Change Your Image
dominicdanielewicz
Reviews
Dragonball Evolution (2009)
Why you should NOT read reviews until after seeing a film...
OK, hands up, I love the Dragon Ball series, I have practically all the episodes and can pretty much say I know it like the back of my hand. Does this mean I am a hard-core fan who wants to see an EXACT replica? Maybe
but then again, the only reason we tend to watch a thing again is because there is always something new to experience
Let's put it this way, I have watched the series about three times over, (that's a lot of episodes and films) and in a break of about four years each. The only reason I have done this is because of "nostalgia" the good old days when I was in secondary school and had nothing to worry about, and/or because something on Wikipedia or god knows where else tell me to look of for this or that in an episode. I wouldn't watch the series over and over because I would get BORED if it was the same thing over and over. And so would you. You know that's true, even if it comes down to the Matrix trilogy, spaghetti westerns and so on. You would just ruin your love of those films, sort of when you get addicted to a certain type of food only to feel sick of it for the rest of your life.
This is why, there HAD to be something different about this film. There would be NO POINT in just green lighting something that has already been done, because I guarantee you even hardcore fans would turn around and say "ZOMG that's soooo boring I've seen that already" – you just can't win these days.
Oh, on the side note, it's not the Director you should be having a go at if you don't like the plot, hairdo's or set, it should really be the Producers – these are the ones who have FULL control of the project and who have the final say about how the film looks, feels and tells. The Director's job is really to just
do what they say and make sure everything runs smoothly. It's as sad as that on a Hollywood set, unless you're Mr. Coppolla on the set of "Tetro" where you DO have control (read the latest edition of Empire magazine if you have no idea what I mean).
Right so, kinda went of on a rant there but anyway, you now know who you should be having a go at and why things are different, though there is more to say about that. The plot could be different because the producers might have decided they wanted to target a wider audience and in order to do that, some things had to be changed. It's a business at the end of the day. And MOST importantly because this is an ADAPTATION. That means the film is LOOSELY based on the original series and so the studio can do what the hell they want with it. Sad fact, but yes, they can. Harry Potter anyone? Remember all those complaints? And yet it still rolls in the millions
ANYWAY onto the film now, and why you should NOT read reviews before watching it. Simply put, it's because people who have no grasp of the term "critical analysis" convince everyone that the film is really bad, and then this spreads around the globe until it's "cool and hip" to be a hater. And if you love the film you should be sentenced to death by rocks. That's how ridiculous it is. Nobody knows why they hate the film (Even those who haven't watched it) and its people like me who suffer.
The cast was pretty good I think. Chatwin played Goku really well I believe so hats of to him, Reminded me of the teenage Gohan when he was at school
Master Roshi, and Chi Chi were also pretty well cast however something felt jarring with Emmy Rossum (who I love) as Bulma and Joon Park as Yamcha. I felt as if Emmy Rossum had never seen the original series and as if Joon Park was trying too hard, though this could be the language barrier. Piccolo seemed a bit too pretentious for my liking, but then again I feared that ever since James Masters compared him to something from Shakespeare's writings
The sets were pretty cool, and the special effects were quite nice, although the gorilla bit made me cringe slightly.
Overall, the story wasn't that much different from the originals. I mean, come on, it's not like Piccolo was now a white boy fighting against a robot called Goketa who married a blade of grass with fart bending techniques. It was rather close I would say, and so I have to congratulate the producers on not changing things too drastically. The reason for the seven is because the film was enjoyable, I really enjoyed it for what it was supposed to be, a fun quirky action film. It made me smile and I really hope there is another one (which looks like that isn't going to happen, but then again, look at HellBoy II – there's always hope). If there special effects were better and the acting was a bit better in parts I mentioned, I'm sure this could have done really well.
So yeah, don't read reviews from people on here who have titles such as "Dnt watch dis film" or even from newspapers, because those reporters tend to be snobby. Go watch a film for yourself first with a fresh mind, and I guarantee you will enjoy it more, or at least come out with your own, ORGANIC opinion. It would save me having to write such long reviews as this one
Thanks for reading
If you did!
The Hottie & the Nottie (2008)
Failed because of IDIOT voters and STUPID reviews!
OK, before you shout and scream at the "5" rating I give, please just read this. I think that it will help you.
Firstly, lets talk about the low 1.1 (or whatever it is now) score that this movie has been given by IMDb users. It doesn't deserve it. Yep, you heard me right. It doesn't deserve it. Why? Because the truth is - this film isn't "awful, horrendous, a crime..." or other words LAZY, IDIOTIC certain IMDb users throw about. Screaming and shouting even more? Hang on, I'll explain.
Why does it deserve 5? Because there are other films out there, that have been worse then this. Meet the Spartans for example, another film I have seen recently. That deserves to have a lower score. Why? Because it has poor acting from nearly everyone, a terrible story and a horrible attempt at a spoof. And believe me, I love my spoofs from classics such as Airplane to Hotshots right up to the Scary movie series. There are films out there that have been made with NO CARE just for fame or money. But "The hottie and the nottie" was not one of them.
I'm going to be honest. This film wasn't the best film in the world. The acting wasn't amazing, the cinematography didn't blow me away and the cast wasn't all A list. But so what? Does every single film have to have these attributes to be "watchable"? No. This movie WAS made with some care, although not a lot. The script although cheesy at most points, wasn't as bad as (do I have to mention meet the Spartans again? How about Datemovie yuck) others, and the acting (minus Paris Hilton) was actually decent.
So what went wrong? Well obviously you are all shouting out "Paris Hilton" by now and I do have to admit She was pretty bad. And Paris, I hope you read this, because I am not going to be immature and throw stupid words around, but rather give some advice. You need to seriously consider acting as an ART not a "job" or a quick route to glamour and honour. Some people are born with the talent and some need to develop it through teaching and discipline. You have some evidence of ability (towards the end of the movie you don't have to wince as much watching Paris and during the "pretend drunken" scene she was actually OK) but you unfortunately HAVE to work on your abilities. You need to take time out from the crazy lifestyle you lead and spend a few years asking yourself do you want to become a SERIOUS DEDICATED actress or a laughing stock. If you put your mind to it, I'm sure you will impress most of us but make it a comeback wait a few years, don't just keep making half-assed attempts in many movies otherwise there will be a day when not even ANY director will hire you.
After her performance in HOUSE OF WAX, I'm not surprised many people didn't want to see this movie, but they should have still given the movie a rating based on the other actors abilities not just Hiltons and based on the story. I know it was clichéd and cheesy at some points, but generally I think it was a good idea, and in fact, honestly, the very end scene, on the pier did move me. That scene between the other two actors (JOEL MOORE and CHRISTINE LAKIN) showed that there WAS evidence of good acting, and that this movie could have done better.
So, if you like Romantic comedies and can spare Hilton in this, then I would say, see this movie. It's not amazing and it probably doesn't deserve more than 5 stars, but it will give you some laughs and it would also annoy those IMDb users who vote 1's because they are either immature, stupid, or jealous.
Also, don't read reviews from the likes of ROLLING STONES and others. Because what those pompous idiots write is frankly rubbish. They are just middle to upper class idiots who don't understand the meaning of "fun". They also write reviews as if they were judging the film against all time greats such as The Godfather. That's not what a review is supposed to do! In fact, I never read reviews because I want to make my own mind up about films. So, that's why I say, you might read this and think I'm praising the film. No, I'm just saying that there is worse out there and that IMDb users should really THINK before they write USELESS reviews and give BIAS votes! You might go see this movie. You might not. You might love it. You might hate it.
But whatever you do. Don't be influenced by anyone else and remember that one member of cast doesn't make or break a movie.
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005)
Harry Potter & The Goblet Of Fire - Review, Issues & Thoughts For Future Film-making. A short essay ;-)
Harry Potter & The Goblet Of Fire is one good example of how the power of Hollywood is able to manipulate and force directors/scriptwriters into doing something they might not want to do and thus ruining a perfect story. JKR had yet again wrote a good (I dare not use the word excellent for the fear of being bombarded by hundreds of e-mails) book which delighted and captivated millions.
The central issues and themes of the book were obviously: friendship, death, conspiracy and many more second grade ones. However, they were only brushed on for cinematic effect in the film. Maybe I am wrong in blaming just Hollywood for dislocating this film, perhaps JKR actually wanted them to change the script completely - I could be extremely naive, however I doubt this is the case and I confidently believe JKR would not be impressed with the shredding and embarrassing restructure of the script.
There are many scenes (just two I will deal with in this short essay - although if I had more space I would have certainly like to discuss the absence of the elf's) that completely change the story within the book. Sometimes it is necessary to "cut" a certain scene - for instance if it does not build upon and characters or conflict - but not when that scene is vital part where true identities are revealed and the action takes a new turn. The first scene, where Harry is faced with his first task (retrieving a golden egg in a nest guarded by the most ferocious of three dragons imported for the challenge - the Horntail), it seems to me as if very frankly, the scene title was named "SPECIAL EFFECTS SCENE". It was not focusing on the skill of flying on a broomstick Harry inherited from his father, or the courage he has or the tension experienced by his friends. It was rather changed to boost the technology rating of the producing studio. Harry was sent flying round the castle falling on roofs and off them - it did not show how Harry used tactics from Quidditch to his advantage and won the egg, it merrily was a scene for the technology "awe" factor. I do not criticise the tactical use of technology in films (and in a film about magic it would be rather injudicious to say it shouldn't be used) in fact sometimes when used for the right effect it creates an effect not experienced in the book. However I was not the only one who was beginning to be bored with the scene. I noticed children from about the age of six to fifteen starting to fidget and stare at exit signs and fire extinguishers in the hope of something exiting. The fact is that no matter how many special effects you add, how many A-list actors you hire - unless you understand the subtext and it's importance - you may just ruin a perfectly good and important part of the story. This scene was supposed to be the first of three precarious tasks to be faced by Harry, it was supposed to put us on the edge of our seats. I felt as if the seat was more interesting, it certainly slaughtered the issues and themes in this scene.
I felt that the scene where Harry spots Barty Crouch lying in the forest was yet again an example of the eroding of the original text - and worse - poor cutting. It left me and other viewers confused about what was happening and why. According to the book, Harry stumbled on Crouch during the Yule Ball alone and immediately ran to Dumbledore's office where from then on Dumbledore went to find him. This was one of the most interesting and thrilling scenes I found in the book as it dealt with the first step towards the truth and it certainly made the reader begging to know what would happen next. In the film however, Harry stumbled upon him while in a total different scene while Crouch seemed dead not "crazy" like in the book - and the scene instantly cut to Harry casually walking to Dumbledore's office as if nothing had happened. It was certainly poor cutting and rushed post-production. It did not emphasize the seriousness of the matter and the theme of conspiracy in the scene. Yet again it left me confused, irritated and let-down.
Perhaps you are wondering why I decided to talk about these issues. Well when reviewing this film, I felt it necessary to let the two types of viewers going to see this movie (one for its accuracy according to original text, and the other for its action factor.) And therefore I must say, if you are a fan of the original Harry Potter book - you won't be impressed with this film. However if you are going to see it for the special effects - you should thoroughly enjoy this film.
I think that the acting was average (Daniel Radcliff looked as if he was being told exactly what to do instead of trying to use acting instinct) with certain characters (Rupert Grint) seeming more natural in their roles. Music and lighting were used very well to effect and sets seemed in magical perfection.
In conclusion I think that Hollywood needs to thank and respect the authors of these books for coming up with new and fresh ideas (which seem to make good profit at the box office as well) not just disrespect them by unintelligently cutting bits that told the story and expanding bits that did not. As always however, the Harry Potter phenomenon made this film exiting and I must admit it was the main reason why I rated this film at "5". I do hope they respect the next instalment not only as it is one of the most thought about - but it is also my favourite and I hate to be let down.