Change Your Image
ross_kewl
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
World War Z (2013)
They should re-shoot more movies.
After many rewrites and re-shoots, Marc Fosters "World War Z" premiered on the 2nd June 2013 in London. I am a keen Walking Dead fan so I was avidly awaiting the release of this movie. However, after watching the trailer and knowing they delayed the release of this movie, I was not anticipating a great zombie film. All I can say is, whatever they changed in the re-shoots in Budapest, it worked out for the better. Although this is not a flawless movie, it was still quite enjoyable and worth a trip to the cinema.
The audience follows the journey of Gerry Lane (Brad Pitt) in his attempt to find a cure to the sudden outbreak of an antagonizing virus which basically causes its host to go crazy and try to infect other humans. What I did admire about this film is that it incorporated a sense of mystery about it. At various stages in the movie we witnessed that certain people did not attract the infected, rather they just completely ignored by them. This put in the audience in a similar situation to Lane which enabled them to take an interest into his story around the world.
There have been a lot of zombie films in the past so obviously not everything in World War Z is original. This movie gave the sense of the culmination of different zombie film/TV-series. There were elements from AMC's The Walking Dead, aka severing the limb to prevent further infection and also attempting to gain entry into the CDC/W.H.O facilities. The zombie's being drawn to sound is very generic in this genre, but I have never seen hundreds of them stack over each other to get over the wall. That was original.
These zombies were 28 days later zombies, fast and horrific. Some people say way too fast for a normal human, but when your rabid, maybe you would run faster than you would think capable.
This movie was not amazing or ground-breaking. It incorporated a lot of past ideas while introducing some of its own flair. Whoever Brad Pitt is married to, you cannot deny he is a superb actor and his performance as Gerry Lane backs up this claim.
Jagten (2012)
Superb film, will be studied for years to come
Honestly, after watching "The Hunt (Jagten)", I was quite puzzled about how to begin writing this review. The confronting and disturbing subject of the film leaves the viewer in a state of shock as you try to comprehend what you have just witnessed.
Thomas Vinterberg's work is perfect, and I mean that literally, this film has no fault whatsoever. Mads Mikkelsen as Lucas, the Kindergarten teacher, could possibly be the most superb acting on the big screen. The bone-chilling performance of Annika Wedderkopp was so utterly genuine that it didn't feel as if I was watching a movie.
In a small Danish town where everybody knows each other, a quiet rumour can have quite disastrous consequences. I feel it necessary to point out the similarities to Arthur Miller's play, "The Crucible". In this work, a small Massachusetts town called Salem, a young girl starts accusing members of the township of witchcraft. Soon after, all the young girls start naming names and suddenly, hysteria and fear grip the village. Sound familiar? "The Hunt" has a near parallel storyline, where one accuses another of a hideous crime and soon after, everyone is convincing themselves, despite the validity of the offense.
At first, I was rather confused as to why all these adults believed these young children, as well all know, kids lie. The phrase, "children don't lie" was uttered by many characters which no doubt, vexed the audience. However, children are innocent and are expected to know nothing, apart from what they had seen. Grethe, played by Susse Wold, probably had doubts of the legitimacy behind Klara's claims. Slowly over time, however, the horrific possibly of crime being true would take control of her logic and force her to do irrational deeds, like ring Marcus' mother to tell her of the crime, even though it had not been validated.
What I found most entertaining about the film, is that Klara, I believe on three separate occasions, admitted to lying about the events involving Lucas. Yet her adult superiors convinced her of the truth and the audience could recognise how confused the child actually was. She fluctuated between what was the truth and what was a lie. This is a perfectly natural reaction to the mass hysteria because really, she had no clue what was going on.
The music and cinematography were well adapted to the mood of particular scenes, enhancing the effects to a whole new level. I wouldn't be surprised if this movie was to be studied by English/arts students. This movie deserves a 10/10.
Les Misérables (2012)
They save the best til last.
Honestly, 2012 has been a disappointing run of movies. Perhaps it was just my high expectations but films such as Prometheus, Batman, The Bourne Legacy and Skyfall drained my faith in the movie industry. Going into watch Les Miserables, I was not expecting a great film because of the above reasons, (maybe my low expectations is the reason why I think this is one of the best films of the year). Instead what I experienced was an admirable, enjoyable and stunning piece of film.
Being an Australian, I was particularly proud that the two male leads were Australian, namely Hugh Jackman and Russell Crowe. Considering the fact that I did not consider these two stars as singers, they did an exceptional job. It was sad that Anne Hathaway's character Fantine was killed off so easily, taking into account how she cut her beautiful long hair for the sake of the movie. However, the unsung heroes for me, was the performance from Sacha Baron Cohen and Helena Bonham Carter as Mr and Mrs Thenardier. Because of the context of the movie, during the cruel times of the French Revolution, it was pleasing to see some comic relief.
It was an emotionally engaging film. Usually the comedy can be less overlooked then emotions of sadness and despair. Even without the laughter I still would of rated this film an 8 just because the hilarity can take a film the next step higher. A good film should engage all senses which Les Miserables achieves.
People who are doubting whether they should see the film because their not huge fans of musicals, well neither was I but I thoroughly enjoyed it an would recommend it to anyone of any tastes.
Revolution (2012)
Ordinary, nothing exceptional
We have all wondered about how society would function without technology and all the modern day equipment. Such a complex and difficult task for any writer to create a television show that attempts to explain and depict how humanity is able to adapt to a completely different lifestyle. Unfortunately, this show does not cut it; the characters were your typical sentimental, gorgeous blonde, a comedic fatso, the cool, mercurial uncle and couple others who I found hard to engage with.
I guess to find a way in which all technology in the world, including batteries, becomes unusable is a hard task for any writer. My initial reaction to this followed many others such as, "This makes no sense!" and "Electrochemical cells don't require an external source of energy!" The explanation given in the first episode is that someone was able to "turn off" all technology. Considering there is no real way to explain why every piece of modern technology becomes useless I tired to ignore this obvious flaw and turned my attention to different aspects of the show.
To some positives, the set and environment is really beautiful and realistic. The overgrown cities and neglected vehicles was a real stand- out. Society has turned out as how you would expect, there would groups of bandits and no real form of police. Resembles very closely to probably the middle ages where lands would be owned by independent dukes and barons.
I thought the characters were too familiar and didn't really strike me as different and people that I should care about. Also the overall mood of the show was too sentimental. Don't get me wrong, I think that the fallout of losing technology and loved ones should be made apparent but there were too many emotional scenes where I felt like I've seen that too many times. It needs to be more serious. The final fight scene is a perfect example of what I'm saying. Here you have a guy with a sword versus about 20 guys with swords and another ten with guns. It was too comical and silly for my liking. It almost reminded me of a Jedi Knight fighting hundreds of droids and making some cheap call afterwards.
When they first arrive in Chicago, in which probably thousands of people live and the first person they talk to, is the guy their looking for. Just seemed really rushed as they were also able to fast-travel. I would have liked to see maybe a scene where they are confronted by nature but before the blackout could have been overcome easily but without technology, they would have to think and use skills that have been neglected in modern society. The death of Charlie's father, the journey to Chicago should have been spread out on to two episodes at least. It all seemed rushed and as a result wasn't engaging. I will probably watch the second episode just to see if they make any dramatic improvements but at the moment, it lacks any suspense and interesting characters. 5/10
The Bourne Legacy (2012)
Does not live up to the original trilogy
I love and admire the work of Paul Greengrass in the original Bourne films. So when confronted with this "Bourne Legacy", I was disappointed and angry. I did try to find aspects of the film to like, which there were some, but the vast majority, including the plot, was dull and frustrating.
The fundamental platform on which a film is made should be moulded around the plot. After you have this firmly established and perfected this you can go onto looks, action etc...The thing that made the first trilogy so good wasn't the cinematography or the epic car chases just by themselves, but this combined with an intriguing plot. Action scenes on the big screen look great but after you walk out of the cinema you focus on the plot and it was a let down.
From the start, it was flawed, with the original films the audience became invested in Bourne's future and who and what this man really is. Yet with Legacy, Aaron Cross (Jeremy Renner) lacks any mystery about him. Character development falls into the category of plot. The science- fiction that was incorporated into this film was childish and "unbourne" like.
Even the action sequences were similar, especially the motorbike chase scene in Manila. This was on par with the motorbike chase in Tangier, Morrocco in Ultimatum. Most of the audience, I presume, would have seen the previous Bourne film, so they don't want to pay more money to see the same thing over again.
To the positives, the Alaskan scenes were memorable and beautiful. The dog fight scene unique. All the Bourne films have looked great because they go to different cities and landscapes. The acting was good as well but their characters were let down by poor writing.
This film was never really engaging but the entire plot was cringeful. I mean seriously, little pills are the driving force behind the plot. Skyfall better be good...
The Dark Knight Rises (2012)
Over Hyped Action-Movie
The Dark Knight (2008) is probably one of my favourite movies of all time. IMDb gave this new batman film, The Dark Knight Rises a 9, placing it in the top four greatest movies of all time. This was more disappointing than Prometheus and I was close to playing a game of solitaire on my phone for the last hour of the movie.
I think what plays an important role in determining the quality of batman films, and other super-hero films, is the villain. The Joker (Heath Ledger) was terrifying because he really had no motives for his actions, he just enjoyed putting people in situations with impossible decisions. He also had personality and wasn't physically superior so he had to turn to alternative methods to create terror and chaos. This meant that you didn't have your stock-standard fist fight every batman scene.
Bane (Tom Hardy) is a very menacing looking guy and appeared to look like a very good villain. However, upon watching the movie, I discovered that his actions really had no motives. I found it extremely difficult to follow what he was trying to accomplish. At first he was a mercenary, then he turned into some sort of martyr for freedom and liberty but controlled the city through means of a dictatorship.The twist at the end with Miranda (Marion Cotillard) where it was revealed she was the child that escaped the prison was cringeful and silly, because neither me or the audience really cared about this character.
On to the prison, where is it exactly? And this League of Shadows? Perhaps it's some contextual thing from the comics but should be explained. Bane justifies his actions by saying he's returning power to the people. He does this by releasing a thousand criminals and arming them with automatic rifles. So no one in Gotham decides to take action against this guy? Seemed like the residents weren't having a great time under this new regime.
A nuclear bomb? Wow that's incredibly original stuff from the Nolan brothers
Also the police of Gotham use their tactical skills to run into a hundred or so guys armed with guns. Luckily for them though, this tactic paid off because Bane's private army decided to have a punch-up instead. Hopefully this movie doesn't inspire people to raid the stock exchange, it seemed all too easy to bankrupt a huge company.
Some positives
Catwoman (Anne Hathaway) was a welcome surprise and wasn't just Batman's apprentice, she actually had her own agendas. Batmans new fly mobile was cool and the special effects all round were good. The soundtrack was quality and fit the action sequences well.
Overall I think this movie deserves a 5/10 pretty much because of all the weird stuff the come on screen. The final battle went on for too long and this prison thing was just plain random. I can't see why people would think this was one of the greatest batman or even eclipses the quality of The Dark Knight (2008).
The Walking Dead (2010)
The show for people who don't like zombie shows/movies
I am not a fan of zombie films, because really its just a load of zombies popping out of the dark intending to scare the audience or perhaps a group of humans with double-barreled shotguns defend a house against a horde of zombies. None of these scenarios have any real story although can be entertaining. The Walking Dead is the only exception, that I've seen, to this belief.
Yes it has those gory moments where someone would get an axe and decapitate a zombie but this actually serves an additional purpose. This purpose is showing the audience how normal civilians are not afraid to just bash a zombie to death with a baseball bat. In fact there are many scenes where the group would unnecessarily bash the zombie to a bloody mush not because their like, "haha omg this is soo fun!", but rather they show the hatred and fear they have for the walking dead and also showing their doing the absolute maximum they can do to survive.
Onto the characters. There is so much character development and this is what I particularly love about the show. Rick Grimes (Andrew Lincoln) ends up making the decisions for the group and his decisions are very complex. Being the guy he is, he always takes the morally righteous choice rather than the smart, better for survival choice. This was apparent when Rick decided not to kill Randall, which was the morally correct choice but it put their groups safety in danger. To top this off, this is contrasted with Shane Walsh (Jon Bernthal) his best friend, and the guy who was bonking his wife. Shane is not afraid to go down the dark path which was obvious when he killed Otis.
Daryl Dixon (Norman Reedus) is a super cool character and he really finds it hard to establish his leadership in the group but later in the series starts to become like Rick and Shane but has trouble doing that because of his solitary childhood. Lori Grimes (Sarah Wayne Callies) is irritating as a character but when I look back on the series, this is a good thing otherwise the show would be terribly boring. You can't love all the characters, there should be characters you hate. I like Andrea, even though she nearly killed Daryl, but she represent this kind of "anti- man" idea. When zombies attack, women are expected to scream and cuddle the children and the men take out the zombies. Andrea, however, is her own person and proves herself to be quite capable of doing what Rick and Shane do. The way Dale tries to take away her gun was totally out of order, she can do whatever she wants because it's her life.
One thing I still get annoyed about is, there's heaps of memes about it, the way Carl Grimes (Chandler Riggs) seems to end up in strange places. I mean cmon, do mothers during a zombie apocalypse just neglect their children and let them explore a zombie infested forest? The start of the second season was a little dull because I really didn't care whether they found Sophia or not, I just never connected with Carol (Melissa McBride). That episode where she was found in the barn was where the season really started to get interesting.
I can't wait for the third season because this is where the relations in the group will be tested to their absolute maximum and lets not forget Merle Dixon
Falling Skies (2011)
Not terribly new or exciting, just the stock-standard sci-fi
Whenever I watch sci-fi, be it film or television, at the conclusion of watching it, my initial reaction is positive because of all the cool aliens, and the interesting futuristic ideas. Falling Skies is the first and hopefully only exception to this. This isn't a terrible show but it doesn't bring anything new to the table. Re-watching Battlestar Galactica would be more thrilling that watching this.
I only bothered to watch the first episode because the ending was so cringeful and out of place that I didn't waste my time with watching the rest of the season. The show I relate this most to is Lost (2004) where a group of randoms crash on a mysterious island with malevolent inhabitants. There were some many questions I had about the island and its natives, a pity they weren't answered but this is an example of a show that presents a mystery and keeps the audience suspended in curiosity. Some people probably think there's mystery surrounding the aliens that invade Earth, but it doesn't make itself apparent to me. I have a hard time caring about the characters. They're just too typical and predictable and I don't want to watch a show where I can guess what's going to happen every episode.
I have issue with the realism of the show. Sure, it's a sci-fi so how could I criticize a sci-fi for being unrealistic? Well this really irritated me. The first scene depicted a small group of humans skulking around for food and evading the aliens. I accept this because this is realistic. However when a group of a couple hundred walk through the streets during DAYTIME unmolested by the evil aliens, the shows realism comes into question. Some people can tolerate this and I respect that but me, no, the first episode of a sci-fi should be realistic. Later in the show they can play around with the science but its got to be perfect in the first episode.
The last scene was just silly and inappropriate given the context of the show. Here we have the last surviving humans making their way away from the aliens to eventual safety. I'm guessing they're being pursued by these aliens yet its okay for the entire caravan to stop in order to satisfy a little boy's playtime. Seriously? No one was like, "hey c'mon, I wanna make it outta here alive". I expect the intended reaction from the audience was supposed to be, "naww little boy on his rip-stick
gosh there really must be hope for humanity after all
" I just can't tolerate this immaturity.
Maybe I'll give this another shot sometime but there's a lot of TV shows better than this that bring in new ideas and new characters. Again not a bad show, but just doesn't deliver anything exciting and new.
The Amazing Spider-Man (2012)
Not as good as the original
So here it is again folks, but this time, its not just Spiderman, its an AMAZING Spiderman. For someone who thought the original Spiderman was amazing, this movie surely would leave a lasting imprint in my mind that would deem this movie truly the most amazing Spiderman film yet. Wrong. Although this movie wasn't terrible, it wasn't astounding either.
The movie starts off with your typical nerd who gets picked on by the school bully. Sounds similar nay? Through one way or another Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield) finds himself infiltrating a million-dollar bio medical research facility and gets bitten by a spider and starts to exhibit spider-like qualities.
To the positives, Andrew Garfield did a tremendous job and I think it would a close contest between him and Tobey Maguire. His smart-ass appeal was entertaining without being too silly. I preferred Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone) to Mary-Jane basically because she actually helped save the world instead of being the Damsel in distress. Uncle Ben (Martin Sheen) also deserves a mention as the characters death really had a profound effect on Spidey so the acting in this movie is top-notch.
The area in which this movie could have been improved was the plot, and I find with a lot of movies lately, that the writing for the plot has let down some great acting. Prometheus (2012) is a perfect example.
"Peter Parker finds a clue that might help him understand why his parents disappeared when he was young. His path puts him on a collision course with Dr. Curt Connors, his father's former partner." Summary from the IMDb, Spiderman page. The mystery that was presented at the beginning of the movie is never even solved. Why did his parents abandon their only son? It never occurred to me that Dr. Curt Connors (Rhys Ifans) was trying to hunt down Peter Parker's elusive parents.
I never really understood the Connors' motivations. At first he was researching cross-species mutation is a bid to repair his amputated forearm. Then it changes because he thinks human kinds is weak and we should all be turned into monstrous lizards.
The fight scenes were a bit unbelievable and silly. I was watching this with my friend and we both take chemistry and we laughed when dinosaur Connors grabbed two coloured solutions, mixed them together to create a HE grenade. Liquid Nitrogen on the top of a skyscraper? Really? I concede that Lizards are able to grow back their tails, BUT NOT ENTIRE F***ING LIMBS!!! Salamanders, which are amphibians can regrow limbs but no reptile that has been identified possesses the ability to regrow limbs.
I guess also Peter got bored of pursuing his Uncle's killer and decided to become a superhero instead. The crane guy and his cranes was commendable but cringeful and didn't really have the effect that it intended to have. My final ramble is about Parker defending Spiderman's actions at the awkward girlfriend dinner table scene. The way it appeared to me that Parker was only chasing criminals to find the man who killed his uncle, not a public service. And when he did find criminals he wasn't exactly dropping them off in front of the police station, he was having a great time shooting webs into their crotches.
Overall, I think the movie attempted to fit too much in the time frame. There were many ideas that were forgotten during the movie and at points got a bit silly for me to tolerate. This movie isn't terrible and is definitely above 6 stars but doesn't deserve as 8 or higher.
The Legend of Korra (2012)
Great series, If you loved the original, you will adore this!
Being a huge fan of the first Airbender series, I was skeptical about this new series. I was dreading another retell of an avatar travelling the world to master all four elements to free the world from tyranny and destruction...etc. This show is nothing of the sort. The audience is introduced to Korra (Janet Varney), who has actually mastered all the elements except for air. Her personality is totally different to Aangs. Aang was very hesitant about being avatar and didn't really want to take the responsibility but over the (original) series we see him come to realise his destiny. Korra fully realises what she is and has a much more fiery personality. This provides a nice contrast yet sometimes I question her actions but overall she is a well constructed character.
One of the things I loved about the original series, was the tightly bonded group of Aang, Katara, Sokka and later Toph. They were the best of friends and even had disagreements at some times which helped me to relate to their group. In this new series, Korra becomes friends with two pro-benders called Mako (David Faustino) and Bolin (P.J Byrne). They compete in a brutal competition and throughout the series, their performance in the competition heavily relies upon their relationships. The characters of Mako and Bolin, I think, are loosely based upon characters from the first series. Bolin, I can really relate to Sokka and to be honest this is great. I think a TV show of this genre needs a character like that. Mako, kind of resembles Zuko, very serious, bad-ass and overall a cool character, (though not as grumpy as Zuko!!).
As with the original series, the appearance and music is exquisite. The bending fights are just as intense and the voicing is superb.
The first series was about one elemental state, namely the firebenders, taking control over the world under the brutal rule of Firelord Ozai. To my delight, this series deals with an entirely new issue, which is the battle between benders and non-benders. Unlike the first season, where the audience is positioned to barrack for Aang and his friends against the evil Fire Nation, the apparent antagonist Amon (Steve Blum) is not really a clear antagonist because his cause is just. Being born with the ability to bend would of course give you a definite social and economic advantage over non-benders and his intentions are to restore balance. With the original series, I could see where the series was going, Aang is going to travel the world to learn all elements and defeat the Firelord. With this, it's much harder to predict the future and this keeps me intrigued and addicted to watching the show.
My only criticism is out of all the characters to appear in the new series they pick Katara? Don't get me wrong, I thought Katara was a good character, but I would of loved to see a 90-year old Zuko. I also thought the thing in the first episode with Zuko's mother was entertaining, even though frustrating.
Overall a great series and when I saw it had a 9.3 on IMDb top TV series, my reaction was, "its better than the original? No way!" That in itself will be an interesting question to answer because it's far too early to answer that seriously. A definite must-see
Prometheus (2012)
Disappointing, some good things but overall bad.
Since I never watched any Alien films before seeing Prometheus, I was open minded and quite excited because my family and friends talked about Ridley Scott as the godfather of sci-fi horror. Critics have claimed Prometheus as thought-provoking about the origins of human life. Well not really, since we have developed technology to trace our origins of life back to the apes, this idea of humans coming from space is definitely not thought-provoking.
The movie opens with two scientists who find cave paintings all over the world from different civilizations which depict a star constellation. Elizabeth Shaw (Noomi Rapace) and Charlie Holloway (Logan Marshall- Green) form a team of the best scientists to travel light years away to a mysterious planet. Wrong. They form a team full of incompetent retards whose instincts are to touch and cuddle sinister looking reptilian creatures. I mean come on, three times, I was almost rooting for the aliens to win in the end. If this is humanity's best then society in 2093 must of degraded to medieval times.
I could point out all the other minor flaws like David's (Michael Fassbender) motivations and the inability of Vickers (Charlize Theron) to run to the side of a huge rolling spaceship, but from the reviews I've already read, that's already been covered.
The biggest let down for me was when they awakened the space-jockey from hyper sleep. These were meant to be super intelligent beings who engineered the creation of humanity. However when they awake him, he proceeds to killing all of them. Wouldn't the space-jockey ask them questions like, "How did you get here?", "What are you doing here?" or "You survived the sinister looking aliens?". It was established that this was some sort of biological weapons storage facility and which, judging by the large number of corpses that were the Engineers, was overrun and this space-jockey was the sole survivor. Many of my friends have attempted to answer some of the plot holes, but there is no definite answer, like why did the space-jockey then decide to launch his space ship and destroy Earth (which is actually not even made clear in the movie, the characters seem to figure out that the space-jockey is headed for Earth with biological weapons) , not even sure if thats correct but this only proves that there is much ambiguity in the plot.
Some good points, the acting was superb, Fassbender and Rapace's performances were so realistic that I always felt engaged with the story. The special effects were great as well, but with any movie made in this era, it is expected. The Aliens looked great and the scene with the cesarean on Shaw I will never forget, that was utterly disgusting.
I do accept the fact that this movie, although similar to Alien was not in the same genre. Alien was designed to scare people, but Prometheus attempts to be more philosophical. Although this intention is commendable, it was poorly executed.
Project X (2012)
To like or not to like, Project X is the question
*****Spoliers*****
Watching this movie is like drinking a glass of Metamucil, not sure whether you like the taste or not. Thomas (Thomas Mann) is, in the words of his father, a looser who via the persuasion of his friend Costa (Oliver Cooper) decides to throw a party for his 17th birthday. Hoping to climb off the bottom of the social ladder and get laid, Costa advertises the party through means of mobile phones, social networks and email. As anticipated, thousands of teenagers and college students turn up with an abundance of alcohol and drugs.
Now to the meat of it.
There were bits that I loved and bits that I cringed at. As soon as the party started the audience knew that Thomas was screwed. I mean seriously, two 12-year old security guards was just silly and begging for trouble. The trip to T-Rick (Rick Shapiro) was unnecessary but hilarious. They didn't need the marijuana which didn't even look like that much, plus we never see any of the main characters actually use it. When T-Rick comes back and hits the car, I jumped, and following was the terminator reference which was comical.
Costa is a laugh but to be honest he frustrates me. He wants to make a huge party for his friend and get laid etc but the consequences of his actions won't affect him, Thomas ends up taking most of the blame and puts Thomas' parents into a horrible position where their only child has destroyed their home and most likely their reputation. Thomas, Costa and JB (Jonathan Daniel Brown) seem to appear as a friendship trio. However JB is constantly called fat by Costa and he (Costa) is also quite mean to Dax (Dax Flame) by referring to him as "weirdo" which is probably true I guess considering the Thomas and Kirby (Kirby Bliss Blanton) where he spies on them. Some things I was quite confused about, JB's erection, is he gay or what? Also around the middle-to-the-end part Thomas realises he screwed yet continues to make stupid decisions, like taking the ecstasy pill. He surely must of realised he was powerless to stop people vandalising his home and wants to prevent people from doing that, yet when the police show up he tells them to go away, silly boy.
The overall message of "to become cool, you must throw an outrageous party", worked well in the end. They were well known in the school which was one of their goals but this is different to being popular and having friends. By throwing this party, did they actually get laid and find new friends? No, of course people are going to be nice to the party host and they only know him for the "awesome party with the gnome with ecstasy in it" not for "He reads science-fiction and plays tennis" or whatever. They don't like Thomas for his personality, they like him for the party. I recently attended a "ball-afters" party which was hosted by a girl who wasn't that popular but because she was hosting this party for her entire year group, all the popular girls were really friendly to her, yet after it happened they ignored her, they weren't mean or anything, they just didn't show any of the kindness they showed her before the party occurred. This message that I mentioned at the start of the paragraph stands to be true, I think, in modern day society but "coolness" in this sense does not refer to sex, friends and popularity, it refers to notoriety and being renowned.
This movie comments on some interesting issues in today's society. Parties that spiral out of control are a common occurrence and Project X addresses these issues quite well. At the end of the film, I felt really sad for Thomas because it was true what his father said, he is a good kid, but he was led astray by the somewhat selfish ambitions of Costa. There were some hilarious bits with the midget and the "found footage" added a sense of realism. As I said in the beginning, not completely sure if I liked it, I found some parts really enjoyable but the story of Thomas was kind of cringeful as we knew what his parents would do to him. I will probably watch this again with my friends and see what they think of it.