Movie Critiques

[laurelin]

The ship flipping was one of my favorite parts. I have to say, though, I'm surprised so many people liked it so well. I mean, sure, it had a few really great moments, and spectacular effects. Orlando Bloom finally looked like a pirate, and Norrington had a real character again. That alone, though, bothered me, because there was so much potential for plot with him, and all he did was...(spoiler). The comedy was much improved on the horrific attempts at it in Dead Man's Chest, and the story was much better. But there were a lot of cheap twists in it. It wasn't satisfying. The characters were also better than the last, but still not themselves from the first movie. The minor characters were badly underdeveloped, as well. I enjoyed a lot of it, but in the end, I think it could have and should have been much better.

[Gwalchmai]

I think the main problem with a lot of those movies is they want to continue to develop the characters when you don't need to. the main joy (at least for me) is the telling of the adventure. I don't want to know that deep down the villian had a terrible childhood which drove him to become the evil monster fighting our hero. I just want the adventure and to allow my imagination to fill in the rest if I ever cared about that at some point later on.

The best part for me was the Pearl vs the Dutchman, that entire sequence just had me on the edge of my seat the whole time. Just too many awesome parts.

[CynanMachae]

Oceans thirteen: didn't quite like the acting compared to the first two (especially that of Matt Damon) But it is much more along the lines of the first movie than the second, and for that it rocks. It was an excellent movie.

[Dred]

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix

Overall I really enjoyed this movie but there were certain things I wish they had gone into more depth and added time on. I think this movie could have been even better had they not glossed over some things. Just tapping onto something for the sake of doing that doesn't add anything at all to a movie than to say it was mentioned and that doesn't add much for me. Like I said though, overall I enjoyed it very much.

[Daae]

Stardust

I took my younger sister and her friend to see Stardust a week or so ago, and I have to say, I absolutely loved the movie. I haven't read the orginal graphic novel yet, so I can't say if it's accurate to the source material at all, but on it's own as a movie it was wonderful. It was kind of refreshing to see honest-to-goodness fairy tale like fantasy again, and probably the best way to describe it is Pan's Labyrinth meets Princess Bride (more Princess Bride than Pan's Labyrinth). It even had a happily ever after ending.

So, nothing really deep or thought provoking, but well acted, lovely to look at, and lots of fun to watch. And pretty clean too. Nothing overly violent (I don't think I saw any blood), although the witches are a little creepy sometimes. But they're evil witches, so they're supposed to be creepy. Maybe not for real little kids, but it's a pretty clean PG-13.

[pink3elephant]

Enchanted:

LOVED IT. (but I am biased because I pretty much love anything and everything Disney. . .)

A great film for all ages I believe, and it made you feel like smiling and dancing along with the music.

Made me dissapear from the world for 2 hours, loved it.

[ellery]

Here's a few movies I liked, in no particular order.

King Kong (Peter Jackson version) - I saw the original King Kong as well. This one's not in black in white, so better imo hehe. Yeah, there's some cheesy moments and some of the action was lame, especially the parts that defied the laws of physics. On the other hand, some of the action gave me chills. Jack Black filled his role well in my opinion. His character isn't supposed to be a hero or a villain. He's supposed to be pathetic in the pathos sense and in the ordinary sense. My favorite scene was the allusion to Conrad's Heart of Darkness. HoD is one of my top 10 books for sure, and the question, "Why does Marlow keep going upriver?" is what really drives the first half of the movie if you're looking for something deeper than dinosaurs trampling people.

Batman Begins - a lot of people have already reviewed this one. I just wanted to chime in that it's the best comic book movie ever made. I can't wait for The Dark Knight this summer. Too bad about Heath Ledger though.

Much Ado About Nothing - one of the better Kenneth Branaugh Shakespeare adaptions. Very funny, easily understood dialogue, thought provoking, and it actually takes place in Italy instead of some other time or setting.

Safe House - stars Patrick Stewart. He has Alzheimers and is losing his mind. He thinks some Russians or terrorists are gonna come kill him now that the Presidential administration has changed and he's no longer protected. His daughter doesn't believe that he was a spy though. It's been a long time since I've seen this one so my summary might be slightly off, but that's the gist of it. I just remember liking it a lot - funny and serious at the same time.

End of the Spear - a low budget film but one of the most powerful films I've seen in a long time. I just watched it tonight. The story is of some missionary wives that decide to live among a vicious Amazonian tribe that has killed their husbands. It's a true story. Back in the 70s, my parents actually knew one of the missionaries involved in the story. I am wondering if anyone has seen another movie by the same film company, Miss HIV?

[CynanMachae]

A couple movies I watched recently:

Into The Wild. Pretty much one of my favorite movies of all time. If I'm not mistaken, it was Sean Penn's first hack at directing, and man, did he do a good job. Emile Hirsche did a great job. The cinematography was beautiful and the plot poetic.

Smart People. I can't say I enjoyed it as much as Sideways (same producers), but it wasn't at all bad. I rather enjoy that type of "sophisticated" romantic comedy. The best thing it had going for it was the acting. Dennis Quaid, Thomas Hayden Church, Sarah J. Parker (who I normally don't care for but did a good job in this one), and Ellen Page.

[karenee]

Babylon A.D. - Ok, so I like explosions and special effects. I was a little misled by the previews, but not enough to get mad at the movie, right up until the end. It was a good--very, very good--action adventure right up until the last two scenes. Then I wished the director had decided to take the time to deal with the final events properly. Made the whole rest of the movie go flat... at least for me.

I liked that not everything was laid out. I had to figure out what was going on while watching. I liked the unexpected nature of several events. I really didn't know how it would end.

On the negative side, it turns out that the end wasn't as world-changing as I'd like, for all the build-up they put into a saving the world sort of conclusion.

The religious elements were... interesting, but not particularly shocking. One expects such plots in an age where aspects of scientific theory have become god-like. I certainly got several hours of deep thought about the intent and validity of the religious perspective from watching the show, though my conclusions were less than approving.

In summary, Babylon A.D. was action-filled and interesting, but I won't see it again.

V***spoiler***V



But then, I like unadulterated happy endings for the main characters, and if it isn't, then there had better be a good reason for it not to be. And there wasn't.

[mcmojo]

There Will Be Blood

There Will Be Blood is a great film. Technically, it is an exceptional achievement. The directing is nearly flawless. The camera paints this relatively small story with an epic brush. The visual palette that is used is raw; all dust, oil and sweat. The lighting is precise and evocative. The sound design is immersive, dangerous. The score is wildly original and daring. Jonny Greenwood of Radiohead fame, forces his way into the ranks of film composers with his first foray into the world of celluloid. The dialogue is intelligent, unpredictable and precise. No word is spoken without a mountain of weight behind it. Every phrase, every utterance holds profound meaning. And those words are spoken by actors completely devoted to the authenticity and honesty of the material. Daniel Day-Lewis gives one of the great performances of our lifetime. His portrayal of Daniel Plainview is searing, ferocious and impossible to look away from. He imbues Plainview with disparate emotions and seemingly contradicting motivations. Paul Dano, as Eli and Paul Sunday, doesn’t give up much ground to Lewis. He brings an unnerving passion to his characters, something that really gives this story its dramatic punch.

Writer-Director Paul Thomas Anderson has crafted a surgically precise character study on human behavior and motivation. His characters are not fully realized people as much as they are representations of the common corruptions of humanity. Greed, ambition, deceit, hate. These are qualities that saturate every frame of this film. Every character is victim to these sins; no one is spared. That is the film's primary strength, and sadly, its chief weakness as well. If there is any good, hope or purity in the film, it resides painfully and desperately on the outer edges; hanging on for dear life. The point is driven home again and again; Power corrupts everything: Families, churches, relationships, businesses. The list goes on and on. There is a darkness that festers in the souls of Daniel Plainview and Eli Sunday. It is something that destroys every shred of humanity in them. The image of God has been stamped out of them. On one level this is a monster film. Except it is more horrific than any monster film I have seen because these are not monsters. They are human beings who have become so twisted by their lust for power and disdain for their fellow man that they are reduced to snarling, spitting beasts.

Whether this film is an indictment or condemnation of Christianity and Capitalism, I am not prepared to say. I don’t feel that Anderson is throwing out the baby with the bath water. But make no mistake; he is throwing out the bath water. In his view, the church and the capitalistic government have become polluted and corrupted by an unholy alliance with greed and ambition. On some level, he is right and it would be wise to heed his caution. But, he does not go nearly far enough to show how that can be corrected, or even addressed. That is the biggest failure of the film. It is important to point out the festering sickness in our culture and ourselves, but if we do not, or can not ascertain the remedy, all of this introspection and self analysis is hollow. There are a few mentions in the film to “surface” oil. The concept is simple; there are some areas that seem to be just bursting with oil, due to the fact that the oil is seeping out on the surface. But closer inspection reveals that there are no vast hidden reservoirs of oil below the surface. A part of me suspects that is an apposite analogy for this film. Without answers, can the film truly go below the surface? I’m not so sure.

There Will Be Blood is a film that demands much from its audience. Be prepared to listen, hear and receive. But also, be prepared to interact.

[CynanMachae]

The Soloist:

My personal favorite movie of the year so far. Jamie Foxx's performance as the homeless cellist Nathaniel Ayers was absolutely STUNNING. I was in awe of his ability after the movie was done. Robert Downy Jr., playing a Los Angeles journalist who decides to write a story about Ayers, di a good job also, but he was just overshadowed by Foxx's brilliance (and I, for one, believe overshadowing Robert Downey Jr. is not an easy thing).

It's not an easy movie to watch. Most of the film takes place in the alleys of Los Angeles, where the sick homeless gather for a little bit of help from charity organizations. Some of the images are hard to swallow. But, the movie will take you on an incredible emotional ride, that is for sure. I think it's still in theatres, so go this weekend!