theinaniloquent's Reviews

The Royal Tenenbaums (2001)

8/10

18 May 2012

Before anything else, I'd like to tell you all that this is my first Wes Anderson film. I've heard lots about him, but never got around to his films. With the release of Moonrise Kingdom coming closer and closer, I've decided to hand-pick one of his "classics" and click play. Let's just say I've came out happy..

My favorite thing is Anderson's style. You can obviously tell his style in films, because their quirkiness is off-the-wall hilarious. He obviously has the sense of very subtle humor at times, but turns right back around and gives us a very dry sense of humor. I loved it, because it enhanced the film greater narratively and artistically.

I found the acting great. There's lots of well-known names in this gem, but none of them play their usual roles. Anderson made them play good to their part, and good to their material. I especially loved Bill Murray, who plays the not-so sarcastic one in this movie, which is different because in all his others, he played one. He had short-screen time, but the scenes he was in, keep all eyes on him.

The film had it's faults. Not sure if they were done purposely but they set off the mood (pun intended.) The film suffers from strange tonal shifts, that kind of give off the wrong impression. My brother watched the first twenty minutes, fell asleep, then woke up in the last twenty minutes. He thought he was watching an entire different movie! The first half is built of it's main source: quirkiness. But then the second half turns right around and turns melodramatic. Some scenes dragged out, the style seemed to fend out some great scenes, and blah, blah, blah. It still was a great film, which I greatly enjoyed.

For my first Wes Anderson film, I can tell what this man is doing and accomplishing. He feeds the film his style and projects it so it makes you feel an array of emotions. For my first Wes Anderson film, I liked it. It suffered from strange tonal shifts, but all else was great. It was quirky, witty, and had a subtle amount of poignancy.

0 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Shame (2011)

9/10

"Shame"

16 May 2012

I heard about this film beforehand, and found it to be really intriguing. It sounded like one of those films that makes you think, makes you wonder, makes you feel shame. I'm a big fan of these, because they don't attempt to "Hollywood" everything, and actually try to convey emotion from the audience instead of trying to keep everything secreted and giving the audience a half-assed attempt at something. So I finished watching it about ten minutes ago, and I was blown away...

Shame is exactly how I had foresaw. It was brutal, vulgar, and raw. It was one of those films you are embarrassed to talk about, but deep down understanding it's reasoning and meaning. I was, firstly, blown away from Fassbender's performance. He was spellbinding. Without him, I think the film wouldn't of gotten the same reaction it did. Whatever scene he was in, keep your eyes on him, because he knocks it out of the park, and gives a realistic and haunting approach that you will be thinking about for days. I loved Mulligan too, who gave a different performance then when I first saw her in Drive. It was interesting to see, and fantastic to see her with diversity. But what the film is built off of is it's context. I hear people complaining that the film doesn't even know it's own material, and I laugh at them. I found the whole entire film understandable and real, and almost to an extent where I can understand the character's feelings. Then I hear people saying the movie was just a porno in disguise. I laugh at them as well. I felt that the whole vulgarity of the film was a way to push realism, and make you feel like the character himself. I liked it this way, and can clearly see that the film deserved it's NC-17 rating... The film was slow, and was built as a character study. Some people can clearly be put off by this, but you need to know what you're getting yourself into. I loved it. Didn't exactly enjoy it (as it's not exactly an entertaining experience) but appreciated it's artsy direction and also it's clear understanding of an addiction. I thought they did it right.

By the end, I was shook and shamed. The film is not exactly what you see everyday, and that's what made me love it so much. It has almost perfect acting, a realistic approach, a slow but fitting pace, and a depressing and haunting atmosphere that will leave you with a scar for days...

9/10.

2 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Hercules (1997)

8/10

"Hero to zero!"

15 May 2012

I was afraid. As you would all know, Greek mythology has been twisted and turned by loads of people. So much, in fact, their original origins are unknown, because so many "remakes" were made. Worse, this was a Disney production. Disney surely has some great films, but others are cringe-worthy. So what would it be? I watched the film as a class study of Greek mythology, and I'm proud to say the source material hasn't been tampered with THAT much..

First things first: great animation. For a 1997 film, the landscapes were beautiful to see, and this is a person who's seen all the CGI-made films nowadays. My favorite design was the hydra, who seemed 3D-like. They did a great job visualizing the characters and their designs, almost making us forget the fact they were, in fact, animated. Second things second: the music. At first glance, you would never know this is an adventure slash musical film. I really enjoyed the gospel singers and the songs snipped in from Hercules and Meg. They were nice to hear, and the gospel singers enhanced the stories by adding a new form of narration. Third things third: the plot. This is where the film falls apart, for me, because the writers obviously try to lean towards their initial audience. They stripped away some of the Greek mythology by trying to make it a family film, but they end up stripping too much away. There was some clever jokes packed in, especially dozens of pop- culture references, but none of them made up for the fact that they took too much away.

Bad things stop there. Hercules was a very fun film that doesn't take too much away from becoming a fraud. It packs in clever references to Greek mythology, packs in lush animation, and packs in a key item in animations: heart. I recommend for anybody wanting to see a film that can still be enjoyable albeit forgetting some of it's source material.

8/10.

1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Groundhog Day (1993)

7/10

"He's having the day of his life, over and over..."

13 May 2012

I walked in. I had minor tad expectations. This was one of very few peoples favorite film, it had some good potential, and it had Bill Murray in it. How could anything go wrong? I sat down, turned it on, and took a swig at enjoying a mind(less) comedy...

I liked it. Groundhog Day has lots of heart, lots of laugh, and lots of sarcastic one-liners from Bill Murray. But as all this seems to come and go, there were some issues with it. The characters were really one-dimensional. Murray's character was set-up to be a jerk and learn a life lesson from repeating a bad day over and over again. The set-up was useless, and it was contrived. The movie was funny, but the jokes seemed to borrow and borrow from other films similar. Maybe it was because I've seen other modern tales ripped-off from this movie, that the jokes seemed not too smart, but good nevertheless. The film came off a little forgettable, as it gives a good moral lesson and then goes elsewhere; meaning comedy. Lots of it seemed a little preachy, the kind that tells you to get off your ass and live life, but it really didn't take away that much. And my last complaint was how it lacked depth. It sends a message, gives us a good laugh, then wraps up. The movie never gives us something to REALLY think about. The message could've been sugarcoated with more thought and process, but the final product wasn't as bad as my expectations thought it would be.

So the film was good. Although it was somewhat of a forgettable comedy, with a somewhat preachy moral message, it entertains and provides itself as a yearly tradition, and a good one at that.

7/10.

0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)

10/10

"An epic drama of adventure and exploration"

12 May 2012

I've finally watched the so-called masterpiece known as '2001: A Space Odyssey.' My expectations were at the highest beforehand. This was, if you did not know, made by the king Stanley Kubrick. His movies are visualized so perfectly, atmospherically-made haunting, and just all around brilliant. And this is just from seeing The Shining and The Clockwork Orange. So I took advise and watched it at night, on my 60' TV screen. My mind was empty, ready to be fed brilliance.. Not only did the film feed my expectations, it fed my brain. As weird as that sounds, 2001 did much more than it was meant to...

AMAZING. My mind was shattered. Throughout the film, my heart was beating rhythmically to the silence. This film is slow, know this, but it's slow-pace is only to be of annoyance to Michael Bay worshipers. The film's slow-pace is very slow, but to a point where the suspense obscures what could be boring. And the film, in a technical point, was just awe-inspiring. This is a 1968 film. The special effects were stunning to see, and this is from a 90's kid. I've seen late 70's films that have worse special effects than this right here. That's quite the achievement, Kubrick.. Everything from set-design to acting was well- done, but the real film is underlying in it's story.. During the duration, I was confused. The film just made no sense. But that's the point. There has been theories, cult-ish nonsense about the whole 'point' of this film, but no one will understand their confusion. The movie was meant to make you believe it was nonsense, but the truth is never to be told. My confusion made me enjoy the experience more than anything. The film questions humanity itself, even questioning the meaning of existence, of life, all wrapped up in a brilliant sci-fi epic. It seemed like it had no point at first glance, but it's all inside the package. But the film is a experience, that everybody should experience once in their lives. I hate saying "I just saw 2001!" because that sentence, in my mind, wouldn't of made sense. It would sound illiterate. So, I am joyed to say, I have experienced 2001...

But all this brilliance is going to be claimed stupid. Mainstream viewers have already knocked off this film, stating it's prolonged scenes were pointless, the film having no point to it. But, truth is, this film right here as inspired sci-fi films of today. Even if you didn't enjoy it, you have to appreciate what it has done. It has created a universe worth seeing. It has created and planted the idea for Michael Bay to direct Transformers. All these sci-fi films nowadays, are inspired by the greatest sci-fi epic of all-time: 2001: A Space Odyssey.

10/10.

1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Shrek 2 (2004)

9/10

"Once upon another time..."

12 May 2012

Shrek was a fantastic animation. It had everything you would need to enjoy it and appreciate it, too. It was a satire of fairy tales and happy endings, one that is sure to make you laugh. But speculation was arise when a sequel was announced, because only bad thoughts came into my mind. Sequels are sometimes good, but mostly bad. And especially how Shrek was an animation, they always try to do what the first did best.. So instead of complaining and expecting another bad sequel, I sat down to watch it, not much in my mind.. I'm glad to say, all this build-up of bad thoughts simmer out, as Shrek 2 gradually places itself AHEAD of the first..

The thing I loved was how they can this one a modernized look at fairy tales. This could lead to some bad things, but they knew what they were doing with it. We have a Hollywood-esque "Far, Far Away" that is sure to have you grinning. It's just how they executed it, they did a fantastic job. And the animation improved as well. There was so much to look at, so much colors projected onto the screen, I was in awe how much they stepped up. And people who are expecting to see the 'magic' of the first disappear, you're in for a shock. The whole atmosphere was there, albeit it's modernized twist. We have the great somehow fitting music, the underlying adult jokes, and the characters are all there. Some things were downgraded, some things were upgraded. You are sure to enjoy it. And that's what I loved about it. You see the first Shrek scoring itself a satire, and the second doing this as well, but adding new things as well. And this was the point of sequels before, and Shrek 2 fits the definition. A bigger, BETTER film than the first, one that can use new things but succeed at doing so.

I loved it. Some things were changed, big deal. It all worked in it's own way. I recommend for fans of the first, and haters of the third and forth. It contains the same magic of the first (still succeeds at it's satirical view of fairy tales) but also works alone. Fantástico!

9/10.

0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Hugo (2011)

10/10

"One of the most legendary directors of our time takes you on an extraordinary adventure"

11 May 2012

When I first saw the previews of Hugo, I was met with mixed expectations. It was that sort of thing that makes you half interesting, half "meh." It seemed like just another film to me, albeit the director Martin Scorsese. My expectations further went down when I kept scrolling through the forums, seeing the mainstream viewers outraged about how bored they were. And I consider myself a mainstream viewer, so this goes for me. When people review something, I have a 70% that I agree with them as well. But Hugo was way different than I would ever think.. It was, and I say this with all seriousness, a masterpiece...

The movie has a slow-pace, and there's no doubt about that. But it was no reason to call it "boring." The movie had me laughing, enjoying, and grinning throughout the entire film. And even viewers are calling the movie too long? Really? Dark Knight had a two hour and thirty minute run time. Avengers had a two hour and thirty minute run time. All the Transformers movies had a two hour and thirty minute run time. And yet people call this "long" because they weren't met with action-packed nonsense and cheesy one-liners. I loved this film, there's no way around that one.

The only thing I absolutely adored was this thing right here. People called this film a homage to this old French director. But the movie has far more to that. This movie is a homage to movies themselves. It's an entire two hour epic expressing it's appreciation and love for the power of film making. And it was meant for viewers like us, to appreciate how great movies are. But you're probably taking this as a bad thing, the movie has way more to that. Great acting, great story, and great lush directing. It's everything you would want a more. But maybe the film was too much for people to take. Maybe they expected way too much...

Side-note: The 3D! In 2D, I could already see this movie as good as it was, and the 3D is no enhancer. But adding onto the fantastic cinematography, the fantastic directing, and the fantastic environments: the 3D adds everything you want. And it's not that type of 3D that uses the old "pop-out" gimmick that makes us jump out of our seats. It's the kind that adds depth to the entire experience and appreciate how great the film was itself. And the 3D reaches heights films like Avatar had, maybe even surpassing it...

I loved this film. You read all these bad reviews, but Hugo is to be watched with an open-mind, and not exactly what you are getting from the previews. It contains everything you want and need from a movie: heart, depth, and the love and appreciation of movies themselves. Is that not enough?

10/10.

2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Goodfellas (1990)

7/10

"Murderers comes with smiles"

10 May 2012

Warning: Spoilers

When I first heard of Goodfellas, I was intrigued. It wasn't about a a single part of a gangster's life, it wasn't about the one part where the gangster decided to move along, it wasn't all that sappy, stupid stuff. It was about the LIFE of a gangster, and that meant realism..

Realism is a change sometimes, because it's either overused or underused. People make it so hyper-realistic, it may be a bit boring. On the latter, they use so many things to make it unrealistic that it doesn't even make sense to watch it. But realism works as a counterpart, and it was a film by Martin Scorsese. Who could go wrong with that?

I turned it on, watched it, and enjoyed it. It worked as a gangster movie, but anything outside of that? I had some mixed feelings...

The acting was brilliant. Everything did such an amazing job, I was surprised at how good it was. Especially how I've heard some scenes were acted how by REAL gangsters. And some scenes weren't told to the background actors, so their reactions were real and surprised.. The screenplay was really well-done. The jokes weren't supposed to be laugh- out-loud funny, but the actors played their parts and perfected them. Their sarcastic behavior made it THIS much more enjoyable and I had a grin upon my face the entire time.. The thing that made this the best was how the whole film reflected of the entire life of a gangster, and how things go in between. Instead of believing I was just watching a movie, I believed I was watching the unfolding of a gangster's life. We have the start, the life of them, the ups and downs, and how everything just goes downhill. We go on an array of emotions and much more. Classic.. But there seemed to be a problem with all of this. Although the movie broke-ground for future movies, there seemed to be this blandness to it. I don't know what it was. I loved the movie as a whole, but looking as I hadn't seen it when it became a classic, it seemed a bit contrived maybe? It seems sad to say that because I wanted to like it more than I had. But something seemed wrong. Something seemed not Scorsese about it...

Bad things stop there. The movie really was great, and I really do recommend watching it. But as it receives such high praise, maybe I had too much expectation(s) to surpass the un-originality the film gave to me. But the film was good, no doubt about it.

7/10.

0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Fight Club (1999)

10/10

"How much can you know about yourself if you've never been in a fight?"

10 May 2012

You know, it's hard sometimes when you see this extremely thought- provoking movie that thought-provokes you SO much, that you have no idea how to start your review. Other movies have hit me in some emotional way, but Fight Club did it in a secretive way. A way that I don't know what exactly hit me, but I know something hit me.. So instead of blabbering on about how much it 'hit' me, how about getting into actual stuff?

The acting was surprising from both leads. Brad Pitt surprises me left & right, but this was the first time where I saw Edward Norton, and thought: "wow, he CAN act!" And he rightfully can. The plot, at first glance, may seem like your typical boxing movie that adds in one new thing and stamps itself "the best movie ever." Well that's not the case. In the first ten minutes, I thought I was watching an entire different movie. Edward Norton narrates every little thing he does, sees, or thinks. It was a really strange set-up, but the strangeness was intriguing.. Then there's the people who bash this film because they find out the twist, finding it silly. I'm sure none of these people ever heard of multiple personality disorder? I thought it was a surprising twist. And for a film like this? A fantastic twist...But plot, characters, acting, directing, sound design, cinematography, and screenplay do even qualify to compete with this film's brilliance. Strangely enough, you don't even know what was so brilliant about it. You just know that something was there that made you go "wow" and think and think. That's film-making.. But the whole atmosphere of the movie, the whole directorial style Fincher creates, is mystifying. He has created this genre that I can't even get a grasp on. And it contains philosophical elements as well, which further enhance the underlying brilliance of it all... And Fight Club also works as a comedy. A dark, dark comedy. Some parts are so devilish evil that you can't help but smile. Need more? Fight Club works as a counterpart. Let me rephrase. It works as a study. It works as a masterpiece. Everything and anything the movie contains was surely not what you'd expect. "Fight Club." You hear those words and think another attempt at creating yet another boxing movie. No depth, no substance. But when you see it, you'll understand. You'll understand a lot more of everything...

Fight Club is much more an audience film than it is a critic's film. Critics rate the film itself, not even attempting to appreciate it's social commentary or it's brilliant message to the world. But I did. You will too. Fight Club competes with cinematic classics. It works as everything it's not. It's a favorite of mine. A brilliant, clever film. A film that will engage you with it's warm embrace. To have you reconciling every bit and piece. So what are you doing reading this review on the internet? Get off your lazy ass, and get out there. Do something with your life. While your sitting here doing nothing but reading this film, people are appreciating this film, while you are just reading the synopsis, trying to understand something you can't. Signed, Tyler Durden.

10/10.

3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Shark Tale (2004)

4/10

"A new school's gonna rule"

9 May 2012

I had expectations. Whoa, whoa. Don't freak out like I said something wrong. The cast was the only thing building up my expectations. The animation thing was out of my mind. It was made by Dreamwork's too, which is the only animation company that has reached heights Pixar has. And it was a film with gangster sharks. If that's not enough, the man himself Martin Scorsese plays one of the main characters. So the film had loads of potential. Potential that could either be surpassed or smashed...

Smashed.

I didn't like it, at all. My expectations were completely crushed from just the first ten minutes. So I'm going to tell you why exactly not to see this film, because there is no exact reason to anyways:

Voice acting. It seemed liked the actors didn't even care. I mean the cast was built-up so well, this was the main thing keeping my expectations up and running, but no. It was the acting you see where you can hear the pain in the actor's voice, where they are waiting until their break-time to go out and escape this hellish film..

The animation. Really? This was 2004. Animation was just picking up, I mean tremendously. But Shark Tale completely reverses what it could've been. The CGI was lazily-done and the colors were off-beat. It was almost like watching a bunch of colors dancing. But not good dancing, I mean really bad dancing.

The story. Well, I can't even say it's the worst thing here, but it doesn't really attempt to tell a story. The film was meant to be a kid's version of gangster flicks, correct? Well, it's not. It's a disgrace to them. Almost like burning all the classics in your fireplace. It almost hurt seeing the plot mushed by the confused writers who have no idea what they are exactly doing. It hurts!

But the film isn't the worst one ever, and it has a few redeeming qualities, but not the kind that makes you want to see it. I love the gangster references, and I found some of the humor to be somewhat hilarious, but other than that? I was sorely disappointed with what could have been.. I don't recommend. Please don't see this, whatever you do, don't see this.

4/10.

0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Chicken Run (2000)

9/10

"This ain't no chick flick!"

9 May 2012

Animations really question themselves: how can we make this good? How can we make this enjoyable for both children for adults? How can we set good messages and morals for the kids? How can we veer away from stuff that will be 'inappropriate' for children? How this, how that? How do we do this in order to do that? How do we edit this so that we can obtain that? How can we make this? How can we do this? How will this work? How will we make this not look like this? How, how, how. But Chicken Run does the impossible; chicken: impossible. It succeeds at doing all the things above, by obtaining it's status as an above average animation...

The most interesting thing Chicken Run does is completely steer away from animation itself. "What are you talking about?" Well.. instead of making an animation full of the overdone CGI effect, Chicken Run does it old-school style at makes it a stop-motion animation. I really loved this aspect, because it never wanted to be what others have been. And it was like watching something different from an animation.. The voice acting was really well-done. I loved the character of Rocky voiced by Mel Gibson. He gives the character his signature voice by adding his charismatic attitude and fun. The supporting cast all did an equally great job, and there was no complaints in this department.. The plot was quite different. The place where the chickens are imprisoned resembled a concentration camp used back in the Holocaust. While this may at first question the viewers, it was more of a satirical comment more than a hurtful one. I, for one, went along with this animation (key word: animation) and enjoyed the hell out of it. It was fun and inventive, where have you heard that before? Then the whole escape plot (using key plot devices from other films, making this film part animation, part parody) was really funny and cool. The whole 'inside the machine' scene was genius. The whole film reflected off this scene right here... And the movie was cleverly-written! Every scene contained a cleverly done joke that may be too clever for our own good. The writers took time and patience in order to create this hilarious experience, because I took full advantage.

I loved Chicken Run. It's was cleverly directed, written, and acted to a point where you will question if it's TOO clever. Warning: the film may not be for everyone. For people that love and enjoy animation comedies that come out nowadays, you may not understand how great the film really is. And for ones who do, good job. Great film; recommend.

9/10.

0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Adaptation. (2002)

9/10

"From the creator of Being John Malkovich, comes the story about the creator of Being John Malkovich"

9 May 2012

Warning: Spoilers

From the creator of Being John Malkovich, comes a story about the creator of John Malkovich. A story about a man who writes a screenplay from a book, that is to be adapted to a movie. A story about a woman who wrote the book, after being becoming interested in the plants. A story about a man who puts himself into the story, finding a way to "un- Hollywoodize" it, then shifting itself into the movie itself. A story about how a man fails and lets his "twin brother" into creating the story; who is filled with clichés and a big one on "Hollywood" plot, story, and characters. A story about writing, a story about life.

Clever. I could go into the brilliant plot, writing, and directing, but that all seemed a bit useless. The only word to perfectly define the entire film is 'clever' albeit my lame attempt at doing so..

I walked into the film with no expectations just like any other film I go to see. The first time, I turned it off in the first thirty minutes, finding myself in a mixture of confusion and boredom. But the second time, all seemed to come at me, as the overall brilliance was like a punch to the face..

This is one of those films that an explanation completes. The second time, after finished it's bizarre nature, I was met with mixed feelings. But as I thought about, read about it, and found out the whole POINT of it, I was mesmerized. I could go right now and explain the plot, giving the whole plot synopsis, but even that would result in me jumbling words together because it is just BRILLIANT, CLEVER, ORIGINAL. So instead of just saying how good it was (which shouldn't really tell you to go see it) let's go into the specs:

Nicolas Cage's acting. This right here, those third words right over there, make this film what it is. It surely proves the naysayers wrong, and proves the yaysayers right. Nicolas Cage is a wonderful actor, who may put himself in silly roles, but other films (like this one right here) can deplete that fact right there. His acting was great, especially how you see that he plays two characters. The supporting cast was also fantastic. High props to Meryl Streep and Chris Cooper.. The plot was overall just that one word you've heard before in all these identical reviews - clever. I've never seen Being John Malkovich, but the director's artistic mind and cleverly-executed sense of style can lead me right over to it. The overall film itself was a perfect example about how originality can take it's tole, and no, movies nowadays are not shallow. This is the example. The movie was also pretty hilarious in my humble opinion. Adaptation realizes that it's a satire on a writer's life and accepts that, and although that sounds a bit silly, there's so much more to compete with that fact right there. I was impressed. Adaptation has brilliant/clever acting, directing, writing, and soul. It's depth has yet to be found...

But the film isn't for everybody, and I recommend for a select few who can take + understand the underlying satire this film consumes. My first impression might be yours too, but after finding out how clever the film really is, it needs to be taking accounted for. I loved it.

9/10.

0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Phone Booth (2002)

5/10

"Your life is on the line"

9 May 2012

Warning: Spoilers

Well, I can't really get into much detail, as there isn't going to be much going on. Joel Schumacher is a really bad director in my opinion, albeit a few decent films. When I first heard of this one, I passed it off as just another wanna-be thriller that contains no substance or depth. And the overall film itself looked exactly like a Joel Schumacher film, so that's that.. But you know that feeling you get, where your vulnerable and find yourself wanting to watch anything to at least give you *some* entertainment? This was me, three days ago. I wanted to watch something that would provide a twist, even if it came across cliché or stupid. I was the complete antonym of relentlessness..

So I watched it. Can't say I didn't hated it.. But can't say I liked it either...

Phone Booth was that kind of film I wanted to get into. Cheap thrills and some comedic moments as well. The acting was cheap and wooden at times, but I was surprised to find that Collin Ferrell's performance wasn't too bad, especially in the scenes where he follows the man beyond the phone. The plot was new, hasn't been done before. But that gives it no reason to be clichéd as points, and also a bit stupid. (the whole hooker part, really?) And the twist? Really? It wasn't expecting that overall "shock factor" that some classics give to you, but Phone Booth seemed to be lazy in it's writing. It just seemed a little silly, and also a bit cliché. The man behind the phone wasn't that guy, it was this guy. Fade to black; credits roll. Haven't seen that before. And although I keep bashing it like I mean it, it isn't the worse film of all time. It was entertaining and fast-paced, but should be no way with a high point average such as 7.1!

I recommend for the vulnerable feeling I was feeling. If there isn't any other movies to watch, and you're dying to pure boredom, I was suggest watching this; as it provides for your feelings. But the whole film as a whole? As an art? One word: forgettable..

5/10.

0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

The Social Network (2010)

10/10

"You don't get to 500 million friends without making a few enemies"

9 May 2012

When I first heard they were making a film about Facebook, I literally laughed out loud. I've seen some interesting documentaries, but a movie about a overrated social networking site? No.. Then someone told me about David Fincher directing it. That immediately sparked up my interest. He's a favorite of mines, with film classics such as Fight Club.. But, again, a movie about a website? I've never heard the story beforehand, and at first glance, it could be done so boring. My fears were obvious.. Then I saw the trailer. It looked fantastic, albeit the fact it was about a social networking site. I really couldn't picture David Fincher directing this, but it seriously did intrigue me...

It blew all my expectations AWAY!

The thing I liked was how narratively brilliant it was. David Fincher made it easy to follow, with clever twist and turns to make it entertaining to see. That was another fear of mine; it would be boring as ever. But David Fincher can't do that.. The acting was simply some of the best acting I've ever seen. Jesse Eisenberg was genius. His awkward, fast-talking character was perfected. He has this thing where he fits into a character without getting into himself. The one that surprised me was Andrew Garfield, which this was my first film with him in it. He plays his character as good as Jesse Eisenberg, if not, better.. The screenplay was some of my favorite parts. With the character of Jesse alongside his sarcastic behavior, you are sure to laugh. And it's not like laugh-out-loud funny, it was clever funny. The one where you'll secretly smile at it's secretive snide remarks. The score deserves it's recognition. When you first hear it, you're going to be like "this is like a horror film score" and you're rightly so. It fit the film in the strangest way, and made it seem way different then it could've been. I loved it.. And the directing (the combination of all these things: THE FILM) was just brilliant. This is a David Fincher masterpiece, and is surely a favorite of his. The film might not compete with the greatest films of all time, but it deserves to be recognized as one of the best of the decade...

I recommend for anybody who saw it, and thought as I had. It blew away my expectations, and I'm 95% sure it will blow yours away too. With the near-perfected directing, acting, score, and overall atmosphere makes this a near-masterpiece!

10/10.

0 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

From Paris with Love (2010)

1/10

"Two agents, one city, no mercy"

9 May 2012

You know how you can walk into a film with some expectations; those expecting a decent or even above average action flick. Then when the movie progresses, your cringing. You're questioning your reasoning to be there. You begin to check your watch, every five minutes or so. The story in the film was so cliché that you could foresee the plot "twist" from the beginning five minutes. And that's pretty funny, because I had no reason to even finish it. You find yourself wanting to get up, but your asking yourself: "Why did I pay all this money just to walk out?" You question your mortality, your faith in humanity. This is all leading up, of course, to that one moment (thirty minutes before the film concludes) where you stand up and actually do walk out that door, crying yourself to sleep, attempting to bash the film on the internet. You're days are closing in every single day, why even try to attempt to see this kind of movie?

Okay, maybe that was a bit exaggerated, but From Paris with Love was just as expected: bad!

Now I want YOU to know why the film was bad, because it has no redeeming qualities within it. If you walk out of a movie (which is not very likely) you know the movie is bad.. The acting. I hated John Travolta in this movie. When I first saw the previews, I was suspected a Face/Off- esque Travolta. That all went down the drain when I saw his lame attempts at humor. He seemed to be reading the one-liners off his hands, and they didn't even succeed at being funny anyways! The other guy did good, but not good enough.. The plot line. Okay, I admit, I wasn't really expecting much from here. All I was expecting was a decent action-thriller that could hold up a sense of depth, or even a decent plot twist. All that even went down the drain. The first ten minutes, the plot "twist" was right there, I already saw it from guessing it. And I didn't even have to see the end to know how it ended. I already knew.. The action? It was all formulaic. We have a mix of shoot-em-up and more shoot-em-up. And throughout these scenes, we hear a long guitar beat in the background. If a movie doesn't even attempt to create their own "soundtrack" they have no business being a movie...

From Paris with Love surely doesn't deserve a one. It's a five at maximum, and that's pretty bad. It was just another below average movie that you see coming out every single month. I gave it a one for destroying my expectations, cringing at the poorly-executed dialog/action, and leaving a bad aftertaste afterwords. And I don't want you guys to go through that either...

1/10.

1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Donnie Darko (2001)

10/10

"Why are you wearing that stupid man suit?"

8 May 2012

At first glance, Donnie Darko could seem silly, and a bit stupid. This was my first impression when I first came across this film. I mean, a giant bunny? That alone could leave you with a bad taste in your mouth. And when I first watched the movie, I was severely confused; which I considered a problem with the movie back then. I digress, my expectations were a little too high back then, but now I've re-watched it and found something closer than it appears..

The thing I love about Donnie Darko is how confusing it is. Now while that may seem like a problem, it's really not. Donnie Darko has this plot so we can put the pieces together: forming our own branded puzzle set. This is why I refuse to put one footstep into the director's cut, because my imagination seems like a more reasonable and valuable choice. The movie itself? Fantastic. I literally was at the edge of my seat, and there was no point where my arm was resting below my chin. It's one of those films where you're so confusing, so deeply engaged into it's strangeness, that it turns out to be a special one. I don't even need to go into the plot, because twist after twist! I never saw it coming, I never saw the deeply-rich story. And while people think they know the whole film by saying these two words - time travel - they have no idea. The movie has so much more power than what'd you'd expect. And the movie never tells itself what it is, making it one of the most visually- experiencing films ever...

So why would you just sit around and read this with no intention to even see the film? People watch a couple minutes, turn it off, and read the story online stating that they "watched" it all, and end up giving it bad reviews. That was my first choice of action, but nothing would ever make me go back in time to make that happen. Donnie Darko is one of my favorite films of all-time. Not enough? It blends everything you need in a movie, including fan favorites of the atmosphere, the story, then the twist that sets the film off into a whole new image that you can't quite see, but want to. I recommend for everybody and anybody wanting to experience a film, not just find it as escapism. Now question is: what would you do if you could see into the future?

10/10.

0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

We Bought a Zoo (2011)

7/10

"We Bought a Zoo!"

8 May 2012

This is the first film I've seen by Cameron Crowe. I've heard lots about it, news circulating that it was a great film by a unsuspecting director. There's not much to this prologue, except I became intrigued and wanted to see what would happen..

I really did like it. I loved how the plot was so simplistic and low- key, that nothing could really stop you from watching it with a heart. The first thing I really loved was the cast. We have Matt Damon (great actor, with great diversity) Scarlett Johansson (pretty actor that I've known and loved from Lost in Translation) and lots of others underrated actors. They all did a great job playing their parts, albeit some scenes coming across cheesy. And that reminds me, the style of the film.. It really doesn't want to be as complex as you think, and the acting isn't bad at all. People may glance at it and think it is, but I thought the acting contained lots of heart and soul. It takes a lot for that to happen. Everything else was done with a similar fashion, and the film is glossed over with some emotional aspects. And for a family film, it was really refreshing to see. And to keep this alongside the film, I'm not going to go into full details. The movie was simplistic, sweet, and hopeful. So will this review. I liked it, I'm sure you will too.

7/10.

3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Beetlejuice (1988)

1/10

"He's guaranteed to put some life, in your afterlife"

8 May 2012

Now I love Tim Burton. He's probably the most unique, gifted directors out there. Saddest thing is, I've only seen one film by him: Edward Scissorhands, which I loved! So instead of liking the guy from one film, I researched his other works, and Beetlejuice always interested me the most. So I waited and waited, then finally watched it as soon as it started to record. And I'm sad to say that I didn't like Beetlejuice at all..

Now the film doesn't deserve the one rating, but that was given from all my expectations and the fact that Tim Burton made it. It was new and unique, but something about it just gave off the wrong vibe.. The material was just so stupid in my opinion. The afterlife premise was unique, sure, but I thought it was just executed in the wrong way. Tim Burton adds in a little comic effect, which in my opinion, wasn't funny at all.. And the film is straight-up gimmicky. It relies on special effects, not funny jokes, and a bizarre atmosphere that you don't even want to be in. The characters were one-dimensional and the character of Beetlejuice (or should I say Betelgeuse?) wasn't crazy, funny, or unique. Instead he came off rude, stupid, and annoying. The way the film is based off his character alone, especially how he shows up halfway through the film, makes it bad alone.. This film was riveting. It surely hit me as a clever-WRITTEN film, but execution matters. And yes, style over substance is all here. That's a bad thing.

I may be bashed and hated for this review, because I'm the only person on this planet that hated Beetlejuice. Maybe I was expecting too much, but the film just didn't do anything new for me, and the whole thing was too over done. The reason I didn't like it may always start with 'maybe' but surely enough, I didn't like it. It's sad too, because I wanted to..

1/10.

14 out of 35 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Crank: High Voltage (2009)

1/10

"Fully charged"

8 May 2012

Crank wasn't a bad movie, let's just start with that. It was somewhat cleverly done, but it was just too crazy (which makes it stupid) to make it a GOOD movie. But I remembered hearing it had a sequel, that completely gives it a new edge, and is surely better than the original..

Yeah, okay.

I feel bad for hating this film all together, because the directors tried hard to entertain. Sadly enough, I wasn't even entertained with this film. The craziness was maxed out to a whole different dimension, and depending on your taste, this could be a good or bad thing. Me? Bad thing. The film had a plot and characters, but all together it meant nothing towards the film. It was so out-of-control, that it knocks you out for pure meaningless. And, yes, I do understand films are escapism, but Crank: High Voltage wasn't fun for me. It's style was close to pornographic, close to glamorizing violence, close to giving you a lifetime of seizures. But that didn't even come into the equation. Crank: High Voltage is just what I expected: a bad movie. And I don't even like describing this film as a movie, because it's really not. It has what you'd consider characters, plot, setting, and a villain, but it doesn't matter...

If you're a drug-addict, here's your kind of movie!

1/10.

4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

The Italian Job (2003)

6/10

"Get it, get out, get even"

8 May 2012

Warning: Spoilers

I can't honestly say I had an expectation for this sort of film. The trailer made me sit with my left arm on the chin. It just looked clichéd, recycled, and last but not least same kind of film you see nowadays..

But I watched it, and I have to say, the film was better than I thought it would be.

Firstly, the cast was my favorite part. It had a lot of great actors, especially unexpected ones, that made this a much better experience. I mean, we have Mark Wahlburg, great actor with lots of diversity. Jason Statham, which was perfectly fitting for this sort of film. He's the king of action films. Seth Green. I couldn't believe he was cast, but I loved him in this film. He added comic relief (although there was much more comedic things going on) and a sense of style that made the cast all fit together. Mos Def? That was another unexpected actor. He pushed aside what people would call 'racism' but then added his little role to add to the team. Then Edward Norton. Great actor, who played a great villain. He seemed a bit too serious about what was going on in the screen, but nevertheless he added a great part to the film. The greatest charismatic team of all time. So with all that cast going on, what more could add to the film? I love heist movies. This one adds to the list of good ones, but never competes to the classics. But the plans were clever and new, and never stopped twisting and turning with action and intensity.

But the film is just so forgettable. Even with the great cast, and the great action scenes, nothing makes up for it's clichéd doings. I will look back sometimes, and wonder why the critics liked it more than the audience, but I wasn't too fond of how forgettable I will see this film was. But looking for a little entertaining fun? Recommended.

6/10.

0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Drag Me to Hell (2009)

9/10

"Even nice people go to hell"

8 May 2012

Wow!

I love Sam Raimai. He has created masterpieces. Evil Dead? The king of horror. It was badly misunderstood with it's campy effect, but now is known as one of the best. The Spiderman trilogy? This is probably the best trilogy next to the Dark Knight's. He knows how to direct a film without being serious, and taking a break from all seriousness can be great sometimes and we actually need it. But with Drag Me to Hell, I have big expectations. I read the critic's reviews stating that this IS Raimai's return to what we known and loved, and guess what? It surpassed all expectations.

Sam Raimai has this thing with this film, where he takes this forgettable, clichéd story and turns it inside-out. When I first read the plot summary, I really thought it wouldn't turn out to be what it was all cracked up to be.

Wrong.

He inserts his formula of horror slash comedy and wraps it up in his special entrée. And he did a fantastic job. What I liked best was how Sam got away with his PG-13 rating but still keeps all his formula there. We have the gross-out gags, which were hilarious to watch, while also managing to make us look away in disgust. But that's all we wanted, we got it. The movie was actually a bit scary, just like the original Evil Dead. He knows how to mix horror + comedy in a great fashion, where we don't know which one was present more of. And again, the movie was hilarious! If you're not too sure of black comedies, especially ones that mixture with horror, then this won't be that great to you. But every scene was excellently done, and this was the return of the horror/comedy king!

Now what saddens me is that people gave this bad reviews. It was understandable, but films much worse than this are rated higher, but are so much more clichéd. People didn't understand that the film wasn't meant to be taken seriously, was supposed to be a bit campy, and was expected to actually make you laugh. But the critics are the ones to listen to here, and recommend for all people ready to be disgusted, to laugh, to be horrified, to have fun! Drag Me to Hell was a treat, and one of the most entertaining movies of the best decade. And special kudos for the ending, which was one of the craziest twists ever. Now people saw they saw it coming, but I'm 75% sure they didn't, and they wanted to feel a bit better about themselves. Anyways.. Drag Me to Hell was a treat, and one of the most entertaining movies of the best decade.

9/10.

1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

God Bless America (2011)

6/10

"Taking out the trash, one jerk at a time"

7 May 2012

Impressed with Bobcat'this film. It looked daring, violent, and truthful but all wrapped up together in a Bobcat fashion. So I waited and waited, and finally bought it on DirecTV Cinema, spending ten bucks on something (worth?) spending on...

I don't know what exactly to say about this film. Bobcat really puts it in the right direction in some scenes, but then veers off into the wrong direction finding himself at a dead end. I loved the whole 'premise' of the film. It was original, morbid, and daring. And that's all I expected to see. And I got what I wanted to see, but was it handled in the right fashion? Yes and no. Let me start with my likes... It was violent and daring. When I saw the trailer, I actually had faith in the film because I mostly found it truthful. Bobcat has this thing where he inserts the most disturbing things ever, but somehow makes them funny. But that's what I loved about God Bless America. It was a black comedy, a very, very black comedy. That's what I wanted, and I got what I wanted. But then the dislikes come into the equation, making me feel a bit disappointed. I loved the character of Frank. He was just so fed-up, and the first thirty minutes gives us time to feel about his situation. Then the girl comes in, which I absolutely hated! I don't even know why Bobcat would even accept her into the film. She didn't make the film any better, and frankly, I think she almost ruined the film. But I loved their dialogue exchanges, and the girl did good for her role. But a little girl was not needed for this kind of film... Then the film became way too preachy. I mean the kind of preachy you see in church, where the pastor is screaming out of how we need to respect and love the lord! That's annoying? Well the main character's monologues became way too exaggerated (sometimes funny) but all together annoying. And the film, in my opinion, was exaggerated itself. I mean, the media is stupid sometimes, and God Bless America serves itself as a hate message, but sometimes it exaggerates our world we live in today. Maybe if these flaws were taken out, God Bless America would've been redeemed and loved. Otherwise, I'm sad to say.. I was disappointed..

I don't know whether to recommend or not. I see people praising the film, like it was something done right, but I'm not sure if it did something right or not. The message was sent out there, and I loved that aspect, and for that the film could've been redeemed. But for a film, itself, I wasn't too impressed. And that's really sad, because I really wanted to like it.

6/10.

3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief (2010)

5/10

"The Lightning Thief"

7 May 2012

Now I have to be honest, I didn't have no sort of 'expectation' for this film. To be honest, I never even read the book where the film is based off of. All I knew was the book was a book written for middle schoolers who are looking for a more entertaining (isn't it already entertaining enough?) way to get into Greek mythology. So with that already in mind, the words 'cheesy' and 'disastrous' zapped into my mind. Twilight came into mind, too, which was a horrendous film series, which brought nothing to this adaptation phase. Harry Potter also squished itself into my endless amount of thoughts, but that too could never be re-matched by such a film. But I digress, nothing stopped me against seeing this film, realizing it could possibly become a good adaptation.

Wrong.

The movie was exactly the adjectives that popped into my mind.

Cheesy? The movie was polluted with scenes that are sure to make you cringe. The humor was way too immature, trying to get at something it cannot quite reach. The special effects came into the equation, but the cheesiness kind of sets it off. Shoes with wings on it? I mean, if it was directed by a good director, those cringe-worthy scenes could have been redeemed, but then a good director never made the film, did they? I laughed at the scenes attempting to be dramatic too, because they all we're trying to be TOO serious. Maybe the film could've worked as a satirical view of the Greek mythology, but actually that wouldn't of ever worked. And the acting, my God, the acting? It was really, really bad. There were a few scenes where a little acting career is shown, but looking at the film as a whole, this factor bothering me the most. They just ran through their lines, waiting until their break to look at themselves in the mirror with pure humiliation. 'Why am I doing this film?' But then again, the movie consisted of teenagers, so maybe this film seen in their eyes was a mythological masterpiece.

Disastrous? I mean, wow. It was almost worse than Twilight. The acting, with the cheesy lines, with the cheesy attempts at making something 'serious' it was just a bad old movie. I admit, the movie can be viewed as just a cheesy escapist movie, but then all your going to be doing is feeling awkward with the amount of cheesiness. Cheesy. That's the better word for it. Peter Jackson and the Olympians: The Cheesy Thief. And yes, the title was bad. Kind of the point..

I don't recommend at all, point taken? Fin.

5/10.

0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Shrek (2001)

9/10

"The greatest fairy tale never told"

7 May 2012

When I was a kid, Shrek used to be one of those films where I kept watching and watching. It never grew old and tiring, it never seemed to let up. It was the best movie ever back then, I was transfixed in a world where anything happens.. So years later (yesterday, to be exact) I watch it again. I wanted to get that feeling of pure nostalgia, understand the moral of the story, and most importantly understand those adult jokes! And with all this build-up, you must agree, Shrek still holds up.

What I loved best about Shrek was how it was a satirical view of fairy tales. Each setting, line, and situation mimicked some fairy tale of some sort. We have the clichés, but Shrek knows what they are and puts them in the shredder, creating the perfect piece of imagination. The plot wasn't spoiled, or rotten, it kept going and never let up. Now when I was a kid, I never understood any of the jokes, and you know back then all you were laughing at was the slapstick humor. Now, nowadays, the jokes were comedic gold! I'm surprised at how much adult jokes were hidden underneath, making this one of the riskiest animation films of all time. And that's a good thing. Shrek was sarcastically funny while Eddie Murphy's Donkey kept coming and going with fast-paced, witty lines that never let up. I enjoyed every piece of their dialog exchanges. So we have the good plot, the great jokes. What more could this film contain?! It contains one of the key things an animation needs: heart and soul. And Shrek has every bit of it. One sequence (with Hallelujah playing in the background) was one of the most heartbreaking sequences in animation history. But Shrek knows how to sort out the two. Shrek isn't a joke-filled mess, nor a heartbreaking sob-story, it's a perfect blend of them both, then some.

Shrek isn't the best animation film ever, but it sure is one of the best! Those who look down on animation as kid's escapism, think again. Shrek knows how to satisfy all sorts of ages, and does a perfect job of doing so. Shrek IS the greatest fairy tale never told.

9/10.

0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

The Thing (1982)

4/10

"What you fear most.. is among you"

7 May 2012

Long story short: I had large expectations for this film. It's been coined one of the scariest films of all time. The Shining and Exorcist are also coined the same thing, which are actually scary. It had a great plot. I loved the whole mystery thing it had going on, not knowing what 'it' is. And it was made by John Carpenter. He's the director who has created the iconic character of Michael Myers and made the classic horror film. So with all these added up, I was really excited to see what was to come. It had all these things that had it coming, but here's the biggest shocker: it was horrible.

The Thing has all the components of a horror film, and the strangest thing is that it uses them, but for what reason? So the beginning was done fantastic. My expectations were huge, kept me wondering what this film could do. Ready to be scared off my seat. But maybe my expectations were too high.. Carpenter thinks he can create an eerie feeling throughout the entire thing, which he's half right/half wrong. The sense of paranoia IS there, but it just dies down every time something happens. Carpenter also takes the gimmicky effect of gore itself, and uses it to make these far-fetched images, that he thinks will scare us, but then comes off a bit silly. One scene was this guys turn into some crawling creature, which way back in 1982 would surely look stupid. And it does. And Carpenter's vision of aliens itself are just absurd. I imagine aliens as short, green fellows with one eye and a laser gun; the stereotypical vision of them. Carpenter thinks they are shape-shifting guys that we never get to see. And that's the problem with me. Carpenter uses the gimmick to not show the aliens, which sort of comes of as a mixture of stupid and curiosity, but for me? I sat in half-confusion, half-bored. There was no sense of tension between the characters, and the slow-burn pacing never helped either.

So I wouldn't recommend The Thing. It's cracked up to be one of the greatest horror films of all time, but it never ever shows this. It's was boring, slow, pointless, and tension-less. It's not even one of those horror films that you want to watch with your friends, because all you would be doing is watching the gross-out scenes that seamlessly go nowhere. If you loved Halloween, and hate the gimmicky effect of gore, The Thing will be hated by you. If you hate Halloween, love gore, love horror movies that come out today, then this is your sort of film. I didn't like it, my opinion, my fact. The end.

4/10.

13 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

theinaniloquent

Reviews

Tell Your Friends

Recently Viewed