Apt Pupil - 9/10 - I just had to re-watch this movie because it would never be made today with Hollywood being controlled by overly PC cry babies. I thoroughly enjoyed the movie and found the ending wonderful. Just as it should be.
Apt Pupil - 9/10 - I just had to re-watch this movie because it would never be made today with Hollywood being controlled by overly PC cry babies. I thoroughly enjoyed the movie and found the ending wonderful. Just as it should be.
Not whitewashed but Dumbwashed from stem to stern. Lifeless performances all around like having a film populated with David Duchovny's in every role. Typically hollywooded scripting shoehorned into a vehicle that attempts to distract one with style. That style to me was utterly lacking and at times I wondered if the props people were in their preteen years. Spot the Lotus Esprit and win a prize
I found myself almost nodding off through this one and it is not fair to blame Scarlett alone for that. Wooden was a charitable description and should have been extended to the entire cast rather than heaving the burden on her.
This film plays out as if the director watched the original without the sound and made up a Marvel storyline to go along with it.
Save the expense and wait for a netrental on this one. It should be up there fairly soon.
in most episodes of Xfiles I had one and only one question: "how do they get so much light even in the middle of the woods?" I was utterly defeated with my hand held flash and aluminum reflector. I got very sad when I realized they had a generator as big as my room at the university at the time, to power the stuff to call batman several times over, and huge illuminated balloon and ...
I want it all.
but when I think expressionless I think prison break brothers, and also Kristen Stewart in Twilight(I never got to the end of the first one). Han Solo frozen in carbonite displayed more expressions than those guys put together.
Indeed he was but his self proclaimed method of "non Acting" is what I was aiming at. Picture if you will an entire cast following that very same method and you will have a fairly accurate portrayal of Ghost in the Shell For Dummies.
I apparently was wrong on the BO pull as well. Early reports show it's opening weekend performance as dismal. Perhaps there is some justice after all.
in most episodes of Xfiles I had one and only one question: "how do they get so much light even in the middle of the woods?" I was utterly defeated with my hand held flash and aluminum reflector. I got very sad when I realized they had a generator as big as my room at the university at the time, to power the stuff to call batman several times over, and huge illuminated balloon and ...
I want it all.
but when I think expressionless I think prison break brothers, and also Kristen Stewart in Twilight(I never got to the end of the first one). Han Solo frozen in carbonite displayed more expressions than those guys put together.
Kristen Stewart show more range then Felicity Jones in Rogue one I do believe? I can´t remember if I sat through the entire Twilight though.
How about Keanu Reeves? May hold a record in amount of movies with no expressions
Known as the one only horror movie to be filmed fully on the small Buddhist/Shiva island. This movie takes local spirituality and twists a tale of a twenty something USA female writer arriving to write a book on the dark arts. Our star then meets with the local queen of black magic and of course is used fully for the queen's own special needs. A classic tale of black against white, we are treated with the best 1980s video effects and synth soundtracks. Really a must for the complete take on the cheesy 80s World Horror movie style. Unique and funny.
Somehow I barely made it to the end of this. It's not an entertaining movie and the ending was exactly as I expected it to turn out.
It feels a bit wrong rating this so low, but I just could not get into it. The courtroom scenes and the acting were the best parts.
It did make me miss seeing all the old James Stewart movies. I need to go and rewatch the "Spirit of St. Louis"
BTW speaking of courtroom dramas, I saw this a few weeks ago:
A few Good Men - 7/10
Very entertaining but it's like they had used the Hollywood template for it's script. Everything you kind of expect to be in a hollywood movie for the audience to like it is in there.
It almost feels like a Ron Howard movie or something. Doesn't mean it's bad really. I've seen in about 5 times now and it's gotten much worse after repeated viewings.
A much better movie compared to all of these is "A Civil Action".
Anyone seem the TV movie of "Shackleton"? Amazing movie and I need to go watch that one again too.
Ice and Sky - 5/10
This one is about a glaciologist who finds evidence of man-made global climate change inside ice cores.
One of the most pretentious movies i've seen in a long time. The way they directed the movie just ruined the whole experience for me.
Best parts were when they told his stories of when he first came to Antarctica.
It just seemed so filler filled and after seeing the movie I didn't learn much of anything new. There is actually not much explained in the movie, which is kind of strange considering the subject.
This is actually one that I had forgotten I had seen within a week.
PS I'm definitely a believer in global warming, but lets not go there. I know how that usually turns out.
Passengers - 6.5/10 (Second viewing).
I was going to buy this blu-ray, but glad I didn't. I actually scored this one before and the rating still stands. I actually LIKE this movie. Sort of.
Chris Pratts acting is probably the worst thing about this. Some scenes are just not very well done and the middle parts could have been chopped up a little.
I find it amusing how at the end they just had to find something "big and broken" (forgot the exact quote, but it's pretty similar). Apparently fixing a spaceship is very "plug and play" and parts are always around.
Of course I like Jennifer Lawrence as an actress, but just not when she is overacting (like in David O Russell films). "Hunger Games" wouldn't have been the same without her.
I also wasn't convinced that she forgave him so easily. How long did it take her? A week? My friend also said that she tried to kill him. I wasn't convinced she was going to do that either. She didn't use an axe, but it looked like just a crowbar.
If I were in her shoes I would have never forgiven him since it's like killing someone.
LOL actually I would have woken up all 5000 people onboard and just said "Oops. My bad!" At least I could get some entertainment from them (and better food).
Die Hard 2 - 8/10
This used to be my favorite in the series. Don't ask me how that was possible. I really just had to watch part 1 over and over to realize how great it is as an action movie (part 1!). It's pretty close to perfect except for a few stupid things.
This one has some pretty bad acting. The worst was the general.
The director doesn't seem to care too much about getting a good performance from his actors. Oh well. I would have done way more takes. The excessive swearing also never feels natural. They also added in a bunch of extra violence for no apparent reason.
The two worst scenes that deserved to be better were the airport police office scene and the fax machine scene ("Just the fax ma'am!")
The stupidest part in the movie is when he is trying to get out of his parachute and says "Where's the F-ing door!". There's also a lot of cringe-worthy dialogue like "Just like Iwo Jima!" after McClaine goes after the bad guys.
Don't ask me why, but I always liked Richard Thornburg's character. He plays a perfect movie a-hole (he was in "Ghostbusters" too). Not sure what else to call them, but there's a lot of other characters like them! Kiefer Sutherland is another good one!
The one thing I miss the most is the comedy from Die hard 1. Part 1 isn't a comedy, but it has a lot of small funny parts you might not notice.
BTW another favorite is "Executive Decision". Yes, really! "Cliffhanger" is another action movie I really like. Michael Rooker is an underrated actor.
This used to be my favorite in the series. Don't ask me how that was possible. I really just had to watch part 1 over and over to realize how great it is as an action movie (part 1!). It's pretty close to perfect except for a few stupid things.
This one has some pretty bad acting. The worst was the general.
The director doesn't seem to care too much about getting a good performance from his actors. Oh well. I would have done way more takes. The excessive swearing also never feels natural. They also added in a bunch of extra violence for no apparent reason.
The two worst scenes that deserved to be better were the airport police office scene and the fax machine scene ("Just the fax ma'am!")
The stupidest part in the movie is when he is trying to get out of his parachute and says "Where's the F-ing door!". There's also a lot of cringe-worthy dialogue like "Just like Iwo Jima!" after McClaine goes after the bad guys.
Don't ask me why, but I always liked Richard Thornburg's character. He plays a perfect movie a-hole (he was in "Ghostbusters" too). Not sure what else to call them, but there's a lot of other characters like them! Kiefer Sutherland is another good one!
The one thing I miss the most is the comedy from Die hard 1. Part 1 isn't a comedy, but it has a lot of small funny parts you might not notice.
I'm surprised you rated this so high; it doesn't sound as if you like much about it (bad acting, cringe-worthy dialogue)! I felt 2 was a huge step down from the first film personally - clownish, and poor in most departments - whereas the first Die Hard, like you say, is almost perfect as an actioner. Maybe I came to the sequel too late; I didn't see it as a kid so it had none of that residual nostalgia that sometimes carries a bad film over the line.
It sounds like a sequel, but the 2.0 means version 2.0. The film follows a copy cat, who draws on the account of Raman Raghav, a real life serial killer in the 60s, for inspiration. In parallel to the story of Ramanna (Raman), we follow the thread of his nemesis, cop-on-the-edge, Raghavan (Raghav). It's a twist on the old super-foes story; Heat, or Manhunter maybe, relocated to the slums of Mumbai.
Despite being on opposite sides of the law, the two are peas in a pod - something that becomes increasingly clear until the final interchange. It's right there in their names as well. It's not subtle, but then it's not meant to be - director Anurag Kashyap doesn't deal in subtlety. I don't know much about Bollywood, but I'm pretty sure this is meant to be a shock to the system - there are no musical numbers, no romantic overtones and an irreverence that runs through the film like a seam of neon paint - it seems to delight in shocking the audience as much as entertaining it. That said, most of the violence happens off-screen, which for this kind of movie, is unusual - if it were a Korean revenge thriller for example, it would be explicit.
I think what really pushes it over the average are the cinematography - the restless, energetic camera work that captures the fetid vibrancy of the enivronment - and the performances of the two leads, especially Siddiqui, who has a magnetic screen presence as Raman, veering between strangely comic and disturbingly savage in a film that is all about contrasts and correlation.
I think what really pushes it over the average are the cinematography - the restless, energetic camera work that captures the fetid vibrancy of the enivronment - and the performances of the two leads, especially Siddiqui, who has a magnetic screen presence as Raman, veering between strangely comic and disturbingly savage in a film that is all about contrasts and correlation.
Siddiqui has definitely screen presence in most movies where he appears. I haven't seen Indian movies for a while. I used to watch their several movies in a year.
Siddiqui has definitely screen presence in most movies where he appears. I haven't seen Indian movies for a while. I used to watch their several movies in a year.
He's almost an over-bearing presence in this one - that's a slight negative maybe, in that he overshadows all the other characters in the movie! I've not come across him before. Do you have any recommendations of his other films, or Indian films in general (not musicals or romantic stuff!)? I must admit I've seen very few films from this part of the world. I was asking an Indian friend for reccos a while back, but his taste is much more traditional.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
