction in which this series is heading.

As expected, this movie has some of the same problems as the first. For starters, we still don't know the collector's motives as to why he does what he does. We're given a little insight but, it's not enough. If there is a third movie, hopefully it'll explain his back story further. The next are the annoying plot holes, especially in the beginning. How was he able to set up those elaborate traps without anyone noticing and in such a short amount of time?

Then there are the characters. Obviously they're only here to let the film makers show off their cool and twisted traps that they came up with because these characters are as thin as paper. Characterization was left on the cutting room floor and since there's a group of them that go into the collector's lair we get to play the horror game guess who dies next! Even Josh Stewart's character Arkin(who was the main character in the first movie) isn't given any further exploration. With the way this movie ended, hopefully that will change in the next chapter.

The acting is an improvement over the first movie. Probably because this is a whole new cast with only 2 of the previous cast members returning. In the first movie, the acting is was what you would normally find in a porn movie. That's not the case here, with the exception of Josh Stewart who barely emits any emotion. He gave a better performance in The Dark Knight Rises in the ten minutes that he appeared in that movie than in this movie. The rest of the cast does a nice job. There's a naturalness to Emma Fitzpatrick's performance who sells her role. Christopher McDonald, who is probably the only recognizable person in the cast, does a fine job at playing the father who desperately wants his daughter back. As for everyone else, as I just said, they do nice jobs.

Now onto the best part, the traps! The traps this time around are more elaborate and twisted than the first film. I will say that the way some of the people that meet these traps, meet them in most gruesome way(no duh) but, there were points where my stomach turned. Especially the beginning, those who don't have a strong stomach it might be best to avoid this movie. There were also some very tense scenes that were well done. The one in the trailer where you see the spiders on the girl, that scene sent shivers up my spine. Then there's a part where the girl Elena(Emma Fitzpatrick) drops her hearing aid on a bear trap and has to get it off the bear trap. That scene kept me on the edge of my seat and on top of that she has to walk across the hallway full of bear traps. It's scenes like these and the traps that kept me engrossed throughout the movie.

Overall, a slight improvement over the first. Though it shares the some of the same problems as the first, lack of character development, still no back story or explanation as to why the collector does what he does, and plot holes galore. The acting is better this time around(except Josh Stewart), the traps are more elaborate and staged better, the execution is better, and it runs at a nice breezy pace. This movie won't gather any new fans but, to the people who like this kind of stuff, this is a treat. There were nice suspenseful moments that kept me engrossed even if this is implausible. Hopefully with the way this series is heading the third one will be even better and we'll finally get to know more about The Collector. Until then, this is a solid movie for it's genre and a solid entry into this (hopefully) ongoing trilogy.


0 comments, Reply to this entry

Rise of the Guardians review

Posted : 4 years, 8 months ago on 18 December 2012 07:58 (A review of Rise of the Guardians)

Looking back, Dreamworks has some great movies like Shrek but, they've never been the forerunner in the animation field, until recently that is. Ever since Kung Fu Panda, the quality in their movies has increased(with the exception of Monsters vs. Aliens. It was a decent movie, but a step back). Their best to date to me is, How To Train Your Dragon. Rise Of The Guardians doesn't soar as high as How To Train Your Dragon, or kick-ass the way the Kung Fu Panda movies do but, it comes close. This might be a step back for them but, it's only a tiny step back.

As much as I enjoyed this movie there were problems. The first is, the script. It's not bad but, compared to How To Train Your Dragon and Kung Fu Panda it just didn't have the same depth or feel as the scripts from those two movies. That's not to say there wasn't any depth but, it could have been better. The other thing is the storytelling. This movie moves at such a rapid pace that the story can't keep up, which makes some scenes feel out of place. Neither of these things didn't take that much away from the experience though. I loved everything else about the film.

The visuals are really good, the characters are well drawn out, there's ton of pretty colors and action to entertain both parents and kids. The animation isn't the best I've ever seen but, it's better than most these days. Ironically this takes place during Easter but, there's snow everywhere and Santa that it felt like Christmas. I loved that Santa was Russian and had tattoos everywhere, very cool twist on the character. The Easter Bunny is suppose to be the cute and adorable one, not here. He's portrayed as a warrior, and a good one at that. The tooth fairy is this half women half humming bird, not sure how I still feel about it, interesting nonetheless. The sandman doesn't talk and instead has to talk through well, his sand which I thought was cool. He was probably my favorite character next to Jack Frost who's the only normal looking one. He looks like a teenager but, has the voice of a man? It was weird at first but, I got use to it. The only thing that's really cute and adorable is Tooth's army and Santa's elves. The children characters didn't annoy me and I like how they became relevant to the story. Then there's pitch who has the least features and is the least drawn out. He was still cool looking though.

The character's are surprisingly fleshed out with Jack being the most fleshed out. Sure the whole hero trying to discover himself thing is cliched now but, he's given nice twists in his back story that it didn't make me like the character less, he was my favorite one. Pitch is also given an interesting back story, as well as a strong motivation to what he's doing and I like how it ties in with Jack Frost.

Though this won't be staying in theaters much longer as well as playing in 3-D, the 3-D is incredible. If it's still playing in 3-D by you go see it, trust me, the extra surcharge is worth it. The 3-D isn't over done or used as a gimmick, it's used the way it should be, to immerse you in the experience. The best are the fight scenes and when Jack Frost is flying. The fight scenes themselves are really cool and will wow both children and adults alike.

The voice acting is top notch. Sure you can recognize Chris Pine and Jude Laws voice but, it doesn't take you out of the experience at all. Alec Baldwin and Hugh Jackman were great, had I not looked at the cast list before I saw the movie I would haven never known it was them and Isla Fisher uses her American accent. The kids did a good job too, didn't recognize any of the names.

Overall, a nice edition from Dreamworks. It might not be as great as How To Train Your Dragon or Kung Fu Panda but, it comes close. The script isn't as deep and this movie felt rushed. Wish it was longer. This movie was a blast and I'm glad I saw it. The animation is great, the voice acting is top notch, and the 3-D was great. I also forgot to mention, there's not as much comedy as I thought there would be. I didn't care and don't misunderstand me, there were funny lines and scenes but, compared to other animated movies it's more serious. I still liked it anyway and it should still appeal to everyone


0 comments, Reply to this entry

The Perks of Being a Wallflower review

Posted : 4 years, 8 months ago on 18 December 2012 07:57 (A review of The Perks of Being a Wallflower)

I was completely surprised by this movie. I've always wanted this book to be made into a movie ever since I read it the summer before freshman year. Ever since then, the book has always had this lasting impact on me. Most of the things we're so relatable looking back at high school(I'm a freshman in college now). I was so worried that they were going to mess this up but, whatever worries I had subsided way before the end credits rolled. This is one of the best adaptations I've seen in a while and, if you haven't read the book, don't worry. Not only is this a sincere adaptation but, it's also funny, sad, heartfelt, and nostalgic(especially for those who attended high school during this time period).

I don't know where to start since I loved everything about this movie. I will admit, even though I'm giving this a perfect score and even though I loved it, there were two minor things that bothered me. The first, is the subplot involving the sister. It wasn't fully developed, this is because Stephen Chbosky cut out a lot of things involving her which was a little sad. I wish there were more scenes with Charlie and his sister, as well as his brother who is only in the movie for maybe 5 minutes? The other thing that bothered me was that this movie is too short! I know, that's really not a complaint but, I didn't want this movie to end. These two things in no way ruined my enjoyment of this movie or made me love it even less, but I felt like I needed to address them.

The acting in this movie is amazing, and it's so sad that these performances probably won't get recognized by the academy. The two that stick out the most are Logan Lerman and Ezra Miller. Sure Emma Watson is great but, this is Lerman's and Miller's movie. Lerman does such a great job at playing Charlie, he is what I pictured him to be when I read the book. He pretty much embodies Charlie. Miller proves that he has range and that We Nee to Talk About Kevin wasn't a hoax or anything. This character is so different from what he played in that movie, it's literally the opposite of what he played and he has no struggle with it. He is the perfect Patrick and I couldn't see anyone playing the part, but him. Same goes for Lerman. The supporting cast does a great job too. The one that sticks out most from that pact is Paul Rudd who plays Mr. Anderson, Charlies English teacher. All my English teachers in high school were great but, I think I speak for everyone when I say, I wish I had an English teacher like Mr. Anderson when I was in high school. Though, all my English teachers that I had did come close..?

Another thing that saddens me is that the soundtrack will probably be ignored by the Academy. This is going to be like last year where Drive's score was ignored, or the year before that when Tron Legacy's score was ignored. Each song was perfect and added that emotional punch to certain scenes. I will most definitely buy the soundtrack as it is probably on of the best soundtracks of this year. It really is a shame that it'll probably be ignored.

When it was first announced that the book was finally going to be made into a movie, I saw that Stephen Chbosky was going to be the writer and director. I was excited and worried about this. Usually with cases like these the author only does the screenplay and someone else directs it. I was not worried so much about the screenplay but, more so of the directing. Stephen Chbosky has screenplay credits under his name, his biggest one being Rent. However, he didn't have experience behind the camera. That's the part that worried me but, I ended up being worried for nothing. The screenplay is great and it deserve to be at least nominated for best adaptive screen play. The dialogue is amazing and he of course includes the line "We are Infinite!" which sent shivers down my spine when Lerman said that. The direction is also nice, it could have been better with maybe someone else but, either way it was still great.

This is a coming of age story and though it may seems generic on the surface, I assure you it's anything but that. There's so much more too it and though the trailers make this movie seem more of a comedy, it's not. There are funny parts but, the last act takes a dark turn so so of you who haven't read the novel might be surprised, especially with the twist.

Like the book, Charlie is my favorite character and he's the most relatable to me. He will probably be relatable to many of you too. The characters are well-developed of course but, sometimes with adaptations characterization can get lost in translation, that is not the case here. The chemistry between Lerman and Watson is effective. They make a nice couple together, kinda wish they were a couple in real life too aha. The interactions between everyone feels natural and unforced, same goes for the way everyone delivers their lines. I could go on and on but, I'll stop here and let you discover things on your own.

Overall, I couldn't have asked for a better adaptation. This is one of those moments where I was actually pleased with the movie and the book's transition to the big screen rather than being disappointed like, lets say, The Hunger Games. I loved everything about this movie, the soundtrack, the performances, etc. By the time the end credits rolled, I'll admit I cried. I cried because, a part of me now misses high school. I cried because this was such a beautiful movie and it's the movie I've been waiting ever since I picked up that book and read that first page. If there's one thing that I learned from the book and this movie, it's that moving on is simple, it' what we leave behind that's hard.


0 comments, Reply to this entry

Lockout review

Posted : 4 years, 8 months ago on 18 December 2012 04:25 (A review of Lockout)

Even though this got pretty bad reviews, I still decided to check this movie out. This isn't as bad as some people would lead you to believe. It could have been a lot better but, whatever potential they had, they squandered it. This is prett much Escape From New York except, in space.

There's not much in terms of story but, it takes place in the future. There's a max security prison in space and the president's daughter goes to it to check things out. She interviews ones of the prisoners and he ends up breaking free(Whattt???!!!). Soon her and everyone one else is in danger when all the prisoner's get released and in order to save the president's daughter they decide to send a guy named Snow. He is about to get sent to the prison for 30 years but, if he rescues the president's daughter all of his charges will be dropped. Then after that, you can pretty much pinpoint what's going to happen in the movie.

The things that I liked and disliked are all over the place but, I guess I'll start with the visuals. The visuals are inconsistent. Some of it is really bad and some of it is really good and pretty. The scenes where Snow is trying to run away from the police on a bike is laughably bad. You can tell everything is fake and the filming was poorly done. It was a sloppy scene, with a ton of shakey cam. The outerspace images are pretty and they looked like the were done with care(?). At least this movie wasn't in 3-D.

The script is poor for the most part. There are some funny and clever one liners from Guy Pearce but, other than that, the script feels like it was written by a 12 year old. With the exception of Snow, the characters are pretty much cardboard cut outs. I didn't really care for any of the characters including Snow himself even though he's the most developed. I see what the screenwriters were trying to do with him but, he comes off as annoying and an asshole and didn't really come off as the hero type.

Whatever the case, Guy Pearce plays him well. He is probably one of the best things about the movie, such a shame that his talent is not being put to good use here. Maggie Grace on the other hand is so wooden that I almost mistook her from a wooden plank. Her and Pearce barely had any chemistry together. I didn't care if they ended up together or not.The scene with them at the end with these two involving parachutes is unintentionally funny. The rest of the cast was only okay.

Overall, Guy Pearce, the nice visuals, and the occasional funny one liners save the movie. The poor script, the cardboard cut-out characters, the sloppy execution, and Maggie Grace bring this film down. There was a lot of potential that was unfortunately, wasted. The anti-gravity scene would have been a lot cooler had we not seen the same thing almost shot-for-shot in Mission Impossible 4. Unless you're dying to see this movie, then by all means, watch it. Otherwise, this is only good to watch if you truly have nothing to do.


0 comments, Reply to this entry

Sinister review

Posted : 4 years, 8 months ago on 18 December 2012 04:25 (A review of Sinister)

I wish I had seen it in theaters but, I couldn't thanks to hurricane Sandy. Instead I had to watch it on my 14 inch screen laptop. It was still scary to me but, it would have had a better lasting impact on me had I seen it on the big screen. Found Footage films are the new thing now, and it's getting real tiring. However, Sinister manages to inject some freshness into a tiresome genre. It's not the best found footage film to come out this year, that belongs to Chronicle but, it is the scariest. Which is nice because that's what seems to have been lacking this year.

There were some minor problems here and there but, nothing too serious that it diminishes it's effect of scaring you. As always the case with horror films, people do and make pretty dumb decisions that a normal human being wouldn't do. For example: Not turning on the lights when you're looking for something that you think you saw in the dark or not moving out when you've put your family in such danger. You have to accept these things, otherwise you won't enjoy it as much and to be quiet honest, it wouldn't be as much fun if you have characters doing what we would normally do in these situations. The other thing, is that the story is the same as every other haunted house movie. That didn't bother me though since this movie adds some of it's own unique and deliciously fresh twists and ideas.

As always with horror movies, mood and atmosphere are the most important things, and Sinister has no problem with establishing both. The house has this creepy and eerie feel, and has the look of an old fashion haunted house. The scares in this movie are effective, though they are mostly jump scares, they are effective. Especially the ones with the Demon. The home videos are extremely disturbing and creepy. There's one in particular involving a lawnmower that has forever truamatized me. The Demon himself is well done, kudos to the make-up artists. He doesn't look like a copy of anything else out there( that was one of the flaws of Inisdious), which is great because he has more of a lasting impact. I was afraid of looking out my window or wandering the halls of my house after I saw this movie because of him.

The acting is better than average. Ethan Hawke is such an underrated actor. He is conving as the "everyday" man, and even though he puts his familyin such danger, I couldn't help but to sympathize with him a bit. Juliet Rylance does a good job, she's not given much to do at first, but then becomes important to the plot, her and Hawke share some nice chemistry and are convincing as a married couple. The kids do admirable jobs, and aren't irratating in any way which is a plus. James Ransone does a nice job at providing us with some comic relief as the sheriff who just wants to be mentioned in Hawke's book. The rest of the cast does a good job even though they don't have much to do.

I feel like talking about the ending(no spoilers) because it seems to have divided people. I liked the ending, I knew there would be a twist, how can you not expect there to be one? However, it was predictable. Though, it did catch me off guard because while I was expecting one and had an idea of what it would be, for a moment it seemed like there wasn't going to be one. I liked it but, I'm not sure about everyone else.

Overall, a nice edition into the genre by adding some of it's own fresh twists. Sure, the characters do dumb things that any sane person wouldn't do and sure the basic story structure is similar to that of every other haunted house movie. However, it did manage to scare me, and the performances are much better than what we've come to expect in a movie from this genre. There have been more found footage films this year, than any other year that I can recall. Some of them have been good to great(Chronicle, V/H/S, and The Bay), while others have just been pure shit(The Devil Inisde, Project X). Sinister belongs in the former category. It's not the best found footage film, but it can take it's rightful crown as the best horror movie of the year


0 comments, Reply to this entry

Total Recall review

Posted : 4 years, 8 months ago on 30 November 2012 09:09 (A review of Total Recall)

Honestly, this is not as bad as a movie as some people would lead you to believe. This is a pretty generic movie but, it does have it's share of thrills and moments. I can't say if this remake is better or worse than the original since the last time I saw the remake was ten years ago and I don't really remember it. Based on what many people have said, the original is much better but, that shouldn't surprise you since that's case with 90% of all remakes today. Coming from someone who doesn't remember the original, this is just a generic movie.

This movie had the potiential to be a "mind fuck" kind of movie and Colin Farrell would have been perfect for it based on his performance here. However, it's clear that, that was not the filmmaker's idea. It's a dam shame because it could have been a great movie, and what's worse is that there are moments where this movie does toy with your mind, then gets interrupted. The script is pretty poor, the only times when it's good is during those moments when it plays with your mind, other than that it's sloppy and generic. The chemistry between Biel and Farrell isn't really believable even though they look like they would make a nice couple.

Kate Backinsale acts like she's still in the underworld movies and she even has less chemistry with Farrell than Biel. I guess that's because she was only pretending to be his wife, but it still wasn't convincing enough. She can kick ass at least. Farrell is good but, from what I remember in the original, he doesn't have the screen presnce to carry a movie like this out on his own. Biel just kind of phones in her performance, I guess that's because her character doesn't really have much use, she just runs along with Farrell and brings him to someone that he needs to see.

The world looks like bits and pieces from other sci-fi movies. Blade Runner and The Fifth Element come to mind. However, the Cgi is breathtaking, everything looks so real, kudos to the special effects team. It's probably the best Cgi I've seen to date, but that does not make up for the movies problems. The action does get the pulse-pounding and theres plenty of it. It's well choreographed and shot, so no shaky-cam except during the car chases, which ia understandable. The original took place on Mars, here it's on Earth, specifically Britain and Australia. Personally, I like this better and it's the only thing this remake gets right. Normally, when you make a remake, it gives you a chance to correct the problems of the original. That's the only thing it manages to correct, while making even more problems of it's own.

Overall, this would be a tv movie. The script is poor, the performances for the most part are dull(with the exception of Farrel), and the world looks like every other sci-fi world out there. The gorgous Cgi, impressive action sequences, and Farrell's performance save the movie. This is the second remake that Farrell has been in over the past year. Personally, I enjoyed Fright Night better. This movie is never boring but, unlike what the title says, I won't be remembering this movie anytime soon, I'll probably have forgotten this movie tomorrow.


0 comments, Reply to this entry

Skyfall review

Posted : 4 years, 8 months ago on 30 November 2012 08:58 (A review of Skyfall)

Looking at what people have said, they were disappointed because this "didn't feel like bond" or that it "wasn't a bond movie." To a certain extent, that's true. There's no fancy gadgets, no particular bond girl, no bond villain threatening to destroy the world, and no saving the bond girl from the villain. I for one am happy that they didn't stick to this formula. How many times can they make the same movie with a different actor? After Die Another Day I've grown so tired of it. I am glad that they moved away from the formula and that's what makes Skyfall one of the best bond movies(out of all the bond movies I have seen).

As always the case with bond movies, it opens with a thrilling sequence and the opening here does not disappoint. I think I liked the one in Casino Royale a bit more, but Skyfall is the better movie overall. The opening credits with the Adele song was beautiful. I wasn't a fan of the song at first, but now I can't get it out of my head, it's definitely one of the best bond songs.

The movie is gorgeously shot, kudos to the cinematographer. The actions are presented in a nice, clean cut manner. There isn't too much shaking during the action scenes, so you need not worry for those of you usually prone to motion sickness. The action scenes themselves are thrilling, and well choreographed. The action scenes here can stand along side those in The Avengers, Dark Knight Rises, and The Expendables.

Skyfall moves at a nice brisk pace. The movie clocks in at two hours and twenty-five minutes, it felt like it was a half hour. We're given time to get a glimpse at Bond's past which could be explored further, hopefully they'll explore his past more with the next two movies. Each character is given sufficient screen time, especially the villain. From all the bond movies I have seen, this has to be one of the best bond villains. He is a good match for bond both physically and mentally and the face off between these two does not disappoint.

The acting is top notch. Craig is definitely one of the best bonds next to Connery. Hit fits the part so well(physically and acting wise). He delivers a dam good performance. Javier Bardem is also just as good as the villain. I didn't recognize him at first but, he delivers his performance convincingly as a gay villain. The scene between him and Bond when he captures him and has him tied in a chair is just priceless. Judi Dench delivers a great performance as well and her character is given some back story which was nice. There are also some nice bonding scenes between her and Bond. Naomie Harris has great chemistry with Craig. The scenes between her and Bond rise above room temperature, especially the shaving scene. The rest of the cast is solid.

I haven't seen all the bond films, so I don't know if this is the best film ever but, it is one of the best films of 2012, that's for sure. I loved everything from the gorgeous cinematography and action to the great performances. As I mentioned earlier, this may not feel like a bond film but, to me that's a good thing. The formula is getting old and it's time to move on. The direction in which the bond films are heading is perfect, it's a fresh and unique, I cannot wait for the next two bond films. Goodluck to the filmmakers in trying to top Skyfall.


0 comments, Reply to this entry

The Bay review

Posted : 4 years, 8 months ago on 30 November 2012 08:56 (A review of The Bay)

I thought I'd give this movie a try since it seemed interesting even though I'm so sick of found footage films. To my surprise, this rises above most movies in this genre. This is labeled as a horror movie but, it's more psychological. For those of you attuned to found footage movies like the recent paranormal activity movies I suggest you look elsewhere.

Even though this movie was good, it does have it's share of problems. The biggest one being the ending. Which seems to be the case for a lot of found footage movies. It's not The Devil Inside bad but, it ends abruptly and doesn't offer a lot of closure. As the case with horror movies in general, the characters do head scratchingly dumb things. Of course it wouldn't be as much fun or scary if they did what a normal person would do in a situation like this. Once you accept this you'll enjoy the movie more. Though if there's dead bodies all over the place my first thought would be to get the hell away, not investigate.

There's really just one character, Donna. This is just a collection of videos put together while Donna tells us the story through a webcam. There's really no character to attatch too and Donna isn't really all that well developed. We get a couple of clips of her reporting during the midst of everything, but that's it. However, with a story like this you don't really need characters anyway, but it would have been nice if there was something to latch onto because I didn't feel all that sorry for the people who got it.

The story is intriguing and even though it's fake, it doesn't mean it can't happen. It's scary thought that something like this could happen. This reminds me of last year's Contagion. That movie was better but this was scarier. There are some jump scares and it has it's share of creepy moments as well as plenty of gore to keep the viewer engaged. The acting is effective even though not much was required frlm these people.

Overall, a nice edition to the found footage genre. The ending is a bit abrupt and there are really no characters, which means there's nothing to really latch onto. However, this is well made overall. It has some nice scares and gore but this is more psychological. It also puts a nice twist on the genre which puts it above most movies within this genre. This is a movie worth checking out.


0 comments, Reply to this entry

This Means War review

Posted : 4 years, 8 months ago on 30 November 2012 08:55 (A review of This Means War)

This Means War is pretty much what you'd expect from a movie that came out on Valentine's day. At least it's not a Nicholas Sparks movie. I wouldn't consider this as an option for a date movie, there are better choices out there but, if you're looking to pass the time you could do worse I guess.

This Means War is an action romantic comedy, at least that's what the marketing leads you to believe. It fails at all three. I guess comedy wins, but don't expect to be rolling on the floor and laughing your ass off. I will admit though, Chelsea Handler made me laugh a few times and was one of the best things about the movie. They should have expanded her role, it would have made a difference. Supposely they had to remove a few lines from her in order to bring the rating from an R to PG-13. If those lines were as funny as the ones she said now, then they're morons for doing it.

The action in this movie is nothing special and barely gets the pulse pounding. The romance is equally as dull and the heat between the relationships barely gets up to room temperature. Chris Pines and Reese Witherspoon have some sexual attraction but that's as far as it goes. The relationship between Tom Hardy and Reese Witherspoon comes of as the close friends variety. The chemistry between Chris Pines and Tom Hardy is lame. I didn't buy them as close friends or anything, which is a shame because the movie desperately needed something like that.

When seeing Chris Pine and Tom Hardy, one would think Tom Hardy would be the asshole but it's Chris Pines who's the real asshole here and he ups it up from Star Trek. The performances aren't that great with the exception of Chelsea Handler which is shocking considering the talent. It's clear they were hired for their pretty faces than they're acting which, I don't understand because these three can act. If you wanted to do that they why not get people like Taylor Launter? Instead of wasting the talents of these three.

The ending is so predictable and cute that it almost made me go into sugar shock. Everyone wins at the end which made this whole movie seem pointless. I know I've been bashing this movie a lot, but there were things I enjoyed. There is some fun to be had especially when the two guys constantly try to ruin each others dates. There's also a funny and clever little scene where Pine and Hardy are in Witherspoon's apartment planting cameras throughout the house in stealth mode while she's there.

Overall, this is nothing new that you haven't seen before. It attemps to be funny, and romantic, with some action on the side with only moderate sucess. The action isn't exciting, the romance is dull, and while I did laugh a few times most of the jokes fell flat and didn't work. There is some fun to be had, but the movie water the talents of it's cast. I wouldn't recommend this for a date movie or anything, only if you have nothing to do then this isn't such a bad option.


0 comments, Reply to this entry

Chronicle review

Posted : 4 years, 8 months ago on 30 November 2012 08:54 (A review of Chronicle)

Chronicle couldn't have come at a worse time, with Hollywood dumping a new "found footage" movie into multiplexes on a weekly basis(it certainly feels that way), this gimmick is so overused that I've grown tired of it. Fortunately though, with Chronicle there's some hope left in this genre. It's nice to see a found footage movie that doesn't feature demons or spirits haunting a family or a group of people. It puts a nice spin on the genre and that's only one of the many reasons to see this movie.

I really didn't have any problems with this movie at all, the only thing that bothered me was that this was made on a budget of twelve million. It looks like it was made on a budget of about ten dollars. The effects aren't horrendous, but it looks really fake, especially the flying. Other than that, this movie gets everything else right.

Could this film have worked without the first-person style? Maybe. However, for some reason it works well here and fits with the movie. There's not a lot of shaking so those of you prone to the usual symptoms, headaches, nausea, need not to worry. I will admit though, the characters film things but it's never fully explains it which makes this come off as a little awkward. By the end though, I was loving this movie so much that I didn't really care. The director does a nice job in getting us immersed in the action by literally putting us in the middle of it. Especially during the climax where there are ipods, iphones, ipads, and digital cameras floating all around, really bringing us into the chaos.

One thing that most found footage movies lack is a strong script, which Chronicle has. I guess that's because found footage is mostly used within the horror genre, which usually has stupid people doing stupid things that normal people would never do. Each character here gets sufficient screen time, there's Andrew(Dane Dehann) a shy, lonely kid, who's only friend happens to be his cousin Matt(Alex Russell) who hangs out with the popular crow and enjoys philosophy, and Matt's friend Steve(Michael B. Jordan) who everyone likes and is accomplished both in and out of school. These aren't fleshed out three dimensional characters but they're much more than cardboard cut outs or props.

Nothing ruins a found footage movie more than casting familiar faces. It ruins the experience and makes it feel less real. That is not the case here. With the exception of Michael Kelly, I don't recognize anyone. The three main characters mostly have TV credits under their belts with this being their first mainstream motion picture. I'm surprised at how good the performances were from these three and they should have nice futures ahead of them. The rest of the cast did a nice job as well.

The story is pretty much your typical origin story, except it's with real people. There are enough fresh twists and ideas though, which sets above most origin superhero movies. I'd rather take more superhero movies like chronicle than the overproduced, over budgeted crap that we have to deal with on a yearly basis(most recent examples: Green Lantern and Ghost rider 2).

Overall, this is a great edition to the found footage genre. Whatever hope left for the genre was diminished thanks to The Devil Inside but, Chronicle restores some of my faith. This movie does arrive at an unfortunate time but, don't let that stop you from seeing this movie. It injects some freshness in this genre, which is just what it needs as it has been slowly dying(creatively) over the past couple of years. I hope there are more movies like Chronicle in the future. This isn't the best movie of 2012 so far, but it's certainly at the top.


0 comments, Reply to this entry



Insert image

drop image here
(or click)
or enter URL:
 link image?  square?

Insert video

Format block