I try to refrain from rant-like posts, but it's becoming harder and harder to watch a movie in 2D. I'm an avid movie goer. I try to see at least one movie a week at the theater, especially during the summer. Among my social circles, I'm known as the "movie guy." My friends usually ask me my thought on a movie before seeing it themselves. To be honest, not having an exorbitant cash flow is really the only thing limiting how many movies I watch at the theater. With that being said, I have noticed a trend this summer that I didn't in previous years. I'm not sure who to blame for this trend, studio heads, the producers, the theater chains, or the managers. The trend that I'm alluding to is disproportionate showtimes between 2D and 3D.
For an example, these stats are based off my local theater (AMC Showplace 12). The premiere opening on Thursday night for Suicide Squad has two showtimes for the 2D viewing and two showing for the 3D viewing, not bad 50/50 split on the showtimes. Friday and Saturday it gets worst. Suicide Squad has five showtimes all day, one matinee showtime in 2D and four showtimes in 3D, on of which is a matinee. Based on the law of averages, the average person is done working around five in the evening, because of this the pique time for theaters is just slightly after dinner, which for the average person is right after they get off work. Therefore the evening showtimes have more weight because there are more people available to watch a movie. So the 20/80 (2D/3D) split, reflected from Friday and Saturday's showtimes, becomes a 10/90 split. On Sunday, Suicide Squad's showtimes have a 0/100 split. Meaning 100% of the showtimes are 3D. That very annoying. This isn't the first time this has happened. All summer I have seen at least 25/75 split on almost every major movie released, including family movies like Finding Dory.
With those numbers, the average family of four is paying at least fifteen more dollars at the box office. I'm not necessarily mad at 3D movie pricing. I'm irritated that someone is forcing the average movie going audience to buy the "premium priced" ticket, even though they don't want to. It seems like there are only three options at the theater: watch a 3D movie, don't watch a movie, or watch the latest crapfest that has twice as many showings.
I'm not caught up on the latest facts, but the last time I checked 75% of movie goer disliked 3D movies. If I remember correctly that percentage increased with the age of the demographic. Which make sense. Out of the twelve "Real 3D" movies made in 2016 only three of them are live-action, one of which is The Jungle Book, a primarily CGI film. On the "Fake 3D" side of things, every movie was live action. A third of the "Real 3D" movies made last year, 2015, were live action, and none of the "Fake 3D" movies made last year were animated. Even looking through the history of 3D films, they seem to be heavily marketed towards family films, which are typically animated.
I personally don't enjoy 3D movies in general. For me, the 3D effect doesn't add anything to the film. From my experience, the 3D shots are usually forced and are fairly cheesy. Now, I may be more inclined to watch a film in 3D if it was made as a "Real 3D" film. I'm the same way with IMAX. I rather watch a movie filmed with an IMAX camera, than a film that is just projected on a larger screen. When available, I watch movies in the format that it was attended to be viewed. The Hobbit films were created to be viewed at 48fps. My local theater doesn't have the capabilities to show a film at that frame rate. The close theater that did wasn't within a reasonable driving distance. Therefore, I had to view the film in 24fps, but that wasn't a deal breaker. When my local theater has all digital projectors with the capabilities to either show 2D or 3D prints, I should have equal opportunities to view it in my preferred way.
To the studio heads and producers, if you want me to watch your movie maybe make a few more 2D versions. To movie theater chains, and managers, if you want me to spend dollars at your theater how about you schedule showtimes where I have choices. Right now, my choices are to spend money, don't to spend money, or spend money on crap. I like watching movies at the theater, so please STOP forcing me to watch 3D versions.
Showing posts with label Exclusive Review. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Exclusive Review. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 2, 2016
Tuesday, February 24, 2015
Power/Rangers Short Film Reaction
I want to do a quick reaction post to the gritty Power Ranger short film, that’s has been blowing up my Facebook news feed, as of late. Let’s be honest, I was a huge Mighty Morphin Power Ranger geek when I was a kid. I had this “life-size” stuffed White Ranger doll, which I would beat up. The 1995 Power Ranger movie was the best movie ever made, from the perceptive of my ten year old self. After that movie I had every toy relating to the Power Ranger, including a morpher. As you can tell, the Power Ranger was a big part of my childhood.
When a Power Rangers reboot was announced back in 2014, my ten year old self got really excited. There has been little news surrounding this movie. A few months back Roberto Orci left the project because of Star Trek scheduling issues, which may set back its summer 2016 release date. I don’t have high hopes for this film in general, because it’s the Power Rangers, and I don’t think the 90’s martial arts campiness would work today. The film would need a major overhaul for it to work today.
A Youtuber named Adi Shanker post a video title Power/Rangers. This video is a fan made film, by Joseph Kahn. The film’s primary stars are Katee Sachhoff (Battlestar Galactica) as Kimberly/Pink Ranger, and James Van Der Beek (Dawson's Creek) as Rocky. This film’s running time is just shy of 12 minutes, in that time it delivers a grittier Power Ranger world set in the future. I think the darker and grittier tone this Power Rangers short film brought us was good. If the filmmakers from the reboot, presumably coming out in 2016, takes some plays from this film’s playbook, then it could turn out as a good movie. I personally wished they would have gone without the dub-step music during the fight scenes. I felt that it was a bit distracting. I’m kind of surprised they didn't get Jason David Frank to reprise his role as Tommy, that guy is jumping at every chance to suit up as the Green Ranger again. Overall this short film was fairly enjoyable.
When a Power Rangers reboot was announced back in 2014, my ten year old self got really excited. There has been little news surrounding this movie. A few months back Roberto Orci left the project because of Star Trek scheduling issues, which may set back its summer 2016 release date. I don’t have high hopes for this film in general, because it’s the Power Rangers, and I don’t think the 90’s martial arts campiness would work today. The film would need a major overhaul for it to work today.
A Youtuber named Adi Shanker post a video title Power/Rangers. This video is a fan made film, by Joseph Kahn. The film’s primary stars are Katee Sachhoff (Battlestar Galactica) as Kimberly/Pink Ranger, and James Van Der Beek (Dawson's Creek) as Rocky. This film’s running time is just shy of 12 minutes, in that time it delivers a grittier Power Ranger world set in the future. I think the darker and grittier tone this Power Rangers short film brought us was good. If the filmmakers from the reboot, presumably coming out in 2016, takes some plays from this film’s playbook, then it could turn out as a good movie. I personally wished they would have gone without the dub-step music during the fight scenes. I felt that it was a bit distracting. I’m kind of surprised they didn't get Jason David Frank to reprise his role as Tommy, that guy is jumping at every chance to suit up as the Green Ranger again. Overall this short film was fairly enjoyable.
Friday, November 28, 2014
Star Wars Teaser Trailer Reaction
Most of you have probably already have scene the Star Wars: The Force Awakens teaser, if not check it out here before reading on. My first reaction was utter amazement mixed with excitement. I very much like the fact that the tone of the film has an original Star Wars feel. Seeing the fleet of X-wings zip past above the water, brought out my inner child wonder and amazement. From an art direction stand point the world looks lived in and broken down, which for me is another positive quality. There was one thing after another that just make me want to see this film right now. Then the internet blew up.
After see the internet blow up, I decided to give my two cents on the one major complaint of the teaser. Near the middle of the teaser, we see a guy walking in the wood dressed in black, activate a lightsaber. This lightsaber isn't normal, it is a crossguard lightsaber. For those of you who don't know what that is; a crossguard lightsaber is a light saber with two secondarily blades protruding out of the sides of the handle, making the lightsaber look like a longsword with a pommel. Apparently this type of lightsaber is too exotic, and has ruined Star Wars. I personally can't believe a different design in a lightsaber blade would poke the uber Star Wars nerds. Don't get me wrong at first it throw me off, but then I thought it was kind of bad ass looking. Aesthetically speaking the Sith usually have more exotic looking lightsabers anyways. Darth Maul has his double bladed lightsaber. Count Dooku has a curved hilt lightsaber. If you included the Clone Wars cartoons as cannon, then Asajj Ventress has two curved hilt lightsabers that can be attached to one another to from a double blade lightsaber. On the flip side Jedi's tend to have straight forward lightsaber. I personally think that a simple sword represents humility, a trait the Jedi strive towards. As you can tell I ambivalent about the new lightsaber design.
All in all I think it was a good teaser. For those of you who wanted more, be patient. This film isn't due out until December 2015, about an year from now. I assume that they will release a full length trailer this coming summer, that will reveal a synopsis of plot and give context to this teaser. Until then enjoy what you have.
After see the internet blow up, I decided to give my two cents on the one major complaint of the teaser. Near the middle of the teaser, we see a guy walking in the wood dressed in black, activate a lightsaber. This lightsaber isn't normal, it is a crossguard lightsaber. For those of you who don't know what that is; a crossguard lightsaber is a light saber with two secondarily blades protruding out of the sides of the handle, making the lightsaber look like a longsword with a pommel. Apparently this type of lightsaber is too exotic, and has ruined Star Wars. I personally can't believe a different design in a lightsaber blade would poke the uber Star Wars nerds. Don't get me wrong at first it throw me off, but then I thought it was kind of bad ass looking. Aesthetically speaking the Sith usually have more exotic looking lightsabers anyways. Darth Maul has his double bladed lightsaber. Count Dooku has a curved hilt lightsaber. If you included the Clone Wars cartoons as cannon, then Asajj Ventress has two curved hilt lightsabers that can be attached to one another to from a double blade lightsaber. On the flip side Jedi's tend to have straight forward lightsaber. I personally think that a simple sword represents humility, a trait the Jedi strive towards. As you can tell I ambivalent about the new lightsaber design.
All in all I think it was a good teaser. For those of you who wanted more, be patient. This film isn't due out until December 2015, about an year from now. I assume that they will release a full length trailer this coming summer, that will reveal a synopsis of plot and give context to this teaser. Until then enjoy what you have.
Sunday, June 27, 2010
The Picture Box
A co-worker and friend of mine is trying very hard to get his small student film to the high school section of the Heartland Film Festival, which takes place in Indianapolis, Indian. If you're a connoisseur of films and the art of filmmaking, like myself, then you may enjoy this emotional silent film that showcases how precious our memories become to us over time. As a friend and a fellow filmmaker I fully support this film, and I hope you do too.
Saturday, September 19, 2009
Exclusive Review: Sunshine Cleaning
Powered by IMDB
Title: Sunshine Cleaning
Distributor: Back Lot Pictures (Overture Films)
Director: Christine Jeffs
Writer(s): Megan Holley (written by)
Staring: Amy Adams, Emily Blunt, Alan Arkin, Jason Spevack
MPAA Rating: Rated R for language, disturbing images, some sexuality and drug use.
Running Time: 91 min (1 hr and 31 min)
Synopsis: In order to raise the tuition to send her young son to private school, a mom starts an unusual business -- a biohazard removal/crime scene clean-up service -- with her unreliable sister.
Other Sites:
At The Movies: Ben Mankiewicz: See It, Ben Lyons: Rent It
Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 72% (Fresh), Top Critics: 76% (Fresh), RT Community: 86% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: 61 out of 100, Users: 6.9 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 66: (13.5% A, 53.7% B, 55.9% C, 5.3% D, and 0.0% F)
Yahoo Movies: Critics: B- Users: B+
Source Material: An Original written by Megan Holley.
Acting and Dialogue: A: I Like the cast not only are the two leads babes but they also put in a decent effort of acting. I also like the Alan Arkin and Jason Spevack combo and how it becomes the comic relief.
Art Direction: B: The actual art direction in the film didn't move me or inspire me, but for the indie quality it was great.
Cinematography: B+: I believe where the art direction lacks the cinematography gains because I think it has interesting camera shots
Direction: B:Christine Jeffs is very new to America filmmaking from what it seems she is more of New Zealand and British filmmaker, making Sunshine Cleaning her first American film. As far as pace it was very well paced, I didn't have boring time.
Screenplay: A: I like the story very much. It did a good job at captivating family rivalry between sister. There is this underline tone that blood is ticker than water, meaning family is important.
Sound and Music: B+: Mainly indie rock artist and score that blended well with the film.
VFX: B: Mainly the make-up and practical effect teams were used on the film and as far as that goes well, it was good.
Overall: A-: For a indie film this film works on many different levels, I do recommend it
Title: Sunshine Cleaning
Distributor: Back Lot Pictures (Overture Films)
Director: Christine Jeffs
Writer(s): Megan Holley (written by)
Staring: Amy Adams, Emily Blunt, Alan Arkin, Jason Spevack
MPAA Rating: Rated R for language, disturbing images, some sexuality and drug use.
Running Time: 91 min (1 hr and 31 min)
Synopsis: In order to raise the tuition to send her young son to private school, a mom starts an unusual business -- a biohazard removal/crime scene clean-up service -- with her unreliable sister.
Other Sites:
At The Movies: Ben Mankiewicz: See It, Ben Lyons: Rent It
Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 72% (Fresh), Top Critics: 76% (Fresh), RT Community: 86% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: 61 out of 100, Users: 6.9 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 66: (13.5% A, 53.7% B, 55.9% C, 5.3% D, and 0.0% F)
Yahoo Movies: Critics: B- Users: B+
My Review
Source Material: An Original written by Megan Holley.
Acting and Dialogue: A: I Like the cast not only are the two leads babes but they also put in a decent effort of acting. I also like the Alan Arkin and Jason Spevack combo and how it becomes the comic relief.
Art Direction: B: The actual art direction in the film didn't move me or inspire me, but for the indie quality it was great.
Cinematography: B+: I believe where the art direction lacks the cinematography gains because I think it has interesting camera shots
Direction: B:Christine Jeffs is very new to America filmmaking from what it seems she is more of New Zealand and British filmmaker, making Sunshine Cleaning her first American film. As far as pace it was very well paced, I didn't have boring time.
Screenplay: A: I like the story very much. It did a good job at captivating family rivalry between sister. There is this underline tone that blood is ticker than water, meaning family is important.
Sound and Music: B+: Mainly indie rock artist and score that blended well with the film.
VFX: B: Mainly the make-up and practical effect teams were used on the film and as far as that goes well, it was good.
Overall: A-: For a indie film this film works on many different levels, I do recommend it
Thursday, August 6, 2009
Exclusive Review: THX 1138 (Director's Cut)
Powered by IMDb
Title: THX 1138 (Director's Cut)
Distributor: American Zoetrope (Warner Bros.)
Director: George Lucas
Writer(s): George Lucas (story, earlier screenplay, screenplay), and Walter Murch (screenplay)
Staring: Robert Duvall, Donald Pleasence, Don Pedro Colley, Maggie McOmie
MPAA Rating: Rated R for some sexuality/nudity.
Running Time: 86 min | USA:88 min (director's cut) (1 hr and 20 min)
Synopsis: Set in the 25th century, the story centers around a man and a woman who rebel against their rigidly controlled society.
Other Sites:
Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 97% (Fresh), Top Critics: 100% (Fresh), RT Community: 97% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: 75 out of 100, Users: 6.3 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 70: (22.9% A, 55.5% B, 8.8% C, 7.4% D, and 5.1% F)
Yahoo Movies: Critics: NA Users: B
Source Material: Based on George Lucas' student film Electronic Labyrinth: THX 1138 4EB
Acting and Dialogue: A: The Acting was very well done. The principle characters all did a great job portraying someone who was virtually emotionless, while at the same time encapsulating the since of being trapped and wanting the need of escape.
Art Direction: A: Sometimes simple is better and when I say simple I mean simple...lets say a blanket of white covered this film. I also like how Lucas has made it a point in his films that the future is now. Therefore this film, among others, the future is portray as being lived-in , unlike modern futures of today that are usually portray with a shiny finish.
Cinematography: A: The cinematography on a technical leave is awesome. It coincides with the art direction's blanket of white...no shadows or outlines on the performers.
Direction: B+: This is George Lucas we are talking about, he is better at marketing and producing films as of late, but back then...his first film, he's not half bad. The paces was good but that maybe due to fact that it has a short running time, maxing out at 88 minutes.
Screenplay: B+: George Lucas has great stories, not so good screenplays, hence why the dialogue in Star Wars has come out cheesy. The good thing about this film is Lucas focused more on the cinematic elements of film making rather than dialogue.
Sound and Music: B: The score worked, I like the menacing feel of film...I guess this is why THX sound exist today.
VFX: A: I am sure for that kind of budget it was top notch. I also like the use of camera trickery plus the enhancement form today's technology. The added VFX made a better film in my opinion.
Overall: A-: As my first time watching THX 1138 I saw the Director's Cut: a remastered cut that had better quality sound and color. Also in this cut there were some additives and changes made to the original theatrical cut, the most noticeable were in the CGI and VFX departments. To see an artist best version of their art work is a treat. I think Lucas see a future where he can change and improve his art when he does these director cuts and remasters of his films. I can't help and comparing Lucas other remastered film, Star Wars. With Star Wars I have seen the original theatrical cut many times so I can compare and contrast the differences, which usually by the end of the day I swing toward liking the special edition better. Comparing that experience to THX 1138, I would have to say I saw the best version of the film and I would like to see the original theatrical cut mainly out of curiosity. To rap things up I do recommend THX 1138 as a good thought provoking Sci-Fi.
Title: THX 1138 (Director's Cut)
Distributor: American Zoetrope (Warner Bros.)
Director: George Lucas
Writer(s): George Lucas (story, earlier screenplay, screenplay), and Walter Murch (screenplay)
Staring: Robert Duvall, Donald Pleasence, Don Pedro Colley, Maggie McOmie
MPAA Rating: Rated R for some sexuality/nudity.
Running Time: 86 min | USA:88 min (director's cut) (1 hr and 20 min)
Synopsis: Set in the 25th century, the story centers around a man and a woman who rebel against their rigidly controlled society.
Other Reviews
Other Sites:
Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 97% (Fresh), Top Critics: 100% (Fresh), RT Community: 97% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: 75 out of 100, Users: 6.3 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 70: (22.9% A, 55.5% B, 8.8% C, 7.4% D, and 5.1% F)
Yahoo Movies: Critics: NA Users: B
My Review
Source Material: Based on George Lucas' student film Electronic Labyrinth: THX 1138 4EB
Acting and Dialogue: A: The Acting was very well done. The principle characters all did a great job portraying someone who was virtually emotionless, while at the same time encapsulating the since of being trapped and wanting the need of escape.
Art Direction: A: Sometimes simple is better and when I say simple I mean simple...lets say a blanket of white covered this film. I also like how Lucas has made it a point in his films that the future is now. Therefore this film, among others, the future is portray as being lived-in , unlike modern futures of today that are usually portray with a shiny finish.
Cinematography: A: The cinematography on a technical leave is awesome. It coincides with the art direction's blanket of white...no shadows or outlines on the performers.
Direction: B+: This is George Lucas we are talking about, he is better at marketing and producing films as of late, but back then...his first film, he's not half bad. The paces was good but that maybe due to fact that it has a short running time, maxing out at 88 minutes.
Screenplay: B+: George Lucas has great stories, not so good screenplays, hence why the dialogue in Star Wars has come out cheesy. The good thing about this film is Lucas focused more on the cinematic elements of film making rather than dialogue.
Sound and Music: B: The score worked, I like the menacing feel of film...I guess this is why THX sound exist today.
VFX: A: I am sure for that kind of budget it was top notch. I also like the use of camera trickery plus the enhancement form today's technology. The added VFX made a better film in my opinion.
Overall: A-: As my first time watching THX 1138 I saw the Director's Cut: a remastered cut that had better quality sound and color. Also in this cut there were some additives and changes made to the original theatrical cut, the most noticeable were in the CGI and VFX departments. To see an artist best version of their art work is a treat. I think Lucas see a future where he can change and improve his art when he does these director cuts and remasters of his films. I can't help and comparing Lucas other remastered film, Star Wars. With Star Wars I have seen the original theatrical cut many times so I can compare and contrast the differences, which usually by the end of the day I swing toward liking the special edition better. Comparing that experience to THX 1138, I would have to say I saw the best version of the film and I would like to see the original theatrical cut mainly out of curiosity. To rap things up I do recommend THX 1138 as a good thought provoking Sci-Fi.
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Exclusive Review: Willow
Powered by IMDb
Title: Willow
Distributor: Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM)
Director: Ron Howard
Writer(s): George Lucas (story) and Bob Dolman (screenplay)
Staring: Warwick Davis, Val Kilmer, Joanne Whalley, Jean Marsh and Patricia Hayes
MPAA Rating: NA
Running Time: 126 min (2 hr and 06 min)
Synopsis: A reluctant dwarf must play a critical role in protecting a special baby from an evil queen.
Other Sites:
Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 46% (Rotten), Top Critics: NA% (Rotten), RT Community: 82% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: NA out of 100, Users: NA out of 10
MRQE Metric: 65: (12.8% A, 51.4% B, 24.2% C, 11.4% D, and 0.0% F)
Yahoo Movies: Critics: NA Users: B
Source Material: Original:George Lucas (story) and Bob Dolman (screenplay)
Acting and Dialogue: B+: Remember I am reflecting on a 80's movie so yes I see it as somewhat cheesy, I give kudos to Warwick Davis for being a mighty actor even thought he's stature is working against him.
Art Direction: B: For an 80's fantasy it wasn't haft bad.
Cinematography: B: The cinematography work hand-in-hand with the art direction, so it wasn't half bad.
Direction: B+: This is were Ron Howard stared to gain creditability as a filmmaker.
Sound and Music: C: Really not that remember able, mainly the music represented "peril"
VFX: B: Good for the times, it not as magical as today's VFX.
Overall: B-:I enjoyed this film. As of late I been watch old school Sci-Fi and Fantasy to compare them today wok. So if you have my same ambition to explore old art then yes I recommend it for an older fantasy.
Title: Willow
Distributor: Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM)
Director: Ron Howard
Writer(s): George Lucas (story) and Bob Dolman (screenplay)
Staring: Warwick Davis, Val Kilmer, Joanne Whalley, Jean Marsh and Patricia Hayes
MPAA Rating: NA
Running Time: 126 min (2 hr and 06 min)
Synopsis: A reluctant dwarf must play a critical role in protecting a special baby from an evil queen.
Other Reviews
Other Sites:
Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 46% (Rotten), Top Critics: NA% (Rotten), RT Community: 82% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: NA out of 100, Users: NA out of 10
MRQE Metric: 65: (12.8% A, 51.4% B, 24.2% C, 11.4% D, and 0.0% F)
Yahoo Movies: Critics: NA Users: B
My Review
Source Material: Original:George Lucas (story) and Bob Dolman (screenplay)
Acting and Dialogue: B+: Remember I am reflecting on a 80's movie so yes I see it as somewhat cheesy, I give kudos to Warwick Davis for being a mighty actor even thought he's stature is working against him.
Art Direction: B: For an 80's fantasy it wasn't haft bad.
Cinematography: B: The cinematography work hand-in-hand with the art direction, so it wasn't half bad.
Direction: B+: This is were Ron Howard stared to gain creditability as a filmmaker.
Sound and Music: C: Really not that remember able, mainly the music represented "peril"
VFX: B: Good for the times, it not as magical as today's VFX.
Overall: B-:I enjoyed this film. As of late I been watch old school Sci-Fi and Fantasy to compare them today wok. So if you have my same ambition to explore old art then yes I recommend it for an older fantasy.
Exclusive Review: Labyrinth
Powered by IMDb
Title: Labyrinth
Distributor: TriStar Pictures
Director: Jim Henson
Writer(s): Dennis Lee (story) and Jim Henson (story)
Staring: David Bowie, Jennifer Connelly
MPAA Rating: NA
Running Time: 101 min (1 hr and 41 min)
Synopsis: 15-year-old Sarah accidentally wishes her baby half-brother, Toby, away to the Goblin King Jareth who will keep Toby if Sarah does not complete his Labyrinth in 13 hours.
Other Sites:
Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 58% (Rotten), Top Critics: 50% (Rotten), RT Community: 83% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: 50 out of 100, Users: 8.6 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 67: (10.0% A, 52.5% B, 37.5% C, 0.0% D, and 0.0% F)
Yahoo Movies: Critics: NA Users: B+
Source Material: Original:Dennis Lee (story) and Jim Henson (story).
Acting and Dialogue: C:Bad acting and cheesy lines but then their is some prestige because there could be up to five performers simultaneously woring together to make one character come to life.
Art Direction: A+: The artistry in the film is amazing.
Cinematography: B+: Many beautiful shoots
Direction: C: Jim Henson is great with puppeteers but horrible with actors.
Sound and Music: C: I hate the David Bowie promotional aspect of the film.
VFX: B: I love how this film draw most of the VFX from art and puppetry.
Overall: B-:Technology this film is beautiful and amazing so I say watch it for those aspects but with the lame story and sound track you might reconsider. Find a better 80's fantasy.
Title: Labyrinth
Distributor: TriStar Pictures
Director: Jim Henson
Writer(s): Dennis Lee (story) and Jim Henson (story)
Staring: David Bowie, Jennifer Connelly
MPAA Rating: NA
Running Time: 101 min (1 hr and 41 min)
Synopsis: 15-year-old Sarah accidentally wishes her baby half-brother, Toby, away to the Goblin King Jareth who will keep Toby if Sarah does not complete his Labyrinth in 13 hours.
Other Reviews
Other Sites:
Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 58% (Rotten), Top Critics: 50% (Rotten), RT Community: 83% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: 50 out of 100, Users: 8.6 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 67: (10.0% A, 52.5% B, 37.5% C, 0.0% D, and 0.0% F)
Yahoo Movies: Critics: NA Users: B+
My Review
Source Material: Original:Dennis Lee (story) and Jim Henson (story).
Acting and Dialogue: C:Bad acting and cheesy lines but then their is some prestige because there could be up to five performers simultaneously woring together to make one character come to life.
Art Direction: A+: The artistry in the film is amazing.
Cinematography: B+: Many beautiful shoots
Direction: C: Jim Henson is great with puppeteers but horrible with actors.
Sound and Music: C: I hate the David Bowie promotional aspect of the film.
VFX: B: I love how this film draw most of the VFX from art and puppetry.
Overall: B-:Technology this film is beautiful and amazing so I say watch it for those aspects but with the lame story and sound track you might reconsider. Find a better 80's fantasy.
Exclusive Review: Close Encounters of the Third Kind
Powered by IMDb
Title: Close Encounters of the Third Kind
Distributor: Columbia Pictures Corporation
Director: Steven Spielberg
Writer(s): Steven Spielberg (written by)
Staring: Richard Dreyfuss
MPAA Rating: NA
Running Time: 135 min (2 hr and 15 min)
Synopsis: After an encounter with UFOs, a line worker feels undeniably drawn to an isolated area in the wilderness where something spectacular is about to happen.
Other Sites:
Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 95% (Fresh), Top Critics: 100% (Fresh), RT Community: 91% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: NA out of 100, Users: NA out of 10
MRQE Metric: 86: (57.0% A, 37.3% B, 0.0% C, 3.3% D, and 0.0% F)
Yahoo Movies: Critics: A- Users: B+
Source Material: Original: written and directed by Steven Spielberg
Acting and Dialogue: A: When looking at the film it seem a bit cheesy and dated but it was made in the late 70's.
Art Direction: A: It was a beautiful film in both the art direction and cinematography
Cinematography: A: Many iconic images form the history of Sci-Fi
Direction: A: Steven Spielberg at his prime
Sound and Music: A: John Williams is always a good addition to a films score. The whole score was based off those famous five notes.
VFX: A: It is very advanced for the time it was made. I love seeing the primordial forms VFX.
Overall: A: If you are looking for a good old school Sci-Fi then check out Close Encounters of the Third Kind
Title: Close Encounters of the Third Kind
Distributor: Columbia Pictures Corporation
Director: Steven Spielberg
Writer(s): Steven Spielberg (written by)
Staring: Richard Dreyfuss
MPAA Rating: NA
Running Time: 135 min (2 hr and 15 min)
Synopsis: After an encounter with UFOs, a line worker feels undeniably drawn to an isolated area in the wilderness where something spectacular is about to happen.
Other Reviews
Other Sites:
Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 95% (Fresh), Top Critics: 100% (Fresh), RT Community: 91% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: NA out of 100, Users: NA out of 10
MRQE Metric: 86: (57.0% A, 37.3% B, 0.0% C, 3.3% D, and 0.0% F)
Yahoo Movies: Critics: A- Users: B+
My Review
Source Material: Original: written and directed by Steven Spielberg
Acting and Dialogue: A: When looking at the film it seem a bit cheesy and dated but it was made in the late 70's.
Art Direction: A: It was a beautiful film in both the art direction and cinematography
Cinematography: A: Many iconic images form the history of Sci-Fi
Direction: A: Steven Spielberg at his prime
Sound and Music: A: John Williams is always a good addition to a films score. The whole score was based off those famous five notes.
VFX: A: It is very advanced for the time it was made. I love seeing the primordial forms VFX.
Overall: A: If you are looking for a good old school Sci-Fi then check out Close Encounters of the Third Kind
Sunday, July 26, 2009
Exclusive Review: Eastern Promises
Powered by IMDb
Title: Eastern Promises
Distributor: Serendipity Point Films
Director: David Cronenberg
Writer(s): Steven Knight (screenplay)
Staring: Naomi Watts, Viggo Mortensen, Vincent Cassel, Armin Mueller-Stahl
MPAA Rating: Rated R for strong brutal and bloody violence, some graphic sexuality, language and nudity.
Running Time: 100 min (1 hr and 40 min)
Synopsis: A Russian teenager living in London who dies during childbirth leaves clues to a midwife in her journal that could tie her child to a rape involving a violent Russian mob family.
Other Sites:
Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 88% (Fresh), Top Critics: 88% (Fresh), RT Community: 91% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: 82 out of 100, Users: 7.2 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 75: (29.6% A, 50.5% B, 17.2% C, 0.0% D, and 0.0% F)
Yahoo Movies: Critics: B+ Users: B
Source Material: Original:Steven Knight (screenplay) .
Acting and Dialogue: A:The acting in this film was excellent.
Art Direction: A: Admirable
Cinematography: A: It was very well done.
Direction: B+: David Cronenberg put together a good piece of art work.
Sound and Music: A: It complement the images on screen.
VFX: B: It more of a dramatic driven film so not real noticeable VFX.
Overall: A-: I liked the film and I recommend it. The only thing I didn't like was the ending.
Title: Eastern Promises
Distributor: Serendipity Point Films
Director: David Cronenberg
Writer(s): Steven Knight (screenplay)
Staring: Naomi Watts, Viggo Mortensen, Vincent Cassel, Armin Mueller-Stahl
MPAA Rating: Rated R for strong brutal and bloody violence, some graphic sexuality, language and nudity.
Running Time: 100 min (1 hr and 40 min)
Synopsis: A Russian teenager living in London who dies during childbirth leaves clues to a midwife in her journal that could tie her child to a rape involving a violent Russian mob family.
Other Reviews
Other Sites:
Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 88% (Fresh), Top Critics: 88% (Fresh), RT Community: 91% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: 82 out of 100, Users: 7.2 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 75: (29.6% A, 50.5% B, 17.2% C, 0.0% D, and 0.0% F)
Yahoo Movies: Critics: B+ Users: B
My Review
Source Material: Original:Steven Knight (screenplay) .
Acting and Dialogue: A:The acting in this film was excellent.
Art Direction: A: Admirable
Cinematography: A: It was very well done.
Direction: B+: David Cronenberg put together a good piece of art work.
Sound and Music: A: It complement the images on screen.
VFX: B: It more of a dramatic driven film so not real noticeable VFX.
Overall: A-: I liked the film and I recommend it. The only thing I didn't like was the ending.
Friday, July 24, 2009
Exclusive Review: A Clockwork Orange
Powered by IMDb
Title: A Clockwork Orange
Distributor: Warner Bros. Pictures
Director: Stanley Kubrick
Writer(s): Stanley Kubrick (screenplay) Anthony Burgess (novel)
Staring: Malcolm McDowell
MPAA Rating: NA
Running Time: 136 min (2 hr and 16 min)
Synopsis: In future Britain, charismatic delinquent Alex DeLarge is jailed and later volunteers for an experimental aversion therapy developed by the government in an effort to solve society's crime problem... but not all goes to plan.
Other Sites:
Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 90% (Fresh), Top Critics: 71% (Fresh), RT Community: 91% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: 78 out of 100, Users: 8.5 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 86: (56.4% A, 38.0% B, 5.4% C, 6.1% D, and 0.0% F)
Yahoo Movies: Critics: A- Users: B
Source Material: Based on the dystopian novel by Anthony Burgess.
Acting and Dialogue: A: This film showcases Malcolm McDowell’s talents at his prime. He is now a season actor and still performing at high remarks, well I think so anyways. I say this because I am a fanboy of the television show Heroes and Malcolm McDowell plays Mr. Linderman the main “villain” in Season One.
Art Direction: B: It’s not that is was bad it just not that tasteful.
Cinematography: A: It was very well done. Some cool shots that I enjoyed.
Direction: B+: I am not familiar Stanley Kubrick’s work so it is always hard to compare and commit. As far as story and pace it was good, confusing but good
Sound and Music: B: I liked the contrast between the whimsical classical music and the on screen violence.
VFX: B: It more of a dramatic driven film so not real noticeable VFX like Kubrick’s other film 2001: A Space Odyssey
Overall: B: Films like this confuse me…or should I say I don’t know what to make of them. If I were to look at the film as a piece of art, I would have to say it is a good painting. I am not going recommend it to the general audience. I only recommend it to film buffs and film students.
Title: A Clockwork Orange
Distributor: Warner Bros. Pictures
Director: Stanley Kubrick
Writer(s): Stanley Kubrick (screenplay) Anthony Burgess (novel)
Staring: Malcolm McDowell
MPAA Rating: NA
Running Time: 136 min (2 hr and 16 min)
Synopsis: In future Britain, charismatic delinquent Alex DeLarge is jailed and later volunteers for an experimental aversion therapy developed by the government in an effort to solve society's crime problem... but not all goes to plan.
Other Reviews
Other Sites:
Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 90% (Fresh), Top Critics: 71% (Fresh), RT Community: 91% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: 78 out of 100, Users: 8.5 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 86: (56.4% A, 38.0% B, 5.4% C, 6.1% D, and 0.0% F)
Yahoo Movies: Critics: A- Users: B
My Review
Source Material: Based on the dystopian novel by Anthony Burgess.
Acting and Dialogue: A: This film showcases Malcolm McDowell’s talents at his prime. He is now a season actor and still performing at high remarks, well I think so anyways. I say this because I am a fanboy of the television show Heroes and Malcolm McDowell plays Mr. Linderman the main “villain” in Season One.
Art Direction: B: It’s not that is was bad it just not that tasteful.
Cinematography: A: It was very well done. Some cool shots that I enjoyed.
Direction: B+: I am not familiar Stanley Kubrick’s work so it is always hard to compare and commit. As far as story and pace it was good, confusing but good
Sound and Music: B: I liked the contrast between the whimsical classical music and the on screen violence.
VFX: B: It more of a dramatic driven film so not real noticeable VFX like Kubrick’s other film 2001: A Space Odyssey
Overall: B: Films like this confuse me…or should I say I don’t know what to make of them. If I were to look at the film as a piece of art, I would have to say it is a good painting. I am not going recommend it to the general audience. I only recommend it to film buffs and film students.
Sunday, July 19, 2009
What's NEW at Cinematard Central
NEW POSTS
Genre:
This will be a post where I am going to try and reveal a new genre each week and tell what I like about the genre, movie in that particular genre, and so on.
Exclusive Review:
This will be were I review movies that have one or more of these stipulations:
The two new post above will have their own labels but there is a third NEW label, it is Indies. This label will be attached to anything pertaining to independent filmmaking including my reviews.
UPDATES and ADDITIVES
As far as the filmmakers post goes sometime next week I will finish the director/filmmakers category with The Wachowski Brothers, and Robert Zemeckis. I will then move on to producers/filmmakers most likely staring with J.J. Abrams.
Look for post and other information on my Twitter, or my Facebook. I am posting Movie Reviews on Flixter starting now. This will included any new reviews and exclusive reviews.
Genre:
This will be a post where I am going to try and reveal a new genre each week and tell what I like about the genre, movie in that particular genre, and so on.
Exclusive Review:
This will be were I review movies that have one or more of these stipulations:
- Movies On DVD.
- Movies made before my time that I am just now getting around to watch.
- Movie Reviews I forgot to do or didn't have time to write.
The two new post above will have their own labels but there is a third NEW label, it is Indies. This label will be attached to anything pertaining to independent filmmaking including my reviews.
UPDATES and ADDITIVES
As far as the filmmakers post goes sometime next week I will finish the director/filmmakers category with The Wachowski Brothers, and Robert Zemeckis. I will then move on to producers/filmmakers most likely staring with J.J. Abrams.
Look for post and other information on my Twitter, or my Facebook. I am posting Movie Reviews on Flixter starting now. This will included any new reviews and exclusive reviews.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
