dumitru-2 Reviews

Now You See Me 2 (2016)

A Caricature of a Movie

[3/10 · 20 August 2016]

Let me start by saying that I didn't like the first "Now You See Me", but I would rate it a 6/10 just for the fact it was SOMEWHAT enjoyable. The sequel is a movie that probably nobody asked for, but yet they did it anyway. 2 hours of poorly directed and written nonsense.

SOME vague spoilers ahead, though you won't care about them at all.

THE PLOT The plot tries to twist and turn a couple of times, but it is just a straight line. To try and spice it up they tried the twist with Morgan Freeman's character, but nobody believed it, not even Mr. Freeman.

THE MAGIC A movie about magic should not be a movie about CGI, which the first movie was and now the second. The Illusionist and The Prestige were doing their magic tricks for the audience IN the movie, for the crowd in that universe. This one does the tricks just for the people watching the movie. Need to make someone disappear? Of course there will be a cut. Need to make someone escape? They simply transform into water. How? Who cares, a magician never reveals his tricks (hint: CGI).

THE LOGISTICS A bunch of random magicians can take over the whole of London on New Year's Eve in half a day without preparation. They can also somehow broadcast their tricks LIVE all over the world, on all TVs in all city centers, etc.

THE PANDERING TO THE Chinese MARKET Yes I know that "entertaining" movies nowadays always have something for the Chinese market: a character, a vase, a flashback scene, etc. But this one went all in: mystical characters that know and see everything, they help the protagonists without a second thought, etc. Oh and did I mention they are literally going to China for some reason, just to show what a great place it is?

THE HEIST SCENE (FLYING CARD) God please make it stop. A 10-minutes scene with a quintillion number of ways it can go wrong - everything works out. How to prevent a heist like that? A single security camera in the room and an underpaid guard watching it. Done.

THE FEMALE CHARACTER Jesus Christ, don't get me started on Lizzy Caplan's character. With a couple of attempts at witty lines about misogyny and discrimination, her character was a caricature of a female character.

JESSE EISENBERG No.

The Best Movie 3-DE (2011)

Just another Russian rip-off

[1/10 · 20 January 2011]

Every year Russia directs about 5-10 rip-offs of Hollywood movies. Even if they mostly "borrow" ideas of famous TV-shows, they do have the habit of borrowing complete movies as well.

This one steals the premise of the Jack Black / Mos Def 2008 comedy "Be Kind Rewind".

Take a funny premise, mix it with non-existent acting and incredibly stupid "jokes" (can't even call them that), add some Russian glamor and this is what you get.

If you need a mental illness - watch this. Even watching a plant grow is much more entertaining than this.

The Golden Compass (2007)

As 'difficult' as expected

[8/10 · 26 December 2007]

I have read His Dark Materials trilogy many years ago. These are the most inspiring books that I have read in my life. However, seeing the Harry Potter movies (i've also read all 7 parts), I got a little worried.

His Dark Materials is a very dark trilogy with a lot of ideas and taboo topics. These books are based on dialogue, and there's lots of it.

The movie starts with a small introduction about the world Lyra lives in, about the daemons. That kinda prepares the audience for the "talking animals", which is a very tough thing to do. People can't take seriously talking animals. The action starts right away with many characters popping in and out. Nobody gets a proper introduction, nobody gets enough screen-time in order for the audience to start caring for any of them, or at least remember their names. There are like 5 story lines happening at the same time, so the image jumps to different locations every 2 minutes. Again - nobody understands a thing.

To compensate for all this 'nonsense', the eye-candy is present. The bears are done exactly as they should be: big, strong, loud and scary. So if you're going with your kids (7-13 y.) - they will appreciate it.

I enjoyed the movie just because I'm a huge fan of the trilogy. However, I would not go see it without reading the books first. That would be a waste.

Giving a 'high' 8/10 for 2 reasons: 1. It was very hard to make a 2-hour movie based on this book. Even making a 5-hour movie wouldn't have helped much. 2. I'm a fan of His Dark Materials, so I can't give less.

Shoot 'Em Up (2007)

It is stupid... seriously, it IS stupid!

[1/10 · 23 December 2007]

Before seeing the movie, I had the chance to see the trailer a couple of times... Some shots in the trailer were a bit 'ridiculous', so I thought to myself: "Well, don't judge a movie by its trailer". I was wrong, very very wrong.

Before I describe this movie, I should mention this: I always try to interpret a movie in a lot of ways. I'm always trying to interpret the movie in the way the director intended it to be. I gave both "The Fountain" and "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" a 10 out of 10. I even greatly enjoyed "Sin City". So, let's begin.

"Shoot Em Up" is a 'movie' full of cheap and stupid action. I can't even compare it to Rambo! I really thought that nowadays there is NO way you can make a movie where the main character shoots about 50 rounds from his pistol and kills 60 bad guys, whom all shoot from Uzis and Shotguns at him, and he doesn't even get a scratch (even "Equilibrium" was a little unbelievable). The plot is nonexistent. Don't expect a plot twist in the end - it is simply not there. The one-liners are incredibly lame and boring. The whole movie creates the impression of a really big (and probably expensive) mistake. It simply shouldn't exist.

Of course the success of a movie is mostly based on marketing. What do you do when you invested a lot of money into a movie that simply sucks? Correctly, do the exact same thing as was done with the recent Tarantino movies: say that it sucks, but in the good way. Say that it sucks just because you wanted to make it suck. Say that it is a 'satire' and some sort of 'parody of modern action movies'. Great! Now 9 out of 10 people will say: "Wow! This guys were right! They wanted their movie to suck, and it sucks!!! COOOOOL! I'll give it a 10 on IMDb!".

OK. Now for those that read just last lines of a movie "review": don't watch this movie. Seriously, don't watch it. If you will - i'll read your rants here later, because you will be mad about spending 15$ and 90 minutes of your life on this piece of crap. I'm out.