The atmosphere is impressive, the story somewhat different and simplified from the anime
It was an okay movie. Anything is still possible for the Dark Universe, but I hope it will be better. Russel Crowe's part was good and Tom Cruises' action scenes were also pretty good. Sadly the comedy in this movie was pretty bad. Jake Johnson felt really out of place and was only funny for the first 10 minutes.
There also was a problem with the chemistry between Nick and Jenny. It felt so weird sometimes.
Overal the movie felt rushes and could be done so much better. The action is good in this movie. Hope the rest of the Dark Universe will be better.
Nick Fury, Deadpool and Elektra fight together to take down Commissioner Gordon
The deceptively marketed I Kill Giants has nothing in common with Harry Potter or the other recent YA movies that the trailer and poster try to evoke. Instead, it reflects on how a child deals with pain and with understanding that there are forces beyond his/her control.
At a reasonable running time and powered by a great performance by young Madison Wolfe, the movie flows quite nicely. It feels a bit heavy handed with the explaining of the methaphor behind its concept, the delivery of some pieces of exposition to the audience is a little clichéd and convenient, and the ending is a bit drawn out and again overexplanatory, but these may be necessary evils to get the point across to the younger viewers.
While I feel that a very similar topic was handled better and more maturely in J. A. Bayona's sensational A Monster Calls, I Kill Giants is still a constantly entertaining and at times moving watch.
3.5/10
This is movie is pretty much an excuse for Oprah to be bigger than everyone else in the film.
No, really.
The casting director on this should be shot. All performances felt so, very, incredibly fake. The only believable character was played by Chris Pine. EVERYONE else we come across is just awful. It could be the writing, the directing, etc, but the actors seem to be at fault here. It seemed so important to them to have a diversified racial palate of actors, that maybe they were just looking for a race, as opposed to an actual performance. I am not being racist, just look at the film and you will see what I mean.
The visuals were ok, but clearly very CGI. They didn't even try to get the lighting right on many parts, and that disgusts me for what this movie (original story from the book) could have been.
There is no development. You are thrown into these weird, unexplained characters, with a moody, but yet expressionless character (Meg). Then all of a sudden, they are on another planet, with some random dude joining them (Calvin), then suddenly the mothers (whatever the shit you call the big 3) disappear. Like. Why are they even in the movie? Idk.
I want my time back.
My god... Does Ava DuVernay know that you can actually zoom out a camera? I've never seen so many "closeup" face shots in a single movie in my entire life. I'll never be able to get Oprah's giant-sized face out of my mind...
As for the movie itself, It's a bit all over the place. Some parts and themes are very well-done, such as Meg's journey to accept herself, while others are really half-baked (especially the relationships between Meg & Charles Wallace, Meg & Calvin, etc). Too many things just get thrown together or just suddenly happen by sheer "coincidence" without a solid lead-in or development. This could have definitely used some additional scenes and runtime to flesh characters and their relationships between each other out a bit more. Reese Witherspoon's character is actually my favorite of the 3 "Mrs."'s. Oprah and Mindy Kaling's characters definitely did not hit home.
Visuals were pretty stunning for the most part, but sometimes went a bit too overboard. Don't even get me started again on the cinematography and editing... This movie definitely had potential and I was excited to watch it, but it just misses out on some major points. It was enjoyable overall for the visual fest and seeing the world of A Wrinkle in Time, but other than that it is just an average film. I'd temper my expectations for sure. 5/10 as it is just an average movie...
Apparently this is just the third $100+ million budget movie directed by a woman. I'm not sure that Ava DuVernay's movie is going to help buck that trend...
“These creatures were here before us. And if we're not careful... they're going to be here after. Life cannot be contained. Life breaks free. Life... finds a way. Welcome... to Jurassic World.”
Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom takes place three years after the events of the first movie. The left remaining dinosaurs are left on the island as a volcano erupts. As the advertisements put it, “The park is gone”. All of this only raises one question: Why would you put a family theme park next to an active volcano with dinosaurs?
Anywhere...
After the monster success of “Jurassic World” a sequel was certain to happen and will find new ways to bring these extinct animals back onto the big screens. While I enjoyed the first movie a lot, but nowhere near as good compared to Jurassic Park. Had its moments overall, just not Spielberg level good.
We have a new director J.A. Bayona, with Colin Trevorrow only writing this time. Bayona is best known for horror and supernatural tragics, so I was interested for what he will bring to this new franchise. He dose bring a lot those elements into scenes where tension actually worked this time around. You can see the influence to older movies like “Nosferatu” and the golden age of monster movies into play. I must admit, the cinematography is visually stunning and makes the dinosaurs look terrifying. Unfortunately, all of this gets watered down by a terrible script, convenient situations, and the final result is Hollywood fluff.
The visual effects, (for the most part) looked really good and never takes you out of the movie when interacting around non-digital setting/people. I noticed some animatronics dinosaurs, but can easily get overshadowed by the heavy CGI. When I said “for the most part”, there are some shots were it looked a bit noticeable. Other than that, the visual effects are the strongest element to the film.
Chris Pratt and Bryce Dallas Howard ain't brilliant in terms of acting, but at least have great chemistry. If look at any interviews or press event, the two get along so well it easily shows on screen. The biggest change in terms of character is Bryce Dallas Howard, who’s not as idiotic like the first. While both characters aren't great, as some questionable decisions are made, although slightly better compared to the first. Although their motivations for saving the dinosaurs only makes you agree with Ian Malcolm (Goldblum) even more.
The film introduces new characters played by Justice Smith and Daniella Pineda, who tag along with are main characters. One of them can access and hack into anything, but he’s a afraid of pretty much everything - the drop of a penny can startle him, probably thinks it’s a T.Rex. Also his screaming can go right through you. The other takes care of Blue after being badly injured and that’s really it. Both of them didn't do much for me. Half way through the movie you forgot about them, because they literally disappear from the film and later come back in the third act.
The movie is, at the very least, self aware of itself. Evidently by Chris Pratt’s character before agreeing to go on a mission ironically states “What could go wrong” when things go wrong. Giving small winks to the audiences when the obvious is gonna happen. With the endless amount of stupid decisions on top of more stupid decisions to push the plot along - Which I guess if every character had a brain, this movie wouldn't exist, then again it wouldn't be a great loss.
Speaking of idiots, let's talk about the villains. I’m not gonna beat around the bush when I say this, but these are some of the most cartoonist villains I've seen in awhile. It’s pathetic how tedious they are. You wanna know they evil plan and goal? Guess, just guess:
Yep it’s money - Easily one of the worst.
If you’re looking forward for Jeff Goldblum’s return to the series and what role he will have on the story, just from the promotional material alone; well I got some bad news for you. He’s only in two scenes and the total screen time is one minute. All of it is courtroom debates. His character adds nothing to the film, just recycles dialogue from the previous films. What a waste of Goldblum.
Overall rating: While coming off as negative towards the film, it’s not bad or painfully to watch. I mean, it’s stupid fun. The ideas are present in ‘Fallen Kingdom’ for what it’s trying to set up or be, just needs a sharper execution. For those wondering about the third movie, don’t worry...
The studios will find a way.
Big Neil Breen energy with this one. This is a level of bad that transcends boundaries and frankly, I will never be the same.
John Carpenter’s horror classic Halloween is re-envisioned by Rob Zombie as an ugly and grotesque slasher film. The story follows the formation of Michael Myers into a psychopathic killer during his childhood, and the killing spree that follows years later when he escapes from the insane asylum. Unfortunately, nearly all of the characters are unsympathetic and instantly dislikable; making it extremely hard to become engaged in the film. And, Zombie’s gratuitous and exploitative directing style is too brutal and vulgar to enjoy. Completely lacking in suspense, this Halloween remake is a distasteful mess.
Silly, but fun. Love the werewolf effects.
Surreal, psychedelic nonsense that somehow takes an interesting idea, game cast, and state of the art effects to make a tedious, dull bowel movement of a film. Now that's talent. If you thought Dark Tower was bad, you ain't seen nothing yet. 2/10
This is going to be one of those posts where I go against the mainstream but my reaction when I watched this movie was: You got to be f… kidding me?
The only resemblance to the REAL joker in this movie is the name. As far as I am concerned this movie is an insult to the fans of Batman and the REAL Joker.
The “Joker” in this move is a unintelligent deranged nutcase. There is a sob story in the background about how he became that way which is totally uninteresting.
The REAL joker is a intelligent criminal mastermind. I was waiting for this nutcase to actually become that for the entire movie. Spoiler alert, it never happened! This guy starts as a useless sobbing nutcase and he ends the movie as the same useless sobbing nutcase.
The movie has NOTHING to do with the real Joker. It is a blatant attempt to garner support for a unrelated psychopathic thriller by using the Joker name. If it would have been advertised as such I probably would have, if not liked it, so at least appreciated it for it’s qualities. It is indeed a well done movie technically and the main character is indeed excellently performed.
However, even if I try to distance myself from the deceitful Joker label, I find it overall boring, too long and really a movie about a psychopath probably made by someone with mental issues himself. But then that’s Hollywood today.
That the politically biased and elitist so called “critics” on sites like Rotten Tomatoes like it is not really surprising but I have to confess that I am somewhat surprised at the rave ratings by real viewers on some other sites.
Honestly, I was expecting to be disappointing by this movie. Then I am always cautious about movies getting rave reviews, especially from the previously mentioned totally useless and crappy “review” site. I did not expect this level of disappointment though. Epic fail as far as I am concerned.
Ouch.
The visuals are breathtaking, as already shown by the trailers.
ScarJo is trying, you can tell that she wants this to be her new franchise.
It's edited quite nicely, it's got a (simple) story, and it's coherent.
So where did it go wrong?
One of the problems is that it takes away all of the philosophical depth from the original.
Well, that means you can still enjoy it from a simple action flick perspective, right?
Good luck with that.
This film has such a ridiculous amount of exposition, that it badly hurts the enjoyment of the film.
Many sequences consist of characters just talking to each other, and explaining the plot.
Things are definitely shown, but then the filmmakers don't think we're able to put two and two together, and hence add another explanatory scene.
As a result of that, the film doesn't take its time to develop the characters, meaning you won't care about them.
Top it off with an awful performance from Juliette Binoche, and you have your modern style over substance film.
3.5/10
