An American silent historical drama film by D. W. Griffith.
Events in America around the time of the civil war are shown with stories of characters who were involved. Slavery, President Lincoln and his assassination, the civil war itself and the Ku Klux Klan are the main points.
This was SOOOO boring. Can you sit through 3 hours of a silent film this old? The audio was all classical music and seemed to be on the repetitive side. The video was in black and white with scenes being tinted. However, all of the video was correctly exposed! This brings up an issue about newer films: If they could correctly expose video in 1915, why do so many films afterwards suffer from incorrect exposure? The characters were difficult to keep track of because the length of the film required that I take frequent breaks to get away from it. Same with plot. Overall, it is of historic significance and was correctly exposed. It was also too long and extremely boring. I rate it poor. Unless you are burning with an itching desire to view every film ever made, I would not recommend watching this one.
A British American historical drama directed by Victor Sjostrom.
A cardinal makes a deal with a man who is caught dueling illegally. The man must capture the leader of the Huguenots.
The audio and video seem to come from the time period depicted in the film. The plot and characters did not hold my attention in the least bit. The whole thing is just so antiquated that it is impossible to watch. I rate it shit because I turned it off before the end.
An American political drama directed by Anthony Mann.
During the French revolution, a French nobleman has a book containing the names of his political enemies. He plans to become a dictator by having all of the men listed in his book arrested and executed.
This movie started off looking really interesting. The camera-work was lively and the style looked good. Then it got bogged down in politics and the lies that come with that subject matter. Nobody was who they said they were and everyone had hidden agendas. This is not a thing that can be clearly presented in a 1949 film. The characters became difficult to differentiate and I believe that at least one of them was passing himself off as a man whom he had just killed. Overall, it starts out good and becomes both boring and confusing. I rate it bad.
An English historical drama directed by William K. Howard, starring Lawrence Olivier and Vivien Leigh.
English nobles argue about war with Spain while a young Spanish man is falling in love with the English princess.
The plot and characters were some of the driest and most boring I've ever seen and on the whole, it was not a good film. However, the camera-work was PERFECT! I realized this at about 1:10 during a fight scene in which I could see both combatants struggling. Thinking retrospectively, I realized that the whole movie was shot wonderfully. There was a scene in which the young lead characters are together singing and the backdrop looks fantastic. I wish that modern filmmakers would shoot like this. Alejandro Jodorowsky would be proud. I'm rating it o.k. because it was a boring movie despite the great camera-work.
A historical drama by Carol Reed, starring Charlton Heston.Michelangelo is commissioned to paint the Sistine chapel, but does not agree with the pope about the idea.The characters were good, but the plot was mediocre. Charlton Heston acted painting very well and I think he actually painted a few lines himself. This puts the film miles above the ones that feature people pretending to make art or music. You don't want to know how many times I've seen someone fake playing guitar unsuccessfully. I expected more agony and more ecstasy from this film. Michelangelo was definitely shown suffering a little, but not as much as I had hoped. The ecstasy consisted of 1 scene of him looking at some clouds (5 min max). Where did the title emotions go? I'm rating it o.k. and the only thing that saved it from poor was the actor actually painting.
A historical drama directed by Michael Caton-Jones, starring Liam Neeson.A Scottish man has conflicts with the local nobles over honor.This film is very long and not very interesting. Basically, people with accents have verbal and physical conflicts for just over 2 hours. One strange thing is the presence of the male lead from Four Rooms. I'm rating it poor because it failed to keep my attention.
A historical drama directed by and starring Tony Stone.2 vikings are left for dead when their raiding party retreats. They become lost in a strange new land and try not to get killed by the Native Americans.The audio was extremely appropriate and the video was awesome.check out: Taking a massive viking shit. Wikipedia calls this "un-simulated defecation".When you put good viking metal and some Burzum in a viking movie, it's a match made in Valhalla! Throw in some slaughtering of Christians, a real viking funeral pyre and a scene in which one of the vikings gets raped by a Native American woman (as soon as he wakes up from eating poison berries) and You're looking at one of the best films of the year. This is for true Nordic warriors with extremely long attention spans.
a historical drama directed, produced, and starring mel gibsonwilliam wallace is a scottish hero who leads his people in a military campaign for freedom.the audio and video were both good.check out: the reversed religious roles of scotland and england. weren't the scottish still pagan in 1200 something and the brittish the christian ones?it was pretty cool. there was lots of action, but it lasts 3 hours. I'm rating it o.k. because it was good but long. had it been shorter, it would get a good rating. if you're into watching big battles, this one's for you. it's probably worth watching.
