Change Your Image
iso-kincses
Reviews
Terminator Salvation (2009)
C Minus
OK, they DO need money, and a franchise like this called for peeling another skin off it.
But even with the massive basic elements, and small portions of ingredients stolen from Mad Max, Matrix, Blade Runner and who know where else, it is just junk food.
Epic Flaw: how on earth could a 10 storey high steel machine sneak behind a wrecked gas station in the middle of the desert so that only a mute girl can 'sense' it's there???
Question Mark: why 2018? With todays achievements in robotics (major improvement is they can possibly walk up stairs without stumbling) is it really believable that they would run and jump in 10 years time?
The action scenes aren't that bad, thanks to McG, but they could have been better too. Hope he will get his chance to a better script and maybe he could step on Michael Bay's path, or similar.
Now this: you can wait till the DVD or even till the satellite release, don't be bothered now.
Watchmen (2009)
Almost Perfect
I have already shared some of my sulky after-movie rants here when I expected more from a comic book (or graphic novel) adaptation, and I thought while they are making films for profit they wont allow to lose megabucks in favor of some graphic violence. Never mind four letter words or sexually explicit scenes, which probably fall under more strict classification, maybe because they make a character more realistic (and Hollywood wouldn't want to be blamed for some kids getting mixed up between reality and the virtual universe), or more likely it's just the usual hypocrisy.
And now we can see it in full blow: aged ex-heroine boozing at two in afternoon, a physicist turned into a god-like creature who starts to develop god-like aloofness towards mankind, and a violent macho symbolising America's usually concealed or denied fascism and superiority complex. Mind you these are some of the good guys we're talking about! There are some more good guys with a little more touch of the boy scout creed of an average superhero but they wont be caught feeling squeamish about shedding blood and wont say crap instead of f**k, either. (They even do it not just say it!)
The cold war's atmosphere is captivating, but there's even more to it than the paranoid fear of a once highly potential nuclear holocaust. One of my favorite lines is when Adrian Veidt (Ozymandias) goes about solving the general problem of mankind. In brief, he puts it this way: we don't need to declare war on any nation or anything more than 'the evils that beset' men. And this thing is the artificially expensive energy (sources like fossil fuels and oil) that is being used for the only sake of maintaining the economy. This way of thinking wasn't new in the eighties but nobody gave it a f**k, and now it is still vastly ignored on high levels but this is the very reason I am really glad they cared to give it some place in the movie. For the usual moviegoer a bullet in between Lee Iacocca's eyes wont say much but it was my secret warm spot :)
Apart from the deep thoughts there is what we can expect from a director like Snyder: beautifully choreographed fighting scenes every now and again. And not just in the third tier (as it's usually the case in this genre) but we're welcome with one great fight in the first few minutes. I felt ever so satisfied that there was only one character that could do harm by supernatural means, as the others had to perform some real exquisite stunts. This is what I call comic book on the screen, and Snyder proved that 300 wasn't just an accident.
I don't want to spoil the story, but the endgame is a real treat too, without any of the usual Hollywood cheesiness or ignorant spoon-fed moral. Something to think about and at the time of writing I have to admit it is even more. It's a magnetism that I feel very rarely: I simply must see it again in the movies, as I can't wait for the DVD release. Let's hope it'll be a major blockbuster and also a critically acclaimed piece and so we can hope for a long awaited beginning of the adulthood of comic book adaptations. Keep up the good work Zack Snyder!
The Fall (2006)
Eye Candy (in a good sense)
I loved 'The Cell' so much that I was utterly disappointed by its reviews and the lack of afterlife. There are just so many talentless, or burnt out directors these days who can get their hands on relatively good scripts and mess around with them, while Tarsem was nowhere to be seen for long years.
So I've been waiting for this film so long (it was only released in Hungary recently) and it hasn't let me down. I've read some bad comments, going about it'd be nauseously colorful and it's art for art's sake, etc, but I never minded. One can rarely see a movie as a motion picture or as I'd like to think of it: pictures put after each other to create the illusion of movement. This one does so: almost every cut is a painting. These paintings are well composed and you can take your time to consume them as the pace corresponds the natural limits of perception. What is worth seeing is not thrown at you like an explosion in one tenth of a second but it's either a still-life or a slow motion action.
I have to admit the script has it's flaws. The frame story is too simple and the tale within the story lacks the moral or the epic in it. It's like any story we could make up under a bit of a pressure to improvise. But we couldn't paint such good illustrations to our fairy tales and this is the issue here. Most directors would have messed it up by choosing the wrong actors and scenes never mind costumes and shooting angles. Tarsem delivered the best the script allowed him.
He should be directing comic book adaptations, science fictions and any movie that has something to do with dreams, fantasies or hallucinations. Francis Lawrence was decent with 'Constantine' but Tarsem could have been better at it. I love Guillermo Del Toro (especially Pan's Labyrinth) but Hellboy could have been a bit more saturated with Tarsem behind the camera. 10/10 to Terry Gilliam for The Brothers Grimm, yet he messed up Tideland, and Tarsem Singh could have pulled that off, too. Not to mention Aeon Flux or the completely screwed up Alexander (sad but true: Oliver Stone has been just lame for the past 10-11 years).
All in all: hope the seven scant years are over with 'The Fall' and I really do hope the movies marked here as announced or in-production will be completed in time and they'll get the chance to recruit more fans to this cinematographic style.
In the Valley of Elah (2007)
International Distress Signal
Wars have always been rough but I could imagine that a long time ago, going to war had at least some meaning and boys had became men during the process. Like the young David in the Valley of Elah. He killed Goliath and cut off his head no problem, but Goliath was the enemy, a threat, and certainly not a brother-in-arms. Wars has become more and pointless apart from being rough, and it makes no man from kids. It's ar$ewise around: war makes confused adolescents from men. And at the end they are so thoroughly f@kd up they can be a menace to themselves or to each other. You don't need an Arab to cripple an American soldier because they will surely do this favor by themselves.
I reckon this film as a silently uttered statement that can fill a crowded room so that everyone should hear it. It's like the flag flying upside down. This is not a propaganda speech yelled from a spitting mouth, and the face behind from this statement is not the swollen face of a religious sect's preacher trying to tell you where the devil resides. This is the weathered face of Hank Deerfield saying: 'We're in a whole lot of trouble so come save our a$$es 'cause we ain't got a prayer in hell of saving it ourselves.' And the truth is as simple as that.
One small flaw is: war had already been pointless when this Hank Deerfield served, so he should've known better than telling his son to stay put in Iraq or to become a soldier in the first place. But even this point is developed well by Haggis. Deerfield couldn't believe for one moment what those guys (the comrades) are capable of, and that makes the scene of Penning's confession even more shocking.
The other small flaw is James Franco but he has like 3 lines, so it's not a big deal.
The plot nails you to your seat, and so does the act of Tommy Lee Jones. He IS the character. He can tell so much with a tick of a face nerve that you couldn't write it down on one page. In a nutshell: a perfect movie with a powerful message. A message that everybody is familiar with but nobody seems to listen to it as it's become so plain, but this time it's so well put that it might make us (I mean U.S.) think again.
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008)
Simply forgettable
I went to see this film with no expectations at all so it hasn't turned out to be a disappointment. Ford looks all right for the role, but he should pass the hat now to Shia LaBeouf. He could easily have stolen this movie like he did in Transformers, but unfortunately his character wasn't so well developed, and he had lesser chance to prove his comic timing than he should have deserved.
Blanchett is good as villain,though I haven't heard the accent as the film was dubbed. The good villain always have a bit of our sympathy and I really had my fingers crossed for her when she was escaping from the ants. The fencing and the "carchase" in the jungle was the only real highlight of the film (mind you: LaBeouf and Blanchett took the best part of it) the rest is old school adventure blended with some close encounters of the third kind or what have you...
The story was too flat for my taste, the odd joke was not so memorable either, and the ending is just banal. There was also a big gap where some intelligence should have been (riddles or following clues or at least something that verifies Indy as a professor instead of a weathered tomb-raider-turned-to-ex-agent or what is he really now??)
Into the Wild (2007)
Excellent, even-handed portrayal of a grunge-apostle's pilgrimage
For he's one of my favorite actors, I've always feared Sean Penn would eventually leave acting to have more time to direct. Fortunately he seems to find the time to appear on both sides of the camera, and by doing so he's gradually become one of my favorite directors as well.
When I've first seen the trailer I thought: looks like some Great American Adventure. Guy thinks he can do everything, compete with Naturte (mind you: it's The Great American Outdoors kind of nature, not some national park in Germany where you might forage on the leftover of tourists) and WIN over Nature. Well enough, if somebody like Mel Gibson had directed the movie, I would have continued to have such preconceptions, but Sean Penn made me not just curious but full of expectations.
And he haven't let me down.
There is the American Guy similar to what I imagined he would appear: arrogant, conceited, full of judgment towards almost literally everyone. He's not just smart but intelligent, he's reading worthy books, and absorbs some very good ideas, like money makes us too cautious, careers are 20Th century inventions, etc. But he's posing with his superior intelligence rather than trying to show the way to others. You can't be mad at him, because he's special like an alien from space, however you wont understand what is his true point, because maybe it's not clear to himself either.
Obviously, he falls. He could have easily fallen way much earlier on his Odyssey but he's been blessed by the Gods, maybe because that was the plan with his life. To leave a mark. To make a point. A bit too late maybe, but the stuff landed in good hands, and the moral of the story is not distorted into an American heroic tale, it is what it is. You might watch it for the great scenes, for good acting and forget about the monologues/dialogs. You might pack up to go camping without a gas cooker and a folding chair to feel the need for something and be proud that you can cope with it. You might say what a stupid sap he was to give away $24.000 and a promising life, and you might as well prove your point to some idealist friend/schoolmate over a few beers and be proud what a clever product of the Western Educational Industry" you are. You might as well go insane and pack for Siberia. You may chose your views on the matter because you are not brainwashed by the movie and that's the main issue here.
I have my own concepts about life, the universe and everything. I hope everybody does. You don't care what's mine, so I don't add it to this comment. But there's one thing I'd like to add to to this comment: go and see this movie! It might not change your way of life but it will have an impact on you, and these kind of movies are harder and harder to find these days.
Usually I don't care much about the music, but Eddie Vedder here brings back some extra emotion towards the nineties when there was a kind of attempt to draw youngsters' attention away from 'The Grid' and highlight more important things than cool gadgets and promising careers. It can be compared with 'American Psycho' where the music was even more strongly implanted to set you back to the eighties. You may as well go as far as to compare the two extreme characters (Bateman and McCandless) and ask yourself to which the youth of the naughties is similar? Personally, I hope that since we seem to copy the eighties right now, we'd get to copying the nineties soon, and without the need of such exaggerations Chris McCandless went into, we could possibly find a more humane model to identify ourselves with.
Iron Man (2008)
Shiny Kitsch for Kids Only
First and foremost: if you are an adult and you would like to identify yourself (a bit) with a fictional character then you have to chose a CHILD CHARACTER (Harry Potter or Lyra Belaqua for e.g.) because the fictional adult characters are so childish they need to be told not to suck on their thumbs. And where the moral would be: For a start we got a careless billionaire making megabucks on gun manufacturing and trading. Then he realizes that guns are bad (not spoiling the buzz about the moment how he comes to this conclusion...) And what's his next move? To build an armor full of missiles and set out self-judging like Charles Bronson in Death Wish. Great pattern for kids, huh?
Same childishness goes for the Actions Department: as if the people responsible for this crap were giving out Iron Man toys to some 5 year old kids and copied their playing with them, then added some CGI and tapped on each others shoulder for good work. Pityful.
My three stars needs some explanation then: one for good casting (even if it's wasted grossly) and two for the Iron Man outfit which is the only one so far (amongst the Marvel adaptations) that truly resembles the original.
Badly hurts that we're not spared from the sequel as it seems there is an audience out there that is completely ignorant.
4: Rise of the Silver Surfer (2007)
It's high time to stop these crap flowing!
Three guesses why they rarely can do a decent Marvel adaptation:
1:-( The targeted audience must (?) contain everyone. Initially studios considered comic book adaptations to be well on the risky side (and it was true of course, before CGI), so they couldn't allow themselves to let a single ticket loose. They don't seem to realize that there's not much risk in putting a Marvel character up to the silver screen than in making an adaptation of a bestselling novel. Not any more. Some films don't even try to deny this old-fashioned attitude, like this Fantastic Four flick. It's a family movie, NOT a comic book adaptation! (See what they made of The Thing. Originally, as I remember him, it was a bitter and rough character who easily got into a rampaging mood and cigarette smoke surrounded his face. Now, he's a funny-burper, who never stops apologising for his lovable clumsiness. Cute? Pathetic is the word.)
2:-( Stan Lee is a sentimental old gentleman, who once put the soul into the superheroes, but I guess most of the readers (except weirdos like Banky) are turning through the pages on which Peter Parker is listening to the words of wisdom of Aunt May, or the Torch is having a dilemma about enjoying himself instead of wishing the whole cosmic radiation debacle hadn't happened... Readers like to see them kicking a$$! And I hope moviegoers even more so. And since the likes of Blade, The Matrix and the whole new breed of Chinese cinema, kicking a$$ doesn't mean hurling CGI-flashes at each other! Would it be TOO violent if we saw something like The Thing lands a king-sized punch on some(one/thing)s face? In slow-mo if I could ask for more?! And of course in that case he would move like he wasn't a husky guy in a ton of latex foam, but like he was a comic book icon brought to life! Kiddies can beat/shoot the living s**t out of a (more and more realistically animated) person with their Playstation consoles, but can't see such things on screen? Hipocracy has no boundaries.
3:-( When they try their best shot and aim a bit higher, say in Batman: The Beginning, they still just reach up to the adolescent-level. There you go with a problematic, dark", philosophic hero who still doesn't kick a$$. Well he does some, but we don't actually SEE it, thanks to the director. All we see is a cape-ballet and a pointy-eared freak hanging upside down. Tormented soul? Who the f@k cares? Like, are we in high school, moaning around the I doesn't fit in"-theme, or what? If your character is problematic, put them in a likewise problematic universe. An unrealistic one (well, unrealistic as in comic-book-universe, rings a bell?) where they can beat up the baddies without (quasi-)moral pullbacks. Like in Sin City or in Blade or 300 (I know it's a bit rich but still, it's based on a graphic novel, so basically fits in the row). Weren't them successful? I think they were all right.
So, sweeping this together: - If you're an adult who doesn't happen to be a Marvel-Universe-freak, don't go to see this one. (You won't see more of Jessica Alba's bare skin than you would on the Academy Awards, so it doesn't count either...) - If you are a kid, who doesn't like to be treated as a dumba$$, don't go to see it either. If these flicks fell big in a row, while the likes of 300 kept harvesting, they would maybe reconsider some issues and you wouldn't miss anything, there's always ways to see a rated film;-) - If you are a casting director, please note that Chris Evans at least have the decency to actually look like a superhero, unlike Tobey Maguire... - If you are a costume designer, please note that (unless you have the actors with perfect bodies like Evans and Alba) a solution MUST be the Silver Surfer way: a perfect shaped stunt" with no actual clothes on, and certainly not an average dude squeezed into a Mexican luchador outfit! (Even the facemask fits into this category.) - If you are a director, take the bother to see some Chinese action (Stephen Chow would be highly recommended!), put it together with some really dynamic music, and don't be shy when it comes to slow motion. (I know it will raise some eyebrows, but remember Charlie's Angels? A piece of action while Prodigy's 'Smack My B**ch Up' is thundering away? Now, that is badly needed these days...) - If you are Stan Lee...well, with respect sir, but keep your influence away from the world of cinema. Rethink or retire!
Ocean's Thirteen (2007)
The Bottom of the Ocean.
I'm addicted to ensemble-cast flicks, so I simply had to see this, even though I had some very serious foreboding. I consider Ocean's Eleven a very stylish, slick, and well paced heist. I was a bit upset when I learned Soderbergh would make the sequel from lesser money which just sounds unfair. It's like you went to a good restaurant, gave a generous tip, even brought some friends next time just to find less on your plate.
Because (normally) money shows!
Don't get me wrong; I don't have anything against low budget. But a budget-cut sequel to a blockbuster sounds just fishy, without mentioning the extra aces like Zeta Jones, Cassel or the European locations. And if I'm wrong here, and they actually made it out of more money, it must have been used up for the above-mentioned stars and locations, for there were big, yawning gaps where some action should have been. R.I.P.
All right, you could think, now they're teaming up again to make up for it. Back to base, back to Vegas, back to the original". Think again! This is just another desperate grip on the cow's tits which was killed with O12, so they shouldn't try to milk it again. Desperate it is, really. Remember the scene from 'Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back' where Gus was counting money as Damon and Affleck lined up to serve a second helping, before they look frankly in the camera and say something about taking a role sometimes for a friend... I guess this was the case here. Meet up, dress up smart, talk smooth and let the camera roll.
- Cut. -Are we done yet? - How's Angelina? - Grand.
(Why 5 stars then? Just because with this cast I start counting from 5. Without the names it certainly would be just the one.)
28 Weeks Later (2007)
My best "horror" so far.
I didn't go to see '28 Days Later' just because I don't like zombie-flicks, and I thought it was one of them. Now, I may reconsider after seeing this one. Well, to tell the truth, I don't think about it as a zombie-movie, rather than an 'extinction-thriller' if such genre exists...
There are infected people whose brains click to the same trigger as the brain of a zombie would do so. But these people die more efficiently (and plainly, yet way much spectacularly) than the usual living dead. Thus, we're saved from the only-disgusting-but-embarrassingly-boring scenes of rotten corpses crawling towards the heroes with their bowels on a leash. That's a major improvement!
And what's also important: they don't take up more running time than it's really asked for!
So, it's England put back into nature's control for a really good kick-off.
Anyone who ever travelled by any means of public transport in a big city (bodies squeezed together, you can smell armpits, you actually feel the general annoyance of the creature-formed-by-the-mass) or stuck in a traffic jam, (so basically EVERYONE) had the fantasy about being one of the few survivors of a world wide pandemic, strolling the streets and hijacking abandoned vehicles to ride around king-of-the-city-style...
Two kids do so in the streets of London. Loved that!
The pacing is just perfect! A bit of nervous survivor's feast at the beginning, like we were on board of Morpheus' Ship. The tension is in the air, and soon enough we get to see the raging hordes of the infected. Than the vehicle is put back into second gear again, just to gather up the strength for a major boost. When it's Code-Red-Time, our muscles can't relax any more. I think I actually lived with the movie for a while, which is very rare. The SCORE, I'd say that's the main reason. Usually I don't pay much attention to the music, though I know how important it can be. Now, I guessed, it's gonna be like in the case of 'Sunshine'. Both trailers are awesome, with their developing music themes. And we couldn't even get the chance to hear it again in 'Sunshine', so I thought it was going to be another fishy trailer trick. (I had some really bad experiences with trailers lately, biggest was Spiderman 3.) But it wasn't! The score kept together the whole movie, made it tense as ever, made me pinned down to my seat with my fists clinched whenever they started to play it. And one more thing; we simply can't get enough of them Spanish and Mexican directors! Juan Carlos Fresnadillo just joined the league of extraordinary gentlemen formed by Alejandro González Iñárritu, Guillermo del Toro, and Alfonso Cuarón. Though you have the feeling watching this movie as it was a Vietnam Vet's recreation of a nightmare after reading Robert Merle's Malevil, so nothing particularly "Latino", but never mind, it is working like a well greased Spanish torture-machine..
Now, fingers crossed for this movie to be able to push Spiderman 3 off its undeserved throne. GO AND SEE IT FOLKS!
Goya's Ghosts (2006)
Good deliverance
This is a period drama as they have to be.
Not a biographical drama, as the title might suggest.
This isn't about Goya, neither about his muse, nor the Spanish Court, nor the 'Holy Office' (ie: The Inquisition). This is just a big canvas about an era. Ojectively painted, well lighted and well balanced between the chief characters and the bystanders. The features of the selected actors deliver a touch of Goya's characters, and that is true from the vogon-like archbishop to the very last extra. The world is dark, intriguing and deceitful, yet it doesn't lack a sense of humour.
The plot is not as cohesive as you can get, but that's forgivable.
Goya is just an artist with no intention to be a champion of justice, but you forgive him as artists often go that way. He's just a chronicler, but he was damned good at it, wasn't he?
Ines is just a girl, and 'God bless her soul' she remains one forever,and you like her for it. I never thought about Natalie Portman as a capable actress, but as a worn off, tortured half-wit released from the dungeons I have to give her some kudos.
And 'father' Lorenzo is just a man, after all...and you can forgive him if you insist. I thought he's the ultimate opportunist turn-coat, but he managed to show some guts in the end, so I forgave him.
There's a bit much ingredient in the blender than most people will like, from religion to revolution to royal art-critics to tavern-ambiance to execution, but I liked the taste of the turmix"(Hungarian equivalent for (milk)shake, I just love this word) And again; this is a period drama, lapping up almost twenty years of turbulent history so it couldn't avoid to be a bit dense and rich.
The Upside of Anger (2005)
Quite Lovable
To begin with: fair play to Mike Binder. Trick with release dates: I saw two movies from him in the last two weeks, and I would go for a third in two weeks' time. Well written, well directed, well cast. I hope he'll stay on this track.
No need to say anything about the story. Liked 'American Beauty'? Liked 'The Ice Storm'? Liked 'The Squid and the Whale'? Trust me, you're gonna like this too.
Joan Allen haven't been so good since The Ice Storm. Well, she's never ever been so good! Although I have at least three American actresses in her two-years-of-age-radius, who I like more (Griffith, Hunter and Bening), but Griffith's voice would have been too sweet for the role, and the other two just had enough of the kind so far to put their fingers into something else.
And the role of the shabby, beer-guzzling but big-hearted ex baseball pro is something descending stars would kill for. Now, again and more so: there are way many more actors around 50, who could have played this hands down. (Suspect Jeff Bridges could have played it without even reading the script;-) Still, you can't complain about Kevin Costner. What's more, you might start hoping his agent will dig up some more of the sort for him, and he will grow on you.
The rest is all right, though E.R. Wood has to take a bigger step now, because I felt a bit like she made this and 'Running with Scissors' in a way of kill-two-birds-with-one-stone, without even changing her hat. But it's all right when she's just so cute, isn't it? I think when she comes of age, she'll surprise us with some more solid stuff, and won't disappear like Thora Birch or Dominique Swain.
Turning back to Binder for one comparison: this movie was better than 'Reign Over Me'. The difference is in the way you can empathize with characters or not. Maybe I'm just a drinker myself, and it's speaks for it's due, but I like sarcastic and bitter people clinging on a bottle of vodka but knowing perfectly well their boundaries THAN people who can be charming in their strange ways but once they get knocked off balance and drink the best part of a bottle, they get so p**sed they feel the urge to take a stroll with a loaded gun...(I think Binder would cut that part out now, after Virginia Tech...)
Spider-Man 3 (2007)
Melrose Place with Spiderman as special guest
I even can't see the point of making effort to introduce the characters' "birth" and the first awkward steps in the first movies of this kind of sagas (fine example of sparing us from it was Blade) but if Stan Lee or whoever it is insists, then they should at least STOP THERE! This sequel was even worse than the first movie, which is more of a shame if you have heard about some 250 Million spent on it. Spent on WHAT?! Is the bridge in Central Park, or the shabby room of Parker that dear? Because most of the time the characters are set in such locations, doing nothing really but saying clichés. Venom barely scratches the ballet-dancing outfit on Spidey, and mind you, by that time you have a good chance of missing that, as you might be looking around to see other folks' embarrassment. The Sand Giant is laughable too, after King Kong anyway. Well, back to the ballet-outfit for a sec: it actually fits Parker as interpreted by Tobey Maguire, who looks like someone with no hundred percent certainty about his sexual preferences. Just take that walking on the street, Disco Stu-style, than the lashing hair as means of express aggression or whatever...With all respect; that's nothing like the character we know from the books. (Never mind the double chin!) And where are the witty one-liners during the fights? Oh, for chrissakes , where are the fights, after all?!
I see there was a grand opening, which I hope is just the result of the pre-sales of tickets. I would like to see a big fall by next weekend, and a big question mark put after the names of Raimi and Maguire, which could save the fourth episode.
Please bring Venom back, and offer the director's chair someone like Robert Rodriguez or Zack Snyder!