Trakt for iOS
Works on iPhone and iPad.
Everyone keeps suggesting there is a paradox concerning the 5D future humans and their ability to save humanity in the past. It's really not a paradox at all. Everyone assumes humanity survived to ascend to the 5th dimension but how could humanity exist in the future if not for the actions of Cooper.. who was guided by future humans (begin endless loop).
Did anyone ever consider the other important character in the movie? Amelia Brand carried on with the rest of her mission (thanks to Cooper). I postulate that Brand used the human seeds as intended and set up a colony. A colony that would thrive and eventually evolve beyond human. Thus Earth is of little importance, and may have indeed died. These colonists, and the generations that followed, would have been told the story of a great man (Cooper) who saved them from extinction. With the ability to manipulate space-time, they would pay homage to their hero "God" by helping him in the past so he may fulfill the mission most important to him, to once again see his daughter. Plan B worked beautifully. But the 5d humans, having the power to bend space-time, decided there's no reason why Plan A had to fail.
Watching order
Because there are some issues with watching this, here is the order.
Copying from the site in case it ever goes down, but this info came from here: http://thunderpeel2001.blogspot.com/2010/02/battlestar-galactica-viewing-order.html
It's probably more confusing here on trakt, so go to the above linked site for a better layout.
The Miniseries
Night 1
Night 2
Season 1
1.01 33
1.02 Water
1.03 Bastille Day
1.04 Act of Contrition
1.05 You Can't Go Home Again
1.06 Litmus
1.07 Six Degrees of Separation
1.08 Flesh and Bone
1.09 Tigh Me Up, Tigh Me Down
1.10 The Hand of God
1.11 Colonial Day
1.12 Kobol's Last Gleaming, Part I
1.13 Kobol's Last Gleaming, Part II
Season 2
2.01 Scattered
2.02 Valley of Darkness
2.03 Fragged
2.04 Resistance
2.05 The Farm
2.06 Home, Part I
2.07 Home, Part II
2.08 Final Cut
2.09 Flight of the Phoenix
2.10 Pegasus (56 minute extended version)
2.11 Resurrection Ship, Part I
2.12 Resurrection Ship, Part II
2.13 Epiphanies
2.14 Black Market
2.15 Scar
2.16 Sacrifice
2.17 The Captain's Hand
Razor (101 minute extended version - not the 81 minute broadcast version)
Important note: This was originally broadcast just before Season 4, but chronologically it fits here, telling more of the Pegasus's story. Some people argue it's better to watch after Season 3, as originally broadcast, but it makes most sense to watch it here.
The reason that the placement of Razor is a hotly contested issue among BSG fans is because of a bit of dialogue at the very end (in the last 10 minutes) which sets the tone for Season 4 (barely even a spoiler). Everything else in this TV movie is not a spoiler.
So why place it here, and not where it was originally broadcast, if there's any sort of issue? Because, chronologically, the story is set here, and by the time you reach the end of Season 3, the story of Pegasus will feel like ancient history. Indeed, that was the complaint echoed around the internet from fans after Razor originally aired -- it had nothing to do with what was going on in the story at that time.
As a result of this, most fans agree it's better to watch Razor here. In doing so, you'll appreciate the story more and it will have greater emotionally resonance. In short: I highly recommend that you follow my advice and watch it here.
There is one small caveat, however: In order to deal with the above dialogue issue, and so not to unintentionally alter the tone of Season 3, I have two, very specific instructions that I recommend that you follow for your absolute optimum enjoyment.
I will try not to spoil anything with these instructions, so pay attention. You need to press MUTE on your TV (and/or turn off any subtitles) in the following two moments. Both of these moments occur in the last 10 minutes of the story, so you can relax and enjoy the first 90 mins before you need to worry.
Press MUTE when:
and shortly afterwards:
That's it! That's all you have to worry about. Two very small moments, and even if you don't unmute it, it's not a huge spoiler, it just unintentionally alters the tone of Season 3 if you don't, so do try your best to follow my instructions.
2.18 Downloaded
2.19 Lay Down Your Burdens, Part I
2.20 Lay Down Your Burdens, Part II
The Resistance
A 10 episode web-based series bridging seasons 2 and 3. (25 mins.)
Season 3
3.01 Occupation
3.02 Precipice
3.03 Exodus, Part I
3.04 Exodus, Part II
3.05 Collaborators
3.06 Torn
3.07 A Measure of Salvation
3.08 Hero
3.09 Unfinished Business (70 minute extended version - Note: Not included on Region 2 DVDs, but is included on ALL Bluray releases.)
3.10 The Passage
3.11 The Eye of Jupiter
3.12 Rapture
3.13 Taking a Break From All Your Worries
3.14 The Woman King
3.15 A Day in the Life
3.16 Dirty Hands
3.17 Maelstrom
3.18 The Son Also Rises
3.19 Crossroads, Part I
3.20 Crossroads, Part II
Razor: Yes, this again. (Well this is where Razor was originally broadcast, after all.) Remember the last 10 minutes where I told you to MUTE two small moments? Well, guess what, now is when you get to go back and hear what was said. Watch the last 10 minutes of Razor here.
Season 4
4.01 He That Believeth In Me
4.02 Six of One
4.03 The Ties That Bind
4.04 Escape Velocity
4.05 The Road Less Traveled
4.06 Faith
4.07 Guess What's Coming to Dinner?
4.08 Sine Qua Non
4.09 The Hub
4.10 Revelations
Season 4 Continued (aka "Season 4.5" or "The Final Season")
4.11 Sometimes a Great Notion
The Face of the Enemy
A 10 episode web-based series (although it plays together like an intense mini-episode). (36 mins.)
4.12 A Disquiet Follows My Soul (53 minute extended version - only on Bluray releases)
4.13 The Oath
4.14 Blood on the Scales
4.15 No Exit
The Plan (DVD/Bluray movie)
A stand-alone movie that shows (approximately) the first two seasons from the Cylons' perspective. (You finally get to see "The Plan", mentioned all those times in the opening sequence!) Although The Plan was originally released after the show had finished, it is generally agreed that it should be watched here, so that everything is all tied up when you do reach the end.
4.16 Deadlock
4.17 Someone to Watch Over Me
4.18 Islanded In a Stream of Stars (62 minute extended version - only on BluRay releases and Region 1 DVDs)
4.19 Daybreak (150 minute extended version - only on BluRay releases and Region 1 DVDs)
The Plan : This is where this DVD/Bluray movie was originally released (after the show had finished). It seems universally agreed that it's preferable to watch this after No Exit, instead of after you've finished the entire series, but there's no harm in waiting until now.
Then Caprica the series: http://trakt.tv/show/caprica
[7.6/10] Solo has the scruffy confidence to be its own movie. Of the ten Star Wars films, it’s the only so far not to tie directly into the events of the main saga. That alone makes it interesting and laudable as the first real cinematic step of Star Wars ceasing to be a film series and starting to be a “cinematic universe.”
Which isn’t to say the film isn’t closely connected to its predecessors. Solo reveals how Han and Chewbacca first became a team. It features the first meeting between its title character in Lando Calrissian. It even shows how Han ended up with the Millenium Falcon. And that’s setting aside references to a “gangster on Tatooine” and hints of a growing rebellion and familiar characters popping up in unexpected places. Make no mistake -- the film is certainly interested in reminding its viewers where all these characters will be in ten years time.
But it’s also good enough not to be about that. Solo is part-heist flick and part coming-of-age film. It’s more interested in Han’s big adventure in this movie and how he gets to be the sarcastic smuggler we meet in A New Hope than it is in how he fits into the broader Star Wars Universe, to the film’s benefit. The promise of these “Star Wars stories” is that they can use the diverse, elaborate world that George Lucas and his collaborators created to spin all kinds of yarns untethered to the concerns of the Skywalker family. Solo still anchors its story on familiar faces, but tells its own tale, and comes out the better for it.
The big problem with Solo is that it has two modes: (a.) irreverent action/adventure flick filled with colorful characters and (b.) semi-serious interrogation of What Han Solo Is™, and it’s much more entertaining and effective at the former than the latter. The script, penned by Empire Strikes Back scribe Lawrence Kasdan and his son Jonathan, does a superb job at introducing all these figures, old and new, and then letting them bounce off on another in the confines of a rickety old ship and a job pulled at various rough-and-tumble locales. But it falters when trying to use that setup to get at its title character’s true nature.
The film’s thesis on that front is a solid one -- that he is unavoidably rough around the edges, and wants to be “bad,” but deep down he’s good. That is, after all, his essential arc in the Original Trilogy, where a seemingly good-for-nothing smuggler is revealed to have a heart of gold and sympathies to the cause of the Rebellion, or at least his friends. Solo retraces that arc a bit, and weakens Han’s progression in the saga films a little in the course of that, but the Kasdans get Han: the talk that’s bigger than his paydirt, the cocksure improvisational confidence, and the innate goodness that peaks through his rough-hewn if charming exterior which he’ll deny to the end.
The film just does a much better job of showing us those qualities through Han’s actions and attitude than in having various other characters ham-fistedly comment on it and wax rhapsodic about who he’s been and who he’ll be.
The best parts work, as they must, thanks to Alden Ehrenreich, who takes over the role originated by Harrison Ford in 1977’s A New Hope. Following in those iconic footsteps is a tall order, but Ehrenreich makes it work. He doesn't stoop to doing an impression of Ford, short of a few conspicuous mannerisms, but still manages to capture the character’s rakish charm and overconfident, anything goes spirit. Yes, it’s a little hard to grok that this guy becomes 70s era Harrison Ford in ten years, but Ehrenreich absolutely works as Young Han, and the movie wouldn’t work at all without that.
The other characters that populate the film vary a bit more, but are largely fun and entertaining. Woody Harrelson’s turn as Beckett sees him filling the weathered good ol’ boy niche he’s carved out for years now. Emilia Clarke does fine as Qi'ra, who manages to be a little bit more than just Han’s love interest, but only a little. Donald Glover’s charisma carries the day as he inhabits Young Lando, but occasionally he comes across like Glover doing his best Lando impersonation than a fully convincing character (though his chemistry with Ehrenreich sparkles over that nicely). And there’s plenty of other fun, if seemingly disposable side characters, like Paul Bettany’s genteel but menacing villain, Dryden Vos, and Phoebe Waller-Bridge as a delightfully irrepressible droid revolutionary named L3. Even relative newcomer Joonas Suotamo brings character beyond the fur to Chewbacca, alongside Star Wars sound designer Ben Burtt’s traditional groans and growls.
When Solo deploys these characters well, it’s a hell of an action-filled romp. Seeing Han’s Oliver Twist-esque origins blossom into his up-and-down efforts to live on the fringes of both the law and the galaxy are fun and thrilling. The movie takes the viewer to new, scrappier corners of the galaxy, packing the frame with wild new creatures and settings that help make Star Wars feel big and diverse again.
Han’s goals and wants are clear; his compatriots are well-if-quickly sketched, and the set pieces are nicely chaotic and spontaneous, as befits the way any plan involving Solo should shake out. The pacing is off here and there, and certain action sequences extend to the point of exhaustion (likely a casualty of the hand off from the nixed boundary-pushers Phil Lord & Christopher Miller to steady hand Ron Howard). But the core setting of the film -- a band of well-traveled and wannabe outlaws does a job with pitfalls and smart remarks -- works like gangbusters.
Then, the final act hits, and the film stops being fun and starts being serious. There’s double-crosses on double-crosses, heavily sign-posted character-defining choices, and cliché, ponderous statements about who Han is supposed to be or can’t be or might have been that one time (we’re not really sure).
Solo, like its protagonist, has its heart in the right place here. It’s laudable to try to turn this adventure into something revealing about one of the franchise’s biggest characters and not just an empty-calorie escapade. But the film can’t support the weight of that introspection (not to mention all of that clunky extrospection) and becomes bogged down when trying to unravel both its less-compelling plot threads and its character study in one big convoluted finale.
But one thing is for sure. This movie is not about the Skywalkers. Despite an eyebrow-raising tie-in, it is not about the broader Star Wars Universe. It’s about Han Solo, and It is, for the first time, a genuinely independent Star Wars story. For most of its run time, Solo is a standalone (if franchise-winking) adventure from the days when Han was still cutting his teeth as a smuggler and outlaw. The film has its problems when it departs from that, but still shows the benefits, and the fun, of Star Wars movies that follow the lead of Solo himself and aim to go it alone.
Pixar returns after a 1 year gap with this literal look inside the mind of a child, Riley. We see her emotions personified into Joy, Anger, Fear, Disgust and Sadness.
The initial few minutes of Inside Out set the scene out in a simple, easy to digest manner. We see Riley at her birth and the simultaneous birth of her simplest emotions, which take control of her. Memories are created and assigned an emotion, represented by a colour, then stored. It’s almost heavy-handed by Pixar standards but this approach quickly starts to make sense as the film goes on.
Everything goes swimmingly until Riley gets knocked for six with a move to San Francisco; a far cry from her native Minnesota. Her friends and interests all get up-rooted and she considers running away. Meanwhile inside, her emotions are equally out of whack as Joy gets knocked off the controls by a traumatic event.
What a beautiful, original, heartfelt piece of work this is. Docter delves deep into the human condition while somehow pulling off an entertaining family adventure. It’s best not to think too much about the logic of what’s going on; just like the real brain, the actual processes that create memories and personality are fuzzy and chaotic.
Inside Out isn’t afraid to make choices that will make people cry out ‘that doesn’t make sense!’. That’s because it has instead chosen to operate on a higher plane, exploring the reasons behind our actions and reactions to certain events, our motivations in life and dealing with trauma. If you’re worrying that they only picked five emotions to deal with, you’re missing the point.
The film runs mostly on metaphor, and with that it visits previously unexplored territory in children’s cinema. For instance the suggestion that sadness can often be what helps us through difficult times is not something that sells Minion toys in happy meals; but the film makers don’t seem to care. It’s OK to be sad. Sometimes it’s the only way we can feel anything at all.
There’s also a running commentary on how memories affect every part of our lives, from our current mood, our personality, to how we interact with other people. Docter manages to explain the importance of memories, and equally the importance of loading them with emotion. Simply by changing the ‘colour’ of a memory he’s saying that what one remembers is always defined by how one remembers.
The real stroke of genius is that these relatively complex themes are set to the bright, colourful backdrop of Riley’s mind. The set design and art direction are gorgeous and tie the whole thing together nicely. Pixar seems to be the only major animation studio that genuinely cares about how every frame looks, and here that attention to detail only adds to the film.
One other more ‘technical’ aspect that stands out is the inspired choices for the voice performances. These people haven’t been picked because they are big names, it’s because they fit the bill perfectly. Amy Poehler and Phyllis Smith play Joy and Sadness respectively and their work is a large part of what makes the film so memorable.
On a personal level, I found this to be one of the most fascinating, profound experiences I’ve had from a film. There is so much more to talk about, so much more to be uncovered, that I feel like I cannot do it justice in words.
Another smart, entertaining, emotional masterpiece from the studio.
I've had an amazing experience watching the movie premiere in Venice, I've been waiting for this movie for a long time and I was not disappointed in the slightest.
It's a gorgeous movie, it's disturbing but moving at the same time, violent at times, but also subtle. It's a different and fresh spin on the character and on the cinecomic genre as a whole and Phoenix delivers an amazing performance portraying a version of the Joker we've never seen before, he's not the villain of someone else's story, he is the hero and villain of HIS own story, and the audience can be orrified by him, but we can't help but feel for him at times.
Without giving anything away I would recommend to go and see the movie not expecting to go and see an action packed, but gritty cinecomic, I suggest going in and watch it pretending that it's not even about a famous comic villain, but simply a movie, I think that people will appreciate it more in that way, not comparing it to the cinecomics we've seen before, but thinking of it as a normal movie.
P.S.: People will of course compare Phoenix to Ledger, I don't think it's possible, they give a totally different percormance because they portray totally different versions of the character, and I think it's going to be hard to compare them, you either prefere Ledger's version or Phoenix's but only based on the character, the actor's performances cannot be judged by comparison, they're both great. Just enjoy the movie
Dunkirk by Christopher Nolan was just a fabulous experience. I definitely enjoyed the movie quite a bit from start to finish, and usually war movies aren't really my cup of tea (at least not anymore). However, cinematically, the entire movie is just a masterpiece. As a big movie buff, I could appreciate how meticulously crafted the whole movie was. It's so hard to create a movie like this within this genre while trying to remain "minimal", but Christopher Nolan accomplishes it in every sense of the word.
He seamlessly interweaves 3-4 different plot narratives/timelines, while using minimal amounts of exposition. He gives the viewer such a sense of a looming and foreboding threat, while never even having a Nazi soldier on screen at any time. He tells us "so much with so little" and allows the viewer to take in the conflict of each situation (and there are a lot of them) rather than point it all out to us. In that sense, you really feel like you're getting into the mind of each one of the soldiers/main characters when they are contemplating some very crucial decisions that literally determine life and death, for not just them, but many other men as well.
Nolan gives us continued development, closure and solid endings in each one of the tiny subplots that he sets off from the beginning. It's definitely a joy seeing how all the different plotlines intermingle with each other at the end especially with the civilian aspect added in. And, most importantly, he accomplishes all this in less than 2 hours (and by a damn good margin as well).
If you appreciate amazing direction, cinematography, and vision within a movie, this will be an absolute joy. It could definitely get Christopher Nolan that elusive Best Director Oscar come Academy Award season. I watched Dunkirk in 70mm, but, honestly, I couldn't really tell the difference, especially without being able to do a side-by-side comparison to a regular version. Overall, it didn't seem too different from the usual XD or IMAX type presentation at my local big theater. Still, the movie is a visual treat lending heavily to more practical effects that gives a nice sense of realism to it all.
Anyways, this gets a solid 9/10 from me, coming from a war movie curmudgeon. Watch it, and you won't regret it.
Thrilling, creative and well acted. There was a lot of doubts about Edge of Tomorrow, but for me it seemed very cool and since I first saw the trailer that I was excited to see it. Today I finally had the chance to catch it and I really enjoyed!
The concept of the story is so cool! Something between Source Code and a mix of many war films. The action sequences of war are absolutely amazing and the special effects so well done! With a fantastic and super original Sci-Fi story you will be intrigued until the very last minute and you can't even predict what is coming next.
What I wasn't expecting was the amount of humour the film has. Those comical parts go very well with the story and are very well delivered. I let go an amount of spontaneous laughs throughout the story and that was great.
Tom Cruise was really great that his role! We already know that through the last few years he is a guy that likes to do this kind of physically difficult roles full of action and he certainly is in shape for that. I confess that I prefer the 80's and 90's Tom Cruise but he was pretty good in this and that is the Tom Cruise that I wanna continue to see! (although last year I also liked to see him in Oblivion which I think is not as bad as many say). Emily Blunt is a good actress, seeing her in this badass role was awesome! The chemistry between Cruise and Blunt was fantastic! I really liked Bill Paxton's character too.
I heard somewhere that this film was "the best video game film that was not based in a video game" and while I was watching it I really felt that! It was so cool to almost feel that I was actually playing a video game something like "Oh sh*t GAME OVER, start all over again!" haha
First was X-Men: Days of Future Past and now Edge of Tomorrow. Two great Blockbusters! Will this Summer continue to be great? I hope so!
Kevin Spacey is so great in this show, and his wife Claire (Robin Wright) too. They play their roles so realistic, I believe them every word!
Barack Obama wrote a book as he's got into "higher" politics. I see some parallels from the book and this tv show. Everything is very realistic. The show reminds me a little bit of "Damages" with Glenn Close, where intrigue play a big role too, but in House of Cards it is much more sophisticated. You can't really miss one episode, because you gonna miss so much. And I also do not want to miss an episode , because you never get bored here. That is how a tv show concept should be!
The big thing about the show is also the first season's ending. I don't want to put a spoiler here, but I couldn't imagine that all those different story lines got put together to a big picture in the ending.
That was amazing. Really great written.
I give the first season 9 out of 10 points because it is so amazing well written, the acting is simply awesome and the only annoying thing which comes to my mind is the long intro.
So if you want to see a realistic politics & life tv show: Give it a try.
Kevin Spacey is so great in this show, and his wife Claire (Robin Wright) too. They play their roles so realistic, I believe them every word!
Barack Obama wrote a book as he's got into "higher" politics. I see some parallels from the book and this tv show. Everything is very realistic. The show reminds me a little bit of "Damages" with Glenn Close, where intrigue play a big role too, but in House of Cards it is much more sophisticated. You can't really miss one episode, because you gonna miss so much. And I also do not want to miss an episode , because you never get bored here. That is how a tv show concept should be!
The big thing about the show is also the first season's ending. I don't want to put a spoiler here, but I couldn't imagine that all those different story lines got put together to a big picture in the ending.
That was amazing. Really great written.
I give the first season 9 out of 10 points because it is so amazing well written, the acting is simply awesome and the only annoying thing which comes to my mind is the long intro.
So if you want to see a realistic politics & life tv show: Give it a try.
Is Marvel just going to keep increasing the comedy value?
How much is enough?
Thor Ragnarok is a comedy action movie, or simply put ->
https://i.imgur.com/OqUYCJX.png
| FIRST THOUGHT |
Take Thor, mix it with Hulk.
Put your hand on the "comedy" button, press it and never release it.
It's this movie.
And it doesn't actually stop, throughout the entire time. You can't quite figure out how much it takes itself seriously. And it's so goddamn good.
Before you go on about and watch it, you need to put yourself in a spectrum where you're going to enjoy senseless beating and constant, crispy comedy.
It is definitely worth watching. It is worth your time, your money and putting on clothes to get out of your home. (Or just do it like me, I never put on clothes.)
| STORY & ACTORS |
Well, what can be said about the story on a Marvel movie?
However you want to put it, it's actually nothing so special, there's obviously no level of "deepness" to it. It's very linear, of course, with a happy ending - Although I have to admit, very enjoyable.
It's structured for the sole purpose of starting what is going to be the actual, gigantic movie: Infinity War - while closing down the history and settling the character of Thor for good. (Much better than what they did with Iron Man)
I think Marvel, with this one, truly captured the perfect combination of "comedy" and "action" to it's MCU. Sorting out everything that lacked in the second installment of "Guardians of Galaxy".
The comedy was throughout really enjoyable, it was predictable, but we can't pretend much of it - it's classical "Thor & Hulk" memes.
The story also doesn't hold to a very interesting villain. It's really unfortunate because of Hela's position in the comics, but at the same time I can understand what the movie wanted to speak about, so I really cannot be as frustrated as I did with other movies. cough*Wonder Woman*cough
It does, at the same time, bring up new, fun characters (To the MCU). Korg (voice acted by also director Taika Waititi) was an absolute blast and pure enjoyment at everything he said. It can come out as pathetic or annoying, but that just means that you shouldn't watch superhero movies.
I can't talk enough about comedy without entering the realm of "acting", and in doing so, eventually to the actors.
/I will only "in-depth note" some of the actors\
I'll say this, and it took me SIX movies to finally agree and accept it: Chris Hemsworth brought Thor to a level as high as Robert Downey Jr. and Hugh Jackman did with both Iron-Man and Wolverine. I can't "unsee" a Thor that isn't Chris Hemsworth, and this movie put on that thought the final stone.
He showed passion to a character that ended up developing itself positively in barely 2 hours and 10 minutes.
Mark Ruffalo, boy, they finally made him lose that terrifying, horrible gloomy attitude of the Avengers movie. He finally embraced his nature, and so Mark had more room to depict a promising version of Bruce Banner.
Cate Blanchett was disintegrated by the flatness of how they shaped Hela. The villain was disregarded and had no soul. It was just big talk, terrible powers, besides being a Charlie's Angel and ultimately she didn't show anything positive for the movie, except some stuff you will need to see.
Tessa Thompson was a FANTASTIC Brunnhilde. She portrayed that character to a point where the seconds passed and I loved her more and more. I can really say nothing more or add to it, just watch her.
I won't talk about how the Hulk acted because you need to see it first-hand. He's the big star here, remember, this is Hulkhor: Ragnasmask.
Jeff Goldblum as The Grandmaster is fucking weird, man... Weirdly good?
| CINEMATOGRAPHY |
Here's where it gets interesting.
There's a load of color combinations that I found soothing, very soothing and that is perfect because it brings out from the screen the variety and SATURATION of what this movie actually is. The palettes were perfect.
I found the CGI, in some of the action/fighting scenes to be lacking a little bit, especially in very fast-paced shots it looked very unrealistic. And the same can be said about everything, to the brittle of walls getting destroyed, to some of the weapons portrayed.
I don't actually know what happened there, maybe I was too focused on it and eventually could see past the CGI (which is a big mistake to make), but unless you are actively trying to do so it's really minor.
Choreographies, I was actually impressed. The past "Thor" movies were just a bunch of "tank & spank" moves. Fortunately, this wasn't entirely the case, near the end, it lacked a bit, but it's not very noticeable considering everything that's going on.
Music, there was distinct moment where it went from a more classical route to then being mixed out with a more electronic feel, it was a really hearing stimulating oxymoron, so to speak.
I will never get tired of The Immigrant Song by Led Zeppelin.
| FINAL THOUGHT |
All things considered, if we're about to take this logically...
The pros definitely beat the cons in this one.
It is, on that thought, WORTH A WATCH.
And I'll add something that might stir up some grunt:
My official "favorite MCU movie" has changed.
Movie: 8/10
Hulk: 11/10
Note that all of this is driven by my personal opinion. If I wasn't objective in some of the parts of what I've written, you're welcome to make me notice where.
Leave a comment to agree or disagree.
Show some love if you enjoyed my review, it makes me really happy.
On Twitter I review the entire world → @WiseMMO
Peace.
This movie is exactly as good as you think it will be.
Remember how you were wondering how they could pull off such an ambitious movie like the Avengers and then they did some how? Well that, but again, and it is still excellent.
(this review gets a little into details, but nothing really spoilery)
When Tony Stark, a man who thinks he is justified to do anything in the name of protection shockingly goes too far and creates Ultron, a murder bot who loves murder. Ultron, who is basically evil Tony, is very quippy. But this being a Whedon flick, everyone seems really quippy (don't worry, it's not as annoying as that sounds).
One of the best things about this movie is the destruction that you see happening in the action scenes. Something about the other Marvel movies never really made the people seem in danger when everything was exploding, but there are people everywhere in these scenes, screaming in horror as the super people punch the murder robots. Many innocent bystanders die in this one. Easy. Some of the other movies just seem too "clean", no sense of danger.
I also really liked the characters in this one. The other Marvel movies always seem like maybe one or two supporting characters from the other movies show up, but this movie has so many people in it. All your favourites!
Also, it had a really great "adventure continues" vibe. This movie starts with Avengers action and ends with Avengers action. There is no more "how they came together" or "this changes the very foundation of the universe". It was an awesome addition to what is now a serial story. More of this and less of origin stories!
So in conclusion, check out this sweet indie Whedon film, you might not have heard of it but it's pretty cool.
The setting is contemporary, judging by the automobiles, but the ambience is decidedly 1950's era spy film noir. As for genre, I'm forced to call Counterpart science fiction, in that it involves parallel universes, but it's really like nothing else within that genre.
The general scenario is this: 30 years ago, for reasons unknown, reality split into two bifurcating, independent time lines. Until that point, all was unified, meaning that every character alive at that point shared identical histories. Now, things have begun to diverge. But there is a doorway between the universes in a building in Berlin.
Again, for reasons unknown, the two sides have been both communicating with, and spying on, one another through this doorway, and this is where our protagonist Howard Silk (J.K. Simmons) comes in. "Our" Howard is a low level functionary in this spy agency who hasn't a clue as to what is really going on until, one day, his counterpart arrives with news that a woman from "their" side has been sent over to assassinate people on "our" side, including Howard's comatose wife. No one knows why, which is the prevailing state of awareness in this decidedly curious story. "Other" Howard decides that "our" Howard is critical to his investigation and, thus, the strange alliance begins.
J.K. Simmons is a phenomenal actor, despite often being cast in secondary roles, and Counterpart is truly his opportunity to shine. He plays a single character, but one with two separate backgrounds despite shared childhoods, a role requiring some subtlety and nuance. He plays both characters to perfection as the similarities and differences between the two create something of a broader character that calls into question our notions of identity.
In a way, Counterpart is an examination of the concept of self, or soul, but it is also an engaging mystery/thriller. Like its main character, the sum is both greater than, and equal to, its parts.
Before Anthony and Joe Russo were directing superhero movies, they worked on a little show called Community. The series, oddly enough, had some common ground with The Avengers. Both were about seven people from different backgrounds who came in with their own damage, bounced off one another in interesting ways, but would, now and then, come together to do amazing things.
But one of the most remarkable things about the was its mastery of tone. The series was pitched as a comedy, and true to that billing, it was a damn funny show. And yet it could just as easily shift into something quiet and personal, something unremittingly dark, or something complex and difficult without the easy answers that are seemingly required on a network sitcom.
So when watching Captain America: Civil War, I couldn’t help but see how the Russos had brought that amazing ability to balance different characters and tones and translated it onto a much bigger stage without missing a beat.
Because Civil War is hilarious. It is action-packed and all kinds of fun. It’s full of impressive moments and inventive sequences and fights big and small that are filled with feeling and imagination. And at the same time it is, in its own way, a very dark film. It touches on big ideas like moral responsibility and guilt and the dangers of unchained power, but grounds them in characters, and individual moment, and personal relationships. It is a smorgasbord of moods and stories that makes you laugh, makes you gasp, and make you feel the tragedy of a given moment, without letting it clash. And that is one hell of an achievement.
That achievement is all the more impressive given how many moving parts there were to this clockwork behemoth of a film. Civil War features no fewer than twelve heroes, three major villains, and a bevy of supporting characters, and nearly all them get a moment in the sun. Nevermind the fact that on top of all of this, the film had to introduce two new characters slated to get their own films -- one of whom was under the radar for most non-comic book fans, and another who was laden with the expectations that come from being a household name with two prior uneven franchises under his belt.
But Black Panther was far from a third wheel amid the super-powered clash at the top of the card, and his motivations and outsider status with The Avengers gave him a unique role to play in the narrative, an important arc in the film. Spider-Man, for his part, had the kind of chummy-if-overwhelmed vibe with Tony Stark that you’d hope for, and proved himself an enjoyably free spirit in the big battle. And everyone else in the film, from Ant-Man’s show-stealing humor, to Vision and Scarlet Witch’s endearing connection, to Rhodey’s loss, had an important part to play, without anyone getting lost in the shuffle.
That balance is made all the more difficult by how much oxygen Captain America and Iron Man take up at the top of the card. There is a history between the two characters. They have never seen eye-to-eye, and the films in the MCU have never shied away from that, even as they’ve brought the two of them together for their shared struggles. And again, Civil War does well by using the disagreements and difference between these two men as symbols for a larger debate, for bigger issues between them, while never detracting from the personal side of their beef.
To be frank, it took some work to convince me that Tony Stark would be in favor of the Sokovia Accords, which put The Avengers under the supervision of a U.N. Committee. And yet, the film shows Tony’s interaction with a woman whose son perished in the rubble of Sokovia. He’s seen the collateral damage of their actions and he’s feeling the guilt of it. The film does well to couch Stark’s position in terms of his weapons dealing -- he made his living in an industry where his seemingly harmless actions were leading to innocent people being hurt and killed, and he realized he had to do something. For Tony, this is no different. He’s worried about the collateral damage from their actions.
Steve Rogers, for his part, is understandably much less trusting of government supervision. He’s the one who blanched at the discovery that Shield was using Hydra technology to create weapons; he’s the one who saw Hydra take over the organization he worked for from the inside, and use good people to ill-ends, and he’s the one who’s seen his best friend brainwashed and used as a weapon for geopolitical conflict when the higher ups felt it necessary.
At the same time, he’s also concerned about there being a need that he can’t respond to because of red tape. He’s worried that innocent people will suffer, that people who need saving won’t be saved, because the people who try to do right will be too hamstrung by procedure and approval while the good people suffer. He’s worried about the collateral damage from their inaction.
But these are not simply grand philosophical difference between the two of them. Civil War ties it into their unique psychological baggage, which comes to a head in a confrontation between the two of them in the second act of the film. Tony has lost the people in his life that matter to him -- Pepper and his parents, and their absence casts a major shadow over his part of the film. This fight, this struggle, has kept him from the parts of his life that made it all worth it for him, that gave him his Batman-like need to protect them, to create a world where no one would have to suffer that kind of loss.
But Steve, despite his status as a man out of town, found his family. The Avengers, new and old, gave him a place where he felt like he belonged, people who had fought alongside him like the Howling Commandos once had, and became his brothers and sisters in arms. Steve is this close to signing the accords until he finds out that because of them, Tony has Wanda Maximoff under what amounts to house arrest. That’s a bridge too far for Captain America. He isn’t worried about getting people back; he’s worried about outside forces taking them away.
So there is a schism, caused by Secretary (nee General) Ross from above, and Zemo from below. The former is the liaison of the Sokovia accords, who attempts to maneuver his way into corralling more superheroes after his run-ins Hulk, and the latter is a man who lost his family thanks to The Avengers, and is determined to use any means necessary to tear them apart, to have their empire crumble from within. And in the middle of that schism is Black Widow, who’s pragmatic enough to know that Tony’s right in the logistics of it all--that they’ll get a better deal agreeing to conditions than having them forced on the group, but sympathetic enough to understand why Steve can’t get on board, what his connection to her and this group means, and the threat posed by anything with the ability to forcibly sever it.
And then there’s Bucky. While Black Widow is a tie that brings Captain America and Iron Man together, The Winter Soldier is a wedge that drives them apart. When Steve sees Bucky, he sees his childhood friend, the one who knows his mother’s name and, with the death of Peggy Carter, is his last real tie to the life he used to live and the man he used to be. He sees family, and connection.
But when Stark sees him, he sees, by dint of Zemo’s machinations, the man who killed his parents, who took away his last chance to tell his father that he loved him, who, brainwashing or no brainwashing, snuffed out a light that Tony needed desperately in times like these. He sees the end of family, and the severing of a connection he will never be able to get back.
That’s what makes Civil War so powerful. In a genre of escalating bombast, it brings the conflict back to the small and personal. The film’s opening action scene gives a moment in the spotlight to each of the new Avengers; the subsequent chases and rumbles featuring The Winter Soldier are a visual treat, and it all culminates in an internecine conflict among the heroes that stands as one of the most creative, entertaining, and thrilling action set pieces since the Battle of New York in the first Avengers film.
But instead of that continued escalation, the film narrows its focus after that. The climax of the film comes from a personal reveal -- not only that Bucky was the Starks’ assassin, but that Steve knew and had the gist of it, if not the specifics, but never said a word. A film with so many characters and themes and stories comes down to a conflict between three people. That is the heart of the film -- a dispute, a wedge, that is as personal as it is philosophical, that is as meaningful because of the characters as we’ve watched them grow and develop as because of the fact that it’s two icons locked in combat with one another.
And that too, was one of Community’s strengths. For as outrageous and absurd and cartoony as the show could get, at its best, it drew all that weirdness and humor and conflict back down to the simple, emotional, and human. Tony Stark is still quick with a witty, sarcastic remark. Steve Rogers can still take a beating and deliver one in return. And their conflict is the culmination of more than that, of difference of opinion, of lifestyle, of their place in life and their place in relation to one another, with their team and their family.
As grandiose and ambitious and multi-faceted a film and narrative as Civil War presents, at its core, it’s a story about two people who care about each other breaking away, about the elements of their relationships and their histories and psyches that drives them to do it, and the extraordinarily human reasons that both pull them back together and tear them apart. These are the kinds of themes the Russos brought with them from their old gig, and they make Civil War more than just the flash and excitement of the good guys coming to blows; it’s a film that crystallizes from the connections between its characters, between the emotions and experiences that drive them, between the humanity, humor, and heart that drives the Marvel Cinematic Universe and produced what may be its greatest film to date.
More so than either of the other Hobbit films, the titular character is virtually a supporting player in the film and, whilst in the previous two films, the expansion of the book did not overwhelm the central story it was based on, it is here that Jackson's desire to frame this trilogy as a prequel to the Lord of the Rings is far more prominent. Perhaps the lack of material left to cover from the book is the reason for this ( the rousing opening sequence held back for this film would clearly have played equally well as a finale to the previous entry ). As an adaptation of the tone and focus of the book, this is as far removed as you could get and it is evident that two films would have been more than sufficient. There is equally a sense of déjà vu in some scenes in the build-up to the battle that is reminiscent of Return of the King.
Yet the book is its own thing and as a film and finale to the previous entries, this is a fitting conclusion and a largely successful segue into his Rings films. Importantly, the elements that are from the book itself are the strongest part of the film - Freeman again is excellent as Bilbo and his scenes with Armitage as Thorin are certainly the best and most emotional moments. This is as much Thorin's film as anyone else and the resolution to his arc is well handled. Despite initial similarities to the finale of his Rings trilogy, this becomes less of an issue as the film progresses and Jackson manages to create a near hour long action sequence that never becomes confusing or repetitive. If there is a one criticism that stands out, it is that some characters are lost amidst the sheer number fighting for screen time, but this has been evident throughout the Hobbit films, especially with the Dwarves, and Jackson wisely chooses to keep the focus on those characters that made a impression in the previous instalments. Elements that tie the films more closely to the Rings trilogy are cleverly done, even though they do feel a little episodic in nature, with cameos from characters that play a much more prominent role there. Jackson's decision to include Legolas and create a new character in Tauriel may annoy book fans, but it has a strong emotional pay off here and serves as an interesting personal backdrop to the character of Legolas. If nothing else, it is fun to see Jackson create another action beat for the character. The film is beautifully shot throughout and Jackson's penchant for sweeping camera moves capture the stunningly realised environment.
Equally, it is difficult to review this film without looking at it now in the greater context of the six film saga that it has become, and this is some achievement for Jackson to have accomplished. Fellowship of the Ring remains the strongest film ( and fittingly it is probably the one that sticks the closest to the original story ). But, Jackson has created a series of films that will be the benchmark for future fantasy films and this final entry can hold its own with the rest.
I was fortunate to get at that advanced screening earlier this month (thanks gofobo and Regal Cinemas!) and once again witnessed Charlize dominate yet again! No spoilers here. As you can tell by the previews, the soundtrack and action is what defined the movie, but Charlize Theron IS the movie. Her character, Lorraine, is clearly of the the Dirty Harry mold in which her actions speak louder than her words - and that flat out works for this movie. Nothing real groundbreaking or anything, but the "one take action scene" previously seen done well in Netflix's Daredevil, John Wick, The Raid, Oldboy (just to name a few) is very precise in a technical sense, borderline outrageous and comical, yet extremely and brutally visceral. The camera work and sound design is OUTSTANDING in this scene, you'll know which one when you see it.
At the end of the day, this movie feels like very much like a passion project of Theron's - from her style, her walk, her moves and even the way she smokes cigarettes, and it is a sight to behold. There are enough well known actors throughout the movie to keep it interesting, but it's really to see how Lorraine interacts with them. This is quiet storm Charlize and this is her movie through and through. Blondes do have fun indeed!
Before I started watching this movie, I had high expectations. Reviews and friends told me to expect a real science fiction movie. I've been longing for a real sci-fi flick since "Close Encounters of the Third Kind", "Contact" and "Sunshine". I know people nowadays are calling fiction and fantasy movies sci-fi, but I rather tend to draw a dinstinctive line and emphasize on the word "science".
That being said, the plot is simple, but at the same time realistic. The movie tells the story of humans trying to survive in an utterly inhabitable place - space. It's a movie that will remind kids (and adults alike), spoiled by the strange education they receive through contemporary media, that not everything can be achieved by wishful thinking. Humans are not made for living in space. Every step off earth is a step defying nature. Is that bad or good? That's a decision everyone has to make for himself.
The visuals are stunning. I watched it in 2D and I plan on watching it again in 3D. The spectator has the feeling to actually be there.
At least as important though is the sound. Many filmmakers make the mistake of having sound in space. Of course that's totally ridiculous. The only sound there is, is the sound that's created inside of your space-suit or space-station by the shockwaves that hit it. Throughout the movie I had the feeling they got it right. And actually it didn't make the movie "empty", but quite the opposite, more tense. It intensified the feeling of "this is not a place where I belong".
There was one scene though, I thought wasn't right. When Bullock holds on to Clooney, Clooney should already have the same trajectory as Bullock or the station or he should bounce back. I just don't get what's still pulling him. I think it is a mistake in the movie and a serious one at that.
Anyway, I can overlook that, since the rest of the movie is very good. On IMDB it has a rating of 8.2 right now. I'd give it more like a 7.8. Maybe even less. I guess the rating is a bit high, because for young viewers it is a new experience to see something realistic on the screen.
Should you watch it? Yes, definitely. Should you rewatch it? Maybe, for the CGI and if you haven't seen it in 3D. Certainly not for the story.
[9.2/10] Throw away the past. The rap on The Force Awakens was that it was too derivative, too indebted to A New Hope and the blueprint that had started the franchise. There was a sense that the new trilogy needed to break new ground, that having established the new setting, the new characters, and the new conflicts and mysteries, it was time to break from what had come before.
You could be forgiven for thinking that the film’s main characters share that sentiment. Kylo Ren states it explicitly. He pushes Rey to do the same while she labors under the weight of her unknown parentage. And Luke Skywalker himself, the Jedi Master who won the day in those lodestone films that forever emblazoned Star Wars into the annals of culture, has written off his past deeds, and with them, the Jedi as a whole, as a legacy of failure that needs to simply end.
But it cannot, and should not. Where The Force Awakens featured new heroes reliving the past, The Last Jedi features them remaking it. It is a film devoted to embracing the power of that legacy, good and bad, without being beholden to it. Episode 8 a film that is of a piece with its forebears, but also so full of its own life, character, feeling, and awe.
The fear among the fandom is that, as the second installment in the new trilogy, The Last Jedi would be a mirror image of The Empire Strikes Back. (Though, as with the complaints of borrowing from A New Hope, there are worse sources to crib from!). There’s some of that here. As with Episode V, The Last Jedi splits up its heroes, leaving one of them in training with an old Jedi master on a distant planet, and the other on the run from the bad guys, until everyone is united in the end. There’s offers to rule the galaxy and reveals of who the protagonist’s true parents are and a less-than-savory character who seem like friends and then sell our heroes out.
But Episode VIII echoes the whole of the Original Trilogy in moving, thought provoking ways, not just the middle chapter of it. The film meditates (nigh-literally) on the most iconic image of the original Star Wars film -- Luke gazing off at the horizon in search of adventure. It features our light side hero being lured into the throne room of the Big Bad in the hopes of turning the black hat with the twinge of a conscience still remaining, just as Return of the Jedi did with Luke, Palpatine, and Vader. From blue milk to adorable forest-dwelling creatures to wizened masters passing into their next lives and leaving their robes behind, The Last Jedi is not so much reinterpreting The Empire Strikes Back as it is ruminating on all of Star Wars at once.
And yet what’s so striking about the film is that it’s so much more than a recapitulation of those films. It is, a celebration of them, a reflection on them, and an exploration of them, that advances and subverts those ideas and themes as much as it reintroduces them.
It takes the trigger-happy flyboy, the Han Solo-esque roguish type who, true to that lineage, shoots first and asks questions later, and tempers him with the reveal that the calm, measured leadership was a product of careful and clever planning rather than cowardice. It takes the Big Bad, the mysterious power behind the black-clad dragon who can shoot lightning and bark evil monologues, and kills him off suddenly halfway through the film rather than making him the final obstacle to be overcome.
And it takes the biggest mystery of this new trilogy, the question of who Rey’s parents are, that so many diehards and casual fans alike have been buzzing over, and delivers the most inspired subversion. Rather than Luke’s lost daughter or the Emperor’s scion or Kylo Ren’s forgotten twin, she is the product of nobodies, who sold her for drinking money. It’s a truth that deep down she always knew, but couldn’t accept, because like the audience, she assumed that for someone to have fate on their side, to be able to live a life with meaning, they must come from somewhere, from someone.
But that idea is, despite the Skywalker-mad connections of everything that followed, antithetical to the animating beginnings of Star Wars. Before it was decided that Luke was the son of Darth Vader, he was simply the son of some other guy named Anakin Skywalker. He was a nondescript moisture farmer on a backwater planet who was the last guy you’d expect to take down The Empire’s greatest weapon.
That’s what made his journey so powerful. He wasn’t The Chosen One in A New Hope. He was just a kid with unrealized potential who, with the right guidance and the right chance, could save the day. The Last Jedi returns its chosen one to those roots, to providence shining down on the common, that the savior of the galaxy can come from nothing.
It’s a reversion that’s anchored by the character dead set on rejecting his own longstanding anointment. Mark Hamill is a revelation here. Gone is the naive farm boy who whined about picking up power converters, and gone is the seasoned master who saved the world and redeemed his enemy, and in their place is haunted cynic, convinced he’s caused as many problems as he’s ever solved. There’s a caustic quality to the character here, one that makes him gruff and dismissive of Rey, fatalistic about the Jedi, and unquestionably angry at himself.
Where there was an cornbread innocence to the Luke we met on tatooine, The Last Jedi introduces his echo, a man who looks upon his accomplishments that have ascended into legend as false fables of failure, and the current blight sweeping the galaxy as a fault of his own that he cannot elide or escape. He’s done seeing the battle between the dark and the light, and instead sees the continuum between the two, the yin-yang like symbols that dot his surroundings and the film as a whole, the balance that leads light to breed darkness and darkness to breed light.
That sense of balance is at the heart of The Last Jedi. It comes between Rey and Kylo Ren, who feel a force-forged connection between the two of them that lets each see the other beyond the monolithic figures who stand in opposition to one another. It comes in Leia, who tries to find the midpoint between striking the blows necessary to stay in the fight and not losing too many of her compatriots in the process. And it comes in DJ, the Lando-like figure who rejects the good guy/bad guy dichotomy and sees the struggle between The Resistance and The First Order as the changing of the tides he’s unwilling to be swept up in.
It’s there that The Last Jedi feels the most reflective, even political, in ways deeper than the four-color civics parable told by The Prequels. It asks who benefits from these conflicts, who profits from them, and whether who’s on the right side and who’s on the wrong side can be so clear cut when Republics beget Empires, conquerors beget resistance, and slaughterers beget saviors who train yet more slaughterers. In all of the mythic good vs. evil that’s so much in the bones of Star Wars, Episode VIII steps back and dares to consider that conflict, that never ending cycle, as part of some larger, indifferent system rather than an epic journey toward salvation.
It also restores a sense of utter awe to the franchise. Johnson and cinematographer Steve Yedlin create thrilling, jaw-dropping sequences that rarely lose a sense of continuity, instead allowing even the more firework-heavy sequence to progress organically and tell a story rather than simply providing raw but empty splendor. When Leia glides through space to return to her ship, or Rey and Kylo Ren fight hand-to-hand with the Red Guards (who actually get to do something for once!), when our heroes and villains meet in crimson-dusted splendor in the final frame, Johnson and Yeldin show a virtuosity with big spectacle filmmaking to match the thematic and emotional resonance of the rest of their film.
But that spectacle never detracts from the feeling imbued into the film. Episode VIII is not merely a political tract. It’s not a heap of pretty but hollow action. It’s not even just a deconstruction and reconstruction of the films from whence it sprung. It’s a story populated by characters who love and hurt and feel.
There is power in the moment when Rey and Kylo Ren’s hands touch across light years not just as the meeting of lightness and the dark, but as a human connection between two struggling individuals on either side of the same crisis of self. There is meaning when Rose jams Finn out of the path of his suicide mission, not just for the thrill of the moment, but for Finn’s nobility in trying to live the most potent opposite of running away, and Rose’s attachment in saving him, rather than stopping him. And when Luke kisses Leia on the top of her head, it’s not just imbued with the impact of an on-screen goodbye having to stand-in for an offscreen one; it’s imbued with the poignancy of a film that builds the place in one another’s lives each occupies long before they’re face-to-face for the final time.
Because in a way, they both have to move on. Luke has to let go of his failures, cast off his guilt, to do as a delightfully, once again impish Yoda suggests and let his pupils outgrow him. Rey has to let go of her belief that her family is waiting for her, and find the new family who’s sustained her to this point. And even as he seeks the means to rule the galaxy, Ben Solo cannot let go of the masters who’ve failed him, of the feelings that rage inside him, and of the parents who cannot help needing, no matter how much he may want to.
But moving on doesn’t have to mean throwing things away. It can mean giving something back. It can mean sacrificing yourself, ending something, so that something else can be born anew in its place. It can mean preserving the tiniest spark of rebellion, the brave men and women and quirky droids who can start a conflagration to spread across the galaxy. It can mean doing great deeds, that will be bent and twisted and have consequences you never imagined five steps down the line, but also inspire the next nobody on a nothing planet to gaze up at the sky and wonder what adventure may lie there.
The Last Jedi moves on from its predecessors without discarding them, and moves forward enough to leave plenty of room for its successors, both literal and figurative. It moves on from the George Lucas originals, and even from its immediate, J.J. Abrams-helmed predecessor. But it embraces the spirit of these things, an aims to recreate that feelings, that core, that sense of wonder, for a new generation.
In that, Star Wars itself is like The Force as Luke describes it. It does not belong to Lucas or Abrams or Johnson or even our continually growing overlords at the Disney Corporation. It belongs to all of them and none of them, and to us. Like The Force, like the Rebellion, Star Wars is as much an idea as it is a franchise, and just as Lucas himself reimagined those ideas from Kurosawa films and Flash Gordon serials, Johnson posits himself as doing the same, and instilling the hope that one day, kids will look to these bits of awe and wonder and be moved to look out past the horizon and tell their own stories just as he was.
So don’t throw away the past. Remember it. Embrace it. It informs what we do and who we are and who we will one day be. But don’t be bound by it. Be inspired by it. As cheesy as that sounds, The Last Jedi makes good on all the inspiration thirty years of Star Wars has provided. And just as Luke, Leia, Rey, Ben, and the rest of the conflicted figures who populate the film do, Johnson reaches out in the hopes of not just vindicating that legacy, but extending it to whatever, and whoever comes next, no matter who they are or where they come from.
Ah, gotta love those Donkey Balls.
While I am not precisely liking the dubious new addition to the ship's complement, because he feels treacherous, he sure does come up with some good ideas.
This episode had some beautiful moments.
While I am still not enjoying Chrisjen's wooden delivery of dialogue, I very much liked that we got to meet at least one of Holden's parents. It would have been a bit more interesting if we had seen the whole unit of them, but who knows why production felt just his body-mother was required. Frances Fisher does a great job, making a meal of a small role, and we get a great look at Holden's backstory. This late in the season though, I suspect we won't get anyone else's backstory until Season 2. I don't know about you, but I am chomping at the bit to find out Naomi's story.
Miller's sad and wistful goodbye to Octavia, as he heads off into the black chasing Julie Mao; the tense but funny process of getting into the lockbox to find the black ops codes to evade the blockade, these both give us more character depth. Miller is turning into a different kind of man, and the Rocinante crew's democratic, yet effective teamwork makes them a lot of fun to watch as they're grinding through trying to get to the bottom of Lionel Polanski, the Scopuli and the Anubis.
I'm also enjoying the little things in the show: The Belter's patois, although largely incomprehensible, is a nice touch that adds a lot of dimension to the Belter's as an insular, underdog group. That they evolved their own language, says much for the alienation they must have to the rest of the solar system. Jared Harris as Dawes, has the most beautiful sing song thing going on, and it makes his character a much more seductive and enchanting force in the story's play...
Regardless of the next few episodes, which i suspect will be relentless, Sy Fy has done a marvellous job of fueling this production. Despite a few obvious TV gaffs here and there, for the most part the show is really well put together, and the concepts, sets, action sequences and character development almost make you pause, because Sy Fy has gutted us more than once since Battlestar Galactica went off air. I say again, this is the best show I've seen on TV since BSG ended... and that Sy Fy is coming through for us, is something to celebrate.
This show is pure science fiction and it's commitment to creating a believable story, is tremendous.
This series makes me want to read the books. According to Wikipedia, "The Expanse is a series of science fiction novels, novellas, and stories by James S. A. Corey, the pen name of authors Daniel Abraham and Ty Franck. The first novel, Leviathan Wakes, was nominated for the Hugo Award for Best Novel in 2012." You can tell. The story is nuanced, multilayer and intricate. There are Earthers, Martians and Belters (complete with their own patois), politics, a Cold War heating up, an ideology willing to kill people to protect "life". It's a treasure trove of story, characters and good watching. But, it's not for the faint hearted. Because of the depth of the multiple levels, it takes attention and patience to reveal the interwoven pattern(s). I suggest binge watching the first season, so you don't lose the strands of the story, but, now, at the beginning of the second season (on the ScyFi or Space channel), the basic premise has become a solid foundation, that will support the wait for weekly episodes. I gave the first season an 8 (great) out of 10, but with the second season, it has reached a 9 (superb) climbing on its way to a 10 (un-miss-able). Come for the characters, stay for the intensity of the drama.
Well first off I need to say I have been in a total 'bromance' with Jake Gyllenhaal for few years now and biased as I might be, I think this is another movie he nailed just great. I love the subtle way he works to define his characters, how Lou looks gangly and with those big wide opened voracious eyes that are somehow a mirror of what is about to become...Jake has an amazing restraint in acting, especially in this age where tv shows formats brought an often over-dramatized style into storytelling and acting, so his way to sculpt his characters a little at a time manage to build a certain tension underneath that keep you focused on them even in ordinary set-ups and situations..and this approach to acting makes even more intense when those subtle underneath tension gets released like in the mirror scene.
Beside his performance I think Nightcrawler is a very good movie with some really great moments, and a central theme about what we as audience, have been accustomed to consider information and how morbid we grew about the appearance of what happens instead of the reasons or the facts itself.
Directing and photography are stellar, for what seems a well paced and balanced screenplay manage to mix introspection, storytelling and pure action even though there are few unfocused moments. The car chasing scene, considered how has been endlessly abused by movies, is just amazing with a fantastic edit and originality in choosing the point of view af a third spectator instead of the runaway or the chaser, which are the common storytelling perspectives we see in such scenes.
I was slightly disappointed in few aspects about how the plot develops in the last part. I would have liked a more open and thought provoking ending, the final interrogation and the closing scene looked a bit too predictable and not aligned with the overall tone of the story. A bit too 'didactic' in the purpose, probably to accomodate the so called general audience which always needs a proper wrap-up to get what the story is about. If it was up to me I would have ended the movie with the broadcasting of the last reportage for instance.
I gave it a 7, it may have rightfully deserved a 8, but you know the final always influence too much of a movie overall perception. It's somehow unfair even to me, but I can't help it.
I've never made a comment here, but this movie deserves one.
Please read the following comment as my personal opinion, I'm sure not every one will agree with my point of view and thats okay.
And also non native speaker here, so I apologise in advance.
1. This movie is amazing. It was everything I expected it to be and much more. I was afraid because I got hyped a lot before seeing the movie, but I must say it was even better than what I was expecting to see.
2. The music and the sound is amazing. All the choices for the tracks/songs are on point. The moments where they want to build the suspense work perfectly. Also what they do with the Frank Sinatra song is superb. At the end of the movie it will have a whole different meaning for you.
3. The acting of JP is astounding. He portrays the role of Arthur Fleck perfectly. Not that we have a real world example of this role, but for me it comes awfully close to what I imagine a Joker from A Killing Joke (Graphic Novel) to be. Further comparing JP to different Joker portrayals might be fun, but they don't work in the same context, so I won't tell you JP is a better Joker than HL.
4. Don't watch the movie if you're only a Batman fan. For people who are only amazed by how cool the Batman character is, this won't do it for them. This movie needs to be seen as a single uncoupled work of art. Forget Bruce for a second and try to understand how the Joker is the perfect incorporation of what Gotham is.
5. Watch the movie if you like to be challenged. You won't walk out without feeling a tiny bit of empathy for the person Arthut Fleck becomes, and yes he does become a sociopath.
6. This movie reflects society. This movie is in many ways a mirror in whats happening on some parts of our world. This movie shows what happens when people treat other people like garbage. And the elegance of the movie, is that it keeps the discussion so far away from politics.
7. It raises some serious questions. In the beginning Arthur Fleck is just a clown, that has a rough time and we feel for him. At the end he is the Joker that kills people freely and thinks it's funny and even though we don't identify ourselves with this character, we still understand where his thoughts come from. This dissonance between in us that we feel sorry for him in the beginning, that we understand why he becomes the Joker and still wouldn't tolerate anyone that takes such actions in real life is fascinating, to say the least.
8. Will definitely watch it again in the cinema.
For all people that want to see something similar, watch Blue Ruins.
Initially, M. Night Shyamalan was a force to be reckoned with. This may all be ancient history, of course. Most folks no longer care enough about the man to fact check his history, but he really was perceived to be the next big thing. In fact, out of all of the films in his roster, the only movie that people loved so much they demanded a sequel to was Unbreakable, and now they finally have a real sequel. Sure, Split was a part of that as well, but in my books, it’s not a true sequel unless you continue the story following the original characters – and that’s what Glass finally does – but has M. Night let too much time pass?
As amazing as it is to see all of these characters finally occupy the same space together, I think Shyamalan lost his spark as far as his ability to tell a story goes. When a new M. Night Shyamalan film came out, people knew his films would be similar in tone, concept, cinematography, and visuals. Think about how many of his films feel dreamy, like a dark foreboding mystery that makes you cry out what is happening!? The way he solidified that idea was with great characters, symbolic imagery and elements (like water) and visuals (like light and color), soft-spoken dialogue, and a unique use of camerawork. It all came together to feel unlike anything else out there. Typically, his early work also ended with a massive twist-ending that changed the very way you watched the film, making an additional viewing that much more special in the long run.
The more films he made, the more of the aforementioned list he did away with. Whether or not he lost the things that made him special was on purpose or not is unknown, but the fact remains true: it’s not a well-oiled machine anymore. What remains in Glass are really great characters, and only one shot of great lighting and colors, but that’s where it stops feeling like M. Night Shyamalan. It’s not foreboding, it’s not soft-spoken, the camerawork isn’t really impressive, there’s not much focus on symbolic imagery, elements, or visuals. Actually, it’s kind of messy because I’m not sure Shyamalan knew how to write a movie with all of these characters and instead threw something together that wasn’t very solid. But we have lots to discuss. Let’s do it.
PEOPLE – 85% (17/20)
Acting – 3/4 | Characters – 4/4 | Casting – 4/4 | Importance – 3/4 | Chemistry – 3/4
Starting off with the People Category, you’ll notice that M. Night mostly did a great job here. There’s nothing wrong with the casting, characters, or honestly, acting. Pretty much every great thing in this category was borrowed from Split and Unbreakable but I digress. McAvoy is the pure definition of “range of acting” – so his performance impresses the most, and that is probably why it focuses a lot on his character, I just wish it focused more on the characters we haven’t seen in 19 years. I’d say there was definitely some great chemistry, just not everywhere it was needed, and because it is a bit of a sloppy story, I can’t say the characters hold much independent importance, but everyone does play a vital role into the general direction of the plot.
WRITING – 40% (4/10)
Dialogue – 1/2 | Balance – 0/2 | Story Depth – 0/2 | Originality – 1/2 | Interesting – 2/2
We jump straight from one great category to one bad…but what exactly is so bad about the writing in Glass? In general, everything. The first thing I realized while watching the film is there is no main character. There is no real protagonist or antagonist. You can discern the protagonist is Bruce Willis and the two antagonists are Samuel L. Jackson and James McAvoy from common knowledge, but the way the characters are focused on in the movie doesn’t quite feel that way – not from a movie vantage point…and honestly, I don’t think that was the intention. I don’t think M. Night knew how to write all the characters and their roles from a normal cinematic approach. Another problem was it was messy. You absolutely HAVE to watch the other movies to have any real idea on who these people are – it’s like the next scene in a movie, not an entirely different film – which means, as I’ll get into later, the introduction is weak. It has a hard time juggling between the characters and their relevance to the story. Because of that, you have no real story depth because it’s too busy trying to find footing elsewhere. Heck, even the dialogue was weak. Technically, it’s average, but you expect big memorable speeches from Samuel Jackson, and it never quite reaches that level. All-in-all, I’d say the writing was very weak.
BTS – 80% (8/10)
Visuals – 2/2 | Cinematography – 1/2 | Editing – 2/2 | Advertising – 2/2 | Music & Sound – 1/2
The approach taken behind-the-scenes was mostly done pretty well. I wouldn’t necessarily say as well as it used to be back in the early 2000’s, but still pretty good, generally speaking. The visuals are mostly normal, but there is one really cool shot where they use lighting and color in an impressive way, and I can’t ignore it, so that gets full points. Editing is also really good when they transition between modern shots filmed for this film mixed seamlessly with shots taken for the original film – so editing gets full points, but that’s it. As much as I loved the music in Unbreakable, I don’t think I can say the same for this film. It’s just fine for what it is, and the camerawork is as typical as it gets, which is very unlike M. Night Shyamalan.
NARRATIVE ARC – 80% (8/10)
Introduction – 1/2 | Inciting Incident – 2/2 | Obstacles – 1/2 | Climax – 2/2 | Resolution – 2/2
For the most part, the narrative structure in this film is fine. It has an issue fully introducing you to the characters, as it heavily relies on previous films to do that, but once they get that over with, everything is mostly fine. There’s not much of a central plot underneath it all, which doesn’t really help much, but there is an event early on that changes things, that is the inciting incident. There is a big culminating event towards the end that is easily seen as the climax, and it does calm down and return to a new sense of norm for a resolution.
ENTERTAINMENT – 60% (6/10)
Rewatchability – 1/2 | Fun Experience – 2/2 | Impulse to Buy or Own – 1/2 | Impulse to Talk about or Recommend – 1/2 | Riveting – 1/2
As mentioned beforehand, this was an anticipated film with a group of characters you’ve been dying to see for nearly two decades, of course it’s entertaining. It’s entertaining without really trying to be for the most part. I would definitely rewatch this movie, but I’d probably only do that as a series rewatch, if a friend popped it in, or if I caught it live on TV. Half points. I did have a good time watching the film in general, so that gets full points. I do have an impulse to own it, so I’d add it as a wish list item, but I probably wouldn’t buy it myself. I also think there’s plenty to discuss about the film, but I don’t really feel like recommending it. Finally, I think there is enough in the movie that’s important enough to make you feel like you can’t pause it, but that’s not always the case, so that gets half points.
SPECIALTY – 75% (30/40)
Unbreakable Franchise – 5/10 | Sequel – 10/10 | M. Night Shyamalan – 5/10 | Halfway Decent – 10/10
Finally, what do you expect to see from this film? Especially if you’re a fan of Unbreakable or M. Night Shyamalan? What is it that you actually want to see happen? That answer is different for everyone, but I think there are a few things that anybody would ask. Does it feel like it fits in well with Unbreakable? Yes and no. I think the characters fit in wonderfully, but it strangely feels more like a sequel to Split than Unbreakable, at least in tone and overall feel – so this gets half points. As a sequel, did people want to see it and did it add anything new? Yes and yes. Like I said before, in all of Shyamalan’s filmography, people wanted this film to be made – and does it add anything new? Absolutely – the inclusion of James McAvoy makes more sense than I originally thought – as Samuel L. Jackson is no physical match for Bruce Willis. Full points. As an M. Night Shyamalan film, I think it’s fine, but it doesn’t really feel like him, half points. Halfway Decent – did they make the movie they intended to make from the get go? I had to think on that for a while, but I think for the most part, it did, so that gets full points.
TOTAL SCORE – 73%
Unlike most Marvel movies, the interactions between characters were actually memorable. When Strange scoffs at the ancient one's chakra "nonsense" she kicks him out of his body. It's an awesome "welcome to the Matrix"-style intro to a mystical world. This movie is The Matrix plus Inception + the Marvel universe in the best possible way. This introduction to the multiverse sets the tone of the movie, and it carries through to the very end.
The special effects were phenomenal. The CGI sequences were more interesting in a visual sense and more artistic than most recent Marvel CGI scenes. It's nice to see something besides exploding buildings/spaceships/robots. The introduction to the multiverse was the most striking sequence. The universe made out of hands and his transition through a portal formed from his own retina were merely highlights of this delightful montage. Fight scenes were well choreographed, especially when focused around the folding world.
The hero characters were all interesting. The ancient one is dealing with the devil to try to help the human race. The baron feels conflicted about the means used to protect the planet. The likeable Dr. Strange goes through a pretty major transition from narcissist to hero. On the opposing side, the enemies were generic. Mads & co were from the common "we want power from the evil thing that destroys everything it touches, but it won't hurt us!" variety.
My favorite character was the cape! It had so much personality, and its scenes were a nice mixture of comedy and practicality.
I hope the Thor+Strange crossover feels more like this than any of the Thor movies.
Overall, this was quite entertaining and solid addition to the Marvel universe.
After reading reviews and shouts here, I thought that I would be way disappointed. It didn't turn out like that.
As everyone stated, the plot is very predictable, so that is the biggest con of the movie. And I should state that one should not rely on a detailed background story. However, despite some people stating that the story was not cleared in the end, I found it sufficient.
In many Sci-Fi movies, you get to know from where the treat comes from, how they are evolved -as in aliens-. The movie found it sufficient to just let people know about the mission of some far civilization, who came to Earth. And in the end, rather than a movie which tells "there was a distant advanced civilization who came to attack us", a movie which tells "you all know that if it is an alien movie, there is a distant advanced civilization, but we just told why they came!" is better.
So in the end, to me it definitely gives its point to the audience. In my opinion, it overall rates 8, but I wanted to spare it one more for a point which the movie surprised me -I said, the plot was predictable- apart from the whole of it.
Watch it, don't expect a milestone and enjoy.
This is an amazing movie. Everyone should watch it. Why? Because it tells us we're so damn wrong.
Animal based diets will eventually disappear as people will realise they're not sustainable anymore.
It is extremely important the scientific material in the footage as it was made in a science-only point of view. There's no random guy telling you to go vegan because of the animals (which as a vegan myself, I find it enough argument though) they're giving you proofs of every single word they say.
If you're vegan (or in process) you should watch this movie, it will give even more reasons to go vegan and feel great about it.
But, if you're not a vegan, you should definitely watch this documentary as it will show you lots of things you don't know which may change your live.
I understand changing something as basic as what you eat is very difficult, and acknowledging our mistakes is even harder but you should try to be open-minded when your about to watch this documentary because, if you're not, it will be useless.
I really hope you enajoy this documentary as it should be, as a piece of valuable information for every single human out there.
Let me start this off by saying that this sequel did not feel outside of what we remember.
Blade Runner 2049 maintains the mood and feel of its predecessor. The visuals, the sound... the dystopian future, it's all there.
| FIRST THOUGHT |
I love writing reviews, it comes somewhat naturally to me after watching something that I learn to feel passionate about.
This movie taught me to be passionate.
But... it's really hard for me to express judgment. And I'm going to explain why:
Actually, it's very simple. This was a 3 hours movie. Of these 3 hours, 2 were simply... air. Now, don't get me wrong, that isn't always negative, like in this case. It was refreshing air, but still... it doesn't (at first glance) hold anything on the plot.
Because of this, the viewer (me at least), is left with a lot of questions, the picture doesn't explain itself. Also; as a side note - you most definitely need to watch the first one. The great majority of the runtime is inexplicably useless.
The longer it goes, the longer it begins to add new stuff, and then some, then it seems somehow related to what's actually going on, but right after it deviates the actual story on an ideal from the characters involved, that at a certain point, evaporates. I'm really conflicted about this because it looks to me like the screenwriters and director wanted to leave all of this to theory and the fans.
Why is this confusing? Because it's a very strange mixture of linear narrative and non-linear narrative. One is focussed on one objective, the other starts a bunch of other objectives and then it simply dies. No explanation was given, no closure was given.
And this is aggravated by the fact that it's a 3 hours movie, of which 1 hour of the actual story is spread and mixed amongst 2 hours of absolutely nothing. VISUALLY IMPRESSIVE NOTHING. A VERY INTERESTING BUNCH OF LITERAL VOID.
This is actually the only thing I did not like about the movie. Which, again, if you are like me and enjoy movies that aren't patently explaining themselves, it's not a bad thing. I just feel like it could've been much more interesting if they explained somehow what happened to all the side characters, or just cut them out.
|STORY & ACTORS |
Aside from what I've mentioned before, the more "linear" part of the story is actually not that bad. It's nothing impressive. A part of what I said earlier connects to the fact that this movie constantly keeps juggling between what is real and what is not. Be it by robots, or actual reality that the characters are living. So it came out pretty obvious that the movie would have a twist at some point, somewhere. I will admit that I did not get it until the very end, so, don't be discouraged.
Ryan Gosling was great, also because he as an actor was perfect for his role. Being so that he has this way of being and looking conflicted, and so it portrayed really well on the protagonist.
Harrison Ford had less value to this movie than he did in the last Star Wars.
Jared Leto's character is a mystery to me, but he did a phenomenal job talking random shit.
All of the other actors, Jared Leto included, were there to push the story forward (or to add random bullshit) and that's it. They did a fantastic job, but unfortunately, as mentioned above, at first glance it looks like they don't mean shit.
| CINEMATOGRAPHY |
The movie is visually pleasing, it's bliss for people with OCD. It's perfectly round and at the same time perfectly square. It keeps smooth lines combining great color combinations in the palette, and utilizing great solid colors at the same time.
As I said before it holds perfectly a spot near its predecessor, the mood and feel are almost identical. (Having watched the first one only an hour before going to the theater to watch this one)
I have to say, this one looks A LOT, like A FUCKING GIGAZILLION LOT more gruesome and splatter than the first one. The fighting scenes are brutal, they do not go into dramatic effects, they just are what they should be. A punch in the face, exploding heads and blood.
There is no doubt that this movie looks fucking amazing.
It sounds amazing as well. It has a collection of deep, pure sounds. There is not a lot of music, but when there is it's powerful and present and it makes you wake up and amaze. Same goes for the special audio effects: I have watched it in ATMOS and I have to admit, they did not utilize it at all, except for one scene later in the movie, but the way it goes from absolute silence to seat trembling sensations it's really amazing. The sounds were so powerful I could literally see the movie screen shake and the subwoofer hit made the whole room shake.
I would also like to add that in the Italian version, you can clearly see that they used "incorrect" words grammatically, they used a lot of anglicisms, I guess they've done that to express how language is evolving? It's actually current of our generation, I see a lot of people adapting English words in Italian, so I was very impressed by that.
| FINAL THOUGHT |
I feel like everyone needs to understand, before watching this movie, that you need a time, a mood and a place perfectly fit to sit for a 3 hours movie that it's going to feel like a 6-hour long journey into colors, shapes, and absolute "living" silence.
This is NOT a Marvel movie, there is action, well-done action, but it's not about action. You need to sit, relax and don't think about time, because, trust me, it's going to fuck you.
Please like my comment if you enjoyed my review, it makes me really happy.
Note that all of this is driven by my personal opinion. If you think I wasn't objective in some of the parts of what I've written, you're welcome to make me notice where.
On Twitter, I review the entire world -> @WiseMMO
I can tell you that Game of Thrones is phenomenal, visual beautiful, fantastic, exhilarating and action-packed thrilling rollercoaster that in many ways has not been seen yet in a tv show. I could say that and be absolutely right about it, but unless you have been living under a rock without an internet connection for the past 2 years than no doubt you already heard, seen or read for yourself what a masterpiece the books and/or this tv series is.
Game of Thrones is exactly like the title says: A game for the throne. Played by the people who think its their right to claim, conquer or inherit it. They all have different goals and different ways of getting to that point, but their goal is in essence in one way or another the same for all of them: to be recognized and remembered for their deeds. Off course that is not so weird since everyone in real life at some level thinks like that. But the main characters in Game of Thrones are different, either through noble descent, the power and money they have, intelligence or sheer luck they have become a member of one of the noble houses that rule the countries and can decide the fate and lives of hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions of people within the fictional continents of Westeros and Essos.
The story, setting and characters are all taken from a broad range of European history. Most of what we see of the continent Westeros (castles and tournaments) is taken from High Medieval Western Europe from around the 11th, 12th, and 13th centuries. But the story takes bits and pieces from other time periods as well. For example the wildfire that was used in season 2 in a brilliant strategic move of "The Imp" Tyrion Lannister during the Battle of the Blackwater is in fact Byzantine "Greek fire" which was invented and first used in the 7th century during battles between Muslims and Byzantines. This and other historical events, devices and characters based on real people out of history are all as it seems perfectly interwoven into each other into the fictional world of Game of Thrones by the author of the books George R. R. Martin.
For the actors who play the characters i have nothing but utmost respect. The performance they manage to show episode after episode is definitely what makes this tv show so popular. There is one in particular that without a doubt is one of the more popular stars of this tv show: Peter Dinklage who plays the role of "The Imp" Tyrion Lannister. In the 1st season he was portrayed as nothing more than someone who took advantage of his noble status and money to do whatever he wanted. But in season 2 (and hopefully the next seasons too) he transformed despite his disadvantage of being born as a dwarf (who during medieval times and in this fictional world are considered "lesser" humans) into a brilliant military and political strategist and someone who can very good and enjoys as he so very accurately said himself "play the game".
Game of Thrones is without a doubt the hit tv show of this decade. It started out with a story about medieval times, but slowly with every episode we see the world of the Seven Kingdoms transform into a place where mythical creatures exist, magic and dark powers are used as a weapon against enemies and where the dead are once more walking again.... Winter is coming, and i have no doubt it that it will be as spectacular and story-wise phenomenal as we have have seen in the previous seasons.
What a phenomenal show! Being a Marvel production, I fully expected something of quality, but my expectations were blown entirely out of the water. Daredevil has easily taken its place among my favorite shows currently on air and far surpasses the current lineup of comic book-based television properties (including Marvel's own Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.).
The cast is great. Charlie Cox brings emotional weight to Matt Murdock and an intimidating presence to his vigilante alter ego. Supporting players Deborah Ann Woll, Elden Henson, and Rosario Dawson, all make their respective roles feel critical, never distracting or annoying. But it's Vincent D'Onofrio that really steals the spotlight as Wilson Fisk, bringing to life a villain who is not only vicious and truly terrifying, but also heartbreakingly pitiful.
Daredevil's writing separates it from the current crop of superhero television. The progression of the plot is well organized and dialog rarely (if ever) crosses that line into comic book corniness. You really get the sense that the show runners had a clear vision for where they wanted this freshman season to go, while still laying groundwork for future seasons. Never does it feel like you're just being strung along for bigger and better things to come next season. And the show doesn't constantly try to remind you of the broader Marvel Cinematic Universe, as any references to it are (usually) subtle.
But perhaps Daredevil's greatest strength is its cinematography. Fight sequences are expertly choreographed and coherent (not to mention brutally gritty), even rivaling those of Captain America: The Winter Soldier. The production value is top notch, probably thanks to the refreshingly limited reliance on CGI. But what impressed me the most was the brave willingness to let the camera linger or even meander occasionally. Ending episode 2 with a minutes-long single take fight sequence had me speechless, and is a testament to the level of quality brought to the show.
Daredevil is a strong addition to the Marvel Cinematic Universe. I think Marvel's partnership with Netflix could prove to be one of their best decisions regarding their television properties and I look forward to future shows like A.K.A. Jessica Jones and Luke Cage.
Just to preface this, I thought A Force Awakens was emotionless trash that undermined the entire purpose of the original three films.
Rogue One was the opposite.
The best thing about this movie was the emotional impact. It underlined the sacrifices made to make the original trilogy possible. Some people have called it long, but that helped build up characters that you actually felt for, and who weren't carbon copy ripoffs (cough cough A Force Awakens). The final scenes as the two main characters face their fate, recognizing that it was worth it, gave such a high emotional payoff. Each major death scene actually made you feel something.
The second best thing was K-2SO. Very funny, and much needed comedic (but not goofy) relief.
The CGI for landscapes and the world creation was outstanding. When I see a movie like Star Wars I want to be amazed and see things that I haven't seen done before. I want to be impressed and drawn into new, beautifully crafted worlds. In this respect, the movie just kept delivering over and over.
The cinematography was great during the action sequences. The sequences looked epic, and the violence and sacrifice felt meaningful. The Vader fight sequence was intense.
It also had interesting ties to current events with its commentary on terrorism/rebellion/weapons of mass destruction. By the way, the science genius character realizing that he isn't priceless in developing some major device is fantastic. All of the movies with "only so-and-so can figure this out" are very disappointing.
The moral message of the movie was also very clear and well delivered.
I really enjoyed the movie overall and thought that it was a big step in the right direction. It was adventurous again, it was sometimes shocking, original, and most of all meaningful. A Force Awakens failed on all of those points. It's good to see a franchise movie that's taking a bit more risk than average. AFA was just like the new Star Trek films, shiny bling low-impact action movies that just happen to be set in space. Rogue One pushes far beyond to show the what drives the Rebellion in a world we know and love.
Despite the fact that I really liked the movie, it had some flaws:
- Tarkin face CGI
- Some of the acting in the first half.
- Tarkin face CGI
- Some of the cuts were really weird and the pacing felt off for portions of the first half.
- Tarkin face CGI
- Forest Whittaker just deciding to die instead of trying to escape.
- Tarkin face CGI
- A few unbelievable plot lines (thankfully most were minor). Like Cassian being sent to kill Galen for almost no reason, and then deciding not to for no reason, and then Jyn forgiving him surprisingly easily. How did she even know that he was trying to kill her father?
- Tarkin face CGI
- Does every Star Wars movie need to have a father character die? Why didn't Cass follow orders when he heartlessly killed someone else in his first scene?
- Tarkin face CGI
- Heavy handed political messaging.
- Tarkin face CGI
- Said "hope" too many times.
- Tarkin face CGI
- You can just push Star Destroyers that easily?
- Tarkin face CGI
- The word "Stardust"
- Tarkin face CGI
- Too many random worlds introduced that you don't have the time to get invested in.
- Tarkin face CGI
- Too much awkward fan service.
- Tarkin face CGI
- Darth Vader's voice sounded off.
- Tarkin face CGI
- Some of the dialogue was really terrible.
- Tarkin face CGI
Nothing to say really besides: that’s how you do it!
This has without a doubt the most impressive stunts of the franchise, and it really knows how to use its characters and challenge them. There’s a lot of propulsive energy, lush cinematography and great editing. Lorne Balfe does a great Hans Zimmer impression, and Chris McQuarrie does a great Chris Nolan impression. Alright maybe I’m oversimplifying there, because I have to commend McQuarrie for doing another stylistic reinvention of the franchise, the cinematography and general feel aren’t just that of Rogue Nation 2.0. I’m not even sure if the constant evolution of this franchise comes from a place of creative ambition or commercial opportunity, but at least it keeps the films fresh. Some of its core elements will always remain the same, however. For example, the plot’s once again just a vehicle for all the juicy stuff. You could call it out for being generic or basic, but they find so much creativity and fun in these tropes that it becomes very entertaining (intrigue, the mask sequences, the craziness and constantly rising intensity). Sure, there’s a very predictable twist at the end of the second act, but more often than not, it managed to surprise me. Henry Cavill is a great new addition, bringing back Rebecca Ferguson was the best choice they could’ve made, and Pegg & Rhames remain the reliable anchors that add some heart & humour. It’s all exceptional stuff, it could very well go down as the best action franchise in history if the next films stick the landing.
9/10
