The movie has an interesting premise, but the execution didn't turn out so well. The difference between surrogate and real humans is clear-cut (technical limitation, I guess). The character appears out of nowhere, didn't have much time to be developed. And the plot... it's the typical one-big-villain-involved-in-all-things. Still a decent watch though.
Great cinematography, terrific acting and moving story. It is very relatable to today's bigotry to the changes. Though the movie kinda depict Christians in bad terms (with them seem to be the most fundamentalist and destructive), it also shows that even the most "intellectual" ones, the pagans, are not sinless from the guilt of bigotry (shown early in the movie). Under the pretext of "absolute truth", whether it's god or science, anyone can be a bigot, similar to today's debate of the pious vs the godless.
I need Wikipedia to guide me through this film...
Without any single line of words, this movie's strength lies on cinematographic arrangement, musical composition, and viewer's own interpretation. Ron Fricke done a terrific job (especially on his city nightscape) and Philip Glass's composition is wonderful. However, viewers' unfamiliar with the film's narrative (post-capitalist critiques on technology) might find themselves' confused with a long still-shots, slow-motions, and fast-forwarded scenes the movie delivers. I personally need to take some time to connect the dots between the scenes presented.
The lack of dialogue, though, gives the movie more chance to be re-watched, as it presents an open-ended interpretation - which seems to be the director's intention. And if you can't watch it for the narrative, at the very least you can watch it for the wonderful music.
I'm not sure about this movie. The acting is generally decent; while Sophie Nelisse (as Liesel) is charming, I feel she still has more to improve. Geoffrey Rush (Hans) and Emily Watson (Rosa) are amazing.
The plot sometimes feels a bit disconcerted, some other time feels a bit rushed. It lacks the impression it needs when the plot ultimately gives some heart-breaking or relieving moments.
However it has touching moments; when Liesel learns her lesson in reading with Hans, her conversations with Max (when asked to describe outside weather), her determination to read books, etc. Today when thorough reading feels rare, Liesel's dedication to learn reading, describing, and writing serves to remind us (or at least myself) such a delight to be able to read and write. Though, I have to admit, the movie could have explored this theme much more further - especially considering the title it has, "The Book Thief".
This movie is a pure nonsensical action from start to finish. Pure gold.
Basically the movie is about people being beaten up by Muay Thai.
So-so plot and decent cinematography. The story only accompanies the action and the shot does need more work in here and there, especially in action scenes. There seems to be unintentional comedy from the way the plot and cinematography is directed. However the choreography is excellent and Tony Jaa's performance is astounding. Though along the movie the only decent opponent is the boss' right hand man (others are merely cannon fodder).
The first half of this movie is quite... peculiar.
There are just too many "stupidities", so to speak, that it shouldn't happen in a war. There are scenes where the student soldiers was ambushed by one North Korean and all of them chased the enemy to an exposed field and get massacred. Another scene: one of the student soldier walked in the forest randomly and get caught. Another one: a student soldier destroyed the supply stock because he played around with grenade.
Granted, they are kids. Maybe the directors wanted to portray, despite how amateur and unprofessional they are, all of them are still patriots of South Korea. But that doesn't explain how those amateur soldiers defeat dozens of trained North Korean soldiers (and I mean literally dozens - there are scenes where the North Koreans just ran into the line of fire).
Besides the "stupidities", the movie also lacks character development. In the end there are only two memorable characters: Jang-Beom the main character and Kap Jo the deviant. Others seem to be a mere canon fodder, with a few of them appears quite distinct because of physical features (like the fat kid, the four-eyed geek kid, but I can't remember the names). When someone get killed, there's hardly a reason for audience to symphatize. However, given the lack of development on the other characters, we are not presented with good character development on those two either. We never knew who Jang-Beom is, where did he come from, what relationship he had with the older mentor in the army, why the commander trusted him, etc. We don't even get how he managed to handle his fear (he trembled when he see a charging North Korean soldier in the first 15 minutes).
Putting those problem aside, this movie has good actors and good acting. The visual effect also looks great, comparable to today Hollywood movie. But again, seriously, the first half of the movie is filled with "stupidities". It got interesting only in the second half of the movie.
Indeed there are improvements from the second and the first, particularly the animation. It still doesn't to justice to the manga though. Besides the obvious compression and skips (too many contents to be fit in 2 hours movie), this third movie's soundtrack is quite disappointing. It doesn't inflict the horrors of Eclipse as it does in the manga. Too many repetition and gothic choir layering with piano instrumentals; it sounds more like a noise rather than thrilling background music.
It's lovely. I like Juli Baker's characterization, she's a smart girl with great personality.
I always have soft spot for romantic movies though. :s
My first impression when I first watched this... the movie has a peculiar cinematography. Really - some shots were taken unusually (stills on individual's expression, panorama shot on the desert, etc). And despite being a movie in 2004, it feels so 90-ish (partly maybe because of the cinematography?).
But that doesn't make it bad. It might feels unusual, but story, the pace, was built nicely. Good movie overall! The premise itself is already very interesting to watch.
(Granted, I don't watch the original adaptation!)
The only one who fights hard is Gerald Butler... (seriously at least make the other guy a bit smarter by not pointing handguns to a gatling gun).
The strong point of this movie is its attempt to pretend as a recovered footage. Its the mightiest, and maybe the only, suspension of disbelief in this movie. Once you know that this is actually -not- a recovered footage, The Blair Witch Project loses its grip. It becomes a bit dull and you have to withstand the drama, since they don't actually show any ghosts. However the ending is still pretty suspense - very unexpected though it was foreshadowed early in the movie.
Hmm... okay. Where do I start?
Firstly, the camera work is inconsistent. It's pretty decent at times, but it could be really bad. This is particularly disappointing when they're shooting action scenes; they just can't find the right angle for displaying the intensity. Also in night scenes it almost always looks very grainy, as if it was shot with a handycam.
The action scenes itself is actually decent, putting aside the camera work problems. What bothers me though is the other scenes. Some shots were taken without significant usefulness, like when some random cop cursing each time they miss the target; there's also this weird scene where the main character, Jake, awkwardly misstep and fell (this happens during a chasing scene, but the chaser didn't catch up with Jake even after he did that fatal misstep).
And I don't usually mind indecent plot in action movies, but this one is just... bothering. I can't quite figure what's going on until the second half of the movie. The plot seems too convoluted for a decent action movie (conspiracy within the keraton, involvement of the Chinese gang and human trafficking, the politics in US marine, etc). Moreover, they don't develop further the complex subplot! When the complex conspiracy wear out its usefulness, it just got thrown away. It gets better in the second half of the movie, when eventually it ends with Malik (Mickey Rourke) alone - but it should've been that way since the start.
They also have some drama and character development, but feels unnecessary and pretty weak. It also feels pretty odd seeing many Indonesian characters, played by Indonesian actors, speak English almost all the time (this reminds me of Uncharted, the video game that takes place in Indonesia but the characters still speak English).
Another thing, this one especially feels really odd as a Javanese: the movie maker doesn't seem to understand the Keraton system in Java. One thing for sure, it is pretty patriarchist, unlike Aceh Sultanate or a brief period in Ottoman Sultanate. So the existence of "Sultana" (a woman sultan) feels really out of place. Second, there is also no vizier (wazir) in Javanese Keraton. I think they should've researched this part better, since the plot relies on this...
Last, the final scene in Borobudur... is pretty disappointing. It got hyped when this movie was released. But turns out this is just a regular shootout. Not to mention the grainy shot.
At first I really thought it was a real silent film! Perfectly done, nicely paced, and weaved around pleasant surprise. Like @Compuesto56 said, this is a perfect movie for helpless romantics. Wonderful.
While a bit lacking as a science-fiction movie, it serves as a fascinating hypothetical spiritual cosmic journey.
Nice movie. Illustrates a glimpse of the life of crewmates in British Royal Navy. The movie only lacks significant character development for supporting characters - something that makes them feels special were something happened to them.
Great movie. Lucas' life is what people in criminology would call as "ethnic succession theory". The blacks were the "representation of progress" that drove away Italians in the crime world. Loved the way Ridley Scott narrates Lucas' life and movies timeline with the progress on Vietnam War.
Could've elaborate further on Falcon and how the SHIELD people still believe on the Capt. Other than that, good movie. The after-credits is interesting as always.
It's a classic. Decent action, not so much on characters though.
There are some stuff I don't seem to find comfortable with this movie. One thing, it could get a tad boring for a while when it's taking on the drama part, especially on Gwen's romantic relatioonship with Peter. The other, is the destined Uncle Ben's death. As @CatyAlexandre has said, it feels a bit rushed for a character that has quite bonded with the viewers for the first half of the movie (especially when compared with Sam Raimi's Uncle Ben). This makes Spiderman seems to lack a clear motivation when he switched the attention from hunting Uncle Ben's murderer to saving the world. The same goes with The Lizard's motivation to turn the world in danger - though I assume he went insane with the serum affecting him.
On the plus side, Andrew Garfield did a good job for a contemporary geeky Peter Parker; confident, funky, and easy-going. I don't really like this kind of Peter, but considering today's audience it's a good shot. Rhys Ifans also did a good job portraying Curt Connors, having a calm, mature doctor while keeping some kind of weirdo vibe. The Lizard's fate as the main villain also seems unusual for a superhero movie - though, looking at the trailer for the upcoming second movie, I could guess why it became so.
Other than that, excellent movie.
Intense. But the ending seems a bit disconnected.
Pure non-stop action, no mercy.
I guess people expected too much war on this movie.
Most of the acting feels pretty weak, and the plot - though introduced with a bland yet still promising premise - doesn't deliver it pretty well. Some shots seems unnecessary to build up the tense.
While this movie is still an enjoyable ride, it surely misses some important stuff that makes The Hobbit, The Hobbit. On the positive side: the side-story that connects the dot to Lord of the Rings was impressive, and it has better action sequences and well-paced combats. But in place of that it pushed aside a lot of The Hobbit's sense of adventure and excitement.
The visuals are a lot darker compared to first and it has more Lord of the Rings vibe to the atmosphere. It's understandable and actually a well-made decision considering the way the plot is written in a more serious tone, however that seriousness sacrifices a lot of its original source material. Rather than being a stand-alone depiction of Bilbo's adventure, Desolation of Smaug serves more as a prequel to Lord of the Rings.
This sequel also invest quite a time to one of the dwarves' romantic relationship with one of the elves, which doesn't seem to have a significant impact on the overall plot. As a subplot, this doesn't work well though I'm sure it is intended for a several portion of the targeted audience.
Another minus point was the soundtrack. It lacks the feel of continuity from the previous movie. Rather than building upon the theme from Unexpected Journey, it created a whole new different composition for the movie. As a stand-alone soundtrack it's actually a good one - even better than the first without the repetition - but considering it's a sequel it could've been done better.
Undoubtedly another excellent cinematography from Peter Jackson. For a movie adaptation of The Hobbit, a children novel, this movie gets it right: a light tone, rich visuals, and exciting adventure.
It may gets a tad slow in some sequences, and there is a slight lacking of suspension of disbelief, but considering its source material, overall this movie is one enjoyable adaptation. Extended part of the story also serves as bonus point for those who are immersed in the world of the Middle Earth.
The only thing I feel this movie lacks the most is in the soundtrack. It has an immersive composition actually, but seems to be highly repetitive and may get boring at times. The soundtrack uses similar instrumentation (brass section) and lacks variation unlike the LoTR trilogy.
Confusing plot - it doesn't seem to have consistency to what it wants to achieve. The ending seems supposed to be a cliffhanger but didn't leave viewers with anything to be wondering for. Some scenes are wasted with talks that gives neither character development nor plot progression. The acting and visuals were good, though it doesn't save the movie from its flaws.
The story wasn't bad at all. There's more to keep the viewers engaged - a little surprise here and there - the tense was properly built so it didn't leave the viewers with the feeling "everything will come up nice in the end of the day". There's one thing that doesn't seem to fit well though, since it was introduced suddenly near the end with only a little hint before. The action sequences were good but not incredible - still enjoyable regardless.
Certainly not the best Die Hard movie out there. For "just another action movie", it's a decent one though.
