I guess the best thing about this movie is that it gave me an excuse to watch the original trilogy again...
This movie is as if the 1980's and the 1880's were mashed together into one. A slow paced, incomplete and try-to-be creative, but not very convincing, story about the life of brilliant inventor Nicola Tesla who was ahead of his time.
Besides the acting power of Hawke, and some (questionable) creative choices, there is not much here.
The franchise became chaotic and messy from all the backpedaling after fan criticism. Because of this, the 3rd trilogy feels incoherent and without a clear vision, which damages the overall story. This last part is still a good and enjoyable film, especially in the blockbuster 'genre', but it can't rise above (no pun intended) it's competition.
A very bland story that could have been way more interesting if they dared to add some depth to the story. It never shows us something new (and I am sceptical about the few details I didn't know) and doesn't have the courage to make it a sports movie, a drama or a controversy. It looks more like a dramatised documentary made by the USADA. A stage in the beginning of the tour de france where nothing happens but a sprinters final at the end is more interesting.
If you expect a film like 'The Other Guys' you will be quite disappointed. Even though the main characters are played by the same actors, the script is more focussed on bad jokes and a really bad script in stead of clever crazy jokes (with a basic script) the cop film had. The jokes are mainly just bad language with kids and competitive humiliation, something that is not even that absurd in such a situation (they took it too far though, and not in a funny way.) And there are no decent side characters to back them up, just a few passive ones to fill up the screen and character sheet. Even the chemistry between Mark and Will is a bit forced.
And no desk-pops!
In stead of it getting more interesting, it got less interesting. It lost the magic that Divergent had, maybe it was in her hair?
Because of all the great reviews I decided to give this one a go. Definitely not one for me though
.
Even though it is a good movie, I did not really enjoy it as much. It tried to set up a realistic image of small-town boys in a situation you usually don't end up with at that age.
They did a good job acting and story wise, but i simply could not identify with the main characters. This was probably because of multitude of things like the independence of the kids and how they were treated like adults as if it was 200 years ago. But also the completely twisted way they viewed women and relationships. I know this is all to create a certain environment, but I just did not like that environment.
My rating is therefore mostly based on my opinion rather then a technical judgment.
I wasn't expecting much, and it was what I expected.
It wasn't bad, but it wasn't good either. Fun for kids, too silly for adults.
There are many more beautifull, age transcending movies out there to watch with your kids (or solo.) Only 4 or 5 jokes made me smile, all others were pretty lame or cliche. I guess when this movie would have been unknown and stayed in obscurity, it would've been fun to recommend. But with the massive amount of 'fans' this one is getting, it surely is greatly overrated.
Batman is easily the favourite from the movie, and the fun poking at Green Lantern was a funny inside joke.
Stellar cast, fine set pieces. The rest is utter trash. The only reason this movie is even watchable is because the actors made an otherwise hopeless script into a somewhat enjoyable mindless film. What a waste of talent.
This is is vanilla ice cream in movie form.
Everything from story and characters to action and sound design is rather bland and lacking substance, it is just smooth inconsequential sailing to the credits. An innocent little movie for (older) kids.
'Mulan' suffers from poor character writing and questionable creative decisions that ultimately could disappoint both audiences it was made for.
As with most of the Disney live action remakes, 'Mulan' uses a similar base as it's 1998 animated version. However it does not try to recreate it's predecessor scene for scene, while also not deviating as much as some of the other remakes did. Ultimately the balance of originality was pretty well done in this regard. Combine this with stunning set pieces and an inspiring message and this should make for a good, or at least an entertaining, movie. The bad news is that it doesn't.
Warning: Spoilers ahead! (hidden)
What Mulan (played by Liu Yifei) initially is fighting for is the safety of her family (mostly her father) and bringing honour to her family. This is a challenge for her, because her skills do not conform to what is accepted for girls in her society. Mulan has a high amount of chi inside her. Chi (in this movie) is an inconsistently used power that is either a stand-in for magic, or for being able to do martial arts at high levels without (proper) training.
The problem starts with that Mulan's whole character arc is based on this aspect, foregoing any actual personality and turning her into basically a Mary Sue. Only mid-second act we are shown she can outsmart others and can think tactically, which is not (properly) set up.
The sad thing is that the aspect of chi does not enrich the story, but rather takes away from Mulan as a character.
At the opposite side of the spectrum we have the "witch" Niang (played by Gong Li) who uses her chi to wield magic. She has arguably the best character development in the film, however predictable. She joins the enemy Rouran army because she was not accepted for who she was. In this way she hopes to change the world and get rid of the oppression against woman that are different. However she gets betrayed by the Rouran leader, Bori Kahn (played by Jason Scott Lee), who has the same denigrating ideas about who she is. After Mulan gets accepted for who she is by her fellow soldiers, the witch redeams herself by sacrificing her life to save Mulan.
During a key scene of the movie, Mulan and Niang meet, and Mulan declares she fights for the emperor because she knows her place. In that moment she chooses to continue the cycle of oppression she experienced in the first place. This was such a strange moment for me, because it contradicted her original motivation completely. It looked like it was a later change after studio intervention, and it was what broke Mulan's character.
It did not help that most of the performances of the actors were rather lackluster. I can not qualify it as bad, ,most of the time it was just fine. But there were moments when the acting was not convincing or too mediocre and lacking dedication. I had hoped to see a bit more of Jet Li, but with the role he plays my expectations were not set too high.
As said in the opening, the set pieces, background and photography that are done for this movie are stunning. CGI is done very well too. Not too in your face, and most of the time not obtrusive. Costumes and make-up is also masterfully done, and deserves big compliments. So many times you can just look at the images on screen and forget about the story for a moment and feast your eyes.
The directing however is awkward from time to time. Rather intrusive camera movements and strange angles and cutting. Especially during two action scenes of the Rourans attacking, several confusing and unnecessary camera rotations were used that had no function other than being a gimmick. Cutting was often at not intuitive moments and unusual time- and locations jumps happened more than you would want to see. There might have been some inconsistency in the editing process or during the re-shoots, but it was noticeably distracting.
The story itself was done well enough. Of course there was already a solid basis for the story, and I think they build nicely on that. They worked in some new material, gave the enemy a more appropriate name than the kind of inaccurate 'Huns' it used to be. The action was expanded and some interesting perspectives were added. I did not miss the comic relief dragon nor the music, I think it could have messed with the tone of the movie too much. Overall it was a rather coherent and consistent story, but it also did not achieve great heights.
It was obvious that Disney did not want to rub the message too much in your face. The movie can lead to some debate even as it is. And Disney clearly did not want to scare away the Chinese audience, or worse, displease the Chinese government. I think it was difficult for the studio to balance between keeping western audience satisfied as well as the Chinese audience, while also satisfying fans of the 1998 animation and newcomers. It affected the story in making it safe, while at the same time trying to please several camps resulting in some inconsistencies. But in the end, I think it could have been a lot worse.
While 'Mulan' is beautiful to watch at times, the characters and message of the movie are broken. The studio trying to please too many people from very different backgrounds damaged the movie, even though it could have been much worse. I think it is a fine movie for the majority of people to enjoy, but don't expect much special.
Next Gen is not the worst animation movie you will ever see, and definitely is watchable, but too simplistic and flawed to be worth more than a single watch. I would also not recommend it for kids considering the theme, the level of violence and (too?) obvious bleeped swearing.
Story is bland and predictable, lacking some character depth and several plot holes. I won't blame it too severely on that, even though many (animated) kid movies proof that's not necessary.
Most importantly, the animation is inconsistent. There are some (very) good moments, but overall (especially the humans, fluids and backgrounds) look outdated and more like a Saturday cartoon, then a movie. They clearly focused their efforts on the big battle at the end.
I know the movie intents to be messy, but for me personally it didn't work. Too often it felt forced, which made it either into a gimmick being messy for the reason of being messy, while other times it felt messy in an unintended way.
The exposition is probably the worst part of the film. In some kind of attempt to mimic Deadpool or other recent meta/3rd wall breaking movies, it uses narration a lot. And I mean really a lot. It looks like they had to use narration in order to make the movie understandable and messy at the same time, without making its runtime too bloated.
The idea to make the movie hectic is in essence not bad, it can fit well with the Quinn character if done correctly. The execution just left a lot to desire, and it affected many characters in a bad way. They became inconsistent, and/or lacked screentime, background (except for aforementioned narration) or motivation.
Also: I enjoyed Ewan McGregor until I didn't.
Also: I enjoyed Mary Elizabeth Winstead until I didn't.
After the terrible 'Olympus', and the even worse 'London', I expected more of the same terribleness in this 3rd installment. But somehow it was not that bad. It still has many of the same flaws the earlier ones had, but they are overall less severe, and it even looked like they tried to add some story to it (although not that well executed, but at least they tried?)
Still far from a good movie, but this one I could at least enjoy. My surprise says more about how bad the first 2 in the fallen installment are.
I think the others said it very well, this film can be best described in one word: Boring!
I don't know what happened here in the editing room, but some people need to get their salary retracted xD
Poorly written and edited, shots i completely did not understand or add anything to a scene, incredibly pale musical score, nonsensical situations, anticlimactic, badly paced, a lot of slow action scenes, rushed storyline, strange tone shifts that didn't give the decent acting by Serkis and Harrelson any payoff, no real character development except for the 'bad' guy (kinda?) Yes, what is that about? xD. And I tried to avoid a rant here and just sum up my complaints, because I didn't really hate it that much (just 5/10.)
The worst is the movie is actually not even bad enough to be remembered for it being actually bad. And that is probably the worst thing you can achieve as a movie.
Ok ok ok, they got a point for CGI.
I watched this movie for Jeff Bridges, but Alicia Vikander stole the show.
A bad movie that isn't actually as bad I expected. Honorable mentions for Olivia Williams and Jeff Bridges for their acting, and an honorable discharge for the writers please.
Most used word and sentence in the script: "Jesus"
I don't know what the fuzz is about.
The visuals are really good yes, but it's not that ground breaking. It does have some amazing views though, so that's 1 of the main reasons I didn't turn it off. The second reason is the sound. They really managed to get the silence of space on screen, without the movie turning boring (a risk with those long shots.)
What bothered me the most about this movie is the amount of convenience to the story (including the seeming lack of knowledge of the scientists on and off screen.)
A barrage in space because someone (actually a whole nation's science department) faultly blew up a sattelite? What is that civilian (Bullock) doing in space? (I mean not noticing or responding to the fire in the ISS, really?)
And those were a lot of casual talks during critical situations. If regular plain pilots already have such a strict radio script, I doubt an astronaut talks like that during (critical) communications.
Also, ALL communications are down and both ISS, the Chinese station AND their shuttle are just a few 100 miles apart? I guess that's lucky, since she just had barely enough time to make it to each 'save haven.' The fact Clooney wasn't coming back was actually more of a surprise with all this coincidence.
I do have to say that most scientific parts of the movie were pretty accurate as far as I can tell.
Conclusion: She must have been the most luckiest astronaut ever but with incredible bad luck.
Disappointing movie. The acting is ok, but not convincing. Story is not really interesting (I watched it 3 days ago, and I cannot even recall it without trying really hard) and the 'wise' lessons are pretty silly, lack impact and are misplaced several times.
Try to find something better, if you can't, don't expect too much of it and you will be fine.
Over the top at some points with the explicit violent scenes. Also, revenge stories are never the best ones. Very good twist at the end though.
Unfortunately not a movie for me, therefor a low ranking.
Lacked zing, too much cliché and an extremely predictable story.
Of course it is very good for kids, but I'd advice to give them some of the older Disney movies in stead of this.
Pretty disappointing and crappy movie.
I suspected a casual and fun movie with this one, maybe with some puzzles and an interesting premise. However the movie disappointed from the start.
For a adaptation from a book I sure hope this was a bad one. You get thrown into the middle of a stoy where suddenly all kinds of stuff happens. I hope this wasn't the case in the original work, because it is one of the major flaws of this movie, and could be explained as the cause of many of its other faults.
The acting was luckily pretty ok, but many of the characters don't add to the story at all and are just filling up empty screen. The sound was to cry off as well. Soundtrack was ok, but many scenes had no music and felt like a soap because of it.
I am all for being creative with sound, but this was just done badly.
Since I won't bore you with pages of irrelevant texts, like the movie does, i will just make a list of the cons and pros.
Cons:
- Paced way too fast
- No build up for a climax (the film was more of a constant climax actually)
- Not getting time to get acquainted with the characters, therefore not caring about there faith.
- Very little character development, except maybe for Gally (Will Poulter)
- Stating many things as impossible without many explanation
- Revealing the endgame in the first act of the movie with a flashback/memory which makes the whole movie unnecessary,
- Also making the whole story as predictable as a Japanese train schedule.
- Inappropriate absent of sound
- Too much unimportant characters
- Did we really need another Hunger Games movie?
- etc.
Pros:
- Nice environment
- Funny but cool looking cyborg creatures
- Doesn't need many attention to follow, so you can check your twitter or facebook feed in the meantime.
The first one already did not do so well, mostly excelling in original design, decent CGI and it's (attempt of) focusing on characters. Part 2 continues this tradition, but sacrifices the few good things about the first movie with just a grander scale.
I almost could not finish this, and turned it off after 1 hour. But I managed to finish watching it eventually.
Even as a mindless animation action it fails.
It is just unbelievably boring and shallow. Dialogue is piss poor, Story is not terrible, but too basic to get interesting. The animation often lacks details and many corners were cut. The characters are well drawn, but anything else lacks details and movements are very choppy.
The movie just looks and feels like it lacked money at every aspect in its production. Skip this and watch some of the DCU animated movies instead.
Boring, unfunny, poorly written and lackluster acting. Even as a family/kids movie, there are many better films out there.
'Die Hard' in space but bad.
Terrible screenplay where the same setup is repeated in every act, without really changing anything. Dialogue is good, even though it is more a couple of long conversations with time jums mashed together, but it becomes boring pretty fast if you aren't interested in the history of tech companies and/or Jobs. Thank god for Fassbender, Daniels and Rogen's great performances, otherwise it would have been even more of a pain to watch.
Too pretentious for such an average storyline, a typical case of trying too hard.
It looks like they had too many ideas, but not the guts to choose. None of them was worked out well, so we end up with a messy movie that tries to be cool and clever while it is neither.
