Connor Macgregor Reviews Thread

→ in
Tools    







Connor Macgregor Reviews...The Corpse Bride

Whenever you hear Tim Burton saying that he will do Stop Motion Animation , you know you are in for Burton's darkest side of his imagination. And by god in this , its everything you would expect Tim Burton to do.

Set back in the late 1800s in a Victorian village, a man and woman by the names of Victor Van Dort and Victoria Everglot are betrothed because the Everglots need the money or else they'll be living on the streets and the Van Dorts want to be hight in society. But when things go wrong at the wedding rehearsal, Victor goes into the woods to practice his vows. Just as soon as he gets them right, he finds himself married to Emily, the corpse bride. While Victoria waits on the other side, there's a rich newcomer that may take Victor's place. So two brides, one groom, who will Victor pick?

Corpse Bride is a very good romance story with horror thrown into the fray. You know just from the opening credits that something very dark is heading this way. And what it is , is a grave misunderstanding as the main character Victor voiced by Johnny Depp is thrown between the living and dead worlds. Its an interesting idea and The Character Of The Corpse Bride is a sad character in which sad things happen to her.

The Villian Lord Barkis isn't really a good villian. He is cliche and while you do hate him , you feel that you have seen him all before. The Animation is marvellous and really works well with the tone with the story , like most of Burton's films. Music is good but not as good as Nightmare Before Christmas.

Overall , a good dark story which is both fun and mysterious to watch. If your interested , check it out because it is worth the money.

Rating - 76% - B+





Connor Macgregor Reviews...The Nightmare Before Christmas

Tim Burton is like The Dark Matter's biological son. He loves things all dark and twisted. So what happens when he tries to make christmas grim and terrfying. We get The Nightmare Before Christmas.

Jack Skellington, the pumpkin king of Halloween Town, is bored with doing the same thing every year for Halloween. One day he stumbles into Christmas Town, and is so taken with the idea of Christmas that he tries to get the resident bats, ghouls, and goblins of Halloween town to help him put on Christmas instead of Halloween -- but alas, they can't get it quite right.

What a wonderful original piece of animation this is. If you haven't seen this , let me tell you how wonderful this film is. Its great fun. The Songs are catchy and memorable , The Story is fresh and interesting with very intriguing characters and settings. Halloweentown , Christmastown. Who would have thought our own festive seasons would have their own towns. Makes me want to visit them.

The Stop Motion Animation is beautiful and fresh at the time for animation. It was different and intriguing to watch. It made the characters 3 dimensional (Not literally) and the settings and art direction were amazing. Burton knows how to create good artwork and in this film , he gets it right on the mark.

Overall , Great Christmas & Halloween Flick which you rarely get. Give it a watch this christmas because it is a classic.

Rating - 84% - A-





Connor Macgregor Reviews...The Other Boleyn Girl

I wasn't expecting to see much when starting watching this , but at the end my reaction changed and i just adore this film. This Is The Other Boleyn Girl.

A sumptuous and sensual tale of intrigue, romance and betrayal set against the backdrop of a defining moment in European history: two beautiful sisters, Anne and Mary Boleyn, driven by their family's blind ambition, compete for the love of the handsome and passionate King Henry VIII.

People have to remember that this film is histroical fiction , there is no fact based events that occur (except for the obvious events that occur) and it more tells the tale of Henry VIII & The Two Boleyn Sisters. its quite an intriguing story. It potrays Anne Boleyn as quite a manipulating character whose desire is the throne. Played by Natalie Portman who gives a very incredible performance that should have had more oscar nominations. Scarlett Johnansson was also magnificent. Also there english accents were surpringsly convincing. Whenever a period piece hires and american actor (Not really picking on australians because they do our accent quite well) they usually do a piss poor accent or just not bothered and do it in american. But here , its convincing and works well with the story.

Costumes are great as usual in a period setting and it has this erotic feel to it , like something you would see in a romantic subplot. The story while feels like a rejected soap opera plot , does work in the film and intrigued me more. Eric Bana , David Morrissey and certain others were really entertaining in the film.

Overall , great underrated film that deserves to be seen by a lot of people who are interested. Natlaie Portman looks stunning in this film , it has a great story and well delivered to the screen.

Rating - 92% - A



I saw this film a couple years ago. I expected it to blow but was surprised. It's not a classic nor will I ever watch this again but it was pretty decent.
__________________
"Certainly there is no hunting like the hunting of man, and those who have hunted armed men long enough and like it, never really care for anything else thereafter." - Ernest Hemingway



the first time i watch it , i felt really engaged with the story. Maybe its a matter of opinion with some films. I can see why you werent so turned on by it. Never the less , its good.



the first time i watch it , i felt really engaged with the story. Maybe its a matter of opinion with some films. I can see why you werent so turned on by it. Never the less , its good.
It wasn't bad. It's just not one I would say "Hey, let's throw that on and watch it again!"

I'd give it a 2.5 or 3 out of 5.



"blushes" 4.5 out of 5 lol
4.5?! You liked it that much?

I thought Portman was good in it. Actually all the acting was pretty decent. She's a very talented actress.

I'm starting to warm up to Bana. He's a pretty good actor and has done a good job in some movies...

- Black Hawk Down
- Troy
- Munich
- The Other Boleyn Girl
- Time Traveler's Wife





Connor Macgregor Reviews...Gullivers Travels

Another 3D Effects Rape on our beloved screens. This film is one of so many reasons how pointless and unneeded 3D really is. Plus they destroyed a classic novel with Jack Black's fat ass on owr screen. Travel writer Lemuel Gulliver takes an assignment in Bermuda, but ends up on the island of Liliput, where he towers over its tiny citizens.

Oh where to start. 3D is pointless in this film. There was no need plain and simple for this overrated , overblown effect that people fall hook line and sinker for. "Its The Future" , "Its Amazing" & "Anyone Who Hates 3D hates life". THIS FILM IS THE EXAMPLE OF WHY 3D SUCKS!

Jack Black does his usual performance of being lazy and having no goals in life. The Rest of the acting is just flat and not very memorable. Emily Blunt , Billy Connelly , Jason Segal , Catherine Tate & James Corden all pretty much wasted. Catherine Tate is wasted and James Corden just does nothing. I dont like him that much but he is an okish actor.

Overall , 3D Bloated Crap that only deserves money if you are so bored , it would make Citizen Kane look bad.

Rating - 33% - C



Saw the shorts of this the other day looked bad, now i know it is, Thanks
__________________
Health is the greatest gift, contentment the greatest wealth, faithfulness the best relationship.
Buddha



As much as I like Jack Black & Jason Segel, this movie had bad written all over it.
It was a bad movie to even think of making, I can't imagine how they pitched the movie to the studios...

If they actually adapt the whole Gulliver's Travels, that'd be good... Might end up being silly, but atleast something fresh & not so predictable.



It was a bad movie to even think of making, I can't imagine how they pitched the movie to the studios...
I can.

Writers: We want to make Gulliver's Travels.

Suit: Ooh. That'll cost a lot of money and it's not really a proven market.

Writer: No, we just want to make the Lilliput section. It's the only bit that people know anyway.

Suit: OK. That sounds sensible. Now, I've not read the book, obviously, but will it still make sense if we just use one section?

Writer: Who cares? We'll bastardize it anyway. So long as he's big, scares the people, gets tied up and that, no one will know anyway.

Suit: I thought you said people knew this bit of the story?

Writer: They do, but only those bits.

Suit: Ah, great. So, who are you thinking of as Gulliver?

Writer: Well, he's a giant in Lilliput, right? So I'm thinking Jack Black, cos, y'know, he's fat and people like him, right?

Suit: Who else?

Writer: Who cares? That's the film right there! It'll be hysterical!

Suit: Good point. OK, let's make this thing! Hang on. We could make it in 3D.

Writer: Erm... I don't want to mess this up or anything, but um, does it need to be in 3D?

Suit: Of course it does! Everything's better in 3D. If we make everything in 3D then we can prove to the public that they like it and we can continue to charge more. It'll make us relevant again and I'll keep my job and make ridiculous amounts of money. Excellent work everyone. The coke and hookers are on me.



Y'know, this whole 3D thing wouldn't be so bad were it not for the fact that our brain tricks us into believing that we're watching something in 3D anyway, thereby making the whole process pointless.



So cinema's been dead since the 50's?

Someome pointed out to me that after the first round of 3D, we had the late 60's and 70's. After the second, we had the late 80's and 90's. So here's hoping the trend continues because, God knows, Hollywood needs to start making decent films again.



very good point.

The thing is , 3D in the 50s was fun in a sort of cheesy way and was not a once a fortnight thing. Today , You have 3D films crammed out in post conversation twiceevery 2 weeks. Sure they say they filmed it in 3D but you can so tell its converted just to cash in on Avatar's success which we all know was overrated and only people who dont know the history of film are the ones who call it a masterpiece.



The thing is , 3D in the 50s was fun in a sort of cheesy way and was not a once a fortnight thing. Today , You have 3D films crammed out in post conversation twice every 2 weeks.
You're right about that. They're pushing it this time with a whole new vigour and determination. I think the big difference this time is that, now, the target audience for Hollywood and the increased importance of the overseas market, plays right into their hands with 3D.

As I said before, I only hope they're right and the pattern repeats itself.



Who called Avatar a masterpiece?
I disagree that it's overrated, I don't see anyone comparing it to Godfather or Metropolis.. or calling it the best sci-fi film ever made..

If by overrated you mean that the movie made a lot of money & many enjoyed the film, then I am guessing you got the definition of overrated all wrong.
Overhyped maybe.

I personally found Avatar boring, I even slept most of the time... my girl enjoyed it a lot & tried to talk me into seeing it again.. I refused.
But inspite of all that I dont hate the film, I think it succeeded in doing what most films in 3D are failing to do now... It's definitely groundbreaking in terms of FX & 3D....

I agree 3D is overdone, but the studios just want to make quick money.. Trust me, the fad will die soon... But uptil now most films that came out in 3D have made decent amount of money.
Also, why complain when there is an option in the theater to watch it in 3D or not.
I don't see the point.. I don't think Tron would have been a different film without the 3D, same goes for Clash of the Titans.. ofcourse I regretted watching CoT in 3D, but then again if I had seen it on a regular screen, I would have regretted anyway.

3D is just a fad that hollywood seems to be impressed with right now. Considering 3D movies have been pretty much dead for decades, I am willing to live with this.

There are still great directors who make great films that are not in 3D.. Who cares about the Favreaus, McG's, etc.. We still have our Aronofsky, Scorsese, etc..