rowan_vanduren Reviews

Andaz Apna Apna (1994)

This was a horrible movie.

[1/10 · 7 March 2017]

I cannot understand that this movie can be listed in the top 250. The movie has a rating average of 4.3 of the top 1000 voters, which is rating for a bottom rated movie.

I've already seen quite some Hindi movies. My conclusion is most Hindi movies are just average quality. Indeed there are exceptions. The movie 'Dangal' is a good (not super as 8.9 on IMDb) I prefer that IMDb would only list the decent movies in their Top 250. Something remarkable in the top250: Almost all recent Hindi movies are starring Aamir Khan. It's an OK actor, but sorry it's not possible that all his movies are Top250 worthily (with exception maybe 'Dangal'.

IMDb should really redefine the factors, which define a movie for the IMDb Top250 movie.

(1) Top 1000 voters should be an important factor (2) Amount of votes (3) Is the movie new or old. (To avoid hype movies, but also introduce classic movies) ++ Movies should earn there place ++, timeless is also important. (4) Last but not least >> Origin of the voter: Example: An Hindi movie rated by an Italian or American, should have a bigger impact, than an Hindi person.

I'm a Dutch speaking guy, where are used to see several movies in other languages than on native language. This also opens our eyes, regarding what makes a movie good or bad.

I can understand that sometimes you are not always objective in your rating. But I would also understand if rating of foreigners would have a higher weight on the movie. This can make people discover new movies in other languages. Japanese/Swedish/German/Spanish/French movies can be really good.

Cloud Atlas (2012)

See movie, start seeing reviews and reactions of the actors and start thinking "Maybe I have to see this movie a 2nd time"

[6/10 · 10 September 2015]

1st hour: you're watching a movie, but you start thinking "What the hell am I watching, there is no clue in the sorry". But movie still makes you want to keep watching, because it's OK/entertaining

2nd hour: you're seeing the links and you start to realize the actors in the different stories are not meant to refer to the same person. Interest increases but still average.

Last hour: you're seeing the stories floating into each other and the meaning of the film becomes clearer and clearer. And for me this was an OK film, which I will probably want to see again.

10min after: Reading reviews and watching the featurette, made me realize this movie is something unique. And I started doubting if I really understood the movie as it should be. Even missing some parts where one of the actors was unrecognizable by the make-up.

In the future: I will see this movie again. Wondering if my rating will increase. (Possible)

Jurassic Park (1993)

Art piece with a lot of memories: Living in a dinosaur world on screen

[10/10 · 10 December 2014]

At the release of this movie I still was a child. And still now +/-20 years later, I still love this movie. Reason for this is Jurassic Park creates a world for these ancient animals, where we as audience can imagine how this world was millions of years ago and also made us realize the question 'What if this was possible'. Is it really a human thing to do, where we give the dinosaurs back a place to be what they are? Or is this risk too big? As viewer, you will be amazed, shocked, become emotional, but also realistic.

This movie was the cause of my dinosaur hype at the age of 10. And this will movie will keep on doing this even for the children of today. Steven Spielberg did a wonderful work on this piece of masterwork. Some movies have to be watched on big screen. Also the reason why it was released again in 2013 in 3D.

I'm very curious for the release of Jurassic World in 2015, can't wait.