An American science fiction directed by J. A. Bayona, starring Chris Pratt and Bryce Dallas Howard.
The island that Jurassic park was built on has become an erupting volcano. The heroes from the previous installment are hired, along with some military dudes, to go grab some dinosaurs before they're gone. Everyone goes back to this rich dude's house to tangle: heroes, rich people, military dudes and dinosaurs.
This is what happens when you make a big budget B movie. Clocking in at just over 2 hours, this is a bit longer than standard running time. I appreciated that for reasons that will come up later. The plot was a shambles. It was like some of the lowest budget film plots I've ever seen: full of holes and stuff is happening that doesn't make sense. The characters were literally regurgitated from the last film. The leading male and female roles were even in the same type of relationship. Owen's relationship with the dinosaurs is deepened and given back-story, but he is no further along with Claire. Dialogue and acting were extremely professional, this being a big budget film and all. I think that the granddaughter, Maisle did a great job of providing contrast to the super-dinosaur and I really liked seeing the rich, bald guys being afraid of that same monster. Sets and costumes were amazing. That's what money can buy. Camera-work was what I would expect from the series and from modern Hollywood in general. Editing was fast, but there were some times when showing off special effects overpowered close-ups and quick editing pace. Yeah, my image spoils the climax. What are you going to do about it? It was in the trailer that spoiled the whole film! Now we come to special effects: the whole reason for this film to exist. I went to the theater to see digital dinosaurs on the big screen. Unfortunately, it was not being shown in 3D where and when I went. Needless to say, I got what I wanted. If you watch this film to look at the cool dinosaurs, you may have as much fun as I did. If you are looking for a good movie by other standards, look somewhere else. Audio at the theater is a whole new story. I thought their setup was treble-heavy and didn't bring enough bass rumble. It was just a little short on mid-range as well. They don't use a normalizer, but I could hear characters whispering. Maybe if I turned my system up as loud as at the theater, I could hear whispering characters without a normalizer. IMDb lists a rating of 6.5/10 and Rotten Tomatoes lists 51% Tomatometer with 55% audience score for an average of 57% not even passing. I think people are expecting hobos to shit glitter here, flogging a dead horse. The series is 28 years old and was lucky to do blockbusters as long as it did. I liked watching this because I like B movies, series films, dinosaurs and digital effects. Also, it got me into an air conditioned theater and away from my parents for a few hours. If that is not your reason for watching this film, you may agree with everyone else and dislike it. I rate this adequate because it did it's job.
A Chinese kung fu directed by John Woo, starring Jackie Chan and Sammo Hung.
A military leader has destroyed Shaolin and some various fighters team up to defeat him.
Yet another standard kung fu. If you're looking to see what old school fu was like, it was like this. If you're looking to watch a good movie, steer clear. How many revenge plots involving the destruction of Shaolin by a singular villain can there be? The shallow characters did not do it for me. They were like every other fighter in any of the hundreds of kung fu films I've seen. Dialogue could have been copied and pasted from other films and I seriously doubt that anyone would notice. You probably wouldn't even have to change the names. Acting was the same. Same, same, same. There was lots of fighting with weapons and hand to hand as well as discussion of different styles. I swear the filmmakers all used the same sets and costumes. They were like community property for anyone in China who wanted to make a kung fu flick. There was some shot variety in the camera-work and editing. Two that I noticed were an actor seen from between the feet of a horse and a flashback to training during the final fight. Special effects were the same as every other kung fu and so was audio. IMDb lists a rating of 6/10, AllMovie lists 2/5 AllMovie rating with 3.5/5 user ratings and Rotten Tomatoes lists 44% audience score for an average of 53.5%. That sounds right to me because it was so dull and could not be differentiated from any other fu flick. I rate this tolerable because it was not painful to watch.
I might be taking a break from this soon. School taught me too much about movies and I've watched too many. 2500 and something reviews over 8 years is not a bad run if that's all I do with my film blog.
An American documentary directed by Fax Bahr, George Hickenlooper and Eleanor Coppola, starring Francis Ford Coppola.
Francis Ford Coppola is making Apocalypse Now.
This was extremely similar to other "making of" film documentaries that I've seen. Information density was a little bit sparse because (as always) there were problems while filming, the director was going nuts and the cast and crew were working too hard. Most of the narration came from the Coppola couple, with Francis being interviewed and Eleanor speaking about the filming years later. There was a good mix of interviews and on-set footage. All of the interviewees were filmed in different locations, which helped lots. The subject matter is kind of stale to me now and has lost it's original charm. The version that I watched was in 4:3 aspect ratio and it seemed like the bottom was cropped off even then. Lots of the "on-set making of" footage was very grainy and exposures were off in anything but the best sunlight conditions. Apparently, Eleanor Coppola did not have a cinematography team working for her like her husband did. Audio was a little bit low, but mixed correctly. IMDb lists a rating of 8.2/10 and Rotten Tomatoes lists 100% Tomatometer with 94% audience score for an average of 92%. I think that's a little bit high because of how many other films have similar documentaries about them. I rate this o.k.
An American horror slasher directed by Armand Mastroianni.
A killer is murdering girls who are about to get married. One girl is questioning the decision of her groom and there is a police detective on the case.
The plot was cheesy and seemed incomplete, but what was there made sense. The girl questioning her choice of grooms had a better man than her chosen as a friend, but the police detective was just kind of there. This brings us to characters. The bride to be and her man waiting in the wings were developed, but the supposed groom and police detective were left out to dry. The dialogue and acting seemed right. I actually wanted to know more about the characters that were undeveloped because the developed characters were "in" their roles. They played it right, nothing seemed forced and it made sense with them. Sets and costumes were very mundane, except for the jogging trail and the amusement park. Lack of costume earned female anatomy points in the shower scene (image). Camera-work was dead-on. If a moving shot was appropriate (like on the spinning park ride), it was used. If a longer shot was necessary to tell the story (like when Marvin is visiting the bride in the morning), that was used too. Framing was all done to tell the story as well. Audio was only slightly off. The dialogue was right, but sound effects and music were just a touch too loud. IMDb lists a rating of 4.9/10, AllMovie lists 3/5 AllMovie rating with 2.5/5 user ratings and Rotten Tomatoes lists 25% Tomatometer with 30% audience score for an average of 42.8%. I completely disagree. The people rating these must have never taken video or script writing classes. I rate this adequate because it had some plot and character issues, but what was there made sense and made me want to see the filmmakers fix it.
A Chinese action comedy directed by Wong Jing, starring Chow Yun-fat and Andy Lau.
An extremely skilled gambler accidentally falls into a trap laid by a small-time and his friend, hitting his head multiple times and losing his memory. The friends pick him up and soon find out that he can gamble well if they feed him a certain kind of chocolate that reawakens part of his memory. Gambling debts of the unskilled gambler, a bodyguard from the high level gamblers and a team of Triad assassins all converge in a parking garage and the skilled gambler is injured again, restoring his memory. He then goes to one final game before leaving the country.
2 hours of this was a little bit too much. The complex plot had too many sub-plots (as always). There were lots of characters and even more extras, but the few main characters stood out quite well. Their dialogue was written well enough to identify them and their acting was pretty good. Sets and costumes were slightly varied. There were rich people and places as well as poor, seedy ones. My favorite set was the bamboo scaffolding. Camera-work was done very well. Not only was there a variety of shot distances, but a good mix of shot lengths. It was a little heavier on short takes and close-ups, but there were enough medium and long takes and framings mixed in. I think there was something wrong with the version that I got because white items at night had halos around them. This may have been true of the original, but probably not. Special effects were pretty standard of the time and genre: a few shootings, a knifing, some falls and high altitude acrobatics. I watched a version dubbed into Thai with English subtitles, but everything sounded to be mixed correctly. IMDb lists a rating of 7.4/10 and Rotten Tomatoes lists 87% audience score for an average of 80.5%. I rate this o.k. It would have been better if it were shorter and fewer sub-plots.
A British adventure directed by Lewis Gilbert, starring Alec Guinness, Dirk Bogarde and Maurice Denham.
The captain of a British ship brings his 12 year old son as a midshipman on a voyage to Corsica. The first officer likes to punish everyone, so the sailors plan a mutiny.
An hour and 40 minutes sure felt like a long time. I think it took 3 tries with turn-offs to get through this. Not because it was that bad, just boring and slow paced. The plot absolutely failed to hold my interest even though sailors were being flogged between arguments. Characters were a major issue. The only one developed was the first officer antagonist. Dialogue and acting all seemed fine. There were lots of rough sailors and at least 2 dickhead officers. The only other character worth mentioning was a "gentleman" who thought he was in the wrong place and acted his part very well. Sets and costumes seemed to be no fakes. There were real ships, real naval wear of multiple hierachical levels and possibly even real cannons. Camera-work was another problem. The color balance was way off. It may have been the cameras in use in the early '60s or how the file was processed to make it digital, but it looked all gritty and the colors looked oversaturated. Special effects included people getting stabbed, cannon fire, smoke and ships on fire. The audio also played a role in how I disliked this. It sounded just as gritty as the video looked. The levels were correct, but it just sounded plain dirty. IMDb lists a rating of 7.1/10, AllMovie lists 3/5 AllMovie rating with 4/5 user ratings and Rotten Tomatoes lists 100% Tomatometer with 60% audience score for an average of 74.2%. I think that's a little high with all of the issues that I tried to explain. I rate this poor for being boring and irksome.
An American slasher horror directed by Herb Freed, starring Carmen Argenziano and Vanna White.
A girl dies from exhaustion at a school track race and then the whole track team goes missing. There is a killer loose just before high school graduation.
This did not hold my attention at all. The pacing was a little slower than most horror films, which I liked. The plot was not communicated very clearly. Even if I'm distracted by changing mandolin strings, I should have some idea of what's going on. The characters were not very identifiable. I liked the security guard. There was a scene in which he finds kids smoking a joint in a forest. He chases them away and proceeds to light up his own joint. The dialogue was unoriginal and the acting half-assed. Sets and costumes were mundane, but there was a locker room scene with female anatomy points from lack of costume. Camera-work was actually not bad. Their shot compositions looked good and there were lots of B-roll style close-ups of items. Audio was not the best. It sounded kind of gritty, but the mix was not too far off. IMDb lists a rating of 4.6/10, AllMovie lists an AllMovie Rating of 1/5 with User Ratings of 2/5 and Rotten Tomatoes lists 57% Tomatometer with 19% Audience Score for an average of 36.4%. I rate this poor because I've seen much worse.
