athorpe-95303 Reviews

Iron Man (2008)

good foundation, but on its own isn't great.

[8/10 · 22 December 2022]

Aight, maybe it was the tv. Maybe I was too close. But daggum this movie is grainy af.

Ånyhoo. Good plot, and fun characters, but not up to the standard Marvel expectations. Solid 76/100. Love what the movie became, too bad in a vacuum it doesn't stand up. The cast is great, the score is meh, and the plot as I said, is pretty good. The CGI was very difficult to spot, green screen too. I wish the Ten Tings had been explained a little more. Also, we need more Happy Hogan screen time. Other than those small gripes, solid movie. Good use of my time. Great way to introduce someone to the MCU as a whole. Jon Favreau is not only a genius but also an artist. Will be watching it again, hopefully soon. Wanna chronicle all the marvel movies on here.

The Amazing Spider-Man (2012)

better than mcguire, still not holland. and why the Lizard

[8/10 · 22 December 2022]

Um so hear me out. I think spiderman just gets better with time. Toby Mcguire is fun but feels cheap and cheesy. Decent Peter Parker, bad Spiderman. Tom Holland has the refinement of the MCU behind him. Incredible Peter Parker, great Spiderman. Andrew Garfield is kinda in between, doing a little bit better than ok at both roles. It's like the directors/writers are aiming for where Holland ended up, but decided to throw in a little bit of Toby for nostalgia's sake, and fell short. I really like his character. Something seems off, but it's still really good. The product is a movie that is more than passable. It's actually pretty good. Score is a bit boring, but not bad. Too bad they picked such a crappy villain. SERIOUSLY? THE LIZARD? What a stupid move. The CGI is kinda sketchy, but the green screen is harder to pick out than estimated. Solid, uhhhh we'll go 78/100. Even with No Way Home. I'm sorry but that's just how it is. The plot is so much better. Will watch it again.

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003)

fantastic, truly incredible, minor flaws

[9/10 · 22 December 2022]

No words. Just watch it.

That's a lie. I have so many words. First of all, without JRR Tolkien, this movie wouldn't exist. I place all the credit regarding plot excellence on him. Anything about the plot that sucked is due to crappy directing and writing. Honestly, some changes to the plot/minor details were acceptable. Distasteful, but acceptable. But man those big ones sure do detract from the overall film quality. I really detest the nerfing of Faramir. He is redeemed, but much later than in the book, and this decision is partially why the movie "only" gets 93/100 from me. The score is sublime, the casting mostly good, and the special fx, for 2003, are incredible. I still think Viggo Mortenson is a poor choice for Aragorn, and Arwen gets too much screen time. Tons of goosebumps moments. Overall, still an excellent movie, with some sadly understandable yet still frustrating corning cutting. 110% watching again, this is a yearly classic.

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002)

solid choice, showing its age, still good

[8/10 · 14 December 2022]

I just watched the extended edition for the first time, and it was pretty good. Kind of hard to jump in from the second movie, and honestly, the sheer amount of greenscreen does not stand up to the test of time. If you have zero expectations going in, then you will not be surprised by the quality of the film. The plot, of course, is incredible, but they've changed so much from the book, little things, but just enough to irk us originalists. Solid 8/10, if the special fx and plot hadn't been changed, it would be an easy 9.5. Incredible cast, the acting is top-notch, plot and script are both phenomenal. A classic that sadly is showing its 20 years since release. 83/100.

Dune (2021)

So frickin good.

[9/10 · 30 November 2022]

Alright, so much going on here. Incredible cast, mid character interaction, a superb score, top-notch special effects, amazing plot, disappointing pace. 87/100, definitely watching again, super stoked for part 2, too bad we have to wait like 3 years. Hope they don't ruin the sequel. Can't get over this cast. Truly incredible. Just wish they would have fit more of the plot of the first book in, and I wish so many great characters didn't die so soon, but it's faithful to the book, so I can't really complain. Overall incredible movie, shoulda made wayyyyy more money than it did. Great book-to-screen translation.

The Librarian III: The Curse of the Judas Chalice (2008 TV Movie)

bro wut is this dogcrap

[4/10 · 2 November 2022]

Bro wut. How is this even a movie. What a waste of talent. Laughably bad, the only reason I'm not giving it a lower rating, is cause it made me laugh so much. The CGI is all crap, the dialogue is very forced, the plot is um slow, ad the acting... I just can't. It's so bad. Like these actors are great in other stuff. Noah Wylie is fun in the new Leverage, and Stana Katic is amazing in Castle, but this movie? Hard pass. Really bad and definitely not worth your time unless you have literally nothing better to do. In that case, I suggest watching grass grow cause that is way more entertaining that this crapshow.

Holes (2003)

What a classic

[7/10 · 17 September 2022]

Literally this movie is one of the best childhood movies ever. It's a great story, if kinda wacky: you can tell it's was a kids books first, but still. Its so fun. The script is excellent, they stick to the book almost entirely. Literally the cast tho: like what? It's such a good group. Every choice is a good one. Love the dynamic between characters, especially Mr Pendanski and Mr Sir, what a bunch of hooligans. The score is alright, and the scenery fits just how I pictured it in the book. Overall 7/10, not an awesome movie, but a solid choice for 2 hours of your time. Definitely watching again.

What Is a Woman? (2022)

Spittin FAX he is

[9/10 · 7 August 2022]

So good. Says all the things that needed to be said. My only regret is that it took me so long to finally get around to watching it. Kinda sad, kinda funny, and very straightforward. 90/100.

The Prestige (2006)

Timeless Masterpiece

[9/10 · 6 August 2022]

Ohhhhhh myyyyyy goodness. What a masterpiece. Went on a little too long, and didn't end the way I expected. The score was kinda lacking, but the script & screenwriting...... incredible. The plot is soooo good, the cast incredible, overall an excellent film, hopefully it will age well. 89/100.

Paycheck (2003)

Good concept at least

[6/10 · 6 August 2022]

Um. Wellllll. It has an interesting concept at least. I don't see the appeal of uma thurman at all tho. Kinda weird too. Definitely showing its age now, 57/100.

Knight and Day (2010)

funny... ig

[8/10 · 6 August 2022]

Wow, that was fuuuun. A little heavy on the action but really funny, a good script, good character dynamics, excellent film all around. Love me some Tom Cruise. 77/100.

Music and Lyrics (2007)

Wowee that was fun

[8/10 · 6 August 2022]

Wow. That was a RIDE. Dang, very well done. Excellent cast, the emotional investment is REAL. Love Hugh Laurie's sense of humor so much. Very cool overall, definitely watch again, 78/100.

Appaloosa (2008)

The CAST

[7/10 · 6 August 2022]

Wow. Just wow. That was both really good and kinda confusing at the same time. Ed Harris, Viggo Mortensen, Renee Zellweger and jeremy Irons. What an all-star cast. Dang. Definitely will watch it again. 74/100. A little heavy on the profanity for me, but really good overall. Interesting plot fs.

The VelociPastor (2018)

so cringe, guilty

[2/10 · 6 August 2022]

The height of stupidity. Just so stupid. Very difficult to believe this was recorded in 2018. More like 1998. If they'd shot it on an iPhone it would have been better. An $11k budget can only go so far ig. Really funny in its ridiculousness but also just stupid. Only going to watch it again for the joke value. 22/100.

The Sound of Music (1965)

Wholesome and easy

[8/10 · 29 July 2022]

#47 The Sound of Music, (1965) 77/100, C+ Andrew Thorpe, 7/26/2022, Tuesday.

Total out of 250: 192/250

Well. That was a movie fs. And pretty good if I say so myself. Above average acting, great score, good plot, excellent writing, and with Christopher Plummer and Julie Andrews singing to boot. Prolly will watch it again, the problem is, it's so long. Like 3 hours? Dang. It went by quickly tho, the suspension of disbelief was incredible, with very few instances of my brain pulling and tryna find a problem. Very engaging, and fun too. Not an astonishing experience, but definitely a wholesome one. 77/100.

Ford v Ferrari (2019)

wow. i love cars. and christian bale. and matt damon.

[9/10 · 7 July 2022]

Oh. My. Goodness. That was truly incredible. Deserves both Academy Awards it got. Truly fantastic. Excellent acting and writing, the score and foley were executed near perfectly, and the cars..... wow. What a show. Definitely yearly watch type of movie. The ending was unexpected but still good. So. Frickin. Good. 88/100

#46

Movie title and release year: Ford v. Ferrari (2019)

88/100, B+

Reviewer name and watch date: Andrew Thorpe, 7/4/2022, Mon.

1a - Attraction value - upon first contact, is the idea appealing?: 9/10 1b - Attraction value - cast, plot, series, other medium influence?: 7/10 2a - Acting - casting - lead, supporting, villain, etc: 14/15 2b - Acting - character interaction, emotional connection: 15/15 3a - Dialogue - use for moving plot forward, nuance: 8/10 3b - Dialogue - writing quality, profanity, comedy: 13/15 4a - Plot - logical within universe, easy to follow, makes sense: 15/15 4b - Plot - quality, is it a good plot? Too long, unique?: 12/15 5a - Themes & motifs - symbolism, strong impressions: 10/15 5b - Themes & motifs - applicable ideas/thoughts, call to action: 3/5 6a - Cinematography - pace of editing, cuts, scene length, etc: 10/15 6b - Cinematography - angle, tone mood of shots: 12/15 7a - Effects - practical - explosions, large animals & vehicles: 5/5 7b - Effects - practical - costumes, weapons, props: 4/5 7c - Effects - practical - settings, scenery: 4/5 7d - Effects - special - CGI, green screen: 4/5 8a - Sound - score - conveying mood, determining attitude, etc: 15/20 8b - Sound - sound fx - foley, gunshots, explosions, dialogue, sound quality: 10/10 9a - Direction - quality - vision, concept, should this movie exist?: 10/10 9b - Direction - choices - execution of vision, cohesiveness: 15/15 10 - Bonus - up to 30 bonus points: 25/30

Total out of 250: 220 /250.

Hidalgo (2004)

A Horse Movie. But like good....

[8/10 · 6 July 2022]

This was actually really good. Just wish there had been a little more comedy, and sometimes the suspension of disbelief suffered a bit. But it was a fun 2 hours. Def would watch again. 75/100

#45

Movie title and release year: Hidalgo, (2004) 75/100, C Reviewer name and watch date: Andrew Thorpe, 6/24/2022,

1a - Attraction value - upon first contact, is the idea appealing?: 8/10 1b - Attraction value - cast, plot, series, other medium influence?: 6/10 2a - Acting - casting - lead, supporting, villain, etc: 12/15 2b - Acting - character interaction, emotional connection: 12/15 3a - Dialogue - use for moving plot forward, nuance: 8/10 3b - Dialogue - writing quality, profanity, comedy: 11/15 4a - Plot - logical within universe, easy to follow, makes sense: 13/15 4b - Plot - quality, is it a good plot? Too long, unique?: 14/15 5a - Themes & motifs - symbolism, strong impressions: 5/15 5b - Themes & motifs - applicable ideas/thoughts, call to action: 3/5 6a - Cinematography - pace of editing, cuts, scene length, etc: 8/15 6b - Cinematography - angle, tone mood of shots: 10/15 7a - Effects - practical - explosions, large animals & vehicles: 5/5 7b - Effects - practical - costumes, weapons, props: 5/5 7c - Effects - practical - settings, scenery: 5/5 7d - Effects - special - CGI, green screen: 3/5 8a - Sound - score - conveying mood, determining attitude, etc: 15/20 8b - Sound - sound fx - foley, gunshots, explosions, dialogue, sound quality: 5/10 9a - Direction - quality - vision, concept, should this movie exist?: 8/10 9b - Direction - choices - execution of vision, cohesiveness: 12/15 10 - Bonus - up to 30 bonus points: 20/30

Total out of 250: 188/250.

The Pirates Who Don't Do Anything: A VeggieTales Movie (2008)

ehhhh

[5/10 · 25 June 2022]

Um. Idk why this thing exists. It's funny. Has some good themes ig. It's a VeggieTales movie tho. Hmmmmm 52/100

#44

Reviewer name and watch date: Andrew Thorpe, 6/22/2022, Wed.

Movie title and release year: The Pirates Who Don't Do Anything,, (2008)

52/100, E-

1a - Attraction value - upon first contact, is the idea appealing?: 4/10 1b - Attraction value - cast, plot, series, other medium influence?: 6/10 2a - Acting - casting - lead, supporting, villain, etc: 5/15 2b - Acting - character interaction, emotional connection: 9/15 3a - Dialogue - use for moving plot forward, nuance: 7/10 3b - Dialogue - writing quality, profanity, comedy: 12/15 4a - Plot - logical within universe, easy to follow, makes sense: 10/15 4b - Plot - quality, is it a good plot? Too long, unique?: 10/15 5a - Themes & motifs - symbolism, strong impressions: 12/15 5b - Themes & motifs - applicable ideas/thoughts, call to action: 5/5 6a - Cinematography - pace of editing, cuts, scene length, etc: 5/15 6b - Cinematography - angle, tone mood of shots: 5/15 7a - Effects - practical - explosions, large animals & vehicles: 4/5 7b - Effects - practical - costumes, weapons, props: 2/5 7c - Effects - practical - settings, scenery: 2/5 7d - Effects - special - CGI, green screen: 1/5 8a - Sound - score - conveying mood, determining attitude, etc: 10/20 8b - Sound - sound fx - foley, gunshots, explosions, dialogue, sound quality: 5/10 9a - Direction - quality - vision, concept, should this movie exist?: 5/10 9b - Direction - choices - execution of vision, cohesiveness: 5/15 10 - Bonus - up to 30 bonus points: 5/30 Total out of 250: 129/250.

Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom (2018)

Dinosaurs & Chris Pratt: what more do you need?

[7/10 · 11 June 2022]

Things I like: Dinosaurs, Chris Pratt, Dinosaurs & Chris Pratt.

Things in this movie: Dinosaurs, Christ Pratt, Dinosaurs & Chris Pratt.

Too bad the plot sucked.

Def watching again.

74/100.

Same as No Way Home.

#42

Movie title and release year: Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom, (2018)

74/100, C

Reviewer name and watch date: Andrew Thorpe, 6/11/2022, Fri.

1a - Attraction value - upon first contact, is the idea appealing?: 8/10 1b - Attraction value - cast, plot, series, other medium influence?: 8/10 2a - Acting - casting - lead, supporting, villain, etc: 10/15 2b - Acting - character interaction, emotional connection: 10/15 3a - Dialogue - use for moving plot forward, nuance: 6/10 3b - Dialogue - writing quality, profanity, comedy: 10/15 4a - Plot - logical within universe, easy to follow, makes sense: 10/15 4b - Plot - quality, is it a good plot? Too long, unique?:5/15 5a - Themes & motifs - symbolism, strong impressions: 6/15 5b - Themes & motifs - applicable ideas/thoughts, call to action: 1/5 6a - Cinematography - pace of editing, cuts, scene length, etc: 13/15 6b - Cinematography - angle, tone mood of shots: 13/15 7a - Effects - practical - explosions, large animals & vehicles: 5/5 7b - Effects - practical - costumes, weapons, props: 5/5 7c - Effects - practical - settings, scenery: 5/5 7d - Effects - special - CGI, green screen: 4/5 8a - Sound - score - conveying mood, determining attitude, etc: 15/20 8b - Sound - sound fx - foley, gunshots, explosions, dialogue, sound quality: 8/10 9a - Direction - quality - vision, concept, should this movie exist?: 8/10 9b - Direction - choices - execution of vision, cohesiveness: 10/15 10 - Bonus - up to 30 bonus points: 24/30

Total out of 250: 184/250

Instagram: @the_og_bigjoe twitter: @the_og_bigjoe letterboxd: @the_og_bigjoe.

Morbius (2022)

its not that bad lol

[7/10 · 10 June 2022]

Ok. Hear me out. This movie is actually not that bad. Sure, the acting and character interaction leaves much to be desired. Sure, the plot holes are numerous and large. Sure, the audio/score is virtually nonexistent. But it's still pretty cool. The concept's cool, the characters are pretty interesting, and its best feature is its simplicity. It's really easy to understand what's going on. Still though, not as good as pretty much any other modern superhero movie. Besides thor 1 and 2 ofc. 68/100. Prolly will watch again, it's not that bad.

#41

Movie title and release year: Morbius, (2022)

68/100 D+

Reviewer name and watch date: Andrew Thorpe, 6/9/2022, Thu.

1a - Attraction value - upon first contact, is the idea appealing?: 8/10 1b - Attraction value - cast, plot, series, other medium influence?: 8/10 2a - Acting - casting - lead, supporting, villain, etc: 12/15 2b - Acting - character interaction, emotional connection: 10/15 3a - Dialogue - use for moving plot forward, nuance: 5/10 3b - Dialogue - writing quality, profanity, comedy: 9/15 4a - Plot - logical within universe, easy to follow, makes sense: 12/15 4b - Plot - quality, is it a good plot? Too long, unique?: 12/15 5a - Themes & motifs - symbolism, strong impressions: 5/15 5b - Themes & motifs - applicable ideas/thoughts, call to action: 2/5 6a - Cinematography - pace of editing, cuts, scene length, etc: 10/15 6b - Cinematography - angle, tone mood of shots: 10/15 7a - Effects - practical - explosions, large animals & vehicles: 4/5 7b - Effects - practical - costumes, weapons, props: 4/5 7c - Effects - practical - settings, scenery: 3/5 7d - Effects - special - CGI, green screen: 4/5 8a - Sound - score - conveying mood, determining attitude, etc: 10/20 8b - Sound - sound fx - foley, gunshots, explosions, dialogue, sound quality: 6/10 9a - Direction - quality - vision, concept, should this movie exist?: 7/10 9b - Direction - choices - execution of vision, cohesiveness: 10/15 10 - Bonus - up to 30 bonus points: 20/30

Total out of 250: 171/250

instagram: @the_og_bigjoe twitter: @the_og_bigjoe letterboxd: @the_og_bigjoe.

Hook (1991)

I'm only here for Williams & Hoffman & Williams & Spielburg

[5/10 · 9 June 2022]

Umm. Ok, that was alright. Not great, not even good. Just alright. If it weren't for Robin Williams, this movie would be a trainwreck. Kinda surprised it's a Spielberg & Williams tbh. Dustin Hoffman did an admirable job The plot was kinda hokey and predictable. And don't get me started on the green screen and wires. Super crappy. Other than that, like I said, it was alright. 47/100

#40

Movie title and release year: Hook, (1991)

47/100, F+

Reviewer name and watch date: Andrew Thorpe, 6/8/2022, Thu.

1a - Attraction value - upon first contact, is the idea appealing?: 5/10 1b - Attraction value - cast, plot, series, other medium influence?: 5/10 2a - Acting - casting - lead, supporting, villain, etc: 10/15 2b - Acting - character interaction, emotional connection: 10/15 3a - Dialogue - use for moving plot forward, nuance: 5/10 3b - Dialogue - writing quality, profanity, comedy: 10/15 4a - Plot - logical within universe, easy to follow, makes sense: 7/15 4b - Plot - quality, is it a good plot? Too long, unique?: 8/15 5a - Themes & motifs - symbolism, strong impressions: 4/15 5b - Themes & motifs - applicable ideas/thoughts, call to action: 3/5 6a - Cinematography - pace of editing, cuts, scene length, etc: 5/15 6b - Cinematography - angle, tone mood of shots: 8/15 7a - Effects - practical - explosions, large animals & vehicles: 3/5 7b - Effects - practical - costumes, weapons, props: 4/5 7c - Effects - practical - settings, scenery: 3/5 7d - Effects - special - CGI, green screen: 0/5 8a - Sound - score - conveying mood, determining attitude, etc: 13/20 8b - Sound - sound fx - foley, gunshots, explosions, dialogue, sound quality: 4/10 9a - Direction - quality - vision, concept, should this movie exist?: 5/10 9b - Direction - choices - execution of vision, cohesiveness: 6/15 10 - Bonus - up to 30 bonus points: 0/30

Total out of 250: 118/250

instagram: @the_og_bigjoe twitter: @the_og_bigjoe letterboxd: @the_og_bigjoe.

Free Guy (2021)

Oh yeah. Bring it.

[8/10 · 5 June 2022]

That was fun. I don't think I stopped smiling the whole movie, Ryan Reynolds just has that effect I guess. So good, very interesting writing/lot, dialogue was pretty good, acting was decent too. Hilarious script, though a little innuendo heavy for me. Great characters and setting. It's like a combination of the Lego Movie, Wreck-it Ralph, and Elf. Just super awkward and funny. Really well done. 85/100. Def watching again.

#39

Movie title and release year: Free Guy, (2021)

Reviewer name and watch date: Andrew Thorpe

85/100, B

1a - Attraction value - upon first contact, is the idea appealing?: 8/10 1b - Attraction value - cast, plot, series, other medium influence?: 9/10 2a - Acting - casting - lead, supporting, villain, etc: 12/15 2b - Acting - character interaction, emotional connection: 13/15 3a - Dialogue - use for moving plot forward, nuance: 8/10 3b - Dialogue - writing quality, profanity, comedy: 12/15 4a - Plot - logical within universe, easy to follow, makes sense: 13/15 4b - Plot - quality, is it a good plot? Too long, unique?: 13/15 5a - Themes & motifs - symbolism, strong impressions: 12/15 5b - Themes & motifs - applicable ideas/thoughts, call to action: 3/5 6a - Cinematography - pace of editing, cuts, scene length, etc: 14/15 6b - Cinematography - angle, tone mood of shots: 13/15 7a - Effects - practical - explosions, large animals & vehicles: 4/5 7b - Effects - practical - costumes, weapons, props: 5/5 7c - Effects - practical - settings, scenery: 4/5 7d - Effects - special - CGI, green screen: 5/5 8a - Sound - score - conveying mood, determining attitude, etc: 13/20 8b - Sound - sound fx - foley, gunshots, explosions, dialogue, sound quality: 6/10 9a - Direction - quality - vision, concept, should this movie exist?: 8/10 9b - Direction - choices - execution of vision, cohesiveness: 13/15 10 - Bonus - up to 30 bonus points: 25/30

Total out of 250: 213/250

Instagram: the_og_bigjoe Twitter: the _og_bigjoe Letterboxd: the_og_bigjoe.

Journey 2: The Mysterious Island (2012)

a mistake

[3/10 · 4 June 2022]

I legitimately despise this movie. It could have been so good. And it isn't. Great choice of cast, tho I miss Brendan Frasier. It was a good idea, but man the execution of this movie sucked. Bad script, failed comedy, bad acting, poor dialogue, underwhelming score, really cheesy CGI, obvious rope/string work and green screen, the list goes on.... just no. Never watching this again. 34/100

#38

Movie title and release year: Journey 2: The Mysterious Island, (2012)

Reviewer name and watch date: Andrew Thorpe, 6/3/2022, Fri.

34/100, F+

1a - Attraction value - upon first contact, is the idea appealing?: 8/10 1b - Attraction value - cast, plot, series, other medium influence?: 8/10 2a - Acting - casting - lead, supporting, villain, etc: 4/15 2b - Acting - character interaction, emotional connection: 2/15 3a - Dialogue - use for moving plot forward, nuance: 2/10 3b - Dialogue - writing quality, profanity, comedy: 3/15 4a - Plot - logical within universe, easy to follow, makes sense: 3/15 4b - Plot - quality, is it a good plot? Too long, unique?: 5/15 5a - Themes & motifs - symbolism, strong impressions: 0/15 5b - Themes & motifs - applicable ideas/thoughts, call to action: 3/5 6a - Cinematography - pace of editing, cuts, scene length, etc: 8/15 6b - Cinematography - angle, tone mood of shots: 7/15 7a - Effects - practical - explosions, large animals & vehicles: 2/5 7b - Effects - practical - costumes, weapons, props: 3/5 7c - Effects - practical - settings, scenery: 4/5 7d - Effects - special - CGI, green screen: 1/5 8a - Sound - score - conveying mood, determining attitude, etc: 10/20 8b - Sound - sound fx - foley, gunshots, explosions, dialogue, sound quality: 5/10 9a - Direction - quality - vision, concept, should this movie exist?: 3/10 9b - Direction - choices - execution of vision, cohesiveness: 5/15 10 - Bonus - up to 30 bonus points: 0/30

Total out of 250: 85/250

instagram: @the_og_bigjoe twitter: @the_og_bigjoe letterboxd: @the_og_bigjoe.

Gladiator (2000)

Great. Could be Incredible.

[9/10 · 28 May 2022]

Wow. That's good. Honestly, not as good as I expected. Just less plot than I thought there was. But overall, yeah, very good film. Convincing action, excellent acting, and beautiful scenery make this movie truly great. As always, gotta love me some Russell Crowe. Joaquin Phoenix is creepy and disfunctional as ever. Just so good. There were some flukes I noticed, and the ending is not what I would prefer, but it is, as a whole, a great film. Not for kids, simply because of the violence, but really well executed. Definitely watching again. 85/100

#37

Movie title and release year: Gladiator, (2000)

85/100, B

Reviewer name and watch date: Andrew Thorpe, 5/27/2022, Fri.

1a - Attraction value - upon first contact, is the idea appealing?: 9/10 1b - Attraction value - cast, plot, series, other medium influence?: 9/10 2a - Acting - casting - lead, supporting, villain, etc: 13/15 2b - Acting - character interaction, emotional connection: 15/15 3a - Dialogue - use for moving plot forward, nuance: 8/10 3b - Dialogue - writing quality, profanity, comedy: 13/15 4a - Plot - logical within universe, easy to follow, makes sense: 15/15 4b - Plot - quality, is it a good plot? Too long, unique?: 12/15 5a - Themes & motifs - symbolism, strong impressions: 10/15 5b - Themes & motifs - applicable ideas/thoughts, call to action: 5/5 6a - Cinematography - pace of editing, cuts, scene length, etc: 12/15 6b - Cinematography - angle, tone mood of shots: 12/15 7a - Effects - practical - explosions, large animals & vehicles: 3/5 7b - Effects - practical - costumes, weapons, props: 5/5 7c - Effects - practical - settings, scenery: 5/5 7d - Effects - special - CGI, green screen: 2/5 8a - Sound - score - conveying mood, determining attitude, etc: 15/20 8b - Sound - sound fx - foley, gunshots, explosions, dialogue, sound quality: 7/10 9a - Direction - quality - vision, concept, should this movie exist?: 9/10 9b - Direction - choices - execution of vision, cohesiveness: 13/15 10 - Bonus - up to 30 bonus points: 20/30

Total out of 250: 212/250 Instagram: the_og_bigjoe Twitter: the_og_bigjoe Letterboxd: the_og_bigjoe.

Spider-Man 2 (2004)

another overrated raimi film

[7/10 · 27 May 2022]

That was... not as good as the first one. Or any of the Holland movies. I know it's got great reviews, but I just can't see it. The plot was incredibly predictable and unremarkable, the acting sub-par, and the CGI/green screen was obvious and excessive. Not to mention that both Mary Jane and Peter Parker have the emotional maturity of 4-year-olds. And are both morons. I guess that makes them perfect for each other, but seriously? She just screwed over that astronaut guy. He was more than she deserved, but still, disappointing. Also, can I get an explanation as to why his powers just start fizzling out? There is literally no explanation, it just happens. I've never been a huge fan of Raimi, but this just cemented his reputation in my mind as the king of meh. Just boring. It was funny enough I guess. The script was decent, and Alfred Molina did an admirable job. And JK Simmons. Don't get me started on JK Simmons. He's by far the best character in the whole movie. Not terrible, but definitely not great. 68/100. Might watch it again, prolly not tho tbh.

#36

Movie title and release year: Spider-Man 2, (2004)

68/100, D+

Reviewer name and watch date: Andrew Thorpe, 5/26/2022, Thu.

1a - Attraction value - upon first contact, is the idea appealing?: 8/10 1b - Attraction value - cast, plot, series, other medium influence?: 7/10 2a - Acting - casting - lead, supporting, villain, etc: 8/15 2b - Acting - character interaction, emotional connection: 10/15 3a - Dialogue - use for moving plot forward, nuance: 8/10 3b - Dialogue - writing quality, profanity, comedy: 10/15 4a - Plot - logical within universe, easy to follow, makes sense: 13/15 4b - Plot - quality, is it a good plot? Too long, unique?: 8/15 5a - Themes & motifs - symbolism, strong impressions: 10/15 5b - Themes & motifs - applicable ideas/thoughts, call to action: 4/5 6a - Cinematography - pace of editing, cuts, scene length, etc: 12/15 6b - Cinematography - angle, tone mood of shots: 11/15 7a - Effects - practical - explosions, large animals & vehicles: 5/5 7b - Effects - practical - costumes, weapons, props: 5/5 7c - Effects - practical - settings, scenery: 5/5 7d - Effects - special - CGI, green screen: 2/5 8a - Sound - score - conveying mood, determining attitude, etc: 13/20 8b - Sound - sound fx - foley, gunshots, explosions, dialogue, sound quality: 6/10 9a - Direction - quality - vision, concept, should this movie exist?: 7/10 9b - Direction - choices - execution of vision, cohesiveness: 10/15 10 - Bonus - up to 30 bonus points: 10/30

Total out of 250: 172/250

twitter: @ the_og_bigjoe Instagram: @ the_og_bigjoe letterboxd: @ the_og_bigjoe.