Make Your Picks

Weeman's (rather snarky) Reviews

→ in
Tools    





The weird thing is I watched this film a week before all the Bio-Dome stuff started creeping into the site. I wrote this review (or whatever you want to call it) there and then. Thought it was apt that now I should publish it
I will rep you for this, but not for your review, because you gave it a 0.



The Brave Little Weeman Returns!
I will rep you for this, but not for your review, because you gave it a 0.
Its well worth a zero. I can see why it might appeal to some people though, just not me, and I so wanted it to be good
__________________
"This aggression will not stand, man" -The Big Lebowski

Reviews





The Brave Little Weeman Returns!
I promise you, right now, that I will not use “that line” in this review. I won't. I promise.

Lethal Weapon



Did this really get such good reviews when it was released? I mean, its not awful, but its certainly not good. How can a movie with as much incidental saxophone as this one be given such good reviews? For example, someone says something, “saxophone”, someone walks somewhere, “saxophone”. I knew I would not be able to take Lethal Weapon too seriously upon the third hearing of a saxophone. Way too much saxophone in this one for my liking. Saxophone in moderation is fine, but too much saxophone just makes me tired of saxophones.

Onto the film.

Lethal Weapon is the story of two Los Angeles detectives, played by Mel Gibson and Danny Glover, thrown together in order to investigate the death of a local prostitute. This case takes an inexplicable turn and leads them into the murky underworld of heroin smuggling. The two men both have to work together in order to solve the case, despite both of them not enjoying working with partners (although this plot point is weak because they begin to like each other within 10 minutes of screen time).

Yes, the plot is very weak, the “bad guys” are the most generic kind of bad guys you can get, and the pacing of the film is all wrong, leaving little time for its conclusion. As a result of this, the final act all feels a bit rushed, with the two detectives dispatching their heroin pushing enemies with ease. Too much emphasis is put on Danny Glover's family.

Mel Gibson makes the film, and his performance as Martin Riggs, suicidal L.A. Narcotics Detective, feels thoroughly believable throughout. One scene in particular (except for “that moment”) featuring Gibson in his trailer home, is the stand-out in a collection of very average action scenes and very average male bonding scenes.

Danny Glover's line delivery is woeful. There's one in particular when he's on the phone which feels so forced and stilted that I didn't know whether to laugh or cry.

Don't get me started about the fight on Murtaugh's lawn at the end.

In conclusion, Lethal Weapon is a throwaway action film, one that I wouldn't want to see again, but one which I would watch again if needs be. I don't think I'll be watching the sequels mind, because...


I'm too old for this ****.

Sorry.



I was 16yo when this came out, and I thought it was one of the best action films ever made. I watched it again recently, and unfortunately, I have to agree with your review. It was almost as if I had never seen the movie before. I was thinking to myself, I thought this was awesome? It's not terrible, but it's just ok. Mel Gibson was great though; that's when Mel Gibson was at his best.



The Brave Little Weeman Returns!
BREAKING: This is a review of a film currently in the cinemas. I know, a novel idea eh? (as always, minor spoilers maybe)

The World's End


Before I begin, let me ask you a question: “Just what is it that you want to do?”. Seriously, what do you want to do? Or, what did you want to do? Some kids want to be astronauts, some want to be doctors, some want to be Power Rangers. Me? I wanted to be a cat when I was younger, but that isn't important. I'm not sure what I want to be now, I'm not sure I'll even get the choice of what job I'll do when I either: Fail my A-Levels, fail my undergraduate degree, pass my undergraduate degree. Even the third option doesn't guarantee much these days, and it is that notion of security and belonging that runs rife throughout The World's End.


Just what is it that you want to do?

The final installment in the “Cornetto Trilogy”, three films linked by the vague use of ice cream, The World's End is a tale of five friends meeting up once more to relive a night of debauchery and finally complete “The Golden Mile” (twelve pints in twelve pubs in one small town), which they failed to do back in 1990. Simon Pegg (without ginger hair) plays Gary King, a troubled adult with an obsession of reclaiming his youth. His four friends,played by Nick Frost, Paddy Considine, Martin Freeman, and Eddie Marsan, have all “grown-up” since their youth, and all four hold steady jobs and have become integrated members of society. They are secure in their lives, whereas Gary King is not.

Now, its hard to analyze The World's End without looking back at the two previous films in the loose fitting trilogy, Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz. Shaun of the Dead, a “Rom-Zom-Com” as dubbed by Simon Pegg, deals with a zombie apocalypse, whereas Hot Fuzz, buddy cop action film, deals with the layer beneath the surface in middle-class suburbia, much in the same way as David Lynch's Twin Peaks did, or The Stepford Wives, or whatever comparison you'd like to make, there are hundreds I'm sure.

In fact, all three films in the series are tainted by their devotion to suburban life. Even Shaun of the Dead, set in London, seems like its own isolated bubble cut off from the rest of society. This feeling of isolation resonates throughout all three films, Shaun of the Dead with the zombie apocalypse, Hot Fuzz with village life being cover for a more macabre exercise, and now The World's End, where visiting old adolescent haunts gives way to the invasion of the very human race.

It is fitting then, that The World's End brings the trilogy to a natural conclusion, exploring themes of loss and having to grow up in a world where image now dominates. Simon Pegg's character, Gary King (yes, like the rival in Pokémon), is stuck in a sort of stunted adolescence. He worries that his life will never feel complete unless he finishes the Newton Haven “Golden Mile”. So, he rounds up his old friends and descends on Newton Haven to finish what he began 23 years ago. Closure is what Gary King needs, and closure is what this film brings to the viewing audience.

The World's End is a comedy (believe it or not) and like its predecessors, it has its fair share of funny moments, many coming from Simon Pegg's character. Despite him being funny, this leaves the film feeling uneven and the four other members of the gang feeling like background characters, only there to fulfill Gary King's quest. This does, however, fit in with the narcissism of King's character, the other four believing they are just “tag-alongs” on King's quest. So I suppose this is a minor gripe, when every member of the gang feels real and believable, something you can't say about a number of similar films.

Full of fantastic music fitting the era of their youth, The World's End is a fitting tribute to the Wright, Pegg, Frost triumvirate of the last three years. From humble beginnings playing “Timesplitters 2” in Shaun of the Dead, Pegg and Frost come full circle with the advent of the technological age. I hope this isn't the last film the three of them make together.



The world doesn't owe you a damn thing
very good review. Heard good and bad about this film and i am a fan of shaun and hot fuzz so somewhere down the line i will be checking this out
thanks again for the review



The Brave Little Weeman Returns!
Presenting: The Bourne Trilogy


The Bourne Identity







The Bourne Supremacy







The Bourne Ultimatum







Overall:
(just)


At the very beginning of The Bourne Identity, Matt Damon is pulled aboard a fishing trawler. He doesn't know where he is, but more importantly, he doesn't know who he is. This sets in motion a series of high octane action set-pieces, high-octane character development, and high-octane Jason Bourne. Because that's what this is all about really. Jason Bourne. International man of mystery to only himself.




Who am I?


The Bourne Identity was originally going to be a stand-alone film, Damon is on record as saying there were no plans for a sequel. However, the first film's success led to the eventual trilogy, the second and third films being original stories following the adaptation of Robert Ludlum's first book for the first film.


The Bourne Identity is the strongest of the trilogy. Jason Bourne feels real here, he feels like a real human, whereas in the other two he's only there to be an unstoppable machine capable of dismantling anyone or anything that gets in the way of his quest for enlightenment. The Bourne Identity also features actual character development, strangely lacking from the other two considering the subject matter at hand (especially The Bourne Ultimatum which is just a collection of very impressive action set-pieces).


Franka Potente stars alongside Matt Damon in The Bourne Identity. Her character, Marie, is a free-spirit, living a Bohemian-esque lifestyle, leading her to be a direct antithesis and a perfect foil for Jason Bourne's more uptight and serious nature. The interaction between the two, coupled with impressive action, make the first film one of the best spy thrillers in modern times.


The Bourne Supremacy turns this formula on its head, instead focussing on Bourne's quest explicitly, with overtones of corruption inside the National Security Agency (who would have thought it?) and the Central Intelligence Agency. The introduction of Joan Allen as Pamela Landy helps, as The Bourne Identity lacked sane voices inside American Intelligence.




Get some rest Pam. You look tired.”


The Bourne Ultimatum feels different. It feels as if Paul Greengrass just felt that the action sequences were the film's main strength, and so focused exclusively on them. However, where films such as Casino Royale succeeded in maintaining non-stop action while remaining interesting to the viewer, here in The Bourne Ultimatum, we are bombarded with car chases and close-quarter melee fights, all which feel unnatural and forced. Even so, the action sequences are well crafted despite each one feeling exactly like the previous set-piece.


With its shaky hand-held camera work (which I personally feel heightens the sense of urgency running throughout all three films), and its interesting, fast-paced plot, The Bourne Trilogy are a set of films I would have no problem watching again. A thrill ride.


The Bourne Legacy on the other hand...



Moi must be in the minority. I love the original three films in the Bourne series but I also loved Legacy, it was brilliant even when it turned into Terminator 2.



The Brave Little Weeman Returns!
Moi must be in the minority. I love the original three films in the Bourne series but I also loved Legacy, it was brilliant even when it turned into Terminator 2.
I didn't exactly hate Legacy as much as some people do, but I just didn't think it was up to the level of the other three films



I didn't exactly hate Legacy as much as some people do, but I just didn't think it was up to the level of the other three films
Absolutely agree - Matt Damon is perfect as Jason Bourne, especially in the first film.



The Brave Little Weeman Returns!
Absolutely agree - Matt Damon is perfect as Jason Bourne, especially in the first film.
Completely agree. It just felt in The Bourne Ultimatum that he was an empty vessel, waiting for stuntmen to zip on the "Matt Damon" costume and run around being Jason Bourne for a 15 minute action set-piece, before handing it over to another stuntman for another 15 minute action set-piece, wash, rinse and repeat until the film ends.



The world doesn't owe you a damn thing
As already stated, the first was, the best of them, having much of the book to go by. (Though, of course, like most flicks, they meandered and did not follow the actual story). Regardless, the first had real depth along with everything else and that dimmed and faded out to be taken over by action scenes in the following two.
And, having said that, the Bourne trilogy IS a big favorite of mine. Damon is perfect as Bourne and he has a solid list of actors joining him that keep you involved and even though the action took over the movie completely by Ultimatum, it was done brilliantly.

Have not seen Legacy, was a bit hesitant about seeing it, but perhaps I should. . .



The Brave Little Weeman Returns!
Leaving Las Vegas





Leaving Las Vegas. A film about an unredeemable alcoholic, and a prostitute who only wants a companion in life. Sponsors of “late night film” on Film4? Jamesons Whiskey. Followed by no less than three alcohol adverts in the first break (including that fantastic Southern Comfort one). This is completely ironic. It's also completely harrowing then watching the film itself, knowing that Ben Sanderson (Nicolas Cage) likely succumbed to the booze much quicker as a result of advertisements not dissimilar to those featuring the man in the red beach shorts.



I came here to drink myself to death.

Ben Sanderson is an alcoholic screenwriter who, after being made redundant from his job at a production company, decides to take what money he has and move to Las Vegas on a whim. There, he meets Sera (Elisabeth Shue), an optimistic prostitute with a crippling sense of loneliness, and they move in together hoping that both their lives will improve from this point in.

However, this is reality, and in reality, nothing much changes for the insignificant prostitute, or the insignificant alcoholic. The world moves on just fine without them. But, we are given an incredibly deep viewing into their lives together, and how they both cope with their issues. And how glad that makes me. For this is a terrific film, led impeccably by permanently frazzled Nicolas Cage, and the moral centre of the film, Elisabeth Shue.

The chemistry between the two leads is terrific, and it makes the film completely work as a character study. They play off each other so well, especially Shue, who doesn't get half the credit she deserves for her role in this. Cage pulls off a blinder of a performance. Spending an entire film acting out a drunk man may not seem like much of a challenge, but it's hard to make the performance believable, and Nicolas Cage does just that.

Thematically, the film explores addiction, loneliness, and dependence in an excellent way. The scenes where Sera appears to be talking to a therapist illustrate her isolation from the rest of the world, and also show us the differences in character between her and Ben, how she has opinions, feelings even. And he just wants to get drunk. No thoughts, no real feelings. Just the impulsive and stupid actions of a very sick man.

Sera is portrayed throughout as a capable individual, not without her own vulnerabilities which are amplified by her job situation. But this film tells us that we should not be defined by our job title, but by what we are like as people. Two concurrent scenes, both with taxi drivers, show this perfectly. While one taxi driver is impatient, makes prior assumptions about Sara based on her appearance, and questions her ability to pay the fare, the other is more sympathetic, asking Sera about her facial appearance (as a result of a particularly brutal scene shown not long before). I see these scenes as one metaphor for Sera herself, that despite her job as a prostitute, she is not an immoral person. The exact opposite in fact.

Ben Sanderson says early on in the film that he doesn't know whether he started drinking as a result of his wife leaving him, or whether his wife left him because he started drinking. And it's this uncertainty and ignorance of the past that drives the characters. An unknown place in the world. A masterpiece of a film.



Bright light. Bright light. Uh oh.
Good acting but lousy everything else. There are way too many masterpieces around here, but I don't mean to rain on anybody's parade. Now, let me go crap on somebody else's diamond.
__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page



The Brave Little Weeman Returns!
Good acting but lousy everything else. There are way too many masterpieces around here, but I don't mean to rain on anybody's parade. Now, let me go crap on somebody else's diamond.
I'm revising it down to a nine

I think being half-awake would make anything I watched seem like a masterpiece. It's still excellent though



I was going to record this on Film4 but for some reason I didn't, it's always looked interesting though, because of how good Cage is supposed to be in it, I'll have to keep an eye out for it again.



The Brave Little Weeman Returns!
Friday The 13th

You know Friday the 13th? Oh, not the half decent one, no. I'm talking about the absolutely wonderful 2009 remake.



Yes, that one.

Did I mention it was partly produced by Michael Bay? Expect Transformers level of perviness. Expect a topless shot meter. Which I will maintain throughout this review.

Our story begins back in 1980, which coincidentally is when the first Friday The 13th film was released. Because, as we all know, everyone loves a self-referential horror movie. Or teen death movie. Or whatever, we all know this is garbage. Jason Voorhees sees his mum get beheaded by the last survivor of her murder spree. The film then flashes forward to the present day (or 2009 because it was 2009), where a group of friends are all camping, one of them looking for the marijuana plants growing near Camp Crystal Lake. Things take a sinister turn because they all begin to die when Jason appears and kills the bespecaled one near the marijuana for no apparent reason, and then proceeds to kill two others who are having sex. TOPLESS SHOT METER: 1. The remaining two, a random guy and that woman who was once in The Mentalist (this film doesn't deserve me looking up the names of the actors or even the characters, since I can sum them up by their standout cliche) stumble across Jason as well. He then proceeds to kill the random guy, yet the fate of Mentalist lady is uncertain after being knocked down by Jason.

Cut to black. Titles.



A THIRD OF THE FILM HAS GONE AND MORE OR LESS EVERYONE IS DEAD. WHY. WHY MUST YOU DO THIS TO US? WHY?

WHY.

WHY?

So, we are a third of the way into the film and after six weeks of offscreen time, we are introduced to another set of characters, even more unlikeable than the last. The group consists of:
  • Massively rich, annoying t*** who invites everyone to his house for no apparent reason because he seems annoyed by their very presence. (they broke a chair and got annoyed because it was a “family heirloom”. A chair. IN A HOUSE HIS PARENTS DON'T EVEN USE.)

  • His girlfriend who is “the nice one” who will most likely last until the very end or survive the entire movie.

  • A guy and a girl character who just go off “wakeboarding” as they get to the campsite. Wakeboarding obviously being code for “about to get murdered”. Also, wakeboarding = TOPLESS SHOT METER: 2

  • The other girl who is supposed to be the “b***h one” who ends up sleeping with the obnoxious rich, annoying t***, which results in TOPLESS SHOT METER: 3 and her inevitable demise.

  • The token black guy and the token guy of Asian descent, who are best friends and seem like the only real people in this entire film. Of course, they end up dying, because bugger me, who would think a minority could survive? Good god!

  • The brother of The Mentalist lady, so he's bound to survive until the end. He does.

It's all very predictable and silly. No scares, no tension, no nothing. You know who is going to die, you know when, it's just a procession, much like the ride into the Champs-Elysses on the final day of the Tour de France. Yes, I just compared this rubbish to the largest cycling event on the planet. Why? Why not.

Anyway, yeah, they all pretty much die (even the girlfriend, shock horror), and the brother and Mentalist lady survive. But at the very end, SHOCK AGAIN, because Jason rises from the floor and grabs her again. Sequel? No.

I give this film 1 popcorn meter out of five.




Haha, fair play, I don't know how you managed to drag out your thoughts on the movie to a full length review, but you have, and it's great I remember watching this film when it first came out, so I would have been 14, for some reason my mum still didn't like me watching horror films, but it was with my uncles. I found it more hilariously bad than scary, of course, a truly terrible film. I didn't actually know it was partly produced by Michael Bay as my movie interest at the time was basically non-existent, but it comes as absolutely no surprise.