Change Your Image
tom-durham
Reviews
Fetih 1453 (2012)
drawn out and historically inaccurate. Nice CGI
The pacing on this movie is terrible. There is maybe 1.5 hours of actual content plus 1 hour of fluff.
In addition there is a lack of interest in history when making this movie. You'd think for 2.5 hours there is plenty of opportunity to cover the many interesting historical points of the battle for example. In reality they picked maybe 5 main points and these get a minute of screen time each. It's quite bad.
Watching this movie gives you more of an insight into the Turkish culture and religion than the actual conquest of Constantinople. For example they can't show Mohamed on screen so they cleverly use the camera itself, so you the audience become Mohamed. Except it then becomes confusing as you don't realise when this transition occurs back. Also there are many prayers involved. There is even a 'suicide bomb' scene where they all yell Allah Akbar before blowing themselves up.
This movie is almost least twice as long as it should be, given it's content. The script really lets it down, there is little dialogue in parts, and much attention is given to drawn out camera movements or people being idle. The first half of the movie, the lead up to the battle is not too bad. However the second half, the actual battle, is ruined by the drawn out scenes. If the director's effort was to make us feel frustrated with the time required to conquer the city, he succeeded, for the wrong reasons. To add insult to injury, the English subs clearly skip a fair amount of dialogue.
If you want to watch history reviewed with rose tinted glasses by the victor, plus an hour of fluff this is it.
Herbie Goes Bananas (1980)
Let's go racing! Or not.
This movie is very out of character with the previous movies.
I found all of the characters unlikable and annoying. They have no depth and they have few positive traits.
For example, Herbie protects a thief from police, and breaks things, causing his new owners to scam an old lady to pay for the damage.
This is the kind of behaviour I'd expect from Alonzo Hawk. What's going on here???
And I haven't even talked about the bad guys.
You know a movie sucks when you are rooting for the bad guys.
Quake (1996)
A dull technological triumph
When quake 1 came out in 1996, it was more of a technological milestone than a great game, as a stepping stone to it's successors, quake 2 (1997) and half life (1998, which is based on the quake 1 engine).
Quake 1 was the first graphics engine to allow rooms to be any shape, and monsters were made of polygons rather than 2 dimensional sprites.
But it was ugly. Greenish brown walls. Greenish brown water. Some red lava if you were lucky. Quake 1 was not a colourful game. The enemies were slow moving. And at the time it had high system requirements. There was little ambient noise or music unless you had a CD player. Single player action was dull without the creepy ambient sound track.
Competing FPS games at the time were notably duke nukem 3d (1996), doom (1995) and doom engine based games.
Although Quake's engine was superior to Duke Nukem 3D, the gameplay and quality of maps in Duke Nukem 3d was far superior.
Quake's specialty was custom multiplayer; the famous mod Team Fortress was originally made for Quake 1, and was only re-released for half life 3 years later in 1999.
So although it has a multiplayer following, this game is not one to go back and play single player.
The Great Dictator (1940)
Very overrated
What is very clear is that Charlie Chaplain is the master of silent films and slapstick humour. Unfortunately, this is not a silent film.
Near the beginning there is a ~5-10 minute long 'joke' of a speech in garbled German-English words. I couldn't even make out what he is saying, the German-English jokes were not at all obvious, and so it was not funny and quite boring. If you manage to keep watching past this, you're doing well, it gets better but not by much.
The small amount of classic charlie chaplain slapstick was mostly good and I laughed a few times at that, but unfortunately between the slapstick is tedious, unexciting dialogue.
Maybe what Charlie Chaplain did was ground breaking at the time. Today, it fails to capture interest long enough to enjoy the comedic elements.
The Thomas Crown Affair (1999)
The remake is clearly superior unless you love dramas
I watched the remake and the original back to back for the first time, so this review is more about whether you should watch the original or the remake.
Both movies involve a heist, a love connection and a police investigation. However most of the details are quite different in the two movies, and they almost stand alone.
The heist:
The heist in the remake is much more interesting, detailed, and keeps you on the edge of your seat. The original's heist is straightforward and there are no surprises. It is just a plot device in the original, whereas in the remake it is very well done. The item being stolen makes more sense and really helps the story in the remake.
The love connection:
The remake does not just rely on the two main characters to create intrigue. The original spends most of it's time on this. To me it is quantity over quality. If you prefer the classic 1960s actors gazing at each other communicating via body language instead of dialogue, you may prefer the original. I prefer the remake.
The police investigation:
The remake has additional side plots which make it much more interesting. The original is very straightforward, there is an edge of your seat moment or two, but they are not as well done. The way the driver is caught is just wrong and unbelievable, not clever. The remake is far more interesting and well done.
Conclusion
The remake is more interesting and contains much more action. The original is more of a drama about two people.
The Thomas Crown Affair (1968)
Not as good as the remake unless you love dramas
I am going to compare the two movies in this review, 1968 original (this film) and remake, without spoilers. I watched them back to back for the first time with an open mind.
The main similarity is that there a heist, a police investigation and a love connection in both these movies.
Other than this, the movies felt quite different, with entirely different locations, activities and even the item being stolen is different. With the 1968 version I felt that the pacing was slower, and the plot was more straightforward (less interesting).
The love connection:
I don't feel that there was more or less chemistry between the characters in either film, it was more the pacing, where the original has more time spent on the two main characters together, and more emphasis on body language than dialogue. In the original, the characters leave you in less suspense as to what they are doing and why they are doing it. The suspense is in the relationship.
The heist:
The heist premise is entirely different in both movies. The remake version is clearly superior in every way. In the original it feels like a very small part of the film, like a plot device that just happens rather than a major part of the story. In the remake there is much more detail, and you are left guessing what will happen, it feels more on the edge of your seat.
The police investigation:
The original police investigation into the heist relies more on the love connection. The remake includes more detailed side plots and investigations that tie well into the main plot, which makes it seem so much more interesting and clever than the original.
Conclusion:
The plot of the original is fairly simplistic in comparison and not as interesting. If you love dramas you may appreciate the dedication to the characters of the original, but to me it felt like quantity (original) over quality (remake).
Stargate Universe (2009)
It's about human failure, not finding our place in the stars.
Spoiler: Nothing happens.
Imagine if Stargate Atlantis consisted almost entirely of episodes where no one left Atlantis, Atlantis never left it's planet, Atlantis contains no interesting technology, and the Wraith don't exist.
Or stargate SG1: the gate only goes to a few planets. A team goes through. They don't find anything on the other side but they can't get back.
There are no fantastic technological discoveries to play with. There are no more superpower aliens out there threatening our existence as a species. Instead of using technology to solve problems on an epic scale, they worry about mundane stuff like food supplies for 100 people. Any semblance of plot moves at a snails pace. Everything goes wrong. It's painful to watch.
It's a drama not sci-fi.
Command & Conquer (1995)
The best command and conquer game
Thanks to the windows 95 version of this game, it is still playable today with a multiplayer patch that uses TCP/IP.
Although you can still lose a connection.
With an excellent assortment of futuristic units, two totally different yet balanced sides, a great story, great sound track, full motion video, smooth unit animations and outstanding multiplayer where games last 30 minutes, this game really hit a home run when it was released in 1995!
The NOD missions have the best videos, but are harder than the GDI missions.
Deus Ex (2000)
A Masterpiece
Took the best parts of many previous games. Puzzle solving, stealth, character upgrades. Add in a fantastic plot in a dystopian future. There aren't many scripted conversations but they are quality.
The gameplay was so seamless, just like real life, you can 'fail' some missions (if you don't die) and the game continues. You can have conversations that have consequences later in the game.
But what made it so popular was that there were so many ways to complete the game. You could stealth it, blow everyone away or skill your way to success. There are many hidden areas. Every time you play the game differently you find something new.
Because it's plot is based on many conspiracy theories, people say that 'deux ex predicted that' from everything from 9/11 to Snowden's revelations. Is it's portrayal of our future too accurate?
Outstanding gameplay.
Unreal (1998)
A Masterpiece
In 1997 quake 2 was out, and half life debuted in 1998 (based on the quake 1 engine). Maps had bland colours, boring flat textures. Lots of concrete, more polygons.
Then entered Unreal. Huge variety of textures and lighting. Large outdoor areas. Detail textures that looked good up close! Great water/lava/fire animations. Amazing sound track that changed to suit the action. Fantastic ambient sounds. Smarter bad guys, huge variety of weapons with alternative fire modes. A story line. Everything came together seamlessly, which made it feel like you were really there.
It was basically a single player game. The multiplayer aspect was updated and re-released as Unreal Tournament in 1999 winning many awards.
This game is a piece of art.
Das Cabinet des Dr. Caligari (1920)
Can be watched at 3-4x speed
Back in the day when movies were new, you could film anything and people would watch it.
Most movies you can speed up to 1.2x maybe 1.5x. This one was watchable at a whopping 3x-4x. You don't even have to be a fast reader!
The actors pull faces and hardly move, which feels cartoonish. There are a couple of bits near the end where I slowed down to 2x but for the most part....
Even at 4x speed not much happens.
If you can't speed it up, prepare for a snore fest, a predictable plot and a twist that wasn't worth waiting for.
The wacky cheaply made sets might pique your interest if you are into that sort of thing so I gave it an extra star for that.
Cop Car (2015)
Snore fest
(contains very minor spoilers) The pace of this movie is simply too slow.
For example, there is a scene where a car is driving on the highway. The camera sits on the driver for what seems like half an hour, and then nothing happens. You think 'wow so much suspense, something must happen right?'. But no. The bored expression on the drivers face for most of the half hour was a giveaway. If I drive along a straight piece of road for ages at least I'm going somewhere, unlike this movie.
And it continues like this. Suspense leads to... nothing happens. No confrontations, everything is low key and slow paced.
It basically felt like a 30 minute film was stretched to 90 minutes. I gave up at half way through.
The Man in the High Castle (2015)
Snore fest
A TV series about how Germany and Japan take over the US after winning world war 2? Could be interesting. Do they run the economy differently? Different technology? How does the country look, same or different? How did they win?
No apparently they just change the police into a force that shoots and tortures people and slap lots of swastikas everywhere.
Oh and there's some tension with Japan, since it's 1960 and they never had the technological renaissance of the 80s so the Germans must be going to blow them away any time now. Kind of like Russia vs the west after WW2. And Hitler is about to pass away so there is a hint of a power struggle that could happen. Sounds very interesting but sadly it's barely mentioned.
And some plot about smuggling some films. Yes, that's what the resistance does! And also the main plot. "That film could change the world". What kind of film could change the world? Proof that aliens exist? The meaning of life explained? Working blueprints for fusion power? No! A film showing what life would be like if the US won world war 2.
What a minute! This series is a film of exactly the opposite (what would happen if Germany and Japan won WW2)! So it should change the world right! The world will rise up and... er no, it's just a film.
I give it 3 stars because it has some nice visuals.
Local Hero (1983)
The film meanders around with little tension and the ending was not believable.
"Local hero" I felt it was really a weak exploration of a Scottish village with an ending that made absolutely no sense. What hero?
Instead of a strong plot with tension and release, it felt like the movie stumbled around a field dodging cow pats, finally heading towards an exit until all of a sudden it starts hallucinating, trips over and lands face first in a steamy pile of horse manure.
If you just want to see a Scottish village then maybe you will enjoy it.
The spoilers here mainly relate to main plot and the nonsensical ending, and don't discuss the Scottish village. So I hope that if you still decide to see the movie after reading this review, it will spare you the disappointment of the terrible ending.
***PLOT OUTLINE (MINOR SPOILERS)***
The main plot consists of an oil company trying to buy a piece of Scotland so they can drill for oil. They describe how don't have much money to pull it off this time (so expensive fantasies are surely out of the question?).
So throughout the movie you wonder if/where it will come unstuck:
Will the villagers will oppose the destruction of area? Will the villagers not want to sell? Will the villagers want too much? Will environmentalists oppose the oil platform?
Although all these questions are explored I felt there was only serious tension in the third one.
And then the movie quickly ends in the most unlikely way...
*** MAJOR SPOILERS & PLOT TWIST ENDING ****
Finally after over an hour something happens.
We have a hold out. In this area, magically the aeroplanes that bomb the beach next to the village have disappeared. Serene and peaceful all of a sudden in the evening light. Yet negotiations don't seem impossible...
Enter the eccentric manager/CEO! Lets get a deal going and let the credits roll!
Er. no. I like plot twists, but can you believe that the eccentric manager decides to build offshore, and wants to waste money on an observatory, and then the second salesman pipes up 'can you build a fish farm(?) for this hot lady down the beach so I can get into her pants?'. Everyone cringes and the manager says 'What a fantastic idea! Lets do it!'. The movie quickly turns into a mush about the salesman for the last couple of minutes, it was so bad I could barely watch it (nothing to do with fish lady) and the credits roll.
Unfortunately we don't get to see the part where the board of directors fires the manager for wasting money, the villagers unhappy because they aren't paid, and nothing is built because the hold out didn't sell.