Movie review rant 2014

Status
Not open for further replies.
Chlidonias said:
300

I've put off watching 300 for a long time because I thought it was going to be really really dumb. However I watched it the other day, finally, and it is not completely as dumb as I had thought it would be. I do love a good historical drama. Sure, maybe Xerxes wasn't really a nine foot tall Brazilian showgirl, maybe in real life the Spartan force of 300 men actually had 7000 other soldiers at their back, maybe they really did wear armour in battle and not fight in loincloths and capes, maybe possibly there weren't really even any monsters and mutants on the Persian side. But, er, I've forgotten where I was going with that.

Anyway, the movie isn't short on violence and blood and gross overuse of slow-motion. I think the entire thing was shot on a sound-stage if the horrible CGI backgrounds are anything to go by. I have read that the effects are supposed to harken back to the movie's “graphic novel” origin, but I think that must just be a clever way of saying the CGI sucks. The ethnicities and accents are wildly all over the place as well: the guy playing Xerxes may look somewhat less than Iranian but at least he doesn't have Leonidas' Scottish accent! And somehow I couldn't get past David Wenham (Faramir from Lord of the Rings) pretending to be hard-core enough to be a Spartan....

On the plus side there are some good one-liners and ripostes in the movie, the best of which are apparently translations of actual quotes the Spartans used!! Blimey. Those bits where they were told the Persian arrows would blot out the sun and the Spartans replied “then we shall fight in the shade!”, and when they were told to surrender their weapons and the Spartans replied “come and take them!” – those were really said by the Spartans at the Battle of Thermopylae! For the Persians it must have been like facing off against three hundred 80s-era Schwarzeneggers!! If the Spartans had film cameras imagine the action movies they would have made!

I would rate this movie two ways: one, relative to how everyone thinks it is so great, about a four out of ten – it's really not worth the acclaim it gets because it is really rather silly – but two, just as your standard Hollywood actioner, maybe it's worth a five or six.
Click to expand...

NZ is definitely spinning a bit slower than the rest of the world... isn't this a 2007 movie?

I quite enjoyed this flick. 8/10. About 2 weeks ago I watched 300 Part 2 - you should check that one out. The Brazilian showgirl is actually played by a Brazilian actor, and when you see him before the transformation, you can't help but think "damn, you're good looking". Eva Green gave a fantastic performance as an anti-heroine, and the 3-D effects in some parts were great.
 
nanoboy said:
I enjoy watching the occasional foreign film, so I was quite looking forward to 'The Raid: Redemption' because of its great online reviews.

It's an Indonesian film showcasing the native 'silat' style of martial arts. For a relatively low budget film, the choreography of the fight scenes was outstanding. Note that this is an extremely violent film about a SWAT team getting blown away one by one in a multi-storey low-income drug den (think of the 'projects' or 'council flats'), so not for the feint of heart.

If you didn't mind the violence of 'City of God' and you enjoyed the fight sequences of 'Ong Bak', then you simply must watch this 2011 movie. I can't wait to watch 'The Raid 2' (2014 release), but I seriously dread the butchered (pun intended) Hollywood remake.

8/10
Click to expand...

The Raid 2

Why are sequels so often huge disappointments? In my opinion, it's because the director strayed too far from the winning formula of the original, thereby alienating fans of the original.

This is where 'The Raid 2' failed. Gareth Evans tried to give the movie a story and failed miserably. At 2hrs 30mins, this movie was an hour too long. The plot made little sense, and the movie was like a slow moving river broken up by about 4 rapids (fight scenes). Part 1 was like a raging torrent. Gareth made a pathetic attempt to develop the characters, and in places, he introduced characters with little explanation - it was like a bad episode of Game of Thrones where you were left scratching your head and wondering "who is this Bangun dude they keep referring to?".

I have never been to Indonesia, but do people really wear leather jackets and leather gloves as standard attire? And let's not forget the fight scene in the snow in the middle of Jakarta - a failed attempt to get artsy like the final scene in 'House of Flying Daggers', the difference being that it really began snowing when they filmed the latter in Ukraine!

The few fight scenes were ok, but I wanted to be put out of my misery due to the length of the movie. I strongly recommend that you simply watch the fight scenes on Youtube and not waste $6 to rent this movie online.

4/10 - I want a refund

Here's an innovative, well-choreographed fight scene from the subway. (Warning: very violent.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I casually keep up with this thread so I hope this movie hasn't been covered already. On the weekend I went to see Snowpiercer at the cinema because I've read nothing but good reviews, it's based on a graphic novel (I was hoping for Sin City or V For Vendetta) and stars Tilda Swinton (she belongs to a short list of actors and actresses that I'll generally see a movie that they're just for the sake that they're in it). I even paid full price (which is a lot in Australia, as you'll know if you've read any of Nanoboy's reviews).

Anyway, the story goes that in the future there is an ice age caused by chemicals in the sky that were meant to cool the earth and the only surviving humans are all aboard a train that has the richest at the front and the poorest at the back. The people at the back live in squalor and organise a rebellion to make it to the front carriage-by-carriage. The premise sounds good, no? It also starts off really well with good character development and setting up the chance for revenge. However, the massive plot holes; such as characters disappearing when it's convenient and the constantly changing dimensions of the train, start to appear about a quarter of the way in and there are no attempts made to try and explain them. There are twists at the end that were predictable and didn't add anything to the story. I'd have been more surprised if everything was just as it seemed. The only fathomable reason for the good reviews that I can come up with is that perhaps the creators were very aware of the oversights and errors that existed, and exist in this genre in general, and hoped that that self-awareness would be picked up by the audience.

I'd probably give it 1.5/5, the type of thing you could sit through when it comes up on a movie channel at 2am but I'd definitely suggest not going out of your way to see it. Still not the worst movie I've seen though (that honour belongs to Season of the Witch).
 
PAT said:
I casually keep up with this thread so I hope this movie hasn't been covered already. On the weekend I went to see Snowpiercer at the cinema because I've read nothing but good reviews, it's based on a graphic novel (I was hoping for Sin City or V For Vendetta) and stars Tilda Swinton (she belongs to a short list of actors and actresses that I'll generally see a movie that they're just for the sake that they're in it). I even paid full price (which is a lot in Australia, as you'll know if you've read any of Nanoboy's reviews).

Anyway, the story goes that in the future there is an ice age caused by chemicals in the sky that were meant to cool the earth and the only surviving humans are all aboard a train that has the richest at the front and the poorest at the back. The people at the back live in squalor and organise a rebellion to make it to the front carriage-by-carriage. The premise sounds good, no? It also starts off really well with good character development and setting up the chance for revenge. However, the massive plot holes; such as characters disappearing when it's convenient and the constantly changing dimensions of the train, start to appear about a quarter of the way in and there are no attempts made to try and explain them. There are twists at the end that were predictable and didn't add anything to the story. I'd have been more surprised if everything was just as it seemed. The only fathomable reason for the good reviews that I can come up with is that perhaps the creators were very aware of the oversights and errors that existed, and exist in this genre in general, and hoped that that self-awareness would be picked up by the audience.

I'd probably give it 1.5/5, the type of thing you could sit through when it comes up on a movie channel at 2am but I'd definitely suggest not going out of your way to see it. Still not the worst movie I've seen though (that honour belongs to Season of the Witch).
Click to expand...

Aww dammit. I was really looking forward to this flick and planned on renting the BluRay. Is it worthy of watching in a "torrent", if you catch my drift?
 
PAT said:
Anyway, the story goes that in the future there is an ice age caused by chemicals in the sky that were meant to cool the earth and the only surviving humans are all aboard a train that has the richest at the front and the poorest at the back. The people at the back live in squalor and organise a rebellion to make it to the front carriage-by-carriage.
Click to expand...
I don't get it. Is it a regular train? Or some sort of flying space-train or something? Who is maintaining the tracks? Where is the fuel coming from? Where is the food coming from? This makes no sense at all!!!
 
Chlidonias said:
I don't get it. Is it a regular train? Or some sort of flying space-train or something? Who is maintaining the tracks? Where is the fuel coming from? Where is the food coming from? This makes no sense at all!!!
Click to expand...

The reviews I read said that this was a thinking man's movie. Clearly they meant that all throughout, you'll be thinking "this plot makes no sense whatsoever".
 
Chlidonias said:
I don't get it. Is it a regular train? Or some sort of flying space-train or something? Who is maintaining the tracks? Where is the fuel coming from? Where is the food coming from? This makes no sense at all!!!
Click to expand...

Sort of like a futuristic super train. A bit like the one in The Hunger Games. No one maintains the tracks because it's too cold to survive outside. It's fueled by some sort of futuristic engine (again not really explained). There are certain carriages that supply the food but no one seems to work because the rich people seem to sit around all day and the poor people are locked up.
And you won't stop asking yourself those sort of questions throughout the whole movie. Do the school children have to walk through the opium den to get to their classrooms? What laid the eggs? Why bother having an aquarium carriage if it only supplies enough fish to eat sushi twice a year? What's the polar bear been eating for 17 years if there isn't any life on earth.

And Nanoboy, definitely find an alternative method of viewing it. It came out in the USA last year so that shouldn't be hard.
 
nanoboy said:
And yet the reviews are great!

Anyone watched 'Captain America Winter Soldier' yet?
Click to expand...

I caught this flick on BluRay on Friday night, and I fell asleep during the final battle, which says more for the movie than my level of exhaustion. Sequels just seem to be disappointing me these days. I loved the first movie because it developed Captain Rogers' character and showed us his back story. This new movie was just a superhero, action movie that was so overly complicated, that I am sure not many viewers followed it. I should have just waited for it to come to free-to-air TV in a couple years.

Will the new X-Men movie disappoint me as well? Stay tuned until mid-October when the BluRay is released.

6/10
 
Did anyone see 'Noah' yet?

Well, I refused to watch it, because if I want to see make-believe stories, I'll watch a science-fiction flick. My wife was was insistent on watching it, so I duly rented it (i.e. downloaded it for 48hrs) in HD from Bigpond Movies Online for $7. Unfortunately, they don't give refunds.

According to my wife, she thought there would be more shots of the animals (like 'Life of Pi') and it would have been a reinterpretation of the Bible story. Instead, it was the same fairy tale we heard when we were kids that any of us with more than 2 brain cells thought "how did every single species fit on that boat?", and "what about animals from the 'New World'?".

I watched a few scenes myself, and I can confirm that the CGI was B-movie grade, and even Rusty couldn't save this flick. And why does he want to kill his grandkids? Anyway, a silly movie, not worth my time and effort to write any more.

3/10
 
nanoboy said:
And yet the reviews are great!

Anyone watched 'Captain America Winter Soldier' yet?
Click to expand...

I saw both of Marvel Studios' films this year, The Winter Soldier and Guardians of the Galaxy. IMO, both were a big improvement from last year's Iron Man 3 and Thor 2.
 
I watched Escape Plan because I was nostalgic. I was yearning for the 80s and 90s when 'Rambo' and 'The Terminator' were flicks that boys and men loved. Unfortunately, I forgot how old Sly and Arnie are now, so it was a bit of a shock to see two geriatric action heroes trying to be young.

Which brings me to my next point: this was an enjoyable movie that would have been even more so if the protagonists were of a slightly younger vintage.

Two old dudes locked away in an off-the-grid prison sounds like B-movie material, but it was still incredibly fun. Yes there are a few plot holes, and the story made no sense whatsoever in a few places, but you kind of expect that from films that these guys star in. (Have you seen The Expendables??)

Rent this movie or watch it for free on TV, but don't put it too high on your list of priorities.

7/10
 
I watched Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit over the weekend and although I enjoyed it, I felt that there was so much more they could have done with it.

The movie started off quite slowly (I suppose that one can call it 'character building'), and at times I felt like it was a ripoff of the 2003 Colin Farrell/Al Pacino movie, The Recruit - a university kid gets recruited by a shadowy old man to join a covert organisation.

The movie didn't have many big-budget action sequences, but they really let the nail-biting tension build up in a few scenes (e.g. the scene with Keira Knightley in the restaurant and the ensuing sequences).

My rating for this movie is similar to its rating on IMDB: 6/10. Buy the BluRay if it's in the 'bargain bin', and definitely watch it if it's on free-to-air TV.
 
nanoboy said:
I caught this flick on BluRay on Friday night, and I fell asleep during the final battle, which says more for the movie than my level of exhaustion. Sequels just seem to be disappointing me these days. I loved the first movie because it developed Captain Rogers' character and showed us his back story. This new movie was just a superhero, action movie that was so overly complicated, that I am sure not many viewers followed it. I should have just waited for it to come to free-to-air TV in a couple years.

Will the new X-Men movie disappoint me as well? Stay tuned until mid-October when the BluRay is released.

6/10
Click to expand...

I saw this a couple of weeks ago and thought it was pretty reasonable, although not as good as the original. I managed to follow it, liked the unexpected developments and overall plot.

Looking forward to the release of the new X-men as well, hopefully its on par with First Class.
 
I watched a few movies recently but didn't get around to writing reviews, so I'll keep these short and sweet.

Maleficent - 6/10
Given the dark tone of the posters and trailers, I was expecting an adult retelling of the Sleeping Beauty story. Instead, I got a tween movie filmed with a really dark filter!

X-Men: Days of Future Past - 10/10
A worthy, and even better sequel to 'First Class'. The action was non-stop, and with real historical events serving as a backdrop again, this was an entertaining and riveting ride. And yes, I can believe that it was Magneto who curved the trajectory of the bullet that killed JFK. :D

Edge of Tomorrow - 6/10
Entertaining, but seeing the same scenes over and over became a bit repetitive really quickly. After an hour, I just wanted it to be over. Save the world already, Tom!

Godzilla - 6/10
I gave this an extra point because I cranked up the volume and enjoyed the deep bass of the action sequences. Otherwise, it was just your standard Godzilla movie.

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes - 9.5/10
As you can tell, I really enjoyed this film. I thought it was slightly better than the first part with James Franco. The non-human apes were the stars of the show, with a large portion of the 'dialogue' being subtitled sign-language between apes. I really enjoyed the way they developed the characters of the apes, so much so that you forgot they were apes! The CGI was of such high quality that you will be forgiven for thinking that they were humans in monkey suits. Since I expected to see tanks rolling towards San Francisco at the end of the movie and was disappointed, it loses half a point.
 
Guardians of the Galaxy - 8/10

I didn't know what to expect from this movie after all the hype from the critics. A talking raccoon, a walking tree, a green alien, a wrestler, and an earthling with an 80s soundtrack: what's not to love? :D In the end, I found it to be an enjoyable but unmemorable film.
 
I saw a short trailer for the new Mad Max movie yesterday. It was basically a big mess of CGI and made me hate the director. Mad Max was always about real effects, getting out there and smashing up real cars and crippling real stunt-drivers. I expect there will be plenty of that in the movie, or at least I hope there is, but it certainly didn't come across in the trailer!
 
The Battle Of The Five Armies

I also saw the new Hobbit movie today, The Battle Of The Five Armies, and it was awesome with a capital O. When I saw the second of the trilogy last December I was a bit iffy about the amount of slapstick in it. This movie has none. None. Which I applaud. In fact it barely even has any humour at all; it is much more serious in tone, probably because pretty much the entire movie revolves around the battle (it has been a few years since I read the book, so I guess the five armies are those of dwarves, elves, men and two of orcs). The CGI is almost entirely excellent, unlike the last movie which had many ropey bits ruining scenes; here the only bad bit involves Legolas impossibly running up falling masonry. There are a couple of new creatures featured in the movie, namely the Earth-Eaters which are reminiscent of Dune's sandworms and nothing like Geophagus cichlids, and the bats of war which are pretty cool especially if you like bats. In the last movie I was surprised to see Stephen Fry in a primary role: in this movie I was even more surprised to see Billy Connolly riding a pig. Yes, you read that correctly. They did unfortunately feel the need to get in a mention of Aragorn at the end saying he was a ranger called Strider, despite Aragorn being only eleven years old at the time according to the time-line (!), but otherwise not any real complaints. It is a relatively short movie too, just over two hours, and it only has one ending instead of the seventeen or however many the final LOTR movie had!

Final verdict: ten out of ten.

(Note: I saw it in 2D because 3D is a pathetic money-gathering gimic which I will not bow down to).

(Note #2: the above contained spoilers....)
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top