PeterVincent's Reviews
 

So I thought i'd join the many others who have movie review threads, it looks fun and I'd love to share my thoughts on certain films. I was considering starting off with The Dark Knight Rises, but instead, I think I might go with Amazing Spider-Man.



http://www.monteisom.com/blog/wp-con...monte-isom.jpg

When I first heard they were rebooting Spider-Man, my thoughts were mostly negative. As a child I grew up with Sam Raimi's films and I didn't mind Spider-Man 3. But here we are with the Spider-Man reboot...And it isn't too amazing.

The films tagline is 'The Untold Story' and right from the start you can tell that this is the same story with only a few minor adjustments, and the movie knows this. As a matter of fact the movie begins to tweak and rush familiar and iconic scenes to the point that it is almost awkward and uncomfortable to watch (the 'new' Uncle Ben power speech and his ultimate demise is the most noticeable). I have heard nothing but good stuff about Andrew Garfield as Peter Parker, but to me he is less traditional Peter Parker and more generic teenage Peter Parker, to the point in which he is rude to almost every adult that crosses his path.

Though the film has plenty to like also. Emma Stone is great as Gwen Stacy and Rhys Ifans as Curt Connors is fantastic, even if his screen time is maybe 20 minutes tops and his CGI stub is distracting. The film is pushed up by it's occasional extraordinary scenes (such as when Peter is in the sewer with his giant web) and great cinematography.

Overall however the film is unnecessary and is probably my least favourite of the Spider-Man film adaptions. Andrew Garfield manages to become somewhat likeable by the end of the film and the finale is impressive if not 'amazing' (cough, cough). The Amazing Spider-Man is definitely worth a rent at least, though don't be in a rush to see it.

Re: PeterVincent's Reviews
 

I'll probably wait for DVD release or maybe Blu Ray.

Re: PeterVincent's Reviews
 

Not much of a Spiderman fan. Gonna wait until this one comes to DVD.

Lets do one of my favourites from the 80's...

http://images.moviepostershop.com/fr...1010186710.jpg

Fright Night (1985)

Hey PeterVincent? What's your favourite vampire movie? Well, it's probably the one in which there is an actual character called Peter Vincent.

The film centres around a schoolboy named Charlie Brewster, who after peeking through his window at his new neighbour discovers that vampires exist and his neighbour Jerry is one of the creatures of the night.

What makes this movie so good? Or bad? Well it's the 80's style, over-the-top acting and special effects that make the movie what I call a 'guilty pleasure'. The film has more cheese than a Joel Schumacher movie, and yet manages to entertain from start to finish.

http://media.photobucket.com/image/f...s/Fright19.jpg

One of the best things about the movie is Peter Vincent played by Roddy McDowell, a TV show host who is paid by Charlie's friends to help him. The character is funny, cheesy and somehow kicks vampire hide even at an old age.

The film is filled with some of the best practical effects i've ever seen (mainly the wolf transformation towards the end) and the remake is well worth a look too.

Overall Fright Night is a very entertaining movie, and bring your nachos because there is plenty of melted cheese with this 80's flick.

Re: PeterVincent's Reviews
 

I'll probably wait for the dvd release of the new Spiderman movie as well.

I was forced to watch this film series recently, and there is another instalment on the way, so here's my review for:

Resident Evil

http://static.thecia.com.au/reviews/...l-poster-1.jpg

There still isn't a good video game movie adaption in my opinion, and this film is a prime example. It's a melon scratcher...why was this movie made? But what's even more puzzling is the fact that these movies keep on coming and coming. So lets talk about where it all began.

The film starts with Jason Issacs letting you know about the horribly evil Umbrella Corporation, and right from the start you know this won't be a good movie. Maybe it was the horrifyingly annoying techno/videogame soundtrack or the cardboard acting by Milla Jovovich, but this movie goes from bad to worse faster than the sequels came.

http://cdn.snarkfood.com/wp-content/...9/08/milla.jpg

Now some people in the world may argue that it's the greatest movie of all time because it has 'zombies and a hot chick' but trust me...the zombies and the 'hot chick' make it worse. Milla Jovovich fumbles around and delievers a majority of her lines the same way, she has an emotionless stare and even her 'mysterious backstory' manages to be simple and boring. The zombies seem intriguing for the first five minutes, but disappear and reappear whenever the script requires them to.

The 'ultimate villian' of the film is some form of super zombie, rendered by very poor CGI and would probably look much better if they went with a practical approach, the appearance of the super zombie is so ridiculous and video game typical that you can't help but laugh whenever it appears on screen.

Though not everything about the movie is awful, Michelle Rodriguez gives a likeable performance, as well as some of the other supporting cast, though the most interesting characters are killed off before any type of connection can be made with them. But the strangest and worst part of the film is the ending, which manages to confuse and anger me even now. Though this film is not nearly as bad as the sequel.

Overall Resident Evil is a dreadful mess and probably should be avoided unless you really want to watch a horrible attempt at a video game film, it's not the worst movie I have ever seen, but that doesn't change the fact that it is a bad movie.

And who can ever forget the unintentionally hilarious zombie dog fight.

I love Resident Evil, cool movie I'd of give it .

Re: PeterVincent's Reviews
 

The only good thing about Resident Evil is the cool Slipknot song on the soundtrack.

Okay so I did Resident Evil, so while it is still fresh in my mind, lets do:

Resident Evil: Apocalypse

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...pse_poster.jpg

Now after watching the first movie I pretty much assumed this was going to be bad, but I had no idea it was going to be THIS bad. The movie starts exactly where the last one left off, right in the toilet. Alice (still played by Milla Jovovich) wakes up in Raccoon City which has been taken over by zombies infected with the deadly T-Virus. Joining her in the battle for survival is the most inappropriately dressed excuse of a police officer I have ever seen AKA Jill Valentine. The plot is incredibly unclear for the first 20 minutes, as the film tries to show you why the word 'Apocalypse' is in the title, and I know why...because the movie is the equivalent of an apocalypse.

There is not one single thing about this movie I can honestly say is good, the plot is bizarre, the characters are generic stereotypes (especially the gangster character), Alice gets the most forced and obscure subplot ever, the zombies become boring fast (5 minutes of zombie entertainment at most) and the movie takes any opportunity to cram in a videogame character. When the Umbrella Corporation summons Nemesis (I still don't know why) the movie plummets below the first film and into a new level of awful.

Overall I rarely hate films, but Resident Evil: Apocalypse is a film that I can confidently say I hate. The one good thing this movie did was lower my expectations for the next film to such a degree I actually liked the third instalment, but this movie is bleak, boring and extremely bad. It still isn't the worst movie in the world, but it's probably on my list.

Resident Evil: Extinction

The bar literally could not be any lower, but this series must have the T-virus, because even when it seems dead...it comes back to life. To my amazement, I actually liked the movie, maybe it was because the second film was so bad?

So the movie starts off...where the first movie started? But in the desert? Anyway, the beginning of the film had me groaning and preparing for the worst, until the villain spoke his first line of dialogue and I shot up in my seat, Is that an actual ACTOR in a Resident Evil movie?.

But it didn't stop there, the directing was better, the action was better, the acting was better and almost everything was better than any of the other instalments, though that isn't saying much.

http://playeraffinity.com/images/res...tion_still.jpg

I like the movie, it's my favourite of the dreaded franchise and in my opinion the most watchable...but it still suffers from the same problem the others have, it's a videogame movie.

The film had me sold for a while, I was invested in what was going on and even accepted the ludicrous plot (Alice has mental powers and somehow an evil corporation can still be evil...when the apocalypse has happened?). But when the climax began and the villain starts to leap out of his character and into some kind of generic videogame boss, as per usual in the Resident Evil films, I began to lose interest and brain cells.

Overall the film is (in my opinion at least) the best in the franchise (isn't saying much) and has some decent performances and action sequences...but the zombie dogs? Again?

Re: PeterVincent's Reviews
 

I found the second movie alot better than the third.

Okay lets finish off the Resident Evil series with the most recent:

Resident Evil: Afterlife

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi..._Afterlife.jpg

You ever heard the expression 'turn your brain off at the door'? Well be sure to rip it out of your head and feed it to some zombies because Resident Evil: Afterlife raises more and more questions by the second and answers none.

So the original director is back and judging by the tone and style of the film it seems he just discovered The Matrix, because this entire movie echoes it. The movie relies very heavily on slow motion action scenes and a horrible villain who appears to be doing his best Hugo Weaving impression...which is incredibly obvious.

http://www.scenicreflections.com/ith...paper_JxHy.jpg

The plot takes off in Tokyo where the evil Umbrella Corp. is somehow still operational and still evil...despite...you know...the apocalypse and all...again. Alice and her clones attack the Umbrella HQ all Trinity style like in The Matrix Reloaded and are conveniently stopped. The original Alice follows Agent Smith...oops...I mean ahem 'Wesker' (the villain) into some sort of airplane thing and has her mental powers removed...also very conveniently. Then after and explosion nobody could have survived, especially without psychic powers, Alice pulls a little plane out of her a** and flies to where the convoy from the last film was headed. See what I mean about no explanations?

Alice makes a habit of documenting and updating her vlogs on her camcorder (where did this come from? How is she charging this thing?). But she runs into one of the characters from the previous film, who has been given a mind control device in the form of a spider or something (see what I mean...nothing is explained).

After the basic plot is set up Alice heads to a prison, which inside houses survivors and...the dude from Prison Break? In an actual prison? And he knows a way out when the plot requires it? Okay...Oh and he has a useless plot twist.

The zombies can now do strange things like grow tentacles out of their mouths and dig, but this was never explained? Why is this happening? But what's worse is the traditional videogame boss, a huge zombie with a giant axe...now where in the world did that come from and why? Also...the zombie dogs are back yet again, and they can split themselves in half...at least they're a different breed.

What's good though? The ensemble is actually entertaining and despite the overuse of slow motion, the action scenes are decent. You can tell that there's been a huge budget increase.

Overall Resident Evil: Afterlife is a mess of unexplained devices and a plot that relies on convenience. All that said, the action is greatly improved and it lets go of the silly 'mental powers' plot...though it's replaced with a sillier ending which still makes me angry. The film is kind of fun and reminds you why The Matrix is a great movie.

The Dark Knight Rises

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ses_poster.jpg

If there's one thing audiences seem to love, it's Batman, and so do I. He is far from my favourite superhero, but The Dark Knight is my 7th favourite film of all time (so far), so my expectations for this film were pretty high.

The film starts off eight years after the previous movie and from the first 10 minutes, you can tell that this is quite a different film when compared to The Dark Knight.

Christian Bale returns as Bruce Wayne/Batman and gives a great performance, successfully showing a broken man who just wants to die, and as usual the rest of the ensemble cast is great.

http://i1.cdnds.net/11/51/618x400/mo...es_still_1.jpg

The villain of the film is Tom Hardy as Bane, and in my opinion Mr. Hardy is one of the best actors in Hollywood right now, but Bane is no Joker. Hardy does a fantastic job but it's hard to act when a majority of your face is covered up. All that being said, the expressions of Tom Hardy's eyebrows and eyes usually tell you his expressions and emotions...or what they would be.

Anne Hathaway appears as Selena Kyle/Catwoman and does a good...maybe great job, though she is usually overshadowed by the more experienced actors onscreen. Anne successfully portrays a woman with a dark past who has a heart of gold, however I still prefer Michelle Pfeiffer as the Cat.

http://carlosdev.files.wordpress.com...pg?w=500&h=395

Christopher Nolan does a good job as usual, showing us fantastic sets and beautiful locations, however the film suffers from strange editing. The characters jump from location to location, with massive time lapses, and at one point almost three months goes by!

The film also relies heavily on events that have already transpired in the two previous films and it is noticeable, so if you haven't seen Batman Begins and/or The Dark Knight...it's probably best you see those before you view this film.

Overall I was happy and entertained with the film, though in my opinion it is the weakest of the trilogy. A majority if not all of the performances are great and Christian Bale proves himself a hero, I admit I cried...Three times. Though my personal favourite thing about the film is the Cillian Murphy cameo. A solid if not great movie from one of the best trilogies in the last twenty years.

Percy Jackson & The Lightning Thief

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ief_poster.jpg

Harry Potter has done a lot of good to children around the world, but like anything huge in Hollywood, there will be an endless wave of wannabe films that attempt to start a big franchise but just end up failing...usually miserably (Eragon, Golden Compass, The Seeker, this movie etc.). Percy Jackson & The Lightning Thief is the better of those movies and my personal favourite. The film is based on a very popular series of books (of which I also enjoy) and is directed by Chris Columbus, the guy that brought us the first two Harry Potter films (ironic?).

I first watched this movie about two weeks after seeing Clash Of The Titans (the remake) and I was dreading it, but after about ten minutes of crazy greek meets modern day madness, I was surprised and happy with the way the film was going.

The film (and to be honest, the books) are very similar to the Harry Potter franchise, and unfortunately that is a constant comparison that cannot be shaken off, but if you can accept it, you might like the movie.

Percy Jackson (played by Logan Lerman, who is pretty mediocre in the role) is a young man who discovers that the Greek Gods have been watching over humanity for centuries, until Zeus' lightning bolt is stolen and everybody suspects Percy, as he is the son of Poseidon...and Zeus likes to point the finger at Poseidon? I don't know, just go with it.

The ensemble is great, the film is crammed with Hollywood cameos and stars, Uma Thurman appears as Medusa for 5 minutes and Pierce Brosnan is fun as a Centaur.

Though the film is severely dragged down by two cardboard characters that follow Percy around for most of the film, Grover and Annabeth. Grover (Brandon T. Jackson), who in the book is a shy teenager with orange hair, is now a jive-talking Will Smith impersonator who is the Jar Jar Binks of this film...and he takes any opportunity to be annoying comic relief. Annabeth (the actress' name escapes me) on the other hand is the most unexplored and wooden character in the whole film, what this movie needed was a good sit down between a character, maybe Pierce Brosnan's, and Annabeth so they can actually explore the way she approaches being a demigod...she might just be an interesting character.

http://i2.listal.com/image/724879/60...screenshot.jpg

There are two major standouts in this film however, Steve Coogan's Hades and Jake Abel's Luke. Steve Coogan appears about and hour-and-a-half into the movie and doesn't just chew up scenery, he lights it on fire...pun intended. Jake Abel pops up every so often as Luke, the son of Hermes, a senior member of the camp that Percy must now call home. Jake Abel acts well and is very noticeable as the only one with talent, especially when Percy and the gang visit him in his cabin...I couldn't help but laugh as the main three cast members were outshone by a supporting cast member every single time he appeared on screen.

Overall Percy Jackson & The Lightning Thief is a dodgy Harry Potter wannabe, but somehow stands on it's own. It's fun and the special effects are actually pretty impressive. If I had a gun pointed at me and I had to choose between this or The Hunger Games...I'd choose this...it's easier to watch (sorry Hunger Games fans). The sequel (which is surprising) is scheduled to be released next year with Nathan Fillion playing Hermes, I'm actually excited.

Last one for today...

Ghost Rider: Spirit Of Vengeance

Upon first hearing that Ghost Rider will be getting a sequel my immediate response was...why? The first film most was far from a good film and I for one assumed Marvel would pretend it never happened...apparently not.

The directors of Crank take the directors chair (or chairs) for this film to give us an adrenaline filled wreck, it's pretty much Crank meets Ghost Rider, and it is so bad it's funny.

Nicolas Cage is back as Johnny Blaze (he is noticeably the only actor to return from the first film) and is joined by Idris Elba (probably the best thing about the film), an alcoholic French priest.

The villain (excluding the Devil) is played by some strange Kurt Russell look alike with a very similar power to Wes Bentley in the previous film. He jumps around corroding people with a cheap iMovie special effect for almost no reason at all...though I have to admit there is a twinkie joke that made me laugh.

What's good about the film you say? The first 30 minutes are actually kinda likeable, the look of Ghost Rider has been improved greatly, he's covered in CGI tar and I always get a rush of adrenaline rush when he bursts people into flame. After a very impressive action scene involving a flaming crane however the movie plummets downhill. Johnny Blaze is required to escort the son of the Devil to a church somewhere and the film (very poorly) attempts to make a fathery-son relationship between Blaze and the boy, but it seems forced and odd (also very similar to the relationship in T2) and even the film gets bored and inserts a strange CGI piss scene to try to keep the audience entertained...I know.

http://www.cinemasoldier.com/storage...=1329690706352

Overall even though they finally made Ghost Rider look kinda cool and added more action and less cheesy story the film falls into the fire. The movie fails to make you care about it's characters and even insults you with it's horrible dialogue at points. Although...It's pretty funny when the Devil uses a paper mache' flamethrower metaphor to explain being Satan to a kid.

Norman

http://i.imgur.com/yvJ0B.jpg

50/50 was an entertaining cancer comedy, but Norman (in my opinion) is a better film about cancer with a cast of relatively unknown actors (at the time) and features well written characters.

Meet Norman Long, played very well by Dan Byrd, a quirky teenager who witnessed his mothers death and is also watching his father slowly die of cancer. Noman only has one friend in the world and is constantly contemplating suicide, until a new student Emily arrives and shows an interest in the poor boy. After a night of huge stress and an argument with his friend, Norman decides to lie and say that he is dying of cancer, the news spreads fast across the school and soon everybody starts to treat Norman differently. It's Easy A with cancer.

The characters are well written and the cast is great, and I only have two complaints about the film. First off, Adam Goldberg appears every so often as Norman's teacher, and it isn't his character that's annoying, it's simply his presence and the way he appears and moves. Whenever he pops on camera, he usually has some part of his body be cut off screen (his huge hair for example is usually only half visible) or is walking out of the shot, it doesn't happen very often but it is noticeable. My second complaint is the directing, while this movie obviously had a tiny budget and was meant for film festivals, the directing is very amateur and it's very obvious that this is probably the director's first film, the camera is usually in one spot for most of a scene and it rarely pans or moves at all.

http://media.social.s-msn.com/images...rd-jenkins.jpg

Overall Norman is a very entertaining drama about a boy who is sick of the world, the movie jumps around different themes and even explores places you wouldn't expect. It's a hard movie to find though, but if you see it on the shelf at a store for a good price, definitely go for it.

Re: PeterVincent's Reviews
 

Never heard of this. I might have to check it out.

It's hard to find in store apparently, I won it from Empire magazine so i'm not sure where to find the movie, though JB Hi-Fi has it. But it's pretty damn good.

Green Lantern

http://www.onlinemovieshut.com/wp-co...rn-poster1.jpg

Sometimes, just sometimes, I disagree with a majority of people. Green Lantern was released last year and I must admit, I am a fan of both the comic books...and the movie.

Unfortunately not everybody liked Green Lantern as much as I did and it was considered to be a box office flop and an overall bad movie. I for one, disagree.

The film centres around cocky test pilot Hal Jordan (played by Ryan Reynolds, who's probably more suited to play The Flash), who is chosen to join the Green Lantern Core, an intergalactic police force.

A majority of the film follows Hal Jordan's life on Earth, which is probably what pulls the movie down the most, because every so often we see Oa (Green Lantern HQ), the coolest and most entertaining part of the whole movie.

The standout performance in this film is certainly Mark Strong as Sinestro, one of the most respected Green Lantern's in the Core. Strong doesn't have a lot of screen time, but whenever he appears on screen, the movie slowly becomes better and more entertaining with each line of dialogue that slips through is moustache.

http://www.popcultureonline.net/wp-c...st-image-3.jpg

An odd choice though was pitting two villains against Hal Jordan, Parallax and Hector Hammond. Parallax is essentially a giant cloud, though don't worry, he's much more entertaining than Galactus from Fantastic Four 2. Hector Hammond however is a normal human who is mutated by the fear energy of Parallax (sounds silly, I know) and had a grudge against his father (played by Tim Robbins). Both villains however, are not particularly threatening at all.

The pacing of the film changes constantly, from boring scenes on Earth to absurdly entertaining training and action sequences on Oa, this makes it all the more difficult to determine whether you like or dislike the movie, and after careful consideration, I went with like.

But possibly the most surprising thing about the movie is that it is directed by Martin Campbell, the guy that did Casino Royale. If his name hadn't popped up during the credits...I would never had known he'd directed.

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/images...s/glstill3.jpg

Overall Green Lantern plays out more like a 90's superhero movie rather than a modern day one (like The Dark Knight or Ironman), but if you're a fan of some of the older Batman films or the first Spider-Man movie, than you may enjoy this. The entire cast give a great performance (although Blake Lively...isn't very ahem...lively as a love interest).Green Lantern is a good time if you're bored or looking for some form of entertainment while you wait for Man Of Steel or something.

Centurion

Oh man, if there's one thing I can't get enough of, it's Michael Fassbender. The man just radiates talent, he exhales awesome and he always stands out...even in Jonah Hex

Centurion is a film by Neil Marshall, and right from the beginning you can see that the film is low-budget with poor special effects (especially the blood, and there is a lot of blood), but the best thing about Centurion is...you don't notice any of the problems until the movie finishes.

The film centres around Quintus Dias (Fassbender), a soldier of Rome who joins up with the 9th Legion led by Dominic West after escaping...some form of scottish folk?

The film is essentially a gigantic chase scene and is filled with both entertaining and boring moments, and some of the more complex characters are killed off way too early, which is very disappointing.

Perhaps one of the best parts of the film and yet the most questionable is when Michael Fassbender and co. meet an exiled 'witch' played by Imogen Poots, and you can probably predict what will happen between those two. But the age gap between Fassbender and Poots is incredibly noticeable and I was never able to shake it off, it just seems creepy.

The films climax is disappointing, and it is very noticeable that there wasn't much of a budget to play around with, so the climatic fight is considerably fast and poorly constructed and the resolution is way too rushed.

Overall Centurion is fun and entertaining if you're into Lord Of The Rings, 300, etc. but don't be looking for anything huge or epic...or else you will be disappointed.

Me & Orson Welles

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...les_poster.jpg

There are many, many people in the world who hate the charming Mr. Zac Efron. Upon hearing his name the reply is usually, 'oh you mean the guy from Hight School Musical?' and my response is usually, 'but he was also in Me & Orson Welles'.

I must admit, Me & Orson Welles is a hard movie to track down, it was almost impossible for me to find anywhere, until one fateful day...I discovered it in the Target clearance bin.

The film is based one week in the life of Zac Efron's character, Richard Samuels, who is chosen to play Lucius in the upcoming play Caesar, directed by none other than Orson Welles.

While Zac Efron is good in the movie, the clear breakout is Christian McKay as Orson Welles. McKay struts around, barking at actors left right and centre and manages to be the heart and soul of the whole film, you even get a little disappointed whenever one of his scenes finish and the camera cuts to Claire Danes or Zac Efron.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Lu1ECQKkSn...an-mckay-3.jpg

The only problem I had with the movie was the pacing, the film is very slow and relies heavily on dialogue to keep the story going and most of the actors fail to deliver the goods in a believable way. The only exceptions are Christian McKay and Zac Efron, almost everybody else seemed like a stereotype or a cartoon character, even the lovely Claire Danes.

The film benefits greatly from it's cinematography and overall feel. The streets of New York always seem lively and swell and the atmosphere of Orson Welles' theatre is fantastic. So whoever was in charge of the cinematography did a great job at capturing a classical New York, clap...clap...clap.

http://generationfilm.files.wordpres...nd-orson-4.jpg

Overall Me & Orson Welles is a fantastic film with some great acting from it's two leads, though Christian McKay is clearly the better of the two. Just discussing the film makes me want to see it again...and maybe once more after that.

Red Eye

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_nCpJrTboJ2...d+eye+2005.jpg

And now for a movie that I quote frequently and nobody ever understands what i'm on about, a movie from 2005 by Wes Craven that is often forgotten amongst the majority of people, I am, of course talking about Red Eye.

Red Eye is a nice little thriller that revolves around Lisa Reisert (played very well by Rachel McAdams), an acting hotel manager who is returning home after attending her grandmother's funeral. Her flight is a red eye flight, which means she won't arrive home until early in the morning and by the looks of things the flight may be also be cancelled. Things are looking dull for poor Lisa until she bumps into Jackson Rippner (played extremely well by Cillian Murphy), and by incredible chance, the two are sitting next to each other on the flight.

While the film seems like a romantic drama for a while, a sudden twist is introduced, as Jackson Rippner reveals that he's been stalking Lisa for weeks and has a hit-man outside her father's house as they speak. As it turns out, a very powerful politician is staying in the hotel Lisa is managing and Jackson needs her help to assassinate him, or else her father will die.

Rachel McAdams plays the girl who's in the wrong place at the wrong time with excellence, managing to entertaining and establish a huge emotional connection with the audience. Though Cillian Murphy is fantastic also, playing a cold terrorist who honestly has the most powerful eyes of all time.

http://iluvcinema.com/wp-content/upl.../red-eye-4.jpg

The movie is never slow and if I have any complaints, it's that the lighting is strange at certain points and the soundtrack is very generic and annoying almost constantly, but other than that I have no problems.

Overall Red Eye is an absurdly entertaining thriller with intense moments and scenes of chilling grace, Red Eye is a film I strongly recommend, especially if you want something to entertain you on a Friday night.

Project X

http://www.comingsoon.net/nextraimag...t-x-poster.jpg

Well...The neighbour was kinda funny.

Project X is yet another one of those found footage/camcorder type films, but while Chronicle and Cloverfield were interesting and kept you on your feet...Project X is a party movie that takes too long to get to the point.

Project X stars a whole range of unknown actors, but one of the main problems of the film is that all of these strange and new actors seem to be doing impersonations of much better and more popular stars.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ngaWB6Shac...ct_x_still.jpg

The film is about the birthday of lead character Thomas, and his two best friends, all of whom are preparing to host a massive party. After 30 minutes of what feels like a B-grade Superbad, the film actually starts to get interesting, though it lacks in laughs and plot...two essential things for this type of movie.

Overall I haven't said much about Project X, because there isn't much to say about it, it's in-your-face and wild, it fails horribly in many places, but it might be a lot of fun...if you're very drunk.

Re: PeterVincent's Reviews
 

For some reason, I have never checked out Red Eye, despite my love for Murphy as an actor and it's intriguing premise. Your review has given me a boost to go check it out,

I Love You Phillip Morris

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...lip_Morris.jpg

Apparently this is based on a true story.

Jim Carrey plays Stephen Russell, a con-man who will do anything to make a buck, until of course he gets caught out and thrown in jail. Stephen eventually fits in and by chance meets Phillip Morris (played by Ewan McGregor), Stephen falls in love and plans to spend the rest of his life with him, but when he's released from jail he begins to go back to his old con-man ways.

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/ent...p-Morris-1.jpg

Jim Carrey has proved himself a great dramatic actor before, and he doesn't disappoint here. Carrey jumps around with clever humour and convincing dialogue and even manages to jerk a few tears out of you by the end of the film.

Now for Ewan McGregor, if you automatically assume he's a horrible actor because of Star Wars, then you are very wrong. McGregor proves himself a fantastic actor here, equally as good as Jim Carrey in the film.

I'd think of a problem about the film but...I don't have any problems with the it, not that I can remember at least.

Overall I Love You Phillip Morris is a wonderful film with believable characters (even if some ludicrous things happen) and fantastic pacing, it's funny from start to finish and is a must-see.

Underworld

http://www.traileraddict.com/content...underworld.jpg

Well I did the Resident Evil's, so lets do a similar series...a series I actually will admit I enjoy.

Underworld was a movie that popped up in 2004, it starred Kate Beckinsale (the reason I hit puberty) and Scott Speedman. Also supporting was Michael Sheen and Bill Nighy.

The movie focuses around Selene, a death dealer for the vampire clan, and she has one job and one job only, to hunt Lycan's (basically werewolves). After unraveling a Lycan plot to capture a human names Michael Corvin, Selene finds herself in the middle of a much bigger battle or something.

http://mazirian.com/balistarius/img/mmts/underworld.jpg

The movie is filled with flaws, primarily it's pace, it stammers around places and director Len Wiseman continuously uses slow-mo, though I have to admit, when Michael Sheen does that flip off the car in slow-mo...I was entertained. Also Scott Speedman is annoying at every turn, he whines and pouts and drags down the character of Selene.

The best things about the movie are probably Bill Nighy and Michael Sheen. Bill Nighy plays Viktor, one of the vampire elders, and from the moment he appears, covered in prosthetics, he rips apart the scenery with his over-the-top performance. Michael Sheen plays Lucian, the Lycan leader with a mysterious past, and Sheen plays it so well, you forget he's a villain.

http://i.ytimg.com/vi/f_xJ-c0FFiE/0.jpg

Overall Underworld is a dodgy, low-budget, cheesy film. It's filled with wolf puppets and over-the-top nonsense, it's pace is horrible and most of the supporting cast (usually the vampire's) suck (no pun intended). However the backstory and primary performances are strong, as is the overall feel of the movie. Plus you have to admit, when Beckinsale was trapped and made a hole with her guns...that was a highlight, and it's that type of ridiculously entertaining action that makes the movie somewhat enjoyable.

Re: PeterVincent's Reviews
 

I enjoyed underworld.

Underworld Evolution

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...2evolution.jpg

She's like a scotch...or a wine. She just gets better and better with age, i'll take a flaming Beckinsale please.

Back in 2006, Kate Beckinsale, Scott Speedman and director Len Wiseman returned to bring us Underworld Evolution, my least favourite of the series.

There are two things that can be noticed as soon as the film begins, 1. The budget is much bigger and 2. The writers weren't prepared for the film. What ultimately is Underworld Evolution's downfall is it's plot, which, unlike the strong and well thought out plot of the last film, is much simpler and much, much weaker.

The special effects and action sequences are hugely improved however, with a swooping camera and some very impressive make-up and action sequences. The most impressive piece of the film is probably the climactic battle at the end of the film that involves a helicopter and a castle.

http://images.allmoviephoto.com/2006...lution_002.jpg

Tony Curran is the villain this time round, and he does a good job. However Curran lacks the charisma that Bill Nighy and Michael Sheen had in the previous instalment and ends up being a forgettable villain.

Beckinsale is great and hotter than a volcano as usual.

Overall Underworld Evolution is weak in many places, with a thin plot and some thin supporting characters. It is entertaining and fun however, even if some scenes feel like a videogame.

Underworld Rise Of The Lycans

http://www.joblo.com/posters/images/...e_lycans-3.jpg

Well what do ya know? A prequel better than the others? But...no Beckinsale? :(

This prequel jumps a few hundred years before the first two Underworld films and gives us a very entertaining 'Romeo and Juliet' style love story about a Lycan named Lucian (Michael Sheen, reprising his role from the first film) and Sonja, daughter of the vampire elder Viktor (Bill Nighy, also returning).

Michael Sheen and Bill Nighy were essential in the first Underworld film, without them the film would have probably failed, and the second film felt that failure. But never fear! Michael and Bill are back with much more screen-time and they are always absurdly entertaining to watch.

http://www.gmanreviews.com/wp-conten...the-lycans.jpg

Strangely enough, this instalment is the first of the series not to be directed by Len Wisemen, instead special-effects supervisor Patrick Tatoplolus takes the directors chair and delivers very well. The special effects are scattered around the place and despite the noticeable decline in budget, the Lycan's and castles look believable.

Overall Underworld Rise Of The Lycans is a fun and entertaining film, filled with drama and over-the-top performances by the leads. If the film series keeps going, somewhere along the line another prequel should be in order.

Underworld Awakening

http://www.cinemablend.com/images/ne...1321282804.jpg

There was no way I could have predicted anything about this plot.

Underworld Awakening came to us early this year, and it was quite the ride. Beckinsale is back and better than ever, Scott Speedman is gone and only cameos as a CGI double in the first 5 minutes, but most of all the Lycan's are bigger, better and badder...I still miss Michael Sheen and Bill Nighy though.

The films begins, the Screen Gems logo appears and then something strange happens...the soundtrack builds, Beckinsale talks and we get a montage of footage telling us that humanity has finally found out about the Lycans and the Vampires. As soon as that montage finishes and the movie begins, everything goes KABOOM!!! The two new directors obviously want to out-do Michael Bay.

What this movie needed was a scoreboard for each time someone got decapitated, punctured, sliced, diced, thrown, ripped apart, blown up, shot in the skull, shot in the neck, shot in the face, shot in the groin etc. because when the movie reaches the 10 minute mark, I swear 124 people or so were killed. In fact one of the best scenes in the movie is when Selene (Beckinsale) is sliding down a corridor at super speed and slices 15 peoples necks open with a small knife...it's badass.

http://www.lastmoviecritic.com/web_i...moviescene.jpg

The film is not what you'd expect, people are killed, carefully constructed plot is demolished in seconds and people that look like they'll be a primary character are killed off in minutes, even if they are big names.

The villain of this instalment is probably the weakest of the whole series, a scientist played by Stephen Rea, and he doesn't do much expect look sinister and dramatically inject serum into his son.

Not everything about the film works though, a scene that comes to mind is the Lycan car chase, in which a bunch of starved Lycans chase Selene and co. down a highway, it's not the scene that's bad, it's just the pace and the way it plays out. The movie is so fast and reminiscent of Crank it's very forgettable after viewing, you almost forget the entire middle section of the plot. Charles Dance appears as a vampire leader about halfway through the film and does nothing, in fact, I barely remember anything he did except get angry for no apparent reason.

http://l2.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/s3...sale-66417.jpg

Overall Underworld Awakening is a fast paced thrill rise with exciting special effects and Selene is much cooler and easier to watch without Michael Corvin popping up and ruining the vampire carnage. It is far from perfect, but it's like a roller-coaster you want to ride again, I hope there is at least one more film before the series concludes.

Sex Drive

http://i43.tower.com/images/mm113495...-cover-art.jpg

I'm currently sick, so I went through all the dvd's I've never seen before and spotted Sex Drive.

Sex Drive is a nice little comedy that popped up in 2008, it had a mediocre budget for a film of it's type and it had a relatively unknown cast with some small celebrity cameos.

Ian Lafferty (played by Josh Zuckerman...who looks a little like Alan Cumming) is a high school graduate and a virgin. He spends his time browsing the web and talking to an internet stranger named Miss Tasty. After Miss Tasty invites him over, Ian steals his big brother Rex's car and goes on a road trip with his two friends, one male, one female, to meet Miss Tasty.

The best thing about the film is probably James Marsden as Rex, from the moment he starts speaking with his over-the-top douchebag persona, I was in stitches. Rex is homophobic, douchey and loves his car and motorcycle. Every scene he's in is hilarious and a jewel.

http://static.moviefanatic.com/image...ve-picture.jpg

Unfortunately the pacing of the film is strange and the plot is very predictable. Some scenes (usually the ones with James Marsden) seem well thought out and constructed, others however do not. Scenes focusing on Ian very early in the film reflect American Pie and the silliness towards the middle and end of the film reflect a spoof movie (eg. Scary Movie), more than an actual film itself.

Seth Green is also another strong aspect about the film. As is the cinematography involving landscape scenes. The background humour is one of the best things about the movie, especially when Rex jumps off his motorcycle and walks towards the house, it's hard to see as it is in the corner of the camera, but the motorcycle is skidding down the road, and somehow it's funny.

http://www.mediablvd.com/magazine/ga...serialNumber=1

Overall Sex Drive is a dodgy road trip comedy that lacks a solid plot. However, most of the jokes are either clever or delivered well, and James Marsden should win some form of comedy award for his performance.

Dylan Dog Dead Of Night

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-HKu5VXraNK...01-405x600.jpg

And here is the shining example of the worst dialogue I have ever heard. Sorry Schumacher's Batman & Robin, you come second! Because according to this film and quote:
'You know what they say about werewolf hair, it doesn't lie', and that isn't even the worst of it.

Dylan Dog (Brandon Routh) is a retired paranormal investigator, after the death of his beloved Cassandra he has been left in a state of depression, but he is always pulled to his feet by Marcus (Sam Huntington), his best friend. Now there's two things you should know about this film, number one is that the movie is very low budget and looks like a Buffy The Vampire Slayer episode (without the witty Whedon writing), and two, everyone acts like wood, with the exception of Sam Huntington and Peter Stormare.

http://i.movie.as/p/600/43209.jpg

Now keep in mind this is from the guy that directed TMNT and the trailer is one of the worst I have ever seen. However the film is so very 80's with cheesy action sequences and quotes and horrible looking werewolves.

This is the type of movie I wanna watch at midnight with some ginger beer and stale popcorn with a goofy friend, it's a laughable and fun time, each scene is filled with more and more cheesy dialogue that not even Marlon Brando could deliver and crazy character motivations. I will admit, I went to a party as Brandon Routh's Dylan Dog...The photo's online, i'm not kidding.

Brandon Routh plays Dylan like a sand dune, and by that I mean dry. He is so dry a Mountain Dew couldn't help him, and at first I was angry. Routh has proved himself an actor before and for the first 10 minutes he was unbareable, but after a few more actors popped up and delivered lines the same way...I relised it must be the scripts fault, not the actors.

http://s3.amazonaws.com/auteurs_prod...jpg?1313991968

Overall Dylan Dog is a good movie...in the 80's. The action is cheesy, the special effects suck and the horror/comedy never seems to come in at the right time. All that being said however, it's pretty fun with a friend or two and is very quotable...for the wrong reasons.

28 Days Later

Cillian Murphy, raged up zombie things, the 9th Doctor and Britain. Can it get any better?

28 Days Later is an incredibly low budget film that popped up in 2002 and is one of my favourite movies ever, period. Danny Boyle tackled horror in a unique (at the time) way and used fantastic imagery with lots of grit and some gore.

Jim (Cillian Murphy) wakes up in an abandoned hospital and finds the entire city of London abandoned, eventually he discovers that a virus has spread causing people to become infected with 'rage' when bodily fluids are transferred etc. After a very close and horrifying encounter he is saved by some survivors, one played by the lovely and powerful Naomi Harris.

http://thatwasabitmental.files.wordp...11/01/2801.jpg

The movie soars because of it's main cast. Cillian Murphy is fantastic as the very Irish Jim, who walks around without a clue and has multiple breakdowns and develops very well as a character. Naomi Harris is very strong as Selena, a tough woman who does whatever necessary to survive, but she is human on the inside. Other cast members are fantastic as well, though I won't spoil them.

If I would ever have any complaints, it would be that the film gets slow once the plot kicks in, though it's only about 10 minutes, and the horror and thrills return bigger and better, and you learn it isn't just the virus that should be feared.

Overall 28 Days Later is a brilliant film that does amazing things with it's teeny little budget. Every member of the cast is strong and the directing is fantastic even though it looks like it was filmed on a camcorder. I recommend 28 Days Later to anyone that's remotely interested, even if you don't like horror.

28 Weeks Later

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...later_ver3.jpg

So...what happened to that great cast from the last movie?

28 Weeks Later starts..weeks...after the last movie, the infected have starved to death and the American military has occupied London in an attempt to restore the country. Robert Carlyle plays a survivor with some dark secrets who is overjoyed when his children come to stay with him in the country in an attempt to colonise. Imogen Poots plays his older daughter and a child actor plays his youngest son, who has two different coloured eyes...and this becomes a very important (and annoying) plot point.

Danny Boyle is no longer directing for this instalment and it is very noticeable, the writings weaker, the actors don't seem to have much motivation (Rose Byrne seems to scream at everything for no real reason), the characters are all over the place (it is very unclear who we're supposed to root for) and the film just doesn't have the moral lessons or the heart the last film had.

http://farm1.staticflickr.com/148/43...0874bf241b.jpg

What does push the film through is the pace and the occasional strong performance by an ensemble actor (Jeremy Renner is the standout), the budget is much bigger, but what made the previous film so charming was it's low budget, so this film comes off as more of a generic summer zombie/horror film.

Overall 28 Weeks Later is a good horror movie, though it's an ant compared to 28 Days Later. The action is thrilling and the story is somewhat intriguing even if it seems ludicrous. But what this movie could use is some heart...but don't get any blood on you...you'll get infected.

American Beauty

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...uty_poster.jpg

This wasn't just a movie, this was an emotional experience.

Where do I start? Well lets start with the directing I guess...Sam Medes is the director for this film and all I can say is that he did a perfect job with a movie that I can honestly say...is perfect. The camera angles, the music, the acting! Oh my lord! The acting is brilliant and easily the best job Wes Bently has ever done (unless you think Ghost Rider's his best...).

Kevin Spacey plays Lester Burnham, a man who is sick of his life and discovers that he has an attraction to his daughters best friend. His daughter, Jane (Thora Birch), is being filmed and followed by a boy called Ricky Fitts (Wes Bently), the son of the new neighbour (Chris Cooper) who is a homophobic Colonel.

http://www.everythingspacey.com/imag...anbeauty19.jpg

I won't spoil anything else about the plot but what I will say is the film zoomed right into my top 10 after I viewed it for the first time recently, I love this movie to death, and if you haven't seen the film, I cannot recommend it enough.

I cried, I laughed, and most importantly I left with no regrets and no problems, a perfect movie in my opinion.

Youth In Revolt

It's a rare occasion when Michael Cera does something different, and for this film...He kinda does something new.

Nick Twist (Michael Cera) is a lonely hipster, son of a divorced mother and father who don't want much to do with him. However when Nick goes on a vacation he meets Sheeni Saunders (Portia Doubleday), the most exciting thing that has ever happened to him. After returning home Nick creates an alter ego to wreck havoc, François (also Michael Cera), so he can get thrown out and return to his beloved Sheeni and live with her forever.

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/...revolt-001.jpg

While the movie is filled with problems such as pacing, chemistry, and even at some points comedy, the overall joy of the film is François. François is the alter ego that Nick has created and it is not only hilariously entertaining to see Michael Cera attempt to be a bad boy, but the best scene in the film is when Sheeni is flirting with the François side of Nick.

The supporting cast ranges from Zach Galifianakis to Justin Long and usually there presence strengthens the film, you can even see a younger Rooney Mara do her thing for a good ten minutes.

http://cdn.screenrant.com/wp-content...-revolt-07.jpg

The film's plot is simple. It goes from A to Z in a mediocre running time and usually manages to entertain, however I was always horrified whenever the camera would zoom on François' eyes, Michael Cera must have had a problem with his contacts or something because they were scary.

Overall Youth In Revolt is a witty little film that should be checked out. Michael Cera does his usual thing as Nick but also does something different as François, overall it's a fun time despite it's obvious flaws.

Re: PeterVincent's Reviews
 

I like this film, expected much more from it, though.

Fright Night (2011)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...2011Poster.jpg

2011 gave us WAY too many remakes, and Fright Night was easily the best one.

The film is very similar to the original so there isn't much use delving into the plot...until the film reaches the 30 minute mark and goes in an almost completely different direction to the original from 1985.

Anton Yelchin plays the young hero Charlie Brewster this time around and is noticeably too old to play a high school student, unless he was held back...8 years. Collin Farrell is one of the two strong performances in this movie that stick out, the other is David Tennant. Collin Farrell is the evil vampire Jerry, and he plays the character like a shark, as McLovin points out early on in the film...Oh yeah, Christopher Mintz-Plasse is in this also.

http://www.mattopia.com/movies/revie...ht-night-b.jpg

David Tennant is Peter Vincent, the most noticeable and drastic change in the whole film. In the original movie Peter Vincent was an old TV show host, and in this remake Peter Vincent is a Las Vegas magician for the Hard Rock Hotel who specialises in vampires...and he has a very predictable dark past. Tennant plays the role well and makes horrible dialogue sound convincing and work.

The budget is mediocre for a horror movie. The special effects are decent, and there's a very entertaining explosion and chase scene. But the movie is dragged down by the predictable outcomes and lousy dialogue.

http://latimesherocomplex.files.word...ie-still-1.jpg

Overall though Fright Night is one of my favourite films of 2011, and the blu-ray looks great too. Collin Farrell and David Tennant's performances really pull the film and it's roughly as entertaining as the original film. A remake that doesn't go in the direction of the original, I recommend you check it out.

I'm going to venture into the X-Men.

X-Men

http://images.wikia.com/marvelmovies...men_poster.jpg

Hugh Jackman as Wolverine...perfect. James Marsden as Cyclops...wait...what?

X-Men came in 2000 and caused a huge re-emergence in superhero films, which is good...usually. This was also about the time when Marvel began to get the upper-hand in the film industry. X-Men started a franchise and is remembered today as one of the best of the franchise.

Professor Charles Xavier (Patrick Stewart) has a school for mutants, and in this world, mutants are gifted with extraordinary powers. Erik Lehnsherr or as he prefers...Magneto (Ian McKellen) also leads a group of mutants...however he is determined to wipe out humanity because of their refusal to accept mutants.

Perhaps one of the reasons the film is so popular with people is because anybody can relate to a character in the film. The characters range from good to bad, with high moral values to low morals, with respect for people and no respect, there is a character for everyone.

The film isn't perfect though. The special effects and pacing are dodgy and seem rushed. The X-Men go from hanging out at school to wrecking havoc against Magneto on the Statue Of Liberty in about a minute. Also when Halle Berry makes that joke about a toad and lightning...it's cringeworthy.

http://ffmedia.ign.com/x-men/pics/ma...-wolverine.jpg

Overall X-Men is a good movie and one of the better of the superhero genre. Hugh Jackman was born to play Wolverine and audiences love him...apparently. The sequel to X-Men however, blew this one away.

Re: PeterVincent's Reviews
 

I found the first one to be like the Superman of it's universe.

Kind of finding it's feet during production, which gives the overall finished product a naive feel.
I definitely rank it as the lowest of the franchise but still enjoyable.

X2: X-Men United

http://www.spun.com/scover/full/002/298/002298322.jpg

Bryan Singer really stepped up his game for this one.

Everything about X2 is bigger and better. The special effects are better, the acting is better, the pacing is better and the directing is better. It just gets better and better.

Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) returns after searching for the truth about his past and is sad to come to the realisation that he has found nothing. At roughly the same time however Colonel William Striker (Brian Cox) invades Xavier's School For Gifted Youngsters and kidnaps as many mutants as he can, including Xavier and Cyclops. It's up to Wolverine and the surviving to break into Striker's base and rescue the other mutants, with a little help from Magneto and co.

http://content6.flixster.com/rtmovie.../20716_gal.jpg

The cast is much better than in the previous films, especially Halle Berry and James Marsden (despite his role being noticeably shortened...again). However the best performance is clearly Alan Cumming as Nightcrawler.

The movie isn't perfect of course. Some scenes seem rushed and the special effects take charge at moments. One of the slightly annoying problems about the film is the climactic battles at the end, as the camera keeps cutting to different character at different places and causes occasional confusion.

http://content7.flixster.com/rtmovie.../32909_gal.jpg

X2: X-Men United is a wonderful film with huge improvements all round. It's a shame however that Bryan Singer could not return for the third instalment.

X-Men The Last Stand

http://lh3.ggpht.com/-pWervPKH79c/TI...006%252529.jpg

The series really fell flat on it's face when Bryan Singer left to direct Superman Returns, and X-Men The Last Stand is solid proof of that.

After the death of Jean Gray, Scott Summers (James Marsden) is in shock and grief. However due to some apparent miracle Jean is alive and is discovered by Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) after Scott goes missing. Charles Xavier (Patrick Stewart) warns Wolverine however that Jean has an alter-ego named Pheonix, who is incredibly powerful and dangerous. The X-Men are then forced to take matters into their own hands when Pheonix falls into the hands of Magneto (Ian McKellen).

The primary problem with X-Men The Last Stand is simply the fact that it has no heart. The characters seem less motivated and so does the plot. Everything stumbles from left to right, showing you impressive special effects and action sequences without any real relevance to plot or sense of danger. Important characters are killed off so quickly and without any emotion, the entire film seems hollow and emotionless.

http://cps-static.rovicorp.com/2/Ope...=allmovie_soap

However those action sequences are pretty impressive. Ian McKellen does the best with what he has and Hugh Jackman manages to express a lot of emotion in particular scenes (a confrontation at the climax is the best example). James Marsden is yet again cut short and Halle Berry has absolutely nothing to do during the whole film except a few semi-impressive stunts.

The film introduces dozens of new characters such as Archangel (Ben Foster), who actually has something to do with the primary plot but ultimately disappears and reappears whenever the script requires them to. Vinnie Jones appears as the Juggernaught and manages to pull of a few laughs and entertain you whenever he gets the opportunity to use his mutant ability.

http://www.iwatchstuff.com/images/20...magneto-x3.jpg

Overall X-Men The Last Stand isn't horrible, however it's hollow without any sign of heart. The directing is solid and the special effects are great, but that isn't enough to make a good movie. Bryan Singer did a much better job and unfortunately the director of this film (Brett Ratner) didn't return to pick up the pieces and improve in the spin-off/prequel...instead the series went from bad...to worse.

Oh, and Ellen Page is in the movie...I know.

Re: PeterVincent's Reviews
 

Ready to hate?

The Last Stand is my favourite of the X-Men series.

Well...it's not the worst of the franchise.

X-Men Origins: Wolverine

Oh dear...

X-Men Origins: Wolverine is the prime example of what happens when a movie is rushed and unoriginal, and when a movie series becomes so desperate to please fans it takes any opportunity to cram in a comic book character.

Logan (Hugh Jackman) has spent most of his seemingly immortal life fighting in wars with his brother Victor (Liev Schreiber). However after being recruited by William Stryker to join a team of mutants, Logan discovers that he is becoming a monster. Logan leaves his brother and retires to a simple life with his love interest Kayla Silverfox (Lynn Collins). However, Victor returns and kills his beloved, causing Logan to go on a violent hunt after him, the results of course lead him to his destiny...the Wolverine.

http://content2.catalog.photos.msn.c...7079F0181E.jpg

First of all, the film is crammed with comic book characters, from Blob to Gambit. The most offensive (to fans at least) of those is the appearance and mistreatment of Deadpool (Ryan Reynolds), Ryan Reynolds plays the role well, but is handled horrifically by the plot and the direction (with the exception of his brilliant introduction).

The special effects are dodgy and stick out like a sore thumb. One scene in particular, when Logan is playing with his adamantium claws looks horrible and incredibly amateur, and as for the obvious green screens...I won't even bother.

http://cdn.screenrant.com/wp-content...-movie-002.jpg

Hugh Jackman does a good job carrying the film and delivers a solid performance, even if most of his dialogue is screaming (usually at the air). Unfortunately Wolverine just isn't the same without the rest of the X-Men by his side...and this film really feels that.

Overall X-Men Origins: Wolverine is a waste of an iconic figure and jumps around the place with it's shoddy special effects and plot. Characters are trashed and potential is destroyed. I wouldn't recommend it unless you're a big X-Men fan. I had decided then and there that the series was dead...Until Matthew Vaughn came surprised me with the next film.

Re: PeterVincent's Reviews
 

Nice reviews of the X-Men films.

I'd have rated X3 a lot higher than 2.5 popcorns, probably closer to for me... I actually prefer X3 out of all of them...

... and Wolverine Origins was pretty timid really, so I agree with your rating on that one. Not a fan of Origins. Was interesting, but nothing special.

X-Men First Class

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-QkIWsB74wO...irst_class.jpg

Sleek, sexy and stylish. Who'd of guessed it'd be X-Men that would have one of the best prequels to date?

X-Men First Class tells the story of Charles Xavier (James McAvoy), a brilliant young man who will grow up to create the X-Men and Erik Lensherr (Michael Fassbender), a survivor of the holocaust out for revenge against the man who killed his mother, destined to become Magneto. The two of them create the greatest mutant bromance of all time...and my personal favourite of the X-Men series.

Matthew Vaughn is best known for his comedic superhero film Kick-Ass, but also directed a very stylish film known as Layer Cake. Matthew Vaughn is no stranger to cinema and takes a very unique and interesting approach to the X-Men. The entire film is jazzed up, reminiscent of 60's bond films and has a certain charm that none of the other films had.

Supporting McAvoy and Fassbender is Jennifer Lawrence as Raven/Mystique. Lawrence holds her own, however she is difficult to remember due to the equally powerful performances from Michael Fassbender and James McAvoy.

http://cinemasights.files.wordpress....s-epicfail.jpg

Kevin Bacon plays the antagonist Sebastian Shaw and delivers a loveable and charming little performance. Bacon first appears with a creepy beard and a flawless German accent and then returns with a nice cut and a funky American accent. The switch is annoying...but somehow relevant to the plot due to the characters backstory and mutant power.

The plot is well thought out, with Kevin Bacon's plan involving a certain Cuban Missile Crisis. The characters are excellent and well written (with a few exceptions). Kevin Bacon's master plan however has some major flaws and seems slightly forced.

The special effects range from fantastic to mediocre. It sometimes seems that a majority of the budget was saved for Michael Fassbender, as Erik Lensherr gets all of the 'awesome moments' (a submarine lift is the most memorable). A minor character known as Riptide has a cringeworthy tornado special effect which looks more like a painting, and January Jones' Emma Frost looks out of place for a while until you get used her.

http://refrigeratorbox.org/wp-conten...6/lift-sub.jpg

Overall X-Men First Class is a fantastic prequel that is in my opinion the best of the series. It's well made, well acted, well scripted, and an overall well done. It's one of the best films to emerge out of 2011, check it out.

This rating might come as a surprise...

Drive Angry

http://randyraisch.files.wordpress.c...51vnq0n5el.jpg

You remember that obscure little Ryan Gosling movie about driving last year that everyone seems to love? Well Drive Angry runs that sh*t over, reverses back over it, then squashes Gosling with it's awesomeness...I'm just kidding...a little.

Drive Angry stars Nicolas Cage as John Milton, a man who broke out of hell to rescue his dead daughter's baby who's about to be sacrificed by a cult. However Satan isn't going to let John slip out of hell that easily, so he sends The Accountant (played spectacularly by William Fichtner) after him. What then pursues is an out-of-this-world adrenaline ride that flies down the highway of dumb fun at 200 miles an hour.

http://cagewisdom.files.wordpress.co...driveangry.png

Nicolas Cage does his thing as usual and delivers some pretty entertaining dialogue. The shining standout of the film is William Fichtner as The Accountant. For every horrible line of dialogue, for every cringe worthy action scene, William Fichtner comes in and saves the day. I kid you not, Fichtner's performance is what makes the movie worth watching.

The film is filled with errors though. The special effects are cringe worthy, most of the dialogue comes off weak and there is a Nic Cage sex/action scene that gave me nightmares for a month.

Overall Drive Angry is a lot of fun. If you're trying to pick between this and Drive...well it depends on what you want, if you want a nice slow story with strong characters and classical music and stuff pick Drive, if you want some high octave, crazy a** action with ridiculous stunts however...go with Drive Angry.

Shaun Of The Dead

http://images.wikia.com/zombie/image...ad-Posters.jpg

You've got red on you...

Shaun Of The Dead stars Simon Pegg as Shaun, as a deadbeat adult who lives with his best friend Ed (Nick Frost) and his kind-of-friend Pete (Peter Serafinowicz). Shaun has very recently broken up with his girlfriend Liz, and he is desperate to get back with her...no matter what. Unfortunately the zombie apocalypse is also happening at the same time.

What really makes Shaun Of The Dead a great film is the hundreds of different things you pick up each time you watch, this is common in an Edgar Wright movie. Edgar Wright has a very distinctive style in which he crams hundreds of sub-jokes and references into every scene, so no matter how many times you watch the movie...you notice something new.

The acting is great, an all round good job from Simon Pegg to Bill Nighy. If you're a fan of the Simon Pegg television series Spaced (also created by Edgar Wright and starring Nick Frost + a majority of the supporting cast) you'll love the references and nods to the show, especially some surprising cameos.

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/...d_1503861c.jpg

The only complaint I have ever had with the film is the pacing. The film builds up the zombie outbreak to a point in which you're just begging for it to happen so the plot can speed up.

Overall Shaun Of The Dead is a classic and one of the best films of the last decade. A must see for anybody...ever.

Re: PeterVincent's Reviews
 

I rewatched this so much that it's a bit stale for me now. But it was in my top ten when I first joined here, and I still have love for it, so +1.

The Mummy

http://static.moviefanatic.com/image...vie-poster.jpg

The best thing this movie ever did was make me remember Indiana Jones.

The Mummy is a movie that popped up in 1999...and should have stayed there, instead it got two sequels and a spin-off movie series, God knows why.

So the plot is simple. Thousands of years ago in Egypt a priest fell in love with the Pharaoh's mistress, so he killed the Pharaoh and the mistress killed herself so the priest could resurrect her after he escaped from the Pharoah's bodyguards. However the priest was captured, mummified alive, cursed with superpowers or something and buried. Simple. Now, thousands of years later in the early 1900's, Brendan Fraser has to stop this mummy after it escapes from it's tomb.

The Mummy is very poorly edited, people jump around the globe, people jump in one corner and end up in a chamber or something...it's a mess. The Mummy is also a Stephen Sommers film, which pretty much speaks for itself. So overall if you haven't seen the movie, don't expect much.

The special effects are dated, yet occasionally decent. An action sequence involving CGI sand and a plane manages to be an unintentional laugh. The most impressive sequence in the whole film is probably when Fraser leaps over the damsel and slices up a few mummies...It was pretty cool.

Overall...Well...Kids will love it. You might like it. It's silly.

Re: PeterVincent's Reviews
 

I love this movie, and not in a so-bad-it's-enjoyable way. It's an entertaining throwback to the explorer/adventure movies of the 1950's.

The mummy was a great movie.

Scream

http://www.slasherstudios.com/wp-con...vie_poster.jpg

The only thing better than a surprise, is an unexpected surprise.

Scream manages to delight from start to end, not with it's horror...but with it's humour. The frequent subtle jokes and horror references boost the film's awkward pace and help you forget the occasional horrible performance (you know who I'm talking about...right?).

http://cinemafique.files.wordpress.c...arrymore_l.jpg

The cast is fun and some of the scenes are actually scary and thrilling. The characters are well aware of their situation and the cliche' that's happening around them, which only increases the mystery of who the killer really is. My only complaint is the ending, which seems forced and odd in comparison to the rest of the film. I would recommend Scream on a Friday night.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_NugSUQwq6w...tt%2BDamon.jpg

It takes a little while to get into the central plot, but Martin Scorsese's film is without a doubt one of the best crime drama's in the last decade or so. Leonardo DiCaprio is relatable and likeable in the primary role, Matt Damon is great as usual, Jack Nicholson is doing the usual Nicholson thing and even Mark Wahlberg delivers some nice moments. The plot is unpredictable and keeps you guessing until the end. Very entertaining and compelling, I recommend it to anyone interested in this sort of genre. I don't want to spoil anything about the plot, because that's the best part.

Iron Man

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...nmanposter.JPG

I can honestly say I would never have even thought of choosing Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark. Not that he's a bad actor, it's just the thought would never had crossed my mind...ever. I can say though, Robert was and still is perfect for the role.

Iron Man was the first movie in 'Phase One' of Marvel's big Avengers scheme. Not only did it make more money than an aggresive ex-wife with a powerful lawyer, but it managed to be a ridiculously entertaining film.

http://www-deadline-com.vimg.net/wp-...on-man-301.jpg

If another actor with slightly less charisma than Downey Jr. had been in the role, the movie would be ruined. Downey Jr.'s Tony Stark is just the right amount of douche bag, so you don't hate him, you just love each sarcastic remark that leaves his mouth. Supporting Jr. is Gwyneth Paltrow as Pepper Potts, whom also delivers plenty of charisma and spunk, and Jeff Bridges as Obadiah Stone, a humorous but overall underused character.

Iron Man might not be the greatest movie ever made, but it is witty fun. Whenever Jr.'s on the screen you simply cannot get enough of him...hell I'll say it, Tony Stark for President.

Resident Evil: Retribution

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ion_poster.jpg

If you like stuff that makes sense...you'll hate this movie.

If you like dumb fun with a cool soundtrack and clever fight sequences...you'll love this movie.

If you've seen Dawn Of The Dead, Day Of The Dead, Underworld and Aliens...you've seen most of this movie.

Resident Evil: Retribution is the fifth instalment in a franchise that just won't die, even if you want it too. Despite my mostly negative views on the franchise i've come to somewhat enjoy the dumb and loud series, and even begin to find Alice attractive.

Resident Evil: Retribution begins with a backwards slow-motion opening credits sequence (which was at first hilarious...then kinda cool) and dream sequence (the biggest Dawn Of The Dead rip-off iv'e ever seen). Alice then wakes up to find that she is trapped in an Umbrella Corp. virtual testing facility and must escape via the help of her former nemesis Albert Wekser (Shawn Roberts, who you begin to miss once he goes off-screen). Alice must confront clones of her dead friends and an evil Jill Valentine (returning to the tole is Selena Guilroy, who is officially the worst actress I have ever seen) whilst protecting the survivors of the simulations, her mute daughter and a kinder hearted Michelle Rodriguez.

http://www.taazastat.com/movieimage/...0x41037334.jpg

We get the usual slow-mo nonsense and explosions galore. New character Ada Wong gets trapped in a sticky situation and rips-off Underworld, Alice must rescue her daughter from a licker and rips-off Aliens, and a majority of the film rips-off Day Of The Dead.

The performances are bland, with the evil Jill Valentine managing to be one of the worst performances of the year. The soundtrack is upbeat and more exciting than previous films, also more orchestral and less punky. The action is crazy and incredible inventive at points, whilst the writing is dim-witted and meant for 13-year-old boys.

http://melissagraf.com/wp-content/up...etribution.jpg

Overall Resident Evil: Retribution is a bad movie, it will never be a good movie, neither does it have the potential. It is however a hell of a good time and is so dumb it isn't insulting, it's just funny. Have some Pepsi and a big box of popcorn and grab as many friends as you can, it's funnier than Hotel Transylvania, that's for sure.

Clash Of The Titans (2010)

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-UNkF9agmGI...ans-poster.jpg

You know when you need to take a crap but you just can't push it out, and you're sitting there for hours just waiting for the bloody thing to come out, this movie is exactly like that, but in 3D.

Basically...It sucks, a lot.

PV, your review above may be the funniest review I've ever read in my life! :D

But, I did like the film, chiefly because Gemma Arterton was in it. *sigh*

If you're having difficulty passing bowel movements and your stools are bloody, you should see a doctor.

Looper

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...per_poster.jpg

It's smart, it's sexy and it has some of the best damn dialogue since No Country For Old Men...oh and ****.

Levitt still manages to impress and an actor and pulls of an incredible performance, he manages to look and sound convincing whilst making his character unique and distinctive from Bruce Willis at the same time...if that statement made any sense at all.

Jeff Daniels tells us not to think to much about time travel, but the time travel aspect is one of the best things about the movie. You (the entertained audience member) can't help but attempt to predict everything and then squeal in surprise as nothing goes as you expect.

http://download.gamezone.com/uploads...5/Looper_1.jpg

The chases, the fights and the cinematography are excellent. The only visual flaw I noticed involved Levitt and a hover bike in a field...it was pretty dodgy.

Bruce Willis pulls himself off well and takes back his rightful throne as king of badass gunplay and grunting (a scene involving duel P90's and human shields is an epic standout).

Looper is an epic thrill ride that's solid and entertaining from start to finish, despite some minor slow scenes.

Prometheus

http://cdn.mos.totalfilm.com/images/...157-470-75.jpg

Iv'e watched this movie 5 times now...and I don't understand why it gets so much damn hate.

I am an enormous Alien fan, and whilst Prometheus is a prequel to Alien, it is not necessarily vowed to adopt the same tone and story of Ridley Scott's classic.

Alien was a horror film that focused on casual characters in a confined area with a mysterious and scary villain. Prometheus is a film about life and creation with small teaspoons of horror and thriller. Prometheus also has a good 40 minutes of deleted scenes...that explain a fair amount of the movie, but that isn't the primary point.

Prometheus follows a group of scientists and soldiers as they explore a planet that is believed to house our creators, the Engineers. As the crew discovers more...they find out the truth...or something like that.

http://ruthlessculture.files.wordpre...2/06/prom1.jpg

The film stars Noomi Rapace, who is best known for The Millennium Trilogy. It also stars one of my favourite actors in the industry right now...the one...the only...Michael Fassbender.

Fassbender can take any line of dialogue, any gesture or movement and make it so convincing you forget he's a human being. Basically...Fassbender is the balls.

Ridley Scott makes anything look scary. A scene involving a medical procedure makes you wince and another involving a snake-like creature is plain old jump worthy.

http://www.yellmagazine.com/wp-conte...49-445x297.jpg

Prometheus was not what fans were generally expecting...that's for sure. The film references Alien and even directly ties into it at point. Haters will hate and so forth...but dude, don't get aggresive.

I loved Prometheus I admit it.



The Blu-Ray's spectacular too.

Frankenweenie

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mb...8tmo1_1280.jpg

Tim Burton must be tired.

The guy has done so many Johnny Depp films and Frankenweenie shows that he can't do much else, not even his old fashion black-and-white claymation style that used to make him so unique...is that the right word?

http://media2.firstshowing.net/first...irkfull02a.jpg

Frankenweenie starts off nice and paces well, you see all the characters and enjoy learning about the life of this boy and his dog. When the actual plot kicks in however...the movie drags like a pensioner driving a smartcar.

The plot is so simple and uncreative that you start to wish something new would happen, but it never does.

Despite it's major flaws Frankenweenie is still a solid if not...okay...Movie, but it's a massive fall below the usual Burton standard.

Skyfall

http://www.007.com/wp-content/upload...650.jpg?84cd58

It's been about 15 years or so since I've enjoyed a Bond film this much...and I am a large Bond fan. Perhaps it was Sam Mendes' stylish contribution to the franchise or the fresh performances...or maybe even the fact that this film marks James Bond's 50th anniversary.

Skyfall starts off with a brilliant opening, a thrilling chase that re-introduces us to Daniel Craig's James Bond. Bond's desperate to track down the bad guy; he's running, sprinting, jumping, diving, hitching a ride, diving some more, driving, sprinting, jumping a little more, walking, running, driving a non-conventional vehicle, running, climbing, punching, walking, ducking, punching, chocking...and then he's falling...you might even say...Skyfalling...hehehe.

http://static3.businessinsider.com/i...hange-decc.jpg

The enormous introduction to an enormous film really sucks you back into a world you once loved, a world filled with you know...spy stuff. The second act introduces you to the villain, who is (to say the least) an effective and thrilling character. The third act is a showdown that is done (to quote a character in the film) 'the old fashioned way' and we are then treated to a massive and Bondtastic amount of references and homages to previous films and encounters...oh man...I almost wet my pants.

No film is without it's flaws though. The transition between the second and third act are shifty and change from a slow-pace to a fast-pace in half a second. The sub-plot in Shanghai is engaging and (in my opinion) one of the strongest parts of the film. We are introduced to characters that are then killed off despite there being major chances for development. Oh and they make a joke about Goldeneye that was cute but, I love Goldeneye, don't you go making fun of Goldeneye.

http://i2.cdnds.net/12/39/618x411/mo...ll_still_2.jpg

Daniel Craig isn't the most emotive of Bond's (heck, who is?) but a major scene towards the end of the film involves him crying, and when a brick like Daniel Craig cries...well...Your eyes start to get a little wet.

Overall Skyfall is rather brilliant and it is very clear that the guys behind it were trying to make as much of a homage to the 50 years of Bond as they could without ruining the film in the process, and that worked! It's not as good as say, Goldeneye, but then again...It's fricken spectacular...I might watch it again. Hey TylerDurden99...you up for some Skyfall?

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__...THAUJmovie.jpg

There are many folk around that are roasting this movie as if it were the latest in a line of Adam Sandler comedies with Kevin James as the co-star. But (in PeterVincent's opinion at least) it is not.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey has a horrible time finding it's footing (at least for the first ten minutes). The film opens with a narrated flashback remeniscent of The Mummy and is even more uncomfortable to watch with it's 48 frame per second look. Alas, the film finally snaps into gear when we get our first look at Martin Freeman as Bilbo Baggins. Something seemed strange about the character, I couldn't tell if Freeman was making him semi-unlikeable on purpose or because he's overplaying the characters concern for his property. However I soon realised that he's building a character...the best type of character...one of those heroes that turns from a nobody into a complete badass over the course of a few hours.

http://www.containsmoderateperil.com...age-thorin.jpg

The Dwarves of the film were something I was dreading, however, they ended up being incredibly likeable and (some of them at least) memorable. Thorin Oakenshield is the leader of the company and the king of the Dwarves, desperate to take back his home from Smaug The Dragon. This of course leads me to another point...the changes. Peter Jackson and co. have made some rather large changes in order to drag this story on for three movies, one of those is a nemesis for Thorin. The bad guy is an albino orc with one arm, something that wouldn't look out of place in a sequel to Season Of The Witch. This villain was also something I was uneasy about, but that also surprised me...he was only in the movie for about 15 minutes and he wasn't too bad. Another change is the enhanced sub-plot of the Necromancer and Radagast The Brown (played here by former Doctor Who, Sylvester McCoy), that sub-plot wasn't delved into too much, but is sure to become a massive thing in future films.

http://media.avclub.com/images/420/4...9/627.jpg?1457

The direction is beautiful, despite the 48 frames thing screwing around with my eyes and making all the special effects look a little strange. Peter Jackson is doing his ol' camera pans again...and it's beautiful and epic as ever. Lord I missed Middle Earth...and Jackson's bringing it back to me...

Overall The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is not anything like what people are saying, in fact it is a contender for the best film of 2012. Do I regret going to the premiere of this in costume? No...No I don't, and I won't regret doing the same thing for the next one...next year...

Jurassic Park

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-m4jbT8TxZU...sic-park-2.jpg

One of my earliest memories was the dodgy tape my parents had recorded off of the television for Jurassic Park. This movie is what made me love dinosaurs as a six-year-old-boy, this movie is what drove me to learn how to spell the word 'Palaeontologist' before finishing Grade 2, this movie is what gave me nightmares, it's what made me go out and rent my first movie from Blockbuster Video (The Lost World and Hook to be precise), this movie is what made me beg my Father to take me to the museum, this movie is what made me start reading large novels at age 8 (the borrowing of Michael Crichton's book by an 8-year-old alarmed my Librarian, the lovely Miss Blundell), this movie is what made me seek out other great films. This movie is what helped me become the man I am today, and while I might not be as fascinated with dinosaurs as I was many years ago, I still get misty eyes when I remember every little thing this movie has done to me...

Jurassic Park is a film like no other, a film that will always be remembered and a film that is complete and utter perfection, whether it be Dr. Grant's subtle development as a character or Wayne Knight's Dennis Nedrey's comic relief, there is not one single millisecond in Jurassic Park to cause boredom or disinterest.

http://l.yimg.com/ea/img/-/121109/ju...r7c_z3khkcvg--

Describing this film in one word is incredibly difficult, but when I watch it I can say that MAGICAL would be the word to describe it. Everything in Jurassic Park is magical, the pace, the characters, the special effects, the score (arguably the best score ever made), the design, the story and the just...greatness that it is. Spielberg does a gobsmacking job at directing a film that has a such a golden pace and dozens of memorable scenes...heck, I can remember the whole movie! Though I do have to give massive credit to Sam Neill, who is the soul of this film (for me). Neill does an astounding job at Dr. Alan Grant and develops from a likeable character to one of the greatest characters ever known. Dr. Grant becomes such as hero at the end of the film...it's almost impossible to describe the feeling of payoff you get at the end of the film. I also tip my hat to Spielberg yet again, as he never actually showed Dr. Grant firing a gun (something that made him a more family friendly hero, and a believable character, as I for one cannot picture Dr. Grant firing a gun).

I also have to briefly mention that the puppets in this film never cease to amaze me. The animatronics and the CGI bled so well that even today it's sometimes hard to tell what is what. So...I tip my hat to Stan Winston too.

Overall Jurassic Park is one of the most essential films to see. It's one of the greatest films of all time and one of my absolute favourites.

...And for my rating? Well...I spared no expense...


:up::up::up::up::up::up::up::up::up:

Re: PeterVincent's Reviews
 

Nice review matey!
Although I rated JP lower than you did (percentage wise) due to the differences from the book, I had it a #2 in my Top CG Movies Of All Time, it came second to Starship Troopers... like you, even today I get blown away by JP's effects and find it hard to spot the joins.

I had JP at #31 in my Top 100 favourites too.

Though some of the differences were incredibly significant, some changes made the characters more relatable (I am of course referring to Crichton's occasional sexism) such as Dr. Sattler and Lex (also what happens in the books conclusion with Hammond does upset me, character wise). I do understand greatly where you are coming from though.

Re: PeterVincent's Reviews
 

Prometheus felt somewhat unfocused and slow but I liked it well enough. Not what I'd hoped for but pretty good. I'm not one of those haters who tear a movie to shreds if it doesn't meet high expectations, I just try to forget all that and judge it for what it is. I'd give it a 7, maaaybe an 8 depending on how I felt it held up on rewatch.

Fair enough I guess.:dizzy:

Re: PeterVincent's Reviews
 

I've never understood the appeal of Jurassic Park. One of the most underwhelming and dull cine experiences of my life. Maybe if I'd been six? I loved dinosaurs when I was 6.

Re: PeterVincent's Reviews
 

Stolen

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ilm_poster.jpg


'New Orleans always finds a way back...'

Wowzas. Seeing this in the cinema, at the last minute, with a surprisingly full house of cheerful people and plenty of popcorn by my side really amplified and made this a pleasant experience.

Every cliche', every bad pun, every mediocre chase and all of the bizarre dialogue from Josh Lucas' character was met with appreciative laughs and claps from the audience, and for a Box-Office flop that didn't look like it was ever going to be released in Australia...People seemed to enjoy it.

I exited the cinema to the sounds of 'that wasn't that bad' and 'I liked that' comments from wives to husbands and girlfriends to boyfriends. I reflected and thought to myself...hey...that really wasn't that bad...And I love Nicolas Cage...And Simon West still did a much better job at directing on this one than say...The Expendables 2.

http://www.filmjunk.com/images/weblo.../08/stolen.jpg

So the basic plot of Stolen is that Nicolas Cage's daughter has been STOLEN (not Taken...Do you wanna get sued?) by Josh Lucas' Vincent, a criminal friend believed to be dead by Nicolas Cage who wants the $10 million dollars that Nicolas Cage failed to steal in their previous heist. Of course the typical chase and race against time ensues, with predictable explosions and some non-predictable motives from the villain (the speech he gives to the Australian guy is absolutely hysterical and I don't even wanna get started when it comes to what he tells the cop that pulls him over at one point).

Where Stolen succeeds is it's pace, it's effects (mostly practical) and the charisma and charm it brings. Scenes that should be boring aren't and characters that should be bland...aren't. Nicolas Cage brings his charisma and a much calmer performance than usual and helps pull a film I can probably call a guilty pleasure.

This probably won't hold up so well without an audience but for now...It's not too shabby.

Well, I can only comment on the films you've picked that I've actually seen, so given that, for this page I'm pretty pleased with your love of Jurassic Park, The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, and especially Prometheus, which I, too, loved and also have on Blu-Ray Special Edition. For a planned trilogy (at least as far as Ridley Scott is concerned) there are lots of connections to the original Alien that will no doubt be expanded upon in further installments. Apparently the sequel has already been given a green-light and Scott infers that by the third (given that we get one), the connection to the first of the original films will be made. So, I'm still on board and can't wait for Rapace and Fassbender to return.

PeterVincent-

I accidentally gave you thumbs down for your review on Stolen so I gave thumbs up to your 2 previous posts. Sorry about that. I was semi interested in Stolen, but after reading your review, I will definitely try it. It sounds like a really fun movie and I always like Nic Cage. I also quite like Josh Lucas and feel he is very underappreciated.

Oh thank the maker! I was reading my notifications and saw the thumbs down so I instantly thought,
This is what happens when you confess your love for Cage...
But luckily it was a mistake. Thanks Cricket.

Cloud Atlas

Archivist: What if no one believes you?
Sonmi-451: Someone already does.

I have hyped Cloud Atlas for quite some time. I've heard fantastic things and horrible things about the film, I've heard of people that loved it and people that hated it religiously. I went in with an eager attitude and a lot of hype behind me, with Richard Trapp and another friend. I exited as a very different man.

This film changed me. It changed my views. In fact it morphed me so much that me and my entire company decided to cancel our second film (Hansel & Gretel Witch Hunters) because we were so affected by the utter brilliance and trance that was Cloud Atlas. I have read the book, so I knew what I was going into...but nothing can prepare anyone for a film as ambitious as this one.

http://www.wordandfilm.com/wp-conten...-bros-crop.jpg

The cast is perfect, from Tom Hanks' goofy Dr. Henry Goose to Hugh Grant's cannibal villain. There is no moment wasted, no plot that is neglected, everything is paced perfectly and used well. The story I didn't enjoy in the novel (Sloosha's Crossin') ended up being one of my favourites in the film (you can thank Tom Hank's fantastic performance and Hugo Weaving saying the words; 'Piece of ass'). From Adam Ewing to Somni-451, everything works in it's own way and wraps up beautifully.

I will share something with you. I cried. Yes...Yes I did. Richard Trapp tried to stop me by comparing a character to Benedict Cumberpatch but a fantasticly beautiful moment between Jim Sturgees and Hugo Weaving broke the final straw in my back...and so I wept.

http://www.newscinema.it/wp-content/...0657146540.jpg

This is mostly likely going to enter my top 10...

' I will not be subjugated to criminal abuse! '

+

Re: PeterVincent's Reviews
 

Great review; it's definitely a movie I'll be giving a shot.

Re: PeterVincent's Reviews
 

Wow sounds like it had a big impact on you. It's certainly a film I'm very intrigued to see, and hearing people so in love with it as you are just adds to that.

So Hugh Grant does a good job then? Just I was very curious when I heard he had been cast as a cannibal.

Re: PeterVincent's Reviews
 

Brilliant film and one that might catapault into my top ten on a few repeat viewings.

It touched, moved and changed me.

Trance


http://i2.cdnds.net/13/05/618x918/mo...nce-poster.jpg


'Don't be a hero.'


Danny Boyle is one of my favourite directors, & this movie is one that seemed to pop out of nowhere, & sure enough it'll disappear before we know it.

Trance is a psychological thriller that delves into memories, sex, abuse, affairs, torture & endless layers of exposition & character revelation. The film starts off incredibly fast, with almost no room to breathe. To be honest, I wasn't going with it for the first five minutes. But then, sure enough, Danny Boyle sucks you into a whirlpool of mystery.

http://www.indiewire.com/static/dims...anny-boyle.jpg

In this film we get to see outstanding direction, Rosario Dawson shave her...ummm...kitty kat, then show us...everything, James McAvoy give an outstanding performance, one of the most ecstatic & insane scores I have ever heard, a great pace, an ever-so-compelling amount of twists and more turns than a maze.

Danny Boyle truly is a master of making low-budget films absolute art. Whilst this isn't his best film, it's close.

'Anyone can steal a painting. All it takes is a bit of muscle. But no piece of art is worth a human life. No piece of art is…'

I watched this a couple of nights ago and loved it alot more with a second viewing. I think everyone expected a little much from this movie.

Danny Boyle talks about Trance during this interview. Click on Danny Boyle 22 March 13 and his interview starts at 53:07. The whole interview is really interesting, IMO. I'd like to see Trance and Side Effects. Maybe as a double bill, as they both sound a bit like ridiculous 80's erotic thrillers/exploitation.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/kermode

Iron Man 3

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-gEvttsJ1Xw...iron_man_3.jpg


Tony Stark is back! Redeeming himself from Iron Man 2 with the absolutely amazing The Avengers, there is nothing but positive emotion buzzing around this long awaited sequel...but...it could've been so much more!

So, without spoiling anything too massive or important, the story focuses on Tony Stark recovering from the events of The Avengers, he has nightmares & tries his best to avoid sleeping in general. Unfortunately for him, however, a new villain has decided to rise up & start terrorising the President of the United States. Also if that wasn't enough, Pepper Pott's is having relationship issues with Tony whilst an old business man in the form of Guy Pearce shows up to start meddling with Tony's relationship problems.

http://l.yimg.com/ea/img/-/121023/ne...4OJTA6kCOt_w--

What ultimately fails Iron Man 3 however is it's predictable plot & character motivations. Guy Pearce's plot is so incredibly easy to predict that I almost had the entire thing figured out when he hobbled up in an opening flashback & started babbling on about some formula that reminded me way too much of The Amazing Spider-Man & Rhys Ifan's Lizard serum. Pepper Potts is stale & pouts every so often & despite the amazing charisma of Downey Jr. & the wit of director/writer Shane Black, Tony Stark ultimately makes some incredibly bizarre decisions (he has something in the climax that he didn't use before...when he really should have because...wait...what?). In fact, the only thing I didn't see coming at all was the twist with Ben Kingsley's character.

What makes Iron Man 3 entertaining & ultimately a fun time though are two major things;

1) The Opening - The opening of Iron Man 3, whilst having a predictable appearance & such, manages to be so strong & outstandingly witty, that I completely forgot about the dreaded Iron Man 2.

2) A weaker Tony Stark - In this film Tony Stark is brought unto his weakest point, & whilst it isn't handled as well as it could have been, seeing him struggle to take out bad guys with half an Iron Man suit on was so tense & bada$$ that I was squealing with delight...literally, a guy looked at me funny.

http://nerdreactor.com/wp-content/up...iron_man_3.jpg

Overall, Iron Man 3 is a little bit of a let down due to it's large hype & the exciting re-pairing of Shane Black & Robert Downey Jr., however, it is still a very entertaining summer blockbuster with great special effects, some nice set pieces & a fair few good jokes.

Just don't think too much about the plot.

Re: PeterVincent's Reviews
 

Damn I was wanting to post the first Iron Man 3 review! :D However I've gone off on one of my big fanboy ramblings so will be a while before I'm done. Anyway suffice to say that I did enjoy it a lot more than you did, but nice review all the same. :up:

I apologise, Mr. Dee.

Re: PeterVincent's Reviews
 

This wasn't the first either. Here.

I apologise, Mr. F.

Re: PeterVincent's Reviews
 

What for? :)

Star Trek Into Darkness

http://www.uruloki.org/felipeblog/im...trekposter.jpg

''Is there anything that you would not do...for your family? '

Well, Abrams managed to make a decent Star Trek sequel, two in a row! Wowzas!

Star Trek Into Darkness successfully follows up where the last film left off, with a fresh new Kirk at the helm of the Enterprise...but was he really ready to command the ship? Chris Pine still manages to be a good Kirk, whilst making the role his own and Zachary Quinto still absolutely kills it as Spock but the show is stolen by Benedict Cumberpatch and his mysterious villain, John Harrison.

http://i1.cdnds.net/12/49/618x313/mo...r-still-13.jpg

Where Into Darkness succeeds is pace, adrenaline and mixed-up nostalgia. Whilst the first act is rather weak, the second and third act make up for it with a non-stop kicking-of-a**. Abrams tones down the lens flares and instead tries to make his action scenes more spontaneous and exciting, a level on which he succeeds.

Whilst it is difficult to talk about Into Darkness without spoiling anything, the film manages to still please old fans and new ones alike. With a familiar scenario towards the climax, the decision of a role reversal was one that shocked and excited me, very very much.

The film has plenty of weaknesses though, with some directorial decisions that were poor, some bad writing decisions and a lack of focus on the supporting cast, it can sometimes be hard to focus on what is going on.

But, Star Trek Into Darkness is a fun and exciting time, with plenty of laughs, turns, new additions and a shocking twist, it's easily one of the best films of the year.

Re: PeterVincent's Reviews
 

Did you watch it in 3D? If so, how was it and was there any point to it?

It wasn't as nice as Abrams is making it out to be, however, they changed the warp speed special effect quite clearly for 3D, and it looked, to say the least, cool and pretty.

Other than some laser blasts that fly at the screen and some spears, it's not particularly noticeable.

This Is The End

http://laughingsquid.com/wp-content/...End-Poster.jpg

'You're telling me James Franco didn't suck a dick last night? Now, I know you're lying.'

A unique premise meets a familiar blockbuster scenario means that This Is The End could either be really good, or really not-so-good.

Thank God it was the first option. This film had me giggling, cackling and having a jolly old time with some of my favourite actors and some others that, well, I can tolerate.

http://cdn2-b.examiner.com/sites/def...?itok=dsjkfuYr

The humour ranges from clever to vulgar, but thankfully there's so much of it thrown at you that you can't even process the bad ones, only the good ones.

One scene in particular involving a fight between James Franco and Danny McBride had me in stitches, whilst the ending almost made a tear of joy burst from my eye.

It might not always work, but This Is The End is a barrel of laughs, cleverness and even some talent. Overall it isn't as memorable or hilarious as say, Superbad, but it's more along the legendarily decent and funny lines of Pineapple Express.

Great review; I think Danny Mcbride is hilarious and I'm looking forward to seeing this.

The Wolverine


http://cf.badassdigest.com/_uploads/...ter__span.jpeg

In a world where every superhero/comic adaptation must follow the same structure, shove special effects in your throat and be a strangely similar experience to the last superhero film you saw, and the one before that, The Wolverine is certainly a breath of fresh air.

Abandoning dumb battles for deep drama, we get thrills, and a genuine sense of danger. Simply ask my brother (of whom I saw the film with), for I was yelping and squirming for poor ol' Wolverine, as very often it actually looked like our hero might get killed off or mortally wounded.

http://cache.g4tv.com/ImageDb3/31631...y-released.jpg

Ripping up the generic pace and plot of your average blockbuster, The Wolverine leaps around the place, twisting and turning and keeping you on your toes, I can honestly say that I couldn't tell what was going to happen next, and it was VERY exciting.

Because the build up is so great, the third act pay-off includes what is easily one of the most thrilling sequences of the year, as our hero is truly in rage and tells the villain to go **** himself, it truly is glorious.

http://www.empireonline.com/images/u...r-stills-9.jpg

Sure, you can accuse The Wolverine of being a boring snoozefest, but damn...It was truly an immersive and enjoyable experience, although the 3D was lackluster (when isn't it these days?). A definite improvement over X-Men 3: The Last Stand and X-Men Origins: Wolverine, although it doesn't reach the heights of X-Men: First Class.

And be sure to stay for the the post-credits sequence, in which I literally squeaked and started sweating.

The World's End

http://i2.cdnds.net/12/41/618x916/th...end_poster.jpg

"A man of your legendary prowess drinking...f*****g rain! It’s like a lion eating houmous."

We have made it, over ten years, we have finally finished the Three Flavours Cornetto Trilogy, or whatever you might want to call it.

Simon Pegg, Nick Frost and director Edgar Wright return for their last bash, and it does feel like it, despite the film almost going out of it's way to not feel like a sad farewell. The film carries the trilogies trademarks, the in-jokes, the clever humour, the C word, and lots of British cameos, with a certain cameo being the highlight, and I will call him 'Peanut Butter', after his glorious initials (also to avoid spoilers).

Gary King (Pegg) is a guy that never seemed to grow up, and is desperate to relive the night of his life, therefore, he brings forth all of his old friends and attempts to relive the epic (and unfinished) pub-crawl of his youth.

http://metrouk2.files.wordpress.com/...worlds-end.jpg

Now, my greatest fear about the film was it's pub-crawl plot, as the film has it's Sci-Fi homage in the second act (of which I was excited about), I was fearful of the first act's possibly serious and bland tone, but, thank the Wright/Pegg/Frost, I actually enjoyed the hell out of the first act. We get belly laughs, chuckles, heart, relatable characters and all...and I was even a little sad when the actual plot started to kick in.

The second act, of which I was looking forward to, ended up being my least favourite part of the film. Director Edgar Wright tones it down very significantly, showing off his bigger budget with choreographed fights with seemingly no editing. Although, part of the first two films' charms were the cheap edits and clever cuts, so it feels bizarre in this final instalment.

http://l2.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/sT...jpg_195215.jpg

The third act is brilliant and clever. I got used to Wright's more generic style, and heavily enjoyed the final big vocal cameo, whilst the big plot twists made me feel...feelings, well, a few. The films little epilogue almost ruins it, and it ends incredibly abruptly, but, I suppose they just wanted The World's End to be it's own film, and not a farewell to two other films.

Overall The World's End was a great bash, I laughed a lot and really enjoyed myself. It certainly doesn't reach the heights of Shaun Of The Dead and even Hot Fuzz, but it is pretty good on it's own accord.

Let us pray that PeterVincent does not get crucified for this review...

R.I.P.D

http://geekhardshow.com/wp-content/u...PD-poster2.jpg

Let 2013 be known as the year PeterVincent gave almost everything 4 stars, even the critical and commercial failure known as R.I.P.D, which of course stands for Rest In Peace Department, for all you wafflebrains out there.

Speaking of wafflebrains, that's exactly what I must be to have enjoyed this film, and I don't regret it, because even reflecting on it now I have a fondness of it.

A majority of critics have complained about the Men In Black rip-off thing, eh, I was never a big fan of Men In Black anyway, and heck even Avatar ripped off a ton of things (even that crap episode of Doctor Who, Kinda). People complain about the dodgy CGI, hey! Everything's CG now-a-days, and it ain't THAT bad, sure, the villains look unconvincing at points, but that's part of it's charm! Heck, you can't tell me that the scene involving a carpark collapsing, or the scene in which a house rots apart wasn't at least a little pumping (especially with the help of Christophe Beck, which at one point uses the same cue he used in Percy Jackson & The Lightning Thief, which made me giggle). People even complain about the lack of chemistry, sorry to offend the Will Smith fans out there, but I prefer the quip-under-his-breath Ryan Reynolds over the jive yelling Will Smith (although to be fair, he did work well in Men In Black).

http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/9227/...4d682e1_XL.jpg

The humour and direction also worked for me, I really enjoyed the zoom in - zoom out - zoom around direction, I thought the costumes were groovy, I really dug some of the cinematography, and despite the gaping plot holes and unexplained aspects, I even liked the poorly executed story.

But I can see why people hate it so much, put in all good conscience I cannot feel any negative emotion towards R.I.P.D. Although, when the Blu-Ray gets released I will have to turn subtitles on, because Jeff Bridges' accent sometimes rivals Bane in terms of understandability.

Overall however, R.I.P.D is like that ride that you keep hearing about at a theme park, people seem to hate it, but when you go on it it's actually really fun, and secretly, you want to ride it again.



http://cdn.bloody-disgusting.com/wp-...1/ripd-set.jpg

Re: PeterVincent's Reviews
 

I still have no intention of seeing this film but I will give you a rep for bravery.

*Puts hand up* Present.

I can, because those sound like good reasons not to see this.

Here's another one. :D Is it done in the style of De Palma or Ritchie?

How did you manage to write this review from the 1970's? :p

Re: PeterVincent's Reviews
 

+ rep for the crack at Bane from The Dark Knight Rises, and for saying you can enjoy a bad movie.