Saturday, December 17, 2011

What to Watch Over the Holidays

Dear movie fans,

I want to start off by saying, “all good things have to come to the end.” With an opening like that you might be thinking I have to quite or even give up on this blog. Well, that’s not the case at all. Let’s just say my access to free movie watching has be terminated, yes my friends I have lost my job at my local movie theater. Hopefully this minor setback won’t suppress my passion for movies and filmmaking. I will try my best to keep my fellow film fans up to date on movie related news. As far as my movie reviews go, again I will try my best to keep them up to date. I won’t be able to literally watch every movie now, unless I pay an arm and leg for them. On the positive side I can now get some real use out of my “AMC Stubs” card, and really rack up rewards. I’m not paid to promote “AMC Stubs” card anymore but I personally think it’s a good rewards card if you frequently watch movies at an AMC theater.

With that being said what movie shall I spend my money on over the holidays? There is so many coming out that pique my interest, which I’m looking forward to. This weekend, December 16, 2011, Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows and Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol, both look promising. The Wednesday before Christmas on the 21st of December, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and The Adventures of Tintin come out. Both of these films will most likely be seen again around award season, as in the Oscars. I should have my Oscar predictions posted shortly after the nominations are announced. We Bought a Zoo comes out the Friday before Christmas on the 23th; personally it looks alright. Moving on to Christmas Day, a few movies come out and to tell you the truth none of them are really that “Christmassy.” The ones I would watch would be War Horse because of its potential Oscar buzz and The Darkest Hour, for its Sci-Fi themes. Feel free to tell me in the comment bellow what movies you might see over the holidays.

Thursday, December 8, 2011

Review: The Muppets


Title: The Muppets
Distributor: Walt Disney Pictures
Director: James Bobin
Writer(s): Jason Segel, Nicholas Stoller,
Staring: Amy Adams, Jason Segel, Chris Cooper, and The Muppets
MPAA Rating: Rated Rated PG for some mild rude humor.
Running Time: 103 min
Synopsis: With the help of three fans, The Muppets must reunite to save their old theater from a greedy oil tycoon.

What Others Are Saying?

Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 97% (Fresh), Top Critics: 92% (Fresh), Audience: 91% (Like It)
Metacritic: Critics: 76 out of 100, Users: 8.6 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 80 out of 100
Yahoo Movies: Critics: NA Users: B+

My Review

Source Material: The charters were based on Jim Henson creations, but the story was original.  

Entertaining Value:

  • Action Elements: The action comes to you in the from of slapstick, witch is hilarious.  
  • Comedy Elements: Good old comedy, some is corny and others that are just down right funny.    
  • Dramatic Elements: There is some real good dramatic parts, even thought a lot of them played out via musical style, but it was still good.    
  • Sci-Fi / Fantasy Elements: Old school VFX. Good old puppets shine bright in this film, wait a minute, I mean Muppets.   
Cinematic Value:
  • Acting and Dialogue: 9: Add a lovable and musical friendly actress (Amy Adams) to a comic genus (Jason Segel) to an classic "puppet" act and you get gold. I know some people thought the movie 'breaking the fourth plane" was used to much. Personally, The Muppet knowing they are in a movie or that they are "puppets" is part of who they are, that's what makes it funny. 
  • Art Direction: 8.5: I can only imagine the ingenuity the filmmaker have to come up with to make a good amount of "puppets" to come to life and be believable characters.  
  • Cinematography: 8.5: I bet that it a challenge to shoot everything basically waste up especially on the Muppets, well because the puppeteers cant be in the shoot. It always amazes me to see an film shot with majority puppets if all.     
  • Direction: 9: The film flowed nicely. You could see the amount of passion in the filmmaking. A great film coming from a guy behind "Flight of the Conchords"    
  • Editing: 8.5: Very good job like I said before the film was very well paced.     
  • Screenplay: 9: This film has a really good story. I wish every film was mad with the same passion as Jason Segel, there would be many more great film.      
  • Sound and Music: 10: I want to buy this soundtrack so bad. not only did it have great classic song The Muppets are known for but good original ones too. 
  • VFX: 8: Who cares about computer, when you have real life taking frog, pig, bear, and gonzo. Its the Muppet get excited for some fine puppetry.     
Overall: 9: I can say I enjoy this movie tremendously, and hope you do to. I think kids will like this film even though its not animated, maybe not the real young ones. Honestly, the adults may enjoy it more because we grew up on The Muppets. I highly recommend this film to everyone.    

Review: The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part 1

Title: The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part 1
Distributor: Summit Entertainment
Director: Bill Condon
Writer(s): Melissa Rosenberg (screenplay), Stephenie Meyer (novel)
Staring: Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, Taylor Lautner
MPAA Rating: Rated PG-13 for disturbing images, violence, sexuality/partial nudity and some thematic elements
Running Time: 117 min
Synopsis: The Quileute's close in on expecting parents Edward and Bella, whose unborn child poses a threat to the Wolf Pack and the towns people of Forks..

What Others Are Saying?

Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 26% (Rotten), Top Critics: 27% (Rotten), Audience: 69% (Like It)
Metacritic: Critics: 45 out of 100, Users: 4.5 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 46out of 100
Yahoo Movies: Critics: NA Users: NA

My Review

Source Material: Based on the book written by Stephenie Meyer with the same name.  

Entertaining Value:

  • Action Elements: The last ten to fifteen minutes get somewhat intense but the rest of the film is very melodramatic.  
  • Comedy Elements: Some funny one liners from side charters.    
  • Dramatic Elements: This movie has layer and layer of melodramatic moments.   
  • Sci-Fi / Fantasy Elements: There is going to some sci-fi elements when dealing with "vampires" and "werewolf" but nothing to fancy that excites those parts of the brain   
Cinematic Value:
  • Acting and Dialogue: 4: Honestly the side character are better actor then main three. Out of the main three I see Robert Pattinson getting prestige awards some day cause I have seen him in better roles. Out of the entire cast the one the deserves an award, not necessarily for her character in Twilight, is Anna Kendrick cause she is fantastic in just about everything.   
  • Art Direction: 3: The only part I enjoy art wise about this film is it transformation from bright happy wedding to gloomy horror, personally that was the only redeeming factor to this film. 
  • Cinematography: 3.5: I didn't really see much that excited me visually.  
  • Direction: 1: The pacing of this film was slow. I felt like the filmmakers spent at least thirty to forty-five minutes on the wedding/ honey-moon scenes.   
  • Editing: 2: I don't think the filmmaker know what the phrase "cut away the fat." Like I said before I think they should have spent less time on the wedding/ honey moon stuff. I understand that's what the women want but come one, move along.     
  • Screenplay: 3: Can I say loop hole. I have discussed a few difference option that could have worked better than was in the film     
  • Sound and Music: 5: The music was sadly one of the best parts of the film, for me.
  • VFX: 1: One word terrible. You know this to be a fact when even the fans say, "I didn't like the special effects."   
Overall: 3: I'm way late on this review, with that being said, fans of all ages have already seen like a million times. Just look at the box office numbers. This review was more or less to get my opinion out there. Watch with cation though cause this film has caused people to pass out and even go into seizures.  

Sunday, November 13, 2011

Immortals Review

Title: Immortals
Distributor: Relativity Media
Director: Joe Johnston
Writer(s): Charley Parlapanides, Vlas Parlapanides
Staring: Henry Cavill, Mickey Rourke, Freida Pinto, Luke Evans, Isabel Lucas, John Hurt
MPAA Rating: Rated R for sequences of strong bloody violence, and a scene of sexuality.
Running Time: 110 min
Synopsis: Eons after the Gods won their mythic struggle against the Titans, a new evil threatens the land. Mad with power, King Hyperion has declared war against humanity...

What Others Are Saying?

Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 38% (Rotten), Top Critics: 25% (Fresh), Audience: 75% (Like It)
Metacritic: Critics: 48 out of 100, Users: 7.2 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 55 out of 100
Yahoo Movies: Critics: C- Users: B

My Review

Source Material: Based on on the Greek myths of Theseus and the Minotaur and the Titanomachy.

Entertaining Value:

  • Action Elements: Honestly I wish the film had more of a epic feeling to it. Yes it has has some good action sequence but personally over all it fell a little short.
  • Comedy Elements: There was no real comic relief, no one really to break the tension and seriousness. I remember a few cheesy line and stark comments. NO GOOD SIDE-KICK   
  • Dramatic Elements: This film was mainly action driven but with that being there was a good amount of dramatic scenes which personally slowed the film down. 
  • Sci-Fi / Fantasy Elements: Greek mythology = high fantasy now yes VFX were used. 
Cinematic Value:
  • Acting and Dialogue: 7: Over All the actors put forth a good performance. When you exam this film the only real seasoned actors are Mickey Rourke and John Hurt. Mickey Rourke was a decent "bad guy" but I felt like he was board or didn't really care about his character. John Hurt was really good mentor type character, but not much screen time. I also enjoyed the beautiful Freida Pinto but her role and every other side charters role were weak.      
  • Art Direction: 8: I liked the fact this film didn't portray the gods as "aged in wisdom" it was interesting to see them  portrayed as heroic 20 or 30 somethings. I also like the compare and contrast between the different "groups" Immortals vs Greeks (Theseus) vs Cretans (Hyperion).
  • Cinematography: 6.5: I thought it could have been better. Personally I think Zack Snyder captures the "slow-motion / speed-up" effect better.  
  • Direction: 6.5: With being an action film I thought the film moved slower than what I was wanting it to. I guess I was hopping for a 300 pace since it was shot with the same style.  
  • Editing: 7: It was well edited but like everything else it kind of feel short.  
  • Screenplay: 6: I love Greek mythology and lore, they make good stories, so how can you take a good heroic character like Theseus and basically screw it up. Maybe it was the director's fault for not driving the story he is know for visually awesome movies with weak stories. Come on dude Greek mythology is epic so tell a story that matches.     
  • Sound and Music: 7: Over all it was good but again not up to par.
  • VFX: 8: Like I said with the art direction on this film its beautiful. Good VFX all around...the gods smile upon this work. I thought the 3-D was weak though.  
Overall: 7: Personally I had a fairly good time watching this film. I love the action sequence especially the ones with gods...I enjoyed the "bad-ass" feel of the gods over the "aged in wisdom" Like I mention before. Personally after seeing it I don't feel one hundred present recommending it a friend to see at a theater, main because it not worth a full ticket price. Go on haft price day or wait and rent it on DVD.  

Friday, July 22, 2011

Review: Captain America: The First Avenger

Title: Captain America: The First Avenger
Distributor: Marvel Studios
Director: Joe Johnston
Writer(s): Christopher Markus (screenplay), Stephen McFeely (screenplay)
Staring: Chris Evans, Hayley Atwell, Sebastian Stan, Tommy Lee Jones, Hugo Weaving, Dominic Cooper, Stanley Tucci
MPAA Rating:Rated PG-13 for intense sequences of sci-fi violence and action
Running Time: 125 min
Synopsis: After being deemed unfit for military service, Steve Rogers volunteers for a top secret research project that turns him into Captain America, a superhero dedicated to defending America's ideals.

What Others Are Saying?

Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 71% (Fresh), Top Critics: 75% (Fresh), Audience: 86% (Like It)
Metacritic: Critics: 67 out of 100, Users: 8.5 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 67 out of 100
Yahoo Movies: Critics: N/A Users: A-

My Review

Source Material: Based on the Comic Book series with same name.

Entertaining Value:
  • Action Elements: This film is for the most part action pack. What I liked over this movie and other action movies is the action was well choreographed. When I watched let say Transformers 3 sometime there was to much going on but in this movie there seem to be a balance of action and drama.
  • Comedy Elements: There is quite a bit of one liners and homages to original Captain America. Both of these aspects of the film ease some of "war-like" tension. Some may argue that its to campy and light hearted but I think it makes it fun and entertaining. I'm guess there is more movie going people that are looking for fun and entertaining films over a artsy-fartsy films.
  • Dramatic Elements: There is some emotional scene but personally I think there where on the week side. Don't get me wrong the actors were awesome...I'm will to say perfect casting.
  • Sci-Fi / Fantasy Elements: Another comic book movie in the books.
Cinematic Value:
  • Acting and Dialogue: 7.5: Chris Evans is the go to guy if you ever want a superhero. With that being said I'm all right with him being both John Storm and Steve Rogers After seeing the film I came to the conclusion that Chris Evan is to Captain America that Christopher Reeves is Superman. I know Marvel would like to reboot Fantastic Four once they get there right back from Twentieth Century Fox. Therefore casting a person that will basically make us for get about Chris Evan's Human Torch. Anywho lest talk about the other fantastic actors in this film. Hugo Weaving in my opinion is in the top five actors who make an awesome bad guy...I think its the voice. "Mr. Anderson" lol A Matrix reference. It was great seeing Tommy Lee Jones being awesome again. Don't even get me started on the beautiful Hayley Atwell.
  • Art Direction: 8: This film is basically a period peace...Time period WWII...Captain America = Well America and Red Skull = Nazi Germany/ Hitler. I believe that atmosphere was portrayed in this film very well. In a friend of mines review of this very same movie he made a valid point. In a round about way the high-tech weapons that Hydra (Red skull's followers) used was obvious no match for the weapons of the time, therefore disconnecting with the 1940's.
  • Cinematography: 8: Because the action sequences were so well done the over all the film's cinematography was good, if not better than good. Not really much more to say on that topic just have to see to believe it.
  • Direction: 7: The pace was decent, there were some slower parts. I see Joe Johnston work as average if not slightly above average. When you got a guy who is mainly known for film such Honey, I Shrunk the Kids, Jumanji, and Jurassic Park III, would you worry that he might screw up...He did a decent job but I thinking it might have turned out slightly better under other direction.
  • Editing: 8: There are some cool montages that show off the bad ass-ness of Captain America
  • Screenplay: 8: The villain was a bit weak I think the story could have benefited from using more Red Skull, besides that it was good.
  • Sound and Music: 7.5: Good, had some campy music in the middle that was fun and light heart.
  • VFX: 8.5: Most of the film seemed liked it was done with practical effect except for the obvious like the transformation scene. Witch is a very good thing.
Overall: 8: I'm sure if your a fan you already scene it and if you haven't your in line right now, or at least have plane to see it. But if your waiting for this cinematard to make recommendation...then I say see it. its a good action movie that fairly entertaining, and it also a comic book movie.

Tuesday, July 19, 2011

Review: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2

Title: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2
Distributor: Warner Bros. Pictures
Director: David Yates
Writer(s): Steve Kloves (screenplay), J.K. Rowling (novel)
Staring: Ralph Fiennes, Alan Rickman, Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson
MPAA Rating:Rated PG-13 for some sequences of intense action violence and frightening images.
Running Time: 130 min
Synopsis: The final chapter begins as Harry, Ron, and Hermione continue their quest of finding and destroying the Dark Lord's three remaining Horcruxes.

What Others Are Saying?

Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 97% (Fresh), Top Critics: 100% (Fresh), Audience: 93% (Like It)
Metacritic: Critics: 87 out of 100, Users: 8.4 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 84 out of 100
Yahoo Movies: Critics: A- Users: A

My Review

Source Material: Based on Book with same name.

Entertaining Value:
  • Action Elements: There is a good amount of action, lets just say a good amount of the film is a battle sequence. A full blown war break out at Hogwarts. We finally get to see some bad ass wizard encounters, that just makes you smile.
  • Comedy Elements: This is a darker film but that Harry Potter humor and light heartiness isn't completely gone. Meaning you will get a good couple of laughs.
  • Dramatic Elements: Man a live there are a few sequence that might just make you cry especially if your a "fanboy" of the books. These scenes are cinematically beautiful.
  • Sci-Fi / Fantasy Elements: If you don't know by now that Harry Potter takes place in a high fantasy wizarding world then you mostly live under a rock or your just not in touch with any popular culture at all. Either way this film has a bunch of visual effect to achieve the magic from Harry's world, that us Muggles don't understand.
Cinematic Value:
  • Acting and Dialogue: 8: The performance were great overall. There was some highlighted character this time around that was nice to see for a chance. Notably, Minerva McGonagall played by Maggie Smith has an awesome battle with Snape. I think I enjoy the adult actor performance sometime over the now teen actors. I absolutely adore the performance that comes from Ralph Fiennes, and Alan Rickman. I' m not sure who else could have been a better Dark Lord, Ray Fiennes is such a great antagonist. Alan Rickman voice scream Snape, but this film we see the real Snape.
  • Art Direction: 9: The film is straight up beautiful...I hope to see Oscar nomination.
  • Cinematography: 9: Like I said before this film is an action film. With that being said the filming of the action is not horrible like we saw with Transformers a few weeks ago. Also so many different emotion were sparked with the cinematography alone, it was fantastic.
  • Direction: 8: I was never board and the film seemed to flow smoothly. David Yates did a good job in my opinion.
  • Editing: 8: I would basically say the same I did for directing for the editing.
  • Screenplay: 8.5: Lets talk a bit about adaption. The average length of a screenplay is somewhere between 90 pages to 120 pages. Keeping in mind that one page of a screenplay is about one minute of screen time. The book had 759 pages which equals 759 minutes or 12 hours and 40mins. That would be one long about two 120min moives pulse or minus 30mins, meaning a screenplay with over 200pages, that's a little more manageable don't you think. So with that being said some stuff has to be cut. To a "fanboy" these cuts usually ruin the film complete, making claims like,"They forgot this...didn't explain that...WTF" To someone who hasn't read the books, confusion maybe in order but they get over it quickly. This is how I tend to approach adaption film. 1. Did the filmmakers hit the main plot points and premise I remember from the source material? 2. Dose the added material for cinematic effect add to the over story, therefore making a more exciting movie? 3. Dose the content of the film have good literary structure? 4. Was there good character development? 5. Did I enjoy the film as much as I did the book?
  • Sound and Music: 9: I love the score as much as the other Harry Potter film. Music just add another depth of emotion.
  • VFX: 10: The magic was brought to life again but this time better than ever. I see VFX award or two coming out of this film.
Overall: 8.5: Sorry I spent sooooo much time in the screenplay section but I know the worst part of every Harry Potter film or another film with a huge fan base is what the filmmaker choose to leave out of the film. Overall the film is great and I think all Potter fan will enjoy it. I'm sure most of anybody has seen it. I didn't get a chance to watch until Monday after it this review is a bit old news. I suggest watching Part 1 then watch Part 2 while Part 1 is still fresh in your head.

Thursday, June 30, 2011

Review: Transformers: Dark of the Moon

Title: Transformers: Dark of the Moon
Distributor: Paramount Pictures
Director: Michael Bay
Writer(s): Ehren Kruger
Staring: Shia LaBeouf, Rosie Huntington-Whiteley, Josh Duhamel, Patrick Dempsey, Frances McDormand, Voices: Peter Cullen, Hugo Weaving, Leonard Nimoy
MPAA Rating:PG-13 for intense prolonged sequences of sci-fi action violence, mayhem and destruction, and for language, some sexuality and innuendo
Running Time: 157 min
Synopsis: The Autobots learn of a Cybertronian spacecraft hidden on the Moon, and race against the Decepticons to reach it and to learn its secrets

What Others Are Saying?

Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 36% (Rotten), Top Critics: 26% (Rotten), Audience: 90% (Like It)
Metacritic: Critics: 42 out of 100, Users: 6.1 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 47 out of 100
Yahoo Movies: Critics: C Users: A-

My Review

Source Material: Based on Hasbro toys

Entertaining Value:
  • Action Elements: An awesome but awful amount of action. There is a lot of action its a Michael Bay film. With every Michael Bay film there at least 100 explosions. Some scene are visual simulating and are pretty cool but after sometime it becomes a bit boring.
  • Comedy Elements: One liners and small amount of comic relief, insert Sam's parents. I don't think the filmmaker where focusing on comedy this go around, because it more or less a war film.
  • Dramatic Elements: Most if not all the actors need acting lessons...not really...but I'm not to far off...but again its a Michael Bay film. The film tried some dramatic scenes by using slow motion and "sappy" music.
  • Sci-Fi / Fantasy Elements: Umm...Giant Robots fighting over high-tech technology. If that's not Sci-Fi, then I don't know what is...just kidding. Got to love Giant Robots
Cinematic Value:
  • Acting and Dialogue: 6: A teen-heart throb, a underwear model, a Hollywood hunk, and "McDreamy" come together in a movie about fighting robots. Add it all up and what do you get...the best movie ever...that's sarcasm. It not the worst acting in the world but if it didn't have some amazing voice actors like Leonard Nimoy it would be very close.
  • Art Direction: 7: Most of the film looked good from a art point of view. not the prettiest film but good enough for a summer movie.
  • Cinematography: 6.5: In an action film action needs to be captured and be smooth. This is one of the better films from Michael Bay that achieves this aspect. There was still some shaky cam and moments that you don't know what is going on but action and explosions
  • Direction: 6.5: If you can't tell already I'm not that big on Michael Bay films. As far as this film goes, It has high octane action but in places its slow and boring...these moment where when the film was trying on drama...but it a Michael Bay film.
  • Editing: 7: I did like that the filmmaker made a decision to use a slow motion for "cool-action-sequence" but too much of anything is bad including slow motion.
  • Screenplay: 5: The story for me was very weak...I don't expect good storytelling out of an action pact summer blockbuster, but there was so many plot holes I need a shovel to fill them (Brock can I us yours) sorry folk that's was a inside joke...but if your looking for story forget about it.
  • Sound and Music: 8: I think all the Transformers movies have had one thing going for them and that is sound mixing/editing and music.
  • VFX: 8: The visual effect was good as usual..its also another thing that I can get behind on a Transformers movie.
Overall: 6.5: Action + VFX + Robots + Michael Bay - Story = Transformers. Even though I may seem to be harsh against this film it is arguably the best Transformers movie to date.

Friday, June 3, 2011

X-Men: First Class: Review

Title: X-Men: First Class
Distributor: 20th Century Fox
Director: Matthew Vaughn
Writer(s): Ashley Miller (screenplay), Zack Stentz (screenplay)
Staring: James McAvoy, Michael Fassbender, Kevin Bacon, Rose Byrne, Jennifer Lawrence
MPAA Rating: PG -13
Running Time: 132 min
Synopsis: In 1963, Charles Xavier starts up a school and later a team, for humans with superhuman abilities. Among them is Erik Lensherr, his best friend... and future archenemy.

What Others Are Saying?

Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 70% (Fresh), Top Critics: 86% (Fresh), Audience: 88% (Like It)
Metacritic: Critics: 65 out of 100, Users: 8.0 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 76 out of 100
Yahoo Movies: Critics: B Users: A-

My Review

Source Material: Based off Marvel comic book with the same name.

Entertaining Value:
  • Action Elements: This movie has a good balance between action and drama. Personally, I didn't want to leave my seat because I felt I miss something awesome but nature did call. The action on screen was well done.
  • Comedy Elements: A good bit of the humor was thrown into the film for the die hard comic book fans cause there is a good amount of cameos and references to the x-men universe, either from the comic book or from the previous four x-men films. If your reading this and saying "great I never read a x-men comic ever in my life" don't worry the film took that into consideration.
  • Dramatic Elements: This film maybe a heavy action/adventure story. But there is some awesome dramatic scenes, most of them take place between Charles (Professor X) and Erik (Magneto).
  • Sci-Fi / Fantasy Elements: This is one of the many comic book movies coming out this summer, so expect "cool" VFX shots for even "cool" superpowers. Personally some of the VFX shots are campy and a bit funny, but it is a comic book movie and the atmosphere is pose to be light and a bit humorous.
Cinematic Value:
  • Acting and Dialogue: 8.5: Two guys you have to look out for Jamse McAvoy and Michael Fassbender. I willing to bet a lot of people are in the same boat I'm in when it comes to Jamse McAvoy, and that is he has been basically loved, and or respected ever since his appearance as Mr. Tumnus in Narnia. McAvoy has but out some solid performance: Atonement and The Conspirator. As far as Michael Fassbender goes he was fantastic in this role. His roles in 300 and Inglourious Basterds don't realy stand out in my mind, but that because they were smaller roles.
  • Art Direction: 8: This film is not only a comic book movie but also somewhat a period film as it dose take place in the 60's during the Cuban Missile Crisis. The art and clothing do match the time period to a degree, but this film was made in the 2010's so it has some modern edge to as well. This aspect I think can be seen in the suits. The suits represent the old school blue and yellow spandex suits but with modern twist.
  • Cinematography: 8: The good thing about this film was during the action scene the camera wasn't shaky. There were some notable scene were cool camera effect were use. One that stood out in my mind was the beast transformation which was done in a POV style.
  • Direction: 8: The film had a decent pace. A friend of mine said he only look at his watch once to check time, but then at the same time, another friend was on the edge of her seat the entire time.
  • Editing: 7.5: The editing was good, expect for the "training montage." I didn't like it because the filmmakers where trying to achieve a comic book panel type look. In my opinion this style of editing can a bit confusing to the average movie going audience.
  • Screenplay:7.5: The story for this film is great, but the liberties they took on the film will piss hardcore X-Men fans aka "fanboys" off. When it comes to film continuity this film works to a degree, if you look at from the prospective that its similar to Star Trek (2009) or Batman Begins. Besides those minor facts the story was fantastic, the cameo were fantastic as well.
  • Sound and Music: 8.5: The music was good
  • VFX: 7: I though it was kind of weak...or campy. Lets just say its a bit silly, not silly as in looking bad like old school caymation but silly as how they used it. But then there are some spots that are awesome.
Overall: 8: This movie is good. For being a person who doesn't pay for movies often because I work at a movie theater, I would say it was well worth my 9$ admission. As a X-men movie it runs up next to the first two X-men movies. I give it two thumbs up and what not. Happy movie watching.

Friday, May 6, 2011

Review: Thor

Title: Thor
Distributor: Paramount Pictures
Director: Kenneth Branagh
Writer(s): Ashley Miller (screenplay), Zack Stentz (screenplay)
Staring: Chris Hemsworth, Natalie Portman, Tom Hiddleston, Anthony Hopkins, Stellan Skarsgård
MPAA Rating: PG -13
Running Time: 114 min
Synopsis: The powerful but arrogant warrior Thor is cast out of the fantastic realm of Asgard and sent to live amongst humans on Earth, where he soon becomes one of their finest defenders.
What Others Are Saying?

Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 83% (Fresh), Top Critics: 73% (Fresh), Audience: 95% (Want to See It)
Metacritic: Critics: 58 out of 100, Users: NA out of 10 (No votes yet)
MRQE Metric: 67 out of 100
Yahoo Movies: Critics: No Rating At This Time Users: A-

My Review

Source Material: Based off Marvel comic book with the same name.

Entertaining Value:
  • Action Elements: I saw a good amount of entertaining fights. Most of them where on a "epic" level while some fell short. But over all the action in the film was good.
  • Comedy Elements: Humor is one of the stronger aspects of this film. I think when it comes to comic book movies there need to be a good amount of humor so it grounds the characters it into our reality. This film did a good job of doing just that. A feat that was harder because it a story of "gods" duking it out for the fate of man.
  • Dramatic Elements: I think there was a good amount of superficial drama, or lack of a better word some love dove scene that didn't work for me. Don't get me wrong the actors did fantastic but love is deeper than admiration of the male physique.
  • Sci-Fi / Fantasy Elements: A lot of farfetched ideas but believable. This movie is based off a comic book. This comic book drew inspiration from Norse Mythology using many characteristics of their deities to from a superhero in this case the god of thunder, Thor.
Cinematic Value:
  • Acting and Dialogue: B+: Most of the actors in this film where fairly new to the sliver screen. If you remember the open scene of Star Trek (2009) then you may recall seeing Chris Hemsworth (Thor) portraying George Kirk, Capitan Kirks father. Tom Hiddleston (Loki) comes from television. Stellan Skarsgård was in the Pirates movie as Bootstrap Bill. I believe that these actors captured the heart of these characters and did a very good job portraying them. I also enjoy seeing some damn good actors in there as well. Do I have to mention, Anthony Hopkins, its pretty much a given.
  • Art Direction: B+: I like the costume design the most. It felt real and not the campy spandex that is given to us in the comic book, witch is fantastic. I saw a good correlation to color scheme between the civilization clothing and the armor. I think the rendering of Asgard was cool and a bit awe aspiring
  • Cinematography: B: I'm glad the most of fight scene weren't Micheal Bay-ish, meaning it was easy to follow, good work camera men.
  • Direction: B: The film had a decent pace. The scene that took place in Asgard where good but lasted maybe a bit to long but then again I feel like the end was here by no time. But I will bring up that the pace of the movie was fantastic for a summer blockbuster.
  • Editing: B+: I liked the back and forth aspect of the movie.
  • Screenplay: B+: Not being a avid comic book reader I don't have a fully understanding if this film lined up well with the basic story of Thor from the comic. As far as a good story it was good, good conflict, great antagonist, good character development.
  • Sound and Music: B: I enjoyed it. It was simple but I think it works.
  • VFX: B: The environments and sci-fi elements had good VFX, Asgard turned out fantastic in my opinion. It may not be Oscar worthy but I think they filmmakers did a good job.
Overall: B+: I believe you should give this film a shot. It may not satisfy your needs of being an awesome aesthetically pleasing art piece but its one "epic" movie and quite entertaining. I understand going to a movie isn't economy friendly with gas, ticket, and concession price being ridiculously high, but I think you should take the gamble and enjoy yourself for at least. I guess we will see how this compares to the other comic book movies coming out this summer, Thor was a good start to my summer movie season.

Saturday, April 9, 2011

Graphics In Movies vs. Video Games

I'm by far a film fan. My favorite type of film usually come from the genres of Sci-Fi and Fantasy films. With this being said I have seen my far share of special effect (SFX) everything from claymation to computer generated images (CGI). From being a well seasoned Sci-Fi and Fantasy film fan I can say that film graphics is getting better every day, but is it really getting better? I mean yes we have break through in cimea graphic with movies like Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, and Avatar, but that all they are major break through. It seems these film of these caliber take about five years to be made if not longer. So what I'm saying is these breakthrough take quite a bit of time to make. Once one of these new technology is created it seems it takes a good decade or more to find a new and better invention in computer graphics when it come to film. The new craze is 3-D and most of these movies are animated film made for children. Don't get me wrong I like animated film especially Pixar films but I would like to see story made for for big people, like in video games. This were I segway into the graphics of video games. I believe that these graphic are really innovative. I'm not much of a gamer but I have dappled in games such as World of Warcraft and Civilization 5 witch has awesome graphics. I know these game also take years to make but unlike movies a new engine is invented for very new game. Were getting to point were video game such as Crysis and Crysis 2 have such good graphics they have been rumored to crash NASA computers. In my opinion that pretty damn good. Why can't we use the technology that NVIDIA and other computer graphics companies are developing in movies and use the crappy cartoon animation for children in video game. I'm just saying video games are mainly for kids right.

Saturday, March 26, 2011

Sucker Punch Review


Title: Sucker Punch
Distributor: Warner Bros.
Director: Zach Snyder
Writer(s): Zack Snyder (screenplay), Steve Shibuya (screenplay)
Staring: Emily Browning, Abbie Cornish, Jena Malone, Vanessa Hudgens, Jamie Chung
MPAA Rating: PG -13 for thematic material involving sexuality, violence and combat sequences, and for language
Running Time: 109 min
Synopsis: A young girl (Baby Doll) is locked away in a mental asylum by her wicked stepfather where she will undergo a lobotomy in 5 days time. Faced with unimaginable odds, she retreats to fantastical world in her imagination where she and four other female inmates at the asylum plot to escape the facility. The lines between reality and fantasy blur as Baby Doll and her companions battle various creatures and enemies to retrieve the 5 items they need that will allow them to break free from their captors before it's too late

What Others Are Saying?

Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 19% (Rotten), Top Critics: 11% (Rotten), Audience: 65% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: 36 out of 100, Users: 6.7 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 37 out of 100
Yahoo Movies: Critics: C- Users: B

My Review

Source Material: Original work from the mind of Steve Shibuya and Zach Snyder

Entertaining Value:
  • Action Elements: The film has some good action scene that will excite many guys because you have five beautiful women welding swords and fire arms to defeat Samurai's, Nazi's, Orcs, and Dragons, every guys dream.
  • Comedy Elements: Not really that humors but some things become humors because the dialogue was very cheese in parts. More less it was "this is so ridiculous I got to laugh"
  • Dramatic Elements: Hard to pick-up on anything but the I'm going to say No on drama.
  • Sci-Fi / Fantasy Elements: It's a fantasy but in a "it all happening in their mind" type of way. The way it was edited together the fantasy world over lap and it sometime become hard to determine whose head where in.
Cinematic Value:
  • Acting and Dialogue: C+: The acting was good but the writing mainly the dialouge was horrible. So horrible that you feel obligated to laugh at how dumb the words coming out of the actors mouths.
  • Art Direction: B+: Personally being a geek I noticed a heavily influenced art style from Japanese Anime including a hint of 1950's fashion. I think this to styles messed very well.
  • Cinematography: C+: Zack Snyder films have the same formula with the who slowing/ speeding up time to capture those awesomely cool action moves.
  • Direction: B:The film had a decent pace and feel to it...the film is definitely a Zack Snyder film.
  • Editing: B: I always thought something was missing in the story but maybe that was what they eliminated from the book not necessarily the editors fault. Over all I think it was a decent film from a editing stand point.
  • Screenplay: D-: The story was very week. first its a simple story which doesn't always mean better. Also the character were hard to connect with on a personal level, meaning I didn't relate to any character.
  • Sound and Music: A: I enjoyed the sound track, most of the songs had good beat and arises a good emotional cues, even though they emotions weren't being reflected in the actor performance.
  • VFX: B-: Graphically this film did a good job...ditto the comments I said about the art direction.
Overall: C: This film is saddly going to be a major disappointment to those who wanted to go to see it. I recommended watching it on Netflix. or rent it from a DVD 's

Sunday, February 27, 2011

My Oscar Pick 2010

Best Picture

“Black Swan” Mike Medavoy, Brian Oliver and Scott Franklin, Producers

“The Fighter” David Hoberman, Todd Lieberman and Mark Wahlberg, Producers

“Inception” Emma Thomas and Christopher Nolan, Producers

“The Kids Are All Right” Gary Gilbert, Jeffrey Levy-Hinte and Celine Rattray, Producers

“The King's Speech” Iain Canning, Emile Sherman and Gareth Unwin, Producers

“127 Hours” Christian Colson, Danny Boyle and John Smithson, Producers

“The Social Network” Scott Rudin, Dana Brunetti, Michael De Luca and Ceán Chaffin, Producers

“Toy Story 3” Darla K. Anderson, Producer

“True Grit” Scott Rudin, Ethan Coen and Joel Coen, Producers

“Winter's Bone" Anne Rosellini and Alix Madigan-Yorkin, Producers

Actor in a Leading Role

Javier Bardem in “Biutiful”

Jeff Bridges in “True Grit”

Jesse Eisenberg in “The Social Network”

Colin Firth in “The King's Speech”

James Franco in “127 Hours”

Actor in a Supporting Role

Christian Bale in “The Fighter”

John Hawkes in “Winter's Bone”

Jeremy Renner in “The Town”

Mark Ruffalo in “The Kids Are All Right”

Geoffrey Rush in “The King's Speech”

Actress in a Leading Role

Annette Bening in “The Kids Are All Right”

Nicole Kidman in “Rabbit Hole”

Jennifer Lawrence in “Winter's Bone”

Natalie Portman in “Black Swan”

Michelle Williams in “Blue Valentine”

Actress in a Supporting Role

Amy Adams in “The Fighter”

Helena Bonham Carter in “The King's Speech”

Melissa Leo in “The Fighter”

Hailee Steinfeld in “True Grit”

Jacki Weaver in “Animal Kingdom”

Animated Feature Film

“How to Train Your Dragon” Chris Sanders and Dean DeBlois

“The Illusionist” Sylvain Chomet

“Toy Story 3” Lee Unkrich

Art Direction

“Alice in Wonderland” Production Design: Robert Stromberg; Set Decoration: Karen O'Hara

“Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1” Production Design: Stuart Craig; Set Decoration: Stephenie McMillan

“Inception” Production Design: Guy Hendrix Dyas; Set Decoration: Larry Dias and Doug Mowat

“The King's Speech” Production Design: Eve Stewart; Set Decoration: Judy Farr

“True Grit” Production Design: Jess Gonchor; Set Decoration: Nancy Haigh


“Black Swan” Matthew Libatique

“Inception” Wally Pfister

“The King's Speech” Danny Cohen

“The Social Network” Jeff Cronenweth

“True Grit” Roger Deakins

Costume Design

“Alice in Wonderland” Colleen Atwood

“I Am Love” Antonella Cannarozzi

“The King's Speech” Jenny Beavan

“The Tempest” Sandy Powell

“True Grit” Mary Zophres


“Black Swan” Darren Aronofsky

“The Fighter” David O. Russell

“The King's Speech” Tom Hooper

“The Social Network” David Fincher

“True Grit” Joel Coen and Ethan Coen

Documentary (Feature)

“Exit through the Gift Shop” Banksy and Jaimie D'Cruz

“Gasland” Josh Fox and Trish Adlesic

“Inside Job” Charles Ferguson and Audrey Marrs

“Restrepo” Tim Hetherington and Sebastian Junger

“Waste Land” Lucy Walker and Angus Aynsley

Documentary (Short Subject)

“Killing in the Name” Jed Rothstein

“Poster Girl” Sara Nesson and Mitchell W. Block

“Strangers No More” Karen Goodman and Kirk Simon

“Sun Come Up” Jennifer Redfearn and Tim Metzger

“The Warriors of Qiugang” Ruby Yang and Thomas Lennon

Film Editing

“Black Swan” Andrew Weisblum

“The Fighter” Pamela Martin

“The King's Speech” Tariq Anwar

“127 Hours” Jon Harris

“The Social Network” Angus Wall and Kirk Baxter

Foreign Language Film

“Biutiful” Mexico

“Dogtooth” Greece

“In a Better World” Denmark

“Incendies” Canada

“Outside the Law (Hors-la-loi)” Algeria


“Barney's Version” Adrien Morot

“The Way Back” Edouard F. Henriques, Gregory Funk and Yolanda Toussieng

“The Wolfman” Rick Baker and Dave Elsey

Music (Original Score)

“How to Train Your Dragon” John Powell

“Inception” Hans Zimmer

“The King's Speech” Alexandre Desplat

“127 Hours” A.R. Rahman

“The Social Network” Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross

Music (Original Song)

“Coming Home” from “Country Strong” Music and Lyric by Tom Douglas, Troy Verges and Hillary Lindsey

“I See the Light” from “Tangled” Music by Alan Menken Lyric by Glenn Slater

“If I Rise” from “127 Hours” Music by A.R. Rahman Lyric by Dido and Rollo Armstrong

“We Belong Together” from “Toy Story 3" Music and Lyric by Randy Newman

Short Film (Animated)

“Day & Night” Teddy Newton

“The Gruffalo” Jakob Schuh and Max Lang

“Let's Pollute” Geefwee Boedoe

“The Lost Thing” Shaun Tan and Andrew Ruhemann

“Madagascar, carnet de voyage (Madagascar, a Journey Diary)” Bastien Dubois

Short Film (Live Action)

“The Confession” Tanel Toom

“The Crush” Michael Creagh

“God of Love” Luke Matheny

“Na Wewe” Ivan Goldschmidt

“Wish 143” Ian Barnes and Samantha Waite

Sound Editing

“Inception” Richard King

“Toy Story 3” Tom Myers and Michael Silvers

“Tron: Legacy” Gwendolyn Yates Whittle and Addison Teague

“True Grit” Skip Lievsay and Craig Berkey

“Unstoppable” Mark P. Stoeckinger

Sound Mixing

“Inception” Lora Hirschberg, Gary A. Rizzo and Ed Novick

“The King's Speech” Paul Hamblin, Martin Jensen and John Midgley

“Salt” Jeffrey J. Haboush, Greg P. Russell, Scott Millan and William Sarokin

“The Social Network” Ren Klyce, David Parker, Michael Semanick and Mark Weingarten

“True Grit” Skip Lievsay, Craig Berkey, Greg Orloff and Peter F. Kurland

Visual Effects

“Alice in Wonderland” Ken Ralston, David Schaub, Carey Villegas and Sean Phillips

“Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1” Tim Burke, John Richardson, Christian Manz and Nicolas Aithadi

“Hereafter” Michael Owens, Bryan Grill, Stephan Trojansky and Joe Farrell

“Inception” Paul Franklin, Chris Corbould, Andrew Lockley and Peter Bebb

“Iron Man 2” Janek Sirrs, Ben Snow, Ged Wright and Daniel Sudick

Writing (Adapted Screenplay)

“127 Hours” Screenplay by Danny Boyle & Simon Beaufoy

“The Social Network” Screenplay by Aaron Sorkin

“Toy Story 3” Screenplay by Michael Arndt; Story by John Lasseter, Andrew Stanton and Lee Unkrich

“True Grit” Written for the screen by Joel Coen & Ethan Coen

“Winter's Bone” Adapted for the screen by Debra Granik & Anne Rosellini

Writing (Original Screenplay)

“Another Year” Written by Mike Leigh

“The Fighter” Screenplay by Scott Silver and Paul Tamasy & Eric Johnson; Story by Keith Dorrington & Paul Tamasy & Eric Johnson

“Inception” Written by Christopher Nolan

“The Kids Are All Right” Written by Lisa Cholodenko & Stuart Blumberg

“The King's Speech” Screenplay by David Seidler