Movie review rant 2015

Status
Not open for further replies.
Terminator Genisys

(Warning: Includes ALL the spoilers!)

This movie, the fifth in the series but "officially" the third because the previous third and fourth are so bad that they don't exist, has pretty much split critics down the middle. It is either hated or loved (or, to lesser degrees, disliked or not minded). I thought it was great! Supremely better than three and four, not as good as one and two obviously, but good enough for me to agree with James Cameron that it is a worthy third installment. There are various dumb bits in it (including Jai Courtney), some messy parts of the script, some unnecessary extras, but overall really very good. I would recommend it.

Arnold Schwarzenegger returns to his iconic character and gets to fight the original 1980s T-800. Emelia Clarke actually looks really similar to Sarah Connor/Linda Hamilton and plays the role very well. Jai Courtney as Kyle Reese... um, I think the best you could say is that you get used to him being there. He cannot act at all, and worse he looks nothing like the original actor Michael Bien. In connection with that, one particular thing which gets me with this movie is that in the original Terminator the human resistance were basically starving hobos with guns who were hiding in tunnels underground and eating rats; in this one, that same resistance is well-fed and apparently has ample gym time at their disposal.

Other things which grated with me included the physically-impossible bus flip in which even in the action-movie universe Kyle Reese would be dead several times over, not just have a little trickle of blood on his temple. The punks who the T-800 kills at the start of the original movie are also in this movie but played by different actors (of course) - yet they not only look like entirely different people but the make-up crew didn't even try to match their hairstyles to the originals (and they seemingly deliberately reversed the roles of Brian Thompson and Bill Paxton for some reason). It was incredibly distracting because this is such a well-known scene (watch the comparison clip on Youtube to see what I'm talking about - the link is at the bottom of this review). One of the reasons this was so irritating was that they went to great lengths otherwise to recreate the arrivals of the T-800 and Kyle Reese (right down to getting the exact same clothing and even the 1980s-style Nike shoes that Kyle steals from the store), and yet they utterly mutilate the punk scene.

The basic story is that Kyle Reese is sent back to 1984 to save Sarah Connor, but when he gets there he finds that timeline has been altered - a liquid metal T-1000 had been sent back to the 1970s to kill Sarah as a nine-year -old girl but she was rescued by a reprogrammed T-800 who then raised her. Another (or the same?) T-1000 is waiting for Kyle Reese when he arrives, but he is saved by Sarah and her T-800 (and they have already destroyed the other T-800 from the original timeline - er, apparently there can be multiple timelines all running in the same place.... yeah, the movie doesn't make a lot of sense when you try to think about it but hey, it's time travel. It's all timey-wimey and stuff). There's a short re-enactment of the chases from Terminator 2, then the T-1000 is destroyed with acid which when you're thinking about it afterwards makes the whole inclusion of the T-1000 seem a bit cheap and pointless. Almost like it was only in there as a cash-grab for the movie. Sarah and her T-800 have plans to go forward in time to 1997 to stop Judgement Day - they have built a time machine in a basement, as one does, but needed the CPU from the original timeline's T-800 to make it work. However Kyle has been having flash-backs of a childhood he never had in which he was talking to himself in a mirror saying that the Genisys programme would be going live in 2017 and that would be the rise of Skynet. (Again, don't really try to think about it too much!). So Sarah and Kyle go to 2017, and the T-800 stays behind because it has exposed metal from fighting the T-1000 so cannot use the time machine. Once they get to 2017 they meet up with the T-800, now 33 years older, and - Surprise! - John Connor is there too! Whaaaaaaaat!? Yeah, it turns out that John has become a new kind of Terminator, a hybrid man-machine, and he is evil. Actually it wasn't really a surprise - they gave the whole thing away in the goddam trailers!! Back to the Terminator 2 "homages" now, where the final battle takes place in the Cyberdyne building. The T-800 and whatever the heck the John Terminator is called (T-John?) get destroyed in the time machine which John had built at Cyberdyne - there are time machines all over the show in this movie! - but luckily the T-800's CPU ends up in a pool of polyalloy and it is reborn as a liquid metal Terminator. So everyone is happy. Sarah survives. Kyle Reese survives. The T-800 survives and I guess gets an upgrade. Sarah's son and saviour of the resistance is dead.. oh, bummer for him then. And the world is saved! Yay! Except nobody - not even the T-800 itself - seems to realise that the T-800's very presence proves that nothing has changed at all and that sequels are always inevitable.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wU5VUa3sJM

I've only just read the review - because I've only just seen the movie a couple of hours ago - and I have to agree with most of your comments.

A couple of weeks ago I bought a DVD set called the Terminator Quadrilogy and watched my way through them, because I know I went to the third and fourth movies but couldn't remember anything about them (except seeing Schwarzenegger make a very brief appearance towards the end of the fourth movie). And although the movies were not as good as the first two, I didn't mind them.

However, Terminator: Genisys is brilliant! The storyline is complex and has plenty of twists, and there are plenty of nods to the original movie, recreating scenes and doing them well. The punk scene was not quite the same (as already mentioned), but I put that down to a T-800 arriving eleven years earlier and slightly disrupting timelines. That would explain the change in clothes, and roles, of the punks (but not their increased ages). It also explains the physical appearance of the T-1000 and why it doesn't look like Robert Patrick. But it doesn't explain its actual appearance in 1984. But then again, there's a lot about temporal mechanics I don't understand, which is why I accept a lot of the 'holes' in the storyline - because temporal mechanics is not necessarily linear, or following the logics of physics.

In short, it is a worthy instalment in the series and my favourite out of the five.

:p

Hix

PS: Also saw the trailer for Man from U.N.C.L.E. and have to agree, it looks a little too much like an American production company trying to make a period British movie with typical British humour. It just doesn't seem to work (based on what I saw in the trailer).
 
The Kingsman - 8/10

I have a strong suspicion that this has already been reviewed on this thread, so I'll just say "go watch it, now!". There are a couple scenes at locations that Devilfish and I are very familiar with and since one of my hobbies is to visit movie locations, it's always great to say "yup, been in that exact spot many times". Oh, the church scene - amazing. I love 'long shots'.
 
Jupiter Descending - 2/10

Mila Kunis plays a cleaner (as in, 'cleans toilets for a living') who finds out that she really is an intergalactic queen who owns the planet Earth. The movie ends with her choosing a life of cleaning toilets instead of ruling the galaxy. That is all.
 
The Second Best Exotic Marigold Hotel - 6/10 I guess?

So how it seems to work in my house, is that one weekend I choose a movie, the next weekend my wife chooses the movie. I chose poorly the week before with 'Jupiter Ascending', and last weekend my wife chose to watch 'The Second Best Exotic Marigold Hotel'.

I didn't really watch the first movie, and I kept falling asleep during the second movie. I understand that the first movie was better, but this movie was ok. I'm not sure - these movies aren't my sort of bag, baby. (A tip of my hat to any young reader who knows the reference.)
 
Wait, is Jupiter Ascending or Descending? :confused:

Think I'll skip it either way.

Kingsman is epic, brilliant movie. Interestingly, the impressive (cinematically anyway) church scene was cut for release in Latin America, but I'm not sure how they managed to explain its consequences to that audience. What locations have you been to that were in the film?

Still to see BEM Hotel 2, but thought the first one was quite watchable.
 
Sharknado 3, Oh Hell No!

A trashy movie that doesn't take itself to seriously! If you've seen the first two then you'll know what to expect, if you haven't then it doesn't matter as this film throws out fake scientific explanations like nothing before!
Basically sharks are sucked up out of the sea in tornados and (apparently) live in the air eating birds! The sharknado then hits land and sharks fall from the sky and procede to devour everybody in their path. The first attack in this film happens in Washington with our hero (aptly named Fin) saves the president whilst the White House is destroyed by the Washington Monument! Very poor effects galore! ;)
After this dramatic opening set up the action travels to Orlando where 3 massive sharknados are about to collide and make a huge sharkicane (Amazing names, how do they do it?), which threatens Fin's family. Needless to say that blood and gore follow.
The film takes an unexpected twist when our hero has to team up with his estranged father (The one and only Hoff! :)), and they travel to space where they detonate a bomb into the sharkicane to drop air pressure. Cue lots of sharks flying through space and a bit of a cliffhanger featuring Tara Reid...

Some bizarre cameos from Penn and Teller, Ne-yo, Jedward, Steve Guttenberg and Lou Ferrigno make this a bizarre but fairly enjoyable romp of a B movie! I can't give it a proper score out of 10 as it's terrible and good at the same time, you'll have to watch it yourselves to make up your own mind! :)
 
Wait, is Jupiter Ascending or Descending? :confused:

Think I'll skip it either way.

Kingsman is epic, brilliant movie. Interestingly, the impressive (cinematically anyway) church scene was cut for release in Latin America, but I'm not sure how they managed to explain its consequences to that audience. What locations have you been to that were in the film?

Still to see BEM Hotel 2, but thought the first one was quite watchable.

It's Jupiter Ascending, but it just as easily could have been Jupiter Ass-ending.

I didn't realise they cut the church scene from the Latin American version - bizarre!

Prof Luke Skywalker was a lecturer at Imperial College London. There is a scene in a lecture theatre and an establishing shot of one of the entrances. I have stood at that exact entrance: from that point you can look across the road to a block of expensive flats where a scene from the movie 'The X-Files' was filmed. (It's the scene where the council of old men meet in London - the establishing shot was outside of the block of flats on the right of the bend, suggesting that they met upstairs. The university entrance is on the left between the large statues. The building that looks like a castle is the Royal College of Music, which should ring some bells for anyone who has taken piano lessons/exams.)
 

Attachments

  • Imperial X Files.JPG
    Imperial X Files.JPG
    251.3 KB · Views: 3
Quick update:

Both JJ Abrams reboots of Star Trek were awesome! 8/10 each for the great special effects and attempt to delve into the characters' back story. (My local 'Blockbuster' is closing down, so I picked up a few BluRays for a song.)

I watched 'Inside Man' on Netflix again over the weekend and enjoyed it. It's a bank heist movie with many twists, starring Jodie Foster, Denzel Washington and Clive Owen. 8/10
 
Another quick roundup:

Hangover Part 3 - 2/10
I should have stopped watching when in the opening scene a giraffe was killed and one of the 'wolf pack' exclaimed "It's a giraffe. Who gives a f***?". Overall, it's an unfunny movie that isn't sure if it wants to be a drama, comedy, or action, and instead fails at all three genres.

Man of Tai Chi - 6/10
Remember 'The Matrix' movie? Well Keanu Reeves has held a fascination with the kung fu master (Tiger Chen) that trained him for the fight scenes. In Keanu's directorial debut, Tiger Chen is the star of a dark kung fu movie involving an underground 'fight to the death' club for the wealthy. It wasn't bad - there were some excellent fight scenes - but it wasn't a standout movie either - Keanu's acting is as wooden as ever. Watch it for free on TV.

Battle Royale - 7/10
I hadn't seen this movie in a decade and watched it again recently. It's a very violent Japanese version of the Hunger Games. High-school kids battle to the death.

Fast and Furious 7 - 6/10
I am a huge fan of the franchise, but this instalment just didn't do it for me. It was over-the-top, unrealistic action, and at over 2hrs, it felt very very tedious. I only gave it an extra point in honour of Paul Walker.

Wolf Creek 2 - 8/10
You'll enjoy this Aussie slasher flick if you liked the first one. It's a bit on the unrealistic side, and a lot just didn't make sense, but it's a fun movie nonetheless. Australia now has a third stereotype to add to Mick Dundee and Steve Irwin: Mick Taylor. I picked up the BluRay for $5, and it was definitely worth it.

Argo - 8/10
A really good drama, directed by Batman (Ben Afflek).Supposedly based on a true story, it follows a small group of Americans trying to escape post-revolution Iran. It was tight, tense, and captured the era and mood very well. Rent it!
 
Mad Max: Fury Road

You know how you sometimes get those trilogies everyone loves, and the director wants to make a fourth one and somehow despite having decades to work out the plot it ends up feeling like they left it to the last three days before filming to even start writing the script? You know, like Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull?

Well, this is not one of those movies. This movie is amazing. This movie is what you want your action movies to be like but so very rarely end up receiving. George Miller has taken his three original Mad Max movies, rolled them into one movie, made it better than any of them, and yet somehow still made it possible for it to be seen as a fourth movie in the series instead of a simple do-over. The guy is a genius.

The majority of filming was done on location in Namibia as a stand-in for the Australian outback, but the majority of the actors are still Australian (albeit most of the main characters are not!). He even added in the calling of Australian crows to the sound effects, to keep it in line with the originals. There is plenty of CGI but unlike some movies which could be named, this is mostly used in combination with real effects in such a way that they blend together so well you don't even notice it is there. And where it is used in large quantity, it is usually done brilliantly (e.g. the monstrous sand-storm scene).

There are some nice touches as nods to the original movies like a girl with a little wind-up music toy (the one the Feral Kid had in Mad Max 2), the bad cartridges in Max's shotgun, and the main bad guy, Immortan Joe, is played by Hugh Keays-Byrne who also played the main bad guy Toecutter in the first Mad Max. The V8 Interceptor is also still Max's vehicle (although it was destroyed in Mad Max 2).

The actor choices are almost all great. Tom Hardy makes a brilliant Max Rockatansky, Charlize Theron is fantastic as Imperator Furiosa, Hugh Keays-Byrne is suitably freaky as Immortan Joe, Nicholas Hoult and Josh Helman look creepy as mutilated War Boys. Really the only choice I question is that of Rosie Huntington-Whiteley as The Splendid Agharad. I simply cannot imagine the thought process behind George Miller saying "hey, you know who would be great in my new Mad Max movie? That dopey chick from the third Transformers movie. She sure can act...."

Ten out of ten (despite the presence of Rosie Huntington-Whiteley).


Extra: I was just watching a video about the making of the movie, and they were originally supposed to be filming at Broken Hill in Australia, where the other three movies were filmed, but just before they started it began to rain torrentially, the first rain in the area in 15 years, and everything got swamped so they shifted to Namibia.

Well, I really can't improve on the review above. 10/10 from me too. The film is all action and no dialogue - exactly how you want your big budget action movies to be! Rent the BluRay, ASAP.
 
Well, I really can't improve on the review above. 10/10 from me too. The film is all action and no dialogue - exactly how you want your big budget action movies to be! Rent the BluRay, ASAP.
if you didn't get to see it on the big screen then you missed out majorly! It is still excellent on the small screen, but the landscapes and scale really make the movie.
 
if you didn't get to see it on the big screen then you missed out majorly! It is still excellent on the small screen, but the landscapes and scale really make the movie.

75" in full HD wasn't bad. And for extra measure I sat close to the screen. ;)
 
You ever watched a movie and wondered how come the critics got it so wrong? You know, like 'The Shawshank Redemption'? Well, RIPD is just like that... sort of. It only made half of its $130m production costs back at the box-office, and has a 13% Rotten Tomatoes rating, but I LOVED IT!!

I only need one sentence to describe it: it's a cross between Men In Black, and Ghostbusters. It's funny, the CGI is great and the story is cheesy: it's an all-round fun movie with Ryan Reynolds, Kevin Bacon, and Jeff Bridges.

8/10 - rent the BluRay and grab some popcorn.
 
You ever watched a movie and wondered how come the critics got it so wrong? You know, like 'The Shawshank Redemption'? Well, RIPD is just like that... sort of. It only made half of its $130m production costs back at the box-office, and has a 13% Rotten Tomatoes rating, but I LOVED IT!!

I only need one sentence to describe it: it's a cross between Men In Black, and Ghostbusters. It's funny, the CGI is great and the story is cheesy: it's an all-round fun movie with Ryan Reynolds, Kevin Bacon, and Jeff Bridges.

8/10 - rent the BluRay and grab some popcorn.

hmm. Here is my review of that movie, from page many pages back:

Chlidonias said:
R.I.P.D.

How best to describe this movie? Well, if you like the Men In Black movies (you know, M.I.B.) then you'll either love this movie because it is a straight rip, or you'll hate it because it is a straight rip.

A cool but ordinary cop (the loathesome Ryan Reynolds) is recruited to become another sort of cop in a world he never knew existed (hunting down ghosts instead of aliens), and to do this he is partnered with a codgery old-timer (Foghorn Leghorn, oops, I mean Jeff Bridges. Pretending to be Foghorn Leghorn). Together they have to save the world before the end of the movie. I mean, seriously, it is literally as if they were using the same script!

Unfortunately for R.I.P.D., Ryan Reynolds lacks the personality of Will Smith (or, indeed, any other kind of personality) and just smirks his way through scenes. Will Smith may play the same “aw-hell-naw” character in almost all his movies but at least he can act. And while Jeff Bridges can act, in this movie he does not appear to have remembered to do so, unless gurning through Colonel Sanders facial hair counts as acting.

There are a few funny moments here and there but not enough to save this stinking pile of garbage.

Oh, also, it has Kevin Bacon in it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top