A Dutch science fiction directed by Ben Sombogaart.
A soccer player from modern times used his mother's time travel device and accidentally ends up in the 13th century. He joins the children's crusade and tries to help the children while he waits for his mother to find him and warp him back.
Horrible. This is a prime example of New Hollywood Bullshit, even though it was not made in Hollywood. The 2 hour duration seemed to take forever. The premise and plot were not extremely bad, but there were jumpy sections in which events were not clearly presented. I hated all the characters, but the Nicolaas priest actor looked like the bassist from a band I played in (image). Poorly written dialogue and sub-par acting made me hate the characters even more. Sets were pretty basic besides the CG castles, but the costumes looked authentic. Camera-work and editing were disasters. There were way too many shots that were too close to tell a convincing story and the editing was all far too quick. The single, repeated special effect of the time warp got old very fast. If that wasn't bad enough already, audio is where this really irked me. The bread baking scene with all the kids singing Queen's "We Are the Chamions" was too hokey for words. This won 5 awards, has a 6.1/10 on IMDB and 44% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes. I don't get how it won awards with a 52.5% average F grade. I agree with the average grade, but not the awards. I rate this bad for wrecking a Queen song more than it has already been wrecked and for making me hate the characters. I should have turned it off and rated it shit.
An American drama directed by M. Night Shyamalan, starring Bruce Willis and Samuel L. Jackson.
A man who has extremely fragile bones and is obsessed with comic books finds a man who cannot be injured. This "unbreakable" man has family troubles.
This has been incorrectly categorized as a superhero movie, but it's a drama. The hour and 42 minute duration seemed to alternate between the superhero story and the hero's family drama, with family drama always getting more time. It seemed like there were 2 plots that didn't quite meet. The 2 main characters were played by renowned actors who can do a good job in almost any role. I was disappointed by the toy store quote. I found this movie by looking up that quote after having read it on slipsum.com and expected it to be delivered more expressively. The acting was a little low-key and more drama than superhero. Sets and costumes consisted of normally dressed people in a city. Only Samuel L. Jackson's coat made an impression on me. As is typically the case, camera-work used lots of close-ups and underexposures with quicker editing cuts during the few, short action scenes. Audio was mixed correctly. I could hear dialogue, but the music again seemed more drama than action. This won 1/10 awards that it was nominated for, has a 7.2/10 on IMDB, 3/5 stars on AllMovie, Has a Metascore of 62% and user score of 8.6/10 on Metacritic and has 68% tomatometer and 77% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes for an average of 71%. I agree with the C- grade completely because it was unimpressive as action and sappy like a pine tree as drama. I rate this poor.
An American black comedy drama directed by Alexander Payne, starring Matthew Broderick and Reese Witherspoon.
During a high school election for student body president, romantic relationships and competition cause problems.
This was an assignment for a film theory and criticism class. The professor better have something really interesting to point out because the film was pretty standard and run of the mill. The hour and 40 minute duration seemed to take a long time. The pacing was dynamic. It sped up for action and slowed down for narration that gave back-story. I think the characters were played well and all of the dialogue seemed to be written professionally. I was unimpressed with sets and costumes. Having a high school with students and teachers does not require much extra effort in that department. What stood out most in camera-work and editing were freeze frames at the beginning of narrations. There was also a crane shot of the main teacher outdoors and a slow dissolve while he was in a restaurant. Another good edit was everyone's faces in the office at the climax. Audio sounded good to me. Dialogue was audible and there was appropriate music that may have been mixed just a bit too loud. The style reminded me a little bit of Wes Anderson, but faster and more boldly expressive. This has 7.3/10 on IMDB, 4.5/5 on AllMovie, 92% Tomatometer and 79% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes and Metascore of 83% on Metacritic for an average of 83.4%. I think they're ranking it a little bit high, but popular opinion favors "marketable" films. I guess a loss of 10 million dollars between budget and box office makes up for the difference. I rate this adequate because it held my attention, the characters were decent and there was some good editing.
An Italian adventure directed by Mario Gariazzo.
A girl is visiting her parents' plantation in the Amazon after attending school in England. While traveling by boat on the river, her parents are killed and she is taken to a native village.
The hour and a half duration seemed a little shorter because of the relatively quicker pacing. The simple premise lead to a simple plot with only 2 unexpected twists. This is called poor writing. There seemed to be only 2 characters: the white girl and the headhunter who loves her. He tries to impress her and she can't forgive him for killing her parents. I liked that the native speech was not subtitled to give the viewer the same disorientation as the main character. Acting seemed pretty basic and lacked expression of emotion. Rain forest filming locations and the village looked authentic as well as the costumes. It was interesting that all the women were topless, but the main character's boobs were like mosquito bites. No female anatomy points earned there. A special effect worth mentioning is when a man is swimming and is bitten in half by an alligator. The guts in that scene looked very realistic. I did not enjoy the audio. The main character's narration (most important information) was mixed much lower than sound effects and music (not important). This reinforces my long held opinion that filmmakers tend to make the most important information quietest and the least important loudest. I could tell that this was trying really hard to copy Cannibal Holocaust (1980). The music was a dead giveaway. This has a 4.5/10 on IMDB and 42% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes. I agree that it's not a very good movie, but 43.5% average is a little harsh. I'm rating it o.k. because it was mildly entertaining and would be fun to mock.
A Chinese wuxia directed by Michael Mak, starring Tony Leung Chiu-wai, Michelle Yeoh, Jimmy Lin, Joey Wong and Donnie Yen.
An old eunuch disguised as another old eunuch tries to destroy a gang of assassins. Some of this gang live together and there are romantic relationship problems.
The hour 22 duration felt like it took forever. The pacing was really choppy, with slow scenes right next to fast ones. The plot was nearly incoherent and the characters were difficult to differentiate. Most of the dialogue and acting were misleading because everyone was either lying or being snarky to one another. What I could see of the sets and costumes looked good. Unfortunately, the copy that I got was pixelated like a motherfucker. I'm talking big, square blocks here. 432 x 224 resolution and 211MB file size may be to blame. Given that information, looking for good camera-work was not top priority while I was watching this. The special effects were as over the top as I expected. There was flying people and items, magic, fire and a building collapse. The audio was not exactly good, but I did like the soundtrack. It was probably the best part. The sound effects were like an old kung fu flick: extremely annoying. Stylistically, this fit the early '90s wuxia mold. It has a 6.1 on IMDB. I rate it tolerable.
A Chinese wuxia directed by Ching Sui-tung, starring Donnie Yen and Leon Lai.
A princess' father, the king is killed in battle and she takes the throne. Some of the government rulers/warlords are plotting against her and shoot her with a poison dart. A hermit saves her and they fall in love. The princess must restore peace to her kingdom and reunite with the hermit.
A classic example of the new Chinese way of filmmaking. The hour and a half duration seemed right because of dynamic pacing that rose and fell with action. The simplistic premise was difficult to follow in the plot because of language. More on that later. There were basically 3 characters: the princess, the hermit and soldier x infinity. Obviously, the princess and hermit were the most developed main characters. I had issues with dialogue because of subtitles. The only ones that synched with the film were clearly written by an non-English speaker. Sentence structure and word order were the main issues. This made it nearly impossible to follow the plot. The acting all seemed fine though. I really liked the sets. They all looked professional, but my favorite was the hermit's treehouse. Camera-work was all beautifully done as well. There was lots of shot variety, mostly in distances from extreme close up to sprawling landscapes. What I didn't like about video and camera were the giant battle scenes in the flat desert. Boring. There was no flying, but there may have been some undetectable wire-work involved. The audio was all mixed right and the soundtrack was typical of the area and time. Style and flavor seemed like the filmmakers had watched too much Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon, Hero and House of Flying Daggers. This has a 5.9/10 on IMDB and 38% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes. I rate it o.k. because it was very typical of the genre, area and time, but didn't really innovate or get creative and unique with the tools available.
A Chinese American directed by Sandra Weintaub, starring Sammo Hung, Jackie Chan, Yuen Biao and Cynthia Rothrock.
Basic information on martial arts is given, followed by examples of different elements involved in the films.
If you want to watch some fight scenes, this movie is for you. If you want information, titles and years, watch Films of Fury. The hour 26 duration seemed to go on forever because it was all just fighting. It had pitifully low information density and only a few people were interviewed. These people also showed up in all of the fight scenes. They were Sammo Hung, Jackie Chan, Yuen Biao and Cynthia Rothrock. John Saxon's narration was unenthusiastic and dry, the opposite of the narrator from Films of Fury. Most of the clips looked and sounded alright, but some were so underexposed that the fighting was nearly invisible in a sea of black. This has a 7.3/10 on IMDB. I think that the score should be lower because documentaries are supposed to be relatively informative. I'm not talking a master class in kung fu flicks, but titles and years for the clips would have helped. I rate this poor for low information density. The only thing that saves it from "bad" is in depth interviews with Jackie Chan and Sammo Hung.
A Chinese comedy directed by Jeffrey Lau and Corey Yuen, starring Stephen Chow, Ng Man-tat, Sharla Cheung and Sandra Ng.
A young man with supernatural powers goes to stay with his gambler uncle. The uncle finds out that his nephew can see through solid items and uses him to win at gambling.
This was actually funny. The hour 40 duration went by quickly as I was laughing at Stephen Chow's jokes. The simplistic premise had a romantic sub-plot, but didn't really seem to matter much to me. It was more of a framework to hang humor on than a real story. The characters were a little shallow, but the nephew-uncle team made me laugh a few times. I can't say much for dialogue because of the language barrier, but the acting was great. I thought the funniest acting joke was when the uncle shows his nephew a movie about a gambler and there is a slow motion scene of the gambler entering a room. The nephew then does his own slow motion effect by walking slowly when he goes to meet a mob boss gambler. Sets and costumes were pretty standard for the area and time, nothing really worth mentioning. The armpit scene was not funny. Camera-work was standard as well. Not bad, I could see everything clearly, but nothing caught my eye as being above average. The dialogue on the version that I watched was dubbed into Thai. So it was a Chinese film, Thai dubbing with English subtitles. The soundtrack was everything cheesy that I like about late '80s early '90s film score music. Very dated and hokey, but in a good way for a comedy flick. This has a 6.9/10 on IMDB, 78% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes and was nominated for 2 awards. That seems about right to me. I rate it adequate for being a mediocre movie with some funny humor.
A British science fiction directed by Robert Parrish, starring Ian Hendry and Herbert Lom.
Scientists discover a new planet on the opposite side of the sun. 2 astronauts make the journey there, but not enough time has passed when they return and they insist that they are seeing everything in reverse.
Pointless. The hour 40 duration was squandered on filler and making models explode. It took the whole first hour to get to the planet and only 10 minutes of that was the actual journey. I would call that slow pacing. I could swear I've seen a twilight zone episode that fit this whole deal into 20 minutes. The plot took a long time to get going and was never resolved. This "opposite, mirror image" Earth had only one difference: writing was reversed. Lame! The characters were extremely shallow, with their dialogue being drivel and acting sub-par. There were some pretty nice real sets as well as expertly made model sets. In camera-work, I noticed some good psychedelics and layering when the astronauts were drugged for the flight and when the main character was tranquilized because he was acting crazy. The special effects besides that looked like they would be more appropriate in a Japanese Daikaiju flick. The audio was almost constantly full of annoying noises like beeping, feedback, buzzing and "awoogah" alarm sounds. This has a 6.4/10 on IMDB and 46% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes. I agree completely with the failing grade. I rate this bad because it was just an excuse for the effects team to blow up models.
A Czechoslovokian children's science fiction directed by Karel Zeman.
A group of 4 boys go back in time to see prehistoric animals.
This was so hokey that it must have seemed stale even upon it's release. The simplistic plot, static characters, piss poor acting and poorly written dialogue did it in. How did these kids have camping supplies with them when they went to a museum in a city? The sets were a joke. Every one had painted backgrounds. Fuck, even one of the dinosaurs was painted on! (see image) There was a little bit of cool stop motion and puppetry. Otherwise, the video was horrid. I'm talking about color balance changing between shots within a scene, grainy and uncreative compositions. The audio was off-time with the actors, worse than the worst kung fu dubbing job ever. It seemed like a cool idea and premise, but didn't work out all that great. This has a 7.5/10 on IMDB! There must be an error somewhere. I give this a weird pink rating because it's so bad that it's good. I'm keeping it to laugh at later.
A Chinese wuxia directed by Ching Siu-Tung, starring Leslie Cheung, Joey Wong and Wu Ma.
A young debt collector can't afford to stay at an inn, so he spends the night in a "creepy looking old temple". There he meets men fighting with swords and a beautiful woman playing music. It turns out that the woman is a ghost and the swordsman and debt collector try to save her from "the old dame", a tree demoness who forces the ghost woman to lure men to their deaths.
This is the fastest paced film I have ever seen. It makes Kung Fury seem calm and contemplative by comparison. The hour and a half went by very quickly. The plot was clearly communicated and held my attention with ghosts, demons and the undead. Some call this the Chinese Evil Dead. I didn't really have time to get to know the characters because they were always rushing around and speaking like auctioneers. Dialogue was very thick, lots of words per second and acting mirrored this quality. I really liked the old temple set and the town looked authentically ancient China. The camera-work actually did remind me of Evil Dead. There were lots of close ups, creative angles and high contrast imagery. I watched a version dubbed into English, but the soundtrack was awesome. I could tell that it was mostly created using a cheap keyboard and inferior piano skill, but that's what made it so cool. The style was overflowing. Think Bride with White Hair combined with Evil Dead. This won 12/23 awards that it was nominated for, has a 7.6/10 on IMDB and 67% tomatometer and 86% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes. Average grade is a 70% C-. I beg to differ. I thought it was full of style, had an interesting plot and did not struggle to hold my attention. The only problem that I found was that it moved way too fast. More like A Chinese Amphetamine Story. I rate this good.
An American documentary directed by Roy Frumkes.
The story of the making of Street Trash (1987) is told with interviews and clips.
A very complete presentation. I appreciated the 2 hour duration because I like to hear about making movies and I liked Street Trash. Don't stop watching when the credits roll either. There are hidden gems mixed in there. The information density was moderate. It seemed like a nice blend of serious information and comedic entertainment to me. The "plot" of this doc goes from pre-production planning, through filming and release and a "where are they now" type of segment at the end which even includes views of the filming locations. Interviewees were chosen very well. Almost the entire cast and crew were represented. Camera-work was not the best, but not bad. There was pretty much one angle per interviewee and this was mixed with clips from the film, deleted scenes, still photos and important text that was worth reading. There were varying video qualities and exposures between different video elements. The same can be said for audio. The newest interviews mostly looked and sounded best. An exception to this was the Christian cast member whose microphone was too far away. The old footage of cast and crew making the actual film was worst in both areas. This has a 8.0/10 on IMDB and the reviewer on DVD Talk seemed to like it quite a bit. I rate it good for subject matter and completeness.
An American western directed by Elliot Silverstein, starring Richard Harris.
A man from England is on a hunting expedition when he is captured by Native Americans. He is initially mistreated by them and they don't get along well. Eventually, he is accepted into their society, takes a bride and becomes a great leader.
This was on a list of Italian cannibal films, but it wasn't Italian and there were no cannibals. The 2 hour duration seemed to go by quickly because there was always something interesting happening that held my attention. The plot was copied in Last of the Mohicans, Dances with Wolves and Jeremiah Johnson. The main character and Batise were the most interesting folks in this. There wasn't much dialogue and most of the communication came to acting. I liked that there were no subtitles and the Native Americans spoke in their language. It puts the viewer in the same situation as the main character, not understanding what they say. Filming locations were picturesque and the Native American clothing all looked authentic. There were some creative camera shots like during the sun ritual and a composite of 2 people over a cut. All of the scenes looked like they had a warmer color balance to me. The audio was mixed correctly, but seemed to have been recorded a little hot because I could hear some distortion at times. This has a 6.9/10 on IMDB and 86% on Rotten Tomatoes for an average grade of C+ or 77%. I would agree with this. It was interesting and lots of stuff happened, but it wasn't anything special. I rate this adequate.
A Chinese kung fu directed by Yuen Woo-ping, starring Sammo Hung, Kwan Tak-hing and Yuen Biao.
Because of misunderstandings and treason, all of the problems of one kung fu school are blamed on a student from another. The student meets an old drunken master who trains him before he confronts the rival school.
This was pretty standard, but entertaining. I haven't seen a good kung fu flick in a while. The hour 47 duration passed moderately with dynamic pacing. The plot was murky and confusing. It also followed the kung fu revenge formula, which I expected. I actually liked the characters. Sammo Hung is great at comedy by being a fool and the Beggar So character played a classic drunken master. There were some dialogue jokes that crossed the language barrier and all of the actors did a good job in their stereotypical roles. The fights were action-packed and choreographed very well. Sets and costumes were exactly what I've come to expect from Chinese kung fu films of the late '70s and early '80s. There were wardrobe jokes when Sammo's clothes were missing or his pants fell down. The only thing that I noticed in camera-work was extra close ups during the fights, mostly hands demonstrating animal styles. Editing cuts also happened much faster during fights and there were slow motion shots mixed in. I didn't really notice to much wire being used for special effects. Audio was terrible. The mix was clipping on anything louder than normal conversation. I won't even go into "woosh" and "ha!" here. Entertainment Weekly gave it a C+, J. Doyle Wallis of DVD Talk rated it 3.5/5, Bill Gibron of DVD Talk rated it 93/100 and it has 7.5/10 on IMDB. This averages to a 78.75 C+ grade and I agree. It was mostly standard and cookie cutter. I liked the 2 main protagonists though. I rate this adequate.
An American documentary directed by Andrew Corvey and Andrew W. Robinson.
The history of kung fu films is related with examples showcasing actors, directors and sub-genres.
I spent more time copying down titles than I did watching the actual film. The hour 16 duration seemed longer because of this. The actual pacing of the film was absolutely breakneck speed. It was packed with information and examples. There were no interviews, but the subject matter interested me a great deal. Between examples, there was a cartoon of a video store clerk (the narrator) explaining kung fu flicks to a silent man. I really appreciated the on-screen text of film titles with years so I could add to my movie list. The audio was mixed well, considering the variety of sources and reputation of old kung fu films for bad audio. I did not like the narrator's voice. He sounded like a college frat boy: too young, excited and trying to sound cool. A more academic and scholarly approach would have worked better for me. This has a 6.6/10 on IMDB and 56% on rotten tomatoes for a failing grade of 61%. I think that this is a little harsh, considering the information density. I rate it o.k. because it was full of titles and examples of good films, but the presentation was a little too annoying.
An American adventure directed by Henry Levin, starring James Mason.
A scientist receives a volcanic rock as a present from a student and opens it because it is too heavy. He finds evidence there that a previous scientist made an expedition underground and left directions on the artifact enclosed. He follows the directions to the entrance, but another scientist and the descendant of the original explorer are also there to claim the find. The other scientist is killed by the descendant and the 2 groups enter the underground passageway.
Not bad, but predictable. The 2 hour duration had a 45 minute chunk taken out of it's adventure potential while everyone was on the surface in Iceland. After that, the pacing picked up and there turned out to be plenty of adventure left. The simplistic premise lead to all of the stereotypical things that a late '50s film would include: food and light shortages, cheesy monsters, great discoveries, etc. The characters were slightly more varied than I had expected. They weren't written extremely well and the dialogue seems a little stale watching it now. Back in '59 it would have been fresher. The acting was done well at least. The actors all played to their roles just fine. Sets were where this really stood out. The jewel cave, mushroom cave, underground ocean and ruins of Atlantis were all expertly crafted. The camera-work and editing were very straight forward and '50s style. No creative angles, no amazing follow shots, no layering or dissolves and no match cuts. Special effects were so hokey as to be comical. I liked the iguana dimetrodons quite a bit and there was lots of compositing involved. The whole style fit the genre and time perfectly. Unfortunately, the version that I got had a glitch around the hour 45 mark when important stuff is happening. This has 83% on Rotten Tomatoes, 7.1/10 on IMDB and other critics gave it mixed reviews. Basically a C+ grade, but I would argue more for a B because of entertainment value and sets. I rate this adequate.
A Spanish American fantasy drama directed by J. A. Bayona, starring Sigourney Weaver, Toby Kebbell and Liam Neeson.
A boy's mother is dying from cancer, he is being bullied at school and doesn't want to go live with his grandmother. A giant tree monster that may be real, a dream, imagination or hallucination visits him to tell stories.
Besides the monster, this was sappy, lame and boring. The hour 40 duration seemed much longer because the scenes without the monster moved very slowly. The plots of the monster's short stories were much better than the "real world" plot of the whole film. The characters were actually not that bad. All of the dialogue was well written and the actors played their roles appropriately. My favorite set was the cemetery with the sinkhole from the boy's nightmare. Everything else was pretty mundane. The camera-work was professionally done and the editing was seamless. I can't say that I noticed any really good shots that stood out though. The special effects for the tree monster were what kept me from turning this off. It may be CG, but it was good CG. The animations for the monster's stories were also done quite well. Although CG as well, they had a bold style that I appreciated. The audio was all mixed well, but I think that the monster sounded too much like an Ent from Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings. I liked that the style was a little on the dark and gloomy side for the whole film. This won 23/50 awards that it was nominated for, made a gain of about 4 million dollars, has a 7.5/10 on IMDB and 86% on Rotten Tomatoes. I think that it got too much credit. I rate it tolerable because the monster and gloominess were the only positive aspects that I could see.
An American documentary produced by Gaby Monet, starring Beth Thomas.
A violent 6 year old girl is interviewed by her therapist. She tells of how her biological father abused her and how she now abuses her family. It then goes on to show her new living conditions and how she has changed.
This started off amazing, but went downhill quickly at the end. The interview footage was very raw and filmed from the therapist's perspective. Beth, her adopted mother and the reform home owner were interviewed. I think that this was all about content in the beginning and switched gears at around 20 minutes of the 27 minute duration. Up until that point, we saw a girl devoid of mercy, remorse, sympathy, etc. Subject covered in this time frame include sticking pins in people and animals, killing baby birds and stealing knives in the hopes of using them as murder weapons. After that 20 minute mark, she goes to church, takes care of animals and cries. I think they broke her. Production was a little low-budget, but I could hear and see everything fine. There were still photos mixed in with the video interviews. This has a 7.4/10 on IMDB, but I think it deserves better. I rate this awesome because you haven't lived until you've heard a 6 year old girl talk about wanting to murder her family.
An American documentary.
The conventions and standards of American slasher horror films are discussed with examples.
This was not as good as Eaten Alive! TRAFOICF. It focused more on the obvious, mainstream hits of the genre without digging much deeper. This time, the hour and a half seemed to drag. The information density was much lower and it seemed more like an infotainment Discovery channel production. The interviewees were just as good, being filmmakers and stars along with writers. The subject matter was much more mainstream and "pop culture" than Eaten Alive!, which I did not appreciate. Most of the interviews had the same static camera angle, but a couple of them mixed it up a little bit. The audio was mixed well, but the Halloween theme just kept coming back in the soundtrack over and over. The style of this film was much less academic than Eaten Alive! as well. This got a 7.3/10 on IMDB and I agree with a C- grade because it just wasn't that great. I rate this o.k. for mediocrity.
An American documentary directed by Calum Waddell.
Filmmakers, authors and scholars discuss 1970s and '80s Italian cannibal films and play clips from them.
A comprehensive study of the genre. The hour and a half duration went by very quickly. This had a very high information density, citing many films from the genre and discussing each in comparison to others. The interviewees were chosen very well. Who would be better for this than the original filmmakers and actors? There were also modern authors and scholars who specialize in this subject matter. Speaking of subject matter, this was a good choice to make a film about. Not only do I like Italian films, but I like horror and cannibal films as well. The camera-work could have used some work. Each interviewee was only shown from one angle. The films and interviews alternated between widescreen 16:9 and fullscreen 4:3 formats, but that was because of the clip sources. The audio was all mixed well, I could hear everyone and there were subtitles provided when the Italian filmmakers were speaking. As a whole, it seemed very academic for a documentary on B horror films. This has a 7/10 rating on IMDB, but user reviews rate it around 8-9/10. I would agree with the user reviews giving this a B+ grade. I rate it good because of the subject matter, wealth of information and opportunity to add to my list of movies to watch.
An Australian science fiction written and directed by Jesse O'Brien.
A soldier is part of a prison break and joins his fellow ex-inmates in a long lasting rebellion. On a mission to transfer computer data and save his father, he is stranded on a desert moon.
Terrible. The hour and a half duration seemed to take forever because of lack of plot and characters. The plot was almost interesting at the beginning and end, but there was this giant gap in the middle when nothing happened. There were really only 2 characters: the soldier and the ship's computer. I didn't like either one of them. The dialogue and acting would have seemed about right in a Syfy channel movie, but I would expect better from an independent Australian flick. There were 2 sets/locations: inside the ship and a desert. The costumes seemed a little janky too. It looks like they ironed patches on tight shirts, but had some professional looking space helmets made. Camera-work suffered from a lack of variety and corner cutting to aid special effects. Why shoot something that looks good when you can make the CG department's job a thousand times easier by shooting crap? The special effects were obviously all CG. I saw 1 fire that I thought might have been real. At least they showed off the monster in a daylight scene. Audio seemed fine, was mixed well and included no annoying noises or poorly chosen music. This whole film really seemed like a Syfy channel production. Other critics give this an F grade at less than 50% and I agree. I rate this bad for being poorly written, poorly produced and uncreative.
A Japanese samurai series directed by Kenji Misumi, Yasuzo Masumura and Yoshio Inoue, starring Shintaro Katsu.
Hanzo is a loose cannon petty officer with a big dick and a penchant for blackmail who has had enough of government corruption.
Sex and violence! Four and a half hours of Hanzo in one day is a little bit much. It started off great, but I was wishing it would end like 3/4 through the third film. The pacing was really moderate all the way through. There were a few sections where editing cuts picked up speed in fights and sex scenes though. The plot was basically the same through all of the films. There were different people involved in side-plots, but the main idea remained constant. The main characters were developed quite well. Hanzo himself identifies himself by his penis maintenance regimen in the beginning of each film and then goes on to have his lackeys lower a girl in a net onto him, who he spins while she hangs from a rope. The lackeys were criminals that Hanzo freed and act as comic relief. The constant villain is Magobei "snake" Onishi, Hanzo's superior officer, but Hanzo dispatches other bad guys in each film. The dialogue was all written well and crossed the language barrier decently. The actors all knew their roles and played their characters fine. Obviously, Hanzo was the best. The sets and costumes were evidently planned very well and fit the samurai genre to a T. The camera-work included lots of creative angles and shot composition. The first film even had an "inside the vagina" shot. Special effects included lots of blood, as would be expected and was definitely appreciated. The audio was mixed dynamically, with good dialogue levels and a funky psychedelic rock soundtrack. The overall style reminded me of Lone Wolf and Cub. On IMDB, Sword of Justice has 6.8/10, The Snare has 7.1/10 and Who's Got the Gold? has 6.7/10. I think these ratings are very low for such a good series. I rate this awesome for Hanzo's wang and excessive blood.
A Chinese kung fu horror comedy directed by Sammo Hung, starring Lam Ching-ying and Wu Ma.
A poor worker's wife is cheating on him with his boss. The boss hires a magician to kill the worker, who is challenged to spend the night in a temple (A.K.A. morgue). The evil magician's former fellow student helps the worker to avoid the tricks and traps set for him.
Hilarious! The hour 38 duration went by too quickly because of fast pacing. The plot was easy to follow and held my interest all the way through. The characters were all identifiable and relatable, but 1 of the villains looked too much like the good magician. Most of the dialogue was jokes that managed to cross the language barrier pretty well. The rest was basic plot elements being told. I thought the actors did a great job of placing comedy where it belonged. The sets and locations were chosen well and the costumes were pretty decent. Standard kung fu style. The makeup on the corpse was disgusting and nearly terrifying, they did such a good job on it. I really didn't notice too much camera-work that caught my eye. I think that the thing they did best was framing and shot composition. The special effects were all physical with wires and such. One worth mentioning is the mirror ghost's extended arm reaching across the room. As with most kung fu, the audio was a little on the shoddy side and the swooshes and hits were foleyed too loud. The whole thing reeked of classic kung fu. This has a 7.1/10 on IMDB, but all of the user reviews rate it higher than that and have nothing bad to say about it. It was also referenced in 2 documentaries about kung fu movies. Apparently, this introduced the "hopping undead" concept in kung fu horror films. I tend to agree with the user reviews more than the C grade it got. I rate this good because it was funny, scary and held my interest.
A Czechoslovakian animated fantasy directed by Karel Zeman.
A homeless boy is lured by crows to work at a mill. There, the master teaches him and the other apprentices magic from a grimoire. On one of the boy's missions as a crow, he sees a girl. He sneaks back to see the girl and they fall in love, but this is against the will of the master and he devises quests and missions to try to stop the boy.
Crazy animation style. The hour 12 duration seemed a little longer because of the slow pacing and placid presentation. The plot was typical of folklore and mythology, but good. The few main characters were also typical of ancient tales. There were also extra apprentices who did nothing. There was very little dialogue, but the heavy narration told the story very well. The animation looked like mostly cut and illustrated paper. There were also live video elements composited in as well as traditional "cartoon" style animation. I would call it mixed media and this was very good. The audio was mixed well, with vocals higher than music and a little bit of foley sound effects. The whole thing seemed very bleak and northern. This has a 7.8/10 rating on IMDB and someone wrote a really positive user review. I agree. I rate this awesome because of the story and mixing various types of animation.
An Indian comedy drama directed by Kabir Khan, starring Salman Khan, Nawazuddin Siddiqui and Kareena Kapoor Khan.
A mute girl from Pakistan is accidentally left in India while traveling by train. An honest and well-meaning man finds her, but is not allowed to have her stay in his family's house because of national and religious differences. The man then takes the girl back to Pakistan and tries to find her home.
Way sappy and way overproduced. The 2.5 hour duration was alright I guess and the pacing was moderate, but slightly dynamic. The simplistic plot could have been told in much less time. The main characters (honest Bajrangi, mute Shahida and reporter Chand) were identifiable and memorable. I think the acting was way over the top and too overly expressive. The dialogue was actually funny in some parts, despite the language barrier. The costumes were nothing special, but the filming locations were vast. From small city rooms to majestic mountains, they filmed everywhere. I can't say that I liked the camera-work, but it was handled expertly. They knew what they were doing, I just didn't like it. As with all Bollywood, there were cheesy songs with dancing. Like a happy version of Michael Jackson's Thriller with middle eastern folks instead of zombies. The audio was all mixed correctly though. I could hear dialogue and music at the correct levels. The whole style was sap on tap like India does Precious Moments and Hallmark channel. This has 100% on Rotten Tomatoes, made shitloads of money and won a crap ton of awards. It's marketable. I rate this o.k. because I hate mainstream trash, especially when it's as sappy as this. I do have to give the filmmakers credit for knowing what they wanted and making it happen. Nothing was by accident in this movie.
A South Korean thriller directed by Kim Seong-hun, starring Lee Sun-kyun and Cho Jin-woong.
A police detective hits a man with his car and finds him dead in the road. He hides the body in his mother's coffin. It turns out that the dead man is a wanted criminal who was in conflict with the detective's senior officer.
Convoluted plot and shaky camera. The hour 47 duration seemed short because of the quick pace and density of action. The plot was extremely complex, but was presented relatively clearly and written well. The characters were not very identifiable. Besides the main character and the villain, they were all just other cops (extras). The dialogue taught me how to say "fucker" in Korean and the acting was a little shallow. Everyone just acted stressed, worried, scared or angry the whole time. The costumes were what made characters difficult to differentiate. I think they picked good shooting locations though. Camera-work was mostly shaky handheld with quick editing cuts. There were some good shots though: The Yakuza locker room sideways follow and the drug theft through the sink drain were awesome. The audio was mostly mixed right, but the cell phone ringtones and vibrations were way too loud. This won tons of awards at film festivals. I rate it o.k. because I'm not really into the genre, but it was made decently and held my attention.
A Canadian science fiction directed by Panos Cosmatos.
A crazy man is keeping a girl in his strange building.
This was interesting to look at, but totally incoherent. This made the hour 45 duration seem to last forever and a half. The plot only approaches clarity at the very end. The characters were very odd to say the least. This was actually a good thing because normal characters would have seemed out of place. The dialogue was cryptic and acting mostly involved people being in the right position to make it look psychedelic. The sets and costumes were amazing and arty. Like I said, it looked good. The camera-work was part of it looking good. I think that the main thing done right in this department was shot composition. The red look did not do it any favors, but everything else was fine. There were some special effects of various types throughout, mostly physical and camera-oriented. In audio, the dialogue was mixed way too low and the music way too high. The metalheads drinking beer at the end are listening to "Angel Dust" by Venom. For such bold and expressive style, it seemed like it should have a better plot. Other critics mostly give it failing grades, but some thought it looked cool enough for a B+. I agree with Tony Norman of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette who called it "all ambiance and no substance". I give this one of those weird pink ratings for this reason.
A Chinese fantasy directed by Cheang Pou-soi, starring Aaron Kwok and Gong Li.
A Buddhist monk releases the Monkey King from his prison inside a mountain and gains him as an ally on his quest to carry scriptures between temples. They meet another duo on the road and they all travel together. They arrive in a kingdom that is terrorized by a witch called White Bone Demon and run into conflict with her.
The 2 hour duration seemed about right because this sequel had more dynamic pacing than the original. The plot was better too. The quartet of adventurers encounter lots of different excitement on their quest. The 4 main characters were unique and extremely identifiable. The Monkey King even got a better voice! Still, we have Dragonball similarities coming up: Zhu Bajie was obviously Oolong. There was a little bit more dialogue that made a little bit more sense than the original and the acting was still humorous, but not as over the top. It's amazing what some actual sets will do to make a mostly CG film seem more realistic and believable. The costumes all looked good, as in the first film. I think I saw some actual camera movement this time that wasn't just programmed into a computer. The editing was still just as quick, but had a little more dynamics to it. Special effects were pretty and epic and CG and all that jazz. The soundtrack was very similar to the original and everything was mixed right. What irked me was that the subtitles I got had a credit for who made them through the whole first half of the film. Stylistically, it looked just slightly less like a video game than the first film. Other critics agree that this sequel was much better than the original. I rate it good, mostly for entertainment value. It's a fun movie.
A Chinese fantasy directed by Cheang Pou-soi, starring Donnie Yen, Chow Yun-fat and Aaron Kwok.
A magical monkey-man character is created during the rebuilding of heaven's gate. He trains with a master and other pupils before returning to the jungle and arming his monkey friends. He then travels to heaven, where he causes an uproar and eventually turns evil. Upon returning home, he finds his monkey friends dead and this sparks a change in morality.
Someone in China is good at computer animation! The hour 46 duration seemed like a little bit less because of the dense content and quick pacing. I thought that the plot kind of wandered and could have been more cohesive. The main character reminded me of Goku from Dragonball. He even had the power pole and nimbus cloud. There seemed to be the dynamic, humorous Monkey King character and everyone else was static and serious. I think that much of the dialogue got lost in translation, even though there wasn't much anyway. The CG backdrops were amazingly well rendered and everyone's costumes fit their role. There was lots of "camera movement" and quick editing going on in the video side. On audio, we had the expected "epic" soundtrack. The Monkey King's voice kind of irked me. The style was so over the top as to be a negative element. There's only so much CG fantasy that I can tolerate. Other critics agree with me that it's all CG fantasy with no substance. I rate this adequate because it was pretty, but that is all it was.
A French Italian drama directed by Marco Ferreri, starring Marcello Mastroianni, Ugo Tognazzi and Michel Piccoli.
Four friends who normally gather on weekends to cook together decide to eat themselves to death. They are accidentally joined by a female school teacher.
All I could think was Anthony Bourdain. The 2 hour duration went by quickly because of French guys cooking and fart jokes, even though the pacing was rather slow. The scenes were allowed to resolve themselves in their own time. The basic premise was augmented by the addition of extra characters and the Bugatti. The 4 main characters are pretty basic, but they are joined by whores and the school teacher who are also quite shallow. The dialogue initially entertained me, but as the end drew nearer, it became more serious and melancholic. The acting was done quite well. It's difficult to make eating come alive on screen. Basically, the only set was the house and the 4 main characters dressed like one would imagine French men in the '70s to dress. The whores added some color with their costumes and the school teacher's lingerie was revealing. Camera-work was a little bit shoddy on this. Under exposure ruled the roost and there wasn't much camera movement. The video was also quite grainy, giving it more of a horror feel. The French dialogue was mixed well with the single song soundtrack. What I really liked about the audio was the variety of fart sounds. The whole thing seemed kind of gloomy, but in a mocking way, which I liked. This won an award at Cannes the year it was released and was later replayed in the classics section of that festival. I rate it good, mostly for the first 3/4 of it than the last 1/4.
An Argentine Spanish crime mystery directed by Juan Jose Campanella, starring Ricardo Darin and Guillermo Francella.
A retired detective is writing a book about a murder case that he was assigned to. He meets with a female co-worker and the victim's husband to discuss his book.
This reminded me of All the President's Men (1976). The 2 hour duration really felt that way because the pacing was generally slow. The plot skipped backwards and forwards in time. It showed the old, retired detective writing his book as well as the original investigation. The limited number of characters worked well, but they were all mean to each other all the time. The acting was done very serious and poker faced. I got a version with really bad subtitles and my rudimentary Spanish skills came in handy to decode what was going on. The sets and costumes were very boring. I liked the gigantic police building set the most. In camera-work, there was a follow shot at the soccer game and a shot in which the camera circled around the main character's desk that I liked quite a bit. The whole thing had that classic police detective vibe going on. Other critics give this around a B+ grade, but I don't agree. I think it was too slow and boring. I rate this o.k.
A South Korean crime film directed by Kim Jee-woon, starring Hwang Jung-min.
A gangster is assigned to watch his boss' girlfriend because the boss thinks the girl has another boyfriend. When the gangster catches the girl with the other man, he lets them go and doesn't tell the boss. This causes a problem and the gang tortures him until he escapes. Then he works to get revenge.
This was worth watching. The 2 hour duration seemed shorter because there was so much conflict going on. The pacing was dynamic, slowing down and speeding up with action rise and fall. I didn't catch the names of most of the characters, but they were all identifiable. The actors did a good job with their roles, but I can't say much for dialogue because of the language barrier and subtitles. Most of the plot took place in urban settings. There was an outdoor mud and rain scene that really looked powerful. All of the actors had different costumes that helped me to tell them apart very easily. Hat and glasses was the real bad guy. He had long hair and machine gun as backup. The camera-work was some of the best I've seen recently and it was noticeably good, not just seamless. The follow shots were where it really stood out. The audio was mixed well, with dialogue and music being at correct levels. Other critics give this around an A grade and I would agree. Just for the follow shots in the camera-work alone, I rate this good. Watch it!
An American science fiction directed by Andrew Niccol, starring Ethan Hawke, Uma Thurman, Alan Arkin, Jude Law and Ernest Borgnine.
In the future, qualification for a job is based upon genetics. A genetically inferior man wants to be an astronaut and assumes the identity of a man with crippled legs. When there is a murder at the space center, he must protect his false identity.
Not bad. The slowish pacing made an hour 43 seem like longer than it was. The plot started off really good with heavy narration, but got bogged down in the police investigation section (most of the film). The main character living with the man who he is supposed to be was interesting. Dialogue was very dry and the acting was all serious poker face. I liked the space center sets because they looked truly futuristic. Camera-work and editing were pretty seamless. There was a good overhead shot of the beach and a low angle of the main character reading a book at the dinner table in the beginning. When the main character removes his contacts and tries to cross the road, it looked psychedelic. The audio was mixed well with dialogue being more important than music. The whole thing just seemed very serious and sterile to me, which I think was intentional. Other critics have basically given this a C average, which I think is correct. I rate it adequate because it's alright, but nothing special.
A South Korean wuxia directed by Choi Dong-hoon.
A Taoist disciple and his companion are trying to help the 3 Taoist wizards to capture goblins that have been set loose by a magic flute. Their journey takes them from ancient China into the modern city of Seoul.
Way over the top! The two hour duration was greatly appreciated, as it was filled with content all the way through. The pacing was very fast. From dialogue to special effects to editing cuts, everything moved quickly. The massive plot was clear and pretty easy to follow after the first few minutes of chaos. There were a handful of main characters that transcended time and a few well chosen extras. I can't really get into discussion of dialogue because it was in Korean, but there were a few verbal jokes that made it across the language gap and through subtitles. There were tons of physical humor jokes that the actors pulled off perfectly. The sets and costumes were amazing. Ancient China looked just as good as modern Korea and everyone's clothing fit their parts. There were even magical costume changes in the plot that all looked good. I saw loads of good camera-work. The dark scenes were not underexposed and I even identified a jib arm shot on top of a building. Special effects blew away Shaolin Soccer and Kung Fu Hustle. People flew and disappeared and there were CG goblins. Magic was everywhere. The audio sounded good to me. Again, I can't say much about dialogue, but the music and sound effects were great. The whole thing was so cohesive and had a style like Ang Lee was working with Stephen Chow. This has a 6.7/10 on IMDB, but was good enough to spawn a TV series. I liked the humor, special effects and action. I rate it good. You should watch it if you want Kung Fu Hustle and Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon at the same time.
A Danish French crime film directed by Nicolas Winding Refn, starring Kristin Scott Thomas.
A Thai boxer/lounge singer with a sword goes up against a gang who are dealing drugs and murdering people.
This was totally incoherent and poorly made. It's a shame that it was dedicated to Alejandro Jodorowsky. The hour and a half went by too slow, even though the pacing was fast. If you can figure out the plot, you were the one who wrote it. There were too many characters and only 3 of them were identifiable. The hero with the polo shirt and "sword from nowhere" skill was absurd. There was barely any dialogue, but lots of "inaudible dialogue" and what there was was too simplistic to convey any meaning. The only good dialogue scene was the mother berating her son at the upscale restaurant. That was hilarious! There were some good sets, but also some horrible ones. Having the hero wear a polo shirt is a moronic decision in an action film. The villain looks like he belongs in a Fleshgod Apocalypse music video by the end. The camera-work was actually not bad. They had a variety of different angles, movements and exposures. As far as audio goes, all I can think of is the over exaggerated sword sound "blade scrapes, rings". Other critics mostly hated it, but a few loved it. You should read the Wikipedia page's "reception" section for a laugh or two. I hated it and have supplied ample reasons for why I rate it shit. Do not watch this!
A British German drama directed by Jim Jarmusch, starring Tilda Swinton, Anton Yelchin, Jeffrey Wright and John Hurt.
A female vampire in Tangiers goes to visit her husband in Detroit, but her sister shows up and drinks the husband's zombie. They kick out the sister and both go to Tangiers in order to avoid being known.
Every once in a while, a truly goth movie comes along. I definitely appreciated the two hour duration and still wanted more. It went too quickly, even though the actual pacing was moderate. The plot was pretty sparse, but this was like a "slice of life" Mike Leigh film that doesn't need constant action and conflict. The characters were very much to my liking. I cared what happened to them, their dialogue was written in character and the actors did a great job playing their roles. These vampires are of the cleaner Hollywood style. They don't even drool blood like Radu from Subspecies. I liked that the husband wore all black and the wife wore light colors. The husband's house looked like musician's heaven (probably all real equipment) and Tangiers looked convincing. The camera-work and editing were seamless. The only time that I really noticed what the camera was doing was in spinning overhead shots and during the first blood drinking scene. All of the vampires drink blood from small wine glasses and are followed by the camera as they lean back, like in Trainspotting. The audio is where I have to get negative on this. The dialogue was audible and correctly mixed, but the music genre was not to my liking. The whole style, flavor and feeling of this was very cohesive and dark. Other critics give this film about a B average, which I think is abysmally low for something so gloomily beautiful. I rate this best because I wanted to watch it again right after it ended.
An American music documentary directed by Rick Ernst.
Exactly what the title says. A history of the music scene in this genre and interviews with bands and musicians.
This is the stuff that I grew up listening to. I think that they did a good job of presenting the material in chronological order. They didn't leave much out. I would have liked to hear the Megadeth sneaker story though. Discussion of Metallica's post-Burton career would have added some depth as well as discussion of power metal, which was totally absent. Black and death metal were mentioned, but with no samples or interviews. The interviewees were chosen well and the content of the interviews was excellent. Camera angles were lacking though. It was one camera angle per interviewee and most were straight on. The shots were not composed very well either. My favorite interviewee was Blitz from Overkill because he had a sense of humor. The inclusion of stills of vintage photos, posters and ticket stubs was a good idea and I don't think this would have worked without those. Music video clips would have added a whole new dimension. The audio was impeccable. The interview dialogue was mixed well with samples of music, including fade ins and outs. I rate this good because the content was there, but production was just slightly lacking. Watch it if you like heavy metal.
An American disaster science fiction directed by Dean Devlin, starring Gerard Butler, Alexandra Maria Lara, Daniel Wu, Ed Harris and Andy Garcia.
A network of satellites has been set up around the Earth to prevent catastrophic storms. Someone has put a virus into it that causes storms instead of preventing them. The man who was in charge of building the network and his brother work to find the culprit and fix the problem.
Pretty standard and stereotypical. The 209.9 million dollar box office revenue speaks for that. Clocking in at an hour 41, the extremely fast pacing made it seem like less time. The plot was like every other disaster film I have ever seen, just 100% cliche. Characters were pretty much the same. The main character was the "loose cannon" and there were no comedic relief characters. The dialogue seemed like it was copied and pasted from other disaster films, but the acting was convincing. Sets, costumes, locations and special effects looked like 120 million dollars worth of budget to me. The space sets and the storms all looked professional. Camera-work was mostly made up of quick editing cuts. Even conversations between two characters switched back and forth like a tennis match. In audio, I could hear all of the dialogue and the soundtrack included the standard "epic" disaster film music. Other critics give this a failing grade and I agree with them completely. My main disappointment was that there was no CG "Geostorm" in the climax. I rate this bad for being stereotypical, cliche and disappointing. Don't watch it!
An Irish British drama directed by John Michael McDonagh, starring Brendan Gleeson, Aidan Gillen, Isaach de Bankole and M. Emmet Walsh.
A man enters a priest's confessional and threatens to kill him in one week because the man was sexually molested by a priest as a child. He says that killing a bad priest means nothing, so he will kill a good one. The priest then spends the week wandering the small town that he lives in and interacting with people. Most of the residents of the town have a problem that they are seeking advice from the priest to solve.
Very interesting. A drama for the characters within the film, but a murder mystery for the viewer! I know I was trying to figure out who it was. Clocking in around an hour 36, the slow pace made it seem like more. The plot was absolutely brilliant and the varied characters in the town formed a cohesive unit of intertwined relationships. All of the dialogue fit well and the acting was done well. The setting in an actual small town and "street clothes" costumes fit together to convey a bleak style. The camera-work was seamless. That's the goal of good filmmaking, to make even a video dork like me not notice what the camera is doing. Audio included good dialogue levels correctly mixed with appropriate and mostly diegetic music. Other critics have given it a C rating because of the heavily religious overtones and subject matter of sexual abuse. They said it does "not fit in an easily marketable genre" meaning it's not mainstream, braindead trash. I however give it a best rating for being thoughtful and marvelously produced. Watch this!
An American documentary directed by Grover Babcock and Blue Hadaegh.
This film examines what happens when someone with no living relatives dies.
This was disgusting, but very detailed. The film follows the entire process that happens after the death of one man, but includes other corpses as well. What they get right is following the whole process. Each person who handles this man's case is interviewed and explains their job. The interviews aren't very interesting on their own, but must be taken together to make sense. The camera-work was a little dull, but you wouldn't want to see crazy angles and interesting pans or tilts in this type of subject matter. The audio was a little low and ending with the song, "Scarborough Fair" seemed a little odd to me. Don't watch this if seeing really disgusting stuff grosses you out. The workers in this image are dumping cremation boxes into a mass grave. Nothing like breathing in some dead people! I rate it o.k. because I look for a little more excitement in films that get my higher ratings.
An American science fiction directed by Doug Liman, starring Tom Cruise.
A high ranking army officer flees from an order and because he is a deserter, is treated as a low level soldier. The war that is being fought is against aliens and the army is using mechanical suits to fight them. The demoted soldier accidentally kills a large alien before dying and wakes up to repeat the same day again. He meets a renowned female soldier who has been through this process before. Together they must stop the entire alien invasion.
Groundhog Day in science fiction video game format. Duration and pacing are standard for the average action film. Fast pace and an hour 45 duration. The plot was interesting and full of action, but extremely predictable. I found the characters to be stereotypical and did not care about what happened to them. Writing and dialogue was pretty standard for the genre. There was lots of camera movement. It's a spoiler, but most of the final conflict scene was just underexposed shots with lots of movement and editing cuts. There were some very good battle scenes though, with visible monsters and heroes striving to win the day. The audio seemed fine, with audible dialogue, tense musical soundtrack and realistic sound effects. 178 million dollar budget will buy some high quality sets, costumes and special effects. The armors looked good, but would have been done with physical effects in the '80s. I don't think that was the case here. The aliens were animated well, but extremely uncreative. How much thought goes into a glowing ball of tentacles? I rate this adequate because I liked the reset premise and there were lots of good action scenes.
A British American science fiction directed by Ridley Scott, starring Matt Damon, Jessica Chastain, Kristen Wiig, Jeff Daniels, Sean Bean and Michael Pena.
A hasty takeoff from Mars leaves one astronaut stranded. He must survive with the equipment he has there while a rescue is arranged.
This was very long in duration, but the pacing and action held my interest. The writing was full of stereotypical cliches, mainly in the dialogue. The plot held my attention, but I think the characters were a little shallow and stereotypical. There were also some sections of the plot that were not believable, even in a science fiction world. The camera-work was good, including lots of shot variety, movement and good composition. I could see everything that was going on. The audio was not so great. Although the dialogue was audible, the music selection was horrid. This is from 2015, not 1975. The number of characters was astronomical, but number of locations was slightly limited. Obviously, the sets, costumes and special effects took up much of the 108 million dollar budget. I think the goal of the film was to lure the money from a general family audience. I rate this o.k. because entertainment value balanced cliches.
A British American science fiction directed by Alex Garland, starring Domhall Gleeson and Oscar Isaac.
A young computer programmer is invited to the remote home of a scientist who builds robots. The programmer must test to see if the scientist's new robot truly has artificial intelligence.
This really got me into it. The plot and characters were augmented by good camerawork and audio. The whole thing hinges on who can believe whom, but in a more understandable way than film noir. The special effects did not include giant spaceships or wild monsters. It was more about getting the viewer to believe that the robots were robots and they did a great job of mixing actors with CG parts. I won't ruin the unexpected ending. I rate this good. Watch it!
An American science fiction directed by Denis Villeneuve, starring Amy Adams, Jeremy Renner, Forest Whitaker and Michael Stuhlbarg.
Aliens land at 12 places on earth and let humans onto the ships to communicate. The American team includes a linguist and a scientist. As the 12 teams communicate with the aliens, they learn their language.
This is like what Gravity should have been. The plot and characters were amazing, including the cool aliens. The linear and non-linear parts of the story made sense in the end. There was some really bad camera-work and audio production and some really good. It looked like that may have been intentional, but I still dislike vast underexposures. The overall style or flavor of the film was very emotional. I rate this awesome because the filmmakers conveyed these emotions very well. The cool aliens helped. Watch this!
